Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAugust 14, 2024 Committee of Adjustment Agenda Hearing Number: 8 Date: Wednesday, August 14, 2024 pickering.ca Agenda Committee of Adjustment Wednesday, August 14, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page Number For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Secretary-Treasurer or Assistant Secretary-Treasurer Telephone: 905.420.4617 Email: citydev@pickering.ca 1. Disclosure of Interest 2. Adoption of Agenda 3. Adoption of Minutes from July 10, 2024 hearing 1-11 4. Minor Variance Reports 4.1 MV 03/24 – 1338 Poprad Avenue 12-18 4.2 MV 38/24 – 734 Hillcrest Road 19-31 4.3 MV 44/24 – 1598 Major Oaks Road 32-38 4.4 MV 45/24 – 459 Churchwin Street 39-46 4.5 MV 46/24 – 2161 Denby Drive 47-54 4.6 MV 47/24 – 275 Uxbridge-Pickering Townline Road 55-69 4.7 MV 48/24 – 186 Bralorne Trail 70-75 4.8 MV 49/24 – 2099 Duberry Drive 76-83 4.9 MV 50/24 – 621 West Shore Boulevard 84-93 4.10 MV 51/24 – 1494 Rosebank Road 94-104 4.11 MV 52/24 – 1375 Uxbridge-Pickering Townline Road 105-111 5. Adjournment Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, July 10, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 1 of 11 Pending Adoption Present Omar Ha-Redeye Denise Rundle – Vice-Chair Sakshi Sood Joshi Rick Van Andel Sean Wiley – Chair Also Present Deborah Wylie, Secretary-Treasurer Cody Morrison, Secretary-Treasurer – Host Jasmine Correia, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer Liam Crawford, Planner II Ziya Cao, Planner I Absent Not applicable 1.Disclosure of Interest Sakshi Sood Joshi indicated a disclosure of interest for Item Number 4.4 - MV 40/24, assuch Sean Wiley will not vote on this item to avoid a tie vote. 2.Adoption of Agenda Moved by Omar Ha-RedeyeSeconded by Rick Van Andel That the agenda for the Wednesday, July 10, 2024 hearing be adopted. Carried Unanimously 3.Adoption of Minutes Moved by Rick Van AndelSeconded by Omar Ha-Redeye That the minutes of the 6th hearing of the Committee of Adjustment held Wednesday,June 12, 2024 be adopted. Carried -1- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, July 10, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 2 of 11 4. Minor Variance Reports 4.1 (Deferred at the June 12, 2024 Committee of Adjustment Hearing) MV 31/24 P. Tekumalla & S. Vedantam 2719 Sapphire Drive Due to her absence at the June 12, 2024 Committee of Adjustment hearing, Denise Rundle recused herself from voting on this item. In order to avoid a tie vote, Sean Wiley will not be voting on the item. The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 7364/14, as amended by By-laws 7857/21 and 8038/23, to permit a minimum 0.9 metre wide path of travel from the entrance of an additional dwelling unit to a public street, whereas the By-law requires that all lots containing additional dwelling units shall provide a minimum 1.2 metres wide path of travel from the entrance of each additional dwelling unit to a public or private street. The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application to obtain a building permit for the construction of an additional dwelling unit in the basement of the existing single detached dwelling. Input from other sources were received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services, City’s Building Services Section and the Toronto and the City’s Fire Services Department. Nadeem Ismaili, agent and Phani Tekumalla, applicant, were present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. The agent commented that they have spoken with Fire Services and came to a resolution to install water sprinklers in the basement unit and proper lighting in the side yard. Moved by Rick Van Andel Seconded by Sakshi Sood Joshi That application MV 31/24 by P. Tekumalla & S. Vedantam, 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 Zoning By-law, subject to the following conditions: 1. That this variance applies only to the subject property, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated July 10, 2024). -2- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, July 10, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 3 of 11 2. That automatic sprinkler systems be installed and maintained within the existing single detached dwelling and proposed additional dwelling unit, in accordance with NFPA 13R, to the satisfaction of Fire Services. 3. That prior to the issuance of a building permit, Fire Services shall be satisfied with the proposal to construct an additional dwelling unit in the basement of the existing single detached dwelling. Carried 4.2 MV 33/24 N. Turney 107 Secord Street The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 4271/93, to permit an uncovered platform and associated steps (rear yard deck) not exceeding 1.6 metres in height above grade and not projecting more than 2.0 metres into the required rear yard, whereas the By-law permits uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.5 metres into the required rear yard. The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application to obtain a building permit for an existing deck in the rear yard. Input from other sources were received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services, City’s Building Services Section and two area residents. In support of the application, the applicant identified that the deck was reconstructed with a smaller footprint to accommodate a swing set. The deck was also reconstructed to be one level versus two. The height relief is due to the grade of the lot and the height of the patio doors. The size of the deck is needed to accommodate family seating and a barbeque. Nicholas Turney, applicant, was present to represent the application. One area resident was present in favour of the application. The applicant advised that the rear of his property is lined with tall cedars and there is a privacy fence to the right of the deck. An area resident commented that they have no concerns on the application and provided their support. After reviewing the staff report, making a site visit and considering applicant and neighbour comments, Denise Rundle made the following motion: -3- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, July 10, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 4 of 11 Moved by Denise Rundle Seconded by Omar Ha-Redeye That application MV 33/24 by N. Turney, 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 Zoning By-law, subject to the following condition: 1. That this variance applies only to the existing rear yard deck, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3 & 4 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated July 10, 2024). Carried Unanimously 4.3 MV 39/24 A. Naz 1910 Glendale Drive The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-laws 7874/21 and 7902/22 to permit: • a maximum dwelling depth of 21.5 metres, whereas the By-law requires a maximum dwelling depth of 20 metres; and • a maximum lot coverage of 31.5 percent, whereas the By-law permits a lot coverage of 25 percent. The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application to obtain a building permit to develop a new detached dwelling and remove all existing structures. Input from other sources were received from the City’s Engineering Services, the City’s Building Services Section and one area resident. Mike Perger, agent, was present to represent the application. One area resident was present in objection to the application. The agent commented that the variance requesting depth relief is taken from the minimum allowable setback, and some of the depth being requested is dead space in from of the house. They are asking for a little over 2 percent of house coverage, the rest of the coverage is to accommodate the front porch and rear veranda. In response to questions from a Committee member, the agent explained that they have explored other options but that would create additional variances. The application brought forward is minor in their opinion. -4- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, July 10, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 5 of 11 In objection to the application an area resident listed the following concerns: tree preservation and protection of wildlife. In response to the resident comments the agent advised three trees in the rear yard and the tree near the boulevard will remain, the two trees to the north side of the lot will be removed. An area resident comment letter in objection to the application was read out to the Committee. In response to the resident comments the agent provided rationale for the lot coverage variance. The Vice-Chair voiced concerns regarding the lot coverage and the need for the variance. Planning staff provided a list of addresses on the street that have the same type of homes on their lot. A Committee member commented that the neighbourhood is seeing a lot of replacement housing. The application matches the streetscape, and the variances seem minor in nature. Moved by Rick Van Andel That application MV 39/24 by A. Naz, 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 Zoning By-law, subject to the following condition: 1. That these variances apply only to the proposed development, as generally sited, and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, 4, 5, & 6 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated July 10, 2024). Motion Lost Moved by Denise Rundle Seconded by Omar Ha-Redeye That application MV 39/24 by A. Naz, be Refused on the grounds that the requested variances are not desirable for the appropriate development of the land. Carried -5- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, July 10, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 6 of 11 Vote: Omar Ha-Redeye in favour Denise Rundle in favour Sakshi Sood Joshi in favour Rick Van Andel opposed Sean Wiley opposed 4.4 MV 40/24 RIOCAN Holdings (GTA Marketplace) Inc. 1900 Dixie Road Due to technical difficulties Denise Rundle will not be voting on the application. Due to her absence Sean Wiley will be voting. The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-laws 1494/82 and 6104/03 to permit an outdoor garden centre having a maximum area of 517 square metres in association with a food store, while providing a minimum of 277 parking spaces, from April 1st to June 30th of every calendar year, whereas the By-law states that an outdoor garden centre having a maximum area of 362 square metres in association with a food store is permitted from April 1st to June 30th of every calendar year, while providing a minimum 297 parking spaces on the subject property. The applicant requests approval of this variance to permit the expansion of a temporary outdoor garden centre in association with the existing grocery store. Input from other sources were received from the Applicant, City’s City Development Department, City’s Engineering Services, City’s Building Services Section and the Toronto and Region Conservation Area (TRCA). In support of the application, the applicant identified that the previous set up had limited space which resulted in loss of inventory. A larger space will allow all products to be locked in one area. Derek Pereira, agent, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. The agent commented that they are requesting this variance to store all products in one location to allow for more convenience and safety to consumers. Moved by Omar Ha-Redey Seconded by Rick Van Andel -6- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, July 10, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 7 of 11 That application MV 40/24 by RIOCAN Holdings (GTA Marketplace) 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 Zoning By-law, subject to the following conditions: 1. That this variance applies only to the proposed outdoor garden centre, 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 July 10, 2024). 2. That the applicant obtains site plan approval to the satisfaction of City Development, prior to the issuance of any building permits associated with the outdoor garden centre. Carried 4.5 MV 43/24 S. Martin 1506 Major Oaks Road The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 2015/85 to permit: • uncovered steps or platforms (deck) not exceeding 2.8 metres in height above grade and not projecting more than 3.95 metres in the required rear yard and not more than 0.5 metres in any required side yard, whereas the By-law permits uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.5 metres into any required front or rear yard and not more than 0.5 metres in any required side yard; and • a maximum lot coverage of 40.7 percent, whereas the By-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 40 percent. The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application to obtain a building permit for a new deck and remove the existing deck. Input from other sources were received from the City’s Engineering Services and the City’s Building Services Section. Scott Martin, applicant, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Moved by Omar Ha-Redeye Seconded by Denise Rundle -7- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, July 10, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 8 of 11 That application MV 43/24 by S. Martin, 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 Zoning By-law, subject to the following conditions: 1. That these variances apply only to the proposed development, as generally sited, and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, 4, & 5 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated July 10, 2024). Carried Unanimously 5. Consent Reports 5.1 LD 13/24, MV 41/24 & MV 42/24 1000117575 Ontario Inc. 1780 Appleview Road Land Division Application LD 13/24 is proposing to sever a 935.4 square metre parcel of land (Part 2), retaining a 910.3 square metre parcel of land (Part 1). The existing dwelling is proposed to be demolished. MV 41/24 – (Retained Parcel – Part 1) The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-laws 6113/03, 7874/21 and 7902/22, as it relates to the retained lot, to permit: • a minimum lot frontage of 14.7 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum lot frontage of 18.0 metres; • a covered porch and associated steps, not exceeding the height of 1.0 metre, to project a maximum of 2.4 metres into the required front yard, whereas the By-law permits uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.5 metres into any required front or rear yard; • a maximum front yard setback of 13.2 metres, whereas the By-law requires a maximum front yard setback of 12.27 metres; and • to permit a maximum dwelling height of 9.4 metres, whereas the By-law permits maximum dwelling height of 9.0 metres. MV 42/24 – (Severed Parcel – Part 2) The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-laws 6113/03, 7874/21 and 7902/22, as it relates to the severed lot, to permit: -8- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, July 10, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 9 of 11 • a minimum lot frontage of 14.6 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum lot frontage of 18.0 metres; • front steps, with a maximum height of 1.4 metres, to project no more than 1.5 metres into the required front yard, whereas the By-law permits uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.5 metres into any required front or rear yard; • a maximum front entrance elevation of 1.4 metres, whereas the By-law requires the maximum elevation of the front entrance to be 1.2 metres above the average grade; and • a maximum dwelling height of 10.5 metres, whereas the By-law permits a maximum dwelling height of 9.0 metres. Input from other sources were received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services, the City’s Building Services Section, the City’s Fire Services, the Toronto and Region Conservation Area (TRCA) and the Region of Durham Planning and Works Departments. In support of the application, the applicant submitted a rationale. Samantha Webster, agent, was present to represent the application. Two area residents were present in objection to the applications. An area resident made the following comments in objection to the application: requesting the applications be refused because it does not conform to the character of the neighbourhood. An area resident listed the following concerns in objection to the application: the lot frontage variance would change the setting of the neighbourhood and cause more congestion. The agent commented that the Dunbarton Guidelines state 15.0 metres as the suggested minimum lot frontage. The lots are over 200 feet deep, and due to the Infill Bylaw they are under the maximum lot depth. The front yard setback is based on the neighbouring dwellings and the frontage of this lot is diagonal. An area resident’s comment letter in objection to the application was read out to the Committee. In response to the comment letter the agent commented that the proposal will meet the aesthetics of the street and are minor in nature. -9- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, July 10, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 10 of 11 In response to questions from Committee members, the agent confirmed that if approval of the minor variance applications is not received this evening the consent of severance will no longer be viable. The Vice-Chair commented that the lot as it is, is oversized according to the Guidelines and the streetscape. The application will be in conformity with other frontages on Appleview Road. After making a site visit, reading the report and listening to neighbors comments and agent responses, Denise Rundle moved the following motion: Moved by Denise Rundle Seconded by Rick Van Andel That application LD 13/24 by 1000117575 Ontario Inc., be Approved, with respect to Section 51(24) of the Planning Act criteria and recommend, subject to the conditions outlined within Amended Appendix I and Appendices II and III, contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated July 10, 2024. And That application MV 41/24 by 1000117575 Ontario Inc., be Approved on the grounds that the requested variances are minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, subject to the following conditions: 1. That these variances apply only to the retained lot (Part 1) and proposed development, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plan (refer to Exhibits 3, 4 & 5 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated July 10, 2024). 2. That a TRCA permit be obtained from the Toronto Region Conservation Authority prior to the issuance of a building permit. And That application MV 42/24 by 1000117575 Ontario Inc., be Approved on the grounds that the requested variances are minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, subject to the following condition: 1. That these variances apply only to the severed lot (Part 2) and proposed development, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 6, 7 & 8 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated July 10, 2024). Carried -10- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, July 10, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 11 of 11 Vote: Omar Ha-Redeye opposed Denise Rundle in favour Sakshi Sood Joshi in favour Rick Van Andel in favour Sean Wiley in favour 6. Adjournment Moved by Omar, Denise, Sakshi, Rick Seconded by Omar, Denise, Sakshi, Rick That the 7th hearing of the 2024 Committee of Adjustment be adjourned at 8:29 pm. Carried Unanimously __________________________ Date __________________________ Chair __________________________ Assistant Secretary-Treasurer Please note the Committee of Adjustment Hearings are available for viewing on the City of Pickering YouTube channel https://www.youtube.com/user/SustainablePickering -11- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: MV 03/24 Date: August 14, 2024 From: Deborah Wylie Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Minor Variance Application MV 03/24 C. & J. Neblett 1338 Poprad Avenue Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2520, as amended to permit: • a minimum rear yard setback for an accessory building containing an additional dwelling unit on lots with an area of 2,000 square metres or less shall be 1.0 metre, whereas the By- law requires the minimum rear yard setback for an accessory building containing an additional dwelling unit on lots with an area of 2,000 square metres or less shall be 1.2 metres, and; • no more than 68.1 percent (84 square metres) of the gross floor area of the detached dwelling, semi-detached dwelling, block townhouse dwelling unit, or street townhouse dwelling unit on the same lot, whereas the By-law requires no more than 50 percent (61.7 square metres) of the gross floor area of the detached dwelling, semi-detached dwelling, block townhouse dwelling unit, or street townhouse dwelling unit on the same lot. The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit for an additional dwelling unit located in an accessory building. Recommendation For your information, and based solely on the application and supporting documentation filed by the applicant, the City Development Department has reviewed the application with respect to Section 45(1) of the Planning Act and 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. After considering all public and agency input, should the Committee find merit in this application, the following condition is recommended: 1. That these variances apply only to the existing accessory building containing the additional dwelling unit, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, & 4). -12- Report MV 03/24 August 14, 2024 Page 2 2. Background The accessory building was initially constructed as a detached garage and has existed on the subject property for over 40 years without any records of a Building Permit application. The previous owner converted the detached garage to an additional dwelling unit (ADU). Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated “Urban Residential – Low Density Areas” within the Bay Ridges Neighbourhood. Official Plan City Policy 6.4(e) encourages Additional Dwelling Units where appropriate, including in Accessory Buildings. Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The subject property is zoned “R4” – Detached Residential under Zoning By-law 2520, as amended. A detached dwelling along with two additional dwelling units are permitted on the subject property. Rear Yard Setback for an Accessory Building containing an Additional Dwelling Unit The applicant is requesting a minimum rear year setback of 1.0 metres for an accessory building with an ADU, whereas the By-law permits a minimum setback of 1.2 metres. The intent of this provision is to regulate an appropriate setback for maintenance of yards and to maintain effective setback for stormwater drainage. The existing accessory building was constructed prior to the adoption of the Additional Dwelling Unit By-law 8035/23. The accessory building previously complied with the setback requirements for accessory buildings under Section 5.19 of By-law 2520, which permitted a minimum rear yard setback of 1.0 metres. The existing placement of the accessory building has had no negative impacts with respect to stormwater drainage and lot maintenance. Staff is of the opinion that the variance maintains the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. Maximum Size of an Accessory Building containing an Additional Dwelling Unit The intent of this provision is to regulate the size and scale of the ADU, while providing an appropriate sized ADU that considers the existing neighbourhood character and built form. The By-law permits an additional dwelling unit in an accessory building to have a maximum gross floor area not greater than 50 percent of the gross floor area of the principal dwelling. The existing dwelling including a rear addition has a gross floor area of 123.4 square metres. An accessory dwelling unit of a maximum 61.7 square metres gross floor area is permitted. The applicant is requesting to permit an additional dwelling unit in accessory building with a gross floor area of 84 square metres, which is approximately 68.1 percent of the total gross floor area of the principal dwelling. -13- Report MV 03/24 August 14, 2024 Page 3 The existing accessory building maintains a size and scale that is subordinate to the principal building both in height and setback. Overall, the accessory building maintains the overall character of the neighbourhood which consists generally of one storey / split storey dwellings with generous setbacks. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance is in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. Desirable for the Appropriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The requested variances will legalize an accessory building containing an ADU within the rear yard of the property. The placement and scale of the existing accessory building is in keeping with the character of the neighbourhood. The existing accessory building has remained on the lot for over 40 years with minimal negative impacts on the adjacent properties. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variances are desirable for the appropriate development of the land and are minor in nature. Input From Other Sources Applicant •Owner purchased the property in 2022 with an existing dwelling unit in the accessory building. Reducing the size of the existing building would require massive construction at an extensive cost. Engineering Services •No comments. Building Services •Accessory detached garage was converted to an ADU (Additional Dwelling Unit) without the benefit of building permit; permit application is on hold until Committee’s decision. Public Input •As of date of writing this report, no written submissions has been received from the public. Date of report: August 7, 2024 Comments prepared by: Original Signed By Original Signed By Kerry Yelk Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Planner I Manager, Zoning & Administration KY:nr /CityDevDept/D3700/2024/MV 03-24/7. Report/MV 03-24 Report.doc Attachments -14- Li ver pool Road Highway 401 Mo d l i n R o a d Grenoble Boulevard Bayly Street Radom Street Tatra Drive Sa n g r o L a n e Na r o c h B o u l e v a r d Fuschia Lane Poprad Avenue An t o n i o S t r e e t Fordon Avenue Mitchel Park East ShoreCommunityCentre Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: MV 03/24 Date: Dec. 08, 2023 Exhibit 1 ¯ E C. & J. Neblett1338 Poprad Avenue SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\MV\2024\MV 03-24\MV03-24_LocationMap.mxd 1:3,000 SCALE:THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © King's Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © His Majesty the King in Right of Canada, Department ofNatural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights reserved.; © Municipal PropertyAssessment Corporation and its suppliers. All rights reserved. City DevelopmentDepartment -15- Ex h i b i t 2 Su b m i t t e d S i t e P l a n Fi l e N o : MV 03 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : C. & J . N e b l e t t Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 13 3 8 P o p r a d A v e n u e CO N T A C T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T F O R D I G I T A L C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N . Da t e : J u l y 2 9 , 2 0 2 4 to p e r m i t a m i n i m u m r e a r y a r d s e t b a c k fo r a n a c c e s s o r y b u i l d i n g c o n t a i n i n g a n ad d i t i o n a l d w e l l i n g u n i t o n l o t s w i t h a n ar e a o f 2 , 0 0 0 s q u a r e m e t r e s o r l e s s sh a l l b e 1 . 0 m e t r e s to p e r m i t w h e r e a n a d d i t i o n a l d w e l l i n g u n i t i s l o c a t e d w i t h i n a n ac c e s s o r y b u i l d i n g t h e g r o s s f l o o r a r e a o f t h e a d d i t i o n a l dw e l l i n g u n i t s h a l l b e d e t e r m i n e d b y : no m o r e t h a n 6 8 . 1 p e r c e n t o f t h e g r o s s f l o o r a r e a o f t h e de t a c h e d d w e l l i n g , s e m i - d e t a c h e d d w e l l i n g , b l o c k t o w n h o u s e dw e l l i n g u n i t , o r s t r e e t t o w n h o u s e d w e l l i n g u n i t o n t h e s a m e l o t -16- Ex h i b i t 3 Su b m i t t e d El e v a t i o n Pl a n Fi l e N o : MV 03 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : C. & J . N e b l e t t Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 13 3 8 P o p r a d A v e n u e CO N T A C T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T F O R D I G I T A L C O P I E S O F TH I S P L A N . Da t e : Ju l y 2 9 , 2 0 2 4 -17- Ex h i b i t 4 Su b m i t t e d Fl o o r Pl a n Fi l e N o : MV 03 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : C. & J . N e b l e t t Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 13 3 8 P o p r a d A v e n u e CO N T A C T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T F O R D I G I T A L C O P I E S O F T H I S PL A N . Da t e : Ju l y 2 9 , 2 0 2 4 -18- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: MV 38/24 Date: August 14, 2024 From: Deborah Wylie Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Minor Variance Application MV 38/24 K. Li 734 Hillcrest Road Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-laws 7610/18, 7872/21, 7873/21, and 7900/22 to permit: • a maximum dwelling depth of 17.6 metres, whereas the By-law permits a maximum dwelling depth of 17.0 metres for lots with depths up to and including 40 metres; • a maximum front entrance elevation of 1.5 metres, whereas the By-law permits the maximum front entrance elevation to be 1.2 metres above the average grade; • a maximum dwelling height of 9.9 metres, whereas the By-law permits a maximum dwelling height of 9.0 metres; • a maximum lot coverage of 38.8 percent, whereas the By-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent; and • a covered porch and associated steps, not exceeding 2.2 metres in height, to project a maximum of 5.8 metres into the required front yard, whereas the By-law permits uncovered platforms and steps, not exceeding 1.0 metre in height and not projecting more than 1.5 metres into any required front yard. The applicant requests approval of these variances to obtain a building permit for a two-storey dwelling. Recommendation For your information, and based solely on the application and supporting documentation filed by the applicant, the City Development Department has reviewed the application with respect to Section 45(1) of the Planning Act and 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. After considering all public and agency input, should the Committee find merit in this application, the following condition is recommended: -19- Report MV 38/24 August 14, 2024 Page 2 1. That these variances apply only to the proposed development, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibit 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6). Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designed “Urban Residential Areas – Low Density” within the West Shore Neighbourhood. Detached dwellings are permitted within this designation. The subject property is located within the Established Neighbourhood Precinct of the West Shore Neighbourhood and is subject to the Urban Design Guidelines for Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhood Precincts. The applicant has completed the Urban Design Guideline Checklist, which can be found as Appendix A to this report. Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law Maximum Dwelling Depth The intent of permitting a maximum dwelling depth of 17.0 metres for lots with depths up to and including 40.0 metres is to ensure that a consistent rear wall placement with the existing adjacent dwellings is maintained to mitigate privacy and overshadowing issues from new infill housing developments. The applicant is requesting to increase the maximum dwelling depth from 17.0 metres to 17.6 metres to accommodate a bump out in the middle of the rear wall. The remaining portion of the rear wall is within the permitted 17.0 metres. As the bump out represents a small portion of the rear wall and it is setback further from the adjacent dwellings, it is not expected to generate major overshadowing issues to the adjacent dwellings. Additionally, the rear wall placement of the existing dwellings varies along the west side of Hillcrest Road. The rear wall of the proposed dwelling will generally be aligned with the existing dwellings along the street. Maximum Dwelling Height The applicant requests a maximum dwelling height of 9.9 metres, whereas the By-law permits a maximum dwelling height of 9.0 metres. The intent of this provision is to regulate the scale of the proposed buildings and to reduce potential shadowing and overlooking impacts to the adjacent dwellings. The subject property is a front draining lot, with a lower grade at the front of the lot compared to the rear of the lot. Due to the steep grade difference, the basement will appear to be above grade at the front and completely below grade at the rear, making the dwelling appear taller from the street. As dwelling height is measured utilizing the average grade at the front of the dwelling, the applicant is requesting this variance to accommodate for the lower grades at the front of the lot. The proposed dwelling measuring from the average grades of the entirety of the dwelling (front and rear) to the tallest point of the dwelling is 9.0 metres. -20- Report MV 38/24 August 14, 2024 Page 3 Maximum Front Entrance Elevation and Obstruction of Yards Variances Due to the grading of the lot, the applicant is requesting a maximum front entrance elevation of 1.5 metres, whereas the By-law permits a maximum front entrance elevation of 1.2 metres. Additionally, the applicant seeks to permit a covered porch with associated steps, not exceeding a height of 2.2 metres, to project a maximum of 5.8 metres into the required front yard, whereas the By-law permits uncovered platforms and steps, not exceeding a height of 1.0 metre, to project a maximum of 1.5 metres into the required front yard. The intent of permitting a maximum front entrance elevation of 1.2 metres is to ensure that the stairs accessing the main entrance to the dwelling are designed as an integral component of the dwelling’s façade. The intent of the obstruction of yards provision is to ensure that adequate space is provided for landscaping and separation between a dwelling and the adjacent street in the front yard. Additional height to the front entrance elevation is requested to accommodate the basement at the front of the dwelling. As the lot also has lower grade in the front of the lot, additional steps and the associate projection of the steps are required to reach grade level. The applicant also designed the steps to include a landing at middle of the elevation and wider steps at the bottom to provide a transition between the descending grades at the front to the stairs to access the entry of the dwelling. The extension of the steps works with the downward sloping of the lot to integrate the stairs in to front façade of the dwelling and to reduce the visual impact of the stairs from the street. The proposed steps will also maintain a setback of 1.7 metres from the front lot line. As there are no sidewalks on this side of Hillcrest Road, the additional space from the municipal boulevard acts as an additional buffer between the steps and the street. Maximum Lot Coverage Variance The intent of permitting a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent is to regulate the size and scale of the buildings and to ensure an adequate amount of space is left uncovered for outdoor amenities and storm drainage. The applicant requests a maximum lot coverage of 38.8 percent, with the dwelling accounting for 36 percent of the lot coverage, and the covered deck and covered porch accounting for 2.8 percent of the lot coverage. The applicant has indicated that additional space is required to house aging parents on the ground floor, which contributes to the additional lot coverage. The proposed dwelling will maintain a minimum rear yard setback of 11.1 metres to the rear wall and a minimum setback of 9.9 metres to the rear deck. Additionally, a minimum setback of 7.4 metres will be maintained from the front wall to the front lot line. There appears to be sufficient space for soft landscaping, amenity space and storm drainage with the proposed setbacks. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variances are in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. -21- Report MV 38/24 August 14, 2024 Page 4 Desirable for the Appriopriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The applicant is requesting these variances due to the front draining nature of the lot and wishes to accommodate living space for aging parents on the ground floor. The additional height and coverage of the proposed dwelling remains consistent with the existing dwellings in the neighbourhood as the neighbourhood is characterized by 1-storey to 2-storey dwellings, with a maximum height of 10 metres based on the building height of 724 Hillcrest Road. The applicant requests an additional 0.9 of a metre in height to compensate for the By-law requirement to use the grades at the front of the dwelling to measure height. In the case of this lot, the lower grades at the front will contribute to additional height in the calculation. Additionally, the proposed dwelling itself represents a 3 percent increase from the permitted lot coverage of 33 percent, which is minor in comparison. The applicant has provided sufficient setbacks to provide adequate space for parking, soft landscaping, and amenity space. The requested variances will facilitate a two-storey dwelling on the subject property that will accommodate flexibility for intergenerational living and is in keeping with the character of the neighbourhood. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variances are desirable for the appropriate development of the site and are minor in nature. Input From Other Sources Applicant • We comply with all the setback requirements, and only a small projection to the rear yard in the breakfast area makes the building depth exceed the by-law limits. The remaining rear main wall is within the 17m building depth limit. • Furthermore, the neighbour at 738 Hillcrest, which is located one house away from our project on the same street, has a greater building depth. • The variance in building height is due to the calculation based on the average grade, as per the infill bylaw 7822/21. It would be 9m, if measured from the established grade according to the definition of building height in the By-law 2511. The proposed building height won’t have a significant impact on the neighbourhood. • The owner desire to provide a modern home with a spacious living space for his large family. We believe all the variances to be minor and desirable for the appropriate development of the land. -22- Report MV 38/24 August 14, 2024 Page 5 Engineering Services •Ensure the increased dwelling depth(if approved with this application) does notadversely affect the drainage patterns withinthe lot and surrounding area. •Ensure the increased lot coverage area(if approved with this application) does notadversely affect the drainage patterns withinthe lots and surrounding area. •Multiple Low Impact Development measures(such as infiltration galleries with downspoutconnections, rain gardens and 450mmamended soil) will be required at theBuilding Permit stage. Building Services •No concerns from Building Services; permitapplication is on hold until Committee’sdecision. Public Input •As of the date of writing this report, nowritten submission has been received fromthe public. Date of report: August 8, 2024 Comments prepared by: Original Signed By Original Signed By Ziya Cao Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Planner I Manager, Zoning & Administration ZC:nr /CityDevDept/D3700/2024/MV 40-24/7. Report/MV40-24 Report.doc Attachments -23- Urban City of Pickering Established A 1 Appendix A Urban Design Guideline Checklist City of Pickering Established Neighbourhood Precincts Urban Design Checklist Please note, if you mark “no” below please provide your rational in the adjacent “Comments” section either supporting, or not supporting the proposal. Yes No Comments X 1. Is the proposed dwelling height and roof pitch similar/compatible with the surrounding dwellings? (see Section 2.1: Guideline 1) X 2. If the proposed new dwelling is significantly taller than an existing adjacent house, does the roof of the proposed new dwelling slope away from the existing adjacent house? (see Section 2.1: Guideline 2) The proposed new dwelling is designed in a contemporary style with a flat. X 3. Is the maximum elevation of the Front Entrance 1.2 metres, or less, above grade? (see Section 2.2: Guideline 1) The existing topography of the site has a significant grade difference from front to rear. The front entrance needs to be raised; otherwise, the ground floor level will be below the grade in the rear yard. X 4. Is the main entrance visible from the street? (see Section 2.2: Guideline 2) X 5. Are the stairs to the main entrance designed as an integral component of the front façade? (Section 2.2: Guideline 7) X 6. Does the design of the front entrance reduce the visual dominance of the garage and driveway? (see Section 2.2: Guideline 9) -24- Appendix A Urban Design Checklist Cont’d Urban City of Pickering Established A 2 Yes No Comments X 7. Does the proposed dwelling have a similar Dwelling Depth to the adjacent dwellings along the street? (see Section 2.3: Guideline 2) X 8. Does the proposed dwelling have a similar Side Yard Setback to the adjacent dwellings along the street? (see Figure 15) X 9. Has shadow on adjacent dwellings been mitigated with greater Side Yard Setbacks? (Section 3.1: Guideline 2) The north side setback is reduced from 3.12m to 1.5m. X 10. Is the garage flush or recessed from the main front wall? (see Section 3.2: Guideline 5) X 11. Is the proposed driveway width the same as the permitted garage width? (see Section 3.3: Guideline 1) X 12. Does the plan preserve existing trees? (see Section 4.1: Guideline 1) -25- HillviewCrescent Hi l l c r e s t R o a d Vicki Drive Oklahoma Drive Sanok Drive StonebridgeLane BidwellTot Lot Fairport BeachPublic School Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: MV 38/24 Date: Jun. 06, 2024 Exhibit 1 ¯ E K. Li 734 Hillcrest Road SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\MV\2024\MV 38-24\MV38-24_LocationMap.mxd 1:2,000 SCALE:THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © King's Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © His Majesty the King in Right of Canada, Department ofNatural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights reserved.; © Municipal PropertyAssessment Corporation and its suppliers. All rights reserved. City DevelopmentDepartment -26- Ex h i b i t 2 Su b m i t t e d Si t e Pl a n Fi l e N o : MV 3 8 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : K. L i Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 73 4 H i l l c r e s t R o a d FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ju l y 1 6 , 2 0 2 4 to p e r m i t a m a x i m u m l o t co v e r a g e o f 3 8 . 8 p e r c e n t to p e r m i t a m a x i m u m dw e l l i n g d e p t h o f 17 . 6 me t r e s f o r a l o t w i t h de p t h s u p t o a n d in c l u d i n g 4 0 m e t r e s to p e r m i t a m a x i m u m el e v a t i o n o f 1 . 5 m e t r e s fo r t h e f r o n t e n t r a n c e to p e r m i t a c o v e r e d p o r c h a n d as s o c i a t e d s t e p s , n o t e x c e e d i n g 2. 2 me t r e s in h e i g h t , t o p r o j e c t a ma x i m u m o f 5 . 8 me t r e s i n t o t h e re q u i r e d f r o n t y a r d to p e r m i t a m a x i m u m dw e l l i n g h e i g h t o f 9. 9 me t r e s -27- Ex h i b i t 3 Su b m i t t e d Fr o n t E l e v a t i o n (W e s t ) Fi l e N o : MV 3 8 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : K. L i Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 73 4 Hi l l c r e s t R o a d FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ju l y 1 6 , 2 0 2 4 to p e r m i t a m a x i m u m el e v a t i o n o f 1 . 5 m e t r e s fo r t h e f r o n t e n t r a n c e to p e r m i t a m a x i m u m dw e l l i n g h e i g h t o f 9. 9 me t r e s -28- Ex h i b i t 4 Su b m i t t e d Re a r El e v a t i o n (E a s t ) Fi l e N o : MV 3 8 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : K. L i Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 73 4 H i l l c r e s t R o a d FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T DE P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ju l y 1 6 , 2 0 2 4 -29- Ex h i b i t 5 Su b m i t t e d No r t h El e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : MV 3 8 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : K. L i Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 73 4 H i l l c r e s t R o a d FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ju l y 1 6 , 2 0 2 4 to p e r m i t a c o v e r e d p o r c h a n d as s o c i a t e d s t e p s , n o t e x c e e d i n g 2. 2 me t r e s i n h e i g h t , t o p r o j e c t a ma x i m u m o f 5 . 8 me t r e s i n t o t h e re q u i r e d f r o n t y a r d -30- Ex h i b i t 6 Su b m i t t e d So u t h El e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : MV 3 8 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : K. L i Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 73 4 H i l l c r e s t R o a d FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ju l y 16 , 2 0 2 4 -31- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: MV 44/24 Date: August 14, 2024 From: Deborah Wylie Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Minor Variance Application MV 44/24 R. & B. Chung 1598 Major Oaks Road Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 2015/85, to permit a maximum lot coverage of 40.3 percent, whereas the By-law requires a maximum lot coverage of 38 percent. The applicant requests approval of the variance to obtain a building permit for an existing front yard deck (balcony) attached to a detached dwelling. Recommendation For your information, and based solely on the application and supporting documentation filed by the applicant, the City Development Department has reviewed the application with respect to Section 45(1) of the Planning Act and 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. After considering all public and agency input, should the Committee find merit in this application, the following condition is recommended: 1. That this variance applies only to the front yard deck (balcony), as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3 & 4). Background Prior to submitting this minor variance application, the applicant had applied for a building permit on January 23, 2024, and was notified on February 8, 2024, that they exceed the maximum lot coverage and must obtain a minor variance to permit the existing front yard deck (balcony). -32- Report MV 44/24 August 14, 2024 Page 2 Comment Conforms to the intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated “Urban Residential Areas – Low Density Area” within the Duffins Precinct as part of the Brock Ridge Neighbourhood. The requested variance is to permit the existing front yard deck (balcony) on the property, which is permitted within this designation and a common accessory structure within the Brock Ridge neighbourhood. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance maintains the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan. Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The requested variance is to increase the maximum permitted lot coverage from 38 percent to 40.3 percent. The intent of the maximum lot coverage provision is to maintain an appropriate amount of yard space for amenity area and storm drainage uncovered by buildings on a lot and to regulate the scale and size of the building. The lot coverage is determined by adding the area of all structures on the property (dwellings, decks, sheds) as a percentage of the lot area. The existing detached dwelling accounts for approximately 36.1 percent of the total lot coverage, and the front yard deck (balcony) accounts for approximately 4.2 percent of the total lot coverage. The front yard deck (balcony) will provide sufficient space on the property left uncovered by buildings to accommodate soft landscaping, storm drainage and outdoor amenity area as the required minimum front and side yard setbacks are maintained. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance maintains the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. Desirable for the Appriopriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The requested variance is intended to permit a front yard deck (balcony). The deck maintains a similar front yard setback to adjacent properties. Additionally, the subject property abuts a public park to the rear and east sides of the property, and the addition of the deck is not expected to create significant visual impact to the adjacent properties. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance is desirable and appropriate for the development of the land and is minor in nature. Input From Other Sources Applicant • A deck that abides by the currently permitted maximum lot coverage of 38 percent would be too small to be useful. Engineering Services • No comment. -33- Report MV 44/24 August 14, 2024 Page 3 Building Services •The deck has been constructed without the benefit of a building permit. The building permit application is on hold until the Committee of Adjustment’s approval. Public Input •No written submissions were received from the public as of the date of writing this report. Date of report: August 7, 2024 Comments prepared by: Original Signed By Original Signed By Michael David Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Zoning Technician Manager, Zoning & Administration MD:nr /CityDevDept/D3700/2024/MV 45-24/7. Report/MV 45-24 Report.doc Attachments -34- S o m ergro v e C re s c e nt G r e e n m o u n t S tre et De n v a l e D r i v e Maj o r O a k s R o a d Pepperwood Gate Terrac ott a Cou r t Wildwood Cresc ent Middleton Street Ho l l y h e d g e D r i v e A n n a n W o o d s D r i v e MajorOaks Park Valley FarmPublic School Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: MV 44/24 Date: Jun. 13, 2024 Exhibit 1 ¯ E R. & B. Chung1598 Major Oaks Road SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\MV\2024\MV 44-24\MV44-24_LocationMap.mxd 1:2,500 SCALE:THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © King's Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © His Majesty the King in Right of Canada, Department ofNatural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights reserved.; © Municipal PropertyAssessment Corporation and its suppliers. All rights reserved. City DevelopmentDepartment -35- Exhibit 2 Submitted Plan File No: MV 44/24 Applicant: R. & B. Chung Municipal Address: 1598 Major Oaks Road CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN. Date: July 24, 2024. to permit a maximum lot coverage of 40.3 percent -36- Ex h i b i t 3 So u t h ( F r o n t s i d e ) a n d E a s t ( R i g h t s i d e ) E l e v a t i o n s Fi l e N o : MV 4 4 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : R . & B . C h u n g Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 1 5 9 8 M a j o r O a k s R o a d CO N T A C T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T F O R D I G I T A L C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N . Da t e : J u l y 2 4 , 2 0 2 4. -37- Ex h i b i t 4 Gr o u n d F l o o r a n d S e c o n d F l o o r P l a n s Fi l e N o : MV 4 4 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : R . & B . C h u n g Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 1 5 9 8 M a j o r O a k s R o a d CO N T A C T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T F O R D I G I T A L C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N . Da t e : J u l y 2 4 , 20 2 4 . -38- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: MV 45/24 Date: August 14, 2024 From: Deborah Wylie Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Minor Variance Application MV 45/24 S. Monaghan 459 Churchwin Street Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by By-law 2677/88 to permit an accessory building (detached garage) with a maximum height of 4.85 metres, whereas the By-law requires that no accessory building shall exceed a height of 3.5 metres in any residential zone. The applicant requests approval of these variances to obtain a building permit to construct a detached garage. Recommendation For your information, and based solely on the application and supporting documentation filed by the applicant, the City Development Department has reviewed the application with respect to Section 45(1) of the Planning Act and 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. After considering all public and agency input, should the Committee find merit in this application, the following condition is recommended: 1. That this variance applies only to the proposed accessory building, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, 4, & 5). Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated “Rural Settlements – Rural Hamlets” within the Whitevale Settlement Area. Residential and accessory uses hereto are permitted within this designation. City Policy 13.4(b) encourages all new development within the Whitevale Heritage Conservation District to comply with the Council-adopted Guidelines. The Whitevale Heritage Conservation District Guidelines encourage garages to not form part of the front façade of the building and should be located towards the rear of the property. The proposed garage complies with the Whitevale Heritage Conservation District Guidelines. -39- Report MV 45/24 August 14, 2024 Page 2 Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The subject property is zoned “HMR3” – Hamlet Residential under Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by Whitevale By-law 2677/88. The applicant is requesting a maximum accessory building height of 4.85 metres, whereas the By-law permits a maximum accessory building height of 3.5 metres. The intent of this provision is to minimize the visual impact of accessory buildings on abutting properties and on the streetscape, and to ensure other yards are not significantly obstructed on the property. The owner intends to use the detached garage for the storage of vehicles and has included a second story loft for personal storage. The proposed accessory building height of 4.85 metres does not appear to have any negative visual impact on abutting properties or the streetscape. The accessory building will maintain a minimum 2.1 metre setback from the east lot line. The proposed setbacks will allow appropriate maintenance for the existing vegetation along the east lot line, which will also provide screening for the adjacent property. Staff is of the opinion that the variance is in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By- law. Desirable for the Appropriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The requested variance will facilitate the construction of a detached garage with personal storage space. The placement and scale of the existing accessory building is in keeping with the character of the neighbourhood. The accessory building will be screened by existing vegetation which will have reduced visual impacts of the building on the adjacent properties. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance is desirable for the appropriate development of the land and is minor in nature. Input From Other Sources Applicant • The Whitevale HCD Guidelines recommend garages to be detached from the principal structure. Engineering Services • No comments. Building Services • No concerns from Building Services, Building Permit is required prior construction. Public Input • As of date of writing this report, no written submissions have been received from the public. -40- Report MV 45/24 August 14, 2024 Page 3 Date of report: August 7, 2024 Comments prepared by: Original Signed By Original Signed By Kerry Yelk Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Planner I Manager, Zoning & Administration KY:nr /CityDevDept/D3700/2024/MV 45-24/7. Report/MV 45-24 Report.doc Attachments -41- Whitevale Road Gl adstone Street Mill Street No r t h R o a d Churchwin Street Fa c t o r y S t r e e t Go l f C l u b R o a d WhitevalePark Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: MV 45/24 Date: Jun. 20, 2024 Exhibit 1 ¯ E S. Monaghan459 Churchwin Street SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\MV\2024\MV 45-24\MV00-24_LocationMap.mxd 1:4,000 SCALE:THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © King's Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © His Majesty the King in Right of Canada, Department ofNatural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights reserved.; © Municipal PropertyAssessment Corporation and its suppliers. All rights reserved. City DevelopmentDepartment -42- Ex h i b i t 2 Su b m i t t e d O v e r a l l S i t e P l a n Fi l e N o : MV 4 5 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : S. M o n a g h a n Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 4 5 9 C h u r c h w i n S t r e e t CO N T A C T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T F O R D I G I T A L C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N . Da t e : J u l y 2 9 , 2 0 2 4 Pr o p o s e d D w e l l i n g (H e r i t a g e P e r m i t Ap p r o v e d ) Pr o p o s e d D e t a c h e d Ga r a g e to p e r m i t a n a c c e s s o r y bu i l d i n g ( d e t a c h e d ga r a g e ) w i t h a m a x i m u m he i g h t o f 4 . 8 5 m e t r e s Ch u r c h w i n S t r e e t -43- Ex h i b i t 3 Su b m i t t e d El e v a t i o n Pl a n s Fi l e N o : MV 45 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : S. M o n a g h a n Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 45 9 C h u r c h w i n S t r e e t CO N T A C T T H E CI T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T F O R D I G I T A L C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N . Da t e : Ju l y 2 9 , 2 0 2 4 So u t h E l e v a t i o n No r t h El e v a t i o n We s t El e v a t i o n Ea s t El e v a t i o n -44- Ex h i b i t 4 Su b m i t t e d Fl o o r Pl a n s Fi l e N o : MV 45 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : S. M o n a g h a n Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 45 9 C h u r c h w i n S t r e e t CO N T A C T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T DE P A R T M E N T F O R D I G I T A L C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N . Da t e : Ju l y 2 9 , 2 0 2 4 Gr o u n d L e v e l Lo f t F l o o r -45- Ex h i b i t 5 Su b m i t t e d Cr o s s S e c t i o n a l D r a w i n g Fi l e N o : MV 45 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : S. M o n a g h a n Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 45 9 C h u r c h w i n S t r e e t CO N T A C T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T F O R D I G I T A L CO P I E S O F T H I S P L A N . Da t e : Ju l y 2 9 , 2 0 2 4 -46- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: MV 46/24 Date: August 14, 2024 From: Deborah Wylie Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Minor Variance Application MV 46/24 K. Gharib 2161 Denby Drive Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, to permit a covered deck not exceeding 3.6 metres in height and not projecting more than 3.1 metres into the required rear yard. The applicant requests approval of the variance to obtain a building permit for a rear yard deck attached to a detached dwelling. Recommendation For your information, and based solely on the application and supporting documentation filed by the applicant, the City Development Department has reviewed the application with respect to Section 45(1) of the Planning Act and 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. After considering all public and agency input, should the Committee find merit in this application, the following condition is recommended: 1. That this variance applies only to the proposed rear yard deck, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, 4 & 5). Background Prior to submitting this minor variance application, the applicant had applied for a building permit on February 5, 2024, and was notified on February 15, 2024, that they must obtain a minor variance to permit the two-storey rear yard deck constructed by a previous owner. The lower level of the deck is covered and has stairs providing access to the rear yard. The upper level of the deck is uncovered and does not provide access to the rear yard. -47- Report MV 46/24 August 14, 2024 Page 2 Comment Conforms to the intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated “Urban Residential Areas – Low Density Area” within the Duffins Precinct as part of the Brock Ridge Neighbourhood. The requested variance is to permit the existing rear yard deck on the property, which is permitted within this designation and a common structure within the Brock Ridge neighbourhood. Staff are of the opinion that the requested variance maintains the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan. Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The requested variance is to to permit a covered deck not exceeding 3.6 metres in height and not projecting more than 3.1 metres into the required rear yard setback, whereas the By-law permits uncovered steps and platforms (decks) not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade to project not more than 1.5 metres into the required rear yard setback. The intent of this provision is to maintain an appropriate amount of yard space for amenity area and storm drainage by uncovered buildings on a lot and to regulate the scale and size of the building. The existing detached dwelling provides a minimum rear yard setback of 7.73 metres, whereas 7.5 metres is required in the By-law. Uncovered decks are permitted to project 1.5 metres into the required rear yard setback if they do not exceed 1.0 metre in height above grade. The existing deck provides a minimum rear yard setback of 4.5 metres, whereas a rear yard setback of 6.0 metres would be permitted if the deck did not exceed 1.0 metre in height. Therefore, the deck is a minor encroachment into the rear yard, maintaining adequate space for amenity area and storm drainage in the rear yard. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance is in keeping with the general intent and purpose the Zoning By-law. Desirable for the Appriopriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The requested variance is intended to permit an existing deck. The deck maintains a rear yard setback similar to adjacent properties. There are several decks on the same side of the street and others in the neighbourhood that have similar projections, including properties immediately abutting the subject property to the north and south. The deck has existed for some time and has not created significant visual impact to the adjacent properties. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance is desirable and appropriate for the development of the land and is minor in nature. Input From Other Sources Applicant •The deck existed when the property waspurchased, the deck must be legalized tofinalize the sale of the property. Engineering Services •No comment. -48- Report MV 46/24 August 14, 2024 Page 3 Building Services •The deck has been constructed without thebenefit of a building permit. The buildingpermit application is on hold until theCommittee of Adjustment’s approval. Public Input •No written submissions were received fromthe public as of the date of writing thisreport. Date of report: August 7, 2024 Comments prepared by: Original Signed By Original Signed By Michael David Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Zoning Technician Manager, Zoning & Administration MD:nr /CityDevDept/D3700/2024/MV 45-24/7. Report/MV 46-24 Report.doc Attachments -49- De n b y D r i v e Hollyhed g e D r i v e Gandalf Court Duberry Driv e Mcbrady Crescent Th e o d e n C o u r t MajorOaksPark MajorOaks Park Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: MV 46/24 Date: Jun. 21, 2024 Exhibit 1 ¯ E K. Gharib 2161 Denby Drive SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\MV\2024\MV 46-24\MV46-24_LocationMap.mxd 1:1,500 SCALE:THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © King's Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © His Majesty the King in Right of Canada, Department ofNatural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights reserved.; © Municipal PropertyAssessment Corporation and its suppliers. All rights reserved. City DevelopmentDepartment -50- Exhibit 2 Submitted Plan File No: MV 46/24 Applicant: K. Gharib Municipal Address: 2161 Denby Drive CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN.Date: July 24, 2024 Denby Drive projection of 3.1 metres from deck into required rear yard setback -51- Exhibit 3 South Elevation File No: MV 46/24 Applicant: K. Gharib Municipal Address: 2161 Denby Drive CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN.Date: July 24, 2024 3.6 metres in height to top of platform -52- Exhibit 4 West Elevation File No: MV 46/24 Applicant: K. Gharib Municipal Address: 2161 Denby Drive CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN.Date: July 24, 2024 3.6 metres in height to top of platform -53- Exhibit 5 East Elevation File No: MV 46/24 Applicant: K. Gharib Municipal Address: 2161 Denby Drive CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN.Date: July 24, 2024 -54- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: MV 47/24 Date: August 14, 2024 From: Deborah Wylie Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Minor Variance Application MV 47/24 A. Uthayakumaran 275 Uxbridge-Pickering Townline Road Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by By-law 6640/06, to permit an accessory building that shall not exceed 285 square metres in area, whereas the By-law permits accessory buildings and/or structures that do not exceed 10 square metres in area. The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application to obtain a building permit to convert an existing dwelling into an accessory building (storage). Recommendation For your information, and based solely on the application and supporting documentation filed by the applicant, the City Development Department has reviewed the application with respect to Section 45(1) of the Planning Act and 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. After considering all public and agency input, should the Committee find merit in this application, the following condition is recommended: 1. That this variance applies only to the proposed accessory building (storage), as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, & 7). Background The property was previously subject to Minor Variance Application P/CA 104/21, to facilitate the development of a new residential dwelling and a barn structure. The application was approved with conditions on February 9, 2022. One of the City’s conditions is that the applicant enter into a Demolition Agreement with the City to remove the old two-storey residential dwelling, to ensure the agricultural property would not be occupied by two residential buildings. The applicant is now constructing the new dwelling and has registered the Demolition Agreement for the old dwelling which is temporarily being used for the storage of construction materials. -55- Report MV 47/24 August 14, 2024 Page 2 The applicant submitted a Building Permit Application on May 28, 2024, to repurpose the old dwelling into an accessory storage building, along with the site's agricultural use. As part of that application, a site inspection was undertaken by Building Services staff on May 23, 2024, which confirmed the applicant decommissioned the old residential building and removed plumbing and gas lines, leaving only electrical services to light the building. Building Services staff are prepared to confirm with Legal Services that the Demolition Agreement can be removed from title, subject to approval of this Minor Variance Application to permit the increased accessory building size. Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated “Oak Ridges Moraine Countryside Area” within the City of Pickering Official Plan. Agricultural uses and associated accessory building structures are permitted within this designation. Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The requested variance is to permit an accessory building that shall not exceed 285 square metres in area, whereas the By-law permits accessory buildings and/or structures that do not exceed 10 square metres in area. The intent of this provision from the ORM-A zone is to regulate the maximum size of buildings and structures within the Oak Ridges Moraine to limit adverse impacts on environmental features. Maximums regulating the size of accessory buildings are to ensure accessory buildings are subordinate to the principal building and use. The applicant is proposing to maintain an existing 2-storey building that is a total of 285 square metres but only covers approximately 158.1 square metres of the lot. The subject lot is approximately 4.3 hectares (42,676.2 square metres); therefore, the 148.1 square metre exceedance is 0.03 percent of the size of the lot, which staff consider to be minimal. The combined lot coverage of all the buildings on the site (including the proposed accessory building) is 3.9 percent, which is within the permitted maximum total lot coverage of 20 percent. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance maintains the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. Desirable for the Appropriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The requested variance is intended to facilitate the conversion of an old dwelling into an accessory building. The change of use would preserve the building and represents an appropriate adaptive reuse for agricultural storage. The storage building size would not have environmental impacts for the site and it would avoid demolishing the building, and therefore negate the need to dispose of the materials in a landfill. The house has been decommissioned and has had interior modifications such that it will not be able to be used for residential purposes. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance is desirable for the appropriate development of the land and is minor in nature. -56- Report MV 47/24 August 14, 2024 Page 3 Input From Other Sources Applicant •The old residential building is in good standing and theproposed change from a residential use to an accessorystorage use utilizes the building without creating the needto dispose of it in a landfill. The building has beendecommissioned to ensure it is not used for residentialpurposes. Engineering Services •Ensure the increased size of the accessory building (ifapproved with this application) does not adversely affectthe drainage patterns within the lot and surrounding area. •Multiple Low Impact Development measures (such asinfiltration galleries with downspout connections, raingardens and 450mm amended soils) will be required at theBuilding Permit stage. Building Services •The permit application is on hold until the Committeecomes to a decision. TRCA •A TRCA permit revision application will be required thatshows the accessory building (refer to Attachment 1). Public Input •No written submissions have been received from thepublic as of the date of writing this report. Date of report: August 7, 2024 Comments prepared by: Original Signed By Original Signed By Liam Crawford Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Planner II Manager, Zoning & Administration LC:jc https://pickeringo365.sharepoint.com/sites/CityDevDept/D3700/2024/MV 49-24/7. Report/MV 49-24 Report - Copy.docx Attachments -57- Attachment 1 -58- -59- -60- -61- -62- Uxbridge Pickering Townline Road Sid e l i n e 3 2 Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: MV 47/24 Date: Jul. 03, 2024 Exhibit 1 ¯ A. Uthayakumaran275 Uxbridge-Pickering Townline Road SubjectLands Town ofUxbridge L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\MV\2024\MV 47-24\MV47-24_LocationMap.mxd 1:4,000 SCALE:THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © King's Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © His Majesty the King in Right of Canada, Department ofNatural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights reserved.; © Municipal PropertyAssessment Corporation and its suppliers. All rights reserved. City DevelopmentDepartment -63- Exhibit 2 to permit an accessory building that shall not exceed 285 square metres in area Submitted Site Plan File No: MV 47/24 Applicant: A. Uthayakumaran Municipal Address: 275 Uxbridge-Pickering Townline Road FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. Date: July 25, 2024 -64- Exhibit 3 Submitted Site Plan (Zoomed In) File No: MV 47/24 Applicant: A. Uthayakumaran Municipal Address: 275 Uxbridge-Pickering Townline Road FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. Date: July 25, 2024 to permit an accessory building that shall not exceed 285 square metres in area -65- Ex h i b i t 4 Su b m i t t e d Fr o n t E l e v a t i o n (We st ) Fi l e N o : MV 47 / 24 Ap p l i c a n t : A. U t h a y a k u m a r a n Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 27 5 U x b r i d g e -Pi c k e r i n g T o w n l i n e Ro a d FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ju l y 2 5 , 2 0 2 4 -66- Ex h i b i t 5 Su b m i t t e d No r th El e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : MV 4 7 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : A. U t h a y a k u m a r a n Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 27 5 U x b r i d g e -Pi c k e r i n g T o w n l i n e Ro a d FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ju l y 2 5 , 2 0 2 4 -67- Ex h i b i t 6 Su b m i t t e d Rea r El e v a t i o n (Ea st ) Fi l e N o : MV 47 / 24 Ap p l i c a n t : A. U t h a y a k u m a r a n Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 27 5 U x b r i d g e -Pi c k e r i n g T o w n l i n e Ro a d FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ju l y 2 5 , 2 0 2 4 -68- Ex h i b i t 7 Su b m i t t e d So u t h El e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : MV 47 / 24 Ap p l i c a n t : A. U t h a y a k u m a r a n Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 27 5 U x b r i d g e -Pi c k e r i n g T o w n l i n e Ro a d FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ju l y 2 5 , 2 0 2 4 -69- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: MV 48/24 Date: August 14, 2024 From: Deborah Wylie Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Minor Variance Application MV 48/24 I. Chishi 186 Bralorne Trail Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 7537/17 to permit a rear deck to encroach a maximum of 3.4 metres into the required rear yard, whereas the By-law permits a porch or rear deck to encroach a maximum of 2.0 metres into any required rear yard. The applicant requests approval of this variance to obtain a building permit for a rear deck. Recommendation For your information, and based solely on the application and supporting documentation filed by the applicant, the City Development Department has reviewed the application with respect to Section 45(1) of the Planning Act and 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. After considering all public and agency input, should the Committee find merit in this application, the following condition is recommended: 1. That this variance applies only to the rear deck, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibit 2 & 3). Background The applicant initially applied for a building permit for the rear deck in May of 2023, however, the applicant had proceeded to build the deck prior to the issuance of the building permit. On May 6, 2024, an Order to Comply was issued for the deck as it was built without a building permit. This minor variance application is required by the applicant to legalize the existing deck. -70- Report MV 48/24 August 14, 2024 Page 2 Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designed “Urban Residential Area – Low Density” within the Rouge Park Neighbourhood. Detached dwellings and associated structures are permitted within this designation. Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The applicant is seeking relief to permit a rear deck to encroach a maximum of 3.4 metres into the required rear yard, whereas the By-law permits a porch or rear deck to encroach a maximum of 2.0 metres into any required rear yard. The intent of this provision is to ensure that adequate space is provided for landscaping and private amenity in the rear, while protecting the privacy of abutting properties. The proposed deck will maintain a minimum setback of 3.6 metres to the rear lot line, and a minimum setback of 3.2 metres and the 8.6 metres to the north and south lot lines, respectively. The remaining space in the rear yard is sufficient to allow for landscaping and amenity space in the rear. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance is in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. Desirable for the Appriopriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The requested variance will permit the existing rear deck, which is an extension of outdoor living space and amenity space in the rear yard. The proposed setbacks allow for ample space to avoid any privacy or overlooking issues. Additionally, the subject property backs onto a wooded area, as such the additional projection is not expected to generate any negative impacts to the rear adjacent property. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance is desirable for the appropriate development of the site and is minor in nature. Input From Other Sources Applicant • The subject property backs on to open space area regulated by Toronto and Regional Conservation Authority (TRCA). We have received clearance from the TRCA. The proposed deck would provide an outdoor living space that takes full advantage of this scenic backdrop. The reduced setback does not impinge on the privacy or enjoyment of neighboring properties. • The request is minor in nature, meets the intent of the zoning by-law, official plan and is an appropriate development. -71- Report MV 48/24 August 14, 2024 Page 3 Engineering Services •Ensure the encroachment of the deck in the rear yard does not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lot and surrounding area. Building Services •Deck constructed without the benefit of a building permit; application on hold pending Committee’s decision. Toronto Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) •Although the subject property is partially located within the TRCA regulated area of the Petticoat Creek watershed, the proposed work area will be outside the regulated portion of the site and isolated by appropriate erosion and sediment controls. As such, TRCA has no comments or objections for Minor Variance Application No. MV 48/24, and a TRCA permit is not required. Public Input •As of the date of writing this report, no written submission has been received from the public. Date of report: August 8, 2024 Comments prepared by: Original Signed By Original Signed By Ziya Cao Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Planner I Manager, Zoning & Administration ZC:nr /CityDevDept/D3700/2024/MV 48-24/7. Report/MV48-24 Report.docx Attachments -72- B ralorne Trail Finch Avenue Wo o d v i e w A v e n u e Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: MV 48/24 Date: Jul. 03, 2024 Exhibit 1 ¯ E I. Chishti 186 Bralorne Trail HydroLands SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\MV\2024\MV 48-24\MV48-24_LocationMap.mxd 1:3,000 SCALE:THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © King's Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © His Majesty the King in Right of Canada, Department ofNatural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights reserved.; © Municipal PropertyAssessment Corporation and its suppliers. All rights reserved. City DevelopmentDepartment HydroLands -73- Ex h i b i t 2 Su b m i t t e d Si t e Pl a n Fi l e N o : MV 48 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : I. C h i s h i Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 18 6 B r a l o r n e T r a i l FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ju l y 1 6 , 2 0 2 4 to p e r m i t a r e a r d e c k t o en c r o a c h a m a x i m u m o f 3. 4 me t r e s i n t o t h e r e q u i r e d re a r y a r d 3. 68 m 3. 32 m 7. 0 m Re q u i r e d R e a r Y a r d S e t b a c k -74- Ex h i b i t 3 Su b m i t t e d Re a r E l e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : MV 48 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : I. C h i s h i Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 18 6 B r a l o r n e T r a i l FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ju l y 1 6 , 2 0 2 4 -75- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: MV 49/24 Date: August 14, 2024 From: Deborah Wylie Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Minor Variance Application MV 49/24 S. Raza 2099 Duberry Drive Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 1976/85, to permit an uncovered platform (rear yard deck) not exceeding 2.6 metres in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.9 metres into the required rear yard and not more than 0.5 metres in any required side yard, whereas the By-law permits uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.5 metres into the required rear yard and not more than 0.5 metres in any required side yard. The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application to obtain a building permit to construct a new deck and remove the old deck in the rear yard. Recommendation For your information, and based solely on the application and supporting documentation filed by the applicant, the City Development Department has reviewed the application with respect to Section 45(1) of the Planning Act and 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. After considering all public and agency input, should the Committee find merit in this application, the following condition is recommended: 1. That this variance applies only to the proposed rear yard deck, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, 4 & 5). Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated “Urban Residential Areas – Low Density Areas” within the Brock Ridge Neighbourhood. Residential uses such as detached dwellings and associated accessory structures are permitted within this designation. -76- Report MV 49/24 August 14, 2024 Page 2 Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The requested variance is to permit an uncovered deck, not exceeding 2.6 metres in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.9 metres into the required rear yard, whereas the By-law permits platforms (decks) not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.5 metres into the required rear yard. The intent of this provision is to protect the privacy of abutting properties and to ensure that adequate space is provided within the rear yard for outdoor amenity space and soft landscaping. There is a change in grade between the front and rear of the property. The deck is required to be at a height of 2.6 metres to provide access from the first floor of the dwelling. There is no alternative access proposed to the deck, such as exterior stairs to the rear yard. The height and size are consistent with other decks along Duberry Drive (refer to Exhibit 5). The deck minimizes privacy impacts on adjacent properties by maintaining a setback of 5.55 metres from the rear lot line, 1.23 metres from the north lot line, and over 3.64 metres from the east lot line. Furthermore, there appears to be existing mature vegetation within the rear yard of the subject property, which assists with screening the deck from adjacent properties. The size of the deck and the layout of the rear yard, as shown in the applicant’s submitted plans, demonstrates that sufficient space is provided in the rear yard for outdoor amenity space and soft landscaping. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance maintains the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. Desirable for the Appropriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The requested variance is intended to permit a new deck, which is accessed from the first floor of the dwelling and contributes towards the total amount of usable amenity space in the rear yard. The deck's size and projection are consistent with other ones along Duberry Drive (refer to Exhibit 5). There appears to be existing mature vegetation within the rear yard of the subject property, which assists with screening the deck from adjacent properties. The deck is setback from all lot lines to allow for soft landscaping and drainage. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance is desirable for the appropriate development of the land and is minor in nature. Input From Other Sources Applicant • The height relief is due to the grade of the lot and the height of the patio doors. The existing deck is worn down and in need of replacement. The size of the deck is needed to accommodate family seating and is consistent with the decks in the surrounding lots. -77- Report MV 49/24 August 14, 2024 Page 3 Engineering Services •Ensure the projection of the deck in the rear yard does notadversely affect the drainage patterns within the lot andsurrounding area. Building Services •The permit application is on hold until the Committeecomes to a decision. Public Input •No written submissions have been received from thepublic as of the date of writing this report. Date of report: August 7, 2024 Comments prepared by: Original Signed By Original Signed By Liam Crawford Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Planner II Manager, Zoning & Administration LC:jc https://pickeringo365.sharepoint.com/sites/CityDevDept/D3700/2024/MV 49-24/7. Report/MV 49-24 Report - Copy.docx Attachments -78- MajorOaksRoad DuberryDrive Be a t o n W a y Gandalf Cour tHollyhedgeDrive DenbyDrive Th e o d e n C o u r t Castle Hill C o u r t Sh a y D r i v e Mcbrady Crescent Rayleen Crescent BrockridgeCommunity Park MajorOaksPark Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: MV 49/24 Date: Jul. 02, 2024 Exhibit 1 ¯ E S. Raza 2099 Duberry Drive HydroLands SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\MV\2024\MV 49-24\MV49-24_LocationMap.mxd 1:2,500 SCALE:THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © King's Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © His Majesty the King in Right of Canada, Department ofNatural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights reserved.; © Municipal PropertyAssessment Corporation and its suppliers. All rights reserved. City DevelopmentDepartment -79- Exhibit 2 Submitted Site Plan File No: MV 49/24 Applicant: S. Raza Municipal Address: 2099 Duberry Drive FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. Date: July 25, 2024 to permit uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 2.6 metres in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.9 metres into the required rear yard and not more than 0.5 metres in any required side yard -80- Ex h i b i t 3 Su b m i t t e d C o n c e p t Fi l e N o : MV 4 9 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : S . R a z a Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 2 0 9 9 D u b e r r y D r i v e FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : J u l y 2 5 , 2 0 2 4 to p e r m i t u n c o v e r e d s t e p s or p l a t f o r m s n o t e x c e e d i n g 2. 6 m e t r e s i n h e i g h t a b o v e gr a d e a n d n o t p r o j e c t i n g mo r e t h a n 1 . 9 m e t r e s i n t o th e r e q u i r e d r e a r y a r d a n d no t m o r e t h a n 0 . 5 m e t r e s in a n y r e q u i r e d s i d e y a r d -81- Exhibit 4 Submitted Rear Elevation (West) File No: MV 49/24 Applicant: S. Raza Municipal Address: 2099 Duberry Drive FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. Date: July 25, 2024 to permit uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 2.6 metres in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.9 metres into the required rear yard and not more than 0.5 metres in any required side yard 2.6 metres -82- Ex h i b i t 5 Ae r i a l P h o t o Fi l e N o : MV 4 9/2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : S. Ra z a Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 20 9 9 D u b e r r y D r i v e FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Au g u s t 6 , 2 0 2 4 Su b j e c t Pr o p e r t y -83- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: MV 50/24 Date: August 14, 2024 From: Deborah Wylie Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Minor Variance Application MV 50/24 S. Nazarinia 621 West Shore Boulevard Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-laws 7610/18 to permit: •a minimum front yard setback of 1.5 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum front yard setback of 7.5 metres; •a minimum rear yard setback of 2.4 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum rear yard setback of 7.5 metres; •a maximum lot coverage of 36.8 percent, whereas the By-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent; and •to permit a maximum building height of 10.3 metres, whereas the By-law permits a maximum building height of 9.0 metres. The applicant requests approval of this variance to obtain a future building permit for a three- storey detached dwelling. Recommendation For your information, and based solely on the application and supporting documentation filed by the applicant, the City Development Department has reviewed the application with respect to Section 45(1) of the Planning Act and 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. After considering all public and agency input, should the Committee find merit in this application, the following condition is recommended: 1.That these variances apply only to the proposed development, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibit 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6). -84- Report MV 50/24 August 14, 2024 Page 2 Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designed “Natural Area” within the Westshore Neighbourhood. Lawfully existing dwellings are permitted within the Natural Area designation. As the applicant intends to demolish and rebuild, the replacement dwelling will carry the same permissions as the currently existing dwelling on the lot. Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The subject property is zoned R4 under Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-law 7610/18. Detached dwellings and associated structures are permitted within this zone. Minimum Front and Rear Yard Setback The subject property was a part of a historic plan of subdivision that was not built out in the Westshore neighbourhood. The current lot was intended to be a corner lot fronting Bayview Street with a flankage on West Shore Boulevard. As Bayview Street was never built, it resulted in a narrow lot with a wide frontage on West Shore Boulevard. Based on the current zoning standards, variances to the front and rear yard setbacks will be required for any development on this lot. The intent of requiring a minimum of 7.5 metres for the front and rear yard setbacks is to ensure that adequate separation is provided between the dwelling and the street, and to ensure that adequate space is provided for landscaping and amenity space in the rear yard. Due to the restrictions of the lot, the applicant is requesting a minimum front yard setback of 1.5 metres and a minimum rear yard setback of 2.4 metres. The requested minimum front yard setback of 1.5 metres represents a small portion of the front wall. The average front yard setback of the dwelling is roughly 3.0 metres, and the garage is set back a minimum of 6.0 metres to accommodate the length of a car on the driveway. While the rear yard is being reduced, outdoor amenity space is provided on the south side yard, with a minimum setback of 12.3 metres to the first storey and a minimum setback of 8.1 metres to the second storey. Staff is satisfied that the remaining yard space is sufficient for the separation between the dwelling and the street, as well as providing sufficient space for landscaping and amenity space. Maximum Lot Coverage The applicant requests a maximum lot coverage of 36.8 percent, whereas the By-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent. The intent of this provision is to regulate the size and scale of the buildings and to ensure an adequate amount of space is left uncovered for outdoor amenities. -85- Report MV 50/24 August 14, 2024 Page 3 The proposed dwelling accounts for 33.4 percent of lot coverage and the remaining 3.4 percent includes the two porches and the basement walkout. While the applicant proposes additional lot coverage, the proposed dwelling will maintain adequate setbacks to accommodate soft landscaping, drainage and private amenity space as previously mentioned. The dwelling itself represents a minor increase from the permitted lot coverage of 33 percent and it is in keeping with the massing of the existing dwellings within the neighbourhood. Maximum Building Height The applicant is requesting additional building height up to 10.3 metres to accommodate the third storey recreational area and access to the roof top terrace. The By-law permits a maximum building height of 9.0 metres. The intent of this provision is to regulate the scale of the proposed buildings and to reduce potential shadowing and overlooking impacts to the adjacent dwellings. The third storey of the dwelling is roughly 65 square metres, representing less than 50 percent of the building footprint. The height of the rest of the dwelling is roughly 8.4 metres, measured to the parapet. The existing dwellings along West Shore Boulevard range from 1 storey in height to 3 storeys in height, with the tallest height of 10.7 metres at 560 West Shore Boulevard. The majority of the dwelling is in keeping with the heights of the surrounding dwellings in the area. The additional height of the third storey recreational area, is not expected to generate negative impact to the surrounding properties as it is one of the only remaining residential lots on the east side of West Shore Boulevard and it is surrounded by the Frenchman's Bay West Rotary Park. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variances are in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. Desirable for the Appriopriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The requested variances will facilitate a new dwelling on one of the last historically wide and narrow lots in the Westshore Neighbourhood. Due to the narrow depth of the lot, variances to the front and rear yard setbacks are inevitable to site a dwelling on this lot. The applicant has designed the dwelling to provide sufficient setbacks allowing spaces for parking, soft landscaping and outdoor amenity space. As the lot is surrounded by a park, the minor additions to the lot coverage and height are not expected to generate a negative impact to adjacent properties and are generally in keeping with in the massing of the existing dwellings within the neighbourhood. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variances are desirable for the appropriate development of the site and are minor in nature. -86- Report MV 50/24 August 14, 2024 Page 4 Input From Other Sources Applicant •The subject property has a lot depth of only 15.24 metres. As such, it is not possible to build a dwelling on the lot without variances for front and rear yard setback. The proposed lot coverage includes area of two porches and the basement walk up. The dwelling height is consistent with other new builds in the neighbourhood. Engineering Services •Ensure the reduced front and rear yard setbacks (if approved with this application) does not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lot and surrounding area. •Ensure the increased lot coverage area (if approved with this application) does not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lots and surrounding area. •Multiple Low Impact Development measures (such as infiltration galleries with downspout connections, rain gardens and 450mm amended soil) will be required at the Building Permit stage. Building Services •No concerns from Building Services; Building Permit is required prior construction. Fairport Beach Ratepayers Association •Opposition from the President of the Fairport Beach Ratepayers Association was received regarding the reduced front and rear yard setbacks. Date of report: August 8, 2024 Comments prepared by: Original Signed By Original Signed By Ziya Cao Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Planner I Manager, Zoning & Administration ZC:nr /CityDevDept/D3700/2024/MV 50-24/7. Report/MV50-24 Report.docx Attachments -87- We s t S h o r e B o u l e v a r d Ma r k s b u r y R o a d Oklahoma Drive P a r k C r e s c e n t Ye r e m i S t r e e t Ch i p m u n k S t r e e t Sunrise Avenue Tullo Street Mink AvenueVic t o r y D r i v e Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: MV 50/24 Date: Jul. 08, 2024 Exhibit 1 ¯ E S. Nazarinia621 West Shore Boulevard SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\MV\2024\MV 50-24\MV50-24_LocationMap.mxd 1:2,500 SCALE:THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © King's Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © His Majesty the King in Right of Canada, Department ofNatural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights reserved.; © Municipal PropertyAssessment Corporation and its suppliers. All rights reserved. City DevelopmentDepartment -88- Ex h i b i t 2 Su b m i t t e d Si t e Pl a n Fi l e N o : MV 5 0 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : S. N a z a r i n i a Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 62 1 W e s t S h o r e B o u l e v a r d FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ju l y 1 8 , 2 0 2 4 to p e r m i t a mi n i m u m f r o n t ya r d s e t b a c k of 1 . 5 m e t r e s to p e r m i t a m i n i m u m r e a r y a r d s e t b a c k of 2 . 4 m e t r e s to p e r m i t a m a x i m u m l o t c o v e r a g e o f 36 . 8 p e r c e n t to p e r m i t a ma x i m u m bu i l d i n g h e i g h t of 10 . 3 m e t r e s -89- Ex h i b i t 3 Su b m i t t e d We st E l e v a t i o n ( F r o n t ) Fi l e N o : MV 5 0 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : S. N a z a r i n i a Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 62 1 W e s t S h o r e B o u l e v a r d FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ju l y 1 8 , 2 0 2 4 -90- Ex h i b i t 4 Su b m i t t e d Ea st El e v a t i o n ( Re a r ) Fi l e N o : MV 5 0 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : S. N a z a r i n i a Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 62 1 W e s t S h o r e B o u l e v a r d FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ju l y 1 8 , 2 0 2 4 -91- Ex h i b i t 5 Su b m i t t e d So u t h El e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : MV 5 0 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : S. N a z a r i n i a Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 62 1 W e s t S h o r e B o u l e v a r d FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T DE P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ju l y 1 8 , 2 0 2 4 -92- Ex h i b i t 6 Su b m i t t e d No r t h El e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : MV 5 0 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : S. N a z a r i n i a Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 62 1 W e s t S h o r e B o u l e v a r d FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T DE P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ju l y 1 8 , 2 0 2 4 -93- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: MV 51/24 Date: August 14, 2024 From: Deborah Wylie Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Minor Variance Application MV 51/24 GHR Investments Corp. & G. Torcivia 1494 Rosebank Road Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by Infill By-law 7874/21 to permit: • a maximum dwelling depth of 26.5 metres for a lot with lot depth greater than 40.0 metres, whereas the By-law permits a maximum dwelling depth of 20.0 metres for lots with depths greater than 40.0 metres; and • a maximum front yard setback of 13.75 metres, whereas the By-law permits a maximum front yard setback of 13.41 metres. The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application to construct a two-storey detached dwelling. Recommendation For your information, and based solely on the application and supporting documentation filed by the applicant, the City Development Department has reviewed the application with respect to Section 45(1) of the Planning Act and 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. After considering all public and agency input, should the Committee find merit in this application, the following condition is recommended: 1. That these variances apply only to the detached dwelling, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans. Background In 2019, the owner conveyed Part 2 of 40R-30470 for a required realignment of Rosebank Road and Sheppard Avenue. The conveyed lands have created an irregular lot frontage, which places the proposed dwelling in non-compliance with the provisions of the Infill By-law. -94- Report MV 51/24 August 14, 2024 Page 2 Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated “Urban Residential Area – Low Density” within the Woodlands Neighbourhood. This designation primarily provides for residential uses. The Official Plan Woodlands neighbourhood policies encourage new development along Rosebank Road to be compatible with the character of existing development. Staff have reviewed and made comment on the proposed dwelling using the Council adopted Urban Design Guidelines for Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhood Precincts Checklist, which can be found as Appendix A to this report. Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The subject property is zoned “R4” – Detached Dwelling, under Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by Infill By-law 7874/21, as amended. Dwelling Depth Dwelling Depth is the measurement of the distance between the required minimum Front Yard Setback and the rear of the dwelling, which is a measure of how deep a dwelling protrudes into a lot. The intent of requiring a maximum dwelling depth of 20.0 metres is to provide for consistent placement of rear walls on neighbouring properties, and to reduce potential shadowing, massing and privacy impacts on adjacent dwellings and rear yards. The applicant is requesting a maximum dwelling depth of 26.5 metres, whereas the By-law permits 20.0 metres. The minimum front yard setback requirement for 1494 Rosebank Road is 7.5 metres, which is determined by the existing setback of the neighbouring property to the north (1498 Rosebank Road). The proposed dwelling will have a dwelling depth of 26.5 metres. The rear wall of the proposed dwelling will have a greater rear yard setback than the adjacent property to the south. Overshadowing and privacy will be minimized by maintaining a recessed rear wall setback. The proposed placement of the dwelling maintains the general character and consistency of the existing block of development along the west side of Rosebank Road. Additionally, due to the conveyance of Part 2 of 40R-30470, the existing lot has an irregular frontage, which makes it difficult to comply with the existing development on the adjacent lots. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance to permit a maximum dwelling depth of 26.5 metres maintains the general intent and purpose of the Infill By-law. Maximum Front Yard Setback The intent of the maximum front yard setback requirement is to ensure that adequate separation is provided between a dwelling and street activity, a sufficient landscaped area is maintained between a dwelling and the abutting street, and that an appropriate setback is provided to maintain a consistent streetscape. -95- Report MV 51/24 August 14, 2024 Page 3 The intent of the minimum and maximum front yard setbacks of the Infill By-laws is to reinforce the open space characteristics of the neighbourhood by promoting a consistent “street wall” of the front walls of dwellings, and in turn, helping to regulate the extent of dwelling depths along a block. The maximum front yard setback is determined by the average of the two adjacent existing front yard setbacks, plus 1.0 metre. The front yard setback for the adjacent property to the north (1498 Rosebank Road) is 7.5 metres and the front yard setback for the adjacent property to the south (1492 Rosebank Road) is 17.31 metres. Therefore, the maximum front yard setback requirement for the subject property is 13.41 metres. In the block where the subject lot is situated there is a variety of existing front yard setbacks ranging between 7.5 metres to 30.0 metres. Due to the irregular lot frontage of the subject property, the maximum front yard setback provision requires the applicant to bring the house forward. However, the proposed placement brings the house in closer alignment with the existing dwelling immediately to the south, and more generally with the existing setbacks along the same block of existing development. Furthermore, the proposed development will follow the realigned street line through stepped back setbacks that are generally consistent with the existing development. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance to permit a maximum front yard setback of 13.75 metres maintains the general intent and purpose of the Infill By-law. Desirable for the Appriopriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The requested variances will facilitate the construction of a two-storey detached dwelling on the subject property. The proposed development will feature a built form similar to the existing development along Rosebank Road. The proposed placement of the dwelling generally maintains the consistent streetscape south of the subject property and is compatible with the existing development along Rosebank Road. Staff do not have any concerns with the massing and size of the dwelling. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variances are desirable for the appropriate development of the land and are minor in nature. Input From Other Sources Applicant • The existing location of the adjacent dwellings front yard setbacks and where they are currently located makes it difficult to comply with the requirements of the front yard setback and building depth. Engineering Services • Ensure the proposed dwelling depth and increased front yard setback (if approved with this application) does not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lots and surrounding area. • Multiple Low Impact Development measures (such as infiltration galleries with downspout connections, rain gardens and 450mm amended soils) will be required at the Building Permit stage. -96- Report MV 51/24 August 14, 2024 Page 4 Building Services •No concerns from Building Services, permitapplication is on hold until Committee’sdecision. Public Input •As of date of writing this report, no writtensubmissions have been submitted from thepublic. Date of report: August 7, 2024 Comments prepared by: Original Signed By Original Signed By Kerry Yelk Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Planner I Manager, Zoning & Administration KY:jc https://pickeringo365.sharepoint.com/sites/CityDevDept/D3700/2024/MV 51-24/7. Report/MV 51-24 - Report.doc Attachments -97- Urban City of Pickering Established A 1 Appendix A Urban Design Guideline Checklist City of Pickering Established Neighbourhood Precincts Urban Design Checklist Please note, if you mark “no” below please provide your rational in the adjacent “Comments” section either supporting, or not supporting the proposal. Yes No Comments X 1. Is the proposed dwelling height and roof pitch similar/compatible with the surrounding dwellings? (see Section 2.1: Guideline 1) X 2. If the proposed new dwelling is significantly taller than an existing adjacent house, does the roof of the proposed new dwelling slope away from the existing adjacent house? (see Section 2.1: Guideline 2) X 3. Is the maximum elevation of the Front Entrance 1.2 metres, or less, above grade? (see Section 2.2: Guideline 1) X 4. Is the main entrance visible from the street? (see Section 2.2: Guideline 2) X 5. Are the stairs to the main entrance designed as an integral component of the front façade? (Section 2.2: Guideline 7) X 6. Does the design of the front entrance reduce the visual dominance of the garage and driveway? (see Section 2.2: Guideline 9) X 7. Does the proposed dwelling have a similar Dwelling Depth to the adjacent dwellings along the street? (see Section 2.3: Guideline 2) -98- Appendix A Urban Design Checklist Cont’d Urban City of Pickering Established A 2 Yes No Comments X 8. Does the proposed dwelling have a similar Side Yard Setback to the adjacent dwellings along the street? (see Figure 15) X 9. Has shadow on adjacent dwellings been mitigated with greater Side Yard Setbacks? (Section 3.1: Guideline 2) X 10. Is the garage flush or recessed from the main front wall? (see Section 3.2: Guideline 5) The proposed attached garage is flush with the front wall. X 11. Is the proposed driveway width the same as the permitted garage width? (see Section 3.3: Guideline 1) X 12. Does the plan preserve existing trees? (see Section 4.1: Guideline 1) -99- Sheppard Avenue Steeple Hill Barry Drive Autumn Crescent Lightfoot Place Foxwood Trail Laurier Crescent E d m u n d D r i v e O l d F o r e s t R o a d Pineview Lane Gardenvie wSquare Sundown Crescent Ro s e b a n k R o a d Hig h b ushTrail Ernie L.Stroud Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: MV 51/24 Date: Jul. 05, 2024 Exhibit 1 ¯ E GHR Investments Corp. & G. Torcivia1494 Rosebank Road SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\MV\2024\MV 51-24\MV51-24_LocationMap.mxd 1:4,000 SCALE:THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © King's Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © His Majesty the King in Right of Canada, Department ofNatural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights reserved.; © Municipal PropertyAssessment Corporation and its suppliers. All rights reserved. City DevelopmentDepartment -100- Ex h i b i t 2 Su b m i t t e d Si t e Pl a n Fi l e N o : MV 51 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : GH R I n v e s t m e n t s C o r p . & G . T o r c i v i a Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 14 9 4 R o s e b a n k R o a d CO N T A C T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T F O R D I G I T A L C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N . Da t e : Ju l y 2 9 , 2 0 2 4 Fu t u r e R o s e b a n k R o a d ri g h t -of -wa y Pr o p o s e d D w e l l i n g to p e r m i t a m a x i m u m dw e l l i n g d e p t h o f 26 . 5 me t r e s to p e r m i t a m a x i m u m f r o n t y a r d se t b a c k o f 1 3 . 7 5 m e t r e s -101- Ex h i b i t 3 Su b m i t t e d Ea s t a n d W e s t E l e v a t i o n s Fi l e N o : MV 51 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : GH R I n v e s t m e n t s C o r p . & G . T o r c i v i a Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 14 9 4 R o s e b a n k R o a d CO N T A C T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T F O R D I G I T A L C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N . Da t e : Ju l y 2 9 , 2 0 2 4 Ea s t E l e v a t i o n (F r o n t ) We s t El e v a t i o n (R e a r ) -102- Ex h i b i t 4 Su b m i t t e d No r t h El e v a t i o n (S i d e ) Fi l e N o : MV 51 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : GH R I n v e s t m e n t s C o r p . & G . T o r c i v i a Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 14 9 4 R o s e b a n k R o a d CO N T A C T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T DE P A R T M E N T F O R D I G I T A L C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N . Da t e : Ju l y 2 9 , 2 0 2 4 -103- Ex h i b i t 5 Su b m i t t e d So u t h El e v a t i o n (S i d e ) Fi l e N o : MV 51 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : GH R I n v e s t m e n t s C o r p . & G . T o r c i v i a Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 14 9 4 R o s e b a n k R o a d CO N T A C T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T DE P A R T M E N T F O R D I G I T A L C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N . Da t e : Ju l y 2 9 , 2 0 2 4 -104- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: MV 52/24 Date: August 14, 2024 From: Deborah Wylie Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Minor Variance Application MV 52/24 K. & P. Newman 1375 Uxbridge-Pickering Townline Road Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by By-law 6640/06 to permit an accessory building (detached garage) in the front 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 this minor variance application to obtain a building permit to construct an accessory building in the front yard. Recommendation For your information, and based solely on the application and supporting documentation filed by the applicant, the City Development Department has reviewed the application with respect to Section 45(1) of the Planning Act and 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. After considering all public and agency input, should the Committee find merit in this application, the following condition is recommended: 1. That this variance applies only to the detached garage, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, & 4). Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated “Oak Ridges Moraine – Countryside Area” and “Oak Ridges Moraine – Natural Linkage Area” in North Pickering. Residential and accessory uses hereto are permitted uses within these designations. -105- Report MV 52/24 August 14, 2024 Page 2 Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The subject property is zoned “ORM-A” – Oak Ridges Moraine Agricultural Zone and “ORM- EP” – Oak Ridges Moraine Environmental Protection under Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by Oak Ridges Moraine By-law 6640/06. The applicant has requested a variance to permit an accessory building (detached garage) measuring approximately 60 square metres in area to be located in the front yard. The intent of requiring accessory buildings to be located in the rear yard is to minimize their visual impact on the streetscape and adjacent properties, and to ensure that they act as accessory to the principal use of the property. The front yard of the subject property consists of mature trees and vegetation, which will adequately screen the building (garage). The proposed detached garage is setback approximately 60 metres from the front property line maintaining adequate separation from the road, and will not be visible from the street and adjacent properties having no impact on the streetscape. The proposed detached garage is oriented to maximize accessibility from the driveway for vehicles and will be accessory to the residential dwelling. The requested variance maintains the intent of the Zoning By-law. Desirable for the Appriopriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The proposed detached garage will provide an enclosed parking area and storage to support the residential dwelling. The location of the proposed development is appropriately setback from the street and will not require the removal of existing trees. The requested variance is desirable for the appropriate development of the land and are minor in nature. Input From Other Sources Applicant • By-law does not allow accessory structures in front yard. However, the property is large and does not cause an obstruction. Engineering Services • No comments. Building Services • No concerns from Building Services, permit application is on hold until Committee’s decision. Toronto Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) • The subject property is partially located within a TRCA Regulated Area, the proposed works are located outside that TRCA Regulated Area. As such, TRCA staff have no objection to the approval of Minor Variance Application No. MV 52/24 and a TRCA permit is not required. Public Input • As of date of writing this report, no written submissions have been submitted from the public. -106- Report MV 52/24 August 14, 2024 Page 3 Date of report: August 7, 2024 Comments prepared by: Original Signed By Original Signed By Kerry Yelk Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Planner I Manager, Zoning & Administration KY:nr /CityDevDept/D3700/2024/MV 52-24/7. Report/MV 52-24 - Report.doc Attachments -107- Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: MV 52/24 Date: Jul. 08, 2024 Exhibit 1 ¯ E K. & P. Newman1375 Uxbridge-Pickering Townline Road SubjectLands Uxbridge-Pickering Townline Road L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\MV\2024\MV 52-24\MV52-24_LocationMap.mxd 1:5,000 SCALE:THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © King's Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © His Majesty the King in Right of Canada, Department ofNatural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights reserved.; © Municipal PropertyAssessment Corporation and its suppliers. All rights reserved. City DevelopmentDepartment -108- Ex h i b i t 2 Su b m i t t e d Ov e r a l l Si t e Pl a n Fi l e N o : MV 52 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : K. & P . N e w m a n Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 13 7 5 U x b r i d g e -Pi c k e r i n g T o w n l i n e R o a d CO N T A C T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y DE V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T F O R D I G I T A L C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N . Da t e : Ju l y 2 9 , 2 0 2 4 Re f e r t o E x h i b i t 3 -109- Ex h i b i t 3 Su b m i t t e d De t a i l e d Si t e Pl a n Fi l e N o : MV 52 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : K. & P . N e w m a n Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 13 7 5 U x b r i d g e -Pi c k e r i n g T o w n l i n e R o a d CO N T A C T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T DE P A R T M E N T F O R D I G I T A L C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N . Da t e : Ju l y 2 9 , 2 0 2 4 Pr o p o s e d A c c e s s o r y S t r u c t u r e to p e r m i t a n ac c e s s o r y b u i l d i n g (d e t a c h e d g a r a g e ) in t h e f r o n t y a r d Ex i s t i n g F a r m r e l a t e d st r u c t u r e Ex i s t i n g Gr e e n h o u s e Ex i s t i n g Dw e l l i n g Ex i s t i n g S h e d To w a r d s U x b r i d g e – Pi c k e r i n g To w n l i n e R o a d -110- Ex h i b i t 4 Su b m i t t e d El e v a t i o n Pl a n s Fi l e N o : MV 52 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : K. & P . N e w m a n Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 13 7 5 U x b r i d g e – Pi c k e r i n g T o w n l i n e R o a d CO N T A C T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T DE P A R T M E N T F O R D I G I T A L C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N . Da t e : Ju l y 2 9 , 2 0 2 4 -111-