ARU zoning bylaw gets first test in Guelph/Eramosa

‘We have a bylaw ... If we accept this, why limit the size at all’: Dickieson

BRUCEDALE – The newly-minted bylaw allowing alternate residential units (ARU) on properties in Guelph/Eramosa was put to the test at a public meeting on Dec. 19.

The proponent owns property at 5314 3rd Line and recently applied for a surplus dwelling severance. A condition of approval of the severance was to bring the guesthouse on the property into compliance.

John Cox, speaking on behalf of the owner, told council that in 1979 the owner sought a zoning change to allow him to convert an existing drive shed into accommodation for staff.

The building has four bedrooms, two bathrooms, a common area, and in 2004 an addition to the building was added for a wine making facility. 

There is a small vineyard on the property, Cox explained.

Since then, the building has been used by the owner to accommodate family when they visit. No changes have been made to the guesthouse in 18 years, Cox said.

“The building hasn’t changed; nothing will change,” he said.

But the guesthouse is larger and taller than is allowed under the ARU bylaw that came into effect in September, and Cox was seeking an amendment to the zoning bylaw to allow the guesthouse to remain.

“The main issue is the size,” he said. “But the original use was permitted and there has been no change of use since 2004.”

Cox pointed out there were no agency objections or objections from neighbours. He noted the guesthouse probably needs a new septic system, which the owner is willing to install.

Wellington County planner Joanna Salsberg said it is the size of the building that’s at issue. The guesthouse is approximately 300 square metres; 100 square metres is the size allowed for ARUs.

“That is the crux of the issue,”  Salsberg said.

Councillors Mark Bouwmeester, Corey Woods, and Steve Liebig were all okay with the size of the guesthouse.

Councillor Bruce Dickieson wondered if allowing the greater size in this case would be seen as unfair for anyone wanting to build an ARU. They would have to follow the size restrictions set out in the zoning bylaw.

“We have a bylaw,” he said. “If we accept this, why limit the size at all?”