Home ›

"Three sets of eyes" to avoid future setback errors in building permits

by Andrew Bennett on 11 Sep 2012
in
Matt Titheridge's new garage has a green roof that grows buckets of vegetables
Matt Titheridge's new garage has a green roof that grows buckets of vegetables

The garage on 1958 Second Ave. is in compliance with the city's zoning bylaws at last, with council's third reading of bylaw 2537 on Sept. 4 to sell a thin strip of Second Ave. to owner Matt Titheridge.

Nobody spoke at the public hearing for the bylaw, and it will likely be adopted at the next council meeting on Sept. 17.
 
Two years ago, Titheridge received approval from the building inspector at that time, Jason Ward, to remove a crumbling retaining wall on Second Ave. and replace it with a garage wall. The design was perceived as win-win—the retaining wall was posing a public hazard and the new face of the garage was further back from the road than the original retaining wall.
 
Unfortunately, however, the decision was legally a "mistake," as council debated at the council meeting on Aug. 13. Bylaw 2537 was conceived as a solution to the error.
 
"We understand that this is not the property owner's fault at all—there was a staff error involved in this," said Coun. Kathy Moore. 
 
She asked city planner Mike Maturo, "One of the things that Coun. [Cary] Fisher brought up [last meeting] is, what steps can be taken to ensure that this kind of thing won't happen? Are there any checks and balances that have been put in place to prevent this from happening?"
 
Maturo said, "All plans are reviewed by the planning department prior to the building permits being issued. That remedies this. We have three sets of eyes looking for setback compliance and other issues. That's been instituted for a while—the error was that it didn't happen."
 
There was no further discussion at the Sept. 4 meeting and third reading passed unanimously.

Comments

The city bylaw dilema & short comings,

by Les And on 13 Sep 2012 at about 20:13.

Mr. Charlton, I could drive you around this city with you and point out to no less than one hundred plus city bylaw infractions that could be brought before city council.   This city is and was comprised of a group of citizens who were and still are doing their best to survive in a world of opinionated and bungling bureaucratic rules.  When this city was in its infancy, and well into its growth to no more than fifty years ago, many of the city’s blocks, plots and private property perimeters  were simply walked off or measured with 100’ tape measures.  I can very quickly pick out twenty privately owned properties within a five minute drive that are in violation of present city building codes and bylaws.  There are many rock walls in Rossland that were built by adjoining, cooperating neighbours that were never surveyed for a legal perimeter to the Regional District’s property line guidelines.   

For you to choose one property out of more than 100+ violators to enforce a rule upon, you can create a legal nightmare for this city.   If you prohibit one person from forgoing a rule, that means you have backed yourself into a corner where you must prohibit “all” violators who want to break the same rule as well: -past and present-.  To do other-wise creates an element of political favouritism that could send this city into a multimillion dollar legal battle.  Sometimes the blind eye is the wise eye.

For you  to have picked out one (single) property bylaw violation in this city to demean and use as a tool to degrade another shows very little in the way of character, political protocol or substance in working as a political team.   You have carried this grudge against Rossland’s CAO on the public stage for too long and it eventually cost you another term on Rossland City Council.   It’s time to let the past be the past and use it as a tool of learning.

Les Anderson

Greenish....well brownish roof at Red Barn.

by vcanthony on 13 Sep 2012 at about 14:50.

A low tech solution on an old roof. Now I just need to figure out how to keep invasives out.

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Red-Barn-Lodge-BB-and-Guesthouse/211728755568938?ref=hl

 

A thing of beauty! And no

by Andrew Bennett on 13 Sep 2012 at about 18:39.

A thing of beauty! And no shame in browning up in the late, dry summer. We should do a green roof special... any more out there?

I'll do it,

by Les And on 13 Sep 2012 at about 20:16.

All you need to do Andrew is come and share the cost to put a few more support beams in my double garage ceiling.  We can then sit all day and smoke our box garden's special produce!

 

Three sets of eyes - with blinders

by Laurie Charlton on 12 Sep 2012 at about 11:02.

City Council has finally admitted a mistake was made when a resident was given a building permit to construct a garage on City property.  The City will be selling a small strip of Second Ave. to the homeowner to start legalizing the garage.  Even with the sale of the piece of road allowance, the garage will not comply with all provisions of the zoning bylaw until council retroactively grants a development variance permit to allow the garage to encroach on the setbacks prescribed by the zoning bylaw.

Council’s belated acknowledgment of a staff screw-up is just another example of their willingness to rubber stamp whatever CAO Victor Kumar tells them.  

Almost two years ago, I pointed out the problems with the garage that are now being addressed.   (See http://rosslandtelegraph.com/news/letters/city-staff-are-giving-away-city-property-and-council-isnt-doing-anything-about-it-9114#.UFDH3a7mIY0)  At that time, Mr. Kumar jumped to the defense of the building inspector and claimed the garage complied with City policy.  Mr. Kumar went even further and accused me of harassing staff for raising the issue.    He has now been shown to have been wrong.  But council at the time got into lock-step with Mr. Kumar and ignored the contraventions of City bylaws and policies.  

How many other instances of council following Mr. Kumar’s questionable recommendations that turned out to be wrong are going to come to light?  Is this perhaps one of the reasons he has resigned as CAO?  And how many other instances of faulty decisions by the City’s former building inspector are going to be exposed?

Laurie Charlton

Vigilance yes, but let's look to the future now

by Andrew Bennett on 12 Sep 2012 at about 14:47.

Yes, Laurie, I agree that we should hope that the city as a whole will turn a new leaf with CAO Kumar's departure, particularly in making itself more open and transparent to the public, and also in not bending rules for opaque reasons, such as bypassing public or council input.

Compliance aside, I hope the picture to this article draws attention to the fact that Matt TItheridge has done a truly superb job.

All along he has only done what he thought was best and within city policies, and his design is excellent. After all, the garage wall replaces a hazardous retaining wall that the city no longer needs to maintain or replace.

Moreover, this is the only green roof I know of in Rossland—although there must be more? Someone fill me in!

The green roof does a great job reducing storm run-off, reducing the urban heat-island affect, increasing urban food production, increasing useable area and the lot's value, and—especially once the siding goes on the front, a project Titheridge has been waiting for until "closure" of the issue—it is beautiful.

Well done, Matt, I say!