The Minutes of the 19 TH Meeting of the Vaughan Committee of Adjustment for the year 2005 THURSDAY, OCTOBER 20, :00p.m.

Transcription

1 The Minutes of the 19 TH Meeting of the Vaughan Committee of Adjustment for the year 2005 THURSDAY, OCTOBER 20, 2005 Present at the meeting were: 6:00p.m. M. Mauti L. Fluxgold D. H. Kang M. S. Panicali Members of Staff present: Anne Markovsky, Assistant to the Secretary-Treasurer Lenore Providence, Assistant to the Secretary-Treasurer Glenn White, Planner Craig Coulter, Plans Examiner INTRODUCTION OF ADDENDUM REPORTS MOVED L. Fluxgold Seconded by M. S. Panicali That the addendum reports be incorporated into the minutes and be on view at the back of the room in the Report Book. CARRIED DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST None. ADOPTION OR CORRECTION OF MINUTES MOVED by L. Fluxgold THAT the minutes of the Committee of Adjustment Meeting of Thursday, SEPTEMBER 29, 2005, be adopted as circulated. CARRIED It should be noted that M. S. Panicali abstained from voting on the above matter as he was not present at the SEPTEMBER 29, 2005 hearing. ADJOURNMENTS AND/OR DEFERRALS A fax was received on October 19, 2005 from Jim Riddell the applicant, requesting that Item # 10, File No. A227/ ONTARIO INC., be adjourned to the NOVEMBER 17, 2005, due to Planning Staff informing the applicant that the Site Development application will not be considered by Council until November. A fax was received on October 19, 2005 from Gerry Borean, the agent, requesting that Item # 12, File No. B047/05 Anne & Jack Wright, be adjourned to the NOVEMBER 17, 2005, due to Building Staff informing the agent that a Minor Variance application (A346/05) is required. Both applications will be heard together on November 17, An was received on October 17, 2005 from Lawrence M. Weiner, the applicant, requesting that Item # 14, File No. A300/05 Lawrence Martin & Jodi Michelle WEINER, be adjourned to the NOVEMBER 17, 2005, due to Planning Staff requesting the applicants provide a woodlot assessment study. Page 1 of 22

2 ADJOURNMENTS AND/OR DEFERRALS Cont d. A fax was received on October 14, 2005 from Charles Katz, the applicant, requesting that Item # 18, File No. A306/05 Charles Katz, be adjourned to the DECEMBER 8, 2005, due to Planning Staff requesting the applicant provide a woodlot assessment study. A fax was received on October 19, 2005 from Andrea Armstrong, the agent, requesting that Item # 23, File No. A311/05 MICHAEL BERSHADSKY, be adjourned to the NOVEMBER 17, 2005, due to Planning Staff requesting the applicants provide a woodlot assessment study. A fax was received on October 17, 2005 from Lou Marino, the agent, requesting that Item s 26 to 34, File Nos. A314/05 to A322/05 YONG JOON & KYOENGJA LEE, KEVIN & AUDREY LEVY, BRIAN & MICHELLE TORRIE, OLGA & SERGUEI SIIATSKI, JOSEPH LUK, LEANNE & JEFFREY CHANNELL, MARCIO & DEBBIE BETTENCOURT, EVGENY & MIRIAM SHOHET, DEBORAH LEWI, be adjourned to the DECEMBER 8, 2005, due to Planning Staff requesting the applicants provide a woodlot assessment study. A letter was received on October 19, 2005 from Artyom Kurlandski, the applicant, requesting that Item # 23, File No. A324/05 ARTYOM KURLANDSKI, be adjourned to the NOVEMBER 17, 2005, due to Planning Staff requesting the applicants provide a woodlot assessment study. MOVED by L. Fluxgold Seconded by M. S. Panicali THAT Item # 10, File No. A227/ ONTARIO INC., be adjourned to the NOVEMBER 17, 2005 meeting. THAT Item # 12, File No. B047/05 Anne & Jack Wright, be adjourned to the NOVEMBER 17, 2005 meeting. THAT Item # 14, File No. A300/05 Lawrence Martin & Jodi Michelle WEINER, be adjourned to the NOVEMBER 17, 2005 meeting. THAT Item # 18, File No. A306/05 Charles Katz, be adjourned to the DECEMBER 8, 2005 meeting. THAT Item # 23, File No. A311/05 MICHAEL BERSHADSKY, be adjourned to the NOVEMBER 17, 2005 meeting. THAT Item s 26 to 34, File Nos. A314/05 to A322/05 YONG JOON & KYOENGJA LEE, KEVIN & AUDREY LEVY, BRIAN & MICHELLE TORRIE, OLGA & SERGUEI SIIATSKI, JOSEPH LUK, LEANNE & JEFFREY CHANNELL, MARCIO & DEBBIE BETTENCOURT, EVGENY & MIRIAM SHOHET, DEBORAH LEWI, be adjourned to the DECEMBER 8, 2005 meeting. THAT Item # 23, File No. A324/05 ARTYOM KURLANDSKI, be adjourned to the NOVEMBER 17, 2005 meeting. ADMINISTRATIVE CORRECTIONS None. Page 2 of 22

3 (PREVIOUSLY ADJOURNED FROM THE JUNE 23, 2005, JULY 7 & 21 MEETINGS) 1. FILE NO: A148/05 ELENA BELLI Part of Lot 22, Concession 8, (Lot 41, Registered Plan No. 65M-2863, municipally known as 502 Westridge Drive, Kleinburg). The subject lands are zoned R1, Residential under By-law 1-88 as amended and further subject to Exception 9(563). The purpose of this application is to request variances to permit the maintenance of an existing open gazebo and an existing pergola as follows: 1. An accessory building (Gazebo) located in the side yard. 2. An architectural feature (Pergola) with a height of 2.5m set back from the interior lot line a minimum of 0.25m. 1. Accessory buildings shall be located within the rear yard. 2. Any architectural features with a height greater than 1.8m shall be set back from the property line an equal distance to the height (2.5m). Mr. Dino Eleuteri, the agent appeared on behalf of the applicant and gave a brief submission regarding the request. There were discussions between the agent, the Committee and staff. The Committee made a request for pictures of the yard, a letter of support from the new neighbour and that the letter be shown to the Planning Department prior to the next scheduled meeting. On June 16, 2005, a letter of objection with pictures was received from Jeffrey L. Brookhouser of 510 Westridge Drive, Kleinburg, Ontario, Canada, L0J 1C0. The Development Planning Department made the following written comments: The applicant is requesting a variance to permit the maintenance of an existing open gazebo and pergola in the side yard. The By-law states an accessory building shall be located within the rear yard. The applicant has indicated that the gazebo is setback 1.5m from the side lot line and is 4.5 m by 4.5m in area. The By-law states that accessory buildings shall be located within the rear yard not the side yard. The architectural structure (pergola) is located in the interior side yard with the dimensions of 2.5m high by 5.5m long. The By-law states any architectural feature with a height greater than 1.8m shall be setback from the property line an equal distance to the height (2.5m). The architectural feature is permit in the interior side yard as per the By-law requirement. The applicant is providing a minimum interior side yard setback of 0.25m. The applicant s rear yard is 28m deep at the shallowest point. Staff questions why the gazebo could not be located in the rear yard with setbacks complying with the By-law. This would provide the structure with greater distance from property lines and the abutting dwellings and lessen the impact of the structure on the abutting neighbours. Given the height of the architectural feature (2.5m/8.2ft), the proposed setback of 0.25m should be increased to lessen the impact of the pergola on the abutting neighbour. The Development Planning Department does not support Variance Application A148/05, as proposed and does not consider it to be appropriate for the development of the lands. Page 3 of 22

4 (PREVIOUSLY ADJOURNED FROM THE JUNE 23, 2005, JULY 7 & 21 MEETINGS) 1. FILE NO: A148/05 ELENA BELLI There were no other objections from any Departments or Agencies. MOVED by L. Fluxgold Seconded by M. S. Panicali THAT Application No. A148/05 ELENA BELLI, be ADJOURNED, to the NOVEMBER 3, 2005 meeting, so that the applicant can provide the Committee and the Planning Department with a letter of support of the immediate new neighbor and provide the Committee with pictures of the side and rear yard. CONSENT AND (PREVIOUSLY ADJOURNED FROM THE SEPTEMBER 29, 2005 MEETING) 2. FILE NOS: B046/05, A241/05 & A242/05 to WILLIAM & JOANA POTKIDIS 4. Part of Lot 7, Concession 7, (Part of Lot 7, Concession 7, (Parts Lots 4 & 5, Registered Plan No. 546, municipally known as 69 Clarence Street, Woodbridge). B046/05 - The purpose of this application is to request the consent of the Committee of Adjustment to convey a parcel of land as a creation of a new lot for residential purposes, together with all required easements and right-of-ways, if required, and retain the land for residential purposes. There is an existing garage on the subject lands and a proposed single family detached dwelling. There is an existing one and a half storey, single family detached dwelling on the retained lands. A241/05 & A242/05 -The purpose of these applications is to request authorization of variances to facilitate the severance of the total lands, (B046/05), notwithstanding, the proposed changes to the existing By-Law & current By-law requirements are as follows: A241/05 (Subject lands) 1. A minimum 1.61m rear yard setback to the existing garage. 2. An accessory building or structure constructed on a lot prior to the time of construction of the main building to which it is accessory. 1. A minimum required rear yard setback of 7.5m. 2. No accessory building or structure shall constructed on a lot prior to the time of construction of the main building to which it is accessory. A242/05 (Retained lands) 1. An exterior side yard setback of 1.12m. 2. A rear yard setback of 4.8m to the stairs and deck. 1. A minimum required exterior side yard setback of 4.5m. 2. A minimum required rear yard setback of 5.7m to the deck and stairs. The subject and retained lands are zoned R3, Residential under By-Law 1-88 as amended. Page 4 of 22

5 CONSENT AND (PREVIOUSLY ADJOURNED FROM THE SEPTEMBER 29, 2005 MEETING) 2. FILE NOS: B046/05, A241/05 & A242/05 to WILLIAM & JOANA POTKIDIS 4. William Potkidis, the applicant appeared on his own behalf. There were discussions between the applicant, the Committee and Planning staff. The Committee suggested the applications be stood down until a copy of Planning s revised comments dated October 12, 2005 can be provided. MOVED by L. Fluxgold Seconded by M. S. Panicali THAT Application No. B046/05, A241/05 & A242/05, WILLIAM & JOANA POTKIDIS, be STOOD DOWN, until a copy of the Development Planning comments dated October 12, 2005 can be provided to the Committee. (PREVIOUSLY ADJOURNED FROM SEPTEMBER 29, 2005 MEETING) 5. FILE NO.: A233/05 PETRO-CANADA Part of Lot 8, Concession 4, (Part of Parcel 19-2, Registered Plan No. 65M-2696, Reference Plan No.65R-19814, municipally known as 120 MacIntosh Blvd., Concord.) The subject lands are zoned EM2, General Employment Area under By-law 1-88 subject to Exception 9(995) as amended. Prior to the hearing the applicant s agent amended the application, sketch and notice of application to read as follows:. rear yard setback 6.533m.. NOT rear yard setback 2.385m. THEREFORE the purpose of this application is to request variances to permit the construction of a one storey Petro-Pass building, as follows: The applicant is requesting variances to permit the construction of a one storey Petro-Pass building, as follows: 1. Customer Service Building = 214.7m 2 maximum area 2. Rear Yard Setback = 6.533m 3. Interior Side Yard Setback = 2.180m 1. Customer Service Building = 115m 2 maximum area 2. Rear Yard Setback = 12m 3. Interior Side Yard Setback = 3m Note: The existing building to be demolished. Page 5 of 22

6 (PREVIOUSLY ADJOURNED FROM SEPTEMBER 29, 2005 MEETING) 5. FILE NO.: A233/05 PETRO-CANADA Other Planning Act Applications The land which is the subject in this application is also the subject of an application under the Planning act for: Consent Application File No. Site Development Application and Zoning Amendment Application Site Development Applications B084/97 APPROVED, creation of a new lot. Certificate issued March 25, DA & Z (Eaglebrook Inc. of Canada), Adopted by Council September 29, DA (Petro-Canada), Adopted by Council May 24, There was no one present to represent the applicant. There were no objections from any Departments or Agencies. MOVED by L. Fluxgold Seconded by M. S. Panicali THAT Application No. A233/05 PETRO-CANADA, be APPROVED AS AMENDED in accordance with the sketch attached. CARRIED 6. FILE NO: A297/05 ENZO AND JULIE IAFRATE Part of Lot 24, Concession 4, (Lot 31, Registered Plan No. 65M-3106, municipally known as 126 Sierra Court, Maple). The subject lands are zoned R2, Residential under By-law 1-88 subject to Exception 9(840) as amended. The applicant is requesting variances to permit the maintenance of an existing two-storey single family detached dwelling with the garage attached, notwithstanding, the proposed changes to the existing By-Law & current By-Law requirements are as follows: 1. Rear yard setback to accessory structure 1. Rear yard setback to accessory structure = (cabana) = 7.5m 9.0m 2. Interior side yard setback to accessory 2. Interior side yard setback to accessory structure (cabana) = 0.25m structure = 1.2m 3. Interior side yard setback to door of the 3. Interior side yard setback to door = 1.8m cabana = 0.55m 4. Interior side yard setback to pool equipment = 4. Interior side yard setback to pool equipment = 0.30m 1.2m 5. Interior side yard setback to air conditioner = 5. Interior side yard setback to air conditioner = 0.86m. 1.2m. 6. Rear yard setback to spa = 1.2m 6. Rear yard setback to spa = 1.5m 7. Interior side yard setback to pergola = 1.6m 7. Interior side yard setback to pergola = 2.35m. (Required setback is equal to the height of the pergola based on information provided by the applicant) Page 6 of 22

7 6. FILE NO: A297/05 ENZO AND JULIE IAFRATE Enzo Iafrate, the applicant, appeared on his own behalf. Letters of support were received from Marco Lorenti, 120 Sierra Court, Maple, Ontario, L6A 2N7 and Greg and Lu Ciana Spooner, 130 Sierra Court, Maple, Ontario, L6A 2N7. A letter of opposition was received from Luciano Merocchi, 375 Melville Avenue, Maple, Ontario L6A 2N8. There were no objections from any Departments or Agencies. The Committee is of the opinion that the variances sought can be considered minor and are desirable for the appropriate development and use of the land. The general intent and purpose of the By-law and the Official Plan will be maintained. MOVED by L. Fluxgold Seconded by M. S. Panicali THAT Application No. A297/05, ENZO AND JULIE IAFRATE, be APPROVED in accordance with the sketch attached 7. FILE NO: A301/05 IKEA PROPERTIES LTD. Part of Lot 4, Concession 5, (Municipally known as 200 Interchange Way, Concord). The subject lands are zoned C10 Corporate District Zone, under By-Law 1-88 as amended and further subject to Exception 9(957). The applicant is requesting a variance to permit the construction of a proposed architectural element of increased height at the entrance to the store, notwithstanding, the proposed changes to the existing By-Law & current By-Law requirements are as follows: 1. Maximum building height m. 1. Maximum building height 15.0m. 2. A maximum building height of 12.34m. 2. A maximum building height of 9.5m Other Planning Act Applications The land which is the subject in this application was also the subject of another application under the Planning Act: Site Plan File #: DA.O2.012 Issued August 13, 2002 Consent Applications File #: B017/02 Approved April 26/02 (Creation of new lot) Certificates Issued Jun 21/02 File #: B20/02 & B21/02 Approved April 26/02 (Easements) Certificates Issued Jun 21/02 Minor Variance File #: A080/02 Approved April 26/02 lands to be exempt from Build to Zone requirement& 0.0m. landscape strips abutting a street. Page 7 of 22

8 7. FILE NO: A301/05 IKEA PROPERTIES LTD. Paul Sipos, the agent, appeared on behalf of the applicant. There were no objections from any Departments or Agencies. THAT the Committee is of the opinion that the variance sought can be considered minor and is desirable for the appropriate development and use of the land. The general intent and purpose of the By-law and the Official Plan will be maintained. MOVED by M. S. Panicali AND THAT Application No. A301/05, IKEA PROPERTIES LTD., be APPROVED in accordance with the sketch attached CONSENT AND (PREVIOUSLY ADJOURNED FROM THE SEPTEMBER 29, 2005 MEETING) 2. FILE NOS: B046/05, A241/05 & A242/05 to WILLIAM & JOANA POTKIDIS 4. MOVED by M. S. Panicali THAT Application No. B046/05 JOANA & WILLIAM POTKIDIS, be APPROVED, in accordance with the sketch attached and subject to the following conditions: NOTE: All conditions below must be fulfilled and clearance letters must be received by the Secretary-Treasurer before any cheques can be accepted and Certificate of Official can be issued. 1. Payment to the City of Vaughan of a Tree Fee if required, approved by Council as of the date of granting the consent. Payment is to be made by certified cheque, to the satisfaction of the Reserves/Capital Department and Parks Department; 2. That the owner shall pay all taxes as levied, (by certified cheque), if required, to the satisfaction of Reserves/Capital Department; (contact Terri Liuni in the Reserves/Capital Department to have this condition cleared). 3. That the applicant shall provide the City of Vaughan with an appraisal report, if required and valuation of the subject land (land only) to be prepared by an accredited appraiser, if required. Payment of a Parkland Levy to the City in lieu of deeding of land for park purposes shall be made if a new lot is being created. Said levy is to be 5% of the appraised market value of the subject land as of the date of the Committee of Adjustment giving notice to the Application of the herein decision. Said levy shall be approved by the Manager of Real Estate. Payment shall be made by certified cheque only; 4. The Owner shall convey sufficient property to provide 13m from the centerline of Clarence Road municipal road allowance to the City of Vaughan at no cost and free of charge and encumbrance to the City, if required, to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department; Page 8 of 22

9 CONSENT AND (PREVIOUSLY ADJOURNED FROM THE SEPTEMBER 29, 2005 MEETING) 2. FILE NOS: B046/05, A241/05 & A242/05 to WILLIAM & JOANA POTKIDIS The Owner shall convey 5 metre x 5 metre daylight triangle at the corner of Clarence Street and Park Drive municipal road allowances to the City of Vaughan at no cost and free of charge and encumbrance to the City, if required, to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department; 6. The Owner shall convey 0.3m reserve behind the hypotenuse of the daylight triangle to the City of Vaughan at no cost and free of charge and encumbrance to the City, if required, to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department; 7. The Owner shall arrange to prepare and register a reference plan at his/her expense for the conveyance of the required road widening to the satisfaction of the City of Vaughan. Owner shall pay the cost of $ for the registration of the conveyed lands to the City of Vaughan, if required, to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department; 8. A by-law shall be passed dedicating the road widening as public highway to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department and the Owner shall pay the cost of $ for the of the registration of the road dedication by-law to the City of Vaughan, if required, to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department; 9. That the applicant successfully obtain an Ontario Regulation 158 permit from the TRCA for the proposed development, prior to the issuance of a municipal building permit, if required, to the satisfaction of the Toronto & Region Conservation Authority; 10. That the corresponding Minor Variance Applications A241/05 & A242/05 JOANA & WILLIAM POTKIDIS, be approved; 11. Submission to the Secretary-Treasurer of FOUR (4) white prints of a registered deposited reference plan of survey, showing the subject land which conforms with the application submitted and which shows the dimensions and areas of each part shown on the plan; 12. Upon fulfilling and complying with all of the above-noted conditions, the Secretary- Treasurer of the Committee of Adjustment must be provided with a letter and three (3) copies of a legal size (8.5 by 14 ) Schedule Page, in a format satisfactory to the Secretary-Treasurer, from the Applicant s solicitor confirming the legal description of the subject lands, sufficient for registration purposes the Schedule Page will be an attachment to the Certificate. Upon being satisfied with said legal description and upon all other conditions for the consent having been satisfied, the Secretary-Treasurer shall provide a Certificate of Official to the applicant in accordance with Section 53(42) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, as amended; 13. A fee of $ made payable to the Treasurer City of Vaughan shall, be submitted to the Secretary Treasurer for the issuance of the Certificate/stamping of the deeds. It will be necessary to allow up to three (3) working days after all conditions have been fulfilled and documentation filed. Same day service is also available for an additional cost of $145.00, provided all conditions of approval have been fulfilled and all required documents are submitted by 11:30 am that day; 14. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, if required, the applicant shall fulfil and comply with all of the above noted consent conditions; PLEASE NOTE: 1. That the payment of the Regional Development Charge is payable to the City of Vaughan before issuance of a building permit in accordance with the Development Charges Act and the Regional Development Charges By-law in effect at the time of payment. Page 9 of 22

10 CONSENT AND (PREVIOUSLY ADJOURNED FROM THE SEPTEMBER 29, 2005 MEETING) 2. FILE NOS: B046/05, A241/05 & A242/05 to WILLIAM & JOANA POTKIDIS That the payment of the City Development Charge is payable to the City of Vaughan before issuance of a building permit in accordance with the Development Charges Act and the City's Development Charges By-law in effect at the time of payment. 3. That the payment of the Education Development Charge is payable to the City of Vaughan before issuance of a building permit in accordance with the Development Charges Act and the Boards of Education By-laws in effect at the time of payment 4. That the payment of Special Area Development charge is payable to the City of Vaughan before issuance of a building permit in accordance with the Development Charges Act and The City's Development Charge By-law in effect at the time of Building permit issuance, if required, to the satisfaction of the Reserves/Capital Department; The Committee is of the opinion that the variances sought can be considered minor and are desirable for the appropriate development and use of the land. The general intent and purpose of the By-law and the Official Plan will be maintained. MOVED by M. S. Panicali THAT Application Nos. A241/05, A242/05 WILLIAM & JOANA POTKIDIS, be APPROVED, in accordance with the sketches attached, and subject to the following conditions; 1. That the applicant successfully obtain an Ontario Regulation 158 permit from the TRCA for the proposed development, prior to the issuance of a municipal building permit, if required, to the satisfaction of the Toronto & Region Conservation Authority; 2. That the corresponding Consent Application B046/05 JOANA & WILLIAM POTKIDIS, be approved; 3. That if the condition listed above is not fulfilled and the Building Permit is not applied for within twelve (12) months of the date this decision becomes final and binding, the said decision shall expire and shall be deemed to have been annulled and rescinded by the Committee.(PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS TIME PERIOD CANNOT BE EXTENDED IN ANY WAY, FAILURE TO MEET THIS DEADLINE WILL RESULT IN REQUIRING A NEW APPLICATION AND FEE.) 8. FILE NO: A303/05 EMBEE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION Part of Lot 34, Concession 1, (Lot 124, Registered Plan No. 65M-3195, municipally known as 346 Flamingo Road, Thornhill). Page 10 of 22

11 8. FILE NO: A303/05 EMBEE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION The subject lands are zoned R1, Residential and subject to the provisions of Exception Number 9(972) under By-Law 1-88 as amended. The applicant is requesting a variance to permit the construction of a proposed two-storey single family detached dwelling with the garage attached, notwithstanding, the proposed changes to the existing By-Law & current By-Law requirements are as follows: 1. To permit a maximum lot coverage of 1. A maximum lot coverage of 35% is permitted %. 3. A maximum building height of 12.34m. 3. A maximum building height of 9.5m Tony Limotta, of Embee Properties Limited, appeared as the agent with written authorization. A letter was submitted from Michael Baker of Embee Properties Limited, authorizing Tony Limotta to speak as the agent. There were no objections from any Departments or Agencies. The Committee is of the opinion that the variance sought can be considered minor and is desirable for the appropriate development and use of the land. The general intent and purpose of the By-law and the Official Plan will be maintained. MOVED by M. S. Panicali THAT Application No. A303/05, EMBEE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, be APPROVED in accordance with the sketch attached. 9. FILE NO.: A304/05 TISSA DE SILVA Part of Lot 31, 32, Concession 1, (Block 165, Part 9 & 14, Registered Plan No.65M-2219, municipally known as 8 Rosedale Heights, Thornhill.) The subject lands are zoned R3, Residential and subject to the provisions under By-Law 1-88 as amended. The applicant is requesting a variance to permit the construction of a glass covered/enclosed sunroom, as follows: 1) To permit a minimum rear yard setback of 3.4 metres to the sunroom. Page 11 of 22

12 9. FILE NO.: A304/05 TISSA DE SILVA 1) A minimum rear yard setback of 7.5 metres is required to the sunroom. Charinee DeSilva, appeared on behalf of her husband the applicant. There were no objections from any Departments or Agencies. The Committee is of the opinion that the variance sought can be considered minor and is desirable for the appropriate development and use of the land. The general intent and purpose of the By-law and the Official Plan will be maintained. MOVED by L. Fluxgold THAT Application No. A304/05 - TISSA DE SILVA, be APPROVED in accordance with the sketch attached 10. FILE NO.: A307/05 REGION OF YORK c/o MARTIN SILVER Part of Lot 23, Concession 4, (municipally known as Keele Street, Maple.) The subject lands are zoned A, Agricultural under By-law 1-88 as amended. The applicant is requesting a variance to permit the construction of an addition to a Seniors Day Program Area, as follows: Maximum lot coverage = 21.8% Maximum lot coverage = 20% Other Planning act Applications The land which is the subject in this application is also the subject of an application under the Planning act for: Minor Variance Application File No. Lawrence Glazier, the agent, appeared on behalf of the applicant. A87/97, APPROVED, April 17, 1997, for lot coverage of 21.7%. There were no objections from any Departments or Agencies. Page 12 of 22

13 10. FILE NO.: A307/05 REGION OF YORK c/o MARTIN SILVER The Committee is of the opinion that the variance sought can be considered minor and is desirable for the appropriate development and use of the land. The general intent and purpose of the By-law and the Official Plan will be maintained. MOVED by M. S. Panicali THAT Application No. A307/05 - REGION OF YORK c/o MARTIN SILVER, be APPROVED in accordance with the sketch attached 11. FILE NO.: A308/05 MOSHE & SARA ASSOR Part of Lot 15, Concession 2, (Block 274, Part 17, Registered Plan No.65M-3591, municipally known as 29 Clovis Street, Thornhill.) The subject lands are zoned RVM1 (WS-A), Residential Urban Village Multiple Dwelling Zone One (Street Townhouse on a Wide and Shallow Lot and subject to the provisions of Exception Number 9(1063) under By-Law 1-88 as amended. The applicants are requesting a variance to permit the maintenance of a rear yard deck and stairs as follows: 1) To maintain a minimum rear yard setback of 1.0 metres to the deck and stairs. 1) A minimum rear yard setback of 4.2 metres is required to the deck and stairs Jolanta Sasiela, the applicant appeared on her own behalf. Moshe and Sara Assor appeared on their own behalf. There were discussions between the applicant and the Committee, the end of which the Committee recommend the applicants adjourn the application to consider repositioning the stairs on the side of the deck with the setback being no less than 2.75m. The Development Planning Department made the following written comments: The subject lands are designated Low Density Residential by OPA No.600. The subject lands are zoned RVM1 (WS-A) Residential Urban Village Multiple Dwelling Zone One and subject to the provisions of Exception Number 9(1063) under By-law 1-88, as amended. The applicant has submitted a variance application to permit the maintenance of a deck and stairs in the rear yard. The applicant is requesting a minimum rear yard setback to the deck and the stairs to be 1.0m rather than the required 4.2m. The Development Planning Department does not support Variance Application A308/05, as proposed. A suggested alternative would be to turn the stairs parallel to the deck, which would provide a greater rear setback and lessen the impact of stair usage. Page 13 of 22

14 11. FILE NO.: A308/05 MOSHE & SARA ASSOR There were no other objections from any Departments or Agencies. MOVED by M. S. Panicali THAT Application No. A308/05 MOSHE & SARA ASSOR, be ADJOURNED to the NOVEMBER 3, 2005 MEETING, to allow the applicant s time to consider the relocation of the stairs. 12. FILE NO: A309/05 ANNA LOGIUDICE Part of Lot 15, Concession 3, (Lot 44R, Registered Plan 65M Municipally known as 139 Preston Hill Road, Concord). The subject lands are zoned RVM1(A), Residential Urban Village Multiple Dwelling Zone One under By-law 1-88 subject to Exception 9(1039) as amended. The applicant is requesting a variance to permit the construction of a proposed one-storey addition to an existing two-storey single family townhouse, notwithstanding, the proposed changes to the existing By-Law & current By-Law requirements are as follows: 1.Minimum Exterior Side yard Setback = 1.4m. 1.Minimum Exterior Side yard Setback = 2.4m 4. A maximum building height of 12.34m. 4. A maximum building height of 9.5m There was no one present to represent the applicant on this matter. There was no else in attendance either in support of or in opposition to the request. There were no objections from any Departments or Agencies. The Committee is of the opinion that the variance sought can be considered minor and is desirable for the appropriate development and use of the land. The general intent and purpose of the By-law and the Official Plan will be maintained. MOVED by L. Fluxgold Seconded by M. S. Panicali THAT Application No. A309/05, ANNA LOGIUDICE, be APPROVED in accordance with the sketch attached. Page 14 of 22

15 13. FILE NO: A310/05 LIVIA CUTIERO Part of Lot 22, Concession 5 (Lot 11, Registered Plan 65M Municipally known as 33 Chiara Drive, Maple). The subject lands are zoned RV4 (WS) Residential Urban Village Zone four. During the applicants submission it was agreed to amend the Application, Sketch, and Notice of Application as follows: 1. Maximum height for accessory structure 1. Maximum height for accessory structure is (gazebo) is 3.0M NOT 4.5m. 2.5m. 4. Accessory structure (garden shed) to be 4. Accessory Structure shall be located in located in side yard. 5. Minimum side yard setback to the accessory structure (garden shed) is 0.66m. rear yard. 5. Interior side yard setback to accessory structure is 1.2m. THEREFORE the applicant is requesting a variance to permit the construction of a proposed sunroom at the rear of the dwelling and variances to permit the maintenance of an existing clock tower gazebo, air conditioning unit, garden shed and an enclosed and covered front porch, notwithstanding, the proposed changes to the existing By-Law & current By-Law requirements are as follows: 1. Maximum height for accessory structure 1. Maximum height for accessory structure is (gazebo) is 3.0m. 2.5m. 2. Mininum side yard setback to the gazebo 2. Minimum Interior side yard setback to is 0.46m. accessory structure is 0.6m. 3. Minimum side yard to air conditioning 3. Minimum Interior side yard setback to air unit is 0.48m. conditioner is 1.2m. 4. Minimum front yard setback to covered 4. Minimum front yard setback to covered enclosed porch is 2.5m. 5. Minimum rear yard setback to sunroom is 4.25m. and enclosed porch is 30m. 5. Minimum rear yard setback to proposed sunroom is 7.5m. Hurculano Casimiro, the agent, appeared on behalf of his wife, the applicant and gave a brief submission regarding the request. Mr. Casimiro submitted photos and letters of support from the following neighbours: Mary Bubnic Lorenzo Pergola 145 Gianmarco Way Maple, Ontario, L6A 3K2 A310/05 Giancarlo Lisi 22 Chiara Drive Maple, Ontario L6A 3K3 Dina Babakhanian 32 Chiara Drive Maple, Ontario L6A 3K3 A310/05 George Koutrouliotis 43 Chiara Drive Maple, Ontario L6A 3K3 A310/05 Vito Giglio 39 Chiara Drive Maple, Ontario L6A 3K3 A310/05 Mark Wieszczyk 38 Chiara Drive Maple, Ontario L6A 3K3 A310/05 E. Alfredo Cerna 42 Chiara Drive Maple, Ontario L6A 3K3 A310/05 Wilson Babakhanian 30 Chiara Drive Maple, Ontario L6A 3K3 A310/05 A310/05 A letter of opposition was received from: Ng Lai Sham & Dang Su Ha, 37 Chiara Drive, Maple, Ontario, L6A 3K3. Page 15 of 22

16 13. FILE NO: A310/05 LIVIA CUTIERO During discussions between the agent, the Committee and staff. The Committee told Mr. Casimiro that they would not support the side yard shed or the clock tower or a gazebo greater than 3.0m in height. Mr. Casimiro stated he would agree to the recommended changes. The Development Planning Department made the following written comments: The applicant has submitted a variance application to permit the construction of a sunroom in the rear yard and to permit the maintenance of an existing gazebo with a clock, air conditioning unit, garden shed and an enclosed and covered front porch. The applicant is requested a number of variances to maintain and build the above noted structures. The variances are proposed as following: 1. The maximum height for an accessory structure (gazebo with a clock) to be 4.5m (14.76ft.) rather than the maximum height of 2.5m (8.2ft). 2. The minimum side yard to the gazebo is 0.46m rather than the required 0.6m. 3. The minimum side yard to air conditioning unit is 0.48m rather required 1.2m. 4. The accessory structure (garden shed) in the side yard rather than the accessory structure shall be located in the rear yard. 5. The minimum side yard setback to the garden shed is 0.66m rather than the required 1.2m. 6. The minimum front yard setback to a covered enclosed porch is 2.5m rather than the required 3.0m. 7. The minimum rear yard setback to a proposed sunroom in the rear yard will be 4.25m rather than the required 7.5m. This Department has concerns with the height of the existing gazebo (4.5) given it is 2.5 times higher than the normal 1.8m (6ft) solid wood fence surrounding rear yards. The By-law height standard is 2.5m (8.2m) for a gazebo; therefore, the existing gazebo is 2.0m or 80% greater than the By-law standard. The other requested variances are similar to other variances considered by this Committee. In regards to the maintenance of the shed in the side yard, this Department normally does not support sheds in the side yard. However, the existing shed is against the dwelling and only 0.6m(2ft) in depth and 1.5m 2 in area. The applicant has also indicated that there are no windows at the side of his dwelling and the neighbour s dwelling. In regards to Variance Application A310/05, the Development Planning Department has no objection to the proposed variances with the exception of the proposed maximum height of the gazebo, which is not supported. There were no other objections from any Departments or Agencies and any conditions requested are listed below. The Committee is of the opinion that the variances sought can be considered minor and are desirable for the appropriate development and use of the land. The general intent and purpose of the By-law and the Official Plan will be maintained. MOVED by M. S. Panicali THAT Application No. A310/05, LIVIA CUTIERO, be APPROVED AS AMENDED in accordance with the sketch attached and subject to the following conditions: 1. That the chimney of the fireplace in the gazebo be removed, to the satisfaction of the Fire Department; Page 16 of 22

17 13. FILE NO: A310/05 LIVIA CUTIERO 2. That if the condition listed above is not fulfilled and the Building Permit is not applied for within twelve (12) months of the date this decision becomes final and binding, the said decision shall expire and shall be deemed to have been annulled and rescinded by the Committee.(PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS TIME PERIOD CANNOT BE EXTENDED IN ANY WAY, FAILURE TO MEET THIS DEADLINE WILL RESULT IN REQUIRING A NEW APPLICATION AND FEE.). 14. FILE NO: A312/05 IVONIS AND LORA DEMENEGHI Part of Lot 13, Concession 6 (Lot 23, Registered Plan 5757, municipally known as 306 Pine Valley Crescent, Woodbridge). The subject lands are zoned RR- Rural Residential, under By-Law 1-88 as amended. The applicant is requesting a variance to permit the maintenance of an existing two-storey single family detached dwelling and cabana, notwithstanding, the proposed changes to the existing By-Law & current By-Law requirements are as follows: 1. Maximum lot coverage 16.9%. 1. Maximum lot coverage 10%. 2. Minimum rear yard setback of 3.08m. 2. Minimum rear yard setback of 15.0m Other Planning Act Applications The land which is the subject in this application was also the subject of another application under the Planning Act: Minor Variance File #: A307/02 APPROVED as amended Aug 1/02: maximum 15% lot coverage and min. front yard setback of 15m. Antonio Murdocca, the agent, appeared on behalf of the applicant. Dr. Andrew Osuszek, 226 Blackburn Boulevard, Woodbridge, Ontario, L4L 7K2, appeared in opposition to the request. During the discussions between the agent, the Committee, staff and the public, it was agreed that a condition would be added to the decision regarding the provision of adequate screening of the rear yard. There was no one else in attendance either in support of or in opposition to the request. Photos of the rear yard as well as a letter in oppositions to the request were received from Dr. and Mrs. Andrew Osuszek, 226 Blackburn Boulevard, Woodbridge, Ontario, L4L 7K2. The Development Planning Department made the following written comments: The applicant has submitted a variance application to permit the maintenance of a one storey cabana. The applicant was previously granted a variance to permit a maximum lot coverage of 15% (A307/02). To facilitate the maintenance of the cabana, the applicant is requesting a maximum lot coverage of 16.9% rather than the required 10% and a rear yard setback of 3.08m rather than the required minimum rear yard setback of 15m. Page 17 of 22

18 14. FILE NO: A312/05 IVONIS AND LORA DEMENEGHI It is noted that there have been other Variance Applications requesting lot coverage increases along Pine Valley Crescent. At 65 Pine Valley Crescent, (A02/00) the applicant received 15.3% lot coverage; at 284 Pine Valley Crescent, (A82/00) the applicant received 14.9% lot coverage; at 127 Pine Valley Crescent, (A59/01) the applicant received 16.33% lot coverage; at 235 Pine Valley Crescent, (A180/02) the applicant received 17.01% lot coverage; at 306 Pine Valley Crescent, (A307/02) the applicant received 15% lot coverage; and at 113 Pine Valley Crescent the applicant received 14.76%. Also, the applicant at 317 Pine Valley (A030/05) was granted a maximum lot coverage of 16.9%. These applications were not supported by the Development Planning Department. The Development Planning Department does not support Variance Application A312/05. The requested variance represents a 69% increase over the By-law standard of 10%. This department considers the proposed variance to be appropriate for the development of the property. There were no other objections from any Departments or Agencies and any conditions requested are listed below. The Committee is of the opinion that the variances sought can be considered minor and are desirable for the appropriate development and use of the land. The general intent and purpose of the By-law and the Official Plan will be maintained. MOVED by M. S. Panicali THAT Application No. A312/05, IVONIS AND LORA DEMENEGHI, be APPROVED in accordance with the sketch attached and subject to the following conditions: 1. That the applicant provide adequate screening, cedar hedge, minimum of 2.43m (8 ) in height, appropriate density, full width of the back yard, if required, to the satisfaction of the Urban Design Division of the Development Planning Department; 2. That if the condition listed above is not fulfilled and the Building Permit is not applied for within twelve (12) months of the date this decision becomes final and binding, the said decision shall expire and shall be deemed to have been annulled and rescinded by the Committee.(PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS TIME PERIOD CANNOT BE EXTENDED IN ANY WAY, FAILURE TO MEET THIS DEADLINE WILL RESULT IN REQUIRING A NEW APPLICATION AND FEE.). 15. FILE NO: A313/05 GHEORGHE SILBER Part of Lot 15, Concession 2, (Lot 12, Registered Plan No. 65M-3686, municipally known as 37 Balsamwood Road, Thornhill). The subject lands are zoned RV4, Residential Urban Village Zone Four and subject to the provisions of Exception Number 9(1063) under By-Law 1-88 as amended. The applicant is requesting a variance to permit the construction of a proposed pergola and deck at the rear of an existing two-storey single family linked dwelling, notwithstanding, the proposed changes to the existing By-Law & current By-Law requirements are as follows: Page 18 of 22

19 15. FILE NO: A313/05 GHEORGHE SILBER 1. To permit a minimum rear yard setback of 0.6 metres to the pergola. 2. To permit a minimum interior side yard setback of 0.6 metres to the pergola. 3. To permit a minimum rear yard setback of 0.0 metres to the landing and stairs. 4. To permit a minimum interior side yard setback of 0.6 metres to the deck and stairs. 1. A minimum rear yard setback of 3.0 metres is required to the pergola. 2. A minimum interior side yard setback of 3.0 metres is required to the pergola. 3. A minimum rear yard setback of 4.2 metres is required to the landing and stairs. 4. A minimum interior side yard setback of 1.2 metres is required to the deck and stairs. Judith S. Wright, the agent, appeared on behalf of the applicant and gave a brief submission regarding the request. During the discussions between the agent, the Committee, staff and the public, it was agreed that the application would be adjourned to allow the applicant and agent time to reconsider the variances. It was recommended that thee rear yard setback not being less than 2.75m. Ms. Wright told the Committee that she had letters of support from the surrounding neighbours. The Committee instructed Ms. Wright to revisit the neighbours with the revised drawing and submit the updated letters at the next hearing. Mr. Hao Zheng, 26 Krisbury Avenue, Thornhill, Ontario, L4J 9E2 made a written request for a copy of the decision. The Development Planning Department, made the following written comments: The applicant has submitted a variance application to permit the construction of a deck and pergola. It is requested that the pergola have a rear yard setback of 0.6m rather than 3.0m and the pergola to have an interior side yard setback of 0.6m rather than 3.0m. It is also requested that a landing and stairs have a 0.0m rear yard setback rather than the required rear yard setback of 4.2m. The deck and stairs will also have an interior side yard setback of 0.6m rather than the required 1.2m. This Department does not support the requested zero setback to the landing and stairs. The Development Planning Department has not supported other requests for zero setbacks in the past. It is also suggested that the design be changed to removed/reduce the number of variances or increase the setbacks to the proposed structures in order to lessen the possible impact on the abutting neighbours. There were no other objections from any Departments or Agencies and any conditions requested are listed below. MOVED by M. S. Panicali Seconded by L. Fluxgold THAT Application No. A313/05, GHEORGHE SILBER, be ADJOURNED to the NOVEMBER 17, 2005 meeting, to allow time for the applicant and agent to consider amending the variances on the application and to take those new measurements to the Planning Department. Page 19 of 22

20 16. FILE NO: A323/05 BERNADETTE RULLI Part of Lot 30, Concession 3, (Lot 187, Registered Plan No.65M-3556, municipally known as 157 Regency View Heights, Maple.) The subject lands are zoned RV4, Residential Urban Village Zone Four under By-law 1-88 subject to Exception 9(946) as amended. The applicant is requesting variances to permit the construction of a cottage style garden shed as follows: Minimum rear yard setback to the shed = 1.2m Minimum setback to the OS2, Open Space Park Zone = 1.2m Minimum rear yard setback = 7.5m Minimum setback to the OS2, Open Space Park Zone = 6m There was no one present to represent the applicant. Andrew Rooney, 150 Regency View Heights, Maple, Ontario, L6A 3V3, made a written request to received a copy of the Notice of Decision. The Development Planning Department made the following written comments: The subject lands are designated Special Residential by OPA No.332. The subject property is also within the Oak Ridges Moraine Area, and has been designated Oak Ridges Moraine Settlement Area by OPA No.604. The subject lands are zoned RV4 Residential Urban Village Zone Four by By-law 1-88 subject to Exception 9(946), as amended. The applicant has applied for variances to permit the construction of a shed in the rear yard. The applicant is requesting the minimum rear yard setback to the shed to be 1.2m rather than the required minimum rear yard setback of 7.5m and the minimum setback to the OS2 Open Space Park Zone to be 1.2m rather than the required 6m. The subject lands abuts or adjacent to lands that have been identified as Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest (Life Science), Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest (Earth Science), and Landform Conservation Areas. The applicant is required to demonstrate conformity with subsections 5.3 of OPA No The applicant is required to submit a report supporting this application that addressed the requirements of OPA No. 604 with respect to the proposed variances. The Development Planning Department request that Variance Application A323/05 be adjourned until such time as the applicant has submitted the above referenced report for staff s review and consideration. Upon submission of the required report, staff can complete their review and evaluation of the proposed variances and make a recommendation There were no other objections from any Departments or Agencies. Page 20 of 22

21 16. FILE NO: A323/05 BERNADETTE RULLI MOVED by L. Fluxgold Seconded by M. S. Panicali THAT Application No. A323/05 - BERNADETTE RULLI, be ADJOURNED SINE DIE. 17. FILE NO: A325/05 TINA LOMBARDI Part of Lot 13, Concession 6 (Lot 4, Registered Plan 5757, municipally known as 66 Clubhouse Road, Woodbridge). The subject lands are zoned RR- Rural Residential, under By-Law 1-88 as amended. The applicant is requesting a variance to permit the construction of a proposed inground swimming pool, notwithstanding, the proposed changes to the existing By-Law & current By- Law requirements are as follows: 1. Pool to be located in the side yard. 1. Pool to be located in the rear yard 8. A maximum building height of 12.34m. 5. A maximum building height of 9.5m Lillian Lummiss, of Gil-San Pools, 59 Milvan Drive, Toronto, Ontario, M9L 1Y8, appeared as the agent on behalf of the applicant. There were no objections from any Departments or Agencies. The Committee is of the opinion that the variance sought can be considered minor and is desirable for the appropriate development and use of the land. The general intent and purpose of the By-law and the Official Plan will be maintained. MOVED by M. S. Panicali THAT Application No. A325/05, TINA LOMBARDI, be APPROVED in accordance with the sketch attached. 18. FILE NO: A326/05 JOSEPH AND CATHY FUSCI Part of Lot 23, Concession 4, (Lot 261, Registered Plan No.65M-3106, municipally known as 83 Gladstone Ave., Maple.) The subject lands are zoned R2, Residential under By-law 1-88 subject to Exception 9(840) as amended. Page 21 of 22

22 18. FILE NO: A326/05 JOSEPH AND CATHY FUSCI The applicants are requesting a variance to permit the maintenance of a one storey rear addition to as existing two storey single family detached dwelling, with attached garage, as follows: Minimum Rear Yard Setback = 7.99m Minimum Rear Yard Setback = 9.0m Pietro Pumo, the agent, appeared on behalf of the applicant. There were no objections from any Departments or Agencies. The Committee is of the opinion that the variance sought can be considered minor and is desirable for the appropriate development and use of the land. The general intent and purpose of the By-law and the Official Plan will be maintained. MOVED by M. S. Panicali Seconded by L. Fluxgold THAT Application No. A326/05 - JOSEPH & CATHY FUSCI, be APPROVED in accordance with the sketch attached. OTHER BUSINESS None. MOTION TO ADJOURN MOVED by L. Fluxgold THAT the meeting of Committee of Adjustment be adjourned at 7:47 p.m., and the next regular meeting will be held on THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 3, Page 22 of 22