MINUTES BOARD OF VARIANCE MEETING COMMITTEE ROOM NO.2, SAANICH MUNICIPAL HALL, 770 VERNON AVENUE, WEDNESDAY, JULY 11, 2007, AT 7:00 PM

Transcription

1 MINUTES BOARD OF VARIANCE MEETING COMMITTEE ROOM NO.2, SAANICH MUNICIPAL HALL, 770 VERNON AVENUE, WEDNESDAY, JULY 11, 2007, AT 7:00 PM Members: Staff: Minutes: Leney Place Addition Mr. Weinrich in the Chair; Mr. Bartlett; Ms. Jones; and Mr. Parker. Mrs. Hoffmann, Sr. Committee Clerk. Moved by Mr. Bartlett and Seconded by Ms. Jones: That the Minutes of June 13, 2007 be adopted as amended. Carried. APPLICATICATION OF MIKE VUCKOVIC FOR RELAXATION OF THE ALLOWABLE FLOOR SPACE IN NON-BASEMENT AREAS FROM 80% TO 94%, FURTHER TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION TO THE HOUSE ON LOT 7, SECTION 9, LAKE DISTRICT, PLAN 9604, 4411 LENEY PLACE. (Tabled at the June 13, 2007 meeting) Moved by Ms. Jones and Seconded by Mr. Bartlett: That the application be lifted from the table. Carried. Mr. Vuckovic, owner and applicant was present in support of the application. In response to a question from the Board about other options, he stated: There are no other options. He has a large property; most of his neighbours have subdivided, but he doesn t want to do this. He doesn t understand why it is a hardship to grant this variance just to provide a larger master bedroom, closet and bathroom. MOVED BY MS. JONES AND SECONDED BY MR. PARKER: THAT A VARIANCE BE GRANTED TO RELAX THE ALLOWABLE FLOOR SPACE IN NON-BASEMENT AREAS FROM 80% TO 94%, FURTHER TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION TO THE HOUSE ON LOT 7, SECTION 9, LAKE DISTRICT, PLAN 9604, 4411 LENEY PLACE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLANS SUBMITTED, WITH SAID VARIANCE EXPIRING ON JULY 11, 2009, IF NOT ACTED UPON. Discussion noted: The property is large and the addition is unlikely to affect the drainage problems. At the last meeting, the only objections raised were concerning drainage not with the variance itself. Some neighbours supported the application and most will be unable to see it. The Building Inspector has previously confirmed there are no storm sewers in this area and that the drainage issues will be addressed as part of the building permit. Page 1 of 7

2 The Parks Department has confirmed the fir tree that straddles the applicant s property and his neighbour s, Mr. Alyadurai, will not be further impacted by the addition. One member thought there were too many inconsistencies with the drawings and the application. The Motion was then Put and Carried, With Mr. Bartlett opposed. Kootenay Place Addition APPLICATION OF DENNIS NANOS FOR RELAXATION OF THE ALLOWABLE FLOOR SPACE IN NON-BASEMENT AREAS FROM 80% TO 85%, AND RELAXATION OF THE SINGLE FACE HEIGHT FROM 7.5 METRES TO 9.4 METRES, FURTHER TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION TO THE HOUSE ON LOT 2, BLOCK 3706, SECTION 32, VICTORIA DISTRICT, PLAN 25617, 3706 KOOTENAY PLACE. (Tabled at the June 13, 2007 meeting) Moved by Ms. Jones and Seconded by Mr. Bartlett: That the application be lifted from the table. Carried. Mr. Nanos, owner and applicant, together with the builder, Mr. Lindquist, was present in support of the application. Mr. Nanos stated: The back of his house is already non-conforming in terms of height. The proposed addition is one foot higher than the existing house. He has lowered the addition over the garage by 3 since the last application and the variance to the non-basement area is also less. In response to a question as to whether he considered other designs that would meet his needs without a variance, Mr. Nanos advised that it doesn t matter what he does, it will always be non-conforming. Faithwood Road New house MOVED BY MS. JONES AND SECONDED BY MR. BARTLETT: THAT A VARIANCE BE GRANTED TO RELAX THE ALLOWABLE FLOOR SPACE IN NON-BASEMENT AREAS FROM 80% TO 85%, AND RELAXATION OF THE SINGLE FACE HEIGHT FROM 7.5 METRES TO 9.4 METRES, FURTHER TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION TO THE HOUSE ON LOT 2, BLOCK 3706, SECTION 32, VICTORIA DISTRICT, PLAN 25617, 3706 KOOTENAY PLACE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLANS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD, WITH SAID VARIANCE EXPIRING ON JULY 11, 2009, IF NOT ACTED UPON. APPLICATION OF COLIN MANN FOR RELAXATION OF THE OVERALL HEIGHT FROM 7.5 METRES TO 8.3 METRES, FURTHER TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW HOUSE ON LOT 1, SECTION 7, LAKE DISTRICT, PLAN VIP 82229, 4370 FAITHWOOD ROAD. The notice of meeting was read and the applicant s letter received. Note: This property was granted a variance in February, Page 2 of 7

3 In favour In Opposition S. Valley Drive New house Colin and Lindsay Mann, owners and applicants, were present in support of the application. Mr. Mann stated: The designer calculated the original variance request, but when the builder arrived on site, he noted that the house had to be raised up because of the sewer pipe connection. His neighbours had to apply for the same type of variance recently. MOVED BY MS. JONES AND SECONDED BY MR. PARKER: THAT A VARIANCE BE GRANTED TO RELAX THE OVERALL HEIGHT FROM 7.5 METRES TO 8.3 METRES, FURTHER TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW HOUSE ON LOT 1, SECTION 7, LAKE DISTRICT, PLAN VIP 82229, 4370 FAITHWOOD ROAD, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLANS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD, WITH SAID VARIANCE EXPIRING ON JULY 11, 2009, IF NOT ACTED UPON. APPLICATION OF PATRICIA DEVELOPMENTS LTD. FOR RELAXATION OF THE SINGLE FACE HEIGHT FROM 7.5 METRES TO 8.1 METRES, FURTHER TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW HOME ON LOT 20, SECTION 16, VICTORIA DISTRICT, PLAN VIP 81821, 3832 SOUTH VALLEY DRIVE. The Notice of meeting was read and the applicant s letter received. Mr. Don Munro, owner and applicant, together with Wil Peereboom, Victoria Design, was present in support of the application. Mr. Munro stated: The house needs to be raised 2 in order to have a crawl space. The property is in a bowl and without raising the house the crawl space would only be 1 high. The sewer connections are at finished grade. A registered private building scheme for the subdivision prohibits basements and suites, so he is restricted to having a traditional twostorey home of approximately 1350 square feet. Mr. Peereboom stated that many options have been explored, including roof designs, but nothing worked without a variance. By today s standards it is a very modest house. The only home slightly affected would be the neighbour to the north, and he is in full support. This is not a level lot and the road is higher than the house, making it difficult to meet the building scheme and the sewer connections. Once they started construction, they found out the elevations were different from what they originally thought. The variance is not to provide a larger home. If the sewer connection were at the rear of the house, there would be no problem. Unfortunately it is at the front. Page 3 of 7

4 In Favour In Opposition Druce Lane New house MOVED BY MS. JONES AND SECONDED BY MR. BARTLETT: THAT A VARIANCE BE GRANTED TO RELAX THE SINGLE FACE HEIGHT FROM 7.5 METRES TO 8.1 METRES, FURTHER TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW HOME ON LOT 20, SECTION 16, VICTORIA DISTRICT, PLAN VIP 81821, 3832 SOUTH VALLEY DRIVE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLANS SUBMITTED, WITH SAID VARIANCE EXPIRING ON JULY 11, 2009, IF NOT ACTED UPON. APPLICATION OF BC LTD. AND WILLIAM BEADLE, FOR RELAXATION OF THE SINGLE FACE HEIGHT FROM 8.47 METRES AND A REQUEST TO REMOVE A GARRY OAK TREE FROM THE EASTERLY SIDE YARD OF THE PROPERTY, FURTHER TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW HOUSE ON LOT 3, SECTION 32, PLAN 5919, 3927 DRUCE LANE. The Notice of meeting was read and the applicant s letter received. William Beadle, applicant, and Harminder Dhanowa, contractor, were present in support of the application. Mr. Beadle stated: The design of the house has been changed to make it fit within the lot, which has been difficult because of the rear yard covenant to protect the trees. The lot is the minimum size for RS-6, being 6,000 square feet; the house is just over 2000 square feet on two floors. The house has been located as far away from the rear yard, and the trees, as possible, pushing the building envelope to within 5.5m of the front lot line. The neighbour has no objection to the variance. Regarding the tree removal: There are 148 trees on this property. He supports the Tree Preservation Bylaw and it is only due to the placement of the home that this one tree will come within 5 of the foundation and the root system will be compromised. This could be dangerous if we have windstorms again like we did this year. The next door neighbour has no issue with the tree removal. It was pointed out to the applicant that as the tree in question straddles the property line of the adjacent lot to the east, written permission needs to be obtained from the property owner. This was outlined in the June 28, 2007 report from the Parks Department. In response to questions from the Board, the applicant noted: He was aware of the covenants and the lot s restrictions when he bought the property. He cannot move the house further to the west because of a water retention vault at the side of the property. An arborist and Mr. Carter from the Parks Department have carefully selected various trees that can be removed from the site. The house has been designed with an elderly couple, or empty nesters, in mind. It is the smallest size it can be for today s market. Page 4 of 7

5 He was not aware of the requirement for a letter from his neighbour regarding removal of the tree. Arbutus Road Tree removal MOVED BY MR. PARKER AND SECONDED BY MR. BARTLETT: THAT THE APPLICATION BE TABLED FOR A PERIOD OF UP TO THREE MONTHS PENDING RECEIPT OF WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE NEIGHBOUR TO THE EAST, (3932 CEDAR HILL CROSS ROAD) REGARDING REMOVAL OF THE GARRY OAK TREE. CARRIED, WITH MS. JONES VOTING AGAINST. APPLICATION OF EDWARD J. BEATTY FOR PERMISSION TO REMOVE A DOUGLAS FIR TREE FROM THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY ON LOT 6, SECTION 44, VICTORIA DISTRICT, PLAN 34091, 2761 ARBUTUS ROAD. The Notice of Meeting was read and the applicant s letter received. Mr. Beatty, owner and applicant, and Ms. Gloria Morgan, 2770 McColl Street, co-owner of the subject tree, were present in support of the application. Mr. Beatty stated: The tree is listing towards the neighbour s property at about 10 o. The tree continually drops large branches on his house. Ms. Morgan stated she supports the tree removal. The houses in this area are built on solid rock and it is impossible to have a garden. She believes the root ball is very small and the root system is compromised. The tree will cause a lot of damage if it falls down. In response to questions from the Board, they stated that tree is considered to be on the property line, and they will share the removal costs. McRae Avenue Addition MOVED BY MS. JONES AND SECONDED BY MR. BARTLETT: THAT THE REQUEST TO REMOVE THE DOUGLAS FIR TREE BE APPROVED. CARRIED, WITH MR. WEINRICH VOTING AGAINST APPLICATION OF STACY McGHEE FOR RELAXATION OF THE REAR LOT LINE FROM 7.5 METRES TO 6.84 METRES, FURTHER TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION TO THE HOUSE ON LOT 16, SECTION 34, VICTORIA DISTRICT, PLAN 8410, 1751 McRAE AVENUE. The Notice of Meeting was read and the applicant s letter received. Mr. McGhee, owner and applicant was present in support of the application. Page 5 of 7

6 Bremerton Street Deck addition Mayfair Drive Tree removal MOVED BY MS. JONES AND SECONDED BY MR. PARKER: THAT A VARIANCE BE GRANTED TO RELAX THE REAR LOT LINE FROM 7.5 METRES TO 6.84 METRES, FURTHER TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ADDITION TO THE HOUSE ON LOT 16, SECTION 34, VICTORIA DISTRICT, PLAN 8410, 1751 McRAE AVENUE, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLANS SUBMITTED TO THE BOARD, WITH SAID APPROVAL EXPIRING ON JULY 11, 2009 IF NOT ACTED UPON. APPLICATION OF JAMES R. TURNER FOR PERMISSION TO RELAX THE EXTERIOR SIDE LOT LINE FROM 3.5 METRES TO 0.91 METRES, FURTHER TO THE RENOVATION OF THE EXISTING DECK AND CONSTRUCTION OF A DECK ADDITION ON LOT 20, BLOCK 1, SECTION 82, VICTORIA DISTRICT, PLAN 1411, 4138 BREMERTON STREET. The Notice of Meeting was read and the applicant s letter received. Mr. James Turner, applicant, and Mr. and Mrs. Rod Turner, owners, were present in support of the application. Letters in support from adjacent neighbours were submitted. It was noted the only neighbour who will be able to see the deck lives directly across the street, and they have no objection. MOVED BY MR. PARKER AND SECONDED BY MS. JONES: THAT A VARIANCE BE GRANTED TO RELAX THE EXTERIOR SIDE LOT LINE FROM 3.5 METRES TO 0.91 METRES, FURTHER TO THE RENOVATION OF THE EXISTING DECK AND CONSTRUCTION OF A DECK ADDITION ON LOT 20, BLOCK 1, SECTION 82, VICTORIA DISTRICT, PLAN 1411, 4138 BREMERTON STREET, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLANS SUBMITTED, WITH SAID VARIANCE EXPIRING ON JULY 11, 2009 IF NOT ACTED UPON. APPLICATION OF CAROLYN ROGERS FOR PERMISSION TO REMOVE A GARRY OAK TREE FROM THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY ON LOT B, SECTION 36, VICTORIA DISTRICT, PLAN 6250, 1905 MAYFAIR DRIVE. The Notice of meeting was read and the applicant s letter received. A letter of concern was received from Laird McConvey, 1915 Mayfair Drive. Additional information and photographs were submitted by the applicants. Matt and Carolyn Rogers, owners and applicants, were present in support of the application. Mr. Rogers stated: The new photos distributed show some of the trees and branches that have fallen down; during inspections, none of those particular trees showed any signs of distress. His parents owned the property previously and he can confirm that Page 6 of 7

7 many limbs have fallen off the trees over the years. In addition, in the last 3 years a large tree and a limb 2 in circumference have fallen in their front yard and the neighbours property. A large limb fell off the subject tree in January. He has spent $10,000+ in maintenance in the last 10 years. Ms. Rogers stated: From experience, she can conclude there is no such thing as a conclusive arborist s report unless the tree in question is definitely rotting. This particular tree is so large and very near her house, it is a major concern. She has two letters from neighbours who support the tree removal. Removing the tree is the prudent thing to do under the circumstances. She has been told by the insurance company that two claims are enough; if there is a third claim, she is on her own. Mr. Rogers confirmed that Saanich Parks staff have visited the property a few times, and advised that the trees were healthy, with nothing to indicate that the trees are compromised and yet they continue to lose limbs or fall over. Mr. Alan Bevan, 1921 Mayfair Drive, stated he witnessed a large limb crashing down a few weeks ago. There was no warning and the weather was calm. If anyone had been in the garden at the time, they would not have survived. The Board noted that Mr. and Mrs. Rogers are clearly excellent stewards of their property. MOVED BY MS. JONES AND SECONDED BY MR. BARTLETT: THAT THE REQUEST TO REMOVE THE GARRY OAK TREE FROM THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY BE APPROVED. CARRIED, With Mr. Weinrich voting against. Adjournment: On a Motion from Ms. Jones, the meeting adjourned at 8:50 p.m. Peter Weinrich, Vice-Chair I hereby certify that these Minutes are a true and accurate recording of the proceedings. Recording Secretary Page 7 of 7