My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-27-2006 Council Agenda
>
City Council Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2006
>
09-27-2006 Council Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/22/2014 3:17:09 PM
Creation date
3/19/2012 1:43:01 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
178
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />JUNE 28, 2006 <br />LaValle asked how many cars actually belong to Sedaghat. Sedaghat <br />replied that 10 to 15 cars are owned by customers and the rest were his. It <br />was estimated that there are 75 to 100 vehicles on the property. <br />Blesener asked if Sedaghat had any employees who could repair the cars. <br />Sedaghat replied that he has some people that come in in the morning and <br />in the evening to repair vehicles. <br />Blesener stated that he was not willing to grant Sedaghat six months, but <br />would consider a 90 -day timeframe for him to get the property into <br />compliance. Blesener stated that given the 6 % year history with Valor <br />Enterprises, he was not confident that the property would be brought into <br />compliance. LaValle agreed with the 90 -day timeframe and suggested <br />that there be 30 day progress inspections. <br />Sedaghat did not feel 90 days would be adequate time and felt 6 months <br />would be on the safe side. Sedaghat again noted his difficulty in finding <br />people to repair vehicles. <br />Blesener stated that he was not willing to allow the 6 months, noted <br />Sedaghat's history and the fact that he keeps bringing more cars into the <br />site. Blesener instructed Sedaghat to get rid of the junk. <br />Montour noted that when the original CUP was approved in 1999, <br />Sedaghat agreed to the conditions that the City imposed. Montour pointed <br />out that Sedaghat continued bring in more cars to this site over the number <br />allowed and the City kept giving Sedaghat additional time to get the site <br />into compliance. Montour stated that he did not want to put Valor <br />Enterprises out of business, but was only willing to give Sedaghat another <br />90 days. Montour stated that he was afraid this issue will be back before <br />the Council. Montour felt that if compliance is not achieved within the 90 <br />day time period, the CUP's should be revoked and the auto licenses not <br />renewed. <br />Keis agreed. He noted that if Sedaghat had shown progress all along, he <br />would feel more comfortable. Keis indicated that 6 months is too long, <br />but he would agree to a 90 day extension with 30 day progress reports. <br />Keis suggested that if compliance is achieved, the City continue to issue <br />Sedaghat licenses for 90 day periods to keep tight controls on this <br />situation. <br />The City Attorney reported that the City Council has the ability to issue <br />the auto repair and auto sales licenses for time periods shorter than one <br />year. The City is not under any obligation to reissue these licenses if there <br />are non - compliance issues at the property. <br />14 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.