Brian Hagberg
WARREN, Pa. – A lease agreement proposal to accommodate vehicles and equipment during the construction of the Eagles Crest senior housing development caused a “commotion” during Monday’s City Council meeting.
Council eventually voted 5-2 to approve an amended agreement that will allow Hudson Companies, the group building Eagles Crest at the corner of Pennsylvania Ave and Liberty Street, to lease three parcels, separately, from Aug. 1, 2023, through April 1, 2024. Council members Phil Gilbert and Wendy McCain voted against the proposal.
Parcel 1 (which will be used from the time Hudson submits construction notice until 30 days after Cummins vacates Parcel 3) is the area between the parking garage and the HIY building that starts on the eastern edge of the parking garage and extends behind the former Times Observer building. Parcel 2 (which will be used from Nov. 1, 2023 – April 1, 2024) is the space between the parking garage and the parking lot in front of Bent Run Brewing Co. and Allegheny Outfitters. Parcel 3 (which will be used from the completion of the roundabout project until the completion of the Hudson project) is the space at the eastern end of Clark Street behind the TAWC parking lot.
At the heart of the issue was not the lease agreement per se, but the fact that local business owners who stand to be impacted by the agreement weren’t given any indication about the agreement prior to the meeting agenda being posted Friday.
“We’re unsure what exactly is going to happen,” Allegheny Outfitters’ Piper VanOrd said. “We’re really hoping we get to see Exhibit A (the map above), because we may be adversely affected. We’re trying to make sense of what exactly is happening because we honestly hadn’t heard anything about this until I ran into a council member at the grocery store a couple days ago. Fully understanding that everybody’s not going to get what they want. It really would be meaningful, if we could have a conversation, though, to better understand how this might affect our businesses.”
City Manager Mike Holtz said he felt this proposal was the “least intrusive” plan.
“It was a decision, you know, Hudson has to go somewhere,” Holtz said. “They have to build this thing. This seemed like the least intrusive option for all businesses. And that’s where we came up with the plan that we have here.”
McCain then made a motion to table the item in order to convene with the business owners.
“I would oppose Miss McCain’s motion,” Councilman John Wortman said. “This is a multimillion-dollar construction project that is slated to begin in July. We have representatives from some of the businesses here that care about this issue. And of course, we want to listen to the voices and concerns of those businesses. I feel that this should not be tabled and that we should sit here and get this done.
“I want to keep in mind for everyone on council that we seven are fiduciaries to the city of Warren citizens,” he continued. “There are 8,700 people that we are supposed to make decisions in the best interest of. This is our property. It is not currently being leased. We are not ending a lease with any existing business to lease these properties. We will be paid $1,000 per month. How can you look a city of Warren taxpayer in the eye when you have a fiduciary to them and say that we are not going to consider this contract with property that we own?”
Bent Run’s Denise Caudill asked that council take some time in order to communicate with her and other business owners to better understand what exactly the agreement means and how it could affect their business.
“My main concern was that I’m also a taxpayer and a business owner that started a business in this town to help grow this town and bring something really wonderful to this town,” Caudill said. “So I get bringing things in. But nobody ever said anything to us about this or gave us a chance to understand it, have a say or have an opinion, or voice our concerns. Until a few days ago. So a lot of this is going to impact us in a big way. And I think it’s fair to ask that we be somewhat communicated to listened to, to maybe be heard a little bit.”
Gilbert asked why, since it’s March and construction is not scheduled to begin until August, couldn’t the proposal be tabled for one month to allow the City to have a dialogue with the affected businesses.
“I don’t see any reason why we can’t table this for a month to talk to business owners,” Gilbert said. “Anytime a thing like this has caused so much commotion, there’s been no fear about tabling it. So I don’t see any issues with tabling for one month.”
Hudson Companies’ Kelley Coey, who joined the meeting via Zoom, said there would be no issue on Hudson’s end if the proposal was tabled for a month.
Councilwoman Danielle Flasher asked Holtz if a discussion with business owners would result in any changes to the proposal.
“Not that I would be aware of unless somebody provides more input,” Holtz said. “I know it sounds like a know-it-all, but I don’t know where more pieces would fall.”
“We don’t know for sure what the business owners’ input will be until we talk to them,” McCain said.
The motion to table the proposal failed 5-2, with Gilbert and McCain voting in favor.
