CCMIN010395 - Laserfiche WebLink

think this was a good site for this kind of operation and agreed it should be used for offices only. He thinks there are major parking problems in that center. He thought the one hour parking signs with tenants names on them was extremely ugly. He agreed the original PUD requirements should be reinstated. Ms. Dennis believed the problem with the shopping center does not stem from this application, but from the lack of enforcement of prior conditions. She did not believe restricting that space to office use only will solve the problems. She wanted to accommodate businesses, but there are many problems in this center which have not been solved by conditions. She sympathized with the residents because of the halogen lights and people arguing in the parking lot area. Ms. Michelotti asked for clarification of the changes to the original ordinance and Mr. Swift explained the sequence of changes and problems with publication of the original ordinance. Ms. Michelotti indicated there is a problem which the neighbors have had to deal with and that is with the management of the parking situation. She sees that as different than the rights of this applicant for a conditional use permit. It must be granted or denied in light of compliance with what is allowed in that center. That is the basic question and she believed that is what must be decided. Later the enforcement problems can be dealt with separately. She questioned whether Council can legally revert to office use only. Ms. Mohr stated that even changing to office only doesn't sound like it will solve the problem as long as the gate issue stands. She also understands the noise problems at night and there have been problems with Popi Lounge since it opened. She asked Mr. Swift if he could see any solution to the gate problem, other than having the residents call to complain every night. Mr. Swift indicated staff has tried to get the gate closed on numerous occasions. The problems have been with the management of the center over its history. The new owners of the property have been contacted to get the gate closed and with regard to the designation of individual parking spaces for individual business. The City has tried to work with this center in many respects to assist the center in being successful. Unfortunately, the center has not reciprocated by being sensitive to the neighbors and cooperating with the City by abiding by the rules. Mr. Swift preferred dealing with the problems by code enforcement methods to trying to attach conditions on this application and penalize Mr. Abigana. Mr. Tarver suggested denying the application with prejudice. The owner of the property has been given many opportunities to comply with the conditions and has not. The residents are here to say they don't want any more changes given. He did not want to approve the application and then have to evict Mr. Abigana when the conditions are not adhered to. Neither did he want to cause the residents to have to take on the burden of calling enforcement every night when the 01/03/95 13-