Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFebruary 11, 2026 Committee of Adjustment Hearing Agenda Electronic Meeting February 11, 2026 - 07:00 PM Hearing Number: 2 Members of the public may observe the hearing by viewing the livestream on the HTML Agenda or the archived video available on the City's website. How to Participate Individuals looking to make a verbal delegation may do so through a virtual connection into the hearing. To register as a Delegation, please submit a Participation Form. In lieu of a verbal delegation, individuals may also submit written comments to citydev@pickering.ca. For more information regarding how to participate, please visit pickering.ca/coa. For inquiries related to accessibility, please contact the City Development Department Phone: 905.420.4617 | Email: citydev@pickering.ca Land Acknowledgement Statement Disclosure of Interest Adoption of Agenda Adoption of Minutes Page 3 Minor Variance Reports MV 08/26 - 1706 Wollaston Street Page 14 M. Simpatico & I. Segura MV 10/26 - 1894 Glendale Drive Page 26 N. Balachandra MV 11/26 - 2540 William Jackson Drive, Unit 304 Page 38 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 5.1 5.2 5.3 N. Senior MV 12/26 - 2405 Angora Street Page 45 S. Perkins Consent (Land Division) Reports LD 01/26 - 5240 (Old) Brock Road Page 53 L. & H. Park Adjournment 5.4 6. 6.1 7. Committee of Adjustment Hearing Agenda February 11, 2026 - 2 - 1 Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Electronic Meeting January 14, 2026 07:00 PM Pending Adoption Present Omar Ha-Redeye – Vice-Chair Sakshi Sood Joshi Rick Van Andel Sean Wiley – Chair Also Present Deborah Wylie, Secretary-Treasurer Jasmine Correia, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer Nilissa Reynolds, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer – Host Kerry Yelk, Senior Planner, Zoning Ash Roy, Planner I Tanejaé Page-Hamilton, Zoning Examiner Figo Pham, Zoning Technician Absent Denise Rundle 1. Land Acknowledgement Statement 2. Disclosure of Interest Not applicable. 3. Adoption of Agenda In order to avoid a tie vote due to an absence, Sean Wiley will abstain from voting this hearing. - 3 - Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes January 14, 2026 2 Moved By Rick Van Andel Seconded By Sakshi Sood Joshi That the amended agenda for the Wednesday, January 14, 2026 hearing be adopted. Carried Unanimously 4. Adoption of Minutes Moved By Rick Van Andel Seconded By Sakshi Sood Joshi That the minutes of the 12th hearing of the Committee of Adjustment held Wednesday, December 10, 2025 be adopted. Carried Unanimously 4.1 Draft Minutes for the December 10, 2025 Committee of Adjustment Hearing 5. Minor Variance Reports 5.7 MV 09/26 - Bayly Street Corporation of the City of Pickering The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 8149/24, to permit: • a minimum front yard of 7.8 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum front yard of 12.0 metres; • a minimum flankage side yard of 0.8 of a metre, whereas the By-law requires a minimum flankage side yard of 12.0 metres; and • a minimum of 20 spaces for an Emergency Service Facility use, whereas the By-law requires 3.5 spaces per 100 square metres of gross leasable floor area (a minimum of 46 spaces). The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application in order to permit a Fire Hall (Emergency Service Facility). Input from other sources was received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services, the City’s Building Services Section, and one area resident. In support of the application, the applicant identified that due to the nature of the - 4 - Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes January 14, 2026 3 project, a Fire Station, all requirements for turning of the fire trucks into the site will not work due to the limited size of the site. Setbacks on the front yard and flankage side yard, cannot be met Diana Poida, applicant, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. The applicant requested the application be tabled in order to submit a Site Plan Application that may result in a revision to this application. Moved By Rick Van Andel Seconded By Omar Ha-Redeye That application MV 09/26 by the Corporation of the City of Pickering be Tabled. Carried Unanimously 5.1 MV 01/26 - 4938 (Old) Brock Road B. Barrer The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 8149/24 to permit an accessory structure in the front yard, whereas the By-law requires accessory buildings and structures only in the rear and interior side yards. The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application to obtain a building permit to construct a detached garage. Input from other sources was received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services, and the City’s Building Services Section. In support of the application, the applicant identified that there is no access to the rear yard and the septic system is located in the interior side yard. Peter Barton, agent, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. The agent stated that the applicant submitted the application to have additional garage space for their growing son who will be driving soon. The reason for the variance is due to front/exterior side yard. They are unable to comply to the By-law due to the rear/interior yard space being blocked by an existing shed and sewer system. The previous owner had poured a concrete pad where they are proposing the structure. There is existing landscaping by way of trees and shrubs, that will - 5 - Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes January 14, 2026 4 mitigate any visual impact. In response to questions from Committee members, the agent stated that they are looking for more interior parking space than the two car garage that currently exists. They had expanded their home to allow for their parents to move in. The structure is solely for parking. The hedges and shrubs will be maintained during construction. The structure will be tucked away and there are three and four car garages in the neighbourhood. The design of the garage will be cohesive with the main dwelling. Moved By Rick Van Andel Seconded By Omar Ha-Redeye That application MV 01/26 by B. Barrer, 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 applies only to the detached garage, as generally sited and outlined in the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Attachments 2, 3, 4, & 5 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated January 14, 2026). Carried Unanimously 5.2 MV 02/26 - 1125 Cedarcroft Crescent A. Akbari The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 8149/24, to permit an exterior entrance to encroach into any required setback provided it is setback a minimum of 0.44 of a metre from the south property line, whereas the By-law requires a minimum setback of 0.9 of a metre. The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application to obtain a building permit to construct a below grade side entrance. Input from other sources was received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services, the City’s Building Services Section, and two area residents. In support of the application, the applicant identified that there is 1.8 metres between the house and the property line, and the below grade entrance requires 1.27 metres so only 0.53 of a metre is left. The basement is intended for - 6 - Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes January 14, 2026 5 recreational use only. A separate entrance allows guests to enter and exit without disturbing the family, particularly during late hours. Arman Akbari, applicant, was present to represent the application. One area resident was present in objection to the application. The applicant made a brief presentation in support of the application. An area resident made the following comments: current proposal doesn't affect their property; concerns with the street being on a slope; concern this will set a precedent to other neighbours; and concerns with parking traffic. In response to the resident's comments a Committee member commented that each application is looked at separately. A building permit will be required and Engineering will need to be satisfied before the permit is issued. In response to the resident's comments, the applicant stated that the intent of this application is not to host grand parties into the night with people coming and going. They park their cars in the garage and they have more than enough driveway space to accommodate guests. There will be no negative affect to adjacent neighbours. In response to questions from Committee members, the applicant stated that there is drainage measurements in place. A Committee member commented that this application seems more like a personal need rather than a planning necessity. Cumulatively this could change the neighbourhood. A Committee member commented that necessity is subjective. This application doesn't expand the current footprint of the home. Engineering Services had a chance to look at the application and provided comments, and will take a deeper look during the building permit stage to ensure proper drainage. A Committee member commented that several neighbours have side entrances with one step down, which is almost the same footprint impact. Moved By Rick Van Andel Seconded By Sakshi Sood Joshi That application MV 02/26 by A. Akbari, 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 - 7 - Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes January 14, 2026 6 Zoning By law, subject to the following conditions: 1. That this variance applies only to the exterior entrance, as generally sited and outlined in the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Attachments 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated January 14, 2026). 2. That prior to the issuance of a building permit, Engineering Services are satisfied that theproposed exterior entrance will not result in any adverse impacts to the abutting propertyto the south. Carried (2 to 1) 5.3 MV 03/26 - 1609 Winville Road H. Hafeez The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 8149/24, as amended, to permit a minimum total of two parking spaces, whereas the By-law requires a minimum total of three parking spaces. The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application to obtain a building permit to permit an additional dwelling unit in the basement. Input from other sources was received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services, and the City’s Building Services Section. In support of the application, the applicant identified that it is not possible to provide additional parking space, as the existing garage and driveway already utilize all available area. There is no room to expand parking without encroaching into required landscaped or setback areas. Hafiz Zohaib Hafeez, applicant, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. The applicant commented that this is the only relief requested, nothing else one the property will change. Two parking spaces are sufficient because his household only requires one vehicle and the second parking space will serve the additional dwelling unit. The additional dwelling unit is expected to be rented by a family member which will mitigate potential parking issues. The variance is minor and appropriate for the land. - 8 - Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes January 14, 2026 7 In response to questions from Committee members, the applicant stated his family only has one car, the second parking space will be dedicated to the additional dwelling unit mitigating the need to parking on the street. There is no room to create an additional parking space. His engineer and the City both looked at the property and determined due to physical limitations there is no way to create an additional parking space. Committee members commented that they cannot base this decision on the applicant's current situation, they need to make a decision based on long term impact to the neighbourhood. The two parking spots that are available are tandem parking, that may create issues. Moved By Sakshi Sood Joshi Seconded By Omar Ha-Redeye That application MV 03/26 by H. Hafeez, be Refused on the grounds that the requested variance is not minor in nature and not desirable for the appropriate development of the land. Carried Unanimously 5.4 MV 05/26 - 842 Reytan Boulevard S. Alexander The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 8149/24, to permit a minimum side yard : one side 1.5 metres and other side 1.0 metre, whereas the By-law requires a minimum side yard: one side 1.5 metres and other side 2.4 metres. The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application to construct an attached garage. Input from other sources was received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services, the City’s Building Services Section, and the Toronto & Region Conservation Authority (TRCA). In support of the application, the applicant proposes building a two-car garage for storage and to protect personal property, with a rear garage door to allow TRCA access to the rear waterway and backyard if needed. Teri Alexander, agent, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. - 9 - Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes January 14, 2026 8 The agent commented that this request is to construct a private garage so that the applicant has interior parking. The property backs on to a water-way. They are looking to accommodate a proposed large door in the rear. In response to a question from a Committee member, the agent commented that the large door is to accommodate any large equipment that may need to move to the rear in order to work on the waterway because both sides of the house is limited in width. Moved By Rick Van Andel Seconded By Omar Ha-Redeye That application MV 05/26 by S. Alexander, 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 applies only to the proposed addition, as generally sited and outlined in the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Attachments 2, 3, 4 & 5 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment dated January 14, 2026). Carried Unanimously 5.5 MV 06/26 - 1127 Enchanted Crescent T. Shanmuganathan & J. Tharshan The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 8149/24 to permit a deck to encroach into any required rear yard to a maximum of 4.3 metres, whereas the By- law requires a maximum encroachment of 2.0 metres. The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application to obtain a building permit for an existing rear deck with roof. Input from other sources was received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services, the City’s Building Services Section, and 10 area residents. In support of the application, the applicant identified that a porch or deck may encroach into any required rear yard to a maximum of 2.0 metres. But the proposed covered deck sits at 1.72 metres from the rear setback. - 10 - Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes January 14, 2026 9 Raj Balasundaram, applicant, and Tharshan Shanmuganathan, agent, were present to represent the application. One area resident was present in favour of the application. The applicant commented that Engineering Services did not have any comments but to keep the drainage pattern as is. There will be no negative noise impact due to the shed. Several neighbours submitted comment letters in support of the application. The covered deck has provided healthy development for the applicants' children. An area resident made the following comments on the application: there are no drainage issues on the street from what they have seen in the pass few years; and they have no concerns about noise as it has never been a problem. Committee members commented that abutting neighbour comments were helpful input to the application. There is no negative visual impact from the street. After reviewing the evidence before the Committee, including the 10 neighbour comments, Omar Ha-Redeye moved the following motion: Moved By Omar Ha-Redeye Seconded By Rick Van Andel That application MV 06/26 by T. Shanmuganathan & J. Tharshan, 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 applies only to the rear deck, as generally sited and outlined in the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Attachments 2 & 3 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated January 14, 2026). Carried (2 to 1) 5.6 MV 07/26 - 1142 Skyridge Boulevard M. Bilal The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 8149/24, as amended, to permit an exterior staircase to within 0.31 of a metre of the interior side lot line, whereas the - 11 - Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes January 14, 2026 10 By-law permits a porch to encroach into an interior side yard to within 0.6 of a metre of a side lot line. The applicant requests approval of this variance to obtain a revised building permit to construct an exterior staircase within the interior side yard. Input from other sources was received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services, and the City’s Building Services Section. In support of the application, the applicant identified that this is an existing situation. Jonathan Benczkowski, 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 this application is to permit side stairs to allow for access to the accessory unit. In response to questions from Committee members, the agent stated that there is an active building permit for the door and stairs. After making a site visit, reviewing the staff report and seeing no objections or concerns, Rick Van Andel moved the following motion: Moved By Rick Van Andel Seconded By Omar Ha-Redeye That application MV 07/26 by M. Bilal, 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 applies only to the exterior staircase, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Attachment 2 & 3 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment). Carried Unanimously 6. Adjournment Moved By Omar Ha-Redeye Seconded By Sakshi Sood Joshi That the 1st hearing of the 2026 Committee of Adjustment be adjourned at 8:28 pm. - 12 - Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes January 14, 2026 11 Carried Unanimously Minutes recorded on this 14th day of January 2026. Chair Assistant Secretary-Treasurer - 13 - Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: MV 08/26 Date: February 11, 2026 From: Deborah Wylie Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Minor Variance Application MV 08/26 M. Simpatico & I. Segura 1706 Wollaston Court Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 8149/24, to permit a minimum north side yard of 0.3 of a metre, whereas the By-law requires a minimum interior side yard of 1.2 metres on both sides. The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application to construct a two-storey addition with an attached garage. Summary of Findings Based on the application and supporting documentation submitted, the City Development Department has reviewed the proposal in accordance with Section 45(1) of the Planning Act. Staff consider the requested variance to be minor, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and consistent with the general intent and purpose of both the Official Plan and Zoning By-law. Notwithstanding this review, the applicant is responsible for demonstrating the justification for the relief sought and for establishing that the statutory tests are met. After considering all public and agency input, should the Committee find merit in this application, the following condition is recommended: 1. That this variance applies only to the proposed addition and attached garage, as generally sited and outlined in the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Attachments 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 & 8). Background Within the last 20 years, the private garage was enlarged to include a third vehicle without obtaining a building permit. Through this application, the applicant is proposing to demolish the illegally built garage extension and construct a new attached garage with a two-storey addition in the rear. The applicant has indicated that the garage extension was an existing situation prior to purchasing the property. The existing illegally constructed garage extension does not comply with zoning. - 14 - Report MV 08/26 February 11, 2026 Page 2 Staff noted that the proposed eaves could not be supported since they were proposed to encroach beyond the north (side) property line into the neighbouring City owned walkway. Since the issuance of the Public Notice, the applicant has revised the architectural drawings to ensure the eaves are flush with the north exterior wall. The eaves are no longer proposed to encroach into City property. Attachments 2, 3 and 4 have been revised, and Attachment 8 has been added to reflect the proposed roof plan. Comment General Intent and Purpose of the Official Plan Under the Regional Plan, the subject properties are designated “Urban System – Community Areas”. This designation permits a wide range of uses, including residential. The subject site is designated Urban Residential Areas – Low Density Area within the Liverpool Neighbourhood. The applicant is proposing to construct a two-storey addition with an attached private garage. The proposed garage generally complies with City Policy 11.11 with respect to the built form and urban design principles for Garages, as the proposed garage remains as a subordinate element to the dwelling and does not further project into the streetscape. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance to permit a reduced side yard maintains the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan. General Intent and Purpose of the Zoning By-law The subject property is in Exception Zone 295 and is zoned “S1” – Single Residential, under Zoning By-law 8149/24, as amended. A detached dwelling along with an attached garage is permitted. The subject property is a pie-shaped lot that narrows toward the front property line. Due to this configuration, the available building envelope towards the front of the lot is reduced. As a result, the existing dwelling does not meet the required side yard setback at the front corner of the house. However, the lot widens toward the rear, allowing the dwelling to fully comply with the required side yard setback at the rear corner, where the two-storey addition is proposed. The front west corner of the dwelling has a proposed side yard setback of 0.3 of a metre, whereas the rear west corner of the dwelling has a proposed side yard setback of 1.7 metres. Side Yard Setback for Private Garage The intent of the side yard requirement is to provide an appropriate separation between structures on abutting properties to maintain pedestrian access, that roof drainage is maintained within the subject property, and that the visual and privacy impact on adjacent properties is minimized. The north side yard runs adjacent to a city-owned walkway. - 15 - Report MV 08/26 February 11, 2026 Page 3 In this case, the north side yard abuts a city-owned walkway, not a private residential lot. As a result, the reduced setback does not create the typical concerns associated with proximity to another dwelling, such as privacy and building separation. The presence of the public walkway provides an open buffer that exceeds what would normally be expected between two residential structures. Although the reduced setback limits physical access along the north side of the dwelling, the applicant has appropriate side yard setback along the south side yard for yard access. The proposed roofline will reflect the existing roofline of the garage, which has not created negative impacts on adjacent land. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance does not maintain the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. Desirable for the Appropriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The requested variance to permit a reduced north side yard is intended to facilitate the construction of a two-storey addition and to extend the private garage. The proposed garage is proposed to be setback 0.3 of a metre. However, most of the dwelling will be setback beyond the minimum requirement of 1.2 metres. The reduced setback does not introduce any adverse impacts on neighbouring residential properties, as no private dwelling is located along the affected lot line. The walkway provides a buffer between adjacent residential property, and the proposed garage will not impede public access or visibility. The reduced setback applies only to the front portion of the lot where the lot is most constrained. The proposal does not increase the degree of encroachment beyond what has historically existed. Given the context and the absence of impacts on adjacent residential uses, the variance can reasonably be considered minor. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance is desirable for the appropriate development of the land and is minor in nature. Input From Other Sources Applicant • Property was purchased with the encroachment existing in 2015. Engineering Services • Ensure the proposed reduced interior side yard setback (if approved with this application) does not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lot and surrounding area. Building Services • No comments. Durham Region Development Advisory Services • No comments. Public Input • No written submissions have been received from the public as of the date of writing this report. - 16 - Report MV 08/26 February 11, 2026 Page 4 Date of report: February 4, 2026 Comments prepared by: Kerry Yelk Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner, Zoning Manager, Zoning & Administration KY:nr /CityDevDept/D3700/2026/MV 08-26/7. Report/MV 08-26 Report.doc Attachments Original Signed By Original Signed By - 17 - Rathmore Crescent Q) > ·;:: 0 en OJ C: ~ cu 0::: Culross Avenue wo11aston court Rambleberry Avenue Dunbarton Road -04;6/- PlCKERlNG City Development Department Location Ma File: MV 08/26 ~ :::, 0 u C: Q) ""O UJ Subject Lands Munici al Address: 1706 Wollaston Court © The Corporation of the C ity of Pickering Produced (in part) under li cense from: © King's Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.;© Hi s Majesty the King in Right of Canada , Department of Natural Resources. All rights re served .;© Teranet Enterprise s Inc. and its suppliers. All rights reserved.;© Municipal Property Assessment Corporation and its supp liers. All rights reserved . l:\PLANNING\01 -MapFiles\03 -Applications\MV\2025\MV 08-26\MV 08-26\MV 08-26.aprx Attachment 1 :;§: Ql :::, C: r Ql :::, Cl) Date: Dec. 09, 2025 SCALE : 1:2,000 THIS ISNOTAPLANOFSURVEY. - 18 - At t a c h m e n t 2 Su b m i t t e d S i t e P l a n ( R e v i s e d ) Fi l e N o : MV 08 /2 6 Ap p l i c a n t : M. S i m p a t i c o & I. Se g u r a Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 1 7 0 6 W o l l a s t o n 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 : F e b r u a r y 3 , 2 0 2 6 to p e r m i t a m i n i m u m no r t h s i d e y a r d o f 0.3 o f a m e t r e Wo l l a s t o n C o u r t - 19 - At t a c h m e n t 3 Su b m i t t e d De t a i l e d Si t e P l a n ( R e v i s e d ) Fi l e No : MV 08 /2 6 Ap p l i c a n t : M. S i m p a t i c o & I. Se g u r a Mu n i c i p a l Ad d r e s s : 17 0 6 W o l l a s t o n Cou 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 : F e b r u a r y 3 , 2 0 2 6 to p e r m i t a m i n i m u m no r t h s i d e y a r d o f 0. 3 o f a m e t r e Wo l l a s t o n C o u r t Pr o p o s e d n e w at t a c h e d g a r a g e a n d tw o - s t o r e y a d d i t i o n - 20 - At t a c h m e n t 4 Su b m i t t e d F r o n t E l e v a t i o n P l a n ( R e v i s e d ) Fi l e N o : MV 08 /2 6 Ap p l i c a n t : M. S i m p a t i c o & I. Se g u r a Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 1 7 0 6 W o l l a s t o n 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 : F e b r u a r y 3 , 2 0 2 6 - 21 - At t a c h m e n t 5 Su b m i t t e d R e a r E l e v a t i o n P l a n Fi l e N o : MV 08 /2 6 Ap p l i c a n t : M. S i m p a t i c o & I. Se g u r a Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 1 7 0 6 W o l l a s t o n 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 : J a n u a r y 2 1 , 2 0 2 6 - 22 - At t a c h m e n t 6 Su b m i t t e d S i d e ( S o u t h ) E l e v a t i o n P l a n Fi l e N o : MV 08 /2 6 Ap p l i c a n t : M. S i m p a t i c o & I. Se g u r a Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 1 7 0 6 W o l l a s t o n 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 : J a n u a r y 2 1 , 2 0 2 6 - 23 - At t a c h m e n t 7 Su b m i t t e d S i d e (N o r t h ) El e v a t i o n P l a n Fi l e No : MV 08 /2 6 Ap p l i c a n t : M. S i m p a t i c o & I. Se g u r a Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 17 0 6 W o l l a s t o n Co u r t CO N T A C T TH E CI T Y OF PI C K E R I N G CI T Y DE V E L O P M E N T DE P A R T M E N T FO R DI G I T A L CO P I E S OF TH I S PL A N . Da t e : J a n u a r y 2 1 , 2 0 2 6 - 24 - At t a c h m e n t 8 Su b m i t t e d R o o f P l a n Fi l e N o : MV 08 /2 6 Ap p l i c a n t : M. S i m p a t i c o & I. Se g u r a Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 1 7 0 6 W o l l a s t o n 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 : F e b r u a r y 3 , 2 0 2 6 Fr o n t – W o l l a s t o n C o u r t - 25 - Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: MV 10/26 Date: February 11, 2026 From: Deborah Wylie Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Minor Variance Application MV 10/26 N. Balachandra 1894 Glendale Drive Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 8149/24, to permit: •a maximum dwelling depth of 23.6 metres, whereas the By-law permits a maximum dwelling depth of 20.0 metres; and •a maximum front yard setback of 11.22 metres, whereas the By-law permits a maximum front yard setback of 10.5 metres. The applicant requests approval of these variances to obtain a building permit to construct a two-storey detached dwelling. Summary of Findings Based on the application and supporting documentation submitted, the City Development Department has reviewed the proposal in accordance with Section 45(1) of the Planning Act. Staff consider the requested variances to be minor, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and consistent with the general intent and purpose of both the Official Plan and Zoning By-law. Notwithstanding this review, the applicant is responsible for demonstrating the justification for the relief sought and for establishing that the statutory tests are met. After considering all public and agency input, should the Committee find merit in this application, the following condition is recommended: 1.That these variances apply only to the proposed detached dwelling, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Attachments 2 & 3). Comment Conforms to the Intent and Purpose of the Official Plan The More Homes Built Faster Act (Bill 23) made changes that removed statutory powers under the Planning Act from certain upper-tier municipalities including Durham Region. As of January 1, 2025, the applicable parts of the Regional Official Plan for Durham are now deemed to be part of Pickering’s Official Plan. In case of conflict, the Regional Official Plan prevails over Pickering’s Official Plan. Under the Regional Official Plan, the subject property is designated “Urban System – Community Areas”. - 26 - Report MV 10/26 February 11, 2026 Page 2 The subject site is designated Urban Residential Areas – Low Density within the Liverpool Neighbourhood and is located within an Established Neighbourhood Overlay Precinct. OPA 40 implemented the recommendations of the Infill and Replacement Housing in the Established Neighbourhood Study adding policies regarding building mass, dwelling height, lot width, lot coverage and landscaping, and reinforcing established development patterns. Staff has reviewed and made comment on the proposed dwelling using the Council adopted Urban Design Guidelines for Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhood Precincts Checklist, which can be found in Appendix A of this report. Conforms to the Intent and Purpose of the Zoning By-law The subject property is zoned “R1D” – Residential Density 1 under Zoning By-law 8149/24. Maximum Dwelling Depth Dwelling depth is the measurement of the distance between the required minimum front yard setback and the furthest rear wall of the dwelling. Dwelling depth is a measure of how deep a dwelling protrudes into a lot. The intent of requiring a maximum dwelling depth of 20.0 metres is to provide for consistent placement of rear walls, and to reduce potential shadowing, massing, and privacy impacts on adjacent dwellings and rear yards. The applicant is requesting a maximum dwelling depth of 23.6 metres, whereas the By-law permits 20.0 metres. Staff has found that of the proposed 23.6 metre dwelling depth; the 3.6 metres beyond the 20.0 metre maximum requirement will not cause significant shadowing or privacy impacts on the adjacent properties. Staff recognize that the adjacent property to the north contains an older dwelling that is substantially less deep than what is permitted by the Zoning By-law. The requested variance is similar to other variances requested in the Liverpool neighbourhood. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance to permit a maximum dwelling depth of 23.6 metres maintains the general intent and purpose of the Infill By-law. Maximum Front Yard Setback The maximum front yard setback is determined using the average front yard setbacks of the adjacent properties, plus 1.0 metre. The maximum front yard setback applies to 80 percent of the dwelling width including any attached garage. Twenty percent of the dwelling width is exempted from the maximum front yard requirement to accommodate any design features that require a further setback. The intent of this provision is to ensure new dwellings maintain a similar setback as adjacent dwellings to provide for a consistent streetscape. The applicant requests a variance to permit a maximum front yard setback of 11.2 metres, whereas the maximum permitted front yard setback is 10.5 metres. This variance has been requested to accommodate the two recessed wall articulations near the entrance of the home, which account for 38 percent of the front wall face. The recessed walls serve as an architectural feature to accommodate landscaped area. - 27 - Report MV 10/26 February 11, 2026 Page 3 The general placement of the dwelling is consistent with the adjacent dwellings and provides a gentle transition between the proposed infill dwellings and the existing dwellings at the street level. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance to permit a maximum front yard setback of 11.22 metres meets the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. Desirable for the Appropriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The requested variances will facilitate the construction of a two-storey detached dwelling on the subject property. The proposed placement of the dwelling generally maintains the consistent streetscape and is compatible with the development along Glendale Drive. The proposed dwelling is of a size and scale similar to what is permitted in the By-law and reflects the nature of future development along Glendale Drive and within the Liverpool Neighbourhood. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variances are desirable for the appropriate development of the land and are minor in nature . Input From Other Sources Applicant • In order to be in keeping with the size and massing of recent developments. Building Services • Construction is not permitted to take place until a Building Permit has been applied for and issued. Engineering Services • Ensure the proposed dwelling depth and increased front yard setback (if approved with this application) do not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lot and surrounding area. Multiple Low Impact Development measures (such as infiltration galleries with downspout connections, rain gardens and 450 mm amended soils) will be required at the Building Permit stage. A separate Pool Enclosure Permit will be required for the proposed pool. Public Input • Three letters of support have been submitted in support of this application. - 28 - Report MV 10/26 February 11, 2026 Page 4 Date of report: February 4, 2026 Comments prepared by: Original Signed By Original Signed By Tanejaé Page-Hamilton Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Zoning Examiner Manager, Zoning & Administration Original Signed By Ash Roy, B.URPl. Planner II TPH:AR:jc /CityDevDept/D3700/2026/MV 10-26/7. Report/MV 10-26 Report.docx Attachments - 29 - 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) The proposed dwelling is significantly taller than the existing home to the north (1900 Glendale Drive), but is similar in height to the home to the south (1890 Glendale Drive). 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? (see 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) - 30 - 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 development along Glendale consists of a mix of dwelling types. The proposed dwelling is not considered out of character with what is permitted along Glendale Drive. 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? (see Section 3.1: Guideline 2) The side yard setback to the north is twice the required distance. X 10. Is the garage flush or recessed from the main front wall? (see Section 3.2: Guideline 5) Both garage entrances protrude beyond the main front wall. 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) It seems there are a few trees that will need to be removed, but several that will be preserved. - 31 - Canborough Crescent T0f-.------7 1----------1~ -Subject 1-------i ___ /_,,,>-'--y\_ __ _J------j I -Lands- \ "\------'t----\----\ ' '-----I 1-----11 David Farr Park South P✓ne Creek Ravine \,,_________. ----------1------1 C: Q) u (/) ~ u C Q) -0 C1l 2 XX)<-,;xX~ 0xx 'XX I Glenanna Road 1-----------li / -"""'' Sq",;:--I )---1-----------1 I I l I ~---I Location Map File: MV 10/26 Applicant: N. Balachandra Q) > ·.::: 0 ~ C1l -0 C ~ (9 - ~r---- r---- -04;6/- PlCKERlNG Municipal Address: 1894 Glendale Drive © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: l\111~ ;.---- ~ f---- f---- f--- r---- r---- City Development Department © King's Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved .;© His Majesty the King in Right of Canada , Department of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.;© Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights reserved.;© Municipal Property Assessment Corporation and its suppliers. All rights reserved. l:\PLANNING\01 -MapFIles\02 -Appllcations\MV\2025\MV 10-26\MV 10-26\MV 10-26.aprx -0 C1l 0 0::: 0 0 0.. ai > ....I Attachment 1 C Q) u (/) ~ u Q) Q) >, C1l LL '------ Date: Dec. 24, 2025 SCALE : 1:2,500 THIS ISNOTAPLANOFSURVEY. - 32 - Attachment 2 Submitted Site Plan File No: MV 10/26 Applicant: N. Balachandra Municipal Address: 1894 Glendale Drive CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN. Date: January 21, 2026 to permit a maximum front yard setback of 11.22 metres to permit the maximum dwelling depth, measured from the minimum front yard setback to the rear wall of a dwelling shall be: 23.6 metres - 33 - Attachment 3 Submitted Ground Floor Plan File No: MV 10/26 Applicant: N. Balachandra Municipal Address: 1894 Glendale Drive CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN. Date: February 2, 2026 - 34 - Attachment 4 Submitted Second Floor Plan File No: MV 10/26 Applicant: N. Balachandra Municipal Address: 1894 Glendale Drive CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN. Date: February 2, 2026 - 35 - At t a c h m e n t 5 Su b m i t t e d E a s t E l e v a t i o n P l a n Fi l e N o : MV 10 /2 6 Ap p l i c a n t : N . B a l a c h a n d r a Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 1 8 9 4 G l e n d a l e 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 : F e b r u a r y 2 , 2 0 2 6 - 36 - At t a c h m e n t 6 Su b m i t t e d N o r t h E l e v a t i o n P l a n Fi l e N o : MV 10 /2 6 Ap p l i c a n t : N . B a l a c h a n d r a Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 1 8 9 4 G l e n d a l e 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 : F e b r u a r y 2 , 2 0 2 6 - 37 - Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: MV 11/26 Date: February 11, 2026 From: Deborah Wylie Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Minor Variance Application MV 11/26 N. Senior 2540 William Jackson Drive, Unit 304 Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 8149/24, to permit a group home within a block townhouse dwelling, whereas the By-law only permits group homes in detached, semi- detached, and street townhouse dwellings. The applicant requests approval of this variance to operate a licensed youth residence. Summary of Findings Based on the application and supporting documentation submitted, the City Development Department has reviewed the proposal in accordance with Section 45(1) of the Planning Act. Staff consider the requested variance to be minor, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and consistent with the general intent and purpose of both the Official Plan and Zoning By-law. Notwithstanding this review, the applicant is responsible for demonstrating the justification for the relief sought and for establishing that the statutory tests are met. After considering all public and agency input, should the Committee find merit in this application, the following conditions are recommended: 1. That this variance applies only to Unit 304, as generally cited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Attachment 2). 2. That the group home is occupied by no more than 2 persons (children/youth) as defined by the license obtained for the property by Synergy Link Homes exclusive of staff. Background The applicant submitted a Zoning Information Request in June 2025 seeking a compliance letter for the Ministry of Education’s childcare licensing requirements. The proposed group home will operate on a 24/7 basis, accommodating a maximum of two children attended by two staff members and visiting parents/guardians. - 38 - Report MV 11/26 February 11, 2026 Page 2 In May 2023, the organization represented by the applicant received a compliance letter from the City for the same use in unit 502 at the same address. At that time, Zoning By-law 3037 was silent on group homes, and the Official Plan permitted group homes in any zone allowing residential uses. Staff’s interpretation was that group homes were permitted in this zone along with other applicable residential zones, provided they otherwise meet the intent of the zone in terms of built form and intensity of use. Unit 502 continues to operate under legal non-conformity, as By-law 8149/24 now specifies permitted dwelling types for group homes. Because the subject property is regulated by Zoning By-law 8149/24, a compliance letter for an additional group home cannot be issued. Therefore, a minor variance is required to permit a group home within a block townhouse dwelling. Comment Conforms to the Intent and Purpose of the Official Plan As of January 1, 2025, following changes made by Bill 23, applicable parts of the Durham Regional Official Plan are now deemed to be part of Pickering’s Official Plan. Under the Regional Plan, the subject properties are designated “Urban System – Regional Corridor and Community Areas”. This designation permits a wide range of uses, including residential use. The Pickering Official Plan designates the subject properties as “Mixed Use Area – Mixed Corridors”, which are intended to accommodate a wide range of uses, including residential use. Section 6.4 (d) of the City’s Official Plan, Affordable and Special Needs Housing policies, directs that the City’s zoning ensure group homes are permitted in all residential areas. The intent of this policy is to reflect that group homes are a residential use, and should be permitted within all applicable residential zones, provided they otherwise meet the intent of the zone in terms of built form and intensity of use. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance maintains the general intent and purpose of the Official Plans. Conforms to the Intent and Purpose of the Zoning By-law The subject property is zoned “X320 (MU-29)” – Exception Zone 320 under Zoning By-law 8149/24. The requested variance seeks to permit a group home within a block townhouse dwelling, whereas the By-law only permits group homes in detached dwelling, semi-detached dwelling, and street townhouse dwellings. Under By-law 8149/24, the definitions of street townhouse dwelling and block townhouse dwelling are as follows: • Dwelling, Street Townhouse: means a residential building containing three (3) or more attached principal dwelling units divided vertically and where all dwelling units are located on a street. • Dwelling, Block Townhouse: means a residential use building containing three (3) or more attached principal dwelling units divided vertically, and where all dwelling units are located on one (1) lot and accessed from a private street, laneway, or common condominium driveway or aisle. - 39 - Report MV 11/26 February 11, 2026 Page 3 As defined by the Zoning By-law, the two dwelling types are distinguished by public and private access, otherwise they operate similarly. The minimum parking space requirement for a block townhouse is 1.75 spaces per unit whereas a street townhouse requires 2 spaces. However, this unit provides a total of 3 parking spaces within the lot, exceeding the minimum required for both types of dwellings accommodating the parking demand of the staff and visitors. There are 14 visitor parking spaces available to accommodate any additional visitors. A group home can be accommodated within a block townhouse dwelling as it is generally compatible with the surrounding residential uses and will not affect on-site parking. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance maintains the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. Desirable for the Appropriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature Zoning By-law 8149/24 permits a private home daycare, accommodating up to 5 children, as a home occupation, subject to a maximum of 24 consecutive hours of care. This provision aligns with the province’s framework for unlicensed childcare under Section 6.3 of the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014. In contrast, a group home use does not restrict overnight accommodation and is permitted under the By-law with a maximum occupancy of up to ten persons, exclusive of staff. Staff note that the maximum occupancy permitted for a group home has the potential to raise concerns related to noise, parking demand, and neighbourhood compatibility. To mitigate these potential impacts, the proposed variance is accompanied by a condition limiting the youth group home to a maximum of two children, exclusive of staff. The proposed use involves the supervision of up to two children by two adult staff members, which is comparable in scale and intensity to that of many households comprised of two parents and two children. Parents/guardians are anticipated to visit the site occasionally and will not remain overnight. The subject unit is provided with three on-site parking spaces, and the condominium complex includes an additional 14 visitor parking spaces, which collectively are sufficient to accommodate staff and occasional visitors. Given the limited scale of the operation and the availability of parking, City staff is of the opinion that the requested variance will not result in adverse noise or parking impacts, nor create a nuisance within the surrounding residential context. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance is desirable for the appropriate development of the land and is minor in nature. - 40 - Report MV 11/26 February 11, 2026 Page 4 Input From Other Sources Applicant •The use involves only two youths and aligns closely with a typical residential household structure. •No additional parking is needed as there is room for 3 vehicles on site. •The intent of this request is to allow Synergy Link Homes to operate a supervised children’s residence that functions similarly to a traditional household setting, with minimal impact on the surrounding neighbourhood. Building Services •No comments or concerns from Building Services. Construction is not permitted to take place until a Building Permit has been applied for and issued. If no construction is proposed, a Change of Use Permit may be required to be applied for and issued. Contact Building Services for further information. Engineering Services •No comments Public Input •Written submissions were received from nearby residents raising concerns about the potential impact of the requested variance on the common areas of the townhouse complex. Comments have been provided to the Committee members. Date of report: February 4, 2026 Comments prepared by: Original Signed By Original Signed By Figo Pham Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Zoning Technician Manager, Zoning & Administration FP:jc /CityDevDept/D3700/2026/MV 11-26/7. Report/MV 11-26 Report.docx Attachments - 41 - Zents Drive -~of- P](KER]NG City Development Department Subject Lands -0 cu 0 0::: -"' () e Ill Re x. Heath Drive ~ (/) -0 ~ ::::, cc (/) 8ou1 Creekside Park Attachment 1 e vard Misthollow Drive Location Ma File: MV 11/26 Munici al Address: 2540 William Jackson Drive, Unit 304 © Th e Co rporati on of th e C ity of Picke rin g Prod uced (in pa rt ) u nder li cense from: © Ki ng's Pri nter, Ontario Mi ni stry of Natu ra l Resou rces. All righ ts reserved.;© His Ma jesty the Ki ng in Ri g ht of Ca nada , Departme nt of Natura l Resou rces. A ll ri g hts reserved.;© Te ra net Enterpri ses Inc . and its su ppli ers. A ll ri g hts reserved.;© Mun icipa l Pro perty Assessme nt Corporati on and its supplie rs. All ri g hts reserved. Date: Jan. 08, 2026 SCALE : 1:4,000 THIS ISNOTAPLANOFSURVEY. l:\PLANNING\01 -MapFiles\02 -Applications\MV\2026\MV 11 -26\MV 11 -26\MV 11 -26.aprx - 42 - At t a c h m e n t 2 Su b m i t t e d F l o o r P l a n Fi l e N o : MV 11 /2 6 Ap p l i c a n t : N . S e n i o r Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 2 5 4 0 W i l l i a m J a c k s o n D r i v e , U n i t 3 0 4 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 : J a n u a r y 19 , 2 0 2 6 to p e r m i t a g r o u p h o m e i n a bl o c k t o w n h o u s e d w e l l i n g - 43 - At t a c h m e n t 3 Su b m i t t e d F l o o r P l a n Fi l e N o : MV 11 /2 6 Ap p l i c a n t : N . S e n i o r Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 2 5 4 0 W i l l i a m J a c k s o n D r i v e , U n i t 3 0 4 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 : J a n u a r y 1 9 , 2 0 2 6 to p e r m i t a g r o u p h o m e i n a b l o c k to w n h o u s e d w e l l i n g ( U n i t 3 0 4 ) - 44 - Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: MV 12/26 Date: February 11, 2026 From: Deborah Wylie Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Minor Variance Application MV 12/26 S. Perkins 2405 Angora Street Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 8149/24, to permit: • 0 parking space per additional dwelling unit (total 2.0 parking spaces provided), whereas the By-law requires 1.0 parking space per additional dwelling unit (total 3.0 parking spaces); and • a window well encroachment of 0.21 metre into the required 1.2 metre path of travel, whereas the by-law permits no encroachment to obstruct the required 1.2 metre path of travel. The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application to obtain a building permit to construct an additional dwelling unit (ADU) in the basement. Summary of Findings Based on the application and supporting documentation submitted, the City Development Department has reviewed the proposal in accordance with Section 45(1) of the Planning Act. Staff considers the requested variances to be minor, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and consistent with the general intent and purpose of both the Official Plan and Zoning By-law. Notwithstanding this review, the applicant is responsible for demonstrating the justification for the relief sought and for establishing that the statutory tests are met. After considering all public and agency input, should the Committee find merit in this application, the following condition is recommended: 1. That these variances apply only to the proposed development, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Attachments 2, 3 & 4). - 45 - Report MV 12/26 February 11, 2026 Page 2 Comment Conforms to the Intent and Purpose of the Official Plan As of January 1, 2025, following changes made by Bill 23, applicable parts of the Durham Regional Official Plan are now deemed to be part of Pickering’s Official Plan. Under the Regional Plan, the subject properties are designated “Urban System – Community Areas”. This designation permits a wide range of uses, including residential. The Pickering Official Plan designates the subject properties as “Urban Residential Areas – Low Density Area”, which are intended to accommodate residential uses. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variances maintain the general intent and purpose of the Official Plans. Conforms to the Intent and Purpose of the Zoning By-law The subject property is zoned “SLD-1” – Seaton Low Density 1 under Zoning By-law 8149/24. Parking Reduction The applicant proposes to provide 2.0 parking spaces, with 1.0 space for the main dwelling and 1.0 space for the additional dwelling unit (ADU), whereas the By-law requires a total of 3.0 parking spaces, including 2.0 spaces for the principal dwelling and 1.0 space for the ADU. The intent of the parking requirement is to ensure sufficient on-site parking to accommodate residential occupants and to minimize parking spillover onto the surrounding streets. The City permits operable vehicles to be parked on residential driveway aprons, either parallel or perpendicular to the roadway, provided that vehicles are not parked on landscaped areas and do not overhang the roadway or sidewalk. There are no concerns with respect to landscaped areas or vehicle overhang at the subject property. As there is no sidewalk along the frontage of the subject property, there is sufficient space within the municipal boulevard to accommodate an additional parking space if required. The applicant has indicated that the proposed parking arrangement is sufficient to meet the needs of the residents . The reduction in required parking is not anticipated to negatively impact the surrounding area or result in parking spillover. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance maintains the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. Path of Travel Encroachment The intent of requiring a minimum 1.2 of a metre path of travel clear of obstructions is to ensure adequate space for emergency services to access the additional dwelling unit (ADU) in the event of an emergency. The applicant proposes to enlarge the rear basement window on the north side of the dwelling to accommodate the proposed ADU, resulting in a window well that will encroach 0.21 of a metre into the required path of travel. Despite this minor encroachment, sufficient space will remain to allow for safe and unobstructed access around the dwelli ng. The proposed window well is not anticipated to negatively impact emergency access or circulation on the site. - 46 - Report MV 12/26 February 11, 2026 Page 3 Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance maintains the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. Desirable for the Appriopriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The requested variances will facilitate an additional dwelling unit (ADU) within the existing dwelling while maintaining adequate functionality of the site. The proposed reduction in parking is not anticipated to negatively impact the subject property or surrounding neighbourhood, as sufficient space remains to accommodate on -site parking, and the municipal boulevard is capable of accommodating an additional parking space if required. With respect to the path of travel encroachment, the minor reduction resu lting from the proposed window well is not anticipated to adversely affect emergency access or circulation around the dwelling. Sufficient clear space will remain to allow for safe and functional access, and the encroachment is limited in scale and directly related to facilitating the ADU. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variances are desirable for the appropriate development of the land and are minor in nature. Input From Other Sources Applicant • The lot cannot physically fit three parking spaces without violating setbacks. The ADU uses the existing footprint; two spaces are minor and maintain neighbourhood character. The 0.21 metres encroachment into the 1.2 metres path of travel is required for basement window wells and preserves safe, functional rear yard access. Both variances are minimal and necessary. Building Services • A Building Permit application has been submitted, awaiting Committee’s decision. Provide verification of number of risers to the “proposed above grade entrance for second unit”. It appears that an exterior landing may be required, which may result in a change to the minor variance. Construction is not permitted to take place until the Building Permit has been issued. Mandatory inspections will be required. Engineering Services • No comments on the proposed variances. • The walkway is not permitted to be up to the side lot line when applying for the Building Permit. Minimum setback from the lot line to the walkway is to be 0.15m. - 47 - Report MV 12/26 February 11, 2026 Page 4 Public Input •Written correspondence was received from an area resident expressing support for the minor variance application. Date of report: February 2, 2026 Comments prepared by: Ash Roy, B.URPl. Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Planner II Manager, Zoning & Administration AR:jc /CityDevDept/D3700/2026/MV 12-26/7. Report/MV 12-26 Report.docx Attachments Original Signed By Original Signed By - 48 - -04;6/- PlCKERlNG City Development Department Location Ma File: MV 12/26 Q) ~ Subject Lands ro 0 0) ~ f----l------r-------1 Hibiscus Green Munici al Address: 2405 Angora Street © The Corporation of the C ity of Pickering Produced (in part) under li cense from: Ql > ·.:: 0 (/) :::, (.) (/) :a £ © King's Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.;© Hi s Majesty the King in Right of Canada , Department of Natural Resources. All rights re served .;© Teranet Enterprise s Inc. and its suppliers. All rights reserved.;© Municipal Property Assessment Corporation and its supp liers. All rights reserved . l:\PLANNING\01 -MapFiles\02 -Applications\MV\2026\MV 12-26\MV 12-26\MV 12-26.aprx Attachment 1 .c cu a.. ro C Ql .c ~ Cactus Crescent Date: Jan. 08, 2026 SCALE : 1:1,500 THIS ISNOTAPLANOFSURVEY. - 49 - At t a c h m e n t 2 Su b m i t t e d S i t e P l a n Fi l e N o : MV 12 /2 6 Ap p l i c a n t : S . P e r k i n s Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 2 4 0 5 A n g o r a 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 : J a n u a r y 21 , 20 2 6 to p e r m i t a w i n d o w w e l l en c r o a c h m e n t o f 0 . 2 1 m e t r e s in t o t h e r e q u i r e d 1 . 2 m e t r e s pa t h o f t r a v e l to p e r m i t 0 p a r k i n g s p a c e p e r ad d i t i o n a l d w e l l i n g u n i t ( t o t a l 2. 0 p a r k i n g s p a c e s p r o v i d e d ) - 50 - At t a c h m e n t 3 Su b m i t t e d P r o p o s e d B a s e m e n t F l o o r P l a n Fi l e N o : MV 12 /2 6 Ap p l i c a n t : S . P e r k i n s Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 2 4 0 5 A n g o r a 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 : J a n u a r y 21 , 20 2 6 - 51 - At t a c h m e n t 4 Su b m i t t e d E l e v a t i o n P l a n ( N o r t h ) Fi l e N o : MV 12 /2 6 Ap p l i c a n t : S . P e r k i n s Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 2 4 0 5 A n g o r a 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 : J a n u a r y 21 , 20 2 6 - 52 - Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: LD 01/26 Date: February 11, 2026 From: Deborah Wylie Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Consent (Land Division) Application LD 01/26 L. & H. Park 5240 Old Brock Road Application The applicant is proposing to sever a 1,518.7 square metre residential parcel of land (Part 2), retaining a 1,513.1 square metre residential parcel of land (Part 1) (refer to Attachment 2). Summary of Findings Staff has reviewed the consent (land division) application LD 01/26, with respect to Section 51(24) of the Planning Act criteria and recommend Tabling of the application to allow the applicant to address comments from Durham Health, including the submission of a Hydrogeological Study demonstrating that the Region’s Lot Sizing Policy requirements can be satisfied (refer to Attachment 3). Comments Official Plan The subject lands are designated “Rural Settlements – Oak Ridges Moraine Rural Hamlets” under the Pickering Official Plan, which permits residential uses. The applicant proposes to create an infill residential hamlet lot within the existing Claremont Rural Hamlet area. City Policy 13.12(d)(i) recognizes that most of Claremont is designated as Oak Ridges Moraine Rural Hamlet under the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan. Accordingly, City Council must restrict applications for new lot creation to cases of minor infilling only. Zoning By-law The subject lands are zoned “Oak Ridges Moraine – Residential General – ORMR5” under Zoning By-law 8149/24: - 53 - Report LD 01/26 February 11, 2026 Page 2 Lots Zone Min. Required Lot Area (m2) Proposed Lot Area (m2) Min. Required Lot Frontage (m) Proposed Lot Frontage (m) Severed Parcel (Part 2) ORMR5 1,390.0 1,518.7 22.0 29.6 Retained Parcel (Part 1) ORMR5 1,390.0 1,513.1 22.0 29.6 The proposed lots appear to comply with the minimum lot frontage and lot area requirements of the Zoning By-law and staff are satisfied that the proposed severance is appropriate. Input From Other Sources Building Services •No comments. Fire Services •No comments. Region of Durham Community Growth and Economic Development and Works Departments and Durham Health •Refer to the letter dated February 2, 2026, attached hereto as Attachment 3. Public Input •As of the date of writing this report, no written submission was received from the public. Date of report: February 4, 2026 Comments prepared by: Kerry Yelk Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner, Zoning Manager, Zoning & Administration KY:nr /CityDevDept/D3500/2026/LD 01-26/8. Report/LD 01-26 - Report.docx Attachments Original Signed ByOriginal Signed By - 54 - Attachment 1 Haxto n Stree t t o -st-Avemre -~--~--~-_____, 04Jo/ Location Map File: LO 01/26 PlCKERlNG Applicant: L. & H. Park Municipal Address:5240 (Old) Brock Road C ity Development © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from : Date: Feb. 05 , 2026 © King's Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.,© His Majesty the King in Department Right of Canada, Department of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.;© Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its SCALE : 1:3,000 I suppliers. All rights reserved.,© Municipa l Property Assessment Corporation and its suppliers. All rights reserved. THIS ISNOTAPLANOF SURVEY. L:\PLANNING\01 -MapFiles\02 -Applications\LD\2025\LD 01 -2026\LD 01 -2026\LD 01 -2026.aprx - 55 - At t a c h m e n t 2 Su b m i t t e d D r a f t R e f e r e n c e P l a n Fi l e N o : L D 01 /2 6 Ap p l i c a n t : L . & H . P a r k Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 5 2 4 0 ( O l d ) B r o c k 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 : J a n u a r y 2 1 , 2 0 2 6 Se v e r e d Pa r c e l (1, 51 8 . 7 m 2) Pa r t 2 Pa r t 1 LD 0 1 / 2 6 Co n s e n t t o s e v e r a 1, 51 8 . 7 s q u a r e m e t r e re s i d e n t i a l p a r c e l o f la n d ( P a r t 2 ) , r e t a i n i n g a 1, 5 1 3 . 1 s q u a r e m e t r e re s i d e n t i a l p a r c e l o f la n d ( P a r t 1 ) . Re t a i n e d Pa r c e l (1 , 5 13 .1 m 2) - 56 - If you require this information in an accessible format, please contact Planning Reception or call 1-800-372-1102 extension 2548. The Regional Municipality of Durham Community Growth and Economic Development Department 605 Rossland Rd. E. Level 4 PO Box 623 Whitby, ON L1N 6A3 Canada 905-668-7711 1-800-372-1102 Email: communitygrowth @durham.ca durham.ca Sandra Austin Commissioner of Community Growth and Economic Development February 2, 2026 Ash Roy, Planner I Zoning & Administration City Development Department One The Esplanade City of Pickering Pickering, ON L1V 6K7 Durham Ref.: LD 01/2026 Applicant: Lae Kweon Park Location: 5240 Old Brock Rd. Municipality: Pickering Hearing Date: TBD RECOMMENDATION: That the application LD 01/2026 not be approved at this time based on concerns from the Health Department. PURPOSE OF APPLICATION The purpose of this application is to permit a severance for the property at 5240 Old Brock Road. This application would create a 1518.7m2 severed lot for future residential development and retain a 1513.07m2 lot with an existing residential house. The subject lands are on private well and septic services. REGIONAL COMMENTS Development Advisory Services For a comprehensive Regional review of this application, a $500.00 Planning Review fee and a $609.00 Health Review fee are applicable. These fees have not yet been received. At such a time that this application is recommended for approval, payment of both the Planning Review fee and the Health Review fee will be required as Conditions of Approval for this application. Confirmation will be required that these and any other Regional Conditions and Approval have been satisfied prior to the Regional clearance of the consent application. Attachment 3 - 57 - LD 01/2026 -2- Health Department The above noted application has been reviewed by this department and they do not support the severance at this time. The application does not demonstrate that the proposed vacant lot can meet the minimum size requirements in the Region’s Lot Sizing Policy. The prime and reserve sewage system loading areas must be based on a conventional sewage system with a Daily Sewage Flow of 3000 litres/day (see Page 7 of the Lot Sizing Policy). The footprints provided are based on a Level 4 treatment system and a Daily Sewage Flow of 2800 litres/day. For a percolation rate of 50, the total required minimum area for the prime and reserve septic systems is 1000 sq. m. The site plan must confirm all setbacks (property lines, well on the south neighbouring property etc.). A hydrogeological report is not included in the application. This is required because of the lots are undersized and located in a Hamlet. It is recommended the applicant confirm the lot size requirements can be met before completing the hydrogeological study because the proposed lots may not be large enough to meet the sizing requirements. Works Department Please be advised that the Works Department has no objection to the granting of approval for the above noted severance application. CONCLUSION The Region is unable to offer its support for this application due to the above noted concerns from the Health Department. The application does not demonstrate that the proposed vacant lot can meet the minimum size requirements in the Region’s Lot Sizing Policy. The site plan must confirm all setbacks related to the septic system. Additionally, a hydrogeological study is required. At such a time when the applicant has addressed all of these concerns, the Region can provide updated comments. Staff are available for discussion of these comments if required. - 58 - LD 01/2026 -3- Yours truly, Michael Scott Michael Scott, Principal Planner cc: Lesley Kennedy, Health Department Grant Young, Works Department - 59 - REGION OF DURHAM DRILLED WELLS AND LOT SIZING POLICIES AS APPLIED TO CONSENTS (SEVERANCES) AND DRAFT PLANS OF SUBDIVISION October 2010 - 60 - DRILLED WATER WELL POLICY OBJECTIVE To ensure drilled wells are provided on (A) vacant subdivision lots and (B) vacant lots created by Land Division Committee consent where private water supplies are required. (A) Subdivision Lots The requirements for the installation of a drilled well must be incorporated into the Regional Subdivision Agreement respecting all lots created by subdivision. The Region of Durham must obtain from the developer a letter of credit to cover the cost of drilling a new well on each lot in the subdivision or receive a copy of a water well record for each existing drilled well; (B) Lots Created by Consent (Severance) For all lots created through the Land Division Committee Consent Procedure, the applicant will be required to provide to the Durham Region Health Department a copy of a water well record to confirm that a drilled well has been constructed on the vacant lot. Alternatively, the applicant can post a letter of credit to be held as security for the construction of a drilled well. The above procedure (B) is not applicable where a local municipality has a policy in place that requires the installation of a drilled well for vacant lots. Local municipalities that have a policy in place include: City of Pickering, Town of Ajax, City of Oshawa, Township of Uxbridge, Township of Brock, and Township of Scugog. - 61 - DRILLED WELL POLICY AS APPLIED TO SEVERANCES Background The Durham Region Official Plan requires the provision of drilled wells on newly created vacant lots. Drilled wells are considered to be of superior construction and are less susceptible to contamination than other types of wells. To ensure that drilled wells are installed on all newly created vacant lots Durham Region Council has adopted a “Drilled Well Policy” to address the provision of a long term water supply for unserviced properties. Procedures A drilled well must be provided on each newly created vacant lot and in order to satisfy this requirement one of the following two (2) options must be met: 1. Construct a drilled well on each vacant lot and present a “Water Well Record ” from the licensed well contractor to the Environmental Health Division of the Durham Region Health Department at 101 Consumers Dr., 2nd Floor, Whitby, ON, telephone 1-888-777-9613; or 2. Submit a $15,000.00 letter of credit for each newly created vacant lot to the Durham Region Legal Department, 605 Rossland Rd. E., Whitby, ON, telephone 905-668-7711. The above options are not applicable where a local municipality has a policy in place that requires the installation of drilled wells on vacant lots. Local municipalities that have a policy in place include: City of Pickering, Town of Ajax, City of Oshawa, Township of Uxbridge, Township of Brock, and Township of Scugog. Letter of Credit The letter of credit must be prepared by an acceptable financial institution and meet the requirements of Durham Region. To obtain a release of a letter of credit, the owner must obtain a “Water Well Record ” for each vacant lot that validates that a drilled well has been constructed and provide a copy to the Environmental Health Office of the Durham Region Health Department at 101Consumers Dr., 2nd Floor, Whitby, ON, telephone 1-888-777- 9613. - 62 - DRILLED WELL POLICY AS APPLIED TO SUBDIVISIONS Background The Durham Region Official Plan requires the provision of drilled wells on newly created vacant lots. Drilled wells are considered to be of superior construction and are less susceptible to contamination than other types of wells. To ensure that drilled wells are installed on all newly created vacant lots, Durham Region Council has adopted a “Drilled Well Policy” which addresses the provision of a long-term water supply for unserviced properties. Procedures A drilled well must be provided on each newly created vacant lot and in order to satisfy this requirement one of the following two (2) options must be met: 1. Construct a drilled well on each vacant lot in the subdivision and provide a “Water Well Record ” from the licensed well contractor to the Durham Region Legal Department at 605 Rossland Rd. E., Whitby, ON, telephone 905-668-7711; or 2. Submit a $15,000.00 letter of credit for each newly created lot to the Durham Region Legal Department, 605 Rossland Rd. E., Whitby, ON, telephone 905-668- 7711. Letter of Credit The letter of credit must be prepared by an acceptable financial institution and meet the requirements of Durham Region. To obtain a release of a letter of credit, the owner must obtain a “Water Well Record” for each lot that validates that a drilled well has been installed and provide a copy to the Durham Region Legal Department, 605 Rossland Rd. E., Whitby, ON, telephone 905-668-7711. - 63 - LOT SIZE POLICY AS APPLIED TO SEVERANCES Background To prevent land development from potentially contaminating the environment or becoming a public health risk, Durham Region Council has approved a Lot Sizing Policy for properties requiring on-site private sewage systems. The size of lots will be determined by the requirements of the Durham Region Lot Sizing Policy and other applicable provincial policies and guidelines. For all new vacant lots being created, the sewage system area will be based on a Class 4 conventional sewage system including a separate area for the replacement of a Class 4 conventional sewage system. The Class 4 system will be designed to process a minimum daily sewage flow of 3000 L. Procedure The Region may require the applicant to provide a two (2) metre deep test hole(s) to confirm the soil and groundwater conditions. Under these circumstances the inspector will contact the owner to make the necessary arrangements. In some instances, a geo-technical and/or hydro-geological report , a site plan prepared by a qualified designer or hydro-geologist and a peer review at the expense of the applicant may be required (e.g. multiple lot development) by the Region. LOT SIZE POLICY AS APPLIED TO SUBDIVISIONS Background To prevent land development from potentially contaminating the environment or becoming a public health risk, Durham Region Council has approved a Lot Sizing Policy for properties requiring on-site private sewage systems. The size of lots will be determined by the requirements of the Durham Region Lot Sizing Policy and other applicable provincial policies and guidelines. For all new vacant lots being created, the sewage system area will be based on a Class 4 conventional sewage system including a separate area for the replacement of a Class 4 conventional sewage system. The Class 4 system will be designed to process a minimum daily sewage flow of 3000 L. Procedure The lot sizes will be determined by provincial policies and the Durham Region Lot Sizing Policy. It is essential that a representative from the Region be present when onsite testing is being conducted. - 64 - SUBDIVISION/SEVERANCE POLICY FOR LANDS REQUIRING ON-SITE PRIVATE SEWAGE SYSTEMS (Residential/Commercial/Industrial) The Durham Region Health Department requires that all unserviced lands that are subdivided or severed are to be assessed so consequently the development shall not impact the environment or pose a public health risk. The Regional Municipality of Durham only recognizes the design and construction of sewage systems that adhere to the Ontario Building Code (OBC), or have Building Materials Evaluation Commission (BMEC) Authorization. 1. Jurisdiction The Regional Municipality of Durham has entered into an Agreement with certain local municipalities to enforce the requirements associated with sewage systems under the Ontario Building Code (OBC). The Regional Municipality of Durham (Durham Region Health Department) acts as the agent for the local municipalities to perform all activities related to sewage systems. Definitions: Severance - means a Consent under the Planning Act to permit the creation of a new lot. Subdivision - means a subdivision as defined in the Planning Act or a Consent under the Planning Act which are comprised of 3 or more additional lots adjacent to the original parcel or a condominium development under the Condominium Act. Industrial/Commercial - an industrial/commercial lot means the creation of a lot(s) for a building or structure other than a single family dwelling unit. Policy Each newly created vacant lot in a severance application or in a subdivision proposal must be suitable for the construction of a Class 4 conventional sewage system including a separate area for the replacement of a Class 4 conventional sewage system, and also adhere to any other applicable provincial policies and guidelines. These shall be considered as minimum standards for approval of subdivision and severance applications on private sewage systems. The Durham Region Planning Department is responsible for the co-ordination and distribution of proposed land development applications. The Health Department will respond to the Planning Department upon request for comments regarding private sewage systems and its potential impacts on groundwater supplies. - 65 - Scope Subdivision/severance applications shall be assessed for the installation of a conventional Class 4 sewage system on the basis of soil suitability, a prime and separate replacement area, topography, maximum groundwater elevation, surface drainage, flooding potential and potential impact on groundwater quality and other possible provincial policies and guidelines. Assessment The number of lots considered suitable for development on private services will be determined by the requirements of the Ministry of the Environment’s (MOE) Technical Guidelines for assessing the potential for groundwater impact in developments serviced by individual subsurface sewage systems, if applicable. The geo-technical assessment must be in accordance with the MOE Procedure D- 5-4, Technical Guideline for Individual On-Site sewage Systems: Water Quality Impact Assessment, and the hydro-geological assessment must be in accordance with MOE Procedure D-5-5, Technical Guideline for Private Wells: Water Supply Assessment, as applicable and Durham Region’s Lot Sizing Policy. A proposed lot must conform with Part 8 Sewage Systems under the Ontario Building Code as it relates to soil percolation time, depth to high groundwater table elevation, depth to impermeable soil, maximum slopes, drainage characteristics and horizontal clearances and Durham Region’s Lot Sizing Policy. The area required for a conventional Class 4 sewage system and the separate replacement area must be available for all new vacant lots. Each lot will be assessed on the assumption that a minimum daily sewage flow of 3000 L/day will be generated from the proposed residence. Other proposals that will generate sewage flows in excess of 3000 L/day (i.e., commercial/industrial or large residential dwellings) but not more than 10,000 L/day will be assessed on an individual basis. Proposed vacant lots shall be sized according to the following table: SEWAGE SYSTEM AREA ESTIMATES (prime and reserve) Soil Percolation Rate (T) Loading Rate (L/m2/day) Daily Sewage Flow (Litres) Sewage System Area (m2) [m2 x 2] 1<T<20 10 3000 600 20<T<35 8 3000 750 35<T<50 6 3000 1000 T >50 4 3000 1500 Two (2) metre test hole(s) may be required for severance/subdivision applications in order to confirm the percolation rate or “T” time. - 66 - Site Constraints Site constraints for the location of private sewage systems may include but are not limited to: • Soil with a percolation time greater than 50 minutes per cm, or less than 1 minute per cm. • Property is subject to flooding in the proposed sewage system areas. • A high water table in the proposed sewage system areas or where the hydraulic loading of the sewage system may cause a saturated soil condition within 0.9 m of the bottom of the leaching bed. • The topography of the lot or other site deficiencies that may not be suitable for the installation of private sewage systems. (i.e. an area that has an average slope that exceeds one unit vertically to four units horizontally (> 25%). NOTE: All constraints shall be recorded. A technical report addressing the constraints will be required prior to approval. Technical Clarifications Plans A site plan must include; the proposed envelopes of all structures, drilled well(s)/adjacent well(s), prime and separate replacement area for the sewage systems and a final grading/drainage plan. Soils For subdivisions, a comprehensive soils report taken from a sufficient number of two (2) metre deep test holes is required to adequately represent the varying geology. Each sample is to be analysed for: • soil classification • grain size distribution • permeability co-efficient and estimated percolation time in min./cm. • seasonal high groundwater determination • identification of any limiting layer. Topography If a proposed development indicates major reshaping of the property, the Health Department may defer the subdivision/severance assessment until the re-grading has been completed and the municipality has approved the new drainage/grading plans. Extensive reshaping (cut and fill) of the property, particularly sites with fine grained soils, should not be undertaken since re-moulded soils will have a - 67 - reduced hydraulic conductivity or the permeability can be destroyed. The OBC restricts the installation of sewage systems in areas where the natural slope in the proposed sewage system envelope exceeds 25%. Lot development involving proposed sewage system envelopes in locations where the natural slope ranges between 10% and 25% will require very specific details relative to surface grading, drainage, tile field design, alignment and depth of cover. Hydro-geological and Geo-technical Reports A hydro-geological report and/or a geo-technical report is required for any proposed subdivision development and may be required for lots created through the consent process where there is a potential impact on the environment. This study should consider the quality and quantity of drinking water on the proposed site and on adjacent groundwater conditions. This will require a current study of proposed and adjacent wells to determine quality and quantity. The Ministry of the Environment’s Technical Guidelines (D-5-5) must be applied to assess water supplies through the use of individual private wells in order to establish that a sufficient quantity and quality of drinking water is present. The Ministry of the Environment’s Technical Guidelines (D-5-4) is to be applied to determine the impact of the proposed sewage systems on the immediate and adjacent groundwater supplies (bacterial and chemical quality), which will determine the maximum number of lots. The Region will require positive and approving comments from the Region of Durham peer review process/system that confirms the hydro-geological and geo- technical reports associated with the proposal complies with the MOE Technical Guidelines. - 68 - INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR PROPOSED SUBDIVISION SUBMISSION 1. A site plan indicating the proposed location of all structures, drilled wells and sub-surface sewage disposal system envelopes including a separate replacement area for the sewage systems. 2. Results of a soil sampling program comprised of a sufficient number of two (2) metre deep test holes to adequately represent the varying geology of the subdivision. Each sample is to be analysed for: • grain size distribution • permeability coefficient including an estimated percolation time in min./cm. • soil classification • seasonal high groundwater determination, groundwater seepage and level after a 24 hour period Contact the Region prior to doing any field testing. 3. An existing and final grading plan indicating final lot drainage patterns. 4.(a) A hydro-geological report and an environmental impact study of the proposed on-site and adjacent water supplies with respect to bacterial and chemical contents. Information should be obtained through a sufficient number of test wells drilled on the subject property as per MOE D-5-5. 4.(b) A geo-technical report to determine the impact of the proposed sewage systems on the immediate and adjacent groundwater supplies (bacterial & chemical quality) which will determine the maximum number of lots as per MOE D-5-4. 5. The Region will require positive and approving comments from the Region of Durham peer review process/system that confirms the hydro-geological and geo-technical reports associated with the proposal complies with the MOE Technical Guidelines. 6. Provincial policies and Durham Region’s “Lot Sizing Policy” will determine lot sizes. 7. Drilled wells are required in accordance with the “Drilled Well Policy”. - 69 -