Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning File #1103 <br />July 8, 1988 <br />Page 2 of 2 <br />If Council considers extending the duration of Resolution No. 2192, <br />staff would recommend that Park Construction provide a written statement <br />confirming that they would agree to the original conditions of Resolution <br />No. 2192 and that they would agree to an extension of the bond for the <br />appropriate period of time. Council may also wish certain conditions of <br />Resolution No. 2192 amended with this request to extend the conditional use <br />permit. For example, Council may limit the period of filling to no more <br />than two months. Staff would site the example of the berm being installed <br />on County Road 6 that seems to be taking years to complete. Staff would <br />suggest that if the filling project is begun in the summer of this year, <br />the conditional use permit need be extended just to October 31, 1988. <br />if the applicant wishes to extend the deadline beyond October 31, <br />1988, staff would advise that Mr. Eisinger file for a formal renewal <br />conditional use permit. <br />Options of Action Available to Council - <br />A. To deny Mr. Eisinger's request to extend conditional use permit, <br />Resolution No. 2192. <br />B. To approve Mr. Eisinger's request to extend conditional use <br />permit, Resolution No. 2192, asking staff to provide an appropriate <br />resolution that would limit the extension to October 31st, 1988, <br />subject also to the approval of Park Construction Company. Park <br />Construction Company would also have to provide proof to the City that <br />they would support the extension of the required bond through October <br />31, 1988. Mr. Eisirger must be advised that the City will approve of <br />no extensive filling project under the simple extension of the <br />original conditional use permit that would last moil than a 30-60 day <br />period of time. <br />C. To advise applicant to file a renewal conditional use permit <br />application. <br />