The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSeptember 12, 2018 pickering.ca Committee of Adjustment Agenda Meeting Number: 12 Date: Wednesday, September 12, 2018 For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Lesley Dunne T.905.420.4660, extension 2024 Email ldunne@pickering.ca Agenda Committee of Adjustment Wednesday, September 12, 2018 7:00 pm Council Chambers Page Number 1-16 17-23 24-29 30-34 35-38 39-43 44-52 53-57 58-60 61-64 (I)Adoption of Agenda (II)Adoption of Minutes from August 22, 2018 (III)Reports 1.(Tabled at the May 20th meeting) P/CA 45/18 & P/CA 46/18J.Greig 5061 William Street 2.(Deferred at the August 22nd meeting) P/ CA 65/18 D.Bowler & M. Tayler 1305 Cornell Court 3.P/CA 76/18A.Skuhra1503 Alpine Lane 4.P/CA 77/18 Frontdoor Developments (Pickering) Inc. 2090 Duberry Road 5.P/CA 78/18D.De Freitas 1669 Portland Court 6.P/CA 79/18I.Hayhurst 4871 Victoria Street 7.P/CA 80/18 1331301 Ontario Inc. In Trust 1450 Pickering Parkway 8.P/CA 81/18S.Thaneeskaran 543 Rosebank Road 9.P/CA 82/18G.& R. Hamdan 1505 Terracotta Court (IV)Adjournment -Ct%t>f- p](KERJNG -C~0f . P1CKER1NG Pending Adoption Present Tom Copeland -Vice-Chair David Johnson -Chair Eric Newton Denise Rundle Sean Wiley, Also Present Committee of Adjustment 1 Meeting Miriutes Wednesday,August22,2018 7:04 pm Council Chambers Nilesh Surti, Manager, Development Review & Urban Design Lesley Dunne, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer Absent Deborah Wylie, Secretary-Treasurer (I) Adoption of Agenda Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Tom Copeland That the agenda for the Wednesday, August-22, 2018 meeting be adopted. (II) · Adoption of Minutes Moved by Eric Newton Seconded.by Tom Copeland Carried Unanimously That the minutes of the 10th meeting of the Committee of Adjustment held Wednesday, August 1, 2018 be adopted as amended. Carried Unanimously David Johnson, Committee Chair acknowledged the presence of Councillor McLean, Regional Councillor, Ward 2 and Councillor Cumming, City Councillor, Ward 2. · Page 1 of 16 2 -C~0f-p](KERJNG (111) Reports 1. · PICA 62/18 D. Dufaj 700 Hillcrest Road Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday,August22,2018 7:04 pm Council Chambers The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended .by By-law 7610/18: • to permit a maximum height of 10.6 metres; whereas the by-law requires a maximum height of 9.0 metres • to permit covered platform (porch) and associated steps not exceeding 2.6 metres in height above grade to project a maximum of 5.5 metres into the required front yard; whereas uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade may project not more th~m 1.5 metres into any required front yard The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit to construct a 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 also received from the City's Engineering Services Department expressing no comments on the application. In support of the application, the applicant submitted a petition containing signatures from residents of 8 properties along Hillcrest Road including the adjacent neighbours to the north, south and to the east across Hillcrest Road. Mirka Kulesza, agent, was present to represent the application. Michelle Osborne of 593 Stonebridge Lane, Nancy Morgenroth of 599 Stonebridge Lane and Lisa Yuill of 597 Stonebridge Lane were present in objection to the application. Mirka Kulesza explained that as a result of the steep slope on the subject property the height of the proposed dwelling in the front yard is 10.6 metres and in the rear yard the height is 7.5 metres, with a driveway slope of 8%. Mirka Kulesza indicated the front porch will have 16 risers to access the dwelling. Michelle Osborne indicated she is not opposed to the variance for the covered platform (porch), however expressed several concerns with the height variance. Michelle Osborne noted that Council recently passed a height by-law and the applicant is already requesting a variance of 17 percent increase. The increase in height will result in loss of privacy and is considered a major variance not minor. Michelle Osborne submitted a. petition containing 21 signaturel;, opposed to the request for a variance to allow a building height of 10:6 metres. Page 2 of 16 -Cd:J0/-p](KERJNG 3 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday,August22,2018 7:04 pm Council Chambers Nancy Morgenroth expressed a concern with the maximum height of 10.6 metres and feels this is a major variance not minor. Lisa Yuill agreed to comments expressed from Michelle Osborne and Nancy Morgenroth in objection to the application. In response to questions and concerns from residents, Mirka Kulesza explained that the height of the proposed dwelling in the rec;¼r yard is 7.5 metres, which is 1.5 metres below the by-law requirement. They also explore different design options and was not able to accommodate their client's needs. Given that the proposed building height in the rear yard complies with the zoning by-law, and only the height in the front-requires a height variance because of the unique slope situation on the subject property, Denise Rundle moved the following motion: Moved by Denise Rundle Seconded by Sean Wiley That application PICA 62118 by D. Dufaj, be Approved on the grounds that the proposed 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 detached dwelling, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6 contained in Committee of Adjustment Report dated August 22, 2018). 2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by August 24, 2020, or this decision shall become null and void. 2. PICA 65118 D. Bowler & M. Tayler 1305 Cornell Court Carried Unanimously The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 3385190: • to permit an accessory building (shed) to be located in the north 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 accessory building (shed) to be set back a minimum of 0.3 of a metre from the north lot line; whereas the by-law requires that accessory structures must be set back a minimum of 0.6 of a metre from all lot lines Page 3 of 16 4 -Cift;0/-p](KERJNG Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday,August22,2018 7:04 pm Council Chambers The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to permit an accessory building (shed) in the side yard. The Manager, Development Review & Urban Design outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Written comments were also received from the City's Engineering Services Department indicating the Engineering Services Lot Grading Criteria requires a 0.6 of a metre undisturbed strip along the property boundary limits and recommends that the ' accessory building be located a minimum of 0.6 of a metre from the north property line. In support of the application the applicant submitted a petition that contained signature from 18 residents, including 2 directly adjacent to the subject property. Dean Bowler, applicant, was present to represent the application. Gail Reid-Wilkinson · of 2513 Linwood Street was present in objection to the application. Dean Bowler indicated they constructed the existing shed in the same location and .on the same footprint. Dean Bowler also stated they submitted a petition that contained signatures from surrounding neighbours in support of the application. Gail Reid-Wilkinson spoke to the correspondence that was previously submitted in opposition to the application. Gail Reid-Wilkinson expressed concerns with the location of the existing shed in the side yard and having an 8 inch set back does not provide adequate space for maintenance; results in a visual impact; and does not have an eaves trough to ensure rainwater will flow onto subject property. Gail Reid-Wilkinson also expressed a concern with a section of the back fence being removed in order to complete the construction of the shed; damage to their garden while completing the shed and replacing the new post; and requested the owners to replace the entire length of the fencing in their back yard and move the shed to comply with the zoning by-law. Gail Reid-Wilkinson asked the Committee to not approve this minor variance request. Moved by Denise Rundle Seconded by Eric Newton That application PICA 65/18 by D. Bowler & M. Tayler, be Deferred to the next Committee of Adjustment meeting to allow staff to recirculate a revised Public Notice as it relates to the variance$ requested. Carried Unanimously Page 4 of 16 -C1°f-p](KERJNG 3. PICA 66118, PICA 67118 and PICA 68118 J. Butler and A & K. Wald 467 & 471 Rosebank Road 5 Committee of Adjustment ·Meeting Minutes Wednesday,August22,2018 7:04 pm Council Chambers The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-law 7610118: PICA 66118 (Proposed Lot 1) • . to permit a minimum lot frontage of 15.2 metres, whereas the by-law requires a minimum lot frontage of 18.0 metres • to permit a minimum lot area of 509 square metres, whereas the by-law requires a minimum lot area of 550 square metres • to permit a minimum front yard setback of 6.0 metres, whereas the by-law requires a minimum front yard setback of 7.5 metres • to permit a minimum side yard width of 1.2 metres on both sides, whereas the by-law requires minimum side yard width of 1.8 metres where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling • to permit a maximum lot coverage of 51 percent, whereas the by-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent PICA 67118 (Proposed Lot 2) • to permit a minimum lot frontage of 15.2 metres, whereas the by-law requires a minimum lot frontage of 18.0 metres • to permit a minimum lot area of 509 square metres, whereas the by-law requires a minimum lot area of 550 square metres • to permit a minimum front yard setback of 6.0 metres, whereas the by-law requires a minimum front yard setback of 7.5 metres · • to permit a minimum side yard width of 1.2 metres on both sides, whereas the by-law requires minimum side yard width of 1.8 metres where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling . • to permit a maximum lot coverage of 51 percent, whereas the by-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent PICA 68118 (Proposed Lot 3) • to permit a minimum lot frontage of 15.2 metres, whereas the by-law requires a minimum lot frontage of 18.0 metres • to permit a minimum lot area of 509 square metres·, whereas the by-law requires a minimum lot area of 550 square metres • to permit a minimum front yard setback of 6.0 metres, whereas the by-law requires a minimum front yard setback of 7.5 metres · · Page 5 of 16 6 -C~of-p](KERJNG Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday,August22,2018 7:04 pm Council Chambers • to permit a minimum side yard width of 1.2 metres, whereas the by-law requires minimum side yard width of 1.8 metres where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling • to permit a minimum flankage yard setback of 2.5 metres, whereas the by-law requires a minimum flankage ·yard of 4.5 metres • to permit a maximum lot coverage of 46 percent, whereas the by-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent · The applicant requests approval of these minor variance applications in order to facilitate the creation of three additional lots through the Region of Durham's Land Division Committee (File Numbers LO 104/18, LO 105/18 & LO 106/18), and to obtain building permits fo(the construction of three single detached dwellings. The Manager, Development Review & Urban Design outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending the applications be tabled. Written comments were also received from the City's Engineering Services Department expressing no comments on the application. Larry MacDonell, agent, was 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, the Manager, Development Review & Urban Design stated the applicant will be providing the additional information that is being requested. · Moved by Tom Copeland Secc;mded by Eric Newton That applications PICA 66/18, PICA 67/18 and PICA 68/18 by J. Butler and A. & K. Wald, be Tabled until additional i,:iformation regarding the extension and/or completion of Gillmoss Road and Dunn Crescent is provided to the satisfaction of the City. Carried Unanimously 4. PICA 69/18 A. & J. Kimble 945 Essa Crescent The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2520, as amended: • to permit a maximum lot coverage of 37 percent, whereas the by-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent Page 6 of 16 ~C~of-p](KERJNG. Committee of Adjustment 7 Meeting Minutes Wednesday,August22,2018 7:04 pm Council Chambers • to permit partially covered steps to project 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 an addition to the existing dwelling. The Manager, Development Review & Urban Design outlined the staff recommendation from the City Dev~lopment Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Written comments were also received from the City's Engineering Services Department expressing no comments on the application. Alan Kimble, applicant, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Alan Kimble indicated they would like to have the laundry room on the main floor an attached garage. In response to a question from a Committee Member, Alan Kimble stated the steps project approximately 18 inches into the front yard with 2 risers. Moved by Sean Wiley. Seconded by Eric Newton That application PICA 69118 by A. & J. Kimble, 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 detached dwelling, as generally sited and · outlined on the applicant's submitted plans (refer to Exhibit 2 contained in · Committee of Adjustment report dated August 22, 2018). · 2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by August 24, 2020, or this decision shall become null and void. Carried Urianimously 5. PICA 70118 S. Della Porta 220 Martins Street The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended • to permit an accessory building (detached garage and cabana) with a maximum height of 5.7 metres in a residential zone; wherea,s the by-law requires that no accessory building shall exceed a height of3.5 metres in any residential zone . Page 7 of 16 8 -C~o/-PJ(KERJNG Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, August 22, 2018 7:04 pm Council Chambers • to permit an accessory building (detached garage and cabana) to be erected on the property outside of the rear yard; whereas the by-law requires all accessory buildings which are not part of the main building shall be erected in the rear yard The applicant requests approval of these variances in o.rder to obtain a building perrriit to construct an accessory building (detached garage and cabana) as part of a proposal for a new detached dwelling. The Manager, Development Review & Urban Design outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Wri.tten comments were also received from the City's Engineering Services Department expressing no comments on the application. Robert Vrbnjak, applicant, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Robert Vrbnjak indicated the proposed detached garage will be constructed to be in line . with the rear and side yard setbacks, and will have minimal impact on the streetscape. In response to questions from Committee Members, Robert Vrbnjak stated the 2nd floor in the cabana will be open space, it will not be heated and it will have plumbing that will be dosed off in the winter months. Moved by Sean Wiley Seconded by Eric Newton That application PICA 70/18 by S. Della Porta, 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 accessory building (detached garage and cabana), as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans (refer to Exhibit 2 contained in Committee of Adjustment report dated August 22, 2018). 2. That the applicant obtains a building permit for the proposed construction by August 24, 2020, or this decision shall become null and void. Carried Unanimously Page 8 of 16 -C~()f,......__ P1CKER1NG 6. . PICA 71118 M. & S. Lall 2187 Duberry Drive Committee of Adjustment 9 Meeting Minutes Wednesday,August22,2018 7:04 pm Council Ch~mbers The applicant requests re'lief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 2024185: • to permit an uncovered platform (deck) not exceeding 1.4 metres in height above grade to project a maximum of 3.4 metres into the required rear yard whereas the qy-law permits uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade to project a maximum of 1.5 metres into the required rear yard • to recognize an existing accessory structure setback a minimum of 0.9 metres from the north and east lot lines whereas the by-law requires accessory structures greater than 1.8 metres in height to be setback a minimum of 1.0 metres from all lot lines The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit for the construction of an uncovered platform (deck) within the rear yard and to recognize an existing accessory structure setback. The Manager, Development Review & Urban Design outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Written comments were also received from the City's Engineering Services Department expressing no comments on the application. Madoo Lall, applicant, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Tom Copeland That application PICA 71118 by M. & S. Lall, 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 th.e following conditions: 1. That these variances apply only to the proposed deck and existing accessory structure, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plan (refer to Exhibit 2 contained in Committee of Adjustment report dated August 22, 2018). 2. That the applicant obtains a building permit for the proposed construction by August24,2020. · Carried Unanimously Page 9 of ,16 1 o --Cd:J o/--p J (KER J NG 7. PICA 73118 1585708 Ontario Limited 1095 Kingston Road Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday,August22,2018 7:04 pm Council Chambers· The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 4138192 . to permit a Day Nursery as an accessory use to a Commercial-Recreational Establishment, whereas the by-law does not permit.a Day Nursery use on the subject lands. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to permit a Day Nursery use to . operate accessory to a proposed Commercial-Recreational Establishment (indoor commercial playground). The Manager, Development Review & Urban Design outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Departmentrecommending 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 & Region Conservation Authority expressing no objections to the approval of the application. Shanmuga Vignarajah, agent, was present to represent the application. No further · representation. was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Shanmuga Vignarajah explained it will be a large indoor playground; has received approvals for the temporary daycare and programming from the Ministry of Education; and the daycare program can hold up to 69 children. In response to questions from a Committee Member, Shanmuga Vignarajah stated an outdoor space is not required because the after school program will be from 3:00 pm to 6:00 pm. He also stated there will be ample on-site space for drop off and pick up. Moved by Sean Wiley Seconded by Eric Newton That application PICA 73/18 by 1585708 Ontario Limited, 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 condition: 1. That the proposed day nursery shall only be permitted within the area of the existing commercial building identified as Unit 1 on the applicant's submitted plan (refer to Exhibit 2 contained in Committee of Adjustment report dated August 22, 2018). Carried Unanimously Page 10 of 16 -.C1°f-p](KERJNG 8. PICA 74118 Emix Limited 1099 _Kingston Road Committee of Adjustment 11 Meeting Minutes Wednesday,August22,2018 7:04 pm Council Chambers The applicant requests relief from Zoning By.:.law 3036, as amended by By-law 6777107 . to permit an animal boarding establishment in association with a Service Shop (dog grooming facility), whereas the by-law does not permit an animal boarding facility. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to permit a portion of the existing building to be used for an animal boarding establishment in association with a proposed dog grooming facility. The Manager, Development Review & Urba·n 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 & Region Conservation Authority expressing no objection to the approval of the application. · Michael Testaguzza; agent, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in obj~ction to the application. In response to questions from Committee Members, Michael Testaguzza stated the building is a multipurpose building and is currently occupied by a mix of uses including . offices, commercial uses and personal service uses. Michael Testaguzza also stated there would be approximately 50 to .100 dogs based upon a similar size facility located in the GTA. . In response to a question from a Committee Member the Manager, Development Review & Urban Designed explained there are no general provisions for an animal . boarding establishment and that it would be a site specific zoning by-law. Due to other similar service uses currently permitted on the subject property, Denise Rundle moved the following motion: Moved by Denise Rundle Seconded by Tom Copeland That application PICA 74118 by Emix Ltd., be Approved on the grounds that the animal boarding establishment 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: · Page 11 of 16 1 2 -C4o/-PJ(KERJNG Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday,August22,2018 7:04 pm Council Chambers 1. That an animal boarding establishment shall mean a building, structure or part thereof, where dogs, cats and other domesticated animals, excluding livestock, are groomed, trained or kept for a fee on a temporary basis and may include outdoor facilities. 2. That the proposed animal boarding establishment shall only be permitted within the area of the existing commercial building identified as Unit 7 on the submitted plan (refer to Exhibit 3 contained in Committee of Adjustment report dated August 22, 2018). 9. (Tabled at the April 18th mef:}ting) PICA 29118 C. Newton 631 Liverpool Road Moved by Denise Rundle Seconded by Tom Copeland Carried Unanimously That application PICA 29118 by C. Newton, be lifted from the table. Carried Unanimously The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2520, as amended by By-law 5938102, to permit a private school on the subject lands, whereas the by-law does hot permit a private school. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to expand the list of permitted uses on the subject property to include a private school. The Committee Member, Eric Newton, declared that he is not related to the applicant and has no conflict of interest. The Manager, Development Review & Urban Design outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. · Written comments were also received from the City's Engineering Services Department noting that the revised Traffic Report indicates that a restaurant use is expected to result in greater traffic generation than a private school; however no trip generation analysis for a restaurant was provided. The report indicates that the school will . · generate 45 inbound and 37 outbound trips during the morning peak house, operating with an excellent level of services and minimal delay; however the Synchro 9 software used in the analysis has considered the single-lane access as a two-lane access. Page 12 of 16 -C~()f-p](KERJNG· Committee of Adjustment13 Meeting Minutes Wednesday,August22,2018 7:04 pm Council Chambers Due to the one-way access, site traffic will have to wait for each other to exiUenter the site; the actual level of service will go down because of this issue. The traffic report noted that the applicant may use passenger vans of 12 person capacity to transport students to the proposed school; this would be preferred because it would generate less traffic on Liverpool Road and have less of an issue with a single-lane access .. Mori Edelstein, agent, and Carlos Newton, applicant, were present to represent the application. Sarah Dolatshahi of 655 Audley Road South, Lucy Luciano of 1527 Meldron Drive and Mathew Crisp of 935 Essa Crescent were present in favour of the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. · -Mori Edelstein indicated that since the last meeting a revised traffic study has been submitted addressing the volume of traffic and safety concerns. He further stated that the private school operator is committed to using small passenger vans to shuttle students from the main campus to this location in order to reduce traffic. He also stated that his client, Carlos Newton, has submitted a signed petition collecting 66 signatures of residents and 20 signatures from local business in favour of the private school. Mori Edelstein stated that they are in favour of all 'of the conditions, but requested that Condition 5 be amended allow the private school to end at 5:30 pm instead of 6:00 pm. This request is to ·allow Carlos Newton to operate the Mixed Martial Arts School at · 5:45 pm. Mori Edelstein concluded that the proposed complies with the City's Official Plan, will require less parking, the use is similar to other uses on-site and minimal impact on the surrounding areas. Sara Dolatshahi stated that the Montessori School is a family oriented environment, will bring more business to the area; gre~t location to work, shop; play, study and teach children about the environment and nature. Lucy Luciano stated that her children have attended the Montessori School and provided a history and background of her experiences with the school; the Montessori School functions like one large family. Lucy Luciano also stated that since the meeting in April she has had the opportunity to visit the subject property; ask questions and visit local business. Mathew Crisp stated the Montessori School has excellent staff to wmk with, as well a great working community and family environment. David Frampton expressed a concern with traffic and having shuttle buses is not the solution; and the traffic will only increase when the development on Liverpool Road is completed. David Frampton stated he would like the neighbourhood left the way it is. Nancy Norris expressed concernswith no green space and limited parking on-s'ite; the number of students; and using mini vans to transport students that will increase traffic. Page 13 of 16 14 -Ci/J;0f~. --PJCKERJNG Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday,August22,2018 . 7:04 pm Council Chambers Councillor Cumming, Ward 2, expressed several concerns with the increased traffic flow from the proposed drop off and pick up of children without negatively affecting the area residents; limited on-site parking; and potential for traffic to back up on Liverpool Road because of a single aisle driveway. Councillor Cumming stated the surrounding area already has major traffic concerns and is opposed to the application. Councillor McLean, Ward 2, agrees with Councillor Cumming's comments and expressed concerns with traffic safety; that the existing driveway can only accommodate a one-way drive aisle creating an unsafe situation and does not support the application. Councillor McLean stated he would prefer the hours of operation be 7:00 am to 6:00 pm and not end at 5:45 pm as the applicant has requested. In response to questions from Committee Members, Mori Edelstein and Carlos Newton stated that main campus is located at Kingston Road and Rosebank Road. Given the traffic in the immediate area they are no longer interested in operating a restaurant. The purpose of the private school is because of a viable tenant that can make sure of the same space at different times. In response to questions from the Committee, the applicant's transportation consultant stated that notwithstanding the site has along a single-lane access, the level of service would not worsen. Majority of the traffic that will be existing the site will be a north bound right-turn therefore there will be minimal queuing delays along Liverpool Road. Based on their analysis, approximately 1 to 2 vehicles per minutes will be generated during peak hours .. The traffic analysis also took into consideration that all student drop-off and pick-up will happen on-site at the rear of the building. The transportation consultant also acknowledged that if the total number of students were reduced that would potentially reduce traffic volumes Due to the private school being closed during the summer months which is the peak traffic volumes in the area and the applicant has worked with the City to address various traffic and safety concerns, Sean Wiley moved the following motion: Moved by Sean Wiley Seconded by Denise Rundle That application PICA 29/18 by C. Newton, be Approved on the grounds thc;¾t the addition of a private school 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 variance for a private school shall only be approved for a temporary period of two years from the date of this report. Page 14 of 16 -C~6f-p](KER1NG Committee of Adjustment 15 Meeting Minutes Wednesday,August22,2018 7:04 pm Council Chambers 2. That the variance for the private school shall only be permitted to operate within the ground floor and basement of the existing mixed-use building as illustrated on the approved site plan, dated February 9, 2018. 3. That the private school shall be limited to a maximum gross leasable floor area of 335 square metres. 4. That the private school shall not exceed a maximum of 50 students. 5. That the private school shall be permitted to operate from September 1st to July 1st between the hours of 7:00 am and 6:00 pm . . 6. That no other non-residential uses be permitted to operate on the subject property concurrent to the hours of operation of the private school as noted in Condition 5 above. 7. That failure to comply with and maintain the conditions of the Committee will render the approved variance null and void. 8. The operator of the proposed private school shall make arrangements to use passenger vans for transportation of students whenever possible, in order to minimize the amount of vehicular movement required for access and egress. Vote Tom Copeland David Johnson Eric Newton -Denise Rundle Sean Wiley opposed opposed in favour in favour in favour Carried Page 15 of 16 1 6 -C~0f-PJ(KERJNG (IV) Adjournment Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Tom Copeland Committee of Adjustment Mee~ing Minutes Wednesday,August22,2018 7:04 pm Council Chambers That the 11th 'meeting of the 2018 Committee of Adjustment be adjourned at 9: 11 pm and the !")ext meeting of the Committee of Adjustment be held ori Wednesday, September 12, 2018. Carried Unanimously Date Chair Assistant Secretary-Treasurer Page 16 of 16 17 Report to -C1of-p](KER1NG Committee of Adjustment From: Subject: Applications Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Application Numbers: PICA 45118 & PICA 46118 Date: September 12, 2018 Principal Planner, Development Review. Committee of Adjustment Applications PICA 45118 & PICA 46118 J. Greig 5061 William Street PICA 45118 (Proposed Retained Lot) The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by By-law 6640106 to permit a minimum lot area of 0.19 of a hectare, wh.ereas the by-law requires a minimum lot area of 0.3 of a hectare. · PICA 46118 (Proposed Severed Lot) The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by By-law 6640106 to permita minimum lot area of 0.14 of a hectare, whereas the by-law requires a minimum Jot area of 0.3 of a hectare. The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to facilitate the creation of one additional lot for a detached dwelling through the Region of Durham's Land Division Committee. Recommendation (PICA 45118 & PICA 46118) 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 condition: 1. That the applicant obtain clearance for the future Land Division Application by September 13, 2021, or this decision shall become null and void. Background On May 30, 2018, the Committee of Adjustment tabled Minor Variance Applications PICA 45118 & PICA 46118 at the recommendation of City Staff. Staff recommended the subject minor variance applications b.e tabled in order to allow the Region of Durham Health Department to review the proposed development and provide comments regarding the Lot Sizing Policy of the Region of Durham. 1 8 Report PICA 45118 & PICA 46118 September 12, 2018 Page 2 On June 1, 2018, the Region of Durham Health Department provided written comments outlining that they had no objection to the approval of PICA 45118 & PICA 46118. Comment Official Plan and Zoning By-law Pickering Official Plan -"Rural Settlements -Oak Ridges Moraine Rural Hamlets" within the Claremont Settlement Area. Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by By-law 6640106-"ORM-R6" Appropriateness of the Applications Minimum Lot Area Reduction Variances The intent of the minimum lot area requirement of the zoning by-law 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 area of 0.3 of a hectare. The applicant is requesting a reduction in the lot area requirement in order to facilitate the creation of one additional lot through a future Region of Durham Land Division application. The applicant is proposing a minimum lot area of,0.19 of a hectare for the retained parcel and a minimum lot area of 0.14 of a hectare for the severed parcel. The applicant has submitted two conceptual plans (refer Exhibit 2 & 3) which provide the dimensions and details for the two proposed lots, setbacks from the proposed lot line to the existing dwelling on the retained parcel and building sitings for a future dwelling on the proposed severed parcel. The plans demonstrate that the existing dwelling can remain in its current location and maintain the minimum required setbacks from the rear, side and front lot lines and not exceed the maximum lot coverage, should the property be severed. The plans also demonstrate that a future dwelling can be appropriately accommodated on the severed parcel while maintaining the requirements of the zoning by-law. The submitted plans also indicate that separate private sewage systems can be accommodated on both proposed lots. The Region of Durham Health Department has reviewed the proposal and the submitted information and has ·advised that they have no objection to the proposed lots sizes or their ability to accommodate individual private sewage systems. Therefore, the proposed lot area of 0.19 of a hectare and 0.14 of a hectare for the retained and severed parcels, respectively, will be of an appropriate size to accommodate a residential single detached dwelling. · Report PICA 45/18 & PICA 46/18 . · September 12, 20181 9 Page 3 The Official Plan states that in establishing performance standards, there shall be regard for protecting and enhancing the character of surrounding neighbourhoods. As outlined previously, the applicant has demonstrated that the proposed retained and severed lots can accommodate a single detached dwelling, while maintaining the required front, side and rear yard setbacks and the maximum lot coverage of the zoning by-law. Therefore, the proposed variances to reduce the minimum lot area will not negatively impact the character of the surrounding area as the lots are appropriately sized to accommodate single detached dwellings, while maintaining the requirements of the zoning by-law. The properties within the immediate area fronting William Street are significantly sized and characterized by having deep front yards and significant lot frontage ranging between 24.0 metres and 40.0 metres. The proposed retained and severed parcel will have an approximate lot frontage of 40.0 metres and 50.0 metres, respectively, and will be of an appropriate depth to provide a front yard setback that maintains the requirements of the zoning by-law for any future dwellings. Therefore, when viewed from the street, the proposed development will maintain the character of the surrounding area. The Official Plan also states that rural growth shall be directed to rural hamlets and that growth potential within lands designated "Oak Ridges Moraine Rural Hamlets" shall be limited to redevelopment and infilling. The proposal for the creation of one new lot represents infill · development. Staff are of the opinion that the requested variance·s to reduce the minimum lot area are minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the subject property and are in keeping with the ·intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law. Input From Other Sources Engineering Services Durham Regional Health Department Residents of 5088 Brock Road • no comments on the applications • no objection to the approval of the applications • oppose the applications as they do not meet the ·four tests for a minor variance application • it is unclear if the applications maintain the integrity and purpose of the offieial plan as the property is part of a past plan of subdivision, that at the time represented infill development • the proposal does not maintain the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law 20 Report PICA 45118 & PICA 46118 Residents of 5088 Brock Road (continued) Date of report: September 5, 2018 Comments prepared by: CM:DW:jc September 12, 2018 Page 4 • · the proposal is not desirable in nature for the neighborhood or is appropriate as severing this parcel of land into a much smaller lotsize in this neighborhood would alter the characteristics of the existing subdivision and create a precedent for future lots much smaller in nature than originally perceived • the proposal is not minor in nature as the relief sought is close to a 50 percent reduction in required lot are~ • close to a 50 percent reduction in lot size is major · • would alter the integrity of the general area to the detriment of the current landholders surrounding the proposed development Deborah Wylie, GIP, RPP Principal Planner, Development Review J;\Oocuments\Development\0-3700\2018\PCA-45-18 & PCA 46-18\Report\PCA 45-18 & PCA 46-18 Report.doc Attachments -Cdt;{)I-PlCKERlNG City Development Department © n-c---------l ~t-------'-~--1 u5 t---------l E ~1-----t-----i --~---~ ~ Central Street Location Ma File: PICA 45118 & PICA 46118 Exhibit 1 Date: Ma . 07, 2018 1 EXISTING RESIDENTIAL PICA 45118: To permit a minimum lot area of 0.19 hectares /J l PICA 46118: To . permit a minimum lot area of 0.14 hectares Submitted Conceptual Plan - 1 -Oipof- p](KER]NG File No: PICA 45118 & PICA 46118 Applicant: J. Greig EXISTING RESIDENTIAL Property Description: Lot 6, Plan 40M-1482 City Dev~lopment Department L:\Planning\Corel\Planning\Apps\PCA\201 B (5061 William Street) FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. Exhibit 2 ~ WILLIAM STREET EXISTING . RESIDENTIAL : /.:-:. DATE: May 8, 2018 1' ----·--------.. . ~--·· EXISTING RESIDENTIAL PICA 45/18: To . permit a minimum lot area of 0.19 hectares permit a minimum lot area of 0.14 hectares Submitted Conceptual Plan -2 • -· -C~o/- p](KER]NG File No: PICA 45/18 & P/CA 46/18 Applicant: J. Greig Property Description: _Lot 6, Plan 40M-1482 R(oe'./rty Line ..__ (.) ' (t '" '(t. \ Exhibit 3 City Development (5061 William Street) Department FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING DATE: Sept. 4, 20i 8 N> lb==========;::!;gc1~TY~D~E~VE~L~o!2PM~E~N~T~DE~P~AR~T~M!:!EN~t=. =========================================:=.1 w L:\Planning\Corel\Planning\Apps\PCA\2018 24 / -Cdf;t>rJ-p](KERJNG From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner, Deve_lopment Review Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: PICA 65118 Date: September 12, 2018 Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 65118 D. Bowler & M. Tayler 1305 Cornell Court · Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 3385190: • to permit an· accessory building (shed) to be located in the north side yard; whereas the by-law requires all accessory buildings which are not part of the main building to be erected in the rear yard • to permit an accessory building (shed) greater than 1.8 metres in height to be setback a minimum of 0.31 of a metre from the north lot line; whereas the by-law requires accessory structures greater than 1.8 metres in height to be setback a minimum of 1.0 metre from all lot lines • to recognize an accessory building (cabana) greater than 1.8 metres in height to be setback a minimum of 0. 7 of a metre from the south lot line and 0. 75 of a metre from the east lot line; whereas the by-law requires that accessory structures greater than 1.8 metres in height to be setback a minimum of 1.0 metre from all lot lines The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to permit an accessory building (shed) in the side yard and to recognize an accessory building (cabana) in the rear yard. Recommendation 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 Pl0n and the Zoning By-law, and therefore recommends Approval of the proposed variances, subject to the following condition: 1. That these variances apply only to the existing accessory buildings (shed and cabana), as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans and existing on the day of· this report (refer to Exhibit 2). Report PICA 65/18 Background September 12, 201825 Page 2 Due to the circulation of an incorrect notice, PICA 65/18 which was scheduled to be heard at the August 22, 2018 Committee of Adjustment Meeting is. reschE?duled to be heard at the September 12, 2018 Committee Meeting. In order to provide appropriate notice for the application under the requirements of the Planning Act staff recommended the application be deferred and a revised notice sent out. The provision in the original notice stated that "accessory structures must be set back a minimum of 0.6 of a metre from all lot lines". The correct provision is "accessory structures greater than 1.8 metres in height shall be setback a minimum of 1.0 metre from all lot lines". The subject accessory building is approximately 2.8 metres in height. At the August 22, 2018 Committee Meeting some concerns regarding the dimensions of the subject shed were raised. Since the August 22 meeting, staff has conducted a further review of the proposal, including a site visit with staff from the By-law Enforcement Division to re-measure the dimensions and setbacks of all accessory buildings on the property. The dimensions and setbacks provided in this report have been confirmed by staff and the applicant. The resulting review found that the other accessory building on the property (cabana) located in the rear yard, is setback approximately of 0.7 of a metre from the south lot line and 0.75 of a metre from the east lot line; whereas a setback of 1.0 metre is required. A variance to permit the accessory building (cabana) has been added to this application and included in the Revised Notice. Comment Official Plan and Zoning By-law Pickering Official Plan -"Urban Residential Areas -Low Density Areas" within the Liverpool Neighbourhood Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 3385/90 -"S3" Appropriateness of the Application Accessory Building (Shed) Located in the Side Yard and Reduced Setback Variance The intent of the requirement for accessory buildings 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. The intent of the zoning by-law for accessory buildings to provide a minimum setback from lot lines is to ensure that adequate space is provided for maintenance; that the eaves/overhangs do not encroach on adjacent properties, and that the visual impact on adjacent properties is minimized. 2 6 Report PICA 65/18 · September 12, 2018 Page 3 The by-law requires all accessory structures to be located in the rear yard and that accessory structures greater than 1.8 metres in height are to be set back a minimum of 1.0 metre from all lot lines. The applicant has constructed a shed located in the side yard having a height of approximately 2.8 metres, an area of approximately 9.6 square metres and a setback 0.31. of a .metre from the north lot line. The applicant has indicated that the subject shed replaced a previously. existing shed with the same side yard setback but a lower height. As the shed is less than 10.0 square metres in size, no building permit was required for its construction. The shed has a setback of over 15.0 metres from the front lot line and is well set back from the street. The accessory building has no impact on the streetscape, as it is fully screened from the street due to a fence with a gate and vegetation being located between it and the front lot line. · The eaves/overhang of the subject shed is flush with its north wall and is peaked to ensure that rainwater will flow onto the subject property and not onto adjacent lands. The area along the north property line is graded to slope down from the property line towards the dwelling. In their initial review of this application, Development Services recommended that the sh~d be set back a minimum of 0.6 of a metre from the lot line in accordance with Engineering Services Lot Grading Criteria .. Based on the review of additional information regarding the location of the shed with respect to the property lihe, Development Services has confirmed that the shed is not expected to have an adverse effect on neighbouring properties and have revised their comments. Development Services has no objection to the location of the shed. The shed is partially screened by an existing fence along the north side yard, with the peaked roof being visible over the fence line. The existing dwelling is set back between 4.0 metres and 6.8 metres from the north side yard. The shed and a path to the rear yard are located between the dwelling and the north side yard. The view from adjacent properties is of the side wall of the dwelling and the roof of the shed over the fence. The existing height of the accessory structure appears to have minimal visual impact on adjacent properties, which would not be substantially altered by increasing the setback from the property line to the shed. At a setback of 1.0 metre, the peaked roof would still be visible. Accessory Building (Cabana) Setback Variance The intent of the zoning by-law for accessory buildings to provide a minimum setback from lot lines is to ensure that adequate space is provided for maintenance, that the eaves/overhangs do not encroach oh adjacent properties, and that the visual impact on adjacent properties is minimized. .. The by-law requires accessory structures greater than 1.8 metres in height to be set back a minimum of 1.0 metre from all lot lines. The applicant has constructed a cabana having a height of approximately 3.3 metres setback 0.7 of a metre from the south lot line and 0.75 of a metre from the east lot line. The cabana is less than 10.0 square metres in size and did not require a building permit. Report PICA 65/18 September 12, 201827 Page 4 The current location of the cabana appears to provide for adequate space to maintain the accessory structure on all sides. The eaves do not encroach _onto adjacent propertie~ and it appears that the location of the ?Ccessory. structure will ensure that roof drainage will stay on the subject property. The existing shed has minimal visual impact on abutting properties as it is located in the south east corner of the property and is partially screened by a privacy fence to the east and south and mature trees to the east. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variances are 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. Input From Other Sources Development Services Petition signed by Residents of Cornell Court and Linwood Street Date of report: September 6, 2018 Comments prepared by: -~ Rory McNeil Planner I RM:DW:jl \\FS\CSDC\Amanda\docs\templates\CA\programmed\CA Report.doc Attachments • Development Se_rvices has reviewed the revised application and has been provided with additional information regarding the location of the accessory building (shed) with respect to the property line and has no objection to its location, as it will not have an adverse effect on neighbouring properties • no objection to the other requested variances • a petitlon in support of the application was received by the City containing signatures from 18 residents, including two directly adjacent residents Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner, Development Review t,t------1----1 ----+..L.J...L.1...JL.J ~ '----'--.J Hydro Corridor ~ ,Pm 1111111111111mmrrm -04;t>J'-. -PlCKERlNG Location Ma File: PICA 65/18 Applicant: D. Bowler & M. Ta ler Exhibit1 Finch Avenue -11 City Development Department 1305 Cornell Court Date: Jul. 23, 2018 SCALE: 1 :5,000 THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY, To permit an accessory building (shed) greater than 1.8 metres in height to be setback a minimum of 0.31 of a metre from the north lot line -Cr4of-Pl(KER1NG City Development Department L:\Planning\Corel\Planning\Apps\PCA \2018 To permit an accessory building (shed) _to be located in the north side yard Existing Shed (9.6m2) 4.0m 6.1m Cornell Court Submitted Plan File No: P/CA 65/18 Applicant: D. Bowler & M. Tayler Existing Detached · Dwelling Property Description: Blk 27, 40M1609, and Blk 39, 40M1682 (1305 Cornell Court) FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. To recognize an accessory building (cabana) greater than 1.8 metres in height to be setback a minimum of 0.7 of a metre from the south lot line and 0.75 of a metre from the east lot line Exhibit 2 Existing Cabana· DATE: August?, 2018 30 / -C~orJ-p](KERJNG From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner, Development Review Report to Committee ofAdjustment Application Number: PICA 76118 Date: September 12, 2018 Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 76118 A. Sukhra 1503 Alpine Lane Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 2015185 to permit a covered platform (deck) not exceeding 1.3 metres in height above grade to project a maximum of 3.8 metres into the required rear yard, whereas the by-law permits uncovered steps and platforms exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade to project a maximum of 2.5 metres into the required rear yard of each lot so long as no part thereof shall exceed 2.5 metres in depth or 6.0 metres in width. · The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit for the construction of a covered platform (deck) within the rear yard. 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 Plari 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 covered platform (deck), as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans (refer to Exhibit 2). 2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by September 13, 2019 or this decision shall become null and void. Comment Offlcial 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 2015185 -"S-SD" -Single Detached Report PICA 76/18 Appropriateness of the Application September 12, 2018 31 Page 2 The intent of the maximum projection provision of the zoning by-law is to ensure that an adequate amount of private amenity space is provided within the rear yard, appropriate · setbacks are provided to protect the privacy of abutting properties and minimize visual impacts of structures, and allow appropriate access for maintenance, lot grading and drainage. The by-law permits uncovered steps and platforms exceeding 1.0 metres in height above grade to project a maximum of 2.5 metres into the required rear yard of the lot. The applicant is requesting a variance to permit a covered platform (deck), not exceeding 1.3 metres in height above grade and to project a maximum of 3.8 metres into the require rear yard in order to replace and enlarge an existing deck within the rear yard. The covered deck is currently under construction. The ongoing construction of the deck was brought to the attention of the City Development Department by an area resident. Upon investigation by City staff it was determined that the covered deck under construction would require a building permit. Prior to obtaining a building permit, the applicant is required to bring the proposed deck into zoning compliance through a minor variance application. The proposed platform (deck) will be covered and unenclosed and will not exceed 1.3 metres in height above grade. As a result, the proposed deck will not result in a negative visual or privacy impact on abutting properties. In addition, the deck is proposed to maintain a setback of 1.6 metres from the west side lot line and 2.5 metres from the east lot line, which exceeds the 1.3 metre side yard setbacks provided by the existing dwelling. The significant setbacks provided from the side lot lines will further minimize the potential for any visual or privacy impact on abutting properties to· the east and west and will provide adequate space for maintenance, grading a drainage. The proposed deck will be setback 3.7 metres from the rear lot line, which will provide an adequate setback for maintenance grading and drainage, while minimizing the visual impact on the abutting properties immediately to the south. The proposed covered deck will not result in the loss of private amenity space within the rear yard as it is simply providing a raised and covered area for private amenity. 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. Input From Other Sources Engineering Services Date of report: September 6, 2018 Cody Momso-L!n __ Planner II CM:DW:jc J:\Documents\Development\0•3700\2018\PCA 76• 18\Report\PCA 7&.18 Report.doc Attachments • no comments on the application 1fJIIJ/fi • Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner, Development Review Hydro Corridor -Gqjo/-. -PlCKERlNG City Development Department Location Ma File: PICA 76/18 Exhibit 1 40M1542·Now Part 11 40R11867 Date: Au . 08, 2018 SCALE: 1 :5,000 THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. a, s:: co ..J a, s:: ·-0. -<C~ -~of- P](KERJNG City Development Department L:\Planning\Corel\Planning\Apps\PCA 12018 Submitted Plan File No: P/CA 76/18 Applicant: A. Sukhra To permit a covered platform (deck) not exceeding 1.3 metres in height above grade to project a maximum of 3.8. metres into the required rear yard Property Description: Part Lot 7, 40M1542 Now Part 11, 40R11867 (1503 Alpine Lane) FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. Exhibit 2 L ,..._ --- tO r;j-........ -I--w .... Cf) ,.. I I 1.6~. _ • d5 \ DATE:August27,201& ~ -Gipo/- p](KER]NG City Development Department L:\Planning\Corel\Planning\Apps\PCA \201 B 3.8m . ,. .. I '""' .... - l-.l,-l-'l------------------.--4---5j ~; GRo.J-~. Submitted Elevation File No: P/CA 76/18 Applicant: A.·Sukhra Property Description: Part Lot 7, 40M1542 Now Part 11, 40R11867 (1503 Alpine Lane) FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. ir ... Exhibit 3 ~ 1.3m I DATE: August 27, 2018 From: Subject: Application Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP · Principal Planner, Development Review · 35 Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: PICA 77/18 Date: September 12, 2018 Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 77/18 Frontdoor Developments (Pickering) Inc. 2090 Duberry Drive The applicant requests relief from Zoning By~law 3036, as amended by By-law 7541/17, to permit a temporary sales facility (residential home sales), whereas the by-law does not permit a temporary sales facility. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to permit a temporary sales facility on the subject lands for residential home sales. . Comment During the detailed review of the subject minor variance application, it was determined by City Staff that the requested variance was not required to facilitate the proposed temporary sales facility. Based on the City of Pickering's Sales Trailer Standard Operating Procedure, dated May 16, 2011, a temporary sales fa.cility for residential home sales is permitted to operate on a property for a period of up to 24 months, notwithstanding that the proposed use may not comply with the Zoning By-law. The applicant has indicated that the proposed sales facility will not be required for a period lasting longer than 24 months. As a result, the requested variance is not required and the applicant has Withdrawn the application. It is the expectation of the City of Pickering City Development Department that the proposed temporary sales facility will be removed at the conclusion of the aforementioned 24 month period. Date of report: September 5, 2018 Comments prepared by: CM:DW:JI Deborah Wylje, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner, Development Review J:\Documents\Oevelopment\D·3700 Committee of Adjustment (PCA Applicatlons)\2018\PCA 77-18 Frontdoor Dev\Report\PCA 77-18 Report.doc Attachments Hydro Corridor -Cdpo/-· -PICKERING City Development Department Location Ma File: PICA 77 /18 Finch Avenue Inc. -0 ro 0 a::: -"' 0 e 0) Exhibit 1 Usman Road Date:Au 14,2018 _. -Cq;t>/-pJ(KERJNG City Development Department ~ "' '-" ... ..... . . . . . . . . . 0 .... ~ ...... "' ..., .... 0 ;--g ~ ·<>::5 c:::, ..._, ....... 6.00 0 .... ;.., "' ~-l"> T t; 39 I 38 t~ " .;,. Ci ~ ~, \'& N ....., "" 1. ~ '<) GRAVEL PARKING LOT N ~r ,._, 0 0 ,,.. 3.15 ui ~ 'I' Duberry Drive 103.83 Site Plan File No: P /CA 77 /18 0 w 0.. >-f;l~ ,.,, O"" \0 Z-' ..,: :'.i~ !2 5.69 2.0% '° ~ ·i ~ a.. :t: ~~ "!' IQ~ "'ho; N ,,, ....; 6.00 0:, 0 ..., ~ ' 10194 Applicant: Frontdoor Developments (Pickering) Inc. Property Description: Block 111 40M 1413 (2090 Duberry Drive) FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE. CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. 37 Exhibit 2 To permit a temporary sales facility (residential home sales) DATE:August27, 2018 38 \ . \ City Development Department IL Location Plan File No: P/CA 77/18 w > ~ & Applicant: Frontdoor Developments (Pickering) Inc. Property Description: Block 111 40M1413 (2090 Duberry Drive) FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. Exhibit 3 N $ 1' N DATE: August 27, 2018 -Cdjj0/-p](KERJNG From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner: Development Review · Report to 39 Committee of Adjustment Application Number: PICA 78/18 Date: September 12, 2018 Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 78/18 D. De Freitas 1669 Portland Court Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 1698/83: • to permit a minimum rear yard depth of 5.7 metres; whereas the by-law requires a minimum rear yard depth of 7.5 metres • to permit a maximum lot coverage of 42 percent; whereas the by-law requires a maximum lot coverage of 38 percent The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit for a recently constructed addition. Recommendation 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 existing addition, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2 & 3). 2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by September 12, 2019, or this decision shall become null and void. Comment Official Plan and Zoning By-law Pickering Official Plan -"Urban Residential Areas -Medium Density Areas" within the Village East Neighbourhood Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 1698/83 -"S4-SD" 4o Report PICA 78/18 Appropriateness of the Application September 12, 2018 Page 2 Rear Yard Depth and Lot Coverage Variance The intent of the minimum rear yard setback and maximum lot coverage is to ensure adequate amenity space is provided within the rear yard; to ensure that the size, scale and massing of a dwelling is appropriate for the lot size; to ensure ari adequate amount of outdoor amenity . space remains uncovered by buildings; and to ensure that appropriate setbacks are provided to protect the privacy of abutting property owners and allow appropriate access for maintenance, lot grading and drainage. The by~law requires a minimum rear yard depth of 7.5 metres and a maximum lot coverage of 38 percent. The applicant has requested a minimum rear yard depth of 5. 7 metres and a maximum lot coverage of 42 percent to accommodate a one-storey addition, which has already been constructed. The addition is approximately 3. 7 metres in height and does not appear to substantially alter the scale and massing of the existing dwelling. The proposed rear yard depth and lot coverage will maintain a sufficient amount of outdoor amenity area that will remain uncovered and unobstructed on the lot. The addition is to the rear of the dwelling, which backs onto the Village East Park and is partially screened by mature vegetation. The addition is partially screened from adjacent properties to the east and west by a privacy fence and exceeds the minimum side yard setback on both sides. The addition appears to have minimal impact ori the privacy of abutting property owners. The location of the addition appears to provide for more than adequate space for maintenance, lot grading and drainage. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variances are 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. Input From Other Sources Engineering Services • no comments on the application Date of report: September 5, 2018 Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner, Development Review RM:DW:jc . . J:\Documents\Development\0-3700\2018\PCA 78-18\Report\PCA 76-18 Report.doc Attachments Hydro Corridor -Ciq;of-. -PlCKERlNG City Development Department Location Ma File: PICA 78/18 -a (U 0 0:: ~ (.) e Ill Exhibit 1 Date: Au . 29, 2018 SCALE: 1 :5,000 THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. -Cdpof- Pl(KERJNG City Development Department L:\Planning\Corel\Planning\Apps\PCA 12018 Portland Court l 6.12 -5.78 I Submitted Plan · File No: P/CA 78/18 Applicant: D. De Freitas Property Description: Lot 4 40M-1352 (1669 Portland Court) FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. 1 N _ 1.23 I To permit a maximum lot coverage of 42 percent- Addition (23.7m2) To permit a maximum rear yard depth of 5.7 metres Exhibit 2 DATE: August 23, 2018 SILIDING DOOR 2.76 SELF-SEALING ASPHALT SHINGLES PREFIN. ALUM. EAVESTROUGH RWL. & VENTED SOFFFIT 1.42 T 3.62 J_ J 0.47 . 2.66 1.57- 1---9.55 ---- 3.48 ·-5.87 SUNROOM ADDITION -~of- PJ(KERJNG City Development Department L:\Planning\Corel\Planning\Apps\PCA\201 B South Elevation Submitted Elevation · File No: P/CA 78/18 Applicant: D. De Freitas Property Description: Lot 4 40M-1352 (1669 Portland Court) FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. EE WINDOW 24HX36W VYNIL FINISH West Elevation Exhibit 3 DATE: August 23, 201 44~-C~of---p](KERJNG From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner, Development Review Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: PICA 79118 Date: September 12, 2018 Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 79118 I. Hayhurst 4871 & 4875 Victoria Street Application The applicant reque$tS relief from Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by By-law 6640106 to permit a minimum rear yard depth of 3.3 metres; whereas the by-law requires a minimum rear yard depth of 9.0 metres. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit to construct an addition to the existing detached dwelling. · Recommendation The City Development Department considers a variance to permit a minimum rear yard depth of 3.3 metres to be minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, and therefore recommends Approval of the proposed variance, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the applicant provide the City with a Solicitor's Undertaking indicating that the 2 parcels known municipally as 4871 Victoria Street and 4875 Victoria Street will be consolidated on title and that the City will be provided with a copy of the Application to Consolidate Parcels prior to the issuance of a building permit. 2. That this variance apply only to the proposed addition, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3 & 4). 3. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by September 14, 2020, or this decision shall become null and void. Background 4871 and 4875 Victoria Street have been treated as a single lot since at l~ast 2005 when the Committee of Adjustment approved Minor Variance Application PICA 21105 to permit a detached garage with a height of 5.0 metres to be located in the north side yard of the subject lands. · Report PICA 79118 45 September 12, 2018 Page 2 Based on material found in the file of PICA 21105 it appears that the minor variance was approved based on the assumption that the 2 parcels had already been merged on title. However, based on a title search and background research completed for this application, it appears that the 2 parcels have not been merged and still have separate addresses, roll numbers aQd PINs. Although both parcels are owned by the applicant and continue to be used as a single parcel, PICA 21105 has created a situation in which an accessory building (garage) is located on a separate parcel with no main dwelling unit. If the 2 parcels are considered separately, numerous additional variances would be required in order to bring the lots into conformity with the Zoning By-law. Staff would not li.kely support an application ·to have an accessory building located on a parcel without a main dwelling unit. Staff recommends that a condition be added to the approval of this variance application requiring that the 2 parcels be merged on title prior to the applicant obtaining a building permit. This will resolve the majority of zoning non-conformity issues on both lots, with the exception of the re.quested rear yard depth addressed through this application. · Comment Official Plan and Zoning By-law Pickering Official Plan -"Oak Ridges Moraine Rural Hamlets" within the Claremont Settlement Area Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by By-law 6640106 -"ORM-R5" Appropriateness of the Application Rear Yard Depth Variance The intent of the minimum rear yard setback is to ensure adequate amenity space is provided within the rear yard, appropriate setbacks are provided to protect the privacy of abutting property owners and to allow appropriate access for maintenance, lot grading and drainage. The by-law requires a minimum rear yard depth of_9.0 metres. The applicant has requested a minimum rear yard depth of 3.3 metres to accommodate a two-storey addition. The existing dwelling is two-storeys in height at the front of the house and one-storey in height at the rear of the house. The dweiling currently has a rear yard depth of approximately 3.3 metres. The two-storey addition is proposed to replace the one-storey section at the rear of the house. The proposed development will maintain a lot coverage of approximately 11 percent, meeting the maximum lot coverage requirement of 20 percent, and leaving an appropriate amount of · the property uncovered by structures. A sizeable amount of useable amenity space will be maintained i_n the north side yard, south side yard and front yard. 4 6 Report PICA 79/18 September 12, 2018 Page 3 · The proposed development is expected to have minimal impact on the privacy of abutting property owners as the two-storey addition backs onto the rear yarq and accessory building of the adjacent iot to the east, which is largely screened by a row of mature trees and vegetation. Staff is of the opinion that 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. Input From Other Sources Engineering Services Date of report: September 5, 2018 Comments prepared by: ,,--} ~· ( '/////.~:', ~ / -;:; 1/ A·· V' // ,:Y(' ,,,,./ v ,e:... ~ ///~~ ' Rory McNeil Planner I RM:DW:jl \\FS\CSDC\Amanda\docs\lemplates\CA\programmed\CA Report.doc Attachments • no comments on the application Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner, Development Review ') I ~ cu' 7 11ur-;tJ L.l. 1-1-~l I u5L--__ .. ..... 1r §-· -Joseph Street I <D ~l_oi ·r ~ §-Daw! Stre~ -~ . u5 5 C ~ -~~ -. = -'<: -C r ~-~ I IL ti -m~ 15) t---If) ~ . ~ -~ .-~~-rr· ·i iif I -'< ...__ lai If) m q II 0 . <D -m. -Central Street ~t:B (BL-( I --C _OJ c5 a . a>-_JI_ \ ~ ~ ;o >-= \ (I) I---.f: 0 y;; 0 (/j C ro 0 ~-,, Acorn Lane / ......... [7-i_;1 I I -·Ci4;{J/-·-P1CKER1NG ~-Wellington Street 0 ru I -0. _J_ ·c --I--0 ' .'-al I . ~ ~ )j U) -..... -C ~ .8 )-__ H ~ (/j 0) C ·:,; I :.:J f---Subject = Lands j 1/ / V // ,✓ Bovingdon Place / ·r-----I -~ Location Ma File: PICA 79/18 Plan 43 Exhibit 1 I ~ &' t:f cf .._o '(j 1v ~-City Development Department Date: Au . 29, 2018 he rporationo UlEI rtyo e ng roduce (npart)u er cense om: ueens nter, nta o lfllSl!yO alura esources. ri;lhts reserved.;© Her Majesty the Queen In R!ghl of Canada, Department of Natural ReSl:ll!ll:es. AJ rights reserved.; SCALE: 1 :5,000 Teranel Enterprises Inc. and 11s suppliers all rights reserved.;© Municipal Property Asse=enlCorporatlon and ls: suppliers all rights reserved.; THIS IS tlOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. ~• To permit a minimum rear yard depth of 3.3 metres I• Submitted Plan File No: P/CA 79/18 v(7oe/A. -49.5m I I -Oipo/-· - PICKERING Applicant: I. Hayhurst City Development Department L:\Planning\Core~Planning\Apps\PCA 12018 Property Description: Lots 55 & 56, Plan 43 (4871-& 4875 Victoria Street) FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. Exhibit •I s _, •\ 1 Existing ~~ Accessory Building ' I -I ,f l) } .3~-o ~ ~-?'2¥ '? Cf;t • .f",, DATE: August 27, 2018 -C/40/- PlCKERlNG City Developn:ient Department L:\Planning\Corel\Planning\App_s\PCA \2018 i : --, -··-------, ' i: '. i. [ ~ ; : ! r')···--'-···-··-··-·: ; ./~ . ~-----~ South and North Elevations File No: PICA 79/18 Applicant: I. Hayhurst Property Description: Lots 55 & 56, Plan 43 (4871 & 4875 Victoria Street) FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. ·,,~--------··-·-··~--J South Elevation North Elevation Exhibit 3 DATE: August 27, 2018 -C£4-of- PJ(KERJNG City Development Department L:\Planning\Corel\Planning\Apps\PCA\2018 East and West Elevations File No: PICA 79/18 Applicant: I. Hayhurst Proposed Addition Property Description: Lots 55 & 56, Plan 43 (4871 & 4875 Victoria Street) FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. East Elevation West Elevation (View from Victoria Street) ~ . Exhibit DATE: August 27, 2018 -Cif:;of-p](KER]NG From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner, Development Review. 51 Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: PICA 80118 Date: September 12, 2018 Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 80118 1331301 Ontario Inc. In Trust 1450 Pickering Parkway Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 7553117, as amended, to permit a minimum landscaped area of 1.5 metres between an existing residential development and proposed drive aisle, whereas the by-law requires a minimum 3.0 metre wide landscaped area between any existing residential development and parking spaces or aisles. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain site plan approval for a proposed Retirement Home. 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 proposed development, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plan (refer to Exhibit 2). 2. That the applicant obtain final site plan approval for the proposed construction by September 13, 2021, or this decision shall become null and void. Comment Official Plan and Zoning By-law Pickering Official Plan -"Mixed Use Areas -City Centre" within the City Centre Neighbourhood Zoning By-law 7553/17 -"CC2" -City Centre Two -Exception E7 S 2 Report PICA 80/18 Appropriateness of the Application September 12, 2018 Page 2 The intent of the zoning by-law requiring a minimum 3.0-metre landscaped area between parking areas or drive aisles and existing residential development is to provide for an appropriate buffer to minimize the visual impacts of the parking areas on the residential development and minimize potential noise impacts generated from drive aisles. The zoning by-law requires a 3.0 metre wide landscaped area between any existing residential development and the parking spaces or aisles. The applicant has requested to reduce the minimum landscaped area from 3.0 metres to 1.5 metres between a proposed drive aisle and the existing residential development to the north in order to accommodate a new east-west drive aisle providing access to the subject lands from Glenanna Road. The subject site is immediately south of an existing residential apartment building that is five-storeys in height. An eight-storey retirement residence is proposed for the subject site. The proposed retirement residence is subject to site plan control and an application for Site Plan Approval is currently under review by City staff and applicable external agencies. During this process, the details of the site design, circulation and function are reviewed prior to final approval. A landscaped area ranging between 8.0 metres to 23.0 metres in width is provided between the existing residential apartl)1ent building to the north and the mutual lot line. This existing landscaped area on the adjacent lands will directly abut the proposed landscaped area on the subject lands. The adjacent landscaped area consists of manicured landscaping treatments as well as mature trees. As a r.esult of the existing landscaped area on the lands immediately to the north and the substantial setback of the existing residential building from the mutual lot line, the proposed landscaped area of 1.5 metres will provide for an appropriate buffer between the proposed drive aisle and the existing residential development. Staff are of the opinion that the proposed 1.5 metre reduction in landscaped area will not result in a negative noise or visual impact on the existing residential development immediately to the north and that the proposed drive aisle will be adequately setback from the mutual property line. Additional landscaping details will continue to be reviewed through the Site Plan Approval process to ensure that any negative visual or noise impact on the abutting resi.dential development immediately to the north is minimized. Prior to final Site Plan Approval, the proposed development will be subject to the review of the Site Plan Review Committee. The requested variance is minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the property and maintains the purpose and intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law. Report PICA 80/18 Input From Other Sources Engineering Services Date of report: September 6, 2018 Comments prepared by: CM:DW:jl September 12, 201853 Page 3 • no comments on the application Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner, Development Review J:\Documenls\Development\p-3700 Committee of Adjustment (PCA Applicatlons)\2018\PCA 80-1331301 Ontario Inc. In trust\Report\PCA 80-18 Report.doc Attachments -04;~/-PlCKERlNG City Development Department Exhibit 1 Diefenbaker Court Location Ma File: PICA 80/18 Applicant: 1331301 Ontario Inc. In Trust 1450 Pickerin 40M1231; Pis 4 to 9, 15 & 16, 40R10298; Pis 1 to 20, 25 & 26, 40R25784 · M orporationo 11yo enng ro uced{inpart)u er cense om: ueens nnter, ntano 11attyo la!ura esourees, rights reseNed.;©Het Majesty !he Queen ln Right of Carrada, Department of Natural Resources. A1 righ!s reserved.; Teranet Enterprises Im:. and its suppliers all rights reseNed.; e t!unk:lpal Property'A.s.$enment Corp-oration and is sup piers all r~hls reseNed.; THIS JS NOT A PLAN OF sURVEY. -Gtpof- P](KER]NG City Development Department L:\Planning\Corel\Planning\Apps\PCA \2018 ./ Submitted Pla_n File No: P/CA 80/18 Existing Residential Development Applicant: 1331301 Ontario Inc. In Trust To permit a minimum landscaped area of Exhibit 2 1 .5 metres between an existing residential development and · proposed drive aisle ·Property Description: Pt Lt 21, Con 1; Blk 21, Pt Blks 1 & 19 & Pt Sheridan Mall Pkwy, 40M1231; Pts 4 to 9, 15 & 16, 40R10298; Pts 1 to 20, 25 & 26, 40R25784 (1450 Pickering Parkway) FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. DATE: August 27, 201 ss __ C9)of--p](KER]NG · From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner, Development Review Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: PICA 81118 Date: September 12, 2018 Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 81118 S. Thaneeskaran 543 Rosebank Road Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-law 3132189: • to permit an uncovered platform (deck) 1.0 metre in height above grade to project a maximum of 1.0 metre into the required rear yard; whereas the by-law does not permit uncovered steps or platforms to project into the required rear yard -• to permit an existing accessory structure greater than 1.8 metres in height to be setback a minimum of 0.8 of a metre from the south lot line and 0.9 of a metre from the east lot line; whereas the by-law requires accessory structures greater than 1.8 metres in height to be setback a minimum of 1.0 metre from all lot lines The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit for a deck located in the rear yard and recognize an existing accessory structure (shed) located in the rear yard. Recommendation 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 uncovered platform (deck) and accessory structure (shed), as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans (refer to Exhibit 2). 2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the subject deck by September 12, 2020, or this decision shall become null and void. . Report PICA 81/18 Comment Official Plan and Zoning By-law September 12, 20185 7 Page 2 Pickering Official Plan -"Urban Residential Areas -Low Density Areas" within the Rosebank Neighbourhood Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-law 3132/89 -"S" Appropriateness of the Application Uncovered Platform Projecting into the Required Rear Yard Variance The intent of a minimum rear yard setback 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 to provide appropriate access for maintenance, lot grading and drainage. Zoning By-law 2511 does not contain provisions allowing for uncovered steps.or platforms to project into the required rear yard. The subject property currently has a rear yard depth of · 9.4 metres, whereas the by-law requires a rear yard depth of 7.5 metres. The applicant has requested to permit an uncovered platform (deck) 1.0 metre in height above grade to project a maximum of 1.0 metre into the required rear yard. The subject deck has already been constructed. At its widest point the deck has a depth of 5.7 metres; however only 1.0 metre of the deck projects into the required 7.5 metre setback. The deck is setback approximately 6.5 metres from the rear lot line. · In other areas of the City under Zoning By-law 2520 and 3036, uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade may project not more than 1.5 metres into ttie required rear yard. Under other City Zoning By-laws the subject deck would be permitted as-of-right. The deck maintains an appropriate size and scale compared to that of the main dwelling and will not result in any loss of usable amenity space in the rear yard. An appropriate setback between the deck and the side and rear lot lines will be maintained to provide for privacy from adjacent properties and to allow access for maintenance, grading, and drainage on the subject property. Accessory Building Setback Variance The intent of the minimum 1.0 metre setback requirement for accessory structures, greater than 1.8 metres in height, is to ensure that adequate space is available for maintenance, that the eaves/overhangs do not encroach on adjacent properties, that roof drainage stays on the subject property, and to minimize any visual impact on adjacent properties. 58· Report PICA 81/18 September 12, 2018 Page 3 The existing shed has an area of approximately 6.6 square metres, a height of approximately 2.4 metres, and is setback 0.8 of a metre from the the south lot line and 0.9 of a metre from ttie east lot line. The current location of the shed appears to provide for adequate space to maintain the accessory structure on all sides. The eaves do not encroach onto adjacent properties and H appears that the location of the accessory structure will ensure that roof drainage will stay on the subject property. The existing shed has minimal visual impact on abutting properties as it is located in the south east corner of the property abutting the rear yard and accessory structure of the property to the east and is partially screened by a privacy fence to the east and south. 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 Date of report: September 4, 2018 Comments prepared by: Rory McNeil Planner I RM:DW:jl \\FS\CSDC\J\manda\docs\lemplates\CA\programmed\CA Report.doc Attachments • no comments on the application Deborah Wylie, CIP, RPP Principal Planner, Development Review Q) . ·E ,_l""'"T_,....,.....-.---_, a "/i t---'--1-'----'--'--~ <( 1---l-------~ C 2------~ C :::, 0 t-------l-~----1 ~~ -e---f-....--·----I f----w --..... C Q) u· CJ) ai· 0 -~ c :c cu Q) a () CJ) Q) .... u 1'.J 0 Q) • o-2_ -2 . J-lj; 111 ~RIii r-----t----1 ~ 1-'---'r---+----l 15 0 r-----r------i l cu t------io I I I I .~)== ,a/ I 12!1 1JJ I I /l 111 Staghorn Road HII Is I I 0 u J~ a.. I I I I I I T Location Ma I f--.. l Su~ -Lands ~ T -~o/-PlCKERlNG File: PICA 81/18 City Development Department Exhibit 1 Petticoat Creek Conservation Area Date: Au . 29, 2018 SCALE: 1 :5,000 THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. ;::cl 0 Cl) Cl) O" Q) :::s " ;::cl 0 Q) C. -C£fpo/- P1(KER1NG City Development Department L:\Planning\Corel\Planning\Apps\PCA\2018 :i: N 72°301 2011E l1J a:: w II. w a:: 7.69 3: (/) ca ~ 0 v 7.69 0 0 ui Submitted Plan File No: P/CA 81/18 3 D.U.C. To permit an uncovered platform (deck) 1.0 metre in height above grade to project a maximum of 1.0 metre into the required rear yard Applicant: S; Thaneeskaran Property Description: Lot 4 40M-1616 (543 Rosebank Road) FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. Exhibit 2 ~ 33.50 (P8M) I (J 6.5m a, . <O 3: ~ I <;1" 0 9.4m 0 . .: 3.9m 0 v Existing~ ' .. ~ Shed 33 .50 (PAM\ To recognize an accessory structure (shed) greater than 1.8 metres in height to be setback a minimum of 0.8 of a metre from the south lot line and 0.9 of a metre from the east lot line DATE: August 27, 2018 61 Report to -Cif:jo/-PJ(KERJNG Committee of Adjustment From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner, Development Review Application Number: PICA 82/18 Date: September.12, 2018 Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 82/18 G. & R. Hamdan 1505 Terracotta Court Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 2015/85 to permit an uncovered platform (deck) not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade to project' a maximum of 4.1 metres into the required rear yard; whereas the by-law requires uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade to project not more than 1.5 metres into any required rear yard. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit to construct a deck in the rear yard. 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 proposed deck, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans (refer to Exhibit 2). 2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by September 13, 2019, or this decision shall become null and void. Comment Official Pla·n 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" 6 2 Report PICA 82/18 Appropriateness of the Application September 12, 2018 Page2 The intent of the zoning by-law provision requiring maximum projections of platforms into the rear yard is to ensure that any structures can be appropriately maintained without having to encroach onto abutting properties, to minimize any adverse impact on adjacent neighbours such·as privacy and to ensure that an adequate outdoor amenity area is provided within the rear yard. The by-law requires uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade to project not more than 1.5 metres into any required rear yard. The applicant is proposing an uncovered platform (deck) not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade to project a maximum of 4.1 metres into the required rear yard. The deck which is under construction has a height of 1.3 metres and projects 5.3 metres into the rear yard. City Building Services has identified that a building permit is required. In consultation with City Development staff, the applicant agreed to revise the proposal to reduce the height of the proposed deck to meet the maximum 1.0 metre height limit for uncovered platforms, and reduce the projection to 4.1 metres. The proposed revised deck will be setback approximately 3.4 metres from the rear lot line and . will cover a portion of the west side of the rear yard; providing an adequate buffer space between the deck and rear lot line as well as from abutting property owners. The proposed deck will provide for additional outdoor amenity area and will maintain an adequate amount of ~ soft landscaped area in the rear yard. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variances are 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. Input From Other Sources Engineering Services Date of report: Septemb_er 6, 2018 Comments prepared by: ~~~ b''/ ~ ~~ /y ~-'. Rory McNeil· Planner I RM:DW:jc J:\Documenls\Development\D-3700\2018\PCA 82-18\Report\PCA 62-16 Report.doc Attachments • no comments on the application JJwAJ!:! Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Principal. Planner, Development Review Exhibit 1 Hydro Corridor Location Map ·-04;4-File: PICA 82/18 P1CKER1NG Applicant: Giath & Rola Hamdan City Development Property Description: Part Lot 27 40M1542 Parts 5 & 6 40R11918 Department (1505 Terracotta Court) Date: AuQ. 20, 2018 t61 he l..'Orporation o me 1..,ity o ,,.,.enng rro uce t n part) unoer 11cense 1rom: 1&1 uueel'IS 1-'nnter, Ut'l ano MlllStr)' o · Natura1 ttesources. SCALE: 1 :5,000-I ~U rights rese1Ved.;© Her Majesty the Queen In Right of Canada, Department of Hatural Resources. Af righ!s reserved.; :i;iTeranel Enterprises Inc. and lls suppliers aU ri9hls reser,,ed.;C Munlclpal PropertyAssessmentCorporatkln and b suppien, all rights reserved..: THIS JS HOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. 64· -04;bf-P1CKER1NG City Development Department Site Plan Existing Dwelling File No: P/CA 82/18 Applicant: G. & R. Hamdan Exhibit 2 To permit an uncovered platform . (deck) not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above.grade to project a maximum of 4.1 metres into the required rear yard 1' Property Description: Part Lot 27 40M1542, Parts 5 & 6 40R11918 (1505 Terracotta Court) 'FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. DATE: August 29, 2018