Senior complex gets go-ahead

City Council votes 4-1 to allow senior citizens community on city’s north side

By MARY KAYE DAVIS

mary.kaye@register-news.com

MT. VERNON — Much to the disappointment of residents who had been battling the plan for months, city council on Monday approved ordinances which could make a proposed upscale senior citizens housing complex on the city’s north side a reality.

Council members David Wood, Mike Walker, Shirilyn Holt and Mary Burgan voted “yes” and Mayor Mary Jane Chesley voted “no” on the three ordinances, which allow for the rezoning of 22 Fairway Drive from flood plain to high-density residential, annexation of the property and approval of a tax increment redevelopment agreement with Doe Valley Golf Course Inc.

The developer on the proposed project, M&S; Consulting of Centralia, wants to build the $40 million, high-end complex for people age 55 and older on 78 acres which includes the former Homestead Golf Course.

According to the development agreement plans, the project would include construction of 16 condominium buildings of 12 units each (192 units of not less than 900 square feet each) and 23 duplexes. Other amenities would include renovation of an existing club house as well as recreational facilities which could include tennis courts and a swimming pool.

Neighborhood residents have vehemently opposed the project, citing safety concerns and saying the project would change their “quiet” neighborhood and damage its streets both during the construction phase and afterward due to heavier traffic.

Prior to voting “no” on the ordinances, Chesley described the decision-making as “tough” and a “very important issue for the city.”

“In my opinion, (this neighborhood) is not good for R-3 (heavy residential); R-1 (residential), but not R-3,” she said. “You have a small community of 55 homes. You are sincere, good people who were pit bulls on the issue. I have listened to your voice in this matter. I see the benefits, but I am listening to the people.”

While the three ordinances were approved for the project, three more ordinances must be passed before it can begin construction, according to City Manager Ron Neibert.

Those ordinances were the focus of a public hearing held prior to the city council meeting and dealt with the establishment of the tax increment financing district and adoption of the TIF plan and TIF district.

“The statutory items are in place for the project — the zoning, the annexation and the TIF redevelopment agreement,” Neibert said after the meeting. “The reason the items from the public hearing could not be acted upon at tonight’s meeting is because of the time guidelines associated with the public hearing. They cannot be acted upon until 14 days after the hearing.”

He said the three remaining ordinances will likely be discussed at the Sept. 4 city council meeting.



Another roadblock?

The proposed project has hit several speed bumps during a year of discussion, and at Monday night’s council meeting another alleged hurdle was potentially thrown up.

A man in the audience, whose name could not be confirmed by press time today, told council members that Doe Valley Vice President Mark Miller’s claim that he already has a signed agreement to purchase ground from Vic Cusumano to build a second entrance to the planned development was false. The man said he made a call during the meeting to Cusumano to verify that Miller’s claim is false.

Miller contended at Monday night’s meeting that he has signed documents which he would fax to Neibert to prove the agreement with Cusumano is true.

Previously, Miller agreed to add a second entrance to the complex after neighborhood residents said they felt it was needed to cut down on traffic. Cusumano could not be reached for comment this morning at his business. His home phone number is unlisted.

The man’s claim concerned council members, but City Attorney David Leggans and Neibert said that since the second entrance is included in the plans, if it turns out the second entrance has not been added, the agreement would be voided and the project could not progress.

“Any deviation from the agreement would make the TIF agreement void,” Neibert said. “If they don’t put in a second entrance, (the developers) would receive no (TIF) money from the city.”

After that assurance, council members proceeded to vote in favor of the project, but not without some cautionary words.

Burgan said it seemed to her that in some ways the developers had “the cart before the horse” and the plan was sloppy.

“I do feel I need more reassurances,” she said.

Holt agreed.

“I, too, want more assurances,” she said. “Personally, I think it’s a good project.”

She assured the residents that she understood their concerns about the project, but she, as other council members, “were elected by the whole city” to do what was best for the whole city.

Walker said, like the other council members, he had put a lot of hours into studying the pros and cons of the project, and he wanted to do what was best for the entire city.

Wood said the decision was not an easy one to make, but a decision had to be made.

“We have to address population and growth in our community,” Wood said, addressing the residents. “I’m sorry you all feel the way you do.”

After the meeting, Miller said he was “thrilled that the city council approved the project.”

“Years down the road, I think everyone will agree this was the best thing for the city and the neighborhood. The proof will be there to see. It will be a nice development that the city can be proud of. It will enhance property values.”

Text Only