Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNovember 29, 1995 ~~ OF PIC ~O ~ ~--~ ~ Di~Q ~ MINUTES of the 16th meeting of the Committee of Adjustment held in the Committee Room ofthe Pickering Civic Complex on Wednesday, November 29,1995. -.. PRESENT: Mr. J. C. Young, Chairman Mr. S. Smith Mr. N. DiLecce Mr. P. White ALSO PRESENT: Mr. J. Cole, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer Mrs. T. Reid, Planning Department The meeting convened at 7:00 p.m. in the Committee Room of the Civic Complex. 1. MATTERS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES There were no matters arising from the minutes. 2. ADOPTION OF MINUTES MOTION: Moved by Mr. Smith, seconded by Mr. DiLecce and carried unanimously - That the adoption of the minutes of the 15th meeting of the Committee of Adjustment held 'W' November 8,1995, be adopted. 3. PICA 88/95 - C. & W. Betty Lot 18, Plan M-1222 Also known as 1194 Maple Gate Road Town of Pickering The applicants request relief from the provisions of By-law 3036, as amended by By-laws 1228/81 and 1308181, as follows: 1. Section 5.2.(t) of the by-law to permit the continuance of a minimum rear yard depth of 5.5 metres provided by a deck and stairs at the rear of the subject dwelling; whereas the by-law requires a minimum rear yard depth of 7.5 metres. 2. Section 5.2.( d) of the by-law to permit the continuance of a minimum interior side yard width of 0.3 metres provided by a deck and stairs at the rear of the subject dwelling which project into the south side yard; whereas the by-law requires a minimum interior side yard width of 1.2 metres. 'W' 3. Section 5.18(a) of the by-law to permit the continuance of an accessory structure (framed shed) located 0.4 metres from the south side lot line, in the south side yard; whereas the by-law requires all accessory structures to be located entirely within the rear yard a minimum of 1.0 metres from any lot line. This variance application is requested in order to bring the existing dwelling and accessory structure on the property into compliance with the provisions of the by-law. The Assistant Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the Town of Pickering Planning Department. Mr. Kenneth Hodge, agent, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of the application. Mr. Brian Moss, 1192 Maple Gate Road, Pickering, Ontario LIX 1 T9, was present in objection to the application. Mr. Hodge indicated that he sold the property three months ago and has requested the variance on behalf of the new owners. Mr. Moss made a presentation outlining his concerns that were addressed in his letter received November 28, 1995 by the Committee of Adjustment. Mr. Moss indicated that the .... deck and stairs on the subject property visually intrudes on his rear yard and interferes with the degree of privacy in his own yard. He indicated that the stairs are constructed on a higher grade in relationship to the north limit of his property. Mr. Hodge indicated that he personally constructed the stairs, after the deck had been built, not realizing that the stairs were located so close to the lot line. Mr. Young questioned the degree of error. Mr. Cole responded by indicating that the stairs are approximately three feet in error. Mr. White asked if the two neighbours had spoken about the situation when construction took place in 1993. Mr. Hodge indicated that in 1993 Mr. Moss' concern was the location of the accessory structure, which he then relocated as agreed by both neighbours. Mr. White asked if Mr. Hodge had applied to the Town for a building permit. Mr. Hodge indicated that he was under the impression that he was able to build 18 inches from the lot line without obtaining a permit. Mr. DiLecce asked Mr. Moss if he had experienced any drainage problems, or shadowing effects due to the stairs being constructed on a higher grade than his yard. Mr. Moss stated that he had experienced no drainage problems to date, and that shadowing was not a concern. -- Mr. DiLecce also asked if either neighbour had thought of using some tree planting to impair the visual appearance of the stairs. Mr. Moss indicated that he had already planted some trees in his yard. Mr. DiLecce asked Mr. Moss if the deck had been built to full capacity, and the stairs relocated, would it make a significant difference to the visual impact from your yard. Mr. Moss stated that a different location for the stairs would provide him with more privacy. He also indicated that the zoning by-laws are in place for everyone to adhere to. Therefore, the stairs should have been constructed in conformity with the by-law in 1993. DECISION: Moved by Mr. DiLecce and seconded by Mr. Smith and carried that - this application, PICA 88/95, by C. & W. Betty, as outlined, be APPROVED, on the grounds that the rear yard depth, accessory structure location and setback, and interior side yard width variances are minor in nature, appropriate for the desirable development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Durham Regional Official Plan, the Pickering District Plan, Sections 5.2.(t) and 5.2.( d) of Amending By-law 1228/81 and Section 5.18(a) of Zoning By-law 3036, subject to the following condition: .... 1. That these variances apply only to the frame shed, deck and stairs in existence on the date of this decision. 84 4. PICA 89/95 - Director Industrial Holdings Limited Part of Lot 29, Range 3, B. F. C. Also known as 603 Kingston Road Town of Pickering The applicant requests relief from the provision of Section 5.(I)(b)(ix)(B) of amending By-law 1810/84 to By-law 3036, to permit an existing tenant, Pet Choice Distributors Ltd. to provide a sales outlet occupying 35% of the gross leasable floor area of that use, with the ~ remaining 65% of the use occupied by a warehouse; whereas the by-law requires that sales outlets are permitted uses only if accessory to certain uses, including warehouses and providing that the gross floor area of the sales outlet does not exceed 20% of the gross floor area of the warehouse. Approval of this variance application is requested in order to bring the subject property into compliance with the zoning by-law. The Assistant Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the Town of Pickering Planning Department. Mr. J. Solly, agent, and Mr. Brian Hopkins, Pet Choice Distributors, were present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in opposition to the application DECISION: Moved by Mr. White and seconded by Mr. Smith and carried unanimously that - -- the application PICA 89/95, by Director Industrial Holdings Ltd., as outlined, be APPROVED, on the grounds that the proposed variance to permit an increase in the sales outlet from 20% of the gross floor area to 35%, is minor in nature, appropriate for the desirable development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan, and Section 5.(I)(b)(ix)(B) of amending By-law 1810/84, to Zoning By-law 3036, subject to the following condition: 1. That this variance applies only to the existing Pet Choice Distributors Ltd. tenant in their current unit within the building on the subject property. 5. PICA 90/95 - Brancato Construction Co. Ltd. Lot 7, Plan 40M-1823 Also known as 603 Kingston Road Town of Pickering The applicant requests relief from the provision of By-law 2511, as previously varied by PICA 59/95, to permit a minimum rear yard depth of 6.3 metres to be provided by a deck from a kitchen walkout, on a new dwelling to be constructed on the subject property; whereas the by-law requires a rear yard depth of 7.5 metres. The new dwelling to be constructed on the subject property would provide a rear yard depth of 7.5 metres in compliance with the zoning by-law. This variance application is requested in order to permit a deck to be constructed at the ...... rear of the new dwelling which would extend 1.2 metres from the rear face of the dwelling. The Assistant Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the Town of Pickering Planning Department. Mr. Brancato, owner, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Mr. Smith asked if the building envelope is constructed to the maximum, and if any additional construction would require a variance. 85 Mr. Brancato indicated that because of the cul-de-sac, the dwelling must be pushed back to the rear of the lot, therefore, leaving the rear yard depth at the minimum 7.5 metres, without the construction of a deck. DECISION: Moved by Mr. Smith and seconded by Mr. DiLecce and carried unanimously that - this application, PICA 90/95, by Brancato Construction Co. Ltd., as outlined, be APPROVED on the grounds that the proposed rear yard depth 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 Section 10.2.3 of Zoning By-law 2511, subject to the following condition: 1. That this variance applies only to the deck at the rear of the subject dwelling as generally identified on the plans submitted with this application. 6. PICA 91/95 - R. Berriman & L. Clarke Lot 536, Plan M-ll Also known as 862 Krosno Blvd. Town of Pickering The applicants request relief from the provisions of: Section 5.19( d) of By-law 2520 to permit the continuance of a south side yard width of 1.45 metres; whereas the by-law requires that a single-family dwelling with an attached garage provide minimum side yard widths of 1.5 metres. -- Section 5.19(a) of By-law 2520 to permit the continuance of an existing accessory structure (metal shed) located in the north side yard 0.6 metres from the north side lot line; whereas the by-law requires that all accessory structures be located in the rear yard, a minimum of 1.0 metres from all lot lines. This variance application is requested in order to bring the existing dwelling and sheds on the subject property into compliance with the zoning by-law. The Assistant Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the Town of Pickering Planning Department. Ms. Krista Dee, Timothy C. R. Vanular Law Firm, agent, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. DECISION: Moved by Mr. Smith and seconded by Mr. DiLecce and carried unanimously that - this application, PICA 91/95, by R. Berriman & L. Clarke, as outlined, be APPROVED on the grounds that the south side yard width and accessory structure location variances are minor in nature, appropriate for the desirable development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Durham Regional Official Plan, the Pickering District Plan, and Sections 5.19(a) and 5.19(d) of By-law 2520, subject to the following -- condition: 1. That these variances apply only to the existing structures in existence on the date of this decision. 86 7. PICA 92/95 - P. Major Lot 875, Plan M-12 Also known as 792 Balaton Avenue Town of Pickering The applicant requests relief from the provisions of: Section 7.2.3 of By-law 2520 to permit the continuance of a front yard depth of 7.47 metres, '-'" provided by the existing dwelling on the subject property; whereas the by-law requires that a dwelling provide a minimum front yard depth of 7.5 metres. Section 5.19( d) of By-law 2520 to permit the continuance of a west side yard width of 1.37 metres and an east side yard width of 0.55 metres; whereas the by-law requires that a single-family dwelling with an attached garage provide minimum side yard widths of 1.5 metres. Section 5.19(a) of By-law 2520 to permit the continuance of an existing accessory structure (metal shed) located in the rear yard, 0.57 metres from the west side lot line; whereas the by-law requires that all accessory structures be located in the rear yard, a minimum of 1.0 metres from all lot lines. This variance application is requested in order to bring the existing dwelling and shed on the subject property into compliance with the zoning by-law. The Assistant Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the Town of Pickering Planning Department. Mr. Major, owner, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. ~ Mr. White asked what the addition at the side of the dwelling is used for. Mr. Major responded by indicating that it is simply an enclosure which is used as a mud room. DECISION: Moved by Mr. White and seconded by Mr. Smith and carried unanimously that - this application, PICA 92/95, by P. Major, as outlined, be APPROVED on the grounds that the front yard depth, side yard width, and accessory structure setback variances are minor in nature, appropriate for the desirable development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Durham Regional Official Plan, the Pickering District Plan, and Sections 7.2.3, 5.19(d) and 5.19(a) of Zoning By-law 2520, subject to the following conditions: 1. That these variances apply only to the side yard width and front yard depth provided by the existing dwelling and to the shed in existence on the date of this decision. 2. That the east side yard width variance does not come into effect until the owner satisfies the Town's Chief Building Official with respect to building permit issuance and building code compliance. 'W 87 8. PICA 93/95 - North Pier Estates Ltd. Blocks 8 & 39, Plan 40M-1745 and Block 49, Plan 40M-1729 Also known as 1585 Otonabee Drive Town of Pickering The applicant requests relief from the provisions of Section 5.(4)(b)(vi) from amending By-law 4112/92 to By-law 3036, to permit the continuance of a minimum rear yard depth of '-" 5.6 metres provided by the existing dwelling on the subject property; whereas the by-law requires a minimum rear yard depth of 7.5 metres. This variance application is requested in order to bring the existing dwelling on the property into compliance with the provisions of the by-law. The Assistant Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the Town of Pickering Planning Department. He also acknowledged receipt of three letters, from neighbours of the subject property, expressing concerns regarding the rear yard depth and the fact that it was not noticed during the building permit stage. Mr. Jim Reininger, owner, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Mr. Reininger indicated that the irregular shape of the lot has caused this problem. The Town advised North Pier Estates Ltd. to request the variance application in order to correct any future misinterpretation of the zoning by-law. Mr. White asked what is currently existing at the rear property lot line. Mr. Reininger stated that the rear of the property currently supports a six-foot wooden fence. ...... Mr. White made reference to the letters from neighbours, and indicated that it is difficult to assess the matter in more detail without anyone in objection actually being present at the meeting. Mr. Young asked if Mr. Reininger had spoken with any of the neighbours regarding their concerns. Mr. Reininger replied that he was unaware of any concerns from the neighbours. He stated that North Pier Estates has not been contacted to date, and indicated that the telephone number is clearly posted on the subject site. Mr. DiLecce confirmed that only one, rear corner of the dwelling is not in compliance with the by-law. DECISION: Moved by Mr. DiLecce and seconded by Mr. Smith and carried unanimously that - this application, PICA 93/95, by North Pier Estates Limited, as outlined, be APPROVED on the grounds that the rear yard depth variance is minor in nature, appropriate for the desirable development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Durham Regional Official Plan, the Pickering District Plan, and Section 5.( 4)(b )(vi) of amending By-law 4112/92, to By-law 3036, subject to the following condition: 1. That this variance apply only to the rear yard depth provided by the existing residential dwelling on the subject lot. ...... 88 , ' . 9. PICA 94/95 - J. Taylor Lot 81, Plan 283 Also known as 464 Rougemount Drive Town of Pickering The applicant requests relief from the provisions of Section 5.19(d) of By-law 2511 to permit the continuance of a 1.45 metre southeast side yard width, and a 1.6 metre northwest side yard width provided by the existing dwelling on the subject property; ~ whereas the by-law requires that a dwelling with an attached garage provide minimum side yard widths of 1.8 metres. This variance application is requested in order to bring the existing dwelling on the property into compliance with the provisions of the by-law. The Assistant Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the Town of Pickering Planning Department. Mr. David Horwood, agent, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. DECISION: Moved by Mr. Smith and seconded by Mr. White and carried unanimously that - this application, PICA 94/95, by J. Taylor, as outlined, be APPROVED on the grounds that the proposed side yard width variances are minor in nature, appropriate for the desirable development of the lands, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Durham Regional Official Plan, the Pickering District Plan, and Section 5.19(d) of Zoning By-law 2511 subject to the following condition: ... 1. That the side yard width variances apply only to the dwelling in existence on the date of this decision. 10. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Moved by Mr. White, seconded by Mr. Smith and carried unanimously that - The 16th meeting of the Committee of Adjustment be adjourned at 8:10 p.m. and the next regular meeting of the Committee of Adjustment be. held on Wednesday, December 20, 1995. De-c.. 2-0) /9tp> DATE - ASS~T~AS~ 89