Laserfiche WebLink
REGULAR MEETING OF THE OROP70 COTJrdCTL, rIO��EP4F3FR 27, 1979 Page 13 <br /> G�hen we finally see the survey, it confirms NORTH SHORE DRIVE T'IARIN <br /> the City longstanding r.ieasurements and denies (Continued) <br /> Iiork' s contentions of comnliance. The Cit�� <br /> has dela�ed action all year qiving Hork <br /> every opportunity to prove his case. He has <br /> heen unable to do so. <br /> 2 . No additional corirnent is necessarv except to <br /> say that two years ago in approval of the dr_y <br /> stacking aqreerlent, Hork a�reed to comply <br /> with Chapter 73 and Chapter 34 Ordinances. <br /> Iie has failed to do so. Also, surve��inc� does <br /> not normally take frorr► Februar_y (when` the <br /> original pror.mise was made bv Douglas) until <br /> August (when the City received the cony) . In <br /> fact, the survey itself is dated April 13 , 1979 , <br /> Delays frort April (which is prior to the boating <br /> season) until Auqust can onl�� be attributed to <br /> the applicant. As for husiness concerns, there <br /> has been absolutely no showinq that the docks <br /> cannot be rearranqed within the 200 ft. lirnit <br /> as has been done at other P4arinas, expeciallv <br /> considering the dry stacking which is unique <br /> at this marina. <br /> 3. The baf_fle weir and berm were to be constructed <br /> by Septerlber 30, 1977, over two ��ears ago per <br /> the terms of the dry stack ac�reement. In fact, <br /> Part of the weir construction �vas actuallv in <br /> place prior to the agreement and without any <br /> plans submitted or approvals given hv the Citv <br /> or [•7atershed District. ^his is a non-excuse <br /> for non-performance. <br /> 4. Item 2 of the stipulation references rec�uired <br /> landscaping per Fxhibit B which was siqned by <br /> all parties including Hork and Douglas. Exhibit <br /> B �hot•;s "hec?c?es" anc� "tree�" hut no .fence. Exhibit <br /> B was modified by the City at the rec�ruest of Hork <br /> � to include the "fence" as built and to include <br /> "lilac hedges, " on October 16 , 1977! The fence <br /> was not a part of the original agreer�ent. The <br /> City compromised to allow the fence but Iiork has <br /> never installed the other shrubbery as oriqinallv <br /> aqreed upon or as modified. <br /> 5. ^here has been advertising placed on the fence <br /> by Hork making it in ef_fect a giant billboard. <br /> Some panels are loose. Some paint is Peeling. <br /> Again, we have the City compromising from the <br /> well designed wood fence of residential character <br /> imagined by the City Council when the amendment <br /> to Exhibit B was agreed upon, to the industrial <br /> character metal fence actually installed. The <br /> least that could be expected is adequate maintenance <br /> of what is there. <br /> (Continued) <br />