Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAugust 12, 2020c� o� DICKERING Pr¢s¢nt Tom Copeland —Vice -Chair David Johnson —Chair Eric Newton Denise Rundle Sean Wily Also Present Deborah Wylie, Secretary -Treasurer Samantha O'Brien, Assistant Secretary -Treasurer Tanjot Bal, Planner II Isabel Lima. Planner I Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, August 12, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting Due to minor technical difficulties, the Chair was only able to join the meeting through visual connection, thereby instructing the Vice -Chair to commence the meeting and moderate the first application. 1. Disclosure of Interest No disclosures of interest were noted. 2. Adoption of Agenda Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Denise Rundle That the agentla for the Wednesday, August 12, 2020 meeting be adopted. Carried 3. Adoption of Minutes Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Denise Rundle That the minutes of the 5th meeting of the Committee of Atljustment held Wednesday, July 8, 2020 be adopted. Carried Page 1 of 17 c� �� f�1CKERING 4. Reports 4.1 P/CA 35/20 L Kraljevic 7472 Hichbush Trait Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, August 12, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended, to permit: • a maximum lot coverage of 41.5 percent, whereas the By-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent; • a covered plafform (dacK) not exceeding 2.4 metres in height above grade, whereas the By-law requires uncovered steps and platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.5 metres into any required front or rear yard and not more than O.5 metres into any required side yard. The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit for a detached dwelling. The Secretary -Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to a condition. Written comments were received from the City's Building Services Section expressing no concerns with the application. Written comments were received from the City's Engineering Services Department expressing the need to ensure additional percentage of lot coverage does not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lot. Consideration for rain harvesting or other LID measures should ba made if increasing the imperviousness of the lot surface. This will need to ba considered and shown on the plans at the Building Permit stage. Written comments were received from the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) indicating the subject site is regulated by TRCA with respect to the slope feature associated with the Petticoat Creek Ravine located at the rear of the subject property (west). As part of review of an associated severance application, TRCA verified that the proposed new dwelling would be adequately setback from the ravine corridor. TRCA staff have no objections to the proposal in principle and support the requested variances. TRCA staff received an Ontario Regulation '166/06 Parm it Application on March 6, 2020 to facilitate the construction of a detached dwelling. Tha drawings circulated to TRCA as part of this minor variance application era consistent with the plans received with the TRCA permit application (CFN 62979). Page 2 of 17 o� f�1CKERING 4.2 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, August 12, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting Luka Kraljevic, 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 a Committee Member, Luka Kra ljevic stated acknowledgement of the City's Engineering Services concerns that are required to be addressed at the Building Permit stage. Additionally, Luka Kraljevic noted drainage is intended to ba directed towards the ravine at the rear of both properties. After consideration of the City Development Department's Report, reviewing the comments from the City's Engineering Services, approval from the TRCA, and the application appearing to meet the four tests of the P/anning Act, Sean Wiley moved the following motion: Moved by Sean Wiley Seconded by Denise Rundle That application P/CA 35/20 by L. Kraljevic, 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 proposed detached dwelling, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3 & 4 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment dated August 12, 2020). Carried The Chair was able to reconnect to the meeting both auditory and visually and was able to moderate the remainder of the meeting, thanking the Committee for their extra assistance and apologizing for the technical difficulty. P/CA 36/20 M. & M. Bo: Trail The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended, to permit: • a minimum north side yard of 1.45 metres and a minimum south side yard of 1 .2 metres, whereas the By-law states where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling, the minimum required side yard shall be 1.5 metres; • a maximum lot coverage of 41.5 percent, whereas the By-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent; • a covered platform (deck) not exceeding 2.4 metres in height above grade, whereas the By-law requires uncovered steps and platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.5 metras into any required front or rear yard and not more than 0.5 metres into any required side yard. Page 3 of 17 -" o p� Committee of Adjustment I�ICKERI NG Meeting Minutes Wednesday, August 12, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit for a detached dwelling. The Secretary -Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to a condition. Written comments were received from the City's Building Services Section expressing no concerns with the application. Written comments were received from the City's Engineering Services Department expressing the need to ensure additional percentage of lot coverage does not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lot. Consideration for rain harvesting or other LID measures should be made if increasing the imperviousness of the lot surtace. This will need to be considered and shown on the plans at the Building Permit stage. Written comments were received from the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) indicating the subject site is regulated by TRCA with respect to the slope feature associated with the Petticoat Creek Ravine located at the rear of the subject property (west). As part of a review of an associated severance application, TRCA verified that the proposed new dwelling would be adequately setback from the ravine corridor. TRCA staff have no objections to the proposal in principle and support the requested variances. TRCA staff received.an Ontario Regulation 166/06 Permit Application on March 6, 2020 to facilitate the construction of a detached dwelling. The drawings circulated to TRCA as part of this minor variance application are consistent with the plans received with the TRCA permit application (CFN 62980). Josip Bosnjak, representing the applicant, and Luka Kraljevic, agent, were 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, Josip Bosnjak sated his acknowledgment of the City's Engineering Services concerns that are required to be addressed at the Building Parm it stage and is willing to worK with staff to have it rectified. After hearing the comments from the applicant regarding Engineering Service's concerns to be addressed at the Building Permit stage, the support received from the TRCA and the application appearing to meet the four tests of the P/arming Act, as documented and noted by the City Development Department, Sean Wiley moved the following motion: Page 4 of 17 -/,,, o� Committee of Adjustment P1CKE R1 NG Meeting Minutes Wednesday, August 12, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting Moved by Sean Wiley Seconded by Eric Newton That application P/CA 36/20 by M. 8� M. Bosnjak, 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 proposed detached dwelling, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3 & 4 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment dated August 12, 2020). Carried Unanimously 4.3 P/CA 37/20 C. Malvankar & S. Tomer 938 Wingarden Crescent The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 4873/96, to permit a covered platform (deck) not projecting more than 2.9 metres into the required rear yard, whereas the By-law permits uncovered steps and platforms not exceeding 1 .O metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 1 .5 metres into any required front or rear yard and not more than 0.6 metres into any required side yard. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit for a covered deck. The Secretary -Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to a condition. Written comments were received from the City's Building Services Section expressing no concerns with the application. Written comments were received from the City's Engineering Services Department expressing no comments on the application. Chandan Malvankar, applicant, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. After reviewing the application it appears to meet the four fasts of the P/arming Act, Eric Newton moved the following motion: Page 5 of 17 /;•f„ o� Committee of Adjustment I' 1 C K E4 R 1 N G Meeting Minutes Wednesday, August 12, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Tom Copeland That application P/CA 37/20 by C. Malvankar & S. Tomer, 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 proposed covered deck, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3 & 4 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment dated August 12, 2020). Carried Unanimously 4.4 P/CA 38/20 J. Flora 792 Eyer Drives The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2517, as amended by By-law 7610/18, to permit a minimum lot frontage of 6.0 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum lot frontage of 18.0 metres. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit for a detached dwelling. The Secretary -Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending refusal. Written comments were received from the City's Building Services Section expressing no comments on the application. Written comments were received from the City's Engineering Services Department expressing they do not support the application due to the narrowness of the driveway. Written comments were received from the Region of Durham Works Department expressing no objections to the application. Written comments were received from the Ministry of Transportation (MTO) expressing no objections or comments and a MTO clearance is not required. Written comments were received from Metolinx indicating the subject site is within 300 metres of Metrolinx's Kingston subdivision, which carries Lakeshore East GO Train service. Matrolinx indicated no objections to the application. Page 6 of 17 �� o� � Committee of Adjustment PICKERI NG Meeting Minutes Wednesday, August 12, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting The Owner shall provide confirmation to Metrolinx that a warning clause is inserted in all development agreements, offers to purchase and agreements of Purchase and Sale or Lease of each dwelling unit within 300 metres of the railway right-of-way: CN Rail was circulated the Notice of Application and to date the City has not received any comments in return. Written comments were received from the owners of 789 Eyer Drive in objection to the application. Floyd Heath, agent, was present to represent the application. Erik Retr of Eyer Drive was present to receive additional information on the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Floyd Heath spoke in support of the application describing the history of the property, outlining the application mei the four tests of the P/anning Act and that City staff advised the property owners of the subject site to attempt to acquire land from the adjacent church. Attempts to acquire land from the church were unsuccessful. Erik Retz requested atlditional information and clarification regarding the interpretation of the site plan as it pertains to the lot frontage and side yard setback requirements, which City staff spoke to. Erik Retz also questioned if this application would create utility servicing and drainage concerns. In response to the questions raised by Erik Retz, Tanjot Bal, Planner II, advised the applicant has been working with the Region of Durham to receive approval for sanitary services and water connections where this will be evaluated more closely at the building permit stage. In response to questions raised by Committee Members, Floyd Heath advised the applicant did not do a full due diligence review on the property prior to purchasing from the City of Pickering and it is his belief that the property is legal non -conforming. When asked by the Chair for further clarification on the history of the property and interpretation pf the by-law regarding this, Tanjot Bal, Planner II advised that Floyd Heath was referring the Section 6.2 of Zoning By-law 2511, where the provision applies to lots that were created before By-law 2511 was in effect. Since By-law 2511 came into effect in the 1960s, and this lot was created through a draft plan of subdivision in the 1970s, this lot is not considered legal non -conforming. In response to a question from a Committee Member, Isabel Lima, Planner I advised that the City's Engineering Services staff had concerns with the narrowness of the driveway causing difficulty when entering and exiting the property. Page 7 of 17 G'� o� Committee of Adjustment P1CKE R1 NG Meeting Minutes Wednesday, August 12, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting After reviewing the staff report, and considering matters such as driveway access and safety, the impact on privacy of adjacent home owners, the proposed front yard setback being almost SO percent more than the adjacent dwelling to the west, and the proposed detached dwelling not appearing to have regard fior the existing neighbourhood character along Eyer Drive, Tom Copeland moved the following motion: Moved by Tom Copeland Seconded by Sean Wiley That application P/CA 38/20 by J. Flora, be Refused as the requested variance to permit a minimum lot frontage of 6.0 metres is not minor in nature, not desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and not in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law. Carried Unanimously 4.5 P/CA 39/20 R. Keeler The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 6578/05, to permit: • a minimum lot frontage of '13.5 metres, whereas The By-law requires a minimum lot frontage of 60 metres; • a minimum rear yard setback of 3.0 metres; whereas the By-law requires a minimum rear yard setback of 12.0 metres; • a maximum lot coverage of 1 t percent, whereas the By-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 1 O percent. The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit for a 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 Building Services Section expressing no concerns with the application. Written comments ware received from the City's Engineering Services Department expressing no comments on the application. Page 8 of 17 CC� o� Committee of Adjustment PICKERI NG Meeting Minutes Wednesday, August 12, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting Written comments were received from the Toronto antl Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) expressing that the proposed replacement dwelling and ancillary structures are adequately setback from the existing top of slope. TRCA has no objections to the approval of this application. A TRCA Permit application has not been received for the proposed replacement detached dwelling. Written comments were received from the owner of 2505 Linwood Street in objection to the application. - Rebecca Keeler, applicant, was present to represent the application. Jane Long of Finch Avenue was present in opposition to the application. Lisette L�veill� 8. Raymond Cotnoir of Linwood Street ware present in objection to the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Rebecca Keeler spoke in support of the application stating the process began after the Finch Avenue sewer line was installed. Due to the old age of the existing dwelling, there was fear that the foundation was cracked since the home has experienced flooding on five separate occasions. After discussion with City staff, it was determined that the best course of action was not to restore the existing dwelling, but rather build a new dwelling while keeping with the overall plan for future development in the area. In response to drainage, tree preservation, natural vegetation and animal species concerns raised by Jane Long and Lisette L�veill�, Tanjot Bal, Planner 1, advised that grading and drainage would be evaluated more closely at the building permit stage. Additionally, the application has bean circulated to TRCA where they do not have any objections to the approval of this application. The subject site is adjacent to a natural heritage system and does have significant woodlands for tree protection. Jane Long believes the application is not in keeping with the existing homes along Finch Avenue or Linwood Street and not in character basad on the orientation of the dwelling and the length of the driveway. Lisette LAveill� is concerned with potential damages incurred on her property from the removal of the trees located near the property line where the roots have overgrown onto her property. In response to the concerns raised by Jane Long and Lisette L�veill�, Rebecca Keeler stated, upon thorough review by City staff and TRCA there have been no issues raised regarding underground septic lines or drainage issues. The pre -development process triggered the arborist to recommend removal of the trees due to their age and health which have the potential to fall and cause significant damage. Page 9 of 17 Cif^ �� Committee of Adjustment P 1 C K E R 1 N G Meeting Minutes Wednesday, August 12, 2020 7.00 pm Electronic Meeting New trees will ba replanted and the property will be designed to foster a conducive environment for the natural habitat and surrounding animal species. Furthermore, Rebecca Keeler agreed that any damages incurred on neighbouring properties would be repaired. When asked by a Committee Member if the TRCA permit may alleviate some concerns raised by neighbours, Tanjot Bal, Planner 11, advised any drainage related concerns would ba addressed at the building permit stage and TRCA permit stage. Taking into consideration the questions and concerns from the neighbours and the responses and dialogue from the applicant, the report from the City Development Department, the '13.5 metres setback that appears to be aligned with other properties in the neighbourhood and the application appearing to meet the four tests of the Planning Act, Sean Wiley moved the following motion: Moved by Sean Wiley Seconded by Denise Rundle That application P/CA 39/20 by R. Keeler, 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 Ofricial Plan and the Zoning By-law, subject to the following conditions: 1. That these variances apply only to the proposed detached dwelling, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, 4 & 5 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment dated August 12, 2020). 2. The applicant obtain a permit from the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority for the proposed detached dwelling. Carried Unanimously 4.6 P/CA 40/20 '1739592 Ontario Ltd. 905 Sandy Beach Road Tha applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 25'11, as amended, to permit: front yard parking to be limited to 25 percent of the total required parking area, whereas the By-law requires front yard parking to be limited to 20 percent of the total required parking area; side yard parking to be O.O metres from the south side lot line, whereas the By-law permits side yard parking to be no closer than 7.5 metres from the side lot line on one side and 1.5 metres on the other side. Page t O of 17 o� Committee of Adjustment f� 1 C K E R 1 N G Meeting Minutes Wednesday, August 12, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting The applicant r®quests approval of these variances in order to facilitate the development of amulti-tenant industrial building. The Secretary -Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to a condition. Written comments were received from the City's Building Services Section expressing no concerns with the application. Written comments were received from the City's Engineering Services Department expressing no comments on the application. Written comments were received from the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority expressing no objections io the variances pertaining to parking. Robyn Stebner and Michael Testaguzza, Planners with the Biglieri Group, and Christian Hepfer, applicant, were present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. In support of the application, Robyn Stebner stated this application is part of a site plan application currently with the City of Pickering. The purposed building is required to have a 30 metra setback from the west property line to provide an appropriate setback from the residential neighbourhood on the west side of Sandy Beach Road. A proposed landscape buffer that is 1 O metres in width will significantly reduce visual impacts of the purposed parking area. When the landscape buffer is subtracted from the required 30 metre setback to the building, 20 metres is left which has been filled with parking to sufficiently make good use of the space, resulting in a minor increase of 5 percent. Robyn Stebner went on to describe the second variance is to facilitate 3 parking spaces at the rear south-east corner of the property to be located closer than 7.5 metres to the side lot line. The majority of the parking that is located along the south side, meets the 7.5 metre requirement, and the purposetl 3 spaces in the rear south-east corner will not be highly visible. Both requested variances are believed to ba minor in nature and the recommendation report by City staff is supported by the Biglieri Group. When asked by a Committee Member why the snow storage area was designed on the north --east corner of the parking lot rather than the south-east corner to eliminate the need for a variance, Robyn Stebner advised additional parking has been provided as a proactive measure and this design was created to accommodate any potential floor plan changes in the future. Snow storage is also located in the south-east corner, an area along the north property line and a location south-west of the subject site. Additionally, Michael Testaguzza further clarified that the hatching for the snow storage on the submitted drawings are different on the north-east corner than the south-east corner, however both locations are designed for snow storage. Page 11 of 17 o� Committee of Adjustment I�ICKERI NG Meeting Minutes Wednesday, August 12, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting When asked by the Chair what provisions will be put in plata to accommodate traffic and inconvenience during construction, especially with a residential area across from the subject site and a senior's residence nearby, Christian Hepfer advised that the entire site has been designed to be self-contained. Michael Testaguzza added that part of the site plan process was to provide erosion and sediment control, where typical measures and requirements from the city are to be implemented so that construction should not spill onto the roadway. After consideration of the City Development Department's Report, the responses heard from the applicant and agents present, as well as the application appearing to meet the four fasts of the P/arming Act, Tom Copeland moved the following motion: Moved by Tom Copeland Seconded by Eric Newton That application P/CA 40/20 by 1739592 Ontario Ltd., 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 proposed industrial building, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans (refer to Exhibit 2 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment dated August 12, 2020). Carried Unanimously 4.7 P/CA 41/20 F, Molinaro 1771 Woodviaw Avenue The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended, to permit a minimum south side yard of 0.8 metres, whereas the By-law states where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling, the minimum required side yard shall be 1.5 metres. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to recognize a deficient side yard setback. The Secretary -Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to a condition. Written comments were received from the City's Building Services Section expressing no concerns with the application. Written comments were received from the City's Engineering Services Department expressing no comments on the application. Page 12 of 17 /;-f„ o� Committee of Adjustment DICKERING Meeting Minutes Wednesday, August 12, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting Written comments were received from Dave Comery, from IBW Surveyors, indicating an error was made and the house was set in the wrong location. The south side yard setback was supposed to be 1 .52 metres, how®ver it was laid out in the survey as 1.28 metres and 0.8 metres. Grant Morris, agent, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Grant Morris spoke in support of this application stating the purpose of the application was to correct an error after construction that was determined to be the fault of the surveyor. This was discovered approximately two weeks ago and the surveyor has taken full responsibility for the error which will be rectified financially. In response to a question -from a Committee Member, the Secretary -Treasurer stated the deficiency was discovered when the surveyor was preparing the as -built drawings, which occurred after the foundation has been poured. The exact timeline of the remaining construction remains unknown. In response to a question posed by a Committee Member, Grant Morris advised the dwelling to the south has already been constructed and is occupied by residents who have no objections to this application. Altar reviewing the staff report as documented and outlined by the City Development Department, considering that the two dwellings are setback a minimum of 2 metres from one another allowing for sufficient room for the structures to accommodate drainage and maintenance, Sean Wiley moved the following motion: Moved by Sean Wiley Seconded by Denise Rundle That application P/CA 41/20 by F. Molinaro, 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 existing dwelling on the subject site, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, 4 8. 5 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment dated August 12, 2020). Carried Unanimously Page 13 of 17 d o� DICKERING 4.8 P/CA 42/20 P. Bakarovski 405 Frontier Court Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, August 72, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting Tha applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-law 5688/00, to permit a minimum rear yard setback of 5.7 metres for an uncovered deck, whereas the By-law requires a minimum rear yard setback of 7.5 metres. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit for an uncovered deck. The Secretary -Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to a condition. Written comments were received from the City's Building Services Section expressing no concerns with the application. Written comments were received from the City's Engineering Services Department expressing no comments on the application. Written comments were received from the Ministry of Transportation (MTO) express no objections or comments and a MTO clearance is not required. Philip Bakarovski applicant was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. When questioned which level of the dwelling the upper level tlack is on, Philip Bakarovski stated the dwelling is a raised bungalow where the upper level of the deck projects directly out of the kitchen as a landing. After reviewing the City Development Department's Recommendation Report, hearing from the applicant, and the application appearing to meet the four tests of the P/anning Act, Eric Newton moved the following motion: Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Denise Rundle That application P/CA 42/20 by P. Bakarovski, 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 proposed uncovered deck, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans (refer to Exhibit 2 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment tlated August 12, 2020). Carried Unanimously Pages 14 of 17 �� DICKERING 4.9 P/CA 43/20 M. & L. Giampietri 976 Bralorne Trail Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, August 92, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 7537/97, to permit an uncovered deck to encroach into the required rear yard a maximum of 2.4 metres, whereas the By-law permits a porch or uncovered deck to encroach into any required rear yard to a maximum of 2.0 metres. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit for an uncovered deck. Isabel Lima, Planner I, outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to a condition. Written comments were received from the City's Building Services Section expressing no concerns with the application. Written comments were received from the Gity's Engineering Services Department expressing no comments on the application. Written comments were received from the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) confirming TRCA Permit will not be required. Written comments were received from Parks Canada (landowner), expressing they agree with the proposed Minor Variance, requesting that the applicant consider a number of matters during construction. Megan Giampietri applicant, and Cheryl Shindruk, agent, were present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Cheryl Shindruk spoke in support of the application stating the staff report has been reviewed and they concur with the analysis and the recommendations provided by City staff. In response to a question from a Committee Member, Cheryl Shindruk advised they are aware of comments provided by Parks Canada and that the applicant will have regard for clauses 9 to 5 and support the implementation of clauses 6 and 7 during the building permit stage. After review of the staff Recommendation Report prepared by the City Development Department, hearing the comments from the applicant, and the application appearing to meet the four tests of the P/arming Act, Denise Rundle moved the following motion: Pages 95 of 97 C -f ., o� Committee of Adjustment P 1 C KE R1 N G Meeting Minutes Wednesday, August 12, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting Moved by Denise Rundle Seconded by Sean Wiley That application P/CA 43/20 by M. & L. Giampiatri, 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 proposed uncovered deck, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plan (refer to Exhibit 2 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment dated August 12, 2020). Carried Unanimously Page 16 of 17 C-/,,, o� Committee of Adjustment PICKERI NG Meeting Minutes Wednesday, August 12, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting 5. Adjournment Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Tom Copeland That the 6th meeting of the 2020 Committee of Adjustment be adjourned at 8:46 pm and the next meeting of the Committee of Adjustment be held on Wednesday, September 9, 2020. Carried Unanimously September 9, 2020 Date `� Chair t..� Assistant Secretary -Treasurer Page 17 of 17