HomeMy WebLinkAboutSeptember 13, 2023Committee of Adjustment
Hearing Minutes
Wednesday, September 13, 2023
7:00 pm
Electronic Hearing
Page 1 of 7
Present
Omar Ha-Redeye
Denise Rundle – Vice-Chair
Sakshi Sood Joshi
Rick Van Andel
Sean Wiley – Chair
Also Present
Cody Morrison, Secretary-Treasurer – Host
Jasmine Correia, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer
Kerry Yelk, Planner I
Ziya Cao, Planner I
Absent
Not applicable.
1. Disclosure of Interest
No disclosures of interest were noted.
2. Adoption of Agenda
Moved by Omar Ha-Redeye
Seconded by Sakshi Sood Joshi
That the agenda for the Wednesday, September 13, 2023 hearing be adopted.
Carried Unanimously
3. Adoption of Minutes
Moved by Omar Ha-Redeye
Seconded by Rick Van Andel
That the minutes of the 8th hearing of the Committee of Adjustment held Wednesday,
August 9, 2023 be adopted.
Carried Unanimously
Committee of Adjustment
Hearing Minutes
Wednesday, September 13, 2023
7:00 pm
Electronic Hearing
Page 2 of 7
4. Reports
4.1 P/CA 38/23
J. Ciancio
1473 Rougemount Drive
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 2912/88,
By-law 7874/21 & By-law 7902/22, to permit:
• a minimum (east) side yard width of 1.5 metres and a minimum (west) side yard
width of 1.6 metres, whereas the By-law requires where a garage is erected as
part of a detached dwelling, the minimum required side yard shall be 1.8 metres
• a maximum building height of 9.6 metres, whereas the By-law requires a maximum
building height of 9.0 metres
• a maximum driveway width of 6.1 metres, whereas the By-law requires a
maximum driveway width of 6.0 metres
• a maximum dwelling depth of 26.9 metres, whereas the By-law permits a
maximum dwelling depth of 20.0 metres
The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application in order to obtain a
building permit to construct a two-storey detached dwelling.
Input from other sources were received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services
and City’s Building Services Section.
In support of the application, the applicant identified they are applying for variances that
were previously approved and have now expired.
Leonardo Ciancio, agent, was present to represent the application. No further
representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application.
The agent commented that they received approval of these variances a few years ago.
Due to the pandemic, they were unable to receive a building permit for this lot and were
not aware the conditions had an expiration date. Since the approval of the previous
application, a new By-law came into effect, resulting in additional variances to facilitate
the proposal.
In response to a question from a Committee member, the agent stated the owner
designed the home to be relative to the rest of the street and neighbourhood, and be
able to accommodate the needs of elderly members of the family who will reside there.
Committee of Adjustment
Hearing Minutes
Wednesday, September 13, 2023
7:00 pm
Electronic Hearing
Page 3 of 7
On the basis that this application meets the four tests of the Planning Act, Rick Van
Andel moved the following motion:
Moved by Rick Van Andel
Seconded by Denise Rundle
That application P/CA 38/23 by J. Ciancio, 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 proposed development, as generally sited
and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
& 9 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated
September 13, 2023).
Carried Unanimously
4.2 P/CA 39/23
L. Lorenzatti & A. Warboys
1770 Wellington Street
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by By-law 6640/06,
to permit:
• a detached garage to be located on the west side yard, whereas the By-law
requires all accessory buildings which are not part of the main building to be
erected in the rear yard
• a maximum building height of 6.3 metres for a detached garage, whereas the By-
law permits a maximum height of 3.5 metres for accessory buildings in any
residential zone
• a maximum lot coverage of 21 percent in an ORM-R5 zone, whereas the By-law
permits a maximum lot coverage of 20 percent in an ORM-R5 zone (this variance
is not required and has been removed from the application)
The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application in order to obtain a
building permit to convert the existing garage to a family room and the construction of a
detached garage on the west side yard.
Input from other sources were received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services,
City’s Building Services Section and the Region of Durham Health Department.
Committee of Adjustment
Hearing Minutes
Wednesday, September 13, 2023
7:00 pm
Electronic Hearing
Page 4 of 7
In support of the application, the applicant identified they cannot build garage in the rear
yard due to the existing septic bed. Additional space is required for storage on second
storey and shop space.
Luciano Lorenzatti, applicant, was present to represent the application. No further
representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application.
In response to a question from the Vice-Chair, the agent clarified there will be no
plumbing for the space. The second storey is intended for storage.
On the basis that the application is minor in nature, Omar Ha-Redeye moved the
following motion:
Moved by Omar Ha-Redeye
Seconded by Rick Van Andel
That application P/CA 39/23 by L. Lorenzatti & A. Warboys, 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 proposed development, as generally sited
and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 &
8 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated September
13, 2023).
Carried Unanimously
4.3 P/CA 40/23
T. Upadhyay
1546 Dusty Drive
The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by By-law 7022/10,
to permit a total of two (2) parking spaces on the property where the accessory dwelling
unit is located, whereas the By-law requires a total of three (3) parking spaces are
provided on the property where the accessory dwelling unit is located.
The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit to
permit an accessory dwelling unit within a semi-detached dwelling with two parking
spaces on the lot.
Input from other sources were received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services,
City’s Building Services Section and one area resident.
Committee of Adjustment
Hearing Minutes
Wednesday, September 13, 2023
7:00 pm
Electronic Hearing
Page 5 of 7
Tejal Upadhyay, applicant, Shailesh Upadhyay, owner, and Mruga Patel and
Helly Shah, agents, were present to represent the application. No further representation
was present in favour of or in objection to the application.
In support of the application, the agent identified that the owner does not have sufficient
space within their property to fit more than two vehicles entirely on the lot.
The agent commented the following: this variance is to allow for the creation of an ADU
(Additional Dwelling Unit) in the basement of the two-storey dwelling; the existing
dwelling has two parking spaces, one in the garage and one in the driveway; and the
driveway is long enough to accommodate two cars, a total of three parking spaces.
The owner commented that new townhouse developments in the City are being built
with only one parking space provided, for example 1525 Kingston Road. The driveway
can fit two cars, and additional one car in the garage, totaling three parking spaces.
In response to questions from Committee members, the agent commented that the
applicant does not have a sidewalk on their property, making the driveway longer with
2.91 metres of that driveway being owned by the City. Technically, while the home can
accommodate three parking spaces, it is described as only having two because of the
municipal boulevard. In order to add an ADU in the basement they are required to
provide three spaces. The purpose of this application is to allow the use of the
boulevard as a parking space or to reduce the parking spaces required for this ADU.
The standard car size considered for the calculation in the By-law is measurements for
a full sized SUV. However, two sedans or midsize SUV will fit on the driveway easily
without being on the boulevard. The 5.6 metres measurement requirement for parking is
to accommodate the biggest sized car available, the applicant owns a compact SUV.
Using the measurements for sedans and the compact SUVs (roughly 4.695 metres for
sedan, midsize 5.093 metres for compact SUVs) the driveway would easily
accommodate two cars. The owner is a single mother who only has one car, therefore
there will always be a parking space available for the ADU.
A Committee member commented that this variance would be applied to the property
and not to the owner. While this variance may work currently for this owner and the car
they have, it may not work for future residents.
The applicant stated they have no plans to move in the future or sell the property. If an
ADU were to be allowed there may be a possibility the future tenants may not have a
car at all. Public transit is very close by on Zents Drive and on the main road.
The Vice-Chair commented that the subject property is situated in a medium density
a rea, this is a tight development without wide spacious side yards. The entrance for
the accessory dwelling unit is at the side of the home. While two parking spaces may
work for the current owner, the Committee needs consider future users. If this
Committee of Adjustment
Hearing Minutes
Wednesday, September 13, 2023
7:00 pm
Electronic Hearing
Page 6 of 7
variance is permitted it would set a precedent for the rest of the neighbourhood,
resulting in a negative impact for parking, in a neighbourhood that is observed to be
having issues. While the driveway is long, the owner does not own the property to the
curb, there needs to be that space for municipal utility maintenance, snow ploughing,
etc.
A Committee member commented that there is a concern about the impact of lack of
parking on the landscape, the street and concerns by neighbours. Due to those
reasons, and reasons listed by Vice-Chair, it is of their opinion this application is not
minor in nature.
After considering comments from the immediate neighbour and comments/assessments
within the staff report, this application does not meet the tests of being minor in nature
or desirable and appropriate for the land. This variance would result in a negative
parking impact within this neighbourhood and therefore is not in keeping with the
general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law. Denise Rundle
moved the following motion:
Moved by Denise Rundle
Seconded by Rick Van Andel
That application P/CA 40/23 by T. Upadhyay, be Refused on the grounds that the
requested variance is not minor in nature, not desirable for the appropriate development
of the land, and not in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan
and Zoning By-law.
Carried Unanimously
Committee of Adjustment
Hearing Minutes
Wednesday, September 13, 2023
7:00 pm
Electronic Hearing
Page 7 of 7
October 11, 2023
5. Adjournment
Moved by Omar Ha-Redeye
Seconded by Sakshi Sood-Joshi
That the 9th hearing of the 2023 Committee of Adjustment be adjourned at 7:37 pm.
Carried Unanimously
__________________________
Date
__________________________
Chair
__________________________
Assistant Secretary-Treasurer
Please note the Committee of Adjustment Hearings are available for viewing on the City of
Pickering YouTube channel https://www.youtube.com/user/SustainablePickering