Laserfiche WebLink
your consideration: <br />Applicant's October 28_, 1985, letter - 'This is a etter <br />that was pre^ented to the ^Council by the applicant at <br />their October 28th meeting and he specifically requests <br />that we have that that included in this packet. <br />Additionally he has requested staff insert in the draft <br />resolution that applicants findings c,.' facts. As this <br />has not been done in prior applications the staff has <br />indicated that it will be up to the Council as tau <br />tether su 1 should be inserted since applicant and <br />star' a .e lot in agreement on all findings. <br />C.it.1 Attorie 's 0 inion - It is ant Icipated that the <br />City Attorney will present -) written opinion i-gardlig <br />th. matter on Monday, November 25. 1985. <br />Ame:rded Resolution - Attached please find resolution <br />sanded from last time which does include a hold <br />u ,mIess agreement provision as a precondition to <br />granting the variance. <br />Staff re3uest for interpertation dated June 51 1985 - <br />This is the memo that was presented +to CoonciI <br />rtquesting their interpertation and intent as it elates <br />to fences within the 0-75. <br />RECOMMENDATION - Staff rEcommendation based on the exprc.cation <br />that by now�Lhe ordinance would be amended to al low up to 3 112 <br />feet within the 0-75 and review of the situation was that Mr. <br />Rovegno would be allowed to keep up to a 5 foot fence at a place <br />closer to the iakeshore than presently exists sc that it was <br />always 3 112 feet below the crown of the utting road (with thr <br />first 30 feet from the acc,!ss being at - .) <br />