Council Report - Development Variance Permit 2018/02 – 275 Plowright Road

Council Report

TO: Mayor and Council DATE: June 21, 2018 FROM: J. Chow, Senior Planner MEETING DATE: July 3, 2018 FILE NO.: 3090-20-2018/02

Development Variance Permit 2018/02 – 275 Plowright Road

RECOMMENDATION:

THAT Council approve Development Variance Permit 2018/02 as per the plans attached to the June 21, 2018 report from the Senior Planner titled “Development Variance Permit 2018/02 – 275 Plowright Road”.

AND THAT Development Permit 2018/02 include the following variances:

1. Siting of a principal building to the rear lot line in section 6.1.4. of Zoning Bylaw No.900, 2014 from 7.5 m to 0.0m.
2. Separation of an accessory building from a principal building in section 4.6.3. of Zoning Bylaw No.900, 2014 from 3.0m to 0.1m.
3. Height of a fence in section 4.8.1. of Zoning Bylaw No.900, 2014 from 2.0m to 2.6m
4. Siting of an accessory building in section 6.1.4. of Zoning Bylaw No.900, 2014 from 1.2m to 0.0m from the side lot line.
5. Separation of an accessory building from a principal building in section 4.6.3 of Zoning Bylaw No.900, 2014 from 3.0m to 0.7m.

CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER’S COMMENTS:

I concur with the recommendation.

DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES’ COMMENTS:

I concur with the recommendation.

PURPOSE OF REPORT:

To consider a development variance permit application to vary requirements for rear yard building setbacks, fence height, and siting of an accessory building on a detached residential lot

BACKGROUND:

The irregular shaped 717m² parcel is zoned R-1: Detached Residential (Large Lot) and has been reconfigured several times over the past 100 years, most recently in 1978. A single family dwelling and several accessory buildings are located at the rear of the lot as shown in Figure 1. The dwelling is sited within 3.4m of the rear lot line with a deck that extends to the side and rear lot lines. The dwelling was originally constructed circa 1908 and was modified and expanded following approval by the Board of Variance in 2002 for a building addition that reduced the side yard setbacks, the rear yard setback and the setback between an accessory building and a principal building. Two accessory structures are located at the rear of the property: an open shed and a garage adjacent to a lane providing vehicle access to Plowright Road.

Figure 1. Air Photo

PROPOSAL:

The applicant proposes to extend the rear deck, construct a fence, and construct an accessory building (potting shed). The site plan and locations of requested variances are illustrated in Attachment 3 and are summarized as follows:

A. Deck extension

The proposal is to extend the deck along the rear lot line to replace the existing storage shed. The 6m² deck addition would be higher than the existing deck and covered so that the area under the extension can be used for storage (see Attachment 5). Requested variances are as follows:

1. Variance to the siting of a principal building to the rear lot line from 7.5 m to 0.0m. (The deck is part of the principal building).
2. Variance for the separation of an accessory building from a principal building from 3.0m to 0.1m.

The deck would be attached to the principal building and is therefore considered part of the building for setback requirements. No other change is proposed to the existing dwelling, which is 3.4m from the rear lot line. The owner of the neighbouring property at 268 View Royal Avenue that would be the most affected by the proposed deck extension has provided a letter of support in Attachment 9.

B. Fence

A fence has been partially constructed on top of a 1.4m retaining wall along part of the south property line adjacent to the dwelling as shown in Figure 2. The proposal is to cut the existing posts for a 1.2m cedar fence as shown in Attachment 6. A variance is requested as follows:

3. Variance to the height of a fence from 2.0m to 2.6m

The variance is requested because a fence within 1.0m of a retaining wall is measured from the base of the retaining wall to the top of the fence.

Figure 2. Fence on top of retaining wall

The request can be supported for several reasons:

• The visual impact of the overall height would be mitigated by:
  • The wall and fence being made of different materials;
  • Setting the fence slightly away from the edge of the retaining wall; and
  • The use of lattice at the top of the fence to reduce the massing of the fence.
• Good quality, visually appealing materials are proposed: the existing retaining wall is mortared rock and the fence is proposed to be cedar.

The following alternatives to the fence height variance would comply with the Zoning Bylaw:

1. A 1.0m tall fence with chain link or clear glass panelling is permitted on top of the retaining wall. While this would meet BC Building Code guard rail requirements, it would leave little privacy between properties.
2. A fence sited more than 1m from the retaining wall can be up to 2.0m. This additional height would increase the visual impact on the adjacent property and would bisect the side yard of the subject property.
3. Construction of 0.6m fence on top of the 1.4m retaining wall for a combined fence height of 2.0m. A 0.6m fence would not be an effective safety barrier.

C. Accessory building

A 3.7m² 2.4m tall accessory building is proposed along the side lot line and the following variance is requested: 4. Variance to siting of an accessory building from 1.2m to 0.0m from the side lot line. 5. Variance for the separation of an accessory building from a principal building from 3.0m to 0.7m.

The proposed accessory building would be a 5’ x 8’ potting shed integrated into the proposed fence as shown in Attachment 7. The part of the shed visible above the fence line would be clad in clear polycarbonate panels.

DISCUSSION:

In this case, the unusual lot and building configuration creates challenges for the use of the side and rear yard adjacent to the dwelling (see photos in Attachment 8). There are limited alternatives to locating accessory building and structures at the side and rear of the property without variances. Approval of the variances would maintain or improve privacy between adjoining properties.

ALTERNATIVES:

Options that Council may consider include the following: a. Approving the application. b. Declining the application. c. Approving the application with modified variances.

RECOMMENDATION:

THAT Council approve Development Variance Permit 2018/02 as per the plans attached to the June 21, 2018 report from the Senior Planner titled “Development Variance Permit 2018/02 – 275 Plowright Road”.

AND THAT Development Permit 2018/02 include the following variances:

1. Siting of a principal building to the rear lot line in section 6.1.4. of Zoning Bylaw No.900, 2014 from 7.5 m to 0.0m.
2. Separation of an accessory building from a principal building in section 4.6.3. of Zoning Bylaw No.900, 2014 from 3.0m to 0.1m.
3. Height of a fence in section 4.8.1. of Zoning Bylaw No.900, 2014 from 2.0m to 2.6m
4. Siting of an accessory building in section 6.1.4. of Zoning Bylaw No.900, 2014 from 1.2m to 0.0m from the side lot line.
5. Separation of an accessory building from a principal building in section 4.6.3 of Zoning Bylaw No.900, 2014 from 3.0m to 0.7m.

SUBMITTED BY: J. Chow, MCIP, RRP, Senior Planner

REVIEWED BY: L. Chase, MCIP, RRP, Director of Development Services

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Subject Property Map
2. Letter from Applicant, April 23, 2018 (2 pages)