Public Input Development Variance Permit A Tuxedo Drive September 12, On Table Items

Transcription

1 Development Variance September 12, 2017 On Table Items Item Type Date Item No. Stryj, Thomas Girardi, Roberto Prentice, Tom Maksimenko, Valery and Alena Wharton, Calvin and Zhang, Lian Dimond, Richard and Ruth Steeves, Brian September 6, h39 September 6, h34 September 8, h42 September 11, h37 September 11, h28 September 12, h42 September 12, h58 Item Name Reason For On-Table Distribution

2 This Page Intentionally Left Blank

3 -----Original Message----- From: Thomas Stryj Sent: September :39 AM Subject: Re: development variance permit Dear Council, We the homeowners and residents of --- Angela Drive strongly oppose a variance to the building code. The new houses that have gone up recently are already too large. We feel it ruins the feel of the small and beautiful community we have called home for over 17 years. We ask that you please not approve any larger homes to be build. We do not accept this in our neighbourhood. Thank- you Thomas Stryj --- Angela Drive Port Moody BC

4 From: R Girardi Sent: September :34 AM Subject: Proposed Variance Permit 1988, No I am writing in regards to Propose Variance to Zoning Bylaw1988, No for 1120A Tuxedo Drive. My wife and I have been residents of Port Moody for 37 years and seen many changes, however we do not agree with the proposed variance for this property. Although our neighbourhood is changing, we don t think creating larger or higher homes fits into our area. A home of this stature would be an anomaly in the area and in our opinion an eyesore. Over the last few years we have seen many large (monster) homes built in the Port Moody area. It appears the lots are sold and the buyers are well aware of the restrictions of the property. Then they apply for a variance and it appears they get what they want in the end. We believe this practice has to stop at some point before we are taken over. We do not see a good reason to build a house of this size that would benefit the neighbourhood. Please decline this variance permit. Sincerely. Roberto Girardi

5 From: Tom Prentice Sent: Friday, September 08, :42 AM To: Subject: Arneson building A. Port Moody. Good morning. My name is Tom Prentice and I own the house at ---- Port Moody. My home is directly beside Ms. Arneson to the south, on the east side of. I understand Ms. Arneson will be meeting with the city next week with respect to applying for height consideration for her prospective build. I will be out of the country next week but would like to present my position. I have had a chance to review Ms. Arneson s building plans and discuss her desire for consideration of amending the building height. I am in complete agreeance with her proposed plans and would personally have attended the upcoming meeting if not for my being out of the country. Regards, Tom Prentice

6 From: Valery Maksimenko Sent: September :37 PM Subject: Development Variance Permit 1120A Dear Port Moody Council, We are agree with our neighbor's letter and believe that it is not right to make significant changes of the law in favor of one person when it is touching other people interests. We understand that this land has some hardship to build a dream house which cover all wishes but in the same time it worth reasonably less. Sincerelly Valery Maksimenko Alena Maksimenko ---- Tuxedo dr. Port Moody tel: Re: Development Variance Permit 1120A Dear Port Moody Council, We are writing to express our strong objection to the variance permit application for the above property and our feeling of being disrespected by the applicant for all the time and effort of many members involved in the process through the variance board. We understand the City needs to have some flexibility to accommodate minor, but necessary, variances from the bylaws, but the amounts of the variance in this permit is far beyond what s reasonable. If approved, this new house would stand towering 15 to 20 feet over all the houses on the same side of the street, destroying the characteristics of the neighbourhood, blocking the water view of the houses across the street and greatly reducing the privacy of a number of neighbours; as a result, it decreases the enjoyment of our homes. The nature of the slope of this property is not uncommon in certain areas. It is a normal understanding that such a slope can limit the buildability of the land. We know the City staff made the owner of the previous house and some serious potential buyers aware of the challenges posed by the city bylaw if it were to be redeveloped. We believe the slope and covenant of this property explain why the original house was built in the middle of the lot which is now subdivided into two. No doubt, this variance would increase the market value of the new house by enhancing its water view beyond what the bylaw allows at the expense of the water view, privacy, and market value of our house. Bylaws play a very important role in determining the nature and desirability of a neighbourhood and therefore the value of individual properties. Issuing of this variance permit will harm the integrity of the City by sending a message that it favours certain owner/builders over the interest of present families, residents and owners

7 Obviously, we cannot predict if a new owner will subdivide or rebuild their houses, but we trust the council will protect us ordinary long term residents by upholding the relevant bylaw restrictions to ensure fairness and consistency and the nature of any given neighbourhood. Sincerely, Calvin Wharton Lian Zhang Owners of ---- Port Moody tel

8 From: CALVIN WHARTON Sent: September :28 PM Subject: Concerns re: Variance Permit for 1120 A Tuxedo Dr. Date: Sept. 11, 2017 Re: Development Variance Permit Application 1120A Dear Port Moody Council, We are writing to express our strong objection to the variance permit application for the above property and our feeling of being disrespected by the applicant for all the time and effort of many members involved in the process through the City Variance Board. We understand the City needs to have some flexibility to accommodate minor, but necessary, variances from the bylaws, but the amounts of the variance in this permit is far beyond what s reasonable, contradicting to the very intent of our by law. If approved, this new house would stand towering about 15 feet over all the houses on the same side of the street on the east side, destroying the characteristics of the neighbourhood, blocking the water view of the houses across the street and greatly reducing the privacy of a number of neighbours; as a result, it decreases the enjoyment of many of the existing homes. Obviously, we cannot predict if a new owner will subdivide or rebuild their houses, but we trust the council will protect ordinary long term residents like us by upholding the relevant bylaw restrictions to ensure fairness and consistency and the nature of any given neighbourhood. A restrictive covenant or certain slope of a lot is not something unique or uncommon in some areas; therefore, the owner/builder should accept the fact that it can limit the buildability of the land. We know the City staff made the owner of the previous house and some serious potential buyers aware of the challenges posed by the city bylaw if it were to be redeveloped. We believe the slope and covenant of this property explain why the original house was built in the middle of the lot which is now subdivided into two. No doubt, this variance would increase the market value of the new house by enhancing its water view beyond what the bylaw allows at the expense of the water view, privacy, and use of our house. Bylaws play a very important role in determining the nature and desirability of a neighbourhood and therefore the value of individual properties. Issuing of this variance permit will harm the integrity of the City by sending a message that it favours certain owner/builders over the interest of present families, residents and owners. We hope the council will take our concerns seriously on this matter.

9 Sincerely, Calvin Wharton Lian Zhang Owners of ---- Port Moody tel

10 -----Original Message----- From: R Dimond Sent: September :42 AM Subject: Development variance permit # Hi, my name is Richard Dimond and I live at ---- Cecile Place, in Port Moody. I am writing to object to the noted variance. To me it's enough to jam two homes onto a lot that used to contain one let alone to allow a tower to be built that looms over the existing back yards on Cecile Place. You have to ask yourself what the developer will ask next. Will he ask for a variance to build on the easement that exist now? It seems to me they knew the building rules as they stood, and the should live by them now with No variance. Thanks for the chance to respond. Richard and Ruth Dimond.

11 From: Brian Steeves Sent: September :58 AM Cc: Subject: Development Variance Permit # a Brian Steeves Port Moody, B.C. To whom it concerns; I oppose the variance proposed given: ~ 3.7 meters higher than zoning allows ~ The developer was aware of the lot slope zoning and other rules to abide prior to subdivision ~ It is not the responsibility of the residents of Port Moody to compensate a developer for their bad business decisions. ~ It sets a precedence for all adjoining lots which are also located on sloped ground. ~ Detailed information about this proposal was not made available on-line as indicated in the Notice of Intention (I only obtained the information 10 minutes prior to cut off to send this to the clerk via an attachment). Should the variance be allowed I strongly oppose reimbursing the developed the application fee as the variance will significantly increase the property value BC Assessment has evaluated the property as being significantly below comparable adjoining properties given the current slope and zoning constraints. The developer should pay a significant development charge / community benefit contribution to obtain the variance given the immediate increased value of the property to be expected by removing the current zoning constraint. Regards, Brian Steeves Port Moody, B.C.