HomeMy WebLinkAboutFebruary 9, 2011. . •. ,
•�- �-
,_��,_ . �_.�:� �
., ..,. -, _ . ,
I��:�����\[ .� .
Page Number
(I) Adoption of Agenda
(II) Adoption of Minutes from January 19, 2011 1-7
(III) Reports
(Deferred at the January 19, 2011 meeting) 8-12
P/CA 03/11 — P. Lambrinos
1958 Glendale Drive
(Lot 33, Plan 521)
City of Pickering
2. P/CA 04/11 — D. Lazaridis 13-18
519 Sheppard Avenue
(North Part of Lot 30, Broken Frontage Concession Range 3,
Parts 2 and 6, Plan 40R-23855)
City of Pickering
3. P/CA 05/11 — C. Marshall 19-23
1897 Woodview Avenue
(Part Lot 24, Plan 329, Block 45, Part Block 44,
Plan 40M-1700, Part 2, 3, 4, 40R-17588)
City of Pickering
(IV) Adjournment
ACCe55ible For information related to accessibility requirements please contact
PICKER�G LesleyDunne
T. 905.420.4660, e�Aension 2024
TTY 905.420.1739
Email Idunne@cityofpickering. com
.-.� �r��=�: i _ .-..
A �— �j:��� r
���►1_��\�,�
Pending Adoption
Present:
Tom Copeland
David Johnson — Chair
Eric Newton — Vice Chair (arrived at 7:05 pm)
Bill Utton
Shirley Van Steen
Also Present:
Ross Pym, Secretary-Treasurer
Lesley Dunne, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer
Mila Yeung, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer
(I) Appointment of Chairoerson
(II)
(III)
Moved by Bill Utton
Seconded by Shirley Van Steen
Committee of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes O1
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
7:00 pm
Main Committee Room
That David Johnson be appointed as Chairperson for a 1 year term.
Carried Unanimously
Appointment of Vice Chairoerson
Moved by Tom Copeland
Seconded by Bill Utton
That Eric Newton be appointed as Vice Chairperson for a 1 year term.
Carried Unanimously
Appointment of SecreTarv-Treasurer
Moved by Shirley Van Steen
Seconded by Tom Copeland
That Ross Pym be appointed as Secretary-Treasurer.
Carried Unanimously
� � �,���_� _...
...�;�:�� �
�C�:��M��1\C
Committee of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, January 79, 2011
7:00 pm
Main Committee Room
(IV) Appointments of AssisWnt Secretarv-Treasurers
Moved by Shirley Van Steen
Seconded by Bill Utton
That Mila Yeung, Lesley Dunne and Jean Finn be appointed as Assistant
Secretary-Treasu rers.
Carried Unanimously
(V) Adoption of Rules of Procedure
Moved by Bill Utton
Seconded by Tom Copeland
That the Rules of Procedure for the Committee of Adjustment be adopted.
Carried Unanimously
(VI) Adoption of Aaenda
Moved by Bill Utton
Seconded by Shirley Van Steen
That the agenda for the Wednesday, January 19, 2011 meeting be adopted.
Carried Unanimously
(VII) Adoption of 2011 Meetinq Schedule
Moved by Shirley Van Steen
Seconded by Tom Copeland
That the Committee of Adjustment Meeting Schedule for 2011 be adopted.
Carried Unanimously
(VIII) Adoption of Minutes
Moved by Eric Newton
Seconded by Bill Utton
That the minutes of the 15th meeting of the Committee of Adjustment held
Wednesday, November 3, 2010 be adopted.
Carried
� i����:� � �
���\/�C����
(IX) Reports
Committee of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, January 79, 2011 03
7:00 pm
Main Committee Room
1. P/CA 01/11 — C. Rees
502 Downland Drive
(Part Lot 127, Plan M1017, Part 26, 40R-2237)
City of Pickering
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-law
4354f73 to permit an existing side yard width of 0.6 metres and proposed lot
coverage of 34 percent, whereas the by-law requires a minimum side yard width
of 1.2 metres and maximum lot coverage of 33 percent.
The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building
permit for a sunroom addition onto the rear of the existing detached dwelling.
The Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the City of Pickering
Planning 8 Development Department recommending approval subject to
conditions. Written comments were received from the City's Development
Control Manager expressing no concerns. Written comments were received
from Councillor Kevin Ashe in support of the application.
Ivars Kulitis, agent, was present to represent the application. No further
representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application.
Moved by Bill Utton
Seconded by Shirley Van Steen
That application P/CA 01 /11 by C. Rees, be Approved on the grounds that the
side yard width of 0.6 metres and lot coverage of 34 percent are minor variances
that are desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping
with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law,
subject to the following conditions:
1. That these variances applies only to the development proposed, as generally
sited and outlined on the applicanYs submitted plans with this application.
2. That the applicant obtains a building permit for the proposed sunroom
addition construction by January 18, 2013, or this decision shall become null
and void.
Carried Unanimously
� � i���-:� _—.
�}r N..].F ��,�,•
*l�\1NC\���
2. P/CA 02/11 — J. Priest
673 Front Street
(Part Lot 4, Block E, Plan 65)
City of Pickering
Committee of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, January 79, 2011
7:00 pm
Main Committee Room
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, to permit an existing lot
frontage of 9.1 metres and an existing lot area of 373 square metres and
proposed side yard widths of 0.3 metre and 1.2 metres to the proposed new
detached dwelling, whereas the by-law requires a minimum lot frontage of 15.0
metres, a minimum lot area of 460 square metres and minimum side yard widths
af 1.5 metres.
The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building
permit for a new detached dwelling.
The Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the City of Pickering
Planning & Development Department recommending approval subject to
conditions and to a revised north side yard width of 0.6 metres.
Written comments were also received from the City's Development Control
Manager indicating the request to permit a 0.3 metre side yard width should not
be permitted as it would result in an encroachment onto the neighbouring
property during construction, side yard fencing would restrict any access along
the north side yard of the dwelling, potential for storm drainage issues and roof
overhang would also be matters of contention.
Helen Kok, James Priest, and John Reeves were present to represent the
application. Barry Farquharson of 675 Front Road submitted a letter and was
present in objection to the application.
Helen Kok explained there are several existing properties in the surrounding area
that have side yard widths of 0.3 metres or less, the proposed dwelling has been
designed for adequate south side yard width and overhang concerns and will
rebuild fences once construction is completed.
John Reeves provided photos showing examples of other surrounding homes in
the area that have side yard widths of 0.3 metres or less and explained the
property has a natural north to south slope.
— -
o ;:�i��--ll'=; -
� �
I���J�.����I1C J
Committee of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, January 19, 2011 05
7:00 pm
Main Committee Room
Barry Farquharson expressed several concerns with the application; the north
side yard width of 0.3 metres and the impact on his property during construction,
maintenance and the overFlow allowance, the retaining wall along the driveway
and would like it relocated to the south side of the building, damage to the
fencing during construction and would like reassurance it will be replaced at the
owners expense not his, questioned if the hvo proposed fire places will be wood
burning or gas, what the timeframe for the demolition and construction of the
new dwelling and indicated the footprint of his property on the applicants plan is
incorrect. He noted a 0.6 metre or 0.9 metre side yard width next to his property
would be more appropriate.
Moved by Bill Utton
Seconded by Eric Newton
That application P/CA 02/11 by J. Priest, be Approved on the grounds that the
existing lot frontage of 9.1 metres, existing lot area of 373 square metres, the
proposed south side yard width of 1.2 metres and north side yard of 0.6 metre to
the proposed new detached dwelling are minor variances that are desirable for
the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent
and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, subject to the following
conditions:
1. That these variances applies only to the proposed detached dwelling, as
generally sited and outlined on the applicanYs submitted plans with this
application subject to the revised north side yard width.
2. That the applicant obtains a building permit for the proposed construction by
January 18, 2013, or this decision shall become null and void.
Carried Unanimously
3. P/CA 03/11 — P. Lambrinos
� 1958 Glendale Drive
(Lot 33, Plan 521)
City of Pickering
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036 to permit a maximum
height of 5.2 metres for a proposed detached garage, whereas the by-law
requires a maximum building height of 3.5 metres for any accessory structure in
a residential zone.
r� i����7;�. -
_�l�\���\���
Committee of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
7:00 pm
Main Committee Room
The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building
permit.
The Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the City of Pickering
Planning 8 Development Department recommending refusal. Written comments
were also received from the City's Development Control Manager expressing no
concerns.
Peter Lambrinos, owner, was present to represent the application. William
Churchill of 1962 Glendale Drives was present in favour of the application. Brad
Suckling of 1213 Canborough Crescent, Richard Janusz of 1209 Canborough
Crescent and Stan Andrews of 1215 Canborough Crescent were present in
objection to the application.
Peter Lambrinos explained the application that the proposed increased height of
the detached garage is required to accommodate a vehicle lift for the purposes
of restoring vintage vehicles. The design will match the proposed one-storey
dwelling, and does not agree that the property is over developed. In response to
a question from a resident, Peter Lambrinos indicated that he will not be putting
in a pit rather than a lift because of the eMra expense. Peter Lambrinos
indicated he can build the proposed garage wider and would look at the
possibility of reducing the height and is willing to meet with the neighbours to
hear their concems.
William Churchill advised he reviewed the application and feels it is not out of
character to the surrounding neighbourhood and that it is far enough away from
the property lines.
Brad Suckling explained he lives directly behind the subject property and
expressed several concerns with the application; the height of the proposed
garage, visual appearance affecting the enjoyment of rear yard, noise from the
air tools and vintage cars, the future use of the proposed detached garage being
conveAed to an auto repair shop and light penetration from subject property's
driveway.
Richard Janusz expressed several concerns with the application; the height of
the proposed garage, potential of the detached garage being used as a repair
shop if the house is ever sold and noise from the air tools and vintage cars.
Stan Andrews expressed concerns with the application; the height of the
proposed garage and having to look at a wall and noise from the air tools and
vintage cars.
.} r� �����7.��
�li�\1��\_����
Moved by Bill Utton
Seconded by Shirley Van Steen
Committee of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, January 79, 2017 (? 7
7:00 pm
Main Committee Room
That application P/CA 03/11 by P. Lambrinos, be Deferred until the neM meeting
to provide an opportunity for the applicant to meet with neighbours and City staff.
Carried Unanimously
(X) Adiournment
Moved by Eric Newton
Seconded by Bill Utton
That the 1st meeting of 2011 the Committee of Adjustment be adjourned at
7:55 pm and the next meeting of the Committee of Adjustment be held on
Wednesday, February 9, 2011.
Carried Unanimously
Date
Assistant Secretary-Treasurer
c"y °� Report to
�g ' ; Committee of Adjustment
I Application Number: P/CA 03N1
Meeting Date: February 9, 2011
(Deferred from the January 19, 2011 Meeting)
From: Ross Pym, MCIP, RPP
Principal Planner— Development Review
Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application P/CA 03/11 — Amended
P. Lambrinos
1958 Glendale Drive
(Lot 33, Plan 521) �
City of Pickering
Application:
The applicant, as amended requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036 to permit a
maximum height of 4.5 metres for a proposed detached garage, whereas the by-law
requires a maximum building height of 3.5 metres for any accessory structure in a
residential zone.
The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit.
Recommendation:
The Planning 8 Development Department considers the request to permit a maximum
height of 4.5 metres for a proposed detached garage to be a major variance that is
undesirable for the appropriate development of the land and not keeping with the
general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law and therefore recommends Refusal of
the proposed variance.
Comment:
Official Plan and Zoning By-law
Pickering O�cial Plan —"Urban Residential — Low Density Area" within the Liverpool
Neighbourhood
Zoning By-law 3036 —"R3" — Third Density Residential Zone
Report P/CA 03/11 — Amended
(Deferred from the January 19, 2011 Meeting)
Background
February 9, 2011
Page 2 � 9
• the subject application was deferred at the January 19, 2011, Committee of
Adjustment meeting in order for the applicant to consider a revised proposal
• on January 25, 2011, the application was amended to request an accessory
building height of 4.5 metres for the proposed garage
Appropriateness of the Application
Accessory Structure Height Variance
• the intent of the maximum accessory building height of 3.5 metres is to
minimize the visual impact of accessory buildings on abutting properties and
on the streetscape, and to ensure other yards are not signifcantly obstructed
by these structures on the property
• the applicant has advised that the requested height is required to
accommodate a lift for the purposes of restoring vintage vehicles
• the proposed detached garage of 4.5 metres would create a massing that
would have a negative visual impact on abutting properties
• opportunities to provide enclosed vehicle parking will be made available as the
applicant plans to construct a new raised bungalow wdh an attached three-car
garage
• the proposal for an oversized two car detached garage when the property
also provides a three car attached garage is considered overdevelopment for
the property
. the Department is also concerned that the height and size of the proposed
garage will have the potential to encourage other uses that would not comply
with the Zoning By-law
. the intent of the zoning by-law would not be maintained
Date of Report: February 2, 2011
Com nts prepared.�
i
��2
Ashley rwood
rl i
AY:RP:Id
w���.a��a�o>„ �k � ��
Enclosures
�� �[v/'y�'
Ross Pym, MCIP,l2PP
Principal Planner— Development Review
E�i
€
�
a N
§
24.4 m
Proposetl � F
Garage 8�5 m Q �a
l�6 1 a o
0
w
x w
r-
�
nit a maxim �
g height oi4.5 �
for a proposetl
Information Compiled from Applicants
Submitted plan
P/CA 03N1
P. Lambrinos
Proposetl One Storey Dwelling
3.7 m
I m w..��_1 I`�
- � - yi .� m...
�---�
°�€$�
7.7 m
u
6
11
�I i
I$ ' I >
g � .
yI �
a I
._ �i—I �o.�.
s � `
� ��
{ try�d
rI �
�
mms mzvwz: vroeocee M�� cp o�axke�oa aiennme a oevaiwm.m oevenm.m.
Vlanmipinlorma�ion Serviwa MappinpaN De¢Igq Fe0.2 3011.
zz
Information Compiled from Applicants
Submitted plan
P/CA 03N1
P. Lambrinos
�17�=�-`--'=°�
_____r___1__r_r_�1�
_-__. .__________._...___.' .
_.___.____.__ ..._ .. i
so�.. E.E..,� i -�
i
i t i
i . . �� i ��. i
i i
. i . ._, . .., �
i —
8.5 m �
���.,_...._____- �, . . . . .:� . -. . ... i
i.. . „ , , ��, i
i ,
i ... . .<�..,.. ' i
.. ;. '�=�I�..o.....'."' i '....'� i
�= -�
_ _ ____
�
mi: map �re: o�e�cee ey ue cav a ai���s �a�m.re a oe.eioomem cepw�em.
�a��me imo�aiio� serwe: mavv��e aoa oe:ie�, ceo. z. aoi i.
C�� °� Report to
' ; Committee of Adjustment
I KE Application Number: P/CA 04/11 13
Meeting Date:February 9,2011
From: Ross Pym, MCIP, RPP
Principal Planner— Development Review
Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application P/CA 04/11
D. Lazaridis
519 Sheppard Avenue
(North Part of Lot 30, Broken Frontage Concession Range 3,
Parts 2 and 6, 40R-23855)
City of Pickering
Application:
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, to permit a reduced westerly
side yard width of 1.2 metres, a rear yard depth of 4.0 metres and a maximum lot
coverage of 3S percent for a proposed two-storey dwelling with an uncovered deck,
whereas the by-law requires a minimum side yard width of 1.8 metres, a minimum rear
yard depth of 7.5 metres and a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent.
The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit for
the proposed detached dwelling.
Recommendation:
The Planning & Development Department considers the proposed reduced westerly
side yard width of 1.2 metres, a rear yard depth of 4.0 metres and a maximum lot
coverage of 38 percent to be minor variances that are desirable for the appropriate
development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the
Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, and therefore recommends Approval of the
proposed variances, subject to the following conditions:
1. That these variances applies only to the proposed two storey building with an
uncovered rear deck, as generally sited and outlined on the applicanYs
submitted plans with this application.
2. Prior to the approval of a building permit, the owner provides to the City's
satisfaction the easement within the lands described as Part 6, 40R-23855
has been abandon or the decision to permit the 1.2 metre west side yard width
shall become null and void.
3. That the width of the proposed rear deck does not exceed 5.0 metres.
4. That the applicant obtains a building permit for the proposed construction by
February 9, 2013, or this decision shall become null and void.
l. 4
Report P/CA 04/11
February 9, 2011
Page 2
Comment:
Official Plan and Zoning By-law
Pickering Official Plan —"Urban Residential Area — Low Density Area" within the
Woodlands Neighbourhood
Zoning By-law 3036 —"R3" — Third Density Residential Zone
Background
The Committee of Adjustment has previously approved applications for development of
this property. Application P/CA 05/OS recognized a reduced easterly side yard width of
1.5 metres and a reduced lot frontage of 17.0 metres. Application P/CA 52/07 recognized
a reduced westerly side yard width of 1.2 metres and a maximum lot coverage of
38 percent. The applicant was unable to satisfy the conditions of the approved
decisions which caused the variances to lapse.
Appropriateness of the Application
Side Yard Width Variance
• the intent of the side yard width requirement in the zoning by-law is to
maintain an appropriate buffer space between dwellings and adjacent lots,
and to provide adequate access to the rear yard of lots
• the applicant is proposing to erect a dwelling and rear yard deck on lands that
were previously encumbered by an easement that has been abandoned
. development is typically not permitted on easements
• an adequate buffer space and access will be maintained along the west side
yard, however the applicant must provide written confirmation to the
satisfaction of the Planning DepaRment which will allow any development
within the easement
. the intent of the zoning by-law would be maintained
Rear Yard Depth Variance
. the intent of the minimum 7.5 metres rear yard depth is to ensure that a
useable amenity space is provided in the rear yard, and to provide an
appropriate buffer space between structures on abutting properties
• an adequate amenity space in the rear yard would be maintained
. restricting the width of the deck will ensure the property will provide suffcient
area to provide soft landscaping
• the intent of the zoning by-law would be maintained
Report P/CA 04/11
Lot Coverage Variance
February 9, 2011
Page 3 15
• the intent of the maximum building lot coverage requirement is to ensure the
maintenance of an appropriate amount of yard space (amenity area)
uncovered by buildings on a lot and to regulate the maximum size and mass
of buildings on a lot
• an adequate amenity area would to be maintained
• the intent of the zoning by-law would be maintained
Input From Other Sources
Manager, Development Control
Date of report: February 2, 2011
. ��- . -.. -. .
. '_�
.��-
AY:RP:Id
,�,�-„ a�
Enclosures
. a 3.05 metre wide easement exists on the
west side of the lot
• although there are no initial concerns with the
recommended variance, the placement of the
proposed dwelling would not be permitted
within the easement
/`���(�J"y��
Ross Pym, MCIF, RPP
Principal Planner — Development Review
zc
27
1
To permit a west sitle
yartl witl�h of 12
metres
12m
E
m
v
N
Information Compiled from Applicants
Submitted plan
P/CA 04N 1
D Lazaridis
SHEPPARD AVENUE
17.4 m
E
�
v
PROPOSED TWO �
STOREY
DWELLING
�I I To permit a lot
I I coveage of 38 percenl
�
rearyard EI
metres to � i
deck
I �
� i 17.4 m
� .._.._�,. _„_ � . N
rn'is mapwas vmaucea W m. uha amueans aie�nmt b owewomem oenenmen�,
ad�m�e imorm.m� san;ms Meoo��q e�e oe:g�, aa��anzs. xon.
�
Information Compiled from Applicants
Submitted plan
PICA 04/11
D Lazaridis
�
mis m.o.'�• o�aume M m. cnvw Pkue�na alannng a oeacbpmem oec.mmem.
PUnninp I�RUmatim Service[ Mepprg enE cesg^, January 35. ]011.
�w °¢ Report to
' ; Committee of Adjustment
ER Application Number: P/CA 05/11 i 9
Meeting Date: February 9, 2011
From: Ross Pym, MCIP, RPP
Principal Planner— Development Review
Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application P/CA 05/11
C. Marshall
1897 Woodview Avenue
(Part Lot 24, Plan 329, Block 45, Part Block 44,
Plan 40M-1700, Part 2, 3, 4, 40R-17588)
City of Pickering
Application:
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036 to permi[ a lot frontage of 24 metres,
a lot area of 1,644 square metres, a front yard depth of 4.5 metres, side yard widths of
12 metres and a lot coverage of 33 percent, whereas the by-law requires a minimum lot
frontage of 60 metres, a lot area of 8,000 square metres, a front yard depth of 12.0 metres,
a minimum side yard widths of 3.0 metres and a maximum lot coverage of 10 percent.
The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit for a
proposed two-storey dwelling.
Recommendation:
The Planning & Development Department are not supportive of a 12 metre side yard
widths and recommends that the application be amended to allow side yard widths of
1.8 metres. If the application is amended the following is recommended.
The Planning & Development Department considers the proposed lot frontage of
24 metres, lot area of 1,644 square metres, front yard depth of 4.5 metres, side yard
widths of 1.6 metres and lot coverage of 33 percent to the proposed two-storey dwelling
to be minor variances that are desirable for the appropriate development of the land,
and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning
By-law, and therefore recommends Approval of the proposed variances, subject to the
following conditions:
1. That these variances applies only to the proposed two-storey dwelling, as
generally sited and outlined on the applicanYs submitted plans with this
application subject to the revised side yard widths.
2. That the applicant obtains a building permit for the proposed construction by
February 8, 2013 or this decision shall become null and void.
2�
Report P/CA 05/11
Background:
February 9, 2011
Page 2
The Committee of Adjustment on April 7, 2010, approved an application for a lot
frontage of 24.5 metre, a lot area of 1,405 square metres, a rear yard depth of 7.5 metres,
a side yard width of 2.6 metres and a lot coverage of 18 percent. These variances are
related to the existing building on the proposed lot. As a condition of approval the
applicant was required to obtain a final clearance for a future land severance. Land
Division application LD 051/10 was approved by the Region of Durham Land Division
Committee for a proposed severance that is different from the lot depicted on the
subject Committee of Adjustment application (P/CA 05/11).
Comment:
O�cial Plan and Zoning By-law
Pickering Official Plan — Urban Residential Areas — Low Density Areas within the
Highbush Neighbourhood �
Zoning By-law 3036 — "A" — Agricultural
Appropriateness of the Application
Lot Frontage Variance
• the intent of the minimum lot frontage requirement is to ensure a usable lot
size that is compatible with the surrounding area
• the proposed retained lot is an existing lot frontage that is in keeping with the
size of existing lots within the surrounding area
• the intent and purpose of the zoning by-law would be maintained
Lot Area Variance
. the intent of the minimum lot area requirement is to ensure a usable lot size
that is compatible with the surrounding area
• the proposed retained lot area is the result of the existing and proposed lot
configuration of the-property
• the intent of the zoning by-law would be maintained
Front Yard Depth Variance
• the intent of the front yard depth requirement is to provide an adequate buffer
space between street activiry and to provide an adequate landscaped area
within the front of the property
Report P/CA 05/11
February 9, 2011
Page 3 z j
• the proposed 4.5 metre front yard depth to the proposed dwelling is in
keeping with the character and front yard depth of existing lots on Woodview
Avenue
• the intent of the zoning by-law would be maintained
Side Yard Widths Variance
• the intent of the minimum side yard width of 3.0 metres is to provide an
appropriate buffer space between structures on abutting properties
• the proposed side yard widths of 1.2 would not be appropriate development of
the land
. in consideration of the size of the lot the side yard widths should provide a
proportional separation belween abutting properties
• the proposed 1.2 metre side yard width is the standard for dwellings on lots
having a lot frontage of 12.0 metres to 15.0 metres and is not considered
appropriate for a lot providing a lot frontage of 24 metres
• given the size of the proposed dwelling the minimum side yard widths must
be increased to reflect the lot and building size
. side yard widths of 1.8 metres for the land would provide an appropriate
buffer belween the existing dwellings and the abutting properties
• the intent of the zoning by-law would be maintained
Lot Coverage Variance
• the intent of the maximum lot coverage requirement is to ensure the
maintenance of an appropriate amount of amenity area uncovered by buildings
and to regulate the maximum size and mass of buildings on a lot
• the proposed 33 percent lot coverage would provide an appropriate lot
coverage for a lot greater than 1,600 square metres
• an acceptable amount of amenity space would be provided
• the intent of the zoning by-law would be maintained
Date of report: February 2, 2011
Comments prepared by:
Mil�Yeun��
Planner I
MY:RP:Id
o»avo>n.<«
Enclosures
�a� �
Ross Pym, MCIP, R�
Principal Planner — Development Review
2
Information Compiled from Applicants
Submitted plan
P/CA OS/11
C. Marshall
To permi� a lo� fmntage
of 24.0 metres
µ�
�
W ti ti
� U
Z 66
; o
Q ; go z
W v o� ��� �..,
\ N �
/ � 3� ��
� a3 "
OMM450„ X
� �
To permit a fronl yaN tlepth
of 6.5 metres to ihe
1.2
`F`:
antl
� ,
lot
�
ya ,,,
PART 1
To permil a bl area of
1,644 metres squaretl
23
\
�
lMS mep wes prWUce00y Me Cdy ol PI }mng Rannl�g d O¢velopmmf CepaMmt,
Plannm0lnbrme�un ServlmsMappnBenE CesIBn.Oec.P2 R011.