MINUTES of a regular meeting
of the MUNICIPAL COUNCIL of The Corporation of the District of Oak Bay, held in
the Council Chambers, Oak Bay Municipal Hall,
|
PRESENT: |
Councillor
H. Braithwaite Councillor
S. F. B. Carson Councillor
A. R. Cassidy Councillor
P. Copley Councillor
J. D. Herbert Councillor
N. B. Jensen |
|
STAFF: |
Municipal Clerk, L. Hilton Confidential Secretary, K. Green Director of Building and Planning, R. Thomassen Director of Engineering Services, D. |
|
PRESENTATION: |
BOWKER CREEK URBAN WATERSHED RENEWAL INITIATIVE |
Councillor Copley said she had attended the Bowker
Creek Urban Watershed Renewal Initiative Community Celebration Day in June at
which time the she was advised that a token of appreciation would be presented
to the municipalities for their support and help with the Bowker Creek Initiative.
Jim Kirby, on behalf of the Friends of Bowker Creek, was in
attendance to present the District of Oak Bay with a limited print of the Bowker
Creek ‘Communi-Tea’ logo. It was also
noted that a gift of a ‘Returning Home’ pebble mosaic, inspired by the
ever-returning wild salmon, would be forthcoming and it is hoped that the
mosaic would be placed along side of Bowker Creek at the Monteith Community
Gardens.
MINUTES:
Council –
June 23, 2008
MOVED by Councillor Jensen
Seconded by Councillor Herbert,
That the minutes of the Council meeting held on Monday, June 23, 2008, be adopted.
Library
Intermunicipal Operating Agreement
With respect to the suggestion that it may be
worthwhile for the member municipality
It was the general consensus of Council to proceed as suggested
by Mayor Causton.
The question was then called.
CARRIED
Committee of the Whole – July 14, 2008
MOVED by Councillor Braithwaite
Seconded by Councillor Copley,
That the minutes of the Committee of the Whole meeting held on Monday, July 21,
2008, and the recommendations contained therein, be adopted.
Estevan/Dunlevy Rezoning and Development Permit
Application
Councillor
Jensen said that in general he was satisfied with the design and concept of the
proposed development, with the exception of perhaps the issue of massing, and
suggested that the application proceed to the Public Hearing forum. As far as parking goes, he said, it is time to
look at it in a different way.
Councillor
Herbert indicated that he felt the discussions should stay at the Committee of
the Whole level raising concerns with respect to the height and the overall massing
of the proposed building, and with the site coverage compared to the
neighbouring Liscombe Manor. He also
reiterated his concerns with the Mezzanine and its effect on the height and massing
of the proposed building, and queried what the effect would be if the rest of
Councillor
Braithwaite noted she would like to see the application remain at Committee of
the Whole level for further discussion.
Councillor
Copley said she liked the concept and proposed design, noting she would be
comfortable with the application moving forward at this point.
With respect
to density, Councillor Cassidy commented that the proposed number of units
should be considered in keeping with adding more housing as part of
Councillor
Cassidy felt that the comparison with the Liscombe Manor demonstrates that the
proposed three storeys can be suitable for the area and felt that there is a
misconception of how visible the mezzanine will actually be from the street
level, however, he added that consideration could be given to reconfiguring the
storage area to create space for a secured underground parking area, as he has remaining
concerns regarding the parking proposed and the security of it.
Councillor
Cassidy drew attention to the proposed landscaping acknowledging that it would
all be on public land and wondering why some of the landscaping is not provided
by the applicant on private property. He
also drew attention to the proposed bio-swale that was proposed to be located
on public land versus on the applicant’s property.
Noting that
the next meeting of Committee would occur while he was absent, Councillor
Cassidy said he would be disappointed if the discussion continued while he was
away.
Councillor
Carson indicated his agreement with some of the comments made by Councillors
Herbert and Cassidy. He noted that while
he finds the building design very pleasing, the only concession that has been
made by the applicant has been to add in the walkway at the west boundary.
Councillor
Carson noted that he does have concerns regarding the massing of the building
from the residential side and would be interested in hearing how the applicant
would address or soften it.
As far as
being precedent setting, Councillor Carson did not see this as the case, noting
that Council would not be compelled to rezone other properties in the
Both
Councillors Braithwaite and Mayor Causton noted that as proposed, the current
rental units would be replaced with strata titled units, which caused them some
concern.
Mayor Causton
went on to note that while the front of the building is attractive, the bulk of
the back of the building needs to be addressed, adding that in his view the
parking issues raised are driven by the volume of the building.
It was
acknowledged that the majority of the Committee members wished to see the
application remain at the Committee of the Whole level for further discussion
and it was suggested that the applicant advise staff whether they wished to
continue discussion at the August Committee of the Whole meeting or at a later
date when more members of the Committee would be in attendance.
The question
was then called.
CARRIED
COMMUNICATIONS:
|
1. |
2008-188 |
TIMES COLONIST
CYCLING FESTIVAL, JUNE 23, 2008 Re Request
for Road Closure for Cops for Cancer Criterium – September 20, 2008 |
Karl Ulrich, Oak Bay Bikes, provided an overview of the request to hold
a cycling fundraising event on September 20, 2008, on the streets surrounding
Responding to a question from a Council member, Mr.
Ulrich advised that the event organizer has been and will continue to be in
contact with the Parks Department and the park user clubs to ensure there are
no park use or access conflicts.
MOVED by
Councillor Jensen
Seconded by Councillor Braithwaite, That approval be
given for the closure of the roads bordering
1) releasing and indemnifying the Municipality
from any claims or liability associated with the event and providing evidence
of public liability insurance in the amount of not less than $3,000,000;
2) agreeing to pay all invoices from the
Municipality for costs incurred in connection with the event; and
3) agreeing to obtain Oak Bay Police approval
for a traffic plan and implement the same subject to any field instructions
from the Police.
4) delivering written notice to all occupiers
of property adjoining any roads to be closed for the event.
CARRIED
|
2. |
2008-189 |
Re Request for
Road Closure for Cops for Cancer Fire Truck Pull – August 24, 2008 |
(Heather Leary, Oak Bay Business Improvement
Association, Project Coordinator and Larry Worock,
Larry Worock answered questions from members of Council with
respect to some of the details of the proposed event.
MOVED by
Councillor Herbert
Seconded by Councillor Braithwaite, That whereas
pursuant to the Streets and Traffic Bylaw, Council has made the determination
that the proposed event will be of general benefit to the adjacent business
district and will create no undue inconvenience, approval be given for the
display and sale of goods and refreshments and for the closure and occupancy of
Oak Bay Avenue between Wilmot Place and Monterey Avenue, between 10:30 a.m. and
3:30 p.m., Sunday, August 24, 2008, in connection with the Business Improvement
Association’s Truck Pull fundraising event as detailed in correspondence item
no. 2008-189, subject to the event organizer:
1) releasing and indemnifying the Municipality
from any claims or liability associated with the event and providing evidence
of public liability insurance in the amount of not less than $3,000,000;
2) agreeing to pay all invoices from the
Municipality for costs incurred in connection with the event; and
3) agreeing to obtain Oak Bay Police approval
for a traffic plan and implement the same subject to any field instructions
from the Police.
CARRIED
|
3. |
2008-190 2008-190-1 |
MEL SCOTT,
June 23, 2008 MUNICIPAL
CLERK, July 15, 2008 Tree
Protection Bylaw – Application for Reconsideration of Permit Refusal – |
Mel Scott, 2161 Cubbon Drive, speaking to his letter requesting Council
reconsideration of the Municipal Arborist’s refusal to issue a tree removal
permit for a Cedrus Atlantica and a Western Red Cedar, indicated that although
he has removed several undersized trees in his yard for the purpose of
increasing sunlight to his garden, he is concerned that the two protected trees
create a considerable amount of shade to his and his neighbour’s property. Mr. Scott felt that the permitted pruning, as
noted in the Tree Cutting Application and Permit, will not allow light into the
backyard and pruning will have to be carried out on a continual basis. Mr. Scott also indicated that the two neighbours
he was able to speak with said they were fine with the trees being removed.
Although the applicant indicated his willingness to
replace the trees he wishes to remove with smaller trees in another location in
his yard, it was pointed out that Council authority to require tree replacement
does not exist in the Bylaw under the circumstances being discussed.
Responding to questions from Council, the Municipal
Clerk noted that under the Tree Protection Bylaw, Council has the authority to
reconsider a Parks Department decision to deny a tree cutting permit under
certain circumstances as noted in her memorandum. In this case, it was pointed out by members
of Council that none of the provisions of the Tree Protection Bylaw that would
allow for the removal of the trees appear to apply, and accordingly, the
request would have to be denied.
MOVED by Councillor Carson
Seconded by Councillor Jensen, That following the
reconsideration of a staff decision to deny a permit to remove a Cedrus Atlantica
and a Western Red Cedar, located on private property at
CARRIED
The view was expressed that perhaps Council should
have even more discretion than that currently contained in the Bylaw for
reconsidering staff decisions with respect to issuing tree removal permits for
protected trees, and it was suggested that staff should report back on the
feasibility of creating a new category to allow the removal of trees that are
considered nuisances, with a view to balancing the various interests involved.
The difficulty in defining a nuisance tree was raised,
and it was also noted that the current Tree Protection Bylaw regulations were
adopted following considerable debate on all the issues, and with the support
of an overwhelming number of residents.
Although the majority of Council did not indicate
support for staff to draft a new exclusion to the prohibition on the removal of
protected trees at this point, it was felt that information regarding the
exclusions provided by other municipalities in their Bylaws would be useful for
future discussion.
MOVED by Councillor Carson
Seconded by Councillor Jensen, That staff be requested to
canvass other municipalities in the Region regarding any “nuisance” exclusions
to allow removal of protected trees under their respective Bylaws, and report
back to Committee of the Whole.
CARRIED
|
4. |
2008-191 2002-136 -- |
JANE VAN SICKLE et al, June 30, 2008 MUNICIPAL
ENGINEER, March 25, 2002 EXCERPT FROM COMMITTEE OF
THE WHOLE MEETING MINUTES,
April 2, 2002 Re |
It was noted that
the petition from those concerned, triggered by a recent accident, has again
raised questions about the safety of the intersection of
In any event, it
was the general consensus of Council that review of this intersection should be
considered at the Committee of the Whole level, and that a staff report would
be beneficial in assisting with the review.
MOVED by Councillor Jensen
Seconded by Councillor Braithwaite, That
staff be directed to bring forward a report with respect to improving traffic and
pedestrian safety at the intersection of
CARRIED
|
5. |
2008-192 |
BRENT
FIELDS, July 9, 2008 Re Request
for Amendment to Zoning Bylaw – Site Coverage for Accessory Buildings |
Attention was drawn
to Mr. Field’s request for an amendment to the Zoning Bylaw to allow larger
accessory buildings, noting that he would like to build a garage large enough
to park two vehicles, including a wheelchair accessible van.
It was noted that the
issue of accessory buildings was not specifically included in the Floor Area
Ratio provisions review that resulted in Zoning Bylaw changes last year, and it
was suggested that staff input be sought in this regard.
MOVED by Councillor Jensen
Seconded by Councillor Herbert, That staff
be directed to prepare a report regarding the options with respect to a
proposed amendment to the Zoning Bylaw with respect to the size of accessory
buildings for further consideration by Committee of the Whole.
CARRIED
|
6. |
2008-193 |
CAPITAL
REGIONAL DISTRICT, June 9, 2008 Re
Community Arts Matching Grant Program |
Councillor Copley
introduced the concept of the proposed Community Arts Matching Grant Program saying
that it is very much in a draft form at this point. The matching grant proposal was designed to
provide joint support through the Capital Regional District Arts Development
Committee and local governments for community art organizations currently not eligible
for grant funding under the Capital Regional District Arts Development Services
in as much as they do not have a regional focus, she said.
Councillor Copley went on to answer questions from
Council, noting that the Program would provide a maximum of $12,000 in funding
per year, with a maximum of $1,500 per organization. The first step, it
was noted, would be to secure support at the Municipal level, and then the
local arts organization would apply to the Community Arts Matching Grant
Program.
It was noted that there is currently no budget for
grants for local community arts organizations, although Oak Bay does contribute
to the Capital
Regional District Arts
Development Service, and it was acknowledged that if the program was to be
supported, funds would need to be allocated in that regard.
Councillor Copley noted that at this point she was
looking for input to relay to the Committee regarding the proposal in general.
There was discussion regarding how the Capital Regional
District’s
$12,000 portion would be raised, and it was noted that it would be provided
from the Commonwealth Legacy Fund.
Some concerns were raised regarding the criteria that
might be used by Council in deciding to provide a grant to local arts
organizations, which would be a pre-requisite for those organizations to apply
to the Capital
Regional District Community
Arts Matching Grant Program for matching funds.
Council members, in general, indicated support for the
proposal noting, however, that further consideration of the budget implications
would need to be discussed during budget deliberations. It was also
acknowledged that the program would require additional staff and Council time
to process applications for funding, and that the Capital Regional District does have a substantial budget
for arts funding already.
Councillor Copley indicated that she would pass along
the comments made to the Capital Regional District Arts Committee, and asked that
further thought be given to the matter by members of Council in order to
provide additional input.
MOVED by Councillor Jensen
Seconded by Councillor Braithwaite, That correspondence
item no. 2008-193 be received.
CARRIED
Councillor Copley agreed to
advise Council on the progress of the Community Arts Matching Grant Program as
it unfolds.
|
7. |
2008-194 |
CAPITAL
REGIONAL DISTRICT, July 10, 2008 Re Capital Regional
District Climate Action and
Adaptation Service Establishment Bylaw No. 3510 |
MOVED by Councillor Herbert
Seconded by Councillor Jensen, That consent
be given to the adoption of the Capital Regional District Bylaw No. 3510,
Capital Regional District Climate Action and Adaptation Service Establishment
Bylaw, 2008, in accordance with Section 801.4 of the Local Government Act.
CARRIED
|
8. |
2008-195 |
MUNICIPAL TREASURER, July 7, 2008 Re Mileage
Rates for the Use of Personal Vehicles
|
MOVED by Councillor Braithwaite
Seconded by Councillor Herbert, That the
mileage rates paid for the use of personal vehicles on municipal business be
increased as follows effective retroactively to June 1, 2008:
§
first
300 km per month $0.56
§
next
200 km per month $0.49
§
over
500 km per month and travel outside the Capital Regional District $0.43
CARRIED
|
9. |
2008-196 2008-196-1 2008-196-2 2008-196-3 2008-196-4 |
BYRON
DAVIES, June 26, 2008 ROBERT
CHOWN, July 17, 2008 BRITT KARLSTROM,
July 21, 2008 ORIANO
BELUSIC, July 21, 2008 Re Bylaw
No. 4421, Low-Speed Electric-Powered Vehicle Authorization Bylaw, 2008 |
MOVED by Councillor Jensen
Seconded by Councillor Braithwaite, That
correspondence items no. 2008-196 to 2008-196-4 be received.
CARRIED
|
10. |
2008-197 |
DIRECTOR OF BUILDING AND PLANNING, July 17, 2008 Re Development Variance Permit /
Subdivision Application – |
The Director of
Building and Planning explained that the homeowner is requesting an additional
variance to his development variance permit application currently before
Council that would vary the requirement to provide a covered parking space,
noting that two covered parking spaces are proposed.
John Young, 686
Island Road, and owner 1226 Roslyn Road, said he would like to request
a variance to allow him to have two uncovered parking spaces on his property,
as he felt that building a carport would not necessarily create a hardship but
would take away from the aesthetic attributes of his proposal and it would not decrease
the amount of available parking on the property.
Mr. Young also
confirmed that he was willing to enter into a preservation covenant for the
existing house on proposed
Responding to
questions, the Municipal Clerk advised that changes could be made to the
proposed resolution appearing later in the agenda with respect to including the
additional variance, along with addressing the preservation covenant.
MOVED by Councillor Jensen
Seconded by Councillor Copley, That correspondence
item no. 2008-197 be received.
With frequent applications for variances to
the Parking Facilities Bylaw coming forward, it was suggested by some members
of Council that it may be time to give thought to amending the bylaw.
The question was then called.
CARRIED
NEW BUSINESS/REPORTS FROM OTHER COMMITTEES:
2008
Rotary
Club of
MOVED by Councillor Braithwaite
Seconded by Councillor Cassidy, That staff
be directed to bring forward design plans and estimated cost, for a covered bike
rack to potentially be installed at the corner of
CARRIED
House
Demolitions
Councillor Cassidy once again drew
attention to his concern with the increasing number of demolitions being
carried out in
TABLED:
Development Variance Permit –
MOVED by Councillor Jensen
Seconded by Councillor Herbert, That the following
motion be lifted from the table:
That the Director of Building and Planning
be authorized to issue a Development Variance Permit with respect to 1613 Elgin
Road (Lot G, Block 2, Section 69, Victoria District, Plan 2197) that will vary
the following provisions of Bylaw No. 3531, being the Zoning Bylaw, 1986, as amended:
|
Bylaw Section |
Required |
Requested |
Variance |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.5.4. (2) (a) Minimum Front |
7.62 m |
1.52 m |
6.12 m |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.5.4. (7) Minimum Clear
Space Between Buildings and Structures |
3.0 m |
0.0 m |
3.0 m |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.15.1 Maximum Paved
Surfaces |
25% |
64% |
39% |
to accommodate a pergola and paving in the front yard
of the property, as shown on the plans attached to Committee of the Whole
agenda item #2008-161, being a memorandum from the Director of Building and
Planning dated June 3, 2008.
CARRIED
The question on the main motion was then
called.
CARRIED
Development Variance Permit –
MOVED by Councillor Jensen
Seconded by Councillor Herbert, That the following motion
be lifted from the table:
That the Director of Building and Planning be
authorized to issue a Development Variance Permit with respect to 2757 Dorset
Road (Lot 4, Block 43 Section 31, Victoria District, Plan 8777) that will vary
the following provisions of Bylaw No. 3531, being the Zoning Bylaw, 1986, as amended:
|
Bylaw Section |
Required/ Permitted |
Requested |
Variance |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.2.4. (2) (c)
& Schedule “C” Minimum Interior
Side |
4.57 m |
0.65 m |
3.92 m |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.2.4. (2) (a) Front Lot Line Setback
(accessory structure) |
10.66 m |
9.0 m |
1.66 m |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.2.4. (7) Minimum Clear
Space Between Buildings and Structures |
3 m |
0.0 m |
3 m |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.2.4. (1) Number of
Accessory Structures (Pergolas) Permitted |
2 structures |
3 structures |
1 structure |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.2.4. (2) (b) Rear Lot Line
Setback (accessory structure) |
1.52 m |
0.68 m |
0.84 m |
to accommodate the construction of three pergolas, as
shown on the plans attached to Committee of the Whole agenda item #2008-162,
being a memorandum from the Director of Building and Planning dated June 5,
2008.
CARRIED
The question on the main motion was then
called.
CARRIED
RESOLUTIONS:
Development Variance Permit –
MOVED by Councillor Jensen
Seconded by Councillor Cassidy, That the Director of Building and Planning
be authorized to issue a Development Variance Permit with respect to 2570
Nottingham Road (Amended Lot 1, (DD268981I), Section 31, Victoria District,
Plan 3811) that will vary the following provisions of Bylaw No. 3531, being the
Zoning Bylaw, 1986, as amended:
|
Bylaw Section |
Required |
Requested |
Variance |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.2.4. (2) (c)
& Schedule “C” Minimum Interior
Side |
4.57 m |
2.44 m |
2.13 m |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.2.4. (2)(e) & Schedule “C” Minimum Total of Side |
12.19 m |
8.29 m |
3.90 m |
to accommodate a kitchen extension and renovations, as
shown on the plans attached to Committee of the Whole agenda item #2008-181,
being a memorandum from the Director of Building and Planning dated July 8,
2008.
MOVED by Councillor Jensen
Seconded by Councillor Cassidy,
That the motion in respect of
the development variance permit for
CARRIED
Development Variance Permit –
MOVED by Councillor Jensen
Seconded by Councillor Cassidy, That the Director of Building and Planning
be authorized to issue a Development Variance Permit with respect to 542 Oliver
Street (Lot B, Section 22, Victoria District, Plan 5230) that will vary the
following provisions of Bylaw No. 3531, being the Zoning Bylaw, 1986, as amended:
|
Bylaw Section |
Required |
Requested |
Variance |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.4.4. (11) Minimum Interior
Side |
3.0 m |
2.13 m |
0.87 m |
to accommodate construction of a second floor bathroom
to the existing dwelling, as shown on the plans attached to Committee of the
Whole agenda item #2008-182, being a memorandum from the Director of Building
and Planning dated July 7, 2008.
MOVED by Councillor Jensen
Seconded by Councillor Cassidy, That the motion in respect of the
development variance permit for
CARRIED
Development Variance Permit –
MOVED by Councillor Jensen
Seconded by Councillor Cassidy, That the Director of Building and Planning
be authorized to issue a Development Variance Permit with respect to 1684 Yale
Street (Lot J, Block 1, Section 69, Victoria District, Plan 2197) that will
vary the following provisions of Bylaw No. 3531, being the Zoning Bylaw, 1986, as amended:
|
Bylaw Section |
Permitted |
Requested |
Variance |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.5.4. (3) (a) & Schedule “B” |
7.32 m |
7.93 m |
0.61 m |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.5.4. (3) (b) &
Schedule “B” Occupiable Height |
4.57 m |
5.13 m |
0.56 m |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.5.4. (3) (c) &
Schedule “B” Maximum Roof Height |
9.14 m |
9.45 m |
0.31 m |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.5.4. (6) (b) Gross Floor Area |
420 sq m |
567.5 sq m |
147.5 sq m |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.5.4.
(6) (b) Gross Floor Area Higher than 0.8 meter Below Grade |
300 sq m |
567.5 sq m |
267.5 sq m |
to accommodate construction of a rear addition, as
shown on the plans attached to Committee of the Whole agenda item #2008-183,
being a memorandum from the Director of Building and Planning dated July 8,
2008.
MOVED by Councillor Jensen
Seconded by Councillor Cassidy, That the motion in respect of the
development variance permit for
CARRIED
Development Variance Permit –
MOVED by Councillor Cassidy
Seconded by Councillor Jensen, That the Director of Building and Planning
be authorized to issue a Development Variance Permit with respect to 565 Oliver
Street (Lot 15, Block D, Section 22, Victoria District, Plan 1092) that will
vary the following provisions of Bylaw No. 3540 (Parking Facilities Bylaw, 1986), with respect to the number and
type of required on-site parking spaces:
|
Parking Facilities Bylaw Section |
Required |
Requested |
Variance |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.7 and Schedule A, A.1.(a) Minimum No. of
Parking Spaces |
2 spaces, Incl. 1 in
building |
1 space (none in building) |
1 space (waive the “1
space in building” requirement) |
to accommodate, in conjunction with the construction
of a new single family dwelling, the
provision of a single uncovered parking space as shown in the site plan
attached to Committee of the Whole agenda item #2008-184, being a memorandum
from the Director of Building and Planning dated July 9, 2008.
MOVED by Councillor Cassidy
Seconded by Councillor Jensen,
That the motion in respect of
the development variance permit for
CARRIED
Development Variance Permit –
In response to the request for
a variance to the Parking Facilities Bylaw, and in recognition of the owner’s
willingness to enter into a preservation covenant for the existing house, the
following resolution, which was revised from the proposed resolution included
in the agenda, was made:
MOVED by Councillor Herbert
Seconded by Councillor Copley, That the Director of Building and Planning
be authorized to issue two (2) Development Variance Permits with respect to the
proposed subdivision of 1226 Roslyn Road (Lot A (DD 189918-I), Block 1, Section
23, Victoria District, Plan 1091) which would vary the provisions of Bylaw No.
3531, being the Zoning Bylaw, 1986,
and Bylaw No. 3540, the Parking
Facilities Bylaw, 1986, as follows:
Permit #1:
To permit the portion of the existing
principal building proposed to be retained on proposed
·
A
minimum total of side lot line setbacks of 3.75 m;
·
Gross
floor area of 408 sq m;
·
Gross
floor area higher than 0.8 m below grade of 408 sq m;
·
Minimum
interior side lot line setback for the second storey of 1.74 m;
and to permit the proposed Lot 1 to have a
minimum lot frontage and minimum lot width of 15.24 m, and to vary the
requirement that one of the two required parking spaces be covered;
Permit #2:
To permit the proposed
Substantially as shown on the plan of the proposed
subdivision prepared by Brad Cunin Land Surveyor, as printed for the purposes
of the July 21, 2008 Council meeting, and floor plans as appended to Committee
of the Whole agenda item #2008-185, being a memorandum from the Director of
Building and Planning dated July 9, 2008, when and if the Approving Officer
grants preliminary approval to the proposed subdivision, and upon the applicant
satisfying all conditions of preliminary approval set out by the Approving
Officer including but not limited to the payment of all required off-site
servicing costs and the execution of a covenant in favour of the Municipality
which, in addition to any other restrictions required by the Approving Officer,
would impose the following restrictions:
MOVED by Councillor Herbert
Seconded by Councillor Copley,
That the motion in respect of
the development variance permit for
CARRIED
Development Variance Permit –
MOVED by Councillor Herbert
Seconded by Councillor Cassidy,
That the Director of Building
and Planning be authorized to issue a Development Variance Permit with respect
to 2156 Brighton Avenue (Lot 3 & 4, Section 23, Victoria District, Plan
2326) that will vary the following provisions of Bylaw No. 3531, being the Zoning Bylaw, 1986, as amended:
|
Bylaw Section |
Required/ Permitted |
Requested |
Variance |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.5.4. (2) (a) Minimum Front |
7.62 m |
3.65 m |
3.97 m |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.5.4. (2) (b) Minimum Rear |
7.62 m |
1.52 m |
6.1 m |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.5.4. (3) (b)
& Schedule “B” Maximum
Occupiable Height |
4.57 m |
5.72 m |
1.15 m |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.6.5. (1)
Maximum Projection into Required Rear and Front Setback: Rear
landing/stair projection Front trellis
projection |
6.42 m 6.42 m |
0.30 m 2.4 m |
6.12 m 4.02 m |
to accommodate the proposed new single family
dwelling, as shown on the plans attached to Committee of the Whole agenda item
#2008-186, being a memorandum from the Director of Building and Planning dated
June 30, 2008.
MOVED by Councillor Cassidy
Seconded by Councillor Herbert,
That the motion in respect of
the development variance permit for 2156 Brighton Avenue, be tabled to allow
notice to be given in accordance with the
Local Government Act.
CARRIED
Attendance at the
MOVED by Councillor Cassidy
Seconded by Councillor Herbert,
That
Council approve the payment of expenses for the
CARRIED
September Meeting Schedule
MOVED by Councillor Herbert
Seconded by Councillor Braithwaite, That the regular meeting of Council
scheduled for Monday, September 22, 2008 be cancelled and re-scheduled for
Monday, September 29, 2008.
CARRIED
BYLAWS:
For Adoption
MOVED by Councillor Herbert
Seconded by Councillor Copley, That Bylaw No. 4420, Tree Protection Bylaw Amendment Bylaw No. 1, 2008, be adopted.
CARRIED
For First, Second and Third Reading
MOVED by Councillor Jensen
Seconded by Councillor Braithwaite, That Bylaw No. 4421, Low-Speed Electric-Powered Vehicle Authorization Bylaw, 2008, be introduced and read a
first time.
CARRIED
MOVED by Councillor Jensen
Seconded by Councillor Braithwaite, That Bylaw No. 4421, Low-Speed Electric-Powered Vehicle Authorization Bylaw, 2008, be read a second time.
A member of Council drew attention to correspondence
from a member of the Canadian Federation of the Blind to the Federal Government
which notes that the Federation is not against electric-powered vehicles
themselves but feels the silent vehicles pose a safety concern for blind and
for other pedestrians and should be equipped with an appropriate sound device.
The question was then called.
CARRIED
MOVED by Councillor Jensen
Seconded by Councillor Braithwaite, That Bylaw No. 4421, Low-Speed Electric-Powered Vehicle Authorization Bylaw, 2008, be read a third time.
CARRIED
MOVED by Councillor Braithwaite
Seconded by Councillor Cassidy, That Bylaw No. 4422, Alternative Transportation Infrastructure Reserve Fund Establishment
Bylaw, 2008,
be introduced and read a first time.
CARRIED
MOVED by Councillor Braithwaite
Seconded by Councillor Cassidy, That Bylaw No. 4422, Alternative Transportation Infrastructure Reserve Fund Establishment
Bylaw, 2008,
be read a second time.
It was noted that the Bylaw simply establishes the
Reserve Fund and that decisions on transferring funds into it could be
discussed at a later date.
The question was then called.
CARRIED
MOVED by Councillor Braithwaite
Seconded by Councillor Cassidy, That Bylaw No. 4422, Alternative Transportation Infrastructure Reserve Fund Establishment
Bylaw, 2008,
be read a third time.
CARRIED
MOVED by Councillor Braithwaite
Seconded by Councillor Herbert, That Bylaw No. 4423, Parking Reserve Fund Establishment Bylaw Amendment Bylaw, 2008, be introduced and read a
first time.
CARRIED
MOVED by Councillor Braithwaite
Seconded by Councillor Herbert, That Bylaw No. 4423, Parking Reserve Fund Establishment Bylaw Amendment Bylaw, 2008, be read a second time.
CARRIED
MOVED by Councillor Braithwaite
Seconded by Councillor Herbert, That Bylaw No. 4423, Parking Reserve Fund Establishment Bylaw Amendment Bylaw, 2008, be read a third time.
CARRIED
MOVED by Councillor Herbert
Seconded by Councillor Braithwaite, That Bylaw No. 4424, Streets and Traffic Bylaw Amendment Bylaw No. 1, 2008, be introduced and read a
first time.
CARRIED
MOVED by Councillor Herbert
Seconded by Councillor Braithwaite, That Bylaw No. 4424, Streets and Traffic Bylaw Amendment Bylaw No. 1, 2008, be read a second time.
CARRIED
MOVED by Councillor Herbert
Seconded by Councillor Braithwaite, That Bylaw No. 4424, Streets and Traffic Bylaw Amendment Bylaw No. 1, 2008, be read a third time.
CARRIED
MOVED by Councillor Copley
Seconded by Councillor Cassidy, That Bylaw No. 4425, Animal Control Bylaw Amendment
Bylaw No. 2, 2008, be introduced and read a first time.
CARRIED
MOVED by Councillor Copley
Seconded by Councillor Cassidy, That Bylaw No. 4425, Animal Control Bylaw Amendment
Bylaw No. 2, 2008, be read a second time.
Councillor Jensen expressed his wish to at some point see
consideration being given to reducing the minimum required lot size required to
keep chickens.
The question was then called.
CARRIED
MOVED by Councillor Copley
Seconded by Councillor Cassidy, That Bylaw No. 4425, Animal Control Bylaw Amendment
Bylaw No. 2, 2008, be read a third time.
CARRIED
MOVED by Councillor Cassidy
Seconded by Councillor Herbert, That Bylaw No. 4426, Ticket Information Utilization Bylaw Amendment Bylaw No. 3, 2008, be introduced and read a
first time.
CARRIED
MOVED by Councillor Cassidy
Seconded by Councillor Herbert, That Bylaw No. 4426, Ticket Information Utilization Bylaw Amendment Bylaw No. 3, 2008, be read a second time.
CARRIED
MOVED by Councillor Cassidy
Seconded by Councillor Herbert, That Bylaw No. 4426, Ticket Information Utilization Bylaw Amendment Bylaw No. 3, 2008, be read a third time.
CARRIED
ADJOURNMENT:
MOVED by Councillor Braithwaite
Seconded by Councillor Herbert, That the meeting of
CARRIED
The meeting adjourned at 9:37 p.m.
Certified Correct:
|
_______________________________ Municipal Clerk |
|
________________________________ Mayor |