Stockton Property

Good afternoon

I have just learned that the expected decision from Judge Fansler has been handed down, relating to the court challenge by the developer of the Stockton property. Based on a review of the record the judge has decided that Council had inadequate justification to overturn the MPC approval of the concept plan. Because the judge ruled on the merits of the appeal, as found in the record no decision was entered on the issue of constitutionality of an appeal to council on a non-zoning issue. The decision, in essence reinstates the MPC approval of the concept plan as submitted by the developer for the land off Stockton. This decision relates to the Council action in March, 2004, and does not consider the subsequent action by Council in October of 2004. West Hills was permitted to argue for support of Council's action, but the city was the object of the law suit. As such, I do not know if we would eligible to file an appeal of this decision, since we were not the primary parties in the suit. If an appeal were to be filed, it would have to be done by July 26th. This action has been lengthy, and costly to the community, and my conversations with our attorney do not encourage me to think that an appeal would lead to a different decision. I will have follow-up talks with our attorney on Monday, and determine whether any other options are available. If members of the executive committee believe a called executive committee meeting should be held, please let me know.

Joe Fuhr President

Waterhouse Property

Good afternoon.

Yesterday, I met with the potential developer of the Waterhouse
property. The proposal at this time involves commercial along
Middlebrook Pike, with a limited number of curb cuts. There is a
planned super market, yet to be defined, a number of smaller stores and
restaurants, and a Lowe's on the eastern side of the property.
I explained that I do not make the decision on community
acceptance, but simply represent the community's position. I further
explained that commercial was not the sought for development on this
site, but that Lowe's, in particular was an issue of concern.
They would like to get a sense of the community's feelings on this
topic; the more specific the concerns the better. If the community is
then interested, they would be willing to meet with the community to
answer the issues raised.
They have indicated that the exclusion of Lowe's would be a deal
breaker for them. In fact the residential development, undefined at
this time, would be delayed for some time because of the current
economy, in particular to the housing market.
I have questioned the commitment of Lowe's to this site, because of
information I have from an individual involved with development of new
Lowe's stores.
I am not certain that they have Lowe's on board, but may be trying
to blame the community's objections for any failure of the development.
The general tone of the meeting was much more curt, than earlier
ones. But comments that the community would end up with a less
desirable eventual development, if we don't accept this, just didn't
add much to their arguments.
Let me know your thoughts, and I will share them with the
developer. We will then determine if a called meeting is necessary.
Thanks,
Joe Fuhr President