For the past few weeks, I've been actively involved with the Crystal Spring project, which is a proposed development in Ward 5 at the NW intersection of Spa Road and Forest Drive on 80 acres of forested land adjacent to the existing horse farm. I've talked with and written with City residents, City staff, environmentalists, and business interests, and I have significant concerns about the current process employed for reviewing plans for development in our City, and specifically those plans that fall under the Forest Conservation Act.

To me, the process appears broken on many levels. For instance, the proper sequence of events is supposed to be:  

1. Developer prepares a Forest Stand Delineation and Natural Resource Inventory, which is a complete inventory of the natural resources on the site; 
2. If complete, the city approves the Forest Stand Delineation and inventory, which identifies areas of the property that can and cannot be developed; 
3. Developer submits applications for permits, including a site plan based on the natural resources inventory; 
4. City staff reviews permits and either (a) sends the application back to the developer for changes, or (b) recommends the site plan for approval to the Planning Commission; and
5. Planning Commission evaluates permit application and City staff recommendations, hears public testimony, and issues decision.

Despite the fact that NONE of these steps has been completed, it already seems, from what I've seen and heard, that the site plan is near ready for approval. That seems way too premature to me. No matter if you are in favor or against this project -- or like me, you are undecided -- I think we should agree to fix the process so that we can trust that the substance of the issues will be fairly and completely addressed.

To address these procedural concerns, I drafted, with the help of the City's Office of Law, a resolution that essentially stops the City from issuing any final permits for developments over 40,000 sq. ft., for up to 6 months, so that the City Council can consider the recommendations of a working group that had been tasked with addressing these issues in the Forest Conservation Act. The working group did most of their work last year, but the Council has not yet received those recommendations. It seems to me, that with the ample evidence that exists to demonstrate that the process is broken, we should make this effort to fix it before more applications are filed.

Unfortunately, the resolution was not added to this week's agenda. I hope that by the time
-- or if -- it is, it is not too late to try to fix the process for this project.