committee of adjustment august 13, 2018 · committee of adjustment meeting #15 agenda august 13,...

COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT

August 13, 2018

Please ensure that cell phones and personal digital assistants (PDAs)

are set to an inaudible function during Committee Meetings


Meeting #15 Meeting Date: August 13, 2018

TIME OF MEETING: 6:30 P.M.

PLACE OF MEETING: Room 247

2nd

Floor

City Hall

AGENDA

DECLARATION OF INTEREST:

HEARING

NO. TIME FILE NO. 540-02- APPLICATION ADDRESS

1) 6:30 P.M.

A-048/18 Re: 1069 Brant St Burington

Ward 2 Pages 1-2

*Revised deferral deadline

requested

2) 6:30 P.M.

A-024/18 Re: 700 Drury Lane, Burlington

Ward 2 Pages 3-13

3) 6:30 P.M. A-043/18 Re: 2281 Sharron St., Burlington

Ward 2 Pages 14-21

4) 6:30 P.M. A-046/18 Re: 433 Stinson Ave., Burlington

Ward 2 Pages 22-32

5) 6:30 P.M. A-082/18 Re: 611 Walker's Line, Burlington

Ward 4 Pages 33-38


Meeting #15 AGENDA AUGUST 13, 2018

Page 1

HEARING NO. 1 - 6:30 P.M.

File

540-02-A-048/18 APPLICANT:

2350957 Ontario Inc., 2380 Weycroft Rd. Unit 3A Oakville, ON L6L 6W1

PROPERTY: 1069 Brant St., PLAN 99 PT LOT 17 LESS EXP PLAN 118 PART 7 City of Burlington - Regional Municipality of Halton.



Page 2

City Staff held a meeting with Applicants on August 1st

, 2018 to discuss the

subject application. City Staff requests the original deferral deadline to be

revised to sine die or at the discretion of the Chair.

VARIANCES: 1. To permit a minimum lot width of 13.7 m instead of the minimum lot area of 25 m for the conversion of a detached dwelling into a commercial building

2. To permit a minimum lot area of 543 m2 instead of the minimum lot area of 1000 m2 for the conversion of a detached dwelling into a commercial building

3. To permit a 9 m maximum yard abutting Brant Street instead of the maximum permitted yard of 4.5 m abutting a street

4. To permit a 6.8 m maximum yard abutting Chruchill Avenue instead of the maximum permitted yard of 4.5 m abutting a street

5. To permit a 0 m landscape area abutting Churchill Avenue instead of the minimum required 3 m

6. To permit a 1.3 m landscape buffer abutting a residential zone instead of the minimum required 6 m

7. To permit one shared loading and parking space whereas the by-law requires a parking space to be readily accessible without obstructions at all times for parking and removal of a motor vehicle without the necessity of moving any other vehicle or obstruction

8. To permit one shared loading and parking space with a minimum width of 2.5 m instead of the minimum required 2.75 m

9. To permit one shared loading and parking space with a minimum area of 15 m2 instead of the minimum required 16.5 m2



Page 3


File

540-02-A-024/18 APPLICANT:

David Dolman, 700 Drury Lane. Burlington, ON L7R 2X7

PROPERTY: 700 Drury Lane, PLAN 688 LOT 20 PART OF LANE City of Burlington - Regional Municipality of Halton.



Page 4

VARIANCES: 1. To permit a 6.7 m front yard setback instead of the minimum required 7.5 m for existing landscape walls on an existing detached dwelling.

2. To permit a 6.7 m front yard setback instead of the minimum required 6.85 m for a proposed front porch including overhang and steps for an existing detached dwelling.

3. To permit a 1.1 m north side yard setback instead of the minimum required 1.2 m for a proposed addition on an existing detached dwelling.

4. To permit a 0.6 m north side yard eave or gutter encroachment from the wall of the dwelling instead of the maximum permitted 0.5m for a proposed addition to an existing detached dwelling.

5. To permit a proposed attached garage projection whereas the Zoning By-law does not permit the garage to project beyond the front wall of the first storey of the dwelling.

6. To permit a patio to be located in a front yard whereas the Zoning By-law does not permit any hard surface other than a driveway or walkway between the street line and the building elevation facing the street.

7. To permit an 11.1 m total hard surface width instead of the maximum permitted 7.5 m for combined driveway and walkway widths for an existing detached dwelling.

8. To permit a 0.8 m rear yard setback instead of the minimum required 1.2 m for an existing accessory building greater than 2.5 m high.



Page 5

STAFF REPORTS:

Committee of Adjustment

There are no previous land division or minor variance applications on record for this property. Date: February 12, 2018 Prepared By: Corina Rose

Zoning The subject property is zoned R2.3, low density residential and is in the designated area for lot coverage, under Zoning By-Law 2020, as amended. The R2.3 zone requires, among other things, the following:

4.1 LOT WIDTH, AREA, YARDS

Table 2.4.1

Zone Lot Width Lot Area Front

Yard

Rear Yard Side Yard Street

Side Yard

R2 ZONES

R2.3 18 m 680 m2 7.5 m 9 m (c) (b) 4.5 m

Footnotes to Table 2.4.1 (b) With attached garage or carport:

(i) One or one and a half storey side: 1.2 m (ii) Two or more storey side: 1.8 m

4.8 GARAGES (b) An attached garage with a garage door facing the street is not permitted to

project beyond the front wall on the first storey of a dwelling.

2.13 ENCROACHMENT INTO YARDS 2.13.1 Every part of a required yard shall be unobstructed with respect to the following encroachments:

(a) The following obstructions may project 50 cm maximum into a side yard and

1 m maximum into any other yard from the wall of the building: chimney pilaster belt course eave or gutter overhang sill lintel cornice ornamental projection



Page 6

(b) The following obstructions may project 65 cm maximum into a required yard:

A roofed-over or screened but otherwise unenclosed 1-storey porch A terrace or unroofed porch A carport

2.2 ACCESSORY BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES AND UNITARY EQUIPMENT

2.2.1 The following regulations shall apply to buildings and structures, when accessory to detached, semi-detached, duplex, triplex, fourplex or street townhouse dwellings:

(b) Regulations for Accessory Building greater than 10 m

2 in floor area and/or

greater than 2.5 m in height: (i) Not permitted in a front yard, street side yard or required side yard.

(ii) Permitted in a rear yard subject to the following:

Setback from a rear lot line: 1.2 m

Setback from a side lot line: 1.2 m

Setback from a street side yard (not required): 7.5 m

Maximum encroachment: 0.5 m

Maximum floor area: 50 m2

Maximum one storey

Maximum height (peaked roof): 4.6 m

Maximum height (flat roof): 3.5 m

2.24 DRIVEWAY WIDTHS AND LANDSCAPED OPEN SPACE AREA

1) The width of driveways and walkways shall be measured perpendicular to the direction of travel of the vehicle or person.

4) Unless otherwise specified in this by-law, the following combined maximum width of all hard surfaces (driveways plus walkways) and landscaped open space area requirements shall apply for detached, semi-detached, duplex, triplex, fourplex, common element townhouse, common element back-to-back townhouse, and street townhouse dwellings:

(e) Front lot or street side lot lines equal to or greater than 18 m in width:

(i) The combined maximum width of all hard surfaces is 50% of the front lot or street side lot line.

(ii) The remaining lot area between a street line and a building elevation facing a street shall be landscaped open space area.



Page 7

Landscaped Open Space Area An open, unobstructed space between a property line and a building elevation facing a street, excluding any permitted encroachment into a required yard, which is dedicated to the growth and maintenance of grass, flowers, shrubs, trees, and other landscaping including a walkway, but does not include a driveway, ramp, or parking area, whether surfaced or not, or any open space beneath a building or structure.

Development Proposal The applicant is proposing the construction of a single storey addition including an attached garage. Variances are required for the side yard setback as well as the proposed protruding garage. Variances required:

1. To permit a 6.7 m front yard setback instead of the minimum required 7.5 m for existing landscape walls on an existing detached dwelling.

2. To permit a 6.7 m front yard setback instead of the minimum required 6.85 m for a proposed front porch including overhang and steps for an existing detached dwelling.

3. To permit a 1.1 m north side yard setback instead of the minimum required 1.2 m for a proposed addition on an existing detached dwelling.

4. To permit a 0.6 m north side yard eave or gutter encroachment from the wall of the dwelling instead of the maximum permitted 0.5m for a proposed addition to an existing detached dwelling.

5. To permit a proposed attached garage projection whereas the Zoning By-law does not permit the garage to project beyond the front wall of the first storey of the dwelling.

6. To permit a patio to be located in a front yard whereas the Zoning By-law does not permit any hard surface other than a driveway or walkway between the street line and the building elevation facing the street.

7. To permit an 11.1 m total hard surface width instead of the maximum permitted 7.5 m for combined driveway and walkway widths for an existing detached dwelling.

8. To permit a 0.8 m rear yard setback instead of the minimum required 1.2 m for an existing accessory building greater than 2.5 m high.

Notes:

1. A zoning clearance certificate is required for the proposed addition. 2. The survey provided is to be stamped/signed by the OLS prior to submission

for zoning clearance certificate. Any additional variances identified if changes to the survey occur are the responsibility of the applicant to obtain.



Page 8

3. The variances identified are based on the plans provided. Any changes to the plans resulting in additional variances will be the responsibility of the applicant to obtain.

4. When submitting for Zoning Clearance Certificate;

elevations are to indicate the overhang dimensions including gutter,

width of walkway to be indicated on site plan,

fences are to be removed from the elevations and floor plans,

height and size of the existing shed to be provided,

Site engineering to be consulted with regards to grading and drainage including the proposed side steps into the dwelling.

Date: July 10, 2018 Prepared By: C. Lipnicky

Site Planning

The applicant requests the approval of variances needed to facilitate the construction of a one storey house addition with an attached garage. A variance is also needed to recognize the location of an existing accessory building (shed) at the rear of the property.

1) Official Plan Designation:

Does the proposed minor variance from the Zoning By-law maintain the general

intent and purpose of the Official Plan?

Yes

The subject property is designated ‘Residential – Low Density’ within the City’s Official Plan. This designation permits ground-oriented residential development to a maximum density of 25 units per net hectare. The proposed development is consistent with the Official Plan in terms of the proposed use and density. Staff also notes that Part II, Subsection 6.5 a) of the Official Plan directs new residential development to be compatible with its surroundings in terms of density, form, bulk, height, setbacks, spacing, and materials. The applicant seeks relief from the Zoning By-law to recognize the location of an existing accessory building and to permit reduced front yard and side yard setbacks for a proposed one storey addition with projecting front-loading garage. Staff is satisfied that the location of the existing building and proposed addition will be substantially in accord with the established built-form line along Drury Lane and therefore considers the proposed setbacks to be compatible with the setbacks of surrounding development.



Page 9

Specifically, the proposed porch is considered an aesthetically-pleasing architectural element, limited to a small area of the dwelling façade and front yard. In staff’s opinion, the proposed porch will be compatible with the streetscape and will enhance the overall appearance of the dwelling. Staff notes that projecting garages are generally viewed as detrimental to streetscape quality. In this case, however, the projection facilitates a single car garage only. The design serves to limit the massing of the projection and does not challenge the front porch addition as the house’s architectural focal point. Staff considers the projection to be minimal and negligible in terms of its effect on the overall quality of the streetscape. Based on the above, staff is satisfied that variances maintain the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan.

2) Zoning By-law Designation:

Do the proposed minor variances from the Zoning By-law maintain the general

intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law?

Yes The applicant requests the approval of 8 variances needed to allow for the construction of a one storey addition to an existing house and to retain an existing detached accessory building/shed at the rear of the property. Staff will address each variance individually: Variance #1 and #2 – Front Yard Setback Front yard setback regulations ensure that an appropriate amount of open space is preserved in the front yard of a property, and to encourage the alignment of built form for consistency in the streetscape. For the subject property and immediate area, which is zoned R2.3, a setback of 7.5 m is in place to facilitate compatible development along this established streetscape. The applicant requests a setback of 6.7 m to an existing landscape wall feature and 6.7 m to a proposed front porch. Staff is satisfied that the front yard setback will allow for the adequate continuation of the established building line on Drury Lane and will continue to afford the property a level of front yard open space that is reflective of front yard open space in the surrounding neighbourhood. Staff notes that the landscape wall is existing and defines an existing courtyard/patio located at the front of the house. This feature will not be altered but will be enhanced by the proposed house construction, whereby it will be better integrated within the overall site design. With regards to the proposed porch, staff notes that the porch projects from the front wall of the house in order to create a desired architectural focal point and enhanced visual connectivity to the street. In both cases, the reduced



Page 10

setbacks do not facilitate over-development or cause structures to overwhelm the street. Variance #3 and #4 – North Side Yard Setback By-law 2020 requires a 1.2 m north side yard setback. The applicant’s design for the proposed single storey addition causes an encroachment of 10 cm into this yard with an associated encroachment of 10 cm for the eave/gutter. The intent of the regulation is to ensure the retention of space between houses on adjacent properties for streetscaping and also to provide outside access around the house from within the subject property. Staff considers the encroachment to be minimal in both cases and do not expect any negative impact as a result. The intent of the zoning regulation will be met in this case. Variance #5 – Garage Projection The intent of the Zoning By-law is to limit the visual impact of garages, avoiding their dominance of the house’s front façade and thus protecting the overall streetscape. Staff notes that in this case the garage projection will be limited in width and depth as a single bay garage. Furthermore, staff notes that the garage will generally line up with the proposed covered porch feature which contributes to a balanced and symmetrical façade design. The garage will not dominate the front appearance of the house. In staff’s opinion, the limited extent and massing of the garage projection will not create a negative impact to the house design or adversely impact the quality of the streetscape. Variance #6 and #7 – Front Hard Surface/Patio The applicant’s plan includes the reuse of an existing driveway from Drury Lane and also the retention of an open courtyard/patio feature currently located at the front of the house. Staff understands that the patio feature was recently installed, without the benefit of the required zoning approval. Notwithstanding this, the applicant wishes to now legalize this feature as part of the subject application. The intent of the zoning regulations restricting the location of patios and limiting hard surface in the front yard is to ensure that front yards retain an open, naturalized appearance thus avoiding hard surface areas that could become parking etc. Staff has assessed the required variances to allow for the continuation of this feature and are of the opinion that the intent of the zoning regulations will be generally met in this case. The patio feature is well integrated with both the front landscaping and the proposed front porch addition. While staff would prefer that the patio/courtyard utilize a permeable surface treatment or be reduced to allow additional sodded area in the front yard, the feature as it exists appears to be well integrated on the site and complimentary to the surrounding development. Its design does not permit for additional parking on the site. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed works at the front of the house (porch feature)



Page 11

will further enhance and better integrate this patio feature as part of the overall house and site design. Staff has no objection to the variances related to allow this patio and the hard surface expansion needed to accommodate it. The applicant is advised that no further expansion or modification is permitted to this patio except in accordance with applicable zoning regulations. Variance #8 – Rear Shed By-law 2020 requires accessory buildings to maintain a rear yard setback of 1.2 m. The existing accessory building currently maintains a setback of 0.8 m in the rear yard. As this is an existing situation and as there is no intent to enlarge or expand/modify this structure, staff are satisfied that a variance to allow the shed to remain in it existing location and configuration is appropriate. The 0.8 m rear yard setback is still sufficient to allow limited access around the building for maintenance purposes. The applicant is advised that any modifications or reconstruction of the subject shed may only occur in compliance with the zoning regulations applicable at the time of redevelopment.

3) Desirability: Is the proposed minor variance from the Zoning By-law desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land, building or structure?

Yes

In each case, the variances are desirable to allow for a modest one storey expansion of the existing house, retaining the existing building and thereby promoting stability in the area.

4) Minor in Nature:

Is the proposed minor variance from the Zoning By-law considered minor in

nature?

Yes

In each case the variances are considered minor with regards to impact to the property and also to surrounding development.

Cumulative Effects of Multiple Variances and Other Planning Matters: Individually or together the variances are considered acceptable to allow for the increased function of an existing house



Page 12

Recommendation: Staff has reviewed the proposed variance in accordance with the Planning Act, the policies of the Official Plan and the requirements of the Zoning By-law and has no objection. Date: July 25, 2018 Prepared By: Charles Mulay MCIP RPP

Site Engineering Actual road width is equal to or greater than deemed road width (20m) No road widening required. Date: February 12, 2018 Prepared By: A. Capone Site Engineering staff have reviewed the proposed minor variances and have no objection subject to the following:

The applicant must enter into an enchroachment agreement for any strucutre(s) within the existing servicing easment located along the north sideyard or pay for the cost to abandon the subject easement. Prior to building permit, the applicant is to obtain a grading and drainage clearance.

Date: July 18, 2018 Prepared By: J. Medeiros

Building

1. A Building Permit is required for all building construction. 2. Permit application drawings are to be prepared by a qualified designer as per

Div. C., Section 3.2 - Qualifications of Designers and OBC 2012.

NOTE: Unprotected openings are not permitted in a side yard less than 1.2m (east elevation).

Date: July 17, 2018 Prepared By: Kathy Pavlou

Transportation Planning

Transportation Services has no concerns with this Minor Variance Application. Date: July 13, 2018 Prepared By: Trevor Clark



Page 13

Finance

Notice regarding Development Charges: The owner, its successors and assigns, are hereby notified that City Development Charges may be payable in accordance with the applicable By-law 72-2004, as may be amended, upon issuance of a building permit, at the rate in effect on the date issued. For further information, the owner is advised to contact the City Building Department (905) 335-7731.

Tax Pay all property taxes owing. The taxes owing includes any outstanding balances plus current year taxes that have been billed to the satisfaction of the Director of Finance. Local improvement must be commuted. Date: July 11, 2018 Prepared By: L. Bray

COPYRIGHT ACT APPLIES TO USE AND REPRODUCTION



Page 14


File

540-02-A-043/18 APPLICANT:

Teddy Stawikowski & Dale Kelly, 2281 Sharron St. Burlington, ON L7R 1W5

PROPERTY: 2281 Sharron St., PLAN 616 LOT 77 City of Burlington - Regional Municipality of Halton.

VARIANCES: 1. To permit a 4.9 m front yard setback instead of the minimum required 6.85 m (7.5 m – 0.65 m encroachment) for a proposed front porch including overhang and steps on a proposed detached dwelling.

2. To permit a 0.7 m west side yard eave or gutter encroachment from the wall of the dwelling instead of the maximum permitted 0.5 m for a proposed detached dwelling.

3. To permit a 0.7 m east side yard eave or gutter encroachment from the wall of the dwelling instead of the maximum permitted 0.5 m for a proposed detached dwelling.

4. To permit lot coverage of 29.9% instead of the maximum permitted 25% for a proposed 2 storey dwelling with attached garage in the designated area.

5. To permit floor area ratio of 0.51:1 instead of the maximum permitted 0.45:1 for a proposed 2 storey dwelling.



Page 15

STAFF REPORTS:


There are no previous land division or minor variance applications on record for this property.

Date: March 14, 2018 Prepared By: Robyn Stebner



Table 2.4.1


Yard


Side Yard

R2 ZONES

R2.3 18 m 680 m2 7.5 m 9 m (c) (b) 4.5 m

Footnotes to Table 2.4.1 (b) Without attached garage or carport:

(i) One or one and a half storey side: 1.2 m, 3 m other side (ii) Two or more storey side 1.8 m, 3 m other side

With attached garage or carport:

(iii) One or one and a half storey side: 1.2 m (iv) Two or more storey side: 1.8 m

4.2 LOT COVERAGE

Table 2.4.3

Dwelling Type Dwelling with Attached

Garage

Dwelling without Attached

Garage

All Dwellings in

Designated Areas (b)

(c)

35% for one storey dwellings including accessory buildings 30% for one and a half storey dwellings including accessory buildings 25% for all other dwelling types including accessory buildings

27% for one storey dwellings plus 8% for accessory buildings 22% for one and a half storey dwellings plus 8% for accessory buildings 17% for all other dwelling types plus 8% for accessory buildings

Footnotes to Table 2.4.3



Page 16

(a) One accessory building less than 10 m

2 and less than 2.5 m in height shall be

exempt from the lot coverage requirements of Table 2.4.3. (b) Designated Areas are shaded on ZONING MAPS in Part 15. (c) Properties with a front or street side yard abutting Lakeshore Road or North

Shore Boulevard and all properties south of Lakeshore Road and North Shore Boulevard shall be exempt from the designated area regulation. For through lots, the front building elevation shall determine the front of the lot for the purposes of this regulation.

4.5 FLOOR AREA RATIO (a) A maximum floor area ratio of 0.45:1 shall apply to all properties in

Designated Areas for Lot Coverage.

2.13 ENCROACHMENT INTO YARDS 2.13.1 Every part of a required yard shall be unobstructed with respect to the following encroachments:

(c) The following obstructions may project 50 cm maximum into a side yard and

1 m maximum into any other yard from the wall of the building: chimney pilaster belt course eave or gutter overhang sill lintel cornice ornamental projection

(d) The following obstructions may project 65 cm maximum into a required yard:


The applicant is proposing the construction of a new 2 storey dwelling with a lot coverage of 29.78% and a floor area ratio of .506:1 Variances required:

1. To permit a 4.9 m front yard setback instead of the minimum required 6.85 m (7.5 m – 0.65 m encroachment) for a proposed front porch including overhang and steps on a proposed detached dwelling.

2. To permit a 0.7 m west side yard eave or gutter encroachment from the wall of the dwelling instead of the maximum permitted 0.5 m for a proposed detached dwelling.

3. To permit a 0.7 m east side yard eave or gutter encroachment from the wall of the dwelling instead of the maximum permitted 0.5 m for a proposed detached dwelling.

4. To permit lot coverage of 29.9% instead of the maximum permitted 25% for a proposed 2 storey dwelling with attached garage in the designated area.



Page 17

5. To permit floor area ratio of 0.51:1 instead of the maximum permitted 0.45:1 for a proposed 2 storey dwelling.

Notes:

1. A zoning clearance certificate is required for the proposed dwelling. 2. The variances identified are based on the plans provided. Any changes to

the plans resulting in additional variances will be the responsibility of the applicant to obtain.

Date: July 17, 2018 Prepared By: C. Lipnicky

Site Planning




Yes The subject property is designated Residential – Low Density within the City’s Official Plan. This designation permits ground-oriented forms of housing to a maximum density of 25 units per net hectare. The proposed development would comply in this regard. The Official Plan requires new development to be compatible with the surrounding area. Part II, Section 6.5 a) of the Official Plan states that “The density, form, bulk, height, setbacks, spacing and materials of development are to be compatible with its surrounding area”. Staff notes that the existing streetscape is comprised primarily of one storey bungalow style dwelling units. As a result, where two storey structures are proposed, extra care must be taken to design such structures to compliment and be considerate of surrounding development. Although designed as a two storey structure, the proposed house utilizes a design that minimizes upper level massing by including a centre peaked roof that extends to the first floor with dormers at the front and back of the house. As a result, a full two storey façade does not occur facing the street or at the rear. The massing created as a result of the proposed setbacks, coverage and floor area ratio does not impact overall compatibility of the proposed building within this neighbourhood. It is the opinion of staff that the proposed dwelling remains in keeping with the character of the area and with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan.



Page 18




Yes

The applicant requests the approval of 5 variances needed to allow for the construction of a new single detached house. Staff will address each variance individually:

Variance #1 – Front Porch By-law 2020 requires a front yard setback of 7.5 m. The By-law permits a porch to encroach by 65 cm into this required yard. The applicant requests a variance to allow the porch to encroach by 2.6 m, maintaining a front yard setback of 4.9 m. Staff regards porch features as elements that connect to the streetscape, that are inviting and that create a strong focal point at the front of a house. Staff has assessed development in the immediate vicinity and finds the proposed setback to be compatible with the surrounding area. It will not detract from the streetscape nor will it negatively impact surrounding development. Staff also notes that the porch will project from the front wall of the house, which will comply with the 7.5 m setback requirement. Staff has no objection to the approval of the requested variance. Variances #2 and #3 – Side yard Setbacks By-law 2020 allows eaves and gutters to encroach by .5 m into a required yard. In this case, the applicant requests that the eves and gutters be allowed to encroach by .7 m on each side of the house. The intent of the regulation is to ensure that eves and gutters not come unusually close to side lot lines whereby they might impact development on adjacent lots. In this case, the additional 20 cm encroachments on each side are deemed to be minor and mostly tied to the roof’s architectural design, which incorporates a slightly larger overhang. Notwithstanding this, the encroachments are not expected to bring about any negative impact to adjacent properties. Variance #4 – Coverage Within an area defined as consisting of mature, stable residential development, By-law 2020 limits coverage to 25% for a two storey house and 35% for a one storey house. The standard coverage limit outside of the defined area is 40%. This enhanced setback requirement was established to maintain open space on each lot and to curtail over-building or development that is deemed to be not compatible with the surrounding area. Compatibility is defined as the ability to co-exist in harmony. It does not require replication of the massing or style of adjacent development.



Page 19

The applicant requests a coverage of 29.9% which is above the permitted coverage for a two storey house but still well below the coverage limit for a one storey dwelling. It is almost at the mid-point between the limits set for one and for two storey houses. The house itself utilizes design elements that enhance the first storey portion of the house while minimizing the upper level massing (second storey) with use of a centre peaked roof that extends to the top of the first floor at the front and rear, and also by the use of dormers. The massing of the second storey is minimized by these design elements. As such, the impacts of a more traditional two storey design are minimized. Staff also notes that the main dwelling (not including eves and front porch) will comply with all required setbacks from lot lines. The building will not come closer to any adjacent development as a result of the subject variance. The proposed 4.9% increase in coverage is considered to be acceptable in this case as it does not facilitate the overbuilding of the property and continues to respect the retention of open space on the subject property. Variance #5 – Floor Area Ratio By-law 2020 limits floor area ratio (the amount of floor area permitted based on the size of the lot) to .45:1. The intent of this regulation is to limit the size of a house, beyond the controls related to lot coverage, building height and setbacks, in recognition of the size of the lot. The floor area ratio ensures that the massing of a house is right for the property. The applicant is proposing a floor area ratio of .51:1. Special care must be taken when considering increases to Floor Area Ratio as increases should not result in an overbuilding situation. Houses that are too large for the property often encroach into required yards around the house and this has a negative impact on the provision of space. Space is a key element in promoting compatible infill development. In this case, the house will not encroach into any required yard (except for porch and eves/gutters) and will not exceed the height limit for this zone designation. The building will be in conformity with all other zoning regulations. Staff notes that the house utilizes a 1 and ½ storey appearance with a dormer in the front so that upper level massing does not dominate the front façade. Although a house with a reduced floor area could be designed to more closely meet the zoning regulation, staff is satisfied that the proposed house adequately utilizes design elements to promote compatible development in this case.



Page 20

3) Desirability:

Is the proposed minor variance from the Zoning By-law desirable for the

appropriate development or use of the land, building or structure?

Yes

In each case the variances are considered desirable to allow for the redevelopment of the subject lot in a manner that is deemed to be compatible with surrounding development.

4) Minor in Nature:


nature?

Yes

The variances are considered to be minor in terms of impact to the site and to adjacent development.

Cumulative Effects of Multiple Variances and Other Planning Matters:


Site Engineering Actual road width is equal to or greater than deemed road width (20m) No road widening required. Date: March 21, 2018 Prepared By: A. Capone Site Engineering has reviewed the proposed minor variances and has no objection. Please not that a Grading and Drainage Clearance as well as a Tree Permit will be required prior to building permit. Date: July 20, 2018 Prepared By: A. Capone



Page 21

Building

1. A Demolition Permit is required. 2. A Building Permit is required for all building construction. 3. Permit application drawings are to be prepared by a qualified designer as per

Div. C., Section 3.2 - Qualifications of Designers and OBC 2012. Date: August 1, 2018 Prepared By: Kathy Pavlou



Finance


Tax Pay all property taxes owing. The taxes owing includes any outstanding balances plus current year taxes that have been billed to the satisfaction of the Director of Finance. Local improvement must be commuted.

Date: July 19, 2018 Prepared By: L. Bray



Page 22


File

540-02-A-046/18 APPLICANT:

Burlington Suites Furnished Rentals Inc., 463 Patricia Dr. Burlington, ON L7T 1J9

PROPERTY: 433 Stinson Ave., PLAN 396 LOT 4 City of Burlington - Regional Municipality of Halton.

VARIANCES: 1. To permit a 3.8 m front yard setback instead of the minimum required 5.35 m (6 m - 0.65 m encroachment) for a proposed front porch including overhang and steps for the proposed one storey detached dwelling.

2. To permit lot coverage of 39% instead of the maximum permitted 35% for the proposed one storey detached dwelling with an attached garage.



Page 23

STAFF REPORTS:



Date: March 29, 2018 Prepared By: Carson O’Connor


4.2 LOT COVERAGE

Table 2.4.3

Dwelling Type Dwelling with Attached

Garage

All Dwellings in

Designated Areas (b)

(c)

35% for one storey dwellings including accessory buildings

Footnotes to Table 2.4.3

(b) Designated Areas are shaded on ZONING MAPS in Part 15.

(c) Properties with a front or street side yard abutting Lakeshore Road or North

Shore Boulevard and all properties south of Lakeshore Road and North Shore Boulevard shall be exempt from the designated area regulation. For through lots, the front building elevation shall determine the front of the lot for the purposes of this regulation.

2.13 ENCROACHMENT INTO YARDS 2.13.1 Every part of a required yard shall be unobstructed with respect to the following

encroachments:

(d) The following obstructions may project 65 cm maximum into a required yard:



Page 24


2) Proposal: The applicant is proposing the construction of a single detached dwelling.

3) Variances required:

1. To permit a 3.8 m front yard setback instead of the minimum required 5.35 m (6 m - 0.65 m encroachment) for a proposed front porch including overhang and steps for the proposed one storey detached dwelling.

2. To permit lot coverage of 39% instead of the maximum permitted 35% for the proposed one storey detached dwelling with an attached garage.

4) Notes and conditions:

1. A zoning clearance certificate is required for the proposed dwelling. 2. A demolition permit is to be applied for prior to the issuance of a zoning

clearance certificate. 3. The variances identified are based on the plans provided. Any changes to


Date: July 12, 2018 (revised) Prepared By: Danielle Beck, CPT

Site Planning

On June 11, 2018, Planning staff submitted comments for the Committee’s consideration based on an original application that requested three variances as follows:

1) To permit a front yard setback of 3.1 m instead of 6 m for a front porch feature.

2) To permit a rear yard setback of 7.5 m instead of the required 9 m

3) To permit a coverage of 43% instead of the 35% permitted

While staff found the front yard reduction acceptable, the variances related to rear yard setback and increased site coverage raised concern. Staff comments (submitted below for the Committee’s information) detailed the concerns and recommended refusal of Variances #2 and #3. Since the preparation of the comments, the applicant has worked with Planning staff to amend the house design and alter the application to increase the front yard setback to 3.8 m from 3.1 m, remove Variance #2 in its entirety and to reduce Variance #3 to propose a coverage of 39% instead of the previously proposed 43%.



Page 25

Staff analysis of the revised variances is contained under Revised Site Planning

Comments which follows the Original Site Planning Comments below.

ORIGINAL SITE PLANNING COMMENTS




Yes Variance #1 – Front Yard Setback

No Variance #2 and #3 – Rear Yard Setback and Coverage

The subject property is designated Residential – Low Density within the City’s Official Plan. This designation permits ground-oriented forms of housing to a maximum density of 25 units per net hectare. The proposed development would comply in this regard. The Official Plan also requires new development to be compatible with the surrounding area. Part II, Section 6.5 a) of the Official Plan states that “The density, form, bulk, height, setbacks, spacing and materials of development are to be compatible with its surrounding area”. The siting and size of a house on a lot are influenced by zoning regulations including those related to required setbacks and site coverage. By including specific regulations related to setbacks and coverage, new development more closely integrates with surrounding development in terms of house siting and overall size. This promotes compatible infill development within established neighbourhoods, by encouraging regard for the surrounding development pattern. The subject application requests the approval of variances needed to facilitate the construction of a new one storey residential dwelling. The dwelling is a low mass structure and one storey in height. These features would normally allow for compatible development, subject to appropriate final design. However, this has not been demonstrated for all three variances in this case. Variance #1 for a reduced front yard setback is deemed to promote the provision of a compatible front yard space. However, the Variances #2 and #3 facilitate development that exceeds the limit of what may be deemed to be compatible by the Official Plan.



Page 26




The applicant has requested three variances needed to facilitate the construction of a

new one storey detached dwelling. Staff will assess each variance individually:

Yes Variance #1 – Front Yard Setback

By-law 2020 requires a front yard setback of 6 m. The By-law permits a porch to encroach by 65 cm into that required yard. The applicant requests variances to allow the porch to encroach by 2.9 m, maintaining a front yard setback of 3.1 m. Staff regards porch features as elements that connect to the streetscape, that are inviting and that create a strong focal point at the front of a house. Staff has assessed development in the immediate vicinity and finds the proposed setback to be in keeping with the surrounding area. Staff also notes that the porch will project from the front wall of the house, which will comply with the 6 m setback requirement. Staff has no objection to the approval of the requested variance.

NO Variance #2 – Rear Yard Setback

The Zoning By-law requires that new development maintains a rear yard setback of 9 m. The requirement ensures that new development does not encroach substantially into the rear yard amenity area or bring building mass to the rear of the property where it could impact the enjoyment of adjacent rear yard amenity spaces (on adjacent lots). Staff is of the opinion that this variance could be reduced or eliminated in conjunction with a reduction to overall building coverage (see comment under Variance #3). Staff has discussed building coverage with the applicant and has recommended that the building coverage be reduced to more closely comply with the zoning requirement. This would allow for a larger rear yard setback and a larger setback would more closely align with the development pattern in the area. Staff considers the subject variance as resulting from an overbuilding situation caused primarily by enlarged coverage. A reduction to coverage will allow for the incorporation of a larger rear yard setback.

NO Variance #3 - Coverage The subject property has an R3.2 (Low Density Residential) zoning classification. Within this classification, the property is located within an area designated for enhanced restrictions regarding lot coverage. The designation was established to curtail over-



Page 27

building within established neighbourhoods. Within the designated area, a one storey house may maintain a coverage of up to 35% and a two storey structure is limited to a maximum of 25%. One storey residential development outside of the designated area is permitted a maximum coverage of 40%. The intent of the enhanced lot coverage restriction is to protect open space on individual lots and to minimize the massing impacts of a new house to the surrounding neighbourhood. In this case, the applicant requests a lot coverage of 43% for a new one storey structure, where 35% is the limit for one storey homes. Planning staff have concerns regarding the increased coverage in this case. The By-law recognizes that one storey house, due to their lower height and lower mass, should be permitted an increased coverage versus a two storey house. For this reason, a one storey house is permitted a coverage of 35% versus 25% for a two storey house. Staff understands that on occasion a minor increase to coverage may be required in recognition of house design or floor plan layout. However, such increases should be limited in scale and should continue to respect the enhanced coverage limitations as set out within the zoning designated area. In this case, the proposed 43% coverage not only exceeds the 35% limit set under the terms of the designated area, it also exceeds the standard limit of 40% for areas outside of the designated area. Clearly, the intent of the by-law which is to provide an enhanced coverage restriction within the designated area relative to the base zoning, will not be met. Staff notes that the proposed coverage is accompanied by a variance to reduce the rear yard setback. Together, these variances identify a one storey house that is too large for the subject property. New house construction allows for flexible design. Staff recommends that the design of the proposed house be amended to more closely comply with zoning regulations. Staff has discussed these concerns with the applicant who understands these issues and has agreed to consider modifications that would more closely comply with the zoning regulations. No revisions have been proposed as of the preparation of the subject report. Staff remains prepared to discuss alternate designs which enhance overall compatibility.


Yes Variance #1

The variance related to front yard setback is considered desirable to allow the front of the house to be sited in a manner that is consistent with homes on adjacent lots and to allow a front porch feature as a streetscape element.



Page 28

No Variance #2 and #3 Variance #2 and #3 together push the boundary of what can be reasonably expected on the subject lot, given the zoning framework. These variances contribute to an over-building situation.

4) Minor in Nature:


nature?

Yes Variance #1

The variance related to front yard setback is considered to minor with regards to impact to the site and to the surrounding neighbourhood.

No Variance #2 and #3 Variance #2 and #3 together create an adverse impact with regards to built form and house siting

Cumulative Effects of Multiple Variances and Other Planning Matters: Together, Variance #2 and #3 identify an overbuilding situation, whereby the footprint of the house has expanded to the point of substantially encroaching into the rear yard.

Recommendation: Staff has reviewed the proposed Variance #1 in accordance with the Planning Act, the

policies of the Official Plan and the requirements of the Zoning By-law and has no

objection. Staff has reviewed the proposed Variances #2 and Variance #3 in accordance with the Planning Act, the policies of the Official Plan and the requirements of the Zoning By-law

and objects to the variances requested. Date: June 11, 2018 Prepared By: Charles Mulay MCIP RPP



Page 29

REVISED SITE PLANNING COMMENTS:




Yes

The subject property is designated Residential – Low Density within the City’s Official Plan. This designation permits ground-oriented forms of housing to a maximum density of 25 units per net hectare. The proposed development would comply in this regard. The Official Plan also requires new development to be compatible with the surrounding area. Part II, Section 6.5 a) of the Official Plan states that “The density, form, bulk, height, setbacks, spacing and materials of development are to be compatible with its surrounding area”. The siting and size of a house on a lot are influenced by zoning regulations including those related to required setbacks and site coverage. By including specific regulations related to setbacks and coverage, new development more closely integrates with surrounding development in terms of house siting and overall size. This promotes compatible infill development within established neighbourhoods, by encouraging regard for the surrounding development pattern. The subject application requests the approval of variances needed to facilitate the construction of a new one storey residential dwelling. The dwelling is a low mass structure being one storey in height. This assists with the provision of a compatible building mass and form. Variance #1 for a reduced front yard setback is deemed to promote the provision of a compatible front yard space that relates well to the existing streetscape. Variance #2 proposes a lot coverage that slightly exceeds the By-law maximum but that still allows for compliance with side and rear yard setbacks in accordance with existing zoning regulations. The building form is consistent with the policies of the Official Plan.




Yes

By-law 2020 requires a front yard setback of 5.35 m (6 m minus a 0.65 m encroachment allowance for a porch). The applicant requests variances to allow the



Page 30

porch to encroach by 1.55 m, maintaining a front yard setback of 3.8 m. Staff regards porch features as elements that connect to the streetscape, that are inviting and that create a strong focal point at the front of a house. Staff has assessed development in the immediate vicinity and finds the proposed setback to be in keeping with the surrounding area. Staff also notes that the porch will project from the front wall of the house, which will comply with the base 6 m setback requirement. The footprint of the proposed house has been reduced to a 39% coverage from the originally proposed 43%. While full compliance with the coverage limit is always preferred, staff accepts the minor increase given that it is now below the 40% coverage permitted outside of the area designated for reduced lot coverage of 35% and which deters overbuilding within mature neighbourhoods. Staff does not regard the proposed development as a case of overbuilding. Furthermore, the reduction in coverage has allowed for an increased front yard setback from the original proposal and also allowed for complete compliance with the rear yard setback requirement. Staff appreciates the work undertaken by the applicant to achieve these revisions. Staff has no objection to the approval of the requested variances.


Yes

The variances are considered desirable to allow for the construction of a one storey house that is considered to be compatible with surrounding development.

4) Minor in Nature:


nature?

Yes

The variances are considered to be minor with regards to impact to the subject property and to the surrounding area.

Cumulative Effects of Multiple Variances and Other Planning Matters: Individually or together, the variances are deemed appropriate to allow for the construction of a compatible single detached home.



Page 31


Site Engineering Actual road width is equal to or greater than deemed road width (20m). No road widening required. Date: April 4, 2018 Prepared By: A. Capone Site Engineering has reviewed the proposed minor variances and objects to #3 which seeks to increase the allowed lot coverage from 35% to 43%. The original plan of subdivision H-396 was designed for a runoff coefficient of 0.4. The coefficient is for all hard surfaces within a lot which our zoning does not take into account such as driveways, walkways, and uncovered patios. Therefore the lot coverage from a storm drainage perspective is even greater than the proposed 43% and is believed to be too significant for the existing subdivision. Site Engineering has reviewed proposed minor variances #1-2 and has no objections provided the applicant obtains grading and drainage approval before applying for a building permit. Please contact the Site Engineering Department to discuss the necessary site plan details. Please note this is a complicated area to develop within due to concerns of high ground water levels and will require onsite monitoring. This is to ensure any proposed home is not built within the ground water or in the event that the ground water unreasonably restricts any proposed basement proper measures are implemented. Date: June 11, 2018 Prepared By: A. Scott As per the revised submission, it still appears that the overall impervious area is greater than 50%. Without a grading and drainage plan to review, we are unable to assess the stormwater requirements for this site. Based on our previous comments, we object to the revised Variance # 2. Date: July 18, 2018 Prepared By: A. Scott



Page 32

Building

1. A Demolition Permit is required. 2. A Building Permit is required for all building construction; 3. Permit application drawings are to be prepared by a qualified designer as per

Div. C., Section 3.2 - Qualifications of Designers and OBC 2012. Date: August 1, 2018 Prepared By: Kathy Pavlou Transportation Planning

Transportation Services has no concerns with this Minor Variance application. Date: July 19, 2018 Prepared By: Trevor Clark

Finance






Page 33


File

540-02-A-082/18 APPLICANT:

Seydedeh Maryam Miraghaie, 611 Walker's Line. Burlington, ON L7N 2E6

PROPERTY: 611 Walker's Line, PLAN 1350 LOT 6 City of Burlington - Regional Municipality of Halton.

VARIANCES: 1. To permit a 5.4 m front yard setback instead of the minimum required 6.0 m to the proposed one storey garage addition.

2. To permit a 5.4 m driveway length instead of the minimum required 6.0 m.

3. To permit a 5.5 m internal garage depth instead of the minimum required 6.0 m.



Page 34

STAFF REPORTS:



Date: June 13, 2018 Prepared By: Carson O’Connor

Zoning

1) Background information (note this not included in the Agenda): The subject property is zoned R3.2, low density residential and is in the designated area for lot coverage, under Zoning By-Law 2020, as amended. The R3.2 zone requires, among other things, the following:


Table 2.4.1


Yard


Side Yard

R3.2 15 m 425 m2 6 m 9 m (c) (b) 4.5 m

Minimum internal garage dimensions (Part 1, Section 2.26 GENERAL PARKING PROVISIONS)

(1) Parking Space Size & Accessibility

The minimum internal dimensions for a private garage are 6.0m depth x 3.0m width x 2.0m height. The minimum internal dimensions for unobstructed area in the private garage are 5.5m depth x 3.0m width x 2.0m height. One step is permitted in the unobstructed area.

2.24 DRIVEWAY WIDTHS AND LANDSCAPED OPEN SPACE AREA

3) Unless otherwise specified in this by-law, driveways shall be a minimum of 6m in length.

2) Proposal: The applicant is proposing the construction of an attached garage to the existing 1 storey detached dwelling.



Page 35

3) Variances required:

1. To permit a 5.4 m front yard setback instead of the minimum required 6.0 m to the proposed one storey garage addition.

2. To permit a 5.4 m driveway length instead of the minimum required 6.0 m. 3. To permit a 5.5 m internal garage depth instead of the minimum required 6.0

m.

4) Notes and conditions:

1. A zoning clearance certificate is required for the proposed attached garage. 2. The variances identified are based on the plans provided. Any changes to


Date: July 9, 2018 Prepared By: Danielle Beck, CPT

Site Planning The subject property is located on the east side of Walker’s Line, between New Street and Fairview Street. In the surrounding residential area, properties support dwellings that range from one to two-storey dwellings. The property currently contains a one-storey single detached dwelling. The applicant proposes to construct a one-storey addition to accommodate an attached garage to the existing dwelling. The following variances are required for the proposed development:

1. To permit a 5.4 m front yard setback instead of the minimum required 6.0 m to the proposed one storey garage addition.

2. To permit a 5.4 m driveway length instead of the minimum required 6.0 m.

3. To permit a 5.5 m internal garage depth instead of the minimum required 6.0 m.




Yes The subject property is designated as “Residential – Low Density” in the City’s Official Plan. This designation permits single-detached and semi-detached dwelling units to a maximum density of 25 units per net hectare. When development occurs the Official Plan seeks to maintain the character of the neighbourhood, and to ensure compatibility with the surrounding development is achieved in terms of density, built form, scale, height, spacing, and materials.



Page 36

The applicant has proposed to construct a one-storey garage addition to the existing dwelling. The existing dwelling has a walkout basement along the south side of the dwelling where the proposed garage addition is to be located. The applicant is proposing to remove the existing stairs and orient them to lead to the rear yard rather than the front yard. The location of the walkout basement establishes constraints on internal dimensions and configuration of the proposed garage. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed addition will be in keeping with the character of the existing dwelling by maintaining the built form, front yard setback, scale, and height of the existing dwelling. Further, the proposed garage addition will not have a negative impact to the streetscape. In the opinion of staff the required variances for the proposed development meet the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan.




Yes Variance 1 – Front Yard Setback Front yard setbacks are intended to provide adequate separation between dwellings and the right-of-way, establish a consistent alignment of dwellings, and to provide front yard space to establish character of the streetscape. Staff note that subject property is currently not at the deemed street width. In this regard, the City may require a road widening of 2.26 m in the future. Zoning regulations are taken from the deemed street width as a result. Staff further note that the front wall of the proposed addition will be in alignment with the front wall of dwelling adjacent to the proposed addition. As such, the proposed addition will not be extending closer to the front lot line than the existing dwelling. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed addition will maintain alignment with the existing dwelling and will not have a negative impact on the open space provided in the front yard. Variance 2 and 3 – Driveway Length and Garage Depth The length of driveways and the depth of garages are regulated by the Zoning By-law to ensure that adequately sized parking spaces can be provided on the property. This further ensures that the property can provide the minimum number of parking spaces required to be supported on the site. The applicant requires a variance to permit a driveway length of 5.4 m instead of the minimum required 6.0 m, and an internal garage depth of 5.5 m instead of the minimum requried 6.0 m. Although the proper length of driveway and garage depth is not provided staff is of the opinion that the subject property can support two parking spaces are required by the Zoning By-law. The Zoning By-law requires parking spaces to be



Page 37

16.5 sq.m in size with a minimum width of 2.75 m. The driveway is approximately 4.5 m in width, and as such is able to support a parking space that is over 16.5 sq.m (4.5x5.4 = 24.3 sq.m). Further, the Zoning By-law requires internal parking spaces within a garage to have a depth of 5.5 m and width of 3.0 m. The front portion of the garage has internal dimensions of 5.59 m in depth and 3.95 m in width, which provides a parking area of 22.1 sq.m. Staff is of the opinion that variances 2 and 3 meet the general intent of the Zoning By-law as two parking spaces are able to be supported on the subject property.


Yes Further, the subject property currently does not have an enclosed garage. The proposed garage addition will provide storage for the property as well as an enclosed area for vehicle storage, increasing the functionality of the property’s built form.

4) Minor in Nature:


nature?

Yes Staff is of the opinion that the variances required for the proposed garage are minor in nature as no adverse impacts will occur to the existing streetscape or adjacent properties. The required variances still allow for adequate parking to be maintained on the property.

Cumulative Effects of Multiple Variances and Other Planning Matters: N/A

Recommendation: Staff has reviewed the proposed variance in accordance with the Planning Act, the policies of the Official Plan and the requirements of the Zoning By-law and has no objection. Date: July 18, 2018 Prepared By: Robyn Stebner



Page 38

Site Engineering Actual road width is +/- 30.5m and deemed road width is 35m. Therefore, a +/- 2.25m road widening is required and shall be confirmed by an OLS. Actual land conveyance may not be required at this time. Date: June 18, 2018 Prepared By: A. Capone Site Engineering has reviewed the proposed minor variances and has no objection. Please note that a grading and drainage clearance is required prior to building permit. Date: July 18, 2018 Prepared By: A. Capone

Building

1. A Building Permit is required for all building construction; 2. Permit application drawings are to be prepared by a qualified designer as per

Div. C., Section 3.2 - Qualifications of Designers and OBC 2012. Date: July 17, 2018 Prepared By: Kathy Pavlou



Finance




committee of adjustment august 13, 2018 · committee of adjustment meeting #15 agenda august 13,...

Documents