Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFebruary 11, 2026Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Electronic Meeting February 11, 2026 07:00 PM Pending Adoption Present Omar Ha-Redeye – Vice-Chair Denise Rundle Sakshi Sood Joshi Rick Van Andel Sean Wiley – Chair Also Present Isabel Lima, Secretary-Treasurer Jasmine Correia, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer Nilissa Reynolds, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer – Host Kerry Yelk, Senior Planner, Zoning Ash Roy, Planner II Tanejaé Page-Hamilton, Zoning Examiner Figo Pham, Zoning Technician Land Acknowledgement Statement Disclosure of Interest Adoption of Agenda Moved By Omar Ha-Redeye Seconded By Rick Van Andel That the agenda for the Wednesday, February 11, 2026 hearing be adopted. Carried Unanimously Adoption of Minutes 1. 2. 3. 4. 1 Moved By Rick Van Andel Seconded By Omar Ha-Redeye That the amended minutes of the 1st hearing of the Committee of Adjustment held Wednesday, January 14, 2026 be adopted. Carried Unanimously Minor Variance Reports MV 10/26 - 1894 Glendale Drive N. Balachandra The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 8149/24, to permit: a maximum dwelling depth of 23.6 metres, whereas the By-law permits a maximum dwelling depth of 20.0 metres; and • a maximum front yard setback of 11.22 metres, whereas the By-law permits a maximum front yard setback of 10.5 metres. • The applicant requests approval of these variances to obtain a building permit to construct a two-storey detached dwelling. Input from other sources was received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services, and the City’s Building Services Section, and three area residents. In support of the application, the applicant identified that these variances are requested in order to be in keeping with the size and massing of recent developments. Sia Zanjani, 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 a question from a Committee member, the agent stated that they had received verbal support of the application from an area resident to the north of the subject property. After reading the report, listening to the presentation, and receiving no comments or objections to the application, Denise Rundle moved the following motion: 5. 5.2 Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes February 11, 2026 2 Moved By Denise Rundle Seconded By Omar Ha-Redeye That application MV 10/26 by N. Balachandra, 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: That these variances apply only to the proposed detached dwelling, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Attachments 2 & 3 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated February 11, 2026). 1. Carried Unanimously MV 08/26 - 1706 Wollaston Street M. Simpatico & I. Segura The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 8149/24, to permit a minimum north side yard of 0.3 of a metre, whereas the By-law requires a minimum interior side yard of 1.2 metres on both sides. The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application to construct a two-storey addition with an attached garage. Input from other sources was received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services, and the City’s Building Services Section. In support of the application, the applicant identified that the property was purchased with the encroachment existing in 2015. Grant Morris, agent, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. The Secretary-Treasurer made the following revisions to the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment contained in the Agenda: Page 14, second sentence of the last paragraph should read: Through this application, the applicant is proposing to renovate the illegally built garage extension and construct a new attached garage with a two-storey addition in • 5.1 Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes February 11, 2026 3 the rear. Page 16, last sentence of paragraph 2 should read: Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance maintains the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. • The agent stated that the applicant purchased the home 10 years ago, and that the garage was built 35 years ago. After reading and agreeing with the contents of the staff report, making a site inspection and receiving no comments or concerns from external agencies or area residents, Denise Rundle made the following motion: Moved By Denise Rundle Seconded By Rick Van Andel That application MV 08/26 by M. Simpatico & I. Segura, 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: That this variance applies only to the proposed addition and attached garage, as generally sited and outlined in the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Attachments 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 & 8 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated February 11, 2026). 1. Carried Unanimously MV 11/26 - 2540 William Jackson Drive, Unit 304 N. Senior Omar Ha-Redeye declared a conflict on this item. ( A deemed pecuniary interest regarding the above for minor business dealings with the Applicant's agent via TMU WE-Hub in the past. ) In order to avoid a tie vote, Sean Wiley recused himself from voting on this item. The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 8149/24, to permit a group home within a block townhouse dwelling, whereas the By-law only permits group homes in detached, semi-detached, and street townhouse dwellings. 5.3 Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes February 11, 2026 4 The applicant requests approval of this variance to operate a licensed youth residence. Input from other sources was received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services, the City’s Building Services Section, and two area residents. In support of the application, the applicant identified the following: the use involves only 2 youths and aligns closely with a typical residential household structure; no additional parking is needed as there is room for 3 vehicles on-site; and the intent of this request is to allow Synergy Link Homes to operate a supervised children’s residence that functions similarly to a traditional household setting, with minimal impact on the surrounding neighbourhood. Odessa Anderson, agent, was present to represent the application. One area resident was present in objection to the application. In support of the application, the agent stated the following: the group home is legally allowed to house 2 children, but they typically only house 1 child per family style home; children's ages range from 0-17; there will be 24/7 supervision of the children by 1 to 2 staff members; there are site inspections done regularly by the Ministry and Fire Services; they received clearance from Fire Services; any visitors to the home are logged for tracking purposes; they are not making any changes to the home; there are no anticipated negative noise impacts as they conduct the home as a family-style; and parking is not an issue as the children do not have cars, there are 3 parking spaces available on-site. In response to questions from a Committee member the agent stated that they receive visitors once a month for inspections, parents are welcome to visit. There is currently a group home in another unit, that was established prior to the changes in the Zoning By-law. They were not advised the By-law had changed when they purchased this second unit. They have not received a letter of support from the condominium corporation, but did receive support from neighbours. A Committee members commented the following in support of the application: the applicant is limiting the number of children being housed at once, the home has three bedrooms plus a den to accommodate the children; they have sufficient parking; major concerns of the neighbourhood objection letters have been addressed by the applicant; the home is being utilized as a residential use; doesn't seem it would cause any negative impacts; it is important for these programs to exist to provide support of social well-being and development. Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes February 11, 2026 5 A Committee member commented that they are hesitant on the recommended condition to limit the number of children because it is difficult to enforce, and ensuring if a new corporation takes ownership of the property follows the same condition. In response to the comments made, the agent clarified that through the Ministry, legally there can only be two children housed for all group homes. Committee members commented that the corporations need to go through regular inspections to keep their certificate, how many children living in a home is one of criteria they look at. After finding no negative impacts to the community, considering the social well- being of the community, and believing this application meets the four tests of the Planning Act, Sakshi Sood Joshi moved the following motion: Moved By Sakshi Sood Joshi Seconded By Rick Van Andel That application MV 11/26 by N. Senior, be Approved on the grounds that the requested variance is minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By law, subject to the following conditions: That this variance applies only to Unit 304, as generally cited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Attachment 2 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated February 11, 2026). 1. That the group home is occupied by no more than 2 persons (children/youth) as defined by the license obtained for the property by Synergy Link Homes exclusive of staff. 2. Carried (2 to 1) MV 12/26 - 2405 Angora Street S. Perkins The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 8149/24, to permit: 0 parking space per additional dwelling unit (total 2.0 parking spaces provided), whereas the By-law requires 1.0 parking space per additional • 5.4 Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes February 11, 2026 6 dwelling unit (total 3.0 parking spaces); and a window well encroachment of 0.21 metre into the required 1.2 metre path of travel, whereas the by-law permits no encroachment to obstruct the required 1.2 metre path of travel. • The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application to obtain a building permit to construct an additional dwelling unit (ADU) in the basement. Input from other sources was received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services, the City’s Building Services Section, and one area resident. In support of the application, the applicant identified that the lot cannot physically fit three parking spaces without violating setbacks. The ADU uses the existing footprint; two spaces are minor and maintain neighbourhood character. The 0.21 metres encroachment into the 1.2 metres path of travel is required for basement window wells and preserves safe, functional rear yard access. Both variances are minor and necessary. Shamrie Perkins, applicant, 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 MV 12/26 by S. Perkins, 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: That these variances apply only to the proposed development, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Attachments 2, 3 & 4 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated February 11, 2026). 1. Carried Unanimously Consent (Land Division) Reports LD 01/26 - 5240 (Old) Brock Road 6. 6.1 Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes February 11, 2026 7 L. & H. Park The applicant is proposing to sever a 1,518.7 square metre residential parcel of land (Part 2), retaining a 1,513.1 square metre residential parcel of land (Part 1) Input from other sources was received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services, the City’s Building Services Section, the Region of Durham Community Growth and Economic Development, Region of Durham Works Department and Region of Durham Health Department. Lae Kweon Park, applicant, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. The applicant stated that the supplemental studies and reports are very expensive and that they need more time to speak with the Region of Durham. Moved By Rick Van Andel Seconded By Sakshi Sood Joshi That application LD 01/26 by L. & H. Park, be Tabled to allow the applicant to address comments from Durham Health, including the submission of a Hydrogeological Study demonstrating that the Region’s Lot Sizing Policy requirements can be satisfied. Carried Unanimously Adjournment Moved By Rick Van Andel Seconded By Omar Ha-Redeye That the 2nd hearing of the 2026 Committee of Adjustment be adjourned at 7:49 pm. Carried Unanimously Minutes recorded this 11th day of February. ______________________________ Chair ______________________________ 7. Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes February 11, 2026 8 Assistant Secretary-Treasurer Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes February 11, 2026 9