HomeMy WebLinkAboutPSD-069-06
REPORT
PLANNING SERVICES
Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION MEETING
Date:
MONDAY JUNE 5, 2006
Report #:File No’s:By-law #:
PSD-069-06 A2006-0017, A2006-0018 & A2006-0020
OMB DECISIONS FOR A2005-0046 & A2005-0040
Subject: MONITORING OF THE DECISIONS OF THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT
FOR THE MEETING OF MAY 25, 2006
RECOMMENDATIONS:
It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee
recommend to Council the following:
1. THAT Report PSD-069-06 be received; and
2. THAT Council concurs with the decisions of the Committee of Adjustment made on May
25, 2006 for applications A2006-0017, A2006-0018 and A2006-0020, and that Staff be
authorized to appear before the Ontario Municipal Board to defend the decisions of the
Committee of Adjustment.
Submitted by: Reviewed by:
David J. Crome, MCIP, R.P.P. Franklin Wu,
Director of Planning Services Chief Administrative Officer
SA*CP*DC*sh
May 29, 2006
CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON
40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T (905)623-3379 F (905)623-0830
REPORT NO.: PSD-069-06 PAGE 2
1.0 APPLICATION DETAILS
1.1 All applications received by the Municipality for minor variance are scheduled for a
hearing within 30 days of being received by the Secretary-Treasurer. The purpose of
the minor variance application and the Committee’s decisions are detailed in
Attachment 1. The decisions of the Committee are summarized below.
DECISIONS OF COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FOR
MAY 25, 2006
Application Number Staff Recommendation Decision of Committee
A2006-0017 Approve/Table Approved/Tabled
A2006-0018 Approve Approve
A2006-0020 Approve subject to conditions Approved subject to
conditions
2.0 COMMENTS
2.1 Staff has reviewed the Committee’s decisions and are satisfied that applications A2006-
0017, A2006-0018 and A2006-0020 are in conformity with the Official Plan policies,
consistent with the intent of the Zoning By-law and are minor in nature and desirable.
2.2 Council’s concurrence with the decisions of the Committee of Adjustment is required in
order to afford Staff’s official status before the Ontario Municipal Board in the event of
an appeal of any decision of the Committee of Adjustment.
3.0ONTARIO MUNICIPAL BOARD DECISIONS
3.1 Written Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) decisions were received May 16, 2006 for
applications A2005-0040 and A2005-0046.
3.2 A2005-0040 was appealed to the OMB by the Municipality of Clarington as the decision
of approval by the Committee of Adjustment was deemed to not meet the required four
tests in the Planning Act required for a minor variance. The application was to permit
2
an additional accessory building 53.1 m in area, which would increase the coverage by
accessory buildings from the permitted 40% to 68% of the floor area of the main
building.
The applicant, Mr. Stewart-Haass approached Planning Staff to seek an agreement
prior to the OMB hearing and a resolution was found. Minutes of Settlement were
drawn up and approved by Council February 27, 2006. The OMB reviewed the Minutes
of Settlement and Planning Staff explained how they met the applicable tests for a
REPORT NO.: PSD-069-06 PAGE 3
minor variance. Both the applicant and Staff expressed to the OMB their satisfaction
with the settlement. The OMB therefore dismissed the appeal and authorized the
variance in accordance with the Minutes of Settlement.
3.3 A2005-0046 was appealed to the OMB by the applicant as they were not in agreement
with the Committee of Adjustment decision. The application was for variances for
reduction in rear yard and side yard setbacks for a deck, reduction in rear yard and
interior side yard setbacks for a shed and for an increase lot coverage by all buildings
and structures.
The Committee of Adjustment approved the portions of the application pertaining to lot
coverage, the rear yard setback for the deck and for the rear yard and side yard
setbacks for the accessory building. The reduction in the interior side yard setback for
the deck was denied as it was not deemed to be minor or desirable.
On March 30, 2006, the OMB heard the appeal. Planning staff attended the hearing in
support of the Committee’s decision. After having heard all the evidence the Board
member reserved his decision. The decision issued in mid-May upheld the decision
made by the Committee that the reduction of the side yard setback for the deck does
not maintain the intent and purpose of the zoning by-law, is not minor and is not
desirable.
Attachments:
Attachment 1 - Periodic Report for the Committee of Adjustment
Attachment 2 – Ontario Municipal Board Decision for A2005-0040
Attachment 3 – Ontario Municipal Board Decision for A2005-0046