Microfiche records prior to 2006 have not been completely digitized and may not be available yet on PRO. If you cannot find what you are looking for please submit a records request.

Case Details

Status:

NOVERIFY

Type:

COMMERCIAL ZONING
Address:

Entered Date:

06/27/2014

Applicant:

JOHN D VAGRETTI JR 1/2 & WARFIELD TOTTEN K & DONNA JT/RS 1/2

Description:

POSSIBLE ZONING ISSUE - BACK PARKING LOT WALL

Outstanding Inspections

Case Number: T14DV04271
Case Status: NOVERIFY
Case Description: COMMERCIAL ZONING
Total Outstanding Inspections - 1
End Date Description Inspector Results Comments
07/28/2014 LUC - ZONING OTHER COX Item closed

Completed Inspections

Case Status: NOVERIFY
Case Number: T14DV04271
Case Description: COMMERCIAL ZONING
Total Completed Inspections - 2
End Date Description Inspector Results Comments
06/27/2014 INSP - INITIAL CODE ENFORCMENT COX Approved There is no wall prohibiting access from the rear parking lot of this address to the neighboring address 4998. There is a double hung chain link gate which is secured with a padlock and chain. The gate does not appear new and perhaps has been in place for some time. There were two signs on the gates which stated beware of dog and no trespassing. The buildings at 4998 and 5002 E. 22nd are owned by the complainant, vavant/unoccupied and are currently for sale with Tierra Antigua Realty. I researched the address for the neighboring business for any pending zoning reviews or construction permits and none were found. Any legally recorded documentation of an easement as stated by the complainant would be a civil matter between property owners.
07/28/2014 INSP - FOLLOW UP CODE ENFORCE COX Approved On 07/22/14 inspector Pumphrey and myself met the property owner on site to conduct an additional inspection. The PO was insistant that one of the access doors to her property was blocked. Inspector Pumphrey and myself checked from the property owners side as well as the adjacent property and there is no access blockage. Even in the face of this evidence the owner insisted the neighboring business had modified the opening to her business. I explained again that if her claim had any validity she would be in a place where civil action on her part would be her line of recourse and that no code violations existed. In the end she still refused to accept that civil action was her recourse to validate her claims. Case closed.

Completed Activity Special Conditions

Case Description - COMMERCIAL ZONING
Case Number - T14DV04271
Case Status: NOVERIFY
Total Completed Case Activity Conditions: 1
Date Name
07/07/2014 VIOLATION CLOSED