HomeMy WebLinkAboutOctober 15, 2014Committee of Adjustment
Agenda
Meeting Number: 14
Date: Wednesday, October 15, 2014
(I)
(II)
(Ill)
(IV)
Adoption of Agenda
Committee of Adjustment
Agenda
Wednesday, October 15, 2014
7:00pm
Main Committee Room
Page Number
Adoption of Minutes from September 24, 2014 1-17
Reports
1. PICA 89114 18-23
C. & L. Gertzos
1972 Glendale Drive
2. PICA 90114 24-27
K. MacKay
830 Reytan Blvd.
3. PICA 92114 28-31
B. & J. Henderson
1731 Lane Street
4. PICA 93114 32-35
C. Annable
1435 Altona Road
5. PICA 96114 & PICA 97114 36-39
Maddy Developments Inc.
578 & 580 Oakwood Drive
Adjournment
Accessible •-For information related to accessibility requirements please contact:
Lesley Dunne PICKE~G T. 905.420.4660, extension 2024
TTY 905.420.1739
Email ldunne@pickering.ca
·Pending Adoption
Present:
David Johnson -Chair
Eric Newton
Bill Utton
Shirley Van Steen -Vice-Chair
Also Present:
Melissa Markham, Secretary-Treasurer
Lesley Dunne, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer
Absent:
Tom Copeland
(I) Adoption of Agenda
Moved by Bill Utton
Seconded by Eric Newton
Committee of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, September 24, 2014
7:02pm
Main Committee Room
That the agenda for the Wednesday, September 24, 2014 meeting be adopted.
(II) Adoption of Minutes
Moved by Eric Newton
Seconded by Bill Utton
Carried Unanimously
That the minutes of the 12th meeting of the Committee of Adjustment held
Wednesday, September 3, 2014, 2014 be adopted as amended.
Carried
Page 1 of 17
Committee of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
0 2 Wednesday, September 24, 2014
(Ill) Reports
1. Tabled at the July 23, 2014 meeting
PICA 68114 to PICA 71114-Revised
Nuteck Homes Ltd
1825 1827 Appleview Road
Moved by Shirley Van Steen
Seconded by Bill Utton
7:02pm
Main Committee Room
That applications PICA 68114 to PICA 71114 be lifted from the table.
Carried Unanimously
PICA 68/14 (Proposed Retained Lot-Appleview Road)
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended, to permit a
minimum lot frontage of 15.2 metres and a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres
where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling; whereas the by-law
requires a minimum lot frontage of 18.0 metres and a minimum side yard width of
1.8 metres where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling.
The applicant requests approval of four minor variance applications, to create
three additional lots (two fronting onto Appleview Road and two fronting onto
Heathside Crescent) through the Region of Durham Land Division Committee, in
order to permit a detached dwelling on the retained parcel and on each of the
proposed severed parcels.
The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendations from the City
Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions.
Sarah & Cesare Molinaro, owners, were present to represent the application.
Moved by Shirley Van Steen
Seconded by Bill Utton
That application PICA 68114 by Nuteck Homes Ltd., be Approved on the
grounds that the minimum lot frontage of 15.2 metres and a minimum side yard
width of 1.5 metres, where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling on
the proposed retained parcel are minor in nature, 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:
Page 2 of 17
Committee of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, September 24, 2014
7:02pm
Main Committee Room
1. That these variances apply only to the proposed lot configuration for the
proposed retained parcel, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's
submitted plans.
2. That the applicant obtains final clearance for a future land severance to
create the proposed retained parcel by December 18, 2015, or this decision
shall become null and void.
3. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction on
the proposed retained parcel by September 23, 2016, or this decision
affecting the reduced side yard widths shall become null and void.
Carried Unanimously
PICA 69/14 (Proposed Severed Lot-Appleview Road)
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended, to permit a
minimum lot frontage of 15.2 metres and a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres
where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling; whereas the by-law
requires a minimum lot frontage of 18.0 metres and a minimum side yard width of
1.8 metres where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling.
The applicant requests approval of four minor variance applications, to create
three additional lots (two fronting onto Appleview Road and two fronting onto
Heathside Crescent) through the Region of Durham Land Division Committee, in
order to permit a detached dwelling on the retained parcel and on each of the
proposed severed parcels.
The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendations from the City
Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions.
Sarah & Cesare Molinaro, owners, were present to represent the application.
Moved by Eric Newton
Seconded by Bill Utton
That application PICA 69/14 by Nuteck Homes Ltd., be Approved on the
grounds that the minimum lot frontage of 15.2 metres and a minimum side yard
width of 1.5 metres where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling for
the proposed severed parcel are minor in nature, 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:
Page 3 of 17
03
Committee of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, September 24, 2014
7:02pm
Main Committee Room
1. That these variances apply only to the proposed lot configuration for the
proposed severed parcel, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's
submitted plans.
2. That the applicant obtains final clearance for a future land severance to
create the proposed severed parcel by December 18, 2015, or this decision
shall become null and void.
3. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction on
the proposed severed parcel by September 23, 2016, or this decision
affecting the reduced side yard widths shall become null and void.
Carried Unanimously
PICA 70/14 (Proposed Severed Lot-Heathside Crescent)-Revised
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended, to permit a
minimum lot frontage of 14.3 metres and a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres
where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling; whereas the by-law
requires a minimum lot frontage of 18.0 metres and a minimum side yard width of
1.8 metres where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling.
The applicant requests approval of four minor variance applications, to create
three additional lots (two fronting onto Appleview Road and two fronting onto
Heathside Crescent) through the Region of Durham Land Division Committee, in
order to permit a detached dwelling on the retained parcel and on each of the
proposed severed parcels.
The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendations from the City
Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions.
Written comments were received from the City's Engineering & Public Works
Department indicating they are satisfied with the revised plan identifying
preliminary grading and drainage, and location of driveway entrances.
Sarah & Cesare Molinaro, owners, were present to represent the application.
Jim Cushnie of 1610 Heathside Crescent was present in objection to applications
PICA 70114 and PICA 71114.
Page 4 of 17
Committee of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, September 24, 2014 05
7:02pm
Main Committee Room
Sarah Molinaro indicated she has worked with the City's Engineering & Public
Works staff and other agencies to address concerns regarding driveway
entrances, the future grading and drainage of the proposed lots, mailbox location,
snow storage and the existing light standard. She stated Canada Post has
indicated the existing community mailbox on Heathside Crescent will have to be
relocated beside the existing community mailbox located at 1599 Heathside
Crescent. She also stated that the existing light standard will remain on the
property, but will be relocated slightly if there are conflicts with the proposed
driveway locations. She stated that existing side yard setbacks along Heathside
Crescent are 1.2 metres and the applications are for a minimum 1.5 metre side
yard setback.
Jim Cushnie was present to represent the concerns of residents along Heathside
Crescent. He expressed concerns that the proposed lots are not in keeping with
the existing streetscape along Heathside Crescent and the reduction in lot
frontages is not minor in nature. He stated many concerns such as: safety, lack
of on-street parking, snow storage, re-location of community mailbox and street
light, the proposed distance between driveways and concern with the excavation
during construction.
In response to the concerns of residents Sarah Molinaro indicated that the
driveway widths had been reduced in width to accommodate the alignment at the
boulevard. She also mentioned that the lot coverage on the proposed lots is
lower than what is permitted.
A Committee member asked for clarification in regards to the relocation of the
community mailbox and how lot frontage is calculated.
The Secretary-Treasurer provided a response to the Committee members.
Moved by Bill Utton
Seconded by Shirley Van Steen
That application PICA 70/14 by Nuteck Homes Ltd., be Approved on the
grounds that the revised minimum lot frontage of 14.3 metres and a minimum
side yard width of 1.5 metres where a garage is erected as part of a detached
dwelling for the proposed severed parcel are minor in nature, 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:
Page 5 of 17
Committee of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, September 24, 2014
7:02pm
Main Committee Room
1. That these variances apply only to the proposed lot configuration for the
proposed severed parcel, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's
submitted plans.
2. That the applicant obtains final clearance for a future land severance to
create the proposed severed parcel by December 18, 2015, or this decision
shall become null and void.
3. That the applicant obtains a building permit for the proposed construction on
the proposed severed parcel by September 23, 2016, or this decision
affecting the reduced side yard widths shall become null and void.
Vote
David Johnson
Eric Newton
Bill Utton
Shirley Van Steen
in favour
opposed
in favour
in favour
Carried
PICA 71/14 (Proposed Severed Lot-Heathside Crescent)-Revised
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended, to permit a
minimum lot frontage of 14.4 metres and a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres
where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling; whereas the by-law
requires a minimum lot frontage of 18.0 metres and a minimum side yard width of
1.8 metres where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling.
The applicant requests approval of four minor variance applications, to create
three additional lots (two fronting onto Appleview Road and two fronting onto
Heathside Crescent) through the Region of Durham Land Division Committee, in
order to permit a detached dwelling on the retained parcel and on each of the
proposed severed parcels.
The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendations from the City
Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions.
Written comments were received from the City's Engineering & Public Works
Department indicating they are satisfied with the revised plan identifying
preliminary grading and drainage, and location of driveway entrances.
Page 6 of 17
Committee of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, September 24, 2014 0 7
7:02pm
Main Committee Room
Sarah & Cesare Molinaro, owners, were present to represent the application.
Jim Cushnie of 1610 Heaths ide Crescent was present in objection to applications
PICA 70114 and PICA 71114. The comments of the residents were presented
with application PICA 70114.
Moved by Shirley Van Steen
Seconded by Bill Utton
That application PICA 71114 by Nuteck Homes Ltd., be Approved on the
grounds that the revised minimum lot frontage of 14.4 metres and a minimum
side yard width of 1.5 metres where a garage is erected as part of a detached
dwelling for the proposed severed parcel are minor in nature, 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 apply only to the proposed lot configuration for the
proposed severed parcel, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's
submitted plans.
2. That the applicant obtains final clearance for a future land severance to
create the proposed severed parcel by December 18, 2015, or this decision
shall become null and void.
3. That the applicant obtains a building permit for the proposed construction on
the proposed severed parcel by September 23, 2016, or this decision
affecting the reduced side yard widths shall become null and void.
Vote
David Johnson
Eric Newton
Bill Utton
Shirley Van Steen
in favour
opposed
in favour
in favour
Carried
Page 7 of 17
08
2.
Committee of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, September 24, 2014
7:02pm
Main Committee Room
Deferred at the September 3, 2014 meeting
PICA 75/14-Revised
C. Sewell
663 Front Road
The applicant requests relief from the following provisions of Zoning By-law 2511,
as amended:
• to permit a maximum lot coverage for all accessory buildings of 6 percent of
the total lot area; whereas the by-law permits a maximum lot coverage of
5 percent of the total lot area for all accessory buildings, and
• to permit a maximum lot coverage of 34 percent for all buildings and
structures; whereas the by-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent
for all buildings and structures
The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building
permit to recognize an accessory building (shed) to remain in the rear yard.
The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City
Development Department recommending refusal. Written comments were
received from the City's Engineering & Public Works Department indicating the
revised siting of the proposed shed will provide adequate grading and drainage.
Written comments were received from J. Maingot of 665 Front Road, J. & K. Avis
of 595 Annland Street and M. & M. Metcalfe of 667 Front Road indicating no
objection to the applicant's proposal. Additional comments received from K. Yates
of 602 Annland Street indicating no objection to the applicant's revised proposal.
Chris Sewell, owner, was present to represent the application. No further
representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application.
Chris Sewell advised the Committee that he would be relocating the shed to the
required 1.0 metre setback from property lines. In regards to the increase in
coverage he provided pictures of large accessory structures in the surrounding
nieghbourhood for the Committee to review. In response to questions from the
Committee, Chris Sewell indicated he does not have a garage and the shed will
be used for storage of seasonal equipment.
In response to a question from the Committee, staff indicated that the shed would
have to be reduced by 4.0 square metres to comply with the zoning by-law
requirements.
Page 8 of 17
Committee of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, September 24, 2014 09
7:02pm
Main Committee Room
The applicant stated that the shed has been constructed, excluding siding and
eaves troughs. The applicant agreed to install eaves and downspouts on the
shed and to erect a fence to screen the structure from the adjacent property.
Moved by Shirley Van Steen
Seconded by Bill Utton
That application PICA 75114 by C. Sewell, be Approved on the grounds that the
maximum lot coverage of 6 percent for all accessory structures and a maximum
lot coverage of 34 percent for all buildings and structures are minor in nature,
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 apply only to the accessory structure (shed), as
generally sited and outlined on the applicant's revised submitted plans.
2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by
March 27, 2015, or this decision shall become null and void.
3. PICA 82114
S. Jamieson & K. Nakamura
1779 Silverthorn Square
Carried Unanimously
The applicant requests relief from the following provisions of Zoning By-law 3036,
as amended by By-law 1493182:
• to permit a canopy to project a maximum of 3.6 metres into the required rear
yard; whereas canopies are not permitted to encroach into the required rear
yard, and
• to permit a maximum lot coverage of 40 percent for all buildings and
structures; whereas the by-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 38 percent
for all buildings and structures
The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building
permit to construct an accessory building (shed) and a canopy in the rear yard.
The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City
Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Written
comments were also received from the City's Engineering & Public Works
Department expressing no concerns.
Page 9 of 17
10
Committee of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, September 24, 2014
7:02pm
Main Committee Room
Shawn Jamieson & Keiko Nakamura, owners, were 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 Eric Newton
That application PICA 82114 by S. Jamieson & K. Nakamura, be Approved on
the grounds that the proposed canopy projecting a maximum of 3.6 metres into
the required rear yard and a maximum lot coverage of 40 percent are minor in
nature, 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 apply only to the proposed accessory building (shed)
and canopy, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted
plans.
2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by
September 23, 2016, or this decision shall become null and void.
Carried Unanimously
4. PICA 83114
M. & E. Kim
729 Breezy Drive
The applicant requests relief from the following provisions of Zoning By-law 2520,
as amended:
• to permit a minimum east side yard width of 0.9 of a metre to a proposed
second storey addition; whereas the by-law requires minimum side yard width
of 1.5 metres where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling, and
• to recognize an existing shed less than 10.0 square metres in area setback a
minimum of 0.4 of a metre from the east side lot line and 0.5 of a metre from
the rear lot line; whereas the by-law requires accessory structures less than
10.0 square metres in area to be setback a minimum of 0.6 of a metre from all
lot lines
The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building
permit to construct a second storey addition above an existing garage and to
recognize an existing shed.
Page 10 of 17
Committee of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, September 24, 2014 11
7:02pm
Main Committee Room
The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City
Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Written
comments were also received from the City's Engineering & Public Works
Department expressing no concerns. Written comments were also received from
Kevin Ashe, City Councillor, Ward 1 in support of the application.
Maylynn Kim, owner, was present to represent the application. No further
representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application.
Moved by Eric Newton
Seconded by Bill Utton
That application PICA 83114 by M. & E. Kim, be Approved on the grounds that
the minimum east side yard width of 0.9 of a metre for a proposed second storey
addition and recognizing an existing shed less than 10.0 square metres in area
setback a minimum of 0.4 of a metre from the east side lot line and 0.5 of a metre
from the rear lot line are minor in nature, 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 apply only to the proposed second storey addition and
the existing shed, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted
plans.
2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by
September 23, 2016 or this decision shall become null and void.
5. PICA 84114
C. McMannis
1315 Wharf Street
Carried Unanimously
The applicant requests relief from the following provisions of Zoning By-law 2511,
as amended:
• to recognize the existing east side yard width of 1.2 metres; whereas the
by-law requires a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres, and
• to permit a minimum front yard depth of 4.5 metres to the proposed front
porch; whereas the by-law requires a minimum front yard depth of 7.5 metres
Page 11 of 17
12
Committee of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, September 24, 2014
7:02pm
Main Committee Room
The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building
permit to allow for the construction of an attached garage on the lower level and
a front porch addition to the existing dwelling.
The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City
Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Written
comments were received from the City's Engineering & Public Works Department
expressing no concerns.
Written comments were also received from Toronto and Region Conservation
Authority (TRCA) indicating on December 13, 2013 TRCA approved a permit to
reconstruct the existing basement walkout, repair the dwelling foundations and
replace the existing deck. No further objections to the requested variances,
however, the owner should contact TRCA to confirm if a TRCA permit approval
or clearance is required for the proposed construction.
Cade McMannis, owner, was present to represent the application. No further
representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application.
Moved by Shirley Van Steen
Seconded by Eric Newton
That application PICA 84/14 by C. McMannis, be Approved on the grounds that
the existing east side yard width of 1.2 metres, and the minimum front yard depth
of 4.5 metres to a proposed front porch are minor in nature, 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 apply only to the proposed construction of an attached
garage on the lower level and a front porch addition to the existing dwelling,
as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans.
2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by
September 23, 2016, or this decision shall become null and void.
Carried Unanimously
Page 12 of 17
6. PICA 85114
P. & C. Carvalho
1 004 Albacore Manor
Committee of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, September 24, 2014
7:02pm
Main Committee Room
The applicant requests relief from the following provisions of Zoning By-law 2511,
as amended by By-law 1299181 :
• to recognize an existing uncovered platform (deck) not exceeding 3.0 metres
in height above grade to project a maximum of 3.6 metres into the required
rear yard; whereas the by-law does not permit an uncovered platform to
project into the required rear yard, and
• to permit a minimum rear yard depth of 4.0 metres to a proposed second
storey addition (enclosed sunroom); whereas the by-law requires a minimum
rear yard depth of 7.5 metres
The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building
permit to construct a second storey sunroom addition and to recognize an
existing uncovered deck in the rear yard.
The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City
Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Written
comments were also received from the City's Engineering & Public Works
Department expressing no concerns.
Bob Davidson, agent, was present to represent the application. No further
representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application.
Moved by Shirley Van Steen
Seconded by Bill Utton
That application PICA 85114 by P. & C. Carvalho, be Approved on the grounds
that the uncovered platform (deck) not exceeding 3.0 metres in height above
grade projecting a maximum of 3.6 metres into the required rear yard and a
minimum rear yard depth of 4.0 metres to a second storey addition (enclosed
sunroom) are minor in nature, 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 apply only to the existing deck and proposed second
storey addition (enclosed sunroom), as generally sited and outlined on the
applicant's submitted plans.
Page 13 of 17
13
'l~ I' . "'1:
Committee of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, September 24, 2014
7:02pm
Main Committee Room
2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the construction by
September 23, 2016, or this decision shall become null and void.
Carried Unanimously
7. PICA 86114
D. Kelly & S. Head
578 Creekview Circle
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-laws
4354/73 and 4470173, to permit an uncovered platform not exceeding 2.5 metres
in height above grade to encroach a maximum of 0.5 of a metre into the required
minimum rear yard and to permit uncovered stairs to encroach an additional
1.0 metre into the required minimum rear yard; whereas the by-law does not
permit uncovered steps or platforms to encroach into the required rear yard.
The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building
permit to construct an uncovered deck and stairs within the required rear yard.
The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City
Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Written
comments were received from the City's Engineering & Public Works Department
expressing no concerns. Written comments were also received from Kevin Ashe,
City Councillor, Ward 1 in support of the application.
Robert Reid, 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 PICA 86114 by D. Kelly & S. Head, be Approved on the grounds
that the uncovered platform not exceeding 2.5 metres in height above grade to
encroach a maximum of 0.5 of a metre into the required minimum rear yard and
to permit uncovered stairs to encroach an additional 1.0 metre into the required
minimum rear yard are minor in nature, 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 this variance applies only to the proposed uncovered platform and stairs
as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans.
Page 14 of 17
Committee of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, September 24, 2014 15 7:02pm
Main Committee Room
2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by
September 23, 2016 or this decision shall become null and void.
Carried Unanimously
8. PICA 87/14
Marshall Land Corp. Ltd.
Nordane Drive (Pt. Lot 24, Plan 329, Part 3 40R-27800)
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law
7274/13, to permit a maximum lot coverage of 45 percent and a minimum east
side yard width of 0.6 of a metre; whereas the by-law permits a maximum lot
coverage of 38 percent and a minimum side yard width of 1.2 metres each side.
The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application in order to
obtain a building permit to construct a two-storey detached dwelling.
The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City
Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Written
comments were also received from the City's Engineering & Public Works
Department expressing no concerns.
Samantha Bateman, an employee of Marshall Homes, was present to represent
the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection
to the application.
Moved by Eric Newton
Seconded by Bill Utton
That application PICA 87/14 by Marshall Land Corp. Ltd., be Approved on the
grounds that the maximum lot coverage of 45 percent and a minimum east side
yard width of 0.6 of a metre are minor in nature, 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 the requested variances apply only to the proposed detached dwelling
as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plan.
2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed detached
dwelling, by September 23, 2016, or this decision shall become null and void.
Carried Unanimously
Page 15 of 17
9. PICA 88114
J. & C. Johnston
979 Mountcastle Crescent
Committee of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, September 24, 2014
7:02pm
Main Committee Room
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law
1998185, to permit an uncovered platform (deck) not exceeding 2.5 metres in
height above grade to project a maximum of 2.2 metres into the required rear
yard, whereas the by-law permits uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding
1.0 metre in height above grade to project a maximum of 1.5 metres into the
required rear yard.
The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building
permit to construct an uncovered platform (deck) within the required rear yard.
The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City
Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Written
comments were also received from the City's Engineering & Public Works
Department expressing no concerns.
John & Caryn Johnston, owners, were present to represent the application. No
further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application.
Moved by Shirley Van Steen
Seconded by Eric Newton
That application PICA 88114 by J. & C. Johnston, be Approved on the grounds
that the uncovered platform (deck) not exceeding 2.5 .metres in height above
grade to project a maximum of 2.2 metres into the required rear yard are minor in
nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and is in keeping
with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law,
subject to the following conditions:
1. That this variance apply only to the uncovered platform (deck) as generally
sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans.
2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by
September 23, 2016 or this decision shall become null and void.
Carried Unanimously
Page 16 of 17
Committee of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, September 24, 2014 1 7
7:02pm
Main Committee Room
(IV) Adjournment
Date
Chair
Moved by Bill Utton
Seconded by Shirley Van Steen
That the 13th meeting of the 2014 Committee of Adjustment be adjourned at
8:15 pm and the next meeting of the Committee of Adjustment be held on
Wednesday, October 15, 2014.
Carried Unanimously
Assistant Secretary-Treasurer
Page 17 of 17
18
From:
Subject:
Application
Nilesh Surti, MCIP, RPP
Report to
Committee of Adjustment
Application Number: PICA 89114
Meeting Date: October 15, 2014
Manager, Development Review & Urban Design
Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 89114
C. & L Gertzos
1972 Glendale Drive
The applicant requests relief from the following provisions of Zoning By-law 3036, as
amended:
• to permit accessory buildings (detached garage and hot tub) to be partially located in
the required side yards; whereas the by-law requires all accessory buildings which
are not part of the main building to be erected in the rear yard
• to recognize a 0.8 of a metre south side yard width to an existing accessory building
(detached garage); whereas the by-law requires all accessory buildings be set back
a minimum of 1.0 metre from all lot lines, and
• to recognize an existing uncovered platform (deck) not exceeding 1.4 metres in
height above grade to project a maximum of 1.4 metres into the required north side
yard; whereas the by-law permits uncovered platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in
height above grade to project a maximum of 0.5 of a metre into the required
side yard
The applicant requests approval of these minor variances in order to allow an existing
detached garage and hot tub to be partially located in the south and north side yards
respectively, and to recognize the location of an existing deck within the required north
side yard.
Recommendation
The City Development Department considers accessory buildings (detached garage
and hot tub) to be partially located in the required side yards; a minimum 0.8 of a metre
south side yard width to an existing accessory building (detached garage), and a
maximum projection of 1.4 metres into the required north side yard for an existing
uncovered platform (deck) 1.4 metres in height above grade to be minor in nature,
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 apply only to the existing detached garage, hot tub and deck,
as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans.
2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed one-storey addition as
generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans, or the decision
affecting the existing detached garage and hot tub proposed to be partially located in
the south and north side yards respectively shall become null and void.
Report PICA 89/14
Background
October 15, 2014
Page 2 19
The applicant has submitted a building permit for a one-storey addition at the rear of the
existing detached dwelling. As a result of the proposed addition, the existing garage
and hot tub will be partially located in the south and north side yards respectively, and
no longer be completely located within the rear yard, which is not permitted under the
zoning by-law.
Following the circulation of the Public Notice, Planning Staff conducted a site inspection
which determined that the existing hot tub complied with the minimum side yard setback
requirement and therefore staff has removed this variance from the application. Staff
also recognized that the hot tub will also be deemed to be in the north side yard upon
completion of the rear yard addition to the dwelling and have therefore included this as
an additional variance required for this application. The City Development Department
is satisfied that this amendment is in accordance with the spirit and intent of the
applicant's requested variances and has revised the requested variances pertaining to
the existing hot tub as follows:
Previous Relief Applied For Revised Requested Relief Applied For
to recognize a 0.4 of a metre north side to permit an existing accessory structure
yard width to an existing accessory (hot tub) to be partially located in the north
structure (hot tub); whereas the zoning side yard; whereas the zoning by-law
by-law requires that all accessory requires all accessory buildings which are
buildings must be set back a minimum of not part of the main building to be erected
1.0 metre from all lot lines in the rear yard
Comment
Official Plan and Zoning By-law
Pickering Official Plan-"Urban Residential -Low Density Areas" within the Liverpoool
Neighbourhood
Zoning By-law 3036 -"R3" -Third Density Residential Zone
Appropriateness of the Application
Accessory Buildings/Structures Located in the Side Yard Variance
• the intent of the by-law requirement that all accessory buildings/structures shall
be erected in the rear yard is to minimize their visual impact on the street, to
ensure that they act as an accessory structure to the principal use of the
property, and to ensure that unobstructed access to the rear of the property is
available
• the detached garage and hot tub are currently located in the rear yard of the
property, however due to the proposed rear addition to the existing dwelling, the
structures will be located in the side yards
Report PICA 89/14 October 15, 2014
20 Page 3
• the existing detached garage and hot tub partially located within the south and
north side yards respectively do not appear to have a negative visual impact on
the street or adjacent properties
• adequate space will be maintained between the existing structures to ensure that
unobstructed access to the rear of the property is available
• the requested variances are minor in nature, are desirable for the appropriate
development of the property and maintains the purpose and intent of the Official
Plan and Zoning By-law
Accessory Building Setback Variance
• the intent of the minimum 1.0 metre setback requirement for accessory structures
greater than 1.8 metres in height, and 0.6 metres for other accessory structures
is to minimize the visual impact that their location may have on adjacent
properties, and to ensure that adequate access for maintenance is available to
the sides of the structures
• the detached garage is an existing structure on the property and its location does
not appear to have a negative visual impact on adjacent properties
• accessibility between the garage and the south lot line will be maintained
• the requested variance is minor in nature, is desirable for the appropriate
development of the property and maintains the purpose and intent of the Official
Plan and Zoning By-law
Increased Projection of Uncovered Steps and Platforms into the Side Yard Variance
• the intent of this provision is to ensure that appropriate setbacks are provided to
protect the privacy of abutting property owners and allow for appropriate access
for maintenance, lot grading and drainage
• the by-law permits uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in
height above grade to project not more than 0.5 of a metre into the required side
yard
• the uncovered deck is an existing structure on the property which projects
1.4 metres into the required side yard
• the existing grades established on the north side of the property between the
dwelling appears to restrict access from the front yard to the rear yard
• the existing deck appears to have minimal impact on adjacent properties,
however, accessibility between the north lot line and the deck for maintenance
purposes, grading and drainage is limited
• the existing deck will not impact the privacy of the north adjacent land owner
since it sides onto an existing shed owned by the north adjacent land owner
• the requested variance is minor in nature, is desirable for the appropriate
development of the property and maintains the purpose and intent of the Official
Plan and Zoning By-law
Report PICA 89/14
Date of report: October 9, 2014
Comments prepared by:
AY:NS:Id
J:\Documents\Development\0·3700\2014 \PC A 89·14\Report\PCA 89-14.doc
Enclosures
r . r
Nilesh S~rti, \MCIP, RPP
October 15, 2014 21
Page4
Manager, Development Review & Urban Design
')2 ""
City Development
Department
-
1--
1---
f-
1--
GLENDALE
1972 Glendale Drive
To
pe
r
m
i
t
an
ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
ho
t
tu
b
to
be
pa
r
t
i
a
l
l
y
lo
c
a
t
e
d
in
th
e
no
r
t
h
si
d
e
ya
r
d
E
""
:
To
pe
r
m
i
t
an
ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
un
c
o
v
e
r
e
d
de
c
k
to
pr
o
j
e
c
t
a
ma
x
i
m
u
m
of
1.4
me
t
r
e
s
in
t
o
th
e
no
r
t
h
si
d
e
ya
r
d
I
0
.
-
r-
;
:
-
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
-
-
'
.
(!
)
--
-
-
-
7
(
60
.
9
m
I
1
z
:::c
:
1
\
F
-
-
-
E X
IS
TI
N
G
-
t
f
..•
f=
~
I
I~
N
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
PO
O
L
t 6-
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
Cl-
l
A
I
N
I
LIN
K
FE
N
C
E
t
+
-
-
~--
-
·
;
:
_
:
-
-
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
f
--
+
6.
7
m
~P
O
O
L
I
l_
_
_
[_
_
_
_
j
j
SH
E
D
~ I
t
-
l
E
co
N
Su
b
m
i
t
t
e
d
Pl
a
n
FI
L
E
No
:
PI
C
A
89
/
1
4
HO
T
TU
B
i
i.
K
.
~ o
!S
T
I
N
G
1
. • ''n
·
x
PO
R
T
I
O
N
OFE~
;
I
N
L
~
.
i 1
UJ
OW
O
00
R
b!
:
:
-
-
PR
O
P
O
S
E
D
NE
l
-
l
SI
N
G
L
E
ST
O
R
E
Y
AD
D
I
T
I
O
N
(5
1
-
l
O
N
N
SH
A
D
E
D
)
E
60
.
9
m
("
'
)
I'
-
\
.
.
-
-
+
-
-
-
-
t
~
E
o
0
)
0
To
pe
r
m
i
t
an
ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
so
u
t
h
si
d
e
ya
r
d
wi
d
t
h
of
0.
8
me
t
r
e
s
to
a
de
t
a
c
h
e
d
aa
r
a
a
e
AP
P
L
I
C
A
N
T
:
C.
&
L.
Ge
r
t
z
o
s
Ci
t
y
De
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
De
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
PR
O
P
E
R
T
Y
DE
S
C
R
I
P
T
I
O
N
:
19
7
2
Gl
e
n
d
a
l
e
Dr
i
v
e
(L
o
t
30
,
Pl
a
n
52
1
)
FU
L
L
SC
A
L
E
CO
P
I
E
S
OF
TH
I
S
PL
A
N
AR
E
AV
A
I
L
A
B
L
E
FO
R
VIE
W
I
N
G
AT
TH
E
CIT
Y
OF
PI
C
K
E
R
I
N
G
CI
T
Y
DE
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
DE
P
A
R
T
M
E
N
T
.
E co N N
9.
1
m
~·
EX
I
S
T
I
N
G
DR
I
V
E
N
A
Y
To
pe
r
m
i
t
an
ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
de
t
a
c
h
e
d
ga
r
a
g
e
to
be
pa
r
t
i
a
l
l
y
lo
c
a
t
e
d
in
th
e
so
u
t
h
si
d
e
ya
r
d
---r d w > 0:::: 0 w ...J <.( 0 z w ...J (!) 1' DATE: Sept. 18,2014 rv w
24
From:
Subject:
Application
Nilesh Surti, MCIP, RPP
Report to
Committee of Adjustment
Application Number: PICA 90/14
Meeting Date: October 15, 2014
Manager, Development Review & Urban Design
Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 90/14
K. MacKay
830 Reytan Boulevard
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2520, as amended, to permit an
unenclosed covered carport having a minimum front yard depth of 7.0 metres and a
minimum flankage side yard width of 3.0 metres; whereas the by-law requires a
minimum front yard depth of 7.5 metres and a minimum flankage side yard width of
4.5 metres.
The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit
to construct an unenclosed covered carport within the west side yard.
Recommendation
The City Development Department considers the minimum front yard depth of 7.0 metres
and minimum flankage side yard width of 3.0 metres to be minor in nature, 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 apply only to the proposed carport, as generally sited and
outlined on the applicant's submitted plans.
2. That the applicant removes/relocates the existing shed currently located in the west
flankage side yard to be in compliance with the zoning by-law requirements prior to
the issuance of a building permit.
3. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by
October 14, 2016, or this decision shall become null and void.
Report PICA 90/14
Comment
Official Plan and Zoning By-law
October 15, 2014
Page 2
Pickering Official Plan -"Urban Residential -Low Density Areas" within the Bay Ridges
Neighbourhood
Zoning By-law 2520-"RM1"-First Density Residential Zone
Appropriateness of the Application
Front Yard Depth and Flankage Side Yard Width Variances
• the intent of a minimum front yard depth is to ensure that an adequate
landscaped area, parking area and separation distance is provided between the
dwelling and the front lot line
• the intent of a minimum flankage yard width is to provide an adequate separation
distance between buildings and street activity and to maintain an adequate
landscaped area
• the proposed front yard depth of 7.0 metres to an unenclosed covered carport
will maintain an adequate landscaped area and parking area in the front yard in
keeping with other dwellings in the neighbourhood
• an adequate driveway entrance supporting a parking area between the proposed
carport and street can be maintained
• the proposed 3.0 metre flankage side yard width will maintain an adequate
separation distance between the proposed carport and Krosno Boulevard and will
be partially screened by an existing fence located along the westerly limits of the
property
• the proposed carport is in keeping with the established neighbourhood character
• the requested front yard depth and west flankage side yard width variances are
minor in nature and meets the purpose and intent of the Official Plan and the
Zoning By-law
Date of report: October 9, 2014
Comments prepared by:
Nilesh urti, MCIP, RPP
Manager, Development Review & Urban Design
AY:NS:Id
J:\Documents\Development\0·3700\2014 \PC A 90-14\Report\PCA 90-14.doc
Enclosures
25
Cw,"l ~~ ~
City Development
Department
Location Map
FILE No: PICA 90/14
APPLICANT: K. MacKay
0 )>
01--------1
0 <t: 0 n::
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: 830 Reytan Blvd (Lot 647, Plan M11)
DATE: Sept. 17,2014
SCALE 1 :5,000 PN-12
0
~
~ w
_J
~
0 c::a
0 z
(/)
0
~
~
To permit a
minimum flankage
side yard width of
3.0 metres to an
unenclosed
covered carport
. f •
E
0
27
18.2m •
REYTAN BOULEVARD
To permit a minimum front
yard depth of 7.0 metres
to an unenclosed covered
car art
City Development
Department
Submitted Plan
FILE No: P/CA 90/14
APPLICANT: K. MacKay
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: 830 Re Lot 647, Plan M11
DATE: Sept. 17,2014
')8 (..,
From:
Subject:
Application
Nilesh Surti, MCIP, RPP
Report to
Committee of Adjustment
· Application Number: PICA 92114
Meeting Date: October 15, 2014
Manager, Development Review & Urban Design
Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 92114
B. & J. Henderson
1731 Lane Street
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by By-law 6640106,
to permit an addition to an existing accessory building (detached garage) partially
located within the west side yard; whereas the by-law requires all accessory buildings
which are not part of the main building to be erected in the rear yard.
The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit to
construct an addition to an existing accessory building (detached garage) partially
located within the side yard.
Recommendation
The City Development Department considers the addition to an existing accessory
building (detached garage) partially located within the west side yard to be minor in
nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the lands, 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 variance subject to the following conditions:
1. That this variance applies only to the proposed addition to the detached garage as
generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans.
2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by
October 14, 2016, or this decision shall become null and void.
Background
On October 12, 1995, the Committee of Adjustment approved Minor Variance
application PICA 80195 to recognize a reduced lot area, a reduced east side yard width,
and a reduced minimum floor area for the main dwelling in order to bring the existing
property into compliance with the zoning by-law and to issue a building permit for a
detached garage.
In September 1996, a building permit was approved for an addition to the rear of the
existing dwelling. As a result of the addition the existing detached garage was deemed
to be located in the side yard, which does not comply with the accessory structure
requirement in the zoning by-law. In order to permit an addition to the existing detached
garage a minor variance is required to permit the structure to remain in its current
location within the west side yard.
Report PICA 92/14
Comment
Official Plan and Zoning By-law
October 15, 2014
Page 2
Pickering Official Plan -Oak Ridges Moraine Rural Hamlets, Claremont Hamlet
Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by 6640/06,-"ORM-5"-Oak Ridges Moraine-
Hamlet Residential Five Zone
Appropriateness of the Application
Accessory Structure (Detached Garage) Located Partially in the West Side Yard
• the intent of the by-law requirement that all accessory buildings shall be erected
in the rear yard is to minimize their visual impact on the streetscape, and to
ensure that they act as an accessory structure to the principle use of the property
• the detached garage was originally located in the rear yard of the property,
however, due to an addition to the rear of the dwelling it is now deemed to be
located in the side yard
• the existing detached garage is setback approximately 20 metres from the front
property line
• the existing detached garage and proposed addition do not appear to have a
negative visual impact on the street or on adjacent property owners
• the requested variance is minor in nature and maintains the intent of the zoning
by-law
Input From Other Sources
Engineering & Public Works
Building Services
Date of report: October 8, 2014
Comments prepared by:
\ ~· . ~
Deepak Bhatt, MCIP, RPP
Planner II
DB:NS:Id
J:\Oocuments\Development\D-3700\2014\PCA 92-14\Report\PCA 92-14.doc
Enclosures
• no concerns
• no concerns or comments
/
Nilesh S i, MCIP, RPP
Mal)ager, Development Review & Urban Design
29
30
f-w w
Q:'
f-Ul
2
<(
=:J _j
~
City Development
Department
0 <( 0
Q:'
CLAREMON
a <(
0 a::
~ (.)
0 a:: Q)
Lot 22 Plan 1
DATE: Sept. 21, 2014
SCALE 1 :5,000
LANE STREET
,_.,--~.-..·-::::.------· ···-------------
To permit an addition to an
existing accessory building
(detached garage) partially
located within the west
side yard
E co
"¢
('I)
' ..;
~ 1.9m---.'
6.0m
EXISTING
DETACHED
GARAGE
...............
PROPOSED
GARAGE
ADDITION ..-
l •• §l>lr.
t
E ~
CD ~
Submitted Plan
E
CD
1'-
E 0
CD
FILE No: P/CA 92/14
24.3m
('I)
('I)
T"""
j
12.1m
E EXISTING ('I)
1'-2 STOREY
DWELLING
24.3m
APPLICANT: B. & J. Henderson
31
E co
"¢
('I)
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: 1731 Lane Street (Part Lot 22 Plan 12)
City Development
Department
FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING
CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DATE: Sept. 23, 2014
32
From:
Subject:
Application
Nilesh Surti, MCIP, RPP
Report to
Committee of Adjustment
Application Number: PICA 93114
Meeting Date: October 15, 2014
Manager, Development Review & Urban Design
Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 93114
C. Annable
1435 Altona Road
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended, to permit a
minimum lot frontage of 16.0 metres; whereas the by-law requires a minimum lot
frontage of 18.0 metres.
The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to create one additional lot
through the Region of Durham Land Division Committee for a detached dwelling ..
Recommendation
The City Development Department considers a minimum lot frontage of 16.0 metres to
be minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the lands, 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 variance, subject to the following
conditions:
1. That this variance applies only to the proposed retained parcel as generally sited
and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans.
2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by
October 14, 2016, or this decision shall become null and void.
Background
The applicant has submitted a Consent Application (LD 09112014) to the Region of
Durham Land Division Committee for the subject property in order to create one
additional residential lot along Fiddlers Court. In support of the Consent Application, the
owner has requested a minor variance to reduce the minimum lot frontage requirement
for the retained parcel from 18.0 metres to 16.0 metres.
Approval of this Minor Variance Application will allow the owner to create two
developable lots fronting Fiddlers Court.
Report PICA 93/14 October 15, 2014
Comment
Official Plan and Zoning By-law
Pickering Official Plan -"Urban Residential -Low Density Areas" within the
Rougemount Neighbourhood
Zoning By-law 3036-"R3"-Detached Dwelling (Third Density Residential Zone)
Appropriateness of the Application
Reduction in Lot Frontage
Page 2
• the intent of the minimum lot frontage requirement is to ensure a usable lot size
that is compatible with the neighbourhood
• the proposed retained parcel is approximately 19.0 metres in width at the rear of
the lot
• due to the requirement for a daylight triangle, the owner is requesting the minimum
lot frontage for the proposed retained parcel be reduced from 18.0 metres to
16.0 metres
• the proposed retained parcel with a reduced lot frontage will provide an adequate
landscaped area, and parking will continue to be provided within the front yard
• the proposed retained lot is appropriately sized and will be consistent with the
character of the established neighbourhood along Fiddlers Court
• the severed and retained parcels will comply with all other zoning provisions such
as lot coverage, lot depth, and side yard requirements
• the requested variance to reduce the minimum lot frontage is minor in nature and
maintains the intent and purpose of the Official Plan, Rougemount Neighbourhood
Development Guidelines and the Zoning By-law
Date of report: October 8, 2014
Comments prepared by:
D~(J.
-c;;;a ~aray, MCIP, RPP
Planner II
LP:NS:Id
J:\Documents\Development\D-3700\2014 \PC A 93-14\Report\PCA 93_14.doc
Enclosures
Nilesh Surti, MCIP, RPP
Manager, Development Review & Urban Design
33
34
HOWELL El
CRESCENT
~
City Development
Department
ST. MONICA :5'
SEPARATE SCHOOL
FILE No: PICA 93/14
APPLICANT: C. Annable
lan 228 Pt Lot 12,
DATE: Sept. 21, 2014
0
<(
0
0:::
<( z
0 1--_.J
<(
E -.:t:
00 ......
City Development
Department
FIDDLERS COURT
12.6m
PROPOSED
DWELLING
L _________ ...J
PROPOSED
RETAINED
PARCEL
19. m
Submitted Plan
FILE No: P/CA 93/14
APPLICANT: C. Annable
E
0
("'")
("'")
18.0m
To permit a minimum lot
frontage of 16.0 metres
PROPOSED
SEVERED
PARCEL
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: 1435Aitona Road (Plan 228 Pt Lot 12,
40R-11813 Part 6)
35
FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING
CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DATE: Sept. 25, 2014
From:
Subject:
Applications
Nilesh Surti, MCIP, RPP
---------------------
Report to
Committee of Adjustment
Application Number: PICA 96114 & PICA 97114
Meeting Date: October 15, 2014
Manager, Development Review & Urban Design
Committee of Adjustment Applications PICA 96114 & PICA 97114
Maddy Developments Inc.
578 & 580 Oakwood Drive
PICA 96114 (580 Oakwood Drive}
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended, to permit a
maximum lot coverage of 38 percent; whereas the by-law permits a maximum lot
coverage of 33 percent.
PICA 97114 (578 Oakwood Drive}
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended, to permit a
maximum lot coverage of 38 percent; whereas the by-law permits a maximum lot
coverage of 33 percent.
The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain building permits to
facilitate the development of two lots for detached dwellings.
Recommendation PICA 96114 (580 Oakwood Drive}
The City Development Department considers a maximum lot coverage of 38 percent to
be minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the lands, 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 variance, subject to the following
conditions:
1. That this variance applies only to the proposed dwelling as generally sited and
outlined on the applicant's submitted plans.
2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by
October 14, 2016, or this decision shall become null and void.
Recommendation PICA 97114 (578 Oakwood Drive}
The City Development Department considers a maximum lot coverage of 38 percent to
be minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the lands, 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 variance, subject to the following
conditions:
1. That this variance applies only to the proposed dwelling as generally sited and
outlined on the applicant's submitted plans.
Report PICA 96114 & PICA 97114 October 15, 2014
2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by
October 14, 2016, or this decision shall become null and void.
Comment
Official Plan and Zoning By-law
Page 2
Pickering Official Plan -"Urban Residential -Low Density Areas" within the Rosebank
Neighbourhood
Zoning By-law 2511 -"R4"-Fourth Density Residential Zone
Appropriateness of the Application
Increase in Lot Coverage
• the intent of the maximum lot coverage provision is to ensure that the overall
size, scale and massing of a dwelling is appropriate for the lot size and to ensure
an adequate amount of outdoor amenity area remains uncovered by buildings on
a lot
• the increase in lot coverage from 33 to 38 percent will not change the character
of these properties or the area
• staff are of the opinion that the proposed development will maintain a sufficient
amount of outdoor amenity area that will remain uncovered and unobstructed on
each lot and will provide for the appropriate development of the land as the size
and massing of the proposed dwellings will be in keeping with the character of
the surrounding neighbourhood
• the requested increase in lot coverage is minor in nature and will meet the intent
and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law
Input From Other Sources
Engineering & Public Works
Building Services
Date of report: October 8, 2014
Comments prepared by:
\/ ~/
Deepak Bhatt, MCIP, RPP
Planner II
DB:MM:Id
• no concerns
• no concerns or comments
Nilesh urti, MCIP, RPP
Manager, Development Review & Urban Design
J:\Documents\Development\D-3700\2014\PCA 96-14 & PCA 97-14\Report\PCA 96-14 & PCA 97-14t.doc
Enclosures
37
3~
Cit~J"I ~~ rmmc
City Development
Department
-------------------
l I
~~~t=~~~------~
t----1------1 Cl::
1------t------l =s t-----1------l
1------+----l I t-----1------l
t-----1------l 0 1-----1------1 ;'!i t-----1------l
SCALE 1 :5,000
PICA 96114
To permit a maximum lot
coverage of 38 percent
' ~\ 32.S. ' •
-·--··-···--~~:. ............ J ..... \\:::···~--~---....-~--2-3-.7--~~~=-·=· =···=···=· =--·=-=--=--·=·--=-~-___, I .r-.,'----4 I'
7.9 i/ . ! 8.1
! ' l
I'
0 It)
! I
PROPOSED
DWELLING
i i H-----~~--~~~ 7.6 It) ,... I ! i Oi' 0 ~
i i i i i --·------·---··-------··-----~ f-~-~---------;------'-+------··---·--------------···-"
I ..r a 32.5
I i 8.7 ~ 23.7 i
-------------··-·---··----·+· n ir---,...-----------..Lt-·---··-------=--··--·-
0 It) ,...
7.9
I ! i i
I i I i I i !
I
PROPOSED
DWELLING
--------~-~-=LO"E=...I __ -_L------...:ll=i======.·-==1 .. , I =
PICA 97114
To permit a maximum lot
coverage of 38 percent
Submitted Plan
FILE No: P/CA 96/14 & P/CA 97/14
APPLICANT: Maddy Developments Inc.
w >
0:::
0
0
0
0 s: ~
<(
0
1'
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: 578 & 580 Oakwood Drive (Pt Lt 66, Plan 350,
City Development
Department 40R-28284 Pt 5, 8 & Pt Lt 66, Plan 350, 40R-28284 Pt 4, 7)
FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING
CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DATE: Sept. 26, 2014