The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPD-164-97THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON DN: COFA.GPA REPORT p Meeting: General Purpose and Administration Committee File # I - f Date: Monday, December 8, 1997 Res. # C-fA ", -) 0 Report #: PD- 164 -97 File #A97/072 to A97/077 inclusive By -law # Subject: MONITORING OF THE DECISIONS OF THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FOR MEETING OF NOVEMBER 27, 1997 FILE: A97/072 TO A97/077, INCLUSIVE Recommendations: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PD- 164 -97 be received; 2. THAT Council concur with the decision of the Committee of Adjustment made on November 2, 1997, for applications A97/072 and A97/075 to A97/077; and 3. THAT staff be authorized to appear before the Ontario Municipal Board to defend the decision of the Committee of Adjustment for applications A97/072 and A97/075 to A97/077 in the event of an appeal. 1.1 In accordance with Section 45 of the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, all applications received by the Municipality for minor variance are scheduled to be heard within 30 days of being received by the Secretary Treasurer. The Committee approved all six (6)' applications heard at the November 27, 1997 meeting. The purpose of each minor variance application and the Committee's decision are detailed in Attachment No. 2. 1.2 Application A97/073 and A97/074 were filed by 511060 Ontario Limited for two houses to be constructed on Borland Court in Bowmanville. Both proposed fu U ) REPORT NO. PD- 164 -97 PAGE 2 structures required relief from the rear yard setback to a distance of 5.3 metres (17.3 ft.) and 5.4 metres (17.7 ft.) as opposed to the required 7.5 metres (24.6 ft.). 1.3 The Public Works Department provided comments in objection to the applications. The comments advise that the application does not satisfy their guideline of a 6.0 m (19.6 ft.) minimum useable rear yard area. 1.4 In an attempt to increase the rear yard setback and reduce the amount of variance required, Planning staff prepared three alternative scenarios using a combination of the two models proposed by the applicant and a third model built on the street. By using two "Monte Carlo" models side by side, one of the models proposed by the applicant, staff managed rear yard setbacks of 6.95 metres (22.8 ft.) and 7.25 metres (23.8 ft.), as opposed to 7.5 metres. This scenario reduced the amount of variance requested and satisfied the Public Works Department. 1.5 The applicant opposed this alternative for marketing reasons, and driveway alignment. Committee in reviewing the application felt the applicant's submission provided a better streetscape and driveway alignment, and approved the applications as applied for. Two residents appeared at the meeting. One expressed concerns with the application and wanted assurances on the models being constructed. The second resident was upset with the Committee's decision and potential loss of privacy. 1.6 In November 1994, the applicant had applied for a minor variance at 48 Borland Court (See Attachment #1). The Committee of Adjustment approved that application, however, in reviewing the Committee's decision on December 12, 1994, Council passed the following resolution: REPORT NO. PD- 164 -97 PAGE 3 "THAT Application A94/051 be appealed, and the appeal be withdrawn at such time as the applicant provides the Director of Public Works with an acceptable grading plan and a letter of undertaking that no further minor variance applications will be applied for to reduce the rear yard setback for other lots in the same subdivision" 1.7 Grading plans for the lot were submitted and approved by the Public Works Department December 20, 1994, however, a letter of undertaking was never received. An Ontario Municipal Board hearing was scheduled for September 22, 1995. On September 7, 1995, the applicant forwarded a letter to the Ontario Municipal Board withdrawing his application. 1.8 Staff have reviewed the Committee's decisions with the Public Works Department and although neither Department agrees with the decisions, staff do not believe it is in the best use of staff resources to appeal these decisions to the Ontario Municipal Board. However, in consideration of the previous Council resolution of December 1994, should Council wish to appeal the Committee's decision, staff would appear at the Board in support of Council's decision. In this regard, a new recommendation #4 should be added to read: "THAT Council appeal the decisions of the Committee of Adjustment with respect to A97/073 and A 97/074." 1.9 Staff have reviewed the balance of the Committee's decisions and are satisfied that the decision to approve applications A97/072 and A97/075 to A97/077, inclusive, is in conformity with the Official Plan policies, consistent with the intent of the Zoning By -law, minor in nature and desirable. 1.10 Council's concurrence with the Committee of Adjustment decision is required in order to afford staff's official status before the Ontario Municipal Board. In the event of an appeal of any decision of the Committee of Adjustment, with the REPORT NO. PD- 164 -97 PAGE 4 exception of A97/073 and A97/074, staff would attend the hearing to defend the Committee's decision. Respectfully submitted, Franklin Wu, M.C.I.P., R.P.P. Director of Planning and Development Reviewed by, W. H. Stockwell Chief Administrative Officer CP *FW *cc Attachment #1 - Key Map for A97/073 and A97/074 Attachment #2 - Summary of Applications heard at the Nov. 27, 1997 meeting. 1 December 1997 Ub6 ATTACHMENT NO. 1 MINOR VARIANCE APPLICATION 94/051 MINOR VARIANCE APPLICATION 97/073 MINOR VARIANCE APPLICATION 97/074 LOT 11 y X-1 SAUNDERS AVENUE 0- Z z 0 UJ N U O BORLAND COURT CONCESSION STREET WEST BOWMANVILLE KEY MAP THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT PERIODIC REPORT FILE NUMBER: A97/072 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** APPLICANT: HARDISON, JOHN DAVID & KAREN OLIVE MARIA AGENT: STEPHEN F. SHINE PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 75 TOWNLINE RD. S. PART LOT: 35 CONCESSION: 2 TOWNSHIP: DARLINGTON PLAN NUMBER: - - ZONING: R1 HEARING DATE: 27- Nov -97 DECISION: APPROVED APPEAL DATE: 17- Dec -97 MINOR VARIANCE: TO RECOGNIZE THE EXISTING GARAGE WITH A SIDE YARD SETBACK OF 1.12 M (3.67 FT.) AND FRAME SHED WITH A REAR YARD SETBACK OF 0.83 M (2.72 FEET) INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 1.2 M (3.94 FT) REAR AND SIDE YARD SETBACKS. REASON FOR DECISION: THAT AS THE APPLICATION IS CONSIDERED TO BE IN CONFORMITY WITH THE OFFICIAL PLAN AND THE ZONING BY -LAW AND IS DEEMED TO BE MINOR AND DESIRABLE, THE APPLICATION BE APPROVED AS APPLIED FOR. 6b b THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT PERIODIC REPORT FILE NUMBER: A97/073 APPLICANT: 511060 ONTARIO LIMITED AGENT: FRANK VELTRI PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 38 BORLAND COURT PART LOT: 11 CONCESSION: 2 TOWNSHIP: BOWMANVILLE PLAN NUMBER: 40M -1680 -7R ZONING: R1 HEARING DATE: 27- Nov -97 DECISION: APPROVED APPEAL DATE: 17- Dec -97 MINOR VARIANCE: TO REDUCE THE REAR YARD SET BACK TO 5.3 M (17.4 FEET), INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 7.5 M (24.6 FEET) REAR YARD SETBACK. REASON FOR DECISION: THAT AS THE APPLICATION IS CONSIDERED TO BE IN CONFORMITY WITH THE OFFICIAL PLAN AND THE ZONING BY -LAW, THE APPLICATION BE APPROVED AT 5.3 M REAR YARD SUBJECT TO THE "MONTE CARLO" BEING THE MODEL CONSTRUCTED ON THIS LOT. 669 THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT PERIODIC REPORT FILE NUMBER: A97/074 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** APPLICANT: 511060 ONTARIO LIMITED AGENT: FRANK VELTRI PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 40 BORLAND COURT PART LOT: 11 CONCESSION: 2 TOWNSHIP: BOWMANVILLE PLAN NUMBER: 40M -1680 -7L ZONING: R1 HEARING DATE: 27- Nov -97 DECISION: APPROVED APPEAL DATE: 17- Dec -97 MINOR VARIANCE: TO REDUCE THE REAR YARD SETBACK TO 5.4 M (17.72 FEET), INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 7.5 M (24.6 FEET) REAR YARD SETBACK. REASON FOR DECISION: THAT AS THE APPLICATION IS CONSIDERED TO BE IN CONFORMITY WITH THE OFFICIAL PLAN AND THE ZONING BY -LAW, THE APPLICATION BE APPROVED AT 5.4 M REAR YARD SUBJECT TO THE "NINA" BEING THE MODEL CONSTRUCTED ON THIS LOT. 6/0 THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT PERIODIC REPORT FILE NUMBER: A97/075 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** APPLICANT: VELTRI & SON LIMITED AGENT: MARIO VELTRI PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 2 HOGAN CRESCENT PART LOT: 11 CONCESSION: 2 TOWNSHIP: BOWMANVILLE PLAN NUMBER: 40M -1886 -5R ZONING: Rl HEARING DATE: 27- Nov -97 DECISION: APPROVED APPEAL DATE: 17- Dec -97 MINOR VARIANCE: TO PERMIT A DWELLING HAVING AN EXTERIOR SIDE YARD SETBACK OF 4 M (13.12 FEET), INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 6 M (19.68 FEET) EXTERIOR SIDE YARD SETBACK. REASON FOR DECISION: THAT AS THE APPLICATION IS CONSIDERED TO BE IN CONFORMITY WITH THE OFFICIAL PLAN AND THE ZONING BY -LAW, THE APPLICATION BE APPROVED AS APPLIED FOR, SUBJECT TO A GRADING PLAN BEING SUBMITTED AND APPROVED WITHIN 15 DAYS OF THE DECISION. THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT PERIODIC REPORT FILE NUMBER: A97/076 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** APPLICANT: VELTRI & SON LIMITED AGENT: MARIO VELTRI PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 160 HIGH STREET PART LOT: 11 CONCESSION: 2 TOWNSHIP: BOWMANVILLE Ipjffffl ZONING: R1 HEARING DATE: 27- Nov -97 DECISION: APPROVED APPEAL DATE: 17- Dec -97 MINOR VARIANCE: TO PERMIT A DWELLING HAVING AN EXTERIOR SIDE YARD SETBACK OF 3 M (9.84 FEET), INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 6 M (19.68 FEET) EXTERIOR SIDE YARD SETBACK. REASON FOR DECISION: THAT AS THE APPLICATION IS CONSIDERED TO BE IN CONFORMITY WITH THE OFFICIAL PLAN AND THE ZONING BY -LAW AND IS MINOR IN NATURE AND DESIRABLE, THE APPLICATION BE APPROVED AT A 3.85 M EXTERIOR SIDE YARD. THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT PERIODIC REPORT FILE NUMBER: A97/077 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** APPLICANT: VELTRI & SON LIMITED AGENT: MARIO VELTRI PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 178 HIGH STREET PART LOT: 11 CONCESSION: 2 TOWNSHIP: BOWMANVILLE PLAN NUMBER: 40M -1886 -9R ZONING: Rl HEARING DATE: 27- NOV -97 DECISION: APPROVED APPEAL DATE: 17- Dec -97 MINOR VARIANCE: TO PERMIT A DWELLING HAVING AN EXTERIOR SIDE YARD SETBACK OF 4 M (13.12 FEET), INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 6 M (19.68 FEET) EXTERIOR SIDE YARD SETBACK. REASON FOR DECISION: THAT AS THE APPLICATION IS CONSIDERED TO BE IN CONFORMITY WITH THE OFFICIAL PLAN AND THE ZONING BY -LAW, THE APPLICATION BE APPROVED AT 3.75 M EXTERIOR SIDE YARD, SUBJECT TO A GRADING PLAN BEING SUBMITTED AND APPROVED WITHIN 15 DAYS OF THE HEARING. 6/3