Downtown Oxford’s northeast parking lot was once again the center of controversy Friday as a large portion of it was closed to the public on the eve of Celebrate Oxford.
But it wasn’t the village who barricaded the area containing more than 50 parking spaces, it was the property’s new owners ? Knauf Family Properties, LLC.
‘It’s within our rights, property right wise, to fence it off forever. It’s our property,? said local attorney Lee Knauf, who’s acting as the family spokesperson. ‘But that doesn’t seem to be a morally right thing to do.?
‘I don’t want to put anybody out of business over it. That’s not the goal at all,? he said, referring to the surrounding businesses who rely on that parking.
As a gesture of goodwill, the Knaufs on Monday reopened a portion, but not all, of their parking property for public use.
‘It will be (open) in a controlled manner,? Knauf said. ‘We don’t intend to have the thing opened up all the way after we’ve expended the monies to secure the property.?
Knauf Family Properties ? which is comprised of Knauf, his father Bob Knauf and other family members ? purchased the two northeast quadrant parcels from the Grove family for an undisclosed amount in April 2006.
All public records concerning the transaction show only a token amount as the sale price.
‘That’s a private matter and private matters will stay private,? Knauf said.
The larger parcel contains more than 50 parking spaces and a thru-way which allows vehicles to travel between the lot’s north and south ends. The smaller parcel contains no parking, but does include a loading/drop-off zone and portions of the sidewalk area behind the businesses.
Rusted metal barrels, yellow ‘caution? tape and concrete bumper blocks closed off the area all weekend.
Bob Knauf started erecting a fence around the area Friday afternoon, but he didn’t have a permit so the village issued a stop-work order.
Bob Knauf allegedly had his workers continue construction of the fence in spite of the order, right in front of the village manager. Young said he called the village police who informed Knauf violating the order is a misdemeanor. Putting up a fence without a permit is also a misdemeanor, the manager said.
Work on the fence then ceased and the posts that workers installed were removed, Young said. No tickets were issued and no arrests were made.
In a July 31 letter, the Knaufs offered to lease the property to either the village or Downtown Development Authority from Aug. 4-6 for the sum of $2,500 plus proof of at least $1 million in liability insurance covering personal injury and property damage.
‘Doesn’t that seem a little bit unreasonable,? Jim Carlisle, owner of CAM Logic, told the village council Tuesday. ‘I called it extortion, he called it rent.?
Knauf insisted liability was the main issue and reason why the property was blocked off. He said they weren’t sure if Celebrate Oxford vendors would be allowed to set up on their property as he claimed they had in the past when the Groves owned it.
‘We just weren’t willing to accept that exposure,? Knauf said.
An insurance certificate good for up to $5 million in coverage and bearing the Knauf Family Properties name was given to them, according to Manager Joe Young.
However, the DDA was not willing to pay the $2,500 lease price.
‘He can do this at any time anyway, so paying for it this weekend is not going to help in the long run,? said DDA Executive Director Amanda Cassidy on Friday. ‘We might as well get used to it during the hardest time which is Celebrate Oxford.?
As for the closing’s impact on Celebrate Oxford, Cassidy said, ‘I actually didn’t hear too many people complain about it.?
Knauf indicated the family plans to submit a site plan to the village to turn the larger parcel plus ‘a little bit of the other one? into a pay-to-park facility.
‘It’s only zoned for parking,? he said. ‘That’s all we can do with it without asking for a rezoning. And we wouldn’t expect that from the village.?
‘We purchased it knowing what it was zoned, so we’re going to use it for what we bought it for,? Knauf explained.
Cassidy said she doesn’t believe converting that area to paid-parking will have a negative impact on the downtown.
‘I don’t think it’s going to be a bad thing for the downtown,? she said. ‘It’s not the end of the world at all.?
She said people will either cross the street and park for free or pay to park on the Knauf property.
‘I think the downtown will survive either way,? Cassidy said. ‘At least there’s still parking?
‘Free parking, yeah that’s nice, but it’s not essential,? she added.
As for the smaller parcel, Knauf said it’s zoned commercial (C-1) and that’s what the family intends to use it for.
Once the pay-to-park facility is set up, he said the next project would be to prepare a plan, ‘probably next year,? to construct a building there. He noted the area allows for a building three or four stories in height.
‘We happen to have just about the right amount of parking for the square-footage we can build,? Knauf said.
Knauf explained that the family is still open to leasing or selling all of the property or trading for village/DDA owned properties.
‘We bought it as an investment,? he said. ‘It’s going to pay for itself one way or another.?
On the village end, council President George Del Vigna said, ‘Right now, it’s in the courts. We don’t know where it’s going to go from there.?
The village is waiting to hear whether the state’s highest court will agree to hear it’s case concerning the condemnation of the property now owned by the Knaufs.
‘Our attorney advised us at this point, since (it could go before) the Supreme Court, that we have no alternative, nothing that we can do at this time,? said Councilman Tom Benner. ‘According to our attorney, we’ve done everything that we can.?
When the property was owned by the Grove family ? who tried to turn it into a pay-to-park facility after decades of leasing it to the village for use as free parking ? the village, in July 2002, attempted to condemn it using the need for free parking as a justification.
The village and DDA were prepared to pay $170,000 ? each entity contributed $85,000 ? for the property based on an appraisal they had conducted. That money is still being held in escrow.
Subsequently, the village lost the condemnation case in both Oakland County Circuit Court (2004) and the Michigan State Court of Appeals (2006).
Earlier this year, the village decided to take the case to the state Supreme Court and is currently waiting to find out if it will agree to hear the case.
‘Right now, we can’t do a whole lot until we find out what the courts are going to say,? Del Vigna said.
Young said the village/DDA are open to negotiating with the Knaufs and coming up with a proposal agreeable to all parties. He noted there are five new DDA members and two new village council members, so things could change.
Exactly what the Knaufs want for the property in terms of dollars and cents to either lease or buy the parcels depends on who you talk to.
Brett Knapp, owner of Red Knapp’s American Grill, said Lee Knauf told him they would lease the large parcel for $7,500 a month and the smaller one for $2,000 a month. Knauf would not confirm this.
‘The only thing that’s going to be public is dealings with the government and quasi-governmental agencies,? he said. ‘Our private business will remain private.?
Knapp also said that Bob Knauf told him ‘he’d like to see these business owners (in the northeast quadrant) all pool their money and buy? the smaller parcel.
‘And then the village somehow make a deal for (the larger one),? Knapp said.
Bob Knauf wouldn’t comment on the record.
Prices for the small parcel have ranged from the $200,000s to the $400,000s, according to Knapp.
Other prices ranging from $1 million to $1.5 million have been bandied about for either both parcels or just the larger one. Knapp said the whole situation is ‘really ambiguous.?
‘Nobody seems to know what he wants,? he said. ‘We’re not really sure what he wants.?
In July 2005, the Knaufs offered to trade the larger parcel in exchange for two village-owned parcels that form the alley between Broadway and Ensley streets, the three DDA-owned properties on E. Burdick St., back rent on the northeast quad property in the amount of approximately $200,000, dismissal of the appeal in the Grove lawsuit, and payment of an estimated $50,000 in attorney fees on the lawsuit.
The Knaufs also wanted the smaller parcel to be sold to a third party for $330,000.
A cost analysis done by the village revealed Knauf’s July 2005 proposal equalled a total of $1,548,980 for both parcels.
The village/DDA rejected the offer.
In December 2005, the DDA offered a straight trade of its three E. Burdick St. properties for both the northeast quadrant parcels. Cassidy said the Knaufs didn’t respond to the offer. ‘He just says you know what we want,? she said.
Lee Knauf said he didn’t recall the DDA’s offer.
Knauf said the last offer his family made to the village/DDA was to sell them the larger parcel for $1 million.
‘I don’t recall seeing that in writing or anything,? said Young, referring to the $1 million offer.
‘All of our efforts over the last year or two to work with the village and DDA haven’t borne any fruit,? Knauf said. ‘We haven’t been able to reach any agreement with them.?