- liz_dighton
Letters Letters - General What kind of representation is this in Flett subdivision?
What kind of representation is this in Flett subdivision?
| Letters - Letters - General |
A resident of Flett subdivision built an open seven-bay structure and attached it to the back of an existing two-car garage. This new structure is an illegal building, has two different ‘roofings’ and is oversized for the lot.
This building was completed with no permits, no inspections and with neighbors within 60 metres of his property saying ‘no’ in writing to the CRD.
This neighbor told the CRD in writing that he did not get a permit because he knew that the CRD would not approve of the building. He did not get a building permit, did not comply with a ‘stop order’ from the CRD, but continued to complete the structure.
Our elected representative of Area E took a variance application for the building to the CRD Board and the variance was unanimously approved, with no discussion or awareness that Flett subdivision is under a land use contract, much like 108 subdivision.
The adjacent neighbors within the 60 metres were contacted by the CRD and they all wrote letters of protest. There has been no positive feedback to the CRD from any Flett subdivision owners regarding the questionable variance for an illegal building.
The CRD planners said ‘no’ to the variance application. There was a neighborhood meeting on November on 10, 2009 at the CRD and the residents asked to have the building removed. This building is illegal, with no permits, including no fire code inspections, and was built with commercial intent.
No one in Flett subdivision wants a commercial development in a residential subdivision. Letting the building remain sets a precedent.
20 residents attended the meeting in November, and there were many phone calls and letters to the CRD and to the CRD board saying ‘no’ to the structure remaining in the neighborhood.
The residents of Flett subdivision received a letter on November 20 from Steve Mazur that said, “I remain convinced that requiring the removal of the building at this time serves no useful purpose.”
Because of this decision you’re representing one individual and not representing the opinions and requests of the 50+ residents. The removal of the building would restore the function of a residential subdivision.
The letter heading of the CRD says ‘Building Communities Together.’ We have built a community at Flett subdivision for 40 years, and in a short time you are destroying it.
Yours truly,
Donna Flett
Resident and Developer
Flett subdivision
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
Other articles in Letters - General
World Water Day 2010 is set for March 22 17 March 2010
Do you know how rail-ties are being chipped and burned in Williams Lake? 17 March 2010
Donna Barnett and the HST 16 March 2010
HST will mean a decrease in pay 16 February 2010
The Real Olympic Legacy 04 February 2010
Small Business Month defined 29 October 2009
The Liberals are down in the polls 29 August 2009
Latest classifieds ad listing
- Hot dogs --- a part of summer?
- Disappointment in the forestry district
- Harper government plans changes to the census process
- HST too complicated to undo
- Cariboo-Chilcotin first riding to hit the 40% mark for Anti-HST signatures
- MoneySense Magazine ‘Best Places to Live in Canada 2010’
- April 28 is Canada’s National Day of Mourning
- Picture perfect business profile
