Committee of Adjustment Agenda - Pickering...02 (II I) 1. Reports PICA 26/13 K. & J. Sukhra 1101 Gossamer Drive Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, May 22, 2013 7:00pm

Committee of Adjustment

Agenda

Meeting Number: 7 Date: Wednesday, June 12, 2013

(I) Adoption of Agenda

(II) Adoption of Minutes from May 22, 2013

(Ill) Reports

1. (Deferred from May 1, 2013 meeting) PICA 25113 H. & Z. Tieze 1877 Pine Grove Avenue

2. (Deferred from May 22, 2013 meeting) PICA 26113 J. & K. Sukhra 1101 Gossamer Drive

3. (Deferred from May 22, 2013 meeting) PICA 27113 G. Modica 481 Oakwood Drive

4. (Deferred from May 22, 2013 meeting) PICA 29113 G. & J. Timleck 691 Foxwood Trail

5. PICA 30113 1613275 Ontario Inc. 684 Victory Drive

6. PICA 31113 J. CaiataiA. Caiata 468 Rosebank Road

7. PICA 32113 G. & D. Robar 403 Finch Avenue

Committee of Adjustment Agenda

Wednesday, June 12, 2013 7:00pm

Main Committee Room

Page Number

1-9

10-15

16-21

22-28

29-33

34-40

41-45

46-52

Accessible •--

PICKE~G

For information related to accessibility requirements please contact Lesley Dunne T. 905.420.4660, extension 2024 TTY 905.420.1739 Email [email protected]

Page Number

8. PICA 33113 53-57 Z. lnshanally 1592 Harrowsmith Court

9. PICA 34113 58-62 Whitevale Golf Club 2985 Golf Club Road

10. PICA 35113 63-66 S. Clayton 521 Mcleod Crescent

11. PICA 36113 67-73 Bancan Homes (S. Hossain) 606 Rosebank Road

(IV) Adjournment

Accessible •--

PICKE~G

For information related to accessibility requirements please contact Lesley Dunne T. 905.420.4660, extension 2024 TTY 905.420.1739 Email [email protected]

Pending Adoption

Present:

Tom Copeland David Johnson - Chair Bill Utton

Also Present:

Mila Yeung, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer Lesley Dunne, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer

Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes 01

Wednesday, May 22, 2013 7:00pm

Main Committee Room

Melissa Markham, Principal Planner, Development Review

Absent:

Eric Newton Shirley Van Steen -Vice-Chair

(I) Adoption of Agenda

Moved by Bill Utton Seconded by Tom Copeland

That the agenda for the Wednesday, May 22, 2013 meeting be adopted.

(II) Adoption of Minutes

Moved by Tom Copeland Seconded by Bill Utton

Carried Unanimously

That the minutes of the 5th meeting of the Committee of Adjustment held Wednesday, May 1, 2013 be adopted.

Carried Unanimously

1

02

(II I)

1.

Reports

PICA 26/13 K. & J. Sukhra 1101 Gossamer Drive

Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes


Main Committee Room

The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 4113/92 to permit a minimum rear yard depth of 3.4 metres to a roof extension within the rear yard, a maximum lot coverage of 39 percent to accommodate the existing roof extension in the rear yard, and an 8 square metre shed in the front yard with a minimum front yard depth and flankage side yard width of 0.6 metres, respectively; whereas the by-law requires a minimum rear yard depth of 7.5 metres, a maximum lot coverage of 38 percent and that all accessory buildings detached from the dwelling shall be erected in the rear yard.

The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit for an existing roof extension within the rear yard and zoning compliance for an existing shed.

M. Yeung, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the City of Pickering City Development Department recommending approval for the variance related to the rear yard depth and lot coverage for the existing roof extension in the rear yard, subject to conditions and recommended refusal for an 8 square metre shed within the front yard and a flankage side yard width of 0.6 metres. The City Development Department recommends that the application be amended to allow an 8 square metre shed be located in the flankage side yard with a minimum setback of 12.0 metres from the front lot line and a flankage side yard width of 0.6 metres, subject to conditions.

Written comments were also received from the City's Development Control Manager and Chief Building Official both expressing no concerns.

Pasha Afshar, agent, and K. & J. Sukhra, owners, were present to represent the application. Sally Gajraj of 1106 Gossamer Drive was present in favour of the application. Luigi & Nancy Morra of 1100 Pine Glen Drive and Peter Bonfiglio of 1122 Pine Glen Drive were present in objection to the application.

Pasha Afshar explained there is an existing roof extension within the rear yard and it will be removed and the proposed roof extension will be approximately two feet smaller than the existing. In response to questions from a Committee Member, Pasha Afsher indicated the existing posts will be removed and replaced with metal posts and the roof extension is covering a concrete pad.

2



Main Committee Room

Sally Gajraj indicated the subject property is well maintained and does not have a problem with the shed being located in the front yard.

Luigi Morra expressed concerns with drainage onto his property and the location of the shed in the front yard.

Peter Bonfiglio expressed concerns with drainage affecting surrounding properties and building without a permit.

In response to questions from a Committee Member, M. Yeung, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer explained the building permit process which assesses drainage to ensure it is self contained on the property and is not aware of any other complaints reported regarding drainage.


That application PICA 26113 by K. & J. Sukhra, be Deferred until the next meeting in order to give the Committee Members an opportunity to visit the site.

2. PICA 27113 G. Modica 481 Oakwood Drive

Carried Unanimously

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

• to permit a minimum south side yard width of 0.9 metres to a proposed attached garage; whereas the by-law requires a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres

• to permit a minimum flankage side yard width of 1.9 metres to a proposed covered entrance and to recognize a flankage side yard width of 1.3 metres to an existing two-storey detached dwelling; whereas the by-law requires a minimum flankage side yard width of 4.5 metres

• to recognize a south side yard width of 0.7 metres to an existing two storey detached dwelling and to an existing uncovered rear deck; whereas the by-law requires a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres

3

r~ r~( ·~ ... ~...~



Main Committee Room

• to recognize a rear yard depth of 0.7 metres and a flankage side yard width of 0. 7 metres to an existing shed on a corner lot; whereas the by-law requires a minimum rear yard depth of 3.0 metres and a minimum flankage side yard width of 4.5 metres for all accessory buildings located on a corner lot

The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit to construct a covered entrance within the side yard and an attached garage within the front yard, as well as to obtain zoning compliance for the existing dwelling, uncovered rear deck and shed.

M. Yeung, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the City of Pickering City Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Written comments were received from the City's Development Control Manager and Chief Building Official both expressing no concerns. Written comments were also received from Carolyn & Paul Sweenie of 473A Oakwood Drive in objection to the application.

Vince Modica, agent, Guiseppe Modica, owner, were present to represent the application. Sal Modica was present in favour of the application. Robert & Sharon Van Shaik of 478 Oakwood Drive, Thomas Martin & Michelle Mitchell of 477 Oakwood Drive, Doreen Brown of 475 Oakwood Drive, Brendan Donnelly & Vera lsachenko of 479 Oakwood Drive and Dan Drummond of 482 Oakwood Drive were present in objection to the application.

Correspondence received from Carolyn & Paul Sweenie expressed concerns that the subject property is a corner lot and the visual obstruction the proposed garage will have for vehicles approaching the stop sign at Stag horn Road and Oakwood Drive, safety of pedestrians due to potential traffic hazard and the siting of the garage in front of the existing home is unappealing. Carolyn & Paul Sweenie questioned if the proposal is for an attached or detached garage, the visual details in comparison to the surrounding neighbouthood, and will the face of the garage be in line with or extend further than the existing home to the south.

In response to questions from concerned neighbours Vince Modica explained the house has no garage, there are several trees on the property that have to be preserved and the proposed garage is not able to be located in the rear yard because there is not enough space. Vince Modica also indicated the dwelling is registered as a 2-unit dwelling with the City.

Sal Modica explained the proposed garage will add value and blend in with the home and surrounding neighbourhood. Sal Modica also indicated the zoning issues are a result of the new street Stag horn Road.

4



Main Committee Room

Robert & Sharon Van Shaik expressed concerns the proposed attached garage will negatively impact the surrounding area, decrease property values and feels the garage can be located in the rear yard off of Staghorn Road.

Thomas Martin & Michelle Mitchell expressed concerns with the location of the proposed garage and feels it could be located in the rear yard out of the way.

Doreen Brown expressed the same concerns as her surrounding neighbours with the location of the proposed garage and feels it could be located in the rear yard out of the way.

Brendan Donnelly & Vera lsachenko expressed concerns the height of the proposed garage that it may turn into living space and feels a single car garage would be better suited for the subject property. A photo was submitted for the Committee to review and questioned where the proposed garage is going to be located and how many metres it will project outwards from the front main wall of the house.

Dan Drummond indicated there have been lots of changes in the neighbourhood with large homes being built and he feels the neighbourhood is becoming over developed. Dan Drummond expressed concerns with the proposed garage having a negative visual impact and the affect it will have on the surrounding neighbourhood.


That application PICA 27113 by G. Modica, be Deferred until the next meeting in order to give the Committee Members an opportunity to visit the site.

3. PICA 28113 H. & Z. Tieze 1877 Pine Grove Avenue

Carried Unanimously

The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended to permit an east side yard width of 1.0 metre to an existing detached dwelling and an east side yard width of 0.8 metres to an existing deck in the rear yard, whereas the by-law requires a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres.

5

lao). _,,.,

c:: J



Main Committee Room

The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain zoning compliance for a proposed land severance administered by the Region of Durham to create a new residential lot on the east side of the existing dwelling.

M. Yeung, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the City of Pickering City Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions.

Written comments were received from the City's Development Control Manager indicating the applicant be advised that through the severance application the City will require a preliminary grading plan that will address the placement of a common drainage swale to redirect roof drainage that presently drains onto the future severance lands.

Written comments were received from the City's Chief Building Official indicating without any information on the dwelling, the Building Department cannot assess whether or not there is any spatial separation concerns.

Written comments were also received from the Region of Durham Health Department indicating no objections, however the lots will require either connection to municipal services or compliance with the regional lot sizing policy.

Jakub Tieze, agent, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the applicatfon.


That application PICA 28/13 by H. & Z. Tieze, be Approved on the grounds that the proposed east side yard width of 1.0 metre to an existing detached dwelling and an east side yard width of 0.8 metres to an existing rear deck are minor in nature that are 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 existing building and rear deck on the proposed retained parcel, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans.

6



Main Committee Room

2. That the applicant demonstrates, via calculations, that the location of the proposed new property/severance line meets the spatial separation requirements of the Ontario Building Code to the satisfaction of the Chief Building Official prior to receiving final clearance for a future land severance.

3. That the applicant obtains final clearance for a future land severance by November 30, 2014, or this decision shall become null and void.

4. PICA 29/13 G. & J. Timleck 691 Foxwood Trail

Carried Unanimously

The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 1543/82 to permit a 0.2 metre south side yard width to an existing accessory structure (pergola attached to a deck) not part of the main building, whereas the by-law requires a minimum side yard width of 1.0 metre for all accessory structures not part of the main building.

The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit for an existing accessory structure (pergola attached to a deck) associated with an above ground pool.

M. Yeung, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the City of Pickering City Development Department recommending refusal. Written comments were also received from the City's Development Control Manager and Chief Building Official both expressing no concerns.

James Timleck, owner, Jim Drakopoulos, agent, were present to represent the application. Douglas Kutz of 693 Foxwood Trail was present in favour of the application.

James Timleck indicated this minor variance application is only in front of the committee because of a complaint that was filed on the height of the existing privacy fence and accessory. structure (pergola and deck) and not on the side yard width. He further indicated that since the height of the privacy fence and deck is below City requirements and there are no complaints regarding the side yard width, the Committee should approve the application. James Timleck explained if the deck was relocated or reduced in width size, it will not change the visual impact on surrounding neighbours but rather there would be a safety concern with the lack of space on the deck for people to pass.

7

03



Main Committee Room

In response to questions from Committee Members, James Timleck advised that the above ground pool was installed in 2011 and the deck was built in the spring of 2012. In addition, the Committee Member questioned James Timleck for not obtaining a building permit and whether the existing accessory structure and deck will comply with the Ontario Building Code. James Timleck responded that he did not know he needed a building permit as the structure is soundly built, but he anticipates that he would have no issues in obtaining a building permit to comply with the Ontario Building Code.

Jim Drakopoulos explained if the structure was reduced in size there will be a safety issue and if it is relocated there will be no change on the visual impact on the surrounding neigbourhood. The Committee Members also questioned the agent for building without a building permit. Jim Drakopoulos indicated he was not employed for the construction of the accessory structure.

Douglas Kutz indicated moving or making the structure smaller will provide no change and if the structure was to be made smaller, there will be a safety concern for the users walking on the deck. Douglas Kutz explained the existing construction does not impact property values.


That application PICA 29/13 by G. & J. Timleck, be Deferred until the next meeting in order to give the Committee Members an opportunity to visit the site.

Carried Unanimously

8



Main Committee Room

(IV) Adjournment

Date

Chair


That the 6th meeting of the 2013 Committee of Adjustment be adjourned at 8:13 pm and the next meeting of the Committee of Adjustment be held on Wednesday, June 12, 2013.

Carried Unanimously

Assistant Secretary-Treasurer

9

n ') ·:·~·' J

From:

Subject:

Application

Nilesh Surti, MCIP, RPP

Report to Committee of Adjustment

Application Number: PICA 25113 Meeting Date: June 12, 2013

(Deferred from May 1, 2013 meeting)

Manager, Development Review & Urban Design

Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 25113 J. & J. Gray 699 Front Road

The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended to permit a front yard depth of 0.3 metres to a second storey addition above the existing dwelling and a front yard depth of 5.2 metres to a proposed two-storey addition supporting a covered vehicular entrance, whereas the by-law requires a minimum front yard depth of 7.5 metres.

The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit for a proposed addition to the existing dwelling.

Recommendation

The City Development Department considers the minimum front yard depth of 0.3 metres to a second storey addition above the existing dwelling and a front yard depth of 5.2 metres to a proposed two-storey addition to be minor in nature that are 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 the proposed second storey addition above the existing dwelling and to the proposed two-storey south addition, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans.

2. That the applicant further consults with City Development Staff and submits revised building elevations that compliments and respects the character of the existing building, to the satisfaction of the Director, City Development, or this decision shall become null and void.

3. That the applicant obtains a building permit for the proposed construction by June 12, 2015, or this decision shall become null and void.

Report PICA 25/13 June 12, 2013 (Deferred from May 1, 2013 meeting)

Page 2

Comment

Official Plan and Zoning By-law

Pickering Official Plan- "Urban Residential- Low Density Area" within the Bay Ridges Neighbourhood

Zoning By-law 2511- "R4"- Fourth Density Residential Zone

Background

On November 7, 1967, the City of Pickering expropriated approximately 4.0 metres of land across the property's frontage for road widening purposes. As a result, the expropriation caused the existing front porch to encroach within the City's road allowance. In order to recognize the porch encroachment, a formal agreement between the City and the owner was executed.

The existing dwelling is a one storey frame structure and is estimated to have been built in the 1870's. It is known as the Mathew O'Brien House. The property is identified in the City of Pickering Inventory of Heritage Properties prepared by Unterman McPhail Associates, February 2002, but is not listed on the City of Pickering Municipal Heritage Register of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest or is it designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act, therefore consultation with the Heritage Committee is not required.

On May 1, 2013, the Committee of Adjustment deferred the minor variance application as per the request of City Staff. Staff requested to defer the application in order to allow the Pickering Heritage Advisory Committee to review and comment on the applicant's proposal as a courtesy, given the age of the structure and its potential to have heritage value.

On May 23, 2013, the applicant and owner presented their proposal at the Pickering Heritage Advisory Committee meeting. The Committee commented a week following the meeting in order to allow its members to visit the property. The Pickering Heritage Advisory Committee advised that City Development Staff should consider a reduction to the proposed scale and massing of the applicant's proposal in order to preserve the character of the existing building.

Appropriateness of the Application

Front Yard Depth Variances

• the intent of this provision is to provide an adequate separation between the building and the street activity in the front yard, and to provide an adequate landscaped area and parking space in front of the property

• the front yard depth variances are to review the appropriateness of a second storey addition and two-storey south extension to an existing detached dwelling

Report PICA 25/13 June 12, 2013 (Deferred from May 1, 2013 meeting)

Page 3

• the location of the dwelling is a pre-existing condition • the owner intends on constructing above the majority of the existing footprint

while maintaining the front porch and front fagade • the location of the proposed covered vehicular entrance will align itself with the

existing side entry • the owner advised that the vehicular entrance in front of the covered entrance is

not intended to accommodate long-term vehicle parking since a designated parking area exists in the rear yard

• the applicant is encouraged to design the addition in a style that is in keeping with the architecture of the building and is complementary to the existing Ontario cottage style structure

• provided that the applicant can submit building elevations to the satisfaction of the City Development Department addressing matters such as but not limited to scale, massing, glazing, building materials and roof design which complements the existing building, the intent of the zoning by-law will be maintained

Date of report: June 6, 2013

Comments prepared by:

A"~'L ~~~~ ( ~shle e · rwood, Nilesh urti, MCIP, RPP

annerll Manager, Development Review & Urban Design

AY:NS:Id J:\Documents\Development\D-3700\2013\PCA 25-13\Report\PCA 25-13 Deferred.doc

Enclosures

FRENCH 'AN'S

BAY

City of Pickering

ITT lJlL

r--

r---r--r---~

--

'----

HOLY REDEEMER SEPARATE SCHOOL

City Development Department

PROPERlY DESCRIPTION 699 Front Road(Pian M90, Pt. Lot 55, 40R-24569, Part 3)

OWNER J. & J. Gray DATE Apr. 9, 2013 DRAWN BY JB

FILE No. P/CA 25/13 SCALE 1 :5,000 CHECKED BY MY

PN-3

13

14

To permit a front yard depth of 0.3 metres to a proposed second storey addition above the existing dwelling

Information Compiled from Applicant's Submitted Plan

PICA 25/13 J. & J. Gray

FRONT ROAD

To permit a front yard depth of 5.2 metres to a proposed two storey addition

This map was produced by the City of Pickering City Development Department. Planning Information Services Mapping and Design, April 16, 2013.

15 Information Compiled from Applicant's.

FRONT(EAST) ELEVATION

Submitted Plan PICA 25/13

J. & J. Gray

SIDE(SOUTH) ELEVATION

REAR(WEST) ELEVATION

SIDE(NORTH) ELEVATION

This map was produced by the City of Pickering City Development Department, Plann1ng lnformat1on Serv1ces Mapping and Design, April 16, 2013.

From:

Subject:

Application




(Deferred from May 22, 2013 meeting)


Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 26113 -Amended K. & J. Sukhra 1101 Gossamer Drive

The applicant requests relief from the provisions of Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 4113192:

• to permit a minimum rear yard depth of 3.4 metres to an existing roof extension within the rear yard; whereas the zoning by-law requires a minimum rear yard depth of 7.5 metres

• to permit a maximum lot coverage of 39 percent to accommodate the existing roof extension in the rear yard; whereas the zoning by-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 38 percent

• to permit an accessory structure to be erected in the flankage side yard; whereas the by-law requires that all accessory buildings detached from the dwelling shall be erected in the rear yard (Amended variance}

• to permit a minimum flankage side yard setback of 0.6 metres to a detached accessory building; whereas the by-law requires a minimum setback of 4.5 metres to an accessory building detached from the main building on a corner lot (Amended variance}

The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit for an existing roof extension within the rear yard and zoning compliance for an existing shed in the flankage side yard.

Recommendations

The City Development Department considers the minimum rear yard depth of 3.4 metres to a roof extension within the rear yard; a maximum lot coverage of 39 percent to accommodate the roof extension within the rear yard; and an accessory structure to be erected in the flankage side yard with a minimum flankage side yard setback of 0.6 metres, to be minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development of the lands, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law,

Report PICA 26/13 -Amended (Deferred from May 22, 2013 meeting)

June 12, 2013

and therefore recommends Approval of the proposed variances, subject to the following conditions:

Page 2

1. That these variances apply only to the roof extension, not to be enclosed with walls, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans.

2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by June 12, 2015, or this decision shall become null and void.

Comment


Pickering Official Plan - Urban Residential Area - Low Density Area within the Liverpool Neighbourhood

Zoning By-law 3036 as amended by By-law 4113/92 - "S3-3"


Rear Yard Depth and Lot Coverage Variances

• the intent of the minimum rear yard depth and maximum lot coverage is to ensure that an appropriate amount of useable amenity space is provided and left uncovered by buildings on a lot

• the applicant has requested an increase in the maximum lot coverage from 38 percent to 39 percent and a reduction the minimum rear yard depth from 7.5 metres to 3.4 metres to facilitate the construction of a roof extension within the rear yard and to recognize the existing accessory structures on the property

• since the requested variances are related to a roof extension, with no walls, an appropriate amount of amenity area is being maintained within the rear yard

• there appears to be no acjverse impact on surrounding properties • the requested variance is minor in nature and maintains the intent of the zoning

by-law

Accessory Structure in the Flankage Side Yard Variance

• the intent of the requirement for accessory structures to be located in the rear yard is to maintain a visually attractive front yard and streetscape, maintain adequate buffer space between buildings on a property and street activity, and avoid adverse impact on the streetscape

• the applicant has submitted amended plans demonstrating the location of the shed within the flankage side yard, and not the front yard as previously submitted

• the shed is located within the flankage side yard and does not demonstrate any adverse impact on the streetscape as it is screened by existing fencing and landscaping from Dixie Road and minimizes the visual impact along Gossamer Drive

17

18

Report PICA 26/13 - Amended (Deferred from May 22, 2013 meeting)

June 12, 2013

Page 3

• the requested variance is minor in nature and maintains the intent of the zoning by-law



IJf( rw{fk'J)a~A Melissa Markham, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner- Development Review

MM:NS:Id J:\Documents\Development\D-3700\2013\PCA 26--13\pca 26-13 * Amended.docx

Enclosures

Nilesh Surti, MCIP, RPP Manager, Development Review & Urban Design

~----------~T/~,----------------~o / ' <(

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

CHERRYWOOD TRANSFORMER

STATION

HYDRo

/'

/' 0 /' ~

\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \

uJ x 0

CoRRtDop w _j (L <(

L2i

13


PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 1101 Gossamer Drive (lt>t 55, Plan 40M-1811)

DRAWN BY JB 1' FILE No. P /CA 26/13

OWNER K. & J. Sukhra DATE Apr. 27,2013

SCALE 1 :5,000 CHECKED BY MY

PN-12

To permit an accessory structure in the flankage side yard

To permit a minimum flankage side yard setback of 0.6 metres to a detached accessory building

To permit a maximum lot coverage of 39 %

~I C'i

"''

I

I

L_

I

I

i

!I


PICA 26/13 K. & J. Sukhra

GOSSAMER OR\VE E tO 6 )----- --- r-1

I

EXISTING SHED

-- ~-

' 16.2m

en .... 3

l

\

I en. ~ 3

l I I

;__,.__ 5.5m .I --

EXtSTINCi POOL

19.1m

EXISTING 2 STOREY DWELLING ~

I.

SHED

I I I

i I

I

3

3.0m

---·-··-'---· _.L.J.. l_j 1\)

0 3

To permit a minimum rear yard depth of 3.4 metres

This map was produced by the City of Pickering City Development Department, Planning Information Services Mapping and Design, May 3, 2013.

...,__~

:=:=~~~~~?S


PICA 26/13 K. & J. Sukhra

·----·--·---~----------- ------------------- _ _.. ___ ... -- ~- -·----- --------- ....... --~ -- ..... ___ ___

. WEST ELEVATION - - - -;;;.,-;::-;;- - --EAST ELEVATION ~-;;,-;::1~:----

21

---------------~

c=::~::;::-===--=--=


From:

Subject:

Application



Application Number: PICA 27113 Meeting Date: May 22, 2013


Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 27113 G. Modica 481 Oakwood Drive

The applicant requests relief from the following provisions .of Zoning By-law 2511, as amended:

• to permit a minimum south side yard width of 0.9 metres to a proposed attached garage; whereas the by-law requires a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres

• to permit a minimum flankage side yard width of 1.9 metres to a proposed covered entrance and to recognize a flankage side yard width of 1 .3 metres to an existing two-storey detached dwelling; whereas the by-law requires a minimum flankage side yard width of 4.5 metres

• to recognize a south side yard width of 0. 7 metres to an existing two storey detached dwelling and to an existing uncovered rear deck; whereas the by-law requires a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres

• to recognize a rear yard depth of 0. 7 metres and a flankage side yard width of 0.7 metres to an existing shed on a corner lot; whereas the by-law requires a minimum rear yard depth of 3.0 metres and a minimum flankage side yard width of 4.5 metres for all accessory buildings located on a corner lot

The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit to construct a covered entrance within the side yard and an attached garage within the front yard, as well as to obtain zoning compliance for the existing dwelling, uncovered rear deck and shed.

Recommendation

The City Development Department considers the minimum south side yard width of 0.9 metres to a proposed attached garage; the minimum. flankage side yard width of 1.9 metres to a proposed covered entrance; the flankage side yard with of 1.3 metres to

, the existing two-storey detached dwelling; the south side yard widths of 0.7 metres to the existing two-storey dwelling and uncovered rear deck; and the rear yard depth and side yard width of 0.7 metres to an existing shed on a corner lot to be minor in nature that are 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:

Report PICA 27/13 May 22, 2013

·page 2

1. That these variances apply only to the proposed attached garage and attached side covered entrance as well as to the existing dwelling and shed, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans.

2. That the applicant obtains a building permit for the proposed construction by May 22, 2015, or this decision affecting the proposed detached garage and proposed covered entrance shall become null and void.

Comment


Pickering Official Plan-- Urban Residential- Low Density Area within the Rosebank Neighbourhood


Background

Upon review of the application, the City of Pickering Building Services Section considers the proposed garage as a contiguous connection to the dwelling by means of a roof extension between the proposed garage and the existing dwelling. As a result, the applicant's designer has amended the proposed site plan to illustrate this change.

The City's Planning & Design Section is satisfied that this amendment is in accordance with the spirit and intent of the applicant's requested variances and has revised the requested variances pertaining to the proposed garage as follows:

Previous Relief Applied For Revised Requested Relief Applied For

to permit a 52 square metre detached garage located in the front yard with a minimum front yard depth of 9.0 metres, a minimum south side yard to permit a minimum south width of 0.9 metres; whereas the by-law requires all side yard width of 0.9 metres accessory structures detached from the dwelling be to a proposed attached erected in the rear yard garage; whereas the by-law

to permit a maximum height of 3.8 metres for a requires a minimum side yard

proposed 52 square metre detached garage; width of 1.5 metres

whereas the by-law permits a maximum height of 3.5 metres for all accessory buildings

Since Staff considers the proposed attached garage as a contiguous connection to the dwelling, the same zoning requirements (such as building setbacks and height) which currently apply to the dwelling will also apply to the attached garage.

Report PICA 27113 May22, 2013

Page 3

On March 24, 1984, the City of Pickering Committee of Adjustment approved a Minor Variance Application (PICA 01184) to permit a south side yard width of 0.79 metres and a flankage side yard width of 1.58 metres to the existing dwelling. As part of this application, the applicant submitted a Surveyor's Certificate which illustrated a slight reduction to the Committee's approved flankage side yard and south side yard variances affecting the existing footprint of the dwelling. City records indicate that no new alterations to the original dwelling have been made since the Committee's decision in 1984. As a result, the City Development Department has requested that the applicant recognize the flankage side yard and south side yard setbacks as illustrated on the applicant's submitted Surveyor's Certificate.


Side Yard Width Variance to the Proposed Attached Garage

• the intent of a side yard width is to provide an appropriate separation distance between structures on abutting properties in order to maintain a pedestrian access, and to accommodate grading, drainage and residential services such as air conditioning units and utility metres

• the existing driveway entrance is off of Oakwood Drive • the proposed facade for the garage addition will feature garage doors and

windows along Oakwood Drive and Staghorn Road providing a visual interest to the streetscape

• an adequate separation distance between the garage and the property line to accommodate pedestrian access, grading and drainage will be maintained

• the proposed southern wall on the proposed attached garage will be parallel with the existing dwelling


Flankage Side Yard Width Variance to the Dwelling and Proposed Covered Entrance

• the intent of this provision is to provide an adequate separation distance between buildings and street activity within the flankage side yard, as well as provide an adequate landscaped area

• the flankage side yard width of 1.3 metres to the existing building is an existing condition

• the proposed flankage side yard width of 1.9 metres to a proposed covered entrance has no adverse impact on the streetscape

• the requested variances are minor in nature and maintains the intent of the zoning by-law

Side Yard Width Variance to the Dwelling and Uncovered Deck

• the 0. 7 metre south side yard width to the existing dwelling and uncovered deck are existing conditions

Report PICA 27/13 May 22, 2013 2 5

Page4

• the dwelling's side yard width updates the side yard width previously approved through Minor Variance Application PICA 01/84

• the requested side yard width of 0. 7 metre·s to the proposed dwelling and uncovered deck currently accommodates a pedestrian access, grading, drainage and residential utility services

• the requested variances are minor in nature and maintain the intent of the zoning by-law

Flankage Side Yard Width and Rear Yard Depth Variance to Accessory Structures on a Corner Lot

• the intent of this provision is to provide an adequate separation distance between accessory buildings and street activity in the flankage side yard, provide an adequate separation distance between accessory buildings and the adjacent dwelling on the flanking street, and to regulate the location of accessory structures to adjacent dwellings on the flanking street

• the owner constructed the shed in 2012 • the shed occupies a floor area of approximately 1 0 square metres • the existing shed does not appear to significantly obstruct the streetview of

abutting property owners • the existing shed provides adequate maintenance accesses around the structure • the existing eaves/overhangs from the existing shed do not encroach onto

adjacent properties or onto the municipal right-of-way • the City is satisfied that roof drainage will be contained on the subject property • the applicant intends on erecting a fence to partially screen the shed from

Staghorn Road • the requested variances are minor in nature and maintains the intent of the

zoning by-law

Date of report: May 16, 2013


Nilesh Surti, MCIP, RPP Manager, Development Review & Urban Design

AY:NS:Id J:\Documents\Development\D-3700\Reports\2013\pca27-13.doc

Enclosures

26 0

t-- u 1----t----l

E~ v =2 ~~~IT-1-------11--

/ >= ~ t-- couRT\ w 1-----+---1~ f----f----1 I H ~ ~ - ~ I I I I E I ~ ~ E 1-----+---l .,_----,--_,

~ ~ : DRIVE 5 :5 1----t----l

"" ~ ~ I I r- 1----+---lo 1----t---l~ 1-----t----l "'\----1----J I t---t----18 1----t---1 "'------L-,-----1 r------1'---l (j) 1-----t------l J----1!------l~ 1---t--1

" 1------+----l «: t----+-----1 () ~ \..._'\--'------r-1---l - - 1----+--12 = ~ 1

r- ~ r--- /-- r---r--T-1 +-H---1

'iiq,G> ~=====~==~ ~ ~==::::=~====j cn=--,--r-"f' j"---r -t-----+---lo r---+---1 o 1 MAITLAND DRivE

-2

1-----1-----1 I I I ~

r--

I

HUL

(

City of Pickering City Development Department

PROPERlY DESCRIPTION 481 Oakwood Drive(Pian 350, Pt. Lot 110, 40R-24967, Part 1)

OWNER G. Modica

FILE No. P /CA 27/13 o o .;:,.ources:

~- Teronet Enterprisl!:s Inc. and its suppliers. AU ri9hts Reser"Ved. Not o plan of survey. r§ 2012 MPAC and its suppliers. All rr.;i-hts Reserved. Not o plan of Survey.

DATE Apr. 29, 2013

SCALE 1 :5,000

DRAWNBY JB

CHECKED BY MY

PN-1


6-To recognize· a 0.7 metre I r

flankage side yard width to J

an existing shed on a j corner lot __. 0.7m ~~~~------------~ I

To permit a flankage side yard width of 1. 9 metres to a covered entrance

0 <(

E: co c:N "<t I

0 0::: z 0::: 0 I ~

~I I

~ CJ)

To recognize a 1.3 metre flankage side yard width t an existing dwelling

PICA 27/13 G. Modica

E 1'-

···- _o~·- 15.2m -y- To recognize a 0. 7 metre - - -·- -· -· ~

SHED

EXISTING DECK

0.7m-+-

EXISTING 2STOREY DWELLING

PROPOSED ROOF

EXTENSION

E 0 oi

i

I

rear yard depth to an existing shed on a corner lot

To recognize a 0.7 metre south side yard width to an existing uncovered deck

I

~0.7m

j

~0.9m

To recognize a 0.7 metre south side yard width to an existing dwelling

To permit a south side yard of 0.9 metres to a proposed garage

u OAKWOOD DRIVE


28

l:::;::;r:~===;:;;:;:tf· .. . - -. .

--_··;[0~---.~···

•;,_ .· .. '-:·

··.: . -;· :·.

'· '

.·: :··I · ..•. · . . .1.....,-.~-.- .·

· ..... ·.·

. '•;

··.


PICA 27/13 G. Modica

WEST ELEVATION

[JJ .... ~--... ·. .

NORTH ELEVATION

·'·:-.··.; ......

· .. · .. ·· •', •··.

This map was produced by the City of Pickering City Development8ep~rt~0~ni: Planning Information Services Mapping and Des1gn, ay ,

From: Nilesh Surti, MCIP, RPP

Report to 23 Committee of Adjustment

Application Number: PICA 29/13 Meeting Date: May 22, 2013


Subject: . Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 29/13 G. & J. Timleck 691 Foxwood Trail

Application

The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 1543/82 to permit a 0.2 metre south side yard width to an existing accessory structure. (pergola attached to a deck) not part of the main building, whereas the by-law requires a minimum side yard width of 1.0 metre for all accessory structures not part of the main building.

The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit for an existing accessory structure (pergola attached to a deck) associated with an above ground pool.

Recommendation

The City Development Department considers the 0.2 metre south side yard width to an existing accessory structure (pergola attached to a deck) not part of the main building is not considered to be minor in nature; not desirable for the appropriate development of the land, building or structure; and not in keepillg with the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law, and therefore recommends Refusal of the proposed variance.

Comment


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

Zoning By-law 3036 as amended by By-law 1543/82- "S-SD-SA"

Report PICA 29/13 May 22, 2013

Page 2


Accessory Structure Setback Variance

• the intent of the zoning by-law in requiring accessory structures to provide a minimum 1.0 metre setback from lot lines is to ensure that adequate space is available for maintenance, to ensure that the eaves/overhangs do not encroach on the adjacent properties, ensure roof drainage stays on the subject property, and to minimize the visual impact that their location may have on adjacent properties

• the applicant has installed an above ground pool and constructed a 1.0 metre high detached deck around the pool. In addition, the applicant has erected a 2.5 metre high pergola on top of the deck and a fence along the south side of the deck; these works have been constructed without obtaining a building permit

• the existing detached deck has a south side yard setback of 0.2 metres and a rear yard setback of 1.0 metres

• further reducing the south side yard setback would increase the visual impact on the adjoining properties and would also result in potential increase in the activities on the deck thus having greater negative impacts on the privacy of adjoining properties

• this may also establish an undesirable precedent for property owners to construct decks beyond the by-law requirements·

• staff are of the opinion that the deck, pergola and fence would create an adverse impact on to the abutting neighbours and therefore staff are of the opinion that the requested variance is not minor in nature, not desirable and appropriate for the development of the land and does not meet the general intent of Zoning By-law

• it should be noted that the applicant has submitted letters from 3 property owners in the neighbourhood indicating that they have no issue or objection to the proposed variance

Date of report: May 16, 2013


~~ Nile h Surti, MCIP, RPP Planner II Manager, Development Review & Urban Design

MY:NS:Id J:\Documents\Development\D-3700\Reports\2013\pca29-13.doc

Enclosures

-

}

AMBERLEA

PARK

L5 C::Tit-...1--,l,l.,.--,---l ci

w

~..L....I.....L..J....J....J.....!...-L..l...l~ SUBJECT PROPERTY


PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 691 Foxwood Traii(Pian 40M-1254, Pt. Block 9, 40R-7440, Part 16)

OWNER G. & J. Timleck DATE Apr. 29,2013 DRAWN BY JB

FILE No. P/CA 29/13 0 0 OUr'"Ce:s: Teronet Enterprises Inc:. and its suppliers. All rights Reserved. Not a pion of survey. 2012 MPAC and its suppliers. All ri hts Reserved. Not o pion of Survey.


PN-10

32

~ 1-0 0 0

~ 0 LL.

E '<t ai


PICA 29/13 G. & J. Timleck

EXISTING DWELLING

POOL

.-

37.8m

EXISTING PERGOLA

To permit a side yard width of 0.2 metres

. _, E '<t ai


Information Compiled from Applicant's Submitted Plan - PICA 29/13

G. & J. Timleck

NORTH ELEVATION

WEST ELEVATION

\

;=;:::

m ::1

33

/ lf-

= E

1.0 ('I')

~ 0

I. 1 r


From:

Subject:

Application





Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 30113 1613275 Ontario Inc. 684 Victory Drive

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

• to permit a minimum front yard depth of 6.0 metres; whereas the by-law requires a minimum front yard depth of 7.5 metres

• to permit a minimum south side yard width of 0.6 metres to a proposed garage attached to the detached dwelling; whereas the by-law requires a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres

• to permit a maximum lot coverage of 35 percent; whereas the by-law requires a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent

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 depth of 6.0 metres; the minimum south side yard width of 0.6 metres to a proposed garage attached to the detached dwelling; and the maximum lot coverage of 35 percent to be minor in nature that are 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 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 relocates the existing utility pole at the owner's expense to the satisfaction of the City of Pickering.

Report PICA 30/13 June 12, 2013

Page 2

3. That the applicant removes the existing driveway located on the north side of the property, at the owner's expense to the satisfaction of the City of Pickering.

4. That the applicant submits a grading plan as part of the building permit review process to the satisfaction of the City of Pickering.


Comment


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

Zoning By-law 2511 - "R4"- Fourth Density Residential Zone


Front Yard Depth Variance

• the intent of this provision is to provide an adequate separation between the building and the street activity in the front yard, and to provide an adequate landscaped area and parking space in front of the property

• the proposed front yard depth of 6.0 metres will provide a sufficient separation distance between the dwelling and Victory Drive

• an adequate driveway entrance supporting a parking area between the garage and street will be maintained

• the proposed attached garage will not obstruct the streetview of abutting property owners


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 a pedestrian access, and to accommodate grading, drainage and residential services such as air conditioning units and utility metres

• the requested south side yard width of 0.6 metres to the proposed attached garage will provide an adequate separation distance between the dwelling and the south property line

• the proposed side yard setbacks will provide sufficient pedestrian accesses into the rear yard

33

31J


Page 3

• the proposed dwelling (excluding the attached garage) will maintain a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres

• the proposed variance to reduce the side yard width from 1.5 metres to 0.6 metres to the proposed attached garage will not adversely impact adjoining properties

• provided that the rear yard drainage is not directed onto neighbouring properties and that a new drainage swale is constructed to carry the rear yard drainage to the front of the property, the requested variance is minor in nature and maintains the intent of the zoning by-law

Lot Coverage Variance

• the intent of the maximum building lot coverage requirement is to maintain an appropriate amount of yard space (amenity area) uncovered by buildings on a lot and to regulate the scale and size of the building

• the proposed dwelling will maintain an appropriate amount of yard space in the front and rear yards


Input From Other Sources

Manager, Development Control • the proposed 0.6 metre side yard setback will


)

Niles Su i, MCIP, RPP

require the relocation of the existing utility pole (at the owner's expense) servicing both the subject property and the property to the south

• rear yard drainage must not be directed onto neighbouring properties

• the existing swale on the south side of the lot will be impacted by the 0.6 metre side yard setback

• a new drainage swale must be constructed to carry the rear yard drainage to the front of the property


NS:Id J:\Documents\D&velopment\D-3700 Committee of Adjustment (PCA Applications)\2013\PCA 30~13 1613275 Ontario lnc\Report\PCA 30-13.doc

Enclosures

SAMFORD

L N[ -ENUE

llji I r\1r

1llll ~r MORETTA Alt[N

~lllilllllllij ~~(Ji- - - 111111 -

UE

Ill t---

t---

SANOK r-

[ 1j111111111j1111j~~§ [I _ 1111111 _ Ill -~

r-~ ~ ~ -<( _j -I I

tl'!l~l~i I I

J ) I ~

r-- r----1 > ...J ...J I.

>--1----J---l 0:::

1---+---l~ 1----J---l lf)

1----J---l~ 1----J---l~

OKLAHOMA

'---

1---+----l tJ 1---+--l 1---+----l ~ 1---+--l 1---+----l f-1---+---l 1---+----ll/) 1---+--l

tn 1---+----l ~ 1---+--l w _j 1--+---l 3: 01---+--l

& L-.l.--'-.1-.L..---'

37

::;;,----~r-..::::::~='------l

City of Pickering PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 684 Victory Drive(Pian 331, Lot 71)

OWNER 1613275 Ontario Inc.

FILE No. P/CA 30/13 o o ources: Teronet Enterprises Inc. end its suppliers. All rights Reserved. Not o pion of survey. 2012 MPAC end its su liers. All ri hta Reserved. Not o len of Surve .

w _j

::::> 1---..r------. as

-- --

-r----

AVENUE

w 0::: 0 :r: lf)


DATE May 16,2013 DRAWN BY JB


PN-2

38

I


To permit a lot coverage of 35 percent

2.4m

PICA 30/13 1613275 Ontario Inc.

To permit a minimum front yard depth of 6.0 metres to a proposed attached garage

111111 8.5m

w > 0::: 0

I

El C\1'

~I I

I I

I

PROPOSED 2 STOREY DWELLING

36.5m

I : I I

..---w-:-u-~ J:· ;.

To permit a south side yard of 0.6 metres to a proposed attached garage

& 0 I()

>

This map was produced by the City of Pickering City Development Department, Planning Information Services Mapping and Design. May 21, 2013

39 Information Compiled from Applicant's


1613275 Ontario Inc.

FRONT (EAST) ELEVATION

SIDE (NORTH) ELEVATION

8.7m

<; ,,

.~

J[l =.: _,:1[]

i··rn---.. ~r l '/ \i

i \ li '- ·' ' .

This map was produced by the City of Pickering City Development Department, Planning Information Services Mapping and Design, May 21,2013

40 Information Compiled from Applicant's Submitted Plan

PICA 30/13 1613275 Ontario Inc.

REAR (WEST) ELEVATION

SIDE (SOUTH) ELEVATION

This map was produced by the City of Pickering City Development Department, Planning Information Services Mapping and Design, May 21, 2013

From:

Subject:

Application


Report to Committee of Adjustment 41



Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 31113 J. & A. Caiata 468 Rosebank Road

The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended, to permit a minimum north side yard width of 1.2 metres to a proposed detached dwelling on a proposed severed lot fronting onto Pike Court, whereas the by-law requires a minimum side yard width of 1.5 metres.

The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit to construct a one-storey bungalow with an associated loft space following the finalization of Land Division Application LD 126112.

Recommendation

The City Development Department considers the minimum north side yard width of 1.2 metres to a proposed detached dwelling to be 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 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 proposed detached dwelling and proposed lot, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans.

2. That the applicant finalizes Land Division Application LD 126112 by January 20, 2014, or this decision shall become null and void.


Comment


Pickering Official Plan - "Urban Residential - Low Density Area" within the Rosebank Neighbourhood

Zoning By-law 2511 - "R4"- Fourth Density Residential Zone

42


Page 2

Background

On December 10, 2012, the Region of Durham Land Division Committee approved an application through Land Division Application LD 126/12, to sever the subject lands and create one new residential lot fronting onto Rosebank Road while retaining a larger lot with partial frontage to permit one buildable lot off of Pike Court (see Applicant's Submitted Plan). Amongst other conditions stipulated by the Land Division Committee, the applicant is required to satisfy various requirements by the City of Pickering outside of this minor variance application in order to finalize the land division.

The applicant proposes to construct a detached bungalow on the northerly portion of the proposed retained lot. The owner intends to further subdivide the southerly portion of the retained lands to create two additional lots once there is an opportunity to extend Pike Court further south.

Although the Pickering Official Plan does not illustrate a future extension of Pike Court, the City anticipates a southerly extension of the road through orderly rear lot development. If rear lot development is pursued by abutting landowners, the owner of the subject lands may consider filing future land division applications to the Region of Durham Land Division Committee to create two additional parcels with minimum lot frontages of 15.0 metres off of Pike Court.


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 a pedestrian access, and to accommodate grading, drainage and residential services such as air conditioning units and utility metres

• the requested side yard width of 1.2 metres to the proposed dwelling will provide an adequate separation between the dwelling and the property line to accommodate pedestrian access, grading, drainage and residential utility services

• the proposed variance to reduce the side yard width from 1.5 metres to 1.2 metres will not negatively impact the adjoining property to the north




rti, MCIP, RPP Manager, Development Review & Urban Design

AY:NS:Id J:\Documents\Development\0~3700\2013\PCA 31-13\Report\PCA 31-13.doc

Enclosures

=]& f---- -

,_____ r----- C 0 U RT) w

1----------'1 I I F ~ ~ : DRIVE

r- I I~ 1------t-----li 1------t-----l~l----+--------l

r-----+--~qr--+------~ --

r-----~~~ r--+--,----~ - ~- L~-----1

r------1..,----1 ~ 1----'----r-----1

~======~==-=: 31-------+------l

c--:-- 2 r-----t---~

\. I

TOYNEVALE

Ll ~ I-z

~ ~ w

'--- u '--- ~ rw- w -

~ 0::: u

"-

I-z w u ~ w 0::: q u _J

I 0 q

0 0 w _J u

~ 2-

--~ l J Elll ~ MAITLAND

I I I I

I

~~ L ~L

I I;::!L f,-,L

f----J r 11! I I

I

/---

/---

DRIVE

~ 1----j-----J g; /--- I- '---1-------t----l z z ,---------

q 1---- tjl--------r-----1 1----j-----J d '- - ~ t-----l----1 1---+----+ 0::: w -1----+---1 0 0::: t-----1------1 1-----+---1 ~ -- u t-------1

-

T\~E= II I I

43


PROPERlY DESCRIPTION 468 Rosebank Road(Pian 350, Pt. lot 113, 114, 40R-27556, Parts 2, 4 & 5)

OWNER J. & A. Caiata DATE May 16,2013 DRAWN BY JB

FILE No. P/CA 31/13 SCALE 1:5,000 CHECKED BY MY

PN-2

! I' ri '1:


PICA 31/13 J. & A. Caiata

ROSEBANK ROAD

! 15.2m

i E N (") N

' I ' I ' f--------------1

I

\ ! 15.2m

1-oO w.-J

E ,---~ (/') 0 V 1 I ow

I 15.2~

cD ~ a_ z L() o- ·:"

OCJ ........ ~ ' . wz ~~ ~ ~~(/)- a..w ./: 1.2m , ,., 0 ....J " 1

l \ \ _J et::: IJ I

: .\ ll. w ;~~J ~--~o --.0 > I ..... > .. : i -- ~-P -·j; ~- -- I I ••• I : h__ -,; ~---- _j:~i -~: : ' ' I _ -::.~111i,:r-----: ~-- E I

'"'/~===- ~~ ~-----,---~,----~-r--- I -- i ~~1~~-.. 2-m--~ :

-~~-~="J..I-~~:t---;-----___.~.._~---- ----.,.-_ ___, _ ___,J l ;

PIKE COURT -----------~-----------~--------~--- I

I I

' ' ' ' -----r~--,

' ' ' ' '

I

' I --------,

' I ,,

....J ll. ll. <(


FRONT(WEST) ELEVATION


PICA 31/13 J. & A. Caiata

REAR(EAST) ELEVATION

45

14--------------25.8m-===========--=======~~_L~-~-


This map was produced by the City of Pickering City Development Department, Planning Information Services Mapp1ng and Des1gn, May 27, 2013.

From:

Subject:

Application





Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 32113 G. & D. Robar 403 Finch Avenue

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

• to permit a minimum front yard depth of 10.0 metres to the proposed covered porch; whereas the by-law requires a minimum front yard depth of 12.0 metres

• to permit uncovered steps to project a maximum of 2.2 metres into the required front yard; whereas the by-law requires uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade may project 1.5 metres into any required front yard

• to permit a minimum side yard width of 0.9 metres to an accessory building (detached garage); whereas the by-law requires a minimum side yard width of 1.0 metres

• to allow an accessory building (detached garage) to be partially located in the east side yard; whereas the by-law requires all accessory buildings shall be erected in the rear yard

• to permit a maximum lot coverage of 23 percent; whereas the by-law requires a maximum lot coverage of 20 percent

The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit to construct a second storey addition, a covered front porch and an accessory building (detached garage).

Recommendation

The City Development Department considers the minimum front yard depth of 10.0 metres to the proposed covered porch; the projection of 2.2 metres of the uncovered steps into the front yard; an accessory building (detached garage) having a minimum side yard width of 0.9 metres and partially located in the side yard; and a maximum lot coverage of 23 percent 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:


Page 2 4 7

1. That this variance apply only to the proposed covered porch and detached garage as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans.

2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by June 12,2015 or this decision shall become null and void.

Comment


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

Zoning By-law 3036 - Rural Agriculture - "A"; permit a detached dwelling

Background

The applicant has applied for a building permit to construct a second storey addition to the existing dwelling including the addition of a front porch and a detached garage.


Front Yard Depth Variance to the Proposed Covered Porch

• the intent of this provision is to ensure an appropriate off street parking area is provided on the property and to ensure a consistent streetscape by avoiding significant deviations in the front yard setback between abutting dwellings

• the applicant is requesting to reduce the front yard setback from 12.0 metres to 10.0 metres to accommodate a covered porch

• the proposed front yard depth of 10.0 metres generally aligns with the abutting property to the west and provides for a consistent streetscape and a sufficient parking area within the front yard


Uncovered Steps to Project into the Required Front Yard Variance

• the by-law requires uncovered steps or platforms not exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade to project no more than 1.5 metres into the required front yard

• the applicant is requesting that the uncovered steps project 2.2 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 and to ensure adequate space between the projected steps and the street and an adequate landscaped area within the front yard is provided


Page 3

• given that the proposed front yard depth is 10.0 metres, the uncovered steps projecting 2.2 metres into the required front yard is appropriate


Side Yard Width Variance to the Proposed Accessory Structure (Detached Garage)

• the intent of a side yard width is to provide an appropriate distance between structures on abutting properties, to allow for pedestrian access for property maintenance and appropriate lot grading and drainage

• the by-law requires a side yard width of 1.0 metres to an accessory structure (detached garage)

• the proposed width of 0.9 metres is an adequate separation distance between the garage and the property line to accommodate pedestrian access for property maintenance, lot grading and drainage


Accessory Structure (Detached Garage) Located Partially in the East Side Yard

• the intent of the by-law requirement that all accessory buildings shall be erected in the rear yard is to provide an appropriate distance and setback from the street and dwelling and to minimize the visual impact of the accessory structure on the streetscape

• the detached garage is located partially in the east side yard and rear yard of the property adjacent to the Hydro Corridor

• given that the detached garage is setback 16.0 metres from the street and set only partially in the site yard, the siting of the garage will not impact the

. streetscape or neighbouring land owners • the requested variance is minor in nature and maintains the intent of the zoning

by-law

Lot Coverage Variance

• the intent of the maximum building lot coverage requirement is to maintain an appropriate amount of yard space (amenity area) uncovered by buildings on a lot to regulate the scale and size of the buildings

• the immediate area surrounding the property includes single detached lots, Hydro Corridor located east and south of the property and beyond is an open space area

• the minor increase in lot coverage will not change the character of this property or the area


Report PICA 32/13


Toronto and Region Conservation Authority



t.L Cristina Celebre, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner - Development Review & Heritage

CC:NS:Id J:\Documents\Development\D-3700\2013\PCA 32-13\Report\PCA 32-13 Rerpot.doc

Enclosures

June12,2013 lz3

Page4

• no comment

City of Pickering

1-----1------i~l---+----l

~------;jl---+---1

1-----1------i~ ~===t===l

J Ill r----1---

1-


PROPERlY DESCRIPTION 403 Finch Avenue(Concession 1, N. Pt. lot 31, 40R-25868, Part 7)

OWNER G. & D. Robar

FILE No. P /CA 32/13 o o ources: Teronet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All ri9hts Reserved. Not o plan of survey. 2012 MPAC and its suppliers. All ri hts Reserved. Not a pion of Surve •


SCALE 1 :5,000 CHECKED BY AY

PN-14


PICA 32/13 G. & D. Robar

51.

To permit uncovered steps to project a maximum of 2.2 metres into the front yard

To permit a minimum front yard depth of 1 0 metres to a proposed covered porch

FINCH AVENUE

I .

-~-:- T- t TiSom- -"- " ~ I I I E

:.<

I

----- 1·'-i t ' I ' I , ( I

' o <XI I

~_Ll,~; nr:r . tM'· ·. : •,;1 I

I EXISTING . I

':(

! r

I T' 1/ ., I

l I .. l

:l E ',I

1 SINGLE STOREY 'f i 1----' DWELLING t I

0 BE RENOVATED INTO 1 2 STOREY DWELLING *- 1

• E To permit a minimum side ___ _._... .... j~ yard width of 0.9 metres to <"> an accessory building

~~

~~r L!) t . ·7'

1.'1'"'-' ..

~~J ~)'

r

(), •.

I

t ~

t . t8 ..--' ,-k' ,.,/

?' ,,

PROPOSED DETACHED

GARAGE

To permit a maximum lot coverage of 23 percent

.j

To permit an accessory building(detached garage) to be partially located in th side ard

This map was produced by the City of Pickering City Development Department. Planning Information Services Mapping and Design, May 30, 2013.

52

ju


PICA 32/13 G. & D. Robar

'-l I '

. 1 .. ~;:-,· F''.' '' i I

FRONT(NORTH) ELEVATION

I .-,

J : :I

DETACHED GARAGE (NORTH) ELEVATION

i ! ;'

i i !,

I ' l~


From:

Subject:

Application





Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 33113 Z. lnshanally 1592 Harrowsmith Court

The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 1975185, to permit a minimum flankage side yard width of 2.6 metres to a proposed second storey covered balcony, whereas the by-law requires a minimum flankage side yard width of 7.5 metres.

The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit to construct a second storey covered balcony.

Recommendation

The City Development Department considers the minimum flankage side yard width of 2.6 metres to a second storey covered balcony to be 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 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 proposed second storey covered balcony, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans.

2. That the proposed second storey covered balcony remains unenclosed, or this decision shall become null and void.


Comment


Pickering Official Plan -"Urban Residential - Low Density Area" within the Brock Ridge Neighbourhood

Zoning By-law 3036 as amended by By-law 1975185- "S2"- Single Residential Zone

53

Report PICA 33113 June 12, 2013

Page 2

Background

On July 11, 2007, the Committee of Adjustment approved a minor variance application PICA 40107 to permit the construction of a one-storey rear addition and to recognize an existing shed in the flankage side yard.

The applicant's proposal to permit a reduced flankage side yard width for a second storey covered balcony through this variance application will allow the balcony to slightly encroach over the existing shed.


Flankage Side Yard Width Variance

• the intent of this provision is to provide an adequate separation distance between buildings and the street within the flankage side yard, and provide an adequate landscaped area

• the proposed second storey covered balcony will have an area of approximately 11 square metres

• an existing wood privacy fence screens the existing shed from Valley Farm Road • an adequate setback will be provided between the proposed balcony and the

property line along Valley Farm Road • the proposed balcony faces Valley Farm Road, therefore it will not negatively

impact the privacy of surrounding neighbours • so long as the proposed second storey covered balcony remains unenclosed, an

uninterrupted pedestrian access into the rear yard through the flankage side yard will be maintained




N/ sh Surti,~MCIP, RPP Manager, Development Review & Urban Design

AY:NS:Id J:\Documents\Development\D-3700 Committee of Adjustment (PCA Applications)\2013\PCA 33-13 Z. lnshanally\Report\PCA 33-13.doc

Enclosures

THIRD

0 <( 0 0::

55

CONCESSION

City Development Department PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 1592 Harrowsmith Ct. (Plan 40M-1513, Block 97, 40R-11609, Pt 1, 44 &

Concession 2, Part Lot 21, 40R-11609, Part 2

OWNER Z.lnshanally DATE May 21,2013 DRAWN BY JB

FILE No. P/CA 33/13 o o ources:

Teronet Enterprises Inc. ond its suppliers. All ri~hts Reserved. Not c plan of survey. 2012 MPAC and its sup liers. All ri hts Reserved. Not o lon of Surve .


PN-13

To permit a minimum flankage side yard width of 2.6 metres to a proposed second storey balcony

Existing shed previously approved by minor variance application file number P/CA40/07


PICA 33/13 Z. lnshanally

--- Existing rear yard depth previously approved by

4-------------lf--+--i minor variance application

l1.4m

EXISTING DWELLING

file number PICA 40/07

5.6m J

HARROWSMITH COURT


I I I I

57 Information Compiled from Applicant's


Z. lnshanally

SIDE (WEST) ELEVATION

FRONT(SOUTH) ELEVATION

DDDDDDDD DDDDDDDD DODD DDDDDDDD


58

From:

Subject:

Application





Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 34113 Whitevale Golf Club 2985 Golf Club Road

The applicant requests relief from the provisions of Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by By-laws 3155189, 4825196, 6847108, to permit a temporary golf practice facility use, whereas the by-law permits a golf club practice facility use until December 31, 2012, after which only agriculture uses are permitted.

The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to continue the operation of a temporary golf practice facility use for the period of July 5, 2013 to December 31, 2014, after which only agriculture uses are permitted.

Recommendation

The City Development Department considers a temporary golf practice facility 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 this variance apply only to the area zoned as "A(T-GPF)" in By-law 3037 as amended by By-laws 4825196 and 6847108, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans.

2. That the variance shall apply for the period of July 5, 2013 to December 31, 2015, and that this decision shall become null and void on January 1, 2016.

The above-noted minor variance has been amended by staff to apply for the period of July 5, 2013 to December 31, 2015 to allow the applicant additional time to seek permanent zoning for the subject lands.


Page 2

Comment


Official Plan Amendment No.22 - Mount Pleasant Neighbourhood Plan 18- Active Recreation

Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by By-laws 3155/89, 4825/96 and 6847/08-"A(T-GPF), A/GC & 02/GC"

Background

The subject lands are part of the Whitevale Golf Club property, which is located southeast of the Hamlet of Whitevale. The Golf Course is within the limits of the Seaton Urban Area. The Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) recently approved Official Plan Amendment No. 22 (OPA 22) including revised schedules on March 25, 2013, which implements the Central Pickering Development Plan for the Seaton Urban Area. The subject lands are currently within in the Mount Pleasant Neighbourhood Plan and are designated "Active Recreation" which permits a golf course.

The golf practice facility (driving range) has been permitted on a temporary basis since 1996. The temporary use permission was considered appropriate until such time as major road alignments for the future Seaton Community, which affect the golf course lands, could be confirmed through the Region of Durham Environmental Assessment program.

The current zoning permission expired on January 1, 2013 and the applicant has requested to extend the permission for two more years. As noted above, staff are recommending that the requested permission be extended for a maximum of three years to allow the Whitevale Golf Club lands to seek permanent zoning permission to permit the golf club and accessory uses over the subject lands. The draft Seaton Zoning By-law permits a golf course on the lands in accordance with the Official Plan and the property appears to meet the proposed performance measures.


• the intent of the zoning by-law is to provide uses that are appropriate for the subject lands

• a golf practice facility use has been permitted on the subject lands and no change to the subject property are proposed

• the continuance of a golf practice facility on a temporary basis does not appear to have any adverse effects on the surrounding area

• OPA 22 designates the lands Active Recreation which permits a golf course use • a zoning amendment application will be submitted after the Seaton Zoning by-law

has been approved by the OMB

53

6D


Page 3

• an extension of the golf practice facility use for 3 years is considered appropriate to allow for the completion of the Region of Durham Environmental Assessment program

• the intent of the zoning by-law would be maintained



l.~· Cristina Celebre, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner- Development Review & Heritage

CC:NS:Id J:\Documents\Development\D-3700\2013\PCA 34-13\Report\PCA 34-13 Report.doc

Enclosures

Nile i, MCIP, RPP Manager, Development Review & Urban Design

ROAD

SUBJECT PROPERTY


PROPERlY DESCRIPTION 2985 Golf Club Road (South Part of Lot 29 & 30, Con. 4, 40R-18997, Pts 1 & 2)

OWNER Whitevale Golf Club DATE May 21,2013 DRAWN BY JB

FILE No. P /CA 34/13 SCALE 1:10,000 CHECKED BY AY

PN-RUR


PICA 34/13 Whitevale Golf Club

To permit a golf practice facility.

EXISTING WHITEVALE

GOLF COURSE

This map was produced by the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department, Planning Information Services Mapping and Design, May 29, 2013

From:

Subject:

Application


Report to Committee of Adjustment 6 3



Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 35113 S. Clayton 521 Mcleod Crescent

The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended, to permit a rear yard depth of 6.0 metres to a proposed uncovered deck, whereas the by-law requires a minimum rear yard depth of 7.5 metres.

The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit to construct and replace an existing uncovered deck.

Recommendation

The City Development Department considers the rear yard depth of 6.0 metres to an uncovered deck in the rear yard 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 proposed uncovered deck, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans.


Comment


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



Page 2

Background

The applicant recently applied for a building permit to replace the existing deck in its current location. Based on staff's review it was determine that proposed new deck required relief from the zoning by-law. The new deck will be attached to the main floor of the dwelling and will have a similar height and dimension as the existing deck. The proposed deck will have a height of approximately 8.0 metres from the established ground level and will be approximately 13.0 square metres in size. In order to permit the construction of the new deck, the applicant is seeking relief from the zoning by-law to reduce the maximum rear yard setback.


Rear Yard Depth Variance

• the intent of the rear yard depth requirement is to provide appropriate separation between adjoining properties to protect privacy of neighbouring amenity areas and to ensure adequate private rear yard amenity area is provided on the subject property

• the proposed rear yard depth of 6 metres to the uncovered deck does not extend across the entire width of the dwelling and the remainder of the rear yard will still have sufficient amount of private amenity area

• concerns regarding privacy and potential overlook on adjoining properties to the south and east will be minimal due to an existing mature hedge along the south and east properties lines

• staff are of the opinion that 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



l.L-Cristina Celebre, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner - Development Review & Heritage

CC:NS:Id J:\Documents\Development\D-3700\Reports\2013\pca35-13 Report. doc

Enclosures

e Surti, MCIP, RPP Manager, Development Review & Urban Design

LL r---

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

-~ L-- . f--- COURTL-

I I Fl ~ l DRIVE

r----- I II~ I U1 <t

f-- '---

r---- ~- I <t f-z ::::> 0

f-- 2

I « \ \

" \

w > C2 0

TOYNEVALE

Ll f--- f-

z

~ w

I-- f--- u f--- U1

f--- w f--- - 0::

u

f-z w u U1 w 0:: <t u _j

I 0 <t 0 0 w _j

~~ t2z -J~ ~f-

_I I

I

r----

-

=lll/ MAITLAND DRIVE

...S.!'P:!~f! I I I ~ r·nvr·a;;n 1 1

I

~)== I <;L

L ,;J, ,,....,[

~ ?' \

n~u 1

~\ I c\

~ \ \ ct.\ I

~\ I \

' \

'\ \ \ ~

I \li ~ n""-

0 0 0 $: ::,:: <t 0

STAGHORN ROAD

--4 I I f-

l 0:: ::::> I

1'--

::,::

ICL L__

I

I I

[L J DRIVE

1---+---l ~ - f- r----1-------!-----l z z ~--~--

::5 1-- tji----{"----J 1---+---1 w r-- U1 t-----\-----1 t------t-----1 0:: w ,-----,___---' 1---+---1 0 0:: t------J-----1

0 f--- u r------J-----1 t----+---!2 ~-

r---1

65

City of Pickering City Development Department PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 521 Mcleod Crescent (Lot 20, Plan M1226)

OWNER S. Clayton DATE May 21,2013 DRAWN BY JB

FILE No. P/CA 35/13 SCALE 1 :5,000 CHECKED BY AY

PN-1

I-z w

E u Cf) N

1.0 w ....... 0::: u 0 0 w _J 0 ~ --


PICA 35/13 S. Clayton

EXISTING 2 STOREY DWELLING

33.6m •

EXISTING SECOND STOREY ......,_6.0m DECK

To permit a minimum rear yard depth of 6.0 metres to an existing second storey deck ·

6 ~ .......

This map was produced by the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department. Planning lnformalion Services Mapping and Design, May 30. 2013

From:

Subject:

Application:


Report to Committee of Adjustment 6 ~~


Manager- Development Review & Urban Design

Committee of Adjustment Application PICA 36113 Bancan Homes (S. Hossain) 606 Rosebank Road

The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as amended:

• to permit a minimum rear yard depth of 3.0 metres, whereas the by-law requires a minimum rear 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 permit a maximum projection of eaves and sills to project 1.0 metre into the required yards; whereas the by-law permits a maximum projection of eaves and sills into a required yard of 0.45 metres; and

• to permit a maximum lot coverage of 44 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 construct a two-storey detached dwelling.

Recommendation:

The City Development Department considers the rear yard depth of 3.0 metres; north side yard width of 1.2 metres; eaves and sills to project 1.0 metre into the required yards; and a lot coverage of 44 percent for the proposed detached dwelling to be major variances that are not 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.

68


Page 2

Background:

Land Division Application LD 058/1 0 was approved by the Durham Region Land Division Committee in 2010 to create the subject property. At the time of the land division application a conceptual site plan was submitted to the City Development Department, which demonstrated that a future dwelling could be located on the subject property in compliance with the zoning by-law.

Comments:


Pickering Official Plan - Urban Residential Area - Low Density Areas within the Rosebank Neighbourhood

Zoning By-law 2511 - "R4" - Detached Dwelling Residential Zone


Rear Yard Depth, North Side Yard Width, Eaves and Sills Projection and Coverage Variances

• the requested variances should be considered as a whole as all variances are required for the proposed development

• the intent of the zoning by-law is to regulate the size, scale and massing of the dwelling and to ensure that proposed uses and structures are compatible with the existing community

• a conceptual site plan, submitted as part of the previous land division application, demonstrated that the property is of adequate size to accommodate a detached dwelling in compliance with the zoning by-law

• City Development staff are of the opinion that the variances are not minor in nature, given the extent and magnitude of the variances being sought

• the variances are not desirable for the appropriate development of the land as the proposed dwelling will not be compatible with the surrounding character of the neighbourhood

• the approval of the combination of variances requested by the applicant will result in a property that is overdeveloped and will not provide sufficient soft landscaping opportunities on the lot

• staff are of the opinion that modifications can be made to the proposed dwelling in order to align the proposal with the standards established in the zoning by-law

Report PICA 36113


Manager, Development Control

Toronto and Region Conservation Authority


Comments pr~ared by:

1711· ;r/fddc111\ Melissa Marknam, MCIP, RPP

June 12, 2013

Page 3

• no comments

• no objections to the application • the owner is required to apply for a TRCA

permit revision as the drawings approved on June 27, 2012, Permission for Minor Works- Letter of Approval No. C-120438 permit drawings do not match the drawings provided as part of Minor Variance Application PICA 36113

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

MM:NS:Id J:\Documents\Development\D-3700\2013\PCA 36-13\Report\PCA 36-13 Report.docx

Enclosures

70

I I I I I

~\

lT OAD

I

y'\-----'---,-----------1 \\-----J------1

\\------+------1

\\---------L-----1 \

1-:D

City of Pickering

STAGHORN ROAD f-

RICK

HULL

COWAN CIRCLE

/

A T 0 c

City Development Department PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 606 Rosebank Road(Pian 350 Pt. Lt. 118, 40R-26896, Part 2, 6)

OWNER Bancan Homes Inc. (S. Hossain)

FILE No. P /CA 36/13 a o ~ources:

Ia- Teronet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights Reserved. Not o plan of survey. ~ 2012 MPAC and its suppliers. All ri9hts Reserved. Not o pion of Survey.



PN-1


PICA 36/13 Bancan Homes lnc(S. Hossain)

To permit a minimum rear

To permit a minimum north side yard width of 1.2 metres

· yard depth of 3.0 metres I

IE 0

,~

E ~

PROPOSED DWELLING

E (!) - ......

I I I I I I I I I -=- ::_- -..:::.- =--- -..:::.-= -3o:-4m--=--!:\-..:::.-=- ::_- J _

E L()

....----7.6m

-1

t

To permit the eaves to encroach a maximum of 1.0 metre into the required yard

To permit a maximum lot coverage of 44 percent

71

0 <( 0 n:: ~ z <( (() w en 0 n::


~

--------~]

I I

\ \

1-'

lr-r--'

I

' I

' \

' \

/ / f-1--

FRONT(EAST) ELEVATION

/ l



-------\ \

I I

~

t~: '---

~

REAR(WEST) ELEVATION


~ f-- _l l -,_ r-

' '' ' ' ' ' / ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ....__ \ '' ' '-

SIDE (NORTH) ELEVATION


I I ~

L,..,,·,-

Information Compiled from Concept Plan Submitted with LD 058/10


FFF = 97.37 TBW = 97.07 SF= 94.75 UF ~ 94.52

NO. 475 1 STOREY

BRICK

DRI~WAY

\ ,,,

... ~' 'HP/LP

0 <( 0 0::: ~ z <( (0 w CJ)

0 0:::

71
