, ,

Variances sought for 546 Hurd, 938 Hazel

cofaMinor variances are being sought for projects at 546 Hurd Ave. and 938 Hazel St. in Ward 2. The Committee of Adjustment will hear the requests at its meeting Monday, April 25. Residents can attend and provide feedback. The meeting begins at 6:30pm in Room 247 at City Hall.

To read the report and staff response to the variances visit the agenda here: CofA Council Pkg – April 25-2016

Summary of variances is below:

546 Hurd – Variances requested

1. To permit a north side yard setback of 0.8 m whereas Part 1, Section 2.2.1 (b) (ii) of Zoning By-Law 2020, as amended, requires a minimum side yard setback of 1.2 m for an accessory building greater than 10 sq m.

2. To permit a two storey accessory building whereas Part 1, Section 2.2.1 (b) (ii) of Zoning By-Law 2020, as amended, permits a maximum one storey accessory building.

3. To permit a height of 6.35 m whereas Part 1, Section 2.2.1 (b) (ii) of Zoning By-Law 2020, as amended, permits a maximum height of 4.6 m for a peaked roof.

4. To permit a floor area of 115.1 sq m whereas Part 1, Section 2.2.1 (b) (ii) of Zoning By-Law 2020, as amended, permits a maximum floor area of 50 sq m.

5. To permit lot coverage of 12.6% whereas Part 2, Section 4.2, of Zoning By-Law 2020, as amended, permits 8% maximum for accessory buildings.

938 Hazel – Variances requested

1. To permit a maximum lot coverage of 30 % whereas Part 2, Section 4.2, Table 2.4.3 requires a maximum lot coverage of 25% for all other dwelling types in designated areas.

2. To permit a 5.7 m internal depth dimension for a private garage whereas Part 1, Section 2.26(1)(a) requires the minimum internal depth dimension for a private garage is 6 m

 

I was inspired to seek public office because I believe, like so many of you, “I can do something about that” on the issues we face. As councilor, my role is to take a stand on what’s best for residents and go to bat for it. Pushback is inevitable from those who don’t have the community’s interests at heart. I will stand with you and for you, to achieve the best interests of our city, without caving to unacceptable compromise in the name of consensus.

What's your take?