by Vince Phillips
Once again, some Salida city council members appear ready to quietly rewrite the rules for their own South Ark development, and residents need to pay close attention.
Ordinance 2026-10 would change key parts of the South Ark Planned Development south of Highway 50. Some updates are minor clarifications to the plan and building standards. The real issue is the significant reduction in affordable and workforce housing requirements.
The original 2023 plan called for at least 50% deed-restricted affordable workforce housing, plus another 25% reserved for local Chaffee County workers. Builders were required to deliver one affordable unit for every four total units.
The new proposal for Phase 1 drops affordable units to 33%, workforce housing for locals to just 10% (the staff recommendation, though the Planning Commission wanted to keep it higher), and relaxes the timing to one affordable unit for every six built. This would allow significantly more market-rate homes and make the project much easier to finance.
No one disputes that construction costs, interest rates, and inflation have risen sharply since 2023. Private developers face those same harsh realities every day and must make their projects work without rewriting the rules mid-stream. Good developers stress-test their plans upfront.
The city, however, owns the land, is funding backbone infrastructure with public money and grants, and now wants to wave their magic wand and lower its own commitments. This raises serious questions about accountability, fairness, and the legality of changing the terms of the project after receiving the grant based on the original commitment to affordable housing.
How has the city’s track record been when it tries to play developer? The NRCDC (Natural Resources Center Development Corporation) is a clear example. Previous efforts on the Vandaveer property ultimately cost taxpayers around $5 million. Even after the NRCDC split off, the city continued to subsidize the project by pulling money from our water fund to pay off the land, then had to raise water rates on residents to refill the fund. Here we go again.
Some council members argue “at least there will be homes built.” That sounds reasonable on the surface, but it rings hollow when the same body pushed hard for a building moratorium in Salida just a year or so ago, right after the City of Salida had imposed a full-on moratorium on new developments in Poncha Springs for several years based on what turned out to be misinterpreted data. Their attorney claimed there were already plenty of homes able to be built. Council members recognized the obvious conflict of interest with South Ark and rescinded the moratorium. It feels like one set of rules for everyone else, and creative flexibility for the city’s own projects.
Those who have watched South Ark closely saw this adjustment coming. If approved, one private developer will likely get a sweetheart deal with whatever concessions are needed. The city has also reportedly moved fees-in-lieu money paid by other developers into the inclusionary housing fund to help finance its own pet project.
This isn’t just unfair to larger developers. Every local home builder buying market-rate lots and every subcontractor they employ is placed at a real disadvantage. These are hardworking members of our community trying to meet Chaffee County’s housing needs while competing against a subsidized city project that can change the standards when the numbers don’t work. I don’t understand why Developers, Realtors and Builders are not fighting the city on this.
The city still says it wants meaningful workforce and affordable housing long-term. But lowering the bar this way after the fact suggests they care more about pushing their project forward than honoring their original public commitments.
This approach mirrors the city’s experience with other subsidized facilities. The SteamPlant Events Center recovers only a fraction of its operating costs and relies on ongoing taxpayer support, directly competing with private venues expected to turn a profit. Similarly, the Hot Springs Aquatic Center operates with significant subsidies and maintenance shortfalls while competing against private hot springs businesses. In each case, public funds de-risk city projects, and allow inefficient management, at the expense of unsubsidized private operators.
Residents deserve honesty: If the 2023 plan was unrealistic. The city should have stress-tested it properly before approval and if didn’t pass a stress or “what if” test, not start it. That is what good developers do. Market changes like construction costs and interest rate changes are common variables that should have been built in. The City apparently didn’t do that. Changing the rules and commitments now sets a poor precedent and tilts the playing field. They are swapping their developer hat for their council hat, then granting themselves a sweetheart deal.
The City Council should reject these reductions, demand full transparency on the financials, and avoid repeating past costly mistakes like the NRCDC. South Ark needs to deliver real workforce housing, not just another subsidized project that disadvantages everyone else.
Support Independent Local Journalism — High Country Advocate was created as a real alternative to regional media that too often silences dissenting voices while taking sides in the political struggle. Producing in-depth, unflinching reporting like this series and others is expensive: servers, editing, research time, and legal review all add up quickly. If these articles have informed you or given you new perspective, please consider supporting HCA with a paid subscription — every subscriber helps keep this reporting strong and independent. 