By Roland Murphy for AZBEX
After the extensively drawn-out approval for Greenbelt 88 was finally secured (AZBEX; Feb. 11) and two Arizona Legislators made major waves across the state’s local zoning authorities and development communities with the introduction of HB 2674, a bill that would have stripped municipalities of much of their power in determining project approvals (AZBEX, Feb. 8), I had the opportunity to talk with Jason Morris, partner at land use law firm Withey Morris, PLC and one of Arizona’s most sought-after experts in terms of zoning, land use and entitlements.
HB 2674 caused massive waves in municipal halls of power and in the development community, as it would have set rigid timelines for approvals, assigned building height and density requirements for projects without any local ability to deny, and implement “zoning by right,” creating automatic approvals for developments meeting the law’s generous criteria.
For those readers who don’t follow the approval side of the project development process, Morris is one of the developer representatives whose name pops up most frequently in zoning and approval cases for complicated proposals, large-scale developments and projects – like Greenbelt 88 – that need an expert pilot to help navigate them from proposal to permits.
HB 2674: A Counterproductive Solution to a Nuanced Problem
Diving right into the legislation, which was pulled by Democratic co-sponsor César Chávez before it went into the committee review process, Morris wasted no time saying why he thought HB 2674 had merit in what it sought to accomplish but was potentially disastrous if enacted.
“I understand the impetus behind it,” Morris said. “I think it may even be laudable in terms of trying to find an opportunity for more abundant housing, but the methodology is so problematic and so, ultimately, deleterious to the effort because there would be such a harsh reaction, and there would be such litigation, and, frankly, I think there would be years of trying to understand what the actual legislation allowed for that it would be counterproductive.”
While some housing supply advocates gave the bill their full-throated support, nearly no one expected it to pass as written, given the almost universal degree of opposition from municipalities. I was, personally, a little surprised at just how quickly Rep. Chávez withdrew the bill, expecting he would have wanted to see it in the public arena a bit longer to make more waves in pushing the discussion along.
Morris, however, was more sanguine in his response. “(The withdrawal) says a lot, and, frankly, it was just the right move because it wouldn’t have gotten better, and it may hamper some legitimate efforts either by Rep. Chávez or others to intervene in a more positive way. The unintended consequences of that legislation were beyond anything that I’ve seen in real estate thus far, but the thought process behind it and the desire to create additional housing and bring down prices that are excluding people from the market isn’t a bad objective.”
He added, “To wrench away control from municipalities when neighborhoods are much closer to the city council than they ever will be to the state legislature, it’s just the wrong tool for land planning.”
I agreed with his assessment and said that while some precision tools were needed to address the genuine problem of bureaucratic hindrance of solid proposals, HB 2674 was a mallet, a too-blunt instrument for the task at hand.
Morris went a step further. “This tool was a Wile E. Coyote Acme bomb.”
Showing his adroitness as an attorney, Morris turned the questioning on me at this point, asking me, as someone who follows these issues closely, what I thought of the intensity the small number of public supporters brought to the discussion. I said I was not surprised, as it was the first time in recent memory leaders at any level expressed a need and desire to rectify the increasing degree of resistance and delay well-planned projects – particularly those that would revitalize declining areas – encounter more and more as a matter of course.
Morris appreciated the assessment saying, “I don’t think there’s been a tremendous amount of leadership in land use on a macro scale. The positive of this legislation is it seeded a conversation that needs to occur. I think you’re alluding to the fact that it’s a shot across the bow to municipalities that if you abuse the right of local control, it can be taken away from you with one small law.”
A little later in the discussion he added, “If you want to consider this The Ghost of Christmas Future, I think that’s a fair title.”
King for a Day
I asked Morris what, in his perfect world and given the power to decree process and policy, he would like to see happen moving forward.
“I think all of us have this fantasy of being king or queen for a day so we can work this out. Two things I would say: One, we shouldn’t just focus on the entitlement timeframe. That’s only half the battle. Once you have zoning, and once you’re able to build, the other half of the battle is getting a permit, which entails going through site plan reviews and construction reviews and engineering reviews and fire reviews and traffic reviews in order to get a permit so you can start moving dirt. So, we need to look at the timeframes for those things and see what can be done on that end to ensure these are properly processing.”
He went on to say, “On the entitlement side, there is no detriment to continuing conversations with neighborhood groups and analysis at the city council level, but there have to be hard and fast calendars. They can’t be drawn out, as Greenbelt 88 was, for two years when the project was really just being held ransom. If we look at those timeframes, rather than changing the actual zoning, I think the right decisions would be made, albeit in a little bit more of a pressure cooker environment.”
A Year Down the Road
Wrapping up our discussion, I asked Morris where he wants things to be in a year. He responded by saying, “Such a good question. We have the tools available to us today to have comprehensive conversations about how the zoning process can be improved, and it doesn’t require your parents threatening you with being grounded.
“A year from today, I would like to see a comprehensive report that includes stakeholders like the League (of Arizona Cities and Towns) and the APA (Arizona Planning Association), as well as the homebuilders and (Arizona) Multifamily Association. If that tool is in place, I think we’ll be better situated.”