Phase 2… Finally?
At Tuesday’s Council meeting (11/9/21), agenda item 21-116, was on it’s third reading, and therefore, actionable. This resolution authorizes the city manager to enter into a purchase and sale agreement with Fairmount Properties for the sale of the area of land west of Morse Road and north of Owen Brown.
Since this project was introduced, we have received a lot of resident feedback in person at the Phase 2 Forums the city hosted, online via the new “Let’s Talk Hudson” feature, and via direct contact with residents. At this point, it appears that a significant majority of residents are in favor of this plan. The new Heinen’s is especially appealing to the community.
As the community has given feedback, Fairmount Properties has gone to great lengths to make changes and truly listen.
Here is what you need to know about the original legislation that was proposed:
The agreement states the developer will develop the property into a residential district composed of townhomes and cluster homes with an anchor grocery store tenant to the south
As a condition of closing AND prior to the transfer of the property, Fairmount Properties must first receive all necessary development related approvals, licenses, permits and authorizations – this includes approval from the Planning Commission
The plan is estimated to have 100 residential units
During October, we discussed the terms of this legislation at great length and arrived at a draft which was labeled “As Revised 11-9-2021.”
This revised draft added the following:
That Council is under no obligation to approve more than 100 residential units for the project – this was added to curb density, which has been a consistent concern for residents
Even if the number of housing units is reduced to be less than 100, the sale price of the land shall still be no less than $2,000,000.00.
As a condition to closing the transaction, approval by Council of an ordinance authorizing a development agreement for the project is required– this ensures that the project will come back before Council
Sometime this week, it seems the developer began to have some concerns about working with Hudson on this project. It became clear that in order to save this project, Fairmount would need some assurances from the city. My understanding is that one of their concerns is getting all the way to the finish line – getting through Planning Commission, going through countless revisions, investing a lot of time and money in the project – only to have the next Council put the kibosh on the project at the last minute.
From a historic perspective, when we went through this process with Testa, we revised that plan over 40 times. So, I can understand how Fairmount might expect a long road ahead to get the plan right. And I can also understand their desire not to be led along and then be out their entire investment at the last minute because of politics. They are a business, and this desire to be a community partner and not let politics get in the way of doing business is a reasonable desire.
So, Councilman Hal DeSaussure put forth the following amendment to the original version of the amendment:
Motion to amend Resolution 21-116:
In addition to the original language of the legislation, I move to amend the language to insert a new section 2 and to renumber the existing sections 2 through 4 as newly renumbered 3 through 5:
Section 2. The Project shall be submitted to Planning Commission pursuant to the applicable terms of the Land Development Code and shall be subject to further reviews as set forth in the Land Development Code. In the event that, during the review process as set forth in the Land Development Code, the Project is altered to include less residential units or the grocery store footprint and plan submitted by Fairmount is reduced or eliminated such that Fairmount can no longer undertake the Project within the cost structure set out in Section 1 above, the City shall reimburse Fairmount for the reasonable costs associated with producing the plans and documents necessary for Planning Commission or other review.
Reactions to this amendment from my colleagues on Council were mixed.
At the meeting, it became evident to me that various communications had taken place which not all members of Council were privy to – at least, not me. A letter from Randy Ruttenberg, Principal of Fairmount Properties, was read into the record by Councilman Skylar Sutton and referenced or quoted by at least two other members during the meeting. Some of my colleagues seemed ready to take action solely based on their perception of the email. Having only heard the contents of the email communication in its entirety at that very moment and having 0 background on what led up to the email being sent, I saw no reason to let it impact my decisions. It does, however, lead me to wonder quite a bit about any other communications between members of Council and Fairmount that resulted in this response, considering the email was only sent to one specific member of Council. I was dismayed to see the email weaponized, because I think that a lot of context was missing. Although, I don’t know this for certain, because as I stated before, I was not privy to these conversations. Not knowing the full story behind these conversations made the whole thing almost feel like a setup.
I digress.
What I do know about business is that negotiations are sometimes very messy, and telling someone you are negotiating with that there are circumstances in which you would have to walk away from the table is a very normal part of most negotiations.
This amendment was done to give Fairmount assurances that what I outlined above would not happen. This amendment will hopefully signal to Fairmount that Hudson sees the value in the plan and a partnership with them.
The segment of the above amendment I want to draw everyone’s attention to is the line that reads, “…the City shall reimburse Fairmount for the reasonable costs…” The key word here is reasonable. Some have suggested that this means unlimited. Well, I suppose if we put Fairmount through 40+ revisions, yes, we may need some sort of undefined budget as we cannot know or assess in advance what those costs may be. But I disagree that undefined means unlimited. Additionally, I think it is important to acknowledge the situation in which we have to reimburse Fairmount. If everything goes smoothly in accordance with our Land Development Code (LDC), the plan maintains the support from the community that it currently has, and Fairmount truly is the partner we know them to be, we won’t be reimbursing them for anything. We will have a shiny, beautiful, new Heinen’s and empty-nester housing.
But if we lead them on, let politics get in the way, waste their time, money, and resources only to show them the door… well, I think reimbursing them for a portion of the plan they had to develop seems reasonable. When a developer purchases land in cases like this, they often negotiate who is going to pay for what. They could ask a municipality to pay for roads or other infrastructure, or any number of things. Negotiating to protect their business in the instance that this project goes south is simply something they have negotiated at this point.
I also believe that letting that land sit idle as we pay interest on it isn’t fiscally responsible. Doing something with the land which will bring in property and income taxes is a benefit to all in the community.
Some on Council used the opportunity to grandstand and make wild political threats. It was entertaining. I recommend watching.
We voted on this amendment, it passed 4-3.
Then, Councilman Skylar Sutton made a motion to amend the resolution further to add back in sections 2 and 3 from the “As Revised 11-9-2021” draft. This also passed, but with broader support of 6-1.
Finally, we voted on whether or not to pass the 2x amended resolution, which passed 4-3.
If that was difficult to follow, I apologize. I will link the final resolution when I get it. Essentially, everything I outlined above is now combined into one resolution. And with that, Phase 2 will move forward, and the developer will have to move through the normal process our LDC outlines.
We have been talking about Phase 2 for 7+ years. Both in reference to actual plans, and prior to that, studies, resident input, and conceptual ideas. I keep hearing that we need to slow down and study this further. My question is, when is it finally time to take action? We have a plan before us that has broad community support. Now seems like a good time to listen to residents, work with this developer, and move forward.
This development will bring more housing – specifically empty-nester housing – and a bigger Heinen’s to Hudson. Those are both things our community needs.
Is this plan perfect? No. Nothing in life ever is. But we can’t seek perfect, we have to seek what is best for Hudson. And I think this might be just that.
Will everyone be happy/completely in agreement on this plan? Also, no. But, again, achieving 100% approval is not possible. We have broad support from what appears to be a majority of the community, and that is what is important.
Remember, this plan is still evolving. There is still time and opportunity to make improvements and integrate more resident input. I hope as this project evolves, you all will continue to be part of the process and stay engaged.
Follow my Facebook and Twitter for frequent updates!
Have questions? Want to share your thoughts with me on any of the agenda items or issues listed above? As always, I would love to have a conversation! Email me directly at nkowalski@hudson.oh.us.
