HomeMy WebLinkAboutSeptember 9, 2020-C14of-p](KER1NG Present Tom Copeland -Vice-Chair David Johnson -Chair Eric Newton Denise Rundle Sean Wiley Also Present Deborah Wylie, Secretary-Treasurer Samantha O'Brien, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer Isabel Lima, Planner I Absent 1. Disclosure of Interest No disclosures of interest were noted. 2. Adoption of Agenda Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Tom Copeland Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, September 9, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting That the agenda for the Wednesday, September 9, 2020 meeting be adopted. 3. Adoption of Minutes Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Denise Rundle Carried Unanimously That the minutes of the 6th meeting of the Committee of Adjustment held Wednesday, August 12, 2020 be adopted. Carried Unanimously Page 1 of 14
-CdJ;of-p](KERlNG 4. Reports 4.1 PICA 44120 S. Kathiravel 1290 Old Orchard Avenue, Unit 10 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, September 9, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-law 6375104 and By-law 7201112, to permit a minimum rear yard depth of 6.0 metres for an uncovered deck, whereas the By-law requires a minimum rear yard depth of 7.5 metres. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit for an uncovered deck. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to a condition. Written comments were received from the City's Building Services Section expressing no comments on the application. Written comments were received from the City's Engineering Services Department expressing no comments on the application. Sivarooby Kathiravel, applicant, was present to represent the application. Daphne FitzGerald, 1290 Old Orchard Avenue Unit 1, was present in support of the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. After considering the City Development Department's report, recognizing there are no concerns from the City's Engineering Services and Building Services, that there is support from the surrounding neighbours and that the application appears to meet the four tests of the Planning Act, Sean Wiley moved the following motion: Moved by Sean Wiley Seconded by Denise Rundle That application PICA 44120 by S. Kathiravel, 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 this variance apply only to the proposed uncovered deck, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans (refer to Exhibit 2 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment dated September 9, 2020). Carried Unanimously Page 2 of 14
4.2 PICA 45/20 Marshall Homes (Copperfield) Ltd. 520 West Shore Boulevard Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, September 9, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-law 7610/18, to permit: • minimum lot frontage of 7.6 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum lot frontage of 15 metres; • minimum front yard setback of 2.4 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum front yard setback of 7.5 metres; • minimum rear yard setback of 1.5 metres; whereas the By-law requires a minimum rear yard setback of 7.5 metres; • maximum lot coverage of 40 percent, whereas the By-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent; • an uncovered platform (second-storey balcony) not exceeding 5.0 metres in height above grade, whereas the By-law requires uncovered steps and platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.5 metres into any required front yard and not more than 1.0 metres into any required side yard. The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit for a detached dwelling. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Written comments were received from the City's Building Services Section expressing no comments on the application. Written comments were received from the City's Engineering Services Department expressing that the applicant ensure additional percentage of lot coverage does not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lot. Consideration for rain harvesting or other LID measures should be made at the Building Permit stage if increasing the imperviousness of the lot surface. Written comments were received from the Durham of Region Works Department expressing no objections to the proposal. Page 3 of 14
Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, September 9, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority provided the following written comments: • The subject site contains a flood or erosion hazard associated with Lake Ontario. TRCA staff are unable to determine the location of the natural hazard without a peer review of a Coastal Hazard Study prepared by a qualified Coastal Engineer. The location of the natural hazard is critical to determine if the proposed new dwelling is adequately setback from that natural hazard in order to reduce the risk to life and property, and to determine whether TRCA can support the proposal from a conservation authority regulatory perspective. We are concerned that the proposed variances, if approved, may be moot if the proposal changed to accommodate TRCA regulatory requirement. • In addition, the application appears to be predicated on a conveyance of land to the TRCA. Please be advised that there is no agreement neither formal nor in principle, for any such conveyance and we advise that that the conveyance of lands to TRCA should not be considered in the review of any minor variance application unless the conveyance is approved by TRCA's Board of Directors. • As such, TRCA staff cannot determine if the proposed dwelling is adequately setback from the natural hazard, whether the lot configuration as proposed is appropriate and, therefore, whether we can support the issuance of a TRCA permit. Further details of the proposal are required to determine if TRCA can support the minor variances. • A TRCA permit application has not been received for the proposed replacement detached dwelling. The applicant is advised to pre-consult with TRCA staff prior to submitting an application. • Given the above, TRCA staff opinion is that the application is premature. We request tabling of Minor Variance Application No. PICA 45/20 until we have had the opportunity to review a Coastal Hazard Study, identified the appropriate location and size of a new dwelling, and completed any land conveyance agreements that may be supported by TRCA's Board of Directors. TRCA staff would be pleased to meet with the various parties involved, including the City of Pickering, to discuss an overall approach for this portion of the waterfront. Samantha Bateman, agent, was present to represent the application. Also in attendance was Councillor Brenner. Page 4 of 14
Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, September 9, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting Samantha Bateman outlined the application, indicating agreement with the staff report, and noted that the lot is uniquely shaped with an easement running through of the property where a building is not permitted. Also noted was that the staff report indicates due to orientation of the lot minor variances would be required to permit a replacement dwelling. Ms. Bateman advised that the applicant is in negotiations with TRCA, that TRCA concerns can be addressed at TRCA permit, and building permit stages. Councillor Brenner addressed the Committee indicating that the proposal is complex with matters that go beyond the proposed minor variances that are before the Committee. He noted that TRCA commented indicating the variance application is premature. Councillor Brenner requested the Committee to table the application to allow further discussions in an effort to resolve differences and ensure environmental concerns are addressed. In response to Chair's question about whether anyone present wished to comment on this application, the following people addressed the Committee. Genevieve Lattouf, 528 West Shore Boulevard, noted TRCA has requested the application be tabled, and identified concerns that the proposed dwelling is not appropriate development of the property. Jasmine Rauh-Munch, 509 Marksbury Road, requested deferral of the application citing serious concerns with the proposed property lines, building elevation and footprint, and waterfront trail and erosion. Christopher Rankin, 515 Marksbury Road, indicated concerns regarding waterfront erosion, relocation of the waterfront trail, proposed new property line, prematurity of the application, and that the proposed variances are not minor. Jane Stone, 521 Park Crescent, noted concerns over waterfront erosion, location of proposed dwelling on the lot and proximity to the cliff, tree removal, and requested that the proposed lot coverage be denied. Barb Szinessy, 501 Marksbury Road, indicated that the application is premature considering negotiations with TRCA are ongoing, the waterfront trail should not run behind houses, and the variances are not minor. Concern was noted over the impact of construction equipment on the stability of the bluff, impact of the proposed development on mature trees, and the increased flood risk to surrounding properties. Paul White, 507 Cliffview Road, indicated that an Official Plan Amendment implementing the Infill and Replacement Housing Study will be considered by Council next week resulting in the proposal not being in keeping with intent and purpose of the Official and Zoning By-law. It was also noted that the application is premature as the proposed new property line may require an application for land division. Mr. White supported TRCA's request for tabling of the application. Page 5 of 14
Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, September 9, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting In response to a question asked by a Committee member, the Secretary-Treasurer responded that she was not aware of recent discussions involving the City regarding the trail. Councillor Brenner indicated that in discussion with Regional Councillor Kevin Ashe and TRCA Board member, he is aware that there have been discussions and will continue to be discussions regarding the waterfront trail at this location. In response to a question from a Committee member, Samantha Bateman responded that she has not been involved in discussions regarding conveyance of lands for trail purposes and that the easement running through the property makes redevelopment of the north portion of the property difficult. In response to a question from a Committee member, Samantha Bateman responded the applicant has not submitted a land division application to create the lot addition parcel, and that an application for a TRCA permit has not been submitted. In response to questions from a Committee member, Samantha Bateman responded that the applicant has received a proposal for a coastal hazard study, the proposed dwelling footprint is expanded slightly to the east to accommodate a garage, and the applicant has not yet proceeded with building elevations as the building design is in preliminary stages. Councillor Brenner indicated that he is not speaking against the application however confirmed that the application is premature and tabling the application would allow time to arrive at a waterfront trail solution suitable for the community, the applicant and the City. After hearing the residents, applicant, and the Councillor; considering TRCA's comments, and recognizing the need for further discussions between the residents, the applicant and TRCA, Tom Copeland moved the following motion: Moved by Tom Copeland Seconded by Eric Newton That application PICA 45/20 by Marshall Homes (Copperfield) Ltd., be Tabled until further negotiations are completed with the TRCA. Carried Unanimously Page 6 of 14
-C~6f-p](KER]NG 4.3 PICA 46/20 W. & D. Steinwall 120 Woodview Drive Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, September 9, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended, to permit: • an accessory building (garage) which is not part of the main building to be erected in the front yard, whereas the By-law requires all accessory buildings which are not part of the main building to be erected in the rear yard; • an accessory building (garage) with a maximum height of 6.35 metres, whereas the By-law requires no accessory building to exceed a height of 3.5 metres in any residential zone; • an accessory structure (shed) to be setback a minimum of 0.2 metres from the east side lot line, whereas the By-law requires accessory structures to be setback a minimum of 0.6 metres from all lot lines. The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit for a detached garage and to recognize a deficient side yard setback for an existing shed. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to a condition. Written comments were received from the City's Building Services Section expressing no comments on the application. Written comments were received from the City's Engineering Services Department expressing no comments on the application. Written comments were received from four surrounding neighbours expressing they have reviewed the proposed plans for the garage and have no objections. Warren Steinwall, applicant, and John Antonopoulos, agent were present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Warren Stienwall explained the height variance is to accommodate storage. In response to a question from a Committee Member, Warren Stienwall indicated the garage will only be heated and there will be no plumbing. After considering the City Development Department's report, visiting the site, recognizing support from the surrounding neighbours, and that the proposed height appears to complement the dwelling and the streetscape, Sean Wiley moved the following motion: Page 7 of 14
Moved by Sean Wiley Seconded by Eric Newton Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, September 9, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting That application PICA 46120 by W. & D. Steinwall, 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 condition: 1. That these variances apply only to the proposed detached garage and existing shed, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 & 7 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment dated September 9, 2020). Carried Unanimously 4.4 PICA 47120 A. & 0. Grignon 1795 Pine Grove Avenue The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended, to permit a commercial vehicle with a maximum height of 3.5 metres and a maximum length of 8.25 metres to be parked on a residential lot, whereas the By-law permits vehicles parked on any residential lot to be a maximum height of 2.6 metres and a maximum length of 6.7 metres. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to permit the parking of a commercial vehicle used for the operation of a home-based business in a residential driveway. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to a condition. Written comments were received from the City's Building Services Section expressing no comments on the application. Written comments were received from the City's Engineering Services Department expressing no concerns with the application. Written comments were received from Derek and Mercia Jaglall, 1790 Pine Grove Avenue, in objection to the application indicating that the variance does not comply with the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, is not minor, and citing precedent setting and safety concerns. Page 8 of 14
-C1o/-P](KER]NG Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, September 9, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting Written comments were received from Stephanie McQuaid, 1800 Pine Grove Avenue, in objection to the application citing concerns that a precedent will be set allowing parking of large commercial vehicles in a residential area. Written comments were received from Maria Veriniotis, 1784 Pine Grove Avenue, in objection. Written comments were received from Amelia DeVito, 1840 Pine Grove Avenue, in objection citing concerns that a precedent will be set allowing parking of large commercial vehicles in a residential area. Written comments were received from Roger Gianfriddo, 1670 Valley Ridge Crescent, in objection citing precedent setting concerns. Written comments were received from Mary Gianfriddo, 1799 Pine Grove Avenue, in objection citing precedent setting, visual, and safety concerns. Written comments were received from Nancy Park, 219 Wilcroft Court, in objection indicating it will have a negative impact on the neighbourhood. Written comments were received from Jody Loussarian, 1793 Pine Grove Avenue, in objection indicating parking of the large commercial vehicle is undesirable, very noisy when in reverse and does not fit within the neighbourhood. Written comments were received from Bill Baldasti, 1818 Pine Grove Avenue, in objection citing precedent setting, visual and safety concerns of large commercial vehicles parking in residential areas. Andrew Grignon, applicant, indicated approval of the variance would support his small business. Bill Baldasti spoke to written comments previously received; indicating safety concerns with the size of the commercial vehicle; and concerns that a precedent will be set in the surrounding neighbourhood. Kevin Neild, 1796 Pine Grove Avenue, indicated that the he believes the spirit of the zoning is intended to address parking of residential vehicles and not large commercial vehicles. He also noted that parking of the commercial vehicle will impact the streetscape, the height and length of the vehicle is not minor; there are safety concerns, and concerns over setting a precedent for other small business owners in the area. Wendy Jo Hanninen, 1808 Pine Grove Avenue, spoke to written comments previously received; indicated that in addition to comments made by previous speakers there are safety and noise concerns, and property values will be affected. Page 9 of 14
Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, September 9, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting In response to questions from residents, Andrew Grignon responded that the vehicle does not have a back-up noise emitting device, the driveway is large, and large trees screen the truck. In response to a question from a Committee member, City staff responded that written comments are not passed on to the applicant. Notwithstanding that, the staff report indicates the lot is large, and the truck does not dominate the property, enforcement by the City of parking of the truck as shown on the site plan is difficult. In addition, recognizing that the variance runs with the property and future owners may not be as responsible as the current owner, that landscaping may be removed, and concern that a precedent for parking of commercial vehicles may be set, Denise Rundle moved the following motion: Moved by Denise Rundle Seconded by Tom Copeland That application PICA 47120 by A. & 0. Grignon, be Refused on the grounds that the requested variance is not desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and is not in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. Vote Tom Copeland David Johnson Eric Newton Denise Rundle Sean Wiley in favour in favour in favour in favour opposed 4.5 PICA 48120 to PICA 52120 Oak Ridges Seaton Inc. Carried Lots 86, 93, 94, 95 and 96 on Draft Approved Plan of Subdivision SP-2008-06 The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 7364114, as amended, to permit street townhouse dwellings in the Low Density Type 2 (LD2) Zone, whereas the LD2 Zone in the By-law only permits detached dwellings and semi-detached dwellings. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to permit nine street townhouse dwellings on Lots 86, 93, 94, 95 and 96 on Draft Approved Plan of Subdivision SP-2008-06. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Page 10 of 14
Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, September 9, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting Written comments were received from the City's Building Services Section expressing no concerns with the application. Written comments were received from the City's Engineering Services Department expressing no concerns with the application. Written comments were received from the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority expressing no objections. Billy Tung, 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, Bill Tung indicated the change from detached dwellings to street townhouses would be in keeping with the surrounding neighbourhood. After considering the City Development Department's report, hearing comments from the agent, and that the applications appear to meet the four tests of the Planning Act, Tom Copeland moved the following motion: Moved by Tom Copeland Seconded by Eric Newton That applications PICA 48120 to PICA 52120 by Oak Ridges Seaton Inc. be Approved on the grounds that 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, subject to the following conditions: 1. That this variance apply only to Lots 86, 93, 94, 95 and 96 on Draft Approved Plan of Subdivision SP-2008-06, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2 & 3 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment dated September 9, 2020). 2. That the proposed street townhouse dwellings be constructed in accordance with Zoning By-law 7364114, Low Density Type 2 -Multiple (LD2-M) Zone performance standards. Carried Unanimously Page 11 of 14
4.6 PICA 53120 to PICA 56120 Zavala Developments Inc. Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, September 9, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting Block 156, Lots 157 & 158 and Block 161 on Draft Approved Plan of Subdivision SP-2008-05 Block 156 (PICA 53120) The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 7364114, as amended, to permit a maximum of 9 street townhouse dwellings in a street townhouse building in the Low Density Type 2 -Multiple (LD2-M) Zone, whereas in the By-law the maximum number of street townhouse dwellings in a street townhouse building shall be 8 in the LD2-M Zone. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to permit 9 street townhouse dwellings in a street townhouse building on Block 156 on Draft Approved Plan of Subdivision SP-2008-05. Lots 157 & 158 (PICA 54120 and PICA 55120) The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 7364/14, as amended, to permit street townhouse dwellings in the Low Density Type 2 (LD2) Zone, whereas the LD2 Zone in the By-law only permits detached dwellings and semi-detached dwellings. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to permit 5 street townhouse dwellings on Lots 157 and 158 on Draft Approved Plan of Subdivision SP-2008-06. Block 161 (PICA 56120) The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 7364/14, as amended, to permit a maximum of 9 street townhouse dwellings in a street townhouse building in the Mixed Corridor Type 2 (MC2) Zone, whereas in the By-law the maximum number of street townhouse dwellings in a street townhouse building shall be 8 in the MC2 Zone. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to permit 9 street townhouse dwellings in a street townhouse building on Block 161 on Draft Approved Plan of Subdivision SP-2008-05. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Written comments were received from the City's Building Services Section expressing no concerns with the application. Written comments were received from the City's Engineering Services Department expressing no concerns with the application. Page 12 of 14
Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, September 9, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting Written comments were received from the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority expressing no objections. Billy Tung, agent, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. After reviewing the staff Recommendation Report, acknowledging that these variance applications are not introducing new land use on Lots 157 and 158, and recognizing that the proposed variances are a minor increase in density across properties; Denise Rundle moved the following motion: Moved by Denise Rundle Seconded by Sean Wiley That application PICA 53120 by Zavala Developments Inc., 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 this variance apply only to Block 156 on Draft Approved Plan of Subdivision SP-2008-05, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2 & 3 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment dated September 9, 2020). That applications PICA 54120 and PICA 55120 by Zavala Developments Inc., be Approved on the grounds that the requested variance is minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, subject to the following conditions: 1. That this variance apply only to Lots 157 and 158 on Draft Approved Plan of Subdivision SP-2008-05, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2 & 3 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment dated September 9, 2020). 2. That the proposed street townhouse dwellings be constructed in accordance with Zoning By-law 7364114, Low Density Type 2 -Multiple (LD2-M) Zone performance standards. That application PICA 56120 by Zavala Developments Inc., 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 this variance apply only to Block 161 on Draft Approved Plan of Subdivision SP-2008-05, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2 & 3 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment dated September 9, 2020). Carried Unanimously Page 13 of 14
-C14of-p](KER1NG 5. Adjournment Moved by Sean Wiley Seconded by Denise Rundle Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, September 9, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting That the 7th meeting of the 2020 Committee of Adjustment be adjourned at 8:33 pm and the next meeting of the Committee of Adjustment be held on Wednesday, October 14, 2020. Carried Unanimously October 14, 2020 Date Chair Assistant Secretary-Treasurer Page 14 of 14