Marion P&Z pulls Riverwest proposal

Marion P&Z pulls Riverwest proposal

City, developers looking for a compromise that will satisfy current residents

news@theeveningtimes.com

A proposed 43-lot subdivision in Riverwest which has caused controversy among residents for its smaller lot sizes, was pulled from the City Council agenda at the last minute, leaving residents who rearranged their schedules to attend the meeting and speak against it frustrated.

The city’s Planning and Zoning Commission approved the developer’s preliminary plat for what is being called “The Reserve” at its August meeting, but voted 4-2 against recommending the city grant final approval.

The City Council has the ultimate say on whether to accept the plat and the required infrastructure to service it.

The item appeared on the agenda for the council to discuss and vote on, but City Planner Ed Cain said the agents for the developers sent him a text message around noon on Monday asking that it be pulled from the agenda, which he forwarded to Mayor Frank Fogleman. “No specific reason was given,” Cain said. “They contacted me on Friday saying they might want to postpone it and they would let me know later. They contacted me to say they did want to take it off. And I sent it on to the mayor.”

Residents from Riverwest who packed the council chamber and were prepared to speak against the proposal, were visibly upset about it being pulled from the agenda at the last minute and not getting a chance to share their comments with officials.

“We rearranged our schedules,” said Cynthia Lucas.

“Then when we get here we are told they didn’t want to have the meeting. You represent us, not somebody who lives in Olive Branch.

We should have as much notice as they had. You’re valuing their time more than ours. What’s to stop them from not being ready at the next meeting?”

Another resident asked how it got taken off the agenda.

“Shouldn’t it have been close of business yesterday and not some time today?”

she asked. “You’re telling me they could have walked in here and said ‘there’s too many people here. We don’t want to do this.’ There should be some standards. It shouldn’t be pulled the same day of.

There are probably several people here who took off work to come here.”

Fogleman explained that they have allowed items to be pulled from the agenda in the past, but allowed discussion of it to proceed anyway.

“It has been permitted in the past that topics be pulled off for whatever reason,” Fogleman said. “I don’t know their reasons.

And we are airing this out.

We are allowing comment and there is a opportunity for both sides to be heard.

So you can have your say.

But we don’t know what kind of response there is, if any, from the other side.”

Residents cited concerns that the smaller lot sizes would bring their property values down.

“I’m very concerned about this,” said Julian Carter. “I don’t want to see it go to smaller lots. We were looking for a certain level of living when we moved out there. We want better. We don’t want 1,700 square foot lots.”

“I don’t care if they build,” one resident added. “ I just want them to build like us.

That’s all I ask. I’m ready to put my house up for sale. I hate to do that because I love Marion. All of my neighbors love it. This is the nicest neighborhood in Marion. Let’s make it a nice subdivision. They need to look at what we’ve got.”

Another resident pointed to the smaller lot sizes at St. John’s Landing as proof that smaller homes would bring down property values.

“If you want to see the fate of what they have planned for us, just look at St.

John’s Landing,” he said.

“The houses are tiny. The driveways are small. The lots are even smaller. It’s a rats nest.”

Tom Donaldson, an attorney representing the homeowners association in Riverwest, came prepared to point out the defects in the proposed final plat but added that since the developer didn’t show up that they should have to start the planning process again.

“I understand they have a right to withdraw it from the council,” Donaldson said. “ But I don’t see where they can come back and get a second bite of the apple on a plat that was previously denied by the planning commission.”

Lucas said she thought proposed development had to come before the Planning Commission three times before it goes to the City Council for final approval.

“We were under the impression we had three meetings,” Lucas said.

Cain tried to clear up the confusion. According to Cain, the 25 acres that became known as Riverwest Phase 3 was originally approved by the planning commission, but the owner sold the property and a final plat was never voted on.

The new owners brought the planning commission a proposal in June that asked for a rezoning to build a gated community on a portion of the land with smaller lot sizes for residents 55 years and older. A public hearing was held and that proposal was voted down by the planning commission.

The developers came back with a new preliminary plat which they renamed “The Reserve” that proposed subdividing the property into 43 lots with smaller square footage. The preliminary plat was approved in August. However, a vote at the September meeting to recommend the city approve the final plat failed on a 4-2 vote. The petitioner then has a right to appeal the decision to the full City Council which has the final say.

Cain said a city ordinance takes three readings before it can be approved, not a vote on a plat approval.

“That could be what you’re thinking,” Cain told Lucas. “It just takes one meeting to approve that. If it were denied tonight, then it would have to come back and start from scratch.”

Lucas asked the council to vote it down.

“We know they aren’t here to represent themselves tonight,” Lucas said. “But we are. We want a vote so that way it can start all over again.”

City Attorney James “Jimbo” Hale explained that the council has nothing to vote on because the item was withdrawn at the developer’s request.

“As we sit here, it is denied,” Hale said. “And the people did not show up to present it to the City Council, and it is still denied.”

Councilman Cliff Wood said the developers can come back to the planning commission with another amended proposal that will hopefully address some of their concerns.

“They can keep working with the planning commission to work out the details,” Wood said. “In the meantime, hopefully they will be talking with y’all.

Maybe they will go up to 2,200 square feet.”

Lucas said the developer should follow the original plan for Phase 3.

“It should go back to Phase 3 Riverwest,” Lucas said. “ Everything has been denied by the planning commission to this date.

The truth is, you have constituents who have a say in this. We’re being played by the owners. And if you accept that, you are doing this group, this city, a great wrong.”

The deadline to get on the October P& Z agenda has passed. The earliest a new proposal can be heard will be November.

Councilman Don Hanks, who represents Riverwest, thanked them for showing up to the meeting.

“I’m glad you showed up,” Hanks said. “I know you are angry. It is a beautiful place. I appreciate your concerns.”

Fogleman said he hopes the developers will come back with a compromise proposal that will satisfy resident’s concerns.

“My hope is that they will compromise on whatever housing is developed,” Fogleman said. “If a com-

promise is capable that allows development to go on,

that would be my wish.”

By Mark Randall