Skip to main content
File #: 15-505    Version: 1 Name:
Type: Staff Report Status: Passed
File created: 11/2/2015 In control: Council
On agenda: 11/16/2015 Final action: 11/16/2015
Title: DEVELOPMENT VARIANCE PERMIT, 1019 Colville Road, PID 006-328-661, Amended Lot 10, (DD 114302-I), Block 20, Section 10, Esquimalt District, Plan 2546
Attachments: 1. Staff Report DEV-15-059, 2. 1019 Colville Road - DVP00038, Schedule A Plans, Schedule B Survey, 3. Appendix C - Subject Property Map, 4. Appendix D - Aerial Photo, 5. Appendix E - RS-1 Zone

REQUEST FOR DECISION

 

DATE:                       November 9, 2015                     Report No. DEV-15-059

TO:                       Laurie Hurst, Chief Administrative Officer

FROM:                      Krystal Wilson, Planning Technician

SUBJECT:

 

Title

DEVELOPMENT VARIANCE PERMIT, 1019 Colville Road, PID 006-328-661, Amended Lot 10, (DD 114302-I), Block 20, Section 10, Esquimalt District, Plan 2546

End

 

RECOMMENDATION:

 

Recommendation

That Council resolves that Development Variance Permit No. DVP00038 authorizing the construction as shown on the plans prepared by Andrew Akehurst and Lys Hermanski, stamped ‘Received September 25, 2015’ [attached as Schedule ‘A’] and as sited on the survey plan prepared by Powell & Associates, stamped ‘Received October 1, 2015’ [attached as Schedule ‘B’] and including the following relaxations to Zoning Bylaw, 1992, No. 2050, be approved, and staff be directed to issue the permit and register the notice on title of PID 006-328-661, Amended Lot 10, (DD 114302-I), Block 20, Section 10, Esquimalt District, Plan 2546 [1019 Colville Road].

 

Zoning Bylaw, 1992, No. 2050, Section 34(9)(b)(ii) - Side Setback - Accessory Building: a 0.9 metre reduction to the required 1.5 metre side setback [i.e. from 1.5 metres to 0.6 metres].

 

Zoning Bylaw, 1992, No. 2050, Section 34(9)(a)(ii) - Side Setback - Principal Dwelling: a 0.75 metre reduction to the required 1.5 metre side setback [i.e. from 1.5 metres to 0.75 metres] for the principal dwelling.

Body

 

RELEVANT POLICY:

 

Official Community Plan Bylaw, 2006, No. 2646

Zoning Bylaw, 1992, No. 2050

Development Application Procedures and Fees Bylaw, 2012, No. 2791

 

STRATEGIC RELEVANCE:

 

This Request for Decision does not directly relate to a specific strategic objective.

 

BACKGROUND:

 

Attachments:

Attachment 1 - DVP00038, Schedule ‘A’ Construction Plans, Schedule ‘B’ Survey Plan

Appendix C - Subject Property Map

Appendix D - Aerial Photo

Appendix E - RS-1 Zone

 

Context

Applicant:                     Andrew Richard Payne Akehurst

Owners:                     Andrew Richard Payne Akehurst and Ashleigh Hope Payne Akehurst

Property Size:  Metric:  947.71 m2                                          Imperial:  10,459.4 ft2                     

Existing Land Use:                     Single Family Residence

Surrounding Land Uses:

                     North:                     Two Family Residential                     

South: Multi Family Residential

                     West:                     Two Family Residential

                     East:                     Two Family Residential                     

Existing Zoning: RS-1 [Single Family Residential] [No change required]

 

Purpose of the Application

 

The new owners of the property are proposing to rebuild the existing accessory building that was built by the previous owners without the benefit of a building permit, in the same location as the current building. The proposal also includes an addition on the west side of the existing accessory building. This application for a Development Variance Permit is required as the accessory building contravenes zoning regulations pursuant to the RS-1 zone [attached as Appendix ‘E’].

 

The owners are requesting a Development Variance Permit to allow the accessory building to be sited 0.9 metres within the interior side setback.

 

The eves of the proposed accessory building would not encroach onto neighbouring properties.

 

Comments from Other Departments:

The plans for this proposal were circulated to other departments and the following comments were received:

 

Building Services: Construct to BC Building Code 2012 and Municipal Building Code Bylaw, 2002, No. 2538.  Applicant must address all issues contained within the Township Development Protocol should the application be approved. Plans will be reviewed for compliance with BC Building Code upon submission of a building permit application.

 

Engineering Services: Engineering staff have completed an evaluation of the proposed accessory building and have no concerns.

 

Fire Services: Fire Staff have completed an evaluation of the proposed accessory building and have no concerns.

 

Comments from the Advisory Planning Commission [APC]:

 

The application was considered at the regular meeting of the APC held on October 21, 2015. The APC members had no concerns with the application but requested staff to consider including a request for approval for the relaxation of the side yard setback of the existing house to legalize the existing non-conformity. The APC has recommended forwarding the application to Council with a recommendation of approval.

 

 

ISSUES: 

 

1.  Rationale for Selected Option

The application legitimizes a situation that has existed for years. The APC has recommended support of the application. To date, none of the neighbours have expressed any concern with the location of the accessory building.

 

2.  Organizational Implications

This Request for Decision has no organizational implications.

 

3.  Financial Implications

This Request for Decision has no financial implications.

 

4.                     Sustainability & Environmental Implications

This Request for Decision has no sustainability/environmental implications

 

5.  Communication & Engagement 

As this is a Development Variance Permit application, notices were mailed to owners and occupiers of parcels within 50 metres [164 ft.] of the subject property. Notices were mailed on October 29, 2015 indicating that Council would be considering the requested Development Variance Permit on November 16, 2015. To date, no responses have been received from the public as a result of these notifications.

 

ALTERNATIVES:

 

1. Council approve Development Variance Permit No. DVP00038 and direct staff to issue the permit and register a notice on the property title.

 

2. Council deny Development Variance Permit No. DVP00038.

 

3. Council postpone making a decision pending additional information.