Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-05-27Ciarftwn Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington May 27, 2021 Municipal Administrative Centre, Council Chambers 40 Temperance Street, Bowmanville Preliminary Note In response to the Province's Emergency Order and to maintain physical distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic, this Committee of Adjustment meeting took place in an electronic format. Members listed as being "electronically present," as well as applicants and members of the public, participated though the teleconferencing platform Microsoft Teams, which allows participation through a computer's video and audio, or by telephone. Electronically present: Todd Taylor Chairperson Aibelle Babista Acting Secretary -Treasurer Annette VanDyk Meeting Host Shelley Pohjola Member Dave Eastman Member Noel Gamble Member Gord Wallace Member Anne Taylor Scott (for A2021-0013) Planning Staff Mitch Morawetz (forA2021-0014) Planning Staff Sean Jeffrey Planning Staff Regrets: John Bate 1. Call to Order The Chair called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. 2. Disclosures of Pecuniary Interest There were no pecuniary interests stated for this meeting. Member Minutes from May 27, 2021 Page 2 3. Applications: 3.1 A2020-0051 Owner/Applicant: Alan Johansen 11 Church Street, Bowmanville A. Johansen participated via the Teams app with audio and video and gave a verbal presentation to the Committee in favour of the application and explained the purpose. D. Eastman asked if a building permit was issued before the need for a minor variance was recognized. A. Johansen responded and said a building permit was issued prior to realizing the need for a minor variance. D. Eastman asked if the second parking space was wide enough to comply with the zoning requirements. A. Johansen responded and said the parking space remained outside of the sight triangle. No other persons spoke in support or opposition of the application. No other Committee Members had questions or comments. Motion to approve as recommended moved by N. Gamble, seconded by D. Eastman. Full text of decision: "That application A2020-0051 for a minor variance to Section 12.2.d.i) of Zoning By-law 84-63 to reduce the front yard setback from the minimum required 4.5 metres to 4.1 metres to the dwelling be approved as it is minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land and maintains the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law, the Durham Region Official Plan and Clarington Official Plan." "Carried" 3.2 A2021-0012 Owner/Applicant: Barry Mount & Kerry Sanders Agent: R. Bouma Construction Inc. 5 Craig Court, Part Lot 10, Concession 3, Former Township of Darlington R. Bouma participated via the Teams app with audio only. He gave a verbal presentation to the Committee in favour of the application and stated the purpose. No other persons spoke in support or opposition of the application. No other Committee Members had questions or comments. Minutes from May 27, 2021 Page 3 Motion to approve as recommended moved by S. Pohjola, seconded by G. Wallace Full text of decision: "That application A2021-0012 for minor variances to Section 3.1.c. of the Zoning By-law to facilitate the construction of a detached garage by increasing the maximum permitted total floor area for accessory buildings from 90 square metres to 104 square metres and to recognize the height of 4.9 metres for an existing children's play structure, be approved as it is minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land and maintains the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law, the Durham Region Official Plan and Clarington Official Plan". "Carried" 3.3 A2021-0013 Owner/Applicant: Sasi Kumar Agent: Stonefield Homes- Ken Hoy 3238 Tooley Road, Courtice K. Hoy participated via the Teams app with audio only. He gave a verbal presentation to the Committee in favour of the application and explained the purpose as to facilitate a land division requested by the applicant. He added that through consultation with Planning Staff that a variance was required to reduce the lot frontage. He noted that the applicant desired two homes on the property to improve the existing neighbourhood. S. Pohjola, asked the agent about the status of the Land Division application. K. Hoy stated that the land division process has not started yet. S. Pohjola asked Planning Staff whether Durham Regional Health was circulated for this minor variance application. A. Babista clarified that Durham Health was not circulated on this application. A. Babista explained that at this preliminary stage, Staff do not have a siting or house plan for the property. The purpose of this application is to set the zoning in place. Durham Health's comments would be required when those plans come forward and will be involved at both the time of lot creation (land division stage) and at the building permit stage. S. Pohjola asked Planning Staff what the rationale was for the 17 metre frontage that derived from the Zoning By-law Amendment in 2016. A. Babista clarified that the 2016 Zoning By-law Amendment came forward in response to the public opposition to development applications in the Tooley Road neighbourhood. The minimum lot frontage requirement of 17 metres was introduced to help preserve the character of the street and an increased front yard setback was established to maintain the large landscaped frontages and minimize the impact of intensified severances for future development. Minutes from May 27, 2021 Page 4 D. Eastman asked Planning Staff whether the property was serviced by Municipal water. A. Babista explained that within an urban area, it is more likely that lots will have access to municipal water. She was unsure whether the lots on Tooley Road all rely on private wells, but some do. K. Hoy stated that the subject property currently relies on private septic and mentioned the possibility about installing a tertiary septic system versus a traditional tile field and reserve area. D. Eastman asked Staff about their commitment in 2016 to maintain the minimum 17 metre frontage requirement. A. Babista confirmed there were a number of discussions with K. Hoy about the details of the minor variance application. K. Hoy represents an owner with a lot that is deficient by 1 metre in order to accommodate a future infill lot, thus resulting in a minor variance application. As the original lot has a frontage of 33 metres, Staff discussed different lot configurations and options for the proposed severed and retained lots. One option he could have pursued was a minor variance for each of the severed and retained lot and requesting permission for a 16.5 metre lot frontage for each however he decided upon proceeding with one compliant 17 metre lot, and one lot requiring a minor variance of 16 metres in order to proceed to a land division application. While this proposed minor variance deviates from the 2016 rezoning, the proposed lots would be larger than the minimum of 15 metres required by the original R1 Zone regulations. The Chair asked if any member of the public wanted to speak. Justin Kennedy, spouse of Halina Workman, and a resident of Tooley Road spoke in opposition to the application. They stated that 200-foot (60 metre) lots experience flooding issues. Other residents experienced septic system issues and new builders caused greater issues on existing properties. The resident clarified that properties on Tooley rely on wells although not all rely on private septic. The resident also stated that sewers do not exist on Tooley Road and the closest sewer line is on Nash Road. K. Hoy stated that he had never encountered issues of that sort and there are solutions to flooding. He stated that he will commit to ensure appropriate drainage on the property. As a local builder he promised that his work will not cause severe impacts in the community. A resident of Tooley Road, Eleanor Von Gunten, spoke in opposition to the application. She has lived on Tooley Road since 1948 and experienced many water issues in this area. She had agreed with Halminen Homes to have a minimum 17 metre frontage during the 2016 rezoning process. She stated that she and other Tooley Road residents submitted opposition letter to Staff with regards to the application. She reiterated resident comments raised during the 2016 rezoning process. Previous Tooley Road residents who requested severances were told by Planning Staff that they could not proceed to sever. Minutes from May 27, 2021 Page 5 A resident of Tooley Road, Donna Murray, mentioned she was involved in the 2016 rezoning. She was upset about where this had led the residents since that time and questioned the integrity of Staff. She also expressed concerns for water issues on the west side Tooley Road. N. Gamble asked Staff how they could ensure this property and others on Tooley Road wouldn't seek further variance reductions to frontage. A. Babista responded noting that the Minor Variance application is available to anyone. She explained that the proposed lot area for both the proposed severed and retained lots were sufficient for appropriate drainage as per the minimum lot area regulations in the Zoning By-law and added that Staff's rationale for their support of the subject application was to meet the intensification objectives in the local and Regional Official Plans, while maintaining the overall intent of the Zoning By-law. She also explained that the R1-95 Zone specifically permits single detached dwellings which require a minimum frontage of 17 metres, whereas the parent R1 Zone permits a single detached dwelling with a minimum frontage of 15 metres. Staff found that a proposed 16 metre frontage was a compromise and met the four tests of a minor variance. Any development application in the neighbourhood must be analysed under the policies in place and if a deficiency is noted Staff would direct the applicant as to whether a minor variance or a rezoning would be the necessary application depending on the nature of the application A resident of Tooley Road, Halina Workman, spoke in opposition to the application. She agreed with Ms. Murray's comments. She wanted to ensure the character is maintained as they were initially promised during the 2016 rezoning process. D. Eastman asked Staff how the residents could be satisfied if the water issues were addressed. A. Babista referenced the Staff Report before the Committee, which included comments from the Building Division of Clarington's Planning & Development Department, and the Infrastructure Division of Clarington's Public Works Department, which stated that they had no issues with the application in principle. Ms. Murray mentioned that one resident had increased insurance fees due to the water and flooding issues. She emphasized her concern for these issues herself and many other residents continue to experience. No other members of the public spoke in support or in opposition of the application. No other Committee Members had questions or comments. Motion to approve as recommended by G. Wallace, seconded by S. Pohjola. Full text of decision: "That application A2021-0013 for a minor variance to Section 12.4.95 of Zoning By-law 84-63 to facilitate a land division that would have the effect of creating a new lot for a single detached dwelling by reducing the minimum lot frontage from 17 metres to 16 metres for the severed lot, be approved as it is minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land and maintains the general intent and Minutes from May 27, 2021 Page 6 purpose of the Zoning By-law, the Durham Region Official Plan and Clarington Official Plan.." "Carried" 3.5 A2021-0014 Owner/Applicant: High Street Courtice Inc.- Alan Hirschfield Agent: SVN Architects + Planners- Kelly Graham 1475-1495 Highway 2, Courtice K. Graham participated via the Teams app with audio only. She gave a verbal and power -point presentation to the Committee, comparing the previous and current proposed site plans, which replaced one building with stacked townhouse units and eliminated additional guest parking, and increased the height of the two apartment buildings by one storey. She explained the minimum density is still maintained and the requested variances propose no adverse impacts to the neighbourhood or natural environment. The Chair asked if any members of the public wanted to speak. A nearby resident, Sheila Costanzi, spoke in opposition to the proposal. She stated that increasing the building heights to 10 storeys with an HVAC System above the building increases the height further. K. Graham responded by stating that the HVAC equipment is a permitted encroachment by the Zoning By-law. Ms. Costanzi questioned the increased development along Highway 2 extending further east in Durham and why Staff must approve this proposal. M. Morawetz explained that all levels of government address the requirements for increased density along transit corridors, such as Highway 2, through their policy direction for development. He added that this helps maintain and improve existing infrastructure within key locations in Urban Areas. Ms. Costanzi asked about the phasing and timing of the project. K. Graham stated that there is not an exact time schedule but clarified the two 10 storey buildings is proposed to commence in the second phase. A nearby resident, Dietmar Reiner, spoke in opposition to the application and the increased density proposed. He provided a written submission to Staff and sought clarity on the variance. K. Graham responded to say the density did not change and remains at 104 units per hectare. The revised proposal increased the total unit count by one. She added that more townhouses were added, and the size of units were larger than previously Minutes from May 27, 2021 Page 7 proposed. She added that the density was addressed at the time of the Official Plan Amendment and this proposal did not deviate from that measure. Mr. Reiner asked why the applicant is proposing a minor variance if there is only one additional unit in the revised proposal. M. Morawetz, explained the minor variance acknowledges the change in unit count that is associated with the type of built form that is permitted Zoning By-law 84-63. K. Graham responded to say the Gross Floor Area decreased by 10 square metres. She added that this plan proposes a lower volume of development and through the site plan review process, the change in density and built form type was influenced by the pandemic and the desire from purchasers to acquire a townhouse style unit with independent access to private outdoor amenity spaces A nearby resident, Randy Boissoin, spoke in opposition to the application and asked whether the proposed parkette size is large enough to accommodate 400 new families. He also sought clarity on the proposed buildings and unit size and stated his concern with the visual impact from the towers. K. Graham explained this minor variance application does not relate to the proposed towers, and that the change in built form to townhouses reduced the need for additional surface parking and introduced private garages and driveways for multi -use purposes. K. Graham and M. Morawetz added that with different parking layouts, bring different parking efficiencies. No other members of the public spoke in support or in opposition of the application. No other Committee Members had questions or comments. Motion to approve as recommended by D. Eastman, seconded by N. Gamble. Full text of decision: "That application A2021-0014 for a minor variance to Section 15.4.30 a., b. iii) and e. of Zoning By-law 84-63 to facilitate a proposed multi -unit residential development by permitting Stacked Townhouse Dwellings subject to the regulations for Link Townhouse Dwellings in the R4-30 Zone, and by increasing the maximum percentage of Link Townhouse Dwellings relative to the total number of units in the R4-30 Zone from 15% to 16%, be approved as it is minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land and maintains the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law, the Durham Region Official Plan and Clarington Official Plan." "Carried" Minutes from May 27, 2021 Page 8 3.3 A2021-0015 Owner/Applicant: Natmar Properties Inc. Agent: TD Consulting Inc. -Tom deBoer 221 Lake Road, Bowmanville T. deBoer participated via the Teams app with audio and video. He gave a verbal presentation to the Committee in favour of the application and explained the purpose to reduce the side yard setback from 7.5 metres to 6.5 metres and the required parking spaces from 113 to 103 spaces. D. Eastman asked for clarification on the reduced number of parking spaces. T. deBoer, responded that a reduction of 10 spaces is proposed. D. Eastman asked Staff to clarify the proposed number of parking spaces. A. Babista responded that the Staff report before the Committee is correct in that the proposed number of parking spaces is 73. A. Taylor Scott stated the application indicated a proposed 103 parking spaces but said she relied on the recommendation in the Staff report prepared in consultation with B. Weiler who is the lead planner on the file. T. deBoer, then stated the proposed number of parking spaces was 76 instead of 103. A. Babista clarified to the Committee that by doing a count of the parking spaces on the site plan provided in the Staff report, she could confirm a parking space count of 73. No other persons spoke in support or opposition of the application. No other Committee Members had questions or comments. Motion to approve as recommended by S. Pohjola, seconded by N. Gamble. Full text of decision: "That application A2021-0015 for a minor variance to Sections 3.16 a. and 24.2 c. ii). of Zoning By-law 84-63 to facilitate the construction of a six -unit industrial building by reducing the minimum exterior side yard setback from 7.5 metres to 6.5 metres and by reducing the minimum number of parking spaces from 113 to 73, be approved as it is minor in nature, desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land and maintains the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law, the Durham Region Official Plan and Clarington Official Plan." "Carried" Minutes from May 27, 2021 Page 9 4. Adoption of Minutes of Previous Meeting, May 13, 2021 Moved by D. Eastman, seconded by S. Pohjola. "That the minutes of the Committee of Adjustment, held on May 13, 2021 be Approved." "Carried" 5. Other Business • Appeal date for the foregoing applications is June 16, 2021. • Next Meeting of the Committee of Adjustment is scheduled for June 24, 2021. No other business. 6. Adjournment Moved by N. Gamble, seconded by D. Eastman. "That the meeting adjourn at 8:35 pm."