Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJuly 10, 2024 Committee of Adjustment Agenda Hearing Number: 7 Date: Wednesday, July 10, 2024 pickering.ca Agenda Committee of Adjustment Wednesday, July 10, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page Number For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Secretary-Treasurer or Assistant Secretary-Treasurer Telephone: 905.420.4617 Email: citydev@pickering.ca 1. Disclosure of Interest 2. Adoption of Agenda 3. Adoption of Minutes from June 12, 2024 hearing 1-22 4. Minor Variance Reports 4.1 (Deferred at the June 12, 2024 Committee of Adjustment Hearing) MV 31/24 – 2719 Sapphire Drive 23-38 4.2 MV 33/24– 107 Secord Street 39-45 4.3 MV 39/24 – 1910 Glendale Drive 46-54 4.4 MV 40/24 – 1900 Dixie Road 55-59 4.5 MV 43/24 – 1506 Major Oaks Road 60-67 5. Consent Reports 5.1 LD 13/24, MV 41/24 & MV 42/24 – 1780 Appleview Road (Parts 1& 2) 68-100 6. Adjournment Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, June 12, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 1 of 22 Pending Adoption Present Omar Ha-Redeye Sakshi Sood Joshi Rick Van Andel Sean Wiley – Chair Also Present Deborah Wylie, Secretary-Treasurer Cody Morrison, Secretary-Treasurer – Host Jasmine Correia, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer Isabel Lima, Senior Planner Liam Crawford, Planner II Kerry Yelk, Planner I – Host Ziya Cao, Planner I Absent Denise Rundle – Vice-Chair 1. Disclosure of Interest A disclosure of interest was noted for MV 34/24, as such Rick Van Andel will not be voting on that application. Due to an absence, Sean Wiley will abstain from voting to prevent a tie vote, except for MV 34/24. 2. Adoption of Agenda Moved by Omar Ha-Redeye Seconded by Sakshi Sood Joshi That the agenda for the Wednesday, June 12, 2024, hearing be adopted. Carried 3. Adoption of Minutes Moved by Omar Ha-Redeye Seconded by Rick Van Andel That the minutes of the 5th hearing of the Committee of Adjustment held Wednesday, May 8, 2024, be adopted. Carried -1- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, June 12, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 2 of 22 4. Reports 4.1 (Deferred at the May 8, 2024, Committee of Adjustment Hearing) MV 22/24 Delta Property Holdings Inc. 975 Dillingham Road The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-law 5502/99, to: • permit a maximum gross leasable floor area of 2,390 square metres for any bingo facility, whereas the By-law requires that the gross leasable floor area of any bingo facility shall not exceed 1,740 square metres; • recognize a maximum gross leasable floor area of 1,007 square metres for any office use, whereas the By-law requires that the gross leasable floor area of any office use shall not exceed 950 square metres; and • recognize side yard parking no closer than 3.5 metres from the north side lot line and 1.5 metres from the south side lot line, whereas the By-law states that side yard parking shall only be permitted no closer than 7.5 metres from the side lot line on one side and 1.5 metres on the other side. The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application to recognize an existing parking area setback and office uses, and permit enlargement of an existing bingo facility. No exterior alterations to the building or site are being proposed. Input from other sources was received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services, and the City’s Building Services Section. Jessica Baker, applicant, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. After reading the report, the proposal does not seem to impact traffic or parking in the neighbourhood, as such Rick Van Andel moved the following motion: Moved by Rick Van Andel Seconded by Omar Ha-Redeye That application MV 22/24 by Delta Property Holdings Inc., be Approved on the grounds that the requested variances are minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, subject to the following condition: -2- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, June 12, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 3 of 22 1. That these variances apply only to the proposed development, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plan (refer to Exhibit 2 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated June 12, 2024). Carried 4.2 MV 26/24 R. Thiyagarajah & Y. Gopalapillai 425 Rougemount Drive The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-laws 7610/18, 7872/21, and 7900/22, to: • permit a maximum front yard setback of 21.9 metres, whereas the By-law permits a maximum front yard setback of 10.65 metres (1.0 metre beyond the existing average front yard setbacks of the adjacent dwellings along the same side of the street and within the same block); • permit a maximum dwelling depth of 25.0 metres, whereas the By-law permits a maximum dwelling depth of 20.0 metres for lots with depths greater than 40.0 metres; and • permit a maximum lot coverage of 27 percent, whereas the By-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 25 percent for lots greater than or equal to 1,000 square metres in area. The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application to construct a two storey detached dwelling. Input from other sources were received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services, City’s Building Services Section and one area resident. In support of the application, the applicant submitted a Justification Letter. Sean Toussi, agent, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. The agent made a brief presentation in support of the application. In response to questions from Committee members, the agent clarified the appearance and the location of the proposed ramps. The agent explained the complexity of designing an accessible house. The variances proposed are minor in nature in the fact that the request does not contribute to the overall massing of the house. -3- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, June 12, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 4 of 22 A Committee member commented that should the application be refused, it would severely impact the occupants and while the new proposal is not consistent with the current aesthetic of the neighbourhood, it does follow newer developments in the area. In response to a question from a Committee member, the agent advised the concerns raised by an area resident had been resolved. Moved by Omar Ha-Redeye Seconded by Sakshi Sood Joshi That application MV 26/24 by R. Thiyagarajah & Y. Gopalapillai, 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 detached dwelling, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 & 7 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated June 12, 2024). Carried 4.3 MV 27/24 2519644 Ontario Inc. 2000 Clements Road The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-law 5836/01: • to permit a truck wash use in association with a General Truck Stop, whereas the By-law does not permit a truck wash in association with a General Truck Stop; • to recognize a maximum Gross Leasable Floor Area of 355 square metres for accessory retail sales, whereas the By-law requires that the Gross Leasable Floor Area of accessory retail sales shall not exceed 270 square metres; and • to recognize a maximum Gross Leasable Floor Area of 270 square metres for a Restaurant – Type A, whereas By-law requires that the Gross Leasable Floor Area of a Restaurant – Type A shall not exceed 120 square metres. The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application to obtain site plan approval for a truck service and repair building. The requested variances are to recognize an existing restaurant and retail sales area, and to permit a truck wash in association with a truck stop. Input from other sources were received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services and the City’s Building Services Section. -4- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, June 12, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 5 of 22 In support of the application, the applicant identified that the current By-law provisions do not permit a truck wash as part of the “General Truck Stop” use. We believe the washing of trucks can be considered part of their maintenance and servicing as per the “General Truck Stop”. The proposed Truck Wash would be 1 of 3 bays inside the proposed Truck Repair building. Trucks would park on the existing truck spaces adjacent to the building and would be washed in the building in sequence. Please note a Traffic Memorandum has been prepared to confirm that the proposed use will function within the existing site, existing parking supply, and road network. Francesco Fiorani, agent, 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 a Committee member, the agent explained the role of truck washing within the context of a general truck stop. A Committee member commented they have no concerns with the application as truck washing seems like a logical and complementary use to the establishment, the other two requested variances are to recognize existing uses on the site. Moved by Omar Ha-Redeye Seconded by Rick Van Andel That application MV 27/24 by 2519644 Ontario Inc., be Approved on the grounds that the requested variances are minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, subject to the following condition: 1. That these variances apply only to the proposed development, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibit 2 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated June 12, 2024). Carried 4.4 MV 28/24 M. Haas 133 Secord Street The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-laws 4271/93, to permit an uncovered platform (deck) not exceeding 1.3 metres in height above grade to project a maximum of 2.9 metres into the required rear yard, whereas the By-law permits uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.5 metres into any required front or rear yard. -5- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, June 12, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 6 of 22 The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application for a building permit to construct a rear yard deck. 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 the rear yard lacks the space to accommodate a deck of sufficient size. The size of the proposed deck is in keeping with the decks of the neighbouring houses. Michael Haas, applicant, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Moved by Rick Van Andel Seconded by Sakshi Sood Joshi That application MV 28/24 by M. Haas, 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 the variance applies only to the proposed deck, as generally sited, and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2 & 3 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated June 12, 2024). Carried 4.5 MV 29/24 A. Saksea 1044 Dalewood Drive The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-laws 1703/83, to permit: • a minimum front yard depth of 4.2 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum front yard depth of 4.5 metres; • a minimum flankage side yard width of 1.8 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum flankage side yard width of 2.7 metres; and • a covered porch not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade to project a maximum of 1.5 metres into the required front yard, whereas the By-law permits uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1 metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.5 metres into any required front or rear yard. -6- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, June 12, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 7 of 22 The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application to obtain a building permit for the construction of a two-storey addition to the existing detached dwelling. Input from other sources were received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services, City’s Building Services Section and three area residents. In support of the application, the applicant identified seeking variances to the Zoning By-law as the two-storey addition to the front of the house does not comply. Ambar Saksea, Anjali Saksea and Gaurav Saksea, applicants, and Benan Hanoudi, agent, were present to represent the application. Two area residents were present in objection to the application. The agent explained the layout and design of the addition, and reasoning for the variances. The applicant made a brief presentation supporting the application. An area resident listed the following concerns: the side yard variance is not minor; the proposal is not desirable for the appropriate development of the land as it is not consistent with the current neighbourhood; negative impact of light and visibility; and property standard issues. An area resident listed the following concerns: property standards issues may increase during construction. In response to resident comments the applicant commented that the property was not in good condition when it was acquired and that they will try to address their concerns. They have considered the current neighbourhood while creating the design of the addition. The applicant stated the covered porch is to provide coverage from the weather. In response to a question from a Committee member the agent commented that the existing roof pitch and the front facing brick will remain. An area resident stated that the application will negatively impact the neighboughood due to the size and shape of the house. In response to a question from a Committee member the agent confirmed they will oblige Engineering Services’ comments for tree preservation. The applicant does not have any nieghbours on the side where the addition is being proposed which is why they consider the side yard variance minor. The same footprint would be maintained, the only change is that the house would be one storey taller. -7- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, June 12, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 8 of 22 A Committee member said the residents may contact the City about the property standards concerns. Based on the report, materials provided at the hearing and a site visit it is difficult to understand how the proposal conforms with the appearance of the neighbourhood. A Committee member said the side yard variance is due to a function of the property's shape. Moved by Rick Van Andel That application MV 29/24 by A. Saksea, 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 addition, as generally sited, and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, 4 & 5 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated June 12, 2024). Motion Lost Based on comments received from area residents, and not being able to reconcile the application being desirable for the appropriate development of the land and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning Bylaw, Omar Ha- Redeye moved the following motion: Moved by Omar Ha-Redeye Seconded By Sakshi Sood Joshi That application MV 29/24 by A. Saksea, be Refused on the grounds that the requested variances are 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. subject to the following condition: Carried Vote: Omar Ha-Redeye in favour Sakshi Sood Joshi in favour Rick Van Andel opposed -8- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, June 12, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 9 of 22 4.6 MV 30/24 R. Kush 1015 Mountcastle Crescent The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 1826/84, to permit an uncovered platform (deck) and associated steps, not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade, and not projecting more than 3.5 metres into the required rear yard, whereas the By law permits uncovered steps and platforms, not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade, and not projecting more than 1.5 metres into the required rear yard. The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application to obtain a building permit for a rear-yard deck. Input from other sources was received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services, City’s Building Services Section, the Toronto and Region Conservation Area (TRCA) and two area residents. In support of the application, the applicant identified that to provide safe access to the rear yard due to grade change. Rick Kush, applicant, and Spencer Joy, agent, were present to represent the application. One area resident was present. An area resident commented that their concern was resolved regarding tree preservation. The applicant confirmed that no trees will be affected during the construction of the deck. The applicant confirmed that the dimensions will be the same as the existing deck, except the railing will be narrower. Moved by Omar Ha-Redeye Seconded by Rick Van Andel That application MV 30/24 by R. Kush, 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 the variance applies only to the rear yard deck and uncovered stairs, as generally sited, and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3 & 4 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated June 12, 2024). Carried -9- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, June 12, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 10 of 22 4.7 MV 31/24 P. Tekumalla & S. Vedantam 2719 Sapphire Drive The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 7364/14, as amended by By-laws 7857/21 and 8038/23, to permit a minimum 0.9-metre-wide path of travel from the entrance of an additional dwelling unit to a public street, whereas the By-law requires that all lots containing additional dwelling units shall provide a minimum 1.2 metres wide path of travel from the entrance of each additional dwelling unit to a public or private street. The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application to obtain a building permit for the construction of an additional dwelling unit in the basement of the existing single detached dwelling. Input from other sources were received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services, City’s Building Services Section, and the City’s Fire Services. In support of the application, the applicant identified that the 0.3 metre deficiency along the length of the porch area is due to the outward projection of the front porch foundation. The front porch has 2 columns (posts) which support the roof structure. This would entail significant demolition, construction, and costs since it involves removing the front porch roof and moving the posts that are supporting the structure. Phani Tekumalla, applicant, and Nadeem Ismaili, agent, were present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. The agent said they are not making any changes to the structure of the house or adding any new openings in the basement apartment. The agent made a brief presentation in support of the application. The Secretary-Treasurer clarified the Fence By-law and confirmed that as of this hearing the comments made by Fire Services shown in the staff report stand. In response to a question from a Committee member, the agent commented that they cannot reduce the front porch size because of the columns on the porch that support the roof and cost. The applicant commented that a 0.9-metre-wide path of travel is currently in use in other cities and provided the Committee with supporting documentation. The 0.9 metre deviation from the By-law will only occur in the area abutting the porch. The agent proposed a sprinkler system be installed in the basement to address Fire Services’ comments. -10- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, June 12, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 11 of 22 A Committee member said it is hard to go against the recommendation of Fire Services when it comes to residents' safety. In response to a question from a Committee member, the applicant commented that they were not able to speak with Fire Services in regard to the resolution they are proposing. Moved by Rick Van Andel Seconded by Sakshi Sood Joshi That application MV 31/24 by P. Tekumalla & S. Vedantam, be Deferred to the July 10, 2024, Committee of Adjustment hearing to allow for a resolution to be sought with the Fire Services Department. Carried A five-minute recess was held at 8:47 pm. -11- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, June 12, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 12 of 22 4.8 MV 32/24 F. Elhami 1691 Shade Master Drive The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-laws 4873/96 and 6618/06, to permit: • uncovered steps, not exceeding 1.6 metres in height above grade, to project a maximum of 2.5 metres in the required front yard, whereas the By-law permits uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.5 metres into any required front or rear yard; and • an uncovered platform (deck) and steps, not exceeding 2.9 metre in height above grade, to project a maximum of 2.8 metres into the required rear yard, whereas the By-law permits uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.5 metres into any required front or rear yard. The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application in order to obtain a building permit for a two-storey detached dwelling. Input from other sources was received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services, City’s Building Services Section and the Toronto and Region Conservation Area (TRCA). In support of the application, the applicant identified that the house is currently under construction, additional steps are required to reach the ground. Frank Elhami, applicant, was present to represent the application. And two area residents were present in objection to the application. An area resident stated concerns with the placement of the shed. In response to the area resident comment the applicant stated that the concrete pad is setback one foot from the retaining wall fence. An area resident made the following comments in objection to the application: the proposal is not minor; the height of the deck causing lack of privacy and value of the house; drainage. In response to area resident comments, the applicant stated the work done on the property was done with a building permit. -12- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, June 12, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 13 of 22 In response to questions by Committee members the Secretary-Treasurer commented that a grading plan will need to be approved by Engineering Services prior to issuance of a Building Permit. The applicant commented that the variance for the deck is so that they can access the backyard from the kitchen. In response to questions by Committee members the Secretary-Treasurer commented that the first floor is higher than what was approved in the plans, requiring more steps in the front yard. The deck was an addition to the original permit. Moved by Omar Ha-Redeye Seconded by Rick Van Andel That application MV 32/24 by F. Elhami, 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 the variance applies only to the proposed development, as generally sited, and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated June 12, 2024). 2. That Engineering Services be satisfied that the Engineering Design Criteria can be adequately addressed prior to the issuance of a building permit. Carried 4.9 MV 34/24 Jeflin Farms Ltd. 1125 Squires Beach Road The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, to: • permit a minimum rear yard of 3.25 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum rear yard of 7.5 metres; • permit a minimum side yard of 3.0 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum side yard of 7.5 metres; • permit a minimum parking requirement for a commercial office use to be 5 spaces per 223 square metres of gross floor area, whereas the By-law states that a minimum parking requirement for a commercial office use shall be 5 spaces per 93 square metres of gross floor area; -13- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, June 12, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 14 of 22 • permit a minimum parking requirement for an industrial use to be 1 space per 136 square metres gross floor area, whereas the By-law states that a minimum parking requirement for an industrial use shall be 1 space per 56 square metres of gross floor area; and • permit front yard parking to be limited to 31 percent of the total required parking area, whereas the By-law states that, except for commercial zones used for commercial purposes, front yard parking shall be limited to 20 percent of the total required parking area. The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application to obtain site plan approval for a warehouse expansion. Input from other sources were received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services, City’s Building Services Section. Dean Taylor and David Leaung, agents, were present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. A Committee member commented on the geographical location of this application and the limited impact on residential neighbouhoods. Moved by Omar Ha-Redeye Seconded by Sakshi Sood Joshi That application MV 34/24 by Jeflin Farms Ltd., be Approved on the grounds that the requested variances are minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and 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 plan (refer to Exhibit 2 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated June 12, 2024). Carried -14- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, June 12, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 15 of 22 5.Consent Applications 5.1 (LD 078/2023 Tabled at the Region of Durham Land Division Committee Meeting)LD 078/2023, LD 08/24 to LD 10/24 MV 35/24 to MV 37/24S. Gleed & F. Maida1754 & 1756 Appleview Road Moved by Sakshi Sood Joshi Seconded by Omar Ha-Redeye That application LD 078/2023 be lifted from the Table. Carried LD 078/2023 The purpose of the application is to permit the severance of a 995.7 square metre residential parcel of land (Parts 5 and 6), retaining a 1,502.7 square metre residential parcel of land (Part 2) as outlined on Exhibit 3. LD 08/24 The purpose of the application is to permit the severance of a 322.7 square metre residential parcel of land (Part 5), retaining a 670.9 square metre residential parcel of land (Part 6), as outlined on Exhibit 4. LD 09/24 The purpose of the application is to permit the severance of a 946.9 square metre residential parcel of land (Parts 3 and 4), retaining a 1,429.0 square metre residential parcel of land (Part 1), as outlined on Exhibit 5. LD 10/24 The purpose of the application is to permit the severance of a 324.2 square metre residential parcel of land (Part 4), retaining a 670.9 square metre residential parcel of land (Part 3), as outlined on Exhibit 6. The above noted applications will facilitate the creation of three new residential lots (Part 6, Part 4 & 5 and Part 3) for detached dwellings, fronting onto the future extension of Goldenridge Road. Two lots (Part 1 & Part 2), each with an existing dwelling fronting Appleview Road, will be retained (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 & 7). Parts 7 to 12 will be conveyed to the City of Pickering for the future extension and connection of Goldenridge Road. -15- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, June 12, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 16 of 22 The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-laws 7874/21, and 7902/22, as it relates to the severed lots, to permit: MV 35/24 (Severed Parcel – Part 6) • a minimum lot frontage of 15.8 15.7 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum lot frontage of 18.0 metres; (amended by the applicant at the hearing) • a minimum north and south side yard setback of 1.2 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum side yard setback of 1.8 metres; • a maximum lot coverage of 38 percent, whereas the By-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent; and • a maximum dwelling height of 10.5 10.0 metres, whereas the By-law permits a maximum dwelling height of 9 metres. (amended by the applicant at the hearing) MV 36/24 (Several Parcel – Parts 4 & 5) • a minimum lot frontage of 15.2 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum lot frontage of 18.0 metres; • a minimum north and side yard setback of 1.2 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum side yard setback of 1.8 metres; • a maximum lot coverage of 38 percent, whereas the By-law requires a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent; and • a maximum dwelling height of 10.5 10.0 metres, whereas the By-law permits a maximum dwelling height of 9 metres. (amended by the applicant at the hearing) MV 37/24 (Severed Parcel – Part 3) • a minimum lot frontage of 15.8 15.7 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum lot frontage of 18.0 metres; (amended by the applicant at the hearing) • a minimum north and side yard setback of 1.2 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum side yard setback of 1.8 metres; • a maximum lot coverage of 38 percent, whereas the By-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent; and • a maximum dwelling height of 10.5 10.0 metres, whereas the By-law permits a maximum dwelling height of 9 metres. (amended by the applicant at the hearing) -16- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, June 12, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 17 of 22 Input from other sources were received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services, City’s Building Services Section and the Region of Durham Planning and Works Departments. Frank Maida, applicant, and Justin Mamone, agent, were present to represent the application. Two area residents were present. The agent made a brief presentation in support of the application. An area resident listed the following concerns: tree preservation; the view from her home will change; the space between the proposed houses; and lack of greenspaces. In response to the area resident’s comments the agent assured that a Tree Preservation Plan and Arborist Report will be required, and the applicant is committed to preserve as much of the hedge as possible. Additional street trees will be planted along the right-of-way of Goldenridge Road. An area resident listed the following concerns: proposed variances will negatively change the look and feel of the neighborhood; the tighter spaces between homes go against the established pattern; 38 percent maximum lot coverage will decrease the greenspace and increase the visually mass of dwellings; disruptions to the natural biodiversity of the neighbourhood; and tree preservation. In response to questions from Committee members, the agent clarified the houses to the north are approximately 13.0 metres. Moved by Rick Van Vandel That application LD 078/2023, LD 08/24, LD 09/24 and LD 10/24 by S. Gleed & F. Maida, be Approved. And That applications MV 35/24 to MV 37/24 by S. Gleed & F. Maida, 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 severed parcels (refer to the submitted Draft Reference Plan), as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plan (refer to Exhibit 2 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated June 12, 2024). Motion Lost -17- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, June 12, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 18 of 22 Moved by Sakshi Sood Joshi Seconded by Omar Ha-Redeye That application LD 078/2023, LD 08/24, LD 09/24 and LD 10/24 by S. Gleed & F. Maida, be Approved, subject to the following: Applicants/owners are responsible for fulfilling all conditions. Conditions 1. That the applicant satisfies the requirements of the City Development Department’s Report to the Committee of Adjustment and Appendix I, dated June 6, 2024. 2. That the applicant satisfies the requirements of the City Engineering Services Department’s memo, Appendix II, dated June 3, 2024. 3. That the applicant satisfies the requirements of the Regional Planning and Economic Development Department’s letters, Appendix III, dated June 4, 2024. 4. That the applicant satisfies the conditions of approval for LD 078/2023, LD 08/24, LD 09/24 and LD 10/24, to the satisfaction of the Secretary-Treasurer. 5. That the applicant submits two copies of a registered plan on the subject parcel. 6. That the consent be subject to the following periods: • Last day for fulfilling Conditions is June 12, 2026. • Expiry Date of Applications is July 12, 2026. Clearing Agencies 7. Prior to the signing of the certificate by the Secretary-Treasurer that the consent has been given, the Secretary-Treasurer is to be advised in writing by the City Planning Department that Condition #1 has been carried out to its satisfaction. 8. Prior to the signing of the certificate by the Secretary-Treasurer that the consent has been given, the Secretary-Treasurer is to be advised in writing by the City Engineering Services Department that Condition #2 has been carried out to its satisfaction. 9. Prior to the signing of the certificate by the Secretary-Treasurer that the consent has been given, the Secretary-Treasurer is to be advised in writing by the Regional Planning and Economic Development Department that Condition #3 has been carried out to its satisfaction. -18- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, June 12, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 19 of 22 10. Prior to the signing of the certificate by the Secretary-Treasurer that the consent has been given, the Secretary-Treasurer is to be satisfied that the time periods outlined in Condition #6 have been adhered to. Advisory Comments 1. Once all the conditions contained in the Committee's Decision are fully satisfied by the applicant, the applicant’s solicitor must prepare and forward the legal document(s) with the applicable stamping fee to the Region of Durham Land Division Committee office, to the attention of the Secretary-Treasurer for review and approval with stamping. The document(s) will be returned to the solicitor for registration purposes. Failing receipt by the Secretary-Treasurer of the Deed Package by the requisite date, the application shall be deemed expired and shall lapse. That the variances for minimum lot frontage, minimum north and south side yard setback and maximum lot coverage, be Approved on the grounds that the requested variances are minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, subject to the following condition: 1. That these variances apply only to the severed parcels (refer to the submitted Draft Reference Plan), as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plan (refer to Exhibit 2 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated June 12, 2024). and That the variance for maximum dwelling height, be Refused on the grounds that the requested variance does not maintain the intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law, are not minor in nature and is not desirable for the appropriate development of the land. Carried Vote: Omar Ha-Redeye in favour Sakshi Sood Joshi in favour Rick Van Andel opposed -19- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, June 12, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 20 of 22 5.2 LD 11/24 R. Taghipour 1964 Royal Road Land Division Application LD 11/24 proposes to sever a 354.84 square metre parcel of land (Part 2), retaining a 354.79 square metre parcel of land (Part 1). The existing dwelling is proposed to be demolished. The application will facilitate the creation of 1 new lot for a semi-detached dwelling. Input from other sources was received from the Applicant, the City’s Engineering Services and the Region of Durham Planning and Works Departments. Bob Martindale, agent, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Moved by Omar Ha-Redeye Seconded by Rick Van Andel That application LD 11/24 by R. Taghipour, be Approved as applied for, as it generally complies with all applicable plans and policies, subject to: Applicants/owners are responsible for fulfilling all conditions. Conditions 1. That the applicant satisfies the requirements of the City Development Department’s Report to the Committee of Adjustment and Appendix I, dated June 6, 2024. 2. That the applicant satisfies the requirements of the City Engineering Services Department’s memo, Appendix II, dated May 29, 2024. 3. That the applicant satisfies the requirements of the Regional Planning and Economic Development Department’s letter, Appendix III, dated June 6, 2024. 4. That the applicant submits two copies of a registered plan on the subject parcel. 5. That the consent be subject to the following periods: • Last day for fulfilling Conditions is June 12, 2026. • Expiry Date of Application LD 11/24 is July 12, 2026. -20- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, June 12, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 21 of 22 Clearing Agencies 6. Prior to the signing of the certificate by the Secretary-Treasurer that the consent has been given, the Secretary-Treasurer is to be advised in writing by the City Planning Department that Condition #1 has been carried out to its satisfaction. 7. Prior to the signing of the certificate by the Secretary-Treasurer that the consent has been given, the Secretary-Treasurer is to be advised in writing by the City Engineering Services Department that Condition #2 has been carried out to its satisfaction. 8. Prior to the signing of the certificate by the Secretary-Treasurer that the consent has been given, the Secretary-Treasurer is to be advised in writing by the Regional Planning and Economic Development Department that Condition #3 has been carried out to its satisfaction. 9. Prior to the signing of the certificate by the Secretary-Treasurer that the consent has been given, the Secretary-Treasurer is to be satisfied that the time periods outlined in Condition #5 have been adhered to. Advisory Comments 1. Once all of the conditions contained in the Committee's Decision are fully satisfied by the applicant, the applicant’s solicitor must prepare and forward the legal document(s) with the applicable stamping fee to the Region of Durham Land Division Committee office, to the attention of the Secretary-Treasurer for review and approval with stamping. The document(s) will be returned to the solicitor for registration purposes. Failing receipt by the Secretary-Treasurer of the Deed Package by the requisite date, the application shall be deemed expired and shall lapse. Carried -21- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, June 12, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 22 of 22 6. Other Business That the revised 2024 Hearing Schedule be adopted. Carried 7. Adjournment Moved by Omar Ha-Redeye Seconded by Sakshi Sood Joshi That the 6th hearing of the 2024 Committee of Adjustment be adjourned at 10:00 pm. Carried __________________________ 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 -22- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: MV 31/24 Date: July 10, 2024 From: Deborah Wylie Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: (Deferred at the June 12, 2024 Committee of Adjustment Hearing) Minor Variance Application MV 31/24 P. Tekumalla & S. Vedantam 2719 Sapphire Drive Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 7364/14, as amended by By-laws 7857/21 and 8038/23, to permit a minimum 0.9 metre wide path of travel from the entrance of an additional dwelling unit to a public street, whereas the By-law requires that all lots containing additional dwelling units shall provide a minimum 1.2 metres wide path of travel from the entrance of each additional dwelling unit to a public or private street. The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application to obtain a building permit for the construction of an additional dwelling unit in the basement of the existing single detached dwelling. Recommendation 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 the subject property, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6). 2. That automatic sprinkler systems be installed and maintained within the existing single detached dwelling and proposed additional dwelling unit, in accordance with NFPA 13R, to the satisfaction of Fire Services. 3. That prior to the issuance of a building permit, Fire Services shall be satisfied with the proposal to construct an additional dwelling unit in the basement of the existing single detached dwelling. Background At the June 12, 2024, Committee of Adjustment Hearing, City staff recommended refusal of Minor Variance Application MV 31/24, as in staff’s opinion the requested variance did not meet the four tests of a minor variance (refer to Attachment 1, MV 31/24 Report (June 12, 2024)). -23- Report MV 31/24 July 10, 2024 Page 2 At the hearing, the applicant presented new information to the Committee of Adjustment which had not been previously shared with City staff. Below is a general description of the information provided by the applicant at the hearing: • Fire Department Access Requirements in the City of Toronto: In the City of Toronto, the minimum path of travel for Fire Department access to a laneway suite is 0.9 metres wide by 2.1 metres high. Additionally, the City of Toronto requires a maximum path of travel distance of 45 metres, measured from the public street to the entry of a laneway suite. The maximum travel distance can be increased from 45 metres to 90 metres, if additional fire-safety measures are incorporated into the design of the laneway suite. The City of Toronto also requires a fire hydrant to be located within 45 metres of where a firefighting vehicle would park in front of a subject property. • Approved Minor Variance in the Town of Milton: In May of 2024, the Committee of Adjustment for the Town of Milton approved a minor variance application, to reduce the width of a parking space on a residential driveway, and to reduce a side yard setback to install a single step and landing to access the entrance of an additional dwelling unit (ADU). The path of travel from the public street to the landing/entrance of the ADU was 0.96 metres wide. Milton Fire & Rescue Services reviewed the application and stated that the 0.96 metre wide path of travel was not sufficient to allow access during an emergency and that they objected to the proposal. However, Milton Fire & Rescue Services did state that an alternative solution would be for the applicant to sprinkler the ADU, to mitigate fire and life safety risk. • Commitment to Install Additional Fire-Safety Measures: During the hearing, the applicant made a commitment to install additional fire-safety measures within the dwelling and proposed ADU. The proposed fire-safety measures include: • installing automatic sprinkler systems throughout the entire dwelling, including two sprinklers installed in the mechanical room; • installing increased fire protection materials in the ceiling, walls, mechanical room, staircase, around steel columns, and between the principal dwelling unit and the ADU; and • installing adequate lighting along the south side yard, to ensure the path of travel is always visible. The Committee of Adjustment deferred application MV 31/24 to the July 10, 2024 hearing, to give the applicant an opportunity to reconsult with the City’s Fire Services Department and present the above-noted information. The applicant met with staff in the Fire Services Department on June 21, 2024. Following the meeting, Fire Services staff requested the applicant consider the following options as part of their proposal to construct an ADU in the basement of the existing single detached dwelling: -24- Report MV 31/24 July 10, 2024 Page 3 1.Create a separate entrance through the existing garage (by means of a fire separatedcorridor) that would allow the ADU occupants to enter/exit through the garage. 2.Remove the portion of the front porch that projects into the south side yard and obstructs the minimum required path of travel. 3.Install automatic sprinkler systems throughout the entire dwelling, in accordance withNFPA 13R (which is a National Fire Protection Association standard for the installation ofsprinkler systems in low-rise residential dwellings) and capture the installation of thesprinkler systems in the building permit. The applicant has decided to proceed with Option 3, to install automatic sprinkler systems throughout the entire dwelling, in accordance with NFPA 13R. The applicant has provided revised plans, which show the proposed fire-safety measures to be installed in the ADU (refer to Exhibit 4) and in the principal dwelling unit (refer to Exhibits 5 & 6). Fire Services staff have confirmed that, should the applicant proceed with Option 3 to install automatic sprinkler systems throughout the entire dwelling, they have no objections to the proposed variance. Input From Other Sources Engineering Services •No comments. Building Services •No concerns with the revised proposal. Public Input •No written submissions have been received from the public as of the date of writing this report. Date of report: July 3, 2024 Comments prepared by: Original Signed By Original Signed By Isabel Lima Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner Manager, Zoning & Administration IL:nr /CityDevDept/D3700/2024/MV 31-24/7. Report/2. July Meeting/MV 31-24 Report.docx Attachment -25- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: MV 31/24 Date: June 12, 2024 From: Cody Morrison Principal Planner, Development Review Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application MV 31/24 P. Tekumalla & S. Vedantam 2719 Sapphire Drive Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 7364/14, as amended by By-laws 7857/21 and 8038/23, to permit a minimum 0.9-metre-wide path of travel from the entrance of an additional dwelling unit to a public street, whereas the By-law requires that all lots containing additional dwelling units shall provide a minimum 1.2 metres wide path of travel from the entrance of each additional dwelling unit to a public or private street. The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application to obtain a building permit for the construction of an additional dwelling unit in the basement of the existing single detached dwelling. Recommendation For your information, and based solely on the Application for Minor Variance and supporting documentation filed by the applicant, the City Development Department has reviewed the application with respect to Section 45(1) of the Planning Act and considers the requested variance to not be minor in nature, not desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and not in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law, and therefore recommends Refusal of the proposed variance. 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 subject property, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2 & 3). Background Proposed ADU Has Not Been Constructed The public notice for this application, dated May 27, 2024, stated that the additional dwelling unit (ADU) in the basement is existing. A City Building Inspector visited the subject property on May 30, 2024, and confirmed that the ADU has not been constructed and that the basement remains unfinished. The applicant has submitted a building permit for the construction of the ADU and requires approval of this minor variance application to proceed. Attachment 1 -26- Report MV 31/24 June 12, 2024 Page 2 Previous Minor Variance Application On February 14, 2024, the Committee of Adjustment approved Minor Variance Application MV 05/24 for the subject property, to permit a maximum driveway width of 5.75 metres, whereas the By-law permits a maximum driveway width of 4.6 metres. The purpose of the application was to accommodate a third parking space on the lot (one existing space in the garage and two spaces outside). The minimum parking requirements for a detached dwelling and an ADU is 3 parking spaces. At the time of processing Minor Variance Application MV 05/24, the applicant was requesting a second variance to permit a minimum 0.9-metre-wide path of travel from the entrance of an ADU to the public street. The variance is a result of the existing front porch of the dwelling that projects into the side yard and obstructs the path of travel (refer to Exhibit 2). Fire Services staff reviewed the application and were not in support of the variance to reduce the minimum required path of travel. As such, the applicant withdrew the variance and proposed to remove the portion of the front porch that projects into the side yard. It is staff’s understanding that the applicant is no longer proposing to remove the portion of the front porch due to the associated cost (refer to comments from Applicant under Input From Other Sources). As such, the applicant has submitted Minor Variance Application MV 31/24 to permit a minimum 0.9-metre-wide path of travel from the entrance of the ADU to the public street. Prior to submitting this application, the applicant’s agent spoke to Fire Services staff on a few occasions. Fire Services staff indicated to the agent that they are not in support of the requested variance to reduce the minimum required path of travel. Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated Urban Residential Areas – Low Density Area in the Seaton Lamoreaux Neighbourhood. Lands within this designation are intended to accommodate residential uses, including detached dwellings and ADUs. In September of 2023, City Council approved Official Plan Amendment 49, which was intended to bring the Official Plan into conformity with the Planning Act, to implement policies that support the construction of ADUs across the City. Staff are of the opinion that the requested variance maintains the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan. Does Not Conform to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The Zoning By-law states that all lots containing ADUs shall provide a minimum 1.2 metres wide path of travel from the entrance of each ADU to the public street, and that no encroachment is permitted to obstruct this path of travel. The intent of this provision is to ensure that there is safe access to and from the ADU for emergency personnel, who provide aid and assistance to the residents of the ADU (e.g., transporting a resident by stretcher). -27- Report MV 31/24 June 12, 2024 Page 3 The requested variance is to permit a minimum 0.9-metre-wide path of travel from the entrance of the ADU to the public street. The variance is a result of the existing front porch of the dwelling that projects into the side yard and obstructs the path of travel (refer to Exhibit 2). Fire Services staff have reviewed the application and have stated that they are not in support of the requested variance (refer to comments from Fire Services under Input From Other Sources). A minimum of 1.2 metres is required to allow the firefighter crews to safely access the ADU and accommodate a small stretcher, if one is required. Fire Services staff have stated that the impact on firefighter access in an emergency event would be compromised to a point that they are not comfortable. Given the comments from Fire Services, staff are of the opinion that the requested variance does not maintain the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. Not Desirable for the Appropriate Development of the Land and Not Minor in Nature As residential properties within the City begin to densify and ADUs are accommodated on existing lots, the City must ensure that emergency service workers can safely access and service those living in such units. Fire Services staff have reviewed the proposal and have concluded that a reduction in the minimum required path of travel will negatively impact emergency access. The requested variance is a result of the existing front porch of the dwelling that projects into the side yard and obstructs the path of travel (refer to Exhibit 2). The porch is located 0.9 metres from the shared south lot line. The adjacent dwelling to the south is located 0.6 metres from the shared lot line. There is a separation of 1.5 metres between the two dwellings. The applicant is of the opinion that the 1.5 metres, located across both the subject property and the adjacent property to the south, is sufficient to allow firefighter crews to safely access the ADU. However, the applicant cannot guarantee continual access onto their neighbour’s private property, as a current or future property owner could restrict access along the shared property line by erecting a fence. Considering the requested variance will impact the ability for firefighter crews to safely access the ADU, staff are of the opinion that the requested variance is not desirable for the appropriate development of the land and is not minor in nature. Input From Other Sources Applicant •The 0.3 metre deficiency along the length of the porcharea is due to the outward projection of the front porchfoundation. The front porch has 2 columns (posts) which are supporting the roof structure. This would entail asignificant demolition, construction, and costs since itinvolves removing the front porch roof and moving theposts that are supporting the structure. -28- Report MV 31/24 June 12, 2024 Page 4 Fire Services •The minimum 1.2 metres wide path of travel is required toallow our firefighter crews to safely access the additionaldwelling unit and accommodate a small stretcher, if one is required. •Fire Services is not in support of the requested variance.The impact on firefighter access and access with astretcher in case of an emergency would be compromised to a point that we would not be comfortable. •Staff in Fire Services have spoken to the applicant on afew occasions and have informed the applicant that we arenot in support of the requested variance. We ask that the applicant explore methods to provide the minimum required 1.2 metre path of travel from the entrance of theadditional dwelling unit to the public street. Engineering Services •No comments. Building Services •No concerns; building permit application is on hold until Committee’s decision. Public Input •No written submissions were received from the public as ofthe date of writing this report. Date of report: June 4, 2024 Comments prepared by: Original Signed By Original Signed By Isabel Lima Cody Morrison Senior Planner Principal Planner, Development Review IL:jc J:\Documents\Development\D-3700\2024\MV 31-24\7. Report Attachments -29- Bu r k h o l d e r D r i v e Cameo Street Belcourt St r e e t Sa p p h i r e D r i v e Dragonfly Avenue Re f l e c t i o n P l a c e To f f e e S t r e e t Taunton Road A z a l e a A v e n u e Fa l l H a r v e s t C r e s c e n t Ti g e rlily T r a il Skyridge Boule v a r d Marat hon Aven ue Clipper Lane Silk Street T a n gr e e n T r a il Moon l ight Cresce nt Orenda Street Foxtail Crescent Location Map File:Applicant: Municipal Address: MV 31/24 Date: May. 10, 2024 Exhibit 1 ¯ E P. Tekumalla & S. Vedantam 2719 Sapphire Drive SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\MV\2024\MV 31-24\MV31-24_LocationMap.mxd 1:4,000 SCALE:THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © King's Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © His Majesty the King in Right of Canada, Department ofNatural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights reserved.; © Municipal PropertyAssessment Corporation and its suppliers. All rights reserved. City DevelopmentDepartment -30- Ex h i b i t 2 Su b m i t t e d Si t e Pl a n Fi l e N o : MV 3 1 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : P. T e k u m a l l a & S . V e d a n t a m Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 27 1 9 S a p p h i r e D r i v e FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ju n e 4 , 2 0 2 4 Ex i s t i n g Fr o n t Po r c h Re a r w a l k o u t a c c e s s t o ba s e m e n t a p a r t m e n t lo c a t e d u n d e r e x i s t i n g d e c k Pr o p e r t y Li n e s 1. 2 2 m 0. 9 4 m 0. 6 6 m to p e r m i t a m i n i m u m 0 . 9 m e t r e w i d e p a t h of t r a v e l f r o m t h e e n t r a n c e o f t h e ad d i t i o n a l d w e l l i n g u n i t t o a p u b l i c s t r e e t -31- Exhibit 3 Submitted Front Elevation Plan File No: MV 31/24 Applicant: P. Tekumalla & S. Vedantam Municipal Address: 2719 Sapphire Drive FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. Date: May 22, 2024   Property Line Existing Front Porch to permit a minimum 0.9 metre wide path of travel from the entrance of the additional dwelling unit to a public street  -32- Bu r k h o l d e r D r i v e Cameo Street Belcourt St r e e t Sa p p h i r e D r i v e Dragonfly Avenue Re f l e c t i o n P l a c e To f f e e S t r e e t Taunton Road A z a l e a A v e n u e Fa l l H a r v e s t C r e s c e n t Ti g e rlily T r a il Skyridge Boule v a r d Marat hon Aven ue Clipper Lane Silk Street T a n gr e e n T r a il Moon l ight Cresce nt Orenda Street Foxtail Crescent Location Map File:Applicant: Municipal Address: MV 31/24 Date: May. 10, 2024 Exhibit 1 ¯ E P. Tekumalla & S. Vedantam 2719 Sapphire Drive SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\MV\2024\MV 31-24\MV31-24_LocationMap.mxd 1:4,000 SCALE:THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © King's Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © His Majesty the King in Right of Canada, Department ofNatural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights reserved.; © Municipal PropertyAssessment Corporation and its suppliers. All rights reserved. City DevelopmentDepartment -33- Ex h i b i t 2 Su b m i t t e d S i t e P l a n Fi l e N o : M V 3 1 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : P . T e k u m a l l a & S . V e d a n t a m Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 2 7 1 9 S a p p h i r e D r i v e FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : J u n e 4 , 2 0 2 4 Ex i s t i n g F r o n t P o r c h Re a r w a l k o u t a c c e s s t o ba s e m e n t a p a r t m e n t lo c a t e d u n d e r e x i s t i n g d e c k Pr o p e r t y Li n e s 1. 2 2 m 0. 9 4 m 0. 6 6 m to p e r m i t a m i n i m u m 0 . 9 m e t r e w i d e p a t h of t r a v e l f r o m t h e e n t r a n c e o f t h e ad d i t i o n a l d w e l l i n g u n i t t o a p u b l i c s t r e e t -34- Exhibit 3 Submitted Front Elevation Plan File No: MV 31/24 Applicant: P. Tekumalla & S. Vedantam Municipal Address: 2719 Sapphire Drive FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. Date: May 22, 2024 Property Line Existing Front Porch to permit a minimum 0.9 metre wide path of travel from the entrance of the additional dwelling unit to a public street -35- Ex h i b i t 4 Su b m i t t e d R e v i s e d B a s e m e n t F l o o r P l a n ( A d d i t i o n a l D w e l l i n g U n i t ) Fi l e N o : M V 3 1 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : P . T e k u m a l l a & S . V e d a n t a m Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 2 7 1 9 S a p p h i r e D r i v e FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : J u l y 2 , 2 0 2 4 -36- Ex h i b i t 5 Su b m i t t e d R e v i s e d M a i n F l o o r P l a n ( P r i n c i p a l D w e l l i n g U n i t ) Fi l e N o : M V 3 1 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : P . T e k u m a l l a & S . V e d a n t a m Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 2 7 1 9 S a p p h i r e D r i v e FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : J u l y 2 , 2 0 2 4 -37- Ex h i b i t 6 Su b m i t t e d R e v i s e d S e c o n d F l o o r P l a n ( P r i n c i p a l D w e l l i n g U n i t ) Fi l e N o : M V 3 1 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : P . T e k u m a l l a & S . V e d a n t a m Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 2 7 1 9 S a p p h i r e D r i v e FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : J u l y 2 , 2 0 2 4 -38- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: MV 33/24 Date: July 10, 2024 From: Deborah Wylie Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Minor Variance Application MV 33/24 N. Turney 107 Secord Street Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 4271/93, to permit an uncovered platform and associated steps (rear yard deck) not exceeding 1.6 metres in height above grade and not projecting more than 2.0 metres into the required rear yard, whereas the By-law permits uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.5 metres into the required rear yard. The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application to obtain a building permit for an existing deck in the rear yard. Recommendation For your information, and based solely on the application and supporting documentation filed by the applicant, the City Development Department has reviewed the application with respect to Section 45(1) of the Planning Act and considers the requested variance to be minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, and therefore recommends Approval of the proposed variance. 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 existing rear yard deck, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3 & 4). Background The applicant reconstructed a rear yard deck without a building permit in 2020. The applicant has since submitted a building permit to the City to legalize the existing deck and requires approval of this minor variance application to obtain the permit. -39- Report MV 33/24 July 10, 2024 Page 2 Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated “Urban Residential Areas – Low Density Areas” within the Highbush Neighbourhood. Residential uses such as detached dwellings and associated accessory structures are permitted within this designation. Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The requested variance is to legalize an uncovered deck and associated steps, not exceeding 1.6 metres in height above grade and not projecting more than 2.0 metres into the required rear yard, whereas the By-law permits uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.5 metres into the required rear yard. The intent of this provision is to protect the privacy of abutting properties and to ensure that adequate space is provided within the rear yard for outdoor amenity space and soft landscaping. There is a change in grade between the front and rear of the property. The deck is required to be at a height of 1.6 metres to provide access from the first floor of the dwelling to the rear yard. The deck maintains a setback of 5.49 metres from the rear lot line, 1.0 metre from the west lot line, and over 4.0 metres from the east lot line. The setbacks from the rear and side lot lines ensure that negative privacy impacts on adjacent properties are minimized. The size of the deck and the layout of the rear yard, as shown in the applicant’s submitted plans, demonstrates that sufficient space is provided in the rear yard for outdoor amenity space and soft landscaping. 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 The requested variance is intended to legalize an existing deck, which provides access to the rear yard from the dwelling and contributes towards the total amount of usable amenity space in the rear yard. The projection of the deck into the rear yard is in keeping with existing rear yard decks along Secord Street (refer to Exhibit 4). There appears to be existing mature vegetation within the rear yard of the subject property, which assists with screening the deck from adjacent properties. The deck is setback from all lot lines to allow for soft landscaping and drainage. 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 33/24 July 10, 2024 Page 3 Input From Other Sources Applicant •The deck was reconstructed with a smaller footprint toaccommodate a swing set. The deck was also reconstructed to be one level versus two. The height reliefis due to the grade of the lot and the height of the patiodoors. The size of the deck is needed to accommodatefamily seating and a barbeque. Engineering Services •Ensure the projection of the deck in the rear yard does notadversely affect the drainage patterns within the lot andsurrounding area. Building Services •The deck was constructed without the benefit of a building permit. The permit application is on hold until theCommittee makes a decision. Public Input •No written submissions have been received from thepublic as of the date of writing this report. Date of report: July 3, 2024 Comments prepared by: Original Signed By Original Signed By Isabel Lima Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner Manager, Zoning & Administration IL:nr /CityDevDept/D3700/2024/MV 33-24/7. Report/MV 33-24 Report.docx Attachments -41- West Lane Va l l e y R i d g e C r e s c e n t Sa n d c h e r r y C o u r t Th i c k e t C r e s c e n t Copley Street Secord Street White Pine Crescent ThicketOpen Space Valley RidgeOpen Space Location Map File: Applicant: Municipal Address: MV 33/24 Date: May. 15, 2024 Exhibit 1 ¯ E N. Turney 107 Secord Street City ofToronto SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\MV\2024\MV 33-24\MV33-24_LocationMap.mxd 1:2,500 SCALE:THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © King's Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © His Majesty the King in Right of Canada, Department ofNatural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights reserved.; © Municipal PropertyAssessment Corporation and its suppliers. All rights reserved. City DevelopmentDepartment -42- Exhibit 2 Submitted Site Plan File No: MV 33/24 Applicant: N. Turney Municipal Address: 107 Secord Street FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. Date: June 19, 2024   to permit an uncovered platform and associated steps (rear yard deck) not exceeding 1.6 metres in height above grade and not projecting more than 2.0 metres into the required rear yard  -43- Exhibit 3 Submitted Rear Elevation File No: MV 33/24 Applicant: N. Turney Municipal Address: 107 Secord Street FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. Date: June 19, 2024   to permit an uncovered platform and associated steps (rear yard deck) not exceeding 1.6 metres in height above grade and not projecting more than 2.0 metres into the required rear yard  -44- Ex h i b i t 4 Ai r P h o t o Fi l e N o : M V 3 3 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : N . T u r n e y Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 1 0 7 S e c o r d S t r e e t FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : J u l y 3 , 2 0 2 4 Su b j e c t P r o p e r t y -45- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Numbers: MV 39/24 Date: July 10, 2024 From: Deborah Wylie Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Minor Variance Application MV 39/24 A. Naz 1910 Glendale Drive Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-laws 7874/21 and 7902/22 to permit: • a maximum dwelling depth of 21.5 metres, whereas the By-law requires a maximum dwelling depth of 20 metres; and • a maximum lot coverage of 31.5 percent, whereas the By-law permits a lot coverage of 25 percent. The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application to obtain a building permit to develop a new detached dwelling and remove all existing structures. Recommendation For your information, and based solely on the application and supporting documentation filed by the applicant, the City Development Department has reviewed the application with respect to Section 45(1) of the Planning Act and considers the requested variances to be minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, and therefore recommends Approval of the proposed variances. 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 Exhibits 2, 3, 4, 5, & 6). Comments Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated “Urban Residential Area – Low Density Areas” under the Pickering Official Plan, which permits residential uses at a density of up to 30 units per net hectare. -46- Report MV 39/24 July 10, 2024 Page 2 The subject property is located within the Liverpool Established Neighbourhood Precinct and is subject to the Urban Design Guidelines for Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhood Precincts. The Urban Design Guidelines are intended to assist in reinforcing the sense of character of the proposed Established Neighbourhood Precinct by addressing compatibility of new homes with adjacent, existing houses, as well as the streetscape. Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The By-law permits a dwelling depth of 20 metres and a maximum lot coverage of no more than 25 percent. The intent of the provisions is to establish standards regarding dwelling size, massing, and building layout to ensure that new developments are appropriate for the Liverpool Neighbourhood, and to ensure that the site has adequate space for private amenity area, soft landscaping, and drainage. The applicant is proposing a dwelling that is approximately 21.3 metres in depth, measured from the rear wall of the dwelling to the edge of the front porch. The dwelling depth is not uniform but is staggered and ranges from 21.3 metres to 20 metres. The majority of the dwelling (75 percent) is approximately 20.3 metres in depth, or 0.3 metres more than what is permitted by the By-law. In the Liverpool Neighbourhood there is a mix of older dwellings, ranging between one and two storeys, and newer dwellings that are larger in size and reflect the built form of contemporary homes. Staff recognize that the adjacent properties to the north and south contain older dwellings that are substantially less deep than what is permitted by the Zoning By-law. The variance to permit a 0.3 metre increase to the depth of portions of the proposed dwelling, and a 1 metre extension for the front porch is considered minor. Should the north and south properties be redeveloped, the Zoning By-law would permit dwelling depths of 20 metres, aligning the front walls and rear walls of the new structures with the proposed dwelling on the subject property. It is the opinion of staff that the proposed variance to the dwelling depth generally meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The applicant is proposing a lot coverage of 28.2 percent for the building and 3.2 percent for the rear veranda and steps, for a total of approximately 31.5 percent. The increased lot coverage does not prevent the site from maintaining appropriate yard setbacks that can accommodate soft landscaping, drainage, and private amenity space. The applicant is not seeking variances to any of the required yard setbacks. The dwelling is also proposed to be below the maximum permitted height. When considering the proposed massing of the principal structure only (i.e., not rear veranda and steps), the overall massing achieved on the site as seen from Glendale Drive is in keeping with the intent of the By-law. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variances 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 variances will facilitate the development of the subject property with a dwelling that accommodates a more flexible family size, provides sufficient outdoor amenity spaces, and provides screening with mature vegetation for enhanced privacy. The proposed setbacks accommodate appropriate soft landscape coverage, further enhanced with other drainage -47- Report MV 39/24 July 10, 2024 Page 3 treatments, including soakaway pits and walkways and a driveway made with permeable paving. The proposed dwelling is of a size and scale that is similar to what is permitted in the By-law and reflects other new developed dwellings in 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 •No comments on the application. Building Services •No concerns from Building Services. •A Building Permit is required priorconstruction. Engineering Services •Ensure the increased lot coverage area(if approved with this application) does notadversely affect the drainage patterns withinthe lots and surrounding area. •Multiple Low Impact Development measures (such as infiltration galleries with downspoutconnections, rain gardens and 450mmamended soil) will be required at theBuilding Permit stage. Public Input •As of the date of writing this report, nowritten submission was received from thepublic. Date of report: July 4, 2024 Comments prepared by: Original Signed By Original Signed By Liam Crawford Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Planner II Manager, Zoning & Administration LC:nr /CityDevDept/D3700/2024/MV 39-24/7. Report/MV 39-24 Report.doc Attachments -48- Ma l d e n C r e s c e n t Anton Square Glenanna Road B o w l e r Drive Li v e r p o o l R o a d Br o n t e S q u a r e Gl e n d a l e D r i v e Mulmur Court He n s a l l C o u r t BicroftCourt Fa y l e e C r e s c e n t Canborough Crescent MulmerTot Lot Glendale Park DavidFarr Park SouthPine CreekRavine Location Map File: Applicant: Municipal Address: MV 39/24 Date: Jun. 10, 2024 Exhibit 1 ¯ E A. Naz 1910 Glendale Drive SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\MV\2024\MV 39-24\MV39-24_LocationMap.mxd 1:3,000 SCALE:THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © King's Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © His Majesty the King in Right of Canada, Department ofNatural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights reserved.; © Municipal PropertyAssessment Corporation and its suppliers. All rights reserved. City DevelopmentDepartment -49- Ex h i b i t 2 Su b m i t t e d P l a n Fi l e N o : MV 3 9 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : A. N a z Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 19 1 0 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 : Ju n e 2 4 , 2 0 24 to p e r m i t a ma x i m u m l o t co v e r a g e o f 3 1 . 5 p e r c e n t to p e r m i t a ma x i m u m d w e l l i n g de p t h of 21. 5 me t r e s 21. 5 m e t r e s -50- Ex h i b i t 3 Su b m i t t e d Si d e E l e v a t i o n ( N o r t h S i d e ) Fi l e N o : MV 3 9 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : A. N a z Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 19 1 0 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 : Ju n e 2 4 , 2 0 24 to p e r m i t a ma x i m u m d w e l l i n g de p t h of 21. 5 me t r e s -51- Ex h i b i t 4 Su b m i t t e d F r o n t E l e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : M V 3 9 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : A . N a z Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 1 9 1 0 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 : J u n e 24 , 2 0 24 -52- Ex h i b i t 5 Su b m i t t e d Re a r El e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : MV 3 9 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : A. N a z Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 19 1 0 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 : Ju n e 2 4 , 2 0 24 -53- Ex h i b i t 6 Su b m i t t e d Si d e El e v a t i o n (S o u t h S i d e ) Fi l e N o : MV 3 9 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : A. N a z Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 19 1 0 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 : Ju n e 2 4 , 2 0 24 to p e r m i t a ma x i m u m d w e l l i n g de p t h of 2 1 . 5 me t r e s -54- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: MV 40/24 Date: July 10, 2024 From: Deborah Wylie Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Minor Variance Application MV 40/24 RIOCAN Holdings (GTA Marketplace) Inc. 1900 Dixie Road Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-laws 1494/82 and 6104/03 to permit an outdoor garden centre having a maximum area of 517 square metres in association with a food store, while providing a minimum of 277 parking spaces, from April 1st to June 30th of every calendar year, whereas the By-law states that an outdoor garden centre having a maximum area of 362 square metres in association with a food store is permitted from April 1st to June 30th of every calendar year, while providing a minimum 297 parking spaces on the subject property. The applicant requests approval of this variance to permit the expansion of a temporary outdoor garden centre in association with the existing grocery store. Recommendation For your information, and based solely on the application and supporting documentation filed by the applicant, the City Development Department has reviewed the application with respect to Section 45(1) of the Planning Act and considers the requested variance to be minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, and therefore recommends Approval of the proposed variance. 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 the proposed outdoor garden centre, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibit 2). 2. That the applicant obtains site plan approval to the satisfaction of City Development, prior to the issuance of any building permits associated with the outdoor garden centre. Background Based on the approved site plan of the subject property, a temporary outdoor garden centre was identified to be located adjacent to the existing grocery store (refer to Exhibit 2). Over the years, several minor variance decisions were approved by the City of Pickering Committee of Adjustment to permit the outdoor garden centre to be erected on a yearly basis. In 2003, -55- Report MV 40/24 July 10, 2024 Page 2 Zoning By-law 6104/03 was approved to permit a temporary outdoor garden centre on the subject property annually from April 1st to June 30th, with a maximum area of 362 square metres, while providing a minimum of 297 spaces. In 2007, the City of Pickering Committee of Adjustment approved Minor Variance decision P/CA 17/07 to permit the expansion of the outdoor garden centre to a maximum area of 482 square metres, while providing 286 parking spaces. The new owner of the grocery store is proposing to relocate the outdoor garden centre, which results in a larger area and a further reduction in parking. As such, this application is to seek relief from the Zoning By-law to permit the expansion of the outdoor garden centre in a new location within the subject property. Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designed “Mixed Use Area – Local Node” within the Liverpool Neighbourhood. Commercial and retail uses are permitted within this designation. Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The subject property is zoned “LCA-2” and “G” under Parent Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-laws 1492/82 and 6104/03. The existing grocery store and the proposed garden centre location is within the “LCA-2” zone, which permits a range of commercial and retail uses. The applicant is requesting to increase the maximum area of the outdoor garden centre to 517 square metres, while providing a minimum of 277 parking spaces, whereas the By-law permits the outdoor garden centre to have a maximum area of 362 square metres, while providing a minimum of 297 parking spaces. The intent of requiring a maximum size for the outdoor garden centre is to ensure that the area would not be negatively impacted by the operations of the seasonal outdoor garden centre. The applicant is proposing to relocate the outdoor garden centre on the northeast corner of the subject property. This location remains to be a small portion of the overall parking lot, and the parking spaces consumed during its temporary operating period do not appear to diminish the overall site function. Staff is of the opinion that adequate parking will continue to be maintained, and that the variance is in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. Desirable for the Appriopriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The requested variance will allow the relocation of the outdoor garden centre and will allow all related products to be located within one central area during its operations. The previously approved minor variance decision allowed a maximum area of 482 square metres, while providing 286 parking spaces during the operations of the garden centre. The requested variance represents a minor increase in area and a minor reduction in parking based on the previously approved size of the outdoor garden centre. -56- Report MV 40/24 July 10, 2024 Page 3 The relocation of the outdoor garden centre will require a Site Plan application for a minor revision to the approved Site Plan. The proposed location of the garden centre will be further examined through that process. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance is desirable for the appropriate development of the site and is minor in nature. Input From Other Sources Applicant •Previous set up had limited space whichresulted loss of inventory. Larger space willallow all products to be locked in one area. Site Planning •A minor revision to approved Site Plan willbe required. Engineering Services •No comment. Building Services •No concerns from Building Services, permitapplication is on hold until Committee’sdecision. Toronto Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) •The proposed works are located outside the regulated portion of the site. As such, TRCAhas no comments or objections regardingthis proposal, and a TRCA permit is notrequired. Public Input •As of the date of writing this report, nowritten submission has been received fromthe public. Date of report: July 3, 2024 Comments prepared by: Original Signed By Original Signed By Ziya Cao Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Planner I Manager, Zoning & Administration ZC:nr /CityDevDept/D3700/2024/MV 40-24/7. Report/MV40-24 Report.doc Attachments -57- Ly n n H e i g h t s D r i v e Dix i e R o a d GloucesterSquare Finch Avenue Ridgewood Court Du n c a n n o n D r i v e Kitley Avenue Mo n t e a g l e L a n e Pinecreek C o u r t Bo w l e r D r i v e Glen a n n a R o a d Redbir dCrescent Ly d i a C r e s c e n t Si l v e r t h o r n S q u a r e M o untcastle Cres c e nt Cedarcrof t CrescentBe n t o n C r e s c e n t LynnHeightsPark ForestbrookPark Kitley Ravine DavidFarr ParkWilliam DunbarPublic School Location Map File: Applicant: Municipal Address: MV 40/24 Date: Jun. 19, 2024 Exhibit 1 ¯ E RIOCAN Holdings (GTA Marketplace) Inc. 1900 Dixie Road SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\MV\2024\MV 40-24\MV40-24_LocationMap.mxd 1:4,000 SCALE:THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © King's Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © His Majesty the King in Right of Canada, Department ofNatural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights reserved.; © Municipal PropertyAssessment Corporation and its suppliers. All rights reserved. City DevelopmentDepartment -58- Ex h i b i t 2 Su b m i t t e d S i t e P l a n Fi l e N o : M V 4 0 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : R I O C A N H o l d i n g s ( G T A M a r k e t p l a c e ) I n c . Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 1 9 0 0 D i x i e R o a d FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : J u l y 2 , 2 0 2 4 to p e r m i t a n o u t d o o r g a r d e n c e n t r e ha v i n g a m a x i m u m a r e a o f 5 1 7 s q u a r e me t r e s i n a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h a f o o d st o r e , w h i l e p r o v i d i n g a m i n i m u m o f 27 7 p a r k i n g s p a c e s , f r o m A p r i l 1 st t o Ju n e 30 th o f e v e r y c a l e n d a r y e a r Or i g i n a l l y a p p r o v e d ou t d o o r g a r d e n ce n t r e l o c a t i o n -59- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: MV 43/24 Date: July 10, 2024 From: Deborah Wylie Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Minor Variance Application MV 43/24 S. Martin 1506 Major Oaks Road Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 2015/85 to permit: • uncovered steps or platforms (deck) not exceeding 2.8 metres in height above grade and not projecting more than 3.95 metres in the required rear yard and not more than 0.5 metres in any required side yard, whereas the By-law permits uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.5 metres into any required front or rear yard and not more than 0.5 metres in any required side yard; and • a maximum lot coverage of 40.7 percent, whereas the By-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 40 percent. The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application to obtain a building permit for a new deck and remove the existing deck. Recommendation For your information, and based solely on the application and supporting documentation filed by the applicant, the City Development Department has reviewed the application with respect to Section 45(1) of the Planning Act and considers the requested variances to be minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, and therefore recommends Approval of the proposed variances. 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 Exhibits 2, 3, 4, & 5). -60- Report MV 43/24 July 10, 2024 Page 2 Comments Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated “Urban Residential Areas – Low Density Area” within the Brock Ridge Neighbourhood. Residential uses such as detached dwellings and associated accessory structures are permitted within this designation. Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The By-law permits uncovered platforms and steps that are of a height of no more than 1.0 metre and project no more than 1.5 metres into the required rear yard and a maximum lot coverage of no more than 40 percent. The intent of the projection provisions is to ensure that the site has adequate space in the rear yard for private amenity area, soft landscaping, and drainage, and the intent of limiting the height of the platform (deck) is to protect the privacy of abutting properties. The applicant is requesting a variance to permit a deck (with no stairs) that does not exceed 2.8 metres in height above grade and projects no more than 3.95 metres into the required rear yard, and a variance to permit a maximum lot coverage of no more than 40.7 percent. The increased lot coverage is due to the proposed deck. No alterations are proposed to the existing detached dwelling. There is a change in grade between the front and rear of the property. The deck is required to be at a height of 2.8 metres to provide access between the first floor of the dwelling and the rear deck. The proposed deck will project no more than 3.95 metres into the rear yard. The deck maintains a setback of 3.89 metres from the rear lot line, 3.37 metres from the south lot line, and 3.65 metres from the north lot line. The setbacks from the rear and side lot lines, and mature trees along the east property line, ensure that negative privacy impacts on adjacent properties are minimized. Based on the By-law, lot coverage of the existing dwelling is 36.6 percent and the new deck is 4.1 percent for a total of approximately 40.7 percent. The layout of the rear yard, as shown in the applicant’s submitted drawings, demonstrates that the height of the deck provides usable outdoor amenity space below. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variances are in keeping with 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 are intended to permit the proposed deck, which allows a deck that is directly accessible from the dwelling, is consistent with the layout and design of the neighbouring properties, permits additional outdoor amenity area on the deck, and allows amenity area below the deck. The proposed setbacks to the deck and mature vegetation along the rear property line provides privacy to the surrounding neighbours. As outlined previously, no changes to the existing dwelling are proposed. The lot coverage is being increased in a -61- Report MV 43/24 July 10, 2024 Page 3 minor way, and functionally the deck is not reducing rear yard area or opportunities to provide landscaping and on-site water drainage. Staff is satisfied that the requested variances are desirable for the appropriate development of land and are minor in nature. Input From Other Sources Date of report: July 3, 2024 Comments prepared by: Original Signed By Original Signed By Liam Crawford Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Planner II Manager, Zoning & Administration LC:nr /CityDevDept/D3700/2024/MV 43-24/7. Report/MV 43-24 Report.docx Attachments Applicant •No comments. Engineering Services •Ensure the projection of the deck in the rear yard andincreased lot coverage area (if approved with this application) does not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lot and surrounding area. Building Services •No concerns from Building Services, Building Permitis required prior construction and is on hold until the Committee’s decision is made. Public Input •No written submissions were received from the publicas of the date of writing this report. -62- B ent l e y Lane MajorOaksRoad B e a r e C o u r t Un d e r h i l l C o u r t BlueRidgeCrescent Harrowsmith Court P e a c h w o o d L a n e Somergrove Crescent M i d dle t o n Street Dell b r o o k A v e n u e ValleyFarmRoad Valley FarmRavine Location Map File: Applicant: Municipal Address: MV 43/24 Date: Jun. 13, 2024 Exhibit 1 ¯ E S. Martin 1506 Major Oaks Road HydroLands SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\MV\2024\MV 43-24\MV43-24_LocationMap.mxd 1:2,500 SCALE:THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © King's Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © His Majesty the King in Right of Canada, Department ofNatural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights reserved.; © Municipal PropertyAssessment Corporation and its suppliers. All rights reserved. City DevelopmentDepartment HydroLands -63- Ex h i b i t 2 Su b m i t t e d S i t e P l a n Fi l e N o : MV 4 3 /2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : S . M a r t i n Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 15 06 M a j o r O a k s R o a d FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : J u n e 24 , 2 0 2 4 MA J O R O A K S R O A D Ex i s t i n g Ho u s e Pr o p o s e d De c k to p e r m i t u n c o v e r e d s t e p s o r pl a t f o r m s ( d e c k ) n o t e x c e e d i n g 2. 8 m e t r e s i n h e i g h t a b o v e gr a d e a n d n o t p r o j e c t i n g m o r e th a n 3 . 9 5 m e t r e s i n t o t h e re q u i r e d r e a r y a r d a n d n o t mo r e t h a n 0 . 5 m e t r e s i n a n y re q u i r e d s i d e y a r d to p e r m i t a m a x i m u m l o t co v e r a g e o f 4 0 . 7 p e r c e n t -64- Ex h i b i t 3 Su b m i t t e d Fi r s t Fl o o r Pl a n Fi l e N o : MV 4 3 /2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : S. M a r t i n Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 15 06 M a j o r O a k s R o a d FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ju n e 24 , 2 0 2 4 to p e r m i t u n c o v e r e d s t e p s or p l a t f o r m s (d e c k ) no t ex c e e d i n g 2 . 8 me t r e s i n he i g h t a b o v e g r a d e a n d no t p r o j e c t i n g m o r e t h a n 3. 9 5 m e t r e s i n t o t h e re q u i r e d r e a r y a r d a n d n o t mo r e t h a n 0 . 5 me t r e s i n an y r e q u i r e d s i d e y a r d 3.95 metres to p e r m i t a m a x i m u m l o t co v e r a g e o f 4 0 . 7 p e r c e n t -65- Ex h i b i t 4 Su b m i t t e d Re a r E l e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : MV 4 3 /2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : S. M a r t i n Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 15 06 M a j o r O a k s R o a d FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ju n e 1 9 , 2 0 2 4 to p e r m i t u n c o v e r e d s t e p s or p l a t f o r m s ( d e c k ) no t ex c e e d i n g 2 . 8 me t r e s i n he i g h t a b o v e g r a d e a n d no t p r o j e c t i n g m o r e t h a n 3. 9 5 m e t r e s i n t o th e re q u i r e d r e a r y a r d a n d no t m o r e t h a n 0 . 5 m e t r e s in a n y r e q u i r e d s i d e y a r d 2.8 metres -66- Ex h i b i t 5 Ae r i a l P h o t o Fi l e N o : MV 4 3 /2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : S. M a r t i n Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 15 06 M a j o r O a k s R o a d FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T DE P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ju l y 3 , 2 0 2 4 Su b j e c t Pr o p e r t y -67- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Numbers: LD 13/24, MV 41/24 & MV 42/24 Date: July 10, 2024 From: Deborah Wylie Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Committee of Adjustment Applications LD 13/24, MV 41/24 and MV 42/24 100017575 Ontario Inc. 1780 Appleview Road Applications Land Division Application LD 13/24 is proposing to sever a 935.4 square metre parcel of land (Part 2), retaining a 910.3 square metre parcel of land (Part 1). The existing dwelling is proposed to be demolished. Requested Variances MV 41/24 – (Retained Parcel – Part 1) The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-laws 6113/03, 7874/21 and 7902/22, as it relates to the retained lot, to permit: • a minimum lot frontage of 14.7 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum lot frontage of 18.0 metres; • a covered porch and associated steps, not exceeding the height of 1.0 metre, to project a maximum of 2.4 metres into the required front yard, whereas the By-law permits uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.5 metres into any required front or rear yard; • a maximum front yard setback of 13.2 metres, whereas the By-law requires a maximum front yard setback of 12.27 metres; and • to permit a maximum dwelling height of 9.4 metres, whereas the By-law permits maximum dwelling height of 9.0 metres. MV 42/24 – (Severed Parcel – Part 2) The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-laws 6113/03, 7874/21 and 7902/22, as it relates to the severed lot, to permit: • a minimum lot frontage of 14.6 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum lot frontage of 18.0 metres; -68- Report LD 13/24, MV 41/24 & MV 42/24 July 10, 2024 Page 2 • front steps, with a maximum height of 1.4 metres, to project no more than 1.5 metres into the required front yard, whereas the By-law permits uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.5 metres into any required front or rear yard; • a maximum front entrance elevation of 1.4 metres, whereas the By-law requires the maximum elevation of the front entrance to be 1.2 metres above the average grade; and • a maximum dwelling height of 10.5 metres, whereas the By-law permits a maximum dwelling height of 9.0 metres. Recommendation 1. Staff have reviewed Consent Application LD 13/24, with respect to Section 51(24) of the Planning Act criteria and recommend Approval, subject to the conditions outlined within Appendices I, II and III. 2. Staff have reviewed Minor Variance Application MV 41/24 with respect to Section 45(1) of the Planning Act and considers the requested variances to be minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, and therefore recommends Approval, subject to the following conditions: i. That these variances apply only to the retained lot (Part 1) and proposed development, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plan (refer to Exhibits 3, 4 & 5); and ii. That a TRCA permit be obtained from the Toronto Region Conservation Authority prior to the issuance of a building permit. 3. Staff have reviewed Minor Variance Application MV 42/24 with respect to Section 45(1) of the Planning Act and considers the requested variances to be minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, and therefore recommends Approval, subject to the following condition: i. That these variances apply only to the severed lot (Part 2) and proposed development, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 6, 7 & 8). -69- Report LD 13/24, MV 41/24 & MV 42/24 July 10, 2024 Page 3 Comments Consent Application – LD 13/24 Official Plan The subject property is designated “Urban Residential Area – Low Density Areas” under the Pickering Official Plan, which permits residential uses at a density of up to 30 units per net hectare. The subject property is located within the Dunbarton Established Neighbourhood Precinct and is subject to the Urban Design Guidelines for Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhood Precincts and the Dunbarton Neighbourhood Development and design Guidelines. The Urban Design Guidelines are intended to assist in reinforcing the sense of character of the proposed Established Neighbourhood Precinct by addressing compatibility of new homes with adjacent, existing houses, as well as the streetscape. Staff have reviewed and made comments on the proposed dwellings using the Council-adopted Urban Design Guidelines for Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhood Precincts Checklist, which can be found as Appendix A to this report. The Dunbarton Neighbourhood Development and Design Guidelines encourage newly created lots to have a minimum lot frontage of 15.0 metres. The proposed severance will facilitate a residential density of approximately 10.8 units per net hectare, which falls within the permitted density range of the “Low Density” designation. Zoning By-law The subject property is zoned “Detached Dwelling, Third Density Zone – R3” under Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-laws 6113/03, 7874/21 and 7902/22: Lots Zone Required Lot Area (m2) Proposed Lot Area (m2) Required Lot Frontage (m) Proposed Lot Frontage (m) Retained Parcel (Part 1) R3 550.0 910.3 18.0 14.7 Severed Parcel (Part 2) R3 550.0 935.4 18.0 14.6 The proposed severed and retained lots appears to comply with the minimum lot area requirements of the Zoning By-law, however, the lot frontages of the proposed lots do not comply with minimum lot frontage requirements. To facilitate the proposed severance, the applicant requests approval of Minor Variance Applications MV 41/24 and MV 42/24 for the proposed lots. -70- Report LD 13/24, MV 41/24 & MV 42/24 July 10, 2024 Page 4 Minor Variance Applications – MV 41/24 and MV 42/24 Minimum Lot Frontage (MV 41/24 and MV 42/24) The applicant requests a minimum lot frontage of 14.7 metres for the retained lot (Part 1) and a minimum lot frontage of 14.6 metres for the severed lot (Part 2), whereas the By-law requires a minimum frontage of 18.0 metres. The intent of requiring a minimum lot frontage of 18.0 metres is to ensure a usable lot size that is compatible with the neighbourhood. While most of the lots along Appleview Road are zoned R3, several lots along the street have a minimum lot frontage of 15.0 metres approved through previous minor variance decisions. As a result, the lot frontages along Appleview Road range between 15.0 metres to 30.0 metres. The proposed lot frontages of the newly created lots are roughly 14.6 metres at a minimum. However, the applicant has demonstrated that dwellings with similar building footprints and setbacks as the adjacent property can be sited on the new lots. Staff is of the opinion that the reduced lot frontages would not alter the character of the neighbourhood and are in keeping with the general intent of the Zoning By-law. Obstruction of Yards (MV 41/24 and MV 42/24) The Zoning By-law permits uncovered steps and platforms, not exceeding a height of 1.0 metre, to project a maximum of 1.5 metres to the required front yard. A variance to permit a covered porch and associated steps, not exceeding the height of 1.0 metre, to project a maximum of 2.4 metres into the required front yard is requested for retained lot (Part 1). A variance to permit front steps with a maximum height of 1.4 metres, to project no more than 1.5 metres into the required front yard is requested for the severed lot (Part 2). The intent of this provision is to ensure adequate space is provided as buffer between the structures and street activity and to provide for front yard landscaping. As the Zoning By-law only permits uncovered platform and steps to project into the required yards, a variance to permit the covered porch is required for the retained lot. The additional projection of the step is also required to accommodate the front grading of the lot, where the grade at the front lot line is lower than the grades of the proposed dwelling. The proposed porch and steps will maintain a minimum setback of 8.7 metres and 7.8 metres from the front lot line, respectively. As for the severed lot, additional height to the porch is required to accommodate the proposed Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) on the ground floor. The front steps will maintain a minimum setback of 9.4 metres. Staff is satisfied that sufficient space can be provided for soft landscaping within the front yard, and appropriate separation will be maintained between the dwelling and the adjacent street. -71- Report LD 13/24, MV 41/24 & MV 42/24 July 10, 2024 Page 5 Maximum Dwelling Height (MV 41/24 and MV 42/24) The applicant requests a maximum dwelling height of 9.4 metres on the retained lot and a maximum dwelling height of 10.5 metres on the severed lot, whereas the By-law permits a maximum dwelling height of 9.0 metres. The intent of this provision is to regulate the scale of the proposed buildings and to reduce potential shadowing and overlooking impacts to the adjacent dwellings. The applicant has indicated that the requested variances are due to the front draining nature of the lot. As dwelling height is measured utilizing the average grade at the front of the dwellings, the dwelling height will appear taller from the street. Additionally, additional height on the severed lot is required to accommodate a ground floor ADU that is accessible for aging family members or person with accessibility concerns. The existing dwellings along Appleview Road are mainly one to two storeys. The maximum dwelling height along this street is at 10.3 metres on 1772 Appleview Road, which is two lots south of the subject property. The applicant has placed the taller dwelling on the severed lot, which is on the south side, and the lower dwelling on the retained lot, which is on the north side. The placement of the proposed dwelling creates transition of heights between the existing dwellings to the south and the adjacent dwelling to the north. The applicant has also maintained a minimum side yard setback of 1.8 metres on both lots to mitigate shadowing and overlooking impacts to the adjacent dwellings. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance will maintain the general purpose and intent of the By-law. Maximum Front Yard Setback (MV 41/24 – Part 1) 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. 20 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 maximum front yard setback of 13.2 metres, whereas the By-law permits a maximum front yard setback of 12.27 metres. As previously mentioned, the front lot line is irregular and diagonal, which results in the recessed garage exceeding the maximum permitted front yard setback. Note that the proposed dwelling is brought forward to meet the minimum front yard setback. 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 maintains the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. Maximum Front Entrance Elevation (MV 42/24 – Part 2) The applicant requests a maximum front entrance elevation of 1.4 metres, whereas the By-law permits a maximum front entrance elevation of 1.2 metres. The intent of this provision is to ensure that the stairs accessing the main entrance to the dwelling are designed as an integral component of the dwelling’s façade. -72- Report LD 13/24, MV 41/24 & MV 42/24 July 10, 2024 Page 6 The applicant is requesting this variance to accommodate the height of the ground floor ADU, and to accommodate the lower grades at the front of the lot. Although there are extra steps due to the grading changes at the front of the dwelling, the steps are integrated with the front entrance and do not dominate the front façade of the dwelling. Staff is satisfied that the requested variance maintains the general intent and purpose of the By-law. Desirable for the Appropriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The requested variances will facilitate two new lots with a new dwelling on the respective lots. While the proposed retained and severed lots will have smaller lot frontages than the minimum existing lot frontage of 15.0 metres, the reduction of 0.4 of a metre is minor when viewed from the street and will remain consistent with the existing lotting pattern along Appleview Road. The siting of the proposed dwellings has been designed to maintain a consistent alignment with the adjacent properties with similar setbacks. The proposed dwellings also provide a transition in height from the taller existing dwellings south of the subject property to the lower dwellings on the north adjacent lot. Furthermore, the taller dwelling proposed on the severed lot is also designed to mimic a two-storey dwelling from the front to be consistent with the existing character of the 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 • The applicant has submitted a rationale. Please contact the City Development Department to receive a copy of this information at citydev@pickering.ca. Building Services • No concerns from Building Services. Building Permit is required prior construction. Fire Services • No comments on the land division application. Engineering Services (LD 13/24) • Refer to the Engineering Services memo dated July 3, 2024, attached hereto as Appendix II, for conditions of approval for LD 13/24. -73- Report LD 13/24, MV 41/24 & MV 42/24 July 10, 2024 Page 7 Engineering Services (MV 41/24) • Ensure the reduced minimum lot frontage and increased front yard setback (if approved with this application) does not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lots and surrounding area. • Multiple Low Impact Development measures (such as infiltration galleries with downspout connections, rain gardens and 450mm amended soil) will be required at the Land Division Application stage. Engineering Services (MV 42/24) • Ensure the reduced minimum lot frontage (if approved with this application) does not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lots and surrounding area. • Ensure the individual step heights are between 0.15m to 0.20m in height matching to the finished floor elevation with respect to the minor variance of the front steps. • Multiple Low Impact Development measures (such as infiltration galleries with downspout connections, rain gardens and 450mm amended soil) will be required at the Land Division Application stage. Region of Durham Planning and Works Departments • Refer to the letters dated July 4, 2024, attached hereto as Appendix III, for the conditions of approvals for LD 13/24. Toronto Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) (LD 13/24) • Based on the comments provided, TRCA staff have no objection to the approval of Consent Application LD 13/24 subject to the payment of all outstanding TRCA fees. Toronto Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) (MV 41/24) • Based on the comments provided, TRCA staff have no objection to the approval of Minor Variance Application No. MV 41/24 subject to the conditions identified in Appendix A. • Appendix A Condition: A TRCA permit pursuant to the CA Act is issued prior to any development taking place. Resident of 1814 Appleview Road • Objection to the reduced lot frontages below 15.0 metres. -74- Report LD 13/24, MV 41/24 & MV 42/24 July 10, 2024 Page 8 Date of report: July 4, 2024 Comments prepared by: Original Signed By Original Signed By Ziya Cao Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Planner I Manager, Zoning & Administration ZC:nr /CityDevDept/D3500/2024/LD 13-24, MV 41-24 & MV 42-24/8. Report/LD 013-24, MV 41-24 & MV 42-24 Report.doc Attachments -75- 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 roofpitch similar/compatible with the surrounding dwellings? (see Section 2.1: Guideline 1) Two-storey dwelling with a slope roof design. x 2.If the proposed new dwelling issignificantly taller than an existingadjacent house, does the roof of the proposed new dwelling slope away from the existing adjacent house? (see Section 2.1: Guideline 2) x 3.Is the maximum elevation of the FrontEntrance 1.2 metres, or less, above grade? (see Section 2.2: Guideline 1) x 4.Is the main entrance visible from thestreet?(see Section 2.2: Guideline 2) x 5.Are the stairs to the main entrance designed as an integral component of thefront façade?(Section 2.2: Guideline 7) x 6.Does the design of the front entrance reduce the visual dominance of thegarage and driveway?(see Section 2.2: Guideline 9) x 7.Does the proposed dwelling have asimilar Dwelling Depth to the adjacent dwellings along the street? (see Section 2.3: Guideline 2) MV 41/24 – Part 1 -76- Appendix A Urban Design Checklist Cont’d Urban City of Pickering Established A 2 Yes No Comments x 8. Does the proposed dwelling have a similar Side Yard Setback to the adjacent dwellings along the street? (see Figure 15) x 9. Has shadow on adjacent dwellings been mitigated with greater Side Yard Setbacks? (Section 3.1: Guideline 2) 1.8 metres side yard setback maintained. x 10. Is the garage flush or recessed from the main front wall? (see Section 3.2: Guideline 5) Recessed garage. x 11. Is the proposed driveway width the same as the permitted garage width? (see Section 3.3: Guideline 1) 12. Does the plan preserve existing trees? (see Section 4.1: Guideline 1) Unclear at this time. -77- 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) Three-storey dwelling with a slope roof design. The front of the dwelling is designed to appear as a two-storey dwelling from the street. x 2. If the proposed new dwelling is significantly taller than an existing adjacent house, does the roof of the proposed new dwelling slope away from the existing adjacent house? (see Section 2.1: Guideline 2) x 3. Is the maximum elevation of the Front Entrance 1.2 metres, or less, above grade? (see Section 2.2: Guideline 1) Additional height required to accommodate ADU on the ground floor. x 4. Is the main entrance visible from the street? (see Section 2.2: Guideline 2) x 5. Are the stairs to the main entrance designed as an integral component of the front façade? (Section 2.2: Guideline 7) x 6. Does the design of the front entrance reduce the visual dominance of the garage and driveway? (see Section 2.2: Guideline 9) x 7. Does the proposed dwelling have a similar Dwelling Depth to the adjacent dwellings along the street? (see Section 2.3: Guideline 2) MV 42/24 – Part 2 -78- Appendix A Urban Design Checklist Cont’d Urban City of Pickering Established A 2 Yes No Comments x 8. Does the proposed dwelling have a similar Side Yard Setback to the adjacent dwellings along the street? (see Figure 15) x 9. Has shadow on adjacent dwellings been mitigated with greater Side Yard Setbacks? (Section 3.1: Guideline 2) 1.8 metres side yard setback maintained. x 10. Is the garage flush or recessed from the main front wall? (see Section 3.2: Guideline 5) Recessed garage. x 11. Is the proposed driveway width the same as the permitted garage width? (see Section 3.3: Guideline 1) 12. Does the plan preserve existing trees? (see Section 4.1: Guideline 1) Unclear at this time. -79- Fa i r p o r t R o a d RambleberryAvenue Goldenridge Road Spartan Court Dunbarton Road Sh a d e M a s t e r D r i v e Welrus Street Wingarden Crescent Sheppard Avenue Rushton Road Ke l v i n w a y L a n e HeathsideCrescent K i n g s to n R o a d Me r r i t t o n R o a d AppleviewRoad DalewoodRavine DalewoodRavine Location Map File: Applicant: Municipal Address: LD 13/24, MV 41/24 & MV 42/24 Date: Jun. 13, 2024 ¯ E 1000117575 Ontario Inc. 1780 Appleview Road SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\LD\2024\LD 13-24, MV 41-24 & MV 42-24 1000117575 Ontario Inc\LD 00000-2023_LocationMap.mxd 1:4,000 SCALE:THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © King's Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © His Majesty the King in Right of Canada, Department ofNatural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights reserved.; © Municipal PropertyAssessment Corporation and its suppliers. All rights reserved. City DevelopmentDepartment -80- Ex h i b i t 2 Su b m i t t e d Dr a f t R -Pl a n Fi l e N o : LD 1 3 /2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : 10 0 0 1 7 5 7 5 O n t a r i o I n c . Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 17 8 0 A p p l e v i e w R o a d FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ju n e 2 0 , 2 0 2 4 Re t a i n e d Pa r c e l 91 0 . 3 m 2 Se v e r e d Pa r c e l 93 5 . 4 m 2 -81- Ex h i b i t 3 Su b m i t t e d Si t e P l a n Fi l e N o : MV 41 /2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : 10 0 0 1 7 5 7 5 O n t a r i o I n c . Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 17 8 0 Ap p l e v i e w R o a d FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ju n e 2 0 , 2 0 2 4 MV 42 / 2 4 – Pa r t 2 13 . 2 m to p e r m i t a m a x i m u m dw e l l i n g h e i g h t o f 9 . 4 m e t r e s to p e r m i t a c o v e r e d p o r c h a n d as s o c i a t e d s t e p s, n o t ex c e e d i n g th e h e i g h t o f 1 .0 me t r e , t o p r o j e c t a m a x i m u m o f 2 . 4 m e t r e s i n t o t h e re q u i r e d f r o n t y a r d to p e r m i t a mi n i m u m l o t fr o n t a g e o f 14 . 7 m e t r e s to p e r m i t a ma x i m u m f r o n t y a r d se t b a c k o f 1 3 . 2 me t r e s -82- Ex h i b i t 4 Su b m i t t e d Ea s t El e v a t i o n (Fr o n t ) Fi l e N o : MV 41 /2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : 10 0 0 1 7 5 7 5 O n t a r i o I n c . Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 17 8 0 A p p l e v i e w R o a d FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ju n e 2 0 , 2 0 2 4 to p e r m i t a ma x i m u m dw e l l i n g he i g h t o f 9. 4 me t r e s -83- Ex h i b i t 5 Su b m i t t e d So u t h El e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : MV 41 /2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : 10 0 0 1 7 5 7 5 O n t a r i o I n c . Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 17 8 0 A p p l e v i e w R o a d FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T DE P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ju n e 2 0 , 2 0 2 4 -84- Ex h i b i t 6 Su b m i t t e d Si t e P l a n Fi l e N o : MV 42/2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : 10 0 0 1 7 5 7 5 O n t a r i o I n c . Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 17 8 0 Ap p l e v i e w R o a d FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ju n e 2 0 , 2 0 2 4 13 . 2 m to p e r m i t a m i n i m u m l o t fr o n t a g e o f 1 4 . 6 me t r e s MV 41/2 4 – Pa r t 1 to p e r m i t a m a x i m u m fr o n t e n t r a n c e el e v a t i o n o f 1 . 4 m e t r e s to p e r m i t a m a x i m u m d w e l l i n g he i g h t o f 10 . 5 me t r e s to p e r m i t f r o n t s t e p s , w i t h a ma x i m u m h e i g h t o f 1 . 4 m e t r e s , t o pr o j e c t n o m o r e t h a n 1 . 5 m e t r e s in t o t h e r e q u i r e d f r o n t y a r d -85- Ex h i b i t 7 Su b m i t t e d Ea s t E l e v a t i o n ( F r o n t ) Fi l e N o : MV 42/2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : 10 0 0 1 7 5 7 5 O n t a r i o I n c . Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 17 8 0 Ap p l e v i e w R o a d FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ju n e 2 0 , 2 0 2 4 to p e r m i t a ma x i m u m dw e l l i n g he i g h t o f 10 . 5 me t r e s to p e r m i t a ma x i m u m fr o n t en t r a n c e el e v a t i o n o f 1. 4 m e t r e s -86- Ex h i b i t 8 Su b m i t t e d So u t h E l e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : MV 42/2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : 10 0 0 1 7 5 7 5 O n t a r i o I n c . Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 17 8 0 A p p l e v i e w R o a d FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ju n e 2 0 , 2 0 2 4 -87- Appendix I July 10, 2024 Recommended Conditions of Approval for Consent LD 13/24 The City Development Department has reviewed the above application and provides the following conditions, to be fulfilled by the applicant/owner: 1.Submit one copy of a Draft Reference Plan to the satisfaction of theCity of Pickering, prior to depositing the plan with the Land Registry Office, that confirms the dimensions of the proposed retained and severed parcels, and that a survey be submitted showing the location of any buildings and structures locatedthereon. 2.Submit one copy of a Deposited Reference Plan, to the satisfaction of the City ofPickering, upon completion of Condition 1 above. 3.Ensure that any zoning non-compliances identified through Condition 1 above, resulting from the proposed severance, be brought into compliance. 4.Ensure that any existing structure(s) on severed parcel or that straddle both theretained and severed parcels are removed and that all inspections have beencompleted. 5.Provide a certified cheque, made payable to the City of Pickering for cash-in lieu of parkland for each newly created lots. The parkland fee shall be in accordance withthe City’s General Municipal Fees By-law in effect at the date of such payment (thecurrent amount is $7,635.00 per each newly created lot). 6.Coordinate with the City of Pickering, City Development Department to assign an appropriate municipal address for the retained and severed parcels. 7.Provide an acknowledgement that Section 50(3) or 50(5) of the Planning Act shallapply to any subsequent conveyance. Upon fulfillment of these conditions the applicant must submit a cheque payable to the City of Pickering in the amount of $1,110.00 for the stamping of the deed package, to be prepared and submitted by a lawyer. -88- Memo To: Ziya Cao July 3, 2024 Planner I From: Paal Helgesen Division Head, Water Resources & Development Services Copy: Manager, Zoning & Administration Supervisor, Development Approvals Subject: Land Division Application LD 13/2024 -1000117575 Ontario Inc. -S. Webster-1780 Appleview RoadFile: D-4400 Water Resources & Development Services has reviewed the above application and provide the following conditions: 1.We have reviewed the draft reference (40R) plan and provide the following comments: a.Revise the address to the correct municipal address 1780 Appleview Road. 2.The applicant will be required to provide an Engineering Review Fee of $1,700.00 for the two proposed lots, and a fee of $2,265.00 for the clearance of Water Resources &Development Services conditions. A cheque, payable to the City of Pickering, in theamount of $3,965.00 will be required. 3.As a condition of severance, the applicant must pay to the City $231.51 ($2,475.00/hectare) for their Stormwater Maintenance Fee. 4.A preliminary grading and drainage plan will be required as a condition of severance. Itmust contain sufficient information regarding existing and proposed grades such that it canbe adequately determined that development of this property will not adversely affectadjacent properties. The plan must illustrate Low Impact Development Stormwater Management Measures for the proposed lots, including, but not limited to, amended topsoil, permeable pavers on the driveway, infiltration galleries, and rain gardens. The plan shouldindicate existing vegetation/trees within and adjacent to the property that may be affected.The plan should indicate the proposed driveway locations and existing utilities within theboulevard. Relocation of utilities will be the applicant’s responsibility. Appendix II -89- July 3, 2024 Page 2 of 3 Land Division Application LD 078/2023 5. The City requires a stormwater management brief to be submitted for review. The brief shall address the following design criteria: • The 5-year post-development flow from the proposed development shall not exceed the 5-year pre-development flow. The runoff in excess of the pre-development flow must be retained on the site through implementation of Low Impact Development (LID) measures, such as soakaway pits/infiltration trenches. All LID measures must be designed in accordance with the Low Impact Development Stormwater Management Planning and Design Guide (CVC, TRCA, 2010). Sizing calculations and design information for all proposed LIDs must be provided in a Stormwater Management Design Brief signed and sealed by a Professional. Locations and details of the proposed measures must be shown on the Site Servicing/Grading Plan. • All proposed LID measures must be located solely on private property and must be owned and maintained by the property owner. All necessary information regarding the function and maintenance of the LID must be included in the purchase agreements. A Section 119 Restrictive Covenant is to be registered on title prohibiting the alteration or removal of the LID measures. • A minimum 450mm depth of amended soils should be specified for all grassed areas such as back yards, front yards, and side yards. Add appropriate notes on the Site Grading Plan. • Foundation/sump pump must discharge to the surface or to LIDs. • P-1020 is attached for your reference for a typical detail for a private soakaway pit. 6. A Tree Inventory and Protection/Removal Plan, prepared by a qualified Arborist is required. The plan must identify all trees on the subject property and within 3.0m of the lot limits that may be impacted by the proposed development. This information should address matters such as existing tree species, diameter, health, protection/removal strategies, and a proposed replanting plan. Compensation for loss of tree canopy will be required and is over and above any required boulevard tree as per the Boulevard Tree Planting Program. Ensure to include the City’s standard tree protection detail and notes on the tree protection plan (see attached). http://www.pickering.ca/en/city-hall/resources/tree-inventory-preservation-removal-compensation-requirements.pdf -90- July 3, 2024 Page 3 of 3 Land Division Application LD 078/2023 7. Planting of one boulevard tree is required for each new lot being created. Where the planting of a boulevard tree is not possible, cash-in-lieu is to be provided as per the current Development Services Fee Schedule. PH:tj Attachment 2024 Development Services User Fee Schedule P-1020 Typical Res. Roof Water Inf Trench P-1100 Tree Preservation Protection Fencing P-1101 Tree Protection Notes -91- -92- -93- -94- 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 Planning and Economic Development Department 605 Rossland Rd. E. Level 4 PO Box 623 Whitby, ON L1N 6A3 Canada 905-668-77111-800-372-1102Email: planning@durham.ca durham.ca Brian Bridgeman, MCIP, RPP, PLE Commissioner of Planning and Economic Development July 4, 2024 Secretary/Treasurer Committee of Adjustment City Development Department City of Pickering One The Esplanade Pickering ON, L1V 6K7 Re: Application for Consent LD 13/24 Regional File: LD 074/2024 Cross Ref.: MV 41-24 & MV 42-24 Applicant: Marshall Custom Homes Location: 1780 Appleview Road Municipality: City of Pickering Hearing Date: July 10, 2024 RECOMMENDATION: That application LD 13/24 be approved, subject to the following conditions: i). That the applicant demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Region of Durham, that all of the requirements listed in the attached letter from the Region of Durham Works Department, dated July 3, 2024, be satisfied; ii). That the applicant shall implement the recommendations of the Noise Impact Study, prepared by YCA Engineering Limited and dated June 3, 2024, by signing an Agreement with the City of Pickering to ensure that all Noise Warning Clauses are in place for the proposed dwellings. 1.PURPOSE The applicant is proposing to sever a 935.4 sq. m. residential parcel of land while retaining a 910.3 sq. m. residential parcel of land. The existing dwelling on the premises will be demolished and the applicant is proposing to construct two single detached dwellings on the proposed residential parcels. Appendix III -95- LD074/2024 -2- 2. PLANNING ANALYSIS Conformity to the Regional Official Plan (ROP) The subject property is designated “Living Areas” in the Durham Regional Official Plan (ROP). Living Areas shall be developed to include a mix of housing types to meet the diverse housing needs of the residents in Durham Region. The development proposal represents a residential infill development within an established neighbourhood in the City of Pickering. The proposed and retained lots appear to complement similar lot configurations within the neighbourhood. The application appears to conform to the ROP and to Envision Durham. However, in accordance with Policy 14.8.1 of the ROP, severances cannot be granted that are contrary to the ROP and/or any area municipal official plan. As such, full conformity to the ROP will be determined once a final decision has been issued by the area municipality confirming that the retained and severed parcels comply with the requirements of the area municipality’s zoning by-law. 3. PROVINCIAL PLANS AND POLICIES Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) and The Growth Plan The PPS supports the optimization of land and resources by promoting opportunities for intensification and redevelopment. The subject site is located within a settlement area, which promotes infill development and where existing infrastructure and public service facilities will be utilized. The Growth Plan also requires all intensification areas to support vibrant neighbourhoods by providing a diverse and compatible mix of land uses, including but not limited to residential and convenient access to local stores, services, and public service facilities. The proposed development is an infill development that will help contribute to the achievement of more compact complete communities and contribute to the City’s and Region’s intensification targets. As such, the proposed development is consistent with the PPS and conforms to the Growth Plan. -96- LD074/2024 -3- 4. PROVINCIAL PLAN REVIEW RESPONSIBILITIES We have reviewed this application for delegated Provincial plan review responsibilities. Soil and Groundwater Assessment Protocol The proponent and a Qualified Person have completed and signed the Region’s Site-Screening Questionnaire (SSQ), answering ‘no’ to the questions within it. As such, all matters related to potential site contamination on the subject site have been addressed. Noise Impact Study The Noise Impact Study prepared by YCA Engineering Ltd. and submitted with this Consent Application was examined. It was determined that the outdoor living areas (OLA’s) for the proposed residential units will have sound levels between 55 and 60 dBA Leq. Noise attenuation measures (i.e. noise barriers) will not be necessary. The appropriate Warning Clause ‘A’ is recommended. Sound levels along the façades of the proposed buildings will be just below 60 dBA Leq. for both daytime and nighttime hours. Forced Air Heating with Provision for Central Air Conditioning is recommended for the proposed new dwelling units (Warning Clause ‘C’). Further, due to the proximity of the railway (within 300 metres), the Standard Warning Clauses from both the C.N.R. and Metrolinx are recommended. The Warning Clauses mentioned are to be registered on title for the 2 proposed lots (severed and retained) and should be included in the City of Pickering’s Development Agreement. 5. AGENCY COMMENTS Regional Works Department A new water service and sanitary service connection will need to be installed for the severed lot. The applicant will be required to pay the costs of the water and sanitary connection. The Regional Works Department requires that the applicant satisfy all the requirements of the Regional Municipality of Durham concerning the provision of Regional services, financial and otherwise. (Refer to Attachment 1). -97- LD074/2024 -4- 6. CONCLUSION The application conforms with the policies of the Regional Official Plan and the Growth Plan and is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement. As such, the Region of Durham Planning Division recommends approval of this application, subject to the applicant fulfilling the conditions contained in this letter. Yours truly, Richard Szarek Richard Szarek Acting Principal Planner Planning Division Attachments: 1. Regional Works Letter dated July 3, 2024 -98- The Regional Municipality of Durham Works Department 605 Rossland Rd. E. PO Box 623 Whitby, ON L1N 6A3 Canada 905-668-7711 1-800-372-1102 Fax: 905-668-2051 E-mail: works@durham.ca www.durham.ca July 3, 2024 Planning and Economic Development Regional Municipality of Durham 605 Rossland Road East, 4th Floor P.O. Box 623 Whitby, ON L1N 6A3 Sent via Planit Attention: Lino Trombino Re: LD 074/2024 (LD13/24) Marshall Custom Homes 1778 Appleview Road City of Pickering Please be advised that our department has no objection to the granting of approval for the above noted severance application. The application is for the consent to sever a residential lot, retaining a residential lot with an existing dwelling to be demolished. According to our records, 1778 Appleview Road is currently serviced by one 16mm water service and one 100mm sanitary service. A new 19mm water service and 100mm sanitary service will need to be installed to service the severed lot. As a condition of approval for this application, the applicant will be required to pay the Regional connection fees for the new water and sanitary services. In order to ensure the foregoing, our department requires our following standard condition to be imposed: “That the applicant satisfies all the requirements of the Regional Municipality of Durham concerning the provision of Regional services, financial and otherwise.” -99- LD 074/2024 (LD 13/24) 1778 Appleview Road City of Pickering Page 2 of 2 ______________________________________________________________________________________________________ If this information is required in an accessible format, please contact 1-800-372-1102 ext. 3753. In order to satisfy the Regional Works Department conditions, the applicant will be required to fulfill the following: 1. Payment for one 100mm sanitary service connection at $4,035.00 per connection (flat rate): = $4,035.00 2. Payment for one 19mm water service connection at $3,885.00 per connection (flat rate): = $3,885.00 3. Payment for existing water service inspection fee’s: = $131.00 4. Payment for existing sanitary sewer service inspection fee’s: = $131.00 The total amount owing at the current rate is $8,182.00. Payment shall be made by certified cheque or credit card. The above fees are subject to revision on January 1, 2025. Regional connection permits will be issued to the applicant once the above payment is remitted to our department. The severed land will be subject to Regional development charges at the time of building permit issuance. The Region of Durham will not permit the connection of weeping tiles to the sanitary sewer system for the severed lands in accordance with the Region’s Foundation Drain Policy. In the event you have any questions, please contact the undersigned. Yours truly, Grant Young C.E.T. Development Approvals Technician grant.young@durham.ca 905 668 7711 extension 2479 -100-