The Development Appeals Board (DAB) has allowed two homeowners to proceed with their construction projects even though the initiatives contravene the zoning bylaw and have attracted criticism from neighbours.
The board met on May 21 to hear from Daryl Duckworth at 3045 Caribou Street West and Craig Hill at 336 Hochelaga Street West after city hall denied their respective requests to construct detached accessory storage buildings in their backyards.
3045 Caribou Street West
Duckworth wants to construct a storage building that is 267.56 square metres in size, but that exceeds his principal dwelling’s 138.98-square-metre footprint, while the zoning bylaw says the combined footprint of the accessory building cannot exceed the principal building’s footprint, especially in the R5 acreage residential district, the board’s report said.
Duckworth said he would use the building to store work and personal items, while the structure would not cover utility lines and would allow access to the backyard fire hydrant.
“The appellant noted (that) he has looked around (at) neighbouring properties and noticed there are lots with smaller and larger storage buildings than what he proposes, so he doesn’t see how his proposal is any different,” the report said.
Resident Art Watson told the board he was concerned about the activity and appearance of Duckworth’s property since the man has a commercial enterprise in a residential acreage area.
Moreover, Watson thought the traffic density, vehicle types and volume that visited daily were disruptive, a nuisance and ruined his property’s appeal, the document continued. Duckworth also has three double-car garages and wants to construct an additional oversized storage venue, which would ruin the neighbourhood aesthetics.
Watson also feared the proposed building would deny access to the fire hydrant and cover the underground water lines, creating a public safety hazard.
Residents Rick and Charlene Spanjer expressed similar concerns, noting it would hamper their ability to enjoy their yard. Furthermore, they worried about safety and security near their backyard since there would be more movement of people and vehicles.
“Mr. and Mrs. Spanjer commented that while they have contacted the City of Moose Jaw’s bylaw enforcement and planning department numerous times over the years, they have not had co-operation in addressing their concerns,” the report said.
The couple believes Duckworth’s commercial activities have negatively affected their quality of life and fears the proposed structure would encourage similar activity in the area.
The board members said they did not have the authority to address the residents’ concerns since those worries were related to bylaw enforcement and development, the report noted. Instead, the board encouraged the residents to “contact the proper authorities” to have their concerns addressed.
When asked about his commercial activities, Duckworth said he moved all his vehicles, trailers, tools and materials to his property after vandals and thieves disrupted his previous location. He plans to move his materials if his offer on another commercial space is successful.
After considering the proposal, the board approved the appeal because:
- It would not be a special privilege since the board would grant a similar appeal in the same district
- It would not relax the zoning bylaw since it would not hinder the health, safety or general welfare of the community
- Even though four neighbours submitted letters objecting to the project, those concerns focused on bylaw enforcement and did not address zoning contraventions, so approving the project would not injuriously affect the neighbourhood and would not affect the adjacent properties or interfere with their use
336 Hochelaga Street West
Hill wants to replace an existing garden shed with a storage building that is 46.82 square metres in size, the report said. However, the combined floor space of the proposed structure and two other structures totals 109.25 square metres, which exceeds the maximum of 83.61 square metres.
Besides the combined floor space issue, Hill also expressed concern about the zoning bylaw’s provision of a maximum site coverage of 50 per cent, noting that his lot is 787.5 square metres in size and that the buildings would not cover even half that.
After considering the proposal, the board approved the appeal for reasons similar to the Duckworth decision; only one neighbour opposed Hill’s project.
The appeals board submitted its report to the June 10 regular council meeting, with council voting 5-1 to receive and file the document.
Coun. Kim Robinson was opposed, while Coun. Jamey Logan stepped out during the vote.
The next regular council meeting is Monday, June 24.
