Reconnaissance Meeting with Eric Gage


 * Re:	Terrazzo City Hall File Review


 * Last Thursday I reviewed the file on Terrazzo at City Hall. On February 3, 2015, Mr. Futrell submitted his new plan and most significantly, the City opened an entirely new file, while closing the old one.


 * Please note, going forward the main file reference, which should be on all written submissions, is MJP 15-002(see footnote).  At the end of my visit, I spoke with Eric Gage, who indicated that the decision makers would have access to the letters in the old file.  Unfortunately, due to the change, several recent letters of concern ended up in the old file.  Thanks go to James for already addressing this issue with Mr. Gage and saving me from writing a letter about this matter.


 * Given Mr. Futrell’s interest in moving forward expeditiously and what appears to be a close relationship with the City, asking people to submit letters with concerns and objections at this time would be a good idea. The next push after that will be working on significant attendance at the public hearings.


 * The old file has about ten letters or emails from interested parties. Each objects to the development for one or more reasons.  They include safety issues in and around FGAC, traffic and the potential adverse economic impact on FGAC.


 * Mr. Gage put both the outline of the introductory remarks he made at the January meeting as well as his notes into the old file. Most of the notes summarize Mr. Futrell’s presentation.  A much shorter paragraph summarizes concerns raised from the audience:  impact on FGAC, weddings and new members; the fact that FGAC has 2,000 members; safety; and after hours traffic.  (I believe he missed a number of other well made points.)


 * Of interest, it appears that Mr. Futrell now owns the property individually, having purchased it on January 20, 2015 from a limited liability company that included Bill Carle’s name. The developer is a general partnership called, I believe, Futrell Terrazzo, General Partnership.  The developer’s address is not Mr. Futrell’s office, but 200 Fourth Street.  My guess is that is the address for the law firm representing Mr. Futrell.


 * Prior to the purchase, First Community Bank, which holds the FGAC mortgage, had a $2,658,000 encumbrance on the property.


 * The most interesting document was a December 14, 2014 traffic study. Astonishingly, the report said that the development was “not expected to impact [the] entrance to FGAC,” and “signal changes [were] not warranted.”  It reached these conclusions despite the conclusion that the development would add 1,270 daily trips to the intersection.  In my next visit, I plan to  review the study closely and then make it the main focus of my letter to the planning department.


 * Also, I shall review the formal submission in detail, something I forgot to do because I concentrated on various individual documents. The proposal does appear to be for the 19 houses proposed by Mr. Futrell in the January meeting.


 * The file contained an updated engineering report. From a quick review, it did not make any radical changes from the initial report, despite the complete redesign of the project. Also, there was a tree inventory and an October 31, 2014 storm water study.


 * Most of the easements with FGAC were referred to, either in individual documents or as part of a title report issued last fall. Rather than comment now, I would like to review them, too, more closely and, if I can find my notes, compare them to the easements that I studied closely four or five years ago.  I then will follow up with you.


 * According to Mr. Gage, the project is now out for review and comment by the various City departments that need to approve it. He expects some back and forth as comments are received and Mr. Futrell responds to them.  Once the City completes this process, I believe the next step is the Planning Commission hearing.  Prior to that, we shall see another “big blue sign” giving notice of the hearing.