Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSeptember 27, 1995 ~~ OF PiC J...O ~ !'--~ ~ di~~ - MINUTES of the 13th meeting of the Committee of Adjustment held in the Committee Room ofthe Pickering Civic Complex on Wednesday, September 27,1995. '-' PRESENT: Mr. J. C. Young, Chairman Mr. S. Smith Mr. N. DiLecce Mr. R. Johnson Mr. P. White ALSO PRESENT: Mr. J. Cole, A.ssistant 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. Johnson, seconded by Mr. Smith and carried unanimously- "-' That the adoption of the minutes of the 12th meeting of the Committee of Adjustment held September 6, 1995, be adopted. 3. PICA 22/95 - 983963 Ontario Limited Lot 1, 40M-1562 Also known as 1498 Ashwood Gate Town of Pickering The applicant requests relief from the provisions of Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by Zoning By-law 2287/86 as follows: 1. Section 5.(b )(iii) of the By-law to permit the continuance of a front yard depth of 5.5 metres provided by the existing dwelling; whereas the By-law requires a minimum front yard depth of 7.5 metres. 2. Section 5.(b)(iv) of the By-law to permit the continuance of an interior side yard width of 0.8 metres provided by the existing dwelling; whereas the By-law requires a minimum interior side yard width of 1.8 metres. 3. Section 5.(I)(x)A of the By-law to permit the exclusion of a garage to be provided for "-' the residential lot; whereas the By-law requires a minimum of one private garage be provided per lot. The applicant requests this variance application in order to bring the subject property into compliance with the provisions of the zoning by-law. The Assistant Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the Town of Pickering Planning Department and from Mr. A. McMackin, 1494 Ashwood Gate. Mr. C. Marshall, applicant, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. "-" Mr. White wondered if the applicant would agree with the deletion of the portion of the variance referring to the lack of a private garage on the property and the resulting need of unenclosed parking to be accommodated on the subject property. Mr. Marshall indicated that he had no objection to this request. DECISION: Moved by Mr. Johnson and seconded by Mr. Smith and carried unanimously that - this application, PICA 22/95, by 983963 Ontario Limited, as amended to require the construction of a garage as outlined in Section 5.(1)(x)A of By-law 3036, be APPROVED on the grounds that the proposed front yard depth and 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, and Sections 5.(1)(b)(iii) and 5.(1)(b)(iv) of amending Zoning By-law 2287/86 to Zoning By-law 3036, subject to the following conditions: 1. That revised drawings identifying required changes to the structure, including removal of unprotected window openings in the bay on the south side of the structure be submitted, along with an application for revision to Building Permit Application 94.,- 1151 to the satisfaction of the Town's Chief Building Official. 2. That a revised building permit be obtained, and all associated works completed in w accordance with the above-noted revised permit by December 31, 1995, or this decision shall become null and void. 3. That these variances do not come into effect until the applicant submits a revised architectural design statement for the proposed residential dwelling on the subject property for the approval of the Director of Planning, in consultation with Town Council. 4. PICA 51/95 - Rockport Holdings Limited Blocks E, F, & G, Plan M-1024 (East side of Pickering parkway, north of Highway 401) The part of the application referring to the building setback from Pickering Parkway had been deferred from the July 26, 1995 meeting and was withdrawn by the applicant by letter dated September 1, 1995. "-' 70 5. PICA 64/95, PICA 65/95, PICA 66/95, PICA 67/95, PICA 68/95 and PICA 69/95 Maxcon Developments Ltd. Part of Lot 32, Concession 1 (East side of Altona Road, south of Finch Avenue) Town of Pickering - The applicant requests relief from the provisions of the following sections of amending By-law 4645/95 to Zoning By-law 3036: 1. Section 5.(2)(a)B to permit the establishment of a minimum lot area of 164 square metres on Lots 1,2,3 and 4 (pICA 64/95, PICA 65/95, PICA 66/95 and PICA 67/95) and a minimum lot area of 156 square metres on Lots 5 and 8 (PICA 68/95 and PICA 69/95); whereas the by-law requires a minimum lot area of 180 square metres for multiple dwellings - horizontal (townhouses). 2. Section 5.(2)(b)B to permit the establishment of minimum lot frontages of 5.49 metres on Lots 1,2,3, and 4, (PICA 64/95, PICA 65/95, PICA 66/95 and PICA 67/95) and 4.88 metres on Lots 5 and 8, (pICA 68/95 and PICA 69/95); whereas the by-law requires a minimum lot frontage of 6.0 metres for multiple dwellings - horizontal (townhouses). 3. Section 5.(2)(i)B(ii) to permit the establishment of minimum unit widths of 5.49 metres on Lots 1,2, 3 and 4 (pICA 64/95, PICA 65/95, PICA 66/95 and PICA 67/95) and one minimum unit width of 4.88 metres on each of Lots 5 and 8 (pICA 68/95 and PICA 69/95); whereas the by-law requires a minimum unit width of 6.0 metres for multiple dwellings - horizontal (townhouses). Under the current zoning and approved lotting configurations, the lots subject of these applications would accommodate a total of 12 semi-detached residential dwelling units in full compliance with the zoning by-law. The applicant has requested these variances in _ order to allow the realignment of the lot lines so as to accommodate the development of 17 multiple horizontal dwelling units (townhouses). The Assistant Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the Town of Pickering Planning Department. Mr. R. D'Andrea, the applicant, was present to represent the application. Mr. P. Landolt, of Barcana Consultants Ltd. was also present in favour. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Mr. D'Andrea made a brief presentation to outline his aim of building townhouses which were marketable and attractive within the subdivision. Mr. DiLecce asked for clarification of the Zoning By-law. Mr. Cole explained the fact that the by-law permits either semi-detached dwellings or townhouse dwellings, on the subject lands, with the actual housing types determined through the subdivision design and lotting patterns. This subdivision design and lotting pattern which accommodates semi-detached dwellings was approved by the Ontario Municipal Board. w Mr. White, Mr. DiLecce, Mr. Young, and Mr. Smith all expressed concerns regarding on-street parking. Mr. D'Andrea indicated that he has constructed an additional sidewalk along the north side of Sparrow Circle to accommodate on-street parking, along with some parking on the park block to the north of Chickadee Court, and additional parking on the future Commercial Block located to the west of Chickadee Court. 71 . ' Mr. Young asked why the applicant didn't request the townhouses at the Ontario Municipal Board. Mr. Landolt responded that they were going to pursue a change to the subdivision at the O.M.B., but were advised by planning staff that this request would be inappropriate since the subdivision design had already been approved. Minor changes to the zoning and subdivision could be considered by the Committee of Adjustment at a later date. --~ Mr. Johnson expresses support for the proposal as the builder is responsible, the designs appear desirable and the market should be supported. Mr. White expressed concerns regarding the density at the entrance of the subdivision. Mr. D'Andrea indicated that the recent Ontario Municipal Board Decision allowed him to construct ten townhomes on Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4 inclusive; and the variance is only allowing him one additional unit on these lots. Mr. DiLecce wondered about the possibility of increasing the length of the driveways on Lots 5 and 8 to accommodate additional parking. Mr. D'Andrea expressed his agreement for a condition which incfeased front yard depth and off-street parking. DECISION: Moved by Mr. Johnson and seconded by Mr. White and carried unanimously that - (a) these applications, PICA 64/95, PICA 65/95, PICA 66/95, PICA 67/95, be APPROVED on the grounds that the lot area, lot frontage, and unit width variances are minor in nature, and appropriate for the desirable development of the land, and in keeping the with general intent and purpose of Sections 5.(2)(a)B , 5.(2)(b)B, and 5.(2)(i)B(ii) of amending By-law 4645/95 to Zoning By-law 3036. -- (b) these applications, PICA 68/95 and PICA 69/95 by Maxcon Developments Ltd., as outlined, be APPROVED on the grounds that the lot area, lot frontage, and unit width variances are minor in nature, and appropriate for the desirable development of the land, and in keeping the with general intent and purpose of Sections 5.(2)(a)B, 5.(2)(b)B, and 5.(2)(i)B(ii) of amending By-law 4645/95 to Zoning By-law 3036, subject to the following condition: 1. That the dwelling on Lot 5 be constructed to provide 10.6 metres of driveway from the garage entrance to the curb edge, and that the dwelling on Lot 8 be constructed to provide 10.6 metres of driveway from the garage entrance to the south edge of the sidewalk. ........ 72 6. PICA 70/95 - D. & G. Gibson Part of Lot 3, Concession 7 (North side of Seventh Concession Road, east of Balsam Road) Town of Pickering The applicants request relief from the provisions of Section 6.2.2 of By-law 3037 to permit the continuance of a minimum lot frontage of 144 metres; whereas the by-law requires that an agricultural lot provide a minimum frontage of 150 metres. ...... Approval of this variance application is required to bring the subject property into compliance with the zoning by-law in order for the applicants to obtain building permits for a three-car garagelstorage barn to be located in the rear yard and additions to an existing accessory building. The Assistant Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the Town of Pickering Planning Department. Mrs. and Mr. Gibson, owners, were 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 70/95, by D. & G. Gibson, as outlined, be APPROVED on the grounds that the lot frontage variance is considered to be 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 6.2.2 of Zoning By-law 3037. ...... 7. PICA 71/95 and PICA 72/95 Maxcon Developments Ltd. Part of Lot 32, Concession 1 (East side of Altona Road, south of Finch Avenue) Town of Pickering The applicant requests relief from the provision of Section 5.(2)(j)C(ii) of amending By-law 4645/95 to Zoning By-law 3036 to permit the establishment of an 8.79 metre front yard setback for part of Lot 6 (pICA 71/95) and a 9.77 metre front yard setback for part of Lot 9 (PICA 72/95); whereas the by-law requires that a multiple dwelling - quadruplex with an attached garage provide a minimum front yard setback of 10.6 metre. Approval of these variance applications is requested in order to allow the applicant to construct dwellings on lots within the subdivision which do not comply with the above-noted current by-law requirements. The Assistant Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the Town of Pickering Planning Department. ~ Mr. D' Andrea, applicant, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. 73 DECISION: Moved by Mr. Smith and seconded by Mr. DiLecce and carried unanimously that - this application, PICA 71/95 and PICA 72/95, by Maxcon Developments Ltd., as outlined, be APPROVED on the grounds that the proposed front yard setback variances on Lots 6 and 9 are minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land and in keeping with the general purpose and intent of the Official Plan and Section 5.(2)G)C(ii) of amending By-law 4645/95 to Zoning By-law 3036, subject to the following condition: 1. That the front yard setback variances apply only to the west side of the quadruplex dwellings identified on the plans submitted with this application. .....,. 8. PICA 73/95 - G. Leatherdale Lot 15, Plan M-1219 Also known as 601 Aspen Road Town of Pickering The applicant requests relief from the provision of amending By-law 1101/80 to Zoning By-law 3036 to permit the establishment of a 2.1 metre flankage side yard width; whereas the by-law requires that a dwelling on a corner lot provide a flankage side yard width of 2.7 metres. Approval of this variance application is required in order to obtain a building permit for a greenhouse window which has already been constructed on the south (flankage) side of the existing dwelling. The Assistant Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the Town of Pickering Planning Department. w Mr. G. Leatherdale, owner, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Mr. Smith asked the applicant if the greenhouse window addition was constructed. Mr. Leatherdale indicated that the window has been constructed and he didn't realize an error was made until the project was completed. DECISION: Moved by Mr. White and seconded by Mr. DiLecce and carried unanimously that - this application, PICA 73/95, by G. Leatherdale, as outlined, be APPROVED on the grounds that the south flankage side yard width 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.(a)2.(e) of amending By-law 1101/80 to Zoning By-law 3036, subject to the following condition: 1. That the flankage side yard width variance apply only to the dwelling and greenhouse window addition in existence on the date of this decision. '-' 74 9. PICA 74/95 - Marshall Homes Corporation Part of Lot 8, Plan 282 Also known as 1506 Oakburn Street Town of Pickering The applicant requests relief from the provision Section 10.2.6 of By-law 3036 to permit the establishment of a maximum lot coverage of 38 percent; whereas the by-law limits the maximum lot coverage of all structures on the lot to 33 percent. - Approval of this variance application is required in order to obtain a building permit for a proposed two-storey dwelling on the subject property. The Assistant Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the Town of Pickering Planning Department. Mr. C. Marshall, owner, 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 74/95, by Marshall Homes Corporation, as outlined, be APPROVED on the grounds that the lot coverage 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 10.2.6 of By- law 3036, subject to the following condition: 1. That the 38 percent maximum lot coverage variance apply only to the proposed residential dwelling to be built on the subject lot as outlined in the applicant's submitted plans. .-.. 10. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Moved by Mr. White, seconded by Mr. DiLecce and carried unanimously that- The 13th meeting of the Committee of Adjustment be adjourned at 8:45 p.m. and the next regular meeting of the Committee of Adjustment be held on Wednesday, October 18,1995. o~6~ /~~ /9~r . DATE -- I'~ ASSrSTA T ECRET ARY- TREASURER / / 75