SOUTH PORTLAND – The South Portland City Council voted unanimously Monday to pass a 95-day building moratorium in Willard Square – an act called “immoral” by one of the men behind the business plan that spurred the effort to delay development in the historic neighborhood.

Ian Hayward, along with his partner Glenn Perry, had hoped to build an upscale food market and catering business at the corner of Pillsbury and Preble streets. However, word of that plan set off a howl of protest among local residents, who bombarded city officials with calls, emails and public comment.

Some of the communications betrayed the raw emotion behind efforts to derail the development. Some, said Councilor James Hughes, were simply “vile.”

Still, whether the hubbub was about the look of the proposed building, the traffic it might lure or competition with the recently reopened Bathras Market, the noise was enough to convince Councilor Maxine Beecher of the need for a calming period.

On May 2, she proposed a moratorium on construction in the 12-lot Village Commercial-Willard (VCW) zoning district. Although the moratorium was not passed until Monday — following a May 9 council workshop, a May 16 first reading, and a 4-3 split decision of the Planning Board May 24 – it was backdated to May 2, which blocked Perry and Hayward from submitting any of the plans they’d spent more than $55,000 creating and, to please local residents, amending.

“I’m sorry if I’m a little emotional, but I’m also broke,” Hayward told the council.

Hayward later said those unrecoverable, out-of-pocket costs represent his “life’s savings,” and don’t include being unemployed for the past six months, since quitting his job to launch his own business. Perry, who bought the land and an adjacent apartment building, is now stuck with a vacant lot. That’s in addition to taxes on the 401k he cashed in to pursue his dream.

The cruelest cut, the pair say, came at the May 9 workshop. They claim to have been told to expect 20 minutes to unveil an updated plan, drafted at a cost of $6,000 to address all concerns hurled at them, often in virulent tones, at an unmoderated community meeting on April 21. Many speakers Monday agreed that Perry and Hayward had been all but berated at that gathering.

Perry said that, after confirming use of a slide projector to reveal the update, including a small park, he was surprised to find himself limited to the same five minutes allowed each of his detractors, more than 30 of whom took the microphone. When her tried to “borrow” five minutes from each of the half-dozen expert witnesses he brought along, Mayor Rosemarie De Angelis agreed to up his time limit to eight minutes.

“We never really got to show what we had,” said Perry. “In fact, our architect felt so bad about it, he gave us back 20 percent.”

That’s partly why Monday’s vote did not destroy the Perry-Hayward venture, first called Mr. Delicious, then changed to Ebo’s Market when residents at the April 21 meeting objected to the name. It was instead, said Perry, the simple threat of a moratorium that strangled his baby in the crib.

“Moratoriums are like lawsuits,” said Perry. “The mere threat of them, and their indeterminacy, changes people’s behavior. To quote my banker, ‘No bank or lender could tolerate the uncertainty generated by this moratorium.’

“Even if the moratorium were voted down tonight,” he said, “there are still too many factors out there which now make this project too difficult to support.”

Instead, said Perry, he and Hayward are now redrafting their plans for an Ocean Street store in the Knightville neighborhood, where two storefronts will be merged to create a market larger than the one originally planned for Willard Square.

“We are determined to bounce back,” said Perry. “We want nothing more than to become the good neighbor and corporate citizen that our Knightville neighbors deserve and that we had envisioned being in Willard Square.”

No site plan has been submitted at this time, but Perry said he and Hayward hope to open in the fall.

Although several councilors expressed reservations about the process that led up to the moratorium vote, particularly the ill-will reportedly heaped on the developers, all seemed to agree that a pause was needed in order for the town to adopt design standards in the Willard Square area.

That theme was echoed during public comment, as, once again, dozens of residents rose to claim the new market would overcrowd an already congested neighborhood.

“This isn’t NIMBY – not in my back yard,” said longtime resident Rebecca Morong. “I believe a better title would be SIMBY – suitability in my back yard, sensibility in my back yard, safety in my back yard.

“Take the time to enact the standards that would make the Willard Square area attractive, safe and proud,” she urged the council.

The only person to rise in support of Perry and Hayward was Al DiMillo, who demanded to see a survey of accident reports proving that traffic in Willard Square is as dangerous as residents claim.

“Based on these stories you hear, you’d think somebody got killed there every week,” he said.

Still, what seemed to motivate city councilors was not talk of traffic or parking, but the apparent feeling they had unfinished business to which they needed to attend – business that predated Perry and Hayward’s interest in Willard Square, and only roused to life because of it.

Repeatedly, councilors spoke of the 2004 zoning revision that switched Willard Square from a limited commercial zone to a village-commercial district. That change outlawed drive-throughs, motels, auto garages and other similar businesses. However, the finer points of what would be allowed were never addressed, even after the Willard Square Neighborhood Association tried to jumpstart the process in 2009.

According to City Planner Tex Haeuser, residents had a spur in their sides at that time over other proposed businesses, but the drive to define standards petered out when the economy faltered at the start of the recession, and the proposed development projects wilted away.

“We need to complete a job that we started and did not get finished. We have that responsibility,” said Councilor Tom Blake. “Design standards, in my opinion, are critical. We don’t take these breaks because we need a nap. We do it because there’s work to be done.”

But setting those standards may be easier said than done. As De Angelis pointed out, the 300-year-old neighborhood is an eclectic mix of architectural styles.

“There’s no way to set one standard there unless you raze the whole thing and build it over from scratch,” she said.

“I am sorry if there was a financial loss for these two gentlemen,” said Beecher, “but if the neighbors don’t welcome you with open arms, that can be the end of your business. I think this is something we need to do.”

De Angelis fretted over “changing rules midstream,” a theme Perry touched on repeatedly, as he pointed out again and again how the plan he paid Sebago Technics $22,000 to create met every standard laid out in city ordinance, even addressing the traffic and parking issues cited by his detractors.

Planning Board member Gerard Jalbert, who voted against the moratorium when it came in front of his panel, said parking and traffic issues could be handled directly by the City Council without a moratorium. Creating one-way streets and time-limited parking spots could easily resolve many issues, he said.

Jalbert also pointed out that “99.9 percent” of all buildings in South Portland went up without an enforced design standard.

“Overall, I believe that design standards need to be treated very gently,” he said. “We don’t want to take private property owners decisions as to their own property and turning it into a not private decision.”

That drew some dissension on the board. Blake contended that design standards would spur development, because they would demonstrate the city’s care for its neighborhoods. Councilor Tom Coward countered that hint of a moratorium is all it takes to scare development away.

There was talk before the meeting that the council might come down 4-3 on the issue, which would have denied the super-majority needed to pass the moratorium. However, even presumed holdouts like Hughes appeared to accept Haeuser’s contention that his planning staff, while it does not absolutely require a moratorium, could turn out new standards faster without having to worry if some new project might come in under the wire to take advantage of current building rules, before they are likely to tighten.

In the end, it fell to Councilor Patti Smith to voice the two minds in conflict over the Willard Square war dance.

“As a representative of the city, I am heartfully sorry that the folks involved in this were hurt, financially and emotionally,” she said. “I think it’s unfortunate that our citizens, from time to time, get out of hand and show a lack of respect, or no respect. That pains me.

“Having said that, I do believe in the moratorium,” said Smith. “We need proactive planning to make our city a great city 20, 40 years down the road and not just react as things bubble up.”

Most Willard Square residents who spoke Monday claimed those who were meanest to Parry and Hayward, either in emails, on the neighborhood association website or at the April 21 meeting, were not true locals. Still, even as strong a proponent of the moratorium as Dara Saffer seemed apologetic.

Although she was warned by De Angelis to address her comments to the chair, Saffer could not seem to help herself, turning back to Perry once, twice, three times.

“I am so very sorry for what happened to you,” she said.

At Monday’s meeting of the South Portland City Council, resident Donna Yeller shows pictures of parking congestion in Willard Square, in hopes of convincing councilors to pass a building moratorium. The 95-day development moratorium passed, 7-0. (Staff photo by Duke Harrington)