Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSeptember 11, 2024Committee of Adjustment Agenda Hearing Number: 9 Date: Wednesday, September 11, 2024 pickering.ca Agenda Committee of Adjustment Wednesday, September 11, 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 August 14, 2024 hearing 1-14 4. Minor Variance Reports 4.1 (Deferred at the August 14, 2024 Committee of Adjustment Hearing) MV 50/24 – 621 West Shore Boulevard 15-24 4.2 MV 53/24 – 1278 Commerce Street 25-37 4.3 MV 54/24 – 1995 Glendale Drive 38-43 4.4 MV 55/24 – 1075 Squires Beach Road 44-49 4.5 MV 56/24 – 813 Fairview Avenue 50-61 4.6 MV 57/24 – 2729 Sapphire Drive 62-69 4.7 MV 58/24 – 730 Kingfisher Drive 70-77 5. Adjournment Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, August 14, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 1 of 14 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 Nilissa Reynolds, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer Liam Crawford, Planner II Kerry Yelk, Planner I Ziya Cao, Planner I Absent Not applicable. 1. Disclosure of Interest No disclosures of interest were noted. 2. Adoption of Agenda Moved by Omar Ha-Redeye Seconded by Rick Van Andel That the agenda for the Wednesday, August 14, 2024, 2024 hearing be adopted. Carried Unanimously 3. Adoption of Minutes Moved by Omar Ha-Redeye Seconded by Rick Van Andel That the minutes of the 7th hearing of the Committee of Adjustment held Wednesday, July 10, 2024, be adopted. Carried Unanimously -1- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, August 14, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 2 of 14 4. Minor Variance Reports 4.1 MV 03/24 C. & J. Neblett 1338 Poprad Avenue 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 to obtain a building permit for an additional dwelling unit in an accessory building. Input from other sources were received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services and City’s Building Services Section. In support of the application, the applicant identified that the 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. Candice Neblett, the applicant, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. The applicant reminded the Committee that the home was purchased with the accessory building already built. The fence is setback 0.6 metres from the property line so they believe the setback is actually 1.2 metres, however without a survey they cannot be certain. In response to a question from a Committee member the applicant confirmed there is a kitchen in the accessory dwelling unit, located in the living room area. There is sufficient parking provided. -2- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, August 14, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 3 of 14 Moved by Rick Van Andel Seconded by Sakshi Sood Joshi That application MV 03/24 by C. & J. Neblett, 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 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 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, date August 14, 2024). Carried Unanimously 4.2 MV 38/24 K. Li 734 Hillcrest Road 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. Input from other sources were received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services and City’s Building Services Section. -3- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, August 14, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 4 of 14 In support of the application, the applicant identified the following: • They 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. • The neighbour at 738 Hillcrest, which is located one house away from our project on the same street, has a greater building depth. • The building height variance 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 By-law 2511. The proposed building height won’t have a significant impact on the neighbourhood. • The owner desires 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 land. Keqin Li, applicant, and Shenshu Zhang, agent, were present to represent the application. One area resident was present in objection to the application. In objection to the application an area resident listed the following concerns: street flooding; shadowing due to the height of the dwelling; and tree protection. The applicant commented that this dwelling is in a dynamic neighborhood with many different styles of houses. The height requested is due to the sloped lot, the rear yard is higher than the front yard. An engineer will be contracted to create a grading plan to ensure drainage goes toward the City swell drainage and the grass area. No trees are being removed due to construction. There is no anticipated impact of shadowing to the neighbour across the street. In response to a question from a Committee member regarding the need for a variance for the porch and steps, the applicant commented that the lot is deep, and they would like to have more use out of the backyard. They’re requesting a covered porch so that it is a more functional space. The stairs are required to enter the house at the ground level. The ground floor is one storey higher than the grade in the front yard. In response to a question from a Committee member the agent commented that the metal canopy in the rear yard is included in the lot coverage calculation, without it the coverage would be 36 percent. The Chair reassured the area resident that the report included Engineering comments regarding the drainage, which will be addressed during the building permit stage. -4- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, August 14, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 5 of 14 After reading the report and the Engineering Services comments, and hearing the applicant’s rationale for the application, Denise Rundle moved the following motion: Moved by Denise Rundle Seconded by Omar Ha-Redeye That application MV 38/24 by K. Li, 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 Exhibit 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated August 14, 2024). Carried Unanimously 4.3 MV 44/24 R. & B. Chung 1598 Major Oaks Road 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. Input from other sources was received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services, and City’s Building Services Section. In support of the application, the applicant identified that a deck that abides by the currently permitted maximum lot coverage of 38 percent would be too small to be useful. No representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. In response to a question from a Committee member, the Secretary-Treasurer confirmed that the balcony was built without the benefit of a building permit. Once the owner was notified a permit was applied for. The subject variance was noted during the building permit process. Moved by Rick Van Andel Seconded by Omar Ha-Redeye -5- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, August 14, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 6 of 14 That application MV 44/24 by R. & B. Chung, 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 front yard deck (balcony), 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 August 14, 2024). Carried Unanimously 4.4 MV 45/24 S. Monaghan 459 Churchwin Street 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. Input from other sources was received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services, and City’s Building Services Section. In support of the application, the applicant identified that the Whitevale HCD Guidelines recommend garages to be detached from the principal structure. Steve Monaghan, applicant, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. The applicant said many garages near his home are over the density height. The garage will only be seen by the neighbour across the street and is located at the rear of the property. Given that the proposed garage conforms to the Whitevale Heritage Conservation Guidelines, and after reading the report, Denise Rundle moved the following motion: Moved by Denise Rundle Seconded by Omar Ha-Redeye -6- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, August 14, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 7 of 14 That application MV 45/24 by S. Monaghan, 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 proposed accessory building, 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 August 14, 2024). Carried Unanimously 4.5 MV 46/24 K. Gharib 2161 Denby Drive 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. Input from other sources was received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services, and City’s Building Services Section. In support of the application, the applicant identified the deck existed when the property was purchased, the deck must be legalized to finalize the sale of the property. No representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Moved by Sakshi Sood Joshi Seconded by Rick Van Andel That application MV 46/24 by K. Gharib, 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 proposed rear yard deck, 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 August 14, 2024). Carried Unanimously -7- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, August 14, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 8 of 14 4.6 MV 47/24 A. Uthayakumaran 275 Uxbridge-Pickering Townline Road 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). Input from other sources was received from the Applicant, 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 old residential building is in good standing and the proposed change from a residential use to an accessory storage use utilizes the building without creating the need to dispose of it in a landfill. The building has been decommissioned to ensure it is not used for residential purposes. Peter Jauczik, agent, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. In response to a question from a Committee member the agent commented that they are currently in conversation with TRCA, and they have a permit in for the construction of the dwelling. A Committee member commented that the owner’s willingness to repurpose an old dwelling and turn it into an accessory storage building, and retaining said building with due diligence is a great effort and should be considered in making the decision. Moved by Denise Rundle Seconded by Omar Ha-Redeye That application MV 47/24 by A. Uthayakumaran, 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 accessory building (storage), as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, & 7 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, date August 14, 2024). -8- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, August 14, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 9 of 14 2. That a TRCA permit be obtained prior to the issuance of a building permit. Carried Unanimously 4.7 MV 48/24 I. Chishi 186 Bralorne Trail 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. Input from other sources was received from the Applicant, 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 the following: • 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. Shehryar Khan, 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 the deck faces a wooded area, confirmed they are aware of the Engineering comments and noted that they have also supplied TRCA with requested plans, and that they had no comments. Moved by Rick Van Andel Seconded by Sakshi Sood Joshi That application MV 48/24 by I. Chishi, 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: -9- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, August 14, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 10 of 14 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). Carried Unanimously 4.8 MV 49/24 S. Raza 2099 Duberry Drive 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. Input from other sources was received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services, and City’s Building Services Section. In support of the application, the applicant identified the height relief as due to the lot's grade and the patio door height. The existing deck is worn down and needs replacement. The size of the deck is needed to accommodate family seating and is consistent with the decks in the surrounding lots. Syed Raza and Farva Raza, applicants, were present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. The applicant commented that they would like to replace their existing deck with a larger size. In response to a question from a Committee member, the applicant confirmed that the existing deck (small balcony) came with the house when the purchased it from the builder. A Committee member noted that this variance is only for half of the deck due to how it is positioned. Moved by Rick Van Andel Seconded by Sakshi Sood Joshi -10- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, August 14, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 11 of 14 That application MV 49/24 by S. Raza, 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 proposed rear yard deck, 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 August 14, 2024). Carried Unanimously 4.9 MV 50/24 S. Nazarinia 621 West Shore Boulevard 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. Input from other sources was received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services, City’s Building Services Section, the Fairport Beach Ratepayers Association and the Pickering West Shore Community Association. In support of the application, the applicant identified that 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 the front and rear yard setback. The proposed lot coverage includes the area of two porches and the basement walk up. The dwelling height is consistent with other new buildings in the neighbourhood. -11- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, August 14, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 12 of 14 Arlene Beaumont, agent, was present to represent the application. Two representatives from the FBNA & PWSCA were present. Moved by Omar Ha-Redeye Seconded by Sakshi Sood Joshi That application MV 50/24 by S. Nazarinia, be Deferred to the September 11, 2024, Committee of Adjustment hearing for discussions with neighbours, and neighbourhood associations. 4.10 MV 51/24 GHR Investments Corp. & G. Torcivia 1494 Rosebank Road 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. Input from other sources were received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services and City’s Building Services Section. In support of the application, the applicant identified 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. Jonathan Benczkowski, agent, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. The agent confirmed to a Committee member that due to the way the zoning by-law calculations are read, the dwelling depth is 21.3 metres. Given that this application is due to the partial conveyance of the property for corner rounding purposes, that often throws off the dimensions of the lot, and after reading the report and making a site visit, Denise Rundle moved the following motion: -12- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, August 14, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 13 of 14 Moved by Denise Rundle Seconded by Rick Van Andel That application MV 51/24 by GHR Investments Corp. & G. Torcivia, 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 detached dwelling, 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 August 14, 2024). Carried Unanimously 4.11 MV 52/24 K. & P. Newman 1375 Uxbridge-Pickering Townline Road 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. Input from other sources was received from the Applicant, 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 By-law does not allow accessory structures in the front yard. However, the property is large and does not cause an obstruction. Katelyn Newman, applicant, Sean Will, agent, were present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. The agent commented the following: that the garage will follow the existing neighbourhood characteristics; the façade will match the current bungalow; the height is modest; and the garage will have a man door and two windows to match the north side of the dwelling. In response to a Committee member, the agent confirmed that the garage will only be utilized to store cars and garden tools. -13- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, August 14, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 14 of 14 A Committee member stated this is a large property, located outside of the TRCA regulated area. Moved by Denise Rundle Seconded by Sakshi Sood Joshi That application MV 52/24 by K. & P. Newman, 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 detached garage, 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 August 14, 2024). Carried Unanimously 5. Adjournment Moved by Sakshi Sood Joshi Seconded by Omar Ha-Redeye That the 8th hearing of the 2024 Committee of Adjustment be adjourned at 8:14 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 -14- 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). -15- 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. -16- 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. -17- 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 -18- 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. Nazarinia 621 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 -19- 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 -20- 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 -21- 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 -22- 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 -23- 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 -24- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: MV 53/24 Date: September 11, 2024 From: Deborah Wylie Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Minor Variance Application MV 53/24 D. Yapa 1278 Commerce Street Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-laws 7610/21, 7872/21 and 7873/21, to permit: • a minimum front yard setback of 4.5 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum front yard setback of 7.5 metres; • uncovered steps and platforms (uncovered front yard porch) not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.8 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 minimum flankage yard setback (first storey addition) of 3.0 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum flankage yard setback of 4.5 metres; • a partially covered platform (second storey balcony) not exceeding 3.3 metres in height above grade and not projecting more than 2.2 metres into the required flankage yard, whereas the By-law permits uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.0 metre into the required flankage yard; • main eaves (second storey balcony canopy) not projecting more than 0.85 of a metre from the proposed balcony projection, whereas the By-law permits main eaves, belt courses, chimney breasts, sills or cornices not projecting more than 0.45 of a metre into required yard; • a minimum rear yard setback of 2.8 metres, whereas the By-law permits a minimum rear yard setback of 7.5 metres; • a minimum side yard setback of 1.2 metres, whereas the By-law permits a minimum side yard setback of 1.5 metres; and • a maximum lot coverage of 36 percent, whereas the By-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent. -25- Report MV 53/24 September 11, 2024 Page 2 The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application to construct an addition and reconstruct a ground floor porch and second storey balcony. 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. 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 first storey addition, front porch, and second storey balcony, as generally sited, and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 & 7). Background Minor Variance Decisions P/CA 41/85 and P/CA 10/04 The City of Pickering Committee of Adjustment approved Minor Variance Applications P/CA 41/85 and P/CA 10/04 to recognize the existing lot frontage of 13.1 metres and to permit multiple reductions to the front and flankage yard setbacks to accommodate various additions to the dwelling. Minor Variance Decision P/CA 41/85 permitted a continuance of an existing front yard setback of 4.29 metres and an existing flankage yard setback of 4.14 metres to the existing enclosed porch, and the establishment of a 2.95 metre flankage yard setback for a proposed second storey addition and deck. Minor Variance Decision P/CA 10/04 recognized the reduced lot frontage of 13.1 metres and a flankage yard setback of 1.1 metres to an as built second storey balcony and permitted the establishment of a front yard setback of 4.0 metres and a flankage yard setback of 2.9 metres to the second and third storey additions. The applicant is proposing a first storey addition, the conversion of the existing enclosed porch to form part of the building, and changes to the existing balcony. The previously approved flankage and front yard setback reductions applied to the enclosed porch, and the second and the third storey additions, as a result, the proposed changes in this application do not benefit from the previous minor variance decisions. -26- Report MV 53/24 September 11, 2024 Page 3 Comments Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated “Urban Residential Areas – Low Density Area” within the Bay Ridges Neighbourhood and are subject to the Liverpool Road Waterfront Node Development Guidelines. Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The subject property is zoned “R4” in Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-laws 7610/21, 7872/21 and 7873/21. Minimum Front Yard Setback and Flankage Yard Setback Variances The intent of the front yard and flankage yard setback provisions are to provide an adequate separation distance between a building and street activity and to maintain a consistent setback with abutting properties mitigating views and privacy impacts. The applicant requests a minimum front yard depth of 4.5 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum front yard depth of 7.5 metres. Additionally, the applicant requests a minimum flankage yard setback of 3.0 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum front yard depth of 4.5 metres. Previous Minor Variance Application P/CA 10/04 permitted a minimum flankage yard setback of 2.95 metres for a second storey and third storey cantilevered additions. Furthermore, P/CA 10/04 permitted a minimum front yard setback of 4.0 metres for second and third storey additions on top of an existing covered porch. The previously approved variances did not address the first storey of the building. Through this application, the applicant is proposing to bring the first storey wall flush with the existing second and third storey walls, and the enclosed porch has now become a part of the main building. Overall, the proposed first storey addition will have minimal impacts on privacy for adjacent properties and existing landscaping in the front yard and flankage yard will mitigate impacts on the streetscape. Staff is of the opinion that these variances are in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. Front Yard Encroachment Variance The applicant is proposing an uncovered porch not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.8 metres into the required front yard, whereas the Zoning By- law permits uncovered steps and platforms, not exceeding a height of 1.0 metre, to project a maximum of 1.5 metres into the required front yard. The intent of this provision is to ensure adequate space is provided as buffer between the structures and street activity and to provide for front yard landscaping. -27- Report MV 53/24 September 11, 2024 Page 4 The applicant is proposing to replace an existing uncovered wooden platform (porch) in the front yard with an uncovered concrete porch. The proposed porch is an integral part of the existing landscaping within the front and flankage yards. Existing vegetation, which forms part of the front yard landscaping, allows for appropriate buffer space between the existing dwelling and streetscape. Staff is of the opinion that requested variance maintains the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. Flankage Yard Encroachment Variance and Main Eaves Encroachment Variance The intent of the encroachment provision is to ensure that buildings on corner lots provide an adequate distance from the flanking street to maintain a visually cohesive streetscape character in relation to other buildings, to ensure that they are located far enough away to buffer them from street activity, and to ensure that they do not infringe on sight lines for traffic at the corner. The applicant is proposing a partially covered balcony not exceeding 3.3 metres in height above grade and not projecting more than 2.2 metres into the required flankage yard, whereas the By-law permits uncovered steps and platforms, not exceeding a height of 1.0 metre, to project a maximum of 1.0 metre into the required yard. The applicant is proposing to replace an existing partially covered balcony in the flankage yard. The previously built balcony was permitted through Minor Variance Application P/CA 10/04. However, a further variance is required to continue the permitted setback for a covered platform (balcony), whereas the By-law only permits uncovered steps and platforms. Existing vegetation, which forms part of the flankage yard landscaping, allows for appropriate buffer space between the existing dwelling and streetscape. The previously approved balcony does not appear to adversely affect the streetscape and sight lines for traffic. The intent of the main eaves encroachment provision to require eaves to not project more than 0.45 of a metre into any required yard setback is to ensure all runoff and drainage is contained within the subject property. The applicant is proposing to replace an existing balcony covering with a new covering and attached eaves that will encroach 0.85 of a metre into the flankage yard. The previously built balcony was permitted through Minor Variance Application P/CA 10/04. However, a variance is now required to permit the new eaves that cover the balcony. The existing balcony covering does not appear to adversely affect drainage and stormwater runoff. Staff is of the opinion that requested variances maintain the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. Minimum Rear Yard Setback Variance and Minimum Side Yard Setback Variance The intent of the minimum rear yard and side yard setback requirements is to maintain sufficient outdoor amenity space within the rear yard, and to maintain an appropriate separation between structures and abutting rear yards to mitigate privacy concerns. The applicant is proposing a rear yard setback of 2.8 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum rear yard setback of 7.5 metres. Furthermore, the applicant is proposing a side yard setback of 1.2 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum side yard setback of 1.5 metres. The reduced rear yard and side yard setback is to permit the existing attached garage. -28- Report MV 53/24 September 11, 2024 Page 5 In 2009, the City issued a Building Permit to permit a detached garage in the rear yard. At the time, the detached garage (accessory structure) complied with the setback and height provisions of Accessory Structure provisions in Section 5.19 of Zoning By-law 2511. However, the detached garage, which was originally separate from the principal structure, appears to have been connected by a previous owner. Therefore, the detached garage now forms part of the principal structure and must comply with the Residential zoning provisions in Section 10 of Zoning By-law 2511. The attached garage maintains a height of 3.5 metres, with minimal impacts on adjacent privacy. Due to the unique character of the property, most of the outdoor amenity space is provided within the front yard and contained on the existing second storey balcony. Staff is of the opinion that requested variances maintain the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. Maximum Lot Coverage Variance The intent of the maximum lot coverage provision is to maintain an appropriate amount of yard space for outdoor amenity area uncovered by buildings on a lot and to regulate the scale and size of the building. The applicant requests a maximum lot coverage of 36 percent, whereas the By-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent. The property has sufficient outdoor amenity space within the front yard as well as on the second and third storey balconies. Furthermore, there is existing amenity space on the roof of the existing dwelling. The applicant’s proposal does not further extend the dwelling footprint, rather a reconstruction of the existing balcony and porch is proposed. The existing lot coverage does not appear to adversely affect stormwater runoff and drainage within the property and for adjacent properties. Staff is of the opinion that requested variances maintain 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 permit the first storey addition as well as the connection of the garage to the existing dwelling. Furthermore, the variances will permit the reconstruction of an existing balcony in the flankage yard and an uncovered porch in the front yard. The proposed first storey addition will align with the second and third storey of the dwelling. The proposal fits within the unique built form of the neighbourhood, and the requested variances are not expected to generate significant negative impacts on the surrounding properties. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variances are desirable for the appropriate development of land and are minor in nature. -29- Report MV 53/24 September 11, 2024 Page 6 Input From Other Sources Date of report: September 5, 2024 Comments prepared by: Original Signed By Original Signed By Kerry Yelk Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Planner II Manager, Zoning & Administration KY:nr /CityDevDept/D3700/2024/MV 53-24/7. Report/MV 53-24 Report.docx Attachments Applicant •The variances are to permit minor additions and reconstruction of existing decks and balconies. Engineering Services •Ensure the decreased minimum front yard depth, reduced rear yard and side yard setbacks (if approved with this application) do not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lot and surrounding area. •Ensure the projection of the steps in the front yard (if approved with this application) does not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lot and surrounding area. •Ensure the minimum flankage yard setback (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 lot and surrounding area. Building Services •House addition started construction without the benefit of building permit, permit application is on hold until Committee’s decision. Public Input •No written submissions have been received from the public as of the date of writing this report. -30- Liv e r p o o l R o a d Annland Street Commerce Street Wharf Street Browning Avenue Ilona Park Road Fa i r v i e w A v e n u e F r o n t R o a d Do u g l a s A v e n u e Monica Cook Place Ple a s a n t S t r e e t ProgressFrenchman'sBay East Park Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: MV 53/24 Date: Jul. 22, 2024 Exhibit 1 ¯ E D. Yapa 1278 Commerce Street SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\MV\2024\MV 53-24\MV53-24_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 -31- Exhibit 2 Submitted Site Plan File No: MV 53/24 Applicant: D. Yapa Municipal Address: 1278 Commerce Street CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN. Date: August 26, 2024 Commerce Street 1.8 metres -32- Exhibit 3 Submitted Site Plan File No: MV 53/24 Applicant: D. Yapa Municipal Address: 1278 Commerce Street CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN. Date: August 26, 2024 Commerce Street to permit a minimum front yard setback of 4.5 metres to permit uncovered steps and platforms (uncovered front yard porch) not exceeding 1.0 metres in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.8 metres into the required front yard to permit a minimum flankage yard setback (first storey addition) of 3.0 metres to permit a partially covered platform (second storey balcony) not exceeding 3.3 metres in height above grade and not projecting more than 2.2 metres into the required flankage yard main eaves (second storey balcony canopy) not projecting more than 0.85 of a metre from the proposed balcony projection to permit a minimum rear yard setback of 2.8 metres to permit a minimum side yard setback of 1.2 metres to permit a maximum lot coverage of 36 percent -33- Exhibit 4 Submitted North Elevation File No: MV 53/24 Applicant: D. Yapa Municipal Address: 1278 Commerce Street CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN. Date: August 26, 2024 -34- Exhibit 5 Submitted South Elevation File No: MV 53/24 Applicant: D. Yapa Municipal Address: 1278 Commerce Street CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN. Date: August 26, 2024 -35- Exhibit 6 Submitted West Elevation File No: MV 53/24 Applicant: D. Yapa Municipal Address: 1278 Commerce Street CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN. Date: August 26, 2024 -36- Exhibit 7 Submitted East Elevation File No: MV 53/24 Applicant: D. Yapa Municipal Address: 1278 Commerce Street CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN. Date: August 26, 2024 -37- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: MV 54/24 Date: September 11, 2024 From: Deborah Wylie Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Minor Variance Application MV 54/24 A. & F. Lorefice 1995 Glendale Drive Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 7874/21, to permit: • an accessory building (cabana) with a maximum height of 4.6 metres, whereas the By-law permits accessory buildings with a maximum height of 3.5 metres; and • a maximum lot coverage of 35.1 percent, whereas the By-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 25 percent. The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application to construct an accessory building (cabana) 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 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. 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 accessory building (cabana), as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2 & 3). Comments Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated “Urban Residential Areas – Low Density Area” within the Liverpool Neighbourhood. -38- Report MV 54/24 September 11, 2024 Page 2 Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The subject property is zoned “R3” in Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 7874/21. Accessory Building Height Variance The intent of the maximum height requirement of 3.5 metres for accessory buildings is to ensure that accessory buildings remain accessory to the principal dwelling and to minimize visual impact on the adjacent properties and on the streetscape. The proposed cabana has a height of 4.6 metres, with a setback of 2.5 metres from the south lot line and 5.0 metres from the rear property line, which will help reduce the visual impact of the structure for abutting lots. Staff is of the opinion that this variance is in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. Maximum Lot Coverage Variance The intent of the maximum lot coverage provision is to maintain an appropriate amount of yard space for outdoor amenity area uncovered by buildings on a lot and to regulate the scale and size of the building. The applicant requests a maximum lot coverage of 35.1 percent, whereas the By-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 25 percent. The recently constructed dwelling has a total lot coverage of 456.8 square metres or 32.9 percent. The proposed cabana structure has a total floor area of 30.9 square metres or 2.2 percent for a total lot coverage of 35.1 percent (dwelling and cabana). A building permit for the dwelling was issued prior to the enactment of By-law 7874/21 which reduced the maximum permitted lot coverage from 33 percent to 25 percent. The existing dwelling has a minimum rear yard setback of 20 metres, which provides a generous amount of amenity space within the rear yard. The proposed cabana accounts for 2.2 percent of the total lot coverage. The existing lot coverage does not appear to adversely affect stormwater runoff and drainage within the property and for adjacent properties. Staff is of the opinion that requested variances maintain the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. Desirable for the Appropriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The proposed accessory building is intended to complement the amenity space within the rear yard and will be accessory to the residential use of the subject lands. The size and location of the cabana appears to be desirable for the appropriate development of the land. The location of the accessory building at the southeast corner of the lot reinforces the accessory nature of the proposed structure in relation to the dwelling. The proposed accessory building will be in the rear yard and maintain an adequate setback from the adjacent residential lots immediately to the east and south. The accessory building is desirable for the appropriate development of the land and is minor in nature. -39- Report MV 54/24 September 11, 2024 Page 3 Input From Other Sources Date of report: September 5, 2024 Comments prepared by: Original Signed By Original Signed By Kerry Yelk Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Planner II Manager, Zoning & Administration KY:nr /CityDevDept/D3700/2024/MV 54-24/7. Report/MV 54-24 Report.docx Attachments Applicant •The size and scale of the structure is similar to other structures on neighbouring properties and fits within the context of the neighbourhood Engineering Services •Ensure the increased lot coverage area (if approved with this application) does not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lot and surrounding area. Building Services •No concerns from Building Services, permit application is on hold until Committee’s decision Public Input •No written submissions have been received from the public as of the date of writing this report. -40- Ma p l e R i d g e D r i v e Malden Crescent Parkdale Street LinwoodStreet Me m o r y L a n e Bo w l e r D r i v e Finch Avenue Fo r e s t P a r k D r i v e Bushmill Street Wh e at s heaf Lane Mulmur Court Cottonwood Cir cle Li verp ool Road Fi eld sto n e Circle Bridle Path Circle Ferncliff Circle Ca n b o r o u g h C r e s c e n t Br i d g e G a t e C r e s c e n t Faylee Crescent Barnwood Square Gl e n d a l e D r i v e Anton Square MulmerTot Lot Glendale Park MapleRidge Park GlengrovePark BeverleyMorganPark Maple RidgePublic School Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: MV 54/24 Date: Aug. 06, 2024 Exhibit 1 ¯ E A. & F. Lorefice 1995 Glendale Drive SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\MV\2024\MV 54-24\MV54-24_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 -41- 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 54 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : A. & F . L o r e f i c e Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 19 9 5 G l e n d a l e D r i v 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 : Se p te m b e r 5, 20 2 4 Pr o p o s e d C a b a n a Ex i s t i n g D w e l l i n g to p e r m i t an a c c e s s o r y bu i l d i n g ( c a b a n a ) wi t h a ma x i m u m h e i g h t o f 4. 6 me t r e s 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 5 .1 pe r c e n t Glendale Drive -42- Ex h i b i t 3 Su b m i t t e d El e v a t i o n , F l o o r , a n d R o o f P l a n s Fi l e N o : MV 54 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : A. & F . L o r e f i c e Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 19 9 5 G l e n d a l e D r i v 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 DI G I T A L C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N . Da t e : Au g u s t 2 6 , 2 0 2 4 -43- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: MV 55/24 Date: September 11, 2024 From: Deborah Wylie Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Minor Variance Application MV 55/24 Purolator Inc. 1075 Squires Beach Road Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, to permit front yard parking be limited to 107 percent (64 parking spaces) of the total required parking, whereas the By-law limits front yard parking to 20 percent (12 parking spaces) of the total required parking. The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application to obtain Site Plan approval to expand on-site parking. 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. 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 development, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2 & 3). Background The applicant has submitted a revision to Site Plan Application S 17/86 for the subject property to facilitate an expansion of the parking lot within the northeast portion of the lot. The applicant is proposing a total of 64 additional parking spaces (35 vehicle spaces, 6 truck plug-ins, 5 truck parking spaces, 4 loading spaces, and 14 trailer parking spaces) to be located in an area that acts as a rear yard but is interpreted as the front yard due to the lot being a through lot. Currently, there are 62 parking spaces located within the Squires Beach Road front yard and north side yard. During the review of the site plan application, staff identified the noted zoning non-compliance. The requested variance is required for the applicant to obtain final Site Plan approval. -44- Report MV 55/24 September 11, 2024 Page 2 Comments Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated “General Employment” within the Brock Industrial Neighbourhood. Permitted uses within this designation aim to accommodate a range of industrial uses, including but not limited to, light manufacturing, light service industries, and business parks. Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The subject property is zoned “M2S” – Yard Storage and Heavy Manufacturing Zone. Section 5.21.1(3) of By-law 2511 requires a minimum of 1 parking space per 56 square metres of gross floor area for industrial uses. The existing industrial structure has a total gross floor area of 3,327.8 square metres, which requires 60 parking spaces. Currently, sixty-two parking spaces are provided, and an additional 64 parking spaces are proposed. Front Yard Parking Variance The By-law permits a maximum of 20 percent of the total required parking spaces to be located in the front yard, which allows a maximum of 12 parking spaces in the front yard. The intent of limiting front yard parking is to minimize the visual impact of parking areas on the streetscape. The applicant is proposing that the proposed 64 additional parking spaces be located in the front yard. The front yard has been determined to be the yard between the building and the lot line shared with Copperstone Drive. The lot is considered a through lot as it has frontage on both Squires Beach Road and Copperstone Drive. The lot line shared with Copperstone Drive is interpreted to be the front line and the yard between the building and the Copperstone Drive front lot line is interpreted to be the front yard. However, the Squires Beach Road frontage acts as the front of the site providing the only access to the site. The parking expansion area is proposed in the yard facing Copperstone Drive which for the purposes of zoning is interpreted as the front yard but acts as the rear yard for the lot. The yard facing Copperstone Drive contains significant landscaping, including a berm, which will significantly reduce any visual impact of the proposed expanded parking area from Copperstone Drive. This existing berm will continue to be maintained. Staff is of the opinion that this 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 proposed variances are desirable for the appropriate development of the land as the proposal is in keeping with the range of industrial uses within the Brock Industrial Neighbourhood. The proposed parking spaces are in an area interpreted to be the front yard of the lot but which acts as the rear area of the lot and will maintain a sufficient setback to provide for landscaping and will not result in a negative visual impact on the streetscape. -45- Report MV 55/24 September 11, 2024 Page 3 Input From Other Sources Date of report: September 5, 2024 Comments prepared by: Original Signed By Original Signed By Kerry Yelk Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Planner II Manager, Zoning & Administration KY:nr /CityDevDept/D3700/2024/MV 55-24/7. Report/MV 55-24 Report.docx Attachments Applicant •The current Zoning By-law does not recognize Through Lots. As a result, this particular lot technically has two front yards, even though the Squires Beach yard looks and functions like a front yard and the Copperstone yard looks and functions as a rear yard. Engineering Services •No comments on this application. Building Services •No concerns from Building Services. Public Input •No written submissions have been received from the public as of the date of writing this report. -46- Clements Road Silicone Drive Sq u i r e s B e a c h R o a d Copperstone Drive Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: MV 55/24 Date: Aug. 06, 2024 Exhibit 1 ¯ E Purolator Inc. 1075 Squires Beach Road SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\MV\2024\MV 55-24\MV55-24_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 -47- 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 55/2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : Pu r o l a t o r I n c . Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 10 7 5 S q u i r e s B e a c h 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 : Se p t e m b e r 4 , 20 2 4 Pr o p o s e d P a r k i n g A r e a Ex i s t i n g Bu i l d i n g to p e r m i t f r o n t ya r d p a r k i n g b e li m i t e d t o 10 7 p er c e n t (6 4 pa r k i n g sp a c e s ) o f t h e to t a l r e q u i r e d pa r k i n g Squires Beach Road Copperstone Drive Se e E x h i b i t 3 f o r de t a i l s -48- Exhibit 3 Submitted Detailed Site Plan File No: MV 55/24 Applicant: Purolator Inc. Municipal Address: 1075 Squires Beach Road CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN. Date: August 26, 2024 -49- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: MV 56/24 Date: September 11, 2024 From: Deborah Wylie Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Minor Variance Application MV 56/24 J. Rassiah & S. & T. Jegatheeswaran 813 Fairview Avenue Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-laws 7610/18 and 7872/21 to permit: • a maximum dwelling depth of 20.5 metres for a lot with lot depth less than 40.0 metres, whereas the By-law permits a maximum dwelling depth of 17.0 metres for lots with depths less than 40.0 metres; and • a maximum front yard setback of 6.8 metres, whereas the By-law permits a maximum front yard setback of 5.7 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. 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. Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated “Urban Residential Area – Low Density” within the Bay Ridges Neighbourhood. This designation primarily provides for residential uses. -50- Report MV 56/24 September 11, 2024 Page 2 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 by Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-laws 7610/18 and 7874/21. 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 measurement of how deep a dwelling protrudes into a lot. The intent of requiring a maximum dwelling depth of 17.0 metres is to provide for the placement of rear walls consistent with those on neighbouring properties, and to reduce potential shadowing, and massing and privacy impacts on adjacent dwellings and rear yards. The applicant is requesting a maximum dwelling depth of 20.5 metres, whereas the By-law permits 17.0 metres. Dwelling depth is measured by the required minimum front yard setback, which is determined by the shortest setback on the immediate adjacent lots, to the rear dwelling wall. In this case, the minimum front yard setback requirement for 813 Fairview Avenue is 1.76 metres, which is determined by the existing setback of the neighbouring property to the north (815 Fairview Avenue). The proposed dwelling depth of 20.5 metres will bring the rear wall of the proposed dwelling flush with the existing development on the adjacent lots to the north and south minimizing overshadowing and privacy impacts. The proposed placement of the dwelling maintains the general character and consistency of the existing block of development along the east side of Fairview Avenue. Furthermore, the proposed dwelling has a total depth of 15.4 metres. However, due to the existing dwelling to the north, the dwelling depth is measured from the required 1.76 metre setback to the rear wall of the proposed dwelling. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance to permit a maximum dwelling depth of 20.5 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. 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 (815 Fairview Avenue) is 1.75 metres and the front yard setback for the adjacent property to the south (811 Fairview Avenue) is 7.72 metres. Therefore, the maximum front yard setback requirement for the subject property is 5.7 metres. -51- Report MV 56/24 September 11, 2024 Page 3 In the block where the subject lot is situated there is a variety of existing front yard setbacks ranging between 1.0 metre to 8.0 metres. As per the Infill By-law, the proposed dwelling is required to maintain a maximum front yard setback of 5.7 metres. This setback is a result of the existing dwelling to the north at 815 Fairview Avenue. The front yard setback at 815 Fairview Avenue is less in keeping with the general character of the immediately adjacent lots along Fairview Avenue, which have front yard setbacks ranging between 7.0 to 8.0 metres. Furthermore, the proposed front yard setback of 6.8 metres will allow an appropriate setback to accommodate a legal parking space within the front yard, as well as property maintenance and landscaping. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance to permit a maximum front yard setback of 6.8 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 like the existing development along Fairview Avenue, which ranges in height and massing. The proposed placement of the dwelling generally maintains the consistent streetscape and is compatible with the existing development along Fairview Avenue. Staff do not have any concerns about 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 adjacentdwellings front yard setbacks and wherethey are currently located makes it difficult to comply with the requirements of the front yard setback and building depth. Engineering Services •Ensure the increased dwelling depth andfront yard setback (if approved with this application) does not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lot andsurrounding area. •Multiple Low Impact Development measures (such as infiltration galleries with downspout connections, rain gardens and 450mmamended soils) will be required at theBuilding Permit stage. Building Services •No concerns from Building Services, Building Permit is required priorconstruction.Public Input •As of date of writing this report, no written submissions have been submitted from the public. -52- Report MV 56/24 September 11, 2024 Page 4 Date of report: September 5, 2024 Comments prepared by: Original Signed By Original Signed By Kerry Yelk Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Planner II Manager, Zoning & Administration KY:jc /CityDevDept/D3700/2024/MV 56-24/7. Report/MV 56-24 Report.docx Attachments -53- 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) -54- 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 design of garage is flush with the main 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) -55- Do u g l a s A v e n u e Liv e r p o o l R o a d Commerce Street Browning Avenue Ilona Park Road Fa i r v i e w A v e n u e Trellis Cou rt Fr o n t R o a d Haller Avenue Monica Cook Place Ch a p l e a u D r i v e Old Orchard Avenue Douglas Park ProgressFrenchman'sBay East Park Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: MV 56/24 Date: Aug. 07, 2024 Exhibit 1 ¯ E J. Rasiah, S. Jegatheeswaran & T. Jegatheeswaran 813 Fairview Avenue SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\MV\2024\MV 56-24\MV56-24_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 -56- 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 56 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : J. R a s i a h , & S . & T . J e g a t h e e s w a r a n Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 81 3 F a i r v i e w 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 : Au g u s t 2 6 , 2 0 2 4 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 f r o n t ya r d s e t b a c k o f 6 . 8 m e t r e s Fairview Avenue to p e r m i t a m a x i m u m d w e l l i n g de p t h o f 2 0 . 5 m e t r e s -57- Ex h i b i t 3 Su b m i t t e d We s t E l e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : MV 56 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : J. R a s i a h , & S . & T . J e g a t h e e s w a r a n Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 81 3 F a i r v i e w 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 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 : Au g u s t 2 6 , 2 0 2 4 -58- Ex h i b i t 4 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 56 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : J. R a s i a h , & S . & T . J e g a t h e e s w a r a n Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 81 3 F a i r v i e w 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 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 : Au g u s t 2 6 , 2 0 2 4 -59- Ex h i b i t 5 Su b m i t t e d Ea s t El e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : MV 56 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : J. R a s i a h , & S . & T . J e g a t h e e s w a r a n Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 81 3 F a i r v i e w 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 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 : Au g u s t 2 6 , 2 0 2 4 -60- 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 56 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : J. R a s i a h , & S . & T . J e g a t h e e s w a r a n Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 81 3 F a i r v i e w 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 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 : Au g u s t 2 6 , 2 0 2 4 -61- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: MV 57/24 Date: September 11, 2024 From: Deborah Wylie Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Minor Variance Application MV 57/24 N., S. & J. Singh 2729 Sapphire Drive Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-laws 7364/14 and 7857/21, to permit a deck to encroach into any required rear yard to a maximum of 3.2 metres, whereas the By-law permits a deck to encroach into any required rear yard a maximum of 2.0 metres. The applicant requests approval of the variance to obtain a building permit to construct a rear yard 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. 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 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 June 12, 2024, and was notified on June 27, 2024, that they exceed the maximum rear yard encroachment and must obtain a minor variance to permit the proposed rear yard deck. -62- Report MV 57/24 September 11, 2024 Page 2 Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated “Urban Residential Areas – Low Density Area” as part of the Lamoreaux Neighbourhood. The requested variance is to permit the proposed rear yard deck on the property, which is permitted within this designation and a common accessory structure within the Lamoreaux 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 rear yard encroachment from 2.0 metres to 3.2 metres. The intent of the maximum encroachment 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 required rear yard setback for detached dwellings zoned “LD2” under By-law 7364/14 is 6.0 metres and the permitted encroachment into this required rear yard setback for decks is 2.0 metres, therefore allowing a 4.0 metre setback for decks. The existing detached dwelling is set back 7.0 metres from the rear yard property line. The rear yard deck 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 rear yard deck. The deck maintains a rear yard setback similar to the setbacks provided on adjacent properties. Additionally, the subject property abuts a public multi-use path to the north 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 • The space in the rear yard is not enough to support a comfortable deck size within the allowed by-law setback. Engineering Services • Ensure the projection of the deck in the rear yard does not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lot and surrounding area. -63- Report MV 57/24 September 11, 2024 Page 3 Building Services •The deck was constructed without the benefit of a building permit; the building permit application is on hold until the Committee’s decision. Public Input •Two letters of support received from residents of Dragonfly Avenue (letters have been forwarded to the Committee). Date of report: September 5, 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 57-24/7. Report/MV57-24 Report.docx Attachments -64- Dragonfl y A ven u e To f f e e S t r e e t Dashwood Court Skyridge Boule v a r d Cameo Street Clipper Lane Silk Street Reflection Place Fa l l H a r v e s t C r e s c e n t Ho l l o w O a k M e w s Sa p p h i r e D r i v e Foxtail C rescent El m c r e e k M e w s B el c o u r t S t r e e t Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: MV 57/24 Date: Aug. 14, 2024 Exhibit 1 ¯ E N., S. & J. Singh 2729 Sapphire Drive SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\MV\2024\MV 57-24\MV57-24_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 -65- Exhibit 2 Submitted Plan File No: MV 57/24 Applicant: N., S. & J. Singh Municipal Address: 2729 Sapphire Drive CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN.Date: Aug. 22, 2024 to permit a deck to encroach into any required rear yard to a maximum of 3.2 metres -66- Exhibit 3 East Elevation File No: MV 57/24 Applicant: N., S. & J. Singh Municipal Address: 2729 Sapphire Drive CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN. Date: Aug. 22, 2024 3.4 metres in height to top of platform -67- Exhibit 4 North Elevation File No: MV 57/24 Applicant: N., S. & J. Singh Municipal Address: 2729 Sapphire Drive CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN. Date: Aug. 22, 2024 3.4 metres in height to top of platform -68- Exhibit 5 South Elevation File No: MV 57/24 Applicant: N., S. & J. Singh Municipal Address: 2729 Sapphire Drive CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN. Date: Aug. 22, 2024 3.4 metres in height to top of platform -69- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: MV 58/24 Date: September 11, 2024 From: Deborah Wylie Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Minor Variance Application MV 58/24 J. & T. O'Leary 730 Kingfisher Drive Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2520, as amended, to permit uncovered steps and platforms not exceeding 2.5 metres in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.0 metre into the required flankage 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 1.0 metre into any required side yard. The applicant requests approval of this variance to obtain occupancy in the newly built Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU). 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. 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 uncovered steps and platforms, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibit 2, 3 & 4). Background On August 8, 2023, the City of Pickering Committee of Adjustment approved Minor Variance Application P/CA 32/23 for the reduction of the front yard and flankage yard setbacks and an increase in lot coverage to facilitate a proposed two-storey addition at the front of the existing house. On November 22, 2023, a building permit was issued for the addition and the associated ADU and exterior stairs. The original building permit approved exterior stairs tucked behind the addition that provided access to the first floor of the existing dwelling and to the second storey ADU in the addition (refer to Figure 1 below). -70- Report MV 58/24 September 11, 2024 Page 2 Figure 1: Originally approved exterior stairs with direct access to the second storey ADU. The applicant has since constructed the addition and associated exterior stairs. Upon inspection of the works, Building Services staff determined that the exterior stairs do not meet the Ontario Building Code (OBC) as another landing is required at the top of the stairs to access the ADU. To meet the OBC requirements, the applicant worked with Building Services staff to create an alternative stairs arrangement where a portion of the stairs would encroach into the required flankage yard setback. While this design will meet the OBC requirements, the height of the encroachment does not comply with the Zoning By-law. As a result, this minor variance application is required for the applicant to obtain occupancy to the newly built ADU. Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated “Urban Residential – Low Density Area” within the Bay Ridges Neighbourhood. Residential uses such as detached dwellings and associated accessory uses are permitted within this designation. -71- Report MV 58/24 September 11, 2024 Page 3 Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The By-law permits uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.0 metre into any required side yard. The intent of this provision is to ensure that adequate space is provided for landscaping, access to the rear yard, and separation between the street and the structure. The rearranged stair design will have a maximum height of 2.5 metres and will project a maximum of 0.6 of a metre into the required flankage yard. The majority of the stairs are beyond the 2.9 metre flankage yard setback, and only a small portion of the stairs with new landings are encroaching into the flankage yard. The encroachment is within the permitted 1.0 metre projection, however, the proposed height exceeds the maximum permitted height. The proposed stairs will maintain a minimum setback of 2.3 metres from the flankage lot line, providing sufficient space as separation between the stairs and the street, as well as spaces for landscaping and access to the rear yard. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance is in keeping with the intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. Desirable for the Appriopriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The requested variance will facilitate safe access to the newly built ADU as required in the OBC requirements. The proposed stairs and platforms will project a maximum of 0.6 of a metre into the required 2.9 metre flankage yard, being a minor encroachment permitted by the Zoning By-law. The encroaching portion of the stairs will maintain a minimum setback of 2.3 metres from the flankage lot line, allowing sufficient separation from the street to minimize the visual impacts of the stairs. 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 • An error in the original permit process has created the need for an exterior landing and stairs that will encroach into the required setback. Engineering Services • Ensure the projection of the steps and platforms do not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the side yard. Building Services • An error in the original design and permit process has created the need for this exterior landing to be reconfigured. Revised stair configuration provides a good solution meeting the OBC requirements. Building Services is in support of the variance. Public Input • No written submissions were received from the public as the date of writing this report. -72- Report MV 58/24 September 11, 2024 Page 4 Date of report: September 4, 2024 Comments prepared by: Original Signed By Original Signed By Ziya Cao Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Planner II Manager, Zoning & Administration ZC:nr /CityDevDept/D3700/2024/MV 58-24/7. Report/MV58-24 Report.docx Attachments -73- Krosno Boule v a r d An n l a n d S t r e e t He wson Drive H el e n C r e s c e n t Zato r A v e n u e Balaton Ave nue Fan s h a w P l a c e She are r Lane M o dlin Roa d Be m A v e n u e Kin g f i s h e r D r i v e Biid aasigeMand am inP ublic Sc hool Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: MV 58/24 Date : Aug. 16, 2024 Exhibit 1 ¯ E J. & T. O’Le ary 730 Kingfishe r Drive SubjectLands L:\P LANNING\01-MapFile s\MV\2024\MV 58-24\MV58-24_Loc ationMap.m xd 1:2,000 SCALE:THIS IS NOT A P LAN 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 De ve lopm e ntDe partm e nt -74- Exhibit 2 Submitted Site Plan File No: MV 58/24 Applicant: J. & T. O'Leary Municipal Address: 730 Kingfisher Drive CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN. Date: August 29, 2024 to permit uncovered steps and platforms not exceeding 2.5 metres in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.0 metres into the required flankage side yard -75- Ex h i b i t 3 Su b m i t t e d Fr o n t El e v a t i o n (W e s t ) Fi l e N o : MV 58 /2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : J. & T . O ' L e a r y Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 73 0 K i n g f i s h e r D r i v 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 : Au g u s t 19 , 2 0 2 4 -76- Ex h i b i t 4 Su b m i t t e d Fr o n t El e v a t i o n (No r t h ) Fi l e N o : MV 58 /2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : J. & T . O ' L e a r y Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 73 0 K i n g f i s h e r D r i v 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 : Au g u s t 29, 2 0 2 4 2. 5 m to p e r m i t un c o v e r e d st e p s a n d p l a t f o r m s n o t ex c e e d i n g 2 . 5 m e t r e s i n he i g h t a b o v e g r a d e a n d no t pr o j e c t i n g m o r e t h a n 1. 0 me t r e s i n t o t h e re q u i r e d f l a n k a g e s i d e ya r d -77-