Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFebruary 14, 2024 - Revised Committee of Adjustment Agenda Hearing Number: 02 Date: Wednesday, February 14, 2024 pickering.ca Agenda Committee of Adjustment Wednesday, February 14, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page Number For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Secretary-Treasurer or Assistant Secretary-Treasurer Telephone: 905.420.4617 Email: citydev@pickering.ca 1.Disclosure of Interest 2.Adoption of Agenda 3.Adoption of Minutes from January 10, 2024 hearing 1-6 4. Reports 4.1 MV 04/24 – 667 Pleasant Street 7-21 4.2 MV 05/24 – 2719 Sapphire Drive 22-31 4.3 MV 07/24 – 5293 5295 Markham-Pickering Townline Road 32-47 4.4 MV 08/24 – 947 Vistula Drive 48-53 4.5 MV 09/24 – 813 Douglas Avenue 54-65 5. Adjournment Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, January 10, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 1 of 6 Pending Adoption Present Omar Ha-Redeye Denise Rundle – Vice-Chair Sakshi Sood Joshi Rick Van Andel Sean Wiley – Chair Also Present Deborah Wylie, Secretary-Treasurer Cody Morrison, Secretary-Treasurer – Host Jasmine Correia, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer Isabel Lima, Planner II Ziya Cao, Planner I Absent Not applicable. 1. Adoption of Rules of Procedures Moved by Rick Van Andel Seconded by Omar Ha-Redeye That the Rules of Procedures be adopted as amended. Carried Unanimously 2. Terms of Reference Moved by Rick Van Andel Seconded by Omar Ha-Redeye That the revised Terms of Reference be forwarded to the Clerks Office. Carried Unanimously 3. Disclosure of Interest No disclosures of interest were noted. -1- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, January 10, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 2 of 6 4. Adoption of Agenda Moved by Sakshi Sood Joshi Seconded by Denise Rundle That the amended agenda for the Wednesday, January 10, 2024 hearing be adopted. Carried Unanimously 5. Adoption of Minutes Moved by Rick Van Andel Seconded by Sakshi Sood Joshi That the minutes of the 12th hearing of the Committee of Adjustment held Wednesday, December 13, 2023 be adopted. Carried Unanimously 6. Reports 6.1 MV 01/24 A. Sammut & R. MacLeod 2023 Cedarwood Court The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 1267/81, to permit uncovered stairs and a platform (rear yard deck) not exceeding a height of 2.4 metres above grade to project not more than 1.5 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 the required rear yard. The applicant requests approval of the variance to obtain a building permit for a rear yard deck. Input from other sources was received from the Applicant, City Engineering Services and City Building Services Section. In support of the application, the applicant identified the deck is unsafe, and the stairs (new portion) are encroaching into the required setbacks to the rear of the property line. The projection of the deck meets the encroachment permissions. The height of the deck does not comply due to the grading of the rear yard. Aaron Sammut, applicant, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. -2- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, January 10, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 3 of 6 On the basis that the application meets the four tests of the Planning Act, Rick Van Andel moved the following motion: Moved by Rick Van Andel Seconded by Omar Ha-Redeye That application MV 01/24 by A. Sammut & R. MacLeod, be Approved on the grounds that the requested variance is minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, subject to the following condition: 1. That the variance applies only to the rear yard deck and uncovered stairs, 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 January 10, 2024). Carried Unanimously 6.2 P/CA 52/23 OPB Reality Inc. 1355 Kingston Road The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 7553/17, as amended by By-law 7981/23, to reduce the minimum parking ratio to 0.5 parking spaces per apartment dwelling unit, whereas the By-law requires a minimum parking ratio of 0.65 parking spaces per apartment dwelling unit. The applicant requests approval of this variance to facilitate the construction of a mixed- use development, consisting of nine development blocks for high-density residential, office, and commercial uses, and one parkland block. Input from other sources was received from the City Engineering Services, City Building Services Section and one area resident. Daniel Oliveira, agent, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. The agent gave a brief overview of the application. In response to questions from a Committee member the agent commented that the reason for the variance is due to their parking sales data and the high demand during the first phase of sales. Planner II confirmed a copy of the comments received from an area resident was forwarded to the applicant. The agent confirmed they had received the comments. -3- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, January 10, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 4 of 6 In response to the comment letter the agent addressed concerns regarding the expected completion date of the Durham-Scarborough BRT project; parking demand between one bedroom and two-bedroom units; the retail environment rapidly changing in downtown Pickering; access to schools within the community; and parking requirements for the future parkland block. In response to questions from the Chair, the agent confirmed the development will consist of around 5000 units for 9 blocks. Should parking demand require more parking spaces they would have to adjust as they work through the masterplan. They have seen a trend where there is less demand for parking. In response to questions from Committee members, the agent commented that the unit types for the future towers would adjust as the sales data is received. A Parking Justification Report was provided at the time of submission of a Zoning By-law Amendment application to reduce the parking requirement from 0.8 to 0.65. The number requested at that time was based on the sales data they had seen back then. Although they only have sales data for Block 1, they utilized data from Universal City development and the general trend in parking demand. The agent confirmed the Universal City development is at 0.65 parking space per dwelling unit that was granted through a Zoning By-law Amendment. To date no Site Plan Applications have been submitted for Blocks 5, 6, 8 and 9. Unit distribution types are only known for Blocks 1 and 3. Seeking out a Zoning By-law Amendment for the reduction in parking would be a timely process. The two towers currently being addressed are in the northwest corner of Block 1 and the southwest corner of Block 3. The TDM measures have been implemented in Blocks 1 and 3, a surplus of bicycle parking, safe and accessible pedestrian connections and commercial, retail and office use. The overall sole parking data noted in the report is for all seven phases from Universal City over a period of time. The report indicates other comparable municipalities that are also making parking requirement adjustments. In response to a question from the Chair, the applicant indicated at this time are not submitting a Minor Variance application for reduction of visitor parking however they are in conversations with the City Development department regarding the visitor parking and doing further analysis and studies to better understand what the ratios are. A Committee member expressed concerns about having the appropriate documentation and supporting material to make an informed decision on this application. The application looks to be appropriate development of land and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law. However, there are several concerns regarding the test of whether the application is minor in nature. Several cases were referenced in support of those concerns. A minor variance can be more than minor for one of two reasons: it is too large to be considered minor; or that it is too important to be considered minor. The extent of the impact on the immediate property and the general area cannot be determined with the minimal information the -4- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, January 10, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 5 of 6 Committee has received. This application would be more appropriate for a Zoning By-law Amendment because it would provide a legal and precise way in managing land use in future development, it would implement the objectives and policies of the municipalities Official Plan and the requirements that would come in to play with a Zoning By-law amendment, such as further consultation and an Open House. A Committee member commented that the development makes sense. As this is a very specific site, he does not believe approving this application would set a precedent citywide. Expressed concerns on whether this application is minor in nature. The applicant is requesting approval for several Blocks without supporting material to justify the variance. Would consider granting approval to Blocks 1 and 3 since those are the only Blocks they received data on. Moved by Rick Van Andel Seconded by Sakshi Sood Joshi That application P/CA 52/23 by OPB Reality Inc., be Approved on the grounds that the requested variance is minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, subject to the following condition: 1. That this variance applies only to Block 1 and Block 3 within Draft Approved Plan of Subdivision SP-2021-02, located on the eastern portion of the Pickering Town Centre lands, as illustrated on the attached draft plan of subdivision (refer to Exhibit 2 contained in the staff report to the Committee of Adjustment, dated January 10, 2024). Motion Lost Moved by Omar Ha-Redeye Seconded by Denise Rundle That application P/CA 52/23 by OPB Reality Inc., be Refused on the grounds that the requested variance is not minor in nature. Carried Vote: Omar Ha-Redeye in favour Denise Rundle in favour Sakshi Sood Joshi opposed Rick Van Andel opposed Sean Wiley in favour -5- Committee of Adjustment Hearing Minutes Wednesday, January 10, 2024 7:00 pm Electronic Hearing Page 6 of 6 7. Adjournment Moved by Omar Ha-Redeye Seconded by Rick Van Andel That the 1st hearing of the 2024 Committee of Adjustment be adjourned at 8:04 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 -6- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: MV 04/24 Date: February 14, 2024 From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Minor Variance Application MV 04/24 J. Reeves 667 Pleasant Street Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-laws 7610/18, 7872/21, 7873/21, and 7900/22, to permit: • a minimum lot frontage of 14.0 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum lot frontage of 15.0 metres • a maximum building coverage of 38 percent, whereas the By-law permits a maximum building coverage of 33 percent • a maximum driveway width of 6.4 metres, whereas the By-law permits a maximum driveway width of 6.0 metres • a maximum front yard setback of 13.71 metres, whereas the By-law permits a maximum front yard setback of no more than 10.75 metres (1.0 metre beyond the existing average front yard setbacks of the adjacent dwellings on same side of street in the same block) • a maximum height of 5.0 metres for an accessory building containing an additional dwelling unit on lots with an area of 2,000 square metres or less, whereas the By-law permits a maximum height for an accessory building containing an additional dwelling unit on lots with an area of 2,000 square metres or less to be 4.5 metres The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application to obtain a future building permit for a two-storey detached dwelling, with two additional dwelling units (ADUs) on the lot. Recommendation For your information, and based solely on the application and supporting documentation filed by the applicant, the City Development Department has reviewed the application with respect to Section 45(1) of the Planning Act and 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. After considering all public and agency input, should the Committee find merit in this application, the following conditions are recommended: -7- Report MV 04/24 February 14, 2024 Page 2 1. That the variance applies 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). 2. That Engineering Services be satisfied that the Engineering Design Criteria can be adequately addressed prior to the issuance of a building permit. Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated “Urban Residential Areas – Low Density Area” within the Bay Ridges Neighbourhood. Residential uses such as detached dwellings and associated accessory uses and additional dwelling units are permitted within the Urban Residential Areas designations. Staff have reviewed and made comments on the proposed dwelling using the Council-adopted Urban Design Guidelines for Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhood Precincts Checklist, which can be found as Appendix A to this report. Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The subject property is zoned “R4” in Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-laws 7610/18, 7872/21, 7873/21, and 7900/22. Lot Frontage Variance The applicant seeks to recognize a minimum lot frontage of 14.0 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum frontage of 15.0 metres. The current lot has existed prior to the adoption of the current Zoning By-laws. The applicant is seeking to recognize the existing lot to facilitate the proposed development. Lot Coverage Variance The intent of the maximum lot coverage provision is to maintain an appropriate amount of yard space for amenity area uncovered by buildings on a lot and to regulate the scale and size of the building. The By-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent including decks and stairs. The applicant is proposing a maximum lot coverage of 38 percent (dwelling: 17.5 percent; accessory structure: 11.5 percent; porch/deck and stairs: 7.3 percent). The proposed dwelling has a rear setback of over 20.0 metres, and adequate setbacks are provided from the proposed accessory structure. The placement of the proposed building appears to allow for an adequate amount of rear yard space for amenity area. Additionally, the size of the accessory structure remains subordinate to the proposed detached dwelling. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed variance maintains the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. -8- Report MV 04/24 February 14, 2024 Page 3 Maximum Driveway Width Variance The applicant is requesting a maximum driveway width of 6.4 metres, whereas the By-law permits a maximum driveway width of 6.0 metres. The intent of this provision is to minimize the impacts of driveways to the streetscape and to support the character of the Established Neighbourhood Precincts. The proposed driveway design is the same as the existing driveway leading up to the existing detached garage. The applicant has indicated that the proposal will reduce the driveway width at the rear to match the proposed accessory structure, providing buffering between the parking spaces and the abutting lot. The requested variance is an improvement to the current conditions and is not expected to generate significant negative impacts to the streetscape. Staff is of the opinion that the variance is in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. Maximum Front Yard Setback Variance The maximum front yard setback is determined by the average of the two adjacent front yard setbacks, plus 1.0 metre. The maximum front yard setback requirement for the subject property is 10.75 metres, whereas the applicant is requesting a maximum front yard setback of 13.71 metres (measured to the most recessed front wall). The intent of the maximum front yard setback provision to ensure that adequate separation is provided between a dwelling and street activity, a sufficient landscaped area is maintained between a dwelling and the adjacent streets, and that an appropriate setback is provided to maintain a consistent streetscape. The proposed front yard setbacks of the proposed dwelling are generally in keeping with the immediate abutting dwellings as it falls in between the front walls of abutting dwellings and maintains a consistent streetscape. Staff is of the opinion that the variance is in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. Maximum Height for Accessory Buildings with ADUs Variance The applicant is requesting a maximum height of 5.0 metres for an accessory structure with an ADU, whereas the By-law permits a maximum height of 4.5 metres. The intent of this provision is to regulate the size and scale of the accessory ADU, while providing a sufficient height for living space. The proposed ADU will be located on the second floor of the detached garage, the applicant has indicated that the requested height is required to maintain an appropriate height for the living space. The proposed ADU is setback 41.4 metres from the front lot line and the height of the ADU is lower than the principal dwelling. The height and size of the ADU will remain visually subordinate to the principal dwelling from the street. Staff is of the opinion that the variance is in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. -9- Report MV 04/24 February 14, 2024 Page 4 Desirable for the Appriopriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The requested variances will facilitate a two-storey detached dwelling with an ADU within the dwelling and an ADU on the second floor of the two-storey detached garage in the rear yard. The placement and scale of the proposed buildings are consistent with existing dwellings abutting the lot and are in keeping with the character of the neighbourhood. Additionally, mature vegetation will remain along the rear lot line to provide screening of the accessory structure. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variances are desirable for the appropriate development of the land and are minor in nature. Input From Other Sources Applicant • See rationale provided by applicant. Engineering Services • Ensure the reduced minimum lot frontage and increased front yard setback (if approved with this application) does not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lots and surrounding area. • Ensure the increased lot coverage area and increased driveway width (if approved with this application) does not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lots and surrounding area. • It should be noted that part of the proposed driveway is located on the lot line leaving no room for a drainage swale. The driveway should be offset from the property line. The driveway is to be constructed using permeable pavers. • Multiple Low Impact Development measures (such as infiltration galleries with downspout connections, rain gardens and 450mm amended soil) will be required at the Building Permit stage. Building Services • No concerns. Public Input • No written submissions were received from the public as of the date of writing this report. -10- Report MV 04/24 February 14, 2024 Page 5 Date of report: February 8, 2024 Comments prepared by: Ziya Cao Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Planner I Manager, Zoning & Administration ZC:nr J:\Documents\Development\D-3700 Committee of Adjustment (PCA Applications)\2024\MV 04-24\7. Report Attachments -11- Urban City of Pickering Established A 1 Appendix A Urban Design Guideline Checklist City of Pickering Established Neighbourhood Precincts Urban Design Checklist Please note, if you mark “no” below please provide your rational in the adjacent “Comments” section either supporting, or not supporting the proposal. Yes No Comments x 1. Is the proposed dwelling height and roof pitch similar/compatible with the surrounding dwellings? (see Section 2.1: Guideline 1) x 2. If the proposed new dwelling is significantly taller than an existing adjacent house, does the roof of the proposed new dwelling slope away from the existing adjacent house? (see Section 2.1: Guideline 2) X 3. Is the maximum elevation of the Front Entrance 1.2 metres, or less, above grade? (see Section 2.2: Guideline 1) x 4. Is the main entrance visible from the street? (see Section 2.2: Guideline 2) x 5. Are the stairs to the main entrance designed as an integral component of the front façade? (Section 2.2: Guideline 7) x 6. Does the design of the front entrance reduce the visual dominance of the garage and driveway? (see Section 2.2: Guideline 9) x 7. Does the proposed dwelling have a similar Dwelling Depth to the adjacent dwellings along the street? (see Section 2.3: Guideline 2) x 8. Does the proposed dwelling have a similar Side Yard Setback to the adjacent dwellings along the street? (see Figure 15) -12- Appendix A Urban Design Checklist Cont’d Urban City of Pickering Established A 2 Yes No Comments x 9. Has shadow on adjacent dwellings been mitigated with greater Side Yard Setbacks? (Section 3.1: Guideline 2) 10. Is the garage flush or recessed from the main front wall? (see Section 3.2: Guideline 5) N/A. Proposed garage is detached. x 11. Is the proposed driveway width the same as the permitted garage width? (see Section 3.3: Guideline 1) Existing driveway layout is kept. Proposed driveway will match the north wall of the detached garage. 12. Does the plan preserve existing trees? (see Section 4.1: Guideline 1) Unable to determine at this stage. -13- Gull Crossing Annland Street F r o n t R o a d Liv e r p o o l R o a d Commerce Street Pl e a s a n t S t r e e t Wharf Street Ilona Park Road Broadview Street ProgressFrenchman'sBay East Park AlderwoodPark Frenchman'sBay Rate PayersMemorial Park Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: MV 04/24 Date: Dec. 27, 2023 Exhibit 1 ¯ E J. Reeves 667 Pleasant Street SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\MV\2024\MV 04-24\MV04-24_LocationMap.mxd 1:3,000 SCALE:THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © King's Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © His Majesty the King in Right of Canada, Department ofNatural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights reserved.; © Municipal PropertyAssessment Corporation and its suppliers. All rights reserved. City DevelopmentDepartment -14- Exhibit 2 Submitted Site Plan File No: MV 04/24 Applicant: J. Reeves Municipal Address: 667 Pleasant Street FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. Date: Jan 24, 2024 Pleasant Street to permit a maximum building coverage of 38 percent to permit a minimum lot frontage of 14.0 metres to permit a maximum front yard setback of 13.71 metres to permit a maximum height of 5.0 metres for an accessory building containing an additional dwelling unit on lots with an area of 2,000 square metres or less to permit a maximum driveway width of 6.4 metres -15- Ex h i b i t 3 Su b m i t t e d We s t El e v a t i o n ( D e t a c h e d D w e l l i n g ) Fi l e N o : MV 0 4 / 24 Ap p l i c a n t : J. R e e v e s Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 66 7 P l e a s a n t S t r e e t FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ja n 2 4 , 2 0 2 4 -16- Ex h i b i t 4 Su b m i t t e d So u t h El e v a t i o n ( D e t a c h e d D w e l l i n g ) Fi l e N o : MV 0 4 / 24 Ap p l i c a n t : J. R e e v e s Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 66 7 P l e a s a n t S t r e e t FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ja n 2 4 , 2 0 2 4 -17- Ex h i b i t 5 Su b m i t t e d Ea st El e v a t i o n ( D e t a c h e d D w e l l i n g ) Fi l e N o : MV 0 4 / 24 Ap p l i c a n t : J. R e e v e s Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 66 7 P l e a s a n t S t r e e t FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ja n 2 4 , 2 0 2 4 -18- Ex h i b i t 6 Su b m i t t e d No r t h El e v a t i o n ( D e t a c h e d D w e l l i n g ) Fi l e N o : MV 0 4 / 24 Ap p l i c a n t : J. R e e v e s Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 66 7 P l e a s a n t S t r e e t FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ja n 2 4 , 2 0 2 4 -19- Ex h i b i t 7 Su b m i t t e d El e v a t i o n s (Ac c e s s o r y S t r u c t u r e ) Fi l e N o : MV 0 4 / 24 Ap p l i c a n t : J. R e e v e s Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 66 7 P l e a s a n t S t r e e t FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ja n 2 4 , 2 0 2 4 to p e r m i t a ma x i m u m h e i g h t of 5 . 0 m e t r e s f o r an a c c e s s o r y bu i l d i n g co n t a i n i n g a n ad d i t i o n a l dw e l l i n g u n i t o n lo t s wi t h a n a r e a of 2 , 0 0 0 s q u a r e me t r e s o r l e s s -20- Exhibit 8 Submitted Floor Plans (Accessory Structure) File No: MV 04/24 Applicant: J. Reeves Municipal Address: 667 Pleasant Street FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. Date: Jan 24, 2024 -21- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: MV 05/24 Date: February 14, 2024 From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application MV 05/24 P. Tekumalla & S. Vedantam 2719 Sapphire Drive Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 7364/14, as amended by By-law 7857/21, to permit a maximum driveway width of 5.75 metres, whereas the By-law states that for lots having a lot frontage between 9.0 metres and less than 11.0 metres, the maximum driveway width shall be no more than 4.6 metres. The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application to obtain a building permit for the construction of an additional dwelling unit in the basement of the existing single detached dwelling. Recommendation For your information, and based solely upon the application and supporting documentation filed by the applicant, the City Development Department has reviewed the application with respect to Section 45(1) of the Planning Act and 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. After considering all public and agency input, should the Committee find merit in this application, the following conditions are recommended: 1. That this variance apply only to the proposed driveway widening, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plan (refer to Exhibit 2). 2. That prior to the issuance of a building permit, Engineering Services shall be satisfied that Engineering Design Criteria can be adequately addressed. 3. That prior to the issuance of a building permit, Fire Services shall be satisfied with the proposal to construct an additional dwelling unit in the basement of the existing single detached dwelling. -22- Report MV 05/24 February 14, 2024 Page 2 Background The applicant, or a previous property owner, installed interlocking pavers in the front yard of the subject property, generally in the area located between the existing driveway and the front porch. Under the Zoning By-law, interlocking is considered landscaping and is permitted. The minimum parking requirements for a detached dwelling and additional dwelling unit (ADU) is 3 parking spaces. In order to accommodate a third parking space on the lot (one existing space in the garage and two spaces outside), the applicant is proposing to remove a portion of the interlocking pavers and widen the driveway using permeable pavement or porous asphalt. In accordance with requirements from the City’s Engineering Services Department, the widening of the driveway will be located entirely on private property, and no curb cut will be permitted to accommodate the widened driveway. Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated Urban Residential Areas – Low Density Area in the Seaton Lamoreaux Neighbourhood. Lands within this designation are intended to accommodate residential uses, including detached dwellings and additional dwelling units (ADUs). In September of 2023, City Council approved Official Plan Amendment 49, which was intended to bring the Official Plan into conformity with the Planning Act, to implement policies that support the construction of ADUs across the City. Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The intent of the maximum driveway width is to ensure sufficient space is maintained in the front yard for landscaping, to accommodate grading and drainage, and to maintain the character of the street. As noted above, the applicant is proposing to remove a portion of the existing interlocking pavers in the front yard, to accommodate the driveway widening. No soft landscaping, such as grass or other plantings, are required to be removed to accommodate the widening. Additionally, as required by Engineering Services, the existing boulevard tree located in front of the property, within the municipal right-of-way, shall not be disturbed by the driveway widening. In accordance with requirements from the City’s Engineering Services Department, the applicant will be using permeable pavement or porous asphalt to widen the driveway. Through conversations with Engineering Services, it is staff’s understanding that these materials are more suitable to accommodate grading and drainage, as opposed to the interlocking that currently exists. -23- Report MV 05/24 February 14, 2024 Page 3 The City has been experiencing a recent increase in the number of ADUs across the City, particularly within the Seaton neighbourhoods. Property owners are requiring more parking spaces to accommodate these units, and as a result, many of these property owners are widening their driveways, especially in Seaton. A larger driveway on the subject property would not be out of character for this neighbourhood. Desirable for the Appropriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The proposed variance to widen the driveway will allow the applicant to obtain a building permit for the construction of an ADU in the existing detached dwelling. Staff are in support of ADUs as an affordable housing option. As understood from conversations with Engineering Services, the permeable pavement or porous asphalt that is proposed to be used for the driveway widening is better for the overall grading and drainage in the front yard of the property, as opposed to the interlocking that currently exists. For the reasons noted above, staff consider the requested variance to be appropriate development of the land and minor in nature. Input From Other Sources Applicant • No comments. Engineering Services • Ensure the increased driveway width does not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lot and surrounding area. • The proposed driveway is to be constructed using permeable pavers to address the increased imperviousness of the lot. This is to be addressed through the building permit. Building Services • No comments. Fire Services • There is a grade difference between the front yard and the rear yard, which may impact firefighter access to the entrance of the ADU, which is in the rear yard. The slope of the rear yard will need to be addressed through the building permit process. Public Input • No written submissions were received from the public as of the date of writing this report. -24- Report MV 05/24 February 14, 2024 Page 4 Date of report: February 7, 2024 Comments prepared by: Isabel Lima Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Planner II Manager, Zoning & Administration IL:jc J:\Documents\Development\D-3700\2024\MV 05-24\7. Report Attachments -25- Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: MV 07/24 Date: Jan. 08, 2024 Exhibit 1 ¯ E R. & S. Wideman & D. Reesor 5293 5295 Markham-Pickering Townline Road SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\MV\2024\MV 07-24\MV07-24_LocationMap.mxd 1:14,000 SCALE:THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © King's Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © His Majesty the King in Right of Canada, Department ofNatural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights reserved.; © Municipal PropertyAssessment Corporation and its suppliers. All rights reserved. City DevelopmentDepartment Sid e l i n e 3 4 Uxbridge-Pickering Townline Road Ma r k h a m - P i c k e r i n g T o w n l i n e R o a d Sid e l i n e 3 2 Ninth Concession Road -26- Exhibit 2 Submitted Site Plan File No: MV 07/24 Applicant: R. & S. Wideman & D. Reesor Municipal Address: 5293 5295 Markham-Pickering Townline Road FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. Date: Jan 24, 2024 -27- Ex h i b i t 3 Su b m i t t e d Si t e Pl a n (E n l a r g e d ) Fi l e N o : MV 0 7/2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : R. & S . W i d e m a n & D . R e e s o r Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 52 9 3 5 2 9 5 M a r k h a m -Pi c k e r i n g T o w n l i n e R o a d FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ja n 24 , 2 0 2 4 to p e r m i t a d e t a c h e d dw e l l i n g t o b e l o c a t e d a mi n i m u m o f 0 m e t r e f r o m t h e ba s e o f t h e o u t e r m o s t t r e e tr u c k s w i t h i n a w o o d l a n d -28- Ex h i b i t 4 Su b m i t t e d El e v a t i o n P l a n ( S o u t h ) Fi l e N o : MV 0 7/2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : R. & S . W i d e m a n & D . R e e s o r Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 52 9 3 5 2 9 5 M a r k h a m -Pi c k e r i n g T o w n l i n e R o a d FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ja n 24 , 2 0 2 4 -29- Ex h i b i t 5 Su b m i t t e d El e v a t i o n P l a n ( No r th ) Fi l e N o : MV 0 7/2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : R. & S . W i d e m a n & D . R e e s o r Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 52 9 3 5 2 9 5 M a r k h a m -Pi c k e r i n g T o w n l i n e R o a d FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ja n 24 , 2 0 2 4 -30- Ex h i b i t 6 Su b m i t t e d El e v a t i o n P l a n ( Ea s t ) Fi l e N o : MV 0 7/2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : R. & S . W i d e m a n & D . R e e s o r Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 52 9 3 5 2 9 5 M a r k h a m -Pi c k e r i n g T o w n l i n e R o a d FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ja n 24 , 2 0 2 4 -31- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: MV 07/24 Date: February 14, 2024 From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Minor Variance Application MV 07/24 R. & S. Wideman & D. Reesor5293 5295 Markham-Pickering Townline Road Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by By-law 6640/06, to permit a detached dwelling to be located a minimum of 0 metres from the base of the outermost tree trucks within a woodland whereas the By-law requires all buildings and structures to be located a minimum of 30 metres from the base of the outermost tree trunks within a woodland. The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application to obtain a building permit to construct a two-storey garage addition, with an Additional Dwelling Unit on the second floor. Recommendation For your information, and based solely on the application and supporting documentation filed by the applicant, the City Development Department has reviewed the application with respect to Section 45(1) of the Planning Act and 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. After considering all public and agency input, should the Committee find merit in this application, the following condition is recommended: 1. That the variance applies only to proposed addition, as generally sited, and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6). Recommendation Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated “Oak Ridges Moraine Countryside Area”. This designation primarily permits agricultural uses. Lawfully existing dwellings and farm-related residential dwellings are also permitted under this designation. -32- Report MV 07/24 February 14, 2024 Page 2 The dwelling subject to this application is located adjacent to a significant woodland as identified in Schedule IIIB of the Official Plan (refer to Attachment 1). It is located with the Minimum Vegetation Protection Zone (MVPZ) as outlined in Table 17 of the Official Plan, where a minimum setback of 30 metres from the base of outermost tree trunks within the woodland is required. Development or site alterations within the MVPZ requires a natural heritage evaluation to demonstrate that the development or site alteration applied for will have no adverse effects on the key natural heritage feature or on the related ecological functions. The applicant has submitted a scoped natural heritage evaluation (NHE) concluding that the wooded area does not meet the minimum size requirement to deem the woodland significant (refer to Attachment 2). Staff is satisfied with the submitted NHE and is of the opinion that the proposed addition is in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan. Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The subject property is zoned “ORM-A” and “ORM-EP” in Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by By-law 6640/06. The dwelling subject to this application is located entirely within the ORM-EP zone. Existing dwellings within the ORM-EP zone are permitted. As the subject dwelling is located adjacent to a Significant Woodland identified in the Official Plan, the applicant is requesting a 0 metre setback from the base of the outermost tree trucks within a woodland to permit the proposed addition, whereas the By-law requires a minimum setback of 30 metres. The intent of this provision is to ensure the protection of Key Natural Heritage Features within the Oak Ridges Moraine, and that adequate buffering from development is provided. Based on the submitted NHE, it was concluded that the wooded area adjacent to the subject dwelling is not a Significant Woodland. Additionally, no trees are being removed as a part of the proposal. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance is in keeping with the general intent and purpose the Zoning By-law. Desirable for the Appriopriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The dwelling subject to this application was existing prior to the establishment of ORM-EP zone and is located within the 30 metre buffer of the identified Significant Woodland. The applicant has demonstrated that the wooded area surrounding the dwelling is not considered a Significant Woodland, and that no trees will be removed as a part of the proposal. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance is desirable for the appropriate development of land and is minor in nature. Input From Other Sources Applicant •See applicant submitted cover letter. Engineering Services •Ensure the increased lot coverage area (if approvedwith this application) does not adversely affect thedrainage patterns within the lot and surrounding area. Building Services •No concerns. -33- Report MV 07/24 February 14, 2024 Page 3 Public Input • No written submissions were received from the public as of the date of writing this report. Date of report: February 7, 2024 Comments prepared by: Ziya Cao Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Planner I Manager, Zoning & Administration ZC:nr J:\Documents\Development\D-3700 Committee of Adjustment (PCA Applications)\2024\MV 01-24\7. Report\MV 01-24 Report.doc Attachments -34- Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: MV 07/24 Date: Jan. 08, 2024 Exhibit 1 ¯ E R. & S. Wideman & D. Reesor 5293 5295 Markham-Pickering Townline Road SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\MV\2024\MV 07-24\MV07-24_LocationMap.mxd 1:14,000 SCALE:THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © King's Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © His Majesty the King in Right of Canada, Department ofNatural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights reserved.; © Municipal PropertyAssessment Corporation and its suppliers. All rights reserved. City DevelopmentDepartment Sid e l i n e 3 4 Uxbridge-Pickering Townline Road Ma r k h a m - P i c k e r i n g T o w n l i n e R o a d Sid e l i n e 3 2 Ninth Concession Road -35- Exhibit 2 Submitted Site Plan File No: MV 07/24 Applicant: R. & S. Wideman & D. Reesor Municipal Address: 5293 5295 Markham-Pickering Townline Road FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. Date: Jan 24, 2024 -36- Ex h i b i t 3 Su b m i t t e d Si t e Pl a n (E n l a r g e d ) Fi l e N o : MV 0 7/2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : R. & S . W i d e m a n & D . R e e s o r Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 52 9 3 5 2 9 5 M a r k h a m -Pi c k e r i n g T o w n l i n e R o a d FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ja n 24 , 2 0 2 4 to p e r m i t a d e t a c h e d dw e l l i n g t o b e l o c a t e d a mi n i m u m o f 0 m e t r e f r o m t h e ba s e o f t h e o u t e r m o s t t r e e tr u c k s w i t h i n a w o o d l a n d -37- Ex h i b i t 4 Su b m i t t e d El e v a t i o n P l a n ( S o u t h ) Fi l e N o : MV 0 7/2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : R. & S . W i d e m a n & D . R e e s o r Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 52 9 3 5 2 9 5 M a r k h a m -Pi c k e r i n g T o w n l i n e R o a d FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ja n 24 , 2 0 2 4 -38- Ex h i b i t 5 Su b m i t t e d El e v a t i o n P l a n ( No r th ) Fi l e N o : MV 0 7/2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : R. & S . W i d e m a n & D . R e e s o r Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 52 9 3 5 2 9 5 M a r k h a m -Pi c k e r i n g T o w n l i n e R o a d FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ja n 24 , 2 0 2 4 -39- Ex h i b i t 6 Su b m i t t e d El e v a t i o n P l a n ( Ea s t ) Fi l e N o : MV 0 7/2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : R. & S . W i d e m a n & D . R e e s o r Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 52 9 3 5 2 9 5 M a r k h a m -Pi c k e r i n g T o w n l i n e R o a d FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ja n 24 , 2 0 2 4 -40- Attachment 1 ication c::::I Subject Land Key Natural Heritage Features �of Schedule Ill B to the Pickering Official Plan Excerpt File: MV 07/24 PICKERING Applicant: R. & S. Wideman & D. Reesor City Development Municipal Address: 5293 5295 Markham-Pickering Townline Road @ The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: Date: Feb. 07, 2024 Department @ King's Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.;@ His Majesty the King in Righi of Canada, Department of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; @Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its SCALE: 1:2,000 I suppliers. All rights reserved.;@ Municipal Property Assessment Corporation and its suppliers. All rights reserved. THIS ISNOTAPI.ANOF SURVEY. l:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\MV\2024\MV 07-24\MV 07-24.aprx -41- Attachment 2 -42- -43- -44- -45- -46- -47- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: MV 08/24 Date: February 14, 2024 From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Committee of Adjustment Application MV 08/24 A.Saikaly947 Vistula Drive Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2520, as amended, to permit: •a minimum front yard setback of 6.45 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum front yard setback of 7.5 metres •an uncovered platform (porch) with steps not exceeding 1.1 metres in height above grade and not projecting more than 2.53 metres into the required front yard, whereas the By-law permits uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade and not projecting more than 1.5 metres into the required front yard The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application to obtain a building permit to permit an uncovered porch with steps in the front yard. Recommendation For your information, and based solely on the application and supporting documentation filed by the applicant, the City Development Department has reviewed the application with respect to Section 45(1) of the Planning Act and 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. After considering all public and agency input, should the Committee find merit in this application, the following condition is recommended: 1. That these variances apply only to the existing dwelling and uncovered porch and steps,as generally sited and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2 & 3). Background On January 30th, City staff received revised architectural drawings which accurately reflect the property survey. The revised Site Plan (refer to revised Exhibit 2) identifies slightly different and lesser setbacks than what was submitted with the minor variance application and contained in the Notice of Hearing. As the revised variances are lesser than those contained in the Notice of Hearing, no further Notice is required. -48- Report MV 08/24 February 14, 2024 Page 2 Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated “Urban Residential Areas – Low Density Area” within the West Shore Neighbourhood. Residential uses such as detached dwellings and accessory uses are permitted within the Urban Residential Areas designations. Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The subject property is zoned “R4” Single Detached Residential in Zoning By-law 2520, as amended. Obstruction of Yards Variance The applicant is proposing to remove the existing steps and landing and construct a new front porch with steps. The proposed porch has a maximum height of 1.01 metres, projecting 2.53 metres into the required front yard, whereas the By-law permits uncovered steps and platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade to project not more than 1.5 metres into the rear yard. The intent of the provision that requires uncovered platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade to project not more than 1.5 metres into the required front yard is to ensure an adequate buffer space between buildings and to ensure an adequate landscaped area within the front yard is provided. Due to the rounded configuration of the lot, it is impossible for the existing dwelling to comply with the By-law. The deck is a minor encroachment into the front yard, maintaining adequate space for landscaping and buffer space in the front yard. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance is in keeping with the general intent and purpose the Zoning By-law. Front Yard Setback Variance The intent of the provision requiring a 7.5 metre front yard setback is to provide an adequate separation distance between the building and the street activity in the front yard, and to provide an adequate landscaped area and parking space in front of the property. The request to permit a front yard setback to 6.45 metres is to recognize an existing front yard setback. The existing 6.45 metre front yard setback is consistent with the existing setbacks along Vistula Drive. The property has existed since the 1960’s with no concerns. The front yard setback provides an adequate separation distance between the building and street activity and provides for a sufficient landscaped area and parking in front of the property. Desirable for the Appropriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The requested variance is intended to permit an uncovered porch. The deck has a similar projection as existing decks of the adjacent properties. The proposed deck is not expected to create significant visual impact to the adjacent properties. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance is desirable and appropriate for the development of the land and is minor in nature. -49- Report MV 08/24 February 14, 2024 Page 3 Input From Other Sources Applicant • Due to the placement of the existing dwelling, it is difficult to comply with the By-law. Engineering Services • Ensure the reduced front yard setback does not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lot and surrounding area. Building Services • Porch was partially constructed without the benefit of building permit, permit application is on hold until Committee’s decision. Public Input • No written submissions were received from the public as of the date of writing this report. Date of report: February 8, 2024 Comments prepared by: Kerry Yelk Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Planner I Manager, Zoning & Administration KY:jc J:\Documents\Development\D-3700\2024\MV 08-24\7. Report\MV 08-24.doc Attachments -50- Timmins Gardens Vi s t u l a D r i v e Ba t o r y A v e n u e Elvira Court Bayshore Court Highway 401 Ess a C r e s c e n t Bayly Street BruceHanscombePark VistulaRavine GlenRavinePark West ShoreCommunityCentre Location MapFile:Applicant:Municipal Address: MV 08/24 Date: Jan. 12, 2024 Exhibit 1 A. Saikaly 947 Vistula Drive SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\MV\2024\MV 08-24\MV08-24_LocationMap.mxd 1:4,000 SCALE:THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © King's Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © His Majesty the King in Right of Canada, Department ofNatural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights reserved.; © Municipal PropertyAssessment Corporation and its suppliers. All rights reserved. City DevelopmentDepartment -51- Ex h i b i t 2 Su b m i t t e d Si t e Pl a n Fi l e N o : MV 0 8 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : A. S a i k a l y Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 94 7 V i s t u l a D r i v e Co n t a c t T h e C i t y o f P i c k e r i n g C i t y D e v e l o p m e n t D e p a r t m e n t f o r D i g i t a l C o p i e s o f t h i s P l a n . Da t e : Fe b r u a r y 7, 2 0 2 4 to r e c o g n i z e a m i n i m u m f r o n t ya r d s e t b a c k o f 6. 4 5 me t r e s to p e r m i t an un c o v e r e d p o r c h wi t h s t e p s n o t ex c e e d i n g 1. 1 me t r e s i n h e i g h t ab o v e g r a d e a n d n o t pr o j e c t i n g m o r e t h a n 2. 5 3 me t r e s i n t o a n y re q u i r e d f r o n t y a r d Vistula Drive Vi s t u l a D r i v e -52- Ex h i b i t 3   Su b m i t t e d F r o n t E l e v a t i o n P l a n Fi l e N o : M V 0 8 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : A . S a i k a l y Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 9 4 7 V i s t u l a D r i v e Co n t a c t T h e C i t y o f P i c k e r i n g C i t y D e v e l o p m e n t D e p a r t m e n t f o r D i g i t a l C o p i e s o f t h i s P l a n . Da t e : J a n u a r y 2 5 , 2 0 2 4   -53- Report to Committee of Adjustment Application Number: MV 09/24 Date: February 14, 2024 From: Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Manager, Zoning & Administration Subject: Minor Variance Application MV 09/24 A. Cammisa 813 Douglas Avenue Application The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-laws 7610/18, 7872/21, 7873/21, and 7900/22, to permit: • a minimum front yard setback of 9.2 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum front yard setback of 10.63 metres • a covered porch and associated steps not exceeding a height of 1.0 metre above grade to project not more than 2.6 metres into the required front yard, whereas the By-law permits 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 yard The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application to obtain a building permit for a detached dwelling. Recommendation For your information, and based solely on the application and supporting documentation filed by the applicant, the City Development Department has reviewed the application with respect to Section 45(1) of the Planning Act and 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. After considering all public and agency input, should the Committee find merit in this application, the following condition is recommended: 1. That the variance applies only to the proposed development, as generally sited, and outlined on the applicant’s submitted plans (refer to Exhibits 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6). -54- Report MV 09/24 February 14, 2024 Page 2 Comment Conforms to the Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated “Urban Residential Areas – Low Density Area” within the Bay Ridges Neighbourhood. Residential uses such as detached dwellings and accessory uses are permitted within the Urban Residential Areas designations. Staff have reviewed and made comments on the proposed dwelling using the Council-adopted Urban Design Guidelines for Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhood Precincts Checklist, which can be found as Appendix A to this report. Conforms to the Intent of the Zoning By-law The subject property is zoned “R4” in Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-laws 7610/18, 7872/21, 7873/21, and 7900/22. Minimum Front Yard Setback Variance The minimum front yard setback for properties within the Established Neighboourhood Precinct Areas is determined by the shortest existing front yard setback of the dwellings on the immediate abutting lots located along the same side of the street and within the same block. The applicant is requesting a minimum front yard setback of 9.2 metres, whereas the By-law requires a minimum front yard setback of 10.63 metres based on the north abutting property. The intent of this provision is to ensure that adequate separation is provided between a dwelling and street activity, a sufficient landscaped area is maintained between a dwelling and the adjacent streets, and that an appropriate setback is provided to maintain a consistent streetscape. The front wall of the proposed dwelling aligns with the front porch of the existing dwelling to the north. Additionally, the northern portion of the front wall for the proposed dwelling is recessed, matching the front wall of the abutting dwelling of the north. The proposal has considered the abutting dwellings and the requested reduction to the front yard setback maintains sufficient space for landscaping and amenity space. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance is in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. Front Yard Encroachment Variance The applicant is proposing a covered porch and steps that will project 2.6 metres from the front wall of proposed dwelling, whereas the By-law permits uncovered stairs and platforms to project a maximum of 1.5 metres into the required front yard. The intent of this provision is to ensure that adequate space can be provided for landscaping and amenity space. The proposed porch will be setback 7.27 metres from the front lot line. The setback to the porch is consistent with the existing dwellings along the street and allows sufficient space for front yard landscaping. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance is in keeping with general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. -55- Report MV 09/24 February 14, 2024 Page 3 Desirable for the Appriopriate Development of the Land and Minor in Nature The requested variances will facilitate a two-storey detached dwelling on the lot. While the applicant has requested a variance to reduce the front yard setbacks, they have also incorporated design features that has considered the siting of the immediate abutting dwellings, such as the recessing front walls to match the front walls of the abutting dwellings. The proposal is in keeping with the existing neighbourhood character and the requested variances are not expected to generate significant negative impacts to the surrounding properties. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variances are desirable for the appropriate development of land and are minor in nature. Input From Other Sources Applicant • Incorporating a portico with integrated stairs that provided weather protection for the main entrance, which also enhances the streetscape by creating a prominent entry feature. 21 percent of the front main wall (on both storeys) has been recessed beyond the minimum front yard setback on the north side to help alleviate shadow impact concerns to the adjacent property, while maintaining sufficient space between the front wall and the front lot line for front yard landscaping and amenity space. Engineering Services • Ensure increased lot coverage and any reduced setbacks (if approved with this application) do not adversely affect the drainage patterns within the lots and surrounding area. Multiple Low Impact Development measures (such as infiltration galleries with downspout connections, rain gardens and 450mm topsoil) will be required at the Building Permit stage. Building Services • No concerns. Public Input • No written submissions were received from the public as of the date of writing this report. -56- Report MV 09/24 February 14, 2024 Page 4 Date of report: February 7, 2024 Comments prepared by: Ziya Cao Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Planner I Manager, Zoning & Administration ZC:nr J:\Documents\Development\D-3700 Committee of Adjustment (PCA Applications)\2024\MV 09-24\7. Report Attachments -57- Urban City of Pickering Established A 1 Appendix A Urban Design Guideline Checklist City of Pickering Established Neighbourhood Precincts Urban Design Checklist Please note, if you mark “no” below please provide your rational in the adjacent “Comments” section either supporting, or not supporting the proposal. Yes No Comments X 1. Is the proposed dwelling height and roof pitch similar/compatible with the surrounding dwellings? (see Section 2.1: Guideline 1) X 2. If the proposed new dwelling is significantly taller than an existing adjacent house, does the roof of the proposed new dwelling slope away from the existing adjacent house? (see Section 2.1: Guideline 2) X 3. Is the maximum elevation of the Front Entrance 1.2 metres, or less, above grade? (see Section 2.2: Guideline 1) X 4. Is the main entrance visible from the street? (see Section 2.2: Guideline 2) X 5. Are the stairs to the main entrance designed as an integral component of the front façade? (Section 2.2: Guideline 7) X 6. Does the design of the front entrance reduce the visual dominance of the garage and driveway? (see Section 2.2: Guideline 9) X 7. Does the proposed dwelling have a similar Dwelling Depth to the adjacent dwellings along the street? (see Section 2.3: Guideline 2) X 8. Does the proposed dwelling have a similar Side Yard Setback to the adjacent dwellings along the street? (see Figure 15) -58- Appendix A Urban Design Checklist Cont’d Urban City of Pickering Established A 2 Yes No Comments x 9. Has shadow on adjacent dwellings been mitigated with greater Side Yard Setbacks? (Section 3.1: Guideline 2) Greater setbacks provided on the north side to alleviate shadow impacts to the property to the north. x 10. Is the garage flush or recessed from the main front wall? (see Section 3.2: Guideline 5) x 11. Is the proposed driveway width the same as the permitted garage width? (see Section 3.3: Guideline 1) 12. Does the plan preserve existing trees? (see Section 4.1: Guideline 1) Unable to determine at this stage. -59- da o R t n o r F da o R l o o p r e v i L Browning Avenue Ilona Park Road eu n e v A w e i v r i a F eu n e v A s a l g u o D Commerce Street Luna Court Haller Avenue KrosnoBoulevard Monica Cook Place ev i r D u a e l p a h C Douglas Park Old Orchard Avenue Frenchman'sBay Rate PayersMemorial Park Exhibit 1 Location MapFile:MV 09/24Applicant:Municipal Address:Date: Jan. 12, 2024 E ¯ A. Cammisa 813 Douglas Avenue SubjectLands City Development © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: Department © King's Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © His Majesty the King in Right of Canada, Department ofNatural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights reserved.; © Municipal Property 1:3,000Assessment Corporation and its suppliers. All rights reserved. TSHISC ISA NLOTE A: PLAN OF SURVEY. L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\MV\2024\MV 09-24\MV09-24_LocationMap.mxd -60- Ex h i b i t 2 Su b m i t t e d Si t e Pl a n Fi l e N o : MV 0 9 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : A. C a m m i s a Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 81 3 D o u g l a s A v e n u e FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ja n 2 4 , 2 0 2 4 Douglas Avenue to p e r m i t a mi n i m u m f r o n t ya r d s e t b a c k o f 9. 2 m e t r e s to p e r m i t co v e r e d p o r c h an d a s s o c i a t e d s t e p s n o t ex c e e d i n g a h e i g h t o f 1. 0 m e t r e ab o v e g r a d e to p r o j e c t n o t m o r e t h a n 2. 6 m e t r e s i n t o t h e re q u i r e d f r o n t y a r d -61- Ex h i b i t 3 Su b m i t t e d Ea s t E l e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : MV 0 9 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : A. C a m m i s a Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 81 3 D o u g l a s A v e n u e FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ja n 2 4 , 2 0 2 4 -62- Ex h i b i t 4 Su b m i t t e d We s t El e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : MV 0 9 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : A. C a m m i s a Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 81 3 D o u g l a s A v e n u e FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ja n 2 4 , 2 0 2 4 -63- Ex h i b i t 5 Su b m i t t e d No r th El e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : MV 0 9 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : A. C a m m i s a Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 81 3 D o u g l a s A v e n u e FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ja n 2 4 , 2 0 2 4 -64- Ex h i b i t 6 Su b m i t t e d So u th El e v a t i o n Fi l e N o : MV 0 9 / 2 4 Ap p l i c a n t : A. C a m m i s a Mu n i c i p a l A d d r e s s : 81 3 D o u g l a s A v e n u e FU L L S C A L E C O P I E S O F T H I S P L A N A R E A V A I L A B L E F O R V I E W I N G A T T H E C I T Y O F P I C K E R I N G C I T Y D E V E L O P M E N T D E P A R T M E N T . Da t e : Ja n 2 4 , 2 0 2 4 -65-