Efforts to find a compromise on the design of the Weyyakin subdivision's Phase 4 will continue following the Sun Valley City Council's rejection of a mediated settlement on the issue.
The council turned down the proposed settlement between the city and developer Stilwyn Inc. during a meeting last Thursday after hearing an impassioned criticism of it by attorney Ned Williamson, who is representing six of the parcel's neighbors. Williamson contended that even though his clients had been invited to participate in the process, the mediator almost ignored them.
"When I went into mediation, I had high hopes," Williamson said "Frankly, I was wrong. I was dead wrong. There should be in this mediation a three-way agreement. It was a two-way agreement."
The mediation, held Aug. 7 with retired Judge J. Duff McKee, was intended to settle an appeal to 5th District Court of a decision by the council to remand Stilwyn's subdivision application to the Planning and Zoning Commission.
"We had absolutely no opportunity to participate at all," Weyyakin neighbor John Durbin said.
Prompted by Councilman Nils Ribi, the council voted to rescind its remand to the P&Z and to schedule a public hearing for Nov. 15 at 9 a.m. to reconsider Phase 4's preliminary plat.
Only Councilman Lud Renick voted against the motion.
"I think positions are hardening, and that's what's distressing to me," Renick said.
City Attorney Rand Peebles told council members that their actions were probably legal but warned them that the decision could prompt further legal action by the developer on a claim of procedural irregularity.
Peebles urged council members to make their decisions based on the city's ordinances, not on a fear of lawsuits, but said, "I'm not suggesting at all that it's a baseless lawsuit. I take lawsuits very seriously."
In its petition for judicial review, Stilwyn claimed that the remand unlawfully reopened the issue of the sizes of the subdivision's buildings, approved by the P&Z during design review. The council had asked the P&Z to reduce either the proposed subdivision's density or the size of its buildings.
City Administrator Virginia Egger pointed out that if the appeal is successful and the remand is deemed unlawful, consideration of the preliminary plat will be back before the council anyway. She said the developer might welcome the time saved by the council's decision to rescind the remand and hear the issue in November.
During Thursday's meeting, the developer's attorney, Jim Laski, contended that Phase 4 as proposed meets the city's subdivision ordinances and should be approved. He contended that a "handful of very vocal objectors ... were able to sway the City Council into a remand."
