Inside Missoula's Housing Market
Council Members Parse Hot Topic of Infill in Missoula
By Courtney Lowery, 6-11-06
  |
|
 | |
|
In the world of urban planning and public policy in Missoula, there always seems to be one issue that comes up over, and over and over again: Infill.
Whether and how to promote building within Missoula's urban core has produced a long-running debate between those who say it's our best tool for affordable houses and sprawl-prevention and those who say such developments can erode the character of our most-prized neighborhoods.
This week, we posed four questions about the hot topic to two city council members who often fall on opposite sides of the issue. But as you can see, it's not that black and white.
These conversations with Ward 1 Councilwoman Heidi Kendall and Ward 4 Councilman Jon Wilkins preview the discussion the two will have about infill on this week's edition the Live Missoula! radio program on KGVO 1290 AM. Tune in at 10:30 on Sunday, June 18 to listen in.
Right here, read what each has to say about infill and ask them your own questions below in comments.
1.) As the city continues to grow, recent surveys have shown (click for PDF of surveys) that Missoulians don’t want higher density and they don’t want sprawl. As a public policy maker, what direction do you take from that information? Are there alternatives somewhere in between?
Kendall: Our work on City Council is about balancing conflicting rights and preferences in a way that we believe is most satisfactory to most people. In considering land use, we need to consider, among other things, state and federal laws, local ordinances, community values, stated citizen opinion, policy alternatives, and political realities. It's tricky, and you can't please all the people all the time. The survey done last year for the city Local Government Study Commission, though, showed that 95% of Missoulians like living here. That doesn't surprise me a bit, and I think with thoughtful land use decisions, we can maintain that level of love for our city.
Wilkins: I think what's angered people so much, just like I've been saying through this thing, is that we don't let them know it's going to happen before. I think a lot of the anger over the density, if we just were forthright and we come up to the public and especially the neighborhoods, that maybe we can get some more density.
I also worry that the way some of these places have been put up, they've kind of been thrown up, that maybe we need better architecture and make them look a little better and make them fit into a neighborhood a little better.
2.) Infill is a term that is used often in housing discussions. Is there a common definition of the term that you use as policy makers?
Kendall: Though the word has taken on a negative connotation for many people in recent years, I think of it as a simple description of building within the city. The U.S. EPA website notes that, 'Industrial, commercial, and residential development projects can take advantage of land-availability closer to urban centers. Infill developments not only keep greenfields green, they are able to take advantage of proximity to a larger pool of potential employees, transit, and utility infrastructures.' That concept makes a lot of sense to me.
Wilkins: Wilkins said he defines infill as building within existing infrastructure, but more than that, it means building near the city center, "So you can walk to your amenities, so you can walk to a park or a coffee shop. I'm also looking at the mill site. Some of the things I've seen over there, I think it's going to be a very nice development and that's an infill type thing." He also said someplace near downtown is one place he'd really like to see infill.
3.) On its surface, it seems to make sense to build in areas where infrastructure already exists. What are the advantages and disadvantages of attempting to make use of existing infrastructure to construct housing?
Wilkins: I think there's a tremendous advantage not only for us, but for the developer too, if the sewer and water and street and sidewalk are in.
But you need to ask the people in that area if this is what they want.
Kendall: Advantages: The cost of building is less. It has the potential to reduce sprawl by reducing the pressure for building further away. It allows more efficient use of space and infrastructure. It provides more opportunity for protection of open spaces. It can protect air quality by reducing air pollution because more people are able to travel by public transportation. It can protect water quality by making it possible for more developments to be connected to sewer rather than on less reliable septic systems.
Disadvantages: People like the way things are and worry about change. It has the potential to create conflict if issues like parking, access, and design are not addressed.
4.) As a policy maker, what is your biggest challenge in preserving what is special about Missoula while providing for a growing population?
Wilkins: My biggest challenge is to get the city to notify people that we're going to do something different to your neighborhood and (ask) "how do you feel?" I don't know why that has to be such a challenge, but it seems to me … that we try to kind of sneak it in through the back door because we're so worried about what people are going to say.
And that's just not the right way to do things. That's my biggest challenge: To get the public informed.
Kendall: The biggest challenge is to find balance among the competing demands while not losing sight of what my constituents want, what the law requires, and what I believe in for Missoula, now and in the future.
Correction: A previous version of this story gave the incorrect date for the Live Missoula! Radio show. It will air Sunday, June 18.
Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.
Comments
"Maybe we can solve the problem by squeezing human beings into tiny living quarters with no room to breathe, no yards for children to play in, no privacy from your neighbor's who's window is a foot and a half from yours. Then, the wealthy will have plenty of room in their large homes with the large yards and privacy fences where they don't have to look at the poor, and perhaps don't have to travel as far to work. What about raising minimum wage? What about paying the general public what their worth for the strenuous jobs they do to survive? Inflation is everywhere. The prices of our groceries, toiletries, gas, rent, electricity, and other essensials have gone up, but our wages remain the same. If we want to save Missoula, we need to quash the greed of businesses and give Missoulians the raises they need to survive, not pack them into smaller spaces."