Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApril 13, 2022 - Revised Revised Committee of Adjustment Agenda Hearing Number: 3 Date: Wednesday, April 13, 2022 pickering.ca For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Secretary-Treasurer or Assistant, Secretary-Treasurer Telephone: 905.420.4617 Email: citydev@pickering.ca Revised Agenda Committee of Adjustment Wednesday, April 13, 2022 6:30 pm Electronic Hearing Page Number 1. Disclosure of Interest 2. Adoption of Agenda 3. Adoption of Minutes from February 9, 2022 1-15 4. Report 4.1 (Tabled at the February 9, 2022 Hearing) 16-28 P/CA 40/22 W. & P. Grant 521 Bella Vista Drive 4.2 P/CA 43/22 29-41 M. Asgary 681 Front Road 4.3 P/CA 44/22 42-53 V. Pejcinovski 1329 Broadview Street 4.4 P/CA 45/22 54-59 B. Atique 2030 Duberry Road 4.5 P/CA 46/22 60-65 M. Khan & E Barnicutt 2300 Southcott Road 4.6 P/CA 47/22 & P/CA 48/22 66-85 M. Anjam 700 Hillview Crescent 4.7 P/CA 49/22 86-93 S. Xavier 3290 Greenburn Place 4.8 P/CA 50/22 94-99 T. Chaudhry 123 Secord Street For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Secretary-Treasurer or Assistant, Secretary-Treasurer Telephone: 905.420.4617 Email: citydev@pickering.ca Revised Agenda Committee of Adjustment Wednesday, April 13, 2022 6:30 pm Electronic Hearing Page Number 4.9 P/CA 51/22 100-107 P. Pathmanatan & K. Pushpaharan 1832 Appleview Road 4.10 P/CA 52/22 108-112 A. Ford 861 Krosno Boulevard 4.11 P/CA 53/22 113-127 T. Mylvaganam 125 Woodview Drive 4.12 P/CA 54/22 128-139 J. Rajaratnam & K. Sarvendran 1946 Liverpool Road 4.13 P/CA 55/22 – Revised 140-147 R. McKenzie & D. John 1824 Holbrook Court 4.14 P/CA 56/22 & P/CA 57/22 148-157 1000118968 Ontario Ltd. & Whitepine Group Inc. 1835 & 1837 Woodview Avenue 4.15 P/CA 58/22 & P/CA 59/22 158-164 1000118936 Ontario Ltd. & 1000119025 Ontario Ltd. 1586 & 1588 Oakburn Street 4.16 P/CA 60/22 165-176 F. Molinaro 1771 Woodview Avenue 4.17 P/CA 61/22 177-185 S. Wyce & B. Grant 624 Park Crescent 4.18 P/CA 62/22 186-191 P. Nelson 1707 Echo Point Court For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Secretary-Treasurer or Assistant, Secretary-Treasurer Telephone: 905.420.4617 Email: citydev@pickering.ca Revised Agenda Committee of Adjustment Wednesday, April 13, 2022 6:30 pm Electronic Hearing Page Number 4.19 P/CA 63/22 to P/CA 65/22 192-207 R. Crook 1771 Spruce Hill Road 5. Adjournment Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, February 9, 2022 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 1 of 15 Pending Adoption Present Tom Copeland – Vice-Chair David Johnson – Chair Eric Newton – arrived at 7:07 pm Denise Rundle Sean Wiley Also Present Deborah Wylie, Secretary-Treasurer Cody Morrison, Secretary-Treasurer Samantha O’Brien, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer Felix Chau, Planner II Isabel Lima, (Acting) Planner II Kerry Yelk, Planner I 1.Disclosure of Interest No disclosures of interest were noted. 1.1 Reordering of Items Moved by Denise Rundle Seconded by Tom Copeland That Item 4.5 for P/CA 40/22 for W. & P. Grant located at 521 Bella Vista Drive, be reordered to Item 4.1. Carried 2.Adoption of Agenda Moved by Tom Copeland Seconded by Denise Rundle That the agenda for the Wednesday, February 9, 2022 hearing be adopted, as amended. Carried -1- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, February 9, 2022 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 2 of 15 3. Adoption of Minutes Moved by Tom Copeland Seconded by Sean Wiley That the minutes of the 1st hearing of the Committee of Adjustment held Wednesday, January 12, 2022 be adopted. Carried To avoid a tie vote, David Johnson, Chair, stated he will abstain from voting on applications until Committee Member Eric Newton arrives. 4. Reports 4.1 P/CA 40/22 W. & P. Grant 521 Bella Vista Drive The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-law 7610/18 to permit: • a minimum front yard depth of 4.9 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum front yard depth of 7.5 metres; and • a minimum side yard depth of 1.0 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum side yard depth of 1.8 metres. The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit to construct a new detached dwelling with garage. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined that the applicant has requested the application be Tabled. When the application is ready to be lifted from the Table, there will be proper public notice and a staff report for the future Hearing. 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 stating they do not support the reduced side yard depth of 1.04 metre. It would be difficult to fit a drainage swale and the proposed retaining wall with a 1.04 metre side yard setback. Engineering Services has proposed the idea of aligning the rear of the garage with the east side of the proposed house. With regards to the reduced front yard depth, the applicant should ensure this does not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lot and surrounding area. -2- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, February 9, 2022 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 3 of 15 Written comments were received from the Region of Durham expressing no comments on the application. The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff have reviewed the requested variances and have no objections. The applicant will be required to obtain a TRCA permit for the proposed new dwelling. Written comments were received in objection to the application expressing concerns with the loss of nature and green space, inconsistent with the surrounding area; and would cause a negative impact to surround neighbours and community. Written comments were received from a resident of 523 Bella Vista Drive in objection to the application, stating concerns with a retaining wall, grading, proposed building height, the massing of the property, and the character of the neighbourhood. In support of the application, the applicant submitted a Planning Rationale that was shared with Committee Members. Michael Fry, agent, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Michael Fry stated his agreement with the request to Table the application. Given the request by the applicant through the applicant’s agent to Table the application, Tom Copeland moved the following motion: Moved by Tom Copeland Seconded by Denise Rundle That application P/CA 40/22 by W. & P. Grant, be Tabled as requested by the applicant and agent. Carried 4.2 (Tabled at the November 10, 2021 Hearing) P/CA 104/21 A. Uthayakumaran 275 Uxbridge-Pickering Townline Road Moved by Tom Copeland Seconded by Sean Wiley That application P/CA 104/21 by A. Uthayakumaran, be lifted from the table. Carried -3- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, February 9, 2022 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 4 of 15 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. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit to facilitate the construction of a detached dwelling. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined that City staff are of the opinion that the requested variance meets the four tests of the Planning Act. Committee Member, Eric Newton joined the electronic Hearing at 7:07 pm; having all members present and able to vote on the remaining applications. 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 stating the applicant should ensure the increased building ground floor area does not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lot and surrounding area. Written comments were received from the Region of Durham expressing no comments on the application. Written comments were received from residents of 160 Uxbridge-Pickering Townline Road in objection to the application. In support of the application, the applicant identified the intent of the proposal is to facilitate the construction of a new detached dwelling on the lot. Peter Jaruczik, agent, was present to represent the application. Gloria & James 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 has since been modified from its original proposal. The request has scaled down the size of the accessory barn and worked with TRCA to accommodate their recommendations and submission of proper MDS calculations to surrounding farm areas. The original requested variance to facilitate the larger accessory barn, has been removed. The new request is to accommodate the construction of the main dwelling with an enclosed indoor swimming pool. -4- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, February 9, 2022 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 5 of 15 James Johnstone spoke in objection to the application stating concerns with lack of communication from the owners; the agricultural land presumably being used as a commercial site; deterioration of the roads from construction vehicles; loss of natural features; lack of environmental assessment; previous removal of trees; and significant visual impact. In response to questions from Committee Members, Peter Jaruczik stated, the owner has several land holdings, this is his primary residence. The farm operation is managed from this property and accommodates storage of farm vehicles. The accessory barn structure will include a mezzanine, workshop, agricultural business office, and staff room for farm hands. The barn complies with the Zoning By-law and does not require a minor variance. The remaining acreage will be farmed. The main dwelling will be for a single family and not include any rental units. Strictly no lodging will be anywhere on the property. The owner created an addition to the existing 3-4 car detached garage on the westerly limits of property, which received all necessary building permits. The existing dwelling will be demolished to facilitate construction of the new main dwelling. Peter Jaruczik stated he has visited the site several times with the TRCA and will maintain the ecologically sensitive area where a previously purposed entrance was at Sideline 32. A road will be kept on the inside and away from the ecologically sensitive area. A Natural Heritage Feature Study and Stormwater Management Study is underway and will be submitted to the TRCA. A Site Plan Control application was not requested by City staff and has not been applied for to date. Peter Jaruczik continued, the requested extra 80 square metres is to enclose an existing outdoor swimming pool. The total gross floor area for the dwelling including the basement is approximately 3,048 square metres (10,000 square feet). A partially finished basement, will include a home theatre, gym and recreational room. Significant trees and screening along Sideline 32 already exists, and as part of the Natural Heritage evaluation, the applicant will accommodate a buffer zone and plantings to the satisfaction of TRCA. A significant setback of 30 to 40 metres is provided between Sideline 32 and the proposed dwelling. In response to questions from Committee Members, Deborah Wylie, Secretary- Treasurer stated, portions of the land are within the TRCA regulated area, and a TRCA permit will be required prior to the issuance of a building permit. The applicant has been working with TRCA to address any comments, concerns, setback issues, and supporting studies. Agricultural related uses are permitted on the site. This would include the maintenance of any farm equipment, and farm related buildings. The City’s Site Plan Control By-law 7632/18 designation requires Site Plan Control for development within the Oak Ridges Moraine. There are some exceptions of classes of development; however detached dwellings are not exempt. Therefore, Site Plan Control will be required prior to issuance of a building permit. After hearing the concerns from the neighbours and questions from Committee Members, the responses from the agent, the applicant’s collaboration with the TRCA as part of the building permit process, the compliance with Zoning for the use of land as a -5- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, February 9, 2022 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 6 of 15 single family dwelling without any rental or lodging uses, and the size of the structures relative to the lot, the application appears to meet the four tests of the Planning Act, and Sean Wiley moved the following motion: Moved by Sean Wiley Seconded by Denise Rundle That application P/CA 104/21 by A. Uthayakumaran, 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 Zoning By-law, subject to the following conditions: 1. That this variance apply only to the 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 February 9, 2022); and 2. That the applicant obtains a demolition permit to ensure that the existing detached dwelling on the subject property is removed and that all inspections have been completed or, execute and register on title a Demolition Agreement to the satisfaction of the City of Pickering, which will secure the future removal of the existing detached dwelling on the subject property, to the satisfaction of the Building Services Department; and 3. That the applicant receive Site Plan Control approval. Carried Vote: Tom Copeland in favour David Johnson in favour Eric Newton opposed Denise Rundle in favour Sean Wiley in favour -6- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, February 9, 2022 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 7 of 15 4.3 P/CA 34/22 Metropia (Notion Road) Development Inc. 1865 Pickering Parkway The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 7788/20, to permit: • porches and associated stairs not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above established grade to encroach a maximum of 1.0 metre outside the established building envelope, whereas the By-law requires porches and associated stairs not exceeding 1.0 metres in height above established grade may encroach a maximum of 0.5 of a metre outside the building envelope The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application in order to permit residential porches to encroach a maximum of 1.0 metre outside the established building envelope. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined that City staff are of the opinion that the requested variance meets the four tests of the Planning Act. 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 Region of Durham expressing no comments on the application. In support of the application, the applicant identified they are seeking relief from the setback requirements of the current zoning provisions, for which there has been a Zoning By-law Amendment approved within the last two years. The reason for this application despite a Zoning By-law Amendment having been passed for the same project is due to an administrative error in which a portion of encroachment on the proposed development was not completely captured the text of the approved by-law. Michelle Wei & Ryan Guetter, agents, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. In support of the application, Michelle Wei stated the reason for the application is due to an administrative error in the approved Zoning By-law Amendment 7788/20 which was approved in October 2020. This depicted a projection of 0.5 of a metre, whereas it was intended to be 1.0 metres of an encroachment outside of the building envelope. The staff report to the Committee of Adjustment has been reviewed and appears satisfactory to the applicant where they share agreement for the staff recommendation of approval. -7- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, February 9, 2022 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 8 of 15 Based on the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, comments made by the applicant’s agent, the application appears to be very straight forward and appears to meet the four tests of the Planning Act, Tom Copeland moved the following motion: Moved by Tom Copeland Seconded by Eric Newton That application P/CA 34/22 by Metropia (Notion Road) 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 Zoning By-law, subject to the following condition: 1. That this variance apply only to the proposed porches and associated stairs, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibit 2, 3, & 4, contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated February 9, 2022). Carried Unanimously 4.4 P/CA 35/22 Deco Homes (Seaton) Inc. 2617 Hibiscus Drive The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 7364/14, as amended by By-law 7857/21, to permit: • a parking space reduced in width and 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. 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 concerns with the application. Written comments were received from the City’s Engineering Services Department expressing no comments on the application. -8- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, February 9, 2022 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 9 of 15 Written comments were received from the Region of Durham expressing no comments on the application. In support of the application, the applicant identified that the daylight triangle does not permit the required parking space of 2.6 metres by 5.3 metres to be within the lot boundaries. Chris Marchese, applicant, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. In support of the application, Chris Marchese stated he has consulted with the necessary City departments to receive support without any objections. The daylight triangle was not captured in the By-law’s minor encroachment, and agrees with the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment that the application meets the four tests of the Planning Act. Chris Marchese stated the focus of development is on the southeast corner of Marathon Avenue and Hibiscus Drive; with the daylight triangle being fairly large. There is a sidewalk and side yard at the unit being proposed, where this application facilitates technical variances. Functionally it does meet the requirements of a parking space and is a minor encroachment into the daylight triangle of the municipal boulevard. After having reviewed the report to the Committee of Adjustment and agree with the staff comments; seeing that the variances are prompted by the irregular shape of the lot and the application appearing to meet the four tests of the Planning Act. Denise Rundle moved the following motion: Moved by Denise Rundle Seconded by Eric Newton That application P/CA 35/22 by Deco Homes (Seaton) Inc., 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 Zoning By-law, subject to the following condition: 1. That this variance apply only to the proposed outdoor parking space, 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 February 9, 2022). Carried Unanimously -9- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, February 9, 2022 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 10 of 15 4.5 P/CA 36/22 S. & S. Vaz 1315 Broadview Street The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-laws 7872/21 & 7900/22, to permit: • a minimum front yard of 6.3 metres for an uncovered platform and associated steps (front porch) and a second-storey balcony, and to recognize an existing sunroom, whereas the By-law requires a minimum front yard of 7.5 metres; and • a front entrance with a maximum elevation of 1.3 metres above average grade, whereas the By-law states that the maximum elevation of the front entrance shall be 1.2 metres above the average grade. The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit for the construction of the front porch and associated steps, and to recognize the changes made to the existing sunroom. 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 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 Region of Durham expressing no comments on the application. In support of the application, the applicant identified that the house was purchased in 2021. The house was already approved for a setback of 6.0 metres, as per application P/CA 36/95 was granted to allow a 6.0 metre front yard depth. The house foundation was severely damaged and potentially unsafe for occupancy, a basement was built to ensure a structurally sound house. Stuart & Savio Vaz, applicants, were present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Savio Vaz spoke in support of the application stating agreement with City staff’s report to the Committee of Adjustment. -10- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, February 9, 2022 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 11 of 15 In response to a question from a Committee Member, Stuart Vaz stated the sunroom was built in 1995 by the previous homeowners. The sunroom projected 7.5 metres and allowed for a 6.0 metres setback. After the purchase of the property, the sunroom was restored, having been in extreme disrepair. After hearing from the applicant and seeing no comments in objection to the application, it appears to meet the four tests of the Planning Act, and Sean Wiley moved the following motion: Moved by Sean Wiley Seconded by Eric Newton That application P/CA 36/22 by S. & S. Vaz, 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 Zoning By-law, subject to the following condition: 1. That these variances apply only to the uncovered platform and associated steps (front porch), second-storey balcony and existing sunroom, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3 & 4, contained the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated February 9, 2022). Carried Unanimously 4.6 P/CA 41/22 S. Savanyu & B. Pearen 1331 Gull Crossing The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2520, as amended by By-law 7528/16, to permit an uncovered deck to encroach 3.0 metres into the required rear yard, whereas the By-law permits uncovered decks to encroach into any rear yard to a maximum of 2.0 metres. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to facilitate the construction of an uncovered platform (deck). The Secretary-Treasurer outlined that City staff are of the opinion that the requested variance does not meet the four tests of the Planning Act. Written comments were received from the City’s Building Services Section stating the applicants will require a building permit that is to be review in accordance to the Ontario Building Code. It is important to note, what is seen in a conceptual drawing may not be code compliant. The details of the construction will be reviewed by City staff at the time of permit submission. -11- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, February 9, 2022 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 12 of 15 Written comments were received from the City’s Engineering Services Department expressing no comments on the application. Written comments were received from a resident of 1363 Gull Crossing in objection to the application stating concerns with height and privacy. Written comments were received from the residents of 1333 Gull Crossing and 1335 Gull Crossing, in support of the application. In support of the application, the applicant submitted a Planning Rationale that was shared with Committee Members and made available to the public if a copy was requested. Sara Savanyu & Bradley Pearen, applicants, and Alex Savanyu, agent, were present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Alex Savanyu spoke in support of the application stating, the application for the rear yard platform deck exceeds the By-law by 1.0 metres. Discussions have taken place with planning staff, the report has been reviewed and the applicants have no issues with two proposed conditions of approval. Two letters of support have been submitted, along with verbal support from others. After having reviewed the neighbouring concerns regarding privacy and visual impact, the deck has been designed to include a tiered privacy wall on either side and a railing. The deck is not maximizing the allowable width even though it is requesting a 1.0 metre difference in projected length. Most of the dwellings within this subdivision have or are contemplating rear yard decks, that adds amenity space to the property. To avoid a reapplication, should the Committee not favour the current proposal, the applicants would be willing to defer the application and further work with planning staff. In response to a question from the Chair, Deborah Wylie, Secretary-Treasurer, stated she is not aware of any variance applications for decks that have come before the Committee. This is a fairly new subdivision and the Committee may start to see more come forward in the future for consideration. In response to a question from a Committee Member, Alex Savanyu stated, based on the survey the property grading is relatively flat, however it may have a slight slope for drainage purposes. There is a solid wood fence constructed between homes that is 2.13 metres (7 feet) tall, which does not allow for a surplus of privacy. As a result, additional privacy measures have been taken into account, in the form of tiered walls with varying materials on all sides. -12- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, February 9, 2022 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 13 of 15 Denise Rundle, Committee Member, commented that this is an infill type of development surrounded by single family homes. This area is an architecturally interesting townhouse development with very consistent setbacks, that should be maintained. Denise Rundle stated her agreement with the applicant that the decks were anticipated off the second floor of these units due to the narrowness of the rear yards. The previous zoning amendments, anticipated this by allowing for 2.0 metres. By permitting this type of request, it would allow others to do the same and take away from the architectural consistency of the development. The overlook and privacy do appear to be of concern. In this way, the entire townhouse development would need to be reviewed as a whole, and no other applications have been brought forward at this time. Having reviewed the application, listening to the applicant’s agent, appreciating the privacy measures considered by the applicants, being in agreement with comments made, and concurring with the report to the Committee of Adjustment, the application does not appear to meet the four tests of the Planning Act, and Tom Copeland moved the following motion: Moved by Tom Copeland Seconded by Eric Newton That application P/CA 41/22 by S. Savanyu & B. Pearen, be Refused on the grounds that the requested variance does not meet the four tests of the Planning Act. Carried Unanimously 4.7 P/CA 42/22 V. Varghese 1576 Greenmount Street The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 1975/85, to permit: • a covered platform and associated steps not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 2.6 metres into the required rear yard, whereas the By-law requires 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; and • a maximum lot coverage of 39 percent, whereas the By-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 38 percent. The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit for the reconstruction of a covered deck with steps. -13- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, February 9, 2022 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 14 of 15 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 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 Region of Durham expressing no comments on the application. In support of the application, the applicant identified the rear yard distance from the building wall edge to the property line is 7.97 metres. Vincent Varghese, applicant, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. In support of the application, Vincent Varghese stated the intent of this application is to have a covered porch in the rear yard since the dwelling does not have a covered space in the front. The covered porch would assist with enjoying the amenity space under varying weather conditions. In response to a question from a Committee Member, Vincent Varghese stated there is no intent to enclose the covered rear yard porch. After hearing from the applicant and reviewing the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, the application appears to meet the four test of the Planning Act, and Eric Newton moved the following motion: Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Tom Copeland That application P/CA 42/22 by V. Varghese, 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 Zoning By-law, subject to the following condition(s): 1. That these variances apply only to the proposed covered deck and steps, 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 February 9, 2022). Carried Unanimously -14- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, February 9, 2022 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 15 of 15 5. Adjournment Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Sean Wiley That the 2nd hearing of the 2022 Committee of Adjustment be adjourned at 8:17 pm and the next hearing of the Committee of Adjustment be held on Wednesday, March 9, 2022. Carried Unanimously __________________________ Date __________________________ Chair __________________________ Assistant Secretary-Treasurer -15- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: P/CA 40/22 Date: April 13, 2022 From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: (Tabled at the February 9, 2022 Hearing) Committee of Adjustment Application P/CA 40/22 W. & P. Grant 521 Bella Vista Drive Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-law 7610/18 to permit: •a minimum front yard depth of 6.0 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum front yard depth of 7.5 metres; and •a minimum side yard depth of 1.2 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum side yard depth of 1.5 metres. The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit to construct a new detached dwelling with garage. 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 conditions are recommended: 1.That these variances apply only to the proposed new detached dwelling with garage, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (see Exhibits 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 & 7). 2.That prior to the issuance of a building permit, the property owner obtains permission in writing from the adjacent property owner(s) to perform grading works up to the lot line and/or to create a common swale on the lot line, to the satisfaction of Engineering Services. -16- Report P/CA 40/22 April 13, 2022 Page 2 Background Previous Committee of Adjustment Hearing At the February 9, 2022 Committee of Adjustment hearing, the Committee of Adjustment tabled application P/CA 40/22, to allow the applicant to consider Engineering Services comments and address the issues raised by Planning and Engineering such as drainage and the placement of the proposed detached dwelling. The applicant has worked with planning staff to address their concerns, including revisions to their proposal with a reduction in the extent of the previous requested variances. Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated “Natural Area” within the Rosebank Neighbourhood. The primary built form in this neighbourhood is detached dwellings on irregular large lots. The neighbourhood policies encourage, where possible, new development along Bella Vista Drive to be compatible with the character of existing development. The few adjacent houses in the immediate area are large, and have irregular lot shapes. All existing houses including the adjacent houses to the west and east are setback beyond the minimum front yard requirement of 7.5 metres providing deep front yards. The applicant has proposed a west side yard setback greater than the minimum requirement, however, the east side yard setback has been reduced. This is of concern as the dwelling on the adjacent property has a west side yard setback less than the minimum requirement. The houses on the south side of Bella Vista Drive are generally situated closer to the rear lot line/Lake Ontario shoreline than to the front lot line/Bella Vista Drive. The requested variances would facilitate development that maintains the existing character along Bella Vista Drive. Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law 521 Bella Vista Drive is zoned “R4” – One Family Detached Dwelling – Residential Fourth Density, under Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by Zoning By-law 7610/18. A detached dwelling is permitted within the lands zoned “R4.” Front Yard Variance The intent of the front yard provision is to ensure a consistent streetscape, to provide an adequate space for soft landscaping, and to provide sufficient parking space in front of the dwelling. The proposed garage with the detached dwelling creates a minimum front yard depth of 6.0 metres measured at the northeast corner of the garage, whereas the By-law requires a minimum front yard depth of 7.5 metres. The rest of the detached dwelling is significantly setback beyond the minimum required 7.5 metre front yard up to approximately 18.0 metres measured at the northwest corner of the dwelling (refer to Exhibit 2). The reduced front yard relief from the By-law is to construct an attached three-car garage. The requested reduction in the minimum front yard requirement contributes to a streetscape consistent with the existing streetscape. -17- Report P/CA 40/22 April 13, 2022 Page 3 Side Yard Variance The intent of the side yard provisions is to ensure adequate buffer space between structures, appropriate building separation and massing, sufficient space for an adequate landscaped area, access to yards and residential utility services, to allow for maintenance, and to accommodate appropriate drainage. Engineering Services has commented that the requested 1.2 metre side yard is not supported as the information provided by the applicant does not support that the reduced side yard will accommodate a 0.15 metre deep swale and retaining wall when the existing reduced side yard of the dwelling the east is considered. The adjacent house to the east, is setback approximately 0.2 of a metre from the lot line. The City’s Engineering Design Criteria, requires an undisturbed strip and/or flat area having a width of 0.6 metres within the boundary limits of a lot when adjacent to other properties, in order for existing boundary elevations to be maintained. Swales are typically not permitted in this area. Engineering Services requires that the applicant provide written permission from the adjacent property owner to perform any works that conflict with the Engineering Design Criteria. Desirable for the Appropriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The grade of the lot is relatively flat however drops significantly at the rear lot line towards the Lake Ontario Shoreline. The property is within the TRCA regulated area and a permit will be required. The applicant has worked with the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) to address the siting of the dwelling, elevations of below grade openings and shoreline protection including the identification of the limits of development. The applicant has proposed to set back their house approximately 20.0 metres from the rear yard lot line, which provides sufficient amenity space and buffer space for utility access. As noted above the City’s Engineering Design Criteria, requires an undisturbed strip and/or flat area having a width of 0.6 metres within the boundary limits adjacent to other properties, in order for existing boundary elevations to be maintained. Swales are typically not permitted in this area. Staff are of the opinion that the proposed dwelling is desirable for the appropriate development of the land. However, the applicant must consider the existing conditions to the abutting property to the east. Should the Committee find merit in the application, staff recommend the condition that prior to the issuance of a building permit, the property owner obtains permission in writing from the adjacent property owner(s) to perform grading works up to the lot line and/or to create a common swale on the lot line, to the satisfaction of Engineering Services to ensure an adequate swale and retaining wall are accommodated -18- Report P/CA 40/22 April 13, 2022 Page 4 Input From Other Sources Applicant • Proposed lot is regulated by TRCA and has a slope overlooking Lake Ontario we have provided additional space on the west side and rear to accommodate requirements in respect to the slope Engineering Services • With regards to the reduced front yard depth, ensure this does not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lot and surrounding area. • Engineering Services does not support a reduced side yard depth of 1.2 metres. From the information that has been provided, it will not be possible to fit a 0.15 metre deep swale and a retaining wall. • The applicant must also take into account the existing conditions of the adjacent house to the east, which is only around 0.2 metres from the lot line at the northwest corner and around 0.6 metres from the lot line at the southwest corner. • As per the City’s Engineering Design Criteria, an undisturbed strip and/or flat area having a width of 0.6 metres are normally required within the boundary limits adjacent to other properties, developed or undeveloped, in order for existing boundary elevations to be maintained. Swales are typically not permitted in this area. The applicant will need to provide written permission from the adjacent property owner to perform any works that conflict with the aforementioned information. • Once this is obtained, please provide three cross sections as per the attached markup to demonstrate how the applicant intends to construct the swale and retaining wall, including the retaining wall footings/tie backs and the adjacent property (refer to Exhibit 8). Building Services • No concerns regarding this application. Toronto and Region Conservation Authority • TRCA staff have reviewed the requested variances and have no objections. The applicant will be required to obtain a TRCA permit for the proposed new dwelling. Public Input • Resident of 509 Bella Vista Drive does not object to the construction of a home on this site. Their objections are based on the following concerns: Impact to the street, impact to the surrounding neighbours, and impact on surrounding community. • Resident of 519 Bella Vista Drive objects to the Minor Variances requested. Not in keeping with the existing neighbourhood. -19- Report P/CA 40/22 April 13, 2022 Page 5 Date of report: April 7, 2022 Kerry Yelk Planner I Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Manager, Zoning & Administration KY:ld \\Fs\Planning\Documents\Development\D-3700\2022\PCA 40-22\7. Report\April 13 - Report\PCA 40-22 Report.Docx Attachments -20- Rodd Avenue D y s o n R o a d Ro s e b a n k R o a d B e l l a V i s t a D r i v e Rosebank South Park Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: P/CA 40/22 Date: Jan. 18, 2022 Exhibit 1 W. & P. Grant 521 Bella Vista Drive SubjectLands Lake Ontario L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\PCA\2022\PCA 40-22 W. & P. Grant\PCA40-22_LocationMap.mxd 1:3,000 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 Development Department -21- Exhibit 2 Submitted Site Plan File No: P/CA 40/22 Applicant: W. & P. Grant Municipal Address: 521 Bella Vista Drive CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN. Date: Mar 30, 2022 Bella Vista Drive to permit a minimum front yard setback of 6.0 metres to permit a minimum east side yard setback of 1.2 metres proposed single detached dwelling -22- Exhibit 3 Submitted Site Plan (Cropped) File No: P/CA 40/22 Applicant: W. & P. Grant Municipal Address: 521 Bella Vista Drive CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN. Date: March 30, 2022 to permit a minimum front yard setback of 6.0 metres to permit a minimum east side yard setback of 1.2 metres proposed single detached dwelling -23- Ex h i b i t 4 Su b m i t t e d We s t ( Si d e ) El e v a t i o n Pl a n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 40 / 2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : W . & P . G r a n t Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 52 1 B e l l a V i s t a D r i v e 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 : Ma r c h 3 0 , 2 0 2 2 -24- Ex h i b i t 5 Su b m i t t e d No r t h ( F r o n t ) El e v a t i o n Pl a n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 40 / 2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : W . & P . G r a n t Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 52 1 B e l l a V i s t a D r i v e 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 : Ma r c h 3 0 , 2 0 2 2 -25- Ex h i b i t 6 Su b m i t t e d So u t h ( R e a r ) El e v a t i o n Pl a n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 40 / 2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : W . & P . G r a n t Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 52 1 B e l l a V i s t a D r i v e 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 : Ma r c h 30 , 2 0 2 2 -26- Ex h i b i t 7 Su b m i t t e d Ea s t ( S i d e ) El e v a t i o n Pl a n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 40 / 2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : W . & P . G r a n t Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 52 1 B e l l a V i s t a D r i v e 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 : Ma r c h 30 , 2 0 2 2 -27- -28- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: P/CA 43/22 Date: April 13, 2022 From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Manager, Zoning and Administration Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application P/CA 43/22 M. Asgary 681 Front Road Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-laws 7610/18, 7872/21 & 7900/22, to permit: • to permit a minimum front yard depth of 7.1 metres for the second floor front wall, whereas the By-law requires a minimum front yard depth of 7.5 metres; • to permit covered steps and a platform not exceeding 1.6 metres in height above grade, not projecting more than 0.5 metres into the required front yard, whereas the By-law requires 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 yard; • to permit a minimum rear yard depth of 6.2 metres for a rear uncovered porch with steps, whereas the By-law requires a minimum rear yard depth of 7.5 metres; • to permit uncovered steps not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.0 metres into the side yard, whereas the By-law requires Uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 0.6 metres into any required side yard; • to permit a maximum front entrance elevation of 1.6 metres above the average grade, whereas the By-law requires a maximum elevation of the front entrance of 1.2 metres above the average grade; • to permit a parking space within a private garage with a minimum width of 3.0 metres and a minimum depth of 5.5 metres, whereas the By-law requires each parking space within a private garage shall have a minimum width of 3.0 metres and a minimum depth of 6.0 metres; and • to permit a minimum front yard setback of 7.1 metres based on the shortest front yard setback of adjacent dwellings, whereas the By-law requires the minimum front yard setback shall be equal to the shortest existing front yard setback of the dwellings on the immediately abutting lots located along the same side of the street and within the same block. The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to recognize a newly constructed detached dwelling. -29- Report P/CA 43/22 April 13, 2022 Page 2 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 existing two storey detached dwelling with an attached garage including the existing uncovered platform and associated steps (front porch), existing uncovered platform (rear porch) and associated steps, and uncovered steps in the north side yard, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted as-built survey (refer to Exhibits 2, 3 & 4). Background Infill & Replacement Housing By-laws On September 27, 2021, City Council enacted By-law 7872/21 (the Infill By-law) to amend Zoning By-law 2511, to rezone all lands within the Established Neighbourhood Precincts to an “Established Neighbourhood Precinct Overlay Zone” category. The amending Infill By-law introduces new provisions for yard setbacks, building height, lot coverage and other zoning standards to ensure new built form is compatible with existing built form. Following adoption by Council, the City received appeals to the Infill By law. On January 24, 2022, City Council adopted By-law 7900/22, to reinstate a maximum building height of 9.0 metres for all lands within the Established Neighbourhood Precincts. The City also received appeals to this By-law. The Infill By-laws establish a new maximum front entrance and permitted minimum and maximum front yard depths, minimum interior parking spaces, among other new provisions. The applicant is requesting variances to the minimum front yard setback, minimum width of a parking space within a private garage, and maximum front entrance height. However, please note that due to the ongoing appeals, the Infill By laws are not currently in force. Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated Urban Residential Areas – Low Density Area within the Bay Ridges Neighbourhood. The applicant has made minor changes to the existing detached dwelling, which is a permitted use within this designation and a built form within the Bay Ridges Neighbourhood. Staff have reviewed and made comment on the proposal using the Council-adopted Revised Urban Design Guidelines for Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhood Precincts Checklist, which can be found as Appendix A to this report. -30- Report P/CA 43/22 April 13, 2022 Page 3 Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law 681 Front Road is zoned “R4” – One Family Detached Dwelling – Residential Fourth Density, under Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by Zoning By-law 7872/21 & 7900/22. A detached dwelling is permitted within the lands zoned “R4.” Front Yard Variance The intent of the minimum front yard requirement of 7.5 metres is to maintain a consistent setback with abutting properties to mitigate views and privacy concerns, and to provide sufficient landscaped area and space for parking in the front yard. The existing second-storey wall has a setback of 7.1 metres from the front property line, while the main floor wall of the dwelling has a setback of approximately 10.0 metres. Rear Yard Variance The applicant has constructed a deck that connects to the rear ground-floor entrance of the dwelling with a rear yard depth of 6.2 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum rear yard depth of 7.5 metres. The intent of this provision is to ensure that sufficient amenity space is provided in the rear yard. The requested variance is to recognize the existing deck that contributes towards the total usable amenity space in the rear yard. The proposed deck will provide access to the backyard from the dwelling. There is also sufficient amenity space to the south and east of the proposed deck. Elevation of Front Entrance Variance The intent of the maximum elevation of the front entrance of 1.2 metres is to ensure the front entrance is located at a height that is compatible with the height of front entrances of neighbouring dwellings. The requested variance is to permit a front entrance with approximately 8 steps with a maximum elevation of 1.6 metres above grade. Neighbouring dwellings appear to have front entrances with 0 to 5 steps. The proposed front porch has 8 steps, which is not compatible with the height of front entrances of the two southern dwellings, which have steps ranging between 1-3 steps. However, further south down the street, properties respectfully have a range of 5-12 steps to access the front entrance. Projection of Uncovered Platform into Side and Front Yard Variances The intent of the provision that requires uncovered platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade to project not more than 0.6 metres into the required side yard is to protect the privacy of abutting properties. Due to the slight increase in elevation, the owner has constructed 5 steps entrance/exit from the front to rear yard. The existing steps will not have an impact on the views into the abutting properties to the north. The intent of the provision that requires uncovered platforms not exceeding 1.6 metre in height above grade to project not more than 0.5 metres into the required front yard is to ensure an adequate buffer space between buildings and to ensure an adequate landscaped area within the front yard is provided. The 0.5 metre projection into the required front yard leaves approximately 5.0 metres of landscaped area between the edge of the platform with associated steps and the front property line. -31- Report P/CA 43/22 April 13, 2022 Page 4 Interior Garage Parking Space The intent of a minimum parking space requirement of 3.0 x 6.0 metres is to ensure there is sufficient space to park a vehicle and enter/exit a vehicle within the parking space. Operationally, two parking spaces measured at 3.0 x 5.5 metres will be provided within the interior garage. Staff are of the opinion that the reduced parking space within the interior parking garage will 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 with minimal complications with entering/exiting the garage. Desirable for the Appriopriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The existing detached dwelling was completed in 2018, and has minimal impact on the surrounding neighbourhood. Staff are of the opinion that the existing dwelling has proven to be appropriate development of the land and to be minor in nature. Input From Other Sources Applicant • The requested amendments are minor in nature. The rear yard is irregular, more than 50 percent of the rear lot line is beyond the minimum setback. The front and side setbacks are landscaping stones. Building Services • No concerns regarding this application. Engineering Services • No comments. Public Input • No written submissions were received from the public as of the date of writing this report. -32- Report P/CA 43/22 April 13, 2022 Page 5 Date of report: April 7, 2022 Comments prepared by: Kerry Yelk Planner I Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Manager, Zoning and Administration KY:DW:ld \\Fs\planning\Documents\Development\D-3700 Committee of Adjustment (PCA Applications)\2022\PCA 43-22 M. Asgary\7. Report Attachments -33- Gu l l C r o s s i n g Fair vi e w Avenue Browning Avenue Ilona Park Road Annland Street Li v e r p o o l R o a d Broadview Street Commerce Street Wharf Street F r o n t R o a d Pl e a s a n t S t r e e t Progress Frenchman's Bay East Park Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: P/CA 43/22 Date: Feb. 16, 2022 Exhibit 1 M. Asgary 681 Front Road SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\PCA\2022\PCA 43-22 M. Asgary\PCA43-22_LocationMap.mxd 1:3,000 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 Development Department -34- Ex h i b i t 2 Su b m i t t e d As -Bu i l t P l a n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 43 / 2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : M. A s g a r y Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 68 1 F r o n t 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 DE 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 . Ma r c h 3 0 , 2 0 2 2 to pe r m i t a m i n i m u m fr o n t y a r d d e p t h o f 7. 1 me t r e s f o r t h e ca n t i l e v e r e d s e c o n d fl o o r f r o n t w a l l to p e r m i t a m i n i m u m r e a r y a r d d e p t h o f 6. 2 m e t r e s f o r a r e a r u n c o v e r e d p o r c h wi t h s t e p s to p e r m i t c o v e r e d s t e p s an d a pl a t f o r m n o t ex c e e d i n g 1 . 6 m e t r e s i n he i g h t a b o v e g r a d e , n o t pr o j e c t i n g m o r e t h a n 0. 5 me t r e s i n t o t h e re q u i r e d f r o n t y a r d . to p e r m i t u n co v e r e d st e p s n o t e x c e e d i n g 1. 0 me t r e i n h e i g h t ab o v e g r a d e a n d n o t pr o j e c t i n g m o r e t h a n 1. 0 me t r e i n t o t h e s i d e ya r d to p e r m i t a p a r k i n g s p a c e wi t h i n a p r i v a t e g a r a g e w i t h a mi n i m u m w i d t h o f 3 . 0 m e tr e s an d a m i n i m u m d e p t h o f 5. 5 me t r e s to p e r m i t a mi n i m u m fr o n t y a r d se t b a c k o f 7 . 1 me t r e s b a s e d o n th e s h o r t e s t f r o n t y a r d s e t b a c k of a d j a c e n t d w e l l i n g s to p e r m i t a m a x i m u m fr o n t e n t r a n c e e l e v a t i o n of 1 . 6 m e t r e s ab o v e t h e av e r a g e g r a d e Ou t l i n e o f 2 S t o r e y D w e l l i n g -35- Ex h i b i t 3 Su b m i t t e d We s t (F r o n t ) El e v a t i o n Pl a n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 43 /2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : M. A s g a r y Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 68 1 F r o n t Ro 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 OF T H I S P L A N . Da t e : Ma r c h 1 0 , 2 0 2 2 -36- Ex h i b i t 4 Su b m i t t e d Ea s t (R e a r ) El e v a t i o n Pl a n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 43 /2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : M. A s g a r y Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 68 1 F r o n t Ro 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 OF T H I S P L A N . Da t e : Ma r c h 1 0 , 2 0 2 2 -37- Ex h i b i t 5 Su b m i t t e d No r t h (S i d e ) El e v a t i o n Pl a n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 43 /2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : M. A s g a r y Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 68 1 F r o n t Ro 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 CO P I E S O F T H I S P L A N . Da t e : Ma r c h 1 0 , 2 0 2 2 -38- Ex h i b i t 6 Su b m i t t e d S o u t h (S i d e ) El e v a t i o n Pl a n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 43 /2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : M. A s g a r y Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 68 1 F r o n t Ro 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 CO P I E S O F T H I S P L A N . Da t e : Ma r c h 1 0 , 2 0 2 2 -39- 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. Does the proposed dwelling have a sloped roof proposed such as a Hip, Gable, Mansard or Gambrel? (see Figure 5) x 2. Is the proposed dwelling height and roof pitch similar/compatible with the surrounding dwellings? (see Section 2.1: Guideline 1) x 3. For dwellings with a height greater than 8.5 metres – is the dwelling a maximum two storeys with a sloped roof back from the adjacent dwellings? (see Section 2.1: Guideline 2) x 4. Does the front entrance have 6 or less steps? (see Section 2.2: Guideline 1) x 5. Is the main entrance visible from the street? (see Section 2.2: Guideline 2) x 6. Is the design of the main entrance consistent with the architectural style of the dwelling? (Section 2.2: Guidelines 3 and 4) x 7. Does the main entrance include a porch, portico or other weather protection in keeping with the design of the dwelling? (see Section 2.2: Guideline 4) x 8. Are the stairs to the main entrance designed as an integral component of the front façade? (Section 2.2: Guideline 7) -40- Appendix A Urban Design Checklist Cont’d Urban City of Pickering Established A 2 Yes No Comments x 9. Does the design of the front entrance reduce the visual dominance of the garage and driveway? (Section 2.2: Guideline 9) x 10. Does the proposed dwelling have a similar Dwelling Depth to the adjacent dwellings along the street? (see Section 2.3: Guideline 2) x 11. Does the proposed dwelling have a similar Side Yard Setback to the adjacent dwellings along the street? (see Figure 15) x 12. Has shadow on adjacent dwellings been mitigated with greater setbacks? (Section 3.1: Guideline 2) 13. If a projecting garage is permitted, does it have a sloped roof? (see Section 3.2: Guidelines 2 and 4) x 14. If a double car garage is proposed, does it have 2 single doors or is it designed to look like 2 separate doors? (see Section 3.2: Guideline 3) x 15. Is the garage flush or recessed from the main front wall? (see Section 3.2: Guideline 5) 16. Is the proposed driveway width the same as the permitted garage width? (see Section 3.3: Guideline 1) x 17. Are sustainable design features or resilient landscaping proposed as part of the site design? (Section 3.3: Guideline 2 and Section 4.1: Guideline 5) x 18. Does the plan preserve existing trees? (see Section 4.1: Guideline 1) x 19. Does the plan include tree planting on private property? (see Section 4.1: Guideline 2) 20. Does the plan include one or more native species street trees? (Section 4.2) -41- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: P/CA 44/22 Date: April 13, 2022 From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Manager, Zoning and Administration Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application P/CA 44/22 V. Pejcinovski 1329 Broadview Street Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2520, as amended by By-laws 7873/21 & 7901/22: • to permit a minimum front yard depth of 7.1 metres, whereas the By-law establishes a minimum front yard depth of 7.5 metres; • to permit a covered platform (porch) and uncovered steps not exceeding 1.2 metres in height above grade and not projecting more than 2.9 metres into the required front yard, whereas the By-law requires 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 yard; • to permit an uncovered platform (deck) not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.8 metres into the side yard (west), whereas the By-law permits uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.0 metre into any required side yard; and. • to permit a minimum rear yard depth of 3.3 metres for an uncovered rear deck with associated steps, whereas the By-law establishes a minimum rear yard depth of 7.5 metres. The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application in order to facilitate the submission of a Building Permit Application to permit the construction of a second storey addition, front covered porch with steps, and to recognize the existing rear platform (deck) with associated steps. Recommendation The City Development Department has reviewed the application with respect to Section 45(1) of the Planning Act and is 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 second storey addition, front covered porch and uncovered steps, and to recognize the existing uncovered rear yard deck with associated steps, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2 & 3). -42- Report P/CA 44/22 April 13, 2022 Page 2 Background Infill & Replacement Housing By-laws The subject property is subject to By-law 7874/21 and By-law 7901/22. On September 27, 2021, City Council enacted By-law 7873/21 (the Infill By-law) to amend Zoning By-law 2520, to rezone all lands within the Established Neighbourhood Precincts to an “Established Neighbourhood Precinct Overlay Zone” category. The amending Infill By-law introduces new provisions for yard setbacks, building height, lot coverage and other zoning standards to ensure new built form is compatible with existing built form. Following adoption by Council, the City received appeals to the Infill By-law. On January 24, 2022, City Council adopted By-law 7901/22, to reinstate a maximum building height of 9.0 metres for all lands within the Established Neighbourhood Precincts. The City also received appeals to this By-law. Please note that due to the ongoing appeals, the Infill By-laws are not currently in force, however the existing dwelling complies with the new provisions proposed through By-law 7873/21 and By-law 7901/22. 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 Bay Ridges Neighbourhood. Lands within this designation are intended to accommodate residential uses including single detached dwellings. Staff have reviewed and made comment on the proposal using the Council-adopted Revised Urban Design Guidelines for Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhood Precincts Checklist, which can be found as Appendix A to this report. Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law 1329 Broadview Street is zoned “RM2” – One Family Detached Dwelling - Residential Third Density, under Zoning By-law 2520, as amended by Zoning By-law 7873/21 & 7901/22. A detached dwelling is permitted within the lands zoned “R3.” Front Yard Variance The intent of this provision is to ensure a consistent streetscape, to provide an adequate space for soft landscaping, and to provide sufficient parking space in front of the property. The requested setback of 7.1 metres is to construct a front wall bay window. The front yard depths along Broadview Street vary, with properties ranging between setbacks of approximately 6.0 to 12.0 metres. The proposed dwelling is consistent with the streetscape, as the proposed front yard has a similar range to the abutting property’s setbacks along the abutting properties. -43- Report P/CA 44/22 April 13, 2022 Page 3 Rear Yard Variance The intent of this provision is to ensure that sufficient amenity space is provided in the rear yard. The requested variance is to recognize the existing deck which contributes towards the total usable amenity space in the rear yard. The existing deck will provide access to the backyard from the dwelling. There is also sufficient amenity space to the south and east of the proposed deck. Due to a slight decline in the rear yard elevation, the applicant must ensure that the existing rear deck does not adversely affect the drainage patterns for the abutting rear lots. Projection of Uncovered Platform into Side and Front Yard Variances The intent of the provision that requires uncovered platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade to project not more than 1.0 metres into the required side yard is to protect the privacy of abutting properties. The height of the deck is approximately 0.5 metres above grade, and has a 0 metre setback from the west abutting property, and wraps around the west side yard to the south east corner of the dwelling. The deck has not had a significant impact on the views into the abutting properties to the south and west. The intent of the provision that requires uncovered platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade to project not more than 1.5 metres into the required front yard is to ensure an adequate buffer space between buildings and to ensure an adequate landscaped area within the front yard is provided. The 2.9 metre projection into the required front yard leaves approximately 4.6 metres of landscaped area between the edge of the deck and the front property line. Desirable for the Appriopriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The covered front porch with associated steps serves as an enhancement to the front yard amenity area. The existing rear platform with associated steps enhances the rear yard amenity space, and has had minimal impacts on adjacent neighbours’ privacy. The applicant has received a letter in support of this application from the west abutting property owner most impacted by the projection of the uncovered platform. The requested variance will recognize an existing multi-level deck, which will contribute towards the total usable amenity space of the single detached dwelling. However, a rear abutting property owner has indicated that the architectural drawings submitted to Staff appear to propose a significantly tall dwelling which will compromise the adjacent neighbours’ privacy. The proposed second storey addition with rear balcony will dominate the surrounding neighbour’s privacy. Concerns of privacy must be addressed as the upper-level balcony may intrude on neighbour’s privacy due to the dwelling on the property abutting the rear yard is situated at a lower elevation. Staff are of the opinion that the proposed variances are appropriate development of the land are minor in nature. -44- Report P/CA 44/22 April 13, 2022 Page 4 Input From Other Sources Applicant •Homeowner would like proposed house as shown. Felt proportions are perfect. Building Services •No comments on the application. Engineering Services •Ensure the reduced front/rear yard depths and rear yard deck do not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lot and surrounding area. Public Input •Resident of 1327 Broadview Street in favour of this minor variance application •Resident of 660 Annland Street in opposition of this minor variance application Date of report: April 7, 2022 Comments prepared by: Kerry Yelk Planner I Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Manager, Zoning & Administration KY:ld J:\Documents\Development\D-3700\2022\PCA 44-22\7. Report Attachments -45- Commerce Street An n l a n d S t r e e t Wharf Street G ull Cr o s s i n g Ba l a t o n A v e n u e Li v e r p o o l R o a d Colmar Avenue Shearer Lane He w s o n D r i v e Broadview Street Alderwood Park Frenchman's Bay Rate Payers Memorial Park Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: P/CA 44/22 Date: Feb. 25, 2022 Exhibit 1 V. Pejcinovski 1329 Broadview Street SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\PCA\2022\PCA 44-22 V. Pejcinovski\PCA44-22_LocationMap.mxd 1:2,500 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 Development Department -46- Exhibit 2 Submitted Plan File No: P/CA 44/22 Applicant: V. Pejcinovski Municipal Address: 1329 Broadview Street CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN. Date: March 30, 2022 7.1m 4.6m 1.8 m 3.3m to permit a covered platform (porch) and uncovered steps not exceeding 1.2 metres in height above grade and not projecting more than 2.9 metres into the required front yard to permit a minimum rear yard depth of 3.3 metres for an uncovered rear deck with associated steps to permit uncovered platform (deck) not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.8 metres into the side yard (west) to permit a minimum front yard depth of 7.1 metres -47- Ex h i b i t 3 Su b m i t t e d S o u t h (R e a r ) El e v a t i o n Pl a n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 44 /2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : V. P e j c i n o v s k i Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 13 2 9 B r o a d v i e w S t r e e 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 : Ma r c h 1 0 , 2 0 2 2 -48- Ex h i b i t 4 Su b m i t t e d We s t (S i d e ) El e v a t i o n Pl a n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 44 /2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : V. P e j c i n o v s k i Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 13 2 9 B r o a d v i e w S t r e e 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 : Ma r c h 10 , 2 0 2 2 -49- Ex h i b i t 5 Su b m i t t e d No r t h (F r o n t ) El e v a t i o n Pl a n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 44 /2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : V. P e j c i n o v s k i Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 13 2 9 B r o a d v i e w S t r e e 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 : Ma r c h 1 0 , 2 0 2 2 -50- Ex h i b i t 6 Su b m i t t e d Ea s t (S i d e ) El e v a t i o n Pl a n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 44 /2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : V. P e j c i n o v s k i Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 13 2 9 B r o a d v i e w S t r e e 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 : Ma r c h 10 , 2 0 2 2 -51- -52- -53- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: P/CA 45/22 Date: April 13, 2022 From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Manager, Zoning and Administration Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application P/CA 45/22 B. Atique 2030 Duberry Drive Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 1976/85, to recognize a minimum interior side yard width of 0.4 metres one side (north), 0.6 metre other side (south), whereas the By-law permits a minimum interior side yard width of 1.2 metres one side, 0.6 metres other side. The requested variance is intended to recognize existing below grade stairs proposed to be covered. 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 conditions are recommended: 1. That these variances apply only to the covered below grade stairs, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2 & 3), and 2. That any part of the covering over the below grade stairs be set back a minimum of 0.4 of a metre from the north property line. Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated “Urban Residential Areas – Low Density Areas” within the Brock Ridge Neighbourhood. Lands within this designation are intended for residential uses including detached dwellings and uses accessory thereto. -54- Report P/CA 45/22 April 13, 2022 Page 2 Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The property is zoned “S4” – Single family detached under Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 1976/85. The intent of the minimum side yard width provision is to provide an appropriate separation between structures on abutting properties in order to maintain pedestrian access, and to accommodate grading, drainage and other residential services. The proposed 0.4 metre north side yard does not negatively impact the distance separation with the structure on the abutting property to the north. The rear yard can be accessed through the south side yard. Desirable for the Appriopriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The reduced side yard setback of 0.4 metres is an existing situation that has not negatively impacted adjacent properties, as the below grade stairway has existed for over 20 years without neighbouring concerns. The requested variances are in keeping with the established built form of the neighbourhood and will provide access to an Accessory Dwelling Unit. Input From Other Sources Applicant • The enclosed below grade staircase was existing and the present home owner recently bought this house. Building Services • No concerns regarding the application. Engineering Services • Ensure any reduced side yards (if approved with this application) do not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lot and surrounding area. Public Input • No written submissions were received from the public as of the date of writing this report. Date of report: April 7, 2022 Comments prepared by: Kerry Yelk Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Planner I Manager, Zoning and Administration KY:jc \\Fs\planning\Documents\Development\D-3700 Committee of Adjustment (PCA Applications)\2022\PCA 45-22 B. Atique\7. Report Attachments -55- Duberry Drive Beaton Way Castle H i l l C o u r t Wi l d w o o d C r e s c e n t Sh a y D r i v e Brockridge Community Park Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: P/CA 45/22 Date: Feb. 28, 2022 Exhibit 1 B. Atique 2030 Duberry Drive Hydro Lands SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\PCA\2022\PCA 45-22 B. Atique\PCA45-22_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 Development Department -56- 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 45 / 2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : B. A t i q u e Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 20 3 0 D u b e r r y Dr i v e 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 : Ma r c h 8 , 2 0 2 2 to p e r m i t a m i n i m u m i n t e r i o r si d e y a r d w i d t h o f 0 . 4 m e t r e s on e s i d e (n o r t h ) , 0 . 6 m e t r e s ot h e r s i d e (s o u t h ) -57- Ex h i b i t 3 Su b m i t t e d N o r t h (S i d e ) El e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 45 / 2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : B. A t i q u e Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 20 3 0 D u b e r r y D r i v e 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 : Ma r c h 8 , 2 0 2 2 -58- Ex h i b i t 4 Su b m i t t e d P l a n ( De t a i l ) Fi l e N o : P/ C A 45 / 2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : B. A t i q u e Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 20 3 0 D u b e r r y D r i v e 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 : Ma r c h 3 0 , 2 0 2 2 to p e r m i t a m i n i m u m i n t e r i o r si d e y a r d w i d t h o f 0 . 4 m e t r e s on e s i d e (n o r t h ) , 0 . 6 m e t r e s ot h e r s i d e (s o u t h ) -59- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: P/CA 46/22 Date: April 13, 2022 From: Cody Morrison Principal Planner, Development Review Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application P/CA 46/22 M. Khan & E. Barnicutt 2300 Southcott Road Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 5548/99, to permit an uncovered platform not exceeding 2.5 metres in height above grade to project 4.2 metres into the required rear yard, whereas the By-law requires uncovered steps and platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade to project not more than 1.5 metres into the required rear yard. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit to construct an uncovered platform (deck) in the rear yard. 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 meets 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 this variance apply only to the uncovered platform, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibit 2 & 3). Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated “Urban Residential Areas – Low Density Areas” within the Brock Ridge Neighbourhood. Lands within this designation are intended for residential uses including detached dwellings and uses accessory thereto. The subject lands are located within the Natural Heritage System, due to its location adjacent to the Duffins Creek valley corridor. As such, the subject lands are regulated by the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) and the submitted minor variance application is subject to TRCA review. City Staff will defer to the TRCA to provide comments with respect to the appropriateness of the proposed deck setbacks from the adjacent natural features associated with the Duffins Creek valley corridor. A TRCA permit will be required prior to the issuance of any building permit. -60- Report P/CA 46/22 April 13, 2022 Page 2 Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The by-law permits uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade to project not more than 1.5 metres into the required rear yard. The intent of this provision is to provide the opportunity for any stairs and/or a landing platform to encroach into the rear yard when needed, to maintain sufficient separation distances to buildings and structures on abutting lots, and to protect the privacy of adjacent properties. The applicant is proposing to construct an uncovered deck comprised of two connecting platforms. The westerly portion is existing and is elevated approximately 1.9 metres above grade. The easterly portion is proposed to be constructed approximately 2.0 metres above grade. Although the requested variance describes the platform as not exceeding 2.5 metres in height above grade, the applicant provided more detailed information subsequent to the circulation of the Notice of Public Hearing which indicates that the uncovered platform will have a maximum height of 2.0 metres above grade (refer to Exhibit 3, Submitted West Elevation). The proposed deck will project a total of 4.8 metres from the rear wall of the dwelling, which is consistent with the projection of the existing deck. The total width of the deck will be 8.5 metres. The irregular configuration of the property results in less separation between the dwelling and the rear property line in the south-east corner of the property. As a result, expanding the deck easterly increases the projection of the uncovered deck numerically, despite being consistent with the projection of the existing deck. Adequate separation from structures and buildings on abutting lots will be maintained and privacy impacts will be minimized as the deck will maintain a setback of 3.1 metres from the east lot line which is consistent with the existing dwelling. The expanded deck will be setback a minimum of 5.82 metres from the rear lot line, leaving sufficient space for soft landscaping and additional outdoor amenity. Desirable for the Appriopriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The subject property backs onto a forested area, which is designated “Open Space System – Natural Areas” and is intended for environmental protection. As such, there is no abutting residential neighbour to the rear. The deck will maintain a minimum setback of 5.82 metres from the rear lot line and will not result in a negative impact on the natural feature, as confirmed by the TRCA. The residential property that could be most visually impacted by the proposed deck expansion is the easterly neighbour at 2298 Southcott Road. This neighbour has submitted a letter in support of the requested variance. The proposed deck will also be setback a minimum of 3.1 metres from the east lot line which will minimize any visual and privacy impacts on the adjacent property to the east. The proposed deck expansion will continue to enable access from the main floor of the dwelling to the rear yard and will provide additional amenity space on the property. The requested variance is a function of an irregular lot shape and is minor in nature. -61- Report P/CA 46/22 April 13, 2022 Page 3 Input From Other Sources Applicant • The required rear setback is 10.0 metres. The house is setback 11.43 metres, this would only allow for a deck 1.43 metres in size. Engineering Services • No comments. Building Services • No concerns regarding the subject application. Toronto and Region Conservation Authority • No objections to the approval of the subject application. • A TRCA permit application has been submitted and is currently being reviewed. • TRCA staff confirmed that the proposed rear yard deck expansion and side stairs are adequately setback from the existing top of slope and predominantly within the existing limits of development. Public Input • Owners of 2298, 2299, 2302, 2301 2303, and 2305 Southcott Road, and 2286 Canterbury Crescent have submitted letters in support of the requested variance. Date of report: April 7, 2022 Comments prepared by: Felix Chau Cody Morrison Planner II Principal Planner, Development Review FC:jc J:\Documents\Development\D-3700 Committee of Adjustment (PCA Applications)\2022\PCA 46-22 M. Khan & E. Barnicutt\7. Report\PCA 46-22 Report.doc Attachments -62- C a n t e r b u r y C r e s c e n t Abbott C r e s c e n t S o u t h c o t t R o a d Southcott Park Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: P/CA 46/22 Date: Mar. 01, 2022 Exhibit 1 M. Khan & E. Barnicutt 2300 Southcott Road SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\PCA\2022\PCA 46-22 M. Khan & E. Barnicutt\PCA46-22_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 Development Department -63- Exhibit 2 Submitted Plan File No: P/CA 46/22 Applicant: M. Khan & E. Barnicutt Municipal Address: 2300 Southcott Road CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN. Date: Mar 25 2022 to permit an uncovered platform not exceeding 2.5 metres in height above grade to project 4.2 metres into the required rear yard -64- Exhibit 3 Submitted West Elevation File No: P/CA 46/22 Applicant: M.Khan & E. Barnicutt Municipal Address: 2300 Southcott Road CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN. Date: Apr 6, 2022 -65- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Numbers: P/CA 47/22 & P/CA 48/22 Date: April 13, 2022 From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Manager, Zoning and Administration Subject: Committee of Adjustment Applications P/CA 47/22 & P/CA 48/22 M. Anjam 700 Hillview Crescent Applications P/CA 47/22 – Part 1 The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-law 7610/18, By-law 7872/21 and By-law 7900/22, to permit: • a minimum lot area of 465 square metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum lot area of 550 square metres; • a minimum front yard of 3.5 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum front yard of 7.5 metres; • a minimum front yard setback of 3.5 metres, whereas the minimum front yard setback of the dwellings on the immediately abutting lots located along the same side of the street and within the same block are greater than 3.5 metres, whereas the By-law states the minimum front yard setback shall be equal to the shortest existing front yard setback of the dwellings on the immediately abutting lots located along the same side of the street and within the same block; • a minimum rear yard of 1.5 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum rear yard of 7.5 metres; and • a covered and uncovered platform and associated uncovered steps (front porch) not exceeding 1.2 metres in height above grade and not projecting more than 6.2 metres into the required front 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 yard, not 1.0 metre into any required side yard. P/CA 48/22 – Part 2 The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-law 7610/18, By-law 7872/21 and By-law 7900/22, to permit: • a minimum lot area of 505 square metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum lot area of 550 square metres; • a minimum south side yard of 1.6 metres, whereas the By-law states that where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling, the minimum required side yard shall be 1.8 metres; -66- Report P/CA 47/22 & P/CA 48/22 April 13, 2022 Page 2 • a minimum north flankage side yard of 3.5 metres, whereas the By-law states that where a main building is erected upon a corner lot with its main front entrance facing the front of such lot, the minimum width of the side yard facing the street upon which the lot flanks shall be 4.5 metres; and • a covered and uncovered platform and associated uncovered steps (front porch) not exceeding 1.2 metres in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.6 metres into the required front 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 yard, not 1.0 metre into any required side yard. The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to sever the property resulting in a total of two lots and to construct two detached dwellings. Recommendation The City Development Department has reviewed the applications with respect to Section 45(1) of the Planning Act. Staff are of the opinion that the requested variances to side yard setback and projection/height of the front porch on Part 2 (P/CA 48/22) meet the four tests. However, staff are of the opinion that the requested variances to lot area, front yard setback, rear yard setback and projection/height of the front porch on Part 1 (P/CA 47/22), and the variances to lot area and north flankage side yard on Part 2 (P/CA 48/22) do not conform to the intent of the Zoning By-law, are not desirable for the appropriate development of the land and are not minor in nature. 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, 7, 8, 9, 10 & 11). Background During two separate phone calls with the applicant on August 20, 2021 and October 12, 2021, City staff indicated that staff are not in support of the proposed severance. On January 12, 2022, City staff met with the applicant virtually and again indicated that staff have concerns with the proposed reduction to lot area and the ability to appropriately site a dwelling on the proposed lots. Associated Land Division Application The applicant submitted a land division application (LD 2021-00070) to the Region of Durham to facilitate the proposed severance. At that time, the applicant had not submitted minor variance applications to permit the reduced lot areas on Part 1 and Part 2. Staff recommended that the applicant submit minor variance applications to the City of Pickering to permit the reduced lot areas, prior to proceeding with the land division application. In addition, staff required that, as part of the variance applications, the applicant site appropriately sized dwellings on the severed and retained parcels to determine if any variances are required for the dwellings. -67- Report P/CA 47/22 & P/CA 48/22 April 13, 2022 Page 3 The Region of Durham Land Division Committee tabled the Land Division Application at the February 7, 2022 hearing. Previous Minor Variance Application The applicant is requesting a variance to recognize an existing lot frontage of 17 metres for Part 2, whereas the By-law requires a minimum lot frontage of 18 metres. Through the review of this application, staff identified a previous minor variance application (P/CA 08/74), which was approved in 1974 to recognize the existing lot frontage of 17.06 metres. The requested variance to lot frontage for Part 2 is no longer required for this application. Infill & Replacement Housing By-laws On September 27, 2021, City Council enacted By-law 7872/21 (the Infill By-law) to amend Zoning By-law 2511, to rezone all lands within the Established Neighbourhood Precincts to an “Established Neighbourhood Precinct Overlay Zone” category. The amending Infill By-law introduces new provisions for yard setbacks, building height, lot coverage and other zoning standards to ensure new built form is compatible with existing built form. Following adoption by Council, the City received appeals to the Infill By-law. On January 24, 2022, City Council adopted By-law 7900/22, to reinstate a maximum building height of 9.0 metres for all lands within the Established Neighbourhood Precincts. The City also received appeals to this By-law. The subject property is subject to By-law 7872/21 and By-law 7900/22. However, please note that due to the ongoing appeals, the Infill By-laws are not currently in force. Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated Urban Residential Areas – Low Density Area within the West Shore Neighbourhood. This designation primarily provides for residential or related uses at a maximum net residential density of up to and including 30 units per net hectare. The proposal will result in a density of approximately 20.6 units per net hectare. The proposed severance conforms to the intent of the Official Plan. Staff have reviewed and made comment on the proposed dwellings using the Council-adopted Revised Urban Design Guidelines for Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhood Precincts Checklist, which can be found as “Appendix A” to this report. The Requested Variances to Lot Area (Parts 1 and 2) do not Conform to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The intent of the minimum lot area requirement is to maintain a usable lot size that is compatible with the surrounding area. The lot areas of the immediately bordering lots to the west and south range between 1,000 and 2,000 square metres. -68- Report P/CA 47/22 & P/CA 48/22 April 13, 2022 Page 4 The lots to the south, along the west side of Hillview Crescent and along Sandcastle Court, have lot areas ranging between 554 square metres and 1,500 square metres, with none of these lots having areas less than the required 550 square metres. The existing lotting pattern established within this block is that of larger lots. The proposed lot areas for Part 1 and 2 are not in keeping with the established lotting pattern within the surrounding area. There are smaller sized lots along the east side of Hillview Crescent, and to the north fronting Hillview Crescent and Hillcrest Road (these lots range between 441 square metres and 1,200 square metres). However, these smaller lots are within a different zone category and therefore require a lesser minimum lot area of 460 square metres. In addition, the applicant has demonstrated that dwellings cannot be sited on the proposed lots without the need for multiple variances to the required yard setbacks. The Requested Variances to Front Yard Setback and Height/Projection of the Front Porch (Part 1) do not Conform to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The intent of the minimum front yard setback requirement is to maintain a consistent lotting pattern with abutting properties, to mitigate views and privacy concerns and to provide an adequate separation distance between the building and the street activity in the front yard. The abutting dwelling to the west maintains a minimum front yard setback of approximately 4.8 metres. Neighbouring dwellings to the northwest (namely 697, 696 & 700 Hillcrest Road) have front yard setbacks ranging between 6.0 and 13.0 metres. The request to reduce the front yard setback on Part 1 to a minimum of 3.5 metres is not in consistent with the building siting pattern of the adjacent properties. In addition, the front yard setback is further reduced by the proposed front porch, which projects 6.2 metres into the required front yard. The porch is situated 1.3 metres from the front lot line, which results in the porch being located 3.5 metres in front of the abutting dwelling to the west. The further reduction of the front yard setback due to the porch creates a larger inconsistency with the siting of the proposed dwelling and the siting pattern of abutting dwellings. The Requested Variance to Rear Yard Setback (Part 1) does not Conform to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The intent of the minimum rear yard setback requirement is to maintain sufficient outdoor amenity space within the rear yard, and to maintain an appropriate separation between structures and abutting rear yards to mitigate privacy/overlook concerns. Due to the shallow depth of the lot, the proposed rear yard is greatly reduced from 7.5 metres to 1.5 metres. It is staff’s understanding that the large side yards (being 7.5 metres each) would function as the outdoor amenity space for this lot, considering the inability to use the rear yard for amenity space. Staff consider the side yards to be sufficient for outdoor amenity space. However, the rear yard on Part 1 abuts the rear yard/outdoor amenity space for the abutting dwelling to the south (696 Hillview Crescent). The proposed 2-storey dwelling, which has a total of 9 windows on the rear elevation facing south (refer to Exhibit 4), is located only 1.5 metres from the abutting rear yard. In addition, five of these windows are located on the second-floor. The abutting property to the south will experience major privacy and overlook impacts, as a result of the reduced rear yard setback on Part 1. -69- Report P/CA 47/22 & P/CA 48/22 April 13, 2022 Page 5 The Requested Variance to Side Yard Setback and Projection of the Front Porch (Part 2) Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law Though staff do not support a severance of the property for the construction of two detached dwellings, staff do consider the construction of one replacement dwelling on the subject property to be appropriate development of the land. The intent of the minimum side yard setback requirement is to provide an appropriate separation between structures on abutting properties in order to maintain pedestrian access, and to accommodate grading, drainage and residential services. The abutting dwelling to the south (696 Hillview Crescent) is setback approximately 28 metres from the front lot line. As such, the side wall of the proposed dwelling on Part 2, which complies with the minimum front yard setback, does not abut the side wall of the dwelling to the south. As such, there is sufficient space at the side of the proposed dwelling to provide for pedestrian access, and to accommodate grading and drainage. The intent of restricting the height and projection of a platform/associated steps is to ensure the street view of abutting properties is not obstructed and to maintain sufficient landscaping area in the front yard. As mentioned above, the abutting dwelling to the south has an untypical front yard setback of 28 metres. The entirety of the proposed dwelling on Part 2 is located in front of the dwelling to the south. However, in general, other dwellings within the immediate area maintain minimum front yard setbacks ranging between 6.0 metres and 7.5 metres. Notwithstanding the large setback of the abutting dwelling to the south, the setback of the proposed dwelling on Part 2 is consistent with the established front yard setback of neighbouring dwellings. The property has sufficient space to the north of the front porch to allow for landscaping in the front yard. The Requested Variance to Flankage Side Yard Setback (Part 2) does not Conform to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The intent of the minimum flankage side yard setback requirement is to provide an adequate separation distance between buildings and street activity in the flankage side yard, and to maintain a consistent siting pattern with abutting properties. The wall of the proposed dwelling on Part 2 is located approximately 9.5 metres from Hillcrest Road (this includes the area of land for the municipal boulevard). The municipal boulevard in front of the abutting property to the west is much larger, and the dwelling on that property maintains a larger setback to the lot line. As such, the wall of the abutting dwelling to the west is located approximately 15.0 metres from Hillcrest Road. The setback of the proposed dwelling is inconsistent with the siting pattern of the existing dwelling on the abutting property to the west, as a result of the reduced flankage side yard setback and the smaller municipal boulevard. In order to achieve a more consistent setback, the minimum flankage side yard requirement in the By-law should be maintained. Not Desirable for the Appropriate Development of the Land and Not Minor in Nature Staff are of the opinion that the assembly of the subject property with the lots immediately bordering the subject property (refer to Figure 1 below) could accommodate an infill development that provides for a more regular lotting pattern. Assembly and development of the properties would also address the parcel at the southwest corner, which is currently landlocked. -70- Report P/CA 47/22 & P/CA 48/22 April 13, 2022 Page 6 Staff believe that the proposed severance of the subject property would jeopardize the potential for redevelopment of the other three lots. As such, staff do not consider the proposed severance or the requested variances to facilitate the severance to be desirable for the appropriate development of the land or to be minor in nature. Figure 1: Lots for potential assembly and infill development Input From Other Sources Applicant • The applicant has submitted a letter in support of this application. Please contact the City Development Department at ilima@pickering.ca to receive a copy. Engineering Services • Ensure increased lot coverage and any reduced setbacks (if approved with this application) do not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lots and surrounding area. Multiple Low Impact Development measures (such as infiltration galleries with downspout connections, rain gardens and 450mm topsoil) will be required at the Building Permit stage and Land Division stage. • A 5.0 metre corner rounding will be required with the future Land Division application which may impact the building setbacks. -71- Report P/CA 47/22 & P/CA 48/22 April 13, 2022 Page 7 Building Services • Building Services do not have any concerns. Public Input (written submissions received as of the date of writing this report) Resident in Objection (528 Marksbury Road) • The Fairport Beach community is characterized by large lots, most of which have front yard setbacks of 7.5 m or more as required by the zoning bylaw. I am not in agreement with this applicant’s proposal requesting front yard setbacks of 3.5 metres, rather than 7.5 metres on two lots. This creates a precedent which if accepted elsewhere in our community could lead to similar requests for reduced setbacks on other corner lots in our community. The zoning bylaw requires a minimum lot size of 550 metres. Both of the applications are requesting relief from this requirement. Once again the request goes against a zoning requirement met to define neighbourhood character. It is possible for this applicant to build one house on one lot without requiring variances. The applicant is requesting all of these variances to setback and lot size in order to obtain a consent to a severance. If accepted the resulting two house lots will not be compatible with our community. Taken together the combined impact of all of these variances is not minor. The Committee of Adjustment process should not be used in this way to facilitate a severance of the lands into two lots. Date of report: April 7, 2022 Comments prepared by: Isabel Lima Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP (Acting) Planner II Manager, Zoning and Administration IL:jc J:\Documents\Development\D-3700\2022\PCA 47-22 & PCA 48-22 M. Anjam\7. Report Attachments -72- 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) There appears to be a mix of one and two-storey dwellings within the immediate area. N/A 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 dwellings are not significantly taller than adjacent two-storey dwellings. 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) -73- 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) Abutting dwellings appear to have larger side yard setbacks. X 9. Has shadow on adjacent dwellings been mitigated with greater Side Yard Setbacks? (Section 3.1: Guideline 2) The applicant is requesting to reduce the side yard and flankage side yard on Part 2. X 10. Is the garage flush or recessed from the main front wall? (see Section 3.2: Guideline 5) X 11. Is the proposed driveway width the same as the permitted garage width? (see Section 3.3: Guideline 1) 12. Does the plan preserve existing trees? (see Section 4.1: Guideline 1) Unknown at this time. -74- Park Crescent Ma r k s b u r y R o a d Oklahoma Drive Hi l l c r e s t Road H i l l vi e w C r escent Vi c t o r y D r i v e Sandc as tle Court Stonebridge Lane Lookout Point Park Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: P/CA 47/22 & P/CA 48/22 Date: Mar. 15, 2022 Exhibit 1 M. Anjam 700 Hillview Crescent SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\PCA\2022\PCA 47-22 & 48-22 M. Anjam\PCA47-22_48-22_LocationMap.mxd 1:2,500 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 Development Department -75- Ex h i b i t 2 Su b m i t t e d Si t e Pl a n – Pa r t 1 Fi l e N o : P/ C A 47 /2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : M. A n j a m Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 70 0 H i l l v i e w Cr e s c e n t FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G CI T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ma r c h 2 4 , 2 0 2 2 to p e r m i t a mi n i m u m fr o n t y a r d o f 3. 5 m e t r e s to p e r m i t a m i n i m u m l o t ar e a o f 4 6 5 sq u a r e me t r e s to p e r m i t a m i n i m u m f r o n t y a r d s e t b a c k o f 3 . 5 me t r e s , w h e r e a s t h e m i n i m u m f r o n t ya r d s e t b a c k o f t h e d w e l l i n g s o n t h e i m m e d i a t e l y a b u t t i n g l o t s l o c a t e d a l o n g t h e sa m e s i d e o f t h e s t r e e t a n d w i t h i n t h e s a m e b l o c k a r e g r e a t e r t h a n 3 . 5 m e t r e s to p e r m i t a m i n i m u m r e a r ya r d o f 1 . 5 m e t r e s to p e r m i t a c o v e r e d a n d u n c o v e r e d p l a t f o r m a n d as s o c i a t e d un c o v e r e d s t e p s ( f r o n t p o r c h ) n o t e x c e e d i n g 1. 2 me t r e s in h e i g h t a b o v e g r a d e a n d n o t p r o j e c t i n g mo r e t h a n 6. 2 me t r e s i n t o t h e r e q u i r e d f r o n t y a r d -76- 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 1 Fi l e N o : P/ C A 47 /2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : M. A n j a m Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 70 0 H i l l v i e w C r e s c e n t FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A 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 . Da t e : Ma r c h 2 4 , 2 0 2 2 -77- 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 1 Fi l e N o : P/ C A 47 /2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : M. A n j a m Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 70 0 H i l l v i e w C r e s c e n t FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A 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 . Da t e : Ma r c h 2 4 , 2 0 2 2 -78- Ex h i b i t 5 Su b m i t t e d We s t S i d e El e v a t i o n – Pa r t 1 Fi l e N o : P/ C A 47 /2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : M. A n j a m Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 70 0 H i l l v i e w C r e s c e n t FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A 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 DE P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ma r c h 2 4 , 2 0 2 2 -79- Ex h i b i t 6 Su b m i t t e d Ea s t Si d e E l e v a t i o n – Pa r t 1 Fi l e N o : P/ C A 47 /2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : M. A n j a m Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 70 0 H i l l v i e w C r e s c e n t FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A 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 DE P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ma r c h 2 4 , 2 0 2 2 -80- Ex h i b i t 7 Su b m i t t e d Si t e Pl a n – Pa r t 2 Fi l e N o : P/ C A 48 /2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : M. A n j a m Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 70 0 H i l l v i e w C r e s c e n t FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G CI T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ma r c h 2 4 , 2 0 2 2 to r e c o g n i z e a m i n i m u m lo t f r o n t a g e of 1 7 me t r e s to p e r m i t a m i n i m u m l o t ar e a o f 5 0 5 sq u a r e me t r e s to p e r m i t a m i n i m u m s o u t h si d e y a r d o f 1 . 6 me t r e s to p e r m i t a m i n i m u m no r t h fl a n k a g e s i d e ya r d o f 3 . 5 m e t r e s to p e r m i t a c o v e r e d a n d u n c o v e r e d p l a t f o r m a n d a s s o c i a t e d u n c o v e r e d st e p s ( f r o n t p o r c h ) n o t e x c e e d i n g 1 . 2 m e t r e s i n h e i g h t a b o v e g r a d e an d n o t p r o j e c t i n g m o r e t h a n 1. 6 me t r e s i n t o t h e r e q u i r e d f r o n t y a r d -81- Ex h i b i t 8 Su b m i t t e d F r o n t El e v a t i o n – Pa r t 2 Fi l e N o : P/ C A 48 /2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : M. A n j a m Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 70 0 H i l l v i e w C r e s c e n t FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A 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 . Da t e : Ma r c h 2 4 , 2 0 2 2 -82- Ex h i b i t 9 Su b m i t t e d Re a r El e v a t i o n – Pa r t 2 Fi l e N o : P/ C A 48 /2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : M. A n j a m Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 70 0 H i l l v i e w C r e s c e n t FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A 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 . Da t e : Ma r c h 2 4 , 2 0 2 2 -83- Ex h i b i t 1 0 Su b m i t t e d No r t h F l a n k a g e S i d e Y a r d El e v a t i o n – Pa r t 2 Fi l e N o : P/ C A 48 /2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : M. A n j a m Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 70 0 H i l l v i e w C r e s c e n t FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A 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 . Da t e : Ma r c h 2 4 , 2 0 2 2 -84- Ex h i b i t 1 1 Su b m i t t e d So u t h S i d e El e v a t i o n – Pa r t 2 Fi l e N o : P/ C A 48 /2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : M. A n j a m Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 70 0 H i l l v i e w C r e s c e n t FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A 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 DE P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ma r c h 2 4 , 2 0 2 2 -85- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: P/CA 49/22 Date: April 13, 2022 From: Cody Morrison Principal Planner, Development Review Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application P/CA 49/22 S. Xavier 3290 Greenburn Place Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by By-law 2044/85, to permit an accessory building (detached garage) with a maximum height of 4.6 metres within a residential zone, whereas the By-law permits a maximum height of 3.5 metres for accessory buildings within any residential zone. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit to construct an accessory structure (detached garage). 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 meets 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 this variance apply only to the proposed accessory structure (detached garage), as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, 4 & 5). Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated “Rural Settlements – Country Residential” within the Staxton Glen Settlement. Lands within this designation are intended for residential uses such as detached dwellings and uses accessory thereto. Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The intent of the maximum accessory structure height of 3.5 metres is to minimize the visual impact of accessory buildings on abutting properties and on the streetscape. Given the estate residential character of the surrounding properties with significant lot sizes, the proposed accessory structure height of 4.6 metres will have minimal impact on the streetscape and on abutting properties. The subject property is approximately 6,266.5 square metres in size, which -86- Report P/CA 49/22 April 13, 2022 Page 2 is generally consistent with other lots along Greenburn Place. The detached garage to is proposed to have an area of 244 square metres, representing 3.9 percent of the total lot coverage. The proposed detached garage will be setback a minimum of 56.0 metre setback from the front property line and a minimum of 1.8 metres from the north side property line. The garage will maintain a total separation distance of approximately 11.0 metres from the existing detached dwelling immediately to the north. Existing mature vegetation along the north property boundary will provide an additional visual buffer between the proposed garage and the adjacent dwelling. Desirable for the Appriopriate Development of the Land The proposed detached garage is intended to provide for the storage of personal vehicles of the property owner and be accessory to the residential use of the subject lands. Vehicular access to the garage is only provided through three overhead doors on the front elevation of the structure, which are accessed from the existing circular driveway. There are five building openings proposed on the south elevation, four of which are fixed windows which are approximately 0.2 of a metre above finished grade. The middle opening is the only opening at finished grade. This singular grade oriented opening on the south side elevation is only intended for pedestrian access. The design and functionality of the proposed garage appears to be desirable for the appropriate development of the land. The garage will be sited behind the front main wall of the dwelling, which will reinforce the accessory nature of the proposed structure in relation to the dwelling. Minor in Nature The requested variance represents a 1.1 metre increase in height. The proposed detached garage will namely be located within the rear yard and maintain an adequate setback from the nearest residential dwelling immediately to the north and from the front lot line. Visual impacts of the garage are further mitigated by existing mature vegetation along the north property boundary and within the front yard of the subject lands. Input From Other Sources Applicant • To construct a detached garage for the property owner to store personal vehicles. Engineering Services • No comments. Building Services • No concerns regarding the application. Public Input (written submissions received as of the date of writing this report) • No written submissions were received from the public as of the date of writing this report. -87- Report P/CA 49/22 April 13, 2022 Page 3 Toronto and Region Conservation Authority •No objections to the approval of the subject application. •TRCA staff confirmed that the proposed detached garage will meet the required setback from the furthest inland feature or hazard, and will be located no further toward the feature than the existing limit of development. Date of report: April 6, 2022 Comments prepared by: Felix Chau Planner II Cody Morrison Principal Planner, Development Review FC:ld J:\Documents\Development\D-3700 Committee of Adjustment (PCA Applications)\2022\PCA 49-22 S. Xavier\7. Report\PCA 49-22 Report.docx Attachments -88- Fifth Concession Road Gr e e n b u r n P l a c e Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: P/CA 49/22 Date: Mar. 15, 2022 Exhibit 1 S. Xavier 3290 Greenburn Place SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\PCA\2022\PCA 49-22 S. Xavier\PCA49-22_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 Development Department -89- 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 49 / 2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : S. X a v i e r Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 32 9 0 G r e e n b u r n P l a c e 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 : Ma r c h 2 5 , 2 0 2 2 to p e r m i t an a c c e s s o r y bu i l d i n g ( d e t a c h e d ga r a g e ) w i t h a ma x i m u m h e i g h t o f 4. 6 me t r e s w i t h i n a re s i d e n t i a l z o n e Greenburn Place -90- Ex h i b i t 3 Su b m i t t e d Ea s t F r o n t El e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 49 / 2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : S. X a v i e r Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 32 9 0 G r e e n b u r n P l a c e 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 : Ma r c h 2 5 , 2 0 2 2 -91- Ex h i b i t 4 Su b m i t t e d We s t Re a r El e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 49 / 2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : S. X a v i e r Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 32 9 0 G r e e n b u r n P l a c e 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 : Ma r c h 2 5 , 2 0 2 2 to p e r m i t an a c c e s s o r y b u i l d i n g ( d e t a c h e d g a r a g e ) wi t h a m a x i m u m h e i g h t o f 4 . 6 me t r e s w i t h i n a re s i d e n t i a l z o n e -92- Ex h i b i t 5 Su b m i t t e d No r t h a n d S o u t h S i d e El e v a t i o n s Fi l e N o : P/ C A 49 / 2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : S. X a v i e r Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 32 9 0 G r e e n b u r n P l a c e 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 : Ma r c h 2 5 , 2 0 2 2 -93- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: P/CA 50/22 Date: April 13, 2022 From: Cody Morrison Principal Planner, Development Review Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application P/CA 50/22 T. Chaudhry 123 Secord Street Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 4271/93, to permit: • an uncovered platform (rear main-floor deck) not exceeding 2.6 metres in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.5 metres into the required rear 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; and • a maximum lot coverage of 40 percent, whereas the By-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 38 percent. The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit for the reconstruction of a detached dwelling and associated rear deck due to fire damage. 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 detached dwelling and associated rear deck, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2 & 3). -94- Report P/CA 50/22 April 13, 2022 Page 2 Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated “Urban Residential Areas – Low Density Area” within the Highbush Neighbourhood. Residential uses such as detached dwellings and uses accessory thereto are permitted within this designation. The subject property is not located within one of the established Neighbourhood Precincts in which the Urban Design Guidelines for the Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhoods Study applies. Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law Height of Uncovered Platform The intent of restricting the height of platforms to 1.0 metre above grade is to protect the privacy of abutting properties. Due to the change in grade of the property from the front lot line to the rear lot line, a greater height is required to provide access to the rear yard from the main-floor of the dwelling. The proposed deck height, which represents a total increase of 1.6 metres, will not result in a negative privacy impact on adjacent properties as the deck will not project more than 1.5 metres into the required rear yard, will maintain a minimum setback of 1.5 metres and 5.6 metres from the west and east side lot lines, respectively, and will be a consistent height as the main floor of the dwelling. Lot Coverage The dwelling accounts for 38 percent lot coverage, whereas the proposed deck accounts for 2 percent of the total lot coverage. The proposed deck is located 2.6 metres above grade, providing usable amenity space directly below the deck. As a result, the proposed deck is included in the total lot coverage. The intent of a maximum lot coverage of 38 percent is to maintain an appropriate amount of yard space (for landscaping and amenity areas) uncovered by buildings on a lot. The proposed deck, and the area directly below the deck, will provide uncovered and covered spaces for outdoor activities. Additionally, the applicant has indicated that the entire rear yard will have soft landscaping. Desirable for the Appriopriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The requested variances will facilitate the construction of an uncovered deck, which will contribute towards the total amount of usable amenity space in the rear yard. The proposed deck is not anticipated to create adverse privacy impacts on adjacent properties or result in any significant impacts on drainage. Staff consider an increase to the height of the rear deck by 1.6 metres and an increase in the total lot coverage by 2 percent to be minor in nature. -95- Report P/CA 50/22 April 13, 2022 Page 3 Input From Other Sources Applicant • No comments. Engineering Services • No comments. Building Services • No concerns regarding the application. Public Input • No written submissions were received from the public as of the date of writing this report. Date of report: April 6, 2022 Comments prepared by: Isabel Lima Cody Morrison (Acting) Planner II Principal Planner, Development Review IL:jc J:\Documents\Development\D-3700\2022\PCA 50-22 T. Chaudhry\7. Report Attachments -96- Va l l e y R i d g e C r e s c e n t Th i c k e t C r e s c e n t White Pine Crescent Copley Street Secord Street Thicket Open Space Valley Ridge Open Space Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: P/CA 50/22 Date: Mar. 18, 2022 Exhibit 1 T. Chaundhry 123 Secord Street SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\PCA\2022\PCA 50-22 T. Chaundhry\PCA50-22_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 Development Department -97- Exhibit 2 Submitted Site Plan File No: P/CA 50/22 Applicant: T. Chaudhry Municipal Address: 123 Secord Street FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. Date: March 24, 2022 to permit an uncovered platform (rear main-floor deck) not exceeding 2.6 metres in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.5 metres into the required rear yard to permit a maximum lot coverage of 40 percent -98- Ex h i b i t 3 Su b m i t t e d Re a r E l e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 50 / 2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : T. C h a u d h r y Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 12 3 S e c o r d S t r e e t FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A 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 . Da t e : Ma r c h 2 4 , 2 0 2 2 2.6 m to p e r m i t an un c o v e r e d pl a t f o r m ( r e a r ma i n -fl o o r d e c k ) no t e x c e e d i n g 2. 6 m e t r e s in he i g h t a b o v e gr a d e a n d n o t pr o j e c t i n g m o r e th a n 1. 5 me t r e s in t o t h e re q u i r e d re a r y a r d -99- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: P/CA 51/22 Date: April 13, 2022 From: Cody Morrison Principal Planner, Development Review Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application P/CA 51/22 P. Pathmanatan & K. Pushpaharan 1832 Appleview Road Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 7874/21 and By-law 7902/22 to permit a minimum side yard setback of 1.7 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum side yard setback of 1.8 metres. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to recognize an existing reduced side (north) yard setback. 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 meets 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 this variance apply only to the existing detached dwelling, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2 & 3). Background In October 2021, a Building Permit for the construction of the detached dwelling was issued by the City’s Building Services Section. The permit was issued on the basis of the dwelling maintaining a 1.8 metre setback from the north lot line. However, through the submission of an as-built survey, it was determined the dwelling’s foundation was constructed, in error, with 1.7 metre setback from the north lot line. The applicant has requested the proposed variance in order to recognize a reduced north side yard setback for the detached dwelling. Infill & Replacement Housing By-laws On September 27, 2021, City Council enacted By-law 7874/21 (the Infill By-law) to amend Zoning By-law 3036, to rezone all lands within the Established Neighbourhood Precincts to an “Established Neighbourhood Precinct Overlay Zone” category. The amending Infill By-law introduces new provisions for yard setbacks, building height, lot coverage and other zoning standards to ensure new built form is compatible with existing built form. Following adoption by Council, the City received appeals to the Infill By-law. -100- Report P/CA 51/22 April 13, 2022 Page 2 On January 24, 2022, City Council adopted By-law 7902/22, to reinstate a maximum building height of 9.0 metres for all lands within the Established Neighbourhood Precincts. The City also received appeals to this By-law. The subject property is subject to By-law 7874/21 and By-law 7902/22. Please note that due to the ongoing appeals, the Infill By-laws are not currently in force, however the existing dwelling complies with the new provisions proposed through By-law 7874/21 and By-law 7902/22. Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated “Urban Residential Areas – Low Density Residential Area” within the Dunbarton Neighbourhood. Detached dwellings are a permitted use within this designation and a common built form within the Dunbarton Neighbourhood. Staff have reviewed and made comment on the proposal using the Council-adopted Revised Urban Design Guidelines for Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhood Precincts Checklist, which can be found as “Appendix A” to this report. Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The intent of the side yard setback requirement is to provide an appropriate separation between structures on abutting properties in order to maintain pedestrian access, accommodate grading, drainage and residential services; and be compatible with the character of the immediate neighbourhood. The requested reduction in the north side yard setback requirement from 1.8 metres to 1.7 metres does not compromise the function of the north side yard and will enable adequate separation for maintenance, grading and residential services. The reduced side yard does not significantly alter the massing or design of the dwelling and maintains the character of the built form along Appleview Drive. Desirable for the Appropriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature Staff are of the opinion that the existing detached dwelling is desirable for the appropriate development of the land and the requested variance will not result in a negative visual impact on the adjacent dwelling immediately to the north or on the streetscape. The requested variance represents a 0.1 metre reduction in the side yard setback requirement, which is considered minor in nature. -101- Report P/CA 51/22 April 13, 2022 Page 3 Input From Other Sources Date of report: April 7, 2022 Comments prepared by: Kerry Yelk Cody Morrison Planner I Principal Planner, Development Review KY:jc \\Fs\planning\Documents\Development\D-3700 Committee of Adjustment (PCA Applications)\2022\PCA 44-22 V. Pejcinovski\7. Report Attachments Applicant •Unable to achieve minimum requirement. Engineering Services •Ensure any reduced side yards (if approved with this application) do not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lot and surrounding area. Building Services •No concerns regarding the application. Toronto and Region Conservation Authority •Although the subject property is partially located within the TRCA Regulated Area, the proposed works are located well outside the TRCA regulated area and maintain an appropriate distance from the features associated with the valley corridor located within the western limits of the property. As such, TRCA staff have no objection to the approval of the application and a TRCA (after the fact) permit is not required. Public Input •No written submissions were received from the public as of the date of writing this report. -102- 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) N/A 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 dwelling will be two storeys in height, which is consistent with the adjacent dwellings to the north and south. 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) x 8. Does the proposed dwelling have a similar Side Yard Setback to the adjacent dwellings along the street? (see Figure 15) -103- Appendix A Urban Design Checklist Cont’d Urban City of Pickering Established A 2 Yes No Comments N/A 9. Has shadow on adjacent dwellings been mitigated with greater Side Yard Setbacks? (Section 3.1: Guideline 2) The proposed dwelling maintains the minimum side yard setback requirements of the zoning by-law, with the exception of the 0.1 metre reduction being requested to accommodate a minor construction error on the north-west corner of the dwelling. x 10. Is the garage flush or recessed from the main front wall? (see Section 3.2: Guideline 5) x 11. Is the proposed driveway width the same as the permitted garage width? (see Section 3.3: Guideline 1) N/A 12. Does the plan preserve existing trees? (see Section 4.1: Guideline 1) The proposed dwelling is currently under construction. No further tree removals are required to accommodate the reduced side yard setback. -104- Fa i r p o r t R o a d Spartan C o u rt Fa l c o n w o o d W a y Goldenridge Road Ra m b l e b e r r y A v e n u e He a t h s i d e C r e s c e n t Ap p l e v i e w R o a d Dalewood Ravine Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: P/CA 51/22 Date: Mar. 18, 2022 Exhibit 1 P. Pathmanatan & K. Pushpaharan 1832 Appleview Road SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\PCA\2022\PCA 51-22 P. Pathmanatan & K. Pushpaharan\PCA51-22_LocationMap.mxd 1:2,500 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 Development Department -105- 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 51 / 2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : P. P a t h m a n a t a n & K . P u s h p a h a r a n Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 18 3 2 A p p l e v i e w Ro 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 : Ma r c h 3 0 , 2 0 2 2 -106- Ex h i b i t 3 Su b m i t t e d P l a n (D e t a i l ) Fi l e N o : P/ C A 51 / 2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : P. P a t h m a n a t a n & K . P u s h p a h a r a n Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 18 3 2 A p p l e v i e w Ro 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 : Ma r c h 3 0 , 2 0 2 2 to p e r m i t a mi n i m u m si d e y a r d d e p t h o f 1. 7 me t r e s -107- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: P/CA 52/22 Date: April 13, 2022 From: Cody Morrison Principal Planner, Development Review Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application P/CA 52/22 A. Ford 861 Krosno Boulevard Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2520 to permit a minimum side yard setback of 1.2 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum side yard setback of 1.5 metres. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to recognize an existing carport with a reduced south side yard setback. 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 meets 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 existing detached dwelling and attached carport, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plan (see Exhibit 2). Background Through the review of a building permit application submitted by the property owner in support of interior alterations for an accessory dwelling unit, City staff identified that the existing carport attached to the main dwelling did not comply with the minimum side yard setback requirement of the zoning by-law. The requested variance is intended to recognize a reduced south side yard setback of the existing carport, and will enable the applicant to proceed with the processing of the submitted building permit application for unrelated on-site construction. -108- Report P/CA 52/22 April 13, 2022 Page 2 Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated “Urban Residential Areas – Low Density Residential Area” within the Bay Ridges Neighbourhood. Residential uses such as detached dwellings and uses accessory thereto are permitted within this designation. Detached dwellings with attached carports are a common built form along Krosno Boulevard. Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law and The intent of the side yard setback requirement is to provide an appropriate separation between structures on abutting properties in order to maintain pedestrian access, accommodate grading, drainage and residential services; and be compatible with the character of the immediate neighbourhood. The requested reduction in the south side yard setback requirement from 1.5 metres to 1.2 metre does not compromise the function of the south side yard and will enable adequate separation from the south lot line to provide for maintenance, grading and residential services. The reduced side yard does not significantly alter the massing or design of the dwelling and maintains the character of the built form along Krosno Boulevard, which consists namely of detached and semi-detached dwellings. Desirable for the Appropriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The existing carport appears to have been constructed together with the dwelling which has existed on the subject lands since 1963. Staff are of the opinion that the existing detached dwelling and carport are desirable for the appropriate development of the land and the requested variance will not result in a negative visual impact on the adjacent dwelling immediately to the south or on the streetscape. The requested variance represents a 0.3 metre reduction in the side yard setback requirement of the zoning by-law, which is considered minor in nature. Input From Other Sources Applicant • Structure was erected in 1963 with no intention of removing. Owner would like to keep existing as it remains. Engineering Services • Ensure any reduced side yards (if approved with this application) do not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lot and surrounding area. Building Services • No concerns regarding the application. -109- Report P/CA 52/22 April 13, 2022 Page 3 Date of report: April 7, 2022 Comments prepared by: Kerry Yelk Cody Morrison Planner I Principal Planner, Development Review KY:jc \\Fs\planning\Documents\Development\D-3700 Committee of Adjustment (PCA Applications)\2022\PCA 52-22 A. Ford\7. Report Attachments Toronto and Region Conservation Authority • TRCA staff reviewed the requested variances and they have no impact on. TRCA’s policies and programs. As such, TRCA has no objections to the approval of Minor Variance Application No. P/CA 52/22. Public Input • No written submissions were received from the public as of the date of writing this report. -110- Regan Place K r o s n o B o u l e v a r d Bronwen Lane Z a t o r A v e n u e Reytan Boulevard M i r i a m R o a d Garvolin Avenue Sa n d y B e a c h R o a d Bayview Heights Public School Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: P/CA 52/22 Date: Mar. 18, 2022 Exhibit 1 A. Ford 861 Krosno Boulevard SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\PCA\2022\PCA 52-22 A. Ford\PCA52-22_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 Development Department -111- 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 52 / 2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : A. F o r d Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 86 1 K r o s n o B o u l e v a r 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 DE 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 : M a r c h 3 0 , 2 0 2 2 to p e r m i t a m i n i m u m s i d e y a r d de p t h o f 1 . 2 m e t r e s -112- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: P/CA 53/22 Date: April 13, 2022 From: Cody Morrison Principal Planner, Development Review Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application P/CA 53/22 T. Mylvaganam 125 Woodview Drive Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 7874/21 and By-law 7902/22, to permit: • a minimum north side yard and south side yard of 1.2 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum side yard of 1.8 metres; and • a maximum building height of 9.8 metres, whereas the By-law permits a maximum building height of 9.0 metres. 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. 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 to permit a maximum building height of 9.8 metres meets the four tests and the requested variance to permit a minimum north side yard and south side yard of 1.2 metres does not 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 2-storey detached dwelling, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 & 7). or If the applicant were to request that the application be amended to request a minimum north side yard and south side yard of 1.5 metres the following recommendation would apply: 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 to permit a minimum north side yard and south side yard of 1.5 metres and a maximum building height of 9.8 metres meet the four tests. -113- Report P/CA 53/22 April 13, 2022 Page 2 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 conditions are recommended: 1. That the submitted plans be revised to show the proposed 2-storey detached dwelling setback a minimum of 1.5 metres from the north and south side lot lines. 2. That these variances apply only to the proposed 2-storey detached dwelling, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 & 7). Background On September 27, 2021, City Council enacted By-law 7874/21 (the Infill By-law) to amend Zoning By-law 3036, to rezone all lands within the Established Neighbourhood Precincts to an “Established Neighbourhood Precinct Overlay Zone” category. The amending Infill By-law introduces new provisions for yard setbacks, building height, lot coverage and other zoning standards to ensure new built form is compatible with existing built form. Following adoption by Council, the City received appeals to the Infill By law. On January 24, 2022, City Council adopted By-law 7902/22, to instate a maximum building height of 9.0 metres for all lands within the Established Neighbourhood Precincts. The City also received appeals to this By-law. The subject property is subject to By-law 7874/21 and By-law 7902/22. By-law 7902/22 reduced the permitted building height from 18.0 metres to 9.0 metres. The applicant is requesting a variance to the maximum building height in order to permit a detached dwelling with a maximum height of 9.8 metres. However, please note that due to the ongoing appeals, the Infill By-laws are not currently in force. As such, a building permit for a dwelling that exceeds the maximum building height of 9.0 metres can still be issued in the interim. Comment Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated “Urban Residential Areas – Low Density Area” within the Rougemount Neighbourhood. Detached dwellings are a permitted use within this designation the primary built form within the Rougemount Neighbourhood. Section 12.17 (a) of the Official Plan outlines that in the established residential areas along Woodview Drive, City Council shall encourage, and where possible, require new development to be compatible with the character of existing development. Woodview Drive, south of Twyn Rivers Drive, is characterized by large lots with frontages ranging between 20 and 30 metres, that are occupied by 1 and 2-storey detached dwellings that are significantly setback from the roadway and maintain ample separation from side lot lines and adjacent dwellings. -114- Report P/CA 53/22 April 13, 2022 Page 3 Staff have reviewed and made comment on the proposal using the Council-adopted Revised Urban Design Guidelines for Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhood Precincts Checklist, which can be found as “Appendix A” to this report. Intent of the Zoning By-law, Desirable for the Appriopriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature North & South Side Yards The intent of the minimum side yard requirement of 1.8 metres is to provide an appropriate separation distance between structures on abutting properties in order to ensure compatibility with the existing neighbourhood, provide appropriate pedestrian access between dwellings, and to accommodate grading, drainage and residential services. The applicant is proposing a minimum side yard setback of 1.2 metres on both the north and south side. The City’s Engineering Services Department has outlined that it will not be possible to accommodate a minimum 0.15 metre deep drainage swale with 3:1 side slopes and a 0.6 metre undisturbed strip with a setback of less than 1.5 metres. The proposed side yard setback of 1.2 metres on the north and south side yard would result in a dwelling that is not consistent with the established built form along Woodview Drive, which is characterized by significant separation between dwellings on adjacent lots that maintain the minimum side yard setback requirement of 1.8 metres. The subject lands have a frontage of approximately 22.0 metres. The requested side yard reduction of 0.6 of a metre on the north and south sides represents a total setback loss of 1.2 metres and would result in a dwelling with a total width of approximately 20.0 metres. As such, staff are of the opinion that the requested variance to permit a minimum north side yard and south side yard of 1.2 metres does not maintain the intent of the zoning by-law, is not desirable for the appropriate development of the land and is not minor in nature. If the applicant revised their application to request a minimum north and south side yard setback of 1.5 metres, sufficient space would be provided to accommodate grading and drainage on the subject lands. Additionally, a minimum building separation of approximately 2.6 metres and 25.0 metres would be maintained between the proposed dwelling on subject property and the abutting dwellings immediately to the south and north, respectively, if the dwelling were setback a minimum of 1.5 metres from the north and south lot line. Given the significant width of the property, staff are of the opinion that the proposed dwelling could be designed to maintain a minimum setback of 1.5 metres while providing a desirably sized dwelling. Providing a minimum setback of 1.5 metres from the north and south side lot lines would limit the total width of the dwelling to 19.0 metres, minimizing the overall mass of the dwelling on the streetscape and providing greater separation from the adjacent residential properties. This would contribute to maintaining the neighbourhood character established along Woodview Drive. -115- Report P/CA 53/22 April 13, 2022 Page 4 Building Height The intent of the maximum building height of 9.0 metres is to minimize the visual impact of new buildings on the existing streetscape and to ensure new development is compatible with the established built form within the surrounding residential neighbourhood. In accordance with the Zoning By-law, building height for a sloped roof is measured as the vertical distance between established grade and the mid-point of the roof. The proposed 2-storey dwelling has a maximum height of 9.78 metres when measured between grade and the mid-point of the roof. However, the height between grade and the ceiling of the second storey is 6.98 metres (see Exhibit 8). The proposed roof architecture, which does not contain habitable floor space, accounts for 2.8 metres of the building height. This architectural style is similar to the neighbouring dwellings to the south at 121 and 119 Woodview Drive, wherein the height of the dwellings between grade and the mid-point is 10.07 metres and 9.75 metres respectively, but the height between grade and the ceiling of the second storey is 6.95 metres and 6.0 metres, respectively. Due to the size of the lot, the proposed dwelling is able to provide a large front yard (17.13 metres) and rear yard (57.06 metres). The large front yard setback will lessen the visual impact of the proposed dwelling height from the street. As identified in “Appendix A”, the proposed dwelling generally conforms to the Urban Design Guidelines for Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhood Precincts. Design choices such as proposing a sloped roof and providing a visually dominant main entrance will help to lessen the visual impact of the dwelling from the street. The height of dwellings along Woodview Drive varies significantly, with existing detached dwellings having heights ranging between 6.0 metres and 10.0 metres. The proposed building height of 9.8 metres is in keeping with the established built-form of the neighbourhood. The proposed increase to building height will allow the applicant to incorporate a visually interesting roofline architecture, including the proposed steeple and will be consistent with the height and building design established within the immediate neighbourhood. The requested variance for a maximum building height of 9.8 metres maintains the intent of the zoning by-law, is appropriate for the development of the land and is minor in nature. Input From Other Sources Applicant • Existing building footprint has smaller side yard setbacks on north side of property than the new proposed setback. Neighbouring lots additionally have smaller side yard setbacks than required by zoning. -116- Report P/CA 53/22 April 13, 2022 Page 5 Engineering Services • With regards to the reduced side yard depth, it will not be possible to accommodate a minimum 0.15 metre deep drainage swale with 3:1 side slopes and the required 0.6 metre undisturbed strip with a setback of less than 1.5 metre. • If the applicant gets permission in writing from the adjacent property owner(s) to perform grading works up to the lot line and/or to create a common swale on the lot line, Engineering Services may consider a reduced setback. • Ensure any reduced setbacks (if approved with this application) do not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lots and surrounding area. Multiple Low Impact Development measures (such as infiltration galleries with downspout connections, rain gardens and 450mm topsoil) will be required at the Building Permit stage. Building Services • No concerns regarding the subject application. Public Input • No written submissions were received from the public as of the date of writing this report. Date of report: April 7, 2022 Comments prepared by: Isabel Lima Cody Morrison (Acting) Planner II Principal Planner, Development Review IL:jc J:\Documents\Development\D-3700\2022\PCA 53-22 T. Mylvaganam\7. Report Attachments -117- 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) The height of dwellings within this block of Woodview Drive vary significantly, with existing building heights ranging between 6.0 and 11.3 metres. 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 roof is 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) -118- 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) X 9. Has shadow on adjacent dwellings been mitigated with greater Side Yard Setbacks? (Section 3.1: Guideline 2) The applicant is requesting to reduce the proposed north and south side yards. X 10. Is the garage flush or recessed from the main front wall? (see Section 3.2: Guideline 5) X 11. Is the proposed driveway width the same as the permitted garage width? (see Section 3.3: Guideline 1) X 12. Does the plan preserve existing trees? (see Section 4.1: Guideline 1) -119- Twyn Rivers Drive Littleford Street As h w o o d G a t e Lawson StreetSweetbriar Court H o o ve r D ri ve Ro u g e V a l l e y D r i v e Wo o d v i e w A v e n u e Ho w e l l C r e s c e n t Woodview Drive Rouge Valley Park Woodview Tot Lot Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: P/CA 53/22 Date: Mar. 18, 2022 Exhibit 1 T. Mylvaganam 125 Woodview Drive SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\PCA\2022\PCA 53-22 T. Mylvaganam\PCA53-22_LocationMap.mxd 1:2,500 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 Development Department -120- Ex h i b i t 2 Fu l l Su b m i t t e d Si t e Pl a n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 53 /2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : T. M y l v a g a n a m Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 12 5 W o o d v i e w D r i v e FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A 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 . Da t e : Ma r c h 2 4 , 2 0 2 2 -121- Ex h i b i t 3 Su b m i t t e d Si t e Pl a n – Zo o m e d I n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 53 /2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : T. M y l v a g a n a m Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 12 5 W o o d v i e w D r i v e FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A 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 . Da t e : Ma r c h 2 4 , 2 0 2 2 to p e r m i t a m a x i m u m b u i l d i n g he i g h t o f 9 . 8 me t r e s to p e r m i t a mi n i m u m n o r t h s i d e y a r d an d s o u t h s i d e y a r d o f 1 . 2 m e t r e s -122- Ex h i b i t 4 Su b m i t t e d Fr o n t E l e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 53 /2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : T. M y l v a g a n a m Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 12 5 W o o d v i e w D r i v e FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A 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 . Da t e : Ma r c h 2 4 , 2 0 2 2 to p e r m i t a m a x i m u m b u i l d i n g he i g h t o f 9 . 8 me t r e s -123- Ex h i b i t 5 Su b m i t t e d Re a r El e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 53 /2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : T. M y l v a g a n a m Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 12 5 W o o d v i e w D r i v e FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A 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 . Da t e : Ma r c h 2 4 , 2 0 2 2 -124- Ex h i b i t 6 Su b m i t t e d No r t h S i d e El e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 53 /2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : T. M y l v a g a n a m Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 12 5 W o o d v i e w D r i v e FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A 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 . Da t e : Ma r c h 2 4 , 2 0 2 2 -125- Ex h i b i t 7 Su b m i t t e d So u t h Si d e El e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 53 /2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : T. M y l v a g a n a m Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 12 5 W o o d v i e w D r i v e FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A 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 . Da t e : Ma r c h 2 4 , 2 0 2 2 -126- Ex h i b i t 8 Su b m i t t e d Se c t i o n P l a n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 53 /2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : T. M y l v a g a n a m Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 12 5 W o o d v i e w D r i v e FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A 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 . Da t e : Ma r c h 2 4 , 2 0 2 2 -127- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: P/CA 54/22 Date: April 13, 2022 From: Cody Morrison Principal Planner, Development Review Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application P/CA 54/22 J. Rajaratnam & K. Sarvendran 1946 Liverpool Road Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 7874/21 and By-law 7902/22, to permit a minimum side yard depth of 0.8 of a metre, whereas the By-law requires a minimum side yard depth of 1.8 metres. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to construct a three-car garage attached to an existing detached dwelling. 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 meets 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 conditions are recommended: 1. That this variance apply only to the detached dwelling, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6); and 2. That prior to the issuance of a building permit, the property owner obtains permission in writing from the adjacent property owner, immediately to the north, to perform grading works up to the lot line and/or to create a common swale on the lot line, to the satisfaction of Engineering Services. Infill & Replacement Housing By-laws On September 27, 2021, City Council enacted By-law 7874/21 (the Infill By-law) to amend Zoning By-law 3036, to rezone all lands within the Established Neighbourhood Precincts to an “Established Neighbourhood Precinct Overlay Zone” category. The amending Infill By-law introduces new provisions for yard setbacks, building height, lot coverage and other zoning standards to ensure new built form is compatible with existing built form. Following adoption by Council, the City received appeals to the Infill By law. -128- Report P/CA 54/22 April 13, 2022 Page 2 On January 24, 2022, City Council adopted By-law 7902/22, to reinstate a maximum building height of 9.0 metres for all lands within the Established Neighbourhood Precincts. The City also received appeals to this By-law. The subject property is subject to By-law 7874/21 and By-law 7902/22, and the existing dwelling and proposed attached garage complies with the new zone provisions. However, please note that due to the ongoing appeals, the Infill By-laws are not currently in force. Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated “Urban Residential Areas – Low Density Areas” within the Liverpool Neighbourhood. Lands within this designation are intended for residential uses including detached dwellings. Staff have reviewed and made comment on the proposed attached garage using the Council- adopted Revised Urban Design Guidelines for Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhood Precincts Checklist, which can be found as “Appendix A” to this report. Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The intent of a minimum side yard depth provision is to ensure an appropriate separation between structures on abutting properties is provided in order to maintain pedestrian access, and to accommodate grading, drainage and other residential services. The requested variance to reduce the minimum side yard depth to 0.8 of a metre is to facilitate the construction of a three-car garage attached to the existing dwelling. The proposed attached garage will add approximately 2.7 metres to the existing dwelling depth of 12.8 metres, resulting in a total dwelling depth of 15.5 metres. Of the total dwelling depth, only 7.8 metres of the north side wall is proposed to be setback 0.8 of a metre, whereas the balance of the dwelling will be setback a minimum of 3.0 metres from the north lot line. The property immediately to the north contains a detached dwelling that is currently setback approximately 3.7 metres from the shared property line. As such, a separation distance of 4.5 metres would be maintained between the dwellings which will provide adequate separation to accommodate exterior maintenance, grading, drainage and other residential services subject to the applicant obtaining written permission from the adjacent property owner to the north to perform grading works up to the lot line and/or to create a common swale on the lot line, as outlined by the City’s Engineering Services Department. The most northerly section of the proposed garage will provide a through access from the front yard to the rear yard by way of an overhead door on the rear elevation (refer to Exhibit 6), enabling sufficient space for the movement of pedestrians and maintenance equipment. -129- Report P/CA 54/22 April 13, 2022 Page 3 Desirable for the Appriopriate Development of the Land The proposed attached garage will provide a covered parking and indoor storage area for the existing detached dwelling. Given the existing driveway configuration; footprint of the dwelling; and location of the front porch, the proposed garage has been sited in an appropriate location on the property. The proposed garage will be one-storey (4.75 metres) in height and will not contain any windows or opening along the north wall, minimizing any potential privacy and visual impacts on the adjacent property to the north. Minor in Nature The reduced side yard setback of 0.8 of a metre is only required for 7.8 metres of the total dwelling depth along the north side wall in order to accommodate the attached garage proposed. The existing dwelling will maintain a minimum setback of 3.0 metres. Staff consider the requested variance to be minor in nature. Input From Other Sources Applicant • The property owner requires a three-car garage and due to the outline of the existing dwelling and location of the existing front porch, the placement of the proposed garage results in a reduced interior side yard setback. Engineering Services • With regards to the reduced side yard depth, it will not be possible to accommodate a minimum 0.15m deep drainage swale with 3:1 side slopes and the required 0.6m undisturbed strip with a setback of less than 1.5m. If the applicant gets permission in writing from the adjacent property owner(s) to perform grading works up to the lot line and/or to create a common swale on the lot line, Engineering Services may consider a reduced setback. • Ensure reduced side yards (if approved with this application) do not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lots and surrounding area. Multiple Low Impact Development measures (such as infiltration galleries with downspout connections, rain gardens and 450mm topsoil) will be required at the Building Permit stage. Building Services • No concerns regarding the subject application. Public Input (written submissions received as of the date of writing this report) • No written submissions were received from the public as of the date of writing this report. -130- Report P/CA 54/22 April 13, 2022 Page 4 Date of report: April 7, 2022 Comments prepared by: Felix Chau Cody Morrison Planner II Principal Planner, Development Review FC:jc J:\Documents\Development\D-3700 Committee of Adjustment (PCA Applications)\2022\PCA 54-22 J. Rajaratnam & K. Sarvendran\7. Report\PCA 54-22 Report.doc Attachments -131- 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) N/A 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 attached garage is 1-storey and has a maximum height of 4.75 metres. It is not taller than existing adjacent dwellings. N/A 3. Is the maximum elevation of the Front Entrance 1.2 metres, or less, above grade? (see Section 2.2: Guideline 1) The Front Entrance is existing. The subject application will not alter the Front Entrance of the detached dwelling. 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) N/A 6. Does the design of the front entrance reduce the visual dominance of the garage and driveway? (see Section 2.2: Guideline 9) While the garage projects 2.7 metres closer to the front property line than the main wall, it is a one-storey addition to the existing 2-storey detached dwelling. X 7. Does the proposed dwelling have a similar Dwelling Depth to the adjacent dwellings along the street? (see Section 2.3: Guideline 2) -132- 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) N/A 9. Has shadow on adjacent dwellings been mitigated with greater Side Yard Setbacks? (Section 3.1: Guideline 2) The proposed reduced side yard setback is intended solely to facilitate the addition of an attached three-car garage. The addition is one-storey in height, whereas the existing dwelling is two-storeys. There will be minimal shadowing impacts as a result of the attached garage addition. X 10. Is the garage flush or recessed from the main front wall? (see Section 3.2: Guideline 5) The attached garage will project 2.7 metres beyond the main wall of the dwelling. The attached garage has been designed to be a single storey in height and integrate into the design of the existing two- storey dwelling. No habitable space is proposed above the garage. N/A 11. Is the proposed driveway width the same as the permitted garage width? (see Section 3.3: Guideline 1) The driveway is existing and is the same width as the proposed attached garage. X 12. Does the plan preserve existing trees? (see Section 4.1: Guideline 1) -133- Fiel d l i g h t B o u l e v a r d Lutterworth Court Brands Court Ca n b o r o u g h C r e s c e n t Li v e r p o o l R o a d Ma l d e n C r e s c e n t Fa y l e e C r e s c e n t An t o n S q u a r e Gl e n d a l e D r i v e Glendale Park Glengrove Park Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: P/CA 54/22 Date: Mar. 18, 2022 Exhibit 1 J. Rajaratnam & K. Sarvendran 1946 Liverpool Road SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\PCA\2022\PCA 54-22 J. Rajaratnam & K. Sarvendran\PCA54-22_LocationMap.mxd 1:3,000 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 Development Department -134- 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 54 / 2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : J. R a j a r a t n a m & K . S a r v e n d r a n Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 19 4 6 L i v e r p o o l 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 DE 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 : Ma r c h 2 5 , 2 0 2 2 to p e r m i t a m i n i m u m s i d e y a r d d e p t h o f 0 . 8 of a m e t r e -135- Ex h i b i t 3 Su b m i t t e d F r o n t El e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 54 / 2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : J. R a j a r a t n a m & K . S a r v e n d r a n Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 19 4 6 L i v e r p o o l 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 CO P I E S O F T H I S P L A N . Da t e : Ma r c h 2 5 , 2 0 2 2 -136- Ex h i b i t 4 Su b m i t t e d S i d e El e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 54 / 2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : J. R a j a r a t n a m & K . S a r v e n d r a n Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 19 4 6 L i v e r p o o l 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 CO P I E S O F T H I S P L A N . Da t e : Ma r c h 2 5 , 2 0 2 2 -137- Ex h i b i t 5 Su b m i t t e d S i d e El e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 54 / 2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : J. R a j a r a t n a m & K . S a r v e n d r a n Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 19 4 6 L i v e r p o o l 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 CO P I E S O F T H I S P L A N . Da t e : Ma r c h 2 5 , 2 0 2 2 -138- Ex h i b i t 6 Su b m i t t e d Re a r El e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 54 / 2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : J. R a j a r a t n a m & K . S a r v e n d r a n Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 19 4 6 L i v e r p o o l 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 : Ma r c h 2 5 , 2 0 2 2 -139- Revised Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: P/CA 55/22 Date: April 13, 2022 From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application P/CA 55/22 R. McKenzie & D. John 1824 Holbrook Court Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 4912/97, to: • permit a minimum rear yard depth of 7.4 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum rear yard of 7.5 metres; • permit a maximum lot coverage of 46 percent, whereas the By-law requires a maximum lot coverage of 38 percent; • permit uncovered steps or platforms (rear deck) not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.6 metres into the required rear 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 yard • permit uncovered steps or platforms (rear deck) not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.1 metres into the required 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 0.6 metres into any required side yard; The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application in order to facilitate the submission of an Application for Building Permit to permit the construction of a one-storey addition (sunroom) with rear deck. Recommendation The City Development Department has reviewed the application with respect to Section 45(1) of the Planning Act and is 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 one-storey addition and rear deck with associated steps, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, 4, & 5). -140- Report P/CA 55/22 April 13, 2022 Page 2 Revised Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated “Urban Residential Areas - Low Density Residential Area” within the Dunbarton Neighbourhood. Detached dwellings are a permitted use within this designation and a common built form within the Dunbarton Neighbourhood. The applicant is proposing to construct a one-storey addition (sunroom) with rear deck with associated steps, which is in keeping with maintaining the existing character and built form within the Dunbarton Neighbourhood. Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law 1824 Holbrook Court is zoned “S3-7” – Under Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by Zoning By-law 4912/97. A detached residential dwelling is permitted within the lands zoned “S3-7.” Rear Yard Variance The intent of the minimum rear yard requirement of 7.5 metres is to protect the privacy of abutting properties and to maintain sufficient outdoor amenity space. The proposed sunroom will contain windows along all sides, however, due to its at-grade elevation, privacy is mitigated by surrounding property fence, and will maintain privacy for abutting neighbours. This will help mitigate any privacy concerns. There will be sufficient amenity space in the rear yard of the dwelling. Uncovered Rear and Side Deck Variance The By-law requires uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade to project not more than 1.5 metres into the required rear yard and 0.6 metres into the required side yard. The intent of this provision is to provide the opportunity for any stairs and/or a landing platform to encroach into the rear yard when needed, to maintain sufficient separation distances to buildings and structures on abutting lots, and to ensure an adequate landscaped area within the rear yard is provided. The requested variance is to permit an uncovered platform (deck with associated steps) to wrap around the proposed sunroom. The uncovered deck with associated steps will provide sufficient usable amenity space in the rear yard. Lot Coverage Variance The intent of the maximum lot coverage requirement of 38 percent is to maintain an appropriate amount of yard space (for landscaping and amenity areas) uncovered by buildings on a lot. The property has adequate landscaping area in the front yard, and sufficient area in the rear and east side yards for outdoor amenity space. Desirable for the Appriopriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The requested variances are desirable for the appropriate development of the land, as they will enhance the existing usable rear amenity space. The proposed sunroom with rear deck and associated steps will provide sufficient usable amenity space. -141- Report P/CA 55/22 April 13, 2022 Page 3 Revised Staff are of the opinion that the proposed sunroom and deck with associated steps is appropriate use of development and is minor in nature. Input From Other Sources Applicant •The existing dwelling lot coverage is currently 35 percent with a smaller lot area Engineering Services •Ensure the increased lot coverage and proposed deck (if approved with this application) do not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lots and surrounding area. Building Services •No concerns regarding this application. Public Input •No written submissions were received from the public as of the date of writing this report. Date of report: April 12, 2022 Comments prepared by: Kerry Yelk Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Planner I Manager, Zoning & Administration KY:ld J:\Documents\Development\D-3700\2022\PCA 55-22\7. Report Attachments -142- Ap p l e v i e w R o a d Bonita Avenue Br o o k s h i r e S q u a r e Voyager Avenue Fa l c o n w o o d W a y Fa i r p o r t R o a d Ga b l e h u r s t C r e s c e n t Ho l b r o o k C o u r t Bonita Park Dalewood Ravine Dalewood Ravine Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: P/CA 55/22 Date: Mar. 18, 2022 Exhibit 1 R. McKenzie & D. John 1824 Holbrook Court SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\PCA\2022\PCA 55-22 R. McKenzie & D. John\PCA55-22_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 Development Department -143- Exhibit 2 Submitted Plan File No: P/CA 55/22 Applicant: R. McKenzie & D. John Municipal Address: 1824 Holbrook Court CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN. Date: March 30, 2022 uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metres in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.1 metres in any required side yard to permit uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metres in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.6 metres into the required rear yard to permit a maximum lot coverage of 46 percent to permit a minimum rear yard depth of 7.4 metres Holbrook Court -144- Ex h i b i t 3 Su b m i t t e d Re a r E l e v a t i o n Pl a n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 55 / 2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : R. M c K e n z i e & D . J o h n Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 18 2 4 H o l b r o o k C o u r 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 DE 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 : Ma r c h 3 0 , 2 0 2 2 Es t a b l i s h e d Gr a d e 0. 4 7 m -145- Ex h i b i t 4 Su b m i t t e d Ea s t (S i d e ) El e v a t i o n Pl a n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 55 / 2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : R. M c K e n z i e & D . J o h n Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 18 2 4 H o l b r o o k C o u r 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 FO 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 : Ma r c h 3 0 , 2 0 2 2 -146- Ex h i b i t 5 Su b m i t t e d We s t ( S i d e ) El e v a t i o n Pl a n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 55 / 2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : R. M c K e n z i e & D . J o h n Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 18 2 4 H o l b r o o k C o u r 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 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 : Ma r c h 3 0 , 2 0 2 2 -147- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Numbers: P/CA 56/22 & P/CA 57/22 Date: April 13, 2022 From: Cody Morrison Principal Planner, Development Review Subject: Committee of Adjustment Applications P/CA 56/22 & P/CA 57/22 1000118968 Ontario Ltd. & Whitepine Group Inc. 1835 & 1837 Woodview Avenue Applications P/CA 56/22 – 1835 Woodview Avenue The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended, to permit a minimum side yard setback of 1.2 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum side yard setback of 1.5 metres. P/CA 57/22 – 1837 Woodview Avenue The applicant requests approval from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended, to permit a minimum side yard setback of 1.2 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum side yard setback of 1.5 metres. The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to facilitate the submission of an application for Building Permit to permit the construction of two detached dwellings. 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 detached dwellings, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3 & 4). Background The applicant has submitted Land Division Applications LD 36/2022 and LD 37/2022 to the Region of Durham’s Land Division Committee. The applications are scheduled to be heard at the April 11, 2022 Land Division Committee Meeting. -148- Report P/CA 56/22 & P/CA 57/22 April 13, 2022 Page 2 The applicant’s proposals are as follows: LD 036/2022 – 1835 Woodview Avenue Consent to add a vacant 233.3 m2 residential parcel of land to the property to the east (1586 Oakburn Street), retaining a 790.7 m2 residential parcel of land (1835 Woodview Avenue). LD 037/2022 – 1837 Woodview Avenue Consent to add a vacant 233.3 m2 residential parcel of land to the property to the east (1588 Oakburn Street), retaining a 790.7 m2 residential parcel of land (1837 Woodview Avenue). The Land Division Applications, if approved, will have the effect of severing rear portions from 1835 & 1837 Woodview Avenue to be conveyed and added to 1586 & 1588 Oakburn Street enlarging the Oakburn Street properties. The proposed lot sizes are in compliance with the applicable City Zoning By-laws. Infill & Replacement Housing By-laws On September 27, 2021, City Council enacted By-law 7874/21 (the Infill By-law) to amend Zoning By-law 3036, to rezone all lands within the Established Neighbourhood Precincts to an “Established Neighbourhood Precinct Overlay Zone” category. The amending Infill By-law introduces new provisions for yard setbacks, building height, lot coverage and other zoning standards to ensure new built form is compatible with existing built form. Following adoption by Council, the City received appeals to the Infill By law. On January 24, 2022, City Council adopted By-law 7902/22, to reinstate a maximum building height of 9.0 metres for all lands within the Established Neighbourhood Precincts. The City also received appeals to this By-law. The subject property is subject to By-law 7874/21 and By-law 7902/22. Please note that due to the ongoing appeals, the Infill By-laws are not currently in force. As such, a building permit for a dwelling that does not maintain the Infill By-law provisions can still be issued in the interim. However, the proposed dwellings maintain the new zoning provisions proposed through By-law 7874/21 and By-law 7902/22. Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated “Urban Residential Areas – Low Density Areas” within the Highbush Neighbourhood. Lands within this designation are intended for residential uses including detached dwellings. Staff have reviewed and made comment on the proposal using the Council-adopted Revised Urban Design Guidelines for Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhood Precincts Checklist, which can be found as “Appendix A” to this report. -149- Report P/CA 56/22 & P/CA 57/22 April 13, 2022 Page 3 Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law, Desirable for the Appriopriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The intent of a minimum side yard depth provision is to provide an appropriate separation between structures on abutting properties in in order ensure compatibility with the existing neighbourhood, provide appropriate pedestrian access, and to accommodate grading, drainage and other residential services. The zoning by-law requires a minimum side yard of 1.5 metres on both sides where a garage is erected as a part of the dwelling. The applicant has requested a reduction in the south side yard setback from 1.5 metres to 1.2 metres to facilitate a future dwelling at 1837 Woodview Avenue and a reduction of the north side yard setback from 1.5 metres to 1.2 metres to facilitate a future dwelling at 1835 Woodview Avenue. The north and south side yard setback proposed to be reduced on the respective properties will directly abut one another. The proposed reduction of the interior side yard setbacks will provide a total separation of 2.4 metres between the future dwellings which will be sufficient to accommodate pedestrian access, grading, drainage, and residential utility services. The proposed side yard setbacks of 1.2 metres will be located within the interior side yard of both properties. Therefore, the reduced setbacks will not result in a negative visual impact on the abutting properties immediately north or immediately south of the subject lands. The proposed dwellings will maintain the required side yard setback 1.5 metres within the exterior side yards and will maintain all other requirements of the zoning by-law, including building height, lot coverage, front yard setback and rear yard setback. Therefore, the proposed dwellings will maintain the character of the surrounding neighbourhood. The requested variances are minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land and maintain the general intent of the Zoning By-law. Input From Other Sources Applicant •The variance is required to accommodate the proposed dwellings Engineering Services •Ensure reduced side yards (if approved with this application) do not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lots and surrounding area. Multiple Low Impact Development measures (such as infiltration galleries with downspout connections, rain gardens and 450mm topsoil) will be required at the Building Permit stage and Land Division stage. Building Services •No concerns regarding the requested variances. -150- Report P/CA 56/22 & P/CA 57/22 April 13, 2022 Page 4 Public Input (written submissions received as of the date of writing this report) • No written submissions were received from the public as of the date of writing this report. Date of report: April 7, 2022 Comments prepared by: Felix Chau Cody Morrison Planner II Principal Planner, Development Review FC:jc \\Fs\planning\Documents\Development\D-3700\2022\PCA 56-22 & PCA 57-22 1000118968 Ontario Ltd. & Whitepine Group Inc\7. Report\PCA 56-22 & PCA 57-22 Report-CM edits(non-table).doc Attachments -151- 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) 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) 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) -152- 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) X 9. Has shadow on adjacent dwellings been mitigated with greater Side Yard Setbacks? (Section 3.1: Guideline 2) X 10. Is the garage flush or recessed from the main front wall? (see Section 3.2: Guideline 5) X 11. Is the proposed driveway width the same as the permitted garage width? (see Section 3.3: Guideline 1) X 12. Does the plan preserve existing trees? (see Section 4.1: Guideline 1) Both properties are currently vacant and feature a significant amount of trees. Through the Land Division application, a Tree Inventory and Protection/Removal Plan has been requested to be provided and the preservation and protection measures will be determined. -153- Westcreek Drive Pine Grove Avenue Oa k b u r n S t r e e t Wo o d v i e w A v e n u e No r d a n e D r i v e Waterford Gate Prohill Street Ro c k w o o d D r i v e Mossbrook S quare Se n a t o r S t r e e t Westcreek Public School Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: P/CA 56/22 & P/CA 57/22 Date: Mar. 18, 2022 Exhibit 1 1000118968 Ontario Ltd. & Whitepine Group Inc. 1835 & 1837 Woodview Avenue SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\PCA\2022\PCA 56-22 1000118968 Ontario Ltd. & Whitepine Group Inc\PCA56-22_LocationMap.mxd 1:3,000 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 Development Department -154- 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 56 / 2 2 & P / C A 5 7 / 2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : 10 0 0 1 1 8 9 6 8 O n t a r i o L t d & W h i t e p i n e G r o u p I n c . Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 18 3 5 & 1 8 3 7 W o o d v i e w A v e n u e 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 : Ma r c h 3 0 , 2 0 2 2 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 -155- Ex h i b i t 3 Fr o n t E l e v a t i o n – 18 3 5 W o o d v i e w A v e n u e Fi l e N o : P/ C A 56 /2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : 10 0 0 1 1 8 9 6 8 O n t a r i o L t d & W h i t e p i n e G r o u p I n c . Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 18 3 5 W o o d v i e w A v e n u e 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 DE 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 : Ma r c h 2 9 , 2 0 2 2 -156- Ex h i b i t 4 Fr o n t E l e v a t i o n – 18 3 7 W o o d v i e w A v e n u e Fi l e N o : P/ C A 57 /2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : 10 0 0 1 1 8 9 6 8 O n t a r i o L t d & W h i t e p i n e G r o u p I n c . Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 18 3 7 W o o d v i e w A v e n u e 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 DE 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 : Ma r c h 2 9 , 2 0 2 2 -157- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Numbers: P/CA 58/22 & P/CA 59/22 Date: April 13, 2022 From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application P/CA 58/22 & P/CA 59/22 1000118936 Ontario Ltd. & 1000119025 Ontario Ltd. 1586 & 1588 Oakburn Street Applications P/CA 58/22 – 1586 Oakburn Street The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended, to permit: • a minimum side yard setback of 1.2 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum side yard setback of 1.5 metres. P/CA 59/22 – 1588 Oakburn Street The applicant requests approval from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended, to permit: • a minimum side yard setback of 1.2 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum side yard setback of 1.5 metres. The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to facilitate the submission of an application for Building Permit to permit the construction of two detached dwellings. 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 conditions are recommended: 1. That these variances apply only to the detached dwellings, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3 & 4); and 2. That prior to the issuance of a building permit, the property owner obtains permission in writing from the adjacent property owner(s) to perform grading works up to the lot line and/or to create a common swale on the lot line, to the satisfaction of Engineering Services. -158- Report P/CA 58/22 & P/CA 59/22 April 13, 2022 Page 2 Background The applicant has submitted Land Division Applications LD 036/2022 and LD 037/2022 to the Region of Durham’s Land Division Committee. The applications are scheduled to be heard at the April 11, 2022 Land Division Committee Meeting. The applicant’s proposals are as follows: • LD 036/2022 – 1835 Woodview Avenue Consent to add a vacant 233.3 square metre residential parcel of land to the property to the east (1586 Oakburn Street), retaining a 790.7 square metre residential parcel of land. • LD 037/2022 – 1837 Woodview Avenue Consent to add a vacant 233.3 square metre residential parcel of land to the property to the east (1588 Oakburn Street), retaining a 790.7 square metre residential parcel of land. The Land Division Applications, if approved, will have the effect of severing rear portions from 1835 & 1837 Woodview Avenue to be conveyed and added to 1586 & 1588 Oakburn Street enlarging the Oakburn Street properties. The proposed lot sizes are in compliance with the applicable City Zoning By-laws. The subject applications are intended to facilitate zoning compliance for one side yard setback for each of the proposed detached dwellings respectively. Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated “Urban Residential Areas – Low Density Areas” within the Highbush Neighbourhood. Lands within this designation are intended for residential uses including detached dwellings. Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The intent of a minimum side yard depth provision is to ensure an appropriate separation between structures on abutting properties is provided in order to maintain a pedestrian access, and to accommodate grading, drainage and other residential services. The applicant as requested 1.2 metre side yard setbacks along the north side yards. The surrounding properties along Oakburn Street feature a mix of newly constructed two-storey dwellings along with older single-storey dwellings. The proposed height, massing and design of the subject dwellings are generally consistent with the newer dwellings along Oakburn Street which are generally around 9.0 to 10.0 metres in height and feature two garage doors, a double door main entrance, and a window facing into a living area on the front wall of the dwelling. The proposed 1.2 metre side yard setbacks maintain sufficient space for pedestrian access, and accommodates for grading, drainage and other residential services. -159- Report P/CA 58/22 & P/CA 59/22 April 13, 2022 Page 3 Desirable for the Appriopriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The proposed dwellings are designed to blend in with the existing character along Oakburn Street. The proposed height, design and overall massing of the dwellings are generally consistent with the newer two-storey dwellings along the street. The reduction of the side yard setback along the north side yards from 1.5 metres to 1.2 metres will have minimal impact towards any adjacent properties. Input From Other Sources Applicant •The variance is required to accommodate the proposed dwellings Engineering Services •Ensure reduced side yards (if approved with this application) do not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lots and surrounding area. Multiple Low Impact Development measures (such as infiltration galleries with downspout connections, rain gardens and 450mm topsoil) will be required at the Building Permit stage. •With regards to the reduced side yard depth on the north side of the property, it will not be possible to accommodate a minimum 0.15 metre deep drainage swale with 3:1 side slopes and the required 0.6 metre undisturbed strip with a setback of less than 1.5 metre. If the applicant gets permission in writing from the adjacent property owner(s) to perform grading works up to the lot line and/or to create a common swale on the lot line, Engineering Services may consider a reduced setback. Building Services •No concerns regarding the requested variances. Public Input •No written submissions were received from the public as of the date of writing this report. Date of report: April 7, 2022 Comments prepared by: Felix Chau Planner II Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Manager, Zoning & Administration FC:ld J:\Documents\Development\D-3700 Committee of Adjustment (PCA Applications)\2022\PCA 58-22 & PCA 59-22 1000118936 Ontario Ltd. & 1000119025 Ontario Ltd\7. Report\PCA 58-22 & PCA 59-22 Report.docx Attachments -160- Wo o d v i e w A v e n u e Westcreek Drive Prohill Street Oa k b u r n S t r e e t Ro c k w o o d D r i v e Mo s s b r o o k S q u a r e Se n a t o r S t r e e t Westcreek Public School Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: P/CA 58/22 & P/CA 59/22 Date: Mar. 21, 2022 Exhibit 1 1000118936 Ontario Ltd. & 1000119025 Ontario Ltd. 1586 & 1588 Oakburn Street SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\PCA\2022\PCA 58-22 & 59-22 1000118936 Ontario Ltd. & 1000119025 Ontario Ltd\PCA58-22_59-22_LocationMap.mxd 1:2,500 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 Development Department -161- 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 58 / 2 2 & P / C A 5 9 / 2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : 10 0 0 1 1 8 9 3 6 O n t a r i o L t d . & 1 0 0 0 1 1 9 0 2 5 O n t a r i o L t d . Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 15 8 6 & 1 5 8 8 O a k b u r n S t r e e t 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 : Ma r c h 2 9 , 2 0 2 2 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 -162- Ex h i b i t 3 Fr o n t E l e v a t i o n – 15 8 6 O a k b u r n S t r e e t Fi l e N o : P/ C A 58 / 2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : 10 0 0 1 1 8 9 3 6 O n t a r i o L t d . & 1 0 0 0 1 1 9 0 2 5 O n t a r i o L t d . Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 15 8 6 O a k b u r n S t r e e 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 DE 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 : Ma r c h 2 9 , 2 0 2 2 -163- Ex h i b i t 4 Fr o n t E l e v a t i o n – 15 8 8 O a k b u r n S t r e e t Fi l e N o : P/ C A 59 / 2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : 10 0 0 1 1 8 9 3 6 O n t a r i o L t d . & 1 0 0 0 1 1 9 0 2 5 O n t a r i o L t d . Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 15 8 8 O a k b u r n S t r e e 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 DE 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 : Ma r c h 2 9 , 2 0 2 2 -164- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: P/CA 60/22 Date: April 13, 2022 From: Cody Morrison Principal Planner, Development Review Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application P/CA 60/22 F. Molinaro 1771 Woodview Avenue Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 7874/21 and By-law 7902/22, to permit: • a minimum north side yard and 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 dwelling depth of 23 metres, whereas the By-law states that the maximum dwelling depth for lots with depths greater than 40 metres shall be 20 metres; and • a maximum lot coverage of 27 percent, whereas the By-law states that for lots greater than or equal to 1,000 square metres in area, the maximum lot coverage shall be 25 percent. The applicant is proposing to sever the property resulting in a total of 2 lots. The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to construct a bungalow on the proposed north 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 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 conditions are recommended: 1. That these variances apply only to the proposed bungalow on the proposed north lot (Part 1), as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6). 2. That prior to the issuance of a building permit, the property owner obtains permission in writing from the adjacent property owners to perform grading works up to the lot line and/or to create a common swale on the lot line, to the satisfaction of Engineering Services. -165- Report P/CA 60/22 April 13, 2022 Page 2 Background The applicant has submitted a land severance application (LD 042/22) to the Region of Durham to sever the subject property. The application is scheduled for the May 9, 2022 Region of Durham Land Division Committee hearing. Infill & Replacement Housing By-laws On September 27, 2021, City Council enacted By-law 7874/21 (the Infill By-law) to amend Zoning By-law 3036, to rezone all lands within the Established Neighbourhood Precincts to an “Established Neighbourhood Precinct Overlay Zone” category. The amending Infill By-law introduces new provisions for yard setbacks, building height, lot coverage and other zoning standards to ensure new built form is compatible with existing built form. Following adoption by Council, the City received appeals to the Infill By law. On January 24, 2022, City Council adopted By-law 7902/22, to reinstate a maximum building height of 9.0 metres for all lands within the Established Neighbourhood Precincts. The City also received appeals to this By-law. The subject property is subject to By-law 7874/21 and By-law 7902/22. By-law 7874/21 established a new maximum dwelling depth and reduced the permitted lot coverage from 33 percent to 25 percent, among other new provisions. The applicant is requesting variances to the maximum dwelling depth and lot coverage. However, please note that due to the ongoing appeals, the Infill By-laws are not currently in force. As such, a building permit for a dwelling that exceeds the maximum dwelling depth and lot coverage of 25 percent can still be issued in the interim. Previous Minor Variance Application The existing 2-storey dwelling on the proposed south lot (Part 2 on Exhibit 2) was constructed in 2020. Minor Variance Application P/CA 41/20 was approved by the Committee of Adjustment to recognize a minimum south side yard of 0.8 metres for the existing dwelling, resulting from an error made on the construction drawings. Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated “Urban Residential Areas – Low Density Area” within the Highbush Neighbourhood. Detached dwellings are a permitted use within this designation and a common built form within the Highbush Neighbourhood. Staff have reviewed and made comment on the proposal using the Council-adopted Revised Urban Design Guidelines for Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhood Precincts Checklist, which can be found as Appendix A to this report. -166- Report P/CA 60/22 April 13, 2022 Page 3 Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law North & South Side Yards The intent of the minimum side yard requirement of 1.5 metres is to provide an appropriate separation between structures on abutting properties in order to maintain pedestrian access, and to accommodate grading, drainage and residential services. A minimum building separation of approximately 2.7 metres will be maintained between the proposed dwelling on Part 1 and the adjacent dwelling immediately to the north, and a minimum separation of 3.0 metres will be maintained between the proposed dwelling on Part 1 and the existing dwelling immediately to the south on Part 2. There is sufficient space between the proposed dwelling and adjacent dwellings to the north and south to provide for pedestrian access. As noted in the comments from Engineering Services (see Input from Other Sources), provided the applicant obtains permission in writing from the adjacent property owners to perform grading works up to the lot line and/or to create a common swale on the lot line, there is sufficient space between the dwellings to accommodate grading and drainage. Dwelling Depth The intent of the maximum dwelling depth requirement of 20.0 metres is to ensure new dwellings are generally in keeping with the existing dwellings along a street to avoid negative privacy and overshadowing issues. The existing dwellings within this block of Woodview Avenue appear to have dwelling depths ranging between 16.0 and 27.0 metres, including the existing dwellings immediately to the north and south of the proposed dwelling, which have depths of 24 and 20 metres respectively. The proposed dwelling is one-storey in height and would benefit from an increased dwelling depth to provide for additional floor space area without the need to increase the overall building height. Staff are of the opinion that the proposal to increase dwelling depth by 3.0 metres will not result in a loss of privacy or create overshadow issues for the adjacent dwellings to the north or south. The proposed dwelling will maintain a minimum rear yard setback of 37.4 metres despite the marginal increase in dwelling depth requested. Lot Coverage The intent of the maximum lot coverage requirement of 25 percent is to maintain an appropriate amount of yard space (for landscaping and amenity areas) uncovered by buildings on a lot. The proposed dwelling, including the covered front porch and covered rear deck, account for 26 percent of the total lot coverage, whereas the shed in the rear yard accounts for 1.0 percent of the total lot coverage. The proposal will provide sufficient space on the property left uncovered for soft landscaping and outdoor amenity as a minimum front yard setback of 11.0 metres and a minimum rear yard setback of 37.4 metres will be maintained. As mentioned above, the proposed dwelling is one-storey and would therefore benefit from an increased lot coverage to allow for additional floor space area while maintaining a built form that is considered consistent with the immediate neighbourhood. -167- Report P/CA 60/22 April 13, 2022 Page 4 Desirable for the Appriopriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature Staff consider the proposed dwelling to be appropriate relative to the size of the proposed lot. Additionally, the dwelling proposed is a bungalow, which is consistent with the established built form along Woodview Drive and within the immediate neighbourhood, which consists primarily of one and two-storey detached dwellings. Staff consider a reduction in the side yards by 0.3 of a metre, an increase in dwelling depth by 3.0 metres and an increase in total lot coverage by 2 percent to be minor in nature. Input From Other Sources Applicant •To make better design use of the building frontage. Engineering Services •With regards to the reduced side yard depth, it will not be possible to accommodate a minimum 0.15 metre deep drainage swale with 3:1 side slopes and the required 0.6 metre undisturbed strip with a setback of less than 1.5 metre. If the applicant gets permission in writing from the adjacent property owner(s) to perform grading works up to the lot line and/or to create a common swale on the lot line, Engineering Services may consider a reduced setback. •Ensure increased lot coverage and any reduced setbacks (if approved with this application) do not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lots and surrounding area. Multiple Low Impact Development measures (such as infiltration galleries with downspout connections, rain gardens and 450mm topsoil) will be required at the Building Permit stage and Land Division stage. 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: April 7, 2022 Comments prepared by: Isabel Lima Cody Morrison (Acting) Planner II Principal Planner, Development Review IL:jc J:\Documents\Development\D-3700\2022\PCA 60-22 F. Molinaro\7. Report Attachments -168- 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) N/A 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 single-storey dwelling is not significantly taller than existing adjacent dwellings. 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) -169- Appendix A Urban Design Checklist Cont’d Urban City of Pickering Established A 2 Yes No Comments 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 existing dwellings within this block of Woodview Avenue appear to have dwelling depths ranging between 16.0 and 27.0 metres, including the abutting dwellings to the north and south, which appear to have depths of 24.0 and 20.0 metres, respectively. X 8. Does the proposed dwelling have a similar Side Yard Setback to the adjacent dwellings along the street? (see Figure 15) X 9. Has shadow on adjacent dwellings been mitigated with greater Side Yard Setbacks? (Section 3.1: Guideline 2) The applicant is requesting to reduce the minimum north and south side yard setbacks from 1.5 metres to 1.2 metres. However, the proposed dwelling will be limited to 7.5 metres in height which will assist in mitigating any shadow impacts. 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. These details will be confirmed at building permit stage. 12. Does the plan preserve existing trees? (see Section 4.1: Guideline 1) Unknown at this time. As a condition of approval of the land severance application, the applicant will be required to submit a Tree Inventory and Protection/Removal Plan. The Plan must address matters such as existing tree species, diameter, health, protection/removal strategies, and a proposed replanting plan. -170- As h w o o d G a t e Ho o v e r D r i v e Hogarth Street W aterford G ate WilcroftCourt Lawson Street Twyn Rivers Drive Brimwood Court Wo o d v i e w D r i v e Oak burn St reet Ca s t l e S t r e e t Lancrest Street Howell Crescent Sweetbriar Court Wo o d v i e w A v e n u e Se n a t o r S t r e e t Ro c k w o o d D r i v e Woodview Tot Lot Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: P/CA 60/22 Date: Mar. 21, 2022 Exhibit 1 F. Molinaro 1771 Woodview Avenue SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\PCA\2022\PCA 60-22 F. Molinaro\PCA60-22_LocationMap.mxd 1:3,500 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 Development Department -171- 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 60 /2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : F. M o l i n a r o Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 17 7 1 W o o d v i e w A v e n u e FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A 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 . Da t e : Ma r c h 2 5 , 2 0 2 2 to p e r m i t a m a x i m u m l o t co v e r a g e o f 2 7 pe r c e n t to p e r m i t a m a x i m u m dw e l l i n g d e p t h o f 2 3 me t r e s to p e r m i t a m i n i m u m n o r t h s i d e y a r d an d s o u t h s i d e y a r d o f 1 . 2 m e t r e s -172- 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 Fi l e N o : P/ C A 60 /2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : F. M o l i n a r o Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 17 7 1 W o o d v i e w A v e n u e FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A 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 . Da t e : Ma r c h 2 5 , 2 0 2 2 -173- 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 Fi l e N o : P/ C A 60 /2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : F. M o l i n a r o Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 17 7 1 W o o d v i e w A v e n u e FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A 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 . Da t e : Ma r c h 2 5 , 2 0 2 2 -174- Ex h i b i t 5 Su b m i t t e d No r t h S i d e El e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 60 /2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : F. M o l i n a r o Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 17 7 1 W o o d v i e w A v e n u e FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A 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 . Da t e : Ma r c h 2 5 , 2 0 2 2 -175- Ex h i b i t 6 Su b m i t t e d So u t h Si d e El e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 60 /2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : F. M o l i n a r o Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 17 7 1 W o o d v i e w A v e n u e FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A 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 . Da t e : Ma r c h 2 5 , 2 0 2 2 -176- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: P/CA 61/22 Date: April 13, 2022 From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application P/CA 61/22 S. Wyce & B. Grant 624 Park Crescent Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-law 7610/18, By-law 7872/21 and By-law 7900/22, to permit: • a minimum front yard of 7.0 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum front yard of 7.5 metres; • a minimum rear yard of 1.3 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum rear yard of 7.5 metres; • a minimum north side yard of 1.2 metres, whereas the By-law states that where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling, the minimum required side yard shall be 1.5 metres; • a minimum front yard of 0.3 metres, whereas the By-law states that where a main building is erected upon a corner lot with its main front entrance facing the flank of such lot, such main building shall be deemed to have two front yards, one on the street upon which such lot fronts, and one on the street upon which such lot flanks, and shall conform to the respective front yard requirement of 7.5 metres; • a maximum dwelling depth of 23 metres, whereas the By-law states that the maximum dwelling depth for lots with depths up to and including 40 metres shall be 17 metres; • a maximum lot coverage of 43 percent, whereas the By-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent; • a covered platform and associated covered steps (front porch) not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 7.4 metres into the required front 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 yard, not 1.0 metre into any required side yard (2511 Section 5.8(b)); • a covered platform and associated covered and uncovered steps (side porch) not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 2.8 metres into the required front 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 yard, not 1.0 metre into any required side yard (2511 Section 5.8(b)); and -177- Report P/CA 61/22 April 13, 2022 Page 2 • a vehicle in the rear yard to be set back a minimum of 0.0 metres from the south lot line, whereas the By-law states that vehicles parked in a rear yard must be set back a minimum 1.0 metre from the nearest lot line. 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. Recommendation The City Development Department recommends that Minor Variance Application P/CA 61/22 be Tabled to allow the applicant to address comments received from Engineering Services, and to allow the applicant to revise the submitted site plan to include a 5.0 metre by 5.0 metre site triangle at the southwest corner of the subject property, to be conveyed to the City of Pickering. Background In accordance with comments received from Engineering Services (see Input from Other Sources), the City requires a 5.0 metre by 5.0 metre site triangle to be provided at the southwest corner of the subject property. The conveyance of a site triangle was not included on the submitted site plan, nor taken into account when identifying variances for lot coverage, yard setbacks, etc. The conveyance of land for a site triangle is expected to alter the requested variances. As such, City staff recommend that this application be tabled to allow the applicant to address the comments received from Engineering Services, and to revise the submitted site plan to include a site triangle. Input From Other Sources Applicant • The shape of the proposed dwelling encroaches into maximum setback total lot area. Engineering Services • With regards to the reduced side yard depth, it will not be possible to accommodate a minimum 0.15 metre deep drainage swale with 3:1 side slopes and the required 0.6 metre undisturbed strip with a setback of less than 1.5 metre. If the applicant gets permission in writing from the adjacent property owner(s) to perform grading works up to the lot line and/or to create a common swale, Engineering Services may consider a reduced setback. • Ensure increased lot coverage and any reduced setbacks (if approved with this application) do not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lots and surrounding area. Multiple Low Impact Development measures (such as infiltration galleries with downspout connections, rain gardens and 450mm topsoil) will be required at the Building Permit stage. -178- Report P/CA 61/22 April 13, 2022 Page 3 •A 5.0 metre x 5.0 metre site triangle will be required. The applicant will be required to provide a draft reference plan showing the sight triangle and will need to pay all the fees associated with conveyance of the lands to the City for road dedication purposes. •With regard to the reduced front yard setback, all sightlines comply with Transportation Association of Canada (TAC) manual. 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: April 7, 2022 Comments prepared by: Isabel Lima (Acting) Planner II Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Manager, Zoning & Administration IL:ld J:\Documents\Development\D-3700 Committee of Adjustment (PCA Applications)\2022\PCA 61-22 S. Wyce & B. Grant\7. Report\PCA 61-22.docx Attachments -179- Oklahoma Drive Park Crescent We s t S h o r e B o u l e v a r d Sunrise Avenue Hillcres t Road H i l l vi e w C r e s c e n t Vi c t o r y D r i v e Ma r k s b u r y R o a d Tullo Street Cliffview Road Sandcastle Court Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: P/CA 61/22 Date: Mar. 21, 2022 Exhibit 1 S. Wyce & B. Grant 624 Park Crescent SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\PCA\2022\PCA 61-22 S. Wyce & B. Grant\PCA61-22_LocationMap.mxd 1:2,500 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 Development Department -180- 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 61 /2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : S. W y c e & B . G r a n t Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 62 4 P a r k C r e s c e n t FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A 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 . Da t e : Ma r c h 2 5 , 2 0 2 2 to p e r m i t a m i n i m u m f r o n t ya r d o f 7 . 0 m e t r e s to p e r m i t a mi n i m u m re a r y a r d o f 1. 3 m e t r e s to p e r m i t a m i n i m u m n o r t h si d e y a r d o f 1 . 2 me t r e s to p e r m i t a mi n i m u m fr o n t y a r d o f 0. 3 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 2 3 me t r e s to p e r m i t a co v e r e d pl a t f o r m a n d a s s o c i a t e d c o v e r e d s t e p s ( f r o n t po r c h ) no t e x c e e d i n g 1 . 0 m e t r e in h e i g h t a b o v e g r a d e a n d n o t pr o j e c t i n g m o r e t h a n 7. 4 me t r e s i n t o th e re q u i r e d f r o n t y a r d to p e r m i t a v e h i c l e in t h e r e a r y a r d t o be s e t b a c k a mi n i m u m o f 0 . 0 me t r e s f r o m t h e so u t h l o t l i n e to pe r m i t a m a x i m u m l o t co v e r a g e o f 4 3 pe r c e n t to p e r m i t a co v e r e d p l a t f o r m an d a s s o c i a t e d co v e r e d a n d un c o v e r e d s t e p s (s i d e p o r c h ) no t ex c e e d i n g 1. 0 me t r e i n he i g h t a b o v e gr a d e a n d n o t pr o j e c t i n g m o r e th a n 2. 8 me t r e s in t o t h e re q u i r e d fr o n t y a r d -181- 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 ( S o u t h W a l l ) Fi l e N o : P/ C A 61 / 2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : S. W y c e & B . G r a n t Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 62 4 P a r k C r e s c e n t FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A 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 DE P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ma r c h 2 5 , 2 0 2 2 -182- 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 ( No r t h Wa l l ) Fi l e N o : P/ C A 61 / 2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : S. W y c e & B . G r a n t Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 62 4 P a r k C r e s c e n t FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A 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 DE P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ma r c h 2 5 , 2 0 2 2 -183- Ex h i b i t 5 Su b m i t t e d We s t S i d e El e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 61 / 2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : S. W y c e & B . G r a n t Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 62 4 P a r k C r e s c e n t FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A 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 . Da t e : Ma r c h 2 5 , 2 0 2 2 -184- Ex h i b i t 6 Su b m i t t e d Ea s t Si d e El e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 61 / 2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : S. W y c e & B . G r a n t Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 62 4 P a r k C r e s c e n t FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A 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 . Da t e : Ma r c h 2 5 , 2 0 2 2 -185- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: P/CA 62/22 Date: April 13, 2022 From: Deborah Wylie Manager, Zoning and Administration Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application P/CA 62/22 P. Nelson 1707 Echo Point Court Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law No. 3036, as amended by Zoning By-law 1998/85 to permit uncovered steps and platform not exceeding 1.4 metres in height above grade and not projecting more than 3.6 metres into the required rear yard, whereas the By-law permits uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metres in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.5 metres in any required front or rear yard The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application in order to obtain a building permit for the construction of a covered and uncovered deck with steps. 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 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 this variance apply only to the proposed covered and uncovered deck with steps, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibit 2 & 3). Background Previous Committee of Adjustment Hearing At the January 12, 2022 Committee of Adjustment hearing, the Committee of Adjustment refused Application P/CA 31/22, as the application was deemed undesirable for development and not minor in nature. The applicant has revised their proposal to address neighbour’s concerns including privacy and obstructions of the proposed deck in the rear yard. -186- Report P/CA 62/22 April 13, 2022 Page 2 Comments Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated “Urban Residential Areas – Low Density Area” within the Liverpool Neighbourhood. Single detached dwellings are a permitted use within this designation. Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law 1707 Echo Point Court is zoned “S4” – under Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by Zoning By-law 1998/85. A detached dwelling is permitted within the lands zoned “S4”. Uncovered Deck with Associated Steps Variance The intent of the provision that requires uncovered platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade to project not more than 1.5 metres into the required rear yard is to ensure an adequate buffer space between buildings and to ensure an adequate landscaped area within the rear yard is provided. Furthermore, the intent of the provision is to ensure privacy for surrounding neighbours is not compromised. The 3.6 metre projection into the required rear yard leaves approximately 3.9 metres of landscaped area between the edge of the deck and the rear property line. The proposed setback adequately supplies space between neighbouring buildings and maintains landscaped area in the rear yard. There is a change in grade in the rear yard, sloping down towards the rear property line resulting in the abutting property to rear having a lower grade. However, the applicant has mitigated the abutting neighbour’s concerns of privacy by proposing a low-level at-grade deck, which will provide privacy for adjacent properties. Desirable for the Appriopriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The requested variance will facilitate the construction of a deck, which will contribute towards the total usable amenity space of the single detached dwelling. The revised architectural drawings submitted to City staff appear to propose a significant at-grade lower-level deck which will not compromise adjacent neighbours’ privacy. The proposed upper-level deck height of approximately 1.4 metres is necessary in order to enter/exit from the rear entrance, which is approximately 1.4 metres above-grade. Concerns of privacy appear to be addressed as the upper-level deck has been significantly reduced, and only projects 1.2 metres from the rear wall. Staff are of the opinion that the revised proposed deck is desirable for development and is minor in nature. Input From Other Sources Applicant • Proposed rear deck allows for optimal functionality and safe egress. Engineering Services • Ensure the proposed deck (if approved with this application) does not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lots and surrounding area. -187- Report P/CA 62/22 April 13, 2022 Page 3 Building Services • No concerns regarding this application. Public Input • No written submissions were received from the public as of the date of writing this report. Date of report: April 7, 2022 Comments prepared by: Kerry Yelk Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Planner I Manager, Zoning and Administration KY:jc \\Fs\planning\Documents\Development\D-3700 Committee of Adjustment (PCA Applications)\2022\PCA 62-22 P. Nelson\7. Report Attachments -188- G le n anna Road He a t h s i d e C r e s c e n t Deerbrook Drive LongbowDrive Silverthorn Square Echo Point Court Rawlings Drive Honeywood Cresc ent Forestbrook Park William Dunbar Public School Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: P/CA 62/22 Date: Mar. 21, 2022 Exhibit 1 P. Nelson 1707 Echo Point Court SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\PCA\2022\PCA 62-22 P. Nelson\PCA62-22_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 Development Department -189- 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 6 2 /2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : P. N e l s o n Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 17 0 7 E c h o P o i n t C o u r 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 M a r c h 3 0 , 2 0 2 2 to p e r m i t u n c o v e r e d s t e p s a n d pl a t f o r m n o t e x c e e d i n g 1 . 4 me t r e s i n h e i g h t a b o v e g r a d e an d no t p r o j e c t i n g m o r e t h a n 3 . 6 me t r e s i n t o t h e r e q u i r e d r e a r y a r d Hi g h e r p o r t i o n of De c k ( C o v e r e d ) Lo w e r P o r t i o n o f de c k ( U n c o v e r e d ) Echo Point Court -190- Exhibit 3 East Elevation File No: P/CA 62/22 Applicant: P. Nelson Municipal Address: 1707 Echo Point Court CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN. Date: March 30, 2022 1.4 metres above established grade -191- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Numbers: P/CA 63/22 to P/CA 65/22 Date: April 13, 2022 From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application P/CA 63/22 to P/CA 65/22 R. Crook 1771 Spruce Hill Road Applications P/CA 63/22 – Part 1 (West Lot) The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 7874/21 and 7902/22, to permit: • a minimum front yard setback of 5.0 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum front yard setback of 7.5 metres; • a minimum side yard setback of 1.4 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum side yard setback of 1.8 metres; • a minimum side yard setback of 1.4 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum side yard setback of 1.8 metres; • a maximum lot coverage of 34.5 percent, whereas the By-law requires a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent; P/CA 64/22 – Part 2 (Middle Lot) The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 7874/21 and 7902/22, to permit: • a minimum front yard setback of 5.0 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum front yard setback of 7.5 metres; • a minimum side yard setback of 1.4 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum side yard setback of 1.8 metres; • a minimum side yard setback of 1.45 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum side yard setback of 1.8 metres; • a maximum lot coverage of 34.5 percent, whereas the By-law requires a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent; -192- Report P/CA 63/22 to P/CA 65/22 April 13, 2022 Page 2 P/CA 65/22 – Part 3 (East Lot) The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 7874/21 and 7902/22, to permit: • a minimum front yard setback of 5.0 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum front yard setback of 7.5 metres; • a minimum side yard setback of 1.45 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum side yard setback of 1.8 metres; • a minimum side yard setback of 1.5 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum side yard setback of 1.8 metres; • a maximum lot coverage of 34.5 percent, whereas the By-law requires a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent; The applicant requests approval of these minor variance applications in order to facilitate consent applications conditionally approved by the Region of Durham Land Division Committee to sever the property resulting in a total of three lots and to facilitate the submission of building permits applications to permit three detached dwellings. 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 conditions are recommended: 1. That these variances apply only to the proposed lots and detached dwellings, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, 4, & 5). 2. That prior to the issuance of a building permit, the property owner obtains permission in writing from the adjacent property owner(s) to perform grading works up to the lot line and/or to create a common swale on the lot line, to the satisfaction of Engineering Services. Background Land Division Application LD 016/2022 to LD 018/2022 were approved by the Region of Durham Land Division Committee to permit a severance of the subject property, resulting in a total of 3 lots with lot frontages ranging from 20.8 to 20.9 metres. -193- Report P/CA 63/22 to P/CA 65/22 April 13, 2022 Page 3 Infill & Replacement Housing By-laws On September 27, 2021, City Council enacted By-law 7874/21 (the Infill By-law) to amend Zoning By-law 3036, to rezone all lands within the Established Neighbourhood Precincts to an “Established Neighbourhood Precinct Overlay Zone” category. The amending Infill By-law introduces new provisions for yard setbacks, building height, lot coverage and other zoning standards to ensure new built form is compatible with existing built form. Following adoption by Council, the City received appeals to the Infill By law. On January 24, 2022, City Council adopted By-law 7902/22, to reinstate a maximum building height of 9.0 metres for all lands within the Established Neighbourhood Precincts. The City also received appeals to this By-law. The Infill By-laws established a set of zoning provisions to help maintain the existing character of the surrounding neighbourhood. After reviewing the following Minor variance applications, there are no requested variances to the Infill By-law. However, please note that due to the ongoing appeals, the Infill By laws are not currently in force. 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 three detached dwellings 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 with lot frontages greater than the minimum requirement. 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 2, 3, 4 and 5 the applicant is proposing similar house designs for each proposed dwelling. The Pickering Official Plan, the Dunbarton Neighbourhood Development Guidelines and the Urban Design Guidelines for Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhood Precincts have a policies on minimizing garage projections from front wall of dwellings to ensure high quality residential landscapes. It appears that the applicant has addressed this design guideline with front wall garage slightly setback from the dwelling’s main front wall. -194- Report P/CA 63/22 to P/CA 65/22 April 13, 2022 Page 4 Conforms to the General Intent and Purpose of the Zoning By-law 1771 Spruce Hill Road is zoned “R3” – One Family Detached Dwelling – Residential Third Density, under Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by Zoning By-laws 7874/21 & 7902/22. A detached dwelling is permitted within the lands zoned “R3”. Front Yard Variances (West, Middle, & East Lot) The intent of the front yard setback is to provide an adequate separation distance between the building and the street activity in the front yard, and to maintain a consistent lotting pattern with abutting properties to mitigate views and privacy concerns. All three proposed dwellings are proposed to be setback from the front lot line by 5.0 metres, whereas the By-law requires a 7.5 metre setback. There is sufficient room between the front wall of the proposed dwellings to the front lot line for front yard landscaping and amenity space. Furthermore, the three dwellings front onto a easement, therefore, these houses will be sufficiently setback from Welrus Street. The applicant has suggested a reduction in the required front yard to allow for a greater rear yard depth to address privacy concerns of the abutting property to the rear and to protect existing trees. At the present moment, Welrus Street is used as an access route from Fairport to Spruce Hill Road, with most existing properties backing onto the street, with minimal streetscape. The proposed dwellings will help create a streetscape along Welrus Street. Side Yard Variances (West, Middle, & East Lot) 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 2.9 metres between the proposed dwellings on the West Lot and the Middle lot, and a minimum building separation of 2.9 metres between the proposed Middle lot and the East lot. Engineering Services has indicated that the requested reduction in side yard setbacks will not provide sufficient room between the structures to accommodate for a minimum 0.15 metre deep drainage swale. Lot Coverage Variances (West, Middle, & East Lot) The intent of this provision is to maintain an appropriate amount of yard space (amenity area) uncovered by buildings on a lot and to regulate the scale and size of the building. All three of the proposed dwellings have a proposed lot coverage of 34.5 percent whereas the By-law requires a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent. It appears that there will be sufficient amount of yard space. As shown on the overall site plan, adequate amenity space is preserved throughout this proposal. Desirable for the Appropriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The proposed dwellings fill a vacant lot in the Dunbarton Established Neighbourhood, and will provide consistency with the neighbouring lots and the general character of the neighbourhood. The requested reduction in the side yards would be consistent and greater than the side yard depths of the existing homes along Spruce Hill Road and Wingarden Crescent. Presently, Welrus Street does not have any dwellings fronting onto the existing street. The proposed three dwellings will help to create a streetscape, and introduce a neighbourhood character consistent with the Dunbarton Neighbourhood. The requested variances are desirable for the appropriate development of the land and are minor in nature. -195- Report P/CA 63/22 to P/CA 65/22 April 13, 2022 Page 5 Input From Other Sources Building Services •No concerns regarding these applications. Engineering Services •With regards to the outer reduced side yard depths (west side yard for P/CA 63/22 and east side yard for P/CA 65/22), it will not be possible to accommodate a minimum 0.15 metre deep drainage swale with 3:1 side slopes and the required 0.6 metre undisturbed strip with a setback of less than 1.5 metres. If the applicant gets permission in writing from the adjacent property owner(s) to perform grading works up to the lot line and/or to create a common swale on the lot line, Engineering Services may consider a reduced setback. •This property has an active Land Division application (LD 016/2022 to LD 018/2022). The design must provide shared swales along the lot line for the interior side yards. •Ensure any reduced setbacks (if approved with this application) do not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lots and surrounding area. Public Input •No written submissions were received from the public as of the date of writing this report. Date of report: April 7, 2022 Comments prepared by: Kerry Yelk Planner I Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Manager, Zoning & Administration KY:ld J:\Documents\Development\D-3700\2022\PCA 63/22to PCA65/22\7. Report Attachments -196- Fa i r p o r t R o a d Ed g e w o o d R o a d Goldenridge Road Ea s t b a n k R o a d S hadybrookDrive Dunbarton Road S p r u c e H i l l R o a d Hedgerow Place Kates Lane Sheppard Avenue Rushton Road Sh a d e M a s t e r D r i v e Jacqueline Avenue Ad a C o urt Wi n g a r d e n C r e s c e n t Welrus Street Shadybrook Park Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: P/CA 63/22 to P/CA 65/22 Date: Mar. 21, 2022 Exhibit 1 R. Crook 1771 Spruce Hill Road SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\PCA\2022\PCA 63-22 to 65-22 R. Crook\PCA63-22to65-22_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 Development Department -197- 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 63 / 2 2 to P/ C A 6 5 /2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : R. C r o o k Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 17 7 1 S p r u c e H i l l 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 DE 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 : Ma r c h 3 0 , 2 0 2 2 P/ C A 6 3 -22 P/ C A 6 4 -22 P/ C A 6 5 -22 -198- Exhibit 3 Submitted West Lot Plan File No: P/CA 63/22 Applicant: R. Crook Municipal Address: 1771 Spruce Hill Road CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN. Date Mar 30, 2022 to permit a minimum front yard setback of 5.0 metres to permit a side yard setback of 1.4 metres to permit a maximum lot coverage of 34.5 % to permit a side yard setback of 1.4 metres -199- Exhibit 4 Submitted Middle Lot Plan File No: P/CA 64/22 Applicant: R. Crook Municipal Address: 1771 Spruce Hill Road CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN. Date Mar 30, 2022 to permit a minimum front yard setback of 5.0 metres to permit a side yard setback of 1.45 metres to permit a maximum lot coverage of 34.5 % to permit a side yard setback of 1.4 metres -200- Exhibit 5 Submitted East Lot Plan File No: P/CA 65/22 Applicant: R. Crook Municipal Address: 1771 Spruce Hill Road CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN. Date Mar 30, 2022 to permit a minimum front yard setback of 5.0 metres to permit a side yard setback of 1.5 metres to permit a maximum lot coverage of 34.5 % to permit a side yard setback of 1.45 metres -201- Ex h i b i t 6 Su b m i t t e d Ty p i c a l F r o n t E l e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 63 / 2 2 to P/ C A 6 5 / 2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : R. C r o o k Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 17 7 1 S p r u c e H i l l 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 : Ma r c h 3 0 , 2 0 2 2 -202- Ex h i b i t 7 Su b m i t t e d Ty p i c a l Re a r El e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 63 / 2 2 to P/ C A 6 5 / 2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : R. C r o o k Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 17 7 1 S p r u c e H i l l 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 : Ma r c h 3 0 , 2 0 2 2 -203- Ex h i b i t 8 Su b m i t t e d Ty p i c a l We s t El e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 63 / 2 2 to P/ C A 6 5 / 2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : R. C r o o k Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 17 7 1 S p r u c e H i l l 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 : Ma r c h 3 0 , 2 0 2 2 -204- Ex h i b i t 9 Su b m i t t e d Ty p i c a l Ea s t El e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : P/ C A 63 / 2 2 to P/ C A 6 5 / 2 2 Ap p l i c a n t : R. C r o o k Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 17 7 1 S p r u c e H i l l 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 : Ma r c h 3 0 , 2 0 2 2 -205- 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) The proposed heights at 9.0 metres and roof lines are compatible with the adjacent built forms and dwelling styles within the neighbourhood. 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 heights at 9.0 metres and roof lines are compatible with the adjacent built forms and dwelling styles within the neighbourhood. x 3. Is the maximum elevation of the Front Entrance 1.2 metres, or less, above grade? (see Section 2.2: Guideline 1) The proposed entrances are designed with 4 steps. x 4. Is the main entrance visible from the street? (see Section 2.2: Guideline 2) The main dwelling entrance is prominent from the streetscape. x 5. Are the stairs to the main entrance designed as an integral component of the front façade? (Section 2.2: Guideline 7) The stairs to the main entrance are visible and prominent from at the front façade. x 6. Does the design of the front entrance reduce the visual dominance of the garage and driveway? (see Section 2.2: Guideline 9) The front entrance is prominent from the streetscape with the garage recessed behind the main front wall of the dwelling. 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 dwelling depth is less than the Zoning By-law provisions and is appropriately scaled to the lot. x 8. Does the proposed dwelling have a similar Side Yard Setback to the adjacent dwellings along the street? As the proposed development is establishing a new streetscape on the south side of Welrus Street, the -206- Appendix A Urban Design Checklist Cont’d Urban City of Pickering Established A 2 Yes No Comments (see Figure 15) proposed side yard setbacks will not negatively impact adjacent properties. x 9. Has shadow on adjacent dwellings been mitigated with greater Side Yard Setbacks? (Section 3.1: Guideline 2) The dwellings have been sited with a greater rear yard setback to mitigate any potential shadow impacts on adjacent properties. x 10. Is the garage flush or recessed from the main front wall? (see Section 3.2: Guideline 5) The garage is recessed from the main front wall. x 11. Is the proposed driveway width the same as the permitted garage width? (see Section 3.3: Guideline 1) The driveway is not wider than the proposed width of the garage. x 12. Does the plan preserve existing trees? (see Section 4.1: Guideline 1) Existing border trees are being maintained with the proposed development. -207-