Cochrane committee approves variances for proposed three-storey, nine-unit apartment at 144 Fourth Street West

Cochrane’s Committee of Adjustment approved minor variances on April 9 for a proposed three-storey, nine-unit apartment building at 144 Fourth Street West, a property owned by Falcon Investment Inc. The last day to appeal the decision is April 28, with appeals heard by the Ontario Land Tribunal.

The decision sets out several exceptions to what Cochrane’s zoning bylaw would normally require for building height, outdoor amenity space and parking at the site.

According to the town’s Notice of Decision, the proposal is to construct a three-storey apartment dwelling containing nine residential units, with a ground-floor area of 232.44 square metres (2,502 square feet). The notice says the existing building would remain on the property; it currently contains office space and three residential units, and part of the commercial space is vacant.

The committee approved a variance to permit a building height of 11 metres (36.09 feet). The notice cites Zoning By-law 968-2013 as setting a maximum height of 10 metres (32.81 feet) for the property.

For outdoor amenity space, the committee approved a variance to permit 44 square metres (473.61 square feet), which the notice lists as 3.67 square metres per dwelling unit. The same bylaw section requires a minimum of 4.5 square metres per dwelling unit.

In its calculation, the notice refers to “12 dwelling units proposed” at 144 Fourth Street West and says 54 square metres (581.25 square feet) would be required under the bylaw. That differs from the nine-unit description elsewhere in the decision.

On parking, the committee approved a variance to permit 14 off-street parking spaces, listed as 1.1 parking space per dwelling unit. The bylaw requires 1.25 parking spaces per apartment unit, and the notice again bases its comparison on “12 residential units proposed,” stating that 15 spaces would otherwise be required.

A fourth variance approved by the committee is “to permit six (6) parking spaces on the subject property.” The notice ties that to a bylaw provision stating all required parking spaces must be located entirely on the same lot as the building or use they serve, but does not explain how the six-space variance changes that requirement.