07-25-1994 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

,^- i ^r*^■.Z^ '■•■T „4w/• i;il« ^4 t> j > <« • r ^ A • < ■i-S' ■m I \:>' ■;V;'5J '•.V t;:. W-- fe m. S: J ■■ •II- m W: '■■•f^sV^ . ... ■|^ ... ;■■-■■• ■• ConsisGeiit with this piefetence. they have oftod to execute a covenant not to sue.* I have sU|hdy revised their proposed covenant and attached it for your review. At the same time. Whitney MacMiUan. the owner of the property occupied by the appUcant has agreed to execute a hold haimlets and indemnification agieemenL I have also revised this docunenc and a copy for your review. In addition to these two doeuments, I ncomiiieiid dietyou obtain a bold hanolett and indemnification agreement firom Mr. Ttuchinsla. I have attached an agreement for him as well All three agreements have been revised to reflea sufBdent consideration for the promises rendered. Together, these three agreements should wodr to insolaae the City from any UabiUty in the event that the tower were to fall and cause damage on the adjoiiiint property. It appeal! that there is ample factual basis for granting a variance in this instance. Aside from the fare that the affected neighbors are in favor of the vaiianct. the terrain of the applicam's proper^ appean to impose a sufficient hardship to justify a variance. As mentioned earlier, placement of the radio tower on a location of the property which would not require a variance wotild exacerbaie the adverse aesthetic impact of the radio tower. Tharefore. it appears that the City is entitled to grant a variance. I hope this informal questions. cc: ilioffias 1 Barrett, Esq. is helpfuL Please feel free to eontaa me if you have further #• * Note that, although it is helpful for David and Karen MacMillan to agree not to sue. their agfeemeiit will not be binding on subsequent owners of their property. Bence, it is critical that enforceable hold barmhsss agreements be obtained from Whimey MacKfiUsn and Oreg Tnichintlti. U9Q20S14M 7/11/94 -■ V "M. ... r:-» M r"4