AgdaPkt 2005-10-24 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

d)f.~ traffic attendant continuously assisted with any potential traffic issues during unloading, which takes no more than 90 minutes. The delivery procedures were reviewed by the Redwood City police department and found entirely appropriate and sufficient. . The operator swept the street (not just the sales event area) every morning, cleaning up not only debris possibly left by its customers, but also by customers of neighboring businesses, such as KFC. . The Christmas tree lot wrapped up evening operations promptly, by closing its doors at 9 p.m. and worked with the, customers already on the premises to finish their purchases as quickly as possible. These measures worked. Only one neighbor spoke at the public hearing on this use permit application. Jeff Holman, 61 Avondale, testified that that there was a big reduction in neighborhood impacts during Christmas tree sales last year. He agreed that Nicoll Enterprises had moni- tored parking, had directed traffic, and did not block El Camino Real. He also opined that KFC was a major contributor to any problems that did exist. Mr. Holman, joined by Mark Alfenito in a brief letter, asked the city to monitor the Christmas tree lot for compliance with the terms of the permit, but did not ask to end the activity. Gary and Judy Dean sent a letter to the Zoning Administrator reiterating their complaints from before the above mitigation measures were taken. Nicoll Enterprises is not aware of any evidence submitted by the Deans that relate to the type of mitigated activity that it proposes for this season. ~ Comments by the Deans should be viewed with distrust, because last December (and in previous months as well), they actively obstructed the operations of the lot. Judy Dean parked her car (with distinctive body damage) so as to block the curb cut providing access to the lot where Nicoll Enterprises ties trees to customer cars. (See photos, exhibit B - color photos previously submitted to the City.) There are no other known complaints. Up to September 13, 2005, the day before the public hearing for the use permit, the City confIrmed that they had not received any complaints regarding the operation of the Christmas tree lot. Accordingly, when the Zoning Administrator says she "substantiated" complaints about the tree lot (without revealing the complaint), they must have been complaints about a previous activity at a previous time before the mitigation measures were adopted. Indeed, the Zoning Administrator impliedly admits that mitigation measures were successful, because all of her findings concern matters that are independent of the use itself. . The lack of on-site parking is not a new fact and the conclusion "there will be parking impacts on adjacent residential streets" is hardly a finding at all. She {N IC: 14 78:WRW:HOO2167 5.DOC.1} PAGE 3 OF 4