Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJanuary 13 2021 - Revised Revised Committee of Adjustment Agenda Meeting Number: 1 Date: Wednesday, January 13, 2021 pickering.ca REVISED Agenda Committee of Adjustment Wednesday, January 13, 2021 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting Page Number 1. Disclosure of Interest 2. Adoption of Agenda 3. Adoption of Minutes from December 9, 2020 1-14 4. Report 4.1 P/CA 16/19 15-20 1155886 Ontario Inc. 425 Whitevale Road 4.2 P/CA 66/20 21-33 Trillium Housing Oak Nonprofit Corporation 2635 William Jackson Drive 4.3 P/CA 01/21 34-43 M. & M. Henry 1044 Moorelands Crescent 4.4 P/CA 02/21 44-48 C. & J. Cagna 2615 Cerise Manor 4.5 P/CA 04/21 49-56 M. & J. Crokidas 1869 Woodview Avenue 4.6 P/CA 05/21 – Revised 57-61 J. Soo & S. Tam 1860 Glendale Drive 5. Adjournment For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Lesley Dunne Telephone: 905.420.4660, extension 2024 Email: ldunne@pickering.ca Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, December 9, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting Page 1 of 14 Pending Adoption Present Tom Copeland – Vice-Chair David Johnson – Chair Eric Newton Denise Rundle Sean Wiley Also Present Deborah Wylie, Secretary-Treasurer Lesley Dunne, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer 1.Disclosure of Interest No disclosures of interest were noted. 2.Adoption of Agenda Moved by Denise Rundle Seconded by Eric Newton That the agenda for the Wednesday, December 9, 2020 meeting be adopted. Carried Unanimously 3.Adoption of Minutes Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Tom Copeland That the minutes of the 9th meeting of the Committee of Adjustment held Wednesday, November 11, 2020 be adopted. Carried Unanimously -1- Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, December 9, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting Page 2 of 14 4. Reports 4.1 (Deferred at the November 11, 2020 meeting) P/CA 63/20 A. & M. Washington 1674 Dellbrook Avenue The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 2024/85 and By-law 2235/86, to permit an uncovered platform (deck) and associated steps not exceeding 2.45 metres in height above grade and not projecting more than 2.8 metres into the required rear yard and not more than 1.2 metres in the required south side yard, whereas the By-law requires uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.5 metres into any required front or rear yard and not more than 0.5 metres into any required side yard. The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit to revise a constructed uncovered deck. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to a condition. Written comments were received from the City’s Building Services Section expressing no comments on the application. Written comments were received from the City’s Engineering Services Department expressing no comments on the application. Morlan Washington, applicant, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. In response to a question from a Committee Member, Morlan Washington stated he has no problem with removing a portion of the deck as per the revised drawings and removal would occur once the ground is soft enough to do so. After considering the City Development’s report, that a reduction in the size of the deck will address privacy concerns, that no further comments have been received from the neighbour, Building Services or Engineering Services, and that the application appears to meet the four tests of the Planning Act, Sean Wiley moved the following motion: -2- Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, December 9, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting Page 3 of 14 Moved by Sean Wiley Seconded by Eric Newton That application P/CA 63/20 by A. & M. Washington, be Approved on the grounds that the requested variances are minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, subject to the following condition: 1. That these variances apply only to the proposed uncovered deck and associated steps, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibit 2 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated December 9, 2020). Carried Unanimously 4.2 P/CA 65/20 4AMCA Enterprises Ltd. 606 Annland Street The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-law 7610/18, to: • recognize a minimum lot frontage of 8.6 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum lot frontage of 15 metres; • recognize a minimum lot area of 130 square metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum lot area of 460 square metres; • permit a minimum front yard setback of 2.3 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum front yard setback of 7.5 metres; • permit a minimum rear yard setback of 1.6 metres; whereas the By-law requires a minimum rear yard setback of 7.5 metres; • permit a minimum east side yard setback of 0.3 metres, and a minimum west side yard setback of 1.3 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum side yard setback of 1.5 metres on one side, 2.4 metres on the other side; • permit a maximum lot coverage of 52 percent, whereas the By-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent; and • permit an uncovered platform (front porch) not projecting more than 7.2 metres into the required front yard, whereas the By-law requires uncovered steps and platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.5 metres into any required front yard and not more than 1.0 metres into any required side yard. -3- Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, December 9, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting Page 4 of 14 The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit for a detached dwelling. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending the application be tabled. Written comments were received from the City’s Building Services Section expressing no comments on the application. Written comments were received from the City’s Engineering Services Department stating to ensure additional percentage of lot coverage does not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lot. In addition, consideration for rain harvesting or other low impact development (LID) measures be made at the Building Permit stage if increasing the imperviousness of the lot surface. Written comments were received from the owners of 660 Pleasant Street expressing concerns with the proposed rear yard setback of 1.6 metres, as the tall dwelling will tower over the side yard of 660 Pleasant Street. The comments also indicated that the proposed dwelling has a number of windows at the rear of the dwelling that will look into the home to the north. In addition, the proposed height and lot coverage are not in line with the size of the lot, and that an appropriate lot should have been considered for the proposed structure. Concerns regarding privacy and height were identified with the proposed roof terrace, as most homes in the area are bungalows or 2-storey dwellings. A third-floor balcony in this location will look into several surrounding yards. The modern design with a flat roof and rooftop balcony are not in keeping with the style of dwellings in the surrounding streets. The comments noted that the Infill and Replacement Housing Study is looking to regulate roof pitch and design. Helen Qamar, applicant, and Joe Battaglia, agent, were present to represent the application. Alanna Turney of 660 Pleasant Street, Kathleen Fountain of 604 Annland Street, and Corey Leadbetter of 604 Annland Street were present in objection to the application. Helen Qamar, applicant, advised the Committee that she agreed with the staff recommendation to table the application. She also indicated that her family will be residing in the house. Alanna Turney, owner of 660 Pleasant Street, the property to the north of the subject lands, addressed the Committee indicating that while she recognized restrictions on development due to the size of the 606 Annland Street, the style of the proposed dwelling does not fit the neighbourhood. The scale and size of the existing house is appropriate. She indicated concerns with the proposed three storey dwelling regarding the proposed rear yard setback, effects of towering and shadowing over adjacent dwellings, and overlook from the roof top deck. -4- Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, December 9, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting Page 5 of 14 Kathleen Fountain, resides at 604 Annland Street, indicated that while she is not opposed to redevelopment, she objects to the requested variances and agrees with the privacy and shadowing concerns voiced by the owner of 660 Pleasant Street. She voiced an additional concern over blocking of air flow, as well as, safety issues and obstruction of sight lines that the proposed front porch would create. Corey Leadbetter, owner of 604 Annland Street, resides on Commerce Street, objected to the requested variances as they would permit too much house on a tiny lot. He suggested that the new home be constructed to the footprint of the existing dwelling. Joe Battaglia, agent, agreed with staff’s recommendation to table the application to allow submitted comments to be addressed. Some changes to the proposed dwelling have already been initiated which include a sloping a portion of the roof to the property to the north. In response to comments regarding shadowing, Joe Battaglia indicated that the proposed dwelling would not impact the noon and afternoon sunlight that 604 Annland Street enjoys from the south and west directions. Tom Copeland recommended the applicant’s agent review the Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhood Precincts Guidelines. He also indicated that the City and City Council undertook extensive community consultation resulting in these guidelines to help applicants prepare for infill development, and moved the following: Moved by Tom Copeland Seconded by Eric Newton That application P/CA 65/20 by 4AMCA Enterprises Ltd., be Tabled to allow the applicant to consider design elements that address the Urban Design Guidelines for Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhood Precincts. Carried Unanimously 4.3 P/CA 67/20 P. Rahaman 1806 Westcreek Drive The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 2224/86, to permit an uncovered platform (deck) not exceeding 1.1 metres in height above grade and not projecting more than 3.5 metres into the required rear yard, whereas the By-law permits uncovered steps and platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.5 metres into any required front or rear yard and not more than 0.5 metres into any required side yard. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit for an uncovered deck. -5- Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, December 9, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting Page 6 of 14 The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to a condition. Written comments were received from the City’s Building Services Section expressing no comments on the application. Written comments were received from the City’s Engineering Services Department expressing no comments on the application. Spencer Joy, agent, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Spencer Joy stated the approvals are required in order to start building in the spring. After considering the City Development’s report, that no comments in opposition were received from the immediate surrounding neighbours, and that the application appears to meet the four tests of the Planning Act, Denise Rundle moved the following motion: Moved by Denise Rundle Seconded by Sean Wiley That application P/CA 67/20 by P. Rahaman, be Approved on the grounds that the requested variances are minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, subject to the following condition: 1. That these variances apply only to the proposed uncovered deck, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2 & 3 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated December 9, 2020). Carried Unanimously 4.4 P/CA 68/20 P. Wheatle 563 Rougemount Drive The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended, to permit a maximum lot coverage of 34 percent, whereas the by-law establishes a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to facilitate a future Land Division application through the Region of Durham’s Land Division Committee to adjust a lot line. -6- Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, December 9, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting Page 7 of 14 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 Building Services Section expressing no comments on the application. Written comments were received from the City’s Engineering Services Department expressing no comments on the application. Peter Wheatle, applicant, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Peter Wheatle stated Committee of Adjustment approval is required in order to move forward with the Land Division application. In response to a question from a Committee Member, Peter Wheatle stated site plans have been provided to the City for the two proposed severed lots and that no additional variances will be required. After considering the City Development’s report, that 1 percent maximum increase in lot coverage is minor in nature, and no comments were received from Building Services and Engineering Services, Sean Wiley moved the following motion: Moved by Sean Wiley Seconded by Eric Newton That application P/CA 68/20 by P. Wheatle, be Approved on the grounds that the requested variance is minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, subject to the following conditions: 1. That this variance apply only to the proposed “Part 1” as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans. 2. That this variance only apply should a Land Division application generally reflecting the applicant’s submitted plans be approved by the Region of Durham Land Division Committee. Carried Unanimously 4.5 P/CA 69/20 8543941 Canada Corp. 949 Dillingham Road The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-law 3981/71 to permit an outdoor swimming pool accessory to a tavern/patio bar, whereas the By-law does not permit a swimming pool. -7- Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, December 9, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting Page 8 of 14 The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to permit the conversion of an existing water fountain feature to an outdoor swimming pool accessory to a tavern/patio bar. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to a condition. Written comments were received from the City’s Building Services Section expressing no comments on the application. Written comments were received from the City’s Engineering Services Department expressing no comments on the application. Written comments were received from Regional Councillor Ward 2, Bill McLean in opposition of the application. Written comments were received from Regional Councillor Ward 1, Kevin Ashe in support of the application. Robert Gawkins, applicant, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. In response to questions from Committee Members, Robert Gawkins stated the fountain is in ground; there will be no construction required to convert the fountain into a pool; and the size of the existing fountain is approximately 24 feet x 24 feet x 4 feet. In response to a question from a Committee Member, the Secretary-Treasurer indicated no building permit is required for the conversion of the fountain and the fence already exists. There are fencing requirements for pools and the applicant may already meet the requirements as the Engineering Services department were circulated and they have no comments on the application. After considering the City Development’s report, listening to the applicant’s response to questions from Committee Members, that no comments were received Building Services and Engineering Services, and that the proposal appears to be a simple conversion of use of an existing feature, Tom Copeland moved the following motion: Moved by Tom Copeland Seconded by Eric Newton That application P/CA 69/20 by 8543941 Canada Corp., be Approved on the grounds that the requested variance is minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, subject to the following condition: -8- Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, December 9, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting Page 9 of 14 1.That this variance apply only to the subject property, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans. Carried Unanimously 4.6 P/CA 70/20 Daniels LR Corporation 1525 Kingston Road The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 7553/17, as amended, to permit: •air conditioners located in the front yard of a lot, whereas the By-law permits air conditioners on a lot provided they are located in the rear yard or interior side yard or on a balcony or roof; and •a minimum main wall stepback of 0.0 metres on a building face abutting a street line for a building equal to or less than 37.5 metres in height, whereas the By-law requires a minimum main wall stepback of 1.5 metres between 4.5 metres and 15.0 metres in height on any building face abutting a street line for buildings equal to or less than 37.5 metres in height. The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain Site Plan Approval for stacked townhouses. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval. Written comments were received from the City’s Building Services Section expressing no comments on the application. Written comments were received from the City’s Engineering Services Department expressing no comments on the application. Sarah Millar, agent, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. In response to a question from a Committee Member, Sarah Millar stated the distance between the property line and the sidewalk is 0.9 metres. After considering the City Development’s report; understanding locating air conditioner units between the building and the street on back to back stacked townhouses can’t be avoided, trusting the site plan process will ensure there will be adequate landscaping and screening of air conditioning units, and that the application appears to meet the four tests of the Planning Act, Denise Rundle moved the following motion: -9- Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, December 9, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting Page 10 of 14 Moved by Denise Rundle Seconded by Tom Copeland That application P/CA 70/20 by Daniels LT Corporation, be Approved on the grounds that the requested variances are minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law (refer to Exhibit 1 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated December 9, 2020). Carried Unanimously 4.7 P/CA 71/20 to P/CA 73/20 Zavala Developments Inc. 1071, 1073, and 1075 Orenda Street P/CA 71/20 (1071 Orenda Street) The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 7364/14: • to permit a minimum interior side yard of 0.4 metres from the westerly lot line, whereas the by-law requires a minimum interior side yard of 0.6 metres; • to permit eaves and eaves troughs to project up to 0.0 metres from the westerly property line whereas the by-law requires projections of eaves and eaves troughs to project no further than half the distance of the required yard. P/CA 72 /20 (1073 Orenda Street) The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 7364/14: • to permit a minimum interior side yard of 0.4 metres from the westerly lot line, whereas the by-law requires a minimum interior side yard of 0.6 metres; • to permit a minimum rear yard of 5.8 metres, whereas the by-law requires a minimum rear yard of 6.0 metres; • to permit eaves and eaves troughs to project up to 0.0 metres from the westerly property line whereas the by-law requires projections of eaves and eaves troughs to project no further than half the distance of the required yard. P/CA 73 /20 (1075 Orenda Street) The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 7364/14: • to permit a minimum interior side yard of 0.4 metres from the westerly lot line, whereas the by-law requires a minimum interior side yard of 0.6 metres; • to permit a minimum rear yard of 4.8 metres, whereas the by-law requires a minimum rear yard of 6.0 metres; -10- Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, December 9, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting Page 11 of 14 • to permit eaves and eaves troughs to project up to 0.0 metres from the westerly property line whereas the by-law requires projections of eaves and eaves troughs to project no further than half the distance of the required yard. The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain building permits for three detached dwellings. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to a condition. Written comments were received from the City’s Building Services Section expressing no comments on the application. Written comments were received from the City’s Engineering Services Department indicating that after reviewing the overall grading plan, it appears the rear downspouts are going to rain barrels and all other downspouts are connected to a storm/RDC system. As a result, Engineering Services do not see an issue with the requested projection of eaves and eaves troughs up to 0.0 metre to the property line. Billy Tung, agent, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. In response to a question from a Committee Member, Billy Tung stated the rain barrels are provided to all landowners within the Seaton community as part of the low impact development measures. Billy Tung stated he is not sure if the rain barrels will be a permanent structure that cannot be removed at some point by the purchaser of the property. In addition, on behalf of his client, Zavala Developments Inc., arrangements will be made with Legal Services for submission of Part Lot Control applications. After considering the City Development’s report, the addition of Condition #2 requiring the submission of an application for Part Lot Control; and that the application appears to meet the four tests of the Planning Act; Denise Rundle moved the following motion: Moved by Denise Rundle Seconded by Sean Wiley That applications P/CA 71/20, P/CA 72/20 and 73/20 by Zavala Developments Inc., be Approved on the grounds that the requested variances are minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the variances apply only to the subject properties, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, & 4 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated December 9, 2020). -11- Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, December 9, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting Page 12 of 14 2. That the variances apply only should an application for Part Lot Control as generally shown on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, & 4 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated December 9, 2020) be approved by the City by December 31, 2021. Carried Unanimously 4.8 P/CA 74/20 Marshall Homes (Copperfield) Ltd. 1855 Rosebank Road (Lot 6) The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 1929/84, to permit a maximum lot coverage of 41 percent, whereas the By-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 38 percent. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit for a detached dwelling. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to a condition. Written comments were received from the City’s Building Services Section expressing no comments on the application. Written comments were received from the City’s Engineering Services Department stating to ensure additional percentage of lot coverage does not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lot. In addition, consideration for rain harvesting or other low impact development (LID) measures be made at the Building Permit stage if increasing the imperviousness of the lot surface Samantha Bateman, applicant, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Samantha Bateman stated the building footprint has not changed and that the lot coverage was missed in the previous minor variance application. In response to a question from a Committee Member, Samantha Bateman provided clarification on the Exhibits #2 and #3 of the staff report. Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Tom Copeland That application P/CA 74/20 by Marshall Homes (Copperfield) Ltd., be Approved on the grounds that the requested variance is minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, subject to the following condition: -12- Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, December 9, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting Page 13 of 14 1 That this variance apply only to the proposed detached dwelling, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2 & 3 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated December 9, 2020). Carried Unanimously 5. Other Business 5.1 Appointment of Chairperson Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Denise Rundle That David Johnson be appointed as Chairperson for the 2021 term. Carried Unanimously 5.2 Appointment of Vice-Chairperson Moved by Sean Wiley Seconded by Denise Rundle That Tom Copeland be appointed as Vice-Chairperson for the 2021 term. Carried Unanimously 5.3 Acknowledgement David Johnson, Chair, noted this was the last meeting of the year and thanked City Staff and Committee Members for their hard work and support throughout the year. 5.4 City Staff Recognition Sean Wiley, Committee Member, put forward a motion on behalf of the Committee Members for recognition of City Staff for successful organization and management of virtual meetings in 2020 and moved the following motion: Moved by Sean Wiley Seconded by Eric Newton That the City Planning staff and Technology support staff be commended by City Council and the City CAO for their organizational efforts to successfully and professionally enable and conduct Committee of Adjustment meetings in 2020. -13- Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, December 9, 2020 7:00 pm Electronic Meeting Page 14 of 14 Throughout 2020 under the strain of the COVID pandemic, yet highly mindful of the needs of the community, the Planning Department along with Technology support developed the means and trained and guided the Committee, resulting in successful Committee of Adjustment meetings as per regulations and City rules of procedure and allowing for continued meetings and City public engagement. The Committee of Adjustment is greatly appreciative of these efforts to facilitate the City’s service to the community. Carried Unanimously 6. Adjournment Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Tom Copeland That the 10th meeting of the 2020 Committee of Adjustment be adjourned at 8:12 pm pm and the next meeting of the Committee of Adjustment be held on Wednesday, January 13, 2020. Carried Unanimously __________________________ Date __________________________ Chair __________________________ Assistant Secretary-Treasurer -14- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: P/CA 16/19 Date: January 13, 2021 From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application P/CA 16/19 1155886 Ontario Inc. 425 Whitevale Road Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by By-law 2677/88, 5629/00 and 6828/08, to permit: • a maximum of two dwelling units on the property, whereas the By-law permits a maximum of one dwelling unit on the property; and • a professional office that is not a component of a day space use or included in the gross leasable floor area calculation of the day spa use, whereas the By-law permits a professional office as a component of a day spa use, and shall be included in the gross leasable floor area calculation of the day spa use. The applicant requests approval of these variances to recognize two existing uses that are not permitted in the current zoning. Recommendation The City Development Department considers the requested variances to permit an additional dwelling unit and a professional office as an independent use, in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law, desirable for the appropriate development of the land and minor in nature, and therefore recommends Approval of the proposed variances, subject to the following conditions: 1. That a maximum of two dwelling units shall be permitted within the subject building. 2. That the professional office on the ground floor have a maximum gross leasable floor area of 115 square metres. 3. That the professional office on the second floor have a maximum gross leasable floor area of 140 square metres. 4. That the applicant submit revised site plan and floor plans for the subject building, including an Ontario Building Code & Zoning matrix, within three months. 5. That the applicant obtain a change of use permit for the ground floor professional office within three months. -15- Report P/CA 16/19 January 13, 2021 Page 2 Comment Official Plan and Zoning By-law The subject property is designated “Rural Settlements – Rural Hamlets” and “Hamlet Commercial” within the Whitevale Settlement Area. Uses permitted within this designation include retail, office, business, professional service and employment uses, in addition to residential uses. The subject property also falls within the Whitevale Heritage Conservation District which identifies buildings with heritage significance. The subject property is listed as a property with significance. The subject property is zoned “HMC9” within Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by By-law 2677/88, 5629/00 and 6828/08. The following uses are permitted: • bed & breakfast establishment; • day spa; • one dwelling unit; • a professional office as part of a day spa with a maximum gross leasable floor area of 300 square metres; • restaurant – type A on the ground floor only to a maximum of 200 square metres; • retail store on the ground floor only to a maximum of 400 square metres; and, • small implementation repair shop. Past Committee of Adjustment Applications In the past, the applicant has applied for relief from the site-specific zoning by-law, in order to permit similar uses. The applicant has received approval to permit: • a professional office having a maximum gross leasable floor area of 280 square metres (PCA 104/14); and • permit one medical office (naturopathic health practice) use not exceeding 191 square metres (PCA 28/18) To ensure that the scale of the use remained appropriate for a Hamlet setting and sufficient on-site parking was provided for the various uses, staff included restrictions on the floor area. Current Proposal The applicant is currently requesting to permit a second dwelling unit on the third floor, and to permit a professional office use on the ground floor, which is not an accessory component to a day spa use. The City currently has a number of open building permits for this subject site. In order to close some of these permits, the applicant requires approval of these variances. Staff is recommending the following: • that restrictions be placed on the location of the second dwelling unit and on the maximum floor area for the professional office, to ensure the scale remains appropriate and sufficient parking is allocated to each use; • that the maximum gross floor area of the second floor professional office be reduced from 280 square metres to 140 square metres to ensure sufficient parking is allocated to each current and future use within the building; and -16- Report P/CA 16/19 January 13, 2021 Page 3 • that due to all the changes made to the building, the applicant submit revised site and floor plans in order to receive zoning clearance for the open building permits. Supporting Material – Parking Justification To support the requested variances, the applicant has provided parking justification to demonstrate sufficient parking is available on site for all uses (see table below). The applicant previously received approval for a reduction in required parking specifically for the 280 square metres of professional office space on the second floor. Since the first and second floor professional office space is less than 280 square metres and parking has been allocated to all occupied and vacant units within the building, staff are comfortable applying the reduction in parking granted by PCA 104/14 for the professional office uses. In addition, the current tenant in the professional office unit located on the ground floor has indicated that only 1 parking space is required for this unit as most of the business is run online, and all in-person meetings are scheduled which restricts the number of customers within the unit at one time. After review of the parking justification and reduction in parking requirements granted by PCA 104/14, staff are satisfied that there is sufficient parking on-site for the current and proposed uses. Floor Current or Proposed Use Zoning By- law Requirements Parking Spaces Required Parking Spaces Allocated Basement 1 Dwelling Unit (158.8 m²) 2 parking spaces 2 parking spaces 2 parking spaces First Floor Retail (155.6 m²) 3 parking spaces per 100 m² 5 parking spaces 5 parking spaces Medical Office (75.4 m²) 5 parking spaces per 100 m² 4 parking spaces 4 parking spaces Professional Office (113.3 m²) 5 parking spaces per 93 m² 6 parking spaces 1 parking space Second Floor Professional Office (132.6 m²) 5 parking spaces per 93 m² 7 parking spaces 7 parking spaces Third Floor 1 Dwelling Unit (163.8 m²) 2 parking spaces 2 parking spaces 2 parking spaces Total Parking Required: 26 parking spaces (PCA 104/14 reduced the required parking from 26 to 21 parking Provided: 21 parking spaces -17- Report P/CA 16/19 January 13, 2021 Page 4 Appriopriateness of the Application The third storey of the mixed-use building has historically been vacant, intended to be used for a Bed and Breakfast establishment. At this time, the applicant is not interested in opening a Bed and Breakfast establishment, and instead would like to permit a dwelling unit for rental. Since the building already has a dwelling unit and sufficient parking is provided, permitting an additional dwelling unit would be appropriate and supported by staff. In addition, a variance has been granted in the past to permit professional office space that is not associated with a day spa, on the second floor. Staff restricted the floor area of the professional office, to ensure sufficient parking could be accommodated on site. Given a similar variance has been granted in the past, the total floor space of professional office has not been increased, and sufficient parking is provided, staff have no concerns with permitting a professional office on the ground floor. Conclusion Staff is of the opinion that the requested variances are desirable for the appropriate development of land, maintain the intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, and are minor in nature. Input From Other Sources Building Services There is currently a number of open building permits for this property. If these variances are granted, the applicant will need to submit a revision to Building Permit 14-101231 that reflects the proposed and current uses of the building. To be approved, any building permit revision will need to be in compliance with both the Building Code and the approved zoning (including any approved minor variances). Engineering Services No comments. Toronto and Region Conservation Authority TRCA has no objections with the proposal We understand that the existing building contains a number of uses from residential to commercial, etc. Through our review of the site via desktop exercise, TRCA can conclude that a portion of the existing building is within the limits of a Regional Storm Floodplain. As the proposed second dwelling unit will be confined within the existing building footprint, TRCA staff can accept the proposal in principle. We will work with the landowner and their retained consultant to ensure this dwelling unit is appropriately flood proofed to the Regional Storm Floodplain elevation through our review of the forthcoming Permit Application. -18- Report P/CA 16/19 January 13, 2021 Page 5 With respect to the professional office, we understand this use will also be maintained within the existing building footprint. As such, we have no objections to the professional office use which will be consistent with the existing pattern of commercial businesses present on the property. An Ontario Regulation 166/06 Permit Application will be required for the proposed additional dwelling unit and any proposed regrading or fill placement as a result of the landscaping being proposed (ex. driveway improvements). Pickering Heritage The property is located within the Whitevale Heritage Conservation District and designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act. This property does not have historical or architectural significance within the District guidelines. This is a change in use and therefore no heritage permit is required, nor is circulation to the Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee. Exterior alterations to the building or site may require a heritage permit. Durham Health No comments received as of writing this report. Date of report: January 7, 2021 Comments prepared by: Tanjot Bal, MCIP, RPP Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Planner II Manager, Zoning & Administration TB:jc J:\Documents\Development\D-3700 Committee of Adjustment (PCA Applications)\2011-2019\2019\PCA 16-19 1155886 Ontario Inc\6. Report\PCA 16-19 Report.doc Attachments -19- Whitevale RoadMill StreetNorth RoadChurchwin St reet Factory StreetGolf Club RoadAltona RoadWhitevale Park © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © Queens Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.;© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, Department of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers all rights reserved.; © Municipal Property Assessment Corporation and its suppliers all rights reserved.; City Development Department Location MapFile:Applicant:Property Description: P/CA 16/19 Date: Dec. 14, 2020 Exhibit 1 ¯E1155886 Ontario Inc. Pt Lot 24 and Lots 25-27, Plan 21, now Parts 5 & 6, 40R-1139 (425 Whitevale Road) SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\PCA\2019\PCA 16-19 1155886 Ontario Inc\PCA16-19_LocationMap.mxd 1:5,000 SCALE: THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY.-20- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: P/CA 66/20 Date: January 13, 2021 From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application P/CA 66/20 Trillium Housing Oak Non-Profit Corporation 2635 William Jackson Drive Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by By-law 7706/19, to permit: • Air conditioner units to be located between the front wall of a building or a dwelling and a street, whereas the By-law states air conditioner units shall not be located between the front wall of a building or a dwelling and a street. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain site plan approval for stacked townhouses. Recommendation The City Development Department considers the requested variance to be minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, and therefore recommends Approval of the proposed variance (refer to Exhibit 1). Background The applicant has submitted Site Plan and Building Permit applications for the subject property to facilitate a residential condominium development consisting of 13 blocks for 216 stacked townhouse units. The requested variance is required to obtain Site Plan Approval and full Building Permit Issuance. On June 24, 2019, Council passed a site-specific zoning by-law for the applicant-initiated Zoning By-law Amendment application for the subject lands. Section 45(1.4) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990; c. P.13 sets out a 2-year ‘time out’ period, which requires the applicant to wait until June 25, 2021 before seeking relief from the site-specific zoning by-law through a minor variance. However, the Planning Act permits municipal councils to allow, by resolution, consideration of minor variance applications within the ‘time out’ period. The intent of the 2-year time out period is to prevent zoning provisions that Council determined to be important from being reversed through the minor variance process. -21- Report P/CA 66/20 January 13, 2021 Page 2 On December 14, 2020, City Council granted the applicant an exemption to the 2-year ‘time out’ period for applying for a minor variance following the passing of an applicant-initiated zoning by-law amendment (see PLN-32-20, Attachment 1 and Directive Memorandum – Council Decision #487/20, Attachment #2). Comments Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law The subject site is designated Urban Residential Areas – Medium Density Areas within the Duffins Heights Neighbourhood. Stacked townhouses are an appropriate development within the Medium Density designation. The subject site is zoned MD-HD-1, NP and OS-HL within Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by By-law 7706/19. Stacked townhouses are a permitted use within the zone. A variance is required to permit the proposed air conditioner units to be located between the front wall of the stacked townhouse dwellings (Buildings A, B, C, K & J) and the public street (William Jackson Drive and Earl Grey Avenue), whereas the By-law states air conditioner units shall not be located between the front wall of a building or a dwelling and a street (see Exhibit 2). The applicant is proposing to locate the air conditioning units at grade for the lower units, and on balconies for the upper units (see Exhibit 3). This variance is required as the layout of stacked townhouse buildings is such that the units have a back-to-back configuration. As a result, certain units only have frontage or access to the front of the building, and it is therefore difficult to avoid locating air conditioning units in the front yard. The purpose of restricting the location of air conditioning units is to shield views of the units from the public street and to maintain a high-quality public realm. It is proposed that the air conditioning units located between the front wall of the buildings at William Jackson Drive and Earl Grey Avenue will be screened with decorative metal screens (see Exhibit 3). The screens will shield all views of the units from the public street and help provide a more attractive façade and streetscape. Desirable for the Appriopriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The applicant has submitted sufficient information to demonstrate that the location of air conditioning units between the front wall and the public street will result in the appropriate development of the land. The requested variance to permit the development is considered minor in nature. Conclusion Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance to permit air conditioner units to be located between the front wall of a building or a dwelling and a street is desirable for the appropriate development of land, maintains the intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, and is minor in nature. -22- Report P/CA 66/20 January 13, 2021 Page 3 Input From Other Sources Engineering Services No comments on the application. Building Services No comments on the application. Toronto Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) The proposed AC units located between the front main wall of the building and the street are all located outside of the TRCA Area of interest (further to the east). TRCA staff confirm there are no objections to this variance being requested. Date of report: January 13, 2021 Comments prepared by: Isabel Lima Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Planner I Manager, Zoning & Administration IL:jc J:\Documents\Development\D-3700\2020\PCA 66-20\Report\PCA 66-20 Report.doc Attachments -23- WilliamJacksonDriveAdirondack Chase Grenwich Glen PureSprings BoulevardBronzedaleStreet Huckleberry Crossing Liat ris DriveCarousel DriveMisthollow Drive Byford Street Penny LaneRex Heath DriveZents Drive Tally Street Kalmar Avenue Hayden LaneNantucket ChaseE arl Grey A v enueBoston GlenPark hurs t CrescentBrock RoadCreekside Park © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © Queens Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.;© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, Department of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers all rights reserved.; © Municipal Property Assessment Corporation and its suppliers all rights reserved.; City Development Department Location MapFile:Applicant:Property Description: P/CA 66/20 Date: Nov. 05, 2020 Exhibit 1 ¯ E Trillium Housing Oak Nonprofit Corp. Pt Lt 18, Con 3 Now Pt 1, 40R-29457 (2635 William Jackson Drive) SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\PCA\2020\PCA 66-20 Trillium Housing\PCA66-20_LocationMap.mxd 1:4,000 SCALE: THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY.-24- Exhibit 2 Submitted Site Plan File No: P/CA 66/20 Applicant: Trillium Housing Oak Non-Profit Corporation Property Description: Pt Lt 18, Con 3 Now Pt 1, 40R-29457 (2635 William Jackson Drive) CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN. Date: Dec 2, 2020 Building C Building B Building A Building K Building J to permit air conditioner units to be located between the front wall of a building or a dwelling and a street -25- Exhibit 3 Submitted Front & Side Elevations File No: P/CA 66/20 Applicant: Trillium Housing Oak Non-Profit Corporation Property Description: Pt Lt 18, Con 3 Now Pt 1, 40R-29457 (2635 William Jackson Drive) CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN. Date: Dec 14, 2020 to permit air conditioner units to be located between the front wall of a building or a dwelling and a street -26- Report to Council Report Number: PLN 32-20 Date: December 14, 2020 From: Kyle Bentley Director, City Development & CBO Subject: Two-year Period Exemption Request for Minor Variance Application P/CA 66/20 Trillium Housing Oak Non-Profit Corporation Part Lot 18, Concession 3 Now Part 1, 40R-29457 (2635 William Jackson Drive) Recommendation: 1.That Council grant an exemption in accordance with Section 45 (1.4) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990; c. P.13 as amended, and permit the Committee of Adjustment to consider Minor Variance Application P/CA 66/20 resulting from the further processing of the Site Plan or Building Permit applications, submitted by Trillium Housing Oak Non-Profit Corporation, for land municipally known as 2635 William Jackson Drive, before the second anniversary of the day on which an applicant-initiated zoning by-law amendment was enacted for the subject lands. Executive Summary: This report recommends that Council adopt a resolution in accordance with Section 45 (1.4) of the Planning Act, as amended, permitting the Committee of Adjustment to consider Minor Variance Application P/CA 66/20 submitted by Trillium Housing Oak Non-Profit Corporation, owner of 2635 William Jackson Drive (see Location Map, Attachment #1). The applicant is requesting approval of a minor variance application to permit air conditioning units to be located within the front yard for 5 residential blocks along William Jackson Drive and Earl Grey Avenue, whereas the site-specific zoning by-law amendment prohibits air conditioning units to be located between the front wall of a building or a dwelling and a public street. Financial Implications: There are no direct financial implications arising from Council’s adoption of the recommendation of this report. 1. Discussion: Bill 73, the Smart Growth for Our Communities Act, 2015, amended the Planning Act by removing the ability for an applicant to apply for a minor variance for 2 years following the passing of an applicant-initiated zoning by-law amendment. However, the Planning Act changes also permit a municipal Council to allow minor variance applications to proceed on a case-by-case basis by Council resolution. The Province indicated that the intent of the amendment is to prevent, for a 2 year period, zoning provisions that Council determines to be important from being reversed through the minor variance process. Attachment #1 -27- Report: PLN 32-20 December 14, 2020 Subject: Trillium Housing Oak Non-Profit Corporation Page 2 2.Proposed Residential Development In 2018, Trillium Housing Oak Non-Profit Corporation submitted applications for Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment for lands located at the southeast corner of William Jackson Drive and Earl Grey Avenue within the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood (see Location Map, Attachment #1). The applicant proposes to develop the subject lands for a residential condominium development consisting of 13 blocks for 216 stacked townhouse units (see Submitted Site Plan, Attachment #2). On June 24, 2019, City Council passed By-law 7705/19 to adopt Amendment 37 to the Pickering Official Plan. The amendment re-designated the subject lands from “Urban Residential Areas – Medium Density Areas” to “Urban Residential Areas – High Density Areas”, and included a site-specific exemption to permit a maximum density of 161 units per net hectare. Council also passed By-law 7706/19 to rezone the subject lands from “C1-ES” to “MD-HD-1”, “NP” and “OS-HL”. Shortly after these approvals, the applicant submitted a Site Plan Application for the development of the lands. During the review of the site plan, staff noted that the location of air conditioning units between the front wall of the stacked townhouse blocks (Buildings A, B, C, J and K) and William Jackson Drive and Earl Grey Avenue, did not comply with the site-specific zoning by-law approved by Council. 3.Minor Variance Application P/CA 66/20, Trillium Housing Oak Non-Profit Corporation On October 14, 2020, the applicant submitted Minor Variance Application P/CA 66/20 requesting that Section 5.(2)(g)(i) of Zoning By-law 7706/19 be varied to permit air conditioning units in the front yard between the front wall of a building or dwelling and a street. The minor variance application falls within the 2 year “time out” provision of the Planning Act. A Council resolution is required to enable the Committee of Adjustment to consider this minor variance application. The applicant has indicated that the variance is required as the layout of the stacked townhouse building is such that the units on the upper floors have a back-to-back configuration. As a result, certain units only have frontage or access to the front of the building, and it is therefore difficult to avoid locating air conditioning units between the front main wall and the street. The applicant is proposing to locate the air conditioning units at grade for the lower units, and on balconies for the upper units. The purpose of restricting the location of air conditioning units is to shield views of the units from a public street and to maintain a high-quality public realm. It is proposed that the air conditioning units located between the main front wall and William Jackson Drive and Earl Grey Avenue will be screened with decorative metal screens shielding all views from the municipal right-of-ways. The decorative metal screens will be similar in style and colour to the buildings and balcony railings to provide an attractive façade and streetscape. -28- Report: PLN 32-20 December 14, 2020 Subject: Trillium Housing Oak Non-Profit Corporation Page 3 The proposed variance is in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the City’s Official Plan and Zoning By-law, which is to permit primarily housing and related uses. Staff have reviewed the site plan application and consider the proposed screening of the air conditioning units to fit in with the architectural design of the building and maintain a high quality public realm. The requested variance is considered to be minor in nature and appropriate for the site. 4.Conclusion Staff are of the opinion that the submitted minor variance application will facilitate the intended use of the subject lands as residential condominium development, and is in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the City’s Official Plan and the site specific zoning by-law amendment. It is recommended that Council grant an exemption in accordance with Section 45 (1.4) of the Planning Act and permit Minor Variance Application P/CA 66/20, submitted by Trillium Housing Oak Non-Profit Corporation, to be considered by the Committee of Adjustment resulting from the further processing of the site plan or building permit applications. -29- Report: PLN 32-20 December 14, 2020 Subject: Trillium Housing Oak Non-Profit Corporation Page 4 Attachments: 1.Location Map 2.Submitted Site Plan Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Isabel Lima Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Planner I Chief Planner Nilesh Surti, MCIP, RPP Kyle Bentley, P. Eng. Manager, Development Review Director, City Development & CBO & Urban Design IL:ld Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Marisa Carpino, M.A. Interim Chief Administrative Officer -30- WilliamJacksonDriveAdirondack Chase Grenwich Glen PureSprings Boulevard B ronzedaleS tr eet Huckleberry Crossing Liat ris DriveCarousel DriveMisthollow Drive Byford Street Penny LaneRex Heath DriveZents Drive Tally Street Kalmar Avenue Hayden LaneNantucket ChaseE arl Grey A v enueBoston GlenPark hurs t CrescentBrock RoadCreekside Park © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © Queens Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.;© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, Department of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers all rights reserved.; © Municipal Property Assessment Corporation and its suppliers all rights reserved.; City Development Department Location Map File: Applicant: Property Description: P/CA 66/20 Date: Nov. 05, 2020 ¯ E Trillium Housing Oak Non-Profit Corporation Pt Lt 18, Con 3 Now Pt 1, 40R-29457 (2635 William Jackson Drive) Subject Lands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\PCA\2020\PCA 66-20 Trillium Housing\PCA66-20_LocationMap.mxd 1:4,000 SCALE: THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. Attachment #1 to Report #PLN 32-20 -31- Submitted Site Plan File No: P/CA 66/20 Applicant: Trillium Housing Oak Non-Profit Corporation Property Description: Pt Lt 18, Con 3 Now Pt 1, 40R-29457 (2635 William Jackson Drive) FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.Date: Dec 2, 2020 Building C Building B Building A Building K Building J to permit air conditioning units in the front yard between the front wall of a building or dwelling and a street Attachment #2 to Report #PLN 32-20 -32- Attachment #2 Legislative Services Division Clerk’s Office Directive Memorandum December 18, 2020 To: Kyle Bentley Director, City Development & CBO From: Susan Cassel City Clerk Subject: Direction as per Minutes of the Meeting of City Council held on December 14, 2020 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 32-20 Two-year Period Exemption Request for Minor Variance Application P/CA 66/20 Trillium Housing Oak Non-Profit Corporation Part Lot 18, Concession 3 Now Part 1, 40R-29457 (2635 William Jackson Drive) Council Decision Resolution #487/20 That Council grant an exemption in accordance with Section 45 (1.4) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990; c. P.13 as amended, and permit the Committee of Adjustment to consider Minor Variance Application P/CA 66/20 resulting from the further processing of the Site Plan or Building Permit applications, submitted by Trillium Housing Oak Non-Profit Corporation, for land municipally known as 2635 William Jackson Drive, before the second anniversary of the day on which an applicant-initiated zoning by- law amendment was enacted for the subject lands. Please take any action deemed necessary. Susan Cassel Copy: Interim Chief Administrative Officer -33- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: P/CA 01/21 Date: January 13, 2021 From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application P/CA 01/21 M. & M. Henry 1044 Moorelands Crescent Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-law 3132/89, to permit: • a minimum front yard depth of 4.1 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum front yard depth of 6.0 metres; • a minimum rear yard depth of 6.1 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum rear yard depth of 7.5 metres; • a maximum lot coverage of 41 percent; whereas the By-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 35 percent; • a maximum of two dwelling units per lot, whereas the By-law permits a maximum of one dwelling unit per lot, provided a) a total of three parking spaces are provided on the property where the accessory dwelling unit is located, b) the maximum floor area of an accessory dwelling unit shall be one hundred (100) square metres, and c) a home-based business is prohibited in either dwelling units on this lot; and • a minimum of one private garage per lot attached to the main building, any vehicular entrance of which shall be located not less than 5.3 metres from the front lot line, whereas the By-law requires a minimum of one private garage per lot attached to the main building, any vehicular entrance of which shall be located not less than 6.0 metres from the front lot line. The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit for an addition to a semi-detached dwelling, including an addition to the front and rear of the dwelling, an extension to the length of the attached garage, an addition of a front second-storey terrace, an addition of an accessory dwelling unit in the basement and an addition of a rear ground-floor deck. -34- Report P/CA 01/21 January 13, 2021 Page 2 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 these variances apply only to the proposed addition to the semi-detached dwelling, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, 4 & 5). 2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed accessory dwelling unit as determined by Building Services. Comments Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law The subject site is designated Urban Residential Areas – Low Density Area within the Rosebank Neighbourhood. Lands within this designation are intended to accommodate residential uses including semi-detached dwellings and accessory dwelling units. The subject property is not located within one of the established Neighbourhood Precincts in which the Urban Design Guidelines for the Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhoods Study applies. The subject site is zoned SD-B within Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-law 3132/89. A semi-detached dwelling attached horizontally below grade is permitted within the SD-B Zone. Front Yard Variance The proposed addition to the semi-detached dwelling allows for a front yard depth of 4.1 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum front yard depth of 6.0 metres. The intent of this provision is to ensure a consistent streetscape, to provide an adequate space for soft landscaping, and to provide sufficient parking space in front of the property. Due to the irregular shape of the lot, the dwelling is setback 4.1 metres at the east-end of the front lot line, and 7.3 metres at the west-end of the front lot line (see Exhibit 2). The front yard depths along Moorelands Crescent vary, with properties ranging between setbacks of approximately 4.5 to 6.5 metres. The proposed dwelling is consistent with the streetscape, as the proposed front yard is similar to the range of setbacks along the street. Additionally, the dwelling will appear from the street to be setback a greater distance, as the irregular shape of the lot creates a reduced front yard depth. The current front yard landscaping on the subject property is limited due to the narrowness of the lot, which is the case for a number of the lots along Moorelands Crescent. The proposal maintains a sodded area along the west and east property lines within the front yard, as well as a new proposed walkway. The landscaping in the front yard is being reduced slightly to allow for more parking, however not considerably that it is taking away from any significant green space. -35- Report P/CA 01/21 January 13, 2021 Page 3 Rear Yard Variance The applicant is proposing to construct a deck that connects to the rear ground-floor entrance of the dwelling with a rear yard depth of 6.1 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum rear yard depth of 7.5 metres. The intent of this provision is to ensure that sufficient amenity space is provided in the rear yard. The requested variance is to facilitate the construction of a deck that will contribute towards the total usable amenity space in the rear yard. The proposed deck will provide access to the backyard from the dwelling. There is also sufficient amenity space to the south and east of the proposed deck. Lot Coverage Variance The existing dwelling and proposed additions account for a lot coverage of 41 percent, whereas the By-law pe rmits a maximum lot coverage of 35 percent. The intent of this provision is to maintain an appropriate amount of yard space (for landscaping and amenity areas) uncovered by buildings on a lot and to regulate the scale and size of the building. The property maintains the current landscaping area in the front yard, and provides sufficient space in the rear yard for amenity space. Staff are of the opinion that an increase of 6 percent lot coverage will not result in a great loss of amenity space. Staff is also of the opinion that the size of the proposed dwelling is appropriate relative to the size of other dwellings within the Rosebank Neighbourhood. Two Dwelling Units Per Lot Variance The applicant is proposing to add an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) in the basement, whereas Amending By-law 3132/89 only permits one dwelling unit per lot. On the contrary, Zoning By-law 2511 permits accessory dwelling units in any semi-detached dwelling, provided: •a total of three parking spaces are provided on the property where an ADU is located; •the maximum floor area of an ADU is 100 square metres; and •a home-based business is prohibited in either dwelling unit of a dwelling containing an ADU. The Planning Act permits ADU’s within detached, semi-detached and row homes, and requires municipalities to update their zoning by-laws to reflect these requirements of the Planning Act. Since the City has not yet amended the zoning provisions for ADU’s within Amending By-law 3132/89, the applicant is required to request a variance to permit the ADU. The attached garage and driveway have been revised to provide three parking spaces on the lot. The ADU is less than the maximum permitted 100 square metres, and neither unit is proposed to have a home-based business. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance adheres to provincial policies and meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. Vehicular Entrance Variance The proposed extension to the length of the garage allows for a vehicular entrance located not less than 5.3 metres from the front lot line, whereas the By-law requires a vehicular entrance to be located not less than 6.0 metres from the front lot line. -36- Report P/CA 01/21 January 13, 2021 Page 4 The intent of this provision is to ensure adequate space is provided on the driveway for a parking space. In order to provide three parking spaces on the lot (in accordance with requirements for an ADU), the applicant has extended the length of the garage to provide 1 indoor parking space, and slightly increased the size of the driveway to provide 2 outdoor parking spaces. These revisions will allow for parking spaces that meet the minimum required parking space size (2.6 metres x 5.3 metres in By-law 2511). Desirable for the Appropriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The variances to the front yard depth, rear yard depth and lot coverage will facilitate the proposed addition and enhance the overall usability and amenity space of the dwelling and property. Staff support ADUs as an affordable housing option within the City, provided Building Services issue a permit. In order for a permit to be issued, the ADU must adhere to the Zoning By-law, Ontario Building Code and Fire Code. An application for an ADU must be submitted to Building Services by the applicant. The abutting and neighbouring property owners to the east, north and west of the subject property have reviewed the proposal and have no objections to the requested variances (see Input from Other Sources). Staff consider the requested variances to be desirable for the development of the land and minor in nature. Conclusion Staff is of the opinion that the requested variances to permit an addition to a semi-detached dwelling, including an addition to the front and rear of the dwelling, an extension to the length of the attached garage, an addition of a front second-storey terrace, an addition of an accessory dwelling unit in the basement, and an addition of a rear ground-floor deck, are desirable for the appropriate development of land, maintain the intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, and are minor in nature. Input From Other Sources Building Services •No concerns with the application. Engineering Services •Ensure reduced front/rear yard depth and additional percentage of lot coverage does not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lot. Consideration for rain harvesting or other Low Impact Development measures should be made at the Building Permit stage if increasing the imperviousness of the lot surface. Abutting property owner to the east (1046 Moorelands Crescent) •No objections to the application. Property owner to the east (1048 Moorelands Crescent) •No objections to the application. -37- Report P/CA 01/21 January 13, 2021 Page 5 Property owner to the east (1052 Moorelands Crescent) •No objections to the application. Property owner to the north (1031 Moorelands Crescent) •No objections to the application. Abutting property owner to the west (1042 Moorelands Crescent) •No objections to the application. Date of report: January 6, 2021 Comments prepared by: Isabel Lima Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Planner I Manager, Zoning & Administration IL:jc J:\Documents\Development\D-3700\2020\PCA 01-21\Report\PCA 01-21 Report.doc Attachments -38- DunnCrescentRosebank RoadK i mtonCourt Foster Court Rougemount Drive Staghorn Road Cowan CirclePetticoatCreekPikeCourtNomad RoadDyson RoadMaitlandDriveGillmoss RoadMcleod CrescentDahlia CrescentMoorelandsCrescentRick Hull Memorial Park © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © Queens Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.;© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, Department of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers all rights reserved.; © Municipal Property Assessment Corporation and its suppliers all rights reserved.; City Development Department Location MapFile:Applicant:Property Description: P/CA 01/21 Date: Dec. 11, 2020 Exhibit 1 ¯EM. & M. Henry Pt Lot 19, 40M-1616 Now Pt 7, 8, 40R-12795 (1044 Moorelands Crescent) SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\PCA\2021\PCA 01-21 M. & M. Henry\PCA01-21_LocationMap.mxd 1:4,000 SCALE: THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY.-39- Exhibit 2 Submitted Site Plan File No: P/CA 01/21 Applicant: M. & M. Henry Property Description: Pt Lot 19, 40M-1616 Now Pt 7, 8, 40R-12795 (1044 Moorelands Crescent) CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN. Date: Dec 14, 2020 to permit a minimum front yard depth of 4.1 metres to permit a minimum rear yard depth of 6.1 metres to permit a maximum lot coverage of 41 percent to permit a maximum of two dwelling units per lot 5.3 m to permit a minimum of one private garage per lot attached to the main building, any vehicular entrance of which shall be located not less than 5.3 metres from the front lot line -40- Exhibit 3 Submitted Front Elevation File No: P/CA 01/21 Applicant: M. & M. Henry Property Description: Pt Lot 19, 40M-1616 Now Pt 7, 8, 40R-12795 (1044 Moorelands Crescent) CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN. Date: Dec 14, 2020 -41- Exhibit 4 Submitted Rear Elevation File No: P/CA 01/21 Applicant: M. & M. Henry Property Description: Pt Lot 19, 40M-1616 Now Pt 7, 8, 40R-12795 (1044 Moorelands Crescent) CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN. Date: Dec 14, 2020 -42- Exhibit 5 Submitted East Side Elevation File No: P/CA 01/21 Applicant: M. & M. Henry Property Description: Pt Lot 19, 40M-1616 Now Pt 7, 8, 40R-12795 (1044 Moorelands Crescent) CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN. Date: Dec 14, 2020 -43- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: P/CA 02/21 Date: January 13, 2021 From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application P/CA 02/21 C. & J. Cagna 2615 Cerise Manor Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 7364/14, as amended, to permit a maximum driveway width of 6.0 metres, whereas the By-law established a maximum driveway width of 3.0 metres for lots having lot frontages less than 9.0 metres with attached private garages associated with a residential use that are accessed only by a driveway from a street. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to widen the driveway. Recommendation The City Development Department considers the requested variance to not be desirable for the appropriate development of the land and not in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law, and therefore recommends Refusal of the proposed variance. Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan Pickering’s Official Plan designated the property as “Urban Residential Areas – Medium Density Areas” within the Lamoreaux Neigbourhood. Land within this designation is intended to accommodate residential uses including townhouse dwellings. Does not conform to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The property is zoned “LD1-T” as per Zoning By-law 7364/14. The intent of the maximum driveway width of 3.0 metres for lots having lot frontages less than 9.0 metres is to ensure a consistent streetscape and to provide an adequate landscaped area. Presently, two parking spaces are provided for the townhouse dwelling, one space in the attached garage, and one space on the driveway in front of the garage. This meets the minimum parking requirement of two spaces per dwelling unit. The neighbouring townhouses within the same block consistently have one parking space in the attached garage, and one parking space in front of the attached garage. Expanding the driveway width to accommodate a total of three parking spaces (one space in the garage and two spaces in the driveway in front of the dwelling) creates a streetscape inconsistent with the townhouse block and reduces the landscape area. -44- Report P/CA 02/21 January 13, 2021 Page 2 The subject property is the end unit of the townhouse block. The neighbouring properties to the north of the subject property consist of detached dwellings on lots larger than the townhouse lots. The detached dwellings have attached garages accommodating two vehicles. The detached dwelling lots adequately accommodate double wide driveways and maintain adequate landscaped area in the front yard. Not Desirable for the Appriopriate Development of the Land and Not Minor in Nature The subject proposal is not desirable for the appropriate development of the land and not minor in nature. Widening the driveway to 6.0 metres on a lot less than 9.0 metres of frontage would not provide an adequate landscaped area in the front yard to provide for a consistent streetscape or for permeable area for stormwater management purposes. Engineering Services objects to the requested variance as driveway widening would increase the impermeable area of the lot and have a negative impact on stormwater management for the area. Expanding the driveway width by 3.0 metres would not be minor in nature as it covers a significant percentage of the front yard with additional impermeable surfaces. Conclusion Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance to permit a maximum driveway width of 6.0 metres, whereas the by-law established a maximum driveway width of 3.0 metres for lots having lot frontages less than 9.0 metres is not desirable for the appropriate development of land, does maintains the intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law, and is not minor in nature. Input From Other Sources Engineering Services We object to this application for the following reasons: 1. Widening the driveway will increase the impermeable area of the lot having a negative impact on the overall stormwater management scheme for the development. 2. The proposal includes widening within the City’s road allowance, which is not permitted. 3. Widening the driveway will require the removal of a City owned boulevard tree. Date of report: January 7, 2021 Comments prepared by: Felix Chau Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Planner I Manager, Zoning & Administration FC:jc \\FS\CSDC\Amanda\docs\templates\CA\programmed\CA Report.doc Attachments -45- Hibiscus DriveDelphinium TrailBur k h o l d e r D r i v e CactusCrescentA z a le a A ve n u e S k y ri d g e B o u l e v a rd PeterMatthewsDriveChat e a u C o urt Ca r i n a T e r r a c e Cit r i n e S t r e e t Flo r e n t i n e P l a c e En c h a n t e d C r e s c e n t CeriseManorAthena PathCameo Street Apricot LaneSe p i a S q u a r e © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © Queens Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.;© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, Department of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers all rights reserved.; © Municipal Property Assessment Corporation and its suppliers all rights reserved.; City Development Department Location MapFile:Applicant:Property Description: P/CA 02/21 Date: Dec. 11, 2020 Exhibit 1 ¯EC. & J. Cagna Pt Blk 240, 40M-2625 Now Pt 7, 40R-30331 (2615 Cerise Manor) SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\PCA\2021\PCA 02-21 C. & J. Cagna\PCA02-21_LocationMap.mxd 1:4,000 SCALE: THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY.-46- Exhibit 2 Aerial Photo File No: P/CA 02/21 Applicant: C. & J. Cagna Property Description: Pt Blk 240, 40M-2625 Now Pt. 7, 40R-30331 (2615 Cerise Manor) FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. Date: Dec 15 2021 -47- Exhibit 3 Submitted Plan File No: P/CA 02/21 Applicant: C. & J. Cagna Property Description: Pt Blk 240, 40M-2625 Now Pt. 7, 40R-30331 (2615 Cerise Manor) FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. Date: Dec. 15, 2020 to permit a maximum driveway width of 6.0 metres Cerise Manor Existing Asphalt Driveway -48- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: P/CA 04/21 Date: January 13, 2021 From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application P/CA 04/21 M. & J. Crokidas 1869 Woodview Avenue Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 1545/82, to recognize: • an accessory building (cabana) with a maximum height of 4.8 metres, whereas the By-law states no accessory building shall exceed a height of 3.5 metres in any residential zone; • the total lot coverage of all accessory buildings excluding private detached garages, to not exceed 6.8 percent of the lot area, whereas the By-law states the total lot coverage of all accessory buildings excluding private detached garages, shall not exceed 5 percent of the lot area; and • a maximum lot coverage of 44 percent, whereas the By-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent. The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit for an existing accessory structure (cabana). 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 condition: 1. That these variances apply only to the existing accessory structure (cabana), as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibit 2, 3, 4 & 5). Background The existing cabana was constructed in 2020 without a building permit. The applicant has since applied for a building permit and this minor variance application to recognize the structure. -49- Report P/CA 04/21 January 13, 2021 Page 2 Comments Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law The subject site is designated Urban Residential Areas – Low Density Areas within the Highbush Neighbourhood. Residential uses are permitted within the Low Density Area designation and detached dwellings are a primary built form within the Neighbourhood. The construction of a cabana as an accessory structure to a detached dwelling conforms to the intent and purpose of the Official Plan. The subject site is zoned R4 within Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 1545/82. Residential uses and accessory structures are permitted within the R4 Zone. Height Variance The existing cabana is 4.8 metres in height, whereas the By-law states no accessory building shall exceed a height of 3.5 metres in a residential zone. The intent of this provision is to minimize the visual impact of accessory buildings on abutting properties and on the streetscape. The cabana is adequately separated from all neighbouring properties, as it is located 1.3 metres to 2.3 metres from all shared property lines (see Exhibit 2). Tall trees along the north and south property lines and fencing along all shared property lines help to minimize views of the structure from the abutting properties. Additionally, the structure is not visible from the public street, as the existing dwelling is taller in height. Accessory Structures – Lot Coverage The existing cabana accounts for a lot coverage of 6.8 percent, whereas the By-law states the total lot coverage of all accessory buildings excluding private detached garages, shall not exceed 5 percent of the lot area. The intent of this provision is to maintain an appropriate amount of landscaped space uncovered by buildings on a lot. The cabana is located more than 10 metres from the existing dwelling, which provides for sufficient amenity space in the rear yard. All Structures – Lot Coverage The existing dwelling and cabana account for a total lot coverage of 44 percent, whereas the By-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent. The intent of this provision is to maintain an appropriate amount of yard space (amenity area) uncovered by buildings on a lot and to regulate the scale and size of the building. As mentioned above, the cabana allows for a large rear yard that exceeds the minimum required rear yard setback of 7.5 metres. Staff is of the opinion that an increase in 11 percent lot coverage will not result in a great loss of amenity space. Desirable for the Appriopriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The cabana contributes to the amenity area of the residential property. The structure is oriented on the property such that there is sufficient landscaped area in the rear yard. Additionally, the size of the cabana is appropriate relative to the size of the lot and existing dwelling. -50- Report P/CA 04/21 January 13, 2021 Page 3 The applicant has indicated that the cabana blocks views of an abandoned dwelling to the east that was previously visible from the rear yard of the subject property. Staff are unsure of the current state of the dwelling to the east, however Building Services staff have advised that an occupancy permit has not been issued. The existing cabana is not anticipated to have significant impacts on the surrounding area, and abutting neighbours to the north and south have no objections to the structure (see Input from Other Sources). Conclusion Staff is of the opinion that the requested variances to recognize the existing accessory structure (cabana) are desirable for the appropriate development of land, maintain the intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, and are minor in nature. Input From Other Sources Engineering Services Ensure additional percentage of lot coverage does not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lot. Consideration for rain harvesting or other Low Impact Development measures should be made at the Building Permit stage if increasing the imperviousness of the lot surface. Downspouts for the cabana should be directed to the front of the structure so they don’t outlet directly towards the rear neighbour. Building Services No comments on the application. Property owner to the west No objections to the proposal. (1870 Woodview Avenue) Abutting property owner to the south No objections to the proposal. (1900 Pine Grove Avenue) Abutting property owner to the north No objections to the proposal. (1873 Woodview Avenue) Date of report: January 6, 2021 Comments prepared by: Isabel Lima Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Planner I Manager, Zoning & Administration IL:jc J:\Documents\Development\D-3700\2020\PCA 04-21\Report\PCA 04-21 Report.doc Attachments -51- Westcreek Drive Pine Grove Avenue Rockwood DriveWoodview AvenueNordane DriveS a n d h u rs tC re s c e n tValley Ridge Crescent Prohill Street OakburnStreetMel dronDriveM ossb r ookSquareRouge Forest CrescentPinegrove Park Westcreek Public School © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © Queens Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.;© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, Department of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers all rights reserved.; © Municipal Property Assessment Corporation and its suppliers all rights reserved.; City Development Department Location MapFile:Applicant:Property Description: P/CA 04/21 Date: Dec. 14, 2020 Exhibit 1 ¯EM. & J. Crokidas Pt Lt 25, Plan 329 Now Pt 1, 40R-8445 (1869 Woodview Avenue) SubjectLands Hydro Corridor L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\PCA\2021\PCA 04-21 M. & J. Crokidas\PCA04-21_LocationMap.mxd 1:4,000 SCALE: THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. Hydro Corridor -52- Exhibit 2 Submitted Site Plan File No: P/CA 04/21 Applicant: M. & J. Crokidas Property Description: Pt Lt 25, Plan 329 Now Pt 1, 40R-8445 (1869 Woodview Avenue) CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN. Date: Dec 14, 2020 New cabana constructed without a building permit Existing Dwelling to permit an accessory building (cabana) with a maximum height of 4.8 metres to permit the total lot coverage of all accessory buildings excluding private detached garages, to not exceed 6.8 percent of the lot area to permit a maximum lot coverage of 44 percent 1.27 m -53- Exhibit 3 Submitted Front Elevation File No: P/CA 04/21 Applicant: M. & J. Crokidas Property Description: Pt Lt 25, Plan 329 Now Pt 1, 40R-8445 (1869 Woodview Avenue) CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN. Date: Dec 14, 2020 to permit an accessory building (cabana) with a maximum height of 4.8 metres 4.8 m Mid-point of roof -54- Exhibit 4 Submitted Section Plan File No: P/CA 04/21 Applicant: M. & J. Crokidas Property Description: Pt Lt 25, Plan 329 Now Pt 1, 40R-8445 (1869 Woodview Avenue) CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN. Date: Dec 14, 2020 -55- Exhibit 5 Submitted Rendering File No: P/CA 04/21 Applicant: M. & J. Crokidas Property Description: Pt Lt 25, Plan 329 Now Pt 1, 40R-8445 (1869 Woodview Avenue) CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN. Date: Dec 14, 2020 -56- Revised Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: P/CA 05/21 Date: January 13, 2021 From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application P/CA 05/21 J. Soo & S. Tam 1860 Glendale Drive Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended, to permit: •a minimum north side yard setback of 0.6 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum side yard of 1.8 metres where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit for an addition to an attached garage. Recommendation The City Development Department considers the requested variance to be minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, and therefore recommends Approval of the proposed variance, subject to the following condition: 1.That this variance apply only to the proposed addition, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibit 2). Background The applicant identified an error with the original submitted site plan shown in Exhibit 2 of the original report (the proposed addition was shown extending north to the rear edge of the existing attached garage, whereas the proposed addition extends further north to the rear edge of the existing dwelling). The applicant has submitted a revised site plan to clearly depict the area of the proposed addition (see Exhibit 2). The proposed variance remains the same, to permit a minimum north side yard setback of 0.6 metres to obtain a building permit for an addition to an attached garage. Considering the requested variance has not changed, new public notices are not required. Additionally, the abutting property owner to the north has submitted additional comments that acknowledge the revised site plan (see Input from Other Sources). -57- Revised Report P/CA 05/21 January 13, 2021 Page 2 Comments Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject site is designated Urban Residential Areas – Low Density Area within the Liverpool Neighbourhood. Detached dwellings are a permitted use within the designation and a built form within the Liverpool Neighbourhood. City Council has recently endorsed the recommendations of the Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhoods Study, which provides direction on the future evolution of the City’s identified established neighbourhood precincts so that neighbourhood precinct character is properly considered through the development and building approval processes. In addition, Council adopted Urban Design Guidelines for Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhood Precincts to support and enhance neighbourhood precinct characteristics. City staff are preparing an Official Plan Amendment and a Zoning By-law Amendment to implement the recommendations of the Study to help ensure that the redevelopment of residential lots are consistent with the existing neighbourhood precinct character. Staff have reviewed the proposed addition and find it to be consistent with the recommendations of the Infill and Replacement Housing Study and the Urban Design Guidelines for Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhood Precincts. Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The subject site is zoned R3 within Zoning By-law 3036, as amended. A detached dwelling with an attached private garage is permitted within the R3 Zone. The proposed addition to the attached garage allows for a north side yard of 0.6 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum side yard of 1.8 metres. The intent of this provision is to provide appropriate separation between structures on abutting properties, to accommodate drainage and to provide sufficient room for maintenance of the dwelling. The abutting property to the north has a detached dwelling that is setback approximately 7.0 metres from the north property line. There is also a detached garage on the property to the north, which is setback 1.02 metres from the north property line (see Exhibit 2). The proposed addition and dwelling to the north are setback 7.6 metres from each other, and the proposed addition and detached garage to the north are setback 1.62 metres from each other. There is sufficient room between the structures on the abutting properties to accommodate drainage and for the maintenance of the dwellings and detached garage. Desirable for the Appropriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The applicant has indicated that the proposed addition is required to provide the desired parking within the attached garage. Additionally, the abutting property owners to the north and south have stated they have no objections to the requested variance. The proposed addition will result in an increase in lot coverage of 0.9 percent, or 12.44 square metres. Staff consider the variance to be minor in nature. -58- Revised Report P/CA 05/21 January 13, 2021 Page 3 Conclusion Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance to permit an addition to an attached garage is desirable for the appropriate development of land, maintains the intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, and is minor in nature. Input From Other Sources Engineering Services Ensure garage addition does not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lot. Consideration for rain harvesting or other Low Impact Development measures should be made at the Building Permit stage if increasing the imperviousness of the lot surface. Building Services No comments on the application. Abutting property owner to the north The following comments were received in regards to (1862 Glendale Drive) the submission of the revised site plan: No objections to the proposal or to the revised site plan that shows the proposed addition extend further north to meet the north-west corner of the roof of the existing dwelling. Abutting property owner to the south The following comments were received prior to the (1856 Glendale Drive) submission of the revised site plan: No objections to the proposal. Date of report: January 12, 2021 Comments prepared by: Isabel Lima Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Planner I Manager, Zoning & Administration IL:jc J:\Documents\Development\D-3700\2020\PCA 05-21\Report\PCA 05-21 Report.doc Attachments -59- Glenanna Road Fieldlight BoulevardGlendale DriveHensall CourtK in g sto n R o a d Bowl e r D r i v e LiverpoolRoadBicroft CourtChar l o tteC ircleMalden CrescentStorrington StreetFaylee CrescentBronte SquareDavid Farr Park Glengrove Park South Pine Creek Ravine © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © Queens Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.;© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, Department of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers all rights reserved.; © Municipal Property Assessment Corporation and its suppliers all rights reserved.; City Development Department Location MapFile:Applicant:Property Description: P/CA 05/21 Date: Dec. 14, 2020 Exhibit 1 ¯EJ. Soo & S. Tam Lot 80, Plan 492 (1860 Glendale Drive) SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\PCA\2021\PCA 05-21 J. Soo & S. Tam\PCA05-21_LocationMap.mxd 1:4,000 SCALE: THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY.-60- Exhibit 2 Submitted Site Plan (Revised) File No: P/CA 05/21 Applicant: J. Soo & S. Tam Property Description: Lot 80, Plan 492 (1860 Glendale Drive) CONTACT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR DIGITAL COPIES OF THIS PLAN.Date: Jan 12, 2020 Proposed Addition 0.6 m to permit a minimum north side yard of 0.6 metres Existing Two Car Garage 1.02 m Detached Garage to the North Area of proposed addition -61-