Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJanuary 21, 1997Meridian City Council January 21, 1997 Page 44 Corrie: We have a request from Marty Goldsmith that we continue this discussion until February 4, 1997. Bentley: Mr. Mayor, I move we table until. February 4 the discussion on Salmon Rapids No. 3. Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion made by Mr. Bentley, second by Mr. Rountree to postpone the discussion on Salmon Rapids No. 3 by Marty Goldsmith until the February 4 meeting, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #10: ALBERTSONS INC.: DISCUSSION OF TEMPORARY OCCUPANCY PERMIT: Corrie: Is there a representative here from Albertson's that would like to come first? Mollerup: My name is Richard Motlerup, I am the Counsel for Albertson's. I appeared before you on September 3~d, at that time requesting approval of sewer easement (End of Tape) it was the City's position that they couldn't accept the easements for the water and sewer because of the size of the pipes. And suggested ~ or requested that Albertson's grants sewer and water easements directly to Mr. Lovan who is the property owner of and adjacent and west of Albertson's project. I am here tonight to request and excuse me at that hearing the Council made a motion that was passed that a 90 day certificate of occupancy be issued for Albert~n's store conditional upon reaching an agreement on those easements. After some discussion about how that agreement should be reached the motion included that it was Albertson's responsibility to be reasonable in their negotiations and the 90 day certificate of occupancy could be terminated only if this Council found that Albertson's had in fact been unreasonable. That certificate of occupancy was issued on November 7 with the sole conditions that the easement issues be resolved. I am here tonight to ask the Council to remove that condition and issue a certificate of occupancy to Albertsons. 1 would like to briefly recap where we are and how we got here without siting the entire history. Without belaboring the point I think it is important that I note that it is Albertson's position and has always been Albertson's position that the ordinances that have been sited as authority for granting these easements don't apply in this instance. I submitted by fax today a memorandum, I hope it was distributed to the City Council, has it been? So I am not going to rei#erate those arguments, the hour is kind of late. Since the September 3`~ meeting Albertson's redrafted the easement agreement and the late comer agreement incorporated into one doc~unen#. 1 have a copy of that document with me that 1 can submit for the record if you would like. That was submitted to Mr. Howard Manwieler on September 23~d and to date we have received no response from either Meridian City Council January 21, 1997 Page 46 would be reasonable and what kind of input Mr. Lovan should have if we were going to be granting easements to him. During that meeting I said, "I guess my only thought is that absent the City ordinance of not having a 6 inch line for the City we would have more than likely signed the easement here tonight and Mr. Lovan would have a six inch line with a late comers agreement. We are willing to give him exactly that with shared maintenance. I have not talked to Mr. Lovan, I have talked with his Counsel a couple of times those conversations were very short and the time frame my dient has not paid anything." To which Mr. Morrow replied, "That may very well be Mr. Mollerup in my opinion at least the effort needs to take place. Once the effort has taken place if there is no willingness on the part of his part to participate than it very candidly our staff: goes back to the City and says this is where we are and there is no desire on Mr. Lovan's part to negotiate and from that point we make a decision as a Counat as to where we go and we are off and gone. I submit to you that is where we are. The City through a series of circumstances that I don't think anybody is at fault at is really placed in what I see to be untenable position. You are asking Albertson's to grant a private easement to a private individual using your governmental authority to do that and now having to broker the agreement. 1 don't think that is a reasonable. position to place the City in, I don't think it is a tenable position to place the City in. At this time I would request that the condition from the Certificate of Occupancy be removed and a permanent certificate of occupancy be issued. I would be-glad to answer any questions that I can. Corrie: Council, any questions at this point? Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I guess two things that I would like to ask of staff, Gary, bring us up to speed where his position is in terms of these negotiations. Mayl~ a brief history of how we got to this point by virtue of what the line was originally supposed to be. Secondly I note that Mr. Lovan does have a letter in the City requesting. a tabling, 1 do note that he is here this evening and would like to have him address this issue also. Smith: Councilman Morrow, Mayor and Council, when the Albertson's store came in I think that there was some, for building, I think there was some discussion at that time about platting the property on which the store would be located on ore lot and another lot would be set aside for another use. I can't remember all of the things that transpired but I know we had discussions toward the end of the plan review far the building of constructing a sewer line across the Albertson's property to serve Lovan's. There was because of the lateness of that request in accordance of where the plans were in the review process, Albertson's rejected strenuously to that. I don't recall who was all I the meeting but representatives of Albertson's were there, their construction manager, their design chief, Mayor Corrie and myself and Bruce Freckleton and we agreed at that time that the 8 inch line would not be necessary to be extended to Lovan's. I did, I believe that is what happened, I don't know if Mayor Corrie and remember those circumstances or consequences of that meeting or not. But subsequent to that it was determined that there really needed. to be a sewer and water line extended to Lovan's because they had no access to sewer and water service other than digging up Cherry Meridian City Council January 21, 1997 Page 47 Lane Road which was just recently paved and the Highway District was not going to allow that for five years. So Albertson's did agree to extend service lines from what they had built for their store to Lovan's property line, his east property line which would be Albertson's west property line. They did do that, consequently, they constructed a 6 inch sewer to their west property line they constructed an inch and a half water service to their west property line which again is Lovan's east property line. 1 think the Council meeting Mr. Mollerup refers to where I suggested that the City didn't need to be involved in the easements for these lines because they were not city lines they were service fines because of their size, their diameters. They were technically considered service lines and we don't maintain service lines. On October 15"' 1 received some documentation that, well Mr. Lovan brought it into my ofFice and left it with me that he had apparently received from Albertson's. One was a grant of water and sanitary sewer easements and maintenance agreement.. Another agreement was a conditional declaration of restrictions and grant of easements. I transmiifed these documents to a copy to Wayne Crookston and a copy to Walt Morrow on October 15`h. Since that time I don't think I have heard anything. I could be wrong but I don't have record. Morrow. So there has been no further information coming to you concerning. Smith: No, f haven't had anything since that document was brought to my office late in the afternoon on October 15"', because I remember we were just shutting lights off or getting close to it and Mr. Lovan brought them in. Then I just asked the question, I guess it was last Council meeting what the status was because I really hadn't heard anything. To the best of my memory the events that transpired at the beginning are the best of my memory, Albertson's representatives are here tonight and they can add to or delete there from. Morrow: Quick question Gary, in terms of the original proposal that was presented to us as a Council was a two lot subdivision or a 2 lot user, they had a site for an Albertson's store, they had a site for a future store or a future expansion or a future user, was that correct? Smith: Yes Morrow. And then based on our ordinances that were applicable to that particular design they would be required to extend water and sewer to and through the parcel of property to the next piece of property is that correct? Smith: That is my interpretation yes. Morrow. Have we ever had anything from Albertson's that indicated that they abandoned the two lot application? Meridian City Council January 21, 1997 Page 48 Smith: I don't believe I have seen anything in writing that it was abandoned, it just kind of went away, it hasn't been pursued at this point. I don't know what the status of that other piece is. Morrow. So is it possible for that other piece to be a marketable piece of property and an expansion occur on that property? Smith: Well I would assume that if it was under the ownership of Albertsons and that the property or the building was not sold to another party that the answer to your questions is yes they could proceed with construction as .long as it met the zoning criteria and they obtain a building permit. If however #hey wanted to sell a piece of ground for the construction of a building under ownership other than Albertson's then it would need to be platted. Morrow. Thank you, my next question would be for Mr. Lovan. Mollerup: First of all Gary is right, the lines were put in; the size of the lines were put in with City Approval, there was a meeting on May 9th regarding the City and there was a field order on July 11th regarding the 1 '/s inch water line. I don't mean to, I didn't mean to discount the conditional declaration that we sent as well, but I want to be clear is we have two issues here. We have a building of a store and (inaudible} and we have the potential subdivision to sell off the westerly side of the property. Now as I understand it those plans of Aibertson's are now on hold. I am trying to get the certificate of occupancy today, we did send the conditional declaration which establishes some use restrictions and cross easement agreements to Mr. Lovan in the same package. The letter did state that was a preliminary plat, that was a plat issue only, it didn't have anything to do with the certificate of occupancy issues. The two were not connected. We simply would like to, probably if we are going to make the deal with Mr. Lovan we would just like to do all of it if in the event we are going to subdivide. But that is not an issue of the certificate of occupancy. The Council made that very clear on September 3`~. It may be an issue and will be an issue both with the Council and Ada County Highway District if we can proceed with the plat. Morrow: I understand that Mr. Mollerup, the point of my question to Mr. Smith was essentially Albertson's caused the problem, it is my understanding were these lines not in the ground or under construction and that the six inch issue came from a mistake on a plan review because the original submittal was an 8 inch issue and it was a to and through issue and then there was a submittal of vuorking documents by Albertson's construction documents that called for a six inch tine that got overlooked by our staff and they were in fact under construction when the stop work order issues were put forth. Does my memory serve me correctly in terms of some of that? Smith: Councilman Morrow, I don't recall exactly what the status of construction was, t do recall that the six inch line was shown and during one our reviews we came back Meridian City Council January 21, 1997 Page 49 with a request for an 8 inch line because of the extension west. I just don't recall where one was in relation to the other and the actual construction that was going on out there if it indeed started. I don't know that it even started, I think they had a schedule to start that was one of the problems and were wrestling with this sewer tine issue. That precipitated this meeting that Mr. Mollerup referred to earlier that we sat down with the Albertson's because they were quite upset that we were wanting to change things at that late date in the game so to speak on the sewer line and it was going to mess up their construction schedule and their opening of the store which was of a significance in the Albertson's food chain number. wise. 1 just don't recall the timing of the tvw. Morrow: Very fine, at any rate, there are two different issues here, one of them is we need to deal with the occupancy certificate issue. 1 do want to hear from Mr. Lovan in terms of his position then press on from there. Mollerup: One comment though, the original specifications for the eight inch (inaudible) Mr. Smith called for eight inch at the store and only a four inch over to Mr. Lovan's property. Smith: Yes that is correct. Morrow: (Inaudible) at the eight inch deal it was a City Smith: It would have been a city owned and maintained line as an 8 inch line and Albertson's was having a problem with that having someone else involved in their property with an easement. That could cause a problem with access to their store by the people buying groceries which was understandable. Lovan: I really did not come here prepared to do this. I did ask for a postponement until next Council meeting. So I could have my counselor here. It is difficult far me also to put everything together in the right sequence. In the P & Z zoning Mr. Smith told Albertson's at that time that they would put in a sewer line to and through to Mr. Lovan. I was also lead to believe that it would be maintained by the City. Right at this point I would really and truly like to have this thing postponed until next week until the fourth of February until I do have some legal counsel here. There have been many, many things here that .has happened. I personally have been doing business with Albertson's for many years, my company does business with them. I have never had any problems with them. The restrictive use permit, the restrictive use agreements that they sent to me kind of floored me. It was also sent along with the agreement to go ahead and sign and do all these other things as far as the sewer was concerned. Frankly I don't think it was up to them to tell me what I could do with my property, who I could sell it to or anything else. That is up to me and the agreement of the City Council. So with that I would really and truly like to table this motion until the fourth of February arxi give my Counsel a chance to look over and see what it is all about. 1 discovered this late this afternoon, when I called in to see what the agenda was. I have been kind of expending Meridian City Council January 21, 1997 Page 50 of it but I thought maybe I would be notified. Albertson's has never contacted me to talk with me. I know I told Mr. Manweiler when I received the last document from them along with the restrictive uses I said just go and ask them and tell them that { am ready to sign those two papers and all they have to do is come and bring money. And that is (inaudible) Corrie: Come and bring money, you mean to buy your property? Lovan: Yes then they can do anything they want to do with it. Bentley: Mr. Mayor, Shari has a comment over there. Stiles: Mr. Mayor and Council, this is not related to the sewer easement, but it is related to the occupancy. We have had a problem with the lights causing glare and spilling over into the neighboring residential property. They have attempted to remedy that, but I still think they have a ways to go. It may be changing the type of facture they have in there but it is very bright. I would equate it nearly to' the Chevron on Fairview. The individual that is having the particular concern has a twr~ story home right on Cherry Lane and his bedroom. window is on the second story facing Cheny Lane. I know that they have gone out with some light meters but I think anybody walking down the street can tell that it is obviously spilling over into the residential properties and for that reason I have not signed off on the final occupancy. So I would just like to make you aware of that. I had asked the property owners to speak directly with Mr. Scott Edens of Albertson's, Mr. Ken Shelton is the one that is continuing to call and his last indication is that he has had several phone calls, messages left with him and had received no response. If you drive out there or at night you ~ might take a look at that. At this point I don't know what the remedy is. Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I have a couple of questions for Mr. Lovan, thank you Shari. Your attorney, neither you nor your attorney have met with the Albertson's counsel? Lovan: He has met with him on two or three occasions so I have been told. I tried to get a hold of this evening, in fact I did get a hold of him at his residency. He started to say something and we were lost in the confusion. I don't know if he talked to you this last week or not. He indicated that he had tried, like I said we got to talking (inaudible) and it was never finished. Morrow. I guess my question to you is that if there is a two week extension granted are you prepared to come to resolution of this issue over the next two weeks? Lovan: Yes, I do not expect to be treated any different than anyone else under these same conditions. What I was told in the beginning is a lot different than the way it finished up. i do kind of hate to be on the end of sewer line that belongs to somebody else other than City. I don't know if that is major concern or not. Meridian City Council January 21, 1997 Page 51 Morrow: Well I guess not being of legal counsel I think that is an issue for you and your attorney to discuss and then discuss that with the Albertson's folk and come to some sort of resolution where you both can survive. Rountree: I have a couple of questions and I need to run this through. Your residence and parcel are in the City limits? Lovan: They are in the City limits they are zoned commercial. Rountree: How long has that been in place Wally? Lovan: For years and years, I don't know when it was first Rountree: Back as far as the 70's? Lovan: In the 70's I imagine. It was there when I bought the place. Corrie: You say it is commercial. Bentley: I have. a question, how much land do you have there? Lovan: There is about an acre and a half. Bentley: My question, Gary, I guess you have to answer this, is what happens if he subdivides, where does the sewer come from? Smith: Councilman Bentley, right now the sewer would come from the service line that is existing in Albertson's parking lot. Bentley: If he were to subdivide it you would use that existing sewer with Albertson's having control? Smith: If he was going to subdivide as a residential? Bentley: No, if he was going to subdivide as commercial or would we go out to Cherry and tap in again? Smith: Well there isn't anything in Cherry to tap into. You would have to extend the sewer line from Ten Mile Road in Cherry Lane in order to get to his project or parcel without using the service line that has been constructed across Albertson's property. Bentley: But for say a site of his size with going commercial and I realize it depends on what is there, would that line that is there now serve it a six inch line? Meridian City Council January 21, 1997 Page 52 Smith: Yes, to give you an example I think a four inch line has a drainage capacity of 283 fixture units, single family has bout 21 to 30 fixture units. So it would be equivalent on a four inch line equivalent to nine single family homes if you wanted to. I don't think anybody wants to do that but an eight inch line conservatively you can connect 450 singly family homes to. There is a six inch line instatled so the volume of the pipe is proportionate to the diameter squared. So if you are working a 4 inch pipe with 16 versus the 6 inch pipe with 36 so a six inch pipe has more than twice the capacity of a four inch pipe. Bentley: Thank you Corrie: Other comments or questions from the Council? When is your occupancy permit up again? Mollerup: The occupancy permit was issued on November 7t'' on my calculation that would end on February 5. Can I respond for a moment to the request to table? I understand that, it sounds like this is last minute and nobody is prepared. This is four months, documents. have been in Mr. lovan's possession and Mr. Manweiler's possession for four months. I have had one conversation in my office with Mr. Manweiler except for asking for comments. That conversation was not (inaudible) to the documents and offer to sell Mr. Lovan's property to Albertson's for $400,000. I had one more phone conversation with him after that and a letter where we decline that. Albertson's is not in the real estate development they are in the grocery business. It felt a little bit about being extorted to be into the real estate business. I don't know what two more weeks is going to accomplish other than I am going to probably have some conversations with Howard Manweiler. But we have offered these same documents we have offered the City. 1 really hesitate and I am afraid to have a City Council meeting on the fourth when our certificate of occupancy runs out the fifth. I think we have been fairly patient so far. Morrow: I am sorry Mr. Mayor, Shari has a question or a comment. Your point in terms of the lighting and the sign off on the occupancy is that what you were? Stiles: Right Mollerup: 1 read the occupancy as the easement being the only condition to it, am 1 wrong with that? Stites: That is not correct, I have not signed off, I have only signed off on the temporary. Mollerup: But the only condition on the temporary, typed on the temporary is the easement. Meridian City Council January 21, 1997 Page 53 Stiles: I have never seen your temporary certi~rcate; I wasn't aware that you would get a 30 day temporary and then an additional 90 day temporary. I thought the total was for 90 days. Mollerup: I am sure that Albertson's can deal with the lighting problem but f am not sure, 1 have a copy of (inaudible) Stiles: I can't say that I look at all of the final osrtificates of occupancy. Mollerup: Don't misunderstand, my question is a procedural question, is that a certificate of occupancy issue at this point or trot? I don't think that it is. Cowie: You are questioning about the lightir~. Stiles: Yes it is, it is a zoning issue that has rnott been resolved. Morrow I think the issue with temporary occupancies is that in order to convert temporary to permanent you have to satisfy ~I of the conditions of all of the approvals in terms of the UBC, all of the staff conditions and all of the code conditions, electric, P & Z, ACRD and. so on and so forth. The temporary occupancy once it is converted has to have the signature of all of those department heads or of all of those entities that may be applicable in the project. If there is a condition that has not been satisfied and you are operating on a temporary before you can get the signature of the P & Z departments that condition has to be satisfied. In this case before Shari would convert to permanent occupancy. Yes, there are a whole bunch of conditions that apply, temporary simply allows a commercial entity #i open and run while it is satisfying all of the conditions to convert to permanent. So there could be beside the easement issue there could be other issues out there that have not been resolved. Mollerup: I just thought that all of the construction issues had been taken care of in the first thirty days before the 90 day was issued. Stiles: Is my signature on the 90 day certificate? Mollerup: No, Gary's Stiles: Under Planning and Zoning? Mollerup: No, there is no signature under Planing and Zoning. Cowie: It looks like we have got, evidently these are two things, one is the lighting we need to take care of and the other is either getting the negotiations done at this point. Meridian City Council January 21, 1997 Page 54 Crookston: Mr. Mayor, I would not want anybody to be misled in any fashion, when the Mayor said only two issues. It is everything that is required for a permanent certificate of occupancy that has to be met. I don't know what all of those are, but it is not necessarily the two issues. Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I would like to respond,. I think that there is some difference here and I did read the document that Gary alludes to on October 15"', very candidly Mr. Mollerup, Albertson's may not be in the real estate development busiirtess but by virtue of what I remember about that document they are certainly in the real estate control business. If i had been the owner of the parcel 1 would not have signed that document and consented to those controls being exerted over my property. l would have pursued negotiation to get to some reasonable point and then gotten the issue resolved. Now obviously where we are at now those negotiations haven't gone on. Mollerup: They haven't started even. Morrow: And I think that is a fair statement. What I am' suggesting from my position on the Council is that ,the next two weeks they had best get started and completed because given the fact. that all of the other conditions of the occupancy certificate have been met and our staff s are willing to sign off on all of their spaces. If there is not a conclusion between Mr. Lovan and Albertson's that is fair to both parties then at that juncture we will deal with something else. Nly tendency or my belief is that we ought to be getting (inaudible) and getting the thing resolved. But it has to be a fair resolution. Mollerup: We agree it has to be a fair resolution, I take issue somewhat in your comment on the restrictions. Those are fairly standard commercial restrictions. At the time Howard made the offer to sell to us Howard made some cornment about the restrictions. My comment was tell me which ones you don't like we v~ll work with you. Never heard another word. Morrow: What I am suggesting to you is that my advice to Mr. Lovan is that he had better get to work with you. Mollerup: I just don't want to be here and waiting for the other shoe to fall forever. Some time we have to reach some closure on this issue. Morrow. We are in agreement. Baldner: I am a surplus property representative with Albertson's and I spoke with you last time. I guess I am somewhat confused, we were here four months ago with this same .issue. And Councilman Morrow has asserted that it was Albertsan's fault that this line was the way it was. Frankly 1 guess we disagree with that, the City Engineer specked that out to us we built what the City Engineer told us to built. If Mr. Lovan has a problem with that then perhaps his issue is with the City. My conoem then and my Meridian City Council January 21, 1997 Page 55 concern now is that we have an investment of roughly $5 to $7 million there that is dangling pending resolution of this issue. I stated that concern last time. I said specifically l didn't want anyone holding us hostage. I was assured that would not happen, I was told by Mr. Morrow, Mr. Rountree also interjected at that point and said we certainty don't want someone to have the upper hand in these negotiations. And specifically on the record that night it was reflected that if these easements were good enough for the City they were good enough for Mr. Lovan. Frankly some of the Council members didn't understand what there was to negotiate about. Nonetheless in the spirit of cooperation we moved forward and attempted to negotiate with Mr. Lovan. I spent $3000 in attorney fees on behalf of Albertson's trying to come to a resolution of this issue. No answer except for if you don't like. dealing with me buy my property for $400,000. The issues with the conditional declaration, as we said the last time and it is reflected on the record all relate specifically to an access easement, have nothing whatsoever to do with the sewer and water easements. They are two separate issues, the cover letter sent by my attomey reflected that. To argue now that is the reason to hedge on one or the other issues is nonsensical. Frankly Atbertson's has gone to a great deal of time and expense over an issue which we certainly don't think we are at fault. It is not necessarily an issue of fault but the City Engineer told us build the six inch tine and we built it. Once we built it we were told by the City six inch line is too small we can't take it as a public easement to give it to Mr. Lovan. At no point have we raised the issues of now we have an easement running across private property for which we have never been paid. Furthermore it runs to the benefit of a third party private individual. That has to at least approach the outer limits of the City's takings power and at a minimum compensation would have to be paid. to short in the next two weeks my $5 to $7 million investment dangles out (here and there is no further direction. I think we have shown evidence that when the City enters into the fracas with private parties and since Albertson's doesn't get their CO until this issue is resolved then the gun is to our head and that is where we still are. I guess specifically I am uncertain why the representations that were made to us last time have not been honored. We offered him the easement that we would have given to the City, no response was given. Mr. Lovan, we can't deal with him personally he has an attomey. I am sorry that they don't communicate one to the other what else can we do. To table this motion at this point is just to give Mr. Lovan another two weeks to put the gun to our head. I think the issue needs closure simply put. There are a lot of issues that we could raise to contest this thing and frankly that is to the point it is getting. !n the spirit of cooperation has to stop at some point. How much more money do I have to spend, what do I have to give up. Do I have to give him the sewer lines for free, do I have to pay him to take an easement to run sewage across my property an easement for which no one has ever paid me. What is the next step? That is the position of Albertson's, really, frankly I don't know what else we can give and in the two week period all we are forced to do is knuckle under and start writing checks. If that is the way we have to do business I think that is unacceptable. Corrie: Council, any comments? Meridian City Council January 21, 1997 Page 56 Morrow. My comment would be, you and t have totally different, (inaudible) up to the very beginning. Very candidly I felt that Albertson's was outside the bounds here. I think that the issue got started because of a technic~ity, there was a great effort made on the part of the City. The extension, the temporary that we granted is until the 5'~ of February. We don't need to deal with the issue as a Council until the Fourth of February if we are going to do a Council measure. Very candidly from my personal standpoint I am a stockholder in Albertson's I felt from. the beginning when Gary Smith started corresponding with me that Albertson's was outside- the bounds of what had originally been approved and had been intended to be approved by the City Councl as it was presented to us. I understand all of your arguments but 1 disagree with you. 1 think from our perspective it is an issue here of trying to get to what is fair for Mr. Lovan. When we address the issue in terms of easements in my mind the easements didn't include all other conditions, it is a simply th~rg, take care of the easement in terms of the sewer line, it doesn't have anything to do with all of these other issues. When Mr. Lovan presented those documents to Gary and myself and I reviewed them my comment was is that 1 wouldn't sign those either, I would agree to that. So as I recall in our last presentation when you were before us these was never any discussion of a broad amount of conditions. It was simply dealing with the easement to get the easement issue resolved and then (End of Tape} Baldner: (Inaudible) which is where those restrictions arise. Mr. Manweiler, Mr. Lovan's attorney is fully apprised. The record reflects that we said here are your utility easements and then the issue with the plat is the access and if we give the access we want the restrictions. Two separate issues, this is the one that relates to our occupancy. I appreciate the Council's desire to provide fairness to Mr. Lovan, I always think when you have a large company dealing with a private individual {think the scales of justice should perhaps tip in their favor. But who on the Council is going to speak what is fair for Albertson's. Is it fair for Albertson's to only have the response come buy my property for $400,000. That is not fair reasonable fair reasonable behavior. In terms of the dealings that we have right now we have given him what we would have given you and if that isn't enough I don't know what else is. The conditional declaration respectfully is a completely separate issue that relates: only to the plat that arises of an ACRD condition. If there is an issue with those things they are completely separate they have nothing to do with the utility easements. lrAr. Manweiler is aware of that. I can't speak to whether Mr. Lovan is because I don!t know what the status of the communications between the two was but. they are separate. I guess I would again interject who on the Council at some point is going to say we have gone far enough to try and make sure the little guy has been taken care of. He has an attorney who simply won't respond other than to communicate offers to sell. Morrow: Well very candidly from my perspective until right now I have never heard of these two separate issues. I think that in the fairness of the Counsel for Albertson's and. Mr. Lovan that Mr. Lovan and his attorney ought to in fact be here from the Council and Meridian City Council January 21, 1997 Page 57 my standpoint I want to see it closed and closed right away and if that is February 4~" then however the chips fall it falls on February 4~'. Baldner: I understand your position sir, I .guess the point is in the next two weeks the number of issues on which we will (inaudible) and I think that is untenable. So I guess I understand your position, I guess 1 am frankly seeking to get a different opinion from other members of the Council. Rountree: My opinion on this is that Albertsor~'s I believe has taken a good faith effort and starting negotiations with Mr. Lovan. It doesn't appear as if there has Been a good faith response and I would expect that in the next two weeks and if it doesn't occur then I would be inclined to say that the deal that was struck has been met. The issue to me are the issues related to zoning requirements that have to be met and those apparently have not all been resolved and that is an issue that I think you need to concentrate on. Baldner: Absolutely, that is something that vre have worked with, we have property owners in the back that we have been addressing that issue with as well and Scott Edens is here if you have any specific questions or staff. But I think just because of that one condition out there that creates somewhat of a red herring and impetuous to allow the issue to drag on I think that condition can simply be moved at this state. And frankly if Mr. Lovan called us up tomorrow and said I will sign those easement agreements that you would have given the City we will do it Frankly he is going to sell this off for commercial development at some point and there are perspective buyers out there that have contacted us directly saying we will live with all of these restrictions, we will live the sewer hook up. The only, there is no reason to assume that this is unacceptable or will affect resale. Bentley: I too agree with Charlie, I think the effort has been made and I think it needs to be consummated within the next two weeks. if it is not then we will deal with it at the hearing. Baldner: I appreciate your time, are there any other questions? Corrie: No, I just had one comment, I don't know how the vote v~uld go, but my comments to Mr. Lovan would be when you said give me the money and you can have it I hope that is not cut in stone for you bec~ase if that is then you are not going to negotiate anyway. So I don't think it is but the comment was made give me the money and I will do it, so my suggestion would be to work with them in the two weeks that you have got from what you are hearing here. Lovan: (Inaudible) Albertson's did present me with those documents it just kind of struck me wrong that they should not be tell~g me what I could do. I couldn't put a pharmacy in there, I couldn't put a bakery in there, I couldn't put a child care or well anything that had to do with the retail business. I couldn't put a doctor's office in there, I f Meridian City Council January 21, 1997 Page 58 couldn't put most any other thing you want to say that they were trying to restrict me to. I don't know whether they were trying to use that as leverage to get me to sign the other document it is quite obvious that I have to have the sewer. Like t say, I don't really want the Council to treat me any different then they have not treated everyone else. If it is going to cost me the $3000 why that is the way it is period. That is really not an issue, it is an issue of fairness with me. Morrow. Mr. Mayor, I want to make a comment here, I want everybody in this room to understand that there is no difference between my position, Mr. Bentley's and Mr. Rountree's position. l want this settled by the next time. Notwithstanding the perceptions of what is right and what is wrong. I-think the onus here is upon yourself and your attorney to get it resolved over the next two weeks because very candidly at the end of the two weeks at {east as far as this issue is concerned notwithstanding the other issues in terms of the occupancy certificate by virtue of P & Z and the other folks. There will be a resolution from my perspective at the February 4th meeting. If you and your counsel have not made good faith effort you may not be very happy with the resolution. So, that is where I am standing at this particular point ire time, I don't think that is any different than what Mr. Rountree and Mr. Bentley have slated. That should be understood by Mr. Mollerup and the Albertson's folks, is that this issue is separate from the other issues that Shari has talked about but this one will be resolved on the 4th and the burden is upon you to get it resolved. Lovan: My last comment to Mr. Manweiler and the Albertson's legal is right there in the same building and it should be very easy for them to get together. Corrie: We need to have a motion to continue this discussion to the February 4th meeting. Bentley: Mr. Mayor, f move that we continue this discussion to the February 4th meeting. Rountree: Second Corrie: Motion made and seconded that we continue this to the February 4th meeting, all those in favor? Opposed? MOTION CARRIED: All Yea ITEM #11: DEPARTMENT REPORTS: Corrie: Chief? Gordon: Just one issue, I was able to locate Mr. Tolsma, he hurt is leg today and that is the reason he is not here.