11/8/1994 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

POOP( bO €'x RI 4 the shopping center owner that the 15 off-site spaces claimed by Wendy's under the parking agreement would not be allowed to be credited toward any Parking requirements associated with future expansion of the shopping center. The shopping center owner strenuously objected to those conclusions reached in my inter -office memorandum dated September 27th and to any interpretation that allowed - Wendy's a right to use-- those spaces to satisfy their parking requirements. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Uphold the. decision not to release the site plan until such time as the parties obtain a judicial declaration. -of their rights under the reciprocal parking agreement. - 2. Uphold the decision not to release the site plan and -allow - Wendy's/Barnett to seek a. writ of mandamus ordering the site plan - released. 3. Release the site plan and risk a potential lawsuit from the shopping center owner seeking injunction or damages. 4. File for declaratory ' judgment naming both Barnett and the shopping center owner as defendants and obtain a judicial ruling as to whether the easement agreement satisfied code requirements. RECOMMENDATION: The parties to the reciprocal easement agreement disagree as to their rights under the agreement. I suggested that the parties seek a declaratory judgment of their rights under the agreement prior to the site plan being released, Alternative #1. Deputy County Attorney William G. Collins II offered some background information and explained that the former owner, Barnett Bank, had a reciprocal agreement with the shopping center that provided easements for parking on the shopping center site. Wendy's, as a fast food restaurant, required significantly more parking than Barnett Bank would have. Wendy's proposed to satisfy their parking requirements by providing half of the required 44 spaces on-site and half off-site, utilizing the easement agreement that they had with the prior owner. We had some concern about committing property within the shopping center exclusively to the use of Wendy's and a condition was put in the site plan approval that there be some documentation that they had dedicated those 15 extra spaces to Wendy's so that later on the shopping center owner could not come back, -expand the shopping center and use those surplus parking spaces. We have suggested that the parties to the agreement, the shopping center and Wendy's, seek a declaratory judgment as to what their rights are under the easement agreement. - 36 November S, 1994