agenda - pickering...2. pica 07115 d. & c. kokkotas 1820 appleview road committee of adjustment...

Committee of Adjustment

Agenda

Meeting Number: 4 . Date: Wednesday, March 11, 2015

------------- -- --

(I)

(II)

(Ill)

(IV)

Committee of Adjustment Agenda

Wednesday, March 11, 2015 7:00pm

Main Committee Room

Page Number

Adoption of Agenda

Adoption of Minutes from February 18, 2015 1-12

Reports

1. Deferred at the February 18, 2015 meeting 13-20 PICA 08115 1154786 Ontario 1438 Rougemount Drive

2. PICA 11115 21-26 C. Willson 485 Whitevale Road

3. PICA 12115 27-32 2218053 Ontario Corp. 900 Brock Road

4. PICA 13115 33-39 K. Hamoui 860 Strouds Lane

5. PICA 14115 40-46 N. Kalmoni 858 Strouds Lane

6. PICA 15115 47-52 Mattamy (Seaton) Limited Block 1 on Draft Approved Plan of Subdivision SP-2009-13

7. PICA 16115 to PICA 32115 53-58 Mattamy (Seaton) Limited Block 2 and Block 20 on Draft Approved Plan of Subdivision SP-2009-13

Adjournment

Accessible For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: -P-1 (_K_E_R i NN-G Lesley Dunne

·· • ~ T. 905.420.4660, extension 2024 · TTY 905.420.1739

Email [email protected]

Pending Adoption

Present:

Tom Copeland- Vice-Chair David Johnson - Chair Eric Newton Sean Wiley

Also Present:

Melissa Markham, Secretary-Treasurer Lesley Dunne, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer

Absent:

Denise Rundle

(I) Appointment of Chair

Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Tom Copeland

Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes

Wednesday, February 18, 2015 7:00pm

Main Committee Room

That David Johnson be appointed as Chair for the 2015 term.

(II) Appointment of Vice Chair

Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Sean Wiley

Carried Unanimously

That Tom Copeland be appointed as Vice-Chair for the 2015 term.

(Ill) Appointment of Secretary-Treasurer


Carried Unanimously

That Melissa Markham be appointed as Secretary-Treasurer.

Carried Unanimously

Page 1 of 12

01 "

02

(IV)



Main Committee Room

Appointment of Assistant Secretary-Treasurers


That Lesley Dunne and Devin Poole be appointed as Assistant SecretaryTreasurers.

Carried Unanimously

(V) Adoption of Agenda


That the agenda for the Wednesday, February 18, 2015 meeting be adopted.

(VI) Adoption of 2015 Meeting Schedule

Moved by Tom Copeland Seconded by Eric Newton

Carried Unanimously

That the Committee of Adjustment Meeting Schedule for 2015 be adopted.

(VII) Adoption of Minutes


Carried Unanimously

That the minutes of the 2nd meeting of the Committee of Adjustment held Wednesday, January 28, 2015 be adopted.

Carried Unanimously

Page 2 of 12

(VIII) Reports

1. (Tabled at the January 28, 2015 meeting) PICA 06115 M. Modica 557 Marksbury Road


Committee of Adjustment 0 3 Meeting Minutes


Main Committee Room

That application PICA 06115 by M. Modica be lifted from the table.

Carried Unanimously

The applicant requests relief from the following provisions of Zoning By-law 2511:

• to permit a minimum front yard depth of 7.3 metres; whereas the by-law requires a minimum front yard depth of 7.5 metres

• to permit a minimum north side yard width of 1.2 metres; whereas the by-law requires a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres

• to recognize an existing flankage side yard width of 1.1 metres to the ground floor of the existing dwelling and to permit a minimum flankage side yard width of 2. 7 metres to a proposed second storey;· whereas the by-law requires a minimum side yard width of 4.5 metres

• to permit uncovered steps not exceeding 1. 7 metres in height to project a maximum of 1.4 metres into the required flankage side yard from the proposed addition; whereas the by-law permits uncovered decks or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height to project a maximum of 1.0 metre into the required flankage side yard

• to permit a covered porch to project a maximum of 1.0 metre into the required front yard; whereas the by-law permits uncovered decks or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height to project a maximum of 1.5 metres into the required front yard

• to permit a maximum lot coverage of 37 percent; whereas the by-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent

The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit to demolish portions of the existing single-storey dwelling and reconstruct a new two-storey dwelling.

Page 3 of 12



Main Committee Room

The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions.

Written comments were also received from the City's Engineering & Public Works Department expressing no objections to the proposed development. The revised grading plan·demonstrates that grading can be completed without creating a negative impact on adjacent properties. The applicant must provide a common swale along the north property line.

Marco Modica, owner, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application.

In response to a question from a Committee Member, Marco Modica explained the swale along the north property line will be provided for drainage of the site.


That application PICA 06/15 by M. Modica, be Approved on the grounds that a minimum front yard depth of 7.3 metres, a minimum north side yard width of 1.2 metres, an existing flankage side yard width of 1.1 metres to the ground floor, a minimum flankage side yard width of 2.7 metres to a proposed second storey, uncovered steps not exceeding 1. 7 metres in height to project a maximum .of 1.4 metres into the required flankage side yard, a covered porch to project maximum of 1.0 metre into the required front yard and a maximum lot coverage of 37 percent are minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, subject to the following conditions:

1. That these variances apply only to the proposed two-storey detached dwelling, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans.

2. That the applicant provides a grading plan to the satisfaction of the Engineering & Public Works Department which illustrates the removal of the existing retaining wall, located on the north side of the property or the decision affecting the north side yard width variance shall become null and void.

3. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by February 17, 2017 or this decision shall become null and void.

Carried Unanimously

Page 4 of 12

-------------------------------------------------------------------

2. PICA 07115 D. & C. Kokkotas 1820 Appleview Road



Main Committee Room

The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, to permit a minimum south side yard width of 1.4 metres; whereas the by-law requires a minimum side yard width of 1.8 metres on both sides, where a garage is attached to a dwelling.

The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit to construct a two-storey detached dwelling.

The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending refusal. The Secretary-Treasurer also outlined if the applicant were to amend the application to allow a south side yard width of 1.5 metres, staff recommendation would be approval subject to conditions. Written comments were also received from the City's Engineering & Public Works Department expressing no concerns.

Nick Racanelli, agent, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application.

Nick Racanelli provided an overview of site plan drawings he submitted to the Committee Members. The drawings illustrated the difference between a 1.43 metre south side yard width, being proposed, and a 1.5 metre south side yard width. He also stated the proposed detached dwelling is a custom built home that provides larger rooms, double car garage which provides a more marketable product. He stated that his clients wanted to maintain a large setback beside the proposed garage to provide access to the rear yard.

Five letters of support from surrounding neighbours were also provided for the Committee Members to review.

Nick Racanelli stated that his clients would prefer the 1.4 metre south side yard setback but could revise the plan to accommodate a 1.5 metre setback.


That amended application PICA 07115 by D. & C. Kokkotas, be Approved on the grounds that minimum south side yard width of 1.5 metres is minor in nature that is 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 conditions:

Page 5 of 12

05

,--------------------------- ----

fG Committee of Adjustment

Meeting Minutes Wednesday, February 18, 2015

7:00pm Main Committee Room

1. That this variance applies only to the proposed detached dwelling that will be revised to reflect the 1.5 metre setback, as generally outlined on the applicant's submitted plans.

2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by February 18, 2016, or this decision shall become null and void.

Carried Unanimously

3. David Johnson, Committee Member, stated that he has known the agent for application PICA 08115 for many years, however that would not impact his decision on the application.

PICA 08115 1154786 Ontario Ltd. 1438 Rougemount Drive

The applicant requests relief from the following provisions of Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-laws 2912188:

• to permit a minimum front yard depth of 11.9 metres; whereas the by-law requires a minimum front yard depth of 15.0 metres

• to permit a covered porch to project a maximum of 1.8 metres into the required front yard; whereas the by-law permits uncovered decks or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height to project a maximum of 1.5 metres into the required front yard, and

• to permit a minimum north side yard width of 1. 5 metres; whereas the by-law requires a minimum side yard width of 1.8 metres

The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit to construct a two-storey dwelling.

The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending the application be deferred. Written comments were received from Marc Charette of 1450 Rougemount Drive in favour of the application. Written comments were received from Simon Hunter of 1436 Rougemount Drive in objection to the application. Written comments were received from the City's Engineering & Public Works Department expressing no concerns.

Page 6 of 12



Main Committee Room

Correspondence received from Simon Hunter expressed several concerns with the proposed dwelling; too wide for the subject property; window and door openings should not be permitted on the south side; the condition of vehicular access and servicing easement if development is too close to the right-of-way; provide appropriate fencing to protect the existing south vehicular access; and overhang encroachment over the north easement.

Kevin Cahill, agent, Tim Sanderson, owner, were present to represent the application. Simon Hunter of 1436 Rougemount Drive was present in objection to the application.

Kevin Cahill stated that the location of the proposed dwelling is to preserve three large mature trees in the rear yard. He also stated that relocating the dwelling further from the front lot line will infringe on these trees and tree canopy that he is trying to preserve. Kevin Cahill spoke to a letter that was received by Cressman Tree Maintenance & Landscaping Ltd. which stated that if the proposed house was moved back any further, the first two trees would not be able to be preserved as there would be too much root loss.

Simon Hunter expressed a concern with the size and location of the proposed dwelling stating that it is too close to his easement and the road. He was concerned that the construction of the proposed dwelling too close to his easement would cause the access to his property to collapse and therefore he would not be able to access his property. He was also in opposition to the reduction in front yard setback.

The Secretary-Treasurer explained that a tree inventory and preservation plan is required before a recommendation can be made for the Committee to consider. The letter, which was provided to the Committee Members, did not have enough detail to determine the impact of the proposed dwelling on the trees.


That application PICA 08/15 by 1154786 Ontario Ltd., be Deferred to allow the applicant to provide a tree inventory and preservation plan to the satisfaction of the City. This plan is required to be prepared by qualified persons and demonstrate whether the proposed location of the dwelling can accommodate the protection of existing mature trees currently located in the rear yard.

Carried Unanimously

Page 7 of 12

07

ns ·-·

4. PICA 09115 & PICA 10115 G. & R. Kerum 1423 Rougemount Drive

PICA 09115 (Proposed Retained Parcel)



Main Committee Room

The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036 as amended, to permit a minimum lot frontage of 15.2 metres and a minimum side yard width of 1.2 metres where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling, whereas the by-law requires a minimum lot frontage of 18.0 metres and a minimum side yard width of 1.8 metres where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling.

PICA 01 0115 (Proposed Severed Parcel)

The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036 as amended, to permit a minimum lot frontage of 15.2 metres and a minimum side yard width of 1.2 metres where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling, whereas the by-law requires a minimum lot frontage of 18.0 metres and a minimum side yard width of 1.8 metres where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling.

The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to create one additional lot through the Region of Durham Land Division Committee and obtain a building permit to construct a two-storey detached dwelling on the proposed severed parcel and to replace an existing dwelling with a new two-storey detached dwelling on the proposed retained parcel.

The Secretary-Treasurer outlined the staff recommendation from the City Development Department recommending approval for lot frontage subject to conditions and refusal for the minimum side yard width of 1.2 metres. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined if the applicant were to amend the minimum side yard width to 1.5 metres, staff recommendation would be approval subject to conditions. Written comments were also received from the City's Engineering & Public Works Department expressing no concerns.

Brian Moss, agent, was present to represent the application. Virginia & Jan Szott of 1421 Rougemount Drive and Luis Sinn of 1409 Rougemount Drive were present to obtain additional information.

Brian Moss stated that an application for land severance for the subject lands has been tabled at the Durham Region Land Division Committee in order to prepare reports requested by the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA).

Page 8 of 12

--- -------- ---



Main Committee Room

He stated that there are lands to the rear of the properties that are to be maintained by the TRCA. He also stated that staff at the TRCA have accepted the 1.2 metre side yard setbacks as acceptable to access the rear of the properties, for their purposes. No written confirmation of the TRCA approval was provided at the meeting.

Brian Moss stated that it was his planning opinion that the 1.2 metre side yard setbacks were in keeping with character of the neighbourhood as the dwellings are proposed to be setback 15.0 metres from the front lot line. He stated that the unique character of the street with traffic calming is unique to the area and these dwellings would be compatible. He mentioned that the applicant has built similar dwellings in other areas of the City with a 1.2 metre side yard setback. He also stated that this size of dwelling provides for a preferred room layout and design within the dwelling.

In response to a question of a Committee Member, Brian Moss stated that the proposed dwellings would be approximately 3,000 to 3,500 square feet.


That application PICA 09/15 by G. & R. Kerum, be Approved on the grounds that the minimum lot frontage of 15.2 metres for the proposed retained parcel 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, subject to the following conditions:

1. That the variance apply only to the proposed lot configuration for the proposed retained parcel, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans.

2. That the applicant obtains final clearance for Land Division Application LD 086/12 by February 17, 2016, or this decision shall become null and void.

3. That the applicant submits a preliminary site plan indicating proposed driveway locations to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering & Public Works Department.

4. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction on the proposed retained parcel by February 17, 2017, or this decision affecting the proposed detached dwelling shall become null and void.

and

Page 9 of 12

09

10 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes


Main Committee Room

That application PICA 09115 by G. & R. Kerum, be Refused on the grounds that the minimum side yard width of 1.2 metres where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling is a major variance that is not considered to be desirable for the appropriate development of the land, al"!d not in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law.

Vote

David Johnson Eric Newton Sean Wiley

opposed in favour in favour

Moved by Sean Wiley Seconded by David Johnson

Carried

That application PICA 09115 by G. & R. Kerum, be Approved on the grounds that the minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres for the proposed retained parcel is minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, subject to the following conditions:

Vote


in favour opposed in favour


Carried

That application PICA 10115 by G. & R. Kerum, be Approved on the grounds that the minimum lot fro.ntage of 15.2 metres for the proposed severed parcel 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, subject to the following conditions·:

1. That the variance apply only to the proposed lot configuration for the proposed severed parcel, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans.

Page 10 of 12

Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes 11


Main Committee Room

2. That the applicant obtains final clearance for Land Division Application LD 086112 by February 17, 2016, or this decision shall become null and void.

3. That the applicant submits a preliminary site plan indicating proposed driveway locations to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering & Public Works Department.

4. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction on the proposed severed parcel by February 17, 2017, or this decision affecting the proposed detached dwelling shall become null and void.

and

That application PICA 10115 by G. & R. Kerum, be Refused on the grounds that the minimum side yard width of 1.2 metres where a garage is erected as part of a detached dwelling is a major variance that is not considered to be desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and not in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law.

Vote


opposed in favour in favour

Moved by Sean. Wiley Seconded by David Johnson

Carried

That application PICA 10115 by G. & R. Kerum, be Approved on the grounds that the minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres for the proposed severed parcel is minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, subject to the following conditions:

Vote


in favour opposed in favour

Carried

Page 11 of 12

12 Committee of Adjustment

Meeting Minutes Wednesday, February 18, 2015

7:00pm Main Committee Room

(IX) Adjournment

Date

Chair


That the 3rd meeting of the 2015 Committee of Adjustment be adjourned at 7:56 pm and the next meeting of the Committee of Adjustment be held on Wednesday, March 11, 2015.

Carried Unanimously

Assistant Secretary-Treasurer

Page 12 of 12

From:

Subject:

Application

Report to Committee of Adjustment 13

Application Number: PICA 08115 Meeting Date: March 11,2015

(Deferred at the February 18, 2015 Meeting)

Melissa Markham, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner, Development Review

Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 08115 1154786 Ontario Ltd. 1438 Rougemount Drive

The applicant requests relief from the following provisions of Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 2912188:

• to permit a revised minimum front yard depth of 13.0 metres; whereas the by-law requires a minimum front yard depth of 15.0 metres

• to permit a covered porch to project a maximum of 1.8 metres into the· required front yard; wherea$ the by-law permits uncovered decks or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height to project a maximum of 1.5 metres into the required front yard, and

• to permit a minimum north side yard width of 1.5 metres; whereas the by-law requires a minimum side yard width of 1.8 metres

The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit to construct a two-storey dwelling.

Recommendation

The City Development Department considers the revised minimum front yard depth of 13.0 metres, a covered porch to project a maximum of 1.8 metres into the required front yard and a minimum north side yard width of 1.5 metres to be minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, and therefore recommends Approval of the proposed variances, subject to the following conditions:

1. Thafthese variances apply only to the proposed two-storey detached dwelling, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans.

2. That the applicant make every effort to protect the existing Sugar Maple trees located on the north side of the property, situated behind the proposed dwelling in accordance with the Arborist's Report prepared by Cressman Tree Maintenance &

14 Report PICA 08/15 March 11, 2015

Page2

Landscaping Ltd., dated February 26, 2015, or the decision affecting the revised minimum front yard depth shall become null and void.

3. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by March 10, 2017 or this decision shall become null and void.

Background

On February 18, 2015, the Committee of Adjustment deferred the Minor Variance Application at the request of the City Development Department to allow the owner to provide a tree inventory and preservation plan to the satisfaction of the City. The City Development Department required the plan to demonstrate that the proposed location of the dwelling could accommodate the protection of existing mature trees located in the rear yard.

On February 26, 2015, the applicant submitted an Arborist's Report prepared by a qualified person, which contained a tree inventory and preservation plan for the subject property. The Report highlighted mitigation measures to protect three mature Sugar Maple trees located along the north property line to the rear of the dwelling. As a result, the applicant has revised their application to increase the minimum front yard depth from 11.9 metres to 13.0 metres by redesigning the rear of the dwelling to accommodate the trees. After reviewing the details of the plan, the City Development Department is satisfied with the justification.

Comment

Official Plan and Zoning By-law

Pickering Official Plan- "Urban Residential - Low Density Areas" within the Rougemount Neighbourhood

Zoning By-law 3036 as amended by By-law 2912/88- "R3"- Third Density Residential Zone

Appropriateness of the Application

Front Yard Depth Variance

• the intent of a minimum front yard depth is to ensure that an adequate landscape area, parking area and significant separation distance is provided between the dwelling and the street to compliment Rougemount Drive's unique streetscape

• the zoning by-law requires a minimum front yard setback of 15.0 metres • the existing dwelling on the subject lands has a front yard setback of 11.9 metres

Report PICA 08/15 March 11, 2015

· Page 3 15

• the applicant's original application was to remove the existing dwelling and to construct a new detached dwelling with the existing minimum front yard setback of 11.9 metres, in order to preserve mature trees located in the rear yard

• City staff requested that the proposed dwelling have a greater front yard setback than the existing dwelling,. unless the applicant could demonstrate that accommodating the required 15.0 metre front yard setback would cause the removal of the mature trees

• the applicant submitted an Arborist's Report demonstrating that the revised plan could increase the minimum front yard setback to 13.0 metres and still accommodate the preservation of the trees in the rear yard

• the applicant has made alterations to the proposed dwelling to accommodate the existing Sugar Maple trees in the rear yard, which has increased the proposed front yard setback from 11.9 to 13.0 metres

• an adequate soft landscaped and parking area would be maintained on the subject property

• the proposed dwelling would maintain a separation distance and streetscape that is in character with the surrounding neighbourhood

• the requested variance is minor in nature, is desirable for the appropriate development of the property and maintains the purpose and intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law

Uncovered Platforms Projecting into the required Front Yard Variance

• the by-law permits uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade to project a maximum of 1.5 metres into the required front yard

• the intent of this provision is to provide the opportunity for any stairs and/or a landing platform to encroach into the front yard when needed, to ensure an adequate buffer space between buildings and street activity is provided, and to ensure an adequate landscaped area within the front yard is also provided

• the applicant is proposing a covered porch to project an additional 1.8 metres into the 13.0 metre minimum front yard depth

• an adequate buffer space between the proposed covered porch and street activity along Rougemount Drive will be maintained

• the proposed covered porch will enhance the residential streetscape along Rougemount Drive

• the requested variance is minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the property and maintains the purpose and intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law

Side Yard Width Variance

• the intent of a side yard width is to provide an appropriate separation between structures on abutting properties in order to maintain pedestrian access, and to accommodate grading, drainage and residential services such as air conditioning units and utility meters and to compliment Rougemount Drive's unique streetscape

16


Page4

• the proposed 1.5 metre north side yard width will provide an appropriate separation between dwellings on adjacent properties and sufficient access into the rear yard

• the proposed side yard setbacks can accommodate roof overhangs iri compliance with the zoning by-law and will not encroach onto the existing easement to the north

• an area to accommodate grading, drainage and residential services will also be maintained

• the required side yard setbacks could be maintained on the subject property, however concerns raised by the neighbour to the rear, related to the vehicular access to his property along the south easement, has been addressed through an increased setback from 0.9 of a metre to 1.2 metres from this easement

• the proposed dwelling would maintain a streetscape that is in character with the surrounding neighbourhood


Input From Other Sources

Simon Hunter (1436 Rougemount Drive)

Tim Sanderson (1442 Rougemount Drive)

Marc Charette ( 1450 Rougemount Drive)

• the proposed design of the dwelling is too wide for the subject property

• window and door openings should not be permitted on the south side of the proposed dwelling

• concerned about the condition of vehicular access and servicing easement if development is too close to the right-of-way

• development should provide appropriate fencing to protect existing south vehicular access easement in favour of 1436 Rougemount Drive

• concerned about overhang encroachment over the north easement

• concerned about the potential loss of several large trees if the new house is sited in compliance with the front yard depth requirements of the zoning by-law

• supports the proposal • existing structure is out of character with the

streetscape established along Rougemount Drive

Report PICA 08/15

Date of report: March 6, 2015

Comments prepared by:

AY:MM:Id J:\Documents\Oevelopment\0·3700\2015\PCA 08-15\Report\PCA 08-15.doc

Enclosures

March 11,2015 l? Page 5


18

ST. MONICA :S SEPARATE SCHOOL

City Development Department

."'-------f-----1 f---1------z ~--t---------161--------,

)---------'-------1 3t-------,------1 C)

\1-------16!==:=!---1---y---------------J. 0::

Location Map FILE No: PICA 08/15 APPLICANT: 1154786 Ontario Ltd

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: 1438 Rou emount Drive (Plan 228 Pt Lot 16, 17, 40R-16833 Part 1 , 2, 3) DATE: Jan. 27, 2014 ata Sources: Teranet Enterprlaea Inc. and Ita auppllera. AH right. Reserved. Not a plan of aurvey. 2013 llotPAC and Its su liera. All ri hts Reaerved. Not a lan of Su .

SCALE 1 :5,000 N-5

To permit a minimum north side yard width of 1.5 metres To permit a minimum

front yard depth of 13.0 metres

19

. ~ 45.7m ~ \ ~


45.7m

Submitted Plan FILE No: P/CA 08/15 APPLICANT: 1154786 Ontario Ltd

To permit a covered porch to project a maximum of 1.8 metres into the front yard

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: 1438 Rougemount Drive (Plan 228 Pt Lot 16,

17, 40R-16833 Part 1, 2, 3)

w > a: 0 1-z :::> 0 ~ w (!J :::> 0 a:

FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. I DATE: Jan. 9, 2015

20


FRONT (EAST) ELEVATION

Submitted Plan FILE No: P/CA 08/15

APPLICANT: 1154786 Ontario Ltd PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: 1438 Rougemount Drive (Plan 228 Pt Lot 16, 17, 40R-16833 Part 1, 2, 3) FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DATE: Jan. 29, 2014

From:

Subject:

Application

Melissa Markham, MCIP, RPP

Report to Committee ofAdjustment

Application Number: PICA 11115 Meeting Date: March 11, 2015

Principal Planner- Development Review

Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 11115 C. Willson 485 Whitevale Road

The applicant requests relief from the following provisions of Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by By-law 2677188:

• to permit detached dwelling residential uses; whereas the zoning by-law does not permit residential uses

• to recognize an existing front yard depth of 1.7 metres; whereas the zoning by-law requires a minimum front yard depth of 9.0 metres

• to recognize an existing west side yard width of 0.1 of a metre; whereas the zoning by-law requires a minimum side yard width of 1.8 metres

• to recognize an existing uncovered porch and steps not exceeding 0.6 of a metre in height projecting to the front lot line; whereas the zoning by-law permits uncovered decks or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height to project· a maximum of 1.5 metres into the required front yard

The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to permit detached dwelling residential uses as an additional use on the subject property.

Recommendation

The City Development Department considers detached dwelling residential uses, an existing front yard depth of 1.7 metres, an existing west side yard width of 0.1 of a metre and an existing uncovered porch and steps not exceeding 0.6 of a metre in height projecting to the front lot line to be minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, and therefore recommends Approval of the proposed variances, subject to the following conditions:

1. That the variance affecting the existing building setbacks and uncovered porch and steps apply only to the existing footprint, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans.

21

22


Page 2

2. That the owner provides a minimum of 1 parking space on the subject property to accommodate detached dwelling residential uses in compliance with the general provisions of Zoning By-law 3037.

3. That the owner submits a signed Record of Site Condition (RSC) to the Ministry of Environment (MOE), which includes the MOE's Acknowledgement of Receipt of the RSC to the satisfaction of the City of Pickering or this decision affecting detached dwelling residential uses shall become null and void.

4. That the owner obtains a building permit to facilitate the proposed development or this decision affecting detached dwelling residential uses shall become null and void.

Background

On February 15, 1988, the City of Pickering passed a City-initiated Zoning By-law (By-law Number'2677/88), which updated and established new zone categories, permitted uses and lot area requirements for the Hamlet. of Whitevale. The by-law also permitted domestic businesses to operate from residential uses and recognized some existing residential, commercial and other uses unique to the hamlet.

Prior to the passing of Zoning By-law 2677/88, the subject property was zoned "V"Village Zone. This zone permitted a range of uses complementary to a hamlet setting including a detached dwelling.

The subject property is located within the Whitevale Heritage Conservation District. The Whitevale Heritage Conservation District Guide states that the existing building on the subject property contains heritage attributes. A heritage permit is required if any changes are made to the exterior of the existing building.

The applicant has owned the subject property since 1976. The subject property was used as an arts and craft studio until 2011, at which time the building became vacant. The owner has requested residential uses be permitted on the subject lands to allow for uses previously permitted on the lands and provided for elsewhere in the Whitevale Heritage Conservation District.

Comment


Pickering Official Plan -"Rural Hamlets- Hamlet Residential" within the Whitevale Settlement Area

Zoning By-law 3037- "HMC8" - Hamlet Commercial Zone

Report PICA 11/15


Variance to Permit Detached Dwelling Residential Uses

March 11,2015

Page 3 23

• the current zoning by-law permits an arts and craft shop, and does not allow for any additional uses

• the current zoning by-law is restrictive related to the permitted uses on the subject lands

• the owner is requesting detached dwelling residential uses be permitted on the subject lands, as the previous zoning by-law permitted such uses prior to 1988

• the owner has advised that the existing arts and craft building has remained vacant since 2011

• the proposed detached dwelling residential use will facilitate the future occupancy of the building and is a desirable use within the Hamlet of Whitevale

• the subject lands can accommodate a parking space, which is required for a residential use on the lands

• the residential use of the subject lands would be in keeping with the Whitevale hamlet


Front Yard Depth, Side Yard Width and Uncovered Platform and Steps Variances

• the general intent of performance standards in a zoning by-law is to ensure that buildings maintain appropriate height, massing and setbacks that are complimentary to the character of the surrounding neighbourhood

• the existing building on the subject lands was constructed and has remained on the same footprint since 187 4

• the existing uncovered platform and steps are required in order to enter into the building

• the existing building contains historical attributes in its current location that is in keeping with the hamlet's historical character

• the requested variances are minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the property and maintains the purpose and intent of the Official Plan' and Zoning By-law

Report PICA 11/15

24


Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee



March 11,2015

• supports the proposed application to include a residential use

Page4

• the building was originally used as a residence and would like to see it occupied

ll1fL. trlfPlw~ Melissa Markham; MCIP, RPP Principal Planner- Development Review

MM:Id J:\Documents\Development\D-3700\2015\PCA 11-15\Report\PCA 11-15.doc

Enclosures

25

VAL] r? ., l..:J Cl

<( 0 0:::

I I-0::: 0 -- - z

I

b __ II I ~

I Ul ,\et;] STREET f---------,

ill1 r- WHITEVALE

tnl l~f--- l ~UNITED

~ \~f--- I CHURCH

I I l :::;; lc:: WHITEVALE ROAD

u I ~

~ Ul

~ r--- .. ~ WHJTEVALE 0 p:: COMMUNIT'r I u I I'D CENTRE I~ ~ ..,__.

& PARK J Cl ~ <(

"'- 0 0::: I ~ (I)

___/ ~ SUBJECT :::J

PROPERTY ~

I LL _j

0 <..::>

""' I\ 1'

ea.- Location Map FILE No: PICA 11/15 APPLICANT: C. Willson ~b PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:485 Whitevale Road(Con 4, Part of Lot 31)

City Development DATE: Feb. 12 2014

Department oto Sou,..ces:

SCALE 1 :5,000 lPN·RU ~- ~bf;e~P~cie~:~s~ra l:~~~i~~-'tA11s~r!~~~rsRe~~~~gd~tsN~e~e~fod,; ~fts~r!:;" of survey.

26

WHITEVALE ROAD

~}]2iS:~~~:S{i~i---_J To recognize an existing uncovered porch and steps projecting to the front lot line

To recognize an existing front yard depth of 1.7 metres

To recognize an existing west side yard width of 0.1 of a metre

...

::..

E.i ""' .. teo.

Submitted Plan

15.3m

FILE No: P/CA 11/15

APPLICANT: C. Willson

. ,. · ........

::,I . 'l.

'•.

;:·;·.s,.···,:·'.· '.·. ; ·' .

. ... .. ,. . . . '~ .

·,·

\

To permit detached dwelling residential uses

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: 485 Whitevale Road( Con 4, Part of Lot 31) City Development

Department FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. DATE: Feb. 23, 2015

From:

Subject:

Application


Report to Committee of Adjustment 2 7

Application Number: PICA 12/15 Meeting Date: March 11, 2015


Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 12/15 2218053 Ontario Corp. 900 Brock Road

The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended, to permit a retail sales outlet accessory to a wholesale/distribution depot use; whereas the by-law does not permit retail sales and accessory retail sales outlets.

The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application in order to establish a retail sales outlet accessory to a wholesale/distribution depot.

Recommendation

The City Development Department considers the requested variance to permit a retail sales outlet accessory to a wholesale/distribution depot use, to be minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, and therefore recommends Approval of the proposed variance, subject to the following conditions:

1. That only one accessory retail sales outlet not exceeding a gross floor area of 460 square metres be permitted within the existing building on the subject property.

Comment


The subject property is designated "General Employment" within the Official Plan, which permits a range of uses, including but not limited to wholesale/distribution uses and· retail sales as a minor component of an industrial operation.

The subject property is currently zoned "M2" within Zoning By-law 2511, as amended, which permits a wholesale/distribution use, however retail stores and retail operations are not permitted uses and can not be interpreted to exist as accessory uses. The applicant is requesting to permit a retail sales outlet accessory to a wholesale/distribution use.

28

----- ----------------------------

Report PICA 12/15 March11,2015

Page2


• retail sales and accessory retail sales outlets are currently not permitted in an industrial zone category

• the intent of the zoning by-law in prohibiting retail sales and accessory retail sales outlet uses is to ensure that retail sales do not become the primary use on the subject property

• in recent years Council has approved zoning by-law amendments to permit accessory sales outlets within the General Employment designation if they comply with the following provision:

• the gross leasable floor area (GLFA) of a sales outlet shall not exceed 25% of the GLFA of the associated employment use; however, the GLFA of a sales outlet may increase to 40% of the GLFA of the associated employment use providing the GLFA of all sales outlets in the building does not exceed 25% of the GLFA of the building

• the applicant recently purchased the subject property and is intending to occupy the entirety of the existing building for their wholesale/distribution use and accessory retail sales outlet

• the applicant currently owns the property at 901 Dillingham Road, which directly abuts the subject lands, which supports the operation of the proposed "Plumbers Supply" company

• the applicant is proposing to occupy vacant units within the existing building, for a total gross floor area of 1 ,550 square metres, however it is their intent to occupy the entire building, approximately 3,000 square metres, as other lease agreements expire

• the proposed wholesale/distribution establishment intends to utilize a maximum gross floor area of 460 square metres for an accessory retail sales outlet

• the maximum 460 square metre accessory retail sales outlet would occupy a total of 16% of the total floor area of the existing industrial building when all units are occupied by the applicant

• sufficient parking is provided on the subject property to accommodate the accessory retail sales outlet

• the maximum gross floor area of 460 square metres for an accessory retail sales outlet will not create a situation where the retail use becomes the primary use on the subject property

• this variance recognizes the evolving nature of employment activities, which over the past decades have shifted from primarily land-consumptive manufacturing operations, to smaller service-type businesses

• the requested variance to permit a retail sales outlet accessory to a wholesale/distribution depot use is minor in nature and maintains the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law

• the requested variance conforms to, and is compatible with, the designation and policies of the Official Plan

Report PICA 12/15


Engineering & Public Works




March 11,2015 29 Page 3

• no comments or concerns with the application

/

J

Principal Planner- Development Review Niles Surti, MCIP, RPP Manager, Development Review & Urban Design

MM:Id J:\Documents\Development\0·3700\2015\PCA 12·15\Report\PCA 12-15.doc.

Enclosures

30 <t:

~ 0 0:::

0:::: 0 0 DON 0 I c <t: - BEER 0 0:::: ARENA 0::: I< 0:::: 0 \. u

QUIGLEY STREET

1--

xxxxxxxx

~UBJE9h ROPER

~ ~xxxx

2 <t: I 0 ::,:: z 0 ::::::; 0 _j

0 0::: m

'-.... CLEMENTS ROAD /

....._ 0

) <t: 0 0:::

0 \.. FELDSPAR COURT

0:::: loti ~ 0 r 'I :~

>- '\. fJ! "' ::r:: McPHERSON COURT r---

~ Location Map FILE No: PICA 12/15 APPLICANT: 2218053 Ontario Corp.

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:900 Brock Road (Con BF Range 3 N Pt Lot 19, City Development

40R-1 045 Part 1, 3) DATE: Feb. 12 2014 Department Data Sources:

SCALE 1 :5,000 IPN-4 B · Teranet Enterprises Inc. and Its suppliers. All rights Reserved. Not a plan of survey. 2013 t.APAC and its suppliers. All rights Reserved. Not a plan of Survey.

E 0 ("I) en

--1.1..._.._-..-.....,.--- -.-


' ,... I 108.8m

108.8m


APPLICANT: 2218053 Ontario Corp.

To permit a retail sales outlet accessory to a wholesale/distribution depot use not exceeding 460 square metres

II - 1

31

0 <( 0 a: ~ 0 0 a: Ill

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: 900 Brock Road (Con BF Range 3 N Pt Lot 19,

40R-1045 Part 1, 3) FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. I DATE: Feb. 23, 2014

32


.... ----=--.... -= ""·"····················

WAREHOUSE AREA

RETAIL SALES

SHOWROOM


APPLICANT: 2218053 Ontario Corp.

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: 900 Brock Road (Con BF Range 3 N Pt Lot 19, 40R-1045 Part 1, 3) FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DATE: Feb. 23, 2014

From:

Subject:

Application


Report to Committee of Adjustment

Application Number: PICA 13115 3 3 Meeting Date: March 11, 2015

Principal Planner, Development Review

Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 13115 K. Hamoui 860 Strouds Lane

The applicant requests relief from the following provisions of Zoning By-law 3036, as amended:

• to permit a minimum front yard setback of 4.5 metres; whereas the by-law permits a minimum front yard setback of 7.5 metres

• to permit a minimum rear yard setback of 5.0 metres; whereas the by-law permits a minimum rear yard setback of 7.5 metres, and


The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit to construct a two-storey detached dwelling.

Recommendation

The City Development Department considers the minimum front yard setback of 4.5 metres to be minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, and therefore recommends Approval of the proposed variance, subject to the following conditions:

1. That the variance apply only to a revised detached dwelling, illustrating a minimum 4.5 metre front yard setback.

2. That the applicant submits a revised grading plan to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering & Public Works Department.

3. That the applicant obtain a building permit for a revised dwelling sited at a minimum front yard depth of 4.5 metres by March 10, 2017, or this decision shall become null and void.

and


34 Page 2

The City Development Department considers the minimum rear yard setback of 5.0 metres and the maximum lot coverage of 45 percent to be major variances that are not considered to be desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and not in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law, and therefore recommends Refusal of the proposed variances.

Background

On April14, 2014, the Region of Durham Land Division Committee conditionally approved two Land Division Applications (LD 026/2014 and LD 027/2014) which permitted the creation of two new lots with frontages onto Strouds Lane, while retaining a lot with an existing one-storey detached dwelling with frontage onto Spruce Hill Road.

City conditions included submission of an Architectural Design Statement (ADS), to address future development performance standards such as building setbacks and height; a preliminary siting and grading plan; a noise assessment, due to vehicular traffic noise on Strouds Lane (Type C Arterial Road); and, a tree inventory and protection/removal plan.

Through the Land Division Application process, a 5. 79 metre road widening was required to be conveyed to the City across the entire frontage of the property abutting Strouds Lane, in compliance with the municipal right-of-way width requirements of the Pickering Official Plan.

The previous owner submitted a minor variance application (PICA 62/14) to permit a front yard depth of 4.5 metres to a proposed two storey dwelling and maximum lot coverage of 41 percent. On May 21, 2014, the Committee of Adjustment approved the variances subject to the proposed detached dwelling, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans. The current minor variance application is seeking additional permissions with a new site plan and building layout.

Comment


The Pickering Official Plan designates the subject lands as 'Urban Residential - Low Density' within the Dunbarton Neighbourhood. The property is also subject to the Dunbarton Neighbourhood Development Guidelines.

Section 11.9 (a) of the Pickering Official Plan states that City Council shall, in the established residential areas between Spruce Hill Road and Appleview Road, including Fairport Road and Dunbarton Road, encourage and where possible require new development to be compatible with the character of existing development.

The subject property is currently zoned "R4" - Fourth Density Residential Zone within Zoning By-law 3036, as amended. The subject property has a frontage of 21.3 metres, a lot depth of 24.7 metres, and lot area of approximately 526.8 square metres.

Report PICA 13/15



March 11,2015 35

Page 3

• the intent of a minimum front yard depth is to ensure that an adequate landscaped area, parking area and separation distance is provided between the dwelling and the front lot line

• the owner is requesting a reduction in the minimum required front yard depth from 7.5 metres to 4.5 metres

• the City does not anticipate a road widening to Strouds Lane in the immediate future, as such the requested front yard variance will allow the dwelling to be sited closer to the street, which will create an attractive built form and residential streetscape along Strouds Lane in keeping with other dwellings in the neighbourhood

• the current zoning by-law on the south side of Strouds Lane, across from the subject property, permits a minimum front yard depth of 4.5 metres

• the requested front yard depth variance is minor in,nature and meets the intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law

Rear Yard Depth and Lot Coverage Variances

• the intent of the zoning by-law is to regulate the size, scale and massing of dwellings on a lot

• the zoning by-law provisions provide separation from abutting properties to ensure privacy, protect views, ensure openness and to provide an adequate amenity area uncovered by buildings on a lot

• the intent of requiring a minimum rear yard setback of 7.5 metres and permitting a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent is to encourage a style of development on the subject property which is similar to, and compatible with the existing development in the neighbourhood

• the proposed rear yard variance does not provide an appropriate setback or separation from abutting properties

• the proposed development does not provide an appropriate outdoor amenity space, as provided on similar properties within the neighbourhood

• staff are concerned that the requested variance to permit a minimum 5.0 metre rear yard depth would negatively impact adjoining properties to the north with respect to privacy, views and openness

• the impact of the reduced rear yard depth and increased lot coverage would not be in keeping with the character of the surrounding area, and would result in an inappropriate scale of development in relation to the built form that has been established in the neighbourhood

• staff are of the opinion that the proposed variances represent an overdevelopment of the property

• staff are of the opinion that the requested variances for the reduced rear yard depth of 5.0 metres and maximum lot coverage of 45 percent are major variances that are not desirable for the appropriate development of the land and not in keeping with the intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law

Report PICA 13/15

36


Engineering & Public Works Department

M. Zwicker 866 Strouds Lane



Lalita Paray, MCIP, RPP Planner I

LP:MM:Id

March 11, 2015

Page4

• a preliminary grading plan was submitted and approved for Land Division Applications LD 26/14 and LD 27/14

• the current proposal is different from the previous siting plan and grading plan submitted for review and approval; therefore prior to approval of this application, a new grading plan must be submitted for review and approval

• the request for a front yard setback of 4.5 metres is not in keeping with the rest of the neighbourhood; reduced front yard depth will result in an encroachment on the existing buffer between dwellings and street

• the request to permit a maximum lot coverage of 45 percent is unreasonable for this area; variance will result in a 12 percent increase from other previously approved houses in the area

• construction vehicle and traffic impacts; disruption in traffic flow on Strouds Lane

• Environmental impact - the balance between building and landscape area would be comprised


J:\Documents\Deve\opment\0-3700\2015\PCA 13-15\Report\PCA 13-15.doc

Enclosures ·

~ City Development

Department

37

w 1-----+------tu ~-4------l~~------~-------+--------~

f----+----lBi~------~-------f---------~

Location Map FILE No: P/CA 13/15 APPLICANT: K. Hamoui

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:860 Strouds Lane (Plan 1041 Pt Lot 63, 40R-28441 , Part 1) DATE: Feb. 17 2014

a~:r~crtrc~.\erpriaea Inc. and ita euppliera. All righte Reserved. Not a plan of survey. SCALE 1 :5,QQQ N-7 2013 t-APAC and tts au liera. All ri hts Reserved. Not a lon of Su .

38

To permit a maximum lot

coverage of 45 percent

perm a minimum front yard setback of 4.5 metres

1') N 71*35'10" E

~ City Development

Department

E "'" c:i (')

21.3m

PROPOSED TWO STOREY BRICK & STONE

DWELLING HOUSE

21.3m

Requested City Road ning

STROUDS LANE

Submitted Plan FILE No: P/CA 13/15 APPLICANT: K. Hamoui

E

"'" c:i (')

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:860 Strouds Lane Plan 1041 Pt Lot 63, 40R-28441 , Part 1) FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. DATE: Feb. 24, 2015

39

FRONT (SOUTH) ELEVATION REAR (NORTH) ELEVATION

SIDE (EAST) ELEVATION SIDE (WEST) ELEVATION

Submitted Plan FILE No: P/CA 13/15 APPLICANT: K. Hamoui

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:860 Strouds Lane an 1041 Pt Lot City Development

Department DATE:Feb.24,2015

40


Application Number: PICA 14115 Meeting Date: March 11, 2015

From: Melissa Markham, MCIP, RPP

Subject:

Application

Principal Planner, Development Review

Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 14115 N. Kalmoni 858 Strouds lane

The applicant requests relief from the following provisions of Zoning By-law 3036, as amended:

• to permit a minimum front yard setback of 4.5 metres; whereas the by-law permits a minimum front yard setback of 7.5 metres

I

• to permit a minimum rear yard setback of 5.0 metres; whereas the by-law permits a minimum rear yard setback of 7.5 metres, and

I


The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit to construct a two-storey detached dwelling.

Recommendation

The City Development Department considers the minimum front yard setback of 4.5 metres to be minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, and therefore recommends Approval of the proposed variance, subject to the following conditions:

1. That the variance apply only to a revised detached dwelling, illustrating a minimum 4.5 metre front yard setback.

2. That the applicant submits a revised grading plan to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering & Public Works Department.

3. That the applicant obtain a buildit1g permit for a revised dwelling sited at a minimum front yard depth of 4.5 metres by March 10, 2017, or this decision shall become null and void. · :

and

·--------------------------------------------------

Report PICA 14/15 March 11,2015 41

Page 2

The City Development Department considers the minimum rear yard setback of 5.0 metres and the maximum lot coverage of 44 percent to be major variances that are not considered to be desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and not in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law, and therefore recommends Refusal of the proposed variances.

Background

On April14, 2014, the Region of Durham Land Division Committee conditionally approved two Land Division Applications (LD 026/2014 and LD 027/2014) which permitted the creation of two new lots with frontages onto Strouds Lane, while retaining a lot with an existing one-storey detached dwelling with frontage onto Spruce Hill Road.

City conditions included submission of an Architectural Design Statement (ADS), to address future development performance standards such as building setbacks and height; a preliminary siting and grading plan; a noise assessment, due to vehicular traffic noise on Strouds Lane (Type C Arterial Road); and, a tree inventory and protection/removal plan.

Through the Land Division Application process, a 5. 79 metre road widening was required to be conveyed to the City across the entire frontage of the property abutting Strouds Lane, in compliance with the municipal right-of-way width requirements of the Pickering Official Plan.

Comment


The Pickering Official Plan designates the subject lands as 'Urban Residential - Low Density' within the Dunbarton Neighbourhood. The property is also subject to the Dunbarton Neighbourhood Development Guidelines.

Section 11.9 (a) of the Pickering Official Plan states that City Council shall, in the established residential areas between Spruce Hill Road and Appleview Road, including Fairport Road and Dunbarton Road, encourage and where possible require new development to be compatible with the character of existing development.

The subject property is currently zoned "R4"- Fourth Density Residential Zone within Zoning By-law 3036, as amended. The subject property has a frontage of 21.3 metres, a lot depth of 24.7 metres, and lot area of approximately 526.8 square metres.



• the intent of a minimum front yard depth is to ensure that an adequate landscaped area, parking area and separation distance is provided between the dwelling and the front lot line

42


Page 3

• the owner is requesting a reduction in the minimum required front yard depth from 7.5 metres to 4.5 metres

• the City does not anticipate a road widening to Strouds Lane in the immediate future, as such the requested front yard variance will allow the dwelling to be sited closer to the street, which will create an attractive built form and residential streetscape along Strouds Lane in keeping with other dwellings in the neighbourhood

• the current zoning by-law on the south side of Strouds Lane, across from the subject property, permits a minimum front yard depth of 4.5 metres

• the requested front yard depth variance is minor in nature and meets the intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law

Rear Yard Depth and Lot Coverage Variances

• the intent of the zoning by-law is to regulate the size, scale and massing of dwellings on a lot

• the zoning by-law provisions provide separation from abutting properties to ensure privacy, protect views, ensure openness and to provide an adequate amenity area uncovered by buildings on a lot

• the intent of requiring a minimum rear yard setback of 7.5 metres and permitting a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent is to encourage a style of development on the subject property which is similar to, and compatible with the existing development in the neighbourhood

• the proposed rear yard variance does not provide an appropriate setback or separation from abutting properties

• the proposed development does not provide an appropriate outdoor amenity space, as provided on similar properties within the neighbourhood

• staff are concerned that the requested variance to permit a minimum 5.0 metre rear yard depth would negatively impact adjoining properties to the north with respect to privacy, views and openness

• the impact of the reduced rear yard depth and increased lot coverage would not be in keeping with the character of the surrounding area, and would result in an inappropriate scale of development in relation to the built form that has been established in the neighbourhood

• staff are of the opinion that the proposed variances represent an overdevelopment of the property

• staff are of the opinion that the requested variances for the reduced rear yard depth of 5.0 metres and maximum lot coverage of 44 percent are major variances that are not desirable for the appropriate development of the land and not in keeping with the intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law

Report PICA 14/15


Engineering & Public Works Department



~ Lalita Paray, MCIP, RPP Planner I-

LP:MM:Id

March 11, 2015

Page4

• a preliminary grading plan was submitted and approved for Land Division Applications LD 26/14 and LD 27/14

• the current proposal is different from the previous siting plan and grading plan submitted for review and approval; therefore prior to approval of this application, a new grading plan must be submitted for review and approval


J:\Documents\Development\0-3700\2015\PCA 14-15\Report\PCA 14-15.doc

Enclosures

44

em,~~

~b City Development

Department

Location Map FILE No: PICA 14/15 APPLICANT: N. Kalmoni

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:858 Strouds Lane (Plan 1041 Pt Lot 63, 40R-28441 , Part 2) DATE: Feb. 17 2014

SCALE 1 :5,000 PN-7

Paved0rivew9y

21.3m

PROPOSED STOREY BRICK & STONE DWELLING HOUSE

City Road Widening

STROUDS E


Submitted Plan LE No: P/CA 14/15

E ""'" ci C')

45

To permit a minimum front yard setback of 4.5 metres

1041 Pt Lot

DATE:Feb.24,2015

46

FRONT (SOUTH) ELEVATION REAR (NORTH) ELEVATION

SIDE (EAST) ELEVATION SIDE (WEST) ELEVATION

Submitted Plan

APPLICANT: N. Kalmoni Me PROPERTY DESCRIPTION:858 Strouds Lane Plan 1041 Pt Lot 63 City Development

Department Feb.24,2015

From:

Subject:

Application



Application Number: PICA 15115 4 7 Meeting Date: March 11, 2015


Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 15115 Mattamy (Seaton) Limited Block 1 on Draft Approved Plan of Subdivision SP-2009-13

The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 7364114 (Seaton Zoning By-law) to permit a temporary sales facility, whereas the by-law does not permit a temporary sales facility within a residential high density zone.

The applicant requests approval of this minor variance application in order to permit a temporary sales facility on the subject lands for a maximum of 10 years.

Recommendation

The City Development Department considers the temporary sales facility to be minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, and therefore recommends Approval of the proposed variance, subject to the following. conditions:

1. That this variance apply only to the temporary sales facility, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans.

2. That the decision of the Committee shall be null and void after March 11, 2025.

Background

Mattamy (Seaton) Limited has received draft plan of approval for three draft plans of subdivision. Given the relatively long-term nature of the sales program anticipated for Seaton, Mattamy requires a sales centre associated with their model homes for up to a maximum of 1 0 years. The City is currently processing a concurrent site plan application (S 01115) to establish the location, built form, access, landscaping and other performance standards for the temporary sales facility.

Comment


Pickering Official Plan- Residential High Density (HD) Zone

Zoning By-law 7364114- "HD"- High Density Zone

48

------------------------------------------

Report PICA 15/15


March 11, 2015

Page 2

• the zoning by-law has no specific provisions related to sales facility uses, however the owner would like to market their development through the use of a temporary sales facility and associated model homes

• the owner is proposing a 400 square metre temporary sales facility to be located on the north side of Street 2, in Block 1, directly across from seven proposed model homes referenced in PCA 16/15 to PCA 22/15

• the proposed location is suitable for a temporary sales facility as this is an area which is most easily accessible and serviceable

• the lands are currently zoned "HD" - High Density, however given the nature of high density uses, and their building program, the owner does not anticipate the subject lands to be developed in the 10 year time period in which the temporary sales facility will be required

• the proposal to locate the temporary sales facility in Block 1 is appropriate for the development of the land in the short-term, and will not preclude high density development from occurring in the future

• the request to allow a temporary sales facility on the subject lands zoned is minor in nature and maintains the intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law as the prescribed land use can ultimately be achieved -


Lalita Paray, MCIP, RPP Planner I

LP:MM:RP:Id J;\Oocuments\Development\D-3700\2015\PCA 15-15\Report\PCA 15-15.doc

Enclosures

Melissa Markham, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner- Development Review


Location Map FILE No: PICA 15/15

SUBJECT LANDS

APPLICANT: Mattamy (Seaton Limited)

TAUNTON

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Block 1 on SP-2009-13

ata Sources: Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its auppllers. All rights Reserved. Not a plan of survey. 2013 MPAC and Ita su llers. All rl htc Reserved. Not a plan of Surve .

49

ROAD

DATE: Feb. 19,2015

SCALE 1:10,000 PN-RU

50


TAUNTON ROAD

Submitted Plan FILE No: P/CA 15/15 APPLICANT: Mattamy (Seaton Limited) PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Block 1 on SP-2009-13

FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.

g. __.:::.:.::.::~.-... 6

I') ..!..

DATE: Feb. 23, 2015


TAUNTON ROAD

""'" ......


,,

~---

~~~~-,rt~-r--~

en ~ m m -i

APPLICANT: Mattamy (Seaton Limited)

-,--1

I

I

I

I

I

~ I :.., "'

I

I

I

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Block 1 on SP-2009-13

51

FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. . DATE: Feb. 23, 2015

52

' ·~-- -'it

-;,( HVAC } '0 1 "'·' I ·~.


HI/AC

l !£i$ lr;:~ ·~

! --:: r;\,;;

REAR EL~VATION (SOUT_, Sl DE)

LEFT SIDE ELEVATION (~-lEST SIDE)

RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION (EAST SIDE)

Submitted Plan FILE No: P/CA 15/15 APPLICANT: Mattamy (Seaton Limited) PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Block 1 on SP-2009-13

FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.

DATE: Feb. 23, 2015

From:

Subject:

Applications


53 Application Number: PICA 16115 to PICA 32115

Meeting Date: March 11, 2015

Melissa Markham, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner- Development Review

Committee of Adjustment Applications PICA 16115 to PICA 32115 Mattamy (Seaton) Limited Block 2 and Block 20 on Draft Approved Plan of Subdivision SP-2009-13

Block 2 (PICA 16115 to PICA 22115)

The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 7364114 (Seaton Zoning By-law):

• to permit detached dwellings in a "Mixed Corridor Type 1 Exception 2 and 3 (MC1-2-3)" Zone; whereas, the by-law does not permit detached dwellings within the "Mixed Corridor Type 1 Exception 2 and 3 (MC1-2-3)" Zone, and


• to permit street townhouse dwellings in a "Low Density 1 (LD1)" Zone; whereas, the by-law does not permit street townhouse dwellings within the "Low Density 1 (LD 1 )" Zone

The applicant requests approval of these minor variance applications in order to permit detached dwellings on Block 2 and street townhouse dwellings on Block 20 in order to locate future model homes near a proposed temporary sales facility.

Recommendation


The City Development Department considers these minor variance applications to permit detached dwellings on Block 2 in a "Mixed Corridor Type 1 Exception 2 and 3 (MC1-2-3)" Zone to be minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, and therefore recommends Approval of the proposed variances, subject to the following conditions:

1. That these variances apply only to Block 2 on Draft Approved Plan of Subdivision SP-2009-13, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans.

2. That the proposed detached dwellings be constructed in accordance with Zoning By-law 7364114 "Low Density 1 (LD1)" Zone performance standards.

54

Report PICA 16115 to PICA 32115 March 11,2015

Page 2

3. That prior to submitting building permit applications for the proposed detached dwellings the owner must execute a Model Home Agreement to the satisfaction of the City of Pickering.


The City Development Department considers these minor variance applications to permit street townhouse dwellings on Block 20 in a "Low Density 1 (LD1)" Zone to be minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, and therefore recommends Approval of the proposed variances, subject to the following conditions:

1. That these variances apply only to Block 20 on Draft Approved Plan of Subdivision SP-2009-13, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans.

2. That the proposed street townhouse dwellings be constructed in accordance with Zoning By-law 7364114 "Mixed Corridor Type 1 Exception 2 and 3 (MC1-2-3)" Zone performance standards, with the exception of the flankage yard requirement which shall be a minimum of 1. 7 metres.

Background

The owner of the subject lands is proposing to build seven model homes in conjunction with a proposed temporary sales facility in order to promote the sale of units within the Mattamy (Seaton) Subdivision (SP-2009-13). The current zoning by-law on the subject lands does not include specific requirements for model homes. In order to build these model homes the owners are required to relocate an approved street townhouse block of dwelling units with an approved detached block of dwelling units.

The intent of minor variance applications PICA 16115 to PICA 22115 is to allow for seven model homes to be constructed in Block 2, which is in close proximity to a proposed temporary sales facility. The intent of minor variance applications PICA 23115 to PICA 32115 is to allow for the development of ten street townhouse dwellings in Block 20.

The current zoning by-law requires a minimum number of medium density units to be located in this plan of subdivision. To ensure that the required number of medium density units is provided in the plan, the applicant must relocate the street townhouse dwellings from Block 2 to an alternative location within the same plan. The residential density required is being maintained through the proposed exchange of unit types on Block 2 and Block 20.

Report PICA 16115 to PICA 32115

Comment


March 11, 2015 5S Page3

In 2006, the Central Pickering Development Plan (CPDP) came into effect providing a policy framework for a sustainable urban community (Seaton) integrated with a natural heritage system. The CPDP resulted in Amendment 22 to the Pickering Official Plan (OPA 22).

Pickering Official Plan- Block 2 (PICA 16115 to PICA 22115) is designated "Mixed Corridor Type 1", and Block 20 (PICA 23115 to PICA 32115) is designated "Low Density Area Type 1" within the Lamoreaux Neighbourhood

Zoning By-law 7364114- Block 2 (PICA 16115 to PICA 22115) is zoned "MC1-2-3 ... -Mixed Corridor Type 1 Exception 2 and 3, and Block 20 (PICA 23115 to PICA 32115) "Low Density 1 (LD1 )" Zone


Variance to Permit Detached Dwellings in a "MC1-2-3" Zone (Block 2)

• a variance is required to allow for the development of detached dwellings in a Mix Corridor Type 1 Zone

• the intent of the zoning by-law is to permit higher density uses in close proximity to major roads

• the zoning by-law does not permit detached dwellings in this location • the owner is proposing to construct seven model homes as detached dwellings

where street townhouse dwellings are currently proposed • model homes are not identified in By-law 7364114 nor are any regulations

established for this use • the owner is proposing Block 2 for the location for a temporary sales facility and

model homes as this is an area which is most easily accessible and serviceable • the proposed model homes will be constructed in two phases (phase 1 set of 3

and phase 2 set of 4) • the proposed variance will be compatible with the surrounding proposed

neighbourhood • the intent of the zoning by-law is being maintained as the required number of

medium density units are still being provided in an appropriate location within the plan of subdivision

• the requested variances to permit detached dwellings in a "MC1-2-3" Zone is minor in nature and maintains the intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law given the exchange of density proposed in the associated applications

56

Report PICA 16115 to PICA 32115 March 11, 2015

Page4

Variance to Permit Street Townhouse Dwellings in a "LD1" Zone (Block 20)

• a variance is required to permit street townhouse dwellings in a Low Density Type 1 Zone

• the intent of the zoning by-law is to permit lower density residential uses behind higher intensity mixed corridor blocks

• the zoning by-law does not permit street townhouse dwellings in this location • these variances are the result of seven model homes being proposed within the

Mixed Corridor Block (Block 2) • in order to maintain the number of medium density units required in this plan the

owner is proposing to exchange the unit types between Block 2 and Block 20 • the proposed location of street townhouse dwellings within Block 20 is

appropriate as this block is abutting Block 19, which is also intended for street townhouse dwellings

• the owner has also requested a variance to the "MC1-2-3" Zone to reduce the minimum flankage yard from 2.4 metres to 1.7 metres in order to locate these units on Block 20

• the requested variances are compatible with the surrounding neighbourhood • the intent of the zoning by-law is being maintained as the required number of

medium density units are still being provided in an appropriate location within the plan of subdivision

• the requested variances to permit street townhouse dwellings in a "LD1" Zone is minor in nature and maintains the intent and purpose of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law given the exchange in density proposed in the associated applications



~~ <

Lalita Paray, MCI~P Planner I

LP:MM:RP:Id

Melissa Markham, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner- Development RevieW

J:\DocumentsiDevelopment\D-3700\2015\PCA 1 &-15 to PCA 32-15'Report\PCA 16--15 to PCA 32-15.doc

Enclosures


57

Location Map FILE No: PICA 16115 to PICA 32115

APPLICANT: Mattamy (Seaton Limited); PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Block 2 & Block 20 on SP-2009-13

DATE: Feb. 19,2015

SCALE 1:10,000 PN-RU

58

o permit street townhouse dwellings in a "Low Density 1 (LD1 )" Zone

TAUNTON

! II

I I

If/ ( '

I SP-2009-13 //

I

I I ----~-/ I I -~---------1 I ------1 I ---1 ---~-----1 J.--\ 1,! ' ~ f ~

I I .. I 1 • I I 1 I I I ! I I I ~ I I •• I I • ; 1 io I I •

I I ~ ' I

! I ~--~ f I

Submitted Plan

ROAD

FILE No: P/CA 16/15 to P/CA 32/15 APPLICANT: Mattamy (Seaton Limited)

i

l

\\ \ \ I I

/ ! l l I I I ! , I

To permit detached dwellings in a "Mixed Corridor Type 1 Exception 2

and 3 (MC1-2-3)" Zone

! I

! I II II II II

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: Block 2 & Block 20 on SP-2009-13 City Development

Department FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. DATE:Feb.25,2014