Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMay 9, 2018DICKERING Committee of Adjustment Agenda Meeting Number: 6 Date: Wednesday, May 9, 2018 pickering.ca cry oh DICKERING Agenda Committee of Adjustment Wednesday, May 9, 2018 7:00 pm Council Chambers Page Number (I) Adoption of Agenda (II) Adoption of Minutes from April 18, 2018 1-14 (III) Reports 1. (Deferred at the April 18, 2018 meeting) 15-19 P/CA 33/18 R. Gupta 130 Woodview Drive 2. P/CA 34/18 & P/CA 35/18 E. Whitney 1284 Commerce Street 3. P/CA 36/18 M.A. Asgary 681 Front Road 4. P/CA 38/18 & P/CA 39/18 Pinnacle Custom Homes 540 Oakwood Drive (IV) Adjournment 20-23 24-31 32-36 For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Lesley Dunne T. 905.420.4660, extension 2024 Email Idunne@pickering.ca Ci/g DICKERING Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, April 18, 2018 7:00 pm Council Chambers Pending Adoption Present Tom Copeland — Vice -Chair David Johnson — Chair Eric Newton Denise Rundle Sean Wiley Also Present Deborah Wylie, Secretary -Treasurer Lesley Dunne, Assistant Secretary -Treasurer (I) Adoption of Agenda Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Tom Copeland That the agenda for the Wednesday, April 18, 2018 meeting be adopted. Carried Unanimously (11) Adoption of Minutes Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Tom Copeland That the minutes of the 4th meeting of the Committee of Adjustment held Wednesday, March 28, 2018 be adopted. Carried Unanimously David Johnson, Committee Chair acknowledged the presence of Councillor McLean, Regional Councillor, Ward 2 and Councillor Cumming, City Councillor, Ward 2. Page 1 of 14 GGa oii DICKERING Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, April 18, 2018 7:00 pm Council Chambers (III) Reports 1. P/CA 27/18 L. Sharma 356 Rouge Hill Court The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended: • to permit a partially covered platform (deck) to project a maximum of 2.7 metres into the required rear yard, whereas the by-law permits uncovered platforms not exceeding 1.0 metres in height above grade to project a maximum of 1.5 metres into the required rear yard • to permit a maximum lot coverage of 39 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 for a partially covered platform (deck) within the rear yard. The Secretary -Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Written comments were received from the City's Engineering Services Department expressing no comments on the application. Written comments were also received from a resident of 358 Rouge Hill Court in support of the requested variances. Lynn Sharma, applicant, 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, Lynn Sharma confirmed the deck is partially covered. Moved by Sean Wiley Seconded by Eric Newton That application P/CA 27/18 by L. Sharma, be Approved on the grounds that the requested variances are minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, subject to the following conditions: 1. That these variances apply only to the covered platform (deck), as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans (refer to Exhibit 2 and Exhibit 3 contained in the Committee of Adjustment report, dated April 18, 2018). 2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by April 20, 2020, or this decision shall become null and void. Carried Unanimously Page 2 of 14 Ci/g DICKERING Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, April 18, 2018 7:00 pm Council Chambers 2. P/CA 28/18 R. Gosling 425 Whitevale Road The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by Zoning By-law 2677/88: • to permit one medical office (naturopathic health practice) use not exceeding 191 square metres, whereas the by-law does not permit a medical office use The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application in order to expand the list of permitted uses on the subject lands to include a medical office (naturopathic health practice) in a vacant portion of the building. The Secretary -Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Written comments were received from the City's Engineering Services Department expressing no comments on the application. Heritage Pickering comments will be received after their April Committee Meeting. Written comments were received from the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority expressing no objections to the approval of the minor variances. Written comments were received from residents of 3165 Factory Street expressing a concern with the application. Correspondence received from the residents of 3165 Factory Street expressed several concerns with the type of medical office use that may be operating on the subject property; the potential of heavy daily use in the coming and going of patients/clients on a quiet residential street; may increase parking demand that could heavily impact parking availability on-site; increase in traffic; the parking activity on Factory Street is a major concern and suggested if all the parking was located on the west side of the building there would be no issues. Zubeda Gosling, applicant, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. In response to questions from Committee Members, Zubeda Gosling stated the interior of the building is already designed; and no more than 3 parking spaces for staff and 2 parking spaces patients at one time would be required. In response to a question from a Committee Member, the Secretary -Treasurer stated that the intent of staff's recommendation is to limit the proposed medical office use to the proposed naturopathic health practice only; and that no other medical office use is to be permitted. Page 3 of 14 Ci/g 4 DICKERING Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, April 18, 2018 7:00 pm Council Chambers Moved by Sean Wiley Seconded by Denise Rundle That application P/CA 28/18 by R. Gosling, be Approved on the grounds that the addition of one medical office (naturopathic health practice) not exceeding 191 square metres is minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, subject to the following conditions: 1. That this variance apply only to the proposed medical office (naturopathic health practice) with a maximum gross leasable floor area of 191 square metres to be located within the building as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plan (refer to Exhibit 2 contained in the Committee of Adjustment report, dated April 18, 2018). 2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed internal renovations by April 20, 2020, or this decision shall become null and void. Carried Unanimously 3. P/CA 29/18 C. Newton 631 Liverpool Road The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2520, as amended by By-law 5938/02 to permit a private school on the subject lands, whereas the by-law does not permit a private school. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to expand the list of permitted uses on the subject property to include a private school. The Secretary -Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending the application be tabled. Written comments were received from the City's Engineering Services Department expressing no comments on the application. Written comments were received from Councillor McLean, Regional Councillor, Ward 2 in objection to the application and expressed a concern the Montessori school will have an impact on traffic. Written comments were received from residents of 648 Annland Street, 649 Annland Street, 667 Front Road, 681 Pleasant Street, 709 Cortez Avenue, 1283 Wharf Street, 1295 Wharf Street, 1302 Wharf Street, 1303 Wharf Street, 1309 Wharf Street, 1310 Wharf Street and 1312 Wharf Street in objection to the application. Written comments were also received from residents of 673 Front Road and 816 Fairview Avenue, in support of the application. Page 4 of 14 Ci/g DICKERING Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, April 18, 2018 7:00 pm Council Chambers Correspondence received from residents of 648 Annland Street expressed a concern that traffic generated from all the development in the area and the proposed school will result in too much traffic. Correspondence received from residents of 649 Annland Street stated parking and traffic in the area is already chaotic with many people parking illegally, and that the intersection of Liverpool Road and Wharf Street already has traffic issues and by adding a school will increase traffic problems and create an unsafe situation. The residents also stated the area around the Nautical Village should be kept safe, unencumbered and open to all Durham residents and wildlife. Correspondence received from residents of 667 Front Road expressed several concerns that parents dropping off their children at the proposed school would create traffic congestion; there would be noise from children affecting the residential area and concern about child safety on the street. Correspondence received from residents of 681 Pleasant Street expressed several concerns with not enough parking; there is no location for parents to drop-off and pick-up their children along Liverpool Road; and the proposal has the potential to be very dangerous. Correspondence received from residents of 709 Cortez Avenue expressed several concerns that children will disturb the environment in the area; that parents will not respect any pick-up zones and park anywhere causing traffic problems; and combined with other developments in the area traffic will be a problem. Correspondence received from residents of 1283 Wharf Street expressed several concerns with this proposal, together with other developments in the area, traffic will be a problem and that the application should be denied or referred for further study. Correspondence received from residents of 1295 Wharf Street expressed a concern with traffic already being a problem and adding a school will cause an even worse situation for driving and parking. Correspondence received from residents of 1302 Wharf Street expressed several concerns including that the traffic at the intersection of Liverpool Road and Wharf Street is already very busy, adding a school will make it worse and it is not clear where pick-up and drop-off will be located. Correspondence received from residents of 1303 Wharf Street expressed several concerns that by allowing a private school use on the subject property existing traffic problems will increase; Liverpool Road which is a two-lane road cannot accommodate the increased traffic involved with staffing, drop-off and pick-up; and the potential noise and activity of a school would disrupt the surrounding neighbourhood. Page 5 of 14 GGa oii DICKERING Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, April 18, 2018 7:00 pm Council Chambers Correspondence received from residents of 1309 Wharf Street, dated April 16, 2018 stated they would like to retract previous comments received on April 3, 2018 in objection to the application as they have reviewed plans and have been made aware of other permitted uses. The residents stated they support the proposed Montessori school. However, they expressed several concerns with the fence in the rear yard; headlights of vehicles from tenants of the apartments and during early morning drop-offs; the loss of privacy due to the outdoor play area for students and tenant use; and would like to see a privacy fence put up in the rear yard. Correspondence received from residents of 1310 Wharf Street expressed several concerns with the number of students and the increase in traffic. Correspondence received from residents of 1312 Wharf Street indicated that traffic is already very heavy in the area and cars are often parked on the wrong side of Wharf Street in front of "No Parking" signs. Correspondence received from residents of 673 Front Road indicated a private school would be a good addition to the neighbourhood, especially for new young families. Forty students is not too large, and the new traffic will bring extra customers for local businesses. Correspondence received from residents of 816 Fairview Avenue indicated it will bring more people to the area, especially in the winter season and will support the existing businesses. Mori Edelstein, agent, was present to represent the application. Bernie Luttmer of 816 Fairview Avenue and Jan Ploeger of 631 Liverpool Road were present in support of the application. Maureen Metcalf of 667 Front Road, Councillor McLean and Councillor Cummings were present in objection to the application. Mori Edelstein indicated that the traffic impact study and parking justification report requested by City Development staff will be submitted shortly and then submitted to the Committee a letter dated April 13, 2018 from the Montessori Learning Centre outlining details of the proposed private school operation. He outlined the previous variances approved for the site and stated that his plans have changed and he is no longer proposing a restaurant or martial arts school. Mori Edelstein also indicated that the Montessori school will accommodate 40 students in grades 1 to 8, will be located on the ground floor and basement, and that there will be no preschool or daycare as part of the operation. Drop-off will be at 7:00 am to 8:45 am. The school will be from September to June, which is a reduction from the proposed martial arts school. Twenty parking spaces are available on the site to accommodate the Montessori school while 11 spaces will be required. Mori Edelstein pointed out that the definition of commercial school included 'for profit schools except for high schools', and the private school definition exempted commercial school. Page 6 of 14 GGa oii DICKERING Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, April 18, 2018 7:00 pm Council Chambers The Committee Member, Eric Newton, declared that he is not related to the applicant and has no conflict of interest. Bernard Luttmer of 816 Fairview Avenue stated that the proposed Montessori school would benefit the community where there are already commercial uses and that it is difficult to get people to visit the area in the winter. Bernard Luttmer also stated that parents of Montessori school children may patronize area restaurants and businesses. Jan Ploeger of 631 Liverpool Road indicated that the proposed Montessori school is a good idea as there are no schools in the area and both residents and businesses would benefit. Maureen Metcalf of 667 Front Road indicated that she has no objection to schools but is concerned that the area is already experiencing traffic congestion and that the proposed private school would contribute to further congestion. She is concerned that the proposed school may start as a small operation and in the future the applicant may seek variances for more students. She stated concern with child safety, and after school activities going late into the evening creating more traffic congestion and noise. In her opinion the requested variance is not minor. Councillor McLean, Ward 2, indicated he has represented the area for 18 years, is concerned over how the Nautical Village evolves, and that on December 11, 2017 City Council adopted Resolution #383/17 directing the City to undertake a visioning exercise for the Nautical Village. He also indicated that the proposal does not fit the nautical theme of the area, that the existing building was built through variances and that the proposal before the Committee is intended to circumvent the Planning Act and Official Plan. He noted that schools have significant impact on traffic, and that the existing driveway can only accommodate a one-way drive aisle creating an unsafe situation for student drop-offs and pick-ups. He does not believe that increased traffic will use local businesses and that a restaurant is a better fit for the property. Councillor Cumming, Ward 2, outlined that it is important to wait for the outcome of the Nautical Village visioning report. He has concerns over the traffic the school would generate, agrees with Councillor McLean's comments, believes that the requested variance is not minor, and is very opposed to the requested variance. Committee Members indicated that as requested by staff a further understanding is needed of how the proposed school will operate and the regulations the school may be subject to (number and ages of students, square footage of school, Ministry of Education guidelines regarding the floor area per student, potential expansion plans) as well as information regarding traffic impact and parking justification. In response to a question from the Committee, Mori Edelstein answered that 2 apartments exist in the building. Page 7 of 14 Ci/g 4 DICKERING Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, April 18, 2018 7:00 pm Council Chambers In response to a question from a Committee Member, the Secretary -Treasurer indicated that a private school is a use permitted by the Official Plan for this property. This Committee Member indicated that the requested reports are not unreasonable and agrees with the staff recommendation to table the application. The Committee also requested that a site visit be arranged for the members. Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Tom Copeland That application P/CA 29/18 by C. Newton, be Tabled to allow the applicant to submit a Transportation Impact Study, a Parking Justification Report and provide further details regarding the operation of the private school and to allow the Committee Members to visit the subject property. Carried Unanimously Page 8 of 14 Ci/g DICKERING Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, April 18, 2018 7:00 pm Council Chambers 4. P/CA 30/18 K. Ouelette & C. Chartrand 806 West Shore Boulevard The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2520, as amended: • to permit a minimum south side yard setback of 0.91 of a metre; whereas the by-law requires a minimum south side yard setback of 1.5 metres The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application in order to obtain a building permit to enclose an existing carport to be setback 0.91 of a metre from the south property line. The Secretary -Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Written comments were received from the City's Engineering Services Department expressing no comments on the application. Written comments were also received from residents of 802 West Shore Blvd. in favour of the application. Correspondence received from the residents of 802 West Shore Blvd. indicated no objection to the proposed enclosure, however they indicated a concern that construction workers will use their driveway; and they would like the applicant to clean any construction debris from their property. Kevin Ouelette, applicant, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. In response to questions from Committee Members, Kevin Ouelette stated the type of materials used would be wood, brick, cement and steel beams. Kevin Ouelette also stated he is aware of the neighbours concerns and will clean up any construction debris that may be placed on their property. Moved by Denise Rundle Seconded by Eric Newton That application P/CA 30/18 by K. Ouelette & C. Chartrand, be Approved on the grounds that the requested variance is minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, subject to the following condition: 1. That this variance apply only to the south side yard setback adjacent to the proposed enclosed carport, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plan (refer to Exhibit 2 contained in the Committee of Adjustment report, dated April 18, 2018). Carried Unanimously Page 9 of 14 GGa oii DICKERING Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, April 18, 2018 7:00 pm Council Chambers 5. P/CA 31/18 R. & M. Blair 1940 Glendale Road The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended: • to permit a minimum south side yard setback of 1.5 metres, whereas the by-law requires a minimum side yard setback of 1.8 metres • to permit an accessory structure (detached garage) to be partially located within the south side yard, whereas the by-law requires all accessory structures which are not part of the main building to be erected in the rear yard The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit for the construction of a two-storey detached dwelling. The Secretary -Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Written comments were received from the City's Engineering Services Department expressing no comments on the application. Rick Blair, applicant, 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, Rick Blair stated the garage will be used for cars and storage; and the carport on the side is to provide character to the home. Moved by Sean Wiley Seconded by Eric Newton That application P/CA 31/18 by R. & M. Blair, be Approved on the grounds that the requested variances are minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, subject to the following conditions: 1. That these variances apply only to the proposed dwelling and existing detached garage, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plan (refer to Exhibit 2 contained in the Committee of Adjustment report, dated April 18, 2018). 2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by April 20, 2020, or this decision shall become null and void. Carried Unanimously Page 10 of 14 Ci/g DICKERING Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, April 18, 2018 7:00 pm Council Chambers 6. P/CA 32/18 Q. Carrington 620 Park Crescent The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended: • to permit a minimum side yard width of 1.2 metres; whereas the by-law requires a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres • to permit a minimum flankage yard depth of 4.2 metres; whereas the by-law requires a minimum flankage yard depth of 4.5 metres • to permit a minimum front yard depth of 6.0 metres; whereas the by-law requires a minimum front yard depth of 7.5 metres The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to allow for the completion of the two-storey detached dwelling currently under construction. 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 Services Department expressing no comments on the application. Written comments were also received from residents of 624 Marksbury Road in objection to the application. Correspondence received from residents of 624 Marksbury Road indicated the City should have caught the error in the construction sooner; they are concerned with creating a building that is too large for the lot; and that the City should stop this type of construction now or more development like it will be built. Quinn Carrington, applicant, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. In response to questions from Committee Members, Quinn Carrington stated the building was twisted to fit square on the lot and the error in the location of the dwelling was pointed out by the surveyor. No stop work order has yet been issued for the property, however construction has been halted until the variance application is dealt with by the Committee of Adjustment. It was also noted that the 1St floor walls are up, and the 2nd floor construction has been halted. Due to the two-storey detached dwelling being well under construction; that the variances are minor in nature and that the four tests of the Planning Act, are met, Tom Copeland moved the following motion: Page 11 of 14 Ci/g DICKERING Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, April 18, 2018 7:00 pm Council Chambers Moved by Tom Copeland Seconded by Sean Wiley That application P/CA 32/18 by Q. Carrington, be Approved on the grounds that the requested variances are minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, subject to the following condition: 1. That these variances apply only to the two-storey detached dwelling, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plan (refer to Exhibit 2 contained in the Committee of Adjustment report, dated April 18, 2018). Carried Unanimously 7. P/CA 33/18 R. Gupta 130 Woodview Drive The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended: • to permit a minimum front yard setback of 5.3 metres, whereas the by-law requires a minimum front yard setback of 7.5 metres • to permit a maximum lot coverage of 36 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 for the construction of an addition to the existing single detached dwelling. 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 Services Department expressing no comments on the application. Written comments were also received from residents of 105 Woodview Drive in objection to the application. Correspondence received from residents of 105 Woodview Drive outlined that they are very concerned and upset with the continued development on the subject property; they do not believe the application should be granted as is because it does not conform to the City's Official Plan and Zoning By-law and will result in a significant negative impact to their property and neighbourhood. They also indicated that the requested variances will allow the construction of an addition that is not in keeping with the physical character of the neighbourhood and will potentially add greater safety concerns with regard to the flow of traffic around the corner on which the property is located. Page 12 of 14 GGa oii DICKERING Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, April 18, 2018 7:00 pm Council Chambers The requested variances will change the pattern of the front yard setbacks and the landscaped open space, as it will cover a significant portion of the front and side yard in a way that is not found in the surrounding neighbourhood. The proposed scale and proximity to the road, being on an already -problematic curve in the road, will cause increased blindness around the corner and additional safety concerns for both pedestrians and vehicles, and allowing these minor variances will have a significant negative impact on the surrounding neighbourhood. Riccardo Gallo, agent, was present to represent the application. Kailey Sutton of 626 Graceland Court and Christian Sutton of 105 Woodview Drive were present in objection to the application. Riccardo Gallo explained the 7.5 metre front yard depth in the 2016 Building Permit was mistaken for the flankage side yard depth of 4.5 metres and the maximum lot coverage is for the addition of the tower in the front yard and indoor pool in the rear yard. Kailey Sutton was present on behalf of the residents of 105 Woodview Drive and spoke to their comments previously received in objection to the application. Kailey Sutton indicated that the residents of 105 Woodview Drive are frustrated with the development of this property which has been going on for years; that the development should respect the existing community character; that most homes in the surrounding neighbourhood meet or exceed the minimum front yard depth of 7.5 metres; and that there are safety concerns for both pedestrians and vehicles as the proposed addition will create visibility issues. Christian Sutton stated he agrees with concerns raised by Kailey Sutton and included the structure is very imposing on the surrounding neighbourhood; and is concerned with the safety of children, cyclists, and pedestrians due to the proposed addition and the visibility issues it may create. In response to questions from Committee Members, Riccardo Gallo stated the size of the addition is approximately 1,279.74 square metres; the existing pool has been removed to accommodate the new indoor pool; there is a 3 car garage; construction has come to a halt until the variance application is dealt with by the Committee of Adjustment, he is unable to confirm the percentage of work already completed; and there is no sidewalk. Page 13 of 14 GGa oii DICKERING Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, April 18, 2018 7:00 pm Council Chambers Moved by Sean Wiley Seconded by Eric Newton That application P/CA 33/18 by R. Gupta, be Deferred to the next Committee of Adjustment meeting to allow the Committee Members to visit the subject property. Carried Unanimously (IV) Adjournment Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Tom Copeland That the 5th meeting of the 2018 Committee of Adjustment be adjourned at 8:16 pm and the next meeting of the Committee of Adjustment be held on Wednesday, May 9, 2018. Carried Unanimously Date Chair Assistant Secretary -Treasurer Page 14 of 14 Gtr �h DICKERING Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: P/CA 33/18 Date: April 18,.2018 From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP • Principal Planner, Development Review Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application P/CA 33/18 R. Gupta 130 Woodview Drive Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended: • to permit a minimum front yard setback of 5.3 metres, whereas the by-law requires a minimum front yard setback of 7.5 metres • to permit a maximum lot coverage of 36 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 for the construction of an addition to the existing single detached dwelling. Recommendation The City Development Department 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, subject to the following conditions: 1. That these variances apply only to the proposed addition, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plan (Exhibit 2). 2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by April 20, 2020, or this decision shall become null and void. Comment Official Plan and Zoning By-law Pickering Official Plan — "Urban Residential Areas — Low Density Areas" within the Rougemount Neighbourhood Zoning By-law 3036 — "R3" — Third Density Residential Zone Report P/CA 33/18 April 18, 2018 Page 2 Appropriateness of the Application Front Yard Setback Variance The intent of the zoning by-law provision requiring a minimum front yard setback is to provide for a consistent building setback to maintain the character of the surrounding area and to ensure a sufficient landscaped area is maintained between a dwelling and the street. The Zoning By-law requires a minimum front yard setback of 7.5 metres. The applicant has requested a reduction in the minimum front yard setback to 5.3 metres in order to accommodate an addition to the existing detached dwelling. The subject property is a corner lot with a unique pie -shape and curved front lot line. The entire east and south side of the property are located on the bend of Woodview Drive. The requested variance is required as a portion of the front facade of the proposed addition does not meet the setback requirements in the area of the property interpreted as the front yard. The front yard setback is measured from the closest section of the exterior wall of the dwelling to the front lot line. The proposed front yard setback will maintain an adequate buffer space between the dwelling and the street and will ensure that sufficient landscaped open space can be provided within the front yard, including adequate space to park multiple vehicles. The requested variance will not result in a negative visual impact on the streetscape, as only a small section of the dwelling and proposed addition will not comply with the required setback. Additionally, the front yard setback relief sought is appropriate considering the unique shape of the property. The requested variance is minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land and maintains the intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law. Maximum Lot Coverage Variance The intent of the maximum lot coverage provision is to ensure that the size, scale, and massing of a dwelling and accessory buildings is appropriate for the lot size and ensure an adequate amount of outdoor amenity area remains uncovered by buildings. The Zoning By-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent. The applicant has requested a variance to increase the maximum lot coverage to 36 percent in order to account for both the existing dwelling and the construction of a new addition. The proposed addition will maintain the required setbacks from the rear and side lot lines which will minimize any visual impacts on abutting property owners. The size and scale of the proposed dwelling is appropriate for the size of the subject property, which is a large corner lot. Additionally, the requested increase in lot coverage is marginal in nature and will maintain a sufficient amount of outdoor amenity space left uncovered by buildings. The requested variance is minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land and maintains the purpose and intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law. Report P/CA 33/18 April 18, 2018 Page 3 Input From Other Sources Engineering Services Residents of 105 Woodview Drive Date of report: April 11, 2018 Comments prepared by: Cody Planner I CM:DW:jc J:1Documents\DevelopmentlD-3700)@0181PCA 33-18lReport\PCA 33-18 Reporldoc Attachments • no comments on the application • very concerned and upset with the continued development on the subject property • do not believe the application should be granted as is, because it does not conform to the City of Pickering's Official Plan and Zoning By-law 3036 and will result in a significant negative impact to our property and neighbourhood • the requested variances will allow the construction of an addition that is not in keeping with the physical character of the neighbourhood and will potentially add greater safety concerns with regard to the flow of traffic around the corner on which the property is located • the requested variances will change the pattern of the front yard setbacks and the landscaped open space, as it will cover a significant portion of the front and side yard in a way that is not found in the surrounding neighbourhood • the proposed scale and proximity to the road, being on an already -problematic curve in the road, will cause increased blindness around the corner and so additional safety concerns for both pedestrians and vehicles • believe allowing the minor variances will have a significant negative impact on the surrounding neighbourhood Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner, Development Review Exhibit 1 0 a) C Valley Ridge Crescent 0 I Hogarth Street Sweetbriar Court WEN a) G Q 0 0 6-5 .n N 0 Lawson Street Forestview Drive Twyn Rivers Drive Subject Lands Howell Crescent m 0 Littleford Street > 0 0 0 Rtchctreet er 0 f city 4 Location Map File: P/CA 33/18 PICKERING City Development Department Applicant: R. Gupta Property Description: Lot 12, Plan 434 (130 Woodview Drive) Date: Mar. 28, 2018 • he orporaoono a ty o ice duce•(npart) u.erxense.om a •nrter,a norensuye•anra•e.maces . M rights reserved,P Her Majesty fhe queen n In Right of Canada, Oepadmert of Habra' Resources.M MHz ® Teranet Enterprises Inc. and Its supplr ISatl tights reserved.;® MWclpal Property Assessmert Corponc(orationand its supplers a® dgtts reserved SCALE: 1:5,000 THIS IS HOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. Exhibit 2 STUCCO GMAC{ F3 PART 11 I _ _.•.. —I PLAN 1408-15652 Fc 0200 I r r;0.165 r0.46 0.55 0.55E000 14 PIN6.101-00.50 (2q LOT 11 GMUGE 11<N,3't3'GU'C FLAITI CS"4? (11:'Os,Etj 41 A7 �v- 4.44s REGITERED 3 PLAN P� I LOT 1.3 T LOT 12j N� Ga.ie �;.. FM' 2001-0652 2 (L/) -IN :6J0/-005/ (: 0.2211/7 SHED 02711!-, 3.16 - Nft EBF DGS,. POOL 41.42 1626 __ Potoo 9s 4 =4 007., I (1(000)P.FA.. FFui12200 '. 011572 $14000? 22.74 in HEW GUtDUMAGO W1 • FE4 STOREY To permit a maximum lot coverage of 36 percent 5.41 ; 2ri 402 0=-r CAR I „C,iliRGE- 212 'SI 41. -10057,400F.1.136610170 E.G3't EArn+,nO taazcuwsu+uznr.+ Gmlr'ra- -227 -11 \ \/ \0420�% pC') ie 1n - i — (o5 14 J o• (1,,P'b fG w c• To permit a minimum front yard setback of 5.3 metres cdy 4 PICKERING City Development Department Submitted Plan File No: P/CA 33/18 Applicant: R. Gupta Property Description: Lot 12, Plan 434 (130 Woodview Drive) FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. DATE: Mar. 28, 2018 DICKERING c4 Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Numbers: P/CA 34/18 & P/CA 35/18 Date: May 9, 2018 From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner, Development Review Subject: Committee of Adjustment Applications P/CA 34/18 & P/CA 35/18 E. Whitney 1284 Commerce Street Application P/CA 34/18 The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-law 7610/18: • to permit a minimum lot frontage of 9.1 metres; whereas the by-law requires a minimum lot frontage of 15.0 metres • to permit a minimum lot area of 407 square metres; whereas the by-law requires minimum lot area of 460 square metres • to permit a minimum side yard setback of 1.2 metres on one side and 0.6 of a metre on the other; whereas the by-law requires minimum side yard setback of 1.5 metres • to permit a maximum height of 11.0 metres; whereas the by-law requires maximum building height of 9.0 metres • to permit a maximum lot coverage of 40 percent, whereas the by-law requires maximum lot coverage of 33 percent Application P/CA 35/18 The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-law 7610/18: • to permit a minimum lot frontage of 9.1 metres; whereas the by-law requires a minimum lot frontage of 15.0 metres • to permit a minimum lot area of 407 square metres; whereas the by-law requires minimum lot area of 460 square metres • to permit a minimum side yard setback of 1.2 metres on one side and 0.6 of a metre on the other; whereas the by-law requires minimum side yard setback of 1.5 metres • to permit a maximum height of 10.0 metres; whereas the by-law requires maximum building height of 9.0 metres • to permit a maximum lot coverage of 45 percent, whereas the by-law requires maximum lot coverage of 33 percent The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to facilitate Land Severance Application LD 057/18. Report P/CA 34/18 & P/CA 35/18 May 9, 2018 Recommendation P/CA 34/18 & P/CA 35/18 Page 2 The City Development Department recommends that Minor Variance Applications P/CA 34/18 and P/CA 35/18 be Tabled to allow for the applicant to provide additional details such as a planning rationale brief, a building siting plan, and conceptual elevations. Background In November 2016, City Council adopted Resolution 236/16 to commence a community engagement process to establish guidelines to encourage developers and builders to be mindful of established community character. Through community consultation, maximum building height was identified as one of the key criteria in ensuring compatibility of replacement housing in established neighbourhoods. In 2017, the City initiated Zoning By-law Amendment 7610/18, implementing a 9.0 metre height limit, which was passed by Council on March 12, 2018 and is now in force and in effect. The subject property is zoned "R4' under Zoning By-law 2511. To determine whether the proposed variances are appropriate for the subject property and would not negatively impact the surrounding properties, staff requests that the applicant submit a planning rationale brief, a building siting plan, and conceptual elevations. The planning rationale should address whether the requested variances, when considered as a whole, are appropriate and desirable for the development of the land and maintain the purpose and intent of the City's Official Plan and Zoning By-law. Input From Other Sources Engineering Services • no comments on the application Area Residents • no comments received to date Date of report: May 2, 2018 Comments prepared by: /4,1/ Amy Emm, MCIP, RPP Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Planner 11 AE: DW:jc Principal Planner, Development Review J 31m1,291IIIPC:h39.Irt6 PGA 35-19Viapaa,Pcl, 31-19 d 36.19 RopuI Tabpxlslrm Attachments Exhibit 1 c 0 an 2 Haller Avenue L > rn 0 Old Orchard Avenue 1111.11 - p IIIIIonIIII -I. 01I Browning Avenue a / 'I���� �d�'�111111omm _, Ilona Park Road _- MINIM �� � 11111 e14 11111:11 1 1 111 1 y iew et erpoint ree Frenchman's Bay 0 c — m Subject 13 Lands •001 • Naroch Boulevard I 1 1 Luna Court " \ Foxglove Avenue 0 (13 0 0 o. Commerce S -J Wharf Street 0 0 reet Broadview Street Annland Street 1111111.11 4 Location Map File: P/CA 34/18 & P/CA 35/18 O PICKERING City Development Department Applicant: E. Whitney Property Description: Plan 65, Part of Lot 4 and 5, Block B (1284 Commerce Street) Date: Apr. 30, 2018 O The Corporation of the Cdy of Pickering Produced( In part) under license from: O ()teens Pnrter, Organo hon stry of Nahrai Resources. All rights reserved.) Her Majesty the Queen In Right of Canada, Depadrnert of Natural Resources. Al rigtts reserved.; CTeranet Enterprises Inc. and Is suppliers all rights reserved.;® Muntclpel Property Assessrnert Corporation and its stpp)ors al dgtts reserved.; SCALE. I.Jr000 THIS IS NOT APIAN OF SURVEY. Exhibit 2 L:\Planning\Corel\Planning \Apps \PCA\2018 to a REGISTERED ,( PLAN I M-115 LO 1115 LOT 1116 1 oT 1917 to permit a permit maximum lot—_________________________________"_r coverage of PIN 26320-0257(LT) I PW 26320-0255(LT) 1 PW 26320-0252M N.E ANGLE S.T.E AS 1N INST. No. LTC2146 0r5E BF 0.4 BF } 5 4..Q�.P1--- .70,H'S°-• • • -O.,ON --.4 a.- ._m �m - 65 S.TE ASW INST. No. LTC2190 T .23W = •• 0.21N-1 g -IL 1f" '�' u'I maximum lot coverage of J -J 40 percent 518(MNM)1-.- 10.36 F. 1821 T&Sat) m • •11� 9.14 ' SHED tOhSat)"'�'Y zz ' SHm 114 ° 21-87(P)oi) 45 percent .64 x1.25 ' $o PRCFCSED 'EO €D LOT. (P7&5<t) XA LOT1 permit ermit a B.L.00K PLAN E 40R-29227 to permit a maximum maximum height of 11.0 ,-- PIN 26320-0296(LT)' PW 26330.- 0297(LT) m I ' , N j height of 10.0 metres r_ 1`+gym -, ...__)—_.qt- PIN 26320-0296(LT)-, >,: . metres m • I L l Nz1 '' Ia to permit a minimum side ub • , F,..,..., BALCONY o to permit a minimum side p yard setback of 1.2 metres m 6 7..... yard setback of 1.2 metres on one metre side and 0.6 of on the other a - 4 REGIS' , • 9.70 LOT 5 'LAN 1 LOT 02 -.-PIN 28320-0299(Ln on one side and 0.6 of a metre on the other ay Fl i III ti '.4 , �I - n 4 04 • • Na1286 ~2.33 E a p 1 0. N 1 STOREY FRAME to permit a T. I, N , m� i Na tt88A ,-2.. 1 to permit a N • • ; 5T0�1' ALUMINIUM . ¢ RICK minimum lot minimum lot area of 407 , 'I -). o n w. -- $ FRAME - m • 1=248-4. 5 -!GG PORCH area of 407 square metres square metres I � 11.85 1.9• • T. PORCH 4°1 ` v- to permit a to permit a 1-_ 37.79 (P1@M<ao) H m V c w rm. -..-1 19.1J(0,8S<t) minimum lot ,0.36 1329 (01/44 •) 123.25 L �f _ J 1_. -L- minimum lot - -- 6'IB(MM� , SIB B S8(1005 , N70'35257 frontage of 9.1 '//�` / ` frontage of 9.1 metres (1.,.,) p035COMMERCE STREET a»w SE ANGLE SW. T ANGLE 0,,,9N OT 5 LOT 5 (I T•i REGISTERED ft.P 65 63REG 3( ?..�•' �]7) py. 65 metres _ Al 26320-0353(LT) PIN 26320-0353(L'f) Submitted Plan C4 4 File No: P/CA 34/18 and P/CA 35/18 PICKERING Applicant: E. Whitney - Property Description: Plan 65, Part of Lot 4 & 5, Block B City Development (1284 Commerce Street) Department FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. DATE: Apr. 3, 2018 L:\Planning\Corel\Planning \Apps \PCA\2018 Cts �f DICKERING Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: P/CA 36/18 Date: May 9, 2018 From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner, Development Review Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application P/CA 36/18 M. A. Asgary 681 Front Road Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-law 7610/18 to permit a maximum height of 12.1 metres, whereas the by-law requires a maximum building height of 9.0 metres. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit to construct a detached dwelling. Recommendation The City Development Department considers a maximum height of 12.1 metres to be a major variance that is not desirable for the appropriate development of the land and is not in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, and therefore recommends Refusal of the proposed variance. Background Community Character and By-law 7610/18 In November 2016, City Council adopted Resolution 236/16 to commence a community engagement process to establish guidelines to encourage developers and builders to be mindful of established community character. Through community consultation, maximum building height was identified as one of the key criteria in ensuring compatibility of replacement housing in established neighbourhoods. In 2017, the City initiated a Zoning By-law Amendment to add a height limit of 9.0 metres for lands zoned "R3" and "R4" within Zoning By-law 2511. City initiated By-law 7610/18, implementing the 9.0 metre height limit, was passed by Council on March 12, 2018 and now is in force. The area covered by By-law 7610/18 includes most residential lands within the Bay Ridges Neighbourhood. Although many properties in Bay Ridges have been redeveloped, the area retains many dwellings dating back to the 1970's and before. By-law 7610/18 is a measure to help ensure that replacement housing, in areas that were not subject to a maximum building height, is compatible with the predominant surrounding built form. Report P/CA 36/18 May 9, 2018 Page 2 The City will initiate an Infill and Replacement Housing in the Established Neighbourhoods Study this year to examine various components of community character, including building height. The 9.0 metre height limit established in By-law 7610/18 may be re-examined through this Study. Subject Lands The applicant initially submitted a Minor Variance Application on September 27, 2017 requesting reduced side yards and increased lot coverage for a detached dwelling 12.0 metres in height. After discussions with planning staff regarding the likelihood of staff supporting the requested variances, the applicant requested the application be withdrawn. Notices were not sent out and the application was not heard by the Committee of Adjustment. On March 21, 2018, the applicant submitted a Building Permit Application to construct a detached dwelling. The submitted drawings still included a number of zoning non-compliance issues, now with the added non-compliance of a 12.1 metre proposed height; whereas the by- law now requires a maximum height of 9.0 metres. The applicant has since revised the proposal to bring the proposed dwelling, with the exception of the building height, into conformity with the zoning by-law. The applicant is still seeking relief from the by-law to permit a maximum building height of 12.1 metres. Comment Official Plan and Zoning By-law Pickering Official Plan — "Urban Residential — Low Density Areas" within the Bay Ridges Neighbourhood. Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-law 7610/18 — "R4". Appropriateness of the Application Maximum Height Variance The intent of the maximum building height is to minimize the visual impact of the main building on abutting properties and on the streetscape and to ensure that other abutting properties are not significantly obstructed by the proposed main building. The general intent of performance standards in a zoning by-law is to regulate development in order to ensure compatibility with the pattern of development in the area and to maintain the character of the neighbourhood. The Pickering Official Plan contains policies pertaining to protecting and enhancing the character of established neighbourhoods by considering such matters as height, yard setbacks, lot coverage, access to sunlight and the context of the existing adjacent buildings. City Initiated By-law 7610/18, which added the height limit of 9.0 metres to lands Zoned "R4" in Zoning By-law 2511, came into effect to ensure new dwellings are compatible with the surrounding built form of the established neighbourhoods. The applicant has requested a variance to increase the maximum building height from 9.0 metres to 12.1 metres. Report P/CA 36/18 May 9, 2018 Page 3 The applicant has requested this variance in order to construct a new three storey detached dwelling with rooftop amenity space. The increased height is requested to accommodate a partial third storey and a roof -top patio. Building heights in the immediate area along Front Road vary in height with most dwellings having between 1 and 2 storeys and heights that appear to range between less than 6.0 metres and 10.0 metres. Two dwellings on the west side of Front Road north of Commerce Street have building heights of 12.0 metres and 11.3 metres; both of which obtained building permits prior to By-law 7610/18 coming into effect. Existing lots along Front Road generally fall below the minimum lot size and frontage requirements of the "R4" zone. The subject property (with a lot area of 672 square metres) is an exception as the property is of a sufficient size to permit a reasonably sized dwelling that complies with the zoning by-law. Although the proposed dwelling is set well back from the road, the proposed increased height will increase the visual impact of the proposed dwelling on the streetscape. A maximum building height of 12.1 metres will result in a development out of scale with adjacent buildings along Front Road. Staff are of the opinion that the requested variance is a major variance that is not desirable for the appropriate development of the land and is not in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law and therefore recommends Refusal of the proposed variance. Input From Other Sources Engineering Services • no comments on the application Owner of 1281 & 1279 Commerce Street • supportive of the application • notes that existing buildings in the area are already built at or about 12.0 metres • considers 12.0 metres to be appropriate for the area Date of report: May 2, 2018 Comments prepared by: Rory McNeil Planner I RM:DW:bs /gri Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner, Development Review J:1Documents\Development\D-3700\2018\PCA 36-18 M.A. Asgary\Report\PCA 36-18 Report.doc Attachments Exhibit 1 fn m co N 0 LL Browning Avenue 0 Frenchman's Bay Watefpoint reet >, N 03 O• 0 0 0 d Orchard Avenue I onica P d Ilona Park Road -ot Subject Lands Commerce Street 0 Luna Court Foxglove Avenue TT 0 0 0 0 0 Wharf Street Broadview Street Annland Street C4 Location Map File: P/CA 36/18 oIJ PICKERI NG City Development Department Applicant: M. A. Asgary Property Description: North Part of Lot.5, Block E, Plan 65 (681 Front Road) Date: Air. 25, 2018 orpora ono Ryo • c o •to e• (m part u •er cense ,oro:. a • ens •n er ..no s nsbye aatua •e use All rights reserved. HerMajesty the Queen In Right of Canada. Depadme rP of Natural Resources. Al rights resenea; O Tera net Enterprises Inc. and Its suppl"ersall rights reserved.:O Municipal Property Assessmert Corporation and its suppbore al debts resenea.; SCALE: 1:5,000 THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. Exhibit 2 -0 at C6c[ O PaOa,s60116rAW NQWALI N4s'40'O0"F 15.30 N55.49b,„ 23,6a To permit a maximum building height of 12.1 metres NEV.,' ASP --a -- Proposed 3 Storey 16.14 (12.1 m) Dwelling IV54-'43' 00"E 45.03 Cy 4 Submitted Plan File No: P/CA 36/18 PICKERING City Development Department Applicant: M. A. Asgary Property Description: North Part of Lot 5, Block E, Plan 65 (681 Front Road) FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN AREAVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. DATE: Apr. 25, 2018 L:\Planning\Corel\Planning\Apps\PCA \2018 Exhibit 3 West Elevation PROPCSED N VHT3l SfM=NE amnio cszuN OA=17Pcnuncw r o. BASEMENT SLAB m.76 View from Front Road 12.1m To permit a maximum building height of 12.1 metres c4,/ PICKERING City Development Department Submitted Plan File No: P/CA 36/18 Applicant: M. A. Asgary Property Description: North Part of Lot 5, Block E, Plan 65 (681 Front Road) FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. DATE: Apr. 25, 2018 L:\Planning\Corel\Pia nningVApps\PCA\2018 Exhibit 4 L:\Planning\Corel\P la nn i ng\Apps\PCA\2018 South Elevation emOpV�.UImAl9PC VE0. ----`- MUM] mW. UM ^ .T{mIGMC11PC L 3a MAK HEIGHT .7,100`= �.T �. _ c, CM _ . _== • T.O. THIRDFLOOR ..•: " •' '*-. '`:: '': . .•,•, .-:..;.: �. •' ' .. .. .... . am�eiaeu:urz m 4 t( .<° ^r altE. T O SECOND FLOOR 4., ':::'• .. J. R.. • wm.c.ao.mccen msamwrtn � ..l w ' :.. :.: ,• • - =a .. ..>.� ® ME. :xcnuma '3. 7. .ti T.O. MAIN FLOOR.2w I _ •' _, I J I` I 13221 i` .....1.........0111111.11111111111.11111111111111111111111 .r ®."_ ••:. ... EST. GR.... _ ..-.__<..--�gL�tmmmAml-- �.. -�.v-. ..-. _.._...._ _. ...._._.— _. _._.._...-.__.__..__.._..._.-.-._..._..--.•,-_._......_.___._....___ .__....._.. ��..r.....__�_._._�....�...—........ � - __. T.O. BASEMENT SLABj -L �r J •' ` t 1--,..i J SPATIAL SEPARATION '4I r macmmmaNDL MVO. rt, L'''"7"''''''Ai6R: I9mffB tmC Art. rt0 199: tR s ,L—..,L'''"7 Submitted Plan city 4 File No: P/CA 36/18 PICKERING Applicant: M. A. Asgary Property Description: North Part of Lot 5, Block E, Plan 65 City Development (681 Front Road) Department FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. DATE: Apr. 25, 2018 L:\Planning\Corel\P la nn i ng\Apps\PCA\2018 1 Exhibit 5 East Elevation MAX. HEIGHT PROM= STUCCO .214333,1 341941-..N.LTAIr 157 "MEMO =LOUR 3,3 KR offoarzwancArva 3.3.5SRUL.G.C..1#1 Mean. V110,3C...110.49. FAA" TO larL 113 T.O._THIB.0 FLOOR .1 1 ci 111;6'. IV:i', '''14.:4 A.. i T ' :::::: ', " " ... ' ' ' roceOZED.71033v0.ES PEA TATIVI 31,13An =DR 333 TR °Meal VEORC,TKIK 3.5F013‘.34.0ACTVIER. REFER TO1HIC.00 SZN3VILE FCR ONENSCRII YTOONS Ha COLOUR 3.2 CwhlOrt .E.OFIC3.3,33Z T.O. SECOND FLOOR ' . 3,004131311 foul TO CCM S..,,ECOM fOR 3.3ACC31311CCOU GOWER:. VEC,ICATIC.C. FetR,O1CRE11 A3.1,1031"..N.L 3.3.0 • AT f.Tra MD =LOMAS KR tInIf9r1V21:311C+TIOIZ MAIN FLOOR 71).84 Nag 0 Ns\\ Hu, 1..P r• : J.—J., . --1.--.1 , '.,-..,-......,—, —1-..-...L. . ..H._ r , n • T.O. BASEMENT SUB 75.76 4... ' —.— h ........t ' —L. —I r.=r-r-7;. L J. I I !V N I L cezy,/ PICKERING City Development Department Submitted Plan File No: P/CA 36/18 Applicant: M. A. Asgary Property Description: North Part of Lot 5, Block E, Plan 65 (681 Front Road) FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. DATE: Apr. 25, 2018 LAPlanning\CorellPlanning\Apps\PCA\2018 Gtr DICKERING Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Numbers: P/CA 38/18 & P/CA 39/18 Date: May 9, 2018 From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner, Development Review Subject: Committee of Adjustment Applications P/CA 38/18 & P/CA 39/18 Pinnacle Custom Homes 540 Oakwood Drive Applications P/CA 38/18 (Proposed Severed Lot) The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended: • to permit a minimum south side yard setback of 0.9 metres, whereas the by-law requires a minimum side yard setback of 1.5 metres P/CA 39/18 (Proposed Retained Lot) The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended: • to permit a minimum north side yard setback of 0.9 metres, whereas the by-law requires a minimum side yard setback of 1.5 metres The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to facilitate a single detached dwelling on each of the two proposed lots associated with the Region of Durham Land Division Application LD 006/18. Recommendations (P/CA 38/18 & P/CA 39/18) The City Development Department 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, subject to the following conditions: 1. That these variances apply only to the single detached dwellings proposed on the severed and the retained lot, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plan (Exhibit 2). 2. That the applicant obtain building permits for the proposed construction by May 10, 2021, or this decision shall become null and void. Report P/CA 38/18 & P/CA 39/18 May 9, 2018 Page 2 Additional Information On January 15, 2018, the Regional Municipality of Durham Land Division Committee conditionally approved Land Division Application LD 006/18 which considered the creation of a new lot on the subject property. The applicant will be required to fulfill the conditions of approval prior to the Land Division being finalized and the new lot being legally created. Comment Official Plan and Zoning By-law Pickering Official Plan — "Urban Residential Areas — Low Density Areas" within the Rosebank Neighbourhood Zoning By-law 2511 — "R4"- Residential Fourth Density Zone Appropriateness of the Applications North and South Side Yard Setback Variances The intent of a minimum side yard setback requirement is to provide an appropriate separation between structures on abutting properties, provide sufficient space to accommodate grading, drainage and residential services and to maintain the character of the surrounding neighbourhood. The zoning by-law requires a minimum side yard setback of 1.5 metres on one side and 2.4 metres on the other side, however where a garage or carport is erected as a part of the dwelling, a minimum side yard setback of 1.5 metres is required on both sides. The applicant has requested a reduction in the north side yard setback from 1.5 metres to 0.9 metres to facilitate a future dwelling on the retained lot and a reduction of the south side yard setback from 1.5 metres to 0.9 metres to facilitate a future dwelling on the severed lot. Both future dwellings are proposed to have an attached garage. The north and south side yard setback proposed to be reduced on the retained and severed lots, respectively, will directly abut one another. The proposed reduction of the interior side yard setbacks will provide an appropriate separation between the future dwellings and the mutual property line to accommodate pedestrian access, grading, drainage, and residential utility services. The reduced side yards of 0.9 metres will only apply to a small section of the proposed dwellings. More significant side yard setbacks will be provided for majority of the dwellings on the retained and severed lots. This significant setback will create a courtyard between the porte cochere (covered entranceway for vehicles and pedestrians) at the front of the dwelling and the attached garage at the rear of the dwelling, as indicated on Exhibit 2. These courtyards will provide a substantial amount of separation between the proposed dwellings on the abutting lots. Report P/CA 38/18 & P/CA 39/18 May 9, 2018 Page 3 The proposed side yard setbacks of 0.9 metres will be located within the interior side yard of both the severed and retained lot. Therefore, the reduced setbacks will not result in a negative visual impact on the abutting properties immediately north or immediately south of the subject lands. The proposed dwellings will maintain the required side yard setback 1.5 metres within the exterior side yards and will maintain all other requirements of the zoning by-law, including building height, lot coverage, front yard setback, and rear yard setback. Therefore, the proposed dwellings will maintain the character of the surrounding neighbourhood. The requested variances are minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land and maintain the general intent of the Zoning By-law and the Official Plan. Input From Other Sources Engineering Services Date of report: May 3, 2018 Comments prepared by: Cody Planner I CM:DW:bs • no comments on the application Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner, Development Review J:1DocumentslDevelopmentlD-370012018\PCA 38-18 to PCA 39-18 Pinnacle Custom HomesV2eport1.PCA 38-18 to PCA 39-18 Repod.doc Attachments Exhibit 1 N\gr,Na`1 �0 1 0 0 c 0 -J m )( 0 Frontier = ri co C U Toynevale Road c r 0 c Drive Subject Lands Ili 0 N 0 'O 0 U 0 0 0 Dahlia Crescent j a) /0 City of Toronto 0 Rosebank Ro Granite Coon Gillmoss Road Cit, Location Map File: P/CA 38/18 & P/CA 39/18 oI PICKERING City Development Department Applicant: Pinnacle Custom Homes Property Description: Part of Lot 61, Plan 350 (540 Oakwood Drive) Date: Apr. 24, 2018 The Corporation of the City of PKkenng Produced On pan) under license from:® Omens Porter, Crtano ?rorty of Natural Resources. mats reserved.; All rghls reserved.0 Her Rlalesty the Queen In Right of Canada, Dep artmert of Natural Resources. Al m In, HTerangt Enterprises Inand Its suppPers all rights reserved.; 0 MunldpaI Properly Assessmert Corporation and Its suppters al rights reserved.; t000 SCALE,.J, THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. I Exhibit 2 L:\Planning\Corel\Pla n ni ng\Ap ps\PCA\2018 P/CA 38/18 To permit a minimum south side yard setback of 0.9 metres I— II II 491.13 = II sozf 1.4 II II N I%. LIIIIIc��i�:1Yr7 i __� Severed Lot I II II Ila I b _ cli cs Retained Lot II ,s II 11 ii II o 49.13 .40'1nwi�u� sov _-c----- I 11 � it i ( , //: M 1 $ ii I, I,N ` z li P/CA 39/18 -# "1 1 E To permit a minimum 'el\north N side yard setback of 0.9 metres �` ` Submitted Plan Citg 4 File No: P/CA 38/18 & P/CA 39/18 PICKERING Applicant: Pinnacle Custom Homes Property Description: Part of Lot 61, Plan 350 City Development (540 Oakwood Drive) Department FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. DATE: Apr. 24, 2018 L:\Planning\Corel\Pla n ni ng\Ap ps\PCA\2018