By Gagandeep Ghuman
Published: April 25, 2014
Council rejected a variance application by a Brackendale resident who defied the bylaws to built a deck despite warning from the building inspector it flouted subdivision rules.
“The bylaws are in place for all of us to follow.”Nelson Wall
In a unanimous vote, councilors rejected a variance to allow a setback of 20 feet for the deck roof on a Dryden Road house in Brackendale.
The zoning bylaw calls for a minimum setback of 25 feet.
Staff told councilors the applicant, Chamkaur Sidhu, disregarded the zoning bylaw and then continued to build the deck even when told it was illegal and the home won’t be issued an occupancy permit.
“The applicant was advised before the concrete being poured that the deck was not compliant,” planner Sarah McJannet said.
Sidhu said the covered deck allows his parent to sit on the deck protected from the elements and prevents water from splashing back into the house when it rains.
He also said he missed the building inspectors notice as he wasn’t present at his home when it was delivered.
The building inspector, meanwhile, says the owner was given ample time and warned early.
At a council meeting on April 15, Sidhu’s neighbours derided his ‘flagrant disregard for the law’ and asked the council to act swiftly on it.
“This is wrong,” said neighbor, the Nelson Wall. “The bylaws are in place for all of us to follow.”
Another neighbor, Rick Brzezowski, said he would have liked to cover his deck, but couldn’t because of building guidelines.
Brzezowski said it seems unfair that the owner feels ‘it’s better to beg for forgiveness than to ask for permission.’
Councillor Ron Sander said he wouldn’t support the motion to grant variance for the same reason that he didn’t support skate bowl.
“Much like I didn’t support skateboarders, for the same reasoning I can’t support it,” he said.
Coun. Doug Race said what bothers him is that the applicants didn’t follow process even after being made aware.
He also said he can’t recall a variance application where there was such a significant opposition.
Coun. Patricia Heintzman said the present application can’t be compared to the skateboarders.
The skateboarders were issued a stop work order and they stopped, which didn’t happen in this case.
“Ignorance isn’t an excuse,” she said, “We have a zoning bylaw and we need to stick to our guns on this.”
MichaelL65 says
Oh the irony… What a joke this Council is!
Russ says
How is it Ironic? Whybis this a bad decision?
T.C. says
Too funny that counsellors can play favourites. Lets give a variance to some and not to others. Lets really lay it out here: A skatebowl was built from October 2013 to January 2014 completely in secret and hidden away from the public with absolutely NO permits or inspections. They were told 4 times in January, let me repeat that, 4 times to stop building!!! Even posted on social media that they were building a secret bowl. Not to mention that the same guy leading this build admitted to building the one in Britannia against the policies only 2 years before. He also claims to be a mentor for kids and in charge of policy of the Chamber. For some reason building in secret twice against proper procedure and being a somewhat public figure is “okay” but a cover on a deck is not??? Bias, Bias, Bias. I’m sorry but either follow the rules for all or none! I can’t wait for October. Time for a new group who can set rules and follow them.
Maria says
T.C. the You are right on. For whatever reason the continued work that was done after the skateboarder had been caught seems to be always SWEPT UNDER THE RUG. The site was found early January. The group continued working in full force until Friday night January 17th. They even had two (2) new 1000kg bags of cement delivered ( dropped of behind the fence in bright daylight by a white crain truck, VERY CONFIDENT INDEED ). Unfortunately I did not check out what was under the tarp until view days later when the dimensions of the delivery had changed. I alerted the immediate neighborhood the same night and we have all kept a close eye on it ever since. On their cleanup day they opened a perfectly closed 1000kg cement bag and shuffled it into garbage cans (cement dust flying all over the green space beside it)to bring it under the bridge where they filled it into an empty cement bag. What was wrong with taking it out of the location other then that they already knew that it was a done deal. In between the group being caught and finally shut down because the neighborhood stood up against it the group had poured another 1000kg of concrete. They also did not get a fine until January 20st, 2014. I guess it is all about who you know in places where decisions are made.
TJay says
Aborting fine living innocent human babies is quite fine. Promoting the growing of drugs is just fine too. But building a deck nooooooooooo, unlawful !
MKnight says
Councillor heintzman says the deck cant be compared to the skater bowl. she is correct. at least in this case, the guy owned the land he was building it on. thank you mr. Sander for being consistant.
TJay says
Human haters……….
Maria says
Why can the deck not be compared to the skate bowl?
A.) Is it because the neighbours did not want it or it does not fit in the neighborhood? The resident living by the skate bowl do not want the skate bowl and it does not fit in the neighborhood either. Oh yes I forgot to mention, it is for the greater good of the skateboarder coming into town from Whistler and the Lower Mainland use up the parking in the Highlands and crash on his friends couch.
B>) Or is it because he built his DECK on his own property? It is his property, right? He built it so his elderly parents can sit out and enjoy the sight and sound of the nature.
The Skateboarder built it on District Land and I am pretty sure to have read something like “A person must not use, occupy or construct/deposit anything to a highway, or to any land or improvement related to a highway, without written authorization from the minister, or as otherwise authorized by law.”
So the only difference is that the skateboarders got the go ahead to built on public land but the homeowner will have to take his deck down on his private property. You do not have to be a scientist to figure this one out!
TJay says
Yah sure, but both issues are still big time male bovine leavings…