Laserfiche WebLink
~~ <br /> <br />515 Little Canada Road, Little Canada, MN 55117-1600 <br />(651) 766-4029 /FAX: (651) 766-4048 <br />wvnv. ci.little-Canada. mn. us <br />MEMORANDUM <br />TO: Planning Commission Members <br />FROM: Jessica Jagoe, Code Enforcement Officer <br />DATE: May 5, 2004 <br />RE: Valor Enterprises - 3165 Spruce Street <br />MArox <br />Michael 1. Fahey <br />COUNCIL <br />Jim La Valle <br />Maft Anderson <br />Riclc Montour <br />BllL IIlesener <br />AIJMINISTRATOR <br />Joel 12. Hansmt <br />I wanted to give everyone an update on our dealings with Fred Sedaghat, Valor Enhprises, since the matter was tabled to the <br />May cycle. Afrer the meeting on November 13, 2003 when the CUP amendment was tabled, I sent Mr. Sedaghat a letter <br />recapping the options for proceeding with the amendment. The options were as follows: <br />1. Come into city offices and sign another 60-day waiver to allow for more time for him to complete the site plan and <br />grading options. This required him to complete his evaluations and design by no later than Monday, February 23, <br />2004. Processing of the application would then continue in the March planning cycle. <br />2. Come into city offices with a revised site plan by Monday, December 22, 2003 and no engineer's report. In that <br />case, he would have been scheduled for the next Planning Commission meeting on Thursday, January 8, 2004. With <br />out grading information, the Planning Commission will be relying on the drainage information submitted by the City <br />Engineer in his report dated November 6, 2003. <br />3. Lastly, he had the option to not submit any new plans or information. In that event, the matter will go before the <br />Planning Commission and City Council in January with the infom~ation submitted to date. In this case, staff will be <br />recommending denial of the application. If the Planning Commission and City Council agree with staff s <br />recommendation, we would then take an aggressive enforcement stance to resolve outstanding issues. <br />On December 19, 2003, Mr. Sedaghat stopped into city offices to discuss the letter further with Joel Hanson. At that time, it <br />was agreed that he would still submit a more realistic site plan by January 19, 2004 and the grading evaluations by Apri19, <br />2004. He signed the 60-day waiver and wished to proceed with his amendment. Following that meeting, I sent Mr. Sedaghat <br />a letter on January 7, 2004 recapping that conversation and the terms he agreed to. On January 19, 2004, Mr. Sedaghat did <br />submit a revised site plan. The new site plan showed the proposed sales lot area, increased cars for storage/repairables, and <br />the installation of storage closets for parts/junk/debris. I sent the same letter again on March 23, 2004 as no information had <br />yet been received regarding the grading information. <br />On May 5, Joel Hanson and I stopped out at Valor Enterprises to review the status of the property. Mr. Sedaghat said he was <br />not going to have someone come out and survey the grades of the property. He advised us that he would like what has been <br />currently submitted to be reviewed with a decision made based on that. <br />I counted at least 102 cars on the entire lot. There were six in the sales lot (front fenced area, some with flat tires), 6 in <br />customer parking, 12 along side parking (most of these cars were repairables ex. Flat tires, hoods up, etc.), and roughly 78 in <br />rear yard. In the rear yard, it was hard to determine what was a repairable car vs. car clip. He also had numerous piles of car <br />parts, batteries, and junk. Attached are some photos taken of the site on 5/5/04. <br />