Seems like Save our Neighborhood all over again (Item# 33 on the agenda. FF: 23:00). The testimony by the homeowners is riveting, factual and damaging, but apparently MOST of the city council (Councilor Jamison & Karsky voted against the amendment) has earplugs in while listening to citizens. And I am getting sick and tired of Mayor Huether’s stopwatch updates. It is annoying. If someone’s testimony is pertinent, let them continue. Duh.
First off, I totally understand the property rights argument, you don’t need to remind me in the comments section. Should a developer be able to build what he or she wants to on land they own? YES. But if they purchase the land, and they know how the land is zoned when they purchase it, they should not be able to come back on a whim and rezone (amend)Â the land use because they made a poor purchase decision to begin with. Tough cookie. The homeowners in the area chose to move there because they knew how the land around them WAS zoned. They (thought) they made a wise purchase decision. Why should they be punished because and investor or developer made a bad investment? If you can’t make the land work for the reason you purchased it for, sell it and let someone else have a shot.
And the city council’s action on this was an embarrassment at best. Like I said above, totally agree with property rights, but when you are changing the rules after the game has already started, IMO they don’t apply.
Couldn’t agree more. In case some don’t realize this city is owned by developers and controlled by the mayor’s tyranny, that’s where we’re at. Citizens themselves voted in Home Rule Charter. It’s not fair and we can’t change it.
And this is not like the WM situation. WM has not purchased the land at 85th and Minnesota, as I understand it. These clowns above bought the land, had it rezoned once already (to which the neighbors agreed) now realizing that their initial request isn’t doable, they are asking for an amendment. Well tough, you made a bad zoning request and purchase to begin with. Eat it.
BTW, anything Joel Dykstra would be involved with makes me a little leery anyway.
Just makes me wish even more that we had a form-based code, rather than the used-based code. There was some progress on that front in Shape Sioux Falls, until the SoN folks derailed it out of their misguided angst.
Misguided angst? Tom, you normally have pretty thoughtful posts, but that one demonstrates your incompetence on this issue. Are you a bike riding buddy of Patrick Lalley’s by chance? Sheesh.
I have spoken with the SON folks at length, it wasn’t angst that led them to refer Shape Places, it was two main issues.
One, the fact that under the new Shape Places there would be no input from citizens allowed through the conditional use process (not that it matters anyway when the planning commission and city council don’t hear a word you’re saying as evidenced in this latest issue).
The other main issue was that parts of Sioux Falls were up-zoned and down-zoned all over town with no notice provided to property owners and adjacent property owners. That’s not how it works. I would think as a smart growth guy, you’d get that.
The SON folks asked for more time to address these two main issues and the city in their rush to approve the Shape Places changes didn’t listen to them. My buddy’s single family home and surrounding neighborhood was zoned as an multi-family 8 plex under the new plan for crying out loud.
The city left SON with no other choice than to refer the new changes so they have only themselves to blame. In the Sioux Falls Business Journal the other day I read an article that said Dicks Sporting Goods was opening up early. Remember when Jeff Schmidt and the boys were saying the SON folks had delayed projects all over town, sent us back to 1983 and cost the city millions? Hogwash. Every two weeks Kelo or the Argus runs a new story about the city setting another record for building permits. These guys are clowns and people are starting to wake up and see that. Way to go SON.
My bad – I oversimplified way too much. My main feeling is just that the SoN people needed somewhere to vent their anger, so they went after the zoning code. There are legitimate issues there (which you rightly raise), but on the whole, I feel like 90% of what’s in Shape Sioux Falls are steps in the right direction. It would be a real shame if some of that progress (i.e., district simplifications, easier mixed-use development) was lost due to procedural issues.
BTW – thanks for the backhanded compliment in your first paragraph. 🙂
Couldn’t agree with you more that Shape Places is 90% of the way to accomplishing its intended purpose, but as SON has pointed out, the CUP process and proper notice are corner-stones of development in Sioux Falls that have served our city well. They need to be left in place and for that reason, people should vote No in April as it relates to Shape Places.
The Walmart proposal at 85th & Minnesota was a test run of the new zoning ordinances that had never been used before and the folks with SON immediately found the flaws with Shape Places because of this. They asked the council for more time to address these issues, they were denied that request, and they exercised the only option available to them at the time. Nothing wrong with that IMHO and that is why I support them.
As for the Walmart issue, I happen to think there are better locations in southern SF than 85th & Minnesota that don’t have the issues that site does. 60th & Marion makes sense and the south side proposal does not for so many reasons.
As for the compliment, you’re welcome. I enjoy your posts.
I told several councilors that SHAPE should have been broken up in sections and approved that way instead. But the arrogant directors of our city don’t think that way when you have a rubber stamp council. Put all your eggs in one basket. I think that probably about 80-90% of it would be in effect right now if they would have did it that way. Blame SON all you want, but they had to throw the baby out with the bath water on this one. I can’t imagine why you would approve new zoning ordinances that are several 100 pages long in one vote . . . oh wait, nevermind. I wonder if J.S. in the Planning office bleached his underware or just threw them away after SHAPE was revoked?
Ideally, zoning and planning lay out allowable uses and requirements in advance. It provides clarity on the front end of the process, allowing developers to know what uses are allowable and allowing neighbors to know what might pop up in the backyard eventually. Shape was a huge move in the right direction on that front – far, far better than the existing system of making such decisions.
In a perfect situation, there are no conditional use permits and there are no variances because all those things do is encourage uncertainty among landowners and arbitrary decision making on the part of government.
But hey, some people in this city love this patchwork, half-assed approach to planning because it allows nosy neighbors the opportunity to derail the process. On the flip side, it’s also the fuzzy edges in the current process that allows developers to get away with murder sometimes.
and that’s why it should have been broken up in chapters and sections. Not opposed to rules, but let’s be reasonable and contrite folks.
Pingback: More citizen advocacy after out of touch SF city council decision — South DaCola
Pingback: Will the 85th & Western peeps garner the 3 votes needed? — South DaCola