Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11 August 13, 2014L L L L L L ' L L ' ' L L L L L L L L Committee of Adjustment Agenda Meeting Number: 11 Date: Wednesday, August 13, 2014 - - .. .. .. ... .. .. .. • - -- (I) Adoption of Agenda (II) Adoption of Minutes from July 23, 2014 -·· (Ill) . Reports 1. PICA 72114 R. Ficara 1739 Silver Maple Drive 2. PICA 73114 Vaster Construction Inc . 2585 Brock Road 3 . PICA 74114 K. &A. Moore 1591 Otonabee Drive (IV) Adjournment Committee of Adjustment Agenda VVednesday,August13,2014 7:00pm Main Committee Room Page Number 1-5 6-10 . 11-15 16-22 Acct;ssibJ~. • _""""" PlCI<E~G For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Lesley Dunne T. 905.420.4660, extension 2024 TTY 905.420.1739 Email ldunne@pickering.ca - - .. Pending Adoption Present: Tom Copeland David Johnson -Chair Eric Newton Bill Utton Shirley Van Steen -Vice-Chair Also Present: Melissa Markham, Secretary-Treasurer Lesley Dunne, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer (I) Adoption of Agenda Moved by Bill Utton Seconded by Eric Newton Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes 0 l Wednesday, July 23, 2014 7:00pm · Main Committee Room That the agenda for the Wednesday, July 23, 2014 meeti~g be adopted. 11111 Carried Unanimously .. - - - (II) Adoption of Minutes Moved by Tom Copeland Seconded by Shirley Van Steen That the minutes of the 9th meeting of the Committee of Adjustment held Wednesday, July 2, 2014 be adopted. Carried Unanimously Page 1 of 5 Committee of Adjustment · Meeting Minutes 0 2 Wednesday, July 23, 2014 (Ill) Reports 1. PICA 67/14 J. Harbinson 1 002 Albacore Manor 7:00pm Main Committee Room The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-law 1299/81, to recognize an existing uncovered platform to project a maximum of 2.0 metres into the required rear yard; whereas the by-law does not permit an uncovered platform to project into the required rear yard. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit for an uncovered platform (deck) currently under construction. Secretary-Treasurer outlined staff recommendation from the .City Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Written comments were also received from the City's Engineering & Public Works Department expressing no concerns. Janis Harbinson, owner, was present to represent the application. Stephanie Newitt wa~ present seeking information related to the application. Stephanie Newitt indicated she has spoken with the home owner requesting that the privacy fence on the east side of the deck be lowered so it does not block her view of the bay. In response to a question from a Committee Member, Janis Harbinson indicated she would speak to the contractor about lowering the privacy fence on the east side. Moved by Shirley Van Steen Seconded by Bill Utton That application PICA 67/14 by J. Harbinson, be Approved on the grounds that the uncovered platform projecting a maximum of 2.0 metres into the required rear yard is minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the la[ld, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the · Zoning By-law, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the variance applies only to the uncovered platform, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans. 2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the construction by July 23, 2016, or this decision shall become null and void. Carried Unanimously Page 2 of 5 ·-·~ ' ., J ----------------------------------------------- -.. .. .. -.. ----.. ---.. IIIII IIIII .. 2. PICA 68114 to PICA 71114 Nuteck Homes Ltd. 1825 1827Appleview Road Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes 0 3 Wednesday, July 23, 2014 7:00pm Main Committee Room PICA 68114 (Proposed Retained Lot-Appleview Road) The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended, to permit a minimum lot frontage of 15.2 metres and a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling; whereas the by-law requires a minimum lot frontage of 18.0 metres and a minimum side yard width of 1.8 metres where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling. PICA 69114 (Proposed Severed Lot-Appleview Road) The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended, to permit a minimum lot frontage of 15.2 metres and a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling; -whereas the by-law requires a minimum lot frontage of 18.0 metres and a minimum side yard width of 1.8 metres where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling. PICA 70114 (Proposed Severed Lot-Heaths ide Crescent) The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended, to permit a minimum lot frontage of 12.0 metres and a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling; whereas the by-law requires a minimum lot frontage of 18.0 metres and a minimum side yard width of 1.8 metres where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling. PICA 71114 (Proposed Severed Lot-Heaths ide Crescent) The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended, to permit a minimum lot frontage of 15.5 metres and a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling; whereas the by-law requires a minimum lot frontage of 18.0 metres and a minimum side yard width of 1.8 metres where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling. The applicant requests approval of these minor variance applications, to create three additional lots (two fronting Appleview Road and two fronting Heathside Crescent) through the Region of Durham Land Division Committee, in order to permit a detached dwelling on the retained parcel and on each of the proposed severed parcels. · Secretary-Treasurer outlined staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending that the applications be tabled. Written comments were received from the Durham Region Health Department expressing no concerns with the applications. Page 3 of 5 04 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, July 23, 2014 7:00pm Main Committee Room Written comments were also received from the City's Engineering & Public Works Department indicating the following concerns. • the reduction in lot frontage to 12.0 metres, a preliminary grading and drainage plan is required that demonstrates that lot drainage can be accommodated without adversely affecting the lot to the north • the proposed driveway locations related to the crossing at the boulevard fronting the property to the north • the location of the existing Canada Post Community Mailbox and street light fronting the proposed lots on Heathside Crescent, and the requirement for the relocation of each service Sarah & Cesare Molinaro were present to represent the applications. Taylan Tatli of 1638 Heathside Crescent, Johanna & Joe Debono of 1608 He13thside Crescent, Margaret & Ivan Svendsen of Heathside Crescent and Annette Gatsis of 1651 Heathside Crescent were present in objection to the applications. Joan & Jim Cushnie of 1610 Heathside Crescent were present representing their neighbours on Heathside Crescent and the written comments previously received. Secretary-Treasurer informed the Committee Members that a petition had been submitted by area residents in opposition to the application stating loss of tree canopy, small lot frontages, snow storage concerns, crowded on-street parking, mailbox (elocation and disruption of existing water drainage. A letter was also received from Jim and Jo13n Cushnie, who were in attendance. Sarah Molinaro explained this infill development is similar to one that was done on Rambleberry Avenue. Sarah Molinaro stated that there were concerns from area residents related to maintaining the existing streetscape. She stated that existing side yard setbacks along Heathside Crescent are 1.2 metres and the applications are for a minimum 1.5 metre side yard setback, she also mentioned that the lot coverage on the proposed lots is lower than what is permitted. She also indicated the intent to preserve as many trees as possible on the site and will work with a tree planting program to replace the trees that have been removed. Jim Cushnie expressed concerns with the development not in keeping with existing streetscape and the area is different than Ramble berry Avenue. He stated many concerns such as: safety, lack of on-street parking, snow storage, loss of mature trees, re-location of community mailbox and ·street light, drainage onto surrounding properties, the safety of the walkway along the fence line that is used daily, the proposed distance between driveways and concern with the -reduction in side yard setbacks. Jim Cushnie also submitted a written petition signed by 33 surrounding residents in objection to the applications. He stated that the applications to reduce lot frontage were not minor. Page 4 of 5 .. - --.. .. .. .. .. - • .. .. • - Moved by Tom Copeland Seconded by Eric Newton Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, July 23, 2014 05 7:00pm Main Committee Room That applications PICA 68114 to PICA 71114 by Nuteck Homes Ltd., be Tabled to allow the owner to continue working with City staff to address technical grading and driveway location concerns related to the proposed lots fronting Heathside Crescent and to allow an opportunity for the Committee Members to visit the site before the application is brought back to the Committee. Carried Unanimously (IV) Adjournment Date Chair Moved by Bill Utton Seconded by Eric Newton That the 1Oth meeting of the 2014 Committee of Adjustment be adjourned at 7:35 p·m and the next meeting of the Committee of Adjustment be held ori Wednesday, August 13, 2014. · Carried Unanimously Assistant Secretary-Treasurer Page 5 of 5 06 Cit.11 a~ From: Subject: Application Melissa Markham, MCIP, RPP Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: PICA 72114 Meeting Date: August 13, 2014 Princ.ipal Planner-Development Review Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 72114 R. Ficara 1739 Silver Maple Drive The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 4508194: • to permit a covered platform (deck) with a height of 1.2 metres above grade to project a maximum of 2.1 metres into the required rear yard; whereas the by-law permits uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade to project a maximum of 1.5 metres into any required front or rear yard, and • to permit a maximum lot coverage of 42 percent; whereas the by-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 40 percent for a semi-detached dwelling The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit to construct a covered deck in the rear yard .. Recommendation The City Development Department considers the covered platform (deck) with a height of 1.2 metres above grade to project a maximum of 2.1 metres into the required rear yard, and a maximum lot coverage of 42 percent to be minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, and therefore recommends Approval of the proposed variances, subject to the following conditions: 1. That these variances apply only to the covered p[atform (deck) as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans. 2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by August 12, 2016, or this decision shall become null and void. Comment Official Plan and Zoning By-law Pickering Official Plan designates the subject property as "Urban Residential Area- Low Density" within the Amberlea Neighbourhood. - ---.. - -- -.. ... - Report PICA 72/14 August 13, 2014 Page 2 The subject property is currently zoned "S-SD-SA-2" ....: Single and Semi Detached Residential Zone within Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 4508/94, which provides site specific performance standards. · Appropriateness of the Application Covered Platform Projecting into the Required Rear Yard Variance • the by-law permits uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade to project a maximum of 1.5 metres into the required rear yard • the intent of this provision is to ensure an adequate butdoor private amenity area is provided within the rear yard, appropriate setbacks are provided to protect the privacy of abutting property owners, and allow for appropriate access for maintenance, lot grading and drainage • the proposed covered platform (deck) projection of 2.1 metres into the required rear yard maintains the required side yard setbacks and only affects part of the lot; the remainder complies with the rear yard depth requirement • an adequate amount of outdoor private amenity area will continue to be provided within the rear yard and appropriate setbacks are provided to protect the privacy of abutting property owners • the requested variance is minor in nature and maintains the intent of the zoning by-law Increase in Lot Coverage Variance • the by-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 40 percent • the intent of the maximum lot coverage requirement is to maintain an appropriate size, scale and massing of dwellings and to ensure an adequate amount of outdoor amenity area remains uncovered by buildings on a lot • due to the fact that the platform (deck) is covered by a permanent awning, the deck area contributes to the overall lot coverage calculation • the proposed increase in lot coverage to 42 percent will maintain an appropriate amount of amenity. space uncovered by buildings on a lot • the proposed variance appears to have minimal adverse impacts on the abutting neighbours as an a~ceptable amount of buffer space will remain • the requested variance is minor in nature and maintains the intent of the zoning by-law Date of report: August 7, 2014 Lalita Paray, MCIP, RPP Planner I LP:MM:Id J:\Documents\Devetopment\D-3700\2014\PCA 72-14\Report\PCA 72_14.doc Enclosures Melissa Markham, MCIP,· RPP Principal Planner -Development Review 07 City Development Department WOODSMERE ALTONA FOREST PARK PUBLIC SCHOOL 0 ~-------L--------~~ O::: 1----.----..... r~'--'-~'::--:::-...J.......I-' ST. ELIZABETH SETON SEPARATE SCHOOL ,\;:---= 1---- ~ -1----1---~ 1-- .__~ z w r---1--u r---(f) r---1--w 1--0::: t--u t-- r 1-- ~ f--- II· I II Location Map w > (2 0 0::: c3 w u t== FILE No: PCA072/14 LANE W!---1---i ~~==t==l :::;el---1---i -- APPLICANT: Robert Ficara ROSE BANK RESERVOIR HIGH BUSH PUBLIC SCHOOL AMBERLEA PARK PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Plan 40M181 0 Part of Lot 8, 40R16965 Part 6 DATE: July 21, 2014 Doto Sour"ces: Teronet Enterprises Inc. ond its suppliers. All rights Reserved. Not o plan of survey. 2013 MPAC and its suppliers. All d hts Reserved. Not a plan of Survey. SCALE 1:5,000 PN-11 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - I I (/) -~ m :::0 s:: )> -u r Ex i { S / i n g sl a i l s ~ Ex i s t i n g 2 st o r e y Se m i - m De t a c h e d Dw e l l i n g 0 m - m :::0 Co Pr o p o s e d I Co < 3 "" De c k wi t h 3 m ~ Aw n i n g 3 ~ 3. 0 m 31 . 6 m ~ \ To pe r m i t a co v e r e d pl a t f o r m To pe r m i t a lo t co v e r a g e of 42 (d e c k ) wi t h a he i g h t of 1. 2 me t r e s ab o v e gr a d e to pr o j e c t pe r c e n t a ma x i m u m of 2. 1 me t r e s in t o th e re q u i r e d re a r ya r d o, . - 1 ~ Su b m i t t e d Pl a n FI L E No : P/ C A 72 / 1 4 AP P L I C A N T : R. Fi c a r r a m : ~ - PR O P E R T Y DE S C R I P T I O N : 17 3 9 Si l v e r Ma p l e Dr i v e (P a r t of Lo t 8, 40 M - 1 8 1 0, Pa r t 6 40R-16965) Ci t y De v e l o p m e n t De p a r t m e n t I DATE: July 24. 2014 I I I 0 c.c 10 ·-I ~ -------. ~ City Development Department \.Dnr Submitted Plan FILE No: P/CA 72/14 APPLICANT: R. Ficarra PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: 1739 Silver Maple Drive (Part of Lot 8, 40M-1810, Part 6 40R-16965) I DATE: July 23, 2014 - --.. --- --.. -- -- - .. - - From: Subject: Application Melissa Markham, MCIP, RPP Report to Committee of Adjustment ll Application Number: PICA 73114 Meeting Date: August 13, 2014 Principal Planner -Development Review Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 73114 Vastor Construction Inc. 2585 Brock Road The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by By-law 7218/12 to permit a minimum of 138 parking spaces, whereas the by-law requires a minimum of 184 parking spaces. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain site plan approval and a building permit to construct a 3-storey commercial/office building (Brock Square). Recommendation The City Development Department considers a minimum of 138 parking spaces for a proposed 3-storey commercial/office building to be minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, and therefore recommends Approval of the proposed variance, subject to the following conditions: 1. That this variance applies only to the proposed development, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans. 2. That the applicant obtain Site Plan Approval for the proposed construction by August 12, 2016, or this decision shall become null and void. Background On December 18, 2013, the applicant submitted site plan applicationS 01114 proposing a 3-storey mixed-use building, including 3,233 square metres of total gross floor area for commercial, office and restaurant uses. Based on the proposed uses within the building a total of 184 parking spaces were required to be provided on-site for employees and customers, whereas the original site plan illustrated a total of 145 parking spaces. 12 Report PICA 73/14 August 13, 2014 Page 2 During the site plan review process, the City had the application peer reviewed by the City's Urban Design consultants (John G. Williams Limited, Architect) to ensure conformity to the Development Guidelines for the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood and the Mattamy Creekside (Phase 3) Supplementary Urban Design Brief. The site plan was revised with respect to these policies and general principles of good design, which further reduced the provided parking spaces to a total of 138. Revisions to the plan included redesigning the proposed parking area to accommodate additional pedestrian walkways and enhanced landscaping. On June 25, 2014, the application was brought to the Site Plan Advisory Committee; the Committee has expressed no concerns with t~e requested variance. Comment Official· Plan and Zoning By-law The subject lands are designated "Mixed-Use Areas-Mixed Corridors" in the Official · Plan within the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood. The "Mixed Corridor" designation is intended primarily for residential, retail, community, cultural and recreational uses at a sc~le serving the community. The subject property is currently zoned "(H)MU-24"-Mixed Use within Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by By-law 7218/12, which permits a commercial/office building . . The City's Zoning By-law requires that parking shall be provided and maintained at a minimum of 4.0 parking spaces per 100 square metres of gross leasable floor area for all permitted uses except restaurants that exceed a total aggregate gross leasable area of 5QO square metres, which is to be calculated at 10 parking spaces per 100 square metres of gross leasable floor area. Appropriateness of the Application Minimum Parking Variance • the intent of regulating the minimum number of required parking spaces is to ensure that parking demand can be accommodated on-site • the applicant has requested to reduce the total number of required parking spaces from 184 spaces to 138 spaces . • in support of this variance, the applica·nt submitted a Traffic Impact and Parking Study, prepared by Cole Engineering Group Ltd, dated January 29, 2014 demonstrating that ·a reduction in parking spaces would satisfy the proposed commercial/office building --- -- ... ... ... ... - - - ... - - - Report PICA 73/14 August 13, 2014 Page 3 • the consultant also provided information on minimum parking requirements from other GTA municipalities which use the following rates: City of Pickering Town of Richmond Hill City of Toronto 13 Retail 4 spaces/1 00 m2 GLFA 5 spaces/100m2 GLFA 1.5 spaces/100m2 GLFA Office 4 spaces/1 00 m2 GLFA 3.2 spaces/100 tn2 GLFA 1.5 spaces/1 00 m2 GLFA Restaurant 10 spaces/100m2 GLFA 3 spaces/1 00 m2 GLFA 5 spaces/100m2 GLFA Total Parking 184 107 48 Spaces Required • the consultant has advised that the development is anticipated to be a local centre and will serve residents within walking distance and therefore anticipated that a majority of trips to the development will be made by walking or cycling • the consultant stated that based on the rates established in the parking by-law and proposed parking standards, the development should supply between 48 and 107 parking spaces, as more recent parking standards reflect current trends toward reduced vehicle ownership and travel demand management practices • staff are satisfied that the proposed 138 parking spaces are sufficient to accommodate-the parking requirements for the proposed uses • staff are of the opinion that the requested variance is minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the property, and maintains the intent of the Pickering Official Plan and Zoning By-law Date of report: August 7, 2014 ~by: Lalita Paray, MCIP, RPP Planner I LP:MM:Id J:\Oocuments\Development\D-3700\2014\PCA 73-14\Report\PCA 73_14.doc Enclosures Melissa Markham, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner-Development Review 14 City Development Department y: () 0 0:: CD Location Ma FILE No: P/CA 73/14 APPLICANT: Vastor Construction Inc PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: 2585 Brock Road ock 13, Plan DATE: July 21, 2014 SCALE 1 :5,000 r r I I Ci t y De v e l o p m e n t De p a r t m e n t I I I I I I I I I I I \ -~ I N G S BO U L E V A R D WI L L I A M JA C K S O N DR I V E Su b m i t t e d Pl a n FI L E No : P/ C A 73 / 1 4 AP P L I C A N T : Va s t o r Co n s t r u c t i o n In c . PR O P E R T Y DE S C R I P T I O N : 2 5 8 5 Br o c k Ro a d (B l o c k 13 , Pl a n 40 M - 2 4 8 2 ) FU L L SC A L E CO P I E S OF TH I S PL A N AR E AV A I L A B L E FO R VIE W I N G AT TH E CIT Y OF PI C K E R I N G CIT Y DE V E L O P M E N T DE P A R T M E N T . I I I I --;? ~ ::::,...... . 1' DATE: July 24, 2014 J-..d I CJll I 16 From: Subject: Application Melissa Markham, MCIP, RPP Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: PICA 74114 Meeting Date: A~gust 13, 2014 Principal Planner-Development Review Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 74114 K. &A. Moore 1591 Otonabee Drive The applicant requests relief from the following provisions of Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-laws 4112192 and 4221193: • to permit a minimum rear yard depth of 5.0 metres to a proposed sun room; whereas the by-law requires a minimum rear yard depth of 7.5 metres • to permit a maximum lot coverage of 43 percent; whereas the by-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 38 percent, and • to recognize an existing accessory structure (shed) setback a minimum of 0.6 of a metre from the west and south lot lines; whereas accessory structures must be setback a minimum of 1.0 metre from all lot lines The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit to construct a one-storey sunroom addition in the rear yard and receive zoning compliance for an existing accessory structure (shed) in the rear yard. Recommendation The City Development Department considers the minimum rear yard depth of 5.0 metres to a proposed sunroom, a maximum lot coverage of 43 percent and the location of an existing accessory structure (shed) setback a minimum of 0.6 of a metre from the west and south lot lines to be minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, and therefore recommends Approval of the proposed variances, subject to the following conditions: 1. That these variances apply only to the proposed one-storey sunroom addition and the existing shed, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans. 2. That the applicant obtain a building permitter the proposed construction by August 12, 2016, or this decision, affecting the proposed one-storey sunroom addition, shall become null and void. - - .. .. .. .. .. .. .. -.. - .. ... Report PICA 74/14 August 13, 2014 Page2 Comment Official Plan and Zoning By-law Pickering Official Plan-"Urban Residential Ar~as-Low Density Areas" within the Amberlea Neighbourhood Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-laws 4112/92 and 4221/93-"S1-E"-Single· Detached Residential Zone Appropriateness of the Application Rear Yard Depth and Increased Lot Coverage Variances • the intent of the minimum rear yard depth and maximum lot coverage provisions is to ensure that the overall size, scale and massing of a dwelling is appropriate for the lot size and to ensure an adequate amount of outdoor amenity area remains uncovered by buildings on a lot • the proposed rear yard depth of 5.0 metres will still provide a significant amount of useable amenity space in the rear yard and an appropriate separation distance between dwellings • the proposed rear yard depth only affects part of the lot; the remainder complies with the minimum rear yard depth requirement of 7.5 metres • the increase in lot coverage to 43 percent will provide for the appropriate development of the land as the size and massing of the proposed sunroom addition will be in keeping with the character of the surrounding neighbourhood • the proposed variances appear to have minimal impact on the abutting neighbours as there is currently a deck in this location, which is being replaced by the proposed sunroom • the requested variances are minor in nature and will meet the intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law Accessory Buildings Setback Variance • the intent of the minimum 1.0 metre setback requirement for accessory structures greater than 1.8 metres in height is to ensure that adequate space is available for maintenance that the eaves/overhangs do not encroach on adjacent properties, that roof drainage stays on the subject property, and that the visual impact on adjacent properties is minimized • the existing setback of 0.6 of a metre to an existing shed provides adequate space for maintenance, and ensures overhangs and roof drainage stays on the property • the existing setback of 0.6 of a metre does not appear to have any adverse impact on adjacent properties • the requested variance to recognize the existing shed is minor in nature and maintains the intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law 17 Report PICA 74/14 August 13, 2014 18 Page 3 Date of report: August 7, 2014 Comments prepared by: Melissa Markham, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner-Development Review AY:MM:Id J:\Documents\Development\D-3700\2014\PCA 74-14\Report\PCA 74-14.doc Enclosures - - - • .. .. -- .. - - - il SQUARE City Development Department Location Map FILE No: P/CA 74/14 APPLICANT: K & A Moore AVENUE ST. MARY PARK ST. MARY CATHOLIC HIGH SCHOOL 19 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: 1591 Otonabee Drive (Block 6, Plan 40M-1745 & Block 6, 40M-17 48 DATE: July 21, 2014 Dota Sources: Tcranct Enterprises Inc. ond its =suppliers. All rights Reserved. Not o .pion of survey. 2013 MPAC and its :sup Hers. All ri hts Reserved. Not a pion of Surve • SCALE 1:5,000 PN-11 20 To recognize an existing accessory structure setback of 0.6 metres from the west and south lot lines EXISTING 2 STOREY DWELLING PROPOSED ONE STOREY SUN ROOM ADDITION To permit a maximum lot coverage of 43 percent City Development Department Submitted Plan FILE No: P/CA 74/14 To permit a minimum rear yard · depth of 5.0 metres to a proposed sunroom APPLICANT: K &A Moore PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: 1591 Otonabee Drive Block 6, Plan 40M-1745 & Block 6, 40M-17 48) DATE: July 23, 2014 ---.. --,. i .. .. -- -- • .. - i- ! LIJ! i.' i l ' ! I ,===p' 1 rn:,,: ' i . : : ! ' i· ; i I I . .i i _, l i :. ' I ~ i i ! ' I l i I ' I ~ 1 ' l ' ! SOUTH ELEVATION Submitted Plan FILE No: P/CA 74/14 b---------'-'· '-..i ~ ! I ! : i i i i j ! •: I !· ·' APPLICANT: K & A Moore ' ' ~! .I I i I ! :t ; i I ' ' l I i ' j I i ; 1 -J!f ; ! I I ! ! J ' ; ! li . ' ' I ruo;! i . . . r .. ~: •! 21 :r-. i ! . ; .i. City Development Department PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: 1591 Otonabee Drive Block 6, Plan 40M-1745 & Block 6, 40M-1748) DATE: July 23, 2014 22 l i i . \. j WEST ELEVATION I I I ; I I ' i I EAST ELEVATION ! j I ~ ! I ; i l i Submitted Plan FILE No: P/CA 74/14 APPLICANT: K & A Moore IJ] t ;· I I ' ' ' ~ ! . 1. J I ; . ! . -L i ! I ' i I ., I i I ' , I ' ~i ,~~ i \ ; I I ....... ,_ ~ ' j j ' j· ; I . ~+----''----';-'--3.sm I • ; i • PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: 1591 Otonabee Drive Block 6, Plan 40M-1745 City Development Department · & Block 6, 40M-17 48) DATE: July 23, 2014 .