Benny Neilipovitz explained the purpose for requesting the appeal and stated that the light in his backyard is to deter trespassing and damage to his property. He stated that due to a complaint regarding the light Rene Tamminga, By-Law Officer, attended his property and asked him to point the light in a downward direction which he complied, however, Mr. Tamminga returned to the property as the light was still illuminating onto the neighbouring property. Mr. Tamminga suggested moving the light to a tree or fence and he stated that would not serve the purpose of protecting the property. He explained that there was a flag in the proximity of the light for his grandkids that was causing the light to turn on.
Rene Tamminga, By-Law Officer, explained that Property Standards By-Law 936 and Section 15 of the Building Code Act permits him to enter onto the property. He stated that he spoke with Mr. Neilipovitz to provide a solution as this light illuminates the property at 142 Maple Lane. Mr. Tamminga spoke with the resident and provided him with various options such as directing the light further down, shielding the light, relocating the light, or removing the light which was requested verbally and Mr. Neilipovitz did not abide to any of the suggestions.
After discussion and reviewing the evidence, the Appeals Committee provided their decision.