Laserfiche WebLink
<br />by the City, for which a whole neighborhood will suffer. It would seem the City could and <br />should resolve the situation by some such agreement. <br /> <br />Proposal 2 (Alternative) <br /> <br />Deny approval of the variances because of the disputable basis for hardship and <br />complete opposition of the neighborhood. Matt Schlosser can still develop his property <br />with four lots that all meet code, for example, by combining lots 1 & 2 into a single lot - <br />neighbors would then at least not feel like they are paying the price for someone's <br />miscalculation about how many lots could be squeezed out or unfairly subsidizing Matt <br />Schlosser's financial gain. <br /> <br />I would appreciate a formal response prior to or at the City Council meeting on July 27 <br />concerning the assessment and variance/ hardship issues, including a statement by the <br />City Attorney addressing laws and legal precedents relevant to both issues, as well a <br />formal response to these proposals. I also request that this document and the Council's <br />response be made part of the public record. Thank you for your consideration. <br /> <br />GIZi}bmmedj{ <br /> <br /> <br />Robert T. TranqU~ <br /> <br />encl. <br /> <br />1 <br />