CC_Minutes_2010_0222 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, February 22, 2010 Page 18 other non-conformities such as pavement; and availability of an entire parking field on the north side of the property, with that parcel also owned by the current property owner. Riaz Hussain, Property Owner at 1901 Lexington Avenue Mr. Hussain referenced the points made in his written request; and reiterated his need for four cars to park in the existing parking areas on the south side; and opined that the minimal traffic backing onto Autumn Street, not Lexington Ave- nue, would be problematic. Mr. Hussain advised that he was willing to make oth- er adjustments in order for those four spaces to remain. Mayor Klausing noted the extensive detail provided by Mr. Hussain in his re- sponse to the staff report, and expressed concern that Mr. Hussain was unwilling to use the parking lot to the north, and whether the City's request to remove the four spaces was a cost issue for him or if they served another purpose. Mr. Hussain advised that there would be limited customer parking if his business vehicles were parked there, and noted that delivery trucks were unable to use the north lot due to existing electric and phone lines being too low. Mr. Hussain of- fered to put any stipulations for those four spaces, if they remained, into any fix- ture purchase agreement for a future owner. Mr. Hussain advised that his current business was as a consulting engineer for HVAC services for large commercial businesses as well as a retail sales program. It was noted that Mr. Hussain's wife ran another business from the site, selling tools and equipment. Councilmember Johnson noted that there had been a flourish of activity at the site when Mrs. Hussain was having a sale at the site, similar to a yard sale, and ob- served that during that increased activity he had perceived that the situation was indeed borderline dangerous. Further discussion included existing driveway locations and possible relocation areas; review of aerial photographs of the site; and remaining lack of compliance with City Code for the parking area in question to remain. Councilmember Roe .questioned if the conditions of the original CUP remained applicable as established since the veterinary clinic use had never transpired. Mr. Lloyd noted that, as dictated by issuance of construction and building per- mits, if not implemented in six months, approval itself was null and void. Mr. Lloyd clarified that the veterinary clinic had been operational for a short time; and that this CUP would remain valid and stay with the property unless amended or terminated by the applicant or City Council action. Mr. Lloyd noted that this non-