AgdaPkt 2012-09-10 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

8.A. - Page 3 4. Loss of Lot 6 is not acceptable, nor is loss of any of the nine proposed lots. 5. If there is a determination to impose the alternate street design and loss of Lot 6 such that residual property is created, the developer would consider sale of the land. The definition of fair market value would have to be agreed to before the value is determined. Results Neither party found new middle ground nor areas of acceptable compromise, based on the points noted above. Near the conclusion of the session, the discussion shifted to options involving the sale of all or a portion of the property. This topic was first broached with the concept of eliminating the northernmost entry into the site, in exchange for a single drive at the south. This concept, proffered by the neighborhood, and studied to some degree in the EIR creates a small remnant parcel immediately adjacent to and north of Mr. Ponti's property. Also, depending upon the design of the roadway termination, this could result in the removal of Lot 6 from the subdivision, also creating remnant land. As part of the negotiations, Mr. Ponti and the neighborhood were asked if they would consider buying the remnant land. They agreed in concept, as did Mr. McGowan, if the property were to be so reconfigured. The distinction between both sides is the valuation of the property. Subsequent to the facilitated discussion, the neighborhood engaged the services of an appraisal group to assist them in understanding how the property would be valued and what that value might be. As of this writing, the results of this analysis and discussion are unknown. Building off this initial discussion, an alternative raised in the EIR analysis was discussed. In this instance the single entry point would be at the northern boundary, where the current entry is depicted, but the road would not be a loop. In this scenario, the potential for three lots fronting on Finger Avenue could be developed. Lot 6 is also lost in this scheme. The basis of raising this option was at the request of the neighborhood to consider the sale of this land (the property that would run from Mr. Ponti's property line south to the southern property boundary of the development site) to a third party. Mr. McGowan was willing to consider this option, as well, assuming the value could be agreed upon. Finally, there was discussion about the concept of a third party buying the entire development site. Mr. McGowan indicated he was willing to talk with anyone willing and able to pay an appropriate value for the property. A meeting was held between Mr. McGowan and a potential purchaser of some or all of the property, but no agreement was reached to move forward with the discussions or establishing a purchase price.