Laserfiche WebLink
m <br />Dm ft <br />Sobj«cts <br />3300 fox Strmmt <br />Nicha«l P. Cxffron, A**t Planning 4 Zoning Administrator <br />August I4» 1990 <br />Land Altaration in 0-75’ Lakaahora Protactod Zona, <br />No Parmitt <br />v.i ' - ^ <br />This sftsrnoon. Inspector Bruce Vang was inspecting the <br />he was told by his boss and he believed that Mr. Pisher and Mr. <br />Steven Bruce (Bruce Coepanies, the general contractor for the <br />house) had net. on the site prior to the work and he was Just <br />following ordorn.1W. ’l«»«Jl«toly iMuod a Stopproieet* sent all'the sub-contractors hone# and I left the si^ <br />to attesmt to contact Mr. Fisher and Mr. Bruce. Inspector Bruce <br />Vang and eventually Mrs. Fisher showed up at which tine she and <br />Bruce discussed the violations that were occuring. <br />tine# I contacted Chip Fisher’s office and was told by his <br />secretary that he was out of town until Thursday. I then nade <br />contact with Steven Bruce who assured ne that his intent was to <br />have hay bales placed along the lakeshoro, although he would <br />certainly assist in the followup# he was not part of the loop <br />with Mr. Fisher hiring a grading contractor. I notified Mr. <br />Bruce that I need to meet with himself and Mr. 4 Mrs. Fisher <br />toworrow aorning at 9t00 on th. ait. to diaeua. lamadlata <br />restoration and protection of the site. I advised him that X <br />axpactwl hia to follow through with .roalon prot.ctionb.caua. it <br />is likely that we will be getting rain tonight according to the <br />radio. <br />As a point of reference# I met with Mrs. Fisher on December <br />6# 1989 and on December 7# 1989 sent a letter to she and Mr. <br />Fisher documenting our site inspection inspection of December <br />6th# and verifying clearly what could and could not be done as <br />far as grading work on the property. Thic letter was <br />applicant’s surveyor and to Bruce Companies# the <br />contractor. Obviously# this letter has been i^ored jjV <br />property owners and the builder. I noted for the <br />letter of December 7th that there is likely ^*5^. J.? <br />Joatlfication for the City to approve any regarding within 75 or <br />the shoreline. It appears that they have done this anyway. My <br />only reasonable recommendation is that this 5.T <br />^Mi^iately and City staff will recommend denial should an after- <br />the-fact application be forthcoming. <br />_ _