Everything on this site is searchable — a file number, a councillor, a motion, a meeting, or an application.
Committee of Adjustment
February 7, 2019
What was decided (6 motions)
6 carried, 0 recorded otherwise. Every motion below is printed as the minutes print it.
Application for relief of: Section 6.16 (a) “Minimum Parking” to allow 7 parking stalls whereas a minimum of 18 parking stalls are required; Section 19.3 (a) “Maximum gross floor area (GFA) used for residential” to allow 75% of the GFA whereas 50% is required; Section 19.3 (c) “Minimum Landscaped Amenity Area” to allow 0m² whereas 55m² per dwelling unit is required; Section 20.2 (c) “Maximum Lot Coverage” to allow 42% whereas 40% is permitted; Section 20.2 (f) (iii) “Minimum Side Yard abutting a street” to allow 1.44m whereas 3m is required; Section 20.3 (c) “Minimum Front Yard” to allow 1m whereas 3m is required; and Section 20.3 (d) “Minimum Rear Yard” to allow 3m whereas 4m is required. is hereby: GRANTED The above decision is based on the following reasons: 1. The variance is minor in nature considering the future proposed shared parking on Town property, if approved by Council, as well as agreements for additional parking on abutting lands. 2. The variance is minor in nature as ample commercial space exists at this property. 3. The variance is minor in nature given the Downtown context and the subject land directly abuts Marlene Stewart Streit Park and the Lathrop Nature Preserve which has popular walking trails. 4. The variance is minor in nature because little additional storm water runoff will be induced as the majority of the subject lands were hard surfaced originally. 5. The variance is minor in nature given the urban context which consists of many buildings locate
Moved by Brian DiMartile, seconded by James Federico
Carried
Application for relief of Section 7.7 (a) “Maximum Accessory Lot Coverage” to permit an accessory lot coverage of 3% whereas the by-law permits 1% and Section 7.7 (d) Maximum Accessory Building Height” to permit an accessory building height of 4.6m whereas by- law permits a maximum height of 3.7m, is hereby: GRANTED The above decision is based on the following reasons: 1. The variance is minor in nature given the ample amounts of landscaped open space available on the property which allow for storm water penetration, septic system purposes and amenity area. 2. The variance is minor in nature given the rural context; adequate distance buffers the accessory building from nearby neighbours. 3. The general purpose and intent of the Zoning By-Law is maintained. 4. The intent of the Official Plan is maintained. 5. The proposal is desirable for the appropriate development and/or use of the land as it allows for enhanced storage and use of the structure. 6. This application is granted without prejudice to any other application in the Town of Pelham. 7. No objections were received from commenting agencies or abutting property owners. 8. The Committee of Adjustment considered the written and oral comments and agrees with the minor variance report analysis and recommendation that this application meets the Planning Act tests for minor variance. 9. The applicant is aware that all required setbacks, including those relating to the septic system, shall be maintained. The above decision is
Moved by Donald Cook, seconded by Brian DiMartile
Carried
Application is seeking permission pursuant to Section 45(2)(a)(i) & (ii) of the Planning Act to permit an extension to a legal non- conforming use, being a proposed agricultural farm building addition, whereas the by-law permits residential uses. The property has been in use for agricultural purposes for over 100 years, prior to the existence of the by-law and as such, has legal non-conforming status, is hereby: GRANTED The above decision is based on the following reasons: 1. The application satisfies the Planning Act and Town Policy E2 – Non-Conforming Uses. 2. No adverse impacts are anticipated for the surrounding urban residential uses with the continued general nature of agricultural business being practiced. 3. The proposed expansion is compatible with the character of the area. 4. This application is granted without prejudice to any other application in the Town of Pelham. 5. No objections were received from commenting agencies or abutting property owners. 6. The Committee of Adjustment considered the written and oral comments and agrees with the minor variance report analysis and recommendation that this application meets the Planning Act tests for minor variance. The above decision is subject to the following conditions: 1. That all necessary building permits are required prior to construction commencing for the new addition, to the satisfaction of the Chief Building Official. 2. That the Director of Public Works, Town of Pelham, be provided with satisfactory evidence
Moved by Donald Cook, seconded by Brian DiMartile
Carried
That the minutes of the December 4th, 2018, Committee of Adjustment Hearing be approved.
Moved by Donald Cook, seconded by Brian DiMartile
Carried
That the minutes of the January 8th, 2019, Committee of Adjustment Hearing be approved.
Moved by Donald Cook, seconded by Brian DiMartile
Carried
BE IT RESOLVED THAT this Meeting of the Committee of Adjustment Hearing be adjourned until the next regular meeting scheduled for March 12, 2019 at 4:00 pm.