08-22-1994 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

r ,j . J • <J ^j . t - : ' ' Consis*.£nt with this preference, they have offered to execute a covenant net to sue.' I have slieh*tly revised ±eir proposed covenant and attached it for your review. At the sane tune, wiimey MacMillan, the owner of Lhe propeny occupied by the applicant has agreed to execute a hol'd harmless and inderr.mficauon agreement. I have also revised this dccunent and anached a copy for your review. In addition to these two documents. I recommend Lhai vou ohtain'a hold harmlk^s and indemnification agreement from Mr. Tmehinsk:. I have u-tach-ran agreement for him as %vell. .All three agreements have been revised to rerlect mrTicient consideration for the promises rendered. Together, these Lhree agreements should work to insulate the City from any liabiHty in the event that the tower were to fall and cause damage on the adjoining property. It appears that there is ample factual basis for granting a variance in this instance. Aside from the fact that the affected neighbors are in favor of the variance, the terrain of the applicant’s property appears to impose a suiticient hardship to justify a variance As mentioned earlier, placement of the radio tower on a locauon of the propercy which would not require a variance would exacerbate the adverse aesthetic impact of the radio tower. Therefore, it appears that the City is entitled to grant a variance. I hope this information is helpful. Please feel free to contact me if you have further questions. cc; i homes J. Barrett, Esq. ‘ Note that, although it is helpful for David and Karen MacMillan to agree not to aue, their agreement will not be binding on subsequent owners of their property. Hence, it is critical that enforceable hold harmless agreements be obtained from Whimey Mac. Ii an an Greg Truchinski. ;i9/a:051495 7/1S.9J