North Pender Island Local Trust Committee regular meeting, September 13, 2023

[0:00:05] Voice 3: Brad,

[0:00:07] Voice 9: do you want to kick it off for us or do you want me to talk?

[0:00:10] Voice 4: I think it's best to you as the chair do that.

[0:00:12] Voice 9: Okay, so we can do a call to order at 10.02 a.m.

[0:00:21] Voice 9: I believe our first order of business would be the approval of the agenda

[0:00:26] Voice 9: and approval of the minutes of the last meeting.

[0:00:30] Voice 3: Correct.

[0:00:31] Voice 3: I guess

[0:00:31] Voice 9: we can do

[0:00:32] Voice 3: that by consensus.

[0:00:34] Voice 6: Awesome.

[0:00:36] Voice 6: I agree.

[0:00:38] Voice 6: And I'm going to hang up my phone.

[0:00:39] Voice 6: and progress

[0:00:40] Voice 11: awesome

[0:00:42] Voice 9: it's looking like it's two to one versus andrew at the moment

[0:00:53] Voice 6: all

[0:00:54] Voice 5: right colleen they're just going to work through a bit of regular business here and

[0:00:57] Voice 5: then they'll get to your application okay

[0:00:59] Voice 9: thanks so we've approved the agenda by consensus we can

[0:01:05] Voice 9: approve the minutes i believe also by consensus correct burt correct

[0:01:12] Voice 6: awesome you need

[0:01:14] Voice 5: to make a

[0:01:14] Voice 5: motion for each for okay or

[0:01:17] Voice 5: the minutes that you need to uh and

[0:01:20] Voice 9: bert has to make the motion

[0:01:21] Voice 9: correct okay no either of

[0:01:23] Voice 5: you can make the motion then you someone seconds it and then you vote on

[0:01:27] Voice 5: it

[0:01:28] Voice 9: okay

[0:01:29] Voice 5: i'll make sure you just the

[0:01:30] Voice 9: agenda seconds i'll make a motion to approve the minute second

[0:01:38] Voice 9: we can get an update from Secretary.

[0:01:41] Voice 9: Brad, you did that last time.

[0:01:43] Voice 5: Yeah, so now we can work through our application here.

[0:01:46] Voice 5: We have our applicants here, Colleen Jones,

[0:01:49] Voice 5: and I'm not sure, Ken, is it Ken Jones?

[0:01:52] Voice 8: No, it's Tom.

[0:01:54] Voice 5: Sorry.

[0:01:55] Voice 5: Sorry, Tom.

[0:01:57] Voice 5: I saw, okay.

[0:02:00] Voice 5: So we have three applicants on the line here, is that right?

[0:02:05] Voice 8: I'm working with the Congress on the project.

[0:02:08] Voice 8: it you're

[0:02:09] Voice 5: the consultant or the the architect or designer okay thank you for that clarification

[0:02:16] Voice 5: uh so uh the board here has a application before them for uh uh seeking variants for

[0:02:24] Voice 5: uh the property located at 1205 bridges road uh the property owners is seeking to permit

[0:02:32] Voice 5: to permit an amendment or a variance

[0:02:36] Voice 5: to the North Pender Island and use bylaw number 224

[0:02:39] Voice 5: to prevent modifications to the existing legal

[0:02:42] Voice 5: non-conforming dwelling to enclose part of the covered deck

[0:02:45] Voice 5: that is located within the existing roof line

[0:02:49] Voice 5: and is sited within 0.79 meters of an interior side lot line.

[0:02:55] Voice 5: So just speaking to the applicant's rationale,

[0:02:58] Voice 5: they've provided a letter to the board,

[0:03:00] Voice 5: which is included in your agenda package the goal of the applicant is to renovate their home to age

[0:03:06] Voice 5: in place they state their current hallways and doorways are not wide enough to enable

[0:03:10] Voice 5: accessibility and the current master bedroom and bathroom are also too small for accommodation of

[0:03:16] Voice 5: accessibility that the renovation would improve overall energy efficiency and safety in the house

[0:03:22] Voice 5: and remove the furnace the fuel oil tank for heating that there's specific parameters associated

[0:03:31] Voice 5: with the property including the local topography and terrain the siding of the house and there's

[0:03:38] Voice 5: also a herbaceous dpa which is shown in the attached staff report that make the proposed

[0:03:47] Voice 5: proposed renovation the best option they'd like to avoid machine access or of allow continue to

[0:03:55] Voice 5: allow machine access to the south side of the house if they ever need to and they state that

[0:04:00] Voice 5: the neighbors are supportive and sight lines and will not be impacted so the house was built prior

[0:04:06] Voice 5: to current bylaws in 1949 as you've both seen the property and the photos show the existing deck

[0:04:17] Voice 5: attached deck with the covered roof is in the now interior side lot line so it's deemed legal

[0:04:26] Voice 5: non-conforming given that was built prior to that time figure two in your staff report shows the

[0:04:33] Voice 5: site of the corner of the deck where they want to enclose figure three shows the design plan

[0:04:40] Voice 5: and we have the applicant's designer on the line to answer any questions with photos there

[0:04:46] Voice 5: uh it there is some dp on the property but as you can see uh on page six of the package it's well

[0:04:54] Voice 5: away from the house uh along more of the foreshore area and there are a couple letters from the uh

[0:05:03] Voice 5: that the applicant has provided that they state are from the uh current owner or from the owners

[0:05:10] Voice 5: uh there's been no uh response to the uh notices that were sent out to the local property owners

[0:05:19] Voice 5: there's been no response for or against the application uh awesome and uh just uh i'll just

[0:05:33] Voice 5: speak finally to uh i think in in staff's perspective i think that's reasonable to

[0:05:38] Voice 5: deem this a minor variance but that's up the up to the board to decide and the other key factor

[0:05:43] Voice 5: for the board to determine is of course,

[0:05:47] Voice 5: whether there is a demonstrated hardship here or not.

[0:05:50] Voice 5: It's really up to the, you know,

[0:05:52] Voice 5: there's no really clear defined definition of hardship.

[0:05:57] Voice 5: It's really up to the board to kind of shape what that is.

[0:05:59] Voice 5: I would say that financial hardship is not a typical reason

[0:06:04] Voice 5: where hardship is deemed to be warranted.

[0:06:09] Voice 5: And with that, it's back over to the board

[0:06:12] Voice 5: to have a discussion and any questions from the applicants or myself and uh we can send it back

[0:06:19] Voice 5: to you there chair thank you yeah

[0:06:24] Voice 9: so um one thing that i was looking for brad is i believe we are

[0:06:30] Voice 9: allowed to encroach into the side yard 1.2 meters with a porch is that correct uh

[0:06:40] Voice 5: there's no specific

[0:06:42] Voice 5: specific isn't there a deck encroachment

[0:06:44] Voice 5: that there's a 0.6 meters perhaps okay

[0:06:48] Voice 9: so it's that's

[0:06:49] Voice 9: the number that i was looking for so we are currently about 0.8 so where previously they

[0:06:54] Voice 9: were sort of halfway into the setback now they want to go about three quarters of the way into

[0:06:59] Voice 9: the setback so i think that that could be maybe seen as minor i guess the problem that i have is

[0:07:07] Voice 9: the hardship and i'm not sure where the hardship lies in this application it does look like there's

[0:07:18] Voice 9: sort of plenty of space on the south east side of the property and not so much on the southwest so

[0:07:29] Voice 9: i just i'm not sure that there i'm not sure that i can see a hardship here i'm wondering if the

[0:07:41] Voice 9: applicant or bird or anyone wants to speak to the issue of of hardship on this i

[0:07:48] Voice 5: think this

[0:07:49] Voice 5: would be a reasonable time to look to the applicants to speak to their application and

[0:07:53] Voice 5: uh and then could carry on after that chair over

[0:07:59] Voice 4: to you applicants and

[0:08:04] Voice 2: you're just in response

[0:08:05] Voice 2: to your question about the location of the deck the deck is already there it's an existing deck

[0:08:13] Voice 2: I do understand that.

[0:08:15] Voice 9: It's great that Islands Trust is allowing this to be called existing non-conforming. There's an existing deck that is shown on your survey by way as being 0.79 meters from your property line.

[0:08:30] Voice 9: that deck is allowed to encroach 0.6 meters into the setback so you're about 1.4 meters away from

[0:08:40] Voice 9: the step from where you should be at the moment like you're 1.4 meters you've given a 1.4 meter

[0:08:48] Voice 9: setback where you would normally be allowed to have a three meter setback and you're asking to

[0:08:55] Voice 9: to increase that so you're actually asked no sorry colleen no um

[0:09:00] Voice 9: yes i can i'm sorry i'm

[0:09:03] Voice 9: i'm trying to explain that your deck is allowed to encroach into the setback a building is not

[0:09:10] Voice 9: so by virtue of creating the building you are increasing the non-conformity do you follow me

[0:09:18] Voice 9: there because you are enclosing the deck you are giving away the 1.2 meter encroachment that you

[0:09:24] Voice 9: you have. But that notwithstanding, I don't see the hardship. When I look at this, I say,

[0:09:30] Voice 9: why aren't they building on the west side of the house? Why are they turning the living room into

[0:09:35] Voice 9: the master bedroom? And why are they building on the deck? There doesn't seem to be an undue

[0:09:44] Voice 9: hardship that forces you to have to enclose the deck.

[0:09:52] Voice 11: May I speak? Absolutely. Okay.

[0:09:55] Voice 2: Okay. On the side of the house that you're referring to, there's a very large cedar tree,

[0:10:02] Voice 2: mature cedar tree that would be disrupted were we to build on that side of the deck.

[0:10:14] Voice 2: As well, we've had somebody come in to look at accessing our septic system if we need to.

[0:10:26] Voice 2: And currently, there is a way that with the hill, with the cliff that we have there going up, currently there's enough space that they could get the machinery and so on down there.

[0:10:40] Voice 2: but our concern is if if we were to push out in that direction that um yeah that would be

[0:10:51] Voice 2: difficult because you can't access our septic field area in any other with any other route

[0:11:01] Voice 2: um go

[0:11:08] Voice 9: ahead no

[0:11:10] Voice 8: go ahead sorry okay

[0:11:11] Voice 9: so i i do see that there is a cedar tree shown on your survey

[0:11:16] Voice 9: the cedar tree appears to be in the neighborhood of eight meters or so from the house the drip

[0:11:24] Voice 9: line of that cedar tree is not marked but it does look like it's a sort of 0.9 meter so it is a

[0:11:33] Voice 9: somewhat sizable tree the septic lids are shown at the southeast corner of your site

[0:11:39] Voice 9: right? Most of the septic guys on island carry a sizable length of hose, but taking the cedar

[0:11:49] Voice 9: tree down to build over there doesn't seem like, I don't see how it would be a hardship to have to

[0:12:00] Voice 9: take down a tree. And it doesn't seem like that's the only option. You could also build to the sort

[0:12:04] Voice 9: of north east side of the house right where you've got a proposed proposed porch you've got a well

[0:12:11] Voice 9: so there's clearly been development there we can go all the way over to the carport you can see

[0:12:17] Voice 9: by the width of the driveway here where someone it looks that someone could get a truck pretty

[0:12:22] Voice 9: close to the septic field or bring in a smaller bobcat if you ever needed to get to the septic

[0:12:27] Voice 9: field the septic field does look like it's uh quite close to the natural boundary so i'm not

[0:12:33] Voice 9: sure that you would even be able to renovate the septic field i'm not sure how that enters

[0:12:37] Voice 9: into this discussion it does look like there's sort of lots of space on the site to be able to

[0:12:43] Voice 9: push out a master bedroom and that i don't see that that is the only location to put a bathroom

[0:12:50] Voice 9: on your property so

[0:12:54] Voice 7: we actually brought a whole operator here when we know and we said if you

[0:12:58] Voice 7: were going to change our bathroom or or put an extension how would you get how would you get to

[0:13:04] Voice 7: our septic guilt to pull out the i guess it's 20 year old uh tank that's there and he said

[0:13:11] Voice 7: i would have to come down here and it's it's difficult but i could put a little roof beside

[0:13:17] Voice 7: he wasn't you know he wasn't going to knock the cedar tree over he was going to come down

[0:13:21] Voice 7: and there's there's two little i'll call them precipices or rock outcrops and he would he said

[0:13:29] Voice 7: I could come down I can flip a plastic tank in there but I said well if how far can you go and

[0:13:37] Voice 7: he he basically told us where he could and where he couldn't go and that's

[0:13:41] Voice 7: why we we it's one of

[0:13:43] Voice 7: the reasons we wanted on the other side is it's our only

[0:13:46] Voice 7: access into our backyard I I get that

[0:13:49] Voice 9: but then do you have the survey here like what what

[0:13:54] Voice 7: survey are you asking for the survey that

[0:13:57] Voice 9: is included with your permit application yeah it's it's in your it's in your package yeah no

[0:14:02] Voice 9: i'm see i'm looking at it right now and i'm just wondering if you could look at it with me

[0:14:06] Voice 9: because you could build like you could extend your house right where it says abandoned well

[0:14:12] Voice 9: and that wouldn't that wouldn't impact anyone's route to the septic lids or septic field there's

[0:14:20] Voice 9: there's a apparently there's a lot of space there well away from trees and well away from the septic

[0:14:28] Voice 9: field that wouldn't encroach anyone's route to get to the septic field or septic tanks

[0:14:33] Voice 7: if you look at our um our well our actual well the whole you know it goes right to the house

[0:14:40] Voice 7: right to where you're you're talking about yeah so again do we want to create a problem for

[0:14:48] Voice 7: ourselves because i get

[0:14:51] Voice 9: no i get that it would be costly to move that but an unfortunate part

[0:14:56] Voice 9: of the board of variance is that we can't uh we can't incorporate cost in our decision making

[0:15:04] Voice 9: that that's financial burden is not a hardship right so that the well hose going across there

[0:15:11] Voice 9: i do recognize for you that it's unfortunate but it's not but the cost of moving something

[0:15:19] Voice 9: can't be factored into our decision we have to just look at the physical constraints of the site

[0:15:26] Voice 9: And we have to understand that the zoning is applied unevenly.

[0:15:31] Voice 9: Our job is to take this zoning model, which is applied to all of the lots on North Pender, and look at how it creates an undue burden for you that your property is zoned the same way that the neighbor or the other neighbor's property is zoned.

[0:15:49] Voice 9: And that's what I'm seeing is that there's not an undue hardship here, that your property isn't substantially different from your neighbors. For example, if your property was incredibly narrow, and we could say, like, look, my property is only 10 feet wide, it would be crazy of you to make me build a house that's only one foot wide in the middle of it.

[0:16:10] Voice 9: I need to push out into my setbacks. Then we could say, you're right, your property is so narrow

[0:16:17] Voice 9: that there is an undue burden on you and that there is hardship there. But here, I don't see

[0:16:23] Voice 9: that your property is substantially different from either of the neighbor's properties. So it's hard

[0:16:29] Voice 9: for me to see that you are unfairly impacted by this zoning regulation in a way that either of

[0:16:38] Voice 9: your neighbors wouldn't be. And that's the test that we have to look at to determine whether or

[0:16:44] Voice 9: not there's hardship. And that's just what I'm not seeing here is that your property isn't so

[0:16:49] Voice 9: substantially different from your neighbors that we need to bend the rules to apply differently

[0:16:54] Voice 9: to this physical reality of your property.

[0:16:58] Voice 8: A question. Yeah. Just to roll back a bit into

[0:17:03] Voice 8: to the conversation earlier in the conversation it's news to me that a porch is allowed into a

[0:17:13] Voice 8: setback yeah a porch is allowed we were allowed soffits and like a deck surface but not the

[0:17:21] Voice 8: foundation elements to project in the range of two feet we

[0:17:28] Voice 5: looked at that yeah yeah go ahead

[0:17:29] Voice 5: i can speak to that and it probably should have been included in my staff report and

[0:17:33] Voice 5: And it's a different provision than on Galliano or Saturn.

[0:17:37] Voice 5: It's a bit of a unique provision or not unique, but unique to me anyway.

[0:17:40] Voice 5: So I'm just learning it.

[0:17:41] Voice 5: But there is section 3.310, which speaks to the allowance of chimneys, cornices, leaders, gutters, pilasters, belt courses, sills, bays, windows, ornamental features, steps, eaves, sunlight control projections, canopies, balconies, or porches that project beyond the face of a building.

[0:17:59] Voice 5: the minimum distance of 0.6 meters from a lot line essentially so so as andrew was saying you are

[0:18:07] Voice 5: right now with your porch 0.79 meters so you're essentially encroaching 2.21 meters into the

[0:18:15] Voice 5: actual side lot setback but because you are deemed to be it's deemed to be a porch

[0:18:21] Voice 5: you are allowed an allowance of an additional 0.6 meters so essentially for the porch

[0:18:28] Voice 5: The setback is 2.4 meters, and so you're currently non-conforming between 2.4 and 0.79 meters.

[0:18:39] Voice 5: and there's other point there is that as soon as you close that in you lose that provision and

[0:18:45] Voice 5: the 0.6 disappears but also it now is no longer you know you're creating more of a 3d

[0:18:54] Voice 5: structured footprint there so you're increasing the non-conformity and therefore the local

[0:18:59] Voice 5: government act requires that it either meet the new land use bylaw regulations or you get

[0:19:07] Voice 5: variants and that's where you're at

[0:19:09] Voice 5: looking at your building

[0:19:11] Voice 5: plan and it's

[0:19:13] Voice 5: not my role to decide

[0:19:15] Voice 5: a hardship

[0:19:18] Voice 5: here is met or not

[0:19:19] Voice 5: but I would make the point that you have

[0:19:21] Voice 5: that proposed deck where

[0:19:22] Voice 5: you could put your

[0:19:25] Voice 5: additional square footage right

[0:19:27] Voice 5: that's about the same square footage

[0:19:29] Voice 5: as you're seeking on your

[0:19:31] Voice 5: sun deck and

[0:19:33] Voice 5: so is it undue hardship that you're not

[0:19:35] Voice 5: getting your new deck because you're having to put

[0:19:37] Voice 5: your you plan your bathroom there and that would be up to the board to decide but probably in my

[0:19:42] Voice 5: view that's probably not where hardship line would fall just to

[0:19:46] Voice 6: support yeah and just just

[0:19:47] Voice 5: and then yeah miss over to uh trustee hall would probably be

[0:19:53] Voice 6: yeah so so that's what i noticed as

[0:19:55] Voice 6: well um that you know you're expanding to the south with that new sun deck um so you're already

[0:20:02] Voice 6: reducing the access in that corner. And if you were to, I mean, as Brad said, and Andrew said,

[0:20:12] Voice 6: we're not here to redesign your house or anything, but it does look like there's other options

[0:20:16] Voice 6: available to be able to maybe change the layout of your house and put the bathroom either at the

[0:20:24] Voice 6: northeast corner of the house, either to the north or to the east, which probably wouldn't

[0:20:29] Voice 6: encroach on accessibility and um and again as brad just pointed out i thought that you know

[0:20:35] Voice 6: moving the bathroom to the south would also you've already proposed to enclose that or to

[0:20:43] Voice 6: disrupt that part of the building site anyway so that would be another option for you if you

[0:20:49] Voice 6: didn't want to disrupt in other places and

[0:20:53] Voice 5: they might still have room to put out their deck

[0:20:55] Voice 5: without impacting access into their bottom corner there.

[0:21:02] Voice 6: And so I think, you know, clearly to Andrew's point is

[0:21:05] Voice 6: we're having trouble seeing that there's hardship

[0:21:08] Voice 6: because it looks like there are options.

[0:21:10] Voice 6: And unless those options are not feasible for some reason,

[0:21:15] Voice 6: that is a constraint reason,

[0:21:17] Voice 6: then those are the options that would probably be worth exploring

[0:21:20] Voice 6: before coming to us for the relaxation.

[0:21:26] Voice 6: on the side yard setback?

[0:21:29] Voice 8: May I speak?

[0:21:33] Voice 8: What you're not seeing here is the plan that we submitted

[0:21:36] Voice 8: is 10, 11 versions in.

[0:21:42] Voice 8: And as you probably all know, if you've renovated

[0:21:45] Voice 8: and Andrew's an architect, you move one piece of the puzzle,

[0:21:49] Voice 8: it affects everything else.

[0:21:51] Voice 8: It's not a standalone thing that the bathroom ended up

[0:21:57] Voice 8: where we're proposing.

[0:21:58] Voice 8: closing to keep a kitchen and a sunroom in a place that makes sense on the west coast

[0:22:06] Voice 8: those are locked in and now you're working around it to put the bathroom where the front door is is

[0:22:12] Voice 8: like where are you going to put the front door and it just goes on and on and on and you chase your

[0:22:18] Voice 8: tail

[0:22:18] Voice 9: i get that but i don't see how we can how we can see design as hardship or or grant

[0:22:29] Voice 9: hardship based on I would like my sunroom in the front of the house right like that's not a

[0:22:36] Voice 9: that's not a thing that we all automatically get right it's it's not a given that a house would

[0:22:41] Voice 9: have a sunroom at the front of the house and a bathroom at the back of the house some houses have

[0:22:48] Voice 9: some lots propose weird design solutions or require a sort of thinking outside the box

[0:22:55] Voice 9: And that's not necessarily a hardship.

[0:22:59] Voice 9: While I do understand, Ken, that your time is valuable and that these design exercises are costly, again, the cost of redesign is something that we can't consider as it's a material cost and not part of the physical reality of the site.

[0:23:16] Voice 6: Yeah, it's not a hardship as far as the site plan is concerned.

[0:23:21] Voice 6: so

[0:23:24] Voice 8: the what i think the tipping tripping point here seems to be is that it's changing from a

[0:23:30] Voice 8: porch which i thought was deemed structure because it has foundation elements no

[0:23:37] Voice 9: the the tipping

[0:23:38] Voice 9: point sorry is that there's it doesn't have anything really to do with the porch it's just

[0:23:45] Voice 9: that there's not a there's no hardship that's what we before we can look at should we be allowed

[0:23:51] Voice 9: to push out a porch? Should we be allowed to encroach? How much should we be allowed to

[0:23:55] Voice 9: encroach? What should the form should the encroachment take? We have to look at, is there

[0:24:02] Voice 9: a reasonable case for hardship here? So with all of the, like, what form does the building take?

[0:24:09] Voice 9: Arguments aside, we have to say, is there a reason that they can't have this happen in a different

[0:24:16] Voice 9: way to this building and I don't I don't see that

[0:24:21] Voice 3: there is isn't sorry

[0:24:29] Voice 8: Colleen you were about to

[0:24:30] Voice 8: speak yeah

[0:24:31] Voice 2: I was just going to say that um with regards to pushing out in this corner of the house

[0:24:38] Voice 2: um part of the setting up for accessibility is we do need the bedroom to be a little bit larger

[0:24:46] Voice 2: so that we can move around.

[0:24:50] Voice 2: And also the hallway needs to be a little bit wider

[0:24:53] Voice 2: because it's very, very narrow.

[0:24:58] Voice 2: So with regards to pushing out there,

[0:25:00] Voice 2: that wouldn't enable our bedroom to a size that-

[0:25:11] Voice 9: Yeah, I get that.

[0:25:13] Voice 9: I find it, I find the accessibility argument,

[0:25:16] Voice 9: argument again, that's something that we could look at once we have determined that there is a

[0:25:21] Voice 9: hardship. Personally, I don't see the accessibility argument. The floor plan presented is not

[0:25:28] Voice 9: particularly accessible, and there are many barriers here. So I don't think we could say,

[0:25:35] Voice 9: hey, we need this space in order to create an adaptive living situation, because we're not

[0:25:42] Voice 9: not really doing that. But we can't have that argument until we've determined that there is

[0:25:46] Voice 9: a particular hardship. And I don't see

[0:25:50] Voice 3: the hardship here.

[0:25:58] Voice 5: Sorry, can you folks hear me?

[0:26:00] Voice 5: It's Brad here. I'm now in my computer for whatever reason decided that was the time for

[0:26:05] Voice 5: a useful update. So I've caught up to most of where you're at, though, I think. I think you're

[0:26:13] Voice 5: still more or less the same place by the sounds of it

[0:26:15] Voice 3: yeah what

[0:26:17] Voice 5: i would what i would say is that

[0:26:21] Voice 3: the

[0:26:22] Voice 5: board will make a decision today if the board did turn you down you could seek

[0:26:26] Voice 5: a variance through the local trust committee route through a typical

[0:26:31] Voice 5: development variance permit where hardship is not the key criteria and and the board here is

[0:26:38] Voice 5: the board's perspective around hardship is not

[0:26:42] Voice 5: shaped by the local government act and the very clear statement that that is

[0:26:46] Voice 5: what their role is is to decide if there's a reasonable

[0:26:50] Voice 5: variance given a hardship that is

[0:26:54] Voice 5: demonstrated to them for a particular property with respect to

[0:26:58] Voice 5: zoning and the siting

[0:27:01] Voice 5: the local trust committee has

[0:27:05] Voice 5: has a complete discretion to decide

[0:27:07] Voice 5: on if an application is varied or not.

[0:27:11] Voice 5: And so you could apply and go down that route

[0:27:14] Voice 5: if you're unsuccessful with this route.

[0:27:18] Voice 5: Of course, it requires another application,

[0:27:22] Voice 5: but from a reasonableness test,

[0:27:24] Voice 5: I think your application is reasonable

[0:27:26] Voice 5: given everything you're saying.

[0:27:27] Voice 5: It's just challenging to demonstrate

[0:27:29] Voice 5: where the hardship exists is what I'm hearing

[0:27:31] Voice 5: from the board and I tend to agree with them.

[0:27:36] Voice 6: Thanks for that, Brad. Yeah, because I mean, Colleen and Ken both mentioned about, you know, the location of the bathroom relative to, say, the front door or the size of the master bedroom.

[0:27:48] Voice 6: And I look at the proposed floor plan, and even though it would increase the footprint of the house, the den, for instance, the north wall of the den could be extended to the north to make that den the size of the master bedroom you were looking for.

[0:28:01] Voice 6: Or it could be extended north to include the en suite bathroom as well.

[0:28:05] Voice 6: And that's within the building envelope, which wouldn't require a variance.

[0:28:09] Voice 6: So those are the things that we have to weigh, and we're constrained by that, by weighing those factors in whether we can grant this variance or not.

[0:28:17] Voice 6: And that's, you know, there's other options available to you.

[0:28:19] Voice 6: And so because we don't see the demonstration of a hardship here, I think we probably have come to the conclusion here that we likely will not be able to grant this variance in this format.

[0:28:38] Voice 9: I would agree with that statement, yes.

[0:28:42] Voice 9: I think we should, unfortunately, move to deny this application based on that there is no obvious hardship.

[0:28:55] Voice 4: So at this

[0:28:58] Voice 5: point, it would be a resolution that's required.

[0:29:01] Voice 5: So either of you could create a motion.

[0:29:04] Voice 5: Unfortunately, I'm not sitting in front of my computer.

[0:29:07] Voice 5: So I'm not even sure.

[0:29:09] Voice 5: I think it's so, Andrew, and we can get this with the recorder.

[0:29:14] Voice 5: We'll get this mostly right here.

[0:29:16] Voice 5: Carly's awesome.

[0:29:17] Voice 5: So it would be that the North Pender Vorta variants deny application NP-BOV, I think it's 2023.4, but we can clarify that.

[0:29:33] Voice 5: Jones and then you can state based on the reason that

[0:29:41] Voice 4: lack

[0:29:44] Voice 5: of demonstration of hardship from the

[0:29:48] Voice 5: person yeah just I think you can lack of demonstration of hardship yeah

[0:29:52] Voice 3: did you get

[0:29:56] Voice 5: that Carly sorry yeah

[0:29:57] Voice 1: thank you

[0:30:00] Voice 5: maybe you just want to read it back

[0:30:01] Voice 1: sure it was moved in second that the north pender border

[0:30:04] Voice 1: variance denies application np bob 2023.4 i'll check that jones based on lack of demonstration

[0:30:11] Voice 1: of hardship yes

[0:30:14] Voice 11: yes and

[0:30:17] Voice 4: then you would call the vote chair and you would vote call to vote

[0:30:22] Voice 3: all in favor unanimous and

[0:30:33] Voice 5: that's really the the end of your role i think

[0:30:37] Voice 5: here anything else that the applicants want to speak to you're certainly welcome to contact me

[0:30:43] Voice 5: and we can have a discussion about the local trust committee and the development variance

[0:30:49] Voice 5: application right if you want to shift to that we can certainly do that but

[0:30:55] Voice 5: as you've heard today i think this closes out your application i'd

[0:31:01] Voice 2: like to thank you all for

[0:31:03] Voice 2: for giving us your careful consideration.

[0:31:07] Voice 6: Thank you.

[0:31:08] Voice 6: Thank you.

[0:31:09] Voice 6: And I trust you can see the dilemma we've been put in

[0:31:13] Voice 6: to make this decision.

[0:31:14] Voice 6: And we're trying to be reasonable with everything

[0:31:16] Voice 6: that comes before us,

[0:31:17] Voice 6: but unfortunately it doesn't always go

[0:31:19] Voice 6: the way of the applicant.

[0:31:20] Voice 6: So we're sorry for that.

[0:31:23] Voice 9: Thanks for well said.

[0:31:27] Voice 5: And our next meeting is on the 28th

[0:31:30] Voice 5: to revisit the Cameron application.

[0:31:32] Voice 5: So you'll be seeing a staff report prior to that.

[0:31:36] Voice 5: And they've done a lot of work to address some of the concerns you raised when you last met with them.

[0:31:42] Voice 5: Thank you.

[0:31:43] Voice 5: Thank you.

[0:31:44] Voice 5: Thank you, Colleen

[0:31:45] Voice 4: and Tom and Ken.

[0:31:46] Voice 5: Feel free to please contact me and we can go from here.

[0:31:50] Voice 5: Okay.

[0:31:50] Voice 4: Have a

[0:31:51] Voice 5: good afternoon, everyone.

[0:31:52] Voice 4: Bye bye.

North Pender Board of Variance     
Minutes of a Hearing   
September 13, 2023 ADOPTED 1 of 2 
 
North Pender Island Board of Variance 
Minutes of a Hearing 
 
 
 
Members Present: Andrew MacLean, BOV Member (Acting Chair) 
Bert Hol, BOV Member 
 
Staff Present: 
 
Brad Smith, Island Planner 
Carly Bilney, Recorder 
Emily Bryant, Staff 
Applicants: Colleen Jones 
 Thomas Jones 
Ken Rempel, Designer 
 
1. CALL TO ORDER 
 
Chair MacLean called the meeting to order at 10:02 a.m. 
 
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA 
 
By general consent, the agenda was approved as presented. 
3. MINUTES 
 3.1 North Pender Board of Variance Minutes Dated July 26, 2023 
By general consent the North Pender Board of Variance meeting minutes of July 26, 
2023 were adopted as presented. 
4. UPDATE FROM SECRETARY 
5. APPLICATIONS 
 
5.1  NP-BOV-2023.4 (Jones) - Staff Report 
Island Planner Smith reviewed the Staff Report regarding NP-BOV-2023.4 (Jones). 
Discussion ensued and the following comments were made: 
 It was up to the Board of Variance to decide whether the applicants face a 
hardship that warrants variance 
 Hardship was difficult to ascertain in this application as there was space on the 
southeast side of the property where an extension can be added 
 Applicants noted the current design plan allows access to the septic field 
 Financial burden is not a hardship that warrants variance 
Date: 
Location: 
September 13, 2023 
Electronic Meeting (Zoom Webinar) 
 

  
North Pender Board of Variance     
Minutes of a Hearing   
September 13, 2023 ADOPTED 2 of 2 
 It was difficult to see a hardship in this application because there appeared to 
be alternative design options 
 The property is not substantially different from neighbouring properties to 
warrant a variance from the rules 
 Enclosing the deck would cause the applicants to lose their current 
nonconforming provision 
 The applicants could seek a development variance permit through the Local 
Trust Committee 
 
NP-BOV-2023-03 
It was Moved and Seconded, 
that having considered the matters set out in s.542(1)(c) of the Local 
Government Act, and having found that undue hardship would not be caused to 
the applicant if s. 5.2 (1)(b) of the North Pender Land use Bylaw No. 224, 2023 is 
complied with, the North Pender Island Board of Variance denies application 
NP-BOV-2023.4 (Jones). 
CARRIED 
 
6. ADJOURNMENT 
 
By general consent the meeting was adjourned at 10:34 a.m. 
 
 
 
                
               _________________________                                                    ________________________ 
                    Recorder                      Date