CCMIN011795 - Laserfiche WebLink

Ms. Michelotti asked how the word "only" in the current condition applies to tenants; i.e. could they use it to take out the trash. Mr. Roush stated tenants cannot use the back doors to enter or leave the center. There may be appropriate things that could be done and merely walking out the back door would not be a violation. He did not believe the trash receptacle was accessible through the back door. Harvey Levine, 7026 Koll Center Parkway, representing Steve Thomas, indicated he had drafted Measure X and could speak for what the "intentions" were. He reviewed current uses of the back area and indicated people do take the trash out this way and the drycleaners use the area to unload a van. These are inoffensive, non-nuisance activities that will be prohibited by the new condition. He believed the City has lost its opportunity to limit the use of the driveway and disagreed that it was implicit in Measure X. He further stated that Measure X included a condition which specifically provided for when the PUD can be amended; it can be amended provided the ability of the developer to proceed with his project is not limited. What Council is doing now will limit the development of the project. In order to do that, Mr. Levine believed a vote of the people is required. He stated his position that this is in fact a taking and if the court agrees, Color Tile will proceed and the City will have to pay for temporary taking damages, attorneys' fees, as well as whatever the value of the taking. Ms. Michelotti recalled that because of the concerns of the neighbors, the back area was planned for landscaping to prevent activity in the area. Mr. Levine agreed there was no limitation, but people would have been walking back there. He also agreed there were a lot of concerns of the neighbors, who were not satisfied by the City's efforts and circulated a petition. The City rescinded its approval and it was the citizens at large who had to approve the use for this site. The fight of the neighbors has been against the general will of the people to build this project. Mr. Roush did not believe this condition (2.ii.) constitutes a taking because the condition is already in Measure X and that the condition does not prevent Color Tile from going forward because it has agreed to a limit on rear access. There is nothing that would put current tenants out of business because of lack of rear access. Mr. Tarver stated the developer agreed to gate the access and thereby not allow the area to be used. Mr. Levine responded that the gate was installed because juveniles and other non-tenants were causing a nuisance. Mr. Thomas agreed to install a gate and all tenants have keys to the gate. There was never an intention to keep the tenants out. He did not believe tenants taking their trash out is a nuisance. The neighbors have never complained about any of the previously described tenant activities and he did not believe these activities constituted a nuisance. 01/17/95 -5-