Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDecember 8, 2021 Committee of Adjustment Agenda Hearing Number: 12 Date: Wednesday, December 8, 2021 pickering.ca Agenda Committee of Adjustment Wednesday, December 8, 2021 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page Number 1. Disclosure of Interest 2. Adoption of Agenda 3. Adoption of Minutes from November 10, 2021 1-15 4. Report 4.1 P/CA 44/21 & P/CA 45/21 16-22 Marvel Homes Incorporated 1424 Altona Road 4.2 P/CA 109/21 & P/CA 110/21 23-34 S. Perks 1882 Appleview Road 4.3 P/CA 111/21 35-40 M. Vattipulusu & D. Akula 1817 Parkhurst Crescent 4.4 P/CA 112/21 41-44 Marathon Homes Limited 2601 Delphinium Trail 4.5 P/CA 113/21 45-48 A. & R. Lopez 2124 Erin Gate Boulevard 5. Adjournment For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Samantha O’Brien Telephone: 905.420.4660, extension 2023 Email: sobrien@pickering.ca Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, November 10, 2021 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 1 of 15 Pending Adoption Present Tom Copeland – Vice-Chair David Johnson – Chair Eric Newton – Arrived 7:20 pm Denise Rundle Sean Wiley Also Present Deborah Wylie, Secretary-Treasurer Samantha O’Brien, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer Cody Morrison, Principal Planner, Development Review Felix Chau, Planner II Isabel Lima, (Acting) Planner II 1. Disclosure of Interest No disclosures of interest were noted. 2. Adoption of Agenda Moved by Tom Copeland Seconded by Denise Rundle That the agenda for the Wednesday, November 10, 2021 hearing be adopted. Carried 3. Adoption of Minutes Moved by Tom Copeland Seconded by Denise Rundle That the minutes of the 10th hearing of the Committee of Adjustment held Wednesday, October 13, 2021 be adopted, as amended. Carried To avoid a tie vote, David Johnson, Chair stated he will abstain from voting on applications until Committee Member Eric Newton arrives. -1- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, November 10, 2021 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 2 of 15 4. Reports 4.1 P/CA 92/21 M. & J. Stangarone 1376 Rougemount Drive The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 2912/88, to permit: • a maximum dwelling height of 10.3 metres, whereas the By-law permits a maximum dwelling height of 9.0 metres; and • uncovered steps and associated walkway not exceeding 2.7 metres in height above grade and not projecting more than 0.7 metres into the required south side yard, whereas the By-law permits uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.5 metres into any required front or rear yard and not more than 0.5 metres in any required side yard. The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to facilitate the submission of an application for Building Permit to permit the construction of a detached dwelling. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined that City staff are of the opinion that the requested variances meet the four tests of the Planning Act. 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 no comments on the application. Written comments were received from Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff stating: • The property is regulated by TRCA with respect to the limits of significant vegetation (dripline) and the top of bank feature associated with the Petticoat Creek valley corridor located in the rear property. A site visit was conducted on October 12, 2021, to delineate and confirm the on-site physical features (dripline of contiguous vegetation and top of bank). • The TRCA's Living City Policies (LCP) require that development be setback 10 metres inland from the greater of the physical top of bank of the valley feature or the limits of significant vegetation. TRCA staff confirmed that new development would need to be setback 10 metres from the staked dripline. However, The LCP also allows for a setback less than 10 meters where the proposal has regard for the existing development on the subject property and within the context of existing development patterns within the valley corridor reach. -2- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, November 10, 2021 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 3 of 15 • Based on a review of the proposal, some sections of the existing development (the hardscaping associated with the pool) are slightly encroaching into the 10 metre buffer at the southern pinch point on the property. However, native-non-invasive restoration plantings within the limit of the dripline are required as part of the TRCA permit approval process in order to offset these encroachments and provide a net ecological gain. As such, TRCA staff have no objections to the proposal in principle and support the requested variances. • An Ontario Regulation 166/06 Permit Application was received by TRCA staff on September 23, 2021. The drawings circulated to TRCA as part of this minor variance application are consistent with the plans received with the TRCA permit application (CFN 65947). TRCA will require an updated site plan be submitted to reflect the staked dripline, proposed restoration plantings, and an erosion and sediment control (ESC) plan prior to permit issuance. • TRCA staff have no objections to the approval of Minor Variance Application No. P/CA 92/21. Michael Stangarone, applicant, and Albert Yerushalmi, agent, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Albert Yerushalmi spoke in support of the application stating his agreement with the staff report and that the application appears to be minor. The height variance is based on the shape of the mansard roof and difference in grade from the front to the rear. There are no privacy concerns, as the trees provide additional screening. The applicant is working with TRCA to obtain a permit after the minor variance process. In response to questions from a Committee Member, Albert Yerushalmi stated this style of roof was chosen based on a submission to the owners who found the design to be favourable. This lot is at the lowest point of Rougemount Drive and does not create any negative massing concerns. After having read the Report to the Committee of Adjustment, the additional comments from the applicant’s agent are appreciated. While noting that the Report indicates the abutting dwelling to the south has a total building height of 11 metres. The proposed design is in keeping with the existing dwellings along Rougemount Drive, and there has not been any negative feedback received from the neighbourhood. The Urban Design Guideline Checklist has been met, and there is no resistance from the TRCA, and Sean Wiley moved the following motion: -3- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, November 10, 2021 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 4 of 15 Moved by Sean Wiley Seconded by Tom Copeland That application P/CA 92/21 by M. & J. Stangarone, 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 and uncovered steps and associated walkway, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 & 9 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated November 10, 2021). Carried -4- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, November 10, 2021 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 5 of 15 4.2 P/CA 103/21 Universal City Six Development Inc. 1496 Bayly Street The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 7553/17, as amended by By-law 7810/21, to permit the building separation of a second storey unit with primary windows to be reduced to 8.6 metres so long as the primary window is no larger than 0.9 square metres, and the lowest point of the window is located a minimum of 1.8 metres from the floor, or where the primary window is larger than 0.9 square metres, and the lowest point of the window is located less than 1.8 metres from the floor, a 1.8 metre high privacy screen is located along the edge of the building between the primary window and the adjacent building to which the primary window faces. Whereas the By-law permits the building separation of a second storey unit with primary windows to be reduced to 8.6 metres so long as the primary window is no larger than 0.9 square metres, and the lowest point of the window is located a minimum of 1.8 metres from the floor. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain site plan approval to construct a 27-storey residential tower. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined that City staff are of the opinion that the requested variances meet the four tests of the Planning Act. 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 no comments on the application. Written comments were received from the Ministry of Transportation indicating they have reviewed the requested minor variance for 1496 Bayly Street and have no objection to the proposal. Michael Vani, agent, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Michael Vani spoke in support of the application stating the request is to facilitate enlarged windows and privacy screens on second floor units facing the Phase 1 building. After having reviewed the staff Report to the Committee of Adjustment, Michael Vani is in agreement with staff in that the application supports the four tests of the Planning Act. -5- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, November 10, 2021 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 6 of 15 In response to questions from Committee Members, Michael Vani stated the standard condo size windows extend from the top of the ceiling almost the entire length of the unit close to the floor line. The privacy screens are illustrated on Exhibit 3 in the staff Report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated November 10, 2021. The privacy screen will be a permanent fixture that will be constructed of complementary materials to the building. Additional variances are not anticipated as this is one of the last items needed to permit site plan approval. After reading the staff Report to the Committee of Adjustment, listening to the agent’s response to questions and appreciating the thoroughness of the applicant’s submission, the application appears to meet four tests of the Planning Act, and Tom Copeland moved the following motion: Moved by Tom Copeland Seconded by Denise Rundle That application P/CA 103/21 by Universal City Six Development Inc., 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 residential tower, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2 & 3 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated November 10, 2021). Carried Committee Member Eric Newton was able to connect to the electronic Hearing via audio at 7:20 pm. -6- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, November 10, 2021 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 7 of 15 4.3 P/CA 104/21 A. Uthayakumaran 275 Uxbridge-Pickering Townline Road The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by By-law 6640/06, to permit: • a maximum building ground floor area of 580 square metres (detached dwelling), whereas the By-law requires a maximum building ground floor area of 500 square metres; • a maximum building ground floor area of 900 square metres (accessory structure – barn), whereas the By-law requires a maximum building ground floor area of 500 square metres. The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit to facilitate the construction of a detached dwelling and accessory building (barn). The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the application be Tabled until such the applicant provides staff with additional information as outlined in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated November 10, 2021. Written comments were received in objection to the application from the residents of 160 Uxbridge-Pickering Townline Road. Peter Jaruczik, agent, was present to represent the application. James and Gloria Johnstone of 160 Uxbridge-Pickering Townline Road, were present in objection to the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Peter Jaruczik spoke in support of the application stating the application is to increase a farm operation and support the creation of a new residential dwelling. The applicant is working with the City and the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA). There will be an on-site meeting on November 18, 2021 with TRCA staff to provide additional agency comments. Peter Jaruczik indicated he is in favour of the City’s recommendation for a Tabling motion. James and Gloria Johnstone spoke in objection to the application raising concern with: • the application not appearing minor; the request for a maximum building ground floor area of the accessory structure (barn) is almost double in size from the By-law requirement of 500 square metres to 900 square metres; • paving and grading activity already taking place on the property; • the quality of the road and construction vehicles along the street; -7- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, November 10, 2021 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 8 of 15 • the conservation land and Oak Ridges Moraine area and wildlife should be properly maintained; • garbage being dumped along Sideline 32; • the possibility of the site being turned into a community centre; • the large paved driveway surrounding the entire property with two “gatehouses” at either end have no visible permits; • the road is full of stones and the culvert is covered in large limestone blocks which have collapsed and cannot run freely; • the ditches on either side of the road have not been cleaned out; • drainage and flooding on the property; and • the existing dwelling on the site possibly having heritage significance. The Chair asked staff to have someone attend the property to review the neighbour’s concerns and report back to the Committee of Adjustment. The Secretary-Treasurer advised that Engineering Services and Building Services staff will be informed and able to investigate. In response to questions from Committee Members, Felix Chau, Planner II, advised permits are not required for paving on the site and no additional permits have been applied for aside from the building permit which triggered this minor variance application. The property is zoned Oak Ridges Moraine (ORM) Agricultural and ORM Environmental Protection, where a commercial operation would not be permitted on the site. If the office use is accessory to the main agricultural use, it would be permitted. It was advised by the applicant that the agricultural use would be the primary use on this site. In response to questions from Committee Members, Peter Jaruczik stated: • The owners have multiple farm operations across varying cities, where this location is designed to be their primary facility containing offices and storage of equipment. • The neighbouring comments will be taken under consideration moving forward. • Conversations are underway with the TRCA to discuss the roadway and sideline entrances and are open to their suggestions. • The proposed dwelling is to be 580 square metres on the ground floor instead of the required 500 square metres, which is believed to be minor. • The purpose of the residential dwelling variance is to facilitate an enclosed indoor pool. • The residential dwelling will have a second-storey which does not cover the entire footprint, having the garage and pool are excluded. • In reference to the staff parking spaces on the site near the barn, the required amount is not yet confirmed with the applicant at this time and is strictly conceptual. • All previously applied for permits have been obtained while working with the City. • All paving works have been completed in an effort to tidy up the property. • The redesigned garage has been inspected and the permit was approved. -8- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, November 10, 2021 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 9 of 15 • The entrance off of Uxbridge-Pickering Townline Road, received a permit and had the final inspection completed. • The only outstanding building permits are related to this minor variance application. • There will not be a “gatehouse”, rather a stone post has been erected for fencing and security purposes. • The barn will have storage of farm equipment, a mezzanine, farm operations offices, a work space area, and a greenhouse. • The applicant will be farming the land having field crops around the property. In response to a question from a Committee Member, the Secretary-Treasurer stated the Zoning By-law outlines a maximum building ground floor area, and not the entire size limiting the structure. The Chair indicated the Committee would like to review elevation drawings of both the proposed dwelling and accessory structure (barn) prior to issuing a decision. While recognizing the applicant’s request for the two variances in question and noting the other concerns raised by the neighbours, the Committee must be able to advise if the application meets the four tests of the Planning Act. With City staff requiring additional information to determine a position on conformity to the City’s Official Plan, Denise Rundle moved the following motion: Moved by Denise Rundle Seconded by Sean Wiley That application P/CA 104/21 by A. Uthayakumaran, be Tabled until such the applicant provides City staff with additional information as outlined in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated November 10, 2021. Carried Unanimously -9- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, November 10, 2021 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 10 of 15 4.4 P/CA 107/21 H. McDougall & G. Avramopoulos 809 Fairview Avenue The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-law 7610/18 and By-law 7872/21, to permit uncovered steps 2.6 metres in height above grade to project 4.9 metres into the required front yard, whereas the By-law requires uncovered steps not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade to project not more than 1.5 metres into any required front yard. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to recognize existing uncovered steps in the front yard. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined that City staff are of the opinion that the requested variances meet the four tests of the Planning Act. 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 no comments on the application. George Avramopoulos, applicant, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. George Avramopoulos spoke in support of the application stating the application appears to be desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and is minor in nature. In 2019 a Building Permit was issued for a detached dwelling that was constructed. The proposed uncovered steps are required to facilitate pedestrian access into the dwelling. A 2.6 metre buffer between the steps and the front of the property line is provided with the steps being parallel to the front wall of the dwelling. In response to a question from a Committee Member, Felix Chau, Planner II, stated the zoning was compliant at the time of the Building Permit issuance for the dwelling. In response to questions from Committee Members, George Avramopoulos stated the stairs were not part of the original drawings submitted for the construction of the new dwelling. The stairs were constructed at a later time during installation of landscaping due to cost restrictions. A Building Permit was not applied for during the construction of the stairs where George Avramopoulos stated he was unaware one was required. After reading the staff Report to the Committee of Adjustment, not having any community comments and the application appears to meet four tests of the Planning Act, and Tom Copeland moved the following motion: -10- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, November 10, 2021 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 11 of 15 Moved by Tom Copeland Seconded by Eric Newton That application P/CA 107/21 by H. McDougall & G. Avramopoulos, 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 uncovered steps, 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 November 10, 2021). Carried Vote: Tom Copeland in favour David Johnson in favour Eric Newton in favour Denise Rundle opposed Sean Wiley opposed -11- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, November 10, 2021 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 12 of 15 4.5 P/CA 108/21 Amazon Canada Fulfillment Services, ULC 1400 Squires Beach Road The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-law 6070/02, to permit a maximum building height of 14.2 metres, whereas the By-law requires a maximum building height of 12.0 metres. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to facilitate zoning compliance to construct a distribution facility. The subject application is being reviewed in conjunction with a submitted application for site plan approval (S 05/21). The Secretary-Treasurer outlined that City staff are of the opinion that the requested variances meet the four tests of the Planning Act. 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 no comments on the application. Written comments were received from Ira Kagan, of Kagan Shastri LLP Lawyers, solicitors representing Durham Live. The letter asks the Committee of Adjustment to impose a condition requiring cost-sharing and the applicant enter into an agreement with the City ensuring cost-sharing, and requiring that all necessary payments be made prior to the issuance of any Building Permit. Jasjeet Ajimal, applicant, was present to represent the application. Mark Roloson and Joseph Abela, agent with Aecom, were present on behalf of the applicant. Katarzyna Sliwa, solicitor with Dentons, was present on behalf of the applicant. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Mark Roloson spoke in support of the application addressing the requested maximum height for the new proposed delivery station. The setbacks from the road are larger than required, with Squires Beach Road having a proposed setback of approximately 63 metres and 133 metres from Bayly Street; where the By-law requires a 7.5 metres setback. The oversized setbacks will lessen visual impact from the street and from the site’s immediate neighbours. The proposed use is permitted within the applicable zone, generating significant employment opportunities. It is believed that this request satisfies the four tests of the Planning Act. Mark Roloson stated the letter received from the Durham Live solicitors are mainly traffic related concerns and are not believed to be relevant to the application. A comprehensive Traffic Impact Study has been prepared by Aecom on behalf of the -12- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, November 10, 2021 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 13 of 15 applicant as part of the Site Plan approval process. The Traffic Study takes into account the Durham Live site and the Durham Live Urban Transportation Study. The results of Aecom’s Traffic Impact Study indicate the new delivery station would result in less peak period traffic, compared to the current use on the property. Katarzyna Sliwa spoke in support of the application expressing how it meets the four tests of the Planning Act, and that concerns stated in the letter from the Durham Live solicitors are unfounded. In response to questions from Committee Members, Mark Roloson stated the requested variance is to facilitate the construction of a new building where the additional height is for architectural design and not for storage. The primary ingress and egress access onto the site is designed to separate large delivery truck traffic from personal vehicles. In response to a question from a Committee Member, Jasjeet Ajimal stated the site is to facilitate approximately 300 employees. In response to a question from a Committee Member, Deborah Wylie, Secretary-Treasurer stated the Traffic Study completed by Aecom on behalf of the applicant, was submitted as part of the Site Plan approval process, and was circulated to the Region of Durham. The Region has provided comments requiring revisions to the Study and is not requiring cost-sharing for Notion Road improvements. Squires Beach Road, Bayly Street, Brock Road and Church Street are all arterial road right-of-ways owned and maintained by the Region of Durham. This Minor Variance application was circulated to the Region who did not submit any comments on this application. While applauding new development and new business within the City, the applicant is encouraged to take into consideration traffic needs in the area. It is recommended to use every precaution necessary to facilitate smooth traffic and look for ways to optimize traffic flow around site and neighbouring developments. As such, this application appears to meet the four tests of the Planning Act and Sean Wiley moved the following motion. -13- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, November 10, 2021 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 14 of 15 Moved by Sean Wiley Seconded by Eric Newton That application P/CA 108/21 by Amazon Canada Fulfillment Services, ULC, 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 distribution facility, 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 November 10, 2021). Carried Unanimously -14- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, November 10, 2021 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 15 of 15 5. Other Business 5.1 Adoption of 2022 Meeting Schedule Moved by Tom Copeland Seconded by Denise Rundle That the Committee of Adjustment Meeting Schedule for 2022 be adopted. Carried Unanimously 6. Adjournment Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Sean Wiley That the 11th hearing of the 2021 Committee of Adjustment be adjourned at 8:22 pm and the next hearing of the Committee of Adjustment be held on Wednesday, December 8, 2021. Carried Unanimously __________________________ Date __________________________ Chair __________________________ Assistant Secretary-Treasurer -15- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Numbers: P/CA 44/21 & P/CA 45/21 Date: December 8, 2021 From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Manager, Zoning and Administration Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application P/CA 44/21 & P/CA 45/21 Marvel Homes Incorporated 1424 Altona Road Applications P/CA 44/21 – Part 1 The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended, to permit: •a minimum lot frontage of 12.8 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum lot frontage of 18.0 metres; •a minimum side yard setback of 1.2 metres on the north side yard, whereas the By-lawrequires a minimum side yard setback of 1.8 metres; and •a minimum side yard setback of 0.6 of a metre on the south side yard, whereas the By-law requires a minimum side yard setback of 1.8 metres. P/CA 45/21 – Part 2 The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended, to permit: •a minimum lot frontage of 12.8 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum lotfrontage of 18.0 metres; •a minimum side yard setback of 0.6 of a metre on the north side yard, whereas theBy-law requires a minimum side yard setback of 1.8 metres; and •a minimum side yard setback of 1.2 metres on the south side yard, whereas the By-lawrequires a minimum side yard setback of 1.8 metres. The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to facilitate a Land Division application through the Region of Durham’s Land Division Committee. Recommendation The City Development Department has reviewed the applications with respect to Section 45(1) of the Planning Act and are of the opinion that the requested variances meet the four tests. Staff recommend that the Committee of Adjustment consider all public and agency input in reaching a decision. Should the Committee find merit in these applications, the following condition is recommended: 1.That these variances apply only to the subject property, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3 & 4). -16- Report P/CA 44/21 & P/CA 45/21 December 8, 2021 Page 2 Background It is City staff’s understanding that the applicant has not yet submitted a consent application to the Region of Durham for the proposed severances, as of the date of writing this report. The existing dwelling fronts onto Altona Road, however both proposed dwellings are proposed to front onto Fawndale Road. Staff are in agreement with this siting, as the proposed lots and dwellings are more in keeping with the character of the surrounding properties along Fawndale Road. Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan Pickering’s Official Plan designates this property as “Urban Residential Areas – Low Density Areas” within the Rougemount Neighbourhood. This designation provides for residential uses and accessory uses. The subject property is not within an Infill and Replacement Housing Study neighbourhood precinct. Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law Lot Frontage Variances The intent of the minimum lot frontage requirement of 18.0 metres is to ensure a usable lot size that is compatible with the neighbourhood. The surrounding lots to the north and south of the subject property (all fronting onto Fawndale Road) have lot frontages ranging between 13.5 metres and 18.0 metres. The surrounding lots have site specific zoning that permits a minimum lot frontage of 13.5 metres. The subject lot exists as an approximately 1225.5 square metre lot with 25.6 metres of lot frontage, however the applicant is proposing to sever the property to create 2 approximately 610 square metre lots with 12.8 metres of lot frontage. The subject property presents a situation in which it currently exists as the largest property with frontage along Fawndale Road, however once severed, the two lots will become the smallest. The 2 adjacent properties have lot frontages of 14.6 metres (1275 Fawndale Road) and 15.2 metres (1279 Fawndale Road) respectively, which provides a transition to the proposed lots and will mitigate potential compatibility impacts from a visual standpoint. Through consultation with staff, the applicant has designed the dwellings to fit in with the existing streetscape along Fawndale Road. Side Yard Variances The intent of the minimum side yard requirement of 1.8 metres is to accommodate drainage and to provide sufficient room for maintenance. All four side yard setbacks require reductions from the By-law in order to design two dwellings that are in keeping with the existing look and character of the streetscape. The dwellings along Fawndale Road feature a double car garage, a front door, and living space along the main wall of the dwelling. -17- Report P/CA 44/21 & P/CA 45/21 December 8, 2021 Page 3 In order to accommodate for all three features, the applicant is requesting 0.6 of a metre setbacks along the side yards that abut the shared property line. The 0.6 of a metre side yard setbacks are proposed to accommodate for a two car garage. The majority of the abutting side yard maintains a 1.2 metre side yard setback. The proposed setbacks adequately provide sufficient room for pedestrian access and maintenance. Any potential drainage concerns will be addressed through a condition of Land Division approval. Desirable for the Appriopriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature As previously indicated, the subject property presents a situation in which it currently exists as the largest property with frontage along Fawndale Road, however will become the two smallest lots if severed. Adequate transition in lot frontages is provided from the adjacent lots. Additionally, the applicant has designed the dwellings to match the existing streetscape along Fawndale Road. The impact of the requested variances is mitigated by the fact that the neighbouring properties are site specifically zoned with zoning permissions that are consistent with the proposed reductions. Input From Other Sources Applicant •The applicant has submitted a Planning JustificationReport in support of this application. Please contact the City Development Department at fchau@pickering.ca to receive a copy of theapplicant’s report. Engineering Services •Please note that there would not be enough space between the lots for a rear lot catch basin (RLCB)lead and easement, should one be required for thefuture severance application. An alternate solutionwould be required. •No comments were received as of the date of writingthis report. •No written submissions were received from the publicas of the date of writing this report. Building Services Public Input Date of report: December 2, 2021 Comments prepared by: Felix Chau Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Planner II Manager, Zoning and Administration FC:jc J:\Documents\Development\D-3700\Reports\2013\pca44-21&pca45-21-13.doc Attachments -18- Ro u g e m o u n t D r i v e Alt o n a R o a d Hoover Drive L ittl e f o r d Street Fawndale Road Twyn Rivers Drive Fid d l e r s C o u r t HowellCrescent Ro u g e V a l l e y D r i v e Gwendolyn Street Tomlinson Court D a l e w o o d D r i v e Riverview Crescent Richardson Street Stover Crescent Sheppard Avenue South PetticoatRavine SouthPetticoatRavine Elizabeth B.Phin PublicSchool St. Monica'sSeparateSchool © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © Queens Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.;© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, Department of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers all rights reserved.; © Municipal Property Assessment Corporation and its suppliers all rights reserved.; City DevelopmentDepartment Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: P/CA 44/21 & P/CA 45/21 Date: Apr. 16, 2021 Exhibit 1 ¯ E Marvel Homes Incorporated1424 Altona Road SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\PCA\2021\PCA 44-21 & PCA 45-21 Marvel Homes Incorporated\PCA44-21&45-21_LocationMap.mxd 1:4,000 SCALE:THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY.-19- Ex h i b i t 2 Su b m i t t e d P l a n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 44 /2 1 & P / C A 4 5 / 2 1 Ap p l i c a n t : Ma r v e l H o m e s I n c o r p o r a t e d Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 14 2 4 A l t o n a R o a d CO N T A C T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T F O R D I G I T A L C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N . Da t e : No v e m b e r 2 3 , 2 0 2 1 to p e r m i t a m i n i m u m l o t fr o n t a g e o f 1 2 . 8 me t r e s to p e r m i t a m i n i m u m s i d e ya r d s e t b a c k o f 1 . 2 me t r e s on t h e n o r t h s i d e y a r d to p e r m i t a mi n i m u m s i d e ya r d s e t b a c k o f 1 . 2 me t r e s on t h e s o u t h s i d e y a r d to p e r m i t a m i n i m u m s i d e ya r d s e t b a c k o f 0 . 6 of a me t r e o n t h e s o u t h s i d e to p e r m i t a m i n i m u m s i d e ya r d s e t b a c k o f 0 . 6 of a me t r e o n t h e n o r t h s i d e Altona Road Fawndale Road -20- Ex h i b i t 3 Su b m i t t e d F r o n t E l e v a t i o n ( P a r t 1 ) Fi l e N o : P / C A 4 4 / 2 1 Ap p l i c a n t : M a r v e l H o m e s I n c o r p o r a t e d Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 1 4 2 4 A l t o n a R o a d CO N T A C T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T F O R D I G I T A L C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N . Da t e : N o v e m b e r 2 3 , 2 0 2 1 -21- Ex h i b i t 4 Su b m i t t e d F r o n t E l e v a t i o n ( P a r t 2 ) Fi l e N o : P/ C A 45 / 2 1 Ap p l i c a n t : Ma r v e l H o m e s I n c o r p o r a t e d Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 14 2 4 A l t o n a R o a d CO N T A C T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T F O R DI G I T A L C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N . Da t e : No v e m b e r 2 3 , 2 0 2 1 -22- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Numbers: P/CA 109/21 & P/CA 110/21 Date: December 8, 2021 From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Manager, Zoning and Administration Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application P/CA 109/21 & P/CA 110/21 S. Perks 1882 Appleview Road Applications P/CA 109/21 – Part 1 The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 7874/21, to: • permit a minimum lot frontage of 15.2 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum lot frontage of 18 metres; • permit minimum north and south side yards of 1.5 metres, whereas the By-law states that when a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling, the minimum required side yard shall be 1.8 metres; and • permit a maximum dwelling depth of 20.6 metres, whereas the By-law states that the maximum dwelling depth for lots with depths greater than 40 metres shall be 20 metres. P/CA 110/21 – Part 2 The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 7874/21, to: • permit a minimum lot frontage of 15.2 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum lot frontage of 18 metres; • permit minimum north and south side yards of 1.5 metres, whereas the By-law states that when a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling, the minimum required side yard shall be 1.8 metres; • permit a maximum dwelling depth of 20.6 metres, whereas the By-law states that the maximum dwelling depth for lots with depths greater than 40 metres shall be 20 metres; and • recognize an existing accessory structure (shed) with a height of 4.3 metres, whereas the By-law states no accessory building shall exceed a height of 3.5 metres in any residential zone. The applicant requests approval of these minor variance applications in order to sever the property resulting in a total of 2 lots and to construct a detached dwelling on each lot. -23- Report P/CA 109/21 & P/CA 110/21 December 8, 2021 Page 2 Recommendation The City Development Department has reviewed the applications with respect to Section 45(1) of the Planning Act and are of the opinion that the requested variances meet the four tests. Staff recommend that the Committee of Adjustment consider all public and agency input in reaching a decision. Should the Committee find merit in these applications, the following condition is recommended: 1. That these variances apply only to the 2 proposed lots and detached dwellings, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6). Background The applicant has submitted a consent application (LD-2021-00055) to the Region of Durham for the proposed severances. The application is scheduled for a Region of Durham Land Division Committee Hearing on January 10, 2022. Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject site is designated Urban Residential Areas – Low Density Area within the Dunbarton Neighbourhood. The applicant is proposing to construct a detached dwelling on each lot. Detached dwellings are a permitted use within this designation and a built form within the Dunbarton Neighbourhood. The Dunbarton Neighbourhood Development Guidelines permit only detached dwellings and require minimum lot frontages of 15.0 metres. The proposal conforms to the Dunbarton Neighbourhood Development Guidelines. Staff have reviewed and made comment on the proposed dwellings using the Council-adopted Urban Design Guidelines for Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhood Precincts Checklist, which can be found as Appendix A to this report. As shown in Exhibits 3, 4, 5 & 6, the applicant is proposing the same house design for each proposed dwelling on Part 1 and Part 2. The Pickering Official Plan, the Dunbarton Neighbourhood Development Guidelines and the Urban Design Guidelines for Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhood Precincts do not have polices/guidelines that speak to variation in the design of the front elevation of dwellings on abutting lots. Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law Lot Frontage – Part 1 & 2 The intent of a minimum lot frontage requirement of 18 metres is to ensure a usable lot size that is compatible with the neighbourhood. -24- Report P/CA 109/21 & P/CA 110/21 December 8, 2021 Page 3 The surrounding lots to the north and south of the subject property (that front onto the west and east sides of Appleview Road) have lot frontages ranging between 15 and 30 metres, with a majority of the lots being 15 to 22 metres. The existing subject property has a total lot frontage of 30 metres, making it among the largest lots along this block of Appleview Road. The applicant has demonstrated that a detached dwelling can be appropriately sited on each proposed lot (see Exhibit 2). North & South Side Yard Setbacks – Part 1 & 2 The intent of a minimum side yard requirement of 1.8 metres is to accommodate drainage and to provide sufficient room for the maintenance of a dwelling. There is a minimum building separation of approximately 3.0 metres between the proposed dwelling on Part 2 and the abutting dwelling to the north, and a minimum separation of 3.1 metres between the proposed dwellings on Parts 1 and 2. Similarly, there is a minimum building separation of approximately 4.3 metres between the proposed dwelling on Part 1 and the abutting dwelling to the south. There is sufficient room between the structures on the proposed lots and the existing dwellings on the abutting lots to accommodate drainage and for the maintenance of each dwelling. Dwelling Depth – Part 1 & 2 The intent of a maximum dwelling depth requirement of 20 metres is to ensure new dwellings are generally in keeping with the existing dwellings along a street to avoid privacy and overshadow issues. The majority of dwellings along this block of Appleview Road have dwelling depths that comply with the maximum dwelling depth requirement, including the abutting dwellings to the north and south of the subject property which have dwelling depths of 20 and 19 metres respectively. There are also a number of dwellings along this block of Appleview Road that exceed the maximum dwelling depth requirement, generally having dwelling depths of 30 metres. Staff are of the opinion that an increase in dwelling depth by 0.6 metres (2 feet) will not result in a loss of privacy or create overshadow issues for the abutting dwellings to the north or south. The proposed lots have large rear yards (the proposed rear yard setback for each lot is 45.65 metres) which will not be affected by the marginal increase in dwelling depth. Height of Accessory Structure (Shed) – Part 2 The intent of a maximum height of 3.5 metres for accessory structures is to minimize the visual impact of accessory buildings on the streetscape, and to ensure abutting yards are not significantly obstructed by these structures on the property. The existing shed is located in the rear yard and has no impact on the streetscape. The shed is setback more than 1.0 metre from the shared north property line, which helps to reduce the impact of the structure on the abutting north property. -25- Report P/CA 109/21 & P/CA 110/21 December 8, 2021 Page 4 Desirable for the Appriopriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The requested variances will help facilitate the development of the subject property for residential lots. The existing lot has a frontage of 30 metres, which is wider than the majority of lots along this block of Appleview Road. The proposed lots with frontages of 15.2 metres will be in keeping with the existing lotting pattern along the street. The size of the proposed dwellings is appropriate relative to the size of the proposed lots. The existing accessory structure (shed) has existed on the subject property for many years without complaint. Staff consider a reduction in the lot frontages by 2.8 metres, a reduction in the side yards by 0.3 metres and an increase in the dwelling depths by 0.6 metres to be minor in nature. Input From Other Sources Applicant • To accommodate two lots, it is necessary to reduce the lot frontage and the side yards. Engineering Services • No comments. Building Services • Building Services do not have any concerns. Public Input • No written submissions were received from the public as of the date of writing this report. Date of report: December 2, 2021 Comments prepared by: Isabel Lima Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP (Acting) Planner II Manager, Zoning and Administration IL:jc J:\Documents\Development\D-3700\2021\PCA 109-21 & PCA 110-21 S. Perks\7. Report Attachments -26- Urban City of Pickering Established A 1 Appendix A Urban Design Guideline Checklist City of Pickering Established Neighbourhood Precincts Urban Design Checklist Please note, if you mark “no” below please provide your rational in the adjacent “Comments” section either supporting, or not supporting the proposal. Yes No Comments X 1. Is the proposed dwelling height and roof pitch similar/compatible with the surrounding dwellings? (see Section 2.1: Guideline 1) Within this block of Appleview Road, dwellings range between 1 and 2-storeys X 2. If the proposed new dwelling is significantly taller than an existing adjacent house, does the roof of the proposed new dwelling slope away from the existing adjacent house? (see Section 2.1: Guideline 2) The proposed roofs are sloped. X 3. Is the maximum elevation of the Front Entrance 1.2 metres, or less, above grade? (see Section 2.2: Guideline 1) X 4. Is the main entrance visible from the street? (see Section 2.2: Guideline 2) X 5. Are the stairs to the main entrance designed as an integral component of the front façade? (Section 2.2: Guideline 7) X 6. Does the design of the front entrance reduce the visual dominance of the garage and driveway? (see Section 2.2: Guideline 9) X 7. Does the proposed dwelling have a similar Dwelling Depth to the adjacent dwellings along the street? (see Section 2.3: Guideline 2) The abutting dwellings to the north and south have dwelling depths of 20 and 19 metres respectively. The proposed dwellings have depths of 20.6 metres, which is marginally larger than the abutting dwellings. -27- Appendix A Urban Design Checklist Cont’d Urban City of Pickering Established A 2 Yes No Comments X 8. Does the proposed dwelling have a similar Side Yard Setback to the adjacent dwellings along the street? (see Figure 15) The abutting dwelling to the north has a south side yard setback of 1.54 metres. The abutting dwelling to the south has a north side yard setback of 2.8 metres. X 9. Has shadow on adjacent dwellings been mitigated with greater Side Yard Setbacks? (Section 3.1: Guideline 2) Greater side yard setbacks are not proposed. X 10. Is the garage flush or recessed from the main front wall? (see Section 3.2: Guideline 5) 11. Is the proposed driveway width the same as the permitted garage width? (see Section 3.3: Guideline 1) Unknown. Applicant to confirm at building permit stage. 12. Does the plan preserve existing trees? (see Section 4.1: Guideline 1) Unknown. Applicant to confirm at building permit stage. -28- R a m bleberryAvenue Wingarden Crescent Ap p l e v i e w R o a d Gle n a n n a R o a d Bonita Avenue Br o o k s h i r e S q u a r e Fa i r p o r t R o a d Gablehurst Crescent Lo n g b o w D r i v e Strouds Lane VoyagerAvenue EchoPoint Court He a t h s i d e C r e s c e n t Ho l b r o o k C o u r t Sh a d e M a s t e r D r i v e Fa l c o n w o o d W a y Bonita Park ForestbrookPark DalewoodRavine DalewoodRavine William DunbarPublic School Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: P/CA 109/21 & P/CA 110/21 Date: Oct. 28, 2021 Exhibit 1 S. Perks 1882 Appleview Road SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\PCA\2021\PCA 109-21 & PCA 110-21 S. Perks\PCA109-21_PCA110-21_LocationMap.mxd 1:4,000 SCALE:THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © Queens Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, Departmentof Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights reserved.; © Municipal PropertyAssessment Corporation and its suppliers. All rights reserved. City DevelopmentDepartment -29- Ex h i b i t 2 Su b m i t t e d Si t e Pl a n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 10 9 / 2 1 & P / C A 1 1 0 / 2 1 Ap p l i c a n t : S. P e r k s Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 18 8 2 A p p l e v i e w R o a d CO N T A C T T H E CI T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T F O R D I G I T A L C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N . Da t e : No v e m b e r 1 9 , 2 0 2 1 to p e r m i t a m i n i m u m l o t fr o n t a g e o f 1 5 . 2 m e t r e s to p e r m i t m i n i m u m n o r t h a n d so u t h s i d e y a r d s o f 1 . 5 m e t r e s to p e r m i t m i n i m u m n o r t h a n d so u t h s i d e y a r d s o f 1 . 5 m e t r e s to p e r m i t a m a x i m u m d w e l l i n g de p t h o f 20 . 6 m e t r e s to r e c o g n i z e a n e x i s t i n g a c c e s s o r y st r u c t u r e ( s h e d ) w i t h a h e i g h t o f 4. 3 m e t r e s -30- Ex h i b i t 3 Su b m i t t e d Fr o n t E l e v a t i o n – Pa r t s 1 a n d 2 Fi l e N o : P/ C A 10 9 / 2 1 & P / C A 1 1 0 / 2 1 Ap p l i c a n t : S. P e r k s Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 18 8 2 A p p l e v i e w R o a d CO N T A C T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T F O R D I G I T A L C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N . Da t e : No v e m b e r 1 9 , 2 0 2 1 -31- Ex h i b i t 4 Su b m i t t e d Re a r El e v a t i o n – Pa r t s 1 a n d 2 Fi l e N o : P/ C A 10 9 / 2 1 & P / C A 1 1 0 / 2 1 Ap p l i c a n t : S. P e r k s Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 18 8 2 A p p l e v i e w R o a d CO N T A C T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T F O R D I G I T A L C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N . Da t e : No v e m b e r 1 9 , 2 0 2 1 -32- Ex h i b i t 5 Su b m i t t e d No r t h S i d e Y a r d El e v a t i o n – Pa r t s 1 a n d 2 Fi l e N o : P/ C A 10 9 / 2 1 & P / C A 1 1 0 / 2 1 Ap p l i c a n t : S. P e r k s Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 18 8 2 A p p l e v i e w R o a d CO N T A C T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T F O R D I G I T A L C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N . Da t e : No v e m b e r 1 9 , 2 0 2 1 -33- Ex h i b i t 6 Su b m i t t e d S o u t h Si d e Y a r d El e v a t i o n – Pa r t s 1 a n d 2 Fi l e N o : P/ C A 10 9 / 2 1 & P / C A 1 1 0 / 2 1 Ap p l i c a n t : S. P e r k s Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 18 8 2 A p p l e v i e w R o a d CO N T A C T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T F O R D I G I T A L C O P I E S O F TH I S P L A N . Da t e : No v e m b e r 1 9 , 2 0 2 1 -34- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: P/CA 111/21 Date: December 8, 2021 From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Manager, Zoning and Administration Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application P/CA 111/21 M. Vattipulusu & D. Akula 1817 Parkhurst Crescent Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by By-law 7020/10, to permit: • uncovered steps and a platform to be setback a minimum of 0.3 of a metre from an interior side lot line, whereas the By-law requires a covered or uncovered porch, veranda or balcony and with or without a foundation to be setback a minimum of 0.6 of a metre from an interior side lot line; and • a deck in the rear yard to be setback a minimum of 2.1 metres to the rear lot line, whereas the By-law requires uncovered decks of any height provided a minimum setback of 3.0 metres is provided to the rear lot line. The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to facilitate the construction of an above grade staircase leading to an entrance of an accessory dwelling unit and to recognize an existing rear yard platform (deck). Recommendation The City Development Department has reviewed the application with respect to Section 45(1) of the Planning Act and are of the opinion that the requested variances meet the four tests. Staff recommend that the Committee of Adjustment consider all public and agency input in reaching a decision. Should the Committee find merit in this application, the following condition is recommended: 1. That these variances apply only to the subject property, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2 & 3). Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan Pickering’s Official Plan designates this property as “Urban Residential Areas – Medium Density Areas” within the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood. This designation provides for residential uses and uses accessory thereto. -35- Report P/CA 111/21 December 8, 2021 Page 2 Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The subject property is zoned “S-SD-SA-3” within Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by By-law 7020/10. The intent of the By-law provision to permit uncovered steps and a platform to be setback a minimum of 0.6 of a metre from an interior side lot line is to provide the opportunity for encroachment into the side yard where required while maintaining an adequate buffer space between buildings and to accommodate for pedestrian access and other residential services. The applicant is proposing a 0.9 metre by 0.9 metre landing with steps in the east side yard to facilitate steps to an exterior entrance to an accessory dwelling unit (ADU). The proposed ADU will be in the basement of the existing two-storey dwelling. The steps project 0.9 of a metre from the dwelling and maintain a 0.3 of a metre setback from the side property line. The intent of the By-law provision to require uncovered decks of any height to be setback of 3.0 metres from the rear lot line is to ensure there is adequate space between structures, to accommodate for drainage and maintenance, and to ensure adequate soft amenity space is provided in the rear yard. The applicant seeks to recognize an existing uncovered deck in the rear yard that was constructed without a building permit by the previous property owner. The existing deck maintains a 2.1 metre setback from the rear yard, which provides adequate space to meet the intent of the By-law. Desirable for the Appriopriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The side door for the ADU is elevated 0.7 of a metre above grade level requiring steps to safely access the entrance. The proposed platform has an area of 0.9 of a metre by 0.9 of a metre which results in a minor encroachment into the side yard. The existing uncovered deck measures 5.0 metres by 4.3 metres. It provides for additional usable amenity area in the rear yard of the property, while maintaining adequate uncovered soft amenity space in the rear yard. The deck is existing and staff have not received comments from neighbours regarding the deck, as of the writing of this report. Input From Other Sources Applicant • The existing by-law requires an interior side yard setback of 0.6 metre whereas 0.34 metres is being provided. Engineering Services • Ensure reduced setbacks do not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lots and surrounding area. Building Services • No comments as of the writing of this report. -36- Report P/CA 111/21 December 8, 2021 Page 3 Public Input Owners of 1815 Parkhurst Crescent: •In objection to the construction of the staircase leading to the entrance of an accessory dwelling unit. •1815 Parkhurst Crescent is the adjacent propertyowner to the proposed staircase. •The area in between the dwellings is already narrowand there is no fence, constructing the staircase wouldrequire the neighbour to utilize their portion of thespace to access the backyard. •Concerns about safety and maintenance of theirproperty. Date of report: December 2, 2021 Comments prepared by: Felix Chau Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Manager, Zoning and Administration Planner II FC:jc J:\Documents\Development\D-3700\Reports\2013\pca111-13.doc Attachments -37- WilliamJacksonDrive Misthollow Drive Pe n n y L a n e Li a t r i s D r i v e Kalmar Avenue Hayden Lane Pa r k h u r s t C r e s c e n t CreeksidePark Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: P/CA 111/21 Date: Nov. 04, 2021 Exhibit 1 M. Vattipulusu & D. Akula1817 Parkhurst Crescent SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\PCA\2021\PCA 111-21 M. Vattipulusu & D. Akula\PCA111-21_LocationMap.mxd 1:2,000 SCALE:THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © Queens Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, Departmentof Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights reserved.; © Municipal PropertyAssessment Corporation and its suppliers. All rights reserved. City DevelopmentDepartment -38- Ex h i b i t 2 Su b m i t t e d P l a n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 1 1 1 /2 1 Ap p l i c a n t : M. V a t t i p u l u s u & D . A k u l a Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 18 1 7 P a r k h u r s t C r e s c e n t CO N T A C T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T F O R D I G I T A L C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N . Da t e : No v . 2 3 , 2 0 2 1 to p e r m i t un c o v e r e d s t e p s a n d a p l a t f o r m to b e s e t b a c k a m i n i m u m o f 0 . 3 of a m e t r e fr o m a n i n t e r i o r s i d e l o t l i n e to p e r m i t a d e c k i n t h e r e a r y a r d to b e s e t b a c k a m i n i m u m o f 2. 1 m e t r e s t o t h e r e a r l o t l i n e -39- Ex h i b i t 3 Su b m i t t e d S i d e E l e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 11 1 /2 1 Ap p l i c a n t : M. V a t t i p u l u s u & D . A k u l a Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 18 1 7 Pa r k h u r s t C r e s c e n t CO N T A C T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T F O R D I G I T A L C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N . Da t e : No v . 2 2 , 2 0 2 1 to p e r m i t un c o v e r e d s t e p s a n d a p l a t f o r m to b e s e t b a c k a m i n i m u m o f 0 . 3 of a me t r e f r o m a n i n t e r i o r s i d e l o t l i n e -40- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: P/CA 112/21 Date: December 8, 2021 From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Manager, Zoning and Administration Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application P/CA 112/21 Marathon Homes Limited 2601 Delphinium Trail Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 7364/14, as amended by By-law 7857/21, to permit: • a parking space to be a minimum of 2.6 metres in width and 3.8 metres in length, whereas the By-law requires parking spaces to be a minimum of 2.6 metres in width and 5.3 metres in length; and • a parking space to be within a daylighting triangle, whereas the By-law states no parking space shall be permitted within any daylighting triangle. The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application in order to permit an outdoor parking space that is partially located in a daylighting triangle. Recommendation The City Development Department has reviewed the application with respect to Section 45(1) of the Planning Act and are of the opinion that the requested variances meet the four tests. Staff recommend that the Committee of Adjustment consider all public and agency input in reaching a decision. Should the Committee find merit in this application, the following condition is recommended: 1. That these variances apply only to the proposed outdoor parking space, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibit 2). Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated Urban Residential Areas – Medium Density Area within the Lamoureaux Neighbourhood. The residential use of the property is permitted within this designation. Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The purpose of the requested variances is to permit an outdoor parking space for a residential property to be partially located within a daylighting triangle. -41- Report P/CA 112/21 December 8, 2021 Page 2 The purpose of a daylighting triangle is to ensure obstructions such as buildings, structures, fences or hedges on privately owned property do not impede the view of pedestrians, motorists and cyclists at the intersection of two street lines. The City typically requires a conveyance of lands for a daylighting triangle for road dedication purposes, to prevent sightline obstructions to ensure safe pedestrian and vehicular movement. For the subject lands, a daylighting triangle is located abutting the northwest corner of the property, resulting in the irregular shaped lot. A corner of the proposed outdoor parking space is located partially within the daylighting triangle due to the irregularity of the lot. The intent of a minimum parking space requirement of 2.6 x 5.3 metres is to ensure there is sufficient space to park a vehicle and enter/exit a vehicle within the parking space. The intent of prohibiting any parking space from being located within a daylighting triangle is to prevent any sightline obstructions. Staff are of the opinion that the reduced parking space of 2.6 x 3.88 metres will still provide sufficient space to park a vehicle and enter/exit a vehicle. Staff are of the opinion that a vehicle can be accommodated within the proposed parking space without causing any obstructions to the daylighting triangle. Desirable for the Appriopriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature Engineering Services has no concerns with the proposed siting of the outdoor parking space that is partially located in a daylighting triangle. Staff consider a reduction in the length of the parking space by 1.42 metres to be minor in nature. Input From Other Sources Applicant • The large daylight triangle does not permit the required parking space of 2.6 metres by 5.3 metres to be within the lot boundaries. Engineering Services • No comments. Building Services • Building Services do not have any concerns. Public Input • No written submissions were received from the public as of the date of writing this report. Date of report: December 2, 2021 Comments prepared by: Isabel Lima Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP (Acting) Planner II Manager, Zoning and Administration IL:jc J:\Documents\Development\D-3700\2021\PCA 112-21 Marathon Homes Limited\7. Report Attachments -42- Marathon Avenue Hib i s c u s D r i v e S k y ri d g e B o u le v a r d Azalea Avenue Egan Mews De l p h i n i u m T r a i l Ceri s e M a n o r Pe t e r M a t t h e w s D r i v e Cactus Crescent Sp i n d l e M e w s At h e n a P a t h Ap r i c o t L a n e So l s t i c e M e w s Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: P/CA 112/21 Date: Nov. 04, 2021 Exhibit 1 Marathon Homes Limited2601 Delphinium Trail SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\PCA\2021\PCA 112-21 Marathon Homes Limited\PCA112-21_LocationMap.mxd 1:2,000 SCALE:THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © Queens Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, Departmentof Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights reserved.; © Municipal PropertyAssessment Corporation and its suppliers. All rights reserved. City DevelopmentDepartment -43- Ex h i b i t 2 Su b m i t t e d Si t e Pl a n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 11 2 /2 1 Ap p l i c a n t : Ma r a t h o n H o m e s Li m i t e d Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 26 0 1 D e l p h i n i u m T r a i l CO N T A C T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T F O R D I G I T A L C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N . Da t e : No v e m b e r 1 7 , 2 0 2 1 to p e r m i t a p a r k i n g sp a c e t o b e a m i n i m u m of 2 . 6 m e t r e s i n w i d t h an d 3 . 8 m e t r e s i n l e n g t h to p e r m i t a pa r k i n g sp a c e t o b e wi t h i n a da y l i g h t i n g tr i a n g l e -44- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: P/CA 113/21 Date: December 8, 2021 From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Manager, Zoning and Administration Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application P/CA 113/21 A. & R. Lopez 2124 Erin Gate Boulevard Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 5493/99, to permit a total of two parking spaces on the property where an accessory dwelling unit is located, whereas the By-law requires a total of three parking spaces. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to permit an accessory dwelling unit within a dwelling with two parking spaces on the lot. Recommendation The City Development Department has reviewed the application with respect to Section 45(1) of the Planning Act and are of the opinion that the requested variance does not meet the four tests. Staff recommend that the Committee of Adjustment consider all public and agency input in reaching a decision. Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan Pickering’s Official Plan designates this property as “Urban Residential Areas – Low Density Areas” within the Amberlea Neighbourhood. This designation provides for residential uses and uses accessory thereto. Does Not Conform to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The intent of the minimum parking space requirement on a property where an accessory dwelling unit is located is to ensure that adequate parking is provided on a property in order to support two separate dwelling units. The By-law requires three parking spaces to be provided on a property where an accessory dwelling unit is located. The minimum size requirement for a parking space under the Zoning By-law is 2.6 metres in width by 5.3 metres in length. The applicant is proposing to provide a total of two parking spaces on the property where an accessory dwelling unit is proposed. The existing paved surface on the subject property would not provide sufficient space to accommodate three vehicles. Staff are of the opinion that two parking spaces will not adequately support the parking demands of two separate dwelling units. -45- Report P/CA 113/21 December 8, 2021 Page 2 Not Desirable for the Appriopriate Development of the Land and Not Minor in Nature Due to the location of the property within a low density residential area in conjunction with the semi-detached nature of the existing dwelling, three parking spaces are required to accommodate the parking demands of an additional dwelling unit. While staff support ADUs as an affordable housing option within the City, adequate parking supply must be accommodated for in order to avoid increased parking congestion and impact on the surrounding properties. Input From Other Sources Applicant • Proposing a second dwelling unit in basement which requires 3 parking spaces, however only a total of 2 parking spaces are possible at this property. Engineering Services • No comments. Building Services • No comments were received as of the date of writing this report. Public Input • No written submissions were received from the public as of the date of writing this report. Date of report: December 2, 2021 Comments prepared by: Felix Chau Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Planner II Manager, Zoning and Administration FC:jc J:\Documents\Development\D-3700\Reports\2013\pca113-13.doc Attachments -46- Finch Avenue Wh i t e s R o a d Darwin Driv e Er i n G a t e B o u l e v a r d P rimrose Court Sp r u c e H i l l R o a d CraighurstCo u rt Swan Place Regal Crescent Bayl a w n D r i v e Parkside Drive BaylawnDriveRavine Erin GatePark Erin GatePark Erin GatePark Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: P/CA 113/21 Date: Nov. 09, 2021 Exhibit 1 ¯ E A. & R. Lopez2124 Erin Gate Boulevard SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\PCA\2021\PCA 113-21 A. & R. Lopez\PCA113-21_LocationMap.mxd 1:4,000 SCALE:THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © Queens Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, Departmentof Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights reserved.; © Municipal PropertyAssessment Corporation and its suppliers. All rights reserved. City DevelopmentDepartment HydroCorridor HydroCorridor -47- Ex h i b i t 2 Su b m i t t e d P l a n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 11 3 /2 1 Ap p l i c a n t : A. & R . L o p e z Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 21 2 4 E r i n G a t e B o u l e v a r d CO N T A C T T H E C I T Y OF P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T F O R D I G I T A L C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N . Da t e : No v e m b e r 2 3 , 2 0 2 1 to p e r m i t a t o t a l o f t w o p a r k i n g sp a c e s o n t h e p r o p e r t y w h e r e t h e ac c e s s o r y d w e l l i n g u n i t i s l o c a t e d -48-