Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />i.--" <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />. <br /> <br /> <br />ij '::: :; r-..... <br /> <br />;:...;..::.. - -:'.:..:.:..- -' <br /> <br />i: (/1 <-?i' ) <br /> <br />July 6. 1997 <br /> <br />To: <br /> <br />Kim Lee, City Planner <br />Roscville City <br /> <br />fax: <br /> <br />4-~tO- 2 931 <br /> <br />Phone: 490-2236 <br /> <br />From: <br /> <br />Stuart and Carole Sellars <br /> <br />Dear Kim, <br />Thank yOIl for your fax of 7! 3/97 concerning our application for a <br />variatlC'c, "..J../r. \.\.'('re very disappointed in thE' rf'r()mmp.nc:lM,ions as outlined in <br />the "Request for Planning Commission Action - part1cularly since you and <br />Gordon SCSC'l h had both indicated the likelihood of approval for our request, <br />Perh<1ps the ;J,rch1teet got carried away a bit and did not illustrate what <br />Wf' h;'!o In mlmi i1nd hopefuUy that is a factor at this time, <br />There (1[(' several factors which are important to us and include the <br />following: <br /> <br />1, we \(,-I~h to retain a building to act as a visual barrier to ovedooklng <br />the property next door Removal of the accessory build1.ng and adding an In- <br />Une addtUon won Id provtde too open a \.1ew and lessen the w1nd protection <br />presently afforded by the exiSting structure, <br />2. ,vc believe the in-line ~ddltion WO\tlrl. n()t prmirlf' thf' kino of <br />llV1ng/worklng space we envisioned for office / solarium. <br />3, w(' planned an addition that would be in line with the neigh bor's <br />house, extending a similar amount in front of the main house. <br />4, Wf pl8r1ncd an extension that would improve the house, userihitt). 8.nd <br />appearance, while trying to minimiZe the expense. <br /> <br />V.lithou\ the requested vartance we need to retook at how best to use the <br />existing stnt('turc If it is impractical to provtce G perrnGnent Joining of the two <br />exiSting buildings. can they be joined by canvas or other fleXible Joints? <br />Presumably we don't need a vartance to upgrade the exlsttng accessory bu1lding <br />with insulation? <br />Ag;aln. T'm not sure, we would have proceeded with the request for a <br />variance. SpCTI t the money on the appHeatlon or htred an architect If you would <br />have indtcat~c1 anythtng other than a positive response. <br />We belicve we need to delay the request for a variance to another meeting <br />to rp.\.on~1rlf'r how to pn"$ent our ease differently. Attached is OUf response to <br />the eommen t.s S\1 pplied in your fax. <br />r will c,tl! vou Monday, July 7. to discuss the next step. <br /> <br />Yours Sincerely. <br /> <br />Carole and Stuart Sellars <br />