Posted by Mark, a resident of the Shoreline West neighborhood, on Sep 6, 2012 at 12:28 pm

Thank you Mr. Gilli for taking a bigger stick to the zoning regulations table than the wanna-be bully Merlone Geier brought. Your common sense is refreshing to see coming from a public official. Thanks for being fair to not only the business owners in the buildings referred to in this story, but to the members of the public who shop and frequent these businesses as well.

Posted by Nancy Morimoto, a resident of the The Crossings neighborhood, on Sep 6, 2012 at 2:30 pm

I choose to see this as a positive and hopeful sign from Merlone Geier that the city staff, elected officials and citizens of Mountain View will be working with a good faith partner as the community comes together soon to envision the future for the San Antonio change area for the benefit of all invested parties. I hope I'm proved right.

Posted by Peter, a resident of the Cuesta Park neighborhood, on Sep 6, 2012 at 2:33 pm

Hey Mark,

I wonder how you would react if one of your neighbors starting parking their car in your driveway or in your designated parking spot. I wonder then if you would be concerned about property rights. Of course you would. I bet you would call the police or the property manager to have the car towed off your property if the owner of the car refused to move their car. Now if the police said they were not going to do anything about your neighbor’s car, if you would still call this fair.

Posted by James, a resident of the Cuernavaca neighborhood, on Sep 6, 2012 at 3:25 pm

Hey Peter, the issue has been resolved. Seems some people understand that just because you may have the right to be a jerk, doesn't mean you have to be a jerk. If my driveway had plenty of spots and was accessible and accessed by the general public for decades without complaint, I as the new owner may have the right to put up a big fence around it, but I'd be a jerk to do it. Besides, a private driveway is a bit different that a historically accessible public parking lot. Regardless, just because you can, doesn't mean you should.

I'm glad the developer finally understood this and backed down.

Posted by Patrick Grant, a resident of another community, on Sep 6, 2012 at 3:42 pm

Though I'm not a lawyer, from a real estate law course I took a few years ago, seems that Adverse possession of easements apply here. Basically if the property owner allowed access through their property openly and continuously for a number a years, they can no longer block access. Something the developers of San Antonio shopping center are now attempting to do in violation to this centuries old common law principle still very much in force today. Most places that is 7 years. Hopefully the affected businesses have gotten a good real-estate lawyer.

see the California government department of transporation site

dot.ca.gov/hq/row/landsurveys/Study_material/California-Adverse-Possession.pdf

Posted by Sabrina, a resident of the The Crossings neighborhood, on Sep 7, 2012 at 1:00 am

This is good news. Hopefully there won't be worse to come, though with a greedy developer like Merlone Geier one never knows.

Posted by Garrett, a resident of another community, on Sep 7, 2012 at 8:17 am

The question now is? Could MG still give these merchants parking hassles? I think having as many small businesses around my project would be a plus to my tenants their customers and workers. You build a whole mixed use project around small businesses.