How do we turn the Titanic?
I loved the James Cameron movie, which I watched first in the theater and then, more than once, at home on DVD. (We bought the DVD. Or was it a VHS tape?) Perhaps that explains why some of the scenes are very easy for me to call up in my memory. One particular scene: where the two crew members on ‘iceberg duty’ — momentarily distracted by two young lovers on the ship’s deck, below — suddenly notice a massive white shape dead ahead, looming in the dark, foggy night.
The look on their faces.
This same kind of look probably ought to be visible on the faces of our community leaders, in 2021. For the past 20 years, the great ocean liner SS Pagosa Springs has been steaming into the foggy night, believing itself to be on course for New York, or perhaps Durango.
But an iceberg is dead ahead. Will the crew be able to change course in time?
Or… maybe we’ve already hit the iceberg? … and what we’re watching now, is the loading of the lifeboats…?
As I recall the story, only certain passengers were allowed into the Titanic’s lifeboats. In a effort to make more room for first class passengers strolling on the top deck, the ship had been fitted with only 20 lifeboats — enough for about 1,180 people. On its maiden (and final) voyage, the ship had 2,208 people on board.
The expectation, of course, had been that the ship was unsinkable.
Those of us — the very few of us — who are familiar with the Town of Pagosa Springs’ 2018 Comprehensive Plan, entitled Pagosa Springs Forward, will have read the following text:
Pagosa Springs is “Refreshingly Authentic” — a place of natural beauty, diverse cultures, and a genuine community. That natural beauty, along with the hot springs, has drawn groups to the area for centuries. Native Americans, the Spanish, and early American miners and ranchers settled around the hot springs and cultivated the community heritage that thrives into the present. The Town is steeped in its history and profoundly optimistic about its future…
A plan that begins, like this, with questionable statements, may not be the best plan to follow, however.
I see little evidence that a “cultivated community heritage” is thriving. There are certain things thriving here, but they are related to the vacation rental business, not ‘community heritage’. Most importantly, I do not see Pagosa Springs as “profoundly optimistic about its future.” (Who writes this stuff, anyway?)
In James Cameron’s version of the Titanic disaster, the steersman spun the ship’s wheel “hard to starboard”, as far as the wheel would turn. It almost worked. But not quite.
Time for “hard to starboard” here in Pagosa? Or “full speed ahead”?
A literal gush of pennies from heaven have tumbled down into the Archuleta County economy since the beginning of the COVID pandemic. The real estate market fairly burst its seams last summer and fall, driving the median home price above $400,000 for the first time in our history. The Town and County governments collected record levels of sales tax revenue last year, and also spent millions on new Town and County facilities. The Tourism Board has so much money, they can’t seem to spend it all.
We might see all these dollars as the potent fuel burning in the Titanic’s mighty steam engines, below decks.
Last Thursday, March 25, Town Manager Andrea Phillips presented a draft proposal to a joint meeting of the Town Council and the Town Planning Commission, that would allow developers a “density bonus” if they agreed to include some affordable housing within their development.
From the agenda brief:
Land use tools are commonly used to encourage development of workforce housing. The attached DRAFT policy is provided for your input. At this time, staff recommends finalizing a policy that can be implemented in short order and codifying the policy through an Ordinance later this year in conjunction with the LUDC update.
A density bonus can provide more flexibility by adding more units than would otherwise be allowed. This is a VOLUNTARY program in which developers may request additional density if a percentage is provided for a public purpose achieving more income restricted workforce housing units. This policy proposes a scaled approach, depending on the rental amounts/AMI that the units will serve. Feedback is needed from Council and the Planning Commission on these limits.
If you want to review this new draft policy, you can download it here. The basic idea is as stated. If you are willing to include affordable units in your development, the Town might allow you to build more units that would normally be allowed — the assumption being that the Town normally puts limits on the number of dwellings anyone is allowed to build, because dwellings are… essentially a harmful thing? And ought to be limited?
Most of the parcels within the Town limits were built upon between 1890 and 1990, although a sizable number remained vacant. The Town then began an aggressive program of annexing surrounding vacant land, and tripled or quadrupled its corporate size. Most of the annexed parcels still remain vacant in 2021. We have no shortage of vacant land.
Looking at classified ads in the weekly Pagosa Springs SUN for March 2019 — back when life was somewhat ‘normal’ — I found about 41 “Help Wanted” ads, and about 15 “Residential Rentals”.
Looking at March 2021 — when, if we want to believe the media, life is ‘getting back to normal’ — I find 84 “Help Wanted” ads (including some listing multiple job positions) and 6 “Residential Rentals”.
It’s not clear to everyone, yet, that the policies enacted by the Town and County governments, acting hand-in-hand with other business and community leaders, have utterly failed to produce a community with long-term viability, in terms of having dwellings for working people to live in… and these policies and priorities are guiding the SS Pagosa Springs directly into the path of a waiting iceberg…
…While the rest of us, seeing ourselves as passengers and crew, have been shoveling our pennies into the ship’s overheated engines.
Can we turn the Titanic?