The Newmarket Record

Committee of Adjustment

December 16, 2015

What was decided (7 motions)

7 carried, 0 recorded otherwise. Every motion below is printed as the minutes print it.

THAT Minor Variance Application D13-A17-15 be approved, subject to the following conditions: 1. that the variances pertain only to the request as submitted with the application; 2. that development be substantially in accordance with the plans submitted with the application; 3. that the owner be advised that prior to the issuance of any building permit, compliance will be required with the provisions of the Town’s Tree Preservation, Protection, Replacement and Enhancement Policy and the items identified by the Town’s Consulting Arborist in a report dated December 7, 2015. as the Minor Variance Application: (1) appears to be minor in nature as the impact on adjacent properties will be minimal; (2) conforms to the intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning Bylaw as both documents permit detached dwellings; and (3) does not adversely affect the character of the neighbourhood as the use is permitted and is desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land, buildings or structures.
Moved by Peter Mertens, seconded by Betty Dykstra
Carried
THAT Minor Variance Application D13-A21-15 be approved, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the variance pertains only to the requests as submitted with the application; and 2. That the existing driveway on the east side of the property be removed and returned to a planted condition akin to the rest of the lawn of the subject land; and 3. That the development be substantially in accordance with the sketch submitted with the application. as the Minor Variance Application: (1) appears to be minor in nature as the impact on adjacent properties appears to be minimal due to the orientation of the existing properties’ driveways; and (2) conforms to the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law as both documents permit residential uses on the property with driveways; and (3) does not adversely affect the character of the neighbourhood and is considered a desirable development of the lot.
Moved by Fred Stoneman, seconded by Elizabeth Lew
Carried
THAT Minor Variance Application D13-A26-15 be approved, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the variance pertains only to the requests as submitted with the application; and 2. That the development be substantially in accordance with the sketch submitted with the application; and 3. That no additional commercial athletic centre or additional gross floor area devoted to a commercial athletic centre beyond that of the current applicant is permitted on the subject lands. as the Minor Variance Application: (1) appears to be minor in nature as the impact on adjacent properties appears to be minimal due to ability to manage the parking demand on-site; and (2) conforms to the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law as both documents permit commercial athletic centre uses on the property; and (3) does not adversely affect the character of the neighbourhood and is considered a desirable development of the lot.
Moved by Peter Mertens, seconded by Fred Stoneman
Carried
THAT Minor Variance Application D13-A27-15 be approved, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the variance pertains only to the requests as submitted with the application; and 2. That the development be substantially in accordance with the sketch submitted with the application; and 3. That no additional commercial athletic centre or additional gross floor area devoted to a commercial athletic centre beyond that of the current applicant is permitted on the subject lands. as the Minor Variance Application: (1) appears to be minor in nature as the impact on adjacent properties appears to be minimal due to ability to manage the parking demand on-site; and (2) conforms to the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law as both documents permit commercial athletic centre uses on the property; and (3) does not adversely affect the character of the neighbourhood and is considered a desirable development of the lot.
Moved by Elizabeth Lew, seconded by Betty Dykstra
Carried
THAT the Minutes of the Wednesday, November 18 th , 2015 meeting be approved as circulated.
Moved by Peter Mertens, seconded by Elizabeth Lew
Carried
THAT the Meeting adjourn.
Moved by Fred Stoneman, seconded by Peter Mertens
Carried
THAT Minor Variance Application D13-A27-15 be approved, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the variance pertains only to the requests as submitted with the application; and 6 of 6 Town of Newmarket I Committee of Adjustment I Minutes – December 16, 2015 7 2. That the development be substantially in accordance with the sketch submitted with the application; and 3. That no additional commercial athletic centre or additional gross floor area devoted to a commercial athletic centre beyond that of the current applicant is permitted on the subject lands. as the Minor Variance Application: (1) appears to be minor in nature as the impact on adjacent properties appears to be minimal due to ability to manage the parking demand on-site; and (2) conforms to the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law as both documents permit commercial athletic centre uses on the property; and (3) does not adversely affect the character of the neighbourhood and is considered a desirable development of the lot.
Moved by Elizabeth Lew, seconded by Betty Dykstra
Carried

The town’s own record

Read the minutes this page was read from →

Where this page and that document disagree, the document is right and this record is wrong. Say so and it will be corrected.