COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT liiiJiij; - Mississauga BCIMC REAL TY CORPORATION 6550 GLEN ERIN DR A-6/15 MAXIMILIAN KOLBE FOUNDATION 4300 CAWTHRA RD A-7/15 DIXIE EGLINTON CONSTRUCTION 1325

MISSISSAUGA -liiiJiij; COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT

AGENDA

Location: COUNCIL CHAMBER Hearing: JANUARY 8, 2015 AT 1:30 P.M.

1. CALL TO ORDER 2. DISCLOSURES OF DIRECT OR INDIRECT PECUNIARY INTEREST 3. REQUESTS FOR WITHDRAWAL/DEFERRAL

File Name of Applicant Location of Land

NEW APPLICATIONS - (MINOR VARIANCE)

A-1/15 KRISHNA PRASAD GANNE & BIJAYA

5278 HUNTINGFIELD DR GANNE

A-2/15 PCC 313 3075 RIDGEWAY DR

A-3/15 LEMAX HOLDINGS INC 247 RADLEY RD

A-4/15 1579954 ONTARIO INC 800 SOUTHDOWN RD

A-5/15 BCIMC REAL TY CORPORATION 6550 GLEN ERIN DR

A-6/15 MAXIMILIAN KOLBE FOUNDATION 4300 CAWTHRA RD

A-7/15 DIXIE EGLINTON CONSTRUCTION 1325 EGLINTON AVE E

A-8/15 FAUSTO, DONATO & ANTONIO FINELLI 376 DERRY RD W

A-9/15 KENNETH JENSEN 332 MEADOW WOOD LANE

A-10/15 CHRIS & KIM BLACK 2095 CHIPPEWA TR

DEFERRED APPLICATIONS - (MINOR VARIANCE)

A441/14 N TURK INVESTMENTS LTD 1625 TRINITY DR

A-445/14 RONALD JAMES SCHOTT &

151 VERONICA DR LORNA - LEE SCHOTT

A-446/14 501 LAKESHORE INC. 501 LAKESHORE RD E

C:\Useislmaljav\AppData\Local\MicrosonlWindows\Temporary Internet Fiies\Content.Outlook\6KYV4T18\Disp-2015-1-08-BA130.doc; 2015/01/09; 12: 17:04 PM

Ward Disposition

5 Approved

8 Approved

1 Approved

2 Approved

9 Approved

4 Approved

5 Approved

11 Refused

2 Approved

8 Approved

5 Withdrawn

1 Refused

1 Feb. 12

Page: 1 of 1

M MISSISSaUGa

COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT

IN THE MATTER OF SECTION 45(1) OR (2) of The Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13, as amended

- and -IN THE MATTER OF ZONING BY-LAW 0225-2007

as amended - and -

IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION BY

KRISHNA PRASAD GANNE & BIJA YA GANNE

on Thursday January 8, 2015

File: "A" 001/15 WARDS

Krishna Prasad Ganne & Bijaya Ganne are the owners of Lot 86, Registered Plan M-731, located and known as 5278 Huntingfield Drive, zoned R4-20 - Residential. The applicants request the Committee to authorize a minor variance to permit the existing attached garage to remain on the subject property proposing:

1. a rectangular length within the garage of 4.80 m (15.74 ft.); whereas By-law 0225-2007, as amended, requires a minimum interior rectangular length of 6.00 m (19.68 ft.) in this instance; and,

2. an unobstructed length within the garage of 4.80 m (15.74 ft.); whereas By-law 0225-2007, as amended, requires a minimum unobstructed length of 5.20 m (17.06 ft.) in this instance.

Mr. J. Chiu, the authorized agent, attended and presented the application to permit the existing attached garage to remain on the subject property. Mr. Chiu advised the Committee that a stairwell accessed the basement unit from within the garage, causing a 1.20 m (3.94 ft.) shortage in the total rectangular length within the garage. He advised the Committee that the minor variances being requested were necessary for the process of legalization of the basement unit on the subject property.

The Committee reviewed the information and plans submitted with the application.

The City of Mississauga Planning and Building Department commented as follows (January 5th, 2015):

"1.0 RECOMMENDATION

The Planning and Building Department has no objection to the requested variances.

2.0 BACKGROUND

Mississauga Official Plan

Character Area: Designation:

Hurontario Neighbourhood Residential Low Density II

Zoning By-Jaw 0225-2007

Zoning: "R4-20", Residential

3.0 OTHER APPLICATIONS

Page 1of3

C8.J Building Permit

4.0 COMMENTS

~ MISSISSauGa

File: BP 14-3148


Based on a review of the Building Permit application, we advise that the variances as requested are correct.

We note that the proposed stairwell in the existing garage would cause the garage space to be substandard for the parking of vehicles. However, we note that the required two parking spaces on site, including the one required for the second unit, can be accommodated on the existing driveway. Therefore, we have no objection to the requested variances."

The City of Mississauga Transportation and Works Department commented as follows (January 2nd. 2015):

"Enclosed for Committee's easy reference are photos which depict the outside of the subject property."

Mr. J. Lee, Planner for the City of Mississauga, attended and confirmed that only two parking spaces were required on site, including the one parking space for the second unit. He noted that the subject property was exempt from providing an additional on-site parking space for the existing dwelling as the dwelling existed prior to the implementation of the Zoning By-law 0225-2007.

No other persons expressed any interest in the application.

The Committee after considering the submissions put forward by Mr. Chiu and having reviewed the plans and comments received, is satisfied that the request is desirable for the appropriate further development of the subject property.

The Committee is satisfied that the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law and the Official Plan will be maintained in this instance.

The Committee is of the opinion that the requested variance is minor in nature in this instance.

Page 2 of 3

M MISSISSaUGa


Accordingly, the Committee resolves to authorize and grant the request as presented.

MOVED BY: D.Kennedy SECONDED BY: L. Dahonick CARRIED

Application Approved.

Dated at the City of Mississauga on January 15, 2015.

THIS DECISION IS SUBJECT TO APPEAL TO THE ONTARIO MUNICIPAL BOARD BY FILING WITH THE SECRETARY-TREASURER OF THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT A WRITTEN NOTIFICATION, GIVING REASONS FOR THE APPEAL, ACCOMPANIED WITH THE PRESCRIBED FEE ON OR BEFORE FEBRUARY 4, 2015.

Date of mailing is January 19, 2015.

~ S.PA:: .D.GEtftl-R. BENNETT (CHAIR)

d~~ D.KENNEDY L. DAHONICK

.. J. ROBINSON

I certify this to be a true copy of the Committee's decision given on January 15, 2015.

~i/£REASURER A copy of Section 45 of the Planning Act, as amended, is attached.

NOTES: - A Development Charge may be payable prior tO the issuance of a Building Permit. - Further approvals from the City of Mississauga may be required i.e. a Building Permit, a Zoning Certificate, a License, etc.

Page3of3

M MISSISSaUGa




as amended - and -


PCC 313



PCC 313 is the owner of Units 5, 7 & 9, Level 1, Peel Condo Plan 313, located and known as 3075 Ridgeway Drive, zoned C3-46 - Commercial. The applicant requests the Committee to authorize a minor variance to permit the operation of a Medical Office within Units # 5, 7 & 9 within the development on the subject property proposing a total of 259 parking spaces for all uses on site; whereas By-Jaw 0225-2007, as amended, requires a minimum of 425 parking spaces to be provided for all uses on site in this instance.

Ms. D. Martin, the authorized agent, attended and presented the application to permit the operation of a Medical Office within the development on the subject property. Ms. Martin advised the Committee that the subject site was currently occupied by two (2), one-storey, multi-tenanted commercial buildings. She noted that the proposed Medical Office use within Unit # 5, 7 & 9 would provide Chiropractic services, with hours of operation from Monday to Friday, 8 a.m. to 12 p.m. and 3 p.m. to 6 p.m., and Saturday 8:30 a.m. to 3 p.m. She noted that a total of three (3) churches were located within the commercial building on the subject property, with a peak parking demand on Sundays, complimentary to the regular days of operation for the proposed Medical Office. Ms. Martin noted that the residual parking spaces of 116 spaces would sufficiently accommodate the anticipated parking demand generated by the proposed Medical Office use, as supported by the Parking Utilization Study.



"1.0 RECOMMENDATION

The Planning and Building Department has no objection to the requested variance.

2.0 BACKGROUND



Western Business Park Employment Area Mixed Use

Zoning By-law 0225-2007

Zoning:


18] Building Permit

"C3-46", General Commercial

File: BP 14/2942

Page 1of3

M MISSISSaUGa

4.0 COMMENTS

File: "A" 002/15 WARD8

Based on the information provided with the associated Building Permit application, the requested variance is correct.

It is our understanding that the applicant is proposing to convert units #5, #7 & #9 of the subject commercial plaza into a medical office use, with the entire commercial site providing 259 parking spaces. Based on a review of the submitted Parking Utilization Study, this Department has no objection to the requested variance."

The City of Mississauga Transportation and Works Department commented as follows (January 2nd, 2015):

"This Department has no objections, comments or requirements with respect to C.A. 'A' 2/15"


The Committee after considering the submissions put forward by Ms. Martin and having reviewed the plans and comments received, is satisfied that the request is desirable for the appropriate further development of the subject property.



Page 2 of 3

M MISSISSauGa



MOVED BY: D. George SECONDED BY: J. Robinson CARRIED





S.PA~ DISSENTED

R. BENNETT (CHAIR) J. THOMAS

~~.~~ D.KENNEDY L. DAHONICK

\)Jf?d. J. ROBINSON


DAVID L. MARTIN, SECRETARY-TREASURER

A copy of Section 45 of the Planning Act, as amended, is attached.

NOTES: - A Development Charge may be payable prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. - Further approvals from the City of Mississauga may be required i.e. a Building Permit, a Zoning Certificate, a License, etc.

Page 3 of 3

M MISSISSaUGa


IN THE MATTER OF SECTION 45(1_) OR (2) of The Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13, as amended

- and - · IN THE MATTER OF ZONING BY-LAW 0225-2007

as amended - and -


LEMAX HOLDINGS INC


File: "A" 003/15 WARDl

Lemax Holdings Inc is the owner of Lot 69, Registered Plan M-409, located and known as 247 Radley Road, zoned Rl-2 - Residential. The applicant requests the Committee to authorize a minor variance to permit the construction of a new two storey dwelling and attached garage on the subject property proposing a height of 10.40 m (34.12 ft.) measured to the highest ridge of the roof and a height of 7.42 m (24.34 ft.) measured to the underside of the eaves; whereas By-law 0225-2007, as amended, permits a maximum height of 9.50 m (31.16 ft.) measured to the highest ridge of the roof and 6.40 m (20.99 ft.) measured to the underside of the eaves in this instance. ·

Mr. D. Brown, authorized agent, attended and presented the application to permit the construction of a two (2) storey dwelling and an attached garage on the subject property. Mr. Brown advised the Committee that the subject property was located adjacent to a creek corridor. He noted that the property contained an uneven topography which resulted in an average grade calculation that was not reflective of the actual height of the dwelling. He explained that the grading lowered along the easterly boundary of the property, artificially impacting the average grade calculation.

Mr. Brown showed a front elevation of the dwelling, noting that the artificially generated average grade value resulted in the overage in the height of the dwelling measured to highest ridge of the roof as well as the height measured to the underside of the eaves. It was the opinion of Mr. Brown that the proposed dwelling design would not create a negative impact on the streetscape and was compatible with the existing character of the neighborhood.


The City of Mississauga Planning and· Building Department commented as follows (January 5th, 2015):

"1.0 RECOMMENDATION


2.0· BACKGROUND



Mineola Neighbourhood Residential Low Density I


Zoning: "Rl-2", Residential

Page 1of4

M MISSISSaUGa


!ZI Site Plan

4.0 COMMENTS

File: SP 14/118 W1


Based on the information provided with the associated Site Plan application, the requested variances are correct.

We note that the average grade calculation of the subject property impacts the overall height and eave height dimension of the proposed two storey dwelling. In review of the drawings, this Department is of the opinion that the proposed dwelling height and eave height will not create a negative impact on the streetscape and we have no concerns."


"We note for Committee's information that the City is currently processing a Site Plan Application for this property, Reference SP 14/073. Transportation and Works Department concerns/requirements for this property will be addressed through the Site Plan Process."

The Region of Peel, Environment, Transportation and Planning Services, commented as follows (December 19th, 2014):

"As per the Region of Peel Water design standard 4.3, hydrants near driveways must be located a minimum of 1.25 m from the garage (or edge of driveway, whichever is greater) in residential applications.

An upgrade to your existing service may be required. Service connection sizes must be in compliance with the Ontario Building Code and the Region of Peel Design Criteria. Please note that site servicing approvals are required prior to building permit approval."

The Credit Valley Conservation commented as follows (December 11th, 2014):

"SITE CHARACTERISTICS:

The subject property is traversed by a valley slope and floodplain associated with Cooksville Creek and is within a CVC Regulated Area subject to the Development, Interference with Wetlands, and Alterations to Shorelines & Watercourses Regulation (Ontario Regulation 160/06).

PROPOSAL:

The applicant requests the Committee to authorize minor variance to permit the construction of a new two storey dwelling and attached garage on the subject property proposing a height of 10.40m (34.12 ft.) measured to the highest ridge of the roof and a height of 7.42m (24.34 ft.) measured to the underside of the eaves, whereas By-law 0225-2007, as amended, permits a maximum height of 9.50 m (31.16 ft.) measured to the highest ridge of the root and 6.40m (20.99 ft.) measured to the underside of the eaves in this instance.

COMMENTS: CVC is currently reviewing the proposed new dwelling through Site Plan Application (SP 118/14). Minor Variance Application does not impact the Authorities interests in this case; as such CVC has no objection to the approval of the application by the Committee.

The applicant is to note that the proposed development is located within a CVC Regulated Area and a permit from this Authority is required prior to the issuance of a building permit from the City of Mississauga."

A letter was received from J. McKinnon, the Chairman of the Credit Reserve Association, expressing concerns regarding the compatibility of the proposed dwelling height with the existing character of the neighborhood. The letter requested the Committee to defer the

Page 2 of 4

M MISSISSauGa


application to allow the client an opportunity to redesign the dwelling in accordance with the zoning by-law requirements.

Mr. H. Ronald, resident of 250 South Service Road, attended and expressed his concerns regarding the requested variances. He noted that his property was located adjacent to the rear yard of the subject property and that the proposed dwelling height would have an impact on his privacy. He requested the Committee to refuse the subject application.


Mr. Brown. advised the Committee that the required rear yard setback from the neighboring property would be maintained. He explained that there would also be plantation of two (2) new trees in the rear yard to ensure that the privacy of the neighboring property is maintained.

The Committee after considering the submissions put forward by Mr. Brown and having reviewed the plans and comments received, is satisfied that the request is desirable for the appropriate further development of the subject property. The Committee noted that the varying topography of the subject property artificially impacted the average grade calculation leading to an overage in the overall dwelling height and eave height dimension of the proposed dwelling. The Committee noted that the average grade calculation undermined the comparatively depressed grade towards the easterly boundary of the property.



Page 3 of4

M MISSISSaUGa



MOVED BY: L. Dahonick SECONDED BY: S. Patrizio CARRIED





s.~ R. BENNETT (CHAIR) p;THC;MAS

-~~ D. KENNEDY L. DAHONICK

\)J{?d· J. ROBINSON


~~ DAVID L. MARTIN, SECRETARY-TREASURER



Page 4 of4

M MISSISSauGa




as amended - and -


1579954 ONT ARIO INC



1579954 Ontario Inc is the owner of part of Lot 31, Concession 3, SDS, located and known as 800-814 Southdown Road, zoned E2-108 - Employment. The applicant requests the Committee to authorize a minor variance to permit the operation of a Medical Office within Unit #Cl within the development on the subject property proposing to provide a total of 253 parking spaces for all uses on site; whereas By-law 0225-2007, as amended, requires a minimum of 357 parking spaces to be provided for all uses on site in this instance.

Mr. W. Oughtred, authorized agent, attended and presented the application to permit a Medical Office use within the development on the subject property, proposing a reduction in the total required parking. Mr. Oughtred advised the Committee that a Parking Utilization Study had been submitted for the site in the past to evaluate the parking demand of the existing uses. He confirmed that the parking study concluded that the existing parking supply Was sufficient for such uses on site. Mr. Oughtred indicated that the proposed medical office use would have a minute increase in the parking demand and was of the opinion that a new parking utilization study was not required. He noted that the hours of operation of the medical office during weekday mornings were complimentary to the hours of operation for the adjacent banquet hall that operated during the weekday evenings, weekends and holidays.



"1.0 RECOMMENDATION

The Planning and Building Department has no objection to the requested variance.

2.0 BACKGROUND



Southdown Employment Area Business Employment

Z~ming By-law 0225-2007

Zoning: "E2-108", Employment


[gl Certificate of Occupancy File: C 14/3327

Page 1of3

M MISSISSaUGa

4.0 COMMENTS


Based on a review of the information provided with the associated Certificate of Occupancy application, the requested variance is correct.

It is our understanding that the Medical Office use within Unit Cl of the subject property results in an increase of two required parking spaces from the previously approved minor variance application, file 'A' 142/13. We advise that a Parking Utilization Study, dated January 27, 2012, was prepared and submitted in relation to previously approved applications 'A' 84/12 and 'A' 142/13. Given that the parking study was completed in recent years, staff accept this parking study as justification for application 'A' 4/15 and as such, we have no objection to the requested reduction in parking."


"This Department has no objections, comments or requirements with respect to C.A. 'A' 4/15."

The Region of Peel, Environment, Transportation and Planning Services, commented as follows (December 19th, 2014):

"This property is within the vicinity of two private, inactive landfill sites, M.O.E. # A220lll (exact boundaries unknown) and Petro-Canada, located at Southdown and Lakeshore Rd (exact boundaries unknown) and catalogued by the M.O.E as A220102."


The Committee after considering the submissions put forward by Mr. Oughtred and having reviewed the plans and comments received, is satisfied that the request is desirable for the appropriate further development of the subject property.


The Committee is of the opinion that the requested variance· is minor in nature in this instance.

Page 2 of 3

M MISSISSaUGa



MOVED BY: J. Thomas SECONDED BY: J. Robinson CARRIED





R. BENNETT (CHAIR)

.~ er'~~ D.KENNEDY L. DAHONICK

J. ROBINSON





Page 3 of 3

M MISSISSaUGa




as amended - and -


BCIMC REAL TY CORPORATION



BCIMC Realty Corporation is the owner of part of Lot 74, Registered Plan M-146, located and known as 6550 Glen Erin Drive, zoned RA4-l - Residential (Apartments). The applicant requests the Committee to authorize a minor variance to permit alterations to the existing parking structure on the subject property resulting in the removal of approximately 80 parking spaces for a balance of 155 parking spaces to be provided for all uses on the subject property; whereas By-law 0225-2007, as amended, requires a minimum of 163 parking spaces for all uses on the subject property in this instance.

Ms. C. Connor, a representative of the authorized agent, attended and presented the application to permit alterations to the existing parking structure on the subject property. Ms. Connor advised the Committee that the subject property was occupied by a residential apartment building and serviced by a detached, two-storey, above ground parking garage and an on-grade parking lot.

Ms. Connor noted that a site inspection revealed significant deterioration of the parking garage components and efforts were being made to remove unsafe parking garage components. She explained that the maintenance of the site would result in the removal of approximately eighty (80) parking spaces from the subject property, allowing a balance of 146 parking spaces for the apartment building residents and visitors use. It was the opinion of Ms. Connor that the proposed reduction in parking was appropriate and accommodated the parking needs of the residential uses on site.


The City of Mississauga Planning and Building Department commented as follows (January 61h, 2015):

"1.0 RECOMMENDATION

The Planning and Building Department has no objection to the requested variance, as amended.

2.0 BACKGROUND



Meadowvale Neighbourhood Residential High Density


Zoning: "RA4-l", Residential

Page 1of3

M MISSISSaUGa


No other applications currently in process.

4.0 COMMENTS


Based on the review of the Minor Variance application and our records, we advise that the variance request should be amended as follows:

"The applicant requests the Committee to authorize a minor variance to permit alterations to the existing parking structure on the subject property resulting in the removal of approximately 80 parking spaces for a balance of 155 parking spaces to be provided for all uses on the subject property; whereas By-law 0225-2007, as amended, requires a minimum of 170 parking spaces for all uses on the subject property in this instance."

We advise that a Parking Justification Letter prepared by Halsall Associates and dated November 10, 2014 satisfactorily justifies the requested reduction in parking.

Based on the preceding information, we have no objection to the requested variance, as amended."


"This department has no objections to the applicant's request to permit alterations to the existing parking structure."

The Region of Peel, Environment, Transportation and Planning Services, commented as follows (December 191h, 2014):

"A review by the Region of Peel is required for any proposed changes to underground water and/or sanitary sewer infrastructt,1re. Site servicing approvals are required prior to the issuance of a building permit."


Ms. Connor upon hearing the comments of the Committee and the Planning and Building Department, requested that the application be amended in accordance with their recommendations.

The Committee consented to the request and, after considering the submissions put forward by Ms. Connor and having reviewed the plans and comments received, is satisfied that the amended request is desirable for the appropriate further development of the subject property.


The Committee is of the opinion that the amended request is minor in nature in this instance.

Page 2 of 3

M MISSISSauGa


Accordingly, the Committee resolves to authorize and grant the amended request to permit alterations to the existing parking structure on the subject property resulting in the removal of approximately 80 parking spaces for a balance of 155 parking spaces to be provided for all uses on the subject property; whereas By-Jaw 0225-2007, as amended, requires a minimum of 170 parking spaces for all uses on the subject property in this instance.

MOVED BY: J. Robinson SECONDED BY: L. Dahonick CARRIED

Application Approved, as amended.




S.PA?lff--R.. BENNETT (CHAIR)

I K~~ D. KENNEDY L. DAHONICK

J. ROBINSON


~ DAVID L. MARTIN, SECRETARY-TREASURER



Page 3 of 3

M MISSISSauGa




as amended - and -


MAXIMILIAN KOLBE FOUNDATION



Maximilian Kolbe Foundation is the owner of part of Lot 13, Registered Plan A-24, located and known as 4300 Cawthra Road, zoned R3 - Residential. The applicant requests the Committee to authorize a minor variance to continue to permit a portable fruit and vegetable stand on the subject property on Sundays; whereas By-law 0225-2007, as amended, makes no provisions for such a use in this instance.

Mr. J. Bajorek, authorized agent, attended and presented the application to permit a fruit and vegetable stand to operate on Sundays on the subject property. Mr. Bajorek indicated that the stand would be located on the existing interlocked patio area and would service local residents and visitors to the church. He noted that the request for the operation of a portable fruit and vegetable stand on site had previously been granted a temporary approval by the Committee for a period of five (5) years. He explained that there would be no change in the location and operation of the portable fruit and vegetable stand on the subject property.


The City of Mississauga Planning and Building Department commented as follows (January 5th, 2015): .

"1.0 RECOMMENDATION

The Planning and Building Department has no objection to the requested variance, subject to condition #1 under 'A' 363/09.

2.0 BACKGROUND



Rathwood Neighbourhood Residential Low Density I


Zoning: "R3", Residential


IZJ Certificate of Occupancy File: C 09-5392

Page 1of3

~ MISSISSaUGa

4.0 COMMENTS


Based on the information provided with the Minor Variance application and our records, the variances, as requested is· correct. We further advise that a Certificate of Occupancy application was applied for under file C 09-5392, for the proposed use. However the application has not been issued because of outstanding requirements.

We note that the Committee previously approved the same variance under 'A' 363/09 for a temporary period of five years, expiring on November 30, 2014. At the time, this Department stated that we had no objection, provided that the portable fruit and vegetable stand is not located on required parking spaces and does not impede pedestrian or vehicular circulation on site. The Committee approved the application with a condition that the applicant shall proceed in accordance with the submitted site plan. We recommend that the same condition be applied."

The City of Mississauga Transportation and Works Department commented as follows (January 2°d, 2015):

"This department has no objections to the applicant's request."


The Committee after considering the submissions put forward by Mr. Bajorek and having reviewed the plans and comments received, is satisfied that the request is desirable for the appropriate further development of the subject property.



Page 2 of 3

M MISSISSaUGa



MOVED BY: D. George SECONDED BY: L. Dahonick CARRIED





R. BENNETT (CHAIR) ~MAS

1~· D. KENNEDY

J. ROBINSON




Page 3 of 3

M MISSISSauGa




as amended - and -


DIXIE EGLINTON CONSTRUCTION


File: "A" 007 /15 WARDS

Dixie Eglinton Construction is the owner of part of Lot 1, Concession 3, EHS, located and known as 1325 Eglinton Avenue East and 5120 & 5130 Dixie Road, zoned C3-62 - Commercial. The applicant requests the Committee to authorize a minor variance to increase the total gross floor area - non-residential to 4,645.00 m2 (49,998.36 sq.ft.) for all restaurant uses on the subject property from 4,089.69 m2 (44,022.50 sq.ft.) as previously approved pursuant to Minor Variance File 'A' 410/11; whereas By-law 0225-2007, as amended, permits a maximum gross floor area - non-residential of 3,540.00 m2 (38,104.24 sq.ft.) for all restaurant uses on site in this instance.

Mr. W. Oughtred, a representative of the authorized agent, attended and presented the application to permit an expansion of the total gross floor area - non -residential that is permitted for all restaurant uses on the subject property. Mr. Oughtred noted that the existing uses on site included a predominance of restaurants within the development at 5120 & 5130 Dixie Road, and a combination of uses including a banquet hall, night club and offices within the development at 1325 Eglinton Avenue East.

Mr. Oughtred advised the Committee that the existing parking supply was sufficient to meet the parking demand for all uses on site as supported by the Parking Utilization Study. He noted that the banquet hall and night club's hours of operation during the weekends allowed an abundance of parking spaces to remain underutilized during the weekdays. He noted that the site had abundant unused parking supply which would be able to accommodate the additional parking demand generated by the proposed restaurant uses.



"1.0 RECOMMENDATION

The Planning and Building Department has no objection to the requested variance, subject to the condition outlined below. However, the applicant may wish to defer the application to submit the required Certificate of Occupancy and Building Permit applications to verify the accuracy of the requested variance.

2.0 BACKGROUND



Northeast Employment Area Mixed Use

Page 1of3

M MISSISSaUGa


Zoning: "C3-62", General Commercial


D Certificate of Occupancy D Building Permit

4.0 COMMENTS

File: Required - No application received File: Required - No application received

File: "A" 007 /15 WARDS

We note that Certificate of Occupancy and Building Permit applications are required and in the absence of a Certificate of Occupancy application or a Building Permit application, we are . unable to verify the accuracy of the requested variance or determine whether additional variances will be required. In order to confirm the accuracy of the requested variance, the applicant may apply for a Pre-Zoning Review application and submit working drawings in order that a detailed zoning review may be completed. A minimum of four (4) weeks will be required to process a Pre-Zoning Review application depending on the complexity of the proposal and the detail of the information submitted.

In review of the application and the existing zoning that applies to the property, we note that the parking requirements for 1325 Eglinton Avenue East and 5120/5130 Dixie Road are calculated together. Therefore, the maximum gross floor area (GFA) for the C3-62 zone is the combined limit for both sites. We suggest that the following wording be added:

" ... located and known as 1325 Eglinton Avenue East and 5120 & 5130 Dixie Road ... "

We advise that a Parking Utilization Study prepared by Beacon Planning Services and dated June 20, 2014 satisfactorily justifies the requested minor variance. Staff can support the request, subject to the following condition:

1. That the maximum gross floor area - non-residential for all restaurant uses shall not exceed 4,645 sq. m. (49,998.36 sq. ft.)."


"This department has no objections to the applicant's request."

The Region of Peel, Environment, Transportation and Planning Services, commented as follows (December 191h, 2015):

"A review by the Region of Peel is required for changes to the underground water or sanitary sewer to accommodate the Gross Floor Area (GFA) increase .. Site servicing approvals are required prior to the issuance of a building permit. "

A letter was received from J. Fiore, a representative of the owners at 1250-1300 Eglinton Avenue East, stating his concerns regarding the requested variances. He showed concerns regarding the existing parking conditions on the subject property being able to accommodate the increased parking demand generated by the proposed expansion of the total gross floor area - non-residential for new restaurant uses on site.


The Committee after considering the submissions put forward by Mr. Oughtred and having reviewed the plans· and comments received, is satisfied that the request is desirable for the appropriate further development of the subject property.



Page 2 of 3

M MISSISSauGa



MOVED BY: D. George SECONDED BY: D.Kennedy CARRIED

Application Approved, as amended.




S.PA~ D.4 R. BENNETT (CHAIR) ~AS.

D. KENNEDY L. DAHONICK

J. ROBINSON




Page 3 of 3

M MISSISSauGa


IN THE MATTER OF SECTION 45(1) OR (2) . of The Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13, as amended


as amended - and -


FAUSTO, DONATO & ANTONIO FINELLI


File: "A" 008/15 WARD 11

Fausto, Donato & Antonio Finelli are the owners of part of Lot 10, Concession 1, W.H.S, located and known as 376 Derry Road West, zoned D - Development. The applicants request the Committee to authorize a minor variance to continue to permit the outside storage of tractor trailers on the subject property; whereas By-law 0225-2007, as amended, permits a building or structure legally existing on the date of the passing of this By-law (June 20, 2007) and the existing legal use of such building or structure and does not permit the erection of new buildings or structure and the enlargement or replacement of existing buildings and structures in a D - Development zone in this instance.

Mr. W. Oughtred, authorized agent, attended and presented the application to permit the outside storage of tractor trailers on the subject property. Mr. Oughtred advised the Committee that equipment had been stored on the property since 1979, when the property was acquired and that the storage conditions had been an existing condition prior to the development of adjacent residential developments.

Mr. Oughtred noted that a minor variance application to permit the outdoor storage of tractor trailers had been previously refused by the Committee, followed by an appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board where the Committee's decision was upheld. Mr. Oughtred noted that the intent of the subject application was to allow his client an opportunity to generate revenue through the truck trailer storage while the property underwent the process of being rezoned and redeveloped. He explained that in comparison to the previous request, the subject application incorporated a significant reduction in the truck storage area, installation of a berm and plantation of trees along the berm to screen the storage site and minimize the impact on the adjacent residential developments. He requested the Committee to defer the application to allow his client an opportunity for further community engagement in order to mitigate any areas of concerns.


The City of Mississauga Planning and Building Department commented as follows (January 5th, 2015): .

"1.0 RECOMMENDATION

The Planning and Building Department recommends the application be refused.

2.0 BACKGROUND


Character Area: Meadowvale Village Neighbourhood

Page 1of5

M MISSISSaUGa

File: "A" 008/15 WARD 11

Designation: Residential Low Density I & Business Employment


Zoning: "D", Development


D Certificate of Occupancy File: Required - No application received

4.0 COMMENTS

We note that a Certificate of Occupancy is required and in the absence of a Certificate of Occupancy application, we are unable to verify the accuracy of the requested variance or determine whether additional variances will be required. We recommend that the applicant submit a Certificate of Occupancy application in order to ensure that all required variances have been accurately identified.

Further, we note that the Committee previously heard a similar minor variance application for the subject property on June 6, 2013 under 'A 213/13. At the time, this Department recommended that the application be refused as it failed to meet the four tests of a minor variance. The Committee refused the application and the decision was appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB), which dismissed the appeal.

We note that the subject application is identical to the previous application with the exception of a proposed landscaped berm, which would provide for a 15 m (49.21 ft.) setback from all adjacent residential uses. In its decision of the appeal, the OMB stated that the application fails all four tests of a minor variance. The decision clearly states that the Board does not consider the use to be minor and would not consider it for a temporary period, as it is a use that is not contemplated by the Official Plan or the Zoning By-law for the property. The subject property is zoned 'D' Development and is designated Residential Low Density II and Business Employment.

The Residential Low Density II policies of Mississauga Official Plan allow for residential uses, as well as accessory uses to residential such as home occupations, urban gardening and accessory offices for a limited set of professions. The policies do not permit outside storage of truck trailers. The intent of the Residential Low Density II policies is to dedicate and preserve land for residential uses.

The intent of the Business Employment policies of Mississauga Official Plan is to allow for a wide range of employment uses. The outdoor storage of truck trailers is not permitted as the primary use of the property.

In consideration of the preceding policies, the requested variance does not maintain the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan.

The subject lands are currently zoned 'D' Development, which recognizes vacant lands not yet developed and/or permits the use that legally existed on the date of the passing of By-law 0225-2007, until such a time that the lands are rezoned in conformity with the Official Plan. Previous to the passing of By-law 0225-2007, the lands were zoned 'A' (Agricultural), which did not permit outside storage of tractor trailers. In addition, there have been no previous minor variances granted to permit this use. Consequently, it appears that the use was not established legally and therefore is not permitted within the 'D' Zone. Based on the preceding information, the proposed variance does not maintain the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law.

Based on the preceding Information, we recommend that the application be refused."


"As Committee is aware a similar request ('A' 213/13) to permit outside storage of tractor trailers on this property was refused and the decision was appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) which then dismissed the appeal. Information submitted with this application

Page 2 of 5

M MISSISSaUGa

File: "A" 008/15 WARDll

indicates that this current proposal would reflect a significant reduction in the storage area and also the provision of screening from the adjacent residential area by constructing a berm with a lSM setback to the residential° properties and also include the planting of trees on top of the berm. It should also be noted that over the years our Development Construction Section has been involved in a number of drainage related issues where the abutting residential properties have been impacted by the drainage originating from the subject lands.

In view of the above, acknowledging that a similar request was recently refused by the OMB, the fact that it appears that the existing use was not established legally and therefore not permitted within the 'D' Zone and that the Planning Department is not supporting the request we have concerns with the approval of this request.

.Notwithstanding the above, and should Committee see merit in the applicant's request we would strongly request that any condition of approval be for a temporary period and that a letter be received from the Transportation and Works Department indicating that our Development Construction Section has reviewed and is satisfied with a grading/drainage plan (prepared by a consulting engineer) for the subject property which would also include the details for the proposed landscape berm being proposed with a lSM setback to all the residential properties."

The Region of Peel, Environment, Transportation and Planning Services, commented as follows (December 191

h, 2014):

"The subject property contains two legal non-conforming accesses to Regional Road 5 (Derry Road West) that were approved for residential uses only. The current access configuration cannot adequately support any uses related to trucking, as the curb depression at the accesses do not extend far enough to allow a tractor-trailer to complete right turning movements in and out of the site directly from/to the eastbound curb lane on Derry Road West without encroaching into adjacent through lanes. The tire tracks in the attached photo (see photo below) serve as evidence of a tractor-trailer having mounted the raised portion of the curb when entering the site. Such activity can lead to long-term curb erosion, and potentially cause vehicular collisions if curb debris ends up within the adjacent travel lanes.

Recognizing that the requested use has occurred on the site for a number of years, and that its continuation is intended to be interim only until further redevelopment occurs, we do not object to the minor variance application, in principle, provided that the applicant perform necessary road and access works to facilitate the requested use. On this basis, should the Committee see merit in this application, we recommend approval subject to the following conditions:

Conditions:

A vehicle turning movement drawing depicting the swept path of a WB-20 tractor trailer, showing both inbound and outbound movements only at the existing westerly access location; A detailed engineering submission depicting modification(s) to the existing westerly access to accommodate turning movements to/from only the easterly most lane (curb lane) as shown on the vehicle turning movement drawing. The applicant shall widen the limits of curb depression at the westerly and easterly access to sufficiently allow a tractor-trailer to complete right turning movements in and out of the site directly from/to the eastbound curb lane on Derry Road West without encroaching into adjacent through lanes; The closure of the easterly access by means of reconstructing the curb and reinstating the municipal right-of-way with top-soil and sod in a condition acceptable to the Region of Peel; and, The execution of an access agreement which shall be registered on title. The access agreement, amongst other matters, shall waive and release the Region of Peel from any claims from compensation, injurious affection or other damages, Claims, demands, losses, costs, suits or other proceedings by anyone, arising or which may arise as a

Page 3 of 5

M MISSISSauGa

File: "A" 008/15 WARDll

result of the Region, at its cost, constructing a centre median on Derry Road West to physically restrict the Derry Road West access to right turns in and right turns out only, should Regional Council determine that such construction is required in the interest of public safety."


The Committee after considering the submissions put forward by Mr. Oughtred and having reviewed the plans and comments received, is not satisfied that the request is desirable for the appropriate use of the subject property. The Committee indicated that the installation of a berm was not- an appropriate measure to mitigate the impact on adjacent residential developments. The Committee noted that a deferral of the application would not be granted as the applicant has had an ample opportunity for community engagement. They further noted that the propo,sed use is not in compliance with the Zoning By-Jaw and the Official Plan.

The Committee is not satisfied that the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-Jaw and the Official Plan will be maintained in this instance.

The Committee is of the opinion that the requested variance is not minor in nature in this instance.

Page 4 of 5

~ MISSISSaUGa

Accordingly, the Committee resolves to deny the request as presented.

MOVED BY: J. Robinson SECONDED BY: S. Patrizio

Application Refused.


File: "A" 008/15 WARD 11

CARRIED



S.P~~ ~

D.!£f -~

R. BENNETT (CHAIR)

D.KENNEDY L. DAHONICK

~· J. ROBINSON




NOTES: - A Development Charge may be payable prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. - Further approvals from the City of Mississauga may be required i.e. a Building Permit, a Zoning Certificate, a License, ~tc. ·

Page 5 of 5

M MISSISSauGa




as amended - and -


KENNETH JENSEN



Kenneth Jensen is the owner of part of Lot 28, Concession 3, SDS, located and known as 332 Meadow Wood Lane, zoned R3-3 - Residential. The applicant requests the Committee to authorize a minor variance to permit the construction of a new two (2) storey detached dwelling on the subject property proposing:

1. a height of 7.96 m (26.12 ft.) measured to the top of the flat roof; whereas By-law 0225-2007, as amended, permits a maxim1.1m height of 7.50 m (24.61 ft.) to the top of the flat roof in this instance;

2. a dwelling depth of 21.50 m (70.54 ft.); whereas By-law 0225-2007, as amended, permits a maximum dwelling depth of 20.00 m (65.62 ft.) in this instance;

3. a driveway width of 8.50 m (27.89 ft.); whereas By-law 0225-2007, as amended, permits a maximum driveway width of 6.00 m (19.69 ft.) in this instance; and,

4. a landscape area of 30.00% of the front yard; whereas By-law 0225-2007, as amended, requires a minimum landscape area of 60.00% of the front yard in this instance.

Mr. D. Brown, a representative of the authorized agent, attended and presented the application to permit the construction of a new two (2) storey detached dwelling on the subject property. Mr. D. Brown advised the Committee that the requested increase in the heights was a requirement of the contemporary architectural design of the dwelling. He noted that the height of the flat roof was comparably lower that the permitted height for peaked roofs in the area.

Mr. Brown noted that the dwelling had been shifted further west on the subject property and the northerly setback had been increased to provide ample separation distance between the proposed dwelling and the abutting neighbour and to increase the sightlines from the neighbour's porch. He explained that the lot width and the setback requirements created a relatively narrow building envelope, resulting in an increase in the dwelling depth to accommodate the architectural design of the dwelling.

Mr. Brown noted that the existing driveway had been re-located to Meadow Wood Lane as it was initially located partially on City Parkland. He explained that it was a preference of his client to redesign the driveway to accommodate a wider driveway design. He noted that this relocation of the driveway and a private lane within the front yard of the subject property caused a reduction in the available front yard landscape area. Mr. Brown confirmed that the frontage of the subject property would be onto Watersedge Road with ample landscape area along the flankage yard of the subject property.

Page 1of4

~ MISSISSaUGa



The City of Mississauga Planning and Building Department commented as follows (January 61h, 2015):

"1.0 RECOMMENDATION


2.0 BACKGROUND



Clarkson Lorne-Park Neighbourhood Residential Low Density I


Zoning:


[8J Site Plan

4.0 COMMENTS

"R3-3", Residential

File: SP 13/205 W2

Based on the information provided with the associated Site Plan application, the requested variances are correct.

We note that the Committee previously approved a minor variance application for the subject property, under file 'A' 368/13, which permitted a reduction in exterior side yard, an increase in balcony area and projection and to permit a garage projection. At that time, the applicant also requested relief from the Zoning By-law with respect to dwelling height and dwelling depth, which the Committee did not grant approval. For that application, this Department did not support the proposed dwelling height and dwelling depth.

It is our understanding that the current minor variance application reflects a reduced dwelling height and dwelling depth in relation to the previous proposal. Upon review of the submitted elevation drawings, this Department is satisfied that the reduced dwelling height and dwelling depth will not create any additional impacts in this instance.

Furthermore, we believe the applicant's request for driveway width to be minor in nature and we have no concerns.

With respect to the variance required for landscaped area, we note that the Meadow Wood Lane private road way is located on the subject property and is incorporated when calculating the percentage of landscaped area. As such, we believe the variance to be appropriate for the development of the subject property and have no concerns."

The City of Mississauga Transportation and Works Department commented as follows (January 2"d, 2015):

"We note for Committee's information that the City is currently processing a Site Plan Application for this property, Reference SP 13/205. Transportation and Works Department concerns/requirements for this property will be addressed through the Site Plan Process."

The Region of Peel, Environment, Transportation and Planning Services, commented as follows (December 191

h, 2014):

Page 2 of 4

M MISSISSaUGa


"An upgrade to your existing service may be required. Service connection sizes must be in compliance with the Ontario Building Code and the Region of Peel Design Criteria. Please note that site servicing approvals are required prior to building permit approval.

Waste Management

This property is within the vicinity of Petro-Canada, an inactive landfill located at Southdown & Lakeshore Rd and catalogued by the M.O.E as A220102. The exact boundaries are unknown."

The Credit Valley Conservation commented as follows (December 13th, 2014):

"We have now had the opportunity to review information related to the minor variance at 332 Meadow Wood Lane and provide the following comments.

The subject property does not contain. any flood plains, watercourses, shorelines, wetlands, valley slopes or other environmental features of interest to Credit Valley Conservation. Furthermore, the property is not subject. to Ontario Regulation 160/06 or to the policies of the eve at this time. As such, eve will not be providing comment for this Minor Variance application."

A memorandum was received from Ward Councillor K. Ras expressing support for the subject application. She requested the Committee to approve the subject application.

A letter was received from P. Quinn, resident of 1338 Watersedge Road, on behalf of Watersedge Neighbour's Group, stating his suppcxt for the requested variances. He· noted that the applicant had worked with the neighbours and responded to their concerns through a re-design of the proposed dwelling. He requested the Committee to approve the subject application.

Mr. P. Quinn, resident of 1338 Watersedge Road, attended and expressed his support for the subject application.


The Committee after considering the submissions put forward by NAME and having reviewed the plans and comments received, is satisfied that the request is desirable for the appropriate further development of the subject property.



Page 3 of4

M MISSISSauGa



MOVED BY: J. Robinson SECONDED BY: S. Patrizio CARRIED





R. BENNETT (CHAIR) ~-THOMAS

- ' ~~ D.KENNEDY L. DAHONICK

~-----· -J. ROBINSON

A.copy of Section 45 of the Planning Act, as amended, is attached.


Page 4 of 4

M MISSISSaUGa


IN THE MAHER OF SECTION 45(1) OR (2) of The Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13, as amended


as amended - and -


CHRIS & KIM BLACK



Chris & Kim Black are the owners of Lot 110, Registered Plan M-25, located and known as 2095 Chippewa Trail, zoned Rl - Residentfal. The applicants request the Committee to authorize a minor variance to permit the construdion of two (2) accessory structures (patio and outdoor fireplace) within the rear yard of the subject property proposing a lot coverage of 28.01% of the lot area; whereas By-law 0225-2007, as amended, permits a maximum of one accessory structure and a maximum lot coverage of 25.00% in this instance.

Mr. D. Brown, authorized agent, attended and presented the application to permit the construction of two (2) accessory structures within the rear yard of the subject property. Mr. Brown advised the Committee that the proposed accessory structures included a covered patio and an outdoor fireplace. He noted that the proposed covered deck would replace an existing deck in the rear yard of the subject property. He noted that the unique configuration of the lot provided ample space for a rear yard amenity area. It was the opinion of Mr. Brown that the proposed increase in lot coverage would not have a significant impact on the existing character of the neighborhood.



"1.0 RECOMMENDATION

The Planning and Building Department has no objection to the requested variances. However, the applicant may wish to defer the application to submit the required Building Permit application in order to confirm the accuracy of the requested variances and whether additional variances.will be required.

2.0 BACKGROUND



Sheridan Neighbourhood Residential Low Density I


Zoning: "Rl", Residential


No other applications currently in process.

Page 1of3

·~ MISSISSauGa

4.0 COMMENTS


We note that in the absence of a Building Permit application, we are unable to verify the accuracy of the requested variances or determine whether additional variances will be required. In order to confirm the accuracy of the requested variances, the applicant may apply for a Pre-Zoning Review application. Additionally, based on a review of the minor variance application, we advise that the variance request should be amended as follows:

" ... to permit two (2) accessory structures (existing shed and proposed outdoor fireplace) within the rear yard of the subject property proposing a lot coverage of 28.01%; whereas Bylaw 0225-2007, as amended, permits a maximum of one (1) accessory structure and maximum lot coverage of 25.00% in this instance."

We advise that based on the site plan submitted with the application, this Department has no objection to the applicant's request to permit two accessory structures.

Furthermore, we note that the lot coverage figure includes the covered patio located at the rear of the dwelling. In review of the elevations, we are of the opinion that the request will not create any additional impacts on the adjacent properties and therefore, we have no objection."


"We nofe for Committee's information that any Transportation and Works Department concerns/requirements for the proposed 2 accessory structures (patio and outdoor fireplace) will be addressed at the time of the Building Permit process."


Mr. Brown upon hearing the comments of the Committee and the Planning and Building Department, requested that the application be amended in accordance with their recommendations.

The Committee consented to the request and, after considering the submissions put forward by Mr. Brown and having reviewed the plans and comments received, is satisfied that the amended request is desirable for the appropriate further development of the subject property.


The Committee is of the opinion that the amended request is minor in nature in this instance.

Page 2 of 3

M MISSISSaUGa


Accordingly, the Committee resolves to authorize and grant the amended request to permit two (2) accessory structures (existing shed and proposed outdoor fireplace) within the rear yard of the subject property proposing a lot coverage of 28.01 %; whereas By-law 0225-2007, as amended, permits a maximum of one (1) accessory structure and maximum lot coverage of 25.00 % in this instance.

MOVED BY: D.Kennedy · SECONDED BY: S. Patrizio CARRIED





~. R. BENNETT (CHAIR)

~a£~ D. KENNEDY L. DAHONICK

'1/gJ.---· -J. ROBINSON




Page 3 of 3

M MISSISSauGa




as amended - and -


RONALD JAMES SCHOTT & LORNA-LEE HOGAN-SCHOTT



Ronald James Schott & Lorna-Lee Hogan-Schott are the owners of Lot 3, Registered Plan M-355, located and known as 151 Veronica Drive, zoned R2-5 - Residential. The applicants request the Committee to authorize a minor variance to permit:

1. the construction of an accessory structure in the rear yard proposing a floor area of 83.61 m2 (900.00 sq.ft.); whereas By-law 0225-2007, as amended permits a maximum accessory structure floor area of 10.00 m2 (107.64 sq.ft.) in this instance; and,

2. a total height to the ridge of the accessory structure of 4.67 m (15.32 ft.) and to the chimney of 5.38 m (17.65 ft.); whereas By-law 0225-2007, as amended permits a maximum height of 3.00 m (9.84 ft.) for an accessory structure in this instance.

On December 11, 2014, Mr. G. Callaghan, the authorized agent, attended and requested a deferral of the subject application to allow for the amended zoning information be circulated

· in accordance with the requirements of the Planning Act and for review by staff.


The City of Mississauga Planning and Building Department commented as follows (December 5, 2014):

"1.0 RECOMMENDATION

The Planning and Building Department recommends that the application be refused.

2.0 BACKGROUND



Discussion


The subject property is located within the Mineola Neighbourhood character area of Mississauga Official Plan, which contains special site policies. The intent of the special site policies is to ensure that infill development maintains the character of the area and to mitigate potential negative impacts. The following policies apply in this instance:

a. preserve and enhance the generous front, rear and side yard setbacks;

Page 1of5

M MISSISSaUGa


e. ensure that new development has minimal impact on its adjacent neighbours with respect to overshadowing and overlook;

k. the building mass, side yards and rear yards should respect and relate to those of adjacent lots.




No other applications are currently in process.

4.0 COMMENTS

We note that in the absence of a Site Plan Approval application or a Building Permit application, we are unable to verify the accuracy of the requested variance or determine whether additional variances will be required. In order to confirm the accuracy of the requested variance, the applicant may apply for a pre-zoning review application and submit working drawings in order that a detailed zoning review may be completed.

We advise that this Department has concerns with the requested variance. The intent of the Zoning By-law with regard to the rear yard setback is to ensure that rear yard structures do not create an impact on the surrounding properties and to ensure that an appropriate amenity area is maintained. By significantly reducing the required rear yard setback, we are of the opinion that the proposed structure will not preserve or enhance the existing generous rear yard setback, which is a prominent characteristic of the Mineola Neighbourhood character area, and will create a negative massing impact on the easterly neighbouring property.

Furthermore, in review of an aerial image of the subject property, we advise that the neighbouring properties located on the northerly portion of Veronica. Drive do not contain similar built form conditions within the rear yard. Based on this, we are of the opinion that the proposal does not respect and relate to other rear yards within the immediate vicinity and does not maintain the character of the area."

The City of Mississauga Transportation and Works Department commented as follows (December 3, 2014):

"It should be noted that the proposed covered porch addition is significant in size and no grading and drainage information has been submitted with the application to ensure that the proposed structure will not have any drainage related impact on the abutting properties. In view of the above we would have no objections to the request provided that either a recirculated Site Plan Application be required or alternatively confirmation be received that our Development Construction Section has reviewed the proposal and is satisfied with any drainage related concerns."

A letter was received from J. & K. Boggs, residents of 158 Mineola Road West, stating their objection to the requested variances.


The Committee consented to the request and deferred the application to the January 8, 2015 hearing.

On January 8, 2015, Mr. G. Callaghan, authorized agent, attended and presented the application to permit the construction of an accessory structure in the rear yard of the subject proP.erty. Mr. Callaghan advised the Committee that during the interim of the deferral, the subject application was r~vised to confirm the accuracy of the requested variances. He noted that the subject application was no longer for an addition to the rear of the existing dwelling

Page 2 of 5

M MISSISSauGa


but had been revised to permit the construction of _an accessory structure (covered porch) in the rear yard of the subject property.

Mr. Callaghan advised the Committee that the covered porch was considered an accessory structure as the exit door at the rear of the dwelling did not align with the accessory structure. He noted that the covered porch had a wall along the rear of the structure with a number of window openings. He noted that the height of the covered porch maintained the minimum height of the roof of the existing dwelling and that the low pitch of the covered porch and addition of landscaping features along the rear yard of the subject property mitigated the negative massing impact of the proposed structure.



"1.0 RECOMMENDATION

The Planning and Building Department recommends that the application be refused.

2.0 BACKGROUND



Discussion


The subject property is located within the Mineola Neighbourhood character area of Mississauga Official Plan, which contains special site policies. The intent of the special site policies is to ensure that infill development maintains the character of the area and to mitigate potential negative impacts. The following policies apply in this instance:

i. large accessory structures will be discouraged, and any accessory structured will be located in side and rear yards only;

e. ensure that new development has minimal impact on its adjacent neighbours with respect to overshadowing and overlook;

k. the building mass, side yards and rear yards should respect and relate to those of adjacent lots. ·




No other applications are cur~ently in process.

4.0 COMMENTS

It is our recent understanding that the minor variance application has been amended by the applicant to eliminate the previous request for rear yard setback and to request relief from the Zoning By-law regarding accessory structure floor area and height. Based on the amended request, we note that the requested variances appe.ar to be correct. However, without the benefit of Site Plan Approval or Building Permit applications, we are unable to verify the accuracy of the requested variances or determine whether additional variances will be required.

Page 3 of 5

M MISSISSaUGa


We advise that this Department has concerns with the requested variances. The intent of the Zoning By-law with regard to restricting the floor area and height of accessory structures is to ensure that these structures do not create a massing impact on surrounding properties. In review of the elevations submitted, we are of the opinion that the orientation of the proposed structure, in conjunction with the excessive floor area and height, will create a significant massing impact upon the rear yard of the easterly neighbouring property.

Furthermore, in review of an aerial image of the subject property, we advise that the neighbouring properties located on the northerly portion of Veronica Drive do not contain similar built form conditions within the rear yard. Based on this, we are of the opinion that the building mass of the accessory structure does not respect and relate to other rear yards within the immediate vicinity and does not maintain the character of the area."


"Please refer to our comments submitted for the December 11, 2014 hearing of this application as those comments are still applicable."

A letter was received from J. McKinnon, the Chairman of the Credit Reserve Association, expressing concerns regarding the negative impact of the proposed accessory structure on the vistas, privacy and existing character of the· neighborhood. He requested the Committee to refuse the subject application.

A letter was received from K. & J. Boggs, residents of 158 Mineola Road West, stating their objection to the requ~sted variances. They expressed their concerns with respect to the excessive floor area and height of the proposed accessory structure. They requested the Committee to refuse the subject application.


The Committee after considering the submissions put forward by Mr. Callaghan and having reviewed the plans and comments received, is not satisfied that the request is desirable for the appropriate use of the subject property. The Committee indicated that the proposed floor area and height of the accessory structure was excessive in nature and would create a negative massing impact on the surrounding properties. The Committee noted that the building mass of the accessory structure in the rear yard of the subject property would visually be perceived as an extension of the existing dwelling. The Committee indicated that a limitation is set on the permitted dwelling depth to prevent an extensive property line at the side of the dwelling. The Committee indicated that the proposed accessory structure does not respect and relate to other rear yards within the immediate vicinity and does not maintain the character of the area.

The Committee is not satisfied that the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law and the Official Plan will be maintained in this instance.

The Committee is of the opinion that the requested variance is not minor in nature in this instance.

Page 4 of 5

~ MISSISSauGa

Accordingly, the Committee resolves to deny the request as presented.

MOVED BY: S. Patrizio SECONDED BY: D. Kennedy

Application Refused.



CARRIED



R. BENNETT (CHAIR)

' D. KENNEDY

,J11?;1· J. ROBINSON

D.G!!/ KfHOOAs





Page 5 of 5

Documents

COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT liiiJiij; - Mississauga BCIMC REAL TY CORPORATION 6550 GLEN ERIN DR A-6/15 MAXIMILIAN KOLBE FOUNDATION 4300 CAWTHRA RD A-7/15 DIXIE EGLINTON CONSTRUCTION 1325