Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMarch 9, 2016------------------------- Committee of Adjustment Agenda Meeting Number: 3 Date: Wednesday, March 9, 2016 (I) (II) (Ill) (IV) Committee of Adjustment Agenda Wednesday, March 9, 2016 7:00pm Council Chambers Page Number Adoption of Agenda Adoption of Minutes from February 17, 2016 1-18 Reports 1. (Deferred from the January 27, 2016 meeting) 19-29 PICA 06116 2450734 Ontario Inc. (Marshall Homes) 1555 & 1575 Kingston Road 2. PICA 11116 30-36 SR & R Bay Ridges (Plaza II) Ltd. 1261 Bayly Street 3. PICA 12116 & PICA 13116 37-42 Marshall Homes (Copperfield) Ltd. 1423 Rougemount Drive Adjournment Accessible •-For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Lesley Dunne PICKE~G T. 905.420.4660, extension 2024 TTY 905.420.1739 Email ldunne@pickering.ca Pending Adoption Present Tom Copeland-Vice-Chair David Johnson -Chair Eric Newton Sean Wiley Also Present Melissa Markham, Secretary-Treasurer Lesley Dunne, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer Absent Denise Rundle Committee of Adjust111ent Meeting Minutes .Wednesday, February 17, 2016 7:00pm Main Committee Room Tom Copland, Committee Vice-Chair, acknowledged the presence of Rick Johnson, City Councillor-Ward 3 (I) Adoption of Agenda Moved by David Johnson Seconded by Eric Newton That the agenda for the Wednesday, February 17, 2016 meeting be adopted. (II) Adoption of Minutes Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Dav-id Johnson Carried Unanimously That the minutes of the 1st meeting of the Committee of Adjustment held Wednesday, January 27, 2016 be adopted. Carried Unanimously Page 1 of 18 1 2 (Ill) 1. Reports Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, February 17, 2016 7:00pm Main Committee Room (Deferred from the January 27, 2016 meeting) PICA 100/15 D. Rinneard 5034 Wixson The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3037, as amended: • to permit a maximum lot coverage of 24 percent; whereas the by-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 20 percent • to permit a maximum lot coverage of all accessory buildings, excluding private detached garages, to be 9 percent of the lot area; whereas the by-law permits a maximum lot coverage of all accessory buildings, excluding private detached garages, to be 5 percent of the lot area • to recognize an existing front yard setback of 6.6 metres (Building 1 ); whereas the by-law permits a minimum front yard setback of 9.0 metres • to recognize an existing unenclosed covered porch projecting a maximum of 2.0 metres into the required front yard (Building 1); whereas the by-law permits uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade to project a maximum of 1.5 metres into the required front yard • to permit an existing accessory dwelling unit contained within an accessory building (Building 2); whereas the by-law states that an accessory dwelling unit shall mean oneself contained dwelling unit contained within a permitted detached dwelling or semi-detached dwelling • to permit an existing accessory building (Building 2) to be partially located in the side yard; whereas the by-law requires all accessory buildings which are not part of the main, building to be erected in the rear yard • to permit an existing accessory building (Building 2) to be set back 0.4 of a metre from the south side lot line; whereas the by-law permits accessory buildings greater than 10.0 square metres in area to be set back a minimum of 1.0 metre from all lot lines • to permit an existing accessory building (Building 2) with a maximum height of 4.3 metres; whereas the by-law states that no accessory building shall exceed a height of 3.5 metres in any residential zone Page 2 of 18 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, February 17, 2016 7:00pm Main Committee Room • to permit an existing accessory building (Building 3) to be set back 0.3 of a metre from the rear lot line and 0.6 of a metre from the south side lot line; whereas the by-law permits accessory buildings greater than 10.0 square metres in area to be set back a minimum of 1.0 metre from all lot lines • to permit an accessory building (Building 4) with a ma~imum height of 5.5 metres; whereas the by-law states that no accessory building shall exceed a height of 3.5 metres in any residential zone • to permit an existing accessory building (Building 4) to be set back 0.6 of a metre from the rear lot line; whereas the by-law permits accessory buildings greater than 10.0 square metres in area to be set back a minimum of 1. 0 metre from all lot lines The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application to permit an accessory dwelling unit to be located within an accessory building, an increase in maximum lot coverage and maximum lot coverage of all accessory buildings, and recognize existing setbacks to the main dwelling and accessory buildings and to obtain a building permit to construct an addition to an existing accessory building (detached garage). Moved by David Johnson Seconded by Sean Wiley To dispense reading of the application. Carried Unanimously The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions and refusal for maximum height for a proposed addition to an existing building (Building 4). Written comments were received from the City's Engineering & Public Works Department expressing no concerns. Written comments were received from the City's Building Services indicating no comment at this time. Written comments were also received from the Durham Region Environmental Health Division expressing no objection with the proposal and that a building permit for a new private sewage disposal system to service both residential units was approved on December 18, 2015 and is valid for one calendar year. Duff Rinneard, owner, was present to represent the application. John Carruthers of 1717 Joseph Street was present in favour of the application. Page 3 of 18 3 4 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, February 17, 2016 7:00pm Main Committee Room Duff Rinneard provided pictures for the Committee Members to review of other structures in the surrounding neighbourhood exceeding the height requirements. In response to questions from Committee Members, Duff Rinneard stated the proposed garage addition will not be used for commercial use and the height requirement is for a stacking mechanism for storing vintage cars. Duff Rinneard advised the Committee that he has worked with the truss engineers and have . been able to reduce the height for the addition to 4.8 metres. John Carruthers stated he has no objection to the height and feels this will enhance the surrounding area. In response to a question from a Committee Member, the Secretary-Treasurer stated the City Development Department would like the maximum height for the addition to meet the Zoning By-law requirements of 3.5 metres. Moved by Sean Wiley Seconded by David Johnson That application PICA 100/15 by D. Rinneard, be Approved on the grounds that the increase in maximum lot coverage to 24 percent of the lot area and a maximum lot coverage of all accessory buildings, excluding private detached garages, to be 9 percent of the lot area, 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 lot and structures, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans. And Building 1 That variances for Building 1 be Approved on the grounds that the existing front yard setback of 6.6 metres and an existing unenclosed covered porch projecting a maximum of 2.0 metres into the required front yard, 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 existing building (Building 1 ), as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans. And Page 4 of 18 Building 2 ·Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, February 17, 2016 7:00pm Main Committee Room That variances for Building 2 be Approved on the grounds that the existing accessory dwelling unit contained within an accessory building that is partially located in the side yard, set back 0.4 of a metre from the south side lot line, with a height of 4.3 metres, 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 conditions: 1. That these variances apply only to the existing accessory building (Building 2), · as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans. 2. Obtain and post a municipal address, as assigned by the City Development Department, for the accessory dwelling unit contained within an accessory building (Building 2) by May 17, 2016. 3. Obtain a building permit to reflect the building construction of Building 2 by February 17, 2017, or this decision shall become null and void. And Building 3 That variances for Building 3 be Approved on the grounds that the existing accessory building set back 0.3 of a metre from the rear lot line and 0.6 of a metre from the south side lot line, 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 the variance apply only to the existing accessory building (Building 3), as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans. And Building 4 That variances for Building 4 be Approved on the grounds that the existing accessory building set back 0.6 of a metre from the rear lot line having a height of 5.5 metres and the maximum height of 4.8 metres. for an addition to an existing accessory building, 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: Page 5 of 18 5 6 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, February 17, 2016 7:00pm Main Committee Room 1. That these variances apply only to the existing accessory building and proposed garage addition (Building 4), as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans. Vote Tom Copeland David Johnson Eric Newton Sean Wiley in favour in favour opposed in favour 2. (Tabled at the January 27, 2016. meeting) PICA 02116 Altona Road Subdivision Ltd. 1870 Altona Road Moved by Sean Wiley Seconded by David Johnson Carried That application PICA 02116 by Altona Road Subdivision Ltd. be lifted from the table. Carried Unanimously The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 4366193 and By-law 5537199: • to permit Building B and Building D to be erected having a height of 13.0 metres; whereas the by-law states ttiat no building, part of a building, or structure that exceeds a height of 12.0 metres shall be erected • to pen-nit a minimum building height of 7.0 metres for Building E (located in the area cross-hatched on Schedule I to By-law 5537199; whereas the by-law states that in the area cross-hatched on Schedule I to By-law 5537199, the minimum building height shall be 12.0 metres, and the maximum building height shall be 18.0 metres · • to permit the aggregate of the gross leasable floor areas of all buildings on the lands, except multiple dwellings, to be a minimum of 660 square metres; whereas the by-law requires the aggregate of the gross leasable floor areas of all buildings on the lands, except multiple dwellings, to be a minimum of 940 square metres Page 6 of 18 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, February 17, 2016 7:00pm Main Committee Room • to permit multiple dwelling -horizontal units with two parking spaces located within a garage to provide no parking space between the vehicular entrance of the private garage and the nearest traffic aisle, or public road; whereas the by-law states that for each multiple dwelling -horizontal unit there shall be . provided on the lands one parking space located between the vehicular· entrance of the private garage and the nearest traffic aisle, or public road The applicant has requested approval of these variances in order to obtain Site Plan Approval for a proposed mixed use development consisting of 38 residential townhouse units and a four-storey commercial building on the subject lands. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Written comments were received from the City's Engineering & Public Works Department expressing no concerns. Written comments were also received from David Pickles, Regional Councillor, Ward 3 in support of the application. Written comments were received from the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) expressing no concerns with the application and indicated the eastern portion of the subject lands contain a portion of the Region Storm Flood Plan associated with the Petticoat Creek, which is located north of the site beyond Pine Grov~ Avenue and east of the site beyond Altona Road and the subject lands are within the TRCA Regulated Area and any development will require a TRCA permit. Written comments were also received from J. and N. Kirwan of 1972 Pine Grove Avenue expressing concerns with Block E (height, scale and massing) that is not in keeping with the surrounding residential houses, with shadows and overlook from balconies on existing residential and the entrance to the site from Pine Grove Avenue is too close to Altona Road. Melissa McKay, applicant, Sean Lawrence, architect, were present to represent the application. Joseph Kirwan and Nicole Davis of 1972 Pine Grove Avenue, Geoffrey Strong of 1978 Pine Grove Avenue and Tim Rheeder of 1993 Pine Grove Avenue were present in objection to the application. Nicole Davis asked questions to seek clarification with the gross leasable floor area being reduced from 940 square metres to 660 square metres and she also questioned if the vehicle access to the commercial units would be from Altona Road or Pine Grove Avenue, She was also concerned with increased traffic and no driveways being propos~d and the potential safety implications for children on the road. In response to a questions, the Secretary-Treasurer explained the variances that were being requested by the applicant. Page 7 of 18 7 8 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, February 17, 2016 7:00pm Main Committee Room Joseph Kirwan expressed a concern with having no parking spaces in the driveways, safety related to not having a driveway, parking in the laneways, increased traffic and a concern with the balconies overlooking existing residential homes. Tim Rheeder expressed a concern with the height of the buildings. Sean Lawrence stated that the application met the minimum parking space requirement in the current zoning by-law. He stated that the applicant has worked with City staff to maximize the size of the tandem parking spaces by increasing the interior size of the garage, beyond the by-law requirements. In response to a residents comments he stated the entrance for the commercial plaza will be on Pine Grove Avenue, in a location requested by the City. In response to the concern related to building· heights he stated the height for Block E is lower than the Zoning By-law requirements and advised that proposed Blocks B and D require increased heights due to the grading of the site. He stated that all of the buildings will be 3 storeys and will visually appear to be the same height. Melissa McKay provided an overview of the policies related to development of the subject property as a focal point, which requires increase building heights at the intersection of Altona Road and Pine Grove Avenue. She also stated that the design of the subject lands proposes a utilitarian laneway for the use of vehicles, and pedestrian elements along the outside of the development, facing public roads. She also stated that all of the units with garages facing a public street will maintain the parking space in the driveway. In response to a Committee Member question she stated that the development will have a 6.5 metre private laneway. Moved by David Johnson Seconded by Sean Wiley That application PICA 02/16 by Altona Road Subdivision Ltd., be Approved on the grounds that Buildings B and D to be erected having a height of 13.0 metres, a minimum building height of 7.0 metres for Building E, the aggregate of the gross leasable floor areas of all buildings to be a minimum of 660 square metres and permit multiple dwelling -horizontal units with two parking spaces located within a garage to provide no parking space between the vehicular entrance of the private garage and the nearest traffic aisle, or public road, 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 conditions: Page 8 of 18 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, February 17, 2016 7:00pm Main Committee Room 1. That these variances apply only to the proposed development, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans. 2. That the applicant obtain Site Plan Approval and building permits for the proposed construction by February 16, 2018, or this decision shall become null and void. Carried Unanimously 3. PICA 03/16 G. Bevacqua 845 Third Concession Road The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended: • to permit an accessory building with a maximum height of 4.5 metres; whereas the by-law states that no accessory building shall exceed a height of 3.5 metres in any residential zone • to permit a total lot coverage of all accessory buildings, excluding private detached garages, to be a maximum of 7.3 percent of the lot area; whereas the by-law states that the total lot coverage of all accessory buildings, excluding private detached garages, shall not exceed 5 percent of the lot area The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit to construct a 372 square metre accessory building, to be located in the rear yard. The subject lands are located within Minister's Zoning Order (MZO}, Ontario Regulation 154/03, which generally restricts land use to agricultural uses and associated residential dwellings and accessory structures. The MZO requires residential dwellings and accessory structures to have a maximum total lot coverage of all accessory buildings or structures, excluding private detached garage,. not exceeding 5 percent of the total lot area. The applicant has also submitted an application to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing to amend the MZO to permit the proposed accessory structure with a total lot coverage of 7.3 percent. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Written comments were received from the City's Engineering & Public Works Department expressing no concerns. Written comments were received from J. Enright of 820 Jamar Avenue expressing no issues with the application for minor variance proposed for the subject property. Written comments were received from B. and J. Lytwynchuck of 827 Third Concession Road in objection to the application. Page 9 of 18 9 10 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, February 17, 2016 7:00pm Main Committee Room Correspondence received from B. and J. Lytwynchuck of 827 Third Concession Road expres$ed several concerns such as the proposed accessory structure size, height, total lot area, and the use of the structure to store cars (potential to increase noise and traffic levels on Third Concession Road); the visual impact from their property; negatively affect the view of the landscape, and the personal enjoyment of property; the structure will be disproportionately large to any structure on the property or in the general vicinity; negative impact on property values of adjacent residential properties; and recommends that the applicant · comply with the Zoning· By-law requirements for height, 3.5 metres and total lot coverage of 5 percent. Giuseppe (Joe) Bevacqua, owner, Paul Filice, agent, were present to represent the application. Bill Lytwynchuk of 827 Third Concession Road was present in objection to the application. Paul Filice provided an aerial map of the surrounding area and the subject property for the Committee Members to review. In response to questions from Committee Members, Paul Filice and Giuseppe Bevacqua stated the proposed building will be used to store antique cars. The proposed structure will be metal with required fire proofing and garage doors. Giuseppe Bevacqua indicated they would be willing to add additional landscaping and plant more trees if required. Paul Filice stated they have been working with the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing in order to amend the Minister's Zoning Order (MZO) to permit the proposed accessory structure. Bill Lytwynchuk expressed a concern with the size of the structure being proposed on the subject property and that it is out of character with the rest of the neighbourhood. He is concerned with the visual impact the structure will have from his property. Bill Lytwynchuk also spoke to the correspondence that was previously submitted in opposition to the application: Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Sean Wiley That application PICA 03/16 by G. Bevacqua, be Approved on the grounds that the accessory building with a maximum height of 4.5 metres, and a total lot coverage of7.3 percent, 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 conditions: 1. That these variances apply only to the proposed accessory structure (detached garage), as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans. Page 10 of 18 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, February 17, 2016 7:00pm Main Committee Room 2. That the applicant obtain approval from the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing regarding Minister Zoning Order Amendment Application (18-MZOA-158916), or this decision shall become null and void. 3. That the structure maintains an accessory status to the principal residential use of the subject lands. 4. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by February 8, 2018, or this decision shall become null and void. 4. PICA 04/16 A Bobat 1833 Misthollow Drive Carried Unanimously The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by By-law 7020/1 0 to permit a maximum driveway width of 65 percent of the lot frontage; whereas the by-law permits a maximum driveway width of 55 percent of the lot frontage. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to recognize an existing driveway that has been widened beyond the maximum permitted driveway width. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending refusal. Written comments were also received from the City's Engineering & Public Works Department indicating if the application is refused any works that were completed on public property be restored to original condition. Ashraf Bobat, owner, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Ashraf Bobat stated that he reviewed the City's website prior to widening his driveway. He obtained an overview of the Driveway Widening & Curb Cuts from the City's website that did not state that there were any restrictions in the permitted width of a driveway. He stated that he followed the website in terms of widening and he has three cars that he needs to park. In response to a question from a Committee Member, Ashraf Bobat stated he has three vehicles, one is parked in the garage and two are parked in the driveway. Page 11 of 18 11 12 Moved by David Johnson Seconded by Sean Wiley Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, February 17, 2016 7:00pm Main Committee Room That application PICA 04116 by A. Bobat, be Refused on the grounds that the maximum driveway width of 65 percent of the lot frontage is a major variance that is not desirable for the appropriate use of the land and not in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. 5. PICA 05116 Lebovic Enterprises Ltd. 1603 Dusty Drive Carried Unanimously The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by By-law · 7022110, to permit a minimum flanking side yard width of 1.2 metres; whereas the by-law requires minimum flanking side yard width of 2.4 metres. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to recognize an existing two-storey detached dwelling. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Written comments were also received from the City's Engineering & Public Works Department expressing no concerns. Glen Easton, agent, was present to represent the application. No further representation was pre~ent in favour of or in objection to the application. Moved by Sean Wiley Seconded by David Johnson That application PICA 05116 by Lebovic Enterprises Ltd., be Approved on the grounds that the flanking side yard width of 1.2 metres, 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 the Zoning By-law, subject to the following condition: 1. That this variance apply only to the existing dwelling, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans. Carried Unanimously Page 12 of 18 6. PICA 06/16 2450734 Ontario Inc. (Marshall Homes) 1555 & 1575 Kingston Road Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, February 17, 2016 7:00pm Main Committee Room The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 6172/03: • to permit a minimum building height of 12.0 metres and 4 storeys; whereas the by-law states that no building, part of a building, or structure that is less than 16.0 metres and 6 storeys in height, or greater than 35.0 metres and 12 storeys in h~ight, shall be erected on the lands • to permit buildings to be located outside the building envelope having a minimum setback of 1.8 metres from the Kingston Road lot line; whereas the by-law states that all buildings and structures shall be located entirely within the building envelope having a minimum setback of 4.5 metres from the 'Kingston Road lot line · • to permit buildings to be located outside the building envelope having a minimum setback of 0.8 of a metre from the west lot line; whereas the by-law states that all buildings and structures shall be located entirely within the building envelope having a minimum setback of 4.5 metres from the west lot line • to permit any portion of a building or structure in excess of 11.0 metres in height, to be setback a minimum of 17.0 metres from the southern limits of the "(H)RH/MU-1" zone; whereas the by-law states that any portion of a . building or structure in excess of 11.0 metres in height, shall be setback a minimum of 20.0 metres from the southern limits of the "(H)RH/MU-1" zone • to permit a minimum of 1.0 parking space per dwelling unit for residents be provided both above and below grade; whereas the by-law states that for each multiple dwelling vertical there shall be provided and maintained a minimum 1.2 parking spaces per dwelling unit for residents; all resident parking is to be provided in a below grade structure • to permit a minimum of 0.2 of a parking space per dwelling unit for visitors; whereas the by-law states that for each multiple dwelling vertical there shall be provided and maintained a minimum of 0.3 of a parking space per dwelling unit for visitors • to permit at grade parking lots to be no closer than 2.5 metres from the southern limit of the "(H)RH/MU-1" Zone; whereas the by-law states that at grade parking lots shall be permitted no closer than 3.0 metres from the limits of the "(H)RH/MU-1" Zone Page 13 of 18 13 14 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, February 17, 2016 7:00pm Main Committee Room • to permit at grade parking lots to be 0.0 metres from the western limit of the "(H)RHIMU-1" Zone; whereas the by-law states that at grade parking lots shall be permitted no closer than 3.0 metres from the limits of the "(H)RHIMU-1" Zone • to permit at grade parking lots to be no closer than 2.7 metres from the eastern limit of the "(H)RHIMU-1" Zone; whereas the by-law states that at grade parking lots shall be permitted no closer than 3.0 metres from the limits of the "(H)RHIMU-1" Zone The applicant is requesting approval of this minor variance application in order to obtain Site Plan Approval for a residential development consisting of 136 stacked townhouse units. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending the application be deferred. Written comments were also received from the City's Engineering & Public Works Department expressing no concerns. Samantha Bateman, Marshall Homes, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Moved by David Johnson Seconded by Eric Newton That application PICA 06116 by 2450734 Ontario Inc. (Marshall Homes), be Deferred in order to allow time for City staff to receive preliminary comments on the Site Plan application and for the application to be brought to the City's Site Plan Advisory Committee. 7. PICA 07116 I. & S. Gandhi 220 Finch Avenue Carried Unanimously The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended: • to permit uncovered steps with a height of 1.6 metres in height above grade to project 2.3 metres into the required front yard; whereas the by-law permits uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade to project a maximum of 1.5 metres into the required front yard Page 14 of 18 Committee ·of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, February 17, 2016 7:00pm Main Committee Room • to permit a maximum lot coverage of 25 percent; whereas the by-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 20 percent The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application in order to obtain a building permit to construct a two-storey detached dwelling. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Written comments were also received from the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority expressing no objection to the variances proposed however, a Natural Heritage Evaluation, revised Site Plan and Building Elevations are required prior to issuance of final approval for the TRCA permit. · lnderjit Gandhi, owner, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Moved by Sean Wiley Seconded by Eric Newton That application PICA 07/16 by I. & S. Gandhi, be Approved on the grounds that the uncovered steps with a height of 1.6 metres in height above grade to project 2.3 metres into the required front yard and a maximum lot coverage of 25 percent, 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 conditions: 1. That these variances apply only to the proposed two-storey detached dwelling, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans. 2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by February 17, 2017, or this decision shall become null and void . 8. PICA 08/16 M. Bosnjak 1441 Highbush Trail . Carried Unanimously The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended, to permit a minimum side yard width of 1.2 metres, and a maximum lot coverage of 34 percent; whereas the by-law requires a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres, and a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent. Page 15 of 18 15 16 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, February 17, 2016 7:00pm Main Committee Room The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application in order to obtain a building permit to construct a two-story detached dwelling. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Written comments were also received from the City's Engineering & Public Works Department expressing no concerns. Filip Artukovic, owner, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Sean Wiley That application PICA 08116 by M. Bosnjak, be Approved on the grounds that the proposed minimum side yard width of 1.2 metres, and a maximum lot coverage of 34 percent, 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 conditions: 1. That these variances apply only to the proposed two-storey detached dwelling, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans. 2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by February 17, 2017, or this decision shall become null and void. 9. PICA 09116 D. Artukovic 1443 Highbush Trail Carried Unanimously The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended, to permit a minimum side yard width of 1.2 metres, and a maximum lot coverage of 35 percent; whereas the by-law requires a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres, and a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent. The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application in order to obtain a building permit to construct a two-story detached dwelling. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Written comments were also rece-ived from the City's Engineering & Public Works Department expressing no concerns. Page 16 of 18 Committef;! of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, February 17, 2016 7:00pm Main Committee Room Filip Artukovic, owner, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Moved by Sean Wiley Seconded by Eric Newton That application PICA 09116 by D. Artukovic, be Approved on the grounds that the proposed minimum side yard width of 1.2 metres, and a maximum lot coverage of 35 percent, 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, su~ject to the following conditions: 1. That these variances apply only to the proposed two-storey detached dwelling, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans. 2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by February 17,2017, or this decision shall become null and void.· 10. PICA 10116 Marshall Homes (Copperfield Ltd.) Nordane Drive Carried Unanimously The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 7274113, to permit a minimum lot frontage of 7.2 metres; whereas the by-law requires a minimum lot frontage of 7.5 metres. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to facilitate the development of a semi-detached dwelling on a lot. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Written comments were also received from the City's Engineering & Public Works Department expressing no concerns. Brian Moss, agent, was present to represent the application. Samantha Bateman, Marshall Homes, was also present. Page 17 of 18 17 18 Moved by David Johnson Seconded by Eric Newton Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, February 17, 2016 7:00pm Main Committee Room That application PICA 10/16 by Marshall Homes (Copperfield) Ltd., be Approved on the grounds that the minimum lot frontage of 7.2 metres, 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 the Zoning By-law, subject to the following conditions: 1. That this variance apply only to the proposed lot configuration, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plan. 2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by February 17, 2017 or this decision shall become null and void. Carried Unanimously (IV) Adjournment Date Chair Moved by David Johnson Seconded by Sean Wiley That the 2nd meeting of the 2016 Committee of Adjustment be adjourned at 8:45 pm and the next meeting of the Committee of Adjustment be held on Wednesday, March 9, 2016. Carried Unanimously Assistant' Secretary-Treasurer Page 18 of 18 From:· Report to I Committee of Adjustment Melissa Markham, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner-Development Review Application Number: PICA 06116 Meeting Date: March 9, 2016 Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 06/16 2450734 Ontario Inc. (Marshall Homes) Limited 1555 & 1575 Kingston Road Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 6172103: • to permit a minimum building height of 12.0 metres and 4 storeys; whereas the by-law l:?tates that no building, part of a building, or structure that is less than 16.0 metres and 6 storeys in height, or greater than 35.0 metres and 12 storeys in height, shall be erected on the lands • to permit buildings to be located outside the building envelope having a minimum setback of 1.8 metres from the Kingston Road lot line; whereas the by-law states that all buildings and structures shall be located entirely within the building envelope having a minimum setback of 4.5 metres from the Kingston Road lot line • to permit buildings to be locat~d outside the building envelope having a minimum setback of 0.8 of a metre from the west lot line; whereas the by-law states that all buildings and structures shall be located entirely within the building envelope having a minimum setback of 4.5 metres from the west lot line • to permit any portion of a building or structure in excess of 11.0 metres in height, to be setback a minimum of 17.0 metrE:!S from the southern limits of the "(H)RHIMU-1" Zone; whereas the by-law states that any portion of a building or structure in excess of 11.0 metres in height, shall be setback a minimum of 20.0 metres from the southern limits of the "(H)RHIMU-1" Zone • to permit a minimum of 1.0 parking space per dwelling unit for residents be provided both above and below grade; whereas the by-law states that for each multiple dwelling vertical there shall be provided and maintained a minimum 1.2 parking spaces per dwelling unit for residents; all resident parking is to be provided in a below grade structure • to permit a minimum of 0.2 of a parking space per dwelling unit for visitors; whereas the by-law states that for each multiple dwelling vertical there shall be provided and maintained a minimum of 0.3 of a parking space per dwelling unit for visitors • to permit at grade parking lots to be no closer than 2.5 metres from the southern limit of the "(H)RH/MU-1" Zone; whereas the by-law states that at grade parking lots shall be permitted no closer than 3.0 metres from the limits of the "(H)RHIMU-1" Zone 19 20 . Report PICA 06/16 March 9, 2016 Page 2 • to permit at grade parking lots to be 0.0 metres from the western limit of the "(H)RH/MU-1" Zone; whereas the by-law states that at grade parking lots shall be permitted no closer than 3.0 metres from the limits of the "(H)RH/MU-1" Zone • to permit at grade parking lots to be no closer than 2.7 metres from the eastern limit of the "(H)RH/MU-1" Zone; whereas the by-law states that at grade parking lots shal.l be permitted no closer than 3.0 metres from the limits of the "(H)RH/MU-1" Zone The applicant is requesting approval of this minor variance application in order to obtain Site Plan Approval for a residential development consisting of 136 stacked townhouse units. Recommendation The City Development Department 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, subject to the following conditions: -' 1. That the variances apply only to the proposed development, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans. 2. That the applicant obtain Site Plan Approval for the proposed development by March 9, 2017, or this decision shall become null and void. Background On February 17, 2016, the Committee of Adjustment deferred the minor variance application in order to' allow the site plan and minor variance applications to be considered by the City of Pickering Site Plan Advisory Committee. The applications were considered by the Site Plan Advisory Committee on February 23, 2016, and the Committee had no objection to the requested variances. Comment Official Plan and Zoning By-law Pickering Official Plan -Mixed Use Areas -City Centre Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 6172/03-"(H)RH/MU-1"-Multi Residential/Mixed Use (Hold Zone) Report PICA 06/16 Appropriateness of the Application March 9, 2016 Page 3 Requested variance to reduce building height requirements along Kingston Road: • the intent of the by-law in requiring a minimum building height is to ensure a type of built form and massing along Kingston Road • the by-law states that no building, part of a building or structure that is less than 16.0 metres and 6 storeys in height, or greater than 35.0 metres and 12 storeys in height, shall be erected on the lands • the existing site-specific zoning by-law definition for building height excludes roof structures, including a roof top terrace and mechanical enclosure • the applicant is proposing residential buildings with a minimum height of 12.0 metres with 4 storeys • the City's Official Plan policies for lands within the City Centre state that all new buildings are required to be at least three functional storeys • the proposed residential buildings will appear to be 6 storeys in height, as the buildings have been designed with a raised underground garage and a roof top terrace • if the proposed roof structure were calculated as part of the building height the proposed buildings would have a total building height of approximately 15.75 metres • the proposed height of the residential buildings adjacent to Kingston Road achieves the City's urban design objective of providing a strong building presence and an animated streetscape along Kingston Road • staff are of the opinion that this requested variance is appropriate for the development of the lands and i~ minor in nature Requested variances to reduce setbacks from Kingston Road and the west lot line: • the intent of the by-law in requiring a building envelope, is to maintain minimum ·setbacks from streets and abutting properties • the site specific by-law also sets out a build-to-zone along Kingston Road and along the western property line in order to ensure that the site design and layout of the buildings located on the property provide for a strong and identifiable urban edge • the by-law requires a building envelope and build-to-zone as shown on Schedule I to the By-law (6172/03), which illustrates a 4.5 metre setback along Kingston Road and the west lot line and a 3.0 metre setback along the south and east lot lines • the applicant is proposing to permit buildings to be located outside the building envelope having a minimum setback of 1.8 metres from the Kingston Road lot line and a minimum setback of 0.8 of a metre from the west lot line • as part of the development of the subject site the applicant is required to convey a 6.0 metre wide road widening to the ~egion of Durham, along the Kingston Road frontage • the site specific by-law did not include the required 6.0 metre wide road widening • the requested variance to reduce the building setback will provide an appropriate and functional building setback for tl)e development from Kingston Road 21 22 Report PICA 06/16 March 9, 2016 Page4 • the required building envelope along the west lot line was to provide a strong urban edge along a future public road • the owner is currently in the process of purchasing the road allowance, which was to be the future public road, along the west lot line to be developed as a private condominium road • as a result of the future purchase of the road allowance for a private condominium road, the owner has designed and sited the buildings along the west lot line to create a pedestrian friendly environment with patios projecting from the front of the residential dwelling units • the proposed development is compatible with the City Centre lands • the applicant is requesting to reduce the required building envelope on the subject lands, however the prescribed build-to-zone is being maintained • staff are of the opinion that the reduced setbacks from Kingston Road and the west lot line are appropriate for the development of the lands Requested variance to reduce building setback from the south property line: • the intent of the by-law in requiring buildings, in excess of 11-.0 metres in height, to be setback a minimum of 20.0 metres from the southern limits of the zone is to ensure that impacts from the development, such as overl9ok and privacy, are minimized for the existing residential properties immediately to the south along Avonmore Square • the site specific by-law was approved for a residential apartment building and this provision would ensure that an appropriate setback was maintained for any portion of a building in excess of 11.0 metres • the applicant is proposing to permit any portion of a building or structure in excess of 11.0 metres in height, to be setback a minimum of 17.0 metres from the southern limits of the zone · • the applicant is proposing a different built form, which will have a lesser impact on the existing residential dwelling • the City's Official Plan policies for lands within the City Centre state that new development in close proximity to established low density residential areas are required to be gradually transitioned in height • staff have utilized a 45 degree angular plane from the south property line at grade to provide a transition between the proposed development and the existing low density residential development to the south in order to minimize any adverse impact on the existing residents • the applicant has submitted an illustration (attached to this report) demonstrating that when applying a 45 degree angular plane from the south property line at grade the proposed buildings will be below the 45 degree angular plane • staff are of the opinion that the request to reduce the building setback from the south property line will not adversely impact the existing low density residential development to the south • the requested variance meets the intent of the Official Plan, the Zoning By-law and is appropriate and desirable for the development of the lands Report PICA 06/16 March 9, 2016 Page 5 Requested variance to reduce the minimum number of required parking spaces: • the intent of the by-law in requiring a minimum number of required parking spaces is to ensure an adequate supply of on-site parking is available to accommodate the parking requirements ofall permitted uses • the by-law requires a minimum 1.2 parking spaces per dwelling unit within a multiple dwelling vertical building to be provided in a below grade structure and a minimum of 0.3 of a parking space per dwelling unit for visitors • the applicant has submitted a Parking Justification Study, prepared by Trans-Plan, dated January 2016 • the applicant is proposing a parking ratio of 1.0 parking space per dwelling unit for residents and 0.2 of a parking space per dwelling unit for visitors • the submitted site plan illustrate a total of 164 parking spaces to be provided on- site including 136 parking spaces for residents and 28 parking spaces for visitors at grade • a total of 11 additional visitor parking spaces will be provided along the private condominium road • Trans-Plan indicates that the current parking standards that apply to the site can be further reduced for the following reasons: o the proposed unit sizes are relatively small and are comparable to typical apartment sizes · o smaller unit sizes generally cater to fewer persons per unit, resulting in lower auto ownership per unit and lower on-site parking demands o transit use is generally higher in the study area and auto ownership is generally lower compared to the rest of the City • staff are of the view that proposed parking ratio is appropriate and a sufficient supply of parking is provided on-site to serve the residents and visitors Requested variance to setback for at grade parking lots from south, east and west lot lines: • the intent of the by-law in requiring at-grade parking spaces to be located no closer than 3.0 metres from the limits of the zone is to ensure an appropriate landscape strip can be provided • . the applicant is proposing to reduce the required setback to 2.5 metres at the south lot line, 0.0 metres from the west lot line and 2.7 metres from the east lot line • an existing board-on-board privacy fence is along the south property line • the applicant has submitted a landscape plan, prepared by Cosburn Nauboris Ltd., illustrating that the proposed 2.5 metre wide landscape buffer strip along the south property line will accommodate deciduous tree and shrub plantings • the 0.0 metre setback from the west lot line is due to the future purchase of the adjacent lands to the west for a private condominium road • the 2.7 metre setback from the east lot line abuts a hydro corridor 23 24 Report PICA 06/16 March 9, 2016 Page 6 • the proposed landscape buffer strips are of sufficient width to accommodate landscaping and minimize any adverse impacts to the existing residents to the south • staff are of the opinion that the requested variance is minor in nature and is appropriate for the development of the lands Based on the discussion above, staff are of the opinion that the proposed variances are minor in nature, appropriate for the development of the land and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law and Official Plan. Input From Other Sources Site Plan Committee • no objections to the requested variances Engineering & Public Works Department • no concerns with the requested variances Date of report: March 3, 2016 Comments prepared by: Melissa Markham, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner-Development Review MM:NS:df Niles Surti, CIP, RPP Manager, Development Review & Urban Design J;\Documents\Development\0~3700 Committee of Adjustment (PCA Applications)\2016\PCA 06w16 2450734 Ontario Inc. (Marshall Homes)\Report\PCA 06w16-Revised March 3.doc Enclosures City Development Department PICKERING RECREATION COMPLEX Location Map FILE No: PICA 06/16 0:::: 0 .o ~ ~ 0 () DIANA, PRINCESS OF WALES PARK 0 0:::: 0 >-I APPLICANT: 2450734 Ontario Inc. (Marshall Homes) VILLAGE EAST PARK PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Con 1. Pt. Lot 20, 40R~6095 Part 1, (1555 & 1575 Kingston Road) DATE: Jan. 22,2016 SCALE 1 :5,000 PN·8 25 26 To permit buildings to be located outside the building envelope having a minimum setback of 1.8 metres from the Kingston Road lot line · To permit at grade parking lots to be no closer than 2.5 metres from the southern limit of the "(H}RHIMU-1" Zone To permit buildings to be located outside the building envelope having a minimum setback of 0.8 of a metre from the west lot line To permit at grade parking lots to be 0.0 metres from the western limit of the "(H)RHIMU-1" Zone To permit any portion of a building or· structure in excess of 11.0 metres in height, to be setback a minimum of 17.0 metres from the southern limits ofthe (H}RHIMU-1" zone City Development Department D --••. 1' Submitted Plan FILE No: P/CA06/16 APPLICANT: 2450734 Ontario Inc. {Marshall Homes) To permit a minimum building height of 12.0 metres and 4 To permit a minimum of 0.2 of a parking space per dwelling unit for visitors To permit a minimum of 1.0 parking space per dwelling unit for residents be provided both above and below grade To permit at grade parking lots to be no closer than 2.7 metres from the eastern limit of the "(H)RH/MU-1' Zone PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Con 1. Pt. Lot 20, 40R-6095 Part 1, F L AL IES 0 IS AVA LA LE FOR VIE N CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. DATE: Feb. 4, 2016 r- f. ===== E 0 t\i .,... ---·-_L E 0 t\i City Development Department TYPICAL SOUTH ELEVATION TYPICAL NORTH ELEVATION Submitted Plan FILE No: P/CA 06/16 APPLICANT: 2450734 Ontario Inc. (Marshall Homes) PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Con 1. Pt. Lot 20, 40R-6095 Part 1, (1555 & 1575 Kingston Road) FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CllY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DATE: Feb. 4, 2016 . 27 28 City Development Department TYPICAL WEST ELEVATION TYPICAL EAST ELEVATION Submitted Plan FILE No: P/CA 06/16 APPLICANT: 2450734 Ontario Inc. (Marshall Homes} PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Con 1. Pt. Lot 20, 40R-6095 Part 1, (1555 & 1575 Kingston Road) FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. DATE: Feb. 4, 2016 I i5 I~ I~ ·:::i l~i~----------~~----~----~~~i~ BLOCK4 WEST Submitted Plan FILE No: PICA 06/16 DRIVE AISLE APPLICANT: 2450734 Ontario Inc. (Marshall Homes) ' I fi? ' io. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Con 1. Pt. Lot 20, 40R-6095 Part 1, City Development Department (1555 & 1575 Kingston Road) FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. DATE: Feb. 4, 2016 29 30 . From: Subject: Application Melissa Markham, MCIP, RPP Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: PICA 11116 Meeting Date: March 9, 2016 Principal Planner-Development Review Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 11116 SR&R Bay Ridges (Plaza II) Ltd. Bayly Street The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2520, as amended by By-law 6705106, 6786107 and 7006109: • to permit covered and unenclosed porches, platforms and stairs to project a maximum of 2.4 metres outside the building envelope (along Bayly Street), as illustrated on Schedule II to By-law 6705106, as amended; whereas the by-law states that buildings and structures shall be located entirely within the building envelope as illustrated on Schedule II to By-law 6705106, as amended • to permit a building to be located outside the building envelope with a minimum setback of 3.0 metres from the south lot line, as illustrated on Schedule II to By-law 6705106, as amended; whereas the by-law states that buildings and structures shall be located entirely within the building envelope as illustrated on Schedule II to By-law 6705/06, as amended • for multiple dwelling-vertical buildings located within the "RHIMU-2" Zone and within the build-to-zone, any portion of a building or structure in excess of two .storeys in height, be setback a minimum of 0.0 metres from the main wall of the building or structure; whereas the by-law states that for multiple dwelling-vertical buildings located within the "RHIMU-2" Zone and within the build-to-zone, any portion of a building or structure in excess of two storeys in height, shall be setback a minimum of 3.0 metres from the main wall of the building or structure • to permit below grade structures beyond the limits of the building envelope identified on Schedule II to By-law 6705106, as amended, with a 0.0 metre setback from the limits of the lands; whereas the by-law states that below grade structures shall be permitted beyond the limits of the building envelope identified on Schedule II to By-law 6705106, as amended, but no closer than 0.5 metres from the limits of the lands • to permit the minimum aggregate gross leasable floor area for all non-residential uses to be 1,630 square metres; whereas the by-law states the minimum aggregate gross leasable floor area for all non-residential uses shall be 2,410 square metres which can be built in three phases with the first phase having a minimum of 1,300 gross leasable floor area non-residential uses Report PICA 11/16 March 9, 2016 31 Page 2 The applicant is requesting approval of this minor variance application in order to obtain Site Plan Approval for a 23-storey apartment building containing 214 units and a 3-storey building containing 22 stacked units along Bayly Street. Recommendation The City Development Department 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, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the variances. apply only to the proposed development, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans. 2. That the applicant obtain Site Plan Approval for the proposed development by March 9, 2017, or this decision shall become null and void. Comment Official Plan and Zoning By-law Pickering Official Plan -Mixed Use Areas -Mixed Corridors within the Bay Ridges Neighbourhood Zoning By-law 2520, as amended by By-law 6705/06, 6786/07, 7006/09-"(H)RH/MU-2"- Multi Residential/Mixed Use (Hold Zone) Appropriateness of the Application Requested variances to perm if parches, platforms and stairs outside of the building envelope along Bayly Street • the intent of the by-law in requiring a building envelope is to maintain certain setbacks from streets and abutting properties • the site specific by-law also sets out a build-to-zone along Bayly Street in order to ensure that the site design and la"yout of the buildings located on the property provided for a strong and identifiable urban edge • the by-law requires a building envelope and build-to-zone as shown on Schedule II to the By-law (6705/06), which illustrates a 3.0 metre setback along Bayly Street • the applicant is proposing to permit covered and unenclosed porches, platforms and stairs to project a maximum of 2.4 metres outside the building envelope along Bayly Street • the proposed development along Bayly Street has been design~d and sited with minimum setbacks to the main wall of the multiple dwelling-vertical building, in order to accommodate the proposed porches, platforms and stairs projecting from the front of th~ building variances are required 32 Report PICA 11/16 March 9, 2016 Page 3 • the building facades adjacent to Bayly Street have been designed with principal entrances facing the street to create an active streetscape • an appropriate setback from the sidewalk and Bayly Street is being maintained . • the proposed development is compatible with surrounding development • staff are of the opinion that the encroachment of covered and unenclosed porches, platforms and stairs into the setback from ·Bayly Street is appropriate for the development of the lands Requested variance to reduce building setback from the south lot line • the intent of the by-law in requiring a building envelope from the south lot line is to ensure that building siting and massing provides appropriate interfaces with existing development and the Douglas Ravine • the Bay Ridges Plaza Redevelopment Development Guidelines states that the presence of the Douglas Ravine at the site's easterly periphery is a major asset and that views into the Ravine, framed by an east-west road, should be provided • the by-law requires a building envelope as shown on Schedule II to the By-law (6705/06), which illustrates a minimum 4.0 metre setback along the south lot line • the applicant is proposing to permit a building to be located outside the building ·envelope with a setback of 3.0 metres from the south lot line • the proposed development will not impact access or views into Douglas Ravine • the proposed location of the apartment building is setback greater than 21 metres from the existing residential development to the south • the requested variances to reduce the building setback from the south lot line will not adversely impact the views to Douglas Ravine or development to the south • staff are of the opinion that the reduced setback from the south lot line is appropriate for the development of the lands Requested variance to reduce the setback for below grade. parking structures • the intent of the by-law in requiring a 0.5 metre setback for below grade parking structures from the limits of the lands is to ensure that the structure does not encroach onto other lands and impact adjacent landowners • the applicant is requesting to permit below grade structures beyond the limits of the building envelope with a 0.0 metre setback from the limits of the lands • the applicant has requested this variance in order to accommodate the required parking spaces in a more efficient manner within the below grade structure • the requested variance to reduce the setback for below grade parking structure will have no impact on the existing condominium development to the west • staff is of the opinion that the reduction in setback for below grade parking structures is minor in nature and is appropriate for the development of the lands Report PICA 11/16 March 9, 2016 Page4 Requested variance to reduce the minimum set back required for buildings located with the build-to-zone in excess of two storeys in height • the intent of the by-law in requiring that any portion of a building or structure in excess of two storeys in height be set back a minimum of 3.0 metres from the main wall of the building or structure is to create a podium feature for a tower building and to establish a pedestrian scale environment • the applicant is proposing for multiple dwelling-vertical buildings located within the "RH-MU-2" Zone and within the build-to-zone, any portion of a building or structure in excess of two storeys in height, be setback 0.0 metres from the main wall of the building or structure • the site specific by-law was approved for a different built form along Bayly Street, which contemplated a high-rise building with the need for a base or podium style of · development to ensure a pedestrian scale environment along Bayly Street • building set backs above the second storey are typically required for mid-rise and high-rise buildings (approximately 6 storeys or greater) based on the context of the street, adjacent building relationships and building proportion • the proposed multiple dwelling-vertical building along Bayly Street is three storeys • the 0.0 metres setback above the second storey maintains the character of the existing high-rise building to the west · • the proposed built form will maintain a well-defined street edge and pedestrian environment • staff are of the opinion that the reduced set back required for buildings located with the build-to-zone in excess of two storeys in height is appropriate for the development of the lands Requested variance to reduce the minimum aggregate gross leasable floor area for commercial space • the intent of the by-law in requiring a minimum aggregate gross leasable floor area (GLFA) of 2,410 square metres, which can be built in three phases, is to provide sufficient commercial space to service surrounding community • the design objectives for this redevelopment area is to create a higher intensity of development and provide a mix of uses to create a vibrant urban community • the applicant is not proposing any new GLFA within this phase of development • the applicant is requesting to permit the minimum aggregate gross leasable floor area for all non-residential uses to be 1 ,630 square metres, which was developed in previous phases • the by-law was intended to provide commercial space to serve some of the day-to-day needs of the existing and future residents of the neighbourhood, which were previously served by two commercial plazas; Bay Ridges Plaza (5,200 square metres) and Square Boy Plaza (522 square metres) · • the recommendation report, for the site-specific by-law, stated that residents were concerned with the loss of retail floor space resulting from the development of the subject lands 33 34 Report PICA 11/16 March 9, 2016 Page 5 • in order to address residents' concerns, the initial phase of development at the intersection of St. Martins Drive and Bayly Street was required to inclu.de commercial floor space • current tenants within the existing commercial space include a take-out restaurant, food stores and a pharmacy • 422 square metres of space is currently occupied and the applicant has tried to lease the vacant commercial space with minimal success • staff is of the opinion that the reduction in the minimum aggregate Gross Leasable Floor Area to 1 ,630 square metres of commercial space is sufficient to service the surrounding community and will not affect the design and land use objectives of the neighbourhood • the requested variance meets the intent of the Official Plan, the Zoning By-law and is appropriate and desirable for the development of the lands Input From Other Sources Site Plan Committee • no objections to approval Engineering & Public Works Department • no comments on minor variance application Date of report: March 4, 2016 Comments prepared by: Melissa Markham, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner-Development Review MM:NS:df .. \ Niles S rti, MCIP, RPP Manager, Development Review & Urban Design J:\Documents\Development\D-3700 Committee of Adjustment (PCA Applications)\2016\PCA 11-16 SR & R Bay Ridges (Plaza II) Ltd\Report\PCA 11~16.doc Enclosures ST. MARTIN'S ANGLICAN CHURCH l I .• al-~t City Development Department Location Map FILE No: PICA 11/16 APPLICANT: SR&R Bay Ridges PROPERTY DESCRIPTION. North Part o BlockY, Plan M16, Parts 5, 10 12, 13, 17-19, • 40R-27468 Part 1 40R-27608 Parts 6-10 40R-28023 & Parts 14, 15, 16, 40R-25170 (1261 Bayly Street) DATE: Feb. 22, 2016 SCALE 1 :5000 PN-3 35 permit below grade structures beyond the limits of the building envelope identified on Schedule II to By-law 6705/06, as amended, with a 0.0 metre setback from the limits of the lands To permit multiple dwelling-vertical buildings located within the "RH/MU-2" Zone, and within the build-to-zone, any portion of a building or structure in excess of two storeys in height, shall be setback a minimum of 0.0 metres from the main wall of the building or structure To permit a building to be located outside the building envelope with a minimum setback of 3.0 metres from the south lot line, as illustrated on Schedule II to By-law 6705/06, as amended Submitted Plan City Development Department FILE No: P/CA 11/16 APPLICANT: SR&R Bay Ridges PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: To permit covered and unenclosed porches, platforms and stairs to project a maximum of 2.4 metres outside the building envelope (along Bayly Street), as illustrated on Schedule II to By-law 67~5/06, as amended DATE:Feb.22,2016 . Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Numbers: PICA 12116 & PICA 13116 Meeting Date: March 9, 2016 From: ·Melissa Markham, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner-Development Review Subject: Committee of Adjustment Applications PICA 12116 & PICA 13116 Marshall Homes (Copperfield) Ltd. 1423 Rougemount Drive Applications PICA 12116 (Proposed Retained Parcel) The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036 as amended, to permit a minimum lot frontage of 15.2 metres and a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling, whereas the. by-law requires a minimum lot frontage of 18.0 metres and a minimum side yard width of 1.8 metres where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling. PICA 13116 (Proposed Severed Parcel) The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036 as amended, to permit a minimum lot frontage of 15.2 metres and a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling, whereas the by-law requires a minimum lot frontage of 18.0 metres and a minimum side yard width of 1.8 nietres where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling. The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to create one additional lot through the Region of Durham Land Division Committee and obtain a building permit to construct a two-storey detached dwelling on the proposed severed parcel and to replace an existing dwelling with a new two-storey detached dwelling on the proposed retained parcel. Recommendation PICA 12/16 (Proposed Retained Parcel) The City Development Department considers the minimum lot frontage of 15.2 metres for the proposed retained parcel and a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling 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, subject to the following conditions: 37 38 Report PICA 12116 & PICA 13116 March 9, 2016 Page 2 1. That the variance apply only to the proposed lot configuration for the proposed retained parcel, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans. 2. That the applicant obtain final clearance for Land Division Application LD 086112 by October 24, 2016, or this decision shall become null and void. 3. That the applicant submit a preliminary site plan indicating proposed driveway locations to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering & Public Works Department. 4. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction on the proposed retained parcel by February 18, 2017, or this decision affecting the proposed detached dwelling shall become null and void . . Recommendation PICA 13/16 (Proposed Severed Parcel) The City Development Department considers the minimum lot frontage of 15.2 metres for the proposed severed parcel and a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling 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, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the variance apply only to the proposed lot configuration for the proposed severed parcel, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans. 2. That the applicant obtain final clearance for Land Division Application LD 086112 by October 24, 2016, or this decision shall become null and void. 3. That the applicant submit a preliminary site plan indicating proposed driveway locations to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering & Public Works Department. 4. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction on the proposed retained parcel by February 18, 2017, or this decision affecting the proposed detached dwelling shall become null and void. Background On February 18, 2015, the Committee of Adjustment conditionally approved a previous Minor Variance Application for the subject property (PICA 09115 and PICA 1 0115). The previous minor variance application proposed a minimum lot frontage of 15.2 metres and a minimum side yard width of 1.2 metres where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling. The Committee of Adjustment conditionally approved a minimum lot frontage of 15.2 metres and a revised minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling. Report PICA 12116 & PICA 13116 March 9, 2016 Page3 The applicant appealed the Committee's decision to the Ontario Municipal Board. The application was heard by the Ontario Municipal Board on July 27, 2015. An Ontario Municipal Board decision was received on January 19, 2016 approving the Committee of Adjustment decision to permit a minimum lot frontage of 15.2 metres and a side yard width of 1.5 metres. The application became null and void on February 17, 2016, since the conditions of approval were not completed. ' Comment Official Plan and Zoning By-law Pickering Official Plan -"Urban Residential -Low Density Areas" within the Rougemount · Neighbourhood Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 2912188-"R3"-Third Density Residential . Zone and "G" -Greenbelt-Conservation Zone Appropriateness of the Application Reduced Lot Frontage Variances • the intent of the minimum lot frontage requirement is to ensure a usable lot size that is compatible with the neighbourhood • since the adoption of the 1988 area-specific zoning by-law amendment, the City has approved several rezoning applications for a number .of properties along Rougemount Drive, between Kingston Road and Altona Road, which established a minimum lot frontage of 15.0 metres • lot frontages in the area range from 15.0 metres to 38.0 metres • the reduced lot frontage from 18.0 metres to 15.2 metres continues to provide a usable lot size due to the increased depth of these lots • the proposed lot frontages would allow for the development of detached dwellings with appropriate performance standards to ensure compatibility of any future development with the neighbourhood charaCter established along Rougemount Drive • the proposed 15.2 metre lots are generally consistent with the development pattern along the northerly portion of Rougemount Drive • the requested lot frontage variances are minor in nature and maintains the intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law Reduced Side Yard Width Variances • the intent of a minimum side yard width is to provide an appropriate separation distance between structures on abutting properties in order to ensure compatibility with the existing neighbourhood, provide appropriate pedestrian access between dwellings, and to accommodate grading, drainage and residential services such as air conditioning units and utility meters • the current zoning by-law requires a minimum side yard setback of 1.8 metres, the application is proposing a reduction to 1.5 metres 39 40 Report PICA 12116 & PICA 13116 March 9, 2016 Page4 • since the adoption of the 1988 area-specific zoning by-law amendment, the City has approved several rezoning applications for a number of properties along Rougemount Drive, between Kingston Road and Altona Road, which established a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres • to ensure the unique character along Rougemount Drive is maintained and protected, a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres is to be provided • the proposed side yard setbacks will provide an adequate separation between the dwelling and the property line to accommodate pedestrian access, grading, drainage and residential utility services • the proposed side yard setbacks will provide an appropriate setback and separation from abutting properties with respect to privacy, views and openness • the proposed side yard setbacks will maintain the character of the existing 1 residential community • the requested side yard width variances are minor in nature and maintains the intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law Input From Other Sources Engineering & Public Works Department • no objections to approval Date of report: March 3, 2016 Comments prepared by: Amy Emm, MCIP, RPP Melissa Markham, MCIP, RPP Planner II · Principal Planner, Development Review AE:MM:df J:\Oocuments\Development\D-3700 Committee of Adjustment (PCAApplicatlons)\2016\PCA 12-16 & PCA 13-16 Marshall Homes (Coppelfield) Ltd\Report\PCA 12-16 & PCA 13-16.doc Enclosures City Development Department ~~~~~r--.---L--~~~---------~ r---;---------1 O::r-----------; 1---'-..----~ 0)---------1 1"'-----+------1 !zt------------i '------t----~ 6t-------~ r-----'---------1 a~--~---; ~ ~--------~6r.====~--~~~---~ 0:: Location Map FILE No: PICA 12116 & PICA 13116 APPLICANT: Marshall Homes {Copperfield) Ltd. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Part of Lot 27 Plan 228 -41 w > 0:: : 0 1- -z => 0 ::2 : w (. 9 => 0 0::: to pe r m i t a mi n i m u m lo t fr o n t a g e of 15 . 2 me t r e s E ~ ..- - PR O P O S E D 2 ST O R E Y DW E L L I N G 77 . 7 m PA R T l ~ I I ~ I I I ~ ~I ~Lill i ;: g ·- J 3'"~ =~~~ I <O " " " " " " - .. - PR O P O S E D DR I V E W A Y ;u Su b m i t t e d Pl a n to pe r m i t a mi n i m u m si d e ya r d wi d t h of 1. 5 me t r e s wh e r e a ga r a g e is er e c t e d as pa r t of a de t a c h e d dw e l i i n g . FI L E No : P/ C A 12 / 1 6 & P/ C A 13 / 1 6 AP P L I C A N T : Ma r s h a l l Ho m e s (C o p p e r f i e l d ) Lt d . Ci t y De v e l o p m e n t De p a r t m e n t PR O P E R T Y DE S C R I P T I O N : Pa r t of Lo t 27 Pl a n 22 8 (1 4 2 3 Ro u g e m o u n t ) FU L L SC A L E CO P I E S OF TH I S PL A N AR E AV A I L A B L E FO R VI E W I N G AT TH E Cl l Y OF PI C K E R I N G Cl l Y DE V E L O P M E N T DE P A R T M E N T . . LANDS TO BE CONVEYED TOTRCA PART3 N 1' DATE: Feb. 18,2016