Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFebruary 18, 2015 Committee of Adjustment Agenda „:8„, c .tit 00 Ada,. .4t_ 't .---•••• - ;: v :1 :: :.uippi:1:1 =_=, PICICERN6 Meeting Number: 3 Date: Wednesday, February 18, 2015 City 4 Committee of Adjustment Agenda PT �� Wednesday, February 18, 2015 1 7:00 pm Main Committee Room Page Number (I) Appointment of Chair (II) Appointment of Vice Chair (III) Appointment of Secretary-Treasurer (IV) Appointment of Assistant Secretary-Treasurers (V) Adoption of Agenda (VI) Adoption of 2015 Meeting Schedule 1 (VII) Adoption of Minutes from January 28, 2015 2-12 (VIII) Reports 1. Tabled at the January 28, 2015 meeting 13-20 P/CA 06/15 M. Modica 557 Marksbury Road 2. P/CA 07/15 21-26 D. & C. Kokkotas 1820 Appleview Road 3. P/CA 08/15 27-31 1154786 Ontario 1438 Rougemount Drive 4. P/CA 09/15 & P/CA 10/15 32-38 G. & R. Kerum 1423 Rougemount Drive (IX) Adjournment Accessible For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: PICKS N■G T sley D9u0n5ne 420.4660, extension 2024 TTY 905.4 20.1739 Email Idunne @pickering.ca C[!!,00 Committee of Adjustment Tentative Meeting Schedule for 2015 Last Day for Filing DSign ue Posting Meeting Date Date Friday, January 23 February 6 February 18 Friday, February 13 February 27 March 11 • Friday, March 6 March 20 April 1 Friday, March 27 April 10 April 22 Friday, April 17 May 1 May 13 Friday, May 8 May 22 June 3 • Friday, May 29 June 12 June 24 Friday, June 19 July 3 July 15 Friday, July 10 July 24 August 5 Friday, July 31 August 14 August 26 Friday, August 21 September 4 September 16 Friday, September 11 September 25 October 7 Friday, October 2 October 16 October 28 Friday, October 23 November 6 November 18 Friday, November 13 November 27 December 9 City 00 =-` Committee of Adjustment f 2 Meeting Minutes " ' Wednesday, January 28, 2015 iSEitI 7:00 pm Main Committee Room 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 Devin Poole, Clerk, Support Services (I) Adoption of Agenda Moved by Bill Utton Seconded by Eric Newton That the agenda for the Wednesday, January 28, 2015 meeting be adopted. Carried Unanimously (II) Adoption of Minutes Moved by Shirley Van Steen Seconded by Eric Newton That the minutes of the 1st meeting of the Committee of Adjustment held Wednesday, January 7, 2015 be adopted. Carried Unanimously Page 1 of 11 City 00 • Committee of Adjustment P.3 = Meeting Minutes Wednesday, January 28, 2015 �4M13T 4 Id M IN VI IOC 7:00 pm Main Committee Room (Ill) Reports 1. (Tabled at the November 26, 2014 meeting) P/CA 94/14 C. Newton 631 Liverpool Road Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Bill Utton That application P/CA 94/14 by C. Newton be lifted from the table. Carried Unanimously The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2520, as amended by By-law 5938/02: • to permit a commercial school on the subject lands, whereas the by-law does not permit a commercial school • to permit a minimum rear yard setback of 20.0 metres, whereas the by-law requires a minimum rear yard setback of 25.0 metres • to permit a maximum projection of 1.3 metres into the required south side yard, whereas the by-law permits a maximum projection of 0.9 metres into a required side yard • to permit a minimum two-way access drive aisle width of 3.8 metres between Liverpool Road and the rear wall of the ground floor of the proposed building, whereas the by-law requires a minimum two-way access drive aisle width of 6.5 metres The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain Site Plan Approval and a building permit for an addition to an existing building to accommodate a range of permitted uses and a commercial school. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Carlos Newton, owner, and Morry Edelstein, agent, were present to represent the application. Deedee & David Terranova of 1303 Wharf Street and Nancy Norris of 1305 Wharf Street were present in objection to the application. Page 2 of 11 City oq ==' Committee of Adjustment ,111' = Meeting Minutes i �: . �t - a ` Wednesday, January 28, 2015 ON-191A_NIOC 7:00 pm Main Committee Room Morry Edelstein stated that on January 6, 2015 the owner and himself met with the concerned neighbours to address concerns from the last Committee of Adjustment meeting. Since that time the owner has agreed to relocate the garbage enclosure and has provided updated site plan drawings to City staff. He provided shadow drawings to demonstrate the impact on the surrounding properties. He also explained that all other requirements for maximum height, ground floor area, coverage and parking comply with the current zoning by-law. Carlos Newton provided 17 letters of support and a shadow drawing to demonstrate the impact on surrounding properties for the Committee Members to review. Carlos Newton feels the views will not be substantially impacted and that this redevelopment will increase property values. Deedee & David Terranova provided pictures for the Committee Members of the impact the addition will have of their view of the lake. David Terranova also stated the redevelopment will decrease their property value. Nancy Norris provided a rationale for why setbacks are used in the zoning by-law related to providing an appropriate separation from abutting properties to ensure privacy and to protect views. Moved by Shirley Van Steen Seconded by Bill Utton That application P/CA 94/14 by C. Newton, be Approved on the grounds that the requested variance to permit a commercial school, a minimum rear yard setback of 20.0 metres, a maximum projection of 1.3 metres into the required south side yard and, a minimum two-way access drive aisle width of 3.8 metres between Liverpool Road and the rear wall of the ground floor of the proposed building are minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, subject to the following conditions: 1. That these variances apply only to the proposed development as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans. 2. That all non-residential uses permitted within the "MU-13"zone category within Zoning By-law 2520, as amended by By-law 5938/02 and a commercial school may be permitted only within the ground floor and basement of the building, and shall not exceed 360 square metres of gross leasable floor area. 3. That the applicant obtains Site Plan Approval for the proposed construction by January 28, 2016, or this decision shall become null and void. Carried Unanimously Page 3 of 11 City 00 Committee of Adjustment 05 Meeting Minutes Wednesday, January 28, 2015 iSE4i [ 7:00 pm Main Committee Room 2. P/CA 02/15 & P/CA 03/15 F. &J. Racz 317 Sheppard Avenue P/CA 02/15 (Proposed Retained Parcel) The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036 as amended, to permit a minimum lot frontage of 15.2 metres, whereas the by-law requires a minimum lot frontage of 18.0 metres. PICA 03/15 (Proposed Severed Parcel) The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036 as amended, to permit a minimum lot frontage of 15.2 metres, whereas the by-law requires a minimum lot frontage of 18.0 metres. The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to create one additional lot through the Region of Durham Land Division Committee in order to permit a two-storey detached dwelling on the proposed severed parcel and to replace an existing dwelling with a new two-storey dwelling on the proposed retained parcel. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Written comments were received from J. & J. Stangroom of 325 Sheppard Avenue, and . T. & P. Anttila of 311 Sheppard Avenue in objection to the applications. Written comments were received from the City's Engineering & Public Works - Department indicating that the applicant is making an effort to reduce the amount of roof drainage that would be discharge to the rear of the property by directing most of the roof drainage to Sheppard Avenue. Engineering & Public Works staff has no objection to the request to reduce the lot frontages from 18.0 metres to 15.2 metres. Technical matters such as grading, drainage and flooding matter will be address through the concurrent Land Division application process. Written comments received from J. & J. Stangroom expressed the on-going flooding issues since 2012 in the basement and backyard caused by surrounding properties and the potential for additional flooding that may be caused by the proposed Land Division application to create two additional lots. Page 4 of 11 • Oat 0¢1 A Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes C 6 Wednesday, January 28, 2015 v's' Ot4iht 7:00 pm Main Committee Room Written comments received from T. & P. Anttila expressed a concern if two new houses are build at 317 Sheppard Avenue the water table will change and their property will get even more run-off water. A concern was also expressed that their septic system will not be able to absorb the run-off and the house foundation will suffer from the additional flooding. Jim Kotsopoulos, agent, and Florica &Jozsef Racz, owners, were present to represent the application. Dan Farren of 1485 Altona Road was present in favour of the application. Timo Anttila of 311 Sheppard Avenue was present in objection to the application. Jim Kotsopoulos explained the applications and agreed to staff recommendations and conditions. Timo Anttila stated a concern with flooding issues onto his property. The Secretary-Treasurer explained that the City's Engineering & Public Works department is looking into the grading and drainage issues that have been raised by residents along Sheppard Avenue. The grading and drainage of the property will be dealt with through the Land Division process. Moved by Tom Copeland Seconded by Bill Utton That application P/CA 02/15 by F. & J. Racz, be Approved on the grounds that the minimum lot frontage of 15.2 metres for the proposed retained parcel is minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land,.and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, subject to the following conditions: 1. That this variance applies only to the proposed lot configuration for the proposed retained parcel, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plan. 2. That the applicant obtains final clearance for Land Division Application file number LD 001/15 by April 1, 2016, or this decision shall become null and void. 3. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction on the proposed retained and severed parcels by January 27, 2017, or this decision shall become null and void. Carried Unanimously Page 5of11 City Committee of Adjustment i'17 _ l Meeting Minutes Wednesday, January 28, 2015 RIR atV.[ 7:00 pm Main Committee Room Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Tom Copeland That application P/CA 03/15 by F. & J. Racz, be Approved on the grounds that the minimum lot frontage of 15.2 metres for the proposed severed parcel is minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, subject to the following conditions: 1. That this variance applies only to the proposed lot configuration for the proposed severed parcel, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plan. 2. That the applicant obtains final clearance for Land Division Application file number LD 001/15 by April 1, 2016, or this decision shall become null and void. 3. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction on the proposed severed parcel by January 27, 2017, or this decision shall become null and void. Carried Unanimously 3. P/CA 04/15 G. & S. MacGillivary 701 Cortez Avenue The applicant requests relief from the following provisions of Zoning By-law 2520: • to permit a minimum front yard depth of 4.8 metres, whereas the by-law requires a minimum front yard depth of 7.5 metres • • to permit an uncovered platform and steps not exceeding 1.5 metres in height to project a maximum of 1.5 metres into the required front yard, whereas the by-law permits uncovered decks and/or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height to project a maximum of 1.5 metres into the required front yard The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit to construct a one and a half storey sunroom addition in the front yard. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the 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. Page 6 of 11 Cttq o� Committee of Adjustment f Meeting Minutes 0 8 a-' -� `' '• F Wednesday, January 28, 2015 _CO1 NVI 7:00 pm Main Committee Room Ivars Kulitis, 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, Ivars Kulitis stated that the proposed sunroom addition is enclosed with glass and that Lifestyle Sunrooms will be removing the three sheds currently located in the rear yard of the subject property. Moved by Shirley Van Steen Seconded by Eric Newton That application P/CA 04/15 by G. &S. MacGillivary, be Approved on the grounds that the minimum front yard depth of 4.8 metres and an uncovered platform and steps not exceeding 1.5 metres in height to project a maximum of 1.5 metres into the required front yard are minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, subject to the following conditions: 1. That these variances apply only to the proposed sunroom addition, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans. 2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by January 27, 2017, or this decision shall become null and void. Carried Unanimously 4. P/CA 05/15 M. Labalestra & S. Mason 1246 Ilona Park Road The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2520, as amended: • to permit a minimum front yard depth of 5.3 metres; whereas the by-law requires a minimum front yard depth of 7.5 metres • to permit a minimum north side yard width of 0.6 of a metre and a minimum south side yard width of 1.0 metre; whereas the by-law requires a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres, and • to recognize an accessory structure (shed) greater than 1.8 metres in height to be setback a minimum of 0.6 of a metre from the north lot line; whereas the by-law requires accessory structures greater than 1.8 metres in height shall be setback a minimum of 1.0 metre from all lot lines Page 7 of 11 City Committee of Adjustment 9 - <,�Fa Meeting Minutes "T"' '- Wednesday, January 28, 2015 tkoc/aura. 7:00 pm Main Committee Room The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application in order to obtain a building permit to construct an unenclosed covered carport and an unenclosed covered front porch. The applicant also seeks to recognize an existing accessory structure (shed) located in the rear yard. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the 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 recommending the applicant relocate the shed to a minimum of 0.6 of a metre from the property line. Engineering & Public Works staff are now satisfied with the revised 0.6 of a metre setback. Matt Labalestra, owner, stated that he was in agreement with the recommendations in the staff report. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Moved by Tom Copeland Seconded by Shirley Van Steen That application P/CA 05/15 by M. Labalestra & S. Mason, be Approved on the grounds that the north side yard width of 0.6 of a metre to an unenclosed carport, minimum front yard depth of 5.3 metres to an unenclosed covered front porch, and an existing accessory structure (shed) to be setback a minimum of 0.6 of a metre from the north lot line are minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, subject to the following conditions: 1. That these variances apply only to the proposed unenclosed carport, covered front porch, and existing accessory structure (shed), as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans. 2. That the applicant relocates the existing shed currently located in the rear yard to 0.6 of a metre from the north lot line by July 28, 2015. 3. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by January, 27, 2017, or this decision shall become null and void. Carried Unanimously Page 8 of 11 Citg 00 Committee of Adjustment -- _�� � ' = Meeting Minutes ee " "'"- Wednesday, January 28, 2015 Eller_ 7:00 pm Main Committee Room 5. P/CA 06/15 M. Modica 557 Marksbury Road The applicant requests relief from the following provisions of Zoning By-law 2511: pp q 9 • to permit a minimum front yard depth of 7.3 metres; whereas the by-law requires a minimum front yard depth of 7.5 metres • to permit a minimum north side yard width of 1.2 metres; whereas the by-law requires a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres • to recognize an existing flankage side yard width of 1.1 metres to the ground floor of the existing dwelling and to permit a minimum flankage side yard width of 2.7 metres to a proposed second storey; whereas the by-law requires a minimum flankage side yard width of 4.5 metres • to permit uncovered steps not exceeding 1.7 metres in height to project a maximum of 1.4 metres into the required flankage side yard; whereas the by- law permits all uncovered decks or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height to project a maximum of 1.0 metre into a required side yard • to permit an covered porch to project a maximum of 1.0 metre into the required front yard; whereas the by-law permits an uncovered platform and/or project a maximum of 1.5 metres j to height in he' steps not exceeding 1.0 metre ig p into a required front yard, and • to permit a maximum lot coverage of 37 percent; whereas the by-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit to demolish portions of the existing single-storey dwelling and reconstruct a new two-storey dwelling, partially on top of an existing foundation wall which supports the existing one-storey detached dwelling. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending the application be tabled. Written comments were also received from the City's Engineering & Public Works Department expressing a concern with the increase in the impervious roof surface area caused by the proposed redevelopment and its potential drainage impacts on adjacent properties. Page 9 of 11 C.itq o0 Committee.of Adjustment �i�, Meeting Minutes " }_�"1""= F Wednesday, January 28, 2015 rimot c 7:00 pm Main Committee Room Sal Modica, agent,,was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Sal Modica stated a preliminary grading plan has been submitted to the City for review. The Secretary-Treasurer stated that no comments had been received by the City Development Department that a satisfactory plan had been reviewed by the Engineering & Public Works Department. Sal Modica questioned if a decision can be made on any of the other variances being applied for. In response a question from Sal Modica, a Committee Member explained they are unable to make a decision because the City Development Department has not provided their recommendations. Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Bill Utton That application P/CA 06/15 by M. Modica, to be premature and recommends that it be Tabled to allow for the Owner to provide a preliminary grading plan to the satisfaction of the City. Carried Unanimously (IV) Acknowledgement David Johnson, Chair, noted that this was the last meeting of the term for the current Committee of Adjustment. He thanked the Committee members and City staff for their support during the four year term of Committee of Adjustment. Page 10 of 11 Cu,i ¢� Committee of Adjustment 0 Meeting Minutes Wednesday, January 28, 2015 3 7:00 pm Main Committee Room (V) Adjournment Moved by Bill Utton Seconded by Eric Newton That the 2nd meeting of the 2015 Committee of Adjustment be adjourned at 7:46 pm and the next meeting of the Committee of Adjustment be held on Wednesday, February 18, 2015. Carried Unanimously Date Chair Assistant Secretary-Treasurer Page 11 of 11 City oq Report to Committee of Adjustment 13 IKON U Application Number: P/CA 06/15 Meeting Date: February 18, 2015 (Tabled at the January 28, 2015 meeting) From: Melissa Markham, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner, Development Review Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application P/CA 06/15 M. Modica 557 Marksbury Road Application The applicant requests relief from the following provisions of Zoning By-law 2511: - • to permit a minimum front yard depth of 7.3 metres; whereas the by-law requires a minimum front yard depth of 7.5 metres • to permit a minimum north side yard width of 1.2 metres; whereas the by-law requires a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres • to recognize an existing flankage side yard width of 1.1 metres to the ground floor of the existing dwelling and to permit a minimum flankage side yard width of 2.7 metres to a proposed second storey; whereas the by-law requires a minimum side yard width of 4.5 metres • to permit uncovered steps not exceeding 1.7 metres in height to project a maximum of 1.4 metres into the required flankage side yard from the proposed addition; whereas the by-law permits uncovered decks or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height to project a maximum of 1.0 metre into the required flankage side yard • to permit a covered porch to project a maximum of 1.0 metre into the required front yard; whereas the by-law permits uncovered decks or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height to project a maximum of 1.5 metres into the required front yard • to permit a maximum lot coverage of 37 percent; whereas the by-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent. The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit to demolish portions of the existing single-storey dwelling and reconstruct a new two- storey dwelling. Report P/CA 06/15 February 18, 2015 Page 2 1 4 Recommendation The City Development Department considers a minimum front yard depth of 7.3 metres, a minimum north side yard width of 1.2 metres, an existing flankage side yard width of 1.1 metres to the ground floor, a minimum flankage side yard width of 2.7 metres to a proposed second storey, uncovered steps not exceeding 1.7 metres in height to project a maximum of 1.4 metres into the required flankage side yard, a covered porch to project maximum of 1.0 metre into the required front yard and a maximum lot coverage of 37 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 proposed two-storey detached dwelling, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans. 2. That the applicant provides a grading plan to the satisfaction of the Engineering & Public Works Department which illustrates the removal of the existing retaining wall, located on the north side of the property or the decision affecting the north side yard width variance shall become null and void. 3. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by February 17, 2017 or this decision shall become null and void. Background On January 28, 2015, the Committee of Adjustment tabled the Minor Variance Application at the request of the City Development Department to allow the owner to provide a preliminary grading plan to the satisfaction of the City. The City's Engineering & Public Works Department required the preliminary grading plan to ensure that the increased drainage caused by the proposed development would not have a negative impact on adjacent properties. On February 5, 2015, the applicant submitted a preliminary grading plan to the City for staffs review. After reviewing the details of the plan, the Engineering & Public Works Department was satisfied that grading could be completed without creating a negative impact on adjacent properties. Comment Official Plan and Zoning By-law Pickering Official Plan—"Urban Residential - Low Density Areas" within the West Shore Neighbourhood Zoning By-law 2511 —"R4"— Fourth Density Residential Zone Report P/CA 06/15 February 18, 2015 15 Page 3 Appropriateness of the Application Front Yard Depth Variance • the intent of a minimum front yard depth is to ensure that an adequate landscaped area, parking area, and appropriate separation distance is provided between the dwelling and the property lot line • the by-law requires a minimum front yard depth of 7.5 metres • the requested variance is a reduction in the minimum front yard depth to 7.3 metres •, the requested front yard depth is required for the proposed attached garage fronting onto Marksbury Road, which projects from the main wall of the dwelling • an adequate soft landscaped and parking area would be maintained on the subject property • the proposed garage would maintain an adequate separation distance from Marksbury Road that is in character with the surrounding neighbourhood • the requested variance is minor in nature, is desirable for the appropriate development of the property and maintains the purpose and intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Uncovered Steps and Porches Projecting into the required Front Yard and Flankage Side Yard Variances • the intent of this provision is to allow stairs and/or a landing platform to encroach into a required yard when needed, to ensure an adequate buffer space between buildings and street activity is provided, and to ensure an adequate landscaped area within the front yard and flankage side yard is also provided • the by-law permits uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade to project a maximum of 1.5 metres into the required front yard and 1.0 metre into the required flankage side yard • the requested variances are to permit a covered porch to project a maximum of 1.0 metre into the required front yard and for uncovered steps with a maximum height of 1.7 metres to project a maximum of 1.4 metres into the required flankage side yard, from the proposed addition • the proposed covered porch in the front yard will enhance the residential streetscape along Marksbury Road and would maintain an adequate landscaped area between the proposed dwelling and street activity • the proposed covered porch will also maintain existing sight lines of abutting residences • the proposed uncovered steps in the flankage side yard projecting from the proposed addition will maintain an adequate landscaped area in the south side yard, as they are setback further from the street than the existing dwelling • the requested variances are minor in nature, are desirable for the appropriate development of the property and maintains the purpose and intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law • Report P/CA 06/15 February 18, 2015 Page 4 Side Yard Width Variance • the intent of a side yard width is to provide an appropriate separation between structures on abutting properties in order to maintain a pedestrian access, and to accommodate grading, drainage and residential services such as air conditioning units and utility metres • the by-law requires a minimum side yard setback of 1.5 metres, whereas the proposed dwelling has a north side yard setback of 1.2 metres • the proposed two storey dwelling will maintain an appropriate separation from the existing dwelling to the north • the requested side yard setback is required for only a portion of the north side wall as the footprint of the existing dwelling and proposed second-storey addition does not run parallel to the lot line, the setback gradually increases towards the back of the dwelling • when the existing retaining wall is removed, residential services and sufficient access into the rear yard could be maintained on the north side of the dwelling • the requested variance is minor in nature, is desirable for the appropriate development of the property and maintains the purpose and intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Flankage Side Yard Width Variances • the intent of a minimum flankage yard width is to provide an adequate separation distance between buildings and street activity and to maintain an adequate landscaped area • the existing one-storey bungalow is currently setback 1.1 metres from the flankage lot line abutting Surf Avenue, whereas the by-law requires a minimum 4.5 metre flankage side yard width • the applicant intends to partially construct the proposed two-storey dwelling on top of the existing dwelling foundation, with the second floor being setback to have a 2.7 metre flankage side yard • the flankage side yard width of 1.1 metres on the ground floor is an existing condition which maintains an adequate separation distance between the dwelling and street activity • the proposed flankage yard width of 2.7 metres on the second floor is keeping in character with similar zoning performance standards applied to newer developments in the general area • the setback of 1.6 metres from the first storey to the second storey will also provide for an upgraded flankage elevation, an enhanced roof form and reinforces the pedestrian scale of street • the requested variances are minor in nature, are desirable for the appropriate development of the property and maintains the purpose and intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Report P/CA 06/15 February 18, 2015 7 Page 5 Lot Coverage Variance • the intent of the maximum lot coverage of 33 percent 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 • a private outdoor amenity area uncovered by buildings will be maintained,in the east rear yard of the property • staff are of the opinion that the requested variance to permit an increase in lot coverage would not have any adverse impacts of the abutting property owners or the existing lotting pattern style and character of the neighbourhood • the proposed variance to increase the lot coverage from 33 to 37 percent is minor in nature, is desirable for the appropriate development of the property and maintains the purpose and intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Input From Other Sources Engineering & Public Works Department • no objections to the proposed development, the revised grading plan p 9 9p demonstrates that grading can be completed without negatively impacting the adjacent properties • the applicant must provide a common swale along the north property line Date of report: February 12, 2015 Comments prepared by: 71/44 V Ashle ea ood, MCIP, ' •P Melissa Markham, MCIP, RPP • anner II Principal Planner, Development Review AY:MM:Id J:1Doc ments'Devebpmen1'D-3 7 0 0120 1 5VCA 06-15Report'PCA 06-15.doc • Enclosures 1 18 i i i i i I I 1 1 1 1 I M hRT _ BREDA AVENUE 41 j — i 1 0 I� 0 r _—l---—l--- MORETTA AVENUE w — J Q >- , ,, '14 6 ' FATHER —Y = 3 0 CY FENELON -' 0 1 I" 1 J f % I � SEPARATE 1 I I m ,, lit c SCHOOL II I r_ ,, ,.c� SANOK I 1 . I °��� X111111111111 f eI''',- )- * f1 � UJ - - �IMM� �I VICKI z 0 DRIVE FRENCHMANS -w I I ,II ll. l I , II C BAY NM .T ` N mil mom NM L > CC ao — ° PUBLIC SCHOOL = 5 w DRIVE OKLAHOMA NM t.,: w Q M- M� ��' 111111 } � iu . . �� I>a>. - � ; . i�1� IM MEIN>-- - I m >IM� =EMI D _ I>.Li J._}—_N —Li Ilillll//// _ Y =°U ROAD �Il♦ �M __� MINK STREET INEBRIDGE -- f♦f♦ _ �_�z 1 1111 'r _a_ , I \ LANE `Ivry,• � ' � SUNRISE AVENUE mum. E M� AIM -J 1 - COURT 0-I LOOKOUT — PO/NT �= TULLO STREET /,, PARK -_ ap ip w�= °cr - U-_ 01=1- _ i7222 ----PROPERTY Npo s//i " SURF AVENUE PROPERTY Q�pM� 8/ IIICOAT m p\N"S Ilia Y LPG"P U ■w, 3 ` LAKE ONTARIO N..7\ . - L_ T-- Clic 04 Location Map FILE No: P/CA 06/15 .< r:- TA-= k APPLICANT: M. Modica i�.�M '���I,� PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:557 Marksbury Road(Plan 311, Lot 37) City Development DATE: Jan.7,2014 Department M,,, S,,,cim IC 2013 u A'a a It.:PPIII.....MI ngh.R....'.we°.Not a va1; or°ts.°,%.".,°."of •""'•r. SCALE 1:5,000 IN-2 CD To permit a minimum front To permit a minimum side yard depth of 7.3 metres yard width of 1.2 metres I. I I I N�. I 41'.Sm — - —• ' — r —■ . ' y • PROPOSED l Iii I a0 Y"' E � al: 7.3m—1 i c i ADDITION To permit a maximum lot E)051143 - 6.5m--1 TO coverage of 37 percent GARAGE jEXISTING 6.Om E CO BUILDING Y , - CC I r t g – E M • DORMS 1 STORE'DWEJJNG � I E N J - - ai r SURF AVENUE To permit a covered porch to project a maximum of To permit a minimum To recognize an existing To permit uncovered steps not 1.0 metre into the required flankage side yard width flankage side yard width exceeding 1.7 metres in front yard of 2.7 metres to a of 1.1 metres to the height to project a maximum proposed second storey ground floor of the of 1.4 metres into the required existing dwelling flankage side yard N Submitted Plan . C`y 4 a FILE No: P/CA 06/15 -"°77, APPLICANT: M.Modica C,CON-NN1 0C PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:557 Marksbury'Road(Plan 311,Lot 37) City Development . Department - FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ME AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CRY OF PICNERING DATE:Jan 9,20t5 CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. 'I Aid- %NI IF,IIIIII IN ibl■- :::MI �1 /Iri:' ail i ii ail 88 E ......=- ' I1I1 IIIIiIIQhJII!JII!IIIIJI!1191�iP1 - _ cn -a _ `) I __i , IIIIIIIIIIIIII Ill!ICIiIJIIi _II!II T I!Illill -1 6 PROPOSED FRONT(WEST)ELEVATION PROPOSED REAR(EAST)ELEVATION • , A10111111P-/gllgIIIIIIIU: .4,111//\ ////:/,\ .i....ohihn. -- \,- IIIIIIIC liz,-.--7:-.---. "" - - iii = Hi - -: III; 1111 - i_i________ -________---1:---- - .:---- PROPOSED SIDE(NORTH)ELEVATION PROPOSED FLANKAGE(SOUTH)ELEVATION Submitted Plan Cliq'1 -- FILE No: P/CA 06/15 °' • APPLICANT: M.Modica idLI.°.441IWL PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:557 Marksbury Road(Plan 311,Lot37) City Development • [V Department 0 FALL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CRY OF PICKERING DATE:Jan B,2015 CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. • Carl a0 Report to 21 4 Committee of Adjustment Application Number: P/CA 07/15 Meeting Date: February 18, 2015 From: Melissa Markham, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner, Development Review • Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application P/CA 07/15 D. & C. Kokkotas 1820 Appleview Road Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, to permit a minimum south side yard width of 1.4 metres; whereas the by-law requires a minimum side yard width of 1.8 metres on both sides, where a garage is attached to a dwelling. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit to construct a two-storey detached dwelling. Recommendation The City Development Department considers the minimum south side yard width of 1.4 metres to be a major variance, and not in keeping with the general intent of the Dunbarton Neighbourhood Development Guidelines as outlined in the Pickering's Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, and therefore recommends Refusal of the proposed variance. or If the applicant were to request that the application be amended to allow a 1.5 metre minimum south side yard width from the lot line, the following recommendation would apply: 1. The City Development Department considers a minimum south side yard width of 1.5 metres to be minor in nature, that is 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 and therefore recommends Approval of the proposed variance, subject to the following conditions: a) That this variance applies only to the proposed detached dwelling that will be revised to reflect the 1.5 metre setback, as generally outlined on the applicant's submitted plans. b) That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by February 18, 2016, or this decision shall become null and void. Report P/CA 07/15 February 18, 2015 S.J��f/'� 6� Page 2 Comment Official Plan and Zoning By-law Section 11.9 (a) of the Pickering Official Plan states that City Council shall, in the established residential areas between Spruce Hill Road and Appleview Road, including Fairport Road and Dunbarton Road, encourage and where possible require new development to be compatible with the character of existing development. According to the Pickering Official Plan, the subject lands are designated 'Urban Residential— Low Density' within the Dunbarton Neighbourhood. The property is also subject to the Dunbarton Neighbourhood Development Guidelines— Design Precinct Number 7. The upgrading of Fairport Road and Strouds Lane to full urban standards, and the presence of a large number of deep lots has resulted in opportunities for infill development within this area. To ensure development occurs in a manner that is appealing, orderly, and consistent with the character of the neighbourhood, new development proposals must comply with these guidelines. The subject property is currently zoned as "R3"—Third Density Residential Zone within Zoning By-law 3036, as amended. This zone category permits a detached dwelling with a minimum lot frontage of 18.0 metres, a minimum lot area of 550 square metres and a minimum side yard width of 1.8 metres. Previous variances have been approved along Appleview Road to permit reduced lot frontages of 15.2 metres and reduced side yard widths of 1.5 metres. Appropriateness of the Application Side Yard Width Variance • the intent of a minimum side yard width is to provide an appropriate separation distance between structures on abutting properties in order to ensure compatibility with the existing neighbourhood, provide appropriate pedestrian access between dwellings, and to accommodate grading, drainage and residential services such as air conditioning units and utility meters • the Zoning By-law requires a minimum side yard setback of 1.8 metres, however the Dunbarton Neighbourhood Development Guidelines permits development on existing roads to maintain a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres • the requested variance is to reduce the minimum side yard width from 1.8 metres to 1.4 metres on the south side of the proposed dwelling • staff's opinion that the requested variance of 1.4 metres does not meet the intent of the City's Dunbarton Neighbourhood Development Guidelines of 1.5 metres and the Third Density Residential Zone within Zoning By-law 3036 • the proposed side yard setback is not consistent with the character of the neighbourhood • the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan Compendium document (the Dunbarton Neighbourhood Guidelines) and the City's Zoning By-law is not maintained; and the variance is not considered desirable for the appropriate development of the land Report P/CA 07/15 February 18, 2015 23 Page 3 Should the Committee see merit in the application, staff recommends that the applicant maintains a minimum of 1.5 metres from the south side yard. Date of report: February 12, 2015 Comments prepared by: •/LG�ar /; ` K" Lalita Paray, Mme, RPP Melissa Markham, MCIP, RPP Planner II Principal Planner, Development Review LP:Id n -3 7 0 01201 51PCA 07-15Vie d1PCA 07.15 refusal.doc J:tD000mentstDevelopme IUD Pe _ Enclosures • • 24 ■ -r IIIM i �it -��im` 3 . �.■ ►�,�� Jlj = ■ 1U `IIjJ___08 == %11111 i■ _ �1111'DS LANE _ - —=_==z-- Milk ROWN V11110111111111111 111111111111111 ��• __N __ 1111 NGARD N CRESCENT .lam• �I. _M o =- 1111 111 111111' 1111111 1 w=_ imp. CRES, • Mow mil— •_�■ _■� limo S B VAiifluI • �� Q E_ - • � —� ■_� ._iiIIuI_�m�` RATH ffil �— 0.......,_ wain,���lr �_ viii `� �w CRES, I .x.. �� I/111111�� e II111111 1 gam, is 11111111 J -_ 111111 �_�m �r �si,wss�� �_� �■ inragreHiswEE: �= °111111�v= m •ni lI s a °Eil"„ _._ GOLDENRIDGE I_ _ ` ,,, Y,IC Il I DEN CRESCENT ��� 1�//11111111 _J '��__ �` �_� �_L-=° 11111 WELRUS STREET Q ° Llin n oat s s_m__°11111 w o— ��— mss• —4 lil __ _U_— -_a__. i•.C_'- RUSHTON ROAD �_`/ ,,,, z ro I p....rr: HURC io. � 111111111 ■ ∎�� ��UNTED i MN M 1111111i <AIM =o■moouv,: uuu: 0 DUNBARTON �.Vr Location Map Cali off FILE No: P/CA 07/15 LL=.may. _ rt m . : APPLICANT: D. & C. Kokkotas IP kM hi al 01-1"-- PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:1820 Appleview Road (Plan 1051, RCP Lot 61) City Development DATE: Jan. 15,2014 Department Data Sou tee„ T.ranet Enterprises Inc. and It. .upppere. All right. RNerved. NOS a plan o/ survey. SCALE 1:5,000 PN-6 2017 MPAC and it. supplier.. All right. Reserved. Not a plan o1 Survey. ` en • E c p 128_2m - .11+H-ti.-.tom.,-•Y EXISTING STING I �N SHED gFiQPOSED , E .ao STOREY 3 WELLING IV - al) • - 128.2m Q E c To permit a minimum south side yard width of 1.4 metres //‘ Submitted Plan City FILE No: P/CA 07/15 T- APPLICANT: D.&C. Kokkotas WRIINCI ,I,C PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:1820 Appleview Road(Plan 1051,RCP Lot 61) City Development Department FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CRY OF PICKERING DATE:Jan 29,2015 CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. 1 -- 9 // „N___ it* * # I a L* * I I 1 �--�- - -- --- it- - -L '�II ' D- - r \1 �' i- 111_ '°'n -- m E�`�!IIl ,,�i ��!!��_ — III�\ti . 1, —- %I \ - I- �_ - , �J N H In - _./ PROPOSED FRONT(EAST)ELEVATION PROPOSED REAR(WES ELEVATION I- , _ _____\\,._ , ____ Iti , _I II n- - -._Th, PROPOSED(SOUTH)ELEVATION — ---—-—-—-—- - -—r h_ PROPOSED SIDE(NORTH)ELEVATION Submitted Plan Caq'1 `. FILE No: P/CA 07/15 °'- APPLICANT: D.&C.Kokkotas W CM N/i C,IOC PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:1820 Appleview Road(Plan 1051, RCP Lot 61) City Development ": p C) De artment FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. I DATE:Jan 9,2015 II . 1 , I I /} City d4 Report to l 27 wi=— -= R: Committee of Adjustment comtix Application Number: P/CA 08/15 Meeting Date: February 18, 2015 From: Melissa Markham, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner, Development Review Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application P/CA 08/15 1154786 Ontario Ltd. 1438 Rougemount Drive Application The applicant requests relief from the following provisions of Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-laws 2912/88: • to permit a minimum front yard depth of 11.9 metres; whereas the by-law requires a minimum front yard depth of 15.0 metres • to permit a covered porch to project a maximum of 1.8 metres into the required front.yard; whereas the by-law permits uncovered decks or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in'height to project a maximum of 1.5 metres into the required front yard, and • to permit a minimum north side yard width of 1.5 metres; whereas the by-law requires a minimum side yard width of 1.8 metres The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit to construct a two-storey dwelling. Recommendation The City Development Department recommends that minor variance application P/CA 08/15 be Deferred in order to allow the applicant to provide a tree inventory and preservation plan to the satisfaction of the City. This plan is required to be prepared by qualified persons and demonstrate whether the proposed location of the dwelling can accommodate the protection of existing mature trees currently located in the rear yard. Background Pickering Official Plan—"Urban Residential - Low Density Areas"within the Rougemount Neighbourhood Zoning By-law 3036 as amended by By-law 2912/88 -"R3"—Third Density Residential Zone 28 Report P/CA 08/15 February 18, 2015 Page 2 Comment • The applicant has requested a minor variance application to permit the construction of a two-storey building with a covered porch setback approximately 10.0 metres from the front lot line and a minimum of 1.5 metres from the north side lot line. The applicant provided the rationale that the reduction in the required front yard setback was to preserve some of the existing mature trees currently located in the rear yard. The applicant has advised that siting the proposed dwelling closer to the front lot line will provide appropriate screening from abutting properties and preserve mature vegetation on the subject property. Prior to Planning staff commenting on the merits of the minor variance application, the applicant will be required to prepare and submit a tree inventory and preservation plan. Input From Other Sources Simon Hunter • the proposed design of the dwelling is too wide (1436 Rougemount Drive) for the subject property • window and door openings should not be permitted on the south side of the proposed dwelling • concerned about the condition of vehicular access and servicing easement if development - is too close to the right-of-way y • development should provide appropriate fencing to protect existing south vehicular access easement in favour of 1436 Rougemount Drive • concerned about overhang encroachment over the north easement Date of report: February 12, 2015 Comments prepared by: /041 •Es.Ars- /117/4 Ashle -a ood, MCIP, ' °P Melissa Markham, MCIP, RPP anner II Principal Planner, Development Review AY:MM:Id J:1DocomentsVevelopment1D-3700 Committee of Adjustment(PCA Appications)12015 PCA 0&151154706 Ontario LtMlieporFWCA 00.15 Deferral.doc Enclosures I ST. MON/CAS _■■11 ■••-�<__ milSEPARATE SCHOOL o �11111111111 EN o - - ARDSON STREET p y== = 11Ufl111U1T___ ���•��� . 1�I1� ss`�-4,9'3'M ' STREET 1 �e H��• lim r _ - �ill� 1 I MIME _ _ G_� MOM=o ELIZABETH �_ =�0 SUBJECT ,STOVER N ec PUBLIC • I _ �IM I /IIIIIIIIIo l SCHOOL ■'MIL , 1111111111114 FIDDLERS ' : I R DRIVE 1 i ��� • IPuIIHI _- TOM _ ila LINSON CRT. 7\_ —Mill MEMNON°- STREET a MI X11111111111 z I. puiniiuin \ i DRIVE a 0 rn o j_ =-, ��111111111110 0� � �� I 01111111112 Pilw$ �m O I PETTICOA T �-°�i` �III11 , :RARY I'�,�� , =ROUGE HILL •OMEN MI=rt / G .` CEN VALLEY GATE BROOKRIDGE _ -11,11,,ir. 11111111 it 11111►* °�i _ I_ CHURCH F` illW J OF THE �CpJ�=_p- NAZARENE �„�`�2��a ESI C IIIIIIIII ffi1 I, IIIII __ x .11 � 1 1 111 ii}poll �( oN w k J :::id Location Map cif o FILE No: P/CA 08/15 APPLICANT: 1154786 Ontario Ltd U�M�� 191∎L PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:1438 Rougemount Drive (Plan 228 Pt Lot 16, City Development 17, 40R-16833 Part 1, 2, 3) DATE: Jan.27,2015 Department oete Q T.rvnet En•rprl.e. Inc. end It. ppllar.. All right. R...rved. Net a plop of .liver. SCALE 1:5,000 IPN-5 d 201J MPAC and tt. .upDlier.. All right. R.served. Not c plop or Sun.y. 30 To permit a minimum . north side yard width of 1.5 metres To permit a minimum front yard depth of f 11.9 metres o rn o Ti 45.7m + . amerti 1 > t t 4 15.8m • I W 0 Z PROPOSED 11.9m • Q 2 STOREY F— w T- DWELLING Z • 4-1.8M E O O0 SHED E - A Lo M CC 6 T W up 01 ♦ 0 0 E 00 DRIVEWAY EASEMENT FOR T1436 ROUGEMOUNT DRIVE CC vi 45.7m To permit a covered porch to project a maximum of 1.8 metres into the front yard I\ N Submitted Plan Cali 4 FILE No: P/CA 08/15 '1:,a_o:.,., _''' APPLICANT: 1154786 Ontario Ltd iiii ��a t,r,r PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:1438 Rougemount Drive (Plan 228 Pt Lot 16, City Development 17,40R-16833 Part 1, 2, 3) Department FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING DATE: Jan.9,2015 CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. I . 31 Aii�� riiI I iriT i ►Aa � 1i .ice �i�\►� �!!�1 _ -�'v IMO ■I uI 16.1'''-_--- -11111441110_— MI'MR I u 111 Vir,Tr.':� ail: �I Cllr . _ �„�� =' f=�W . ,,_1 ,... ..4 s pia— r, AP - -- �N__ lit _ __�.�- isi 2 • -. arm__ _ -..� =0 ■ 7 Qb nV mmw mi- w maim, _ice /--Fit _=_ _=wa__-=i...z--=i='- ar-2-1 0� ■ i I, .�,'f ��� 1 ■ '■ ■,a■ it •r }s w1_rjG. in In. lir qt . it la simmareritel■Imilm-- lira ; NI l 1il :o� 3 : is IIIIIII t 11111ili1 111111III 11111lI1 r, • ..'!!: i rd itIII1d1f111111:'IIIII'-�! II/II��IIIII�;�I111Ia� i "` >� �~.— t!..1,- iuuui°Illulli.um ina�''',dlliiiii"iiiiiill�,'" -.-'1111•21"'2.- —.UL .-11.15-ue ��.v - I I • • • FRONT (EAST) ELEVATION Submitted Plan City 4 - FILE No: P/CA 08/15 =- APPLICANT: 1154786 Ontario Ltd W it rA hI I OL PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:1438 Rougemount Drive (Plan 228 Pt Lot 16, City Development 17, 40R-16833 Part 1, 2, 3) Department FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING DATE Jan.29,2014 ,CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. City Report to Committee of Adjustment *MN( Application Numbers: P/CA 09/15 and P/CA 10/15 Meeting Date: February 18, 2015 From: Melissa Markham, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner— Development Review Subject: Committee of Adjustment Applications P/CA 09/15 and P/CA 10/15 G. and R. Kerum 1423 Rougemount Drive Applications PICA 09/15 (Proposed Retained Parcel) 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 1.2 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 010/15 (Proposed Severed Parcel) 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 1.2 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 variances in order to create one additional lot through the Region of Durham Land Division Committee and obtain a building permit to construct a two-storey detached dwelling on the proposed severed parcel and to replace an existing dwelling with a new two-storey detached dwelling on the proposed retained parcel. Recommendation PICA 09/15 (Proposed Retained Parcel) The City Development Department considers the minimum lot frontage of 15.2 metres for the proposed retained parcel to be minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, and therefore recommends Approval of the proposed variance, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the variance apply only to the proposed lot configuration for the proposed retained parcel, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans. 2. That the applicant obtains final clearance for Land Division Application LD 086/12 by February 17, 2016, or this decision shall become null and void. Report P/CA 09/15 and P/CA 10/15 February 18, 2015 3 3 Page 2 3. That the applicant submits a preliminary site plan indicating proposed driveway locations to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering & Public Works Department. 4. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction on the proposed retained parcel by February 17, 2017, or this decision affecting the proposed detached dwelling shall become null and void. and The City Development Department considers the minimum side yard width of 1.2 metres where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling to be a major variance that is not considered to be desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and not in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law, and therefore recommends Refusal of the proposed variance. or If the applicant were to request that the application be amended to allow a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling the following recommendation would apply: 1. The City Development Department considers the minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres to be minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the - Zoning By-law, and therefore recommends Approval of the proposed variance. Recommendation P/CA 10/15 (Proposed Severed Parcel) The City Development Department considers the minimum lot frontage of 15.2 metres for the proposed severed parcel to be minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, and therefore recommends Approval of the proposed variance, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the variance apply only to the proposed lot configuration for the proposed severed parcel, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans. 2. That the applicant obtains final clearance for Land Division Application LD 086/12 by February 17, 2016, or this decision shall become null and void. 3. That the applicant submits a preliminary site plan indicating proposed driveway locations to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering & Public Works Department. 4. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction on the proposed severed parcel by February 17, 2017, or this decision affecting the proposed detached dwelling shall become null and void. and Report P/CA 09/15 and P/CA 10/15 February 18, 2015 Page 3 3 4 The City Development Department considers the minimum side yard width of 1.2 metres where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling to be a major variance that is not considered to be desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and not in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law, and therefore recommends Refusal of the proposed variance. or If the applicant were to request that the application be amended to allow a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling the following recommendation would apply: 1. The City Development Department considers the minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres to be minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, and therefore recommends Approval of the proposed variance. Background On October 11, 1988, the City approved an area-specific zoning by-law amendment for the majority of the lands fronting onto Rougemount Drive, north of Kingston Road and east of Altona Road. The amending by-law incorporated specific zoning provisions to the existing "R3" and "R4"zones in order to protect the neighbourhood's unique character. These provisions included amendments to the front yard depth, building height, maximum garage projections and the placement of accessory structures on a lot. June 2012 the applicant submitted a Land Division Application (LD 086/12) to the Region of Durham Land Division Committee to create a total of two residential lots with a minimum lot frontage of 15.2 metres along Rougemount Drive. The City's comments stated that the applications were premature as an Environmental Report and Geotechnical Assessment needed to be submitted to the satisfaction of the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) and the City. At that time the City also recommended that the reduction in lot frontages proceed as a zoning amendment application. This application was tabled at the hearing by the applicant July 2012. The City is now prepared to consider the reduction in lot frontages as a Minor Variance Application. Approval of these Minor Variance Applications will ensure zoning compliance is achieved for the proposed lot frontages. Comment Official Plan and Zoning By-law Pickering Official Plan—"Urban Residential —Low Density Areas"within the Rougemount Neighbourhood Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 2912/88—"R3"—Third Density Residential Zone and "G"—Greenbelt—Conservation Zone • Report P/CA 09/15 and P/CA 10/15 February 18, 2015 Page 4 Appropriateness of the Application Reduced Lot Frontage Variances • the intent of the minimum lot frontage requirement is to ensure a usable lot size that is compatible with the neighbourhood • since the adoption of the 1988 area-specific zoning by-law amendment, the City has approved several rezoning applications for a number of properties along Rougemount Drive between Kingston Road and Altona Road, which established a minimum lot frontage of 15.0 metres • lot frontages in the area range from 15.0 metres to 38.0 metres • the reduced lot frontage from 18.0 metres to 15.2 metres continues to provide a usable lot size, due to the increased depth of these lots • the proposed lot frontages would allow for the development of detached dwellings with appropriate performance standards to ensure compatibility of any future development with the neighbourhood character established along Rougemount Drive • the proposed 15.2 metre lots are generally consistent with the development pattern along the northerly portion of Rougemount Drive • the requested reduction in lot frontage variances are minor in nature and maintain the intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law Reduced Side Yard Width Variances • the intent of a minimum side yard width is to provide an appropriate separation distance between structures on abutting properties in order to ensure compatibility with the existing neighbourhood, provide appropriate pedestrian access between dwellings, and to accommodate grading, drainage and residential services such as air conditioning units and utility meters • the current zoning by-law requires a minimum side yard setback of 1.8 metres, the application is proposing a reduction to 1.2 metres • since the adoption of the 1988 area-specific zoning by-law amendment, the City has approved several rezoning applications for a number of properties along Rougemount Drive between Kingston Road and Altona Road, which established a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres • to ensure the unique character along Rougemount Drive is maintained and protected, a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres is to be provided • the variance to reduce the minimum side yard setback is not supported by City staff as a side yard width of 1.5 metres can be achieved through the appropriate design of the future dwelling • the subject property has a lot depth exceeding 120 metres, the proposed dwellings could be designed to incorporate adequate massing and proportions along the street and lengthen the dwelling towards the rear of the property • the reduction in side yard widths from 1.8 metres to 1.2 metres does not meet the intent of the zoning by-law and is not in keeping with the neighbourhood character established along Rougemount Drive Report P/CA 09/15 and P/CA 10/15 February 18, 2015 3b Page 5 • the proposed side yard width of 1.2 metres does not maintain the intent of the zoning by-law and is not appropriate for the development of the lands within this neighbourhood Input From Other Sources Durham Region Health Department • no objections to approval Engineering & Public Works Department • requested a preliminary site plan be submitted indicating the proposed driveway locations • currently there is a traffic island in the roadway fronting this property and Engineering & Public Works wants to ensure that the driveways can be located such that vehicular movements won't be impaired Date of report: February 12, 2015 Comments prepared by: /11' 1/1 0,(11/1 ' • Melissa Markham, MCIP, RPP Nile- Surti, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner—Development Review Manager, Development Review & Urban Design MM:Id J:\Documents\Development\D3700∎2015aCA 09-15&PCA 10.15 Repo0WCA 09-15&PCA 10-15.doc Enclosures 37 iiit,,y I ST. MONICA'S _I ,p SEPARATE SCHOOL „a 1 11111111111 ■ Q ARDSON STREET o S== I i T 0 1 1 11 1111 711L-7111111MIL �-��STREET ( '�_ I SOUR�_© 1_ — .� 1 — __o 11111 ° ELIZABETH M =p A- STOVER CRESCENT PUBLIC NMI 11111111111M' SCHOOL == Z a FIDDLERS o � ,� R DRIVE .11= I :+1 OA���44••∎•I- lb TOML 'SON CRT.g AN � —w�_ 4.._,E, 1 a STREET x 111111111111 z � 111111111111► o DRIVE ¢ .► w c g,' 0 j ilir -a tor �pol�1 , PETTICOAT Mt o ,` •■1110§ ARY i �m / ,` ROUGE HILL , MMUI J ,I1' E I CEN 1 P R OKR D GEG __ VALLEY GATE B 0 ill.. 11111111 = � CHURCH %c<N . IIIPlk O_-w_ OF THE '�- 3=_L_ NAZARENE •� LO��.Q MI IIIIIIIII //11111 ' q _ •• mum '11 ma Joe 1 J TON w k i1G'. jw Location Map Caq 4 '= FILE No: P/CA 09/15 & P/CA 10/15 -__1 ,G.1 ,=—. a _= '�- � APPLICANT: G. & R. Kerum ai rA N��Ie i PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:1423 Rougemount Drive (Plan 228, Pt Lot 27) City Development Department DATE: Jan.27,2014 3 0eto sere..: SCALE 1:5,000 PN-5 2073 t EY.crnd It Ine. end it• euight. . All right.Not o pl d. oot li plan e1 .urvey. ■ 2073 MPAC and Its euppllers. All rights Res.rvetl. Not a plan of Survey. • • • PICA 09/15 PICA 09/15 To permit a minimum lot To permit a side yard frontage of 15.2 metres width of 1.2 metres E N l I W 122.9m �__ 4 0 E PROPOSED 1N EXISTING BUILDINGS RETAIRNED PARCEL •`iq-TAG 46�?` ~ ai ! DWELOLRING TO BE DEMOLISHED (P/CA 09/15) ,c Z — `4a D O _.__�'-.. � O __....._.�.A.. ._..._. _ _..._ TA. me:: SAKE,5 of _ ,P STOREY f Ll l I f^..,..:_ DWELLING r +qL AS?`} PROPOSED PROPOSED Ej /51 N t 2 STOREY N SEVERED PARCEL ! --AG 1691 z ui + DWELLING, {tom — (P/CA 10/15) / ` — 1 71f.+' �i>tC DUN ../.... a STAi 3 0 / f7 StAYE - N" 122.7m N P/CA 10/15 • PICA 10/15 To permit a side yard To permit a minimum lot width of 1.2 metres frontage of 15.2 metres . Submitted Plan '/ FILE No: P/CA 09/15&P/CA 10/15 • 1'° •! APPLICANT: G.&R.Kerum Ve1:1 �1101 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:1423 Rougemount Drive(Plan 228,Pt Lot 27) City Development W Department FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING DATE:Jan 29,2015 CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. . •