Moratorium For Midway? Part Two of Two

The Public Speaks But Are They Heard?

by Robin M Johnson

Public support for a proposed six month moratorium on residential development in Midway City was unanimous at a public hearing held late into the night last Wednesday, May 17. Everyone agreed taking a step back was necessary and wise. However, there was disagreement over the timing of the moratorium as well as the scope and focus of the moratorium. Over forty citizens patiently sat through discussion, public hearings, and motions on other matters waiting to hear and participate in the night's last agenda item.

As the clock approached 10:00 pm James Kohler, planning commission co-chairman, opened the public hearing regarding the moratorium. During the public hearing some citizens asked questions of city staff, some questions were immediately answered, others were not. 

Robyn Stone was the first resident to speak. Stone said,“I am so appreciative that there’s been some attention given ... to the staff for this busy city in being swamped with many ideas and also accepting requests ... Opportunities come, developments come. And they’ll be able to happen. Everybody gets a chance at one point or another but I appreciate the opportunity to come tonight and speak about the moratorium."

Speaking about a land use request discussed earlier in the evening Stone said, "You really gave the developer today all your heart. Every possible opportunity. And he may be successful in developing the ground. We’ve got benefits all over this sweet valley of improvements, and opportunities to enjoy, everything that we didn’t used to have. 

Asking for the commissioners to listen to the public Stone said, "If you would please, consider with that same valor, the citizen. The person who lives here. The reason we all come. And have the courage to also say we respect your safety ... working together, and being able to interact and listen to these ideas and find the best way then that’s what Midway’s about, to care about one another. Thank you for your service."

Nora Lundin's main concern was the timing of the moratorium. "I am not against the moratorium," Lundin said. "I understand that it takes time to get these new laws and everything in place, but I would suggest that maybe a postponement of the moratorium for people that are kind of at the very edge ... perhaps mid-July or mid-August." Lundin said she and her brother are trying to annex a small part of their acreage into Midway for a six lot subdivision.  They will sell four lots to pay for homes for she and her brother.

"We’ve had lots of setbacks. And I never thought in a million years it would take us this long to get to the point we are, but we still haven’t been able to put our application for the subdivision in. And I just read about this just last week, that there was this proposed moratorium," Lundin said. Just to have "a little bit more time ... to get those applications that are just barely getting started to get it in and get done. That would be my only suggestion. Thanks."

Mickey Oksner said, “I’d like to ask what the exception was for the rural preservation zones. I would ask that we liberalize that a little bit and if somebody comes in with a two or three acre rural offer, ... or somebody coming up with a three or five acre horse property in this period, that that would be considered. So take your R-1-22 or 43 zones and liberalize these a little bit as opposed to just the rural preservation. Thank you."

Katie Noble said, “I think the elephant in the room is the C-4 zone. I wasn’t sure how this was going to impact C-4. It seems to me we need some time to really get C-4 absolutely right. So that would be the only reason not to allow development ... in C-2 and C-3. I guess that’s a question, more than a comment. I’d like to see the moratorium, because of C-4, apply to C-2, C-3, and C-4. Thank you."

Paul Berg said, “Just a few observations I’ve had about moratoriums. This will be the third one I’ve been involved with in Midway. The first one Mayor Probst had was specifically about PUD’s. Mayor Tatton, I think one of her first items right after she was sworn in was she enacted a moratorium."

As an engineer, Berg is often hired to represent developers for their land use requests in city meetings. Berg said, "First of all, I’ve found, just so nobody thinks this is self serving, it doesn’t hurt my business, it doesn’t hurt me financially."

According to Berg's observations city staff really doesn't get a break during a moratorium because they still review applications already in progress, they review building permits, and they take on all work relating to the moratorium. "By the time they are done they are kind of burned out and then they see this long line of applications ready to come in ."

Berg said, "When Mayor Tatton’s moratorium ended I think I was representing eight developments at every planning commission meeting for several months after. So there is a big load while you are doing this and there’s a big load after."

Another observation Berg made from his experience with other cities as well is that "some of the cities that have gone through it a little more successfully have actually hired an outside consultant to help the planning staff during the moratorium. It might be something you need to consider" to avoid staff burn out. 

Further Berg said the good that comes from a moratorium are staff gets a break or a breather and the city hopefully makes better laws to guide the development with the general plan. He said the other side of the moratorium, however, has definite unintended consequences regarding inventory in the housing market and rapidly escalating house prices. "During that six months the inventory just kind of, new inventory disappears, current inventory is bought up, and then there’s this period where we just see prices really spike."

According to Berg by 2006 the Dutch Fields development went through two phases in roughly four years. However the year right after the moratorium ended Dutch Fields went through three phases in one year. Berg said, "They were the only game in town. Not that that’s a bad thing for the people who are already in; but what I then found was that everybody on the outside looked at how fast prices were escalating in Midway and it attracted everybody and their dog to come here to develop. If we have a similar thing happen you may find its worse than before, then the prices skyrocket."

Kohler asked, “Do you think the spike in prices that you referred to in 2006 was a result of the moratorium, or just the general market conditions?”

Berg agreed the general market was up. He said, "suffocating the new inventory let all of these master plan developments that were already in the game that didn’t have to wait ... charge what they want, prices went up. The bigger point is that everybody on the outside saw those escalating prices and just said, Man, Midway’s hot, Midway’s the place to be. It attracted a lot of ... potential developers that I don’t think you’d normally see in Midway ... they were the money guys, they were guys with development experience and house building experience. I haven’t seen those guys back here since then, until recently they are starting to poke around, but I wonder, will this have the same effect?" 

Holly Bodily said, “Is it possible to limit the number of agenda items that are on the agenda for you each month? And I’m sorry if this sounds rude, but if a developer has to wait a few months to get his time in because there are only so many of you, and only one Mike Henke, maybe those developers have to wait just a little bit. I don’t say that in a rude way, I just say that in a realistic way. If we make it a little bit harder, then I don’t think that’s really a bad thing. But I also do agree with the moratorium in the meantime."

Ryan Barney said, “I’ve observed kind of what’s going on and enjoy the fact that you are being proactive, looking toward the future. The time to put up the fence is not after the dog ran away, the time to put up the crossing gate is not after several accidents have happened at the train crossing, and it’s not the time to put the stop sign up after you’ve had accidents there. I look on the wall here, there’s been those in the past that have kicked the can down the road ... I commend you for stepping forward, and also for realizing that it’s not time to kick the can down the road; it’s time for action. Thank you."

Heather Rasband said, “Maybe rather than a complete moratorium for plans for development, could you implement something where it just goes down, put a limit, is it legal to do that?  Say you only will accept so many per year, or so many within a month? Do you have to either freeze it or allow everybody to apply?"

Jewkes said, “It likely would be, the statute is not that specific, it simply discusses temporary land use regulations; we’d have to look at that as a potential solution."

        

Rasband said, “In that regard could you still allow new homes to be coming up but just slowly, instead of really, really fast? I like the idea of what you are trying to do, whether it ends up being a moratorium or just slowing the flow a little bit, by being proactive rather than reactive. 

"I think, too, … that the commercial zones should be included even in your slowing down process or the moratorium, until you have decided what you are going to do with your C-4, to solidify that, because if you are going to enact a new zone you should probably get that all set before you keep allowing things to happen in those zones that you are trying to rezone." Finally Rasband wondered if public parks was the best use for open space. 

Derek Sevensen said, "The public is showing great interest right now, I think that’s a great thing. And to be able to harness their interest, I think, would be awesome as far as the process, and it would validate the public’s presence and feelings as far as being members of the community. Also ...  there’s some really great ideas that just come out of the wood work … so I think that’s one huge benefit that can’t be overlooked. If you can take the time to get that feedback I think it would be critical. Thanks."

Inez Wilde said, “I don’t think a lot of the people realize how many subdivisions are going in right now. I know of at least seven, and I really think the moratorium is a good idea, to take time, to step back, make sure that there will be enough services for everybody, that the city of Midway can expand the way that it should. Also, the idea that one end should have all the development and the other should have all the open space is a little frustrating to me, but I won’t say anymore about that, for now."

Ellen Collette said, “I think that it would be wise to just go ahead and have a full out moratorium. Not because I don’t like development, I think that trying to make a soft moratorium is not going to work. I think it’s too hard, I think it puts you in a spot where you don’t have a solid definition of what’s allowed and what’s not. It’s just going to take a lot more time to do what you could do in six months if it is done right. I am not against development, I am pro smart development  and having Midway be a place where I can live."

Jerry Miller said, “I am kind of a simple mind so I might have missed something, but I have a question more along the lines of this young lady here (referring to Noble's earlier comments) who says 'How come we’re not including the C-2 and C-3 zones? This C-4 thing is part of a residential thing, what we’re talking about is residential, so I’m confused why we are not including that. Did I miss something, or … I feel like her question got kind of blown over. I have the same question."

Henke said, “Yeah, definitely this is discussion so it could be included in the moratorium, that’s definitely a possibility. I think we’d need to define what development in the C-2, if a restaurant is proposed on a property do we want to stop that, for instance? Or just a retail store. We could say mixed use is part of the moratorium, that’s certainly a possibility, but I wouldn’t want to stop just commercial; I don’t think any of the code texts we are talking about (amending) effects just the pure commercial development."

Miller asked if mixed use included the whole C-2 and C-3 zones. 

Henke said, “You can have development in the C-2, C-3 that’s not mixed use. Mixed use is when you have a residential component as part of the development. So the planning commission and city council would need to decide if they want to include all commercial development, or just mixed use commercial development as part of the moratorium.”

Miller said, “And that is my question, because this involves the C-4, which is a mixed use, so why are we not including that. Because if we are trying to slow down residential growth out here, what about right here in the heart of the town?”

Kohler said, “C-4 isn’t even enacted yet, it’s just something that’s being considered.”

Miller said, “Right, but including the C-2 and C-3 in would slow down a little bit that process, and maybe rethink it.”

Randy Lundin said, “I’ll tell you this story first, many years ago ... in 1976 we built the mobile home park on Homestead Dr. The biggest problem that everybody criped about was too much impact on Homestead Dr. That’s in 1976. This is the same … I think you kind of need to step back a little bit and not get so fired up on this. I know you gotta have changes, but it’s the same story that it was in ’76. You know, over and over. Look what’s happened up there. Nobody changes how many people move in here. With all the moratoriums you want to put in, it doesn’t slow down the growth. The other thing, my question to you is, I kind of wonder why you can’t do this on an ongoing basis. Like, why do you have to put a moratorium in to change a rule? Why can’t that be done in your normal day? All of a sudden you have a shut down, why isn’t that an ongoing thing you address?”

Kohler said, “Resources. Thank you. Appreciate the question. I don’t have an answer to it.”

Earlier in the meeting, before the public hearing, Natalie Streator, planning commissioner, said that a moratorium this time of year would not impact a developer as much as it would in October because there is a process a developer goes through to get ready to build in the springtime that he doesn't go through in the winter. 

Lundin said, “ I just think the timing, the time of year, Natalie said the timing is good. I don’t think it is. With the moratorium, even though it will shut down certain projects, there is a certain amount of work that’s being done before construction, that don’t happen in the winter. I think a better time would be to do a moratorium in the winter. There’s a survey and all kinds of things you have to do to get even to that point."

There was no more citizen input following Lundin's comment so Kohler closed the public hearing. At this point the planning commission chairman generally asks if there is any discussion from city staff or the planning commission regarding the public comments. Instead, immediately as the public hearing closed Waldrip began speaking. 

“Mr. chairman, I have a motion if that’s appropriate,” Waldrip said.

Kohler said, "Indeed it is."

"I move that we recommend to the city council that they adopt a resolution for a six month moratorium as requested by the staff on all subdivision applications and we accept the staff report. We find that the city recently adopted a revised general plan with many proposed changes that have not been enacted into code yet, most of which have to do with the residential aspects of the zoning structure of the city. We find that a moratorium would allow the staff more time to pursue the preparation of potential code text amendments for the planning commission to review and recommend on to the city council that pertain to the changes in the general plan and the review of the impact fees that relate to the development in the city, that submittal of building permits would not be effected by the moratorium, nor would applications that have already been made before the moratorium was enacted. And if there is a second to that motion, I will speak to it,” Waldrip said. 

A second was made and Waldrip spoke to his motion. 

He said, “There have been a lot of suggestions as to what we ought to do with the moratorium but I think the most compelling thing is what Michael has asked for. He’s asked for a moratorium on the submission of subdivision applications and since ... he best knows what he needs in terms of being able to step back a little bit to continue with the work that is necessary, but to postpone with the work that would be necessary with future subdivision applications, and I think we ought to honor his request and not try to mess with it.”

Ream said, “Can I ask one question, though, before we go there? Because someone brought up hiring like contractors, is that, I mean, what are you really asking for? Would that help?”

Henke said, “Well, I do know a bit about our budget, and so I don’t think that’s something written in the budget for right now. I think we can, I’ve got a fairly good grasp of what happened here on our general plan and how we need to move forward on those code text amendments. I think we can handle it with our current staff. But, that could be recommended to the city council, but I think we can handle it ourselves.”

Kohler said, “Any further discussion on the motion?”

Streator said, “Clarification. Subdivision, this is applying only to subdivision applications in the R zones, it does not apply to any of the C zones, and it does not apply to an annexation application?”

Henke said, “That’s correct.”

Payne said, “I just have one comment, or suggestion. To include only within the C-2 and C-3 zones projects that are mixed use that are one acre or greater, which would address the issue that we’ve been discussing … today of addressing any increased density that could happen within the C-2 and C-3 zone until that (the C-4) is taken care of and enacted.”

The next events happened in rather rapid succession. 

Waldrip said, “Well, that’s not part of my motion.”

Kohler said, “Would you like to amend it?”

Waldrip said emphatically, “No!” followed by a few chuckles. 

"Any further comment or discussion?" Kohler asked. "I'll go for the question on the motion, all in favor?"

All but one commissioner said, "Aye" in unison while Payne looked back and forth at his fellow commissioners. His aye trailed behind the others by a couple of seconds. 

Several questions raised by the public were left unanswered, most obvious of all was the one Payne tried to bring forth at the last minute but found no support among his colleagues. That question alone was touched on by at least three citizens in the public meeting, and one which Henke expressed support of at least twice in the meeting. 

Note: The recommendation to enact a moratorium will most likely be on the city council agenda on June 14.

For a full transcript of the moratorium agenda item send a request to rmjgoldenjade@yahoo.com