20. Appeal #2013-0138

20.-2013-0138-photo-simpsonType of Suite: In-house suite
Address: 659 Panora Way N.W.
Neighbourhood: Panorama Hills
Appealed by: Homeowner
When: 2013 (SDAB #2013-0138)
Decision: Suite Denied

STORY AND PHOTO BY KELSEY SIMPSON | ksimpson@cjournal.ca

Reason for the Appeal

The homeowner was denied a secondary suite because it was smaller than allowable parcel width of nine metres. The homeowner had only 8.7m of parcel width. The application was also rejected because it requires a parking stall for the secondary suite no less than 2.85 metres wide and the applicant provided a parking stall only 2.6 metres wide. The homeowner then appealed the denial as she felt that “practically speaking it makes a comfortable parking space” and that 25 centimetres should not deter the development of a legal suite.

The Decision

The board denied the appeal due to the number of relaxations needed. The board noted both the inadequacy of the parking stalls (it required a minimum of three parking stalls for both dwelling unit and this one only had two) and parcel size and in light of the bylaw requirements, could not grant the appeal.