Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSeptember 13, 2023Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, September 13, 2023 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 1 of 7 Present Omar Ha-Redeye Denise Rundle – Vice-Chair Sakshi Sood Joshi Rick Van Andel Sean Wiley – Chair Also Present Cody Morrison, Secretary-Treasurer – Host Jasmine Correia, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer Kerry Yelk, Planner I Ziya Cao, Planner I Absent Not applicable. 1. Disclosure of Interest No disclosures of interest were noted. 2. Adoption of Agenda Moved by Omar Ha-Redeye Seconded by Sakshi Sood Joshi That the agenda for the Wednesday, September 13, 2023 hearing be adopted. Carried Unanimously 3. Adoption of Minutes Moved by Omar Ha-Redeye Seconded by Rick Van Andel That the minutes of the 8th hearing of the Committee of Adjustment held Wednesday, August 9, 2023 be adopted. Carried Unanimously Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, September 13, 2023 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 2 of 7 4. Reports 4.1 P/CA 38/23 J. Ciancio 1473 Rougemount Drive The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 2912/88, By-law 7874/21 & By-law 7902/22, to permit: • a minimum (east) side yard width of 1.5 metres and a minimum (west) side yard width of 1.6 metres, whereas the By-law requires where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling, the minimum required side yard shall be 1.8 metres • a maximum building height of 9.6 metres, whereas the By-law requires a maximum building height of 9.0 metres • a maximum driveway width of 6.1 metres, whereas the By-law requires a maximum driveway width of 6.0 metres • a maximum dwelling depth of 26.9 metres, whereas the By-law permits a maximum dwelling depth of 20.0 metres The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application in order to obtain a building permit to construct a two-storey detached dwelling. Input from other sources were received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services and City’s Building Services Section. In support of the application, the applicant identified they are applying for variances that were previously approved and have now expired. Leonardo Ciancio, agent, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. The agent commented that they received approval of these variances a few years ago. Due to the pandemic, they were unable to receive a building permit for this lot and were not aware the conditions had an expiration date. Since the approval of the previous application, a new By-law came into effect, resulting in additional variances to facilitate the proposal. In response to a question from a Committee member, the agent stated the owner designed the home to be relative to the rest of the street and neighbourhood, and be able to accommodate the needs of elderly members of the family who will reside there. Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, September 13, 2023 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 3 of 7 On the basis that this application meets the four tests of the Planning Act, Rick Van Andel moved the following motion: Moved by Rick Van Andel Seconded by Denise Rundle That application P/CA 38/23 by J. Ciancio, be Approved on the grounds that the requested variances are minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By law, subject to the following condition: 1. That these variances apply only to the proposed development, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 & 9 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated September 13, 2023). Carried Unanimously 4.2 P/CA 39/23 L. Lorenzatti & A. Warboys 1770 Wellington Street The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by By-law 6640/06, to permit: • a detached garage to be located on the west side yard, whereas the By-law requires all accessory buildings which are not part of the main building to be erected in the rear yard • a maximum building height of 6.3 metres for a detached garage, whereas the By- law permits a maximum height of 3.5 metres for accessory buildings in any residential zone • a maximum lot coverage of 21 percent in an ORM-R5 zone, whereas the By-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 20 percent in an ORM-R5 zone (this variance is not required and has been removed from the application) The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application in order to obtain a building permit to convert the existing garage to a family room and the construction of a detached garage on the west side yard. Input from other sources were received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services, City’s Building Services Section and the Region of Durham Health Department. Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, September 13, 2023 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 4 of 7 In support of the application, the applicant identified they cannot build garage in the rear yard due to the existing septic bed. Additional space is required for storage on second storey and shop space. Luciano Lorenzatti, 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 the Vice-Chair, the agent clarified there will be no plumbing for the space. The second storey is intended for storage. On the basis that the application is minor in nature, Omar Ha-Redeye moved the following motion: Moved by Omar Ha-Redeye Seconded by Rick Van Andel That application P/CA 39/23 by L. Lorenzatti & A. Warboys, be Approved on the grounds that the requested variances are minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By law, subject to the following condition: 1. That these variances apply only to the proposed development, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 & 8 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated September 13, 2023). Carried Unanimously 4.3 P/CA 40/23 T. Upadhyay 1546 Dusty Drive The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by By-law 7022/10, to permit a total of two (2) parking spaces on the property where the accessory dwelling unit is located, whereas the By-law requires a total of three (3) parking spaces are provided on the property where the accessory dwelling unit is located. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit to permit an accessory dwelling unit within a semi-detached dwelling with two parking spaces on the lot. Input from other sources were received from the Applicant, City’s Engineering Services, City’s Building Services Section and one area resident. Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, September 13, 2023 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 5 of 7 Tejal Upadhyay, applicant, Shailesh Upadhyay, owner, and Mruga Patel and Helly Shah, agents, were present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. In support of the application, the agent identified that the owner does not have sufficient space within their property to fit more than two vehicles entirely on the lot. The agent commented the following: this variance is to allow for the creation of an ADU (Additional Dwelling Unit) in the basement of the two-storey dwelling; the existing dwelling has two parking spaces, one in the garage and one in the driveway; and the driveway is long enough to accommodate two cars, a total of three parking spaces. The owner commented that new townhouse developments in the City are being built with only one parking space provided, for example 1525 Kingston Road. The driveway can fit two cars, and additional one car in the garage, totaling three parking spaces. In response to questions from Committee members, the agent commented that the applicant does not have a sidewalk on their property, making the driveway longer with 2.91 metres of that driveway being owned by the City. Technically, while the home can accommodate three parking spaces, it is described as only having two because of the municipal boulevard. In order to add an ADU in the basement they are required to provide three spaces. The purpose of this application is to allow the use of the boulevard as a parking space or to reduce the parking spaces required for this ADU. The standard car size considered for the calculation in the By-law is measurements for a full sized SUV. However, two sedans or midsize SUV will fit on the driveway easily without being on the boulevard. The 5.6 metres measurement requirement for parking is to accommodate the biggest sized car available, the applicant owns a compact SUV. Using the measurements for sedans and the compact SUVs (roughly 4.695 metres for sedan, midsize 5.093 metres for compact SUVs) the driveway would easily accommodate two cars. The owner is a single mother who only has one car, therefore there will always be a parking space available for the ADU. A Committee member commented that this variance would be applied to the property and not to the owner. While this variance may work currently for this owner and the car they have, it may not work for future residents. The applicant stated they have no plans to move in the future or sell the property. If an ADU were to be allowed there may be a possibility the future tenants may not have a car at all. Public transit is very close by on Zents Drive and on the main road. The Vice-Chair commented that the subject property is situated in a medium density a rea, this is a tight development without wide spacious side yards. The entrance for the accessory dwelling unit is at the side of the home. While two parking spaces may work for the current owner, the Committee needs consider future users. If this Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, September 13, 2023 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 6 of 7 variance is permitted it would set a precedent for the rest of the neighbourhood, resulting in a negative impact for parking, in a neighbourhood that is observed to be having issues. While the driveway is long, the owner does not own the property to the curb, there needs to be that space for municipal utility maintenance, snow ploughing, etc. A Committee member commented that there is a concern about the impact of lack of parking on the landscape, the street and concerns by neighbours. Due to those reasons, and reasons listed by Vice-Chair, it is of their opinion this application is not minor in nature. After considering comments from the immediate neighbour and comments/assessments within the staff report, this application does not meet the tests of being minor in nature or desirable and appropriate for the land. This variance would result in a negative parking impact within this neighbourhood and therefore is not in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law. Denise Rundle moved the following motion: Moved by Denise Rundle Seconded by Rick Van Andel That application P/CA 40/23 by T. Upadhyay, be Refused on the grounds that the requested variance is not minor in nature, not desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and not in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law. Carried Unanimously Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, September 13, 2023 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 7 of 7 October 11, 2023 5. Adjournment Moved by Omar Ha-Redeye Seconded by Sakshi Sood-Joshi That the 9th hearing of the 2023 Committee of Adjustment be adjourned at 7:37 pm. Carried Unanimously __________________________ Date __________________________ Chair __________________________ Assistant Secretary-Treasurer Please note the Committee of Adjustment Hearings are available for viewing on the City of Pickering YouTube channel https://www.youtube.com/user/SustainablePickering