HomeMy WebLinkAboutMay 31, 2017
pickering.ca
Committee of Adjustment
Agenda
Meeting Number: 7
Date: Wednesday, May 31, 2017
For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Samantha O’Brien
T. 905.420.4660, extension 2023
Email sobrien@pickering.ca
Agenda
Committee of Adjustment Wednesday, May 31, 2017 7:00 pm Council Chambers
Page Number
(I) Adoption of Agenda
(II) Adoption of Minutes from May 10, 2017 1-14
(III) Reports
1. (Deferred March 29, 2017)
P/CA 20/17 B. Knight 826 Fairview Avenue
15-22
2. (Deferred May 10, 2017)
P/CA 30/17
D.L. Gray & A. J. Lepp 1282 Commerce Street
23-28
3. (Deferred May 10, 2017) P/CA 31/17
B. & R. Huckstep
1321 Forest Park Drive
29-36
4. P/CA 37/17 A. Ahmed 736 Hillview Crescent
37-41
5. P/CA 38/17
C. Annable 303 Fiddlers Court
42-46
6. P/CA 39/17 D. Kawall
1650 Pepperwood Gate
47-53
7. P/CA 40/17 Mattamy (Seaton) Limited 1024 Reflection Place
54-57
Agenda May 31, 2017 Committee of Adjustment
Page 2 of 2
For information related to accessibility requirements please contact:
Samantha O’Brien
T. 905.420.4660, extension 2023 Email sobrien@pickering.ca
Page Number
8. P/CA 41/17
2450734 Ontario Inc. 1555 Kingston Road
58-67
9. P/CA 42/17 K. Strezov 661 Front Road
68-73
10. P/CA 43/17
C. & J. Estrela 1435 Highbush Trail
74-78
(IV) Other Business
1. Appointment of Secretary-Treasurer
(V) Adjournment
Committee of Adjustment 1
Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, May 10, 2017
7:03pm
Council Chambers
Pending Adoption
Present
Tom Copeland -Vice-Chair
David Johnson -Chair
Eric Newton
Denise Rundle
Sean Wiley
Also Present
Nilesh Surti, Manager, Development Review & Urban Design
Lesley Dunne, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer
Samantha O'Brien, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer
Deborah Wylie, Principal Planner---Development Review; Observer
(I) Adoption of Agenda
Moved by Tom Copeland
Seconded by Eric Newton
That the agenda for the Wednesday, May 10, 2017 meeting be adopted.
(II) Adoption of Minutes
Moved by Eric Newton
Seconded by Tom Copeland
Carried Unanimously
That the minutes of the 5th meeting of the Committee of Adjustment held
Wednesday, April19, 2017 be adopted.
Carried Unanimously
Page 1 of 14
2 -Cdj~f
P1CKER1NG
(Ill) Reports
1. (Tabled March 8, 20 17)
PICA 14/17
C. & J. Spicer
1488 Old Forest Road
Moved by Eric Newton
Seconded by Tom Copeland
Committee of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, May 10, 2017
7:03pm
Council Chambers
That application PICA 14/17 by C. & J. Spicer be lifted from the table.
Carried Unanimously
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended, to permit a
minimum flankage yard setback of 1.2 metres, whereas the by-law requires a minimum
flankage yard setback of 4.5 metres.
The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit for a
new two-storey detached dwelling.
The Manager, Development Review & Urban Design outlined the staff recommendation
from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions.
· Written comments were received from the City's Engineering Services Department
indicating that the.City does not support the use of a reverse grade driveway due to
concerns with flooding from the roadway during a major storm event, and suggested
that the applicant consider a driveway entrance from Highbush Trail and a garage
entrance from the rear of the dwelling. Engineering Services also indicated that they do
not support the cabling of trees on City lands as recommended in the Tree Preservation
Plan. During a site visit conducted by Engineering Services, it was recognized that
many of the trees within the boulevard are leaning to the north and may encroach on
any structure that is constructed closer to the roadway, and recommended to remove
seven trees within the Highbush Trail municipal boulevard. Engineering Services has
requested a financial compensation based on a draft tree compensation policy of
$500.00 per tree up to a maximum of $3,000.00.
Written comments were also received from Marianne Yazbeck of 1490 Old Forest Road
expressing concerns with the removal of trees that run along the north side of the
subject site, and the relocation of the existing fence on the north side of the subject site
closer to their property.
David Brown, agent, was present to represent the application. Marianne Yazbeck of
1490 Old Forest Road was present in objection to the application ..
Page 2 of 14
Committee of Adjustment 3
.Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, May 10, 2017
7:03pm
Council Chambers
David Brown explained that a topographical survey has been obtained. He also stated
that the Owners have spoken with Marianne Yazbeck since the March 8, 2017 meeting
to discuss the minimum flankage yard setback proposal and that it would not have a
negative impact on her property.
Marianne Yazbeck also spoke to the correspondence that was previously submitted in
opposition to the application where she expressed concerns with the removal of trees,
fence relocation, loss of rear yard access, drainage of reverse grade driveway and
construction vehicles.
In response to questions from Committee Members, David Brown stated that the
replacement fence would be located 0.3 of a metre to 0.45 of a metre east of its current
location. He also stated that the slope of the reverse grade driveway is 10 percent with
·strip drain in front of the garage. David Brown indicated that there will be four trees
removed and adequate landscaping will be installed.
In response to questions from Committee Members, the Manager, Development Review
& Urban Design stated that the City does not have a private tree-cutting by-law and the
property owners do have the right to remove trees any existing tree wholly located on
their property. The discrepancy regarding the location of the mutual fence is also a civil
·matter between the property owners and both owner are encourage to obtain a property
determine the location of the mutual fence. He also stated that drainage issues will be
reviewed by the City's Engineering Services Department at the building permit stage
and that all drainage is to be contained on the subject site.
Moved by Denise Rundle
Seconded by Eric Newton
That application PICA 14/17 by C. & J. Spicer, be Approved on the grounds that the
minimum flankage yard setback of 1.2 metres is 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 applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by
May 10, 2018, or this decision shall become null and void.
2. That the applicant provide to the City $3,000.00 for the purpose of replanting seven
trees located on the municipal boulevard, prior to the issuance of a building permit.
3. That the applicant reimburse the City's full cost for the removal of seven trees on the
municipal boulevard, prior to the issue of a building permit.
Carried Unanimously
Page 3 of 14
4 -~~~
PlCKERlNG
2. .PICA 28/17
Grossi Group Building Corporation Inc.
305 Sparrow Circle
Block 1
Committee of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, May 10, 2017
7:03pm
Council Chambers
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 4645/95
and By-law 6637/06:
• to permit a maximum lot coverage of 60 percent; whereas the by-law requires a
maximum lot coverage of 53 percent
• to permit a minimum front yard depth of 4.0 metres; whereas the by-law requires a
minimum front yard depth of 6.0 metres
• to permit covered platforms (porches and balconies) to project up to a maximum of-
1.0 metre beyond the building envelope as illustrated on Schedule I to By-law
4645/95; whereas the by-law permits steps, uncovered platforms, or landscaping
features not exceeding 1.5 metres in height to project outside of the required
building envelope as illustrated on Schedule I to By-law 4645/95
Block 2
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 4645/95
and By-law 6637/06:
• to permit a minimum front yard depth of 4.5 metres; Whereas the by-law requires a
minimum front yard depth of 6.0 metres
Block 3
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 4645/95
and By-law 6637/06:
• to permit a minimum front yard depth of 4.5 metres; whereas the by-law requires a ·
minimum front yard depth of 6.0 metres
• to permit one private garage per dwelling unit attached to the main building to be
located not less than 5.9 metres from the front lot line; whereas the by-law requires
that there shall be provided and maintained on the lot one private garage per
dwelling uriit attached to the main building and located not less than 6.0 metres from
the front lot line and not less than 6.0 metres from any side lot line immediately
adjoining a street or abutting a reserve _on the· opposite side of which is a street
• to permit a covered platform (porches) to project up to a maximum of 1.8 metres
beyond the building envelope as illustrated on Schedule I to By-law 4645/95;
whereas the by-law permits steps, uncovered platforms, or landscaping features not
exceeding 1.5 metres in height to project outside of the required building envelope·
as illustrated on Schedule I to By-law 4645/95
Page 4 of 14
-Cdf;~f
P1CKER1NG
5 · Committee of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, May 10, 2017
7:03pm
Council Chambers
• to permit a building to be located 0.3 of a metre beyond the building envelope as
illustrated on Schedule I to By-law 4645/95; whereas the by-law requires buildings
and structures to be located entirely within the building envelope as illustrated on
Schedule I to By-law 4645/95
Common Element
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 4645/95
and By-law 6637/06:
• to permit visitor parking areas to be set back a minimum of 0.5 of a metre from all
lot lines; whereas the by-law requires all visitor parking areas not located within a
parking structure to be set back a minimum of 3.0 metres from all lot lines
The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain. Site Plan Approval
to permit a common element condominium development consisting of 27 townhouse
units.
The Manager, Development Review & Urban Design outlined the staff recommendation
from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions.
Written comments were received from the City's Engineering Services Department
expressing no comments on the application.
Written comments were also received from a resident of 340 Chickadee Court
expressing concerns with a potential vehicular access onto Chickadee Court. She also
expressed concern with the over development of the subject property ·and future impact
on the Altona Forest ecosystem.
Michael Testaguzza, agent, was present to represent the application. Jim Keating of
355 Chickadee Court was present to address concerns with. development in this
neighbourhood.
Michael Testaguzza explained that his client is in agreement with staff's
recommendation and has no objections with the recommended conditions of approval.
Jim Keating expressed concerns with pedestrian safety, traffic and sidewalk along
Altona Road. Jim Keating also expressed a concern with the proposed "knock-down
barrier" onto Chickadee Court.
In response to questions from the Committee Members, Michael Tesaguzza stated
there will be a semi-private common element sidewalk for pedestrian access from
Chickadee Court through the subject property to Altona Road. He also stated that the
bollards are designed withlock and key to accommodate emergency vehicles, which is
in keeping with best practices.
Page 5 of 14
6 -Cdj~f
P1CKER1NG
Committee of Adjustment·
Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, May 10, 2017
7:03pm
Council Chambers
In response to questions from Committee Members, the Manager, Development Review
& Urban Design stated that traffic concerns can be addres~ed at the Site Plan Approval
stage, and Jim Keating is encouraged to meet with City staff and his respective Ward 3
Councillor to retrieve more information and clarification on the Site Plan process. ·
Moved by Sean Wiley
Seconded by Tom Copeland
That application PICA 28/17 by Grossi Group Building Corporation Inc., be Approved
on the grounds that the requested variances 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 development, as generally sited
and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans.
2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by
May 10, 2018, or this decision shall become null and void.
3. PICA 29/17
· B. Mason & K. Nhan
5025 William Street
Carried Unanimously
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3037, as amended to permit a
minimum front yard setback of 6.9 metres; whereas the by-law requires a minimum front
yard setback of 9.0 metres.
The applicant requests approval of this variance application in order to obtain a building
permit to construct an addition to the existing dwelling.
The Manager, Development Review & Urban Design outlined the staff recommendation
from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions.
Written comments were received from the City's Engineering Services Department
expressing no comments on the application. Written comments were also received
from Durham Region Environmental Health Division expressing no objection to the
application.
Ellen Mason, agent, was present to represent the application. No further representation
. was present in favour of or in objection to the application.
Page 6 of 14
Committee of Adjustment 7
Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, May 10, 2017
7:03pm
Council Chambers
In response to questions from ·committee Members, Ellen Mason stated the minor
variance was requested to create an addition to the single detached dwelling to
increase habitable space. She also stated that the property was built in 1880 and it is
not on the City's Heritage Register as a listed or designated property. Ellen Mason also
indicated that the proposed addition will be recessed back from the original dwelling
with different cladding to maintain the character of the neighbourhood.
Moved by Tom Copeland
Seconded by Denise Rundle
That application PICA 29117 by B. Mason & K. Nhan, be Approved on the grounds that
the minimum front yard setback of 6.9 metres, is 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 apply only to the proposed addition, as generally sited and
. outlined on the applicant's submitted plans.
2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by
May 10, 2019, or this decision shall become null and void.
4. PICA 30117
D. L. Gray & A J. Lepp
1282 Commerce Street
Carried Unanimously
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended:
• to recognize a minimum lot frontage of 10.2 metres, whereas the by-law requires a
minimum 'lot frontage of 15.0 metres
• to recognize a minimum lot area of 455 square metres, whereas the by-law requires
a minimum lot area of 460 square metres
• to permit a covered second-storey balcony and an uncovered third-storey balcony to
project a maximum of 3.0 metres and 1.5 metres, respectively, into the required front
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 front yard
The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit
for the construction of a new three-storey detached dwell.ing.,
The Manager, Development Review & Urban Design outlined the staff recommendation
from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions.
Page 7 of 14
8 -04;~1~
PlCKERlNG
Committee of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, May 10, 2017
7:03pm
Council Chambers
Written comments were received from the City's Engineering Services Department
expressing no comments on the application.
Written comments were received from a resident of 1280B Commerce Street
expressing concerns with the minimum lot frontage, the minimum lot area, as well as
the proposed height and projections of the second and third-story balconies, which are
located beside her single-storey bungalow.
Written comments were also received from residents of 1284 and 1286 Commerce
Street expressing concern with the proposed covered second-storey balcony and
uncovered third-storey balcony height projectioning into the the front yard, which would
impact their views of the bay for the residents to the east.
Dylan Gray, applicant, was present to represent the application. No further
·representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application.
In response to questions from Committee Members, Dylan Gray stated that he intends
to demolish the existing detached dwelling and construct a new detached dwelling.
The requested minor variance application is for second and third-story balcony
projections into the front yard. He also stated that the proposed third-storey uncovered
balcony is not the first one in the neighbourhood, but rather the first one along
Commerce Street facing the roadway.
Moved by Denise Rundle
Seconded by Eric Newton
That application PICA 30117 by D. L. Gray & A. J. Lepp, be Deferred to the next
Committee of Adjustment meeting to allow the Committee Members to visit the subject
property.
Carried Unanimously
5. PICA 31117
B. & R. Huckstep
1321 Forest Park Drive
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 1103180:
• to permit an accessory buildin,g (shed) in the flankage side yard; whereas the by-law
requires all accessory buildings, which are not part of the main building, shall be
erected in the rear yard
Page 8 of 14
-alj~f-.
P1CKER1NG·
Committee of Adjustment 9
Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, May 10, 2017
7:03pm
Council Chambers
• to permit an uncovered platform (deck) and associated steps not exceeding
1.0 metre in height above grade to project a maximum of 5.9 metres into the
required rear yard; whereas the by law permits uncovered steps and platforms not
exceeding 1.0 metre iri height above grade to project a maximum of 1.5 metres into
the required rear yard
The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to permit an uncovered
platform (deck) in the rear yard, and an accessory structure (shed) in the flankage side
yard.
The Manager, Development Review & Urban Design outlined the staff recommendation
from the City Development Department recommending Refusal for an existing
uncovered platform (deck) and associated steps and recommending Approval for an
accessory building (shed) subject to conditions.
Written comments were received from the City's Engineering Services Department
stating that the property has a 2.0 metre wide municipal easement" across the entire
length of the rear lot line. No structures are permitted to be located within the municipal
easement, where the existing deck encro.aches into the easement, and this portion must
be removed.
Written comments were also received from David Craighill of 1323 Forest Park Drive
expressing concerns with the lack of building permit for the existing deck; the platform
deck projecting along the north/east lot lines increasing noise levels; loss of privacy;
visual impact from high fence addition; location of patio furniture along the north lot line
too close to the north property line; and location of the Notice of Public Hearing sign
difficult for area residents to read.
Bonnie & Ron Huckstep, applicants, were present to represent the application. David
Craighill of 1323 Forest Park Drive was present in objection to the application.
Bonnie & Ron Huckstep explained their application and stated they are willing to work
with the City to bring the deck into compliance and remove the portion of the deck which
encroaches into the municipal easement.
David Craighill also spoke to the correspondence that was previously submitted in
opposition to the application.
Moved by Eric Newton
Seconded byTom Copeland
That application PICA 31/17 by B. & R. Huckstep, be Deferred to the next Committee of
Adjustment meeting to allow the Committee Members to vi:;>it the subject property.
Carried Unanimously
Page 9 of 14
10·--~bf--
P1CKER1NG
6. PICA 32117
J. Painter & A. Gill
5455 Sideline 4
Committee of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, May 10, 2017
7:03pm
Council Chambers
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by By-law 6640106
to permit an accessory building (detached garage) having a maximum area of
125 square metres; whereas the by-law requires that no accessory buildipg shall
exceed 1 0 square metres in area.
The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit to
construct a detached garage.
The Manager, Development Review & Urban Design outlined the staff recommendation
from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions.
Written comments were received from the City's Engineering Services Department
expressing no comments on the application. Written comments were also received
from the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority expressing no comments on the
application.
Jim Painter & Anna Gill, applicants, were present to represent the application. No
further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application.
In response to a question from a Committee Member, Jim Painter and Anna Gill stated
the purpose of the detached garage is for additional storage and to replace a previously
existing barn.
Moved by Tom Copeland
Seconded by Eric Newton ·
· That application PICA 32117 by J. Painter & A. Gill, be Approved on the grounds that
the requested variance is 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 apply only to the proposed 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
May 10, 2018, or this decision shall become null and void.
Carried Unanimously
Page 10 of 14
7. PICA 33117, PICA 34117 & PICA 35/17
M. Ghandour and L. & R. Farrell
1733 & 1737 Spruce Hill Road
Committee of Adjustment 11
. Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, May 10, 2017
7:03pm
Council Chambers
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended:
• to permit a minimum lot frontage of 15.3 metres; whereas the by-law requires a
minimum_ lot frontage of 18.0 metres
• to permit a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres; whereas the by-law requires
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 these variances in order to facilitate the
creation of one additional lot through the Region of Durham Land Division
Committee, and obtain building permits for the construction of three detached
dwellings.
The Manager, Development Review & Urban Design outlined the staff recommendation
from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions.
Written comments were received from the City's Engineering Services Department
expressing no comments on the application.
Written comments were received from a resident of 1748 Fairport Road expressing
concerns with the drainage and the impact of runoff; and the loss of mature trees in the
rear yards of the dwellings. The resident of 17 48 Fairport Road would like to see the
natural environment in the rear yards maintained; mature trees outside of the area of
development maintained; and the existing grade preserved.
Written comments were also received from Penelope Lee of 1731 Spruce Hill Road
expressing concerns with the side yard width variance for Proposed Lot 1 (PICA 33117);
proximity between dwellings would present a potential fire hazard; large dwelling would
accommodate more occupants increasing noise and pollution from vehicles; location of
the proposed driveway; location of an air conditioning unit; potential environmental
impacts to the trees in the rear yard; and economic loss from poor drainage.
Mohammed Khan, agent, was present to represent the application. Penelope Lee of
1731 Spruce Hill Road was present in objection to the application.
Mohammed Khan explained the application and stated that the purpose of the
requested variances is to facilitate the creation of three single detached dwellings that
maintain the existing character of the street.
Penelope Lee also s·poke to the correspondence that was previously submitted in
opposition to the application. ·
Page 11 of 14
12 ' 04;bi-
P1CKER1NG
Committee of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, May 10, 2017
7:03pm
Council Chambers
The Manager, Development Review & Urban Design stated that grading and drainage
concerns will be addressed at the building permit stage
In response to questions from a Committee Member and the concerns addressed by
Penelope Lee, Mohammed Khan stated that there will not be a loss of all mature trees
on the property; the property to the south of the subject lands has a retaining wall which
encroaches on the valley; drainage concerns will be improved through grading and
landscaping; the location of the air conditioning unit can be revised; and that the design
and location of the driveways and front yards are in keeping with the characteristic of
the neighbourhood. He also stated that the neighbouring property to the south was built
in approximately 1953, an extension was added in 2002, and Penelope Lee had
purchased the dwelling in 2003.
Moved by Denise Rundle
Seconded by Sean Wiley
A That application PICA 33117 (Proposed Lot 1) by M. Ghandour & L. & R. Farrell, to
permit the minimum lot frontage of 15.3 metres, be Approved as it is 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 applicant obtains final clearance for land severance applications
LD 065117 and LD 066117 by May 10, 2018 or this decision shall become null
and void.
2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed dwellings by
May 10, 2019, or this decision shall become null and void.
and
That application PICA 33117 (Proposed Lot 1) by M. Ghandour & L. & R. Farrell, to
permit the exterior south side yard width of 1 .5 metres be Refused as it is it does
.not meet the intent of the Zoning By-law and is not desirable for the appropriate
development of the land, in particular given the reduced distance separation
between the proposed dwelling and the existing dwelling to the south.
B. That application PICA 34117 (Proposed Lot 3) by M. Ghandour & L. & R. Farrell, be
Approved on the grounds that the minimum lot frontage of 15.3 metres and a
minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres 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 12 of 14
Committee of Adjustment 13
Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, May 10, 2017
7:03pm
Council Chambers
1. That th~ applicant obtains final clearance for land severance applications
LD 065/17 and LD 066/17 by May 10, 2018 or this decision shall become null
and void.
2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed dwellings by
May 10, 2019, or this decision shall become null and void.
C. That application PICA 35/17 (Proposed Lot 2) by M. Ghandoi.Jr & L. & R. Farrell, be
Approved on the grounds that the minimum lot frontage of 15.3 metres and a
minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres 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 applicant obtains final clearance for land severance applications
LD 065/17 and LD 066/17 by May 10, 2018 or this d~cision shall become null
and void.
2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed dwellings by
May 10, 2019, or this decision shall become null and void.
Carried Unanimously
Page 13 of 14
14
(IV) Adjournment
Moved by Eric Newton
Seconded by Denise Rundle
Committee of Adjustment
Meeting Minutes
Wednesday, May 10, 2017
7:03pm
Council Chambers
That the 6th meeting of the 2017 Committee of Adjustment be adjourned at 8:31 pm
and the next meeting of the Committee of Adjustment be held on
Wednesday, May 31, 2017.
Carried Unanimously
Date
Chair
Assistant Secretary-Treasurer
Page 14 of 14
15 Report to -~bf
P1CKER1NG. Committee of Adjustment
From:
Subject:
Application
Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP
Principal Planner -Development Review
Application Number: PICA 20117
Date: May 31,2017
Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 20117 -REVISED
B. Knight
. 826 Fairview Avenue
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended:
• to permit a minimum front yard setback of 2.2 metres; whereas, the by-law requires a
minimum front yard setback of 7.5 metres
• to permit a minimum north side yard width of 0.7 of a metre; whereas, the by-law
requires a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres on one side and 2.4 metres on the
other side, however where a garage (including a carport) is erected as part of the
dwelling, a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres is required on both sides
• to permit a minimum south side yard width of 0.9 of a metre; whereas, the by-law
requires a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres on one side and 2.4 m~tres on the
other side, however where a garage (including a carport) is erected as part of the
dwelling, a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres is required on both sides
• to permit an accessory structure .(Shed A) to be setback 0.6 of a metre from the north lot
line; whereas, the by-law requires accessory structures greater than 10 square metres
in area shall be set back a minimum of 1.0 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, a covered front porch, a carport, and to recognize an
accessory structure (Shed A) in the rear yard.
Recommendations
The City Development Department considers the minimum front yard setback of 2.2 metres,
the minimum north side yard width of 0.7 of a metre, the minimum south side yard width of
0.9 of a metre, and an accessory structure (Shed A) to be setback 0.6 of a metre from the
north lot line, 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 concept site plan, as generally sited and
outlined on the applicant's submitted plans.
16 Report PICA 20/17 May31,2017
Page 2
2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by May 31, 2019,
or this decision shall become null and void.
Background
On March 29, 2017, the Committee of Adjustment deferred the Minor Variance application in
order to allow the applicant time to provide an updated survey of the subject property, and to
allow staff to recirculate a revised Public Notice as it relates to the variances requested.
On May 3, 2017, the applicant submitted an updated survey of the subject property
(Exhibit# 3) and a revised site plan. The revised site plan illustrates the relocation of the
existing accessory structure (Shed A) from the south side yard lot line to the north rear· yard lot
line. Shed A is a group of accessory structures (two sheds with a middle roof) greater than
10.0 square metres in area. A variance is required for Shed A to b~ setback a minimum side yard
setback of 0.6 of a metre.
Comment
Official Plan and Zoning By-law
· Pickering Official Plan -"Urban Residential -Low Density Area" within the
Bay Ridges Neighbourhood
Zoning By-law 2511, as amendecj-"R4"-Fourth. Residential Zone
Appropriateness of the Application
Minimum Front Yard Setback Variance
• 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 By-law requires a minimum front yard setback of 7.5 metres
• the existing dwelling, covered vestibule and front porch was constructed in 1934 prior to
the enactment of Zoning By-law 2511 on January 3, 1963
• in 1967, the City expropriated an 8.3 metre wide road widening along Fairport Avenue
for culvert upgrade
• as a result the expropriation, the minimum front yard setback to the existing building
was reduce to 3.3 metres; therefore an additional variance is required to recognize the
existing front yard setback ·
• the existing -dwelling is .located 3.3 metres to the front lot line, with a wooden uncovered
porch setback 1.9 metres from the front lot line
• the app_licant is proposing to construct a second storey addition within the existing
building footprint, and replace the existing uncovered porch with a covered porch in the
front yard
• the new covered porch will be setback an additional 0.3 of a metre from the front lot line
Report PICA 20/17 May31,2017 17
Page 3
• the front yard setback requested is generally in keeping with the established front yard
setbacks and streetscape along Fairview Avenue
• the requested variance is minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of
the land and maintains the purpose and intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law
Recognize and Permit a North Side Yard Width Variance
• the intent of a side yard width is to provide an appropriate separation between
structures on abutting properties in order to maintain pedestrian access, and to
accommodate grading, drainage and residential services such as air conditioning units
and utility metres ·
. • the Zoning By-law requires a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres on one side and
2.4 metres on the other side, however where a garage or carport is erected as part of
the dwelling, a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres is required on both sides
• as noted above, the existing single storey dwelling was constructed in 1934 and is
currently setback 0.7 of a metre from the north lot line
• the side yard width of 0.7 of a metre on the ground floor is an existing condition, which
maintains an adequate separation distance between the dwelling and the north lot line
• the applicant intends to construct a second storey addition on top of the existing
dwelling, with the proposed second floor having a side yard width of 0.7 of a metre
• the proposed side yard width of 0.7 of a metre to the second floor is generally in
keeping with similar zoning performance standards applied to newer developments in
the general area
• the requested variance is minor in nature and maintains the intent of the Zoning By-law
South Side Yard Width Variance
• the intent of a side yard width is to provide an appropriate separation between
structures on abutting properties in order to maintain pedestrian access, and to
accommodate grading, drainage and residential services such as air conditioning units
and utility metres
• based on the applicant's updated survey and revised site plan, a variance is required to
reduce the minimum south side yard width from 1.5 metres to 0.9 of a metre ·
• the applicant is requesting to reduce the side yard width to permit the construction of an
unenclosed carport to be attached to the existing dwelling .
• the proposed 0.9 of a metre south side yard width provides an appropriate separation
distance between the dwellings and will maintain sufficient pedestrian access and
accommodate grading, drainage and residential services
• the proposed carport location is in keeping with the character of the neighbourhood as ·
many other properties on the street have similar carports
• the reduced side yard width will not alter the character of the subject property or
negatively impact adjacent properties
• the requested variance is minor in nature and maintains the intent of the Zoning By-law
18 Report PICA 20/17
Accessory Structure (Shed A) Setback from the North Lot Line Variance
May 31, 2017
Page4
• the intent of the minimum 1.0 metre setback requirement for accessory structures
greater than 10.0 square metres in area 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 By-law requires all accessory buildings greater than 10.0 square metres in area
shall be setback a minimum of 1.0 metre from all lot lines, and have a maximum height
of 3.5 metres
• Shed A is a group of accessory buildings (two sheds with a middle roof) greater than
10.0 square metres in area
• the existing accessory structure (Shed A) is 1.3 metres in height (to roof peak) and
5.0 metres in width, and is currently located 0.6 of a metre from the north lot line
• Shed A is below the maximum height requirement for an accessory structure, and is
adjacent to Frenchman's Bay
• the proposed 0.6 of a metre to the north lot line will provide for adequate space for
maintenance and drainage, sufficient pedestrian access, and an appropriate separation
distance between the shed and the adjacent property
• the requested variance is minor in nature and maintains the intent of the Zoning By-law
Input From Other Sources
Engineering Services • no comments on the application
Date of Report: May 25, 2017
Comments Prepared By:
-.
Lalita Paray, MCIP, RPP Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP
Planner I Principal Planner-Development Review
LP:Ic
J:\Documents\Development\0-3700\2017\PCA 20-17\Report\PCA 20-17 Report_ May 31 2017.docx
Attachments
SUBJECT
PROPERTY
-atp~f
PlCKERlNG
City Development
Department
Plan 814
Date: Mar. 14, 2017
PN-RU
To permit a minimum front ya.r .. d .. l I setback of 2.2 metres J 7.5· To permit a minimum south side yard width of 0.9 metres J ~-----------------~--, \ i . I ~ I l § I L~~~~~~~~~~----~1 I ~ I I ~ $ ~ ~ m 22.5 I m I I .-"' I ~~ ~ ~ I I "' ·-"' .P I 1\l ~ ~ ~· ;:;-I I ,..g z z o I 1 oz.,G> w I ~o~.,8 I -~., I I ~06l=ti 8 I !:18!)1 ,.~ ~~ i ' ~ "~-------~[)_JJ I ~ ~ I I --------: ----~---------t I =• -I I I s;: I ~ I ll 1 LOT2 1 _ : I metres from the north lot line I To permit a minimum north side yard width of 0. 7 metres J -Ct't;oJ-PJCKERJNG Submitted Plan FILE No: P/CA 20/17 APPLICANT: B. Knight PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Lot 3, Plan 814 (826 Fairview Avenue) ....... 0 './. City Development Department FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. J DATE:.May 16,2017 L:\PLANNINGICOREL\PLANNINGIAPPS\PCA\2017
co N 0 ·-I l5 ~ ::: ~ it ~ :IE " ,g_ FENCE w END u~ 0.1 WEST ~~~; ~ lt~~ 0 ~ s• i "~ & .... " e:.~ • :c: It) -b i5 ~ PiN 26J19-09JB ' /''\ -r-, ... L \../ I / ,_ ~ ~ ... ~ .~~~~y• ~~~~~N:, ~~~: L L • a co LOT 3 ::::: <( -1 Q PIN 26.319-0576 :00:: I'd Q i ~ < a:: ... ..... ,.; No. 826 1 STOREY I"RAME DWEI..UNG ~-· /I Revised o porch. ~~ May 11: ..:: n.. Date 1 I ~) m SIB Tf-i (1oos> 0. ~~ I') sis~ ti: " I n.: .... LL.J ~ ~ll 0-... ~ n . ...., -..J co ~ 12~ .JiSoL.t.Jo ~ s~ ~ ~ :S ~ ui "~I iE It')~~ -Q:IO ll.0co'~ 0 ..... -11> RET. WALL .., iio !!:: ~ ~ • ,.; 0.2:1: SOUn-t '1 -~ ~ ~ le :c: w co ~~iiiiii.li;;;;;;~~~~~~~~~=-=~-=-~~~-Lw-I I :c:$ ~ -l s ... -Cdpc/-PJCKERJNG City Development Department PIN 26319-0577 Submitted Survey Plan FILE No: P/CA 20/17 APPLICANT: B. Knight PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Lot 3, Plan 814 (826 Fairview Avenue) ' /''\ T L \../ I --------------------" .1.4-1 o; d ,re ~--..., ~ yl ~(k: s ~·~ I La..: ).. e I 1' FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. N DATE: May 16, 2017....., L:\PLANNING\COREL\PLANNING\APPS\PCA\2017
1-:-·:·: __ : __ ;;~~--;-j~--------::-..:-~:.~--~-~---==~~~-:_ __ : ___ ::p·-=~19 ~?~~:=~:~ ---~~~~ -~r\\J .:~fi~~4f~~~JW[~J~:: ~~~ ~·"'~t~~'!~!!ll J~!L=,~~·~=~~IJ T-..~ J:;L.;;;; ~; .. -_ .;;. .. c 7.-.. z~ 2!S-~ -----H _,,., , .. ! ' .·.d.· I•• .. · .. • _____ . ____ l ,L •. d, ·-•..J.J,•I • ·,L.L_, I,•.L __ ·2'-4 ~:·:-~~r~-::~ -~-=-=:·:;==t~::tr.;t;~~~~~-f~-:=-e;-~~~-:--~ -~~ -CdtJc/-PlCKERlNG City Development Department Submitted Elevations FILE No: P/CA 20/17 APPLICANT: B. Knight PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Lot 3, Plan 814 (826 Fairview Avenue) FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. L:\PLANNINGICOREL\PLANNINGIAPPS\PCA\2017 DATE: May 16,2017
-C~of
PlCKERl.NG
From: · Nilesh Surti, MCIP, RPP
Report to zs
Committee of Adjustment
Application Number: PICA 30117
Date: May 10, 2017
·Manager, Development Review & Urban Design
Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 30117
D.L. Gray & A.J. Lepp
1282 Commerce Street
Application
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended:
• to recognize a minimum lot frontage of 10.2 metres, whereas the by-law requires a
minimum lot frontage of 15.0 metres
• to recognize a minimum lot area of 455 squ.are metres, whereas the by-law requires a
minimum .lot area of 460 square metres
• to permit a covered second-storey balcony and an uncovered third-storey balcony to
project a maximum of 3.0 metres and 1.5 metres, respectively, into the required front
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 front yard
The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit for the
construction of a new three-storey detached dwelling.
Recommendation
The City pevelopment Qepartment considers a minimum lot frontage of 10.2 metres, a
minimum lot area of 455 square metres, and a covered second-storey balcony and an
uncovered third-storey balcony projecting a maximum of 3.0 metres and 1.5 metres,
respectively, into the required front yard, 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 development, as generally sited and
outlined on the applicant's submitted plans.
2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by
. May 10, 2019, or this decision shall become null and void.
( ---
24Report PICA 30/17
Comment
Official Pran and Zoning By-law ..
May 10,2017
Page2
Pickering Official Plan-"Urban Residential Areas-Low Density Areas" within the
Bay Ridges Neighbourhood
Zoning By-law 2511 -"R4"-Fourth Density Residential Zone
Appropriateness of the Appli.cation
Minimum Frontage a11d Minimum Lot Area
• the intent of the minimum lot frontage and minimum lot area requirements is to ensure a
-usable lot size that is compatible with the surrounding neighbourhood and is of a .
sufficient size to support the permitted use ·
• the by-law requires a minimum· lot frontage of 15.0 metres and a minimum lot area of
460 square metres
• the subject property currently has a minimum frontage of 10.2 metres and a minimum
lot area of 455 square metres.
• the lot was created prior to the passing of Zoning By-law 2511
• these variances will bring the existing legal non-complying lot into compliance with the
Zoning By-law
Covered Second-Storey and Uncovered Third-Storey Balcony Projecting into the Required
Front Yard ·
• the intent of the· maximum permitted projection of uncovered steps or platforms into the
required front yard is to accommodate a landing area and stairs, while ensuring an
appropriate setback is maintained within the front yard to provide an adequate
landscaped area and maintain a consistent streetscape
• the by-law permits uncovered platforms and steps not exceeding 1.0 metre in height
above grade to project a maximum of 1.5 metres into the required front yard
• the applicant is requesting a covered second-storey balcony a·nd uncoven:~d third-storey
balcony to project a maximum of 3.q metres and 1.5 metres, respectively, into the .
required front yard
• the proposed third-storey balcony will be located directly above the covered
second-storey balcony
• · the applicant is maintaining the required front yard depth of 7.5 metres between the
· front lot line and the nearest exterior wall of the dwelling
• the proposed second and third-storey balcony will provide additional usable private
amenity space in the front yard and will not result in any loss of the landscaped area
• the proposed second-storey balcony will be setback a minimum of 4.5 metres from the
front lot line
• front yard setbacks along Commerce Street range between 1.0 metre and 9.0 metres
• the setback of the second and third-storey balcony would fall within. the range of front
yard setbacks established along Commerce Street
Report PICA 30/17 May 10,2017 25
Page 3
• the proposed balcony projections will not alter the character of the neighbourhood and
would be consistent with the established streetscape along Commerce Street
• the requested variances are minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development
of the land and maintain the purpose and intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law
Input From Other Sources
Engineering Services • no comments on the application
Date of report: May 5, 2017
( __ . Comments prepared by:
Cod~so ---,, ___ _
PlanJ~---__J
..
Nilesh S rti, MCIP, RPP
Manager, Development Review & Urban Design
CM:NS:so.
J:\Documents\Development\D-3700\2017\PCA 30-17\Report\PCA 3Q-17 Report (Revised).docx
Attachments
6
-~o~
PJCKERJNG
City Development
Department e rporat1on of the City a PIC:Irenng P~uced fm l)ll;rt) unoer cense !JDm: OQueens rmter, Ontllno Mlrnsny of Natura esources.
PN-RU rlghhl ~erved..,-e Her Maj!lstythe Queen in Righi: of Cane~ Department of Natural ResourceL AD rights resetved.;
'Ter~net Enterprises I~ and ~ aupplle15 al riphN reserved..; C Municipal Property Asse3sment Cotporafion arnllts eupp!iers aJl riphls reserved.~
C'lJ C) ........ 24.6m to recognize a minimum lo area of 455 square metres -Cdt;of-P1CKER1NG Submitted Plan FILE No: P/CA 30/17 APPLICANT: D.L. Gray & A,J. Lepp . 17'1717 1.5 ni 17'1717 1-to permit a covered second-storey balcony and an uncovered third storey balcony not exceeding 3.0 metres and 1.5 metres, respectively, into the required front yard ~"~~~~"~~~~"~~~~~~~-~~~~-~-~~LUG~· •om• M I K,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,y,,,,,,,. -· I I 4.5m (\j C) ........ ~~ City Development Department PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Plan 65 Block B Part Lot 4 (1282 Commerce St) ....... Q.) ~ ....... en Q.) e Q.) E E 0 () FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. DATE: April24, 2017 .....,J
-04cJ-Pl(KERJNG City Development Department ICJIII=::JIIi=:JIII=:JI 888Brm1 DODD Submitted Plan · FILE No: P/CA 30/17 APPLICANT: D.L. Gray & A.J. Lepp PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Plan 65 Block 8 Part Lot 4 (1282 Commerce St) FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CI1Y OF PICKERING CI1Y DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. N 00 DATE: April24, 2017
-0%61-
PJCKERlNG
From: Nilesh Surti, MCIP, RPP
. Report to · 29
Committee of Adjustment
Application Number: PICA 31117
Date:· May 10, 2017
Manager, Development Review & Urban Design
Subject:
Application
Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 31117
B. & R. Huckstep
132.1 Forest Park Road
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 1103180:
• to permit an accessory building (shed) in the flankage side yard; whereas the by-law
requires all accessory buildings, which are not part of the main building, shall be erected
in the rear yard
• to permit an uncovered platform (deck) and associated steps not exceeding 1.0 metre in
height above grade to project a maximum of 5.9 metres into the required rear yard;
whereas the by law permits uncovered steps and 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 these variances in order to permit an uncovered platform
(deck) in the rear yard, and an accessory structure (shed) in the flankage side yard.
Recommendation
The City Development Department considers an accessory building (shed) that is not part of
the main building to be located in the required flankage side yard 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 variance, subject to the following conditions:
1. That this variance apply only to the accessory building (shed), as generally sited and
outlined on the applicant's submitted plan.
And
The City Development Department considers an existing an uncovered platform (deck) and
associated steps not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade to project a maximum of
5.9 metres into the required ·rear yard, to be a major variance, that is not considered to be
desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and therefore recommends Refusal of
the proposed variance.
or
\
3CReport PICA 31/17 May 10, 2017
Page2
If the applicant were to request that the application.be amended to permit a proposed
uncovered platform (deck) and associated steps not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above
grade to project a maximum of 5.5 metres into the required rear yard, the following
recommendation would apply: ·
The City Development Department considers the proposed uncovered platform (deck) and
associated steps not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade to project a maximum of
5.5 metres into the required rear yard 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 variance,
subject to the following recommendation would apply:
1. That this variance apply only to the proposed uncovered platform (deck) and associated
stairs as illustrated the applicant's submitted plan.
2. That applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed platform (deck) and associated
stairs by May 10, 2018, or this decision shall become null and void.
Background .
The Notice of Public Hearing, which was sent to residents within 60.0 metres of the subject site
on April 26, 2017, stated that the applicant was requesting to permit-an uncovered platform
(deck) not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade to project a maximum of 7.4 metres into
the required rear yard. Upon further review of the Zoning By-law provisions and the requested
variance, the applicant is seeking to permit an uncovered platform (deck) not exceeding 1.0
metre in height above grade to project a maximum of 5.9 metres into the required rear yard.
The applicant' has indicated that the existing uncovered platform (deck) was constructed in 2016.
·The existing deck is setback zero metres from the north lot line and 1.6 metres from the rear yard
lot line (see Exhibit #2).
On August23, 2016, the City's By-law Enforcement Division received a complaint from an area
resident regarding Gonstruction noi.se and privacy concerns. Based on staff's review, the owner did
not obtain a· building permit for the existing deck. . ·
On April13, 2017, City Development staff met with the owner to discuss the existing deck. The
applicant has agreed to provide a minimum setback of 0.6 of a metre from the north lot line
(see Exhibit #3). ·
A 2.0 metre wide municipal easement (Part 5 of 40R-7679) is registered on title along the rear lot
for drainage purposes. The existing deck currently encroaches 0.4 of a metre onto the ·
municipal easement.
Report P/CA-31/17 May 10,2011
Comment
Official Plan and Zoning By-law
Pickering Official Plan-"Urban Residential-LowOensity Area" within the
Liverpool Neighbourhood
· Zoning By-law 3036,_ as amended by By-law 1103/80-"S2" Single Residential Zone
Appropriateness of the Application
Accessory Structure in the Flankage Side Yard Variance
Page 3
• the by-law further requires all accessory structures and building to be located in the rear yard
• the intent of the requirement for accessory structures to be locateq in the rear yard is to
maintain a visually attractive streetscape, maintain adequate buffer space between
buildings on a property and street activity, and avoid adverse impact on the streetscape
• in 2015, the applicant erected the existing accessory building (shed) 0.3 of a metre from
the south lot line (flankage side yard) to store pool equipment and outdoor furniture
(see Exhibit #2)
• the applicant has agreed to relocate the shed a minimum of.1.0 metre from the south lot
line, which is in keeping the minimum setback requirements for accessory buildings in
the zoning by-law (see Exhibit #3) .
• the proposed location of the shed in the flankage side yard will not negatively impact the.
streetscape as it is screened by an existing 1.8 metre high wood privacy fence
• the requested variance is minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of
the land and maintains the intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law
Deck Projecting into the Required Rear Yard Variance
• the intent of this provision is to ensure appropriate setbacks are provided to protect the
privacy of abutting property owners as well as to provide appropriate setbacks for
access, maintenance, lot grading and drainage .
• the by-law permits uncovered platforms and steps not exceeding 1.0 metre in height
above grade to project a maximum of 1.5 metres into the required rear yard
• the applicant is requesting an uncovered platform (deck) not exceeding 1.0 metre in
height above grade to project a maximum of 5.9 metres· into the required rear yard
• the existing deck wraps around a swimming pool, and is setback zero metres from the
north lot line and 1.6 metres from the east lot line
• along the east lot line is an existing 2.0 metre wide municipal easement for drainage
purposes, and no structures are permitted to be located within the easement area
• the existing deck and footings currently encroaches 0.4 of a metre onto the
municipal easement
• staff do not support a maximum platform projection of 5.9 metres in to the required rear · ·
yard as a portion of the deck encroaches onto a municipal easement
• staff are supportive of a uncovered platform with a minimum setback of 0.6 of metre from
the north lot line and a minimum setback of 2.0 metres from the east lot line
31
32Report PICA 31/17 May 10, 2017
Page4
• staff's recommended setbacks will ensure an appropriate area is provided between the
deck and the lot lines to accommodate future maintenance, pedestrian access, grading and
drainage
• the proposed s~tbacks will also provide sufficient separation from the north and east lot
lines to minimize concerns related to privacy and overlook
• a revised variance to permit an uncovered platform to project a maximum of 5.5 metres into
the required rear yard is minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the
land· and is in keeping with the general intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law
Input From Other Sources
Engineering Services • there is a 2.0 metre wide municipal easement across the
entire length of the rear lot line
• no structures are permitted to be located within the
municipal easement
• the existing deck encroaches into the easement;
therefore, the portion of the deck encroaching must be
removed
1323 Forest Park Drive • expressed concerns regarding:
Date of Report: M<w 5, 2017
Co~ments Prepared By:
. .. .. · .. _:_:=:r ;:>2'
. ~· ra.rc?-"' Lalita Paray, MCI , RP.P
Planner I
.LP:NS:Ic
o existing deck platform projections along the
north/east lot lines have resulted in increased
noise levels (especially during the summer months),
visual impact (high privacy fencing), loss of privacy
and enjoyment of rear yard amenity area
o the deck construction abutting the common fence
without a building permit; existing platform should be
removed
o the location patio furniture along the north lot line is
too close to the north property line
o large gatherings and loud parties during the summer
months around the pool
o .the location of the Notice of Hearing public notice sign
was too close to the front porch making it difficult to
read by ar a resi nts
Nilesh Surti, MCIP, RPP
· Manag r, Development Review & Urban Design
J:\Dpcuments\Development\D-3700\2017\PCA 31-17\Report\PCA 31_1? Report..docx
Attachments
·-~D~
PICKERING
City Development
Department
33
-
1---
r--
--~
Location Ma
File: PICA 31/17
(1321 Forest Park Drive) Date: A r. 18, 2017
SCALE: 1:5,000 PN-RU
--otp~f-
P1CKER1NG
City Development
Department
EKt57 1.1/~
Submitted Plan -Existing
FILE No: P/CA 31/17
APP.LICANT:' B. & R. Huckste
+-Municipal
Drainage
Easement
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Plan 40M1267 Block 42,59
(1321 Forest Park Drive)
FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING .
CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. . DATE: Apr. 25, 2017
~================================================~s
f-Ju'·~
' .\
/ .. ~
t;;:;:;~r--.-:.
wa+tT I, "111 ..
Municipal
-+-Drainage
Ease merit
~=--:::;;7~-iiJijijjijjiiiji~ijij~~-~~ to permit a platform (deck) not exceeding 1.0 metre in height
--~ti-
PlCKERlNG
City Development
Department
J'' above grade to project up to a
maximum of 5.9 metres into
the ired rear
Submitted Plan
FILE No: P/CA 31/17
APPLICANT: B. & R. Huckste
PROPERTY PESCRIPTION: Plan 40M1267 Block 42, 59
(1321 Forest Park Drive)
FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING
CI"TY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. DATE: Apr. 25,2017
-Olpo/-
PJCKERJNG
City Development
Department
to permit an accessory
structure (shed) in the
flankage side yard
Existing Accessory Structures
FILE No: P/CA 31/17
APPLICANT: B. & R. Huckste
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Plan 40M1267 Block 42, 59
(1321 Forest Park Drive)
FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING
CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DATE: Apr. 25,2017
-04of-
PJCKERJNG
From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP
Report to 37
Committee of Adjustment
Application Number: PICA 37117
Date: May 31,2017
Principal Planner-Development Review
Subject:
Application
Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 37117
A. Ahmed
736 Hillview Crescent
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended, to permit a minimum
flankage yard depth of 2.1 metres; whereas the by-law requires a minimum flankage yard
depth of 4.5 metres. ·
The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit to
construct a detached dwelling.
Recommendations
The City Development Department considers the requested variance to be minor in nature,
desirable for the appropriate development 6f 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 variance, subject to the following conditions:
1. That this variance apply only to the detached 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 May 31, 2018,
or this decision shall become null and void.
Comment
Official Plan and Zoning By-law
Pickering_Official Plan-"Urban Residential-Low Density Areas" within the
West Shore Neighbourhood.
Zoning By-law 2511, as amended-"R4"-One Family Detached Dwelling Fourth Density Zone
38 Report PICA 37/17 May 31, 2017
Page 2
Appropriateness of the Application
Reduced Flankage Yard Depth Variance
• the intent of a minimum flankage yard depth is to provide for a consistent building
setback and to ensure a sufficient landscaped area is maintained between a dw_elling
and the adjacent street
• the applicant has requested a reduction in the minimum flankage yard depth from
4.5 metres to 2.1 metres to accommodate a new two-storey detached dwelling
• the existing one-storey dwelling has a flankage yard depth of less than 1.0 metre; the
. proposed flankage yard depth of 2.1 metres is an improvement on the existing condition
• the main entrance and driveway access is proposed through the front yard onto
Hillview Crescent
• the proposed flankage yard depth of 2.1 metres will provide for an adequate landscaped
area for soft landscaping elements such as trees and shrubs
• in addition to the proposed flankage yard depth of 2.1 metres, there is a municipal
boulevard that extends an additional 5.5 metres between the flankage lot line and
Oklahoma Drive
• the proposed flankage yard depth will provide for adequate building setbacks between
the dwelling and the abutting street
• existing flankage yard depths in the immediate area along Oklahoma Drive vary
between approximately 1.2 metres (732 Hillview Crescent) and approximately
20.0 metres (851 Oklahoma Drive).
• the proposed flankage yard depth maintains the mixed character of the existing
residential community ·
• the proposed two-storey detached dwelling with a single car garage and main building
entrance onto Hillview Crescent represents an appropriate development of the site
• staff are of the opinion that the requested variance is minor in nature, desirable for the
appropriate ,development of the lands, and maintains the intent and purpose of the
Official Plan and Zoning By-l~w
Input From Other Sources
Engineering Services • any new driveway constructed at 736 Hillview
Crescent should be at least 1.0 metre from the
base of the silver maple that is located on the City
road allowance
Resident of 7 40 Hillview Crescent · • commented that the submitted plan attached to the ·
notice was confusing, lacked north, south, east and
west arrows, and incorrectly stated the street name
as "Sparrow Court" where it should be
Hillview Crescent
• would like to know if the tree on the north east
corner of the lot will be removed, and if a boulevard
of grass between the proposed driveway and the
resident's driveway will be provided
Report PICA 37/17
Date of Report: May 24, 2017
RM:Ic
J:\Documents\Development\D-3700\2017\PCA 37 -17\Report\Biank Report Template.docx
Attachments
May 31, 2017 39
Page 3
• concerned with the north side yard depth of
1.5 metres-the view from the resident's porch
and front door will look out onto a brick wall
• concerned that the 1.5 metre north side yard depth
does not need a variance and is permitted in the
by-law-the by-law is too permissive
• concerned about mold in the existing dwelling at
736 Hillview Crescent -when the house is torn
down there are concerns that the spores will create
a health hazard for the surrounding residents
(including animals and children at 740 Hillview)
• would like to be notified when the house is to be
torn down to ensure that all windows are closed to
protect from dust and mold
• concerned that the City's Zoning By-laws are not
protecting the neighbourhood from "giant homes"
being built
• concerned that the City and developers are trying
to force residents out of smaller homes to make
way for larger homes with more tax dollars going to
the City
• not concerned with the variance on the Oklahoma
side of the lot, really concerned about the
residence side that will impact the property to the
north (740 Hillview)
• concerned with the height of the building -would
like to see the number of storeys restricted to the
existing number of storeys on the property
Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP
Principal Planner-Development Review
-C4c/-
P1CKER1NG
City Development
Department
I If I
t----+---1 Cl t----+---1~
1---+--fo:::
1---+---fii::
:==~==:ffi
1----t-----1 ~
1----t---l <(
1----t--42:
lll!
-
PN-RU
. . ................... ~ ~ 1!1 I I I 10>-w,c:e 0 (/): ! a·:S: a::·!S! ...... I ,---0-c: .,---[ 0 j o::O:: <D I ~ o..O (/) Cl (.9 ().) . --·--··-~ I 0.. -~~ z 0 _J -rm I ~ 1 n 4_m 0"(.9 ....J ().) :az uJ ·;;: Q(/) ·s: I o:::· _a (l_ 0 ~LJ f-l 8.7 m 0 I== CL r== ::> __j ~ I-'---~ i !-"'-"-i I .. r-E ' ,-C\i ~ ' ~ ., to permit a minimum flankage yard depth of 2.1 1' metres Oklahoma Drive N -Q~cf Submitted Plan FILE No: P/CA 37/17 P1CKER1NG APPLICANT: A. Ahmed City Development PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Plan 331 Lot 110 Department (736 Hillview Cresent) FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING I DATE: May 23,2017:: CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.
42 --C~ ()f--
p](KERJNG
From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP
Report to
Committee of Adjustment
Application Number: PICA 38117
Date: May31,2017
Principal Planner -Development Review
Subject:
Application
Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 38117
C. Annable
303 Fiddlers Court
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law·3036, as amended, to permit an uncovered
platform (deck) and associated steps not exceeding 1.8 metres in height above grade to
project a maximum of 1.7 metres into the required rear yard; whereas, uncovered steps and
platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade may project a maximum of
1.5 metres into the required rear yard.
The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application in order to obtain a building
permit to construct an uncovered platform (deck) and associated steps in the rear yard.
Recommendations
The City Development Department considers the uncovered platform (deck) and associated
steps not exceeding 1.8 metres in height above grade to project a maximum of 1.7 metres into
the required rear yard, 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 variance, subject to the following
· conditions:
1. That this variance apply 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 May 31, 2019,
or this decision shall become null and void.
Comment
Official Plan and Zoning By-law
Pickering Official Plan -"Urban Residential Areas -Low Density Areas" within the
Rougemount Neighbourhood
Zoning By-law 3036, as amended -"R3" -Third Density Residential Zone
Report PICA 38/17 May 31, 2017 43
Page 2
Appropriateness of the Application
Uncovered Platform (Deck) and Associated Steps Projecting into the Required Rear Yard.
• the intent ofthis provision is to ensure an adequate outdoor private amenity area is
provided within the rear yard, appropriate setbacks are provided to protect the privacy
of abutting property owners and appropriate access for maintenance, lot grading and
drainage
• the by-law permits uncovered platforms and associated steps not exceeding 1.0 metre in
height above grade to project a maximum of 1.5 metres into the required rear yard
• the applicant is requesting an uncovered platform (deck) and associated steps not
exceeding 1.8 metres in height above grade to project a maximum of 1.7 metres into the
required rear yard
• the existing dwelling is currently under construction, and due to a grade change in the
rear yard, a deck and stairs are required to access the rear yard from the main level
• the proposed deck maintains the required east and west side yard setback requirements
• staff is of the opinion that there will be no adverse impacts on adjacent neighbours
resulting from the deck and steps
• an adequate amount of outdoor private amenity area within the rear yard is being
provided and an adequate buffer space between all lot lines and the deck will be maintained
• the requested variance is minor in nature and maintains the intent of the Official Plan
and Zoning By-law and desirable for the appropriate development of the land
Input From Other Sources
Engineering Services
Date of Report: May 25, 2017
Comments Prepared By:
0~1-
Lalita Paray, MCIP, RPP
Planner I
LP:Ic
J:\Documents\Development\0-3700\2017\PCA 38--17\Report\PCA 38·17 Report.docx
Attachments -
• no comments on the application
Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP
Principal Planner -Development Review
4.ll I
I .I
rWYN RIVERS DRIVE
t--
t-t-r--r--
1---
1---
t---
1--
r----1---
,..----
1---
r== [[LLL..:R~IC~H~A~RD~S.J.O.JN ...JST...JR...JEELTFj,------j
~ I ~~~
~ t-I I I
LITTLEFORD~EET ,;;~~ ~
t---~ r----1 b
t---r--f---
1---r--. '--
-
f---f--
~~~~---J. f..-- . ---1 STOVER CRESCENT i---
~Vf I ~
,___ "1111 ~ I r-
...._...J....I.-i-........... SUBJECT 1---FIDDLERS COURT I '\ I t
l ~ \ I PROPERTY i, B f-. I I \ "J,
r-_---\-\---l.v-==::::: I I I I I I I = ~ f-~===~~~===j 7 A
\ l J I I t= 1---+---1~~----------4 ~
"'\ ( I I f--~~===~~==~
I I \ \:-1----------,L----1 ~1------l
I I I I \\ '-§f-------l .----tr
1----r-----~
f-. ~
1-------1 _,.--<(f--z ~ / t----..'Yr~....J....I...I....l.-J.....J....Ju o f--~ «'~ "1----; f---..1 ?J tr f--...J o L
f--~-~~ <( h ~() ~ 1--.--..--1,...-11,........,1,........,.-L, lt-----i
\--~ ~f--I ~t.: -t---m > f--L< 'l 13flUGE HILL COURT · )..__ \--~ ~L..J \' -< -..............
\--() VALLEY GATE u.. BROOKRIDGE GAT "'-, H I I I \ \--~ I ~ \ I _\
1--C/) f--Tf-
)-~{ f--I r---r----_r---l
-at;~f
P1CKER1NG
City Development
Department
1--
1--
1---
IIIIIIIIIIT //7 11 l'v-lr-----u
-J)_f-L---/1---L,..J...-L-'L..L..JII ---~ ,..-
1---
Location Map
File: PICA 38/17
Applicant: C. Annable
Property Description: Plan 228 Pt Lot 12 Now RP 40R28981 Part 1
303 Fiddlers Court Date: Apr. 26, 2017
~~ri~~=~=-:~;i:';.;:e~:e~~:ht :r~~~~~=e:::~=eR":=~~~~=~~atUilll Resources. SCALE: 1 :5,QQQ
Ter11net Entarpl'l.eslnc. and Its suppliers al riptlts ~.erveci.; e Munldpal Pro~rty A~nt Corporation and tt. auppien. an righ1s rese~.; THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. PN-RU
to permit an uncovered
platform (deck) and associated
steps not exceeding 1.8
metres in height above grade
to project a maximum of 1. 7
metres into the required rear
yard
I
-•• ~ •. >J.C..J
Fiddlers Court
i 18.0 '
·~· ·~,"~1!. .
' 1!
j \
-.Gtt:: fs+~ r·}a;
l.:=\·~;~= ~~~~~~~
~·
I / ·--·'
Submitted Plan
FILE No: PCA 38/17
APPLICANT: C. Annable
1
City Development
Department
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Plan 228 Part Lot 12 RP 40R2898i Part 1
(303 Fiddlers Court)
FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING
CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. l DATE: May 10, 2017
_45
41;.
; ---·--
--' .,
!
' \ '
' -·-· G I j -! --...
' J\ ,. -.·
•' -·· -.
LJ .J~l -,,...,._ . l . . 'i'' .__,-r ~ . ! .:,
... --···--~-.. .. ... ~ ·-... -. --. j.", ..
·'· I -·--· l .,
·~·· l -~.LJI --·· ....
~--·--·:·---:l··. :
·-_J
I ! i; ~~J ! j ... ~Jr(>~ .. ·-· -~-' 1 l:J f
' --·
l ..
..... ..
""' ' lJ. ·' ... .. --'}Jh .. -1'5 ~ L f:::--._~i,;;:~~-' . -' .il. . ~--
\ J ··J i:: l J: _l .1 i
J\ -__ (l\ 11 : :1. ~"""' co .. .... .. . . ···--· ••••• h _<,, .......
T ·_1, f\V ,....
~,.-I .. : ... : .. __ \ .......... -.-. ··-·······-l
.. ,.,_."':
., ·--·--~: .. -.... :-
v "~· s i i\~·-. ····-··~~ " ~~f\}t1t1'~~-~t&~\~i' -. ~ >i · .. K~ .
11"'. t:~
..:.?--
otpbl Submitted Elevations
FILE No: PCA 38/17 PICKERING APPLICANT: C. Annable
City Development PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Plan 228 Part Lot 12 RP 40R28981 Part 1
Department (303 Fiddlers Court)
FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING DATE: May 10,2017 CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.
-04of-
PJCKERJNG
From: -Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP
47 Report to
Committee of Adjustment
Application Number: PICA 39117
Date: May 31,2017
Principal Planner -Development Review
Subject: _ Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 39/17
D. Kawall
1650 Pepperwood Gate
Application
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 2015185:
• to permit an accessory building (gazebo) to be setback a minimum of 1.2 metres from
the south lot line of the flanking street; whereas, the By-law requires all accessory
buildings, detached from the main building, shall be a setback a minimum of 4.5 metres
from the south lot line of the flanking street
• to permit an uncovered platform (deck) not exceeding 2.1 metres in height to project a
maximum of 1.8 metres into the required rear yard; whereas, the By-law requires that
uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height may project a maximum
of 1 .5 metres into the required rear yard
• to permit a total lot coverage of all accessory buildings, excluding private detached
garages, to be a maximum of 6.7 percent of the lot area; whereas, the By-law requires
the total lot coverage of all accessory buildings, excluding private detached garages,
shall not exceed 5.0 percent of the lot area
The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to permit an accessory building
(gazebo) in the flankage (corner) side yard, and to recognize an existing uncovered platform
(deck) in the rear yard.
Recommendations
The City Development Department considers an accessory building (gazebo) to be setback a
minimum of 1 .2 metres from the south lot line of the flanking street, an uncovered platform
(deck) not exceeding 2.1 metres in height to project a maximum of 1.8 metres into the required
rear yard, and a total lot coverage of all accessory buildings to be a maximum of 6.7 perce~tof
the lot area, 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 accessory building (gazebo) and 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 May 31, 2018,
or this decision shall become null and void.
48 Report PICA 39/17
Background
May 31,2017
Page2
The accessory building (gazebo) is partially constructed, and is currently located 0.3 of a metre
from the south lot line abutting Pepperwood Gate, and 0.9 of a metre from the east lot line
(rear lot line).
On May 12, 201'7, City Development staff met with the owner to discuss the partially
constructed gazebo and setbacks from the lot lines. To further comply with the By-law, the
owner has agreed to reduce the size and slope of the roof on the gazebo to provide a minimum
setback of 1.2 metres from the south lot line, and 1.8 metres from the east lot line (rear lot line)
(see Exhibit #2).
Comment
Official Plan and Zoning By-law
Pickering Official Plan -"Urban Residential Areas -Low Density Areas" within the
Brock Ridge Neighbourhood
Zoning By-law 3036,as amended by By-law 2015/85-"S-SD"-Single Residential, Semi,
Attached Residential Zone
Appropriateness of the Application
Setback of Accessory Building (Gazebo)
• the intent of the requirement for accessory structures to be located in the rear yard is to
maintain a visually attractive streetscape, maintain adequate buffer space between
buildings on a property and street activity, and avoid adverse impact on the streetscape
• ·Section 6.4 of the Zoning By-law states that on a corner lot in a residential zone no part
of any accessory building detached from the main building shall be erected closer to the
lot line of the flanking street than the required front yard of the abutting lot on the
flanking street
• the abutting lot to the east, which also flanks onto Pepperwood Gate is required to have
a minimum front yard·setback of 4.5 metres from Middleton Street; therefore, all
accessory buildings on the subject property are required to be setback a minimum of
4.5 metres from the south lot line abutting Pepperwood Gate
• the applicant is requesting to permit an unenclosed accessory building (gazebo) to be
setback 1.2 metres to the south lot line, and a 1.8 metres from the east lot line '(rear lot line)
• the proposed gazebo was partially constructed in March 2017, and occupies a floor
area of approximately 26.0 square metres, with a height of 2.7 metres
• the owner has agreed to reduce the size and slope of the roof on the gazebo to bring the
existing structure closer into zoning compliance
• the owner has also agreed to construct eavestroughs on the gazebo to direct drainage
away from neighbouring properties ·
• . the proposed gazebo provides adequate access for maintenance around the structure
Report PICA 39/17 May31,2017 49
Page 3
• the proposed location of the gazebo will not negatively impact. the streetscape as it is
screened by an existing 1.8 metre high wood privacy fence and small shrubs
• the requested variance is minor in nature and maintains the intent of the Zoning By-law
Uncovered Platform (Deck) and Steps Projecting into the Required ~ear Yard
• the intent of this provision is to ensure an adequate outdoor private amenity area is
provided within the rear yard, appropriate setbacks are provided to protect the privacy
of abutting property owners and appropriate access for maintenance, lot grading and
drainage
• the By-law permits uncovered platforms and steps not exceeding 1.0 metre in height
above grade to project a maximum of 1.5 metres into the required rear yard
• the applicant is requesting to recognize an existing an uncovered platform (deck) and
associated steps not exceeding 2.1 metres in height above grade to project a maximum
of 1.8 metres into the required rear yard
• the applicant has advised that the uncovered platform was constructed in 2004, by the
previous owner
• an adequate amount of o·utdoor private amenity area within the rear yard is being
provided and adequate setbacks between ~II lot lines and the deck will be maintained
• the requested variance is minor in nature and maintains the intent of the Zoning By-law
Increase in Total Lot Coverage for Accessory Buildings (Gazebo and Shed)
• the intent of the maximum lot coverage requirement of 5.0 percent of the total lot area of all
accessory buildings, excluding private detached garages, is to maintain an appropriate
amount of amenity area uncovered by buildings on a lot and to ensure the massing, scale
and size of buildings are appropriate for the size of the lot
• the by-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 5.0 percent of the total lot area for
accessory structures, and40.0 percent of the total lot area for all buildings and
structures on a lot
• the applicant is requesting to recognize an existing accessory building (shed) in the rear
yard, and an unenclosed accessory building (gazebo) in the flankage (corner) yard
• the existing shed is approximately 7.3 square metres, and the proposed gazebo is
approximately 26.0 square metres; when combined the two accessory buildings result in
a total lot coverage of all accessory buildings of 6. 7 percent of the lot area
• both accessory buildings are appropriately setback a minimum of 1.0 metre away from
all lot lines, and are below the maximum height for accessory structures in a residential
zone (3.5 metres)
• the proposed 1.7 percent increase in total lot coverage does not appear to subordinate
the principal residential use of the property
• there is an existing 1.8 metre wood privacy fence and small shrubs to minimize the
visual impact of these structures in the flankage and rear yards
• the existing corner lot maintains an adequate amount of outdoor amenity area to
accommodate grading and maintenance
50 Report PICA 39/17 May 31,2017
Page4
• a maximum lot coverage of 6.7 percent for all accessory buildings (gazebo and shed)
maintains an appropriate amenity area uncovered by buildings on a lot and to ensure
the massing, scale and size of buildings are appropriate for the size of the lot
• the requested variance is mir:10r in nature and maintains the intent of the Zoning By-law
Input From Other Sources
Engineering Services
Date of Report: May 25, 2017
Comments Prepared By:
Lalita Paray, MCIP, RPP
Planner I
LP:Ic
J:\Docurnents\Development\D-3700\2017\PCA 39-17\Report\PCA 39 _17 Report.docx:
Attachments
• no comments on the application
.JJ4 L/fi
Deborah Wyli!·.~~P
Principal Planner-Development Review
-Cdt;()I-
P1CKER1NG
City Development
Department
PN-RU
r.::.?
....-~·~--ji------------~ -~ l "' . ..-,
/ J. B '{+~"fl
j :;n 1!' ;·i-C>. 1·!
_£ ~I
-~ I -::~ l . w I t i ~;f ·f -~ ;
rt ~~~~fi-1
1_-w ~ i ~! ·f
.I
i' '1
. ~-~~~-f :t'!~~ .;1 . ---~.~ -o
J I j .•
l
. .
to permit a total lot coverage o -·
all accessory buildings, , . . $
garages to be a max1mum of :'i ·_ -· · •• _Pas~ ~
6.7 percent of the lot area -..~,.:· _L14 _ .. _ _: -. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~L'-··; .. -1· i
G-_ --L~~b'-l ~-: ,----Y?-_~ ~--·1 . _ .--,J
h I· ~ ~ ·' f/-Ke[;[F¢C.?..e.2/ -!'3:.6 rrt I _, ~~1--_#~~.zso )~u~77N~~1_tj,.{ --~-i
r-to_p_e-rm---it_a_n_a_c-ce_s_s_o_ry __ fr1_i!_.-.... /.$m t; l t~ v V . --6>' 'hr.~:_ -i
building (gazebo) to be I -------r · IT f4Z] . Vfm 3:jii;&} J I, 0 tJ1
setback a minimum of 1.2 v--t ./'!-n l : p-/ ., '
metres from the south lot line 71· · · ·· {. -,. J _ . ! .• Lo~ ~ =-X.~~+,I)G , -:
to permit a platform (deck) not ~ 10 . .be;,e~·oved) ·
exceeding 2.1 metres in heigh ~-:.\
above grade to project a .....:.: 7
maximum of 1.8 metres into
the required rear yard
-0£;c/-
PJCKERJNG
City Development
Department
Submitted Plan
FILE No: PCA 39/17
APPLICANT: D. Kawall
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:Pian 40M1511 Par Lot 34 RP 40R11640 Part 9,10
( 1650 Pepperwood Gate)
FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING
CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. ) DATE: May 17, 2017
r------------__:_ _____________ _,_
_T ____ --_--q·-.. ... --
1 i r
__ ll ______ ) __ . ·----~---_-··· ........ .
f '· j l l ; I 2 l I
l_ l \ \ \
1
rl \ \ ~ t. I \ \ !
\ \ i ' .
\' '
'
;
----------1-l-----· Hr-------··--·--------------------~L-------------+
/
; i ! I ;·
I I
~· L.·,
J_
~ I ~J_IIJ5
I I !I I' I' ! t ,! .,
' ! I \ i
t-r-( E --co
C\i
-+----'-----------------------'------'------... ·---------'----'!-f' --'=' ~-· v
--~D~-
p](KERJNG
City Development
Department
Submitted Elevations
FILE No: PCA 39/17
APPLICANT: D. Kawall
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:Pian 40M1511 Par Lot 34 RP 40R11640 Part 9,10
(1650 Pepperwood Gate).
FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING
CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. DATE: May 17, 2017
54 j -04(){!-
PJCKERJNG
From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP
Report to
Committee of Adjustment
Application Number: PICA 40117
Date: May 31, 2017
Principal Planner-Development Review
Subject:
Application
Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 40117
Mattamy (Seaton) Limited
1 024 Reflection Place
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 7364114 to permit a minimum rear yard depth
of 4.4 metres, whereas the by-law requires a minimum rear yard depth of 5.0 metres where the
property is located adjacent to a Natural Heritage System (NHS) Zone.
The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit for one unit
within a seven unit street townhouse block.
Recommendation
The City Development Department considers the requested variance 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 variance, subject to the following conditions:
1. That this variance apply only to the townhouse unit, as generally sited and outlined on the
applicant's submitted plans.
Comment
Official Plan and Zoning By-law
Pickering Official Plan (OPA 22)-"Mixed Use Areas-Mixed Corridors" within the
Lamoreaux Neighbourhood
The property is also subject to the Lamoreaux Neighbourhood Policies and is designated
"Mixed Corridor Type 1" in the Lamoreaux Neighbourhood Plan.
Zoning By-law 7364114-"MC1-2"-Mixed Corridor Type 1 Zone, Exception 2
Report PICA 40/17 55 May 31, 2017
Background
Mattamy (Seaton) Limited has received draft plan of approval for several draft plans of
subdivision within the Seaton lands. Currently the roads surrounding and connecting to
Reflection Place are under construction and not accessible to the public.
Appropriateness of the Application
Reduced Rear Yard Depth Variance
Page2
• the intent of the minimum rear yard depth is to ensure that an adequate amenity space
is provided in the rear yard and appropriate setbacks are provided to protect the privacy
of abutting property owners ·
• the Zoning By;_law requires a minimum rear yard depth of 5.0 metres where the property
is located adjacent to a Natural Heritage System (NHS) Zone
• the applicant has requested this variance to reduce the minimum rear yard depth from
5.0 metres to 4.4 metres ·
• adequate amenity space and landscaped area will be provided in the rear yard as the
property is an irregular shaped lot and the minimum rear yard setback of 4.4 metres
does not extend the full width of the rear yard
• the proposed encroachment will not have any adverse impact on the privacy of abutting
property owners as the property abuts the Natural Heritage System and an open space
block to the north and north-west; the rear yard depth to the south where the property
abuts other residential lands is 7.0 metres
• staff are of the opinion that the requested variance is minor in nature, desirable for the
appropriate development of the lands, and maintains the intent and purpose of the
Official Plan and Zoning By-law ·
· Input From Other Sources
Engineering Services
Date of Report: May 24, 2017
Comments Prepared By:
Rory McNeil
Planner I
RM:Ic
J:\Oocuments\Oevelopment\D-3700\2011\PCA 40-17\Report\PCA 40·17 Report.docx
Attachments
• no comments on the application
Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP
Principal Planner-Development Review
-04Dt-
p](KERJNG
City Development
Department
TAUNTON ROAD
Tne Corpgnrtxm oftne City of Pickertnp Produoecl (In part) unoerhcense from: C Queens Printer, OntanDMIIlJStry of Natural Resources.
I nptus reserveci..:C Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada.. Department of NatLITill Resourc:as. Ah rights reserved_;
Teranet Ememrises Inc. end Its Dllers a& nahts reserved.: C Municioal Prope Assessmenl ColllCiratiDn and Its pliers a~ ri hts reserved.: PN-RU
-C:~c/PlCKERlNG City Development Department ,_ ~~-· _ ___ .· 'l-.,.3.5m __ , , -.. ·· -~ -· --.. --.... ---. . I it · I "'1<:: 0 . 0 [ ,..,_ 1.5 m-7 7.0 m !i_ ~ v .. 6.0m 0 .~ t.., , Submitted Plan FILE No: P/CA 40/17 APPLICANT: Mattamy (Seaton) Limited PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: SP2009-13(Phase 1) Block 84 Unit 7 (1024 Reflection Place) a> u ~ D. c 0 u a> G) a: 1' FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. I DATE: May 12,2017 ~
sa __ ~of--Report to
Committee of Adjustment PJCKERJNG
From:
Subject:
Application
Nilesh Surti, MCIP, RPP
Application Number: PICA 41117
Date: May31, 2017
Manager, Development Review & Urban Design
Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 41117
2450734 Ontario Inc./ Marshall Homes (Centre Point) Inc.
1555 & 1575 Kingston Road
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 6172/03:
a) to permit a minimum building height of 12.0metres and four storeys; whereas the by-law
states that no building, part of a building, or structure that is less than 16.0 metres and
six storeys in height, or greater than 35.0 metres and twelve storeys in height, shall be
erected on the lands
b) to permit buildings to be located outside the building envelope having a minimum setback
of 1.8 metres from the Kingston Road lot line; whereas the by-law states that all buildings
and structures shall be located entirely within the building envelope having a minimum
setback of 4.5 metres from the Kingston Road lot line
c) to permit buildings to be located outside the building envelope having a minimum setback
of 0.7 of a metre from the west lot line; whereas the by-law states that all buildings and
structures shall be located entirely within the building envelope having a minimum
setback of 4.5 metres from the west lot line
d) to permit any portion of a building or structure in excess of 11.0 metres in height, to be
setback a minimum of 17.0 metres from the southern limits of the "(H)RHIMU-1" Zone;
whereas the by-law states that any portion of a building or structure in excess of
11.0 metres in height, shall be setback a minimum of 20.0 metres from the southern limits
of the "(H)RHIMU-1" Zone
e) to permit a minimum of 1.0 parking space per dwelling unit for residents be provided both
above and below grade; whereas the by-law states that for each multiple dwelling vertical
there shall be provided and maintained a minimum 1.2 parking spaces per dwelling unit
for residents; all resident parking is to be provided in a below grade structure
f) to permit a minimum of 0.2 of a parking space per dwelling unit for visitors; whereas the
by-law states that for each multiple dwelling vertical there shall be provided and
maintained a minimum of 0.3 of a parking space per dwelling unit for visitors
g) to permit at grade parking lots to be no closer than 2.5 metres from the southern limit of
the "(H)RHIMU-1" Zone; whereas the by-law states that at grade parking lots shall be
permitted no closer than 3.0 metres from the limits of the "(H)RHIMU-1" Zone
. Report PICA 41117 May 31, 2017 59
Page 2
. h) to permit at grade parking lots to be zero metres from the western limit of the ' .~
"(H)RHIMU-1" Zone; whereas the by-law states that at grade parking lots shall be
permitted no closer than 3.0 metres from the limits of the "(H)RHIMU-1" Zone
i) to permit at grade parking lots to be no closer than 0.8 of a metre from the eastern limit of
the "(H)RHIMU-1" Zone; whereas the by-law states that at grade parking lots shall be
permitted no closer than 3.0 metres from the limits of the "(H)RHIMU-1" Zone
Variance c) above has been revised to permit buildings to be located outside of the building
envelope from 0,8 of a metre to from the west lot line to 0.7 of a metre from the west lot line.
This change is required to provide the applicant a minor tolerance in order to accommodate
the proposed development.
The applicant is requesting approval of this minor variance application in order to obtain
Site Plan Approval to permit a residential deveJopment consisting of 136 stacked townhouse units.
Recommendations
The City Development Department considers the requested variances 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 concept site plan, as generally sited and
outlined on the applicant's submitted plans.
2. That the applicant obtain Site Plan Approval for the proposed development by March 9, 2019,
or this decision shall become null and void
Background
On August 24, 2016, the Committee of Adjustment approved Minor Variance Application
PICA 45116 for the subject lands in order to permit the construction of a residential
development consisting of 136 stacked townhouse units. The Committee's decision included a
condition that the applicant obtaining Site Plan Approval by March 9, 2017 or the Committee's
decision for the required variance would become null and void. The applicant has recently
submitted a revised site plan package, which is presently under review. Since Site Plan
Approval was not granted by March 9, 2017, the applicant is again req'uesting the above-noted
variances to facilitate the proposed residential development.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
SO Report PICA 41/17
Comment
Official Plan and Zoning By-law
Pickering Official Plan -Mixed Use Areas -City Centre
May 31,2017
Page 3
Zoning By-law 2511, as amended-By-law 6172/03 ~ "(H)RH/MU-1"-Multi Residential/Mixed
Use (Hold Zone)
On April11, 2017, the City of Pickering Council approved the City initiated City Centre Zoning
By-law 7553/17, dated April3, 2017, which is currently under appeal to the Ontario Municipal
Board (OMB).
The new City Centre Zoning By-law amends Zoning By-laws 3036 and 251.1 and removes all
of the lands within the City Centre from these parent by-laws and creates a new standalone
zoning by-law. The City Centre Zoning By-law proposes new zoning categories, permits a
broad range of uses, incorporates new development standards to regulate the size, location,
massing and height of buildings, identifies minimum and maximum density provisions, and
introduces new vehicle and bicycle parking standards.
The proposed development complies with the City Centre Zoning By-law; however, since the
· City Centre Zoning By-law is appealed to the OMB, the following variances are required.
Appropriateness of the Application
Requested Variance to Reduce Building Height Requirements along Kingston Road:
• the intent of the by-law in requiring a minimum building height is to ensure a type of built
form and massing along Kingston Road
• the by-law states that no building, part of a building or structure that is less than
16.0 metres and six storeys in height, or greater than 35.0 metres and twelve storeys in
height, shall be erected on the lands
• the existing site-specific zoning by-law definition for building height excludes roof
structures, including a roof top terrace and mechanical enclosure
• the applicant is proposing residential buildings with a minimum height of 12.0 metres
with four storeys
• the City's Official Plan policies for lands within the City Centre state that all new
buildings are required to be at least three functional storeys ·
• the proposed residential buildings will appear to be six storeys in height, as the
buildings have been designed with a raised underground garage and a roof top terrace
• if the proposed roof structure were calculated as part of the building height the proposed
buildings would have a total building height of approximately 15.8 metres
• the proposed height of the residential buildings adjacent to Kingston Road achieves the
City's urban design objective of providing a strong building presence and an animated
streetscape along Kingston Road
• staff are of the opinion that this requested variance is appropriate for the development
of the lands and is minor in nature
Report PICA 41/17 May 31, 2017 61
Page 4.
Requested Variances to Reduce Setbacks from Kingston Road and the West Lot Line:
• the intent of the by-law in requiring a building envelope, is to maintain minimum
setbacks from streets and abutting properties
• the site specific by-law also sets out a build-to-zone along Kingston Road and along the
western property line in order to ensure that the site design and layout of the buildings
located on the property provide for a strong and identifiable urban edge .
• the by-law requires a building envelope and build-to-zone as Shown on Schedule I to
the By-law 6172/03, which illustrates a 4.5 metre setback along Kingston Road and the
west lot line and a 3.0 metre setback along the south and east lot lines
• the applicant is proposing to permit buildings to be located outside the building envelope
having a minimum setback of 1.8 metres from the Kingston Road lot line and a ·
minimum setback of 0.7 of a metre from the west lot line
• as part of the development of the subject site, the applicant is required to convey a
6.0 metre wide road widening to the Region of Durham, along the Kingston Road frontage
• the site specific by-law did not include the required 6.0 metre wide road widening
• the requested variance to reduce the building setback will provide an appropriate and
functional building setback for the development from Kingston Road
• the required building envelope along the west lot line was to provide a strong urban
edge along a future public road ·
• the owner is currently in the process of purchasing the road allowance, which was to be
the future public road, along the west lot line to be developed as a private condominium road
• as a result of the future purchase of the road allowance for a private condominium road,
the owner has designed and sited the buildings along the west lot line to create a
pedestrian friendly environment with patios projecting from the front of the residential
dwelling units
• the proposed development is compatible with the City Centre lands
• the applicant is requesting to reduce the required building envelope on the subject
lands, however the prescribed build-to-zone is being maintained
• staff are of the opinion that the reduced setbacks from Kingston Road and the west lot
line are appropriate for the development of the lands
Requested Variance to Reduce Building Setback from the South Property Line:
• the intent of the by-law in requiring buildings, in excess of 11.0 metres in height, to be
setback a minimum of 20.0 metres from the southern limits of the zone is to ensure that
impacts from the development, such as overlook and privacy, are minimized for the
existing residential properties immediately to the south along Avonmore Square
• the site specific by-law was approved for a residential apartment building and this
provision would ensure that an appropriate setback was maintained for any portion of a
building in excess of 11.0 metres
• the applicant is proposing to permit any portion of a building or structure in excess of
11 .0 metres in height, to be setback a minimum of 17.0 metres from the southern limits
of the zone
• the applicant is proposing a different built form, which will have a lesser impact on the
existing residential dwelling
62 Report PICA 41/17 May 31, 2017
Page 5
• the City's Official Plan policies for lands within the City Centre state that new
development in close proximity to established low density residential areas are required
to be gradually transitioned in. height
• staff have utilized a 45 degree angular plane from the south property line at grade to
provide a transition between the proposed development and the existing low density
residential development to the south in order to minimize any adverse ·impact on the
existing residents
• staff are of the opinion that the request to reduce the building setback from the south
property line will not adversely impact the existing low density residential development
to the south
• the requested variance meets the intent of the Official Plan, the Zoning By-law and is
appropriate and desirable for the development of the lands
Requested Variance to Reduce the Minimum Number of Required Parking Spaces:
• the intent of the by-law in requiring a minimum number of required parking spaces is to
ensure an adequate supply of on-site parking is available to accommodate the parking
· requirements of all permitted uses
• the by-law requires a minimum 1.2 parking spaces per dwelling unit within a multfple
dwelling vertical building to be provided in a below grade structure and a minimum of
0.3 of a parking space per dwelling unit for visitors
• the applicant has submitted a Parking Justification Study, prepared by Trans-Plan,
dated January 2016
• the applicant is proposing a parking ratio of 1.0 parking space per dwelling unit for
residents and 0.2 of a parking space per dwelling unit for visitors
• the submitted site plan illustrate a total of 164 parking spaces to be provided on-site;
including 136 parking spaces for residents and 28 parking spaces for visitors at grade
• a total of 11 additional visitor parking spaces will be provided along the private
condominium road
• Trans-Plan indicates that the current parking standards that apply to the site can be
further reduced for the following reasons:
o the proposed unit sizes are relatively small and are comparable to typical
apartment sizes
o smaller unit sizes generally cater to fewer persons per unit, resulting in lower auto
ownership per unit and lower on-site parking demands
o transit use is generally higher in the study area and auto ownership is generally
lower compared to the rest of the City
• the proposed parking standards are also consistent with the parking ratios within the
new City Centre Zoning By-law
• staff are of the view that proposed parking ratio is appropriate and a sufficient supply of
parking is provided on-site to serve the residents and visitors
Report PICA 41/17 May 31, 2017 63
Page 6
Requested Variance to Setback for at Grade Parking Lots from South, East and West Lot Lines:
• the intent of the by-law in requiring at-grade parking spaces to be located no closer than
3.0 metres from the limits of the zone, is to ensure an _appropriate landscape strip can
be provided ·
• the applicant is proposing to reduce the required setback to 2.5 metres at the south lot
line, zero metres from the west lot line and 0.8 of a metre from the east lot line
• an existing board-on-board privacy fence is along the south property line
• the applicant has submitted a landscape plan, prepared by Cosburn Nauboris Ltd.,
illustrating that the proposed 2.5 metre wide landscape buffer strip along the south
property line will accommodate deciduous tree and shrub plantings
• the zero metre setback from the west lot line is due to the future purchase of the
adjacent lands to the west for a private condominium road
• the 0.8 of a metre setback from the east lot line abuts a hydro corridor
• the proposed landscape buffer strips are of sufficient width to accommodate
landscaping and minimize any adverse impacts to the existing residents to the south
• staff are of the opinion that the requested variance is minor in nature and is appropriate
for the development of the lands
Based on the discussion above, staff are of the opinion that the proposed variances are minor
in nature, appropriate for the development of the land and in keeping with the general intent
and purpose of the Zoning By-law and Official Plan.
Input From Other Sources
Engineering Services • no concerns with the requested variances
Date of Report: May 25, 2017
Comments Prepared By: ~-8h?il:~
Lalita Paray, MCIP, RPP Nilesh Surti, MCIP, RPP
Planner I · Manager, Development Review & Urban Design
LP:NS:Ic
J:\Documenls\Development\0·3700\2017\PCA 41-17\Report\PCA 41-17.docx
Attachments
~II
POPPY LANE
-Oit;o/-
P1CKER1NG
City Development
Department
...__-----10 1---+-----l i"----l~ 1---+---l
1--------lC:: 1----\---l
1--------lO
.Yf-----I...J ~ ::J 1-----1----1
1-----1<.91----1----1
PN-RU
to permit buildings to be
located outside the building
envelope having a minimum
setback of 1 ;s.metres from·the
Kingston Road lotiine·
--~6~-
PlCKERlNG
Submitted Plan
FILE No: PCA 41 /17
APPLICANT: 2450734 Ontario Inc.
to pemiit a minimum
building height of
12;0 metres and 4
storeys
to permit a minimum of
0.2 cif a parking space
per dwelling unit for
visitofs
City Development
Department
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Con 1 Part Lot 20 RP 40R6095 Part 1
(1555 & 1575 Kingston Road)
FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING
CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. \ DATE: May W, 2017
65
E
0
C\i
T"""
--04;()1--
P1CKER1NG
City Development
Department
IIODULE10 IMJ/..3C
IMJI..>C t.wloU
to permit a minimum
building height of
12.0 metres and 4
storeys
Typical North Elevations
MODULE1 AIDLIB
AIOI.2A Unlr.1 ..
MODUI.E1 MDLZl!
AIDL2A Unb11·12
IIODULE1 lol0<.28
IJDL2A Unlts15-15
Typical West Elevations
Submitted Elevations
FILE No: PCA 41/17
APPLICANT: 2450734 Ontario Inc.
AIODULE1 MIJLJB MDI.2A Unlt:Jfi-20
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Con 1 Part Lot 20 RP 40R6095 Part 1
(1555 Kingston Road)
FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING
CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. I DATE: May 10,2017
E
0 C\i
T"""
-£::_,._...,.,.
---....!!2--~-~-----
{--·-·-·-
~":!f!i. ____ _
~ . I {=~·-·-
~' {~·-·-·-
~'!-:!!r:----·-{=~-~~
£~
--~
-___ ,....!!Q __
~~·-----{~.--·-·-"'-'"'·-·--~ c~:~:~~
{ ..... ---·-·-
!!l~------
{=~-=
--Cdt;c/--
PJ(KERJNG
City Development
Department
MODIJI.E6 Ala/.. 2BE AIDL2AE
Unh2/S-Z6
MDDUlEf MDLlB Mat..2A Unilo17·18
Typical so·uth Elevations
MODUI.E 1 Ala/..211 IJiiJ/.2A Unila13-14
Typical East Elevations
Submitted Elevations
FILE No: PCA 41/17
APPLICANT: 2450734 Ontario. Inc.
to permit a minimum
building height of
12.0 metres and 4
storeys
IJ(!)DUI.EfO Mlilt.:IC WL2C Unlb5-ll
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Con 1 Part Lot 20 RP 40R6095 Part 1
(1555 Kingston Road)
FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING
CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. DATE: May 10, 2017
68 J -04()fJ-
P1CKERlNG
From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP
Report to
Committee of Adjustment
Application Number: PICA 42117
Date: May 31, 2017
Principal Planner-Development Review
Subject:
Application
Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 42117
K. Strezov
661 Front Road
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended:
• to permit a minimum rear yard depth of 1 .5 metres; whereas the by-law requires a
minimum rear yard depth of 7.5 metres
• to permit a maximum lot coverage of 37 percent; whereas the by-law requires a
maximum lot coverage of 33 percent
The applicant requests approval ofthese variances in order to obtain a building permit to
construct an addition and an attached garage to the existing detached dwelling.
Recommendation
The City Development Department cqnsiders the requested variances 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 Approvi!ll
of the proposed variances, subject to the following conditions:
1. That these variances apply only to the detached 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 May 31, 2019,
or this decision shall become null and void.
Background
In 1983 the Committee of Adjustment approved a minor variance application to permit a
reduced lot area of 381.7 square metres, and in 1984 the Committee approved another minor
variance application to permit a reduced lot frontage of 6.1 metres.
On July 5, 1995 the Committee of Adjustment approved Minor Variance Application
PICA 44195 to permit a minimum rear yard depth of 1.8 metres for the existing carport,
conditional on the carport remaining open on three sides.
Report PICA 42/17
Comment
Official Plan and Zoning By-law
May 31, 2017 69
Page 2
Pickering Official Plan-"Urban Residential-Low Density Areas" within the Bay Ridges
Neighbourhood
Zoning By-law 2511, as amended -"R4"-One Family Detached Dwelling Fourth Density Zone
Appropriateness of the Application
Reduced Rear Yard Depth Variance
• the intent of the minimum rear yard depth is to ensure adequate amenity space is
provided within the rear yard, appropriate setbacks are providf?d to protect the privacy of
abutting property owners and allow appropriate access for maintenance, lot grading and
drainage ·
. • the applicant is proposing an attached enclosed garage with a second-storey addition to
occupy approximately the same footprint as the existing carport to be demolished
• the applicant has requested a minimum rear yard depth of 1.5 metres to accommodate
the enclosed garage and the second-storey addition; whereas the by-law requires a
minimum rear yard depth of 7.5 metres
• the subject property fronts onto Front Road and the rear yard abuts the west side yard
of the adjacent property on Ann land Street (602 Ann land Street)
• sufficient outdoor amenity space is provided within the front and flankage yards which
includes an existing pool, landscaped area and a porch, while the rear yard contains the
existing carport and driveway
• the proposed addition will continue to maintain an appropriate amount of useable
outdoor amenity space on the subject property
• the proposed rear yard depth will maintain an appropriate separation distance between
the building and the rear lot line to provide access for maintenance, lot grading and
drainage
• the proposed second-storey addition may potentially negatively impact the property
immediately to the north at 663 Front Road by casting a shadow onto the property's rear
yard
• the owner of 663 Front Road has provided written support for the requested variances,
while acknowledging that they are aware of the possible shadow impacts on their
property as a result of the proposed second-storey addition .
• the proposed rear yard depth, driveway access from the flankage yard, and the general
height and massing of the proposed addition maintains the character of the existing
residential community, as other properties on Front Road and Annland Street have
been approved with a wide range of building setbacks, and driveway access from the
flankage yards
7 0 Report PICA 42/17
Increased Lot Coverage Variance
May31,2017
Page 3
• the intent of the maximum lot coverage provision is to ensure that the size, scale and
massing of a dwelling, and accessory buildings is appropriate for the lot size and to
ensure an adequate amount of outdoor amenity space remains uncovered by buildings
on a lot
• the applicant has requested a variance to increase the maximum lot coverage from
33 percent to 37 percent
• . the increase in lot coverage will provide for the appropriate development of the land as
the size and massing of the proposed dwelling will be in keeping with the character of
the surrounding neighbourhood; other properties on Front Road and Annland Street
have been approved with lot coverages up to 57.3 percent (to recognize an existing
condition)
• the proposed development will maintait:'l a sufficient amount of outdoor amenity area that
will remain uncovered and unobstructed on the lot
Staff is of the opinion that the requested variances are minor in nature, desirable for the
appropriate development of the .land and maintain the purpose and intent of the Official Plan
and Zoning By-law.
Input From Other Sources
Engineering Services . • no comments on the application
Resident of 602 Ann land Street • signed a letter indicating that the owner has reviewed
the public notice and is in support of the proposed project
Resident of 663 Front Road • signed a letter indicating that the owner has reviewed
Date of report: May 25, 2017
Co .. ~ mment .. ~·pared by: . y~
Rory McNeil
Planner I
RM:so
J:\Oocuments\Oevelopment\D-3700\2017\PCA 42-17\PCA 42-17.docx
Attachments
the public notice and is in support of the proposed project
• commented that the owner of 663 Front Road has no
concerns with the application for the minor variance to
construct an addition and attached garage at 661 Front
Road
• commented that the owner of 663 Front Road fully
understands that a shadow will be cast into the
backyard of the property and is still in full support of the
application
/MJf!
Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP
Principal Planner-Development Review
City Development
Department
SUBJECT
PROPERTY-~•
Location Ma
1
COMMERCE STREET i
PN-RU
Existing Two Storey Dwelling PROPQSffD N6W STRUCTURE NeW STIJCOO SIPING.......__._..,_ NEW MAN MADE siDING--" -O~t>~PJ(KERJNG City Development Department View from Annland Street Submitted Plan Fl LE No: P /CA 42/17 APPLICANT: K. Strezov PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Plan 65 Block E Part Lot 1 RP40R8411 Part 2 (661 Front Road) FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. N Proposed Garage and Second Storey Addition / r----.-NEW PATIO DOORS NEW bEek <iLAss RAILiNGS MINIMUM 421N HIGH 1' DATE: May 10,2017
Existing Carport ~------------------------------------~30.4m,~--------------~T-----------------~~ ~ -·Oit;Dt-pJ(KERJNG City Development Department ~--l-. 1 I 111.5 m 14.9 m I . 7.3Lm ~~~cor~ l\ ; rL/(:L//L////Lf=, ' 'I \ L I "-... 2.7m 10.3 m ' ............ _ . ---.../.------------Submitted Plan FILE No: P/CA42/17 APPLICANT: K. Strezov \_F"ENCE UNE fOR SIDE AND FRONT YARD ANNLAND· STREET 6.0m Proposed Garage and ~ Second Storey Addition J ~ N PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Plan 65 Block.E Part Lot 1 RP40R8411 Part 2 (661 Front Road) FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. DATE: May 10, 2017(..)
74 __ 04 ()1--
PlCKERlNG
From:· Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP
Report to
Committee of Adjustment
Application Number: PICA 43/17
Date: May 31, 2017
Principal Planner -Development Review
Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 43/17
C. & J. Estrela ·
1435 Highbush Trail
Application
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended, to permit a minimum
south side yard width of 1.2 metres; whereas the by-law requires a minimum side yard width of
.1.5 metres, where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling.
The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application in order to obtain a building
permit to construct a two-storey detached dwelling.
Recommendations
The City Development Department considers the minimum south side yard width of
1.2 metres, where a garage is· erected as part of a detached dwelling, 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 variance, subject to the following conditions: ·
1. That this variance apply 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 May 31, 2019,
or this decision shall become null and void.
Comment
Official Plan and Zoning By-law
Pickering Official Plan-"Urban Residential Areas-Low Density Areas" within the
Woodlands Neighbourhood ·
Zoning By-law 3036, as amended-"R4"-Fourth Density Residential Zone
Report PICA 43/17
Appropriateness of the Application
Side Yard Width Variances
May 31,2017 75
Page 2
• the intent of a minimum side yard width is to provide an appropriate separation between ~
structures on abutting properties, provide for sufficient access to rear yard, and
accommodate grading, drainage, and residential services such as air conditioning units
and utility meters, and to maintain the character of the surrounding neighbourhood
• the Zoning By-law requires a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres on one side and
2.4 metres on the other side, however where a garage is erected as part of the dwelling,
a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres is required on both sides
• the existing dwelling was constructed in 1 97 4, and will be demolished and replaced with
a new detached dwelling.
• the applicant has requested a variance to permit a minimum south side yard width of
1.2 metres in order to construct a new detached dwelling
• the proposed side yard width will provide an adequate separation between the dwelling
and the property line to accommodate pedestrian access, grading, drainage, and
residential utility services
• the requested variance to reduce the minimum side yard width is consistent with
previous Committee of Adjustment approvals within the surrounding neighbourhood
along Highbush Trail
• the proposed side yard width of 1.2 metres maintains the established pattern of
development within the area · .
• the requested variance is minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of
the land, and maintains the intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law
Input From Other Sources
Engineering Services
Date of Report: May 1·9, 2017
Comments Prepared By:
~~a,
Lalita Paray, MCIP, RPP
Planner I
LP:Ic
J:\Documents\Development\D-3700\2017'Pt:;.A 43-17\Report\PCA 43-17 Report.docx.
Attachments
• no comments on the application
Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP
Principal Planner -Development Review
-
I
I
.\
j
w > 0::: 0 I 1-z ::)
0 2 w C9
::)
0 0:::
I 1==='------l---r '-----1
-OftJc/-. -
P1CKER1NG
City Development
Department
Location Map
File: PICA 43/17
Applicant:C. Estrela & J. Marty Estrela
Property Description: Plan 816 Part Lot 107 RP 40R22266 Part 1
(1435 High bush Trail) I Date: Ma_y. 10, 2017
PN-RU
46 :5· Meters
--~~~-
PlCKERING
City Development
Department
I l l
I
:162
t ~ 1 l
~ :~' I l I !
I i I ., l
14.4'M.eters l i'·/· l ! ! I ;
'<"
I
! I
I .. I
' ! I !
I I !
I
Dinette Ki):ffien I
-····
· faffiih{'Raom
~ I !
~Was-hroOm .. ......,. ! I l I •bidv.""""'
Jill ' I '
mTI Dini~g-Room I
I ..
I·
Mud-~
Garage ['' -=
l
12
7.:6 _ ..
1 ~-~"r--~~-~ .......
1 l to permit a minimum south I 1 side yard width of 1 .2 metres
I ~0·
.~m•-
0
Highbush Trail
Submitted Plan
FILE No: P/CA 43/17
APPLICANT: C. & J. Marty Estrela
*All-dimensions are. in meters
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Plan 81 6 Part Lot 107 RP 40R22266 Part 1
(1435 Highbush Trail)
FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING
CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT I DATE: May 10,2017
77
-~ti
PlCKERlNG
City Development
Department
Submitted Elevations
FILE No: P/CA 43/17
APPLICANT: C. & J. Mart Estrela
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Plan 816 Part Lot 107 RP 40R22266 Part 1
(1435 Highbush Trail)
FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING
CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. DATE: May 10, 2017
J