PL PACKET 07211987 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

1 -5- 2 3 show what would -in all probability be "only a tempor- 4 ary arrangement, .particularly if -Mr. Larwick decides to 5 grade his parcel prior to the development of my pro- 6 perty. " 7 8 *stated the reason no contour lines had been drawn . 9 between Mr. Forsberg' s .property on Belden. Drive and 10 Mr. -Larwick' s property had been because there was only 11 a two foot differential in grade between those proper- 12 ties; 13 14 ' *indicated that he talked to 'Mr. Larwick but had been 15 unable to get a slope easement from him because his 16 copy of the minutes requiring that easement had only 17 reached him that afternoon; 18 19 *disputed the minutes ' reference to a motion requirement 20 for "l to 2 feet on the lot, except at the northeast 21 property line" , saying his notes had shown only a 3 22 foot requirement within the final grades had been dis- 23 cussed with 5 feet at the northeast property line; . 24 25 *stated he believed the 5 feet would be within the 26 Larwick parcel. 7 28Councilmember Enrooth asked Mr. Evanson whether delaying a decision to 29the Council ' s June 23rd meeting would be a real problem for him. The 30property owner said that would probably be no problem because he had been 31unsuccessful in finding one person or contractor who would be willing - to 32take ,all the dirt at once. However, he said he was concerned that "every 33time I ' ve come back, having met all requirements, there' s another 34condition imposed on my request being approved. " 35 36Councilmember Enrooth responded that he was not suggesting additional 37conditions but rather only that the Councilmembers and staff might need 38more time to digest and fully understand the plans which had only been 39presented that evening. The Councilmember said he personally would need 40to know specifically how much ground was going to be removed before he 41could approve the plan. 42 43Mayor Sundland agreed that removing 7 feet of grade to obtain the 44required slope appeared to be substantial enough to warrant more 45specifics on just how that transition was going to be made. 46 47Mr. Evanson told him there was an' existing 10 foot transition along Mr. 48Forsberg' s side of the property and a 5 foot easement from Mr. Larwick 49would leave only a. 2 foot differential to be graded even if the grading 50were started immediately. 51 5.2Staff Report: Mr. Childs indicated he would check the tape of- the •53 hearing minutes to clarify the disputed motion, but 54