Thank you Dana for taking the time to respond to my post.
I have again read the SDAB decision and fully understand the rationale for the outcome. It’s unfortunate that I was unable to demonstrate further negative impact that a 5.9” variance (at its maximum) would cause. This whole 30 plus year issue has had a negative impact.
The SDAB decision also states there is sufficient evidence presented that there is a property devaluation due to the presence of the garage. City Council by the way of a Land Use Bylaw has determined this devaluation to be acceptable. Acceptable to who? Is 20% acceptable? That’s what we have been told by several experts. If the land is contaminated the value would be negative.
We have been stonewalled by the city since the early 80”s.
There are too many examples of the stonewalling to list here but I will give you a few:
February 20, 1986 – Then Mayor Fowler sent me a letter stating we have records of my complaints received by the city prior to this date. They will make renewed and concentrated efforts to do whatever is necessary to clean up this situation. Nothing was ever done.
April 14,1986 – In a letter to Mayor Fowler I told him the following,
By Law Officer___________ has been telling us for 2 ½ years that he knows what is going on but nothing can be done. He was correct again nothing was done.
Below are some of the statements Mayor Crouse has made regarding this issue.
July 26,2013 – I received an unsolicited email from Mayor Crouse, with only 1 sentence,
“By the way that is quite the imposing building. Wow”.
September 19,2015 - Email from the Mayor to Senior City Administration.
“Regarding 80 Salisbury Ave residential auction sale of contents
I dropped by this sale on Saturday - quite the place” During this auction the Mayor came to my house, knocked on the door and said he has seen the garage and he is going to reopen this file. Again nothing happened.
May 22,2016 – I asked the Mayor in an email why all discussions regarding this issue are “In Camera”. His response, “You asked for the reason and the reason relates to land and land values”. Yes his land values, he owns 86 Salisbury. (Pecuniary interest)
January 5,2016 – On several occasions we provided proof to the city that an illegal vehicle repair business was operating. We received a letter from then City Manager Mr Draper stating, that the city records indicate no license was ever granted for such an operation at this location.
April 5,2016 – The city offered to have a Phase1 and 2 Environmental Assessment on the new owners property. He refused. The city offered to provide $5,000 to us for a Phase 2 knowing it will cost upwards of $20,000.
Why is the city discriminating against us?
There are far too many other examples of city stonewalling to mention here.
Throughout this whole issue, we have been upfront, fair and completely honest with the city.
Why can they not treat us in the same manner?