Lack of attention to proper process leaves homeowner denied variance permit for carport
A Prince Rupert resident who went ahead and did work on his property without following the proper procedures will be receiving some communication from the City related to his work and what need come next.
The issue came up at Monday's Prince Rupert City Council Session, and as a collective the members of Council were not happy with the Prince Rupert homeowner's disregard for proper process.
The result being a denial of his requested variance and some strong commentary from the Councillors towards the project for his residence on Prince Rupert Boulevard.
The process of Monday night began with a short review of the situation by the City's contract planner Rob Buchan from iPlan, who outlined the history of the project, which noted of the application for the variance that was submitted after the carport project had been started.
When it came time for discussion, Councillor Niesh led off the speaker's list, providing for the first of the range of observations on the topic, expressing his frustration with the work being done without going through the proper process and how the home owners have now have come looking for a variance.
"I am going to start by saying that I am opposed to this, not so much that I'm opposed with somebody wanting to build, but I'm opposed by the way this was done. You know if you allow things to basically be built on a weekend and then apply for a variance, because they got caught building it, if we allow that, then that will continue to happen."
The Councillor also noted that the property owner is a repeat offender when it comes to process on home additions, also recounting his own requirements as a contractor.
"It frustrates me as a builder who, when I build things, I apply for permits, and when I apply for permits I go through process and I go through getting inspections done and I go through that all the time. And for me to see somebody slap something up on a weekend and then get caught and then asking permission to build it after it's already built. To me that is not how it should be done and we should be stopping this right away"
Mr. Buchan, the City's contract planner offered up some additional notes related to the subject property and its status related to the BC Building code.
"I can't tell you that it was built to code but I can tell you that it won't receive building department approval unless it is built to code. So if there are any deficiencies to the current construction, that would have to be rectified before there is an occupancy given on it"
Mr. Niesh's frustrations made for a theme that many of the Council membership followed up on during the course of the discussion, some more than others expressing their frustrations with the proponent's reticence at following the rules, while a few offered up suggestions to address the issue.
Among those discussion points:
"I don't like the way this was handled either, but if we're going to approve this, then I would like to see a covenant put on this, that it can only be used as a carport, it cannot be used as a deck, you can't have access to it from the house ... this person has a tendency to build something and then add onto his house from it. I would like to see a covenant with some recourse if he does anything else that he gets fined and gets fined heavily for it -- Councillor Barry Cunningham
"I think that it's a really slippery slope if you start allowing things to happen after the fact, when you know literally hundreds and hundreds of residents have gone through the process and sometimes have met with decisions that they didn't like ... most of the time I don't see it as my obligation to get in their way as property owners. But I do think that in deference to all of those that have followed the proper process, we need to insist on it in this case" -- Councillor Nick Adey
"The owner of the home, he mentioned that it's a rainy city and he needs a carport to park his car, but I agree with Councillor Niesh that it should be done in a proper way and he should apply like other people do I agree with that" -- Councillor Gurvinder Randhawa
Corporate Administrator Rosa Miller also provided details of a note of concern from a resident in the area related to the situation and in opposition towards the variance permit request.
At the end of the discussion period, City Council moved to deny the variance permit.
Though Council did not specify what measures should take place as a result of their decision, with the Mayor simply noting that the City would have to have a conversation with the home owner related to the topic.
You can review the discussion from the City's Video Archive page here starting at the one hour, thirty one minute mark.
No comments:
Post a Comment