RE: 'ice house'/accessory structure/hardcover issues

Home Browse Search

3532 Ivy March 31, 2003 Page 2 The Resolution required that the icehouse be removed from the property before issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and no later than August 17, 2001. Sometime during 2001-2002,the driveway was paved and incorporated pavement to serve the third garage stall, and the driveway was noted informally by staff to appear to exceed the allowed area. However, in deference to Councilmember White's ongoing concerns about finding some way to allow the icehouse building to remain,staff did not pursue resolving the pavement&icehouse issues during most of 2002. In December 2002 staff concluded that the matter needed to come to a head before it was lost in the shuffle. Lyle Oman sent a letter to the Cables on or about February 12,2003 setting a deadline date of March 10,2003 for removal of the icehouse and the excess pavement. That deadline has come and gone with no action nor contact from the Cables. The City has not issued a permanent Certificate of Occupancy for this property. We have recently heard through a neighboring property owner that the Cable property may be going up for sale. This has added a sense of urgency to the matter since you have in the past advised us that a subsequent owner may not be bound by prior agreements that are not in the form of a contract. We need to proceed on this as soon as possible. Please advise as to our next steps-letter from us?- letter from you? Lis Pendens? Copies of the variance denial resolution, the TCO, and the recent letter requesting removals, are attached. �LS� �G. � �. �'Lt /!V K T'�"� �'l�!►��I - 2�q�� _ 7�z 31/0� (As an aside, after some research, staff has concluded that the `icehouse', if it was used for storing ice,was clearly not designed for commercial use but would have been perhaps just for family use, as it does not have the insulated double-wall construction that would have been typical of a commercial ice house.)