HomeMy WebLinkAboutemail from Spivey to Bozynski with commentsFW: Deltic; Rahling Road Rezonings and Master Street Plan amendments. Pagel of 3
Malone, Walter
From: Bozynski, Tony
Sent: Friday, October 24, 2008 8:56 AM
To: Malone, Walter; Moore, Monte
Cc: Carney, Dana
Subject: FW: Deltic; Rahling Road Rezonings and Master Street Plan amendments.
FYI
Bill pretty much covered everything we talked about for over an hour.
-----Original Message -----
From: Bill Spivey [mailto:jspivey@wlj.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2008 2:17 PM
To: Bozynski, Tony
Cc: tdaters@whitedaters.com
Subject: FW: Deltic; Rahling Road Rezonings and Master Street Plan amendments.
Tony:
I appreciate your meeting with Tim and me this morning and discussing the proposed resolution. I apologize for
my emotional reaction to the language of the resolution prepared by Walter Malone, but I hope you understand
that this has been a difficult process for the applicants as well as the Staff. I appreciate that there is a need to
confirm the "commitments" offered during the Planning Commission meeting on October 2 and I want to be
accurate in what was intended by the applicants when the proposals were made. I have listed below the text of
the three "commitments" from which I read during the meeting. Of course, what was said can be confirmed by
reference to the DVD of the meeting, but I want to stress the points we discussed this morning:
1. 1 do not think that adoption of a resolution, whatever its content, is the appropriate way to memorialize the
"commitments" or to insure either party of what is supposed to happen. It would be more appropriate, in my way
of thinking, to provide for a written agreement or contract, if you will, between Deltic and the City and to authorize
the City to enter into the agreement in the ordinance or ordinances presented for consideration at the November
18 Board meeting. Recognizing that the agenda meeting for that meeting will be held on November 10, we
should all strive to have these terms worked out by that time, I should think.
2. "Chenal Properties" is neither an applicant nor a landowner in this matter. Both the minutes of the Planning
Commission Meeting and the draft resolution incorrectly identify Chenal Properties as one or the other. I do not
believe that the name "Chenal Properties" was ever mentioned or used during the Planning Commission meeting
by any one from the applicants, but I could be mistaken.
3. The section of the Resolution which attempts to add an additional "condition" that Deltic will not sell "even one
acre" of land before the street improvements have been completed is simply inaccurate. It is possible and maybe
even probable, although I do not have any specific recall at this time, that I used the phrase "before or whether or
not even one acre of property has been sold". However, this was done to illustrate the seriousness of Deltic's
commitment and was never offered as a condition. To condition future land sales upon whether the Staff ever
approves plans for construction of the streets or approval of a construction permit is simply not a part of this
proposal and takes completely out of context what the applicants' intentions and commitments were at the
meeting. We said in many conversations leading up to the meeting that there are no contracts for sale of any
portion of the property to third persons at this time, and that Deltic does not know when if ever any portion of this
property may be sold. Nevertheless, its commitment is to proceed with construction of the roads as set forth
below.
10/27/2008
FW: Deltic; Rahling Road Rezonings and Master Street Plan amendments. Page 2 of 3
4. Section 5 attempts, in my opinion, to engraft conditions on the "commitments" which were never even
mentioned at the Planning Commission meeting. It may well be that Walter believed his language to be a fair
construction of the commitment to add traffic signals at the intersection of the new collector and Rahling, but
nothing was ever said that even resembles the language of his Section 5. We only made reference to the "traffic
circles" because the public works staff had indicated to Tim and Ernie that they believed that a traffic circle might
be preferable to traffic signals. Nevertheless, based upon Tim's comments this morning, we will discuss with
Deltic whether it makes practical sense to construct the additional Rahling Road improvements to the standards
agreed to in the original Rahling Road ordinance as part of one construction project. We have no authority to
even suggest that Deltic is prepared to do all of this work as one project, but if Tim is correct and Deltic agrees,
we'll certainly clarify this point. As I mentioned, we do not contend, now that the City has apparently changed its
position as expressed to me months ago by Mike Hood, that construction of the collectors are a precondition to
completion of the Rahling Road improvements. Deltic has the right, but not the obligation, at present to move
forward with construction of these additional improvements and if it elects to do so as part of a single project, we
will so confirm to you.
5. Finally, on a separate point, I feel very strongly that the ordinances should contain a provision by which the
City recognizes that the MSP improvements are being construction pursuant to the City's police powers under the
boundary street ordinance and as such constitute a "public works project." In light of the recent decision of the
Federal District Court in the Whisenhunt case, I think that unless and until the City is able to effectuate the
construction of major portions of the MSP with its own funds, it is imperative that it acknowledge that but for the
boundary street ordinance, the City would have no power to impose such conditions on property owners and
developers in consideration of zoning, building permit and other approvals antecedent to development of private
property within the City. Without this recognition, issues such as the application of the "franchise agreements"
with the various public utilities are left in limbo.
This note is by no means intended to be all inclusive of the matters we discussed this morning and I encourage
you to contact Cindy or Tom or whomever in the City Attorney's office should be involved as quickly as possible.
I'm happy to meet with you and the City Attorney to discus these and any other issues related to these
applications as soon as possible.
Sincerely,
91
From: Jamie Hutchins
Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2008 1:42 PM
To: Bill Spivey
Subject: Deltic
1. To immediately commence the design for Beckenham and Wellington Plantation and will
commence construction of both streets as soon as practically possible allowing for all necessary
governmental approvals.
2. To contribute up to $325,000 for construction of the portion of Beckenham outside of the subject
property upon conditions that:
(a) the City acquire the right of way for that portion of the street; and
(b) the City cooperate with Deltic in the design and approval of plans for Beckenham such
that construction of the entire street and related infrastructure may be accomplished as part of a single
10/27/2008
VW: Deltic; Rahling Road Rezonings and Master Street Plan amendments. Page 3 of 3
project thus achieving cost savings through the design, engineering and simultaneous construction of the
entire street and related infrastructure.
3. To include as part of the Master Street Plan construction and installation of traffic signals at the
intersection of Beckenham/Plantation Drives and Rahling Road.
10/27/2008