Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCRPS-05-011 - Encroachment Request - 115 Stirling Ave. S. ~ Report To: Mayor and Members of Council Date of Meeting: Submitted By: Prepared By: Ward(s) Involved: Date of Report: Report No.: Subject: January 17, 2005 Jennifer Sheryer Assistant City Solicitor Jennifer Sheryer Assistant City Solicitor Ward 5 January 11, 2005 CRPS-05-011 ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT REQUEST - FENCED YARD AT 115 STIRLING AVE. S. RECOMMENDATION: "That the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to execute an Encroachment Agreement, satisfactory to the City Solicitor, with the property owner of Lot 165, Plan 303, municipally known as 115 Stirling Ave. S., to legalize the existing encroachment of a fenced yard which encroaches approximately 484 square feet (11' by 40') onto City property (Iron Horse Trail), more or less." REPORT: I am in receipt of a request to legalize an existing encroachment of a fenced yard. The fence encroaches at the rear of 115 Stirling Ave. S. approximately 484 square feet (11' x 40') onto City property, being the Iron Horse Trail, more or less. Community Services staff has reviewed this request and has no concerns with the location of the existing fenced yard. From an operational standpoint, the Enforcement Division does not have an objection to the requested encroachment agreement. However, the Enforcement Division notes it must be recognized that this request is coming forward as a result of a complaint about the encroachment received from an area resident. The Enforcement Division has also received complaints of other encroachments in the area and is continuing to deal with the other affected properties. Similar requests for encroachment agreements in the same area may come forward. Any decision rendered as a result of this request may have implications on future requests received from this immediate area. Staff is aware of one other request to encroach on the Iron Horse Trail this year at 33-37 Mill St. Council authorized signature of an encroachment agreement in that case. However, that encroachment was brought to the City's attention by the property owner's lawyer who requested legalization of the encroachment rather than by a complainant as in this situation. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: N/A COMMUNICATIONS: N/A CONCLUSION: Council's direction is requested as to whether or not an encroachment agreement may be entered into with the property owner of 115 Stirling Ave. S. JENNIFER SHERYER Assistant City Solicitor JS:sh cc: L. MacDonald P. Wetherup S. Turner