SilverStar Destinations LLC entered into negotiations with the Sunriver Owners Association (SROA) regarding support of a redevelopment proposal in August of 2006. The SROA was represented by a four person committee appointed by the SROA Board, the negotiating committee was headed up by Barbara Wade, a past SROA President.
An agreement was entered into between SilverStar and the SROA based upon these negotiations in December of 2006 (text of Agreement Summary). The Special Meeting mintues from the Board Meting where the agreement was discussed and voted upon - it was not a unanimous vote, are very enlightening as to the thinking of the SROA Board (Dec. 18, 2006 Special Meeting Minutes). The items that are most noteworthy are the four (4) reasons the SROA cites as the assumptions behind entering into the agreement:
- Redevelopment of the Mall is good for Sunriver, [SS.org: The SilverStar proposal is far greater than a simple redevelopment of the mall, it is a residential development with high-rise high-density condos. The residential component is almost 7 times the square footage of the retail/commercial component. No one has shown how this is good for Sunriver.]
- It is what owners want (meets recommendations of Sunriver Strategic Plan and few negative comments have been heard), [SS.org: No survey or forum was ever held to solicit owners actual feelings about the SilverStar plan. The Sunriver Strategic Plan does NOT call for high-rise high-density residential development within the mall area - only for an upgrade to the mall. As the negotiations were held outside of the public domain how could anyone have ever made a comment, positive or negative, about the plan? Based upon the results of the land sale ballot this statement, especially related to few negative comments have been heard, seems inaccurate]
- SilverStar’s proposal is the only project on the table, and [SS.org: What was the sense of urgency that caused the SROA to enter into this agreement because it was the only one on the table? This is a terrible reason to enter into any agreement, especially one with such a dramatic long-term impact on Sunriver.]
- Bill Peck had the most contact with SilverStar personnel and had developed a
level of trust in the project. [SS.org: With all due respect to Bill Peck, shouldn't all of us as owners be asked whether we have a "level of trust" in the project? And for that matter with SilverStar, a newly formed corporation created for the sole purpose of "redeveloping" the Sunriver Mall? There should have been significantly more due diligence completed before even contemplating entering into an agreement of this scope and significance. More than a year after already signing this agreement the SROA conducted a very limited due diligence investigation on SilverStar.]
Based upon these four assumptions the SROA entered into the binding agreement with SilverStar for the redevlopment of the mall. During the four months of negotiations between SilverStar and the SROA there was no public forum to discuss the agreement nor any other public disclosure of the terms of the agreement, or solicitation of comments, before the SROA signed this agreement - although they state it is what owners want. The agreement commits the SROA to support SilverStar's application before the County. It also effectively bars any board member from speaking out against the agreement, regardless of their own personal feelings. This puts those members of the Board who have concerns with, or may dissapprove of, the current plan in a very difficult position. They have been advised that they cannot make any public statements that are not in support of the agreement. This agreement, and the SilverStar proposal, was first publicly disclosed in the Sunriver Scene's February 2007 edition. It included a map of the proposal that was the only publicly available map until late October. There have been several revisions since and with the failure of the land sale ballot in February SilverStar has just released a new plan map
SilverStar submitted their first plan to Deschutes County in August of 2007 and it has been revised many times since. There was a work session held by the Deschutes County Planning Commission September 13, 2007 with the first public hearing held September 27, 2007. These were both on an incomplete application but were held, according to county meeting minutes, because there had already been 4,500 notices of the meeting mailed to the public. At the conclusion of this hearing the Commission moved to keep the public record open and held an additional public meeting on November 8, 2007 at the Great Hall in Sunriver. This meeting had much greater attendance than the first hearing and saw a standing room only crowd. Just under 30 people gave statements to the commission with opponents to the current zoning proposal outnumbering supporters by a 2 to 1 margin. The third, and final, public hearing was held December 13, 2007 and again had a large attendance. The Commissioners reviewed answers submitted by SilverStar to questions previously submitted to them by the Commissioners. Again the public testimony was given primarily by individuals opposed to the application. At the conclusion of this hearing it was moved that the public testimony be closed and that the written record be open until January 3, 2008.
The Commissioners deliberated and voted on the application at their public meeting January 10, 2008. The preliminary vote was 4 to 3 to deny with no changes to the application. After Commissioner Pace proposed some conditions on the proposal, namely a slight reduction in total density and an increase in minimum available commercial space, the proposal was forwarded on to the County Commission with a 6 to 1 vote.
On February 15, 2008 a Special Election was held for homeowners to vote on three items: To approve a change to the Consolidated Plan of Sunriver to allow for the sale of commonly owned land, to approve a sale of commonly owned land to SilverStar, and to approve the building of a new traffic circle at a new instersection of Beaver Drive and Abbot Drive with some of the proceeds of the land sale. The vote required a 60% positive vote by all votes cast to pass. It received just 55.9% and was defeated. Prior to the vote SilverStar had stated that they needed this land in order to proceed and would cease all further development on the mall area. They further stated that they would reduce maintenance within the mall area to a bare minimum if the land sale was not approved.
Currently SilverStar is moving forward with their proposal for a Twon Center District within the 16.5 acres of mall area that they do own. The new proposal does not incorporate any of the substantive changes called for by the Planning Commission which were conditions of their approval. The density is back to 22/units per acre.