By: Lydia Crawley
The Parsons Advocate
The City of Parsons Council changed its mind on the direction the development of a now vacant lot on Main Street will take. The lot, next to the Veterans Memorial, was part of a beautification initiative that saw a total of three buildings in the City torn down this past fall.The vacant two lot area has been in the early stages of development by Woodlands Development Group and encompasses one lot owned by Woodlands and a adjoining City owned lot.
The City Council has previously voted to adopt a plan that would see two three story buildings placed on the lots with parking areas in front of the buildings. This plan was voted to be changed following concerns raised by an affected neighbor in the area.
Mimi Kibler, who owns the house directly behind the construction site, wrote a letter and addressed the Council during the Council’s May 21st meeting. Kibler listed her concerns to include not being previously consulted by the City, being unaware of a vote on the design, and the substantial impact a three story building would have on her view of the mountains. “What I said in the letter is that it is going to affect my life quite a bit,” Kibler said. “Having a tall building in front of my house and I wish there were another solution.”
Kibler was soft spoken when voicing her concerns to the Council and said she just wanted her voice to be heard. Kibler also said she had no intention of trying to stop the project, but wanted to offer alternatives to the proposed design. “I don’t feel like I can veto this project,” Kibler said. “Its not my property, I understand that, but just letting you know how it is going to affect me.”
Council Member Tim Turner voiced concerns over the direction the project had taken. “We’re waiting on a lot for this project,” Turner said. “I think it was started incorrectly in the beginning, quite honestly.”
Parsons Mayor Bruce Kolsun said that he and the Council viewed the project as a boost to economic development in the City. “We’re looking at economic development,” Kolsun said. “We’re looking at bringing in people, bringing in businesses. That’s what we are looking at.”
Recorder Tim Auvil said that the building that previously inhabited the site was a dangerous eyesore. Auvil also explained that Woodlands had received $3 million for the project to rebuild on the site. Auvil also stated concerns that were the project not to go forward, it would affect the city’s ability to obtain funding in the future. “They acquired $3 million of funding to rebuild it so, its got to be rebuilt,” Auvil said. “Because you’re burning bridges for financing, grants of any kind and the city can’t afford to do that, by any means.”
The Council discussed the potential to change the design of the building and stated that under the agreement with Woodlands, the Council has approval authority for the design. Council Member Melissa Jones stated that she felt the design might have to change depending on the view of the WV Department of Highways opinion on the design of the parking lot access.
Kolsun said that DOH had agreed to the plans. However, Jones questioned Kolsun on whether paperwork had been submitted and signed off by the entity. Turner said that he had been in contact with the regional office and the project had permission to go on the property to begin construction, but no paperwork had been filed with the DOH. “There was permission granted to go on the property to build,” Turner said, “but there was never paperwork completed for ingress and egress on the property.”
Kibler said she preferred the initial design of the project that would place a three story building on the empty lot owned by Woodlands next to the Veterans Memorial and would place a parking lot the on the City owned lot directly below Kibler’s property. Kibler also said she would also agree to a plan with a flat roof that would not impede her view.
Kibler also said she wanted to clear up any confusion the council may have had concerning her view of the project. Kibler said she felt the council may have been misinformed that she was “ok” with the project. “I kind of her that maybe you all thought I was ok with all of it,” Kibler said. “I just really wanted to clear up that I’m not really happy with that.”
Auvil said there was already a long term lease in affect on the lot. Auvil stated that Woodlands could not have obtained funding for the project without access to the lot for parking. Jones asked if the lease was in writing and that she did not recall there being a lease in place. Turner also expressed concerns over the “And was that done correctly?” Turner said. “Because if its not done correctly, it can’t be done anyway.”
Auvil said that the plans for the development have been in motion for over two years. Auvil further stated that the current council were present from the beginning of the project. “Everybody here at this table has been present on this from the beginning, so it shouldn’t be a surprise,” Auvil said.
City Attorney Tim Stranko said he was not concerned about the lease issue, should one already be in place. Stranko said that any agreement already in place could easily be remedied, if needed. Stranko also reminded the council that the issue at hand was that of the building design. “Let’s not let the tail wag the dog here,” Stranko said. “This is all paper that we can manage or repair if there’s mistakes. We can always fix things on paper. The question is what do you want to see on the ground and what do we tell the developer in regards to guidance they are looking for to go forward.”
Other issues surrounding the project were also discussed by the Council which included a debate over the City owned lot. The Council discussed the issues surrounding the option to either sell or lease the lot to Woodlands for the development. Stranko informed the Council that should they choose to sell the lot, it would have to be at public auction. Stranko also pointed out that a lease for a building would also require public input.
Turner stated that he felt the City should go back to the original plan that was proposed by Woodlands. Under the proposal, a three story building would be erected on the Woodlands lot with the City owned lot utilized for parking. According to Turner, this proposal was used to secure funding for the project initially. “They are still going to build,” Turner said. “They are going to build on their property. It doesn’t change anything because they applied for a grant to do…That was the basis of their grant.”
Auvil said he was concerned over the designs and blue prints that were in the process of being drawn up for the two building design already approved by the City. “Then we need to tell them to halt them,” Turner said.
Kolsun said he felt that it would have been proper to discuss the issue with Woodlands prior to taking a vote to change the current design plan. Kolsun said he felt it was unfair to make a motion and vote on the issue without the knowledge of Woodlands. “I just think that this is not right to do without talking to our developer,” Kolsun said. “I just think its unfair to vote. Council is steamrolling something else without even talking to them.”
Jones suggested having the architect come before the Council to discuss the issue further. Council Member Sam Humphrey agreed that further talks were warranted. Kolsun said he had no issues with speaking with Woodlands about appearing at the next meeting. “I suggest you talk to them and have them at the next meeting,” Humphrey said.
Turner made a motion to return to the original design and lease the City owned lot to Woodlands for the development. The motion carried with Auvil opposing the measure and Council Member David Greenlief, Sr. not voting on the measure.
Stranko said that the Council was free to vote as they wish and advised the Council on the next steps moving forward after the vote.“Council gets to do what Council gets to do,” Stranko said. “But I think our job now is to inform them ‘A’ is the ticket and that the circumstance changes and that (Kibler) came and talked to us about her concerns. Its that simple. Its not nefarious. This is what happened.”
The next meeting of the Parsons City Council will be held Tuesday, May 21st at 6 p.m. at the Charles W. “Bill” Rosenau Municipal Building located at 341 Second Street in Parsons.
