The Port Colborne Record

Committee of Adjustment

October 11, 2023

Who was there

Present (4): E. Beauregard, Gary Bruno, A. Desmarais, Dave Elliott

Taken from the roll call in the town’s own minutes. The minutes record who was not there and almost never why.

What was decided (3 motions)

3 carried, 0 recorded otherwise. Every motion below is printed as the minutes print it.

The Chair motioned for Chris Roome to be accepted as the Acting Secretary- Treasurer for the respective Committee of Adjustment meeting.
Moved by Member D. Elliott, seconded by Member A. Desmarais
Carried
The Planner concluded that the minor variance application A17-23-PC be granted for the following reasons: 1. The application is minor in nature as the increase in height from 6m to 8m will not negatively impact the subject parcel or neighbouring properties. The proposed structure is located at permissible distance from the lot lines and the increase in height will not produce visibility concerns. 2. It is appropriate for the development of the site as the application is being requested to accommodate a permitted use on the subject property. 3. It is desirable and in compliance with the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-Law as the proposal meets the majority of the zoning requirements and will be accessory in nature to the primary dwelling as the structure will be used for storage of a large motor vehicle and is located in a suitable location. 4. It is desirable and in compliance with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan as the Official Plan permits accessory structures within the Agricultural designation.
Moved by Member D. Elliott, seconded by Member A. Desmarais
Carried
The Planner concluded that the minor variance application A18-23-PC be granted for the following reasons: 1. The application is minor in nature as the reduction from the existing 8.2m setback to the proposed 7.7m setback constitutes a minor change to the building footprint and as the requested relief maintains an adequate amount of spacing from the street and still maintains the parking requirement for the dwelling. 2. It is appropriate for the development of the site as the addition does not propose a further encroachment of the setback and still permits the required amount of parking on the subject property. The proposed covered porch does not pose an impediment to the function of the site. 3. It is desirable and in compliance with the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-Law as the proposal meets the majority of the zoning requirements and the subject lands will still maintain the required amount of parking as the driveway is located on the east side of the property and the front yard setback is acceptable as the building location is currently existing. 4. It is desirable and in compliance with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan as the Official Plan permits detached dwellings within the Rural designation. Subject to the following conditions: 1. That the applicant either relocates the existing front yard shed to a location that meets the applicable zoning requirements or enters into an encroachment agreement to the satisfaction of City Staff, if the
Moved by Member A. Desmarais, seconded by Member D. Elliott
Carried

The town’s own record

Read the minutes this page was read from →

Where this page and that document disagree, the document is right and this record is wrong. Say so and it will be corrected.