Laserfiche WebLink
6 <br /> Ms . Johnson said that she has everything lined up to remove the wall if a decision <br />is made to that effect. <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati asked about the soundness of the wall. <br /> <br /> Ms. Johnson said she feels very good about the soundness of the wall. She said <br />interior improv ements made to the building had no affect on the wall. She said there is <br />no sign of falling bricks, but noted that no one has dissected it. <br /> <br />Mr. Caravati asked why the issue of the authority of the BAR was only recently <br />brought up, and Ms. Johnson said th at she has gone to the BAR with other issues step by <br />step. <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati asked if there is any agreement about the day light issue and is Ms. <br />Johnson trying to sell the property. <br /> <br /> Ms. Johnson said there is no agreement about the day light issue and she h as no <br />plans to sell at this time. <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati asked Mr. David Franzen, attorney for Gabe Silverman, why there <br />was no discussion of the relevance of the BAR, and Mr. Franzen said that is an issue for <br />the defense. <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati asked if there is any mate rial backup to the question of the <br />soundness of the wall. <br /> <br />Mr. Franzen said to the best of his knowledge no structural engineer has evaluated <br />the wall prior to or since it separation from the southern wall. Mr. Franzen said his client <br />believes this discon nection has weakened it. Mr. Franzen said the wall also leans in the <br />direction of the adjacent property. <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati asked if the day light issue has been resolved, and Mr. Franzen said <br />no. <br /> <br /> Mr. Cox said he has been to the site twice and he did not de tect any leaning of the <br />wall at all. He said the wall is absolutely plum, and he said the parapet could be <br />straightened. <br /> <br /> Mr. Schilling said he has no good sense as to why Mr. Silverman has requested <br />that the wall be taken down. <br /> <br /> Mr. Franzen said he thi nks Mr. Silverman is the best person to address that <br />question to. <br /> <br /> Mr. Cox said that when he met with the property owners it appeared to be an issue <br />of clarifying property lines and there was a mention made of a hypothetical development <br />of an addition. <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati said he does not think it is Council's place to determine Mr. <br />Silverman's motivation. Mr. Caravati said it is remiss to vote on the issue at all at this <br />time. He said he thinks it is a piecemeal way to get at what they are trying to do, with the <br />day light issue unresolved. He moved to table the appeal. <br /> <br /> Mr. Schilling seconded the motion to table the appeal, with the caveat that if the <br />judge reinstates the fines that Council will take the matter up again. <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati accepted this condi tion. <br /> <br />rd <br /> Mr. Cox noted that Council will not be meeting again until November 3 . <br /> <br /> Mr. Caravati said that the City Attorney's office will attend the court proceeding <br />and will seek to be a party. <br />