40500-03
CITY OF BURNABY
BOARD OF VARIANCE
M I N U T E S
A Hearing of the Board of
Variance was held in the Council Chamber, City Hall, 4949 Canada Way, Burnaby,
B.C., on Thursday, 2015 April 02 at 1:00 p.m.
PRESENT: Ms. C. Richter
Mr. B. Pound
Mr. S.
Nemeth
Mr. G. Clark
Mr. B. Bharaj
STAFF: Ms. S. Knapp, Planning Department
Representative
Mr. E. Prior, Administrative Officer
1. CALL TO ORDER
The Secretary called the Hearing
to order at 1:05 p.m.
2. MINUTES
MOVED BY Mr. B. POUND:
SECONDED BY MR. S. NEMETH:
"THAT the minutes of the
Hearing of the Burnaby Board of Variance held on 2015 March 05 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. 6151
|
|
|
APPELLANT:
|
Dharam Kajal
|
|
|
|
|
REGISTERED
OWNER OF PROPERTY:
|
Sudesh and
Dharam Kajal
|
|
|
|
|
CIVIC
ADDRESS OF PROPERTY:
|
5469 Forglen
Drive
|
|
|
|
|
LEGAL
DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY:
|
Lot 9;
District Lot 32; Plan 17168
|
|
|
|
|
APPEAL:
|
An appeal
for the relaxation of Section 104.9 of the Burnaby Zoning Bylaw which, if
permitted, will allow for the construction of a new single family dwelling at
5469 Forglen Drive. The front yard setback will be 28.67 feet to the
foundation where a minimum front yard setback of 35.66 feet is required based
on front yard averaging. The window seat projects 1.0 foot beyond the
foundation. The overhang projects 2.0 feet beyond the foundation and the
porch stairs project 3.5 feet beyond the foundation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
APPELLANT'S SUBMISSION:
Dharam Kajal submitted an application
for relaxation of the Burnaby Zoning Bylaw to allow for construction of a new
single family dwelling at 5469 Forglen Drive.
Mr. Dharam Kajal appeared before members
of the Board of Variance at the Hearing.
BURNABY
PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENTS COMMENT:
An appeal for the relaxation of Section 104.9 of the Burnaby Zoning
Bylaw which, if permitted, will allow for the construction of a new single
family dwelling at 5469 Forglen Drive. The front yard setback will be 28.67 ft.
to the foundation where a minimum front yard setback of 35.66 ft. is required
based on front yard averaging. The window seat projects 1.0 foot beyond the
foundation. The overhang projects 2.0 ft. beyond the foundation and the porch
stairs project 3.5 ft. beyond the foundation.
The applicant is proposing to build a new single family dwelling. The
following relaxations are being requested:
The front
yard setback, to the foundation, will be 28.67 ft. where a minimum front yard
setback of 35.66 ft. is required based on front yard averaging. The window seat
projects 1.0 foot beyond the foundation. The overhang projects 2.0 ft. beyond
the foundation. The porch stairs project 3.5 ft. beyond the foundation.
The subject site, which is zoned R4 Residential District,
is located in the Marlborough neighbourhood, in which the age and condition of
single and two-family dwellings vary. This interior lot, approximately 60 ft.
wide and 115 ft. deep, fronts onto the southwest side of Forglen Drive.
Abutting the subject site to the northwest, southeast and across the lane to
the southwest are single family dwellings, and directly across Forglen
Drive to the northeast is a two-family dwelling. The site observes an upward
slope of approximately 17.8 ft. in the north-south direction. Vehicular access to the site is provided from the rear lane.
This property came before the board (BOV 6142) in February 2015, and was
withdrawn. The proposal with a slightly greater front yard setback has been
brought before the Board today.
The applicant proposes to redevelop the site with a new
single family dwelling including an accessory detached garage, which is the subject of this appeal.
The appeal requests a front
yard setback of 28.67 ft., measured to the
foundation of the proposed single family dwelling, with a further projection
for a bay window of 1.0 ft. and for roof eaves of 2.0 ft., where
front yard averaging requires a minimum setback of 35.66 ft.
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 made to
address these concerns, including a requirement to set new construction back
from the front property line based on an average 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 at 5449 and 5459 Forglen Drive immediately west of the subject site
and on the front yard setback of the dwelling at 4981 Buxton Street immediately
east of the subject site. These front yards are 39.23 ft., 39.06 ft. and 28.68
ft. deep respectively, resulting in an average setback of 35.66 ft. The
proposed setback is 28.67 ft. The 9 ft. wide bay window, which is proposed in
the southern portion of the front elevation, would project a further 1.0 ft.
The roof eaves would project further from this southern portion by 2.0 ft. The
northern portion of the front elevation is proposed to be set back further by
2.83 ft., resulting in a distance of 31.5 ft. from the foundation to the front
property line.
The proposed siting would place the subject dwelling 10.39
ft. in front of the neighbouring dwelling to the northwest and in line with the
neighbouring dwelling to the southeast. With respect to the neighbouring
dwelling to the northwest, if the actual ‘corner to corner’ relationship is
considered, the subject dwelling would project 7.56 ft. in front of this
residence. The proposed side yard setbacks, which measure slightly over 9 ft.
on both sides of the proposed dwelling, somewhat mitigate the massing impacts
of the proposal.
Also, on the southeast elevation, the second floor is set
back a further 1.81 ft. from the front property line, to accommodate a high
volume space on the main floor. The result is that the area of the proposed
residence that extends past the neighbouring home to the southeast is minimal,
consisting primarily of roof elements and a shallow bay window on the main
floor.
However, there remains the concern that the proposed siting
of the subject dwelling would dominate the neighbouring one-story dwelling to
the northwest, which is at lower elevation.
Further, the siting of the proposed dwelling would be
approximately 11.33 ft. closer to the front property line than the existing
dwelling on the subject site, which observes an approximately 40 ft. front yard
setback, similar to the adjacent lots to the northwest. In view of the above,
the existing massing relationship between the subject property and the adjacent
properties to the northwest would be substantially changed.
With regard to the broader neighbourhood context, three out
of five lots in the subject block, excluding the subject lot, observe an
average front yard setback of approximately 39-40 ft. The remaining lot at the
south terminus of the subject block (immediately southeast of the subject
site), which is an irregular corner lot, observes a shorter front yard setback
(28.68 ft.). The proposed siting, while consistent with this southernmost lot,
provides an abrupt transition between the longer front yard setbacks to the
northwest and the shorter front yard setback of the lot to the southeast.
Therefore, the intent of the Bylaw would not be met.
Further, it is noted that the siting of the proposed
dwelling would provide for a rear yard setback of approximately 35.18 ft.,
measured from the rear covered deck. As such, there is still more room for
modifying the proposal in order to meet the intent of the Bylaw to ease the new construction into the existing street
frontages with minimal impact.
Since this request would create negative
impacts on the neighbouring properties and the
existing streetscape, this Department cannot
support to the granting of this variance.
ADJACENT OWNER'S COMMENTS:
Correspondence
was received on 2015 April 02 from Ms. Claire Stegen, 4981 Buxton Street in
opposition to this appeal.
No further submissions
were received regarding this appeal.
DECISION:
MOVED BY MR. B. BHARAJ:
SECONDED BY MR. S. NEMETH:
“THAT based on the plans submitted this appeal be ALLOWED.”
FOR:
MR. B. BHARAJ
MR.
B. POUND
MR.
G. CLARKE
MS.
C. RICHTER
OPPOSED:
MR. S. NEMETH
CARRIED
|
(b)
|
APPEAL NUMBER:
|
B.V. 6152
|
|
|
APPELLANT:
|
Tom Harman
|
|
|
|
|
REGISTERED OWNER OF
PROPERTY:
|
Tom Harman
|
|
|
|
|
CIVIC ADDRESS OF PROPERTY:
|
16 Holdom Avenue North
|
|
|
|
|
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF
PROPERTY:
|
Lot 5; District Lot 218; Plan 4953
|
|
|
|
|
APPEAL:
|
An appeal for the relaxation of
Sections 105.3(1) and 105.8(1) of the Burnaby Zoning Bylaw which, if
permitted, will allow for the construction of a new deck at the rear of a
single family dwelling at 16 Holdom Avenue North. The following variances are
being requested:
a) the lot coverage will be
1709.6 square feet where a maximum lot coverage of 1603.7 feet is permitted;
and,
b) the depth of the principal
building will be 72.06 feet where a maximum depth of 60.0 feet is permitted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
APPELLANT'S SUBMISSION:
Tom Harman submitted
an application for the relaxation of the Burnaby Zoning Bylaw to allow for the
construction of a new deck at the rear if a single family dwelling at 16 Holdom
Avenue North.
Mr. Tom Harman
and Mr. Jason Harman appeared before members of the Board of Variance at the
Hearing.
BURNABY
PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENTS COMMENT:
An
appeal for the relaxation of Sections 105.3(1) and 105.8(1) of the Burnaby
Zoning Bylaw which, if permitted, will allow for the construction of a new deck
at the rear of a single family dwelling at 16 Holdom Avenue North. The
following variances are being requested:
a) the lot coverage will be 1709.6 square feet. where
a maximum lot coverage of 1603.7 square ft. is permitted; and,
b) the depth of the principal
building will be 72.06 ft. where a maximum depth of 60.0 ft. is permitted.
The applicant has built an uncovered
deck (without permit) at the rear of an existing single family dwelling. The
following relaxations are being requested:
1) Lot
coverage will be 1709.6 sq. ft. where maximum lot coverage of 1603.7 sq. ft. is
permitted.
2) The
depth of the principal building will be 72.06 ft. where a maximum depth of 60
ft. is permitted.
The subject R5 property is located in
the Capitol Hill neighbourhood, in which the age and condition of single family
dwellings varies. This interior lot, approximately 33 ft. wide and 121.38 ft.
long fronts onto North Holdom Avenue to the west. The lot slopes downwards from
Holdom Avenue to the lane, so that the house has the appearance of a two storey
house in front, and a three storey house at the lane. The subject house was
before the Board twice in 1988 for variances to reduce the width of the south
side yard. Both requests were granted, and a south side yard of 2.5 ft. where
3.3 ft. is required was approved.
The deck under discussion faces the lane
to the east of the principal building.
The first requested variance would
permit the lot coverage to be 1709.6 sq. ft. where maximum lot coverage of
1603.7 sq. ft. is permitted.
The intent of the Bylaw in regulating
lot coverage is to control massing, so that there are no negative impacts on
the adjacent properties, and to ensure that there is adequate outdoor
recreation area for the subject property.
In this instance, the area under the
deck is open, and it does not increase the perception of massing on the subject
site. The rear yard has an area 24.38 ft. deep by 33 ft. wide for outdoor
recreation, plus access to the 8 ft. by 33 ft. wide area below the deck.
In this instance, the increase in the
permitted lot coverage does not appear to have a negative impact on the subject
site in terms of removing outdoor living area or creating additional massing.
However, it is difficult to determine hardship in this case. Until a year ago,
there was a deck off the dining room which spanned half the width of the back
of the house. Subsequently, a deck which spans the full 28 ft. width of the
house was constructed. When the house received its building permits in 1988,
the lot coverage was 1,517 sq. ft. where the Bylaw permits 1,603 sq. ft.
Therefore, a deck that is 8 ft. wide and 11 ft. long could be constructed that
would comply with the Bylaw. As design options exist to provide a deck that
would be in compliance with the Bylaw, this Department cannot support
this request for a variance.
The second variance would permit the
depth of the principal building to be 72.06 ft. where a maximum depth of 60 ft.
is permitted.
The existing house was constructed in
1989 with an attached two car garage facing onto North Holdom. The 68 foot
depth of the house was permissible at that time for a house in the R5 zone. In
1996, the R5 Bylaw was changed to restrict the depth of all principal buildings
to a maximum of 60 ft. or 50% of the lot depth, with the intention of
preventing new dwellings which would present long walls, such that the massing
of the building impacted on the neighbouring properties.
The existing house is legal
non-conforming by 8 ft.. The proposed deck, which was constructed without the
benefit of a building permit, increases the apparent building depth to 76 ft..
However, the measurement of building depth allows for a 3.94 foot projection
from the house which is not included in the overall building depth, so that the
variance requested is to permit a building which is 72.06 ft. long.
In this instance, the deck is unroofed
and underside of the deck is open, which mitigates the perception of the
building massing. However, the proposed deck overlooks and further encloses the
rear yard of the property to the immediate south, which is already flanked by
the south wall of the existing dwelling. In addition, the proposed deck
overlooks the rear yard of the property to the immediate north, including a
small deck adjacent to the shared property line. As noted above, design alternatives
exist to decrease the size of the deck; a smaller deck could be placed in the
center of the rear elevation and thus reduce impacts on the neighbouring
properties to either side.
For the
reasons stated above, this department cannot support the granting of this
variance.
ADJACENT OWNER'S COMMENTS:
A petition
letter, dated 2015 March 29, was received from homeowners/occupants of 3, 9,
12, 14, 17, 18, 21, 41 and 79 Holdom Avenue North, and 11, 15, 51, 91, 105 and
109 Sea Avenue North. The petition read as follows:
“We
urge the Board of Variance to reject the above appeal relating
to
the construction of a sundeck at the rear of the dwelling at 16
North
Holdom Avenue.”
Correspondence
dated 2015 April 02, was received from Jack and Donna Picknell, 14 Holdom
Avenue North, in opposition to the appeal.
Correspondence
dated 2015 April 02, was received from J. F. Morris, 97 Sea Avenue North,
expressing the following two concerns: 1) the balcony, as it is presently
constructed, does not have railings or proper support; and 2) if the variance
is granted, the owner would then enclose the balcony or the area underneath
which the author is opposed to.
Correspondence
dated 2015 April 02, was received from Ms. A Barbera, occupant of the subject
property at 16 Holdom Avenue North, in support of the variance.
Mr. Jack Picknell, 14
Holdom Avenue North, appeared in opposition to the variance. Mr. Picknell
expressed concern regarding loss of privacy and construction without a building
permit.
Ms. Barbera,
occupant of the subject property appeared in support of the semi-constructed
deck.
A petition
letter was received with signatures from homeowners/occupants of 4, 16, 21, 22,
and 41 Holdom Avenue North and 19, 51, 91 and 101 Sea Avenue North in support
of the variances requested. The petition read as follows:
“We,
the undersigned, neighbours and residents of 16 Holdom
Avenue
North, support the homeowner’s application, which is
currently
under review by the City of Burnaby Board of Variance,
for
permission to construct a new rear-facing deck and toward that
end,
relaxation of ss 105.3(1) and 105.8(1) of the Burnaby Zoning
Bylaws.”
DECISION:
MOVED BY MR. B. BHARAJ:
SECONDED BY MR. S. NEMETH:
“THAT based on the plans submitted part (a) this appeal be
ALLOWED.”
FOR:
MR. B. BHARAJ
MR.
B.POUND
MR.
S. NEMETH
OPPOSED:
MS. C. RICHTER
MR.
G. CLARK
CARRIED
MOVED BY MR. B. BHARAJ:
SECONDED BY MR. S. NEMETH:
“THAT based on the plans submitted part (b) this appeal be
ALLOWED.”
FOR:
MR. B. BHARAJ
MR.
B.POUND
MR.
S. NEMETH
MS.
C. RICHTER
OPPOSED:
MR. G. CLARK
CARRIED
|
(c)
|
APPEAL NUMBER:
|
B.V. 6153
|
|
APPELLANT:
|
Reid
Thompson, Woodbridge NW (Deer Lake) Homes Ltd.
|
|
|
|
|
REGISTERED OWNER OF PROPERTY:
|
Woodbridge
NW (Deer Lake) Homes Ltd.
|
|
|
|
|
CIVIC ADDRESS OF PROPERTY:
|
4991 Claude Avenue
|
|
|
|
|
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY:
|
Lot 171; District Lot 85; Plan 40315
|
|
|
|
|
APPEAL:
|
An appeal for the relaxation of
Section 104.8(1) of the Burnaby Zoning Bylaw which, if permitted, will allow
for the construction of a new temporary residential sales centre building at
4991 Claude Avenue. The principal building depth will be 70.0 feet where a
maximum building depth of 60.0 feet is permitted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
APPELLANT'S SUBMISSION:
Jim
Billingsley, CEO Woddbridge Northwest Communities (property owner) submitted an
application for relaxation of the Burnaby Zoning Bylaw to allow for construction
of a new temporary residential sales centre building at 4991 Claude Avenue.
Mr. Reid
Thompson appeared before members of the Board of Variance at the Hearing.
BURNABY
PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENTS COMMENT:
An appeal for the relaxation of Section 104.8(1) of
the Burnaby Zoning Bylaw which, if permitted, will allow for the construction
of a new temporary residential sales centre building at 4991 Claude Avenue. The
principal building depth will be 70.0 ft. where a maximum building depth of
60.0 ft. is permitted.
The applicant
is proposing to construct a temporary residential sales centre for which the
following variance is requested:
1) A principal building
depth of 70 ft. where a maximum building depth of 60 ft. is permitted.
The subject site is located in
the Rayside neighbourhood, in an area designated for multi-family residential
and park uses in the Rayside Community Plan. The subject site is a recently
consolidated lot, 106.23 ft. wide x 205.61 ft. deep. It is one of several
properties that are the subject of a rezoning proposal from R4 Residential
District (single and two family residential) to CD Comprehensive Development
District based on the RM2 Multiple Family Residential District (medium density
multi-family development). To the north, across Claude Avenue, are undeveloped
R4 District lots under City and Provincial ownership. Older single family
residences are located to the immediate east of the subject site. The proposed
sales centre would be located approximately 167 ft. from the western property
line it shares with 4951 Claude Avenue to the west and 30 ft. from the shared
property line with the single family dwelling at 5003 Claude Avenue to the
east.
The requested variance would permit an
overall building depth of 70 ft. where the Bylaw permits 60 ft.. The intent of
the Bylaw in regulating building length is to prevent the creating of a long
building wall that could create negative effects from massing on neighbouring
properties.
The proposed sales centre consists of a
1,761 sq. ft. single storey building. It is located approximately 30 ft. from
the closest house, which is 5003 Claude Avenue to the east. This large side
yard reduces the impact of the additional building length on the adjacent back
yard. In addition, the applicant proposes to construct a solid 6 foot high
cedar fence on the shared property line from the front face of the sales centre
to the rear of the property. The front yard of the sales centre property will
be defined by a three foot tall picket fence.
The additional
massing created by the building length is mitigated by the modest scale of the
structure and its varied design. The first 41 ft. of the building resembles a
house with a traditional pitched roof. This 24 ft. tall “house” is well under
the 29.5 ft. Height permitted in the Bylaw for a structure with a sloping roof.
The rear 29 ft. of the sales centre is 15 ft. tall, which reduces the massing
of the building considerably.
Considering
the large size of the subject lot, the solid fence preventing views into the
adjacent property and the reduction in building height for the last 29 ft. of
the structure, it does not appear that the additional ten ft. of building
length will have a negative impact on the adjacent properties. As the intent of
the Bylaw is not defeated by this request, this Department does not have
any objections.
ADJACENT OWNER'S COMMENTS:
No submissions
were received regarding this appeal.
DECISION:
MOVED BY MR. B. POUND:
SECONDED BY MR. S. NEMETH:
“THAT based on the plans submitted this appeal be ALLOWED.”
CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY
|
(d)
|
APPEAL NUMBER:
|
B.V. 6154
|
|
|
APPELLANT:
|
Gurdeep Sandhar
|
|
|
|
|
REGISTERED OWNER OF
PROPERTY:
|
Gurdeep and Aneeta Sandhar
|
|
|
|
|
CIVIC ADDRESS OF PROPERTY:
|
5591 Marine Drive
|
|
|
|
|
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY:
|
Lot 9; District Lot 159 and 162; Plan 20185
|
|
|
|
|
APPEAL:
|
An appeal for the relaxation of
Sections 102.8, 6.14(5)(b) and 800.6 of the Burnaby Zoning Bylaw which, if
permitted, will allow for the construction of a new single family dwelling at
5591 Marine Drive. The following variances are being requested:
a) the front yard setback will
be 51.46 feet to the post where a minimum front yard setback of 65.05 feet is
required based on front yard averaging;
b) construction of a retaining
wall at the rear of the lot with varying heights up to a maximum of 9.0 feet
where the maximum permitted height is 5.91 feet; and,
c)
construction of an accessory building in a required front yard, located 4.0
feet from the North property line abutting Eleanor Street and 2.0 feet from
the West property line, where siting of an accessory building in a required
front yard is prohibited by the Zoning bylaw.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
APPELLANT'S
SUBMISSION:
Gurdeep
Sandhar submitted an application for the relaxation of the Burnaby Zoning Bylaw
to allow for the construction of a new single family dwelling at 5591 Marine
Drive.
Mr. Gurdeep
and Mrs. Aneeta Sandhar, homeowners, and Mr. Abtar Sandhar, brother of
homeowners, appeared before members of the Board of Variance at the Hearing.
BURNABY
PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENTS COMMENT:
An appeal for the relaxation of Sections 102.8,
6.14(5)(b) and 800.6 of the Burnaby Zoning Bylaw which, if permitted, will
allow for the construction of a new single family dwelling at 5591 Marine
Drive. The following variances are being requested:
a) the front yard setback
will be 51.46 ft. to the post where a minimum front yard setback of 65.05 ft.
is required based on front yard averaging;
b) construction of a
retaining wall at the rear of the lot with varying heights up to a maximum of
9.0 ft. where the maximum permitted height is 5.91 ft.; and,
c) construction of an
accessory building in a required front yard, located 4.0 ft. from the North
property line abutting Eleanor Street and 2.0 ft. from the West property line,
where siting of an accessory building in a required front yard is prohibited by
the Zoning bylaw.
The applicant
is proposing to build a new single family dwelling. The following variances
have been requested:
1) The front
yard setback from Marine Drive will be 51.46 ft. to the post where a minimum front
yard setback of 65.05 ft. is required based on front yard averaging.
2) The
relaxation of Section 6.14(5)(b) of the Zoning Bylaw, which, if permitted, will
allow for the construction of a retaining wall at the rear of the lot with
varying heights up to a maximum of 9.0 ft. where the maximum permitted height
is 5.91 ft..
3) The
relaxation of Section 800.6 of the Zoning Bylaw which if permitted, will allow
an accessory building in a required front yard, located 4.0 ft. from the north
property line abutting Eleanor Street and 2.0 ft. from the west property line,
where siting of an accessory building in a required front yard is prohibited.
The subject site is located in the Big
Bend area, in which the age and condition of single family dwellings vary. This
rectangular interior lot, approximately 65 ft. wide by 153.29 ft. long, fronts
onto the north side of Marine Drive, and also fronts onto the south side of
Eleanor Street. Abutting the subject site to the east and west are single
family dwellings. To the south, across Eleanor Street, are single family
dwellings that sit higher on the slope than the subject lot. Existing and
proposed vehicular access to the site is provided by Eleanor Street.
The site
slopes downwards from the high point of 69.4 ft. at the northwest corner of the
Eleanor Street property line to 46.6 ft. at the south west corner of the front
property line on Marine Drive, dropping 22 ft. over the 153.29 foot length of
the lot. The land continues to slope downwards across Marine Drive and the lots
beyond.
The first requested variance
would permit: front yard setback on Marine Drive to be 51.46 ft. to the front
porch post where a minimum front yard setback of 65.05 ft. is required based on
front yard averaging.
In 1991, Council responded to public
concerns with respect to the bulk and massing of newer and larger homes that
were being built in existing neighbourhoods. Several text amendments to the
Zoning Bylaw were made to address these concerns, including a requirement to
set new construction back from the front property line based on an average of the
the houses on either side of the subject site. The intent was to help to ease
the new construction into existing street frontages with minimal impact. In
this case, the front yard averaging calculation is based on the front yards of
four single family dwellings to the east and west of the subject site. These
front yards and their respective depths are 5611 and 5525 Marine Drive to the
east (69.95 ft. and 68.92 ft.) and 5571 and 5581 Marine Drive to the west (61.58
ft. and 59.74 ft.).
The front yard on the subject site has
been measured from the Marine Drive property line to the front porch posts of
the house, which project 3.92 ft. from the front face of the house. The portion
of the house immediately adjacent to 5611 Marine Drive is further set back by 3.5
ft., so that in a corner to corner relationship, the subject house has a
setback of 58.86 ft., and 5611 Marine Drive has a setback of 69.95 ft., placing
the proposed house 11 ft. in front of 5611 Marine Drive.
The required setback of 65.05 ft., based
on front yard averaging, would be consistent with the existing streetscape of
the newer houses on Marine Drive. However, this may not be achievable with the
current design of the principal building, given the required 42.85 ft. front
yard setback from Eleanor Street based on front yard averaging. As proposed,
the dwelling observes a 53.25 ft. setback from Eleanor Street, consistent with
Bylaw requirements. The same dwelling, if shifted 10.4 ft. north, would observe
the minimum required front yard setback from Eleanor Street and a 61.86 ft.
setback from Marine Drive. If the depth of the building were reduced by 3.19
ft., it could achieve compliance with both required setbacks.
As the request appears to be the result
of a design preference, and alternatives exist, this Department cannot
support the granting of this variance.
The second requested variance is
for the: relaxation of Section 6.14(5)(b) of the Zoning Bylaw, which, if
permitted, will allow for the construction of a retaining wall at the rear of
the lot with varying heights up to a maximum of 9.0 ft., where the maximum
permitted height is 5.91 ft.
The proposed retaining wall runs
east-west across the property, 29.5 ft. from the front property line at Eleanor
Street. The retaining wall would support the parking area and a garage built at
the existing level of Eleanor Street (elev. 69.4 ft.). The elevation at the
bottom of the retaining wall would be approximately 61.0 ft.. At this level, a
28.6 ft. wide yard would extend to the rear face of the house, and within this
area, two small sunken patios at an elevation of 52.17 ft. would connect with
the cellar level.
The intent of the Bylaw in restricting
height of walls in the front yard is to ensure uniform, open front yards and to
limit the massing impacts on the neighbours.
In this case, the retaining wall would
be visible primarily to the residents of the proposed house, and would not have
a negative massing impact on the neighbouring properties. As this variance
request does not defeat the intent of the Bylaw, this department has no
objections.
The third requested variance is
for the: relaxation of Section 800.6 of the Zoning Bylaw which, if permitted,
will allow an accessory building in the required front yard, located 4.0 ft.
from the north property line abutting Eleanor Street and 2.0 ft. from the west
property line, where the siting of an accessory building in a required front
yard is prohibited.
The intent of the Bylaw in prohibiting
accessory buildings within the required front yard is to provide a uniform
streetscape with open front yards and to limit massing impacts on neighbouring
properties. The proposal shows a two car garage 21 ft. wide by 21 ft. deep and
approximately 12 ft. tall placed in the northwest corner of the site. It is
noted that the Engineering Department requires the new dwelling on Marine Drive
to take access from Eleanor Street.
With respect to the subject streetscape,
none of the properties on either side of Eleanor Street have garages in their
front yards. Moreover, design alternatives exist to locate a garage further
away from the Eleanor Street property line, either by integrating it into the
proposed dwelling or directly adjacent to it. While these alternatives may
necessitate some encroachment into the required 42.85 ft. setback, the
placement of the garage directly adjacent to the street is not warranted by any
hardship.
As design alternatives exist to provide
a garage that would not be in the Eleanor Street front yard, and the proposed
garage would be an anomaly in the open front yards of Eleanor Street, the
proposal would defeat the intent of the Bylaw. For this reason, this Department
cannot support the request for this variance.
ADJACENT OWNER'S COMMENTS:
No
submissions were received regarding this appeal.
DECISION:
MOVED BY MR. S. NEMETH:
SECONDED BY MR. B. POUND:
“THAT based on the plans submitted part (a) this appeal be
ALLOWED.”
FOR:
MR. B. BHARAJ
MR.
B.POUND
MR.
S. NEMETH
MR.
G. CLARK
OPPOSED:
MS. C. RICHTER
CARRIED
MOVED BY MR. S. NEMETH:
SECONDED BY MR. B. POUND:
“THAT based on the plans submitted part (b) this appeal be
ALLOWED.”
CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY
MOVED BY MR. S. NEMETH:
SECONDED BY MR. B. POUND:
“THAT based on the plans submitted part (c) this appeal be
ALLOWED.”
CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY
|
(e)
|
APPEAL NUMBER:
|
B.V. 6155
|
|
|
APPELLANT:
|
Avtar Basra
|
|
|
|
|
REGISTERED OWNER OF
PROPERTY:
|
Canada Haojun Development Group Co. and A-G Tej
Construction Ltd
|
|
|
|
|
CIVIC ADDRESS OF PROPERTY:
|
6696 Aubrey Street
|
|
|
|
|
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY:
|
Lot 3; District Lot 132; Plan 20814
|
|
|
|
|
APPEAL
|
An appeal for the relaxation of
Section 6.3.1 of the Burnaby Zoning Bylaw which, if permitted, will allow for
the construction of a new two family dwelling with a detached garage at 6696
Aubrey Street. The distance between the principal building and detached
garage is 6.01 feet where a minimum distance of 14.8 feet is required. (Zone
R-4).
A previous Board of Variance
(BOV 6140 2015 January 08) allowed: a) the principal building front yard
setback from the east property line of 36.0 feet where a minimum 40.0 feet is
required; and b) the detached garage measured from the north property line of
16.0 feet where a minimum 24.6 feet is required.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
APPELLANT'S SUBMISSION:
Avtar Basra submitted an application for
relaxation of the Burnaby Zoning Bylaw to allow for construction of a new two
family dwelling with a detached garage at 6696 Aubrey Street.
Mr. Vikram
Tiku appeared before members of the Board of Variance at the Hearing on behalf
of the homeowners.
BURNABY
PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENTS COMMENT:
An appeal for the relaxation of Section
6.3.1 of the Burnaby Zoning Bylaw which, if permitted, will allow for the
construction of a new two family dwelling with a detached garage at 6696 Aubrey
Street. The distance between the principal building and detached garage is 6.01
ft. where a minimum distance of 14.8 ft. is required.
A previous Board of Variance (BOV 6140 2015
January 08) allowed: a) the principal building front yard setback from the east
property line of 36.0 ft. where a minimum 40.0 ft. is required; and b) the
detached garage measured from the north property line of 16.0 ft. where a
minimum 24.6 ft. is required.
The applicant proposed to construct a new two family
dwelling with two detached garages at 6696/6698 Aubrey Street. The following
variances are requested: the
distance between the principal building and detached garage is 6.01 ft. where a
minimum distance of 14.8 ft. is required.
The subject site, zoned R4 Residential District, is located in the
Lochdale neighbourhood in which the
age and condition of single and two-family dwellings vary. This corner lot,
approximately 83.1 ft. wide and 121 ft. deep, fronts Sperling Avenue to the
east and flanks Aubrey Street to the north. Abutting the site to the south and
across the lane to the west are single family dwellings. Vehicular access to
the subject property is proposed via the lane. The subject lot is relatively flat with a downward slope of approximately 3.6 ft.
in the northwest-southeast direction. The subject site is currently vacant. The subject
lot is proposed to be developed with a new two-family dwelling including two
(2) two-car detached garage, for which one variance has been requested.
Note: The address of
this lot has recently been changed from 1205 Sperling Avenue to 6696/6698
Aubrey Street.
On 2015 January 08, the Board
approved the following requests (BV 6140): a) a principal building front yard
setback, measured from the east property line to the principal building of 36.0
ft. where a minimum of 40.0 ft. is required based on front yard averaging; and
b) a proposed detached garage (B-North) measured from the north property line
to the detached garage, of 16.0 ft. where a minimum of 24.6 ft. is required. In
the current proposal, the eastern front yard setback remains at 36 ft. The two
detached single car garages have been replaced by two (2) two-car garages
placed side by side in the south west corner of the lot.
The appeal proposes a distance between the
principal building and detached garage of 6.01 ft. where a minimum distance of
14.8 ft. is required.
The Bylaw requires a separation between a principal building and an
accessory building (in this case, the detached garage) to ensure that the
overall massing of the buildings does not have a negative impact on subject and
neighbouring properties, as well as to provide for sufficient outdoor living
space.
With respect to the existing streetscape, the proposed double garage would be located
4.0 ft. from the south west corner of the lot at the lane. The proposed garage
would be offset from the garage across the lane at 6690 Aubrey Street. The
gable end of the garage would face the back yard of 1255 Sperling Avenue. It
does not appear that the placement of the garage in this location would have an
adverse effect on the adjacent properties. However, this Department notes that
the previous proposal, which the Board approved, was less intrusive because it
consisted of two single car garages, with significantly less floor area, and
the massing was broken up by the driveway which separated them.
In addition, the western unit of the duplex would be negatively
impacted by the location of the proposed garage. The 6 foot separation
requested between the garage and the house would occur for a distance of 36 ft.
on the western side. (This Department notes that in the previous proposal, the
garage exceeded the required 14.8 ft. separation from the principal building).
In this proposal, the garages have increased in size, from two single garages
totaling 453.6 sq. ft. to a twinned two car garage totaling 800 sq. ft.. The
garages have also increased in height from 9.0 ft. to 14.0 ft. The presence of
the garage wall located 6 ft. from the west side of the duplex for a distance
of 36 ft. will have an adverse effect on the living space on the ground floor
of the western duplex, in terms of light and views, as the kitchen and the wok
kitchen have small windows that will face onto the garage wall. As well, the garage
occupies almost 40% of the side yard of the western duplex, leaving little room
for outdoor recreation for this unit.
This variance request appears to be the result of a design choice
rather than hardship, as alternatives exist to redistribute or reduce the
proposed floor area to meet the required setback. It is noted that the Board
has already approved a variance that would permit two smaller garages that
would have less of an impact. As design solutions exist, and an alternative has
been approved, this Department cannot support
the granting of this variance.
ADJACENT
OWNER'S COMMENTS:
No submissions were received regarding this appeal.
DECISION:
MOVED BY MR. G. CLARK:
SECONDED BY MR. B. BHARAJ:
“THAT based on the plans submitted this appeal be ALLOWED.”
FOR:
MR. G. CLARK
MR.
B. BHARAJ
OPPOSED:
MR. B.POUND
MR.
NEMETH
MS.
C. RICHTER
DENIED
|
(f)
|
APPEAL NUMBER:
|
B.V. 6156
|
|
APPELLANT:
|
Afsana Malik
|
|
|
|
|
REGISTERED OWNER OF PROPERTY:
|
Darmendra and Shoba Singh
|
|
|
|
|
CIVIC ADDRESS OF PROPERTY:
|
5875 Royal Oak Avenue
|
|
|
|
|
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY:
|
Lot 50; District Lot 32; Plan 17623
|
|
|
|
|
APPEAL:
|
An appeal for the relaxation of
Sections 104.8(1), 104.9 and 104.11 of the Burnaby Zoning Bylaw which, if
permitted, will allow for construction of a new single family dwelling at
5875 Royal Oak Avenue. The following variances are being requested:
a) the depth of the principal
building will be 41.17 feet where a maximum depth of 30.88 feet is permitted
based on 50 percent of the lot depth;
b) the front yard setback will
be 11.00 feet to the porch post where a minimum front yard setback of 42.75
feet is required based on front yard averaging. The porch overhang and
stairs project 2.0 feet and 1.83 feet respectively beyond the foundation;
and,
c) the rear yard setback will
be 11.33 feet to the foundation where a minimum setback of 29.5 feet is
required. The overhang projects 2.5 feet beyond the foundation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
APPELLANT'S
SUBMISSION:
Afsana Malik, on behalf of the homeowners, submitted
an application for relaxation of the Burnaby Zoning Bylaw to allow for
construction of a new single family dwelling.
Ms. Malik, Mr. Darmendra and Shoba Singh appeared
before members of the Board of Variance at the Hearing.
BURNABY
PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENTS COMMENT:
An appeal for the relaxation of Sections 104.8(1),
104.9 and 104.11 of the Burnaby Zoning Bylaw which, if permitted, will allow
for construction of a new single family dwelling at 5875 Royal Oak Avenue. The
following variances are being requested:
a) the depth of the
principal building will be 41.17 ft. where a maximum depth of 30.88 ft. is
permitted based on 50 percent of the lot depth;
b) the front yard setback
will be 11.00 ft. to the porch post where a minimum front yard setback of 42.75
ft. is required based on front yard averaging. The porch overhang and stairs
project 2.0 ft. and 1.83 ft. respectively beyond the foundation; and,
c) the rear yard setback
will be 11.33 ft. to the foundation where a minimum setback of 29.5 ft. is
required. The overhang projects 2.5 ft. beyond the foundation.
The applicant is proposing to build a
new single family dwelling. The following relaxations are being requested:
1) The depth of the principal
building will be 41.17 ft. where a maximum depth of 30.88 ft. is permitted
based on 50 percent of the lot depth;
2) The front yard setback will be
11.00 ft., to the porch post, where a minimum front yard setback of 42.75 ft.
is required based on front yard averaging. The porch overhang projects 2.0 ft.
beyond the foundation. The porch stairs project 1.83 ft. beyond the foundation;
and,
3) The rear yard setback to the
foundation will be 11.33 ft. where a minimum rear yard setback of 29.5 ft. is
required. The overhang projects 2.5 ft. beyond the foundation.
The subject site is located in the
Marlborough area, in a single and two family residential neighbourhood where
the age and condition of the dwellings vary. This triangular shaped,
approximately 6,775.88 sq. ft. corner lot measures 114.04 ft. along its Royal
Oak Avenue frontage by 94.32 ft. along the interior property line on the north.
The subject property observes an upward slope of approximately 7.2 ft. in the
north-south direction.
Immediately to the north of the site is
a single family home which also fronts onto Royal Oak Ave. Across the rear lane
on the west side of the subject lot are the rear yards of four single family
dwellings that front onto Forglen Drive. Vehicular access to the site is
proposed from the lane, at the northwest corner of the lot. A new single family
dwelling with an attached garage is proposed for the subject site, for which
three variances are requested.
The first appeal proposes
a principal building depth of 41.17 ft. where a maximum depth of 30.88 ft. is
permitted based on 50 percent of the lot depth.
The Bylaw’s
intent in limiting the building depth is to prevent the creation of dwellings
that present a long “wall”, such that the massing of the building impacts
neighbouring properties. In this case, thebuilding depth calculation is based
on the projected building depth onto the lot depth, which is the line joining
the centre points of the front and rear property lines. Due to the site
geometry, this line is on an angle in relation to the front property line.
Measured along this line, the proposed building depth is 41.17 ft., which
exceeds the maximum permitted building depth by 10.29 ft. Given the
orientation of the lot, the relaxation of the lot depth at the south west
corner of the house would be most visible from the back yards of the properties
at 5918 Forglen Avenue and 5883 Royal Oak Avenue. The view of the proposed
house from the rear yard of 5918 Forglen Avenue, which would be approximately
76 ft. distant, would be screened by the garage of 5918 Forglen Avenue, which
is located at the lane. The house at 5883 Royal Oak is sited to emphasize the
views to the south west, looking away from the proposed house. Consequently,
the closest portion of the house at 5883 Royal Oak is 120 ft. distant from the
closest wall of the proposed house. The proposed depth of the new house is not
likely to have an adverse effect on either property due to the distances
involved. As the intent of the Bylaw would not be defeated by the granting of
this variance, this Department does not object to the granting of this
variance.
The second and third variances
are interrelated and the result of the triangular shape of the lot, so they
will be discussed together. The second variance and third variances are as
follows:
The front yard setback, to the
porch post, will be 11.00 ft. where a minimum front yard setback of 42.75 ft.
is required based on front yard averaging. The porch overhang projects 2 ft.
beyond the foundation. The porch stairs project 1.83 ft. beyond the foundation.
The rear yard setback to the
foundation will be 11.33 ft. where a minimum rear yard setback of 29.5 ft. is
required. The overhang projects 2.5 ft. beyond the foundation.
In 1991, Council responded to public
concerns with respect to the bulk and massing of newer and larger homes that
were being built in existing neighbourhoods. Several text amendments to the Zoning
Bylaw were made to address these concerns, including a requirement to set new
construction back from the front property line based on an average of the the
houses on either side of the subject site. The intent was to help to ‘ease’ the
new construction into existing street frontages with minimal impact.
When front yard averaging is applied to
a triangular shaped lot, the available building envelope becomes very
restricted. In this case, the front yard averaging calculation is based on the
front yards of two single family dwellings on rectangular lots at 5839 and 5849
Royal Oak Avenue immediately north of the subject site. These front yards are
31.83 ft. and 53.67 ft. deep respectively. The front yard setback of the
dwelling at 5849 Royal Oak particularly affects the average.
In this case, the front yard measurement
for the subject site is taken from the front property line to the post on the
front porch. The porch overhang projects 2 ft. beyond the foundation. The porch
stairs project 1.83 ft. beyond the foundation. The proposed house would be
20.83 ft. in front of the house immediately to the north. However, it would not
be possible to construct a house that meets the front yard averaging
requirement of 42.75 ft. and a rear yard setback requirement of 29.5 ft. ,
because the subject lot is a triangular shape. The lot depth at the side of the
triangle, at right angles to the Royal Oak frontage where the lot deepest, is
only 93.92 ft. deep, and the lot depth continues to decrease to a narrow point
at the southwest corner, 114.11 ft. away.
The proposed house is situated so that
the requested variances for front and rear setbacks are both approximately 11.0
ft..
As such, the proposed design attempts to
balance the front and rear yard variances. In the case of the rear yard, the
setback is measured at the closest point of the structure to the curving rear
property line. This is the most extreme condition; at the foundation closest to
the northern property line, the house is 32.1 ft. from the rear property line.
The intent of the Bylaw in requiring a
rear yard setback is to ensure sufficient outdoor living area in the rear yard
and to mitigate the massing impacts of new buildings or structures on
neighbouring properties. Given the geometry of the site, which permits a
greater rear yard setback along the northern property line, which borders the
only abutting lot, the impacts of the proposal on adjacent properties appear to
be minimal. In addition, outdoor living space has been provided in the rear
yard, plus in the triangular yard at the south end of the lot, which is approximately
1,092 sq. ft. As such, the outdoor living space for the occupants would not be
compromised by this proposal.
In view of the above,
this Department does not object to the granting of this proposal.
ADJACENT OWNER'S COMMENTS:
No
submissions were received regarding this appeal.
DECISION:
MOVED BY MR. B. POUND:
SECONDED BY MR. S. NEMETH:
“THAT based on the plans submitted part (a) this appeal be
ALLOWED.”
CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY
MOVED BY MR. B. POUND:
SECONDED BY MR. S. NEMETH:
“THAT based on the plans submitted part (b) this appeal be
ALLOWED.”
CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY
MOVED BY MR. B. POUND:
SECONDED BY MR. S. NEMETH:
“THAT based on the plans submitted part (c) this appeal be
ALLOWED.”
CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY
5. NEW BUSINESS
No items of new business were brought
forward at this time.
A D J O U R N M E
N T
MOVED BY MR. B. POUND:
SECONDED BY MR. S. NEMETH:
"THAT this Hearing do now adjourn."
CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY
The Hearing adjourned at 3:05 p.m.
Ms.
C. Richter
____________________________
Mr.
B. Bharaj
____________________________
Mr.
G. Clark
Mr.
S. Nemeth
Mr.
B. Pound
E. Prior
Administrative Officer