Council approves 68-acre land sale to developer of luxury housing at White Pond

Akron City Council narrowly approved the sale of 68 wooded acres at White Pond to a private developer and operator of luxury housing.

Following the controversial vote, President Margo Sommerville asked Akron police to remove the public from the chambers after issuing several warnings for outbursts.

'A new low for council':Akron police asked to remove the public from a public meeting

The land deal would fetch taxpayers $725,000 for property the city paid more than $7 million for in 2006. (A group of residents called the White Pond organizers and neighbors pointed out that disparity in a research paper released Monday.)

The development agreement calls for up to 238 high-end townhomes, ranch-style homes and apartments with monthly rents of $1,600 to $2,300. The city said construction would require standard permits and adherence to state and federal rules on safety and the environment, as well as final approval by the city's traffic engineer.

But council's approval of the land sale and agreement doesn’t mean the $50 million to $55 million development is a done deal. The developer and buyer — White Pond Reserve LLC and Triton Property Ventures — can back out after testing for soil integrity and contamination on property partially used for years as a dump by the city, its former owners and a concrete plant. The developer has agreed in writing not to develop 29 acres considered wetlands due to peat mining that began some 70 years ago.

The proposal has garnered intense public opposition with council buried each week in emails and hours of public commentary. Opponents raised several concerns at two community meetings at the beginning and end of November, including one run by the residents and another facilitated by Councilman Russ Neal, who represents Ward 4, where the project is proposed.

On its fifth reading before council Monday following a year of private discussion between the developer and city administrators, opponents were denied a last request to speak before the deal moved out of an afternoon committee and passed 7-6 by council that evening.

“This has been a really interesting process, to say the least,” Ward 1 Councilwoman Nancy Holland observed after Planning Committee Chair Jeff Fusco rejected more public input and pushed for a vote.

The committee meeting was attended by a half-dozen residents who, upon hearing they would not be allowed to speak, raised their hands the entire time. They wrote pithy messages in red Crayola marker on pieces of paper, and then held them up for council to read.

When Councilman Donnie Kammer said he’d changed his mind and would not support the project if put to a vote Monday, which was council’s last meeting of the year, the residents snapped their fingers in approval.

When Fusco pushed the deal out of committee, two residents stood and turned their backs to the city lawmakers and administrators. When they left, one was holding a sign above her head that read: “Rude.”

No more public comment on White Pond development

Two council members running for mayor — Shammas Malik of Ward 8 and Tara Mosley of Ward 5 — channeled the public opposition to the project.

Mosley asked Fusco if he’d let residents in council chambers talk. They had emailed her and others on council over the weekend, she said.

Holland, calling for a need to balance fair use of time with public expression, suggested that at least one of the residents be allowed to speak for the group.

“These are taxpayers,” At-Large Councilwoman Linda Omobien joined in. “There is no reason for us to deny them.”

Fusco didn’t respond to Holland’s request for a spokesperson from the group. Instead, he gave Malik a turn to speak.

“I guess there was a point that Ms. Holland —,” Malik started.

“No,” Fusco said, stopping Malik before he finished the thought.

“This has been on the agenda for a while,” Fusco said, explaining that taking time had allowed the community to meet at the end of November and present the administration with outstanding questions. In all, Fusco referenced 140 emails from the public, “many from the same individuals.” He said committee time should focus on “business.”

“At this juncture, I think it would be prudent for us to take a vote,” he said, opening the discussion up to other members of council.

That night, with the chambers full and some residents holding protest signs, Mosley made a motion to allow the public to speak before voting on the deal. Malik seconded the motion. But it failed 7-6.

Opposing additional public comment, and later approving the White Pond development, were Fusco, Ginger Baylor (at-large), Sharon Connor (Ward 10), Mike Freeman (9), Phil Lombardo (2), Brad McKitrick (6) and Margo Sommerville (3).

"Forcing this through is business as usual," Neal said.

He said "liked the project" but wanted more time and assurance that his constituents wouldn't be flooded by development uphill on land that might not be solid enough to build on.

With all of council in attendance, Sommerville thanked the public for being present and occasionally banged her gavel, asking for order and silence from them.

Several council members explained how they would vote, and the discussion veered into personal attacks. Fusco accused Neal of not taking time to ask questions and engage constituents on such a big project in his district. Neal called Fusco a liar and said how he runs his ward is his business.

"There’s a lesson we can learn from White Pond," Sommerville said before ending the discussion and calling for a vote. "It’s that we bring residents in and engage in the beginning of the process. Meetings that were just held three weeks ago should have been held months ago."

Sommerville then moved on with the agenda but had to ask police to remove the public after banging her gavel to quiet the crowd.

One last debate over housing development at White Pond

The committee meeting Monday before the full council vote began with a recap of how the developer has altered the plan in response to public input.

The amended plan presented last week no longer shows tennis courts, a clubhouse or any housing on wetlands, said Sean Vollman, Akron's deputy mayor for integrated development.

The plan now calls for up to 30,000 square feet of retail, or enough for three to five commercial tenants, which is down from the 60,000 square feet and up to 10 retailers in the original plan presented by the developer six months ago.

Latest:New plan for proposed White Pond development cuts retail space in half

“In the normal course of development, we would not have required the developer to make these revisions until it was time to obtain a building permit,” Vollman said. “But he was willing to pay for these changes now, without having any further commitment from this council. And I do appreciate his willingness to do that.”

Some residents at the recent community meeting asked that council delay voting until April, after which the developer could not cut down trees, due to the presumption that endangered bats live in them, until September.

Kammer said he’s got residents in Ward 7 pushing him to take more time, though he opposed waiting until April. He voted Monday to move the proposal out of committee then opposed it on the floor that evening.

Voting with him in opposition to the deal were Holland, Malik, Mosley, Neal and Omobien.

Last-minute questions answered

Mosley asked if the developer has any experience building around wetlands.

“I’m not personally seeing the relevance, but I can find out,” Vollman said.

Brad Beckert, a city engineer in economic development, noted that Environmental Design Group, the local architect hired by Triton, has experience with wetlands.

On soil contamination, including previously detected levels of arsenic and cadmium that might be too high for residential use, Beckert said occupational and environmental rules from the state and federal levels will guide construction to keep workers safe, and plans for concrete slab bases instead of basements could help protect future residents from exposure to contaminants.

The company has already done “some soil borings,” Beckert said of tests that give the developer a sense of the foundation on which they would build.

"What they’ll get further into," he continued, “is the environmental reports” that show areas of more concentrated and potentially poisonous compounds in the soil.

“They’re going to look at them a little further with a fine-toothed comb and say, ‘What do we need to do here?’” to engineer housing that the EPA will approve as safe and healthy.

Malik asked how much the three active oil and gas wells are generating in annual royalties, which the city and developer would split until they run dry, per the agreement.

Vollman said the wells have produced between $7,000 and $15,000 for the city in the last five years, “a modest sum,” Malik concluded.

Move the slider to see how White Pond property will be transformed

Reach reporter Doug Livingston at dlivingston@thebeaconjournal.com or 330-996-3792.