Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMay 19, 1993 - 34 - MINUTES of the 8th meeting of the Committee of Adjustment held in the Committee Room of the Pickering Civic Complex on Wednesday, May 19, 1993 PRESENT Ms. S. Archer, Chairperson Mr. B. Bhuta Mrs. D. Kerr Mr. M. Puterbough - ALSO PRESENT Mrs. Eva McDougall, Secretary-Treasurer Mr. Jeffrey Cole, Planner The Meeting convened at 7:00 p.m. in the Committee Room of the Civic Complex. 1. MATTERS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES There were no matters arising from the minutes. 2. ADOPTION OF MINUTES MOTION: Moved by Mr. Puterbough, seconded by Mr. Bhuta and carried unanimously - That the minutes of the 7th meeting of the Committee of Adjustment held Wednesday, April 28, 1993 be adopted. 3. PICA 32/93, A. and J. Liaghati-Nasseri, Lot 44, Plan 40M-1664 P /CA 33/93, Cougs Investments (Pickering) Ltd., Block 94, Plan 40M-1664 PICA 34/93, Cougs Investments (Pickering) Ltd., Lot 54, Plan 40M-1664 PICA 35/93, Cougs Investments (Pickering) Ltd., Lot 45, Plan 40M-1664 P /CA 36/93, Cougs Investments (Pickering) Ltd., Lot 46, Plan 40M-1664 Also known as 2331 and 2333 Strathmore Crescent; 2324, 2340 and 2342 Wildwood Crescent Town of Pickering ~ APPLICATIONS The applicants requests relief from the provisions of Section 5(I)(b)(vi)B of Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by Zoning By-law 3640/91, to permit the continuance/establishment of rear yard depths as noted below from the "OS-HL" zone designation, whereas the by-law requires that a dwelling provide a minimum rear yard depth of 7.5 metres from the "OS-HL" zone designation. '-" P /CA 32/93, A. and J. Liaghati-Nasseri Lot 44, Plan 40M-1664 5.41 metres P /CA 33/93, Cougs Investments (Pickering) Ltd. Block 94, Plan 40M-1664 4.43 metres P /CA 34/93, Cougs Investments (Pickering) Ltd. Lot 54, Plan 40M-1664 4.5 metres P /CA 35/93, Cougs Investments (Pickering) Ltd. Lot 45, Plan 40M-1664 6.14 metres P /CA 36/93, Cougs Investments (Pickering) Ltd. Lot 46, Plan 40M-1664 3.80 metres Approval of these variance applications are required in order to bring the newly constructed dwellings into compliance with the provisions of the zoning by-law and to obtain building permits for the decks/proposed deck (Lot 54, 40M-1664). Mr. George Karakokkinos of Cougs Investments Ltd., (applicant and agent) was present to represent the applications. No further representation was present in favour or in objection to the application. - 35 - The Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the Town of Pickering Planning Department, the Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, and Regional Councillor Rick Johnson (regarding P /CA 36/93), which the Committee had before them. A copy of all comments received was provided to the applicant(s). The Secretary-Treasurer noted that the last decimal point in the reduced rear yard depths dimension would be deleted as the plans submitted with the applications were not stamped by an Ontario Land Surveyor. Mr. Karakokkinos stated that the lots are not normal building lots because of the zoning line (7.5 metre setback from top-of-bank) and tree preservation area. He added that only a portion of the decks would encroach into the "OS-HL" zone. Mr. Puterbough asked how many more lots would not comply with the by-law. Mr. Karakokkinos stated that four of the decks had been built, and the deck for Lot 54, Plan 40M-1664 was proposed. Mr. Karakokkinos indicated that modifications had been applied to the building plans for Lot 53, 40M-1664 and would not require a variance. Mr. Karakokkinos added that the Town of Pickering is discussing a possible rezoning for the area. Mr. Karakokkinos indicated that the residents of the area are not in objection to the applications. Mrs. Kerr stated that the Planning Department should accelerate the rezoning of the area so that a large number of applications of this type are not brought before the Committee. Mrs. Kerr also stated that when a building permit is submitted and a walk-out is indicated on plans from a second-storey, that it should be obvious a deck is expected to be constructed. Mr. Puterbough stated that in his opinion applications of this type should not be before the Committee. He stated that the Committee can alter Council approved by-laws with regard to corrections to the by-laws and to "round off" the rough edges of by-laws. DECISION: Moved by Mr. Bhuta and seconded by Mrs. Kerr and carried that - these applications, P /CA 32/93 to 36/93 inclusive, as outlined, be APPROVED, on the grounds that the applications extend the useable backyards of the properties; the Town of Pickering Planning Department intends to initiate a rezoning application for properties in similar circumstances in this area of the Town; the properties have large rear yards; the decks are not prohibiting the enjoyment of the properties; no residents are in objection to the applications; the applications are minor in nature; desirable for the appropriate development ~ of the land; and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Durham Regional Official Plan, the Pickering District Plan and Section 5(1)(b)(vi)B of Zoning By-law 3036 as amended by Zoning By-law 3640/91 subject to the following condition: ...... "". 1. That the rear yard depth variances apply only to the existing dwellings with the decks proposed by these applications. 4. P /CA 37/93 - A. and I. Meijer Lot 34, Plan 509 Also known as 1918 Glenview Road Town of Pickering The applicants request relief from the provisions of Section 5.18(a) of Zoning By-law 3036 to permit the continuance of the accessory structure (garage) located in the side yard of the lot, whereas the by-law requires that all accessory buildings which are not part of the main dwelling be erected in the rear yard. Approval of this variance application is required in order to bring the subject property into compliance with the provisions of the zoning by-law and to obtain a building permit for an addition to the rear of the dwelling. Mr. Meijer was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour or in objection to the application. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the Town of Pickering Planning Department, Councillor Rick Johnson and Squareco Properties Inc., which the Committee had before them. The applicants were provided with a copy of all comments received. - 36 - DECISION: Moved by Mr. Puterbough and seconded by Mr. Bhuta and carried that- this application, P /CA 37/93 by A. and I Meijer, as outlined, be APPROVED on the grounds that the variance is minor in nature, appropriate and desirable development of the lands, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Durham Regional Official Plan, the Pickering District Plan, and Section 5.18(a) of Zoning By-law 3036, subject to the following condition: 1. That this variance apply only to the accessory structure in existence on the subject property on the date of this decision and the plans as generally proposed with this application. ~. 5. P /CA 38/93 - G. Sauer Part of Lot 732, Plan M-19 Also known as 753 West Shore Boulevard Town of Pickering The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2520 as follows: (1) Section 8.2.3 of the By-law to permit the establishment of a rear yard depth of 7.0 metres, whereas the by-law requires that any building structure provide a rear yard depth of 7.5 metres. (2) Section 8.2.5 of the By-law to permit the establishment of a maximum lot coverage of 35 percent, whereas the by-law limits the lot coverage of all structures on a lot to 33 percent. Approval of this variance is required in order to obtain a building permit for a proposed sunroom to the rear of the existing dwelling. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the Town of Pickering Planning Department and the Town of Pickering Public Works Department, which the Committee had before them. A copy of all comments received was provided to the applicant. Mr. Rick Banman, the agent, was present to represent the application. Mr. Sauer was also ...... present in favour of the application. No further representation was present in favour or in objection to the application. Ms. Archer asked the applicant about the comment from the Department of Public Works that "no windows are permitted in the north wall of the proposed sunroom addition owing to the setback provided". Mr. Sauer stated that he also owns the adjacent property, so a window on that side would possibly not be objected to by anyone. Ms. Archer advised Mr. Sauer that the properties had to be looked at separately, and that his ownership of the adjacent property could not be guaranteed indefinitely. Ms. Archer advised that the Building Code would have to be complied with. Mr. Sauer agreed that no windows would be placed on the north wall of the sunroom. Ms. Archer cautioned the applicant regarding the comment in the report of the Planning Department that if the two accessory structures showed up on any future surveys of the property, they would be considered not to be in compliance with the zoning by-laws. DECISION: Moved by Mrs. Kerr and seconded by Ms. Archer that- this application, P /CA 38/93 by G. Sauer, as outlined be APPROVED on the grounds that the application is minor in nature, appropriate and desirable development of the lands, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Durham Regional Official Plan, the Pickering District Plan, and Sections 8.2.3 and 8.2.5 of Zoning By-law 2520, subject to the following condition: 1. That these variances apply only to the dwelling in existence with the proposed rear '-" yard addition and lot coverage as generally shown on the plans submitted with this application. 6. PICA 39/93 - G.D. Kearns Part of Lot 2, Plan 237; Part 1, 40R-4658 Also known as 633 Liverpool Road Town of Pickering The applicant requests relief from the provisions of Zoning By-law 2511 as follows: (1) (2) (3) (4) - (5) (6) (7) . . - 37 - Section 10.2.1 of the By-law to permit the continuance of a lot frontage of 14.94 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum frontage of 15.0 metres. Section 10.2.2 of the By-law to permit the continuance of a lot area of 456.5 square metres, whereas the By-law requires that a lot provide a minimum lot area of 460.0 square metres. Section 10.2.3 of the By-law to permit the establishment of a front yard depth of 5.91 metres, whereas the By-law requires that a dwelling provide a front yard depth of 7.5 metres. Section 6.6(a) of the By-law to permit the establishment of a 3.0 metre flankage side yard width for the dwelling, whereas the By-law requires that a dwelling provide a minimum flankage side yard width of 4.5 metres. Section 6.6(b) of the By-law to permit the continuance of the accessory structure (frame shed) 1.16 metres from the rear lot line, whereas the By-law requires that all accessory structures be located a minimum of 3.0 metres from the rear lot line. Section 6.6(b) of By-law to permit the continuance of a flankage side yard width of 6.67 metres for the accessory structure (frame shed), whereas the By-law requires that an accessory structure provide a flankage side yard width of 7.5 metres. Section 5.19(b) of the By-law to permit the continuance of a maximum 10.29 percent lot coverage for the accessory structure (frame shed), whereas the By-law limits the lot coverage of accessory structures on the lot to 5 percent. Approval of this variance application is required in order to bring the subject property into compliance with the provisions of the zoning by-law and to obtain a building permit for the proposed new dwelling on the lot. ' Mr. G. Kearns was present to represent the application. Mr. D. Kitchen, 1302 Wharf Street, was also present in objection to the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the Town of Pickering Planning Department, Region of Durham Department of Health Services, the Pickering Harbour Company Ltd. and Mr. D. Kitchen, which the Committee had before them. Mr. Kearns stated that the existing dwelling is an old style cottage built in 1936, and indicated he wished to build a new dwelling on the lot. Mr. Kearns noted other addresses homes in the area which were recently built. Mr. Kearns noted that the existing house has '-' five variances in existence now. Mr. Kearns added that the existing house has no foundation, and he would like to have a poured basement foundation. Mr. Kearns stated that his lot is quite small, and if he had to build a home to comply with the by-law that the house would be too small. .... Mr. Puterbough inquired if the proposed new dwelling could be shifted further to the south lot line so a variance may not be required or reduced if the house was shifted in this direction. Mr. Kearns replied that he intended to build a stone patio to the south of the proposed dwelling. Mr. Kearns added that he wished to take advantage of the southern exposure, and that he did not want to be located too close to the dwelling south of his property. Mr. Puterbough asked if any trees would have to be removed if the variances were granted. Mr. Kearns indicated that two trees which were decayed and diseased would have to be removed. Mr. Kearns stated that the frame shed noted on the plan is his garage, and that he intends to reside the structure to match the proposed new dwelling, and noted he intends to replace the garage door. Mr. Kitchen stated that two mature trees would have to be removed if the variances were granted. He indicated that enough trees have been removed in the area, and noted the trees on Mr. Kearns' property are not diseased but were old and mature trees. Mr. Kitchen stated a large number of variances were required in the application. He noted that the lot should be considered as a blank lot, and stated the applicant should rezone the property to have a zoning by-law specific to the property. He added that the present nonconformities should be removed from the lot (the garage), and noted that the homes on Wharf Street have attached garages. , . - 38 - Mr. Kitchen indicated that By-law 2511 does not contain height restrictions as to the height of dwellings. Mr. Kearns replied that the proposed dwelling would be under 30 feet in height. Mr. Kearns added that he purchased the property in 1986, and that the garage was built in 1984. ~ Mr. Kitchen cautioned the Committee on giving variances for accessory structures which were not attractive, as an accessory structure directly across the street from Mr. Kearns was now being used as a dwelling. Mrs. Archer indicated that no windows are located in the accessory structure subject of this application, and that the applicant would probably not be able to rent it as a dwelling unit. Mr. Puterbough asked if the property was in a Special Study Area. Mr. Cole replied that the property did not appear to be in a Special Study Area. Mr. Cole stated that the home existed before the zoning by-law was put in place. Mr. Kitchen stated that the property should have to conform with the zoning by-laws, and that the proposed structure should not be built. He stated that too many variances were being applied for. Ms. Archer indicated that since the application is located in an older area of the Town, there are many non-conformities. DECISION: Moved by Mr. Puterbough and seconded by Mr. Bhuta that- this application, P /CA 39/93 by G.D. Kearns, as outlined, be APPROVED on the grounds that the variances are minor in nature, appropriate and desirable development of the lands, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Durham Regional Official Plan, the Pickering District Plan, and Sections 10.2.1, 10.2.2, 10.2.3, 6.6(a), 6.6(b) and 5.19(b) of Zoning By-law 2511, subject to the following condition: 1. That this variance apply only to accessory structure in existence and to the dwelling as proposed with this application on the date of this decision. 11. PICA 40/93 - 699504 Ontario Ltd. Part of Lot 33, Concession 1 \iw' Also known as 1852 - 1866 Altona Road Town of Pickering ~ The applicant requests relief from the provisions of Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by Zoning By-law 2822/88 from the following: (1) Section 5(I)(b)(i) of the By-law to permit the establishment of a 7.5 metre west yard width, whereas the By-law requires that a building provide a minimum west yard width (abutting Westcreek Drive) of 20.0 metres. (2) Section 5(I)(b)(i) of the By-law to permit the establishment of a 7.5 metre north yard width, whereas the By-law requires that a building provide a minimum north yard width (abutting Pine Grove Avenue) of 12.0 metres. (3) Section 5(I)(b)(i) of the By-law to permit the establishment of a 15.0 metre east yard width, whereas the By-law requires that a building provide a minimum east yard width (abutting Altona Road) of 20.0 metres. (4) Section 5(I)(b)(vi)A of the By-law to permit the establishment of more than one building on the lot, whereas the By-law limits the number of buildings on the lot to one. (5) Section 5(I)(a)(xi) to delete the requirement for buildings to be attached horizontally and vertically, whereas the By-law defines multiple dwellings vertical to mean a "building containing three or more dwelling units attached horizontally and vertically by an above grade wall or walls, or an above grade floor or floors, or both". (6) Section 5(I)(b)(ii) of the By-law to permit the establishment of a maximum height of 7.49 metres for two buildings situated within the cross hatched area on Schedule I attached to this Notice, whereas the By-law limits the maximum height of any building on the lot to 22.0 metres except in the area cross hatched on Schedule I attached to this Notice, where building height shall be 6.0 metres. Approval of this variance application is required in order for the proposed development for townhouses, commercial/retail to occur on the subject property. . . ~ . - 39 - As the applicant was not present at the meeting, the application was adjourned according to the Rules of Procedure for the Committee of Adjustment to the next Committee of Adjustment meeting of June 9, 1993. Several residents were in attendance at the meeting. The residents left their names and addresses with the Secretary-Treasurer for further notification of the matter. MOTION: Moved by Mr. Puterbough and seconded by Mrs. Kerr and carried that- The rules of procedure for the Committee of Adjustment be amended to include the following: "In the event an application is intended to be deferred by an applicant(s) at a meeting, the matter shall be placed at the beginning of the agenda for that particular '-" meeting" at the Committee's discretion. 5. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Moved by Ms. Archer, seconded by Mrs. Kerr and carried unanimously - That the 8th meeting of the Committee of Adjustment be adjourned at 8:25 p.m. and the next regular meeting of the Committee of Adjustment be held on Wednesday, June 9,1993. '!2x<./ DA~ 9 /.f'f<:3 / () \..-;/FtJ :}tl/U CHAIRMAN ,rl C~:CL__ '-" \::' ' 5t14 -,~ " ~:_c-,.....J /',-__~?,~/c:-" SECRETARY-TREASURER '-'