MO 2002-055 to 2002-060 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Mr. Guss: Thank you for lett - talk and I apologize for not being er, or understanding how to answer estions like I'm directed. It wasn't -anness in my heart and I apologize to you, sir, for that. McGallian: No apology. I know that you are doing the best you can. Thank you. Mr. Guss: I will get the job done. McGallian: Thank you. Discussion. Eliason: I guess I'll start. I'm very conflicted here. On the one hand, if we approve the new conditions of approval we do provide a condition that I like which says that if it does need to be revoked that the property owner will need to clean up the property. If we revoke it without that, I don't know if we are going to get any kind of compliance to clean up that property. On the other hand, I don't see that in the two years there has been a lot of good faith effort and Mr. Guss has indicated that he is unable to come up with the money to meet the performance deposit and maintenance deposit, so I believe in a way we are simply setting him up for failure in two and a half months and I don't know if we're really doing him any favors by doing that. McGallian: Mr. Guss, you may sit down. Padro: I, too, am kind of torn with this application. There is a part of me, I guess it's the emotional part to be quite frank, I'm kind of one of those guys that's for the underdog and wants an individual to be afforded every opportunity to thrive and prosper. The letters of support that were included in the application along with the supplemented ones this evening certainly speak ighly with regards to character, dignity, respect, and all that. However, I am charged on this Board to find in terms of code, conditional use permits, and their substance. I have had an opportunity to be on this Board long enough to know that when an individual applicant comes before the Board he or she is granted a conditional use based on findings, fact, and conditions and it is fully understood tat that time that no individual represents this City, but a number of entities represents this City and as such when that conditional use permit is issued, compliance is expected and anticipated. When I posed the question earlier to both City staff as well as to the applicant with regard to reassures of compliance should modifications be made, I just again -wanted to see something of substance that we as a Board could hang our hat on. As I sit here this evening after hearing both sides, I'm sorry to say that I really can't find in that favor. As much as my heart wants to hear that, my business sense says there's been a lot of opportunity to comply, to sho%%. good faith in compliance and it just hasn't seemingly been forth coming and I need to put it in the record for whatever it represents. Shields: I went and visited the site. I've read the staff report three different times. I'm looking back from February to today. The City, I feel, has given him a fair share just like Padro and Eliason have mentioned also. It's highly questionable and again like,it was brought up, two and a half months from now when you are talking almost two years here. It's really questionable. So that's all I have for risht now. McGallian: From the Chair and knowing that the back is against the wall, I sympathize, I know •hat it's like to have my back against the wall eating production cost overrides. I think we have Board of Zoning Adjustments Meeting August 1, 1996 Minute {{No. 96-1 5 Page 10 of 12 hi V