|
CITY OF
BURNABY
|
|
Board of Variance
|
|
NOTICE
OF OPEN MEETING
|
|
M I N U
T E S
|
|
A Hearing of the Board of Variance
was held in the Council Chamber, Main Floor, City Hall, 4949 Canada Way,
Burnaby, B.C., on Thursday, 2015 September 03 at 1:00 p.m.
|
|
1.
|
CALL TO ORDER
|
|
PRESENT:
|
Ms.
C. Richter, Chair
Mr.
B. Bharaj, Citizen Representative
Mr.
G. Clark, Citizen Representative
Mr.
S. Nemeth, Citizen Representative
Mr.
B. Pound, Citizen Representative
|
|
|
STAFF:
|
Ms.
E. Prior, Administrative Officer
Ms.
M. Malysz, Development Plan Approvals Supervisor
|
The Chair for the Board of Variance
called the meeting to order at 1:00 p.m.
|
MOVED BY MR. B. POUND:
SECONDED BY MR. S. NEMETH:
|
|
THAT the Hearing of the Burnaby
Board of Variance held on 2015 August 06 be adopted as circulated.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
|
The following persons
filed application forms requesting that they be permitted to appear before
the Board of Variance for the purpose of appealing for the relaxation of
specific requirements as defined in the Burnaby Zoning Bylaw 1965, Bylaw No.
4742.
|
(a)
|
APPEAL
NUMBER:
|
B.V. 6188
|
|
|
|
APPELLANT:
|
Manjit
Baughan
|
|
|
REGISTERED OWNER OF PROPERTY:
|
Manjit
Baughan
|
|
|
CIVIC ADDRESS OF PROPERTY:
|
7969
18th Avenue
|
|
|
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY:
|
Lot
10; District Lot 28; Plan 10459
|
|
|
APPEAL:
|
An appeal for the
relaxation of Section 6.2(2) of the Burnaby Zoning Bylaw which, if permitted,
would allow for the construction of a new home at 7969 18th Avenue with an
accessory building in a required front yard where an accessory building is
not allowed. The accessory building would be located 3.94 feet from the
northwest property line abutting 19th Avenue and 4.01 feet from the southwest
property line. (Zone R5)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
APPELLANT’S
SUBMISSION:
Manjit Singh Baughan
submitted an application to allow for the construction of a new home at 7969 18th
Avenue.
An agent, on behalf of Mr.
Baughan, appeared before members of the Board of Variance at the Hearing.
BURNABY
PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT COMMENTS:
The subject
site, which is zoned R5 Residential District, is located in the Second Street
neighbourhood, in which the age and condition of single dwellings vary. This
interior through lot, approximately 49.5 ft. wide and 119.5 ft. deep, fronts
onto Eighteenth Avenue to the southeast and Nineteenth Avenue to the northwest. Abutting the subject site
to the southwest and northeast
are single family dwellings. Vehicular access to the subject site is proposed via Nineteenth
Avenue; currently there is no vehicular access. The site is flat, with a downward
slope of up to 1 ft. from the southeast property line to the northwest property
line.
The subject
site is proposed to be redeveloped with a new single family dwelling, including
secondary suite and accessory attached garage, and a new accessory building.
The proposed accessory building is the subject of this appeal.
The appeal is to allow an
accessory building in the Nineteenth Avenue front yard where
no accessory buildings are permitted in any required front yard.
The intent of the Bylaw in
prohibiting accessory buildings within the required front yard is to provide for a uniform
streetscape with open front yards and to limit the massing impacts of such
structures on neighbouring properties.
The proposed
accessory building, approximately 30.92 ft. wide by 18.92 ft. deep, is proposed
to be located at the west corner of the Nineteenth Avenue front yard,
3.94 ft. to 4.37 ft. away from the front (Nineteenth Avenue) property
line, and 4.01 ft. away from the southwest side property line.
The proposed
accessory building would occupy almost 2/3 of the lot width along the Nineteenth
Avenue frontage, with the remainder accommodating a 12.58 ft. wide
driveway access and small landscaped areas along the side property lines.
The accessory
building would contain a storage alcove, approximately 13.42 ft. by 8.5 ft. in
size, a powder room, 8.5 ft. by 5.5 ft. in size, and 2 parking spaces. The
interior parking spaces would be accessed from the proposed driveway
immediately to the northeast of the accessory building. This driveway would
also provide vehicular access to the two-car attached garage proposed at the
north corner of the principal building.
The accessory
building is approximately 12.3 ft. high, as measured from the average natural
grade to the top of its sloped roof, when viewed from the neighbouring
properties across Nineteenth Avenue. Two of the proposed total five windows would be
featured on this side.
This Department
notes that it is difficult to provide four-car garage capacities on a standard
sized lot without impacting adjacent properties. It is apparent that the
neighbouring property across Nineteenth Avenue to the northwest would be
impacted by this proposal. Also, the proposed accessory building would directly
overlap the front lawn of the neighbouring property immediately southwest.
Although the existing approximately 6 ft. high fence along the shared side
property line would partially screen the proposed structure, substantial
massing impacts are expected considering the proximity of the proposed
accessory building to this property line and to the front property line.
As noted above,
the proposal includes a two-car attached garage in addition to the two-car
detached garage. As a result, a large paved maneuvering area/driveway is
proposed, which would significantly reduce the available front yard green space
on the subject site.
With respect to
the broader neighbourhood context, Nineteenth Avenue provides vehicular access
to the majority of lots in the subject block, with approximately half of the
lots containing accessory buildings, mostly one-car detached garages. However,
with the exception of two sheds at 7961 and 7991 Eighteenth Avenue (for which
permit records have not been found), all other accessory buildings are located
at least 17ft. away from the Nineteenth Avenue property line. The proposed
accessory building would be substantially larger in massing and substantially
closer to the front property line than any of these existing accessory
buildings.
Further, Nineteenth
Avenue provides the only street frontage for the opposite side of the
block. There are no accessory buildings present on this side of the block, even
though
this is the
only side from which vehicular access is available.
Therefore, the
siting of the proposed accessory building would have a significant impact on
the existing streetscape.
From an historical
perspective there were number of appeals to the Board related to the siting of
detached garages in the subject block. For example, the Board denied appeals to
allow a front yard setback of 4 ft. for a detached garage at 7931 Eighteen
Avenue (BV 4218), 7943 Eighteen Avenue (BV 5890), and 7981 Eighteen Avenue (BV
4932). The Board, however, allowed a front yard setback of 17.18 ft. for a
detached garage (where a setback of 44.98 ft. was required) at 7943 Eighteenth
Avenue (BV 5905 and BV 5927).
Furthermore, it
is difficult to find a hardship in this case. The proposed two-car attached
garage satisfies all parking requirements for the proposed single family
dwelling and secondary suite. Therefore, an additional accessory building
containing two parking spaces (and other uses) is a design choice, not a
necessity. Although the subject site requires a front yard on both sides of the
property, it is not a hardship, as designs are available to accommodate the
double frontage.
Finally,
allowing a new accessory building is significant because the Zoning Bylaw
explicitly prohibits accessory buildings in front of a principal dwelling.
In summary,
this variance is major and clearly defeats the intent of the Bylaw. For these
reasons, this Department recommends that the Board reject the appeal in
accordance with Section 901(2) of the Local Government Act.
ADJACENT
OWNER’S COMMENTS:
A petition letter was
received from the applicant containing signatures from residents/occupants of
7997, 7975, 7964, 7955, 7943, 7937, 7923 18th Avenue in agreement of
the accessory building setback.
No further correspondence was received
regarding this appeal.
MOVED BY MR. B. BHARAJ:
SECONDED BY MR. S. NEMETH:
|
|
THAT
based on the plans submitted this appeal be ALLOWED.
FOR: MR. B. BHARAJ
OPPOSED:
MS. C. RICHTER
MR.
S. NEMETH
MR.
G. CLARK
MR. B. POUND
DENIED
|
|
(b)
|
APPEAL
NUMBER:
|
B.V. 6189
|
|
|
|
|
|
APPELLANT:
|
Amit
K. Mittal
|
|
|
|
|
REGISTERED OWNER OF PROPERTY:
|
1033906
BC LTD. INC
|
|
|
|
|
CIVIC ADDRESS OF PROPERTY:
|
6538
Orchard Place
|
|
|
|
|
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY:
|
Lot
7; District Lot 92; Plan BCP51424
|
|
|
|
|
APPEAL:
|
An appeal for the
relaxation of Section 102.10 of the Burnaby Zoning Bylaw which, if permitted,
would allow for the construction of a new single family dwelling at 6538
Orchard Place. The rear yard setback, to the post, would be 4.0 feet where a
minimum rear yard setback of 29.5 feet is required. The roof overhang would
project 2.0 feet beyond the post. (Zone R2)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
APPELLANT’S SUBMISSION:
Amit Mittal submitted an
application to allow for the construction of a new home at 6538 Orchard Place.
Amit Mittall appeared
before members of the Board of Variance at the Hearing.
BURNABY
PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT COMMENTS:
The
subject property was recently created by the subdivision of three lots into
eight single-family residential lots on a new cul-de-sac (SUB08-00006). The
subject lot is located second from the southeast terminus of the eight-lot
subdivision. Four lots, including the subject lot, are currently vacant; three
lots contain residences under construction; and the remaining lot contains an
existing dwelling. The property at 5971 Brantford Avenue, along the southern
boundary of the Orchard Place right of way, is not part of this subdivision.
The subject
site, zoned R2 Residential District, is located in the Kingsway-Beresford neighbourhood in which the age and condition of single
family dwellings vary. This irregular through lot, approximately 119.68 ft.
wide along the south property line and 93.87 ft. long along the west property
line, fronts onto the Orchard Place cul-de-sac to the north and Oakland Street
to the south. The north front property line parallels the Orchard Place
cul-de-sac curvature, and then turns 90 degrees to the south. It continues
southward approximately 22 ft., then turns 90 degrees to the east and continues
approximately 50 ft. until connecting with the east side property line. The lot
abutting the subject site along this ‘offset’ area, to the northeast
of the subject site, is in the middle stages of construction for a single
family dwelling. Single family dwellings adjoin the subject site to the east
and
to the northwest is a vacant lot. Vehicular access to the subject site is
provided from the Orchard Place cul-de-sac. The site is relatively flat with a
downward slope of approximately 4 ft. from the north to the south.
The
subject site is proposed to be developed with a new single family dwelling,
including secondary suite and accessory attached garage, for which a variance
is requested.
The appeal is for a rear yard setback of 4.0 ft., measured to the
entry porch posts of the proposed single family dwelling, with a further
projection for roof eaves of up to 2.0 ft., where a minimum rear yard setback
of 29.5 ft. is required.
The
intent of the Bylaw is to mitigate the massing impacts of buildings and
structures on neighbouring properties and to ensure sufficient outdoor living
area in the rear yard.
The need for
this relaxation is related to the unique property line configuration at the
northeast portion of the site, as mentioned above. As a result, the ‘offset’
portion of the north property line is a rear property line. Given that the lot
depth between this portion of the north property line and the south property
line is 66 ft., and the required setbacks total 54.1 ft., a hardship is
evident.
Further, this
proposal would have a limited impact on the neighbouring property to the northeast. The
shared portion of the north property line is a side property line for this lot,
with the principal building (under construction) oriented towards Brantford
Avenue. There is an accessory detached garage (under construction) located 4
ft. away from this shared property line and 24.5 ft. away from the west
property line along the straight section of the Orchard Place cul-de-sac. The
eastern portion of the proposed dwelling would overlap the garage and the 24.5
ft. wide front yard area to the west of the garage.
The main body
of the dwelling within the overlap area, approximately 30 ft. long, would be
set back 1 ft. further away from the entry porch posts. The 12 ft. wide covered
deck, attached to the east side of the dwelling, would be set back further by 7
ft. The upper floor would be set back 8 ft. in relation to the entry porch
posts. Only one larger window and three small windows are proposed within the
overlap area. The proposed ‘stepped back’ design in combination with a limited
amount of windows would help reduce massing impacts on the adjacent yard of the
neighbouring property to the northeast.
In
summary, given the hardship imposed by the unusual site geometry and the
proposal’s limited impacts on the neighbouring property to the northeast, this Department
supports the
granting of this variance.
ADJACENT
OWNER’S COMMENTS:
No correspondence was received
regarding this appeal.
MOVED BY MR. B. POUND:
SECONDED BY MR. G. CLARK:
|
|
THAT
based on the plans submitted this appeal be ALLOWED.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
|
MOVED BY MR. S. NEMETH:
SECONDED
BY MR. B. POUND:
|
|
THAT the Hearing do now recess until
1:15 p.m..
|
CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY
The
Hearing recessed at 1:12 p.m.
MOVED BY MR. B. POUND:
SECONDED
BY MR. S. NEMETH:
|
|
THAT the Hearing do now reconvene.
|
CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY
The
Hearing reconvened at 1:15 p.m.
(c)
|
APPEAL
NUMBER:
|
B.V. 6190
|
|
|
|
APPELLANT:
|
Tony
Gill
|
|
|
REGISTERED OWNER OF PROPERTY:
|
A-Pacific
Development Ltd. Inc. and Belltown Homes Ltd
|
|
|
CIVIC ADDRESS OF PROPERTY:
|
7357
Newcombe Street
|
|
|
|
|
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY:
|
Lot
32; District Lot 25; Plan 14945
|
|
|
APPEAL:
|
An appeal for the
relaxation of Sections 6.3.1 and 110.8 of the Burnaby Zoning Bylaw which, if
permitted, would allow for the construction of a new single family home at
7357 Newcombe Street. The following variances are being requested:
a) the distance
between the principal building and the detached garage would be 9.75 feet
where a minimum distance of 14.8 feet is required; and,
b) the front yard
setback, to the foundation, would be 33.86 feet where a minimum front yard
setback of 40.63 feet is required based on front yard averaging. The canopy
overhang would project 3.94 feet beyond the foundation where a maximum
projection of 3.94 feet is permitted. The porch stairs would project 2.0
feet beyond the foundation. (Zone R10)
|
|
|
A previous Board of
Variance (BOV 6177 2015 July 09) denied an appeal requesting a front yard
setback of 24.93 feet and porch stairs projecting 2.0 feet beyond the
foundation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
APPELLANT’S SUBMISSION:
Tony Gill and Kanwaljit
Khangura submitted an application to allow for the construction of a new home
at 7357 Newcombe Street.
Tony Gill appeared before
members of the Board of Variance at the Hearing.
BURNABY
PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT COMMENTS:
This property was the
subject of an appeal before the Board on 2015 July 09 (BV6177). A
variance was sought to allow for the construction of a new single family
dwelling with a detached garage observing a front yard setback of 24.93 ft.
where a front yard setback of 40.63 ft. is required. This Department did not
support this request,
and the Board of Variance denied the appeal.
Subsequently, in response
to the concerns raised by neighbours at the hearing, the applicant has revised
the proposal. The revised design locates the principal building 8.93 ft.
further from the front property line; otherwise, except for a small reduction
in size of the upper floor deck, the proposal is essentially the same as in the
previous 2015 July
09 appeal.
The subject property is
located in the Second Street area, in a mature R10 District neighbourhood
characterized by low-scale single family dwellings. The R10 District in this
area was established through an area zoning process at the request of residents,
in order to control the form and character of new development. The subject lot
measures 49.27 ft. in width and 109.14 ft. in depth. This interior site fronts
onto Newcombe Street to the northeast and flanks the lane to the southwest.
There are single family dwellings to the northwest, southeast and across the
lane to the southwest of the subject site. To the northeast across Newcombe
Street, the entire block is bordered by the Cariboo Conservation Area. Vehicular access
to the subject site is from the
rear lane. The
site observes an ascending slope of approximately 12 ft. from the front to the
rear.
The proposal is
for a new
single family dwelling with a detached garage, for which two appeals are
requested.
As the second
b) appeal concerns the front yard setback, it is discussed first.
The second b)
appeal requests a front
yard setback of 33.86 ft., measured to the
foundation of the proposed single family dwelling, with a further canopy
projection of 3.94 ft., where front yard averaging requires a
minimum setback of 40.63 ft.
from the Newcombe
Street property
line.
In 1991,
Council responded to public concerns regarding the bulk and massing of newer
and larger homes that were being built in existing neighbourhoods. Several text
amendments to the Zoning Bylaw were adopted to address these concerns,
including a requirement to set new construction back from the front property
line based on the average setback of the two dwellings on either side of the
subject site. The intent was to help to ease new construction into existing
street frontages with minimal impact.
In this case,
the front yard averaging calculations are based on the front yard setbacks of
the two dwellings immediately northwest of the subject site at 7325 and 7341
Newcombe Street, and the two dwellings immediately southeast of the subject
site at 7375 and 7391 Newcombe Street. The front yard setbacks for these
properties are 40.63 ft., 40.0 ft., 42.39 ft. and 39.49 ft. respectively.
The front yard
setback is measured to the foundation of the main body of the dwelling. The
proposed center element of the upper floor is set back 9.67 ft. from the
foundation. In addition, the proposed northwest corner of the upper floor is
set back approximately 16.83 ft. further in order to accommodate a high volume
space over the main floor living/dining area; the northeast corner of the upper
floor consists of an open deck, which is approximately 14.5 ft. wide and 11.5
ft. deep.
The proposed siting would
place the subject dwelling 6.14 ft. in front of the neighbouring dwelling to
the northwest and 8.53 ft. in front of the neighbouring dwelling to the
southeast. The modified siting of subject dwelling
(set further back by 8.93 ft.) is more compatible with the neighbouring
residences. The recessed portions of the
proposed upper floor would be behind the neighbouring dwellings, which would noticeably lessen the massing impacts on these
neighbouring properties. It is noted, however, in the northeast corner of the
upper floor, an approximately 128 sq. ft. deck area extends into the required
setback area and approximately 8.53 ft. in front of the neighbouring dwelling
to the southeast, potentially causing overlook and privacy impacts on this
dwelling.
Otherwise, this Department does
not object to the granting of this second b) variance.
The first a)
appeal would permit a distance of 9.75 ft. from the accessory building to the
principal building, with a 2.94 ft. roof projection and a 1.5 ft. bay window
projection, where a minimum distance of 14.8 ft. is required.
The Bylaw
requires a separation between buildings on the same lot in order to ensure that
the overall massing of the building does not have a negative impact on the
occupants of the buildings and neighbouring properties, as well as to provide
for sufficient outdoor living space.
This variance is a direct
result of the revised siting of the principal building discussed under the
second b) appeal. In order to achieve a greater front yard setback, the
proposed dwelling has been located 8.93 ft. closer to the accessory detached
garage, which is located in the south corner of the rear yard, approximately 4
ft. from the southwest (rear) property line and 4 ft. from the southeast (side)
property line.
The proposed detached
garage is 22.6 ft. wide and 20.0 ft. long, and approximately 12.19 ft. high to
the top of the hip roof as viewed from the lane. The proposed garage contains
two parking spaces, accessed off the rear lane, and is consistent with the
existing detached garage immediately to the southeast of the subject lot.
With respect to outdoor living
space, sufficient
yard area would remain to the northwest of the garage.
The 9.75 ft. distance is
measured from the proposed detached garage to the main body of the proposed
principal building. The two bay windows at the upper floor of the dwelling
would not effectively reduce the separation distance at the ground level. The
overlap of the garage and residence would be 21 ft., which is almost the entire
width of the garage. No primary living space would face the proposed garage.
However, the proposed
secondary suite, located in the cellar, would be accessed via a sunken patio
located directly opposite the garage. This patio is approximately 11.76 ft.
below grade at the northeast elevation of the garage. The proposed northeast
elevation of the garage is approximately 9.5 ft. high to the fascia board and
approximately 14.29 ft. high to the top of the roof. The reduced distance
between the proposed house and garage, in combination with the over 20 ft.
height difference would unacceptably reduce the light available to the
secondary suite. Furthermore, this variance could be eliminated by reducing the proposed
two-car garage to a one-car garage and providing an additional surface parking
space to satisfy parking requirements.
For these reasons, the Department
cannot support the first a) variance.
ADJACENT OWNER’S COMMENTS:
A petition letter was
received 2015 August 31, in opposition to the proposed variance appeal
regarding the front yard setback. The petition was signed by owners/occupiers
of 7275, 7291, 7307, 7325, 7341 and 7391 Newcombe Street and 8269 and 8275 18th
Avenue and 8270 and 8278 19th Avenue.
A petition letter was
received 2015 September 03, from the applicant in support of the variances
requested. The petition was signed by owners/occupiers of 8290, 8272, 8266,
8262, 8248, 8238, 8236 18th Avenue, 8175, 8262, 8257, 8245, 8223 and
8250 19th Avenue, 8258 17th Avenue, 7439, 7355,
7345,7338, 7350, 7332, 7268, 7278 and 7373 1st Avenue, and 7241,
7538 and 7357 Newcombe Street.
Ms. C. Antunes, 7341
Newcombe Street, appeared before the Board in opposition to the front yard
setback.
Mr. R. Arseneault, 8249 19th
Avenue, appeared before the Board in opposition to the front yard setback.
Mr. D. Grant, 7391 Newcombe
Street, appeared before the Board in opposition to the front yard setback.
No further correspondence
was received regarding this appeal.
MOVED BY B. BHARAJ:
SECONDED BY MR. S. NEMETH:
|
|
THAT based on the plans submitted
part (a) of this appeal be ALLOWED.
FOR: MR. B. BHARAJ MS.
C. RICHTER
MR. B. POUND
OPPOSED:
MR. S. NEMETH
MR.
G. CLARK
ALLOWED
|
MOVED BY MR. B. BHARAJ:
SECONDED BY MR. S. NEMETH:
|
|
THAT based on the plans submitted
part (b) of this appeal be ALLOWED.
FOR: MR. B. BHARAJ MR.
B. POUND
OPPOSED:
MS. C. RICHTER
MR.
S. NEMETH
MR.
G. CLARK
DENIED
|
4.
|
NEW BUSINESS
No items of new business were
brought forward at this time.
|
|
MOVED BY MR. B. POUND:
SECONDED BY MR. S. NEMETH:
|
|
THAT
this Hearing do now adjourn.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
The
Hearing adjourned at 2:20 p.m.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
________________________
|
|
Ms.
C. Richter
|
|
|
|
|
|
________________________
|
|
Mr.
B. Bharaj
|
|
|
|
|
|
________________________
|
|
Mr.
G. Clark
|
|
|
|
|
|
________________________
|
|
Mr.
S. Nemeth
|
|
|
|
|
|
________________________
|
|
Mr.
B. Pound
|
|
|
|
|
________________________
|
|
Ms.
E. Prior
ADMINISTRATIVE
OFFICER
|
|