Laserfiche WebLink
16 <br />Kevin W. DeVore <br />September 2, 1997 <br />Page 2 <br />B v/as never granted a separate tax parcel number, but probably will end up as an independent tax <br />parcel. <br />Further, to my knowledge I have not suggested, and have not intended to suggest, that the Floyds <br />have any specific interest in any of the parcels identified on the survey other than Parcel B. <br />The staff recommendation adopted by the City Council on August 11 includes the requirement that <br />a final resolution formalizing the approval shall not be adopted until the applicants (McCourtney and <br />Brooks) have provided satisfactory evidence of ownership of Parcels A, E, F, G, H, I and J. The <br />Council took this action with the full knowledge that Parcel B is likely to end up as a separate tax <br />parcel and is not, therefore, included in their motion. <br />I trust this addresses your questions of August 28. Frankly, I don't know how you got the impression <br />that I suggested your client has interest in anything but Parcel B. If I have referenced any documents <br />you do not have, please feel free to contact me. <br />Sincerely, <br />Michael P. Gaffron <br />Senior Planning Coordinator <br />MPG/lsv <br />cc: Tom Barrett, City Attorney <br />4