violation info - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

sense to complete the old house and septic site fill, and then use the remainder of the fill for the driveway project. Until the wetland issues are resolved, we cannot do a survey because we do not know the details of the driveway project. With regard to the old detached garage, our most likely plan has been to remove the building,but we have also given some consideration to updating it for use as an accessory building. We are greatly concerned about the reference you have made to City Code 78- 1435. We do not feel this code can or should be applied to this property due to the limited options we have been presented with regarding the development of the property as a whole. We also do not see the merit of such a code to begin with, with the possible exceptions of some specific circumstances that again, should not apply here. The city should be aware that to date we have worked within the very limiting circumstances of all the city and wetland codes. Because of the development plan we have had to follow in consideration of all these codes, we believe a hardship scenario exists that should allow us to either keep the accessory building intact with a plan to renovate and eventually expand, or to remove it and eventually replace it with another accessory building. Before anything is done with the building we will need the assurances from the city that we will have the option to have an accessory building in that general area of the property. We do not support the concept of spending money to apply for a potential variance that deals with a code issue that should not be applied in our situation to begin with. We are willing to schedule a meeting to work out these details. We are also concerned about the deadlines you have listed in the letter. We had not been previously notified of any deadline dates, and we believe that if such a deadline is to be set it needs to be much more reasonable. We understand the city has provided us with some extra time to this point. Our timeline and process has been mostly based on financial feasibility. We are working very hard to restore our business and finances during a time of extreme economic challenge, and we continue to need the city to understand this and work with us. We will follow through on what needs to be accomplished with the property, in cooperation with the city, but it also needs to be a time frame that is workable for us. From the beginning of our efforts to develop and improve this property, our experience has been that you are very oriented towards identifying codes and requirements that extremely limit our options, and that some of the time it is clear these codes have not been established to be applied to our circumstances. If we toured the city there is no doubt we could find many violations of city ordinances that are not being enforced and no variances to back it up. We would like to have a city representative that will work with us and for us to come up with a plan that helps us to achieve our goal, which is to develop this property into an attractive,practical and functional property. Because we lack in knowledge and understanding of much of the code, we have made decisions along the way (greatly influenced by the actions of the city)that and have left us in a less than desirable position. We believe the city should be on board with us, working along side us to come up with the best solution for the property and advising us in such a manner. We do not feel the city has provided that type of service. You are very quick to point out why we can't do what we want to do, but make little effort to come up with other