Quote:
Originally Posted by IanWatson
Would the addition be small enough that it could be considered non-substantive and approved by the Development Officer?
|
I'm guessing that is what happened but in my opinion they use that loop hole way too much.
I had been investigating the non approved changes to materials on the maple and my response from staff cited these are the ways a Development Officer can approve. To me a substantial extension to a building under construction does not qualify under any of these.
Site Plan Approval: Non-Substantive Applications
(11) The following developments are non-substantive site plan approval applications:
(a) accessory buildings and structures;
(b) development that does not materially change the external appearance of a building facing streetlines;
(c) new window and door openings or alterations to existing window and door openings abutting streetlines;
(d) alteration of external cladding material that does not affect the external appearance of a building facing streetlines;
(e) signs;
(f) decks, patios, and similar unenclosed features; and
(g) steps, stairs and other entryways.
(12) A non-substantive site plan application may be approved by the Development Officer.