PAC Minutes – September 5, 2000
The regular meeting of the Town of Grand Bay-Westfield Planning Advisory Committee was held Tuesday, September 5, 2000 at 7:00 p.m. in Room “A”. Chairman, Larry Chapman conducted the meeting and called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m.
1. RECORD OF ATTENDANCE
All members were present.
2. P.A.C. MINUTES OF AUGUST 21, 2000
“…it was moved by Mel Steffens and seconded by Bill McCann to accept as presented the August 21, 2000 P.A.C. Minutes….”
3. CHAIRMAN’S REMARKS
4. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
James Evans declared a conflict on Item # 6 Re: Application for Subdivision Approval, Kimberly & Kenneth McCurdy – Riverside Park.
5. DEVELOPMENT OFFICER’S REPORT DATED AUGUST 22, 2000 RE: REQUEST FOR VARIANCE JIM RALPH – 38 LACROIX DRIVE
A Closed Session discussion was held regarding the above Request for Variance for the construction of a detached garage requiring a variance to the side yard set back. The Committee concurred with the Development Officer’s recommendations found in his report.
The Development Officer advised that the Applicant is constructing the garage far enough away from the main dwelling to provide access to the rear of the property and to the well.
No replies were received from the surrounding property owners.
Applicant, Jim Ralph was present during the Open Session and stated he had nothing further to add. There was no one present either in favor of or against the application when the following motion was made:
“…moved by Bill McCann that P.A.C. grant the following variance for the development of a detached two-car garage to be located at 38 LaCroix Drive, NBGIC #00458018, under the Town’s By-law No. 16, Town of Grand Bay-Westfield Zoning By-law , Division II
a) under Section 14(b)(ii), a variance of 1.0 metres to reduce the minimum set back from a property side line from 3.0 metres to 2.0 metres….”
Motion seconded by Ralph Stevens. Carried.
6. DEVELOPMENT OFFICER’S REPORT DATED AUGUST 22, 2000 RE: REQUEST FOR VARIANCE EARL BURROWS – 39 MORNINGSIDE CRESCENT
A Closed Session discussion was held regarding the above Request for Variance for the construction of a shed, requiring a variance to the front yard set back.
The Committee concurred with the Development Officer’s recommendations found in his report, however, wished to add a condition regarding the type of finish for the shed. Two replies were received from surrounding property owners stating no objection to this application.
Applicant, Earl Burrows was present during the Open Session and stated that he had nothing further to add. However, he wished to clarify as to where the line is that he should measure from. The Development Officer advised him that the Zoning By-law states 25 feet from a street line and not the paved portion of the street. The Committee stated to Mr. Burrows that the shed will be visible to the neighbouring properties, and requested it be finished to match the house. Mr. Burrows stated that the shed is to be used as a play house and will be tastefully built, and that he had no objection to siding it to match the house.
There was no one present in favor of or against the proposal when the following motion was made:
“…moved by Mel Steffens that P.A.C. grant the following variance for the development of a shed to be located at 39 Morningside Crescent, NBGIC #30003958 under the Town’s By-law No. 16, Town of Grand Bay-Westfield, Division I, as follows:
1. under Section 15 (b)(i), grant a variance of 3. 75 metres to reduce the minimum set back from a street line from 7.5 metres to 3.75 metres;
2. the exterior of the shed to be finished with siding to match the house….”
Motion seconded by Jim Evans. Carried.
7. DEVELOPMENT OFFICER’S REPORT DATED AUGUST 24, 2000 RE: APPLICATION FOR SUBDIVISION APPROVAL KIMBERLY & KENNETH MCCURDY – RIVERSIDE PARK
James Evans left the meeting room during the Closed Session discussion regarding the above application for subdivision approval for the relocation of a river access, requiring a variance to the Subdivision By-law on the street width, and a variance to the Zoning By-law on the lot width.
The Development Officer advised the Committee on background information, stating that the present river access as it exists, is on Town owned property. David reported that he has received further correspondence from surrounding property owners, two against and one in favor of this proposal.
Applicants, Kimberly and Kenneth McCurdy were present during the Open Session. James Evans sat in the public seating area. There was no one present in favor of or against the proposal.
Mr. McCurdy stated that they had nothing further to add. Mrs. McCurdy advised the Committee that they propose to do the following:
- divide and consolidate parcels of waterfront land to existing Lots 37, 41 and 51;
- proposed closure of existing river access;
- proposed new river access;
- amalgamation of Lots 21 and 29 and portion of road (present river access).
She also advised that they plan to construct a retirement home on the two consolidated lots, stating that this could happen without the relocation of the existing river access, however, they wish to relocate the river access in order to use the present access as the driveway to their new home.
When asked if there would be any cost incurred to property owners of Lots 37, 41 and 51 with regard to the consolidation of the parcels of waterfront land, Mrs. McCurdy advised that there would not be, as this would be documented in the Amending Subdivision Plan.
The Development Officer advised that this is a complicated matter and not just a simple Amending Plan and recommended that the following be addressed:
- Applicants must apply for a Road Closing Application;
- Granting of a variance for the width of the road;
- Granting of a variance for road frontage on Lot 15;
- Agreement from property owners regarding the consolidation of waterfront land;.
- Proper Survey be done, depicting what portions are going where;
- Tentative Subdivision Plan be done up for approval.
James Evans expressed concerns regarding the new river access becoming more like a public street that would attract ATV’s, and recommended that the Town not construct it in such a manner as to encourage this.
The following motion was then made:
“…moved by Mel Steffens that the item be tabled for further information being provided by the Applicant, meeting the requirements of the Community Planning Act as set out under Section 49, complete with the applicable Application Fee being paid….”
Motion seconded by Bill McCann. Carried.
The McCurdy’s were thanked for attending and were advised that P.A.C. would meet with them again when the proper documentation is submitted.
8. DEVELOPMENT OFFICER’S MEMO DATED AUGUST 25, 2000 RE: LIST OF P.A.C. ITEMS FOR YEAR 2000, PART 2
The Committee thanked the Development Officer for supplying them with this information.
“…it was moved by Bill McCann that P.A.C. receive and file this information and that a copy be forwarded on to Council for their information….”
Motion seconded by Michael Hare. Carried.
9. DEVELOPMENT OFFICER’S MEMO DATED AUGUST 18, 2000 RE: VARIANCE INFORMATION PACKAGE, ADOPTED 1998
Following a brief discussion, the following motion was made:
“…moved by Ralph Stevens that P.A.C. adopt the amended Section of P.A.C.’s Rules of Procedure regarding the Variance Information Package, as per the Development Officer’s recommendations, as Item # 13 of P.A.C. Business Procedures….”
Motion seconded by Bill McCann. Carried.
Ralph Stevens moved to adjourn at 9:09 p.m.
Laylia Nice, Larry Chapman,
P.A.C. Secretary P.A.C. Chairman