Committee of Adjustment Minutes
Wednesday, February 8, 2017
Page 1
CITY OF MARKHAM
101 Town Centre Boulevard
Markham, Ontario
Council Chambers
February 8, 2017
7:30 p.m.
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT
Minutes
The 2nd regular meeting of the Committee of Adjustment for the year 2017 was held at the time
and place above with the following people present:
Philip Gunn, Chair
Gary Muller, Vice Chair
Michael Visconti
Arun Prasad
Jeamie Reingold
Arrival Time
7:30pm
7:30pm
7:30pm
7:30pm
7:30pm
Rosanna Punit, Secretary-Treasurer
Regrets:
Tom Gutfreund
Gregory Knight
Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest – none.
Minutes
THAT the minutes of Meeting No. 01 of the City of Markham Committee of Adjustment, held
January 18, 2017, be
a) Approved as submitted, on February 8, 2017.
Moved By: Tom Gutfreund
Seconded By: Gary Muller
Carried
Committee of Adjustment Minutes
Wednesday, February 8, 2017
Page 2
PREVIOUS BUSINESS:
1.
B/21/16
Owner Name: Wahta Developments Inc. c/o Metrus Properties
Agent Name: A. Baldassarra Architect Inc. (Matthew Baldassarra)
Address: 281 Hillmount Rd, Markham
PLAN 65M3250 PT BLK 2 65R24264 PTS 1 TO 4
The owner (s) are requesting provisional consent to:
sever and convey a parcel of land with an area of 3136.3m2 and lot frontage of approximately
22m (Part 1), while retaining a parcel of land with an approximate area of 55,216m2 and lot
frontage of 352m (Part 2).
The applicant is proposing to:
a) merge Part 1 with Part 6 on Plan 65M 3250.
b) Transfer titles of Parts 1, 2 & Part 6 on Plan 65M 3250 to Wahta Developments Inc.
c) Partial discharge of mortgage from Part 1.
(West District, Ward 2)
Owner, submitted a letter confirming a deferral as recommended by staff.
Moved by: Arun Prasad
Seconded by: Gary Muller
THAT Application No. B/21/16, submitted by Wahta Developments Inc. c/o Metrus Properties
(Ennio Zuccon) owner(s) of folder 281 Hillmount Rd, PLAN 65M3250 PT BLK 2 65R24264 PTS
1 TO 4, requesting provisional consent to:
sever and convey a parcel of land with an area of 3136.3m2 and lot frontage of approximately
22m (Part 1), while retaining a parcel of land with an approximate area of 55,216m2 and lot
frontage of 352m (Part 2).
The applicant is proposing to:
a) merge Part 1 with Part 6 on Plan 65M 3250.
b) Transfer titles of Parts 1, 2 & Part 6 on Plan 65M 3250 to Wahta Developments Inc.
c) Partial discharge of mortgage from Part 1.
The consent request be deferred sine die.
Resolution Carried
2.
B/24/16
Owner Name: Syed Raza
Agent Name: QX4 Investments Ltd. - Consulting Services (Ben Quan)
Address: 4954 14th Ave, Markham
CON 6 PT LOT 6 RP 65R32027 PT 1
The owner (s) are requesting provisional consent to:
a) sever and convey a parcel of land with an approximate area of 531.8 m2 and lot frontage of
15.24m (Part 4);
b) retain a parcel of land with an approximate area of 531.8m2 and lot frontage of 15.24m (Part
5).
Committee of Adjustment Minutes
Wednesday, February 8, 2017
Page 3
Part 1 & 2 will be conveyed to the Region of York for future road widening.
Part 3 (548.7m2) will be conveyed to the City of Markham for the extension of Tillie Square.
(Central District, Ward 8)
The owner requested a deferral via email to February 22, 2017.
Moved by: Gary Muller
Seconded by: Michael Visconti
THAT Application No. B/24/16, submitted by Syed Raza owner(s) of folder 4954 14th Ave,
CON 6 PT LOT 6 RP 65R32027 PT 1, requesting provisional consent to:
a) sever and convey a parcel of land with an approximate area of 531.8 m2 and lot frontage
of 15.24m (Part 4) b) retain a parcel of land with an approximate area of 531.8m2 and
lot frontage of 15.24m (Part 5).
Part 1 & 2 will be conveyed to the Region of York for future road widening.
Part 3 (548.7m2) will be conveyed to the City of Markham for the extension of Tillie Square
The consent request be deferred to February 22, 2017.
Resolution Carried
3.
A/117/16
Owner Name: Angus Glen Development Ltd. (Michael Montgomery)
Agent Name: Angus Glen Development Ltd. (Michael Montgomery)
Address: 15 Tralee Crt, Markham
PLAN 65M4498 LOT 20
The owner (s) are requesting relief from the requirements of By-law 177-96, as amended
to permit:
a) Section 7.386.1 a) & 7.386.2 a):
a minimum side yard setback of 2.56 m for the northern Open Space (OS1) zone
boundary whereas the By-law requires a minimum side yard setback of 3.0 m for the
northern Open Space (OS1) zone boundary; as it relates to a proposed residential
dwelling. (West District, Ward 6)
Owner, Michael Montgomery presented the application.
There were no members of the public present to speak to the application.
Moved by: Michael Visconti
Seconded by: Jeamie Reingold
Committee of Adjustment Minutes
Wednesday, February 8, 2017
Page 4
THAT Application No. A/117/16, submitted by Angus Glen Development Ltd. (Michael
Montgomery) owner(s) of 15 Tralee Court Markham, PLAN 65M4498 LOT 20, requesting relief
from the requirements of By-law No. 177-96, as amended, to permit the following:
Section 7.386.1 a) & 7.386.2 a): a minimum side yard setback of 2.56 m for the northern Open
Space (OS1) zone boundary whereas the By-law requires a minimum side yard setback of 3.0
m for the northern Open Space (OS1) zone boundary; as it relates to a proposed residential
dwelling.
These variance requests be approved for the following reasons:
(a) In the opinion of the Committee, the general intent and purpose of the By-law will be
maintained;
(b) In the opinion of the Committee, the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan will
be maintained;
(c) In the opinion of the Committee, the granting of the variance is desirable for the
appropriate development of the lot;
(d) In the opinion of the Committee, the requested variance is minor in nature.
Subject to the following conditions:
1. The variance applies only to the proposed development as long as it remains;
2. That the variance applies only to the subject development, in substantial conformity with
the plan(s) attached as “Appendix B” to this Staff Report, to the satisfaction of the
Director of Planning and Urban Design or designate;
3. That the Secretary Treasurer receives written confirmation from Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority (TRCA) that the conditions indicated in the letter dated January
27, 2017 (Appendix C) have been fulfilled to the satisfaction of Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority (TRCA);
The Committee, in making its decision on this matter, took into consideration the written
comments received on the application. There were no persons in attendance at the meeting
who spoke on the matter. The Committee was satisfied with the Toronto Region Conservation
Authority’s (TRCA) sign off with the request.
Resolution Carried
4.
A/159/16
Owner Name: Dianna & Thomas Kasias
Agent Name: Dianna Kasias
Address: 6 Jonquil Cres, Markham
PLAN 4949 PT LOT 141 TO 143
The owner (s) are requesting relief from the requirements of By-law 1229, as amended to
permit:
a) Infill By-law 99-90, Section 1.2 (i):
a maximum building height of 11m whereas the By-law permits a maximum building
height of 9.8m;
b) Infill By-law 99-90, Section 1.2 (iii):
a maximum building depth of 19.46m whereas the By-law permits a maximum building
depth of 16.8m;
Committee of Adjustment Minutes
Wednesday, February 8, 2017
Page 5
c) Infill By-law 99-90, Section 1.2 (vi):
a maximum net floor area ratio of 51.89 percent whereas the By-law permits a maximum
net floor area ratio of 45 percent; as they relate to a proposed new residential dwelling.
(East District, Ward 4)
Dianna, owner, presented the application. Advised that the home was for her family including
parents, and have reduced the size of the home from the initial submission. Advised that the
home is being built for her aging parents, uncle and their kids. Requested for a decision to be
made tonight.
Elizabeth Brown, of Lincoln Green Square, spoke in opposition of the application. Concerned
with the home not keeping in character with the existing area. The size of the home was also a
concern. Submitted a number of signatures of residents in the area opposed to the application.
There were no further comments from members of the public.
Committee member Jeamie Reingold, was concerned with scale and massing,
Committee member Gary Muller, preferred to have the floor area reduced to under 50%.
Committee member, Michael Visconti, viewed the area as under transition and felt the home fit
the area being over the 50% floor area ratio.
There was a tie vote. The Chair made the final decision of a denial.
Moved by: Gary Muller
Seconded by: Jeamie Reingold
THAT Application No. A/159/16, submitted by Dianna Kasias Thomas Kasias owner(s) of 6
Jonquil Crescent Markham, PLAN 4949 PT LOT 141 TO 143, requesting relief from the
requirements of By-law No. 1229, as amended, to permit the following:
a) Infill By-law 99-90, Section 1.2 (i): a maximum building height of 11m whereas the Bylaw permits a maximum building height of 9.8m;
b) Infill By-law 99-90, Section 1.2 (iii): a maximum building depth of 19.46m whereas the
By-law permits a maximum building depth of 16.8m;
c) Infill By-law 99-90, Section 1.2 (vi): a maximum net floor area ratio of 51.89 percent
whereas the By-law permits a maximum net floor area ratio of 45 percent;
as they relate to a proposed new residential dwelling.
These variance requests be denied for the following reasons:
(a) In the opinion of the Committee, the general intent and purpose of the By-law will not be
maintained;
(b) In the opinion of the Committee, the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan will
not be maintained;
(c) In the opinion of the Committee, the granting of the variance is not desirable for the
appropriate development of the lot;
(d) In the opinion of the Committee, the requested variance is not minor in nature.
The Committee, in making its decision on this matter, took into consideration the oral and
written comments submitted on the application. The Committee was split with respect to the
Committee of Adjustment Minutes
Wednesday, February 8, 2017
Page 6
application, two members voted for an approval, and two members voted for a denial. The
Chair made the final decision. The Committee considered the comments of the resident and
overall did not feel that the four tests were met.
Resolution Carried
5.
A/176/16
Owner Name: Qiao Chen
Agent Name: ProHome Consulting Inc. (Vincent Emam Jomeh)
Address: 19 Honeybourne Cres, Markham
PLAN 4949 LOT 118
The owner (s) are requesting relief from the requirements of By-law 1229, as amended to
permit:
Infill By-law 99-90, Section 1.2 (vi):
a maximum net floor area ratio of 49.94 percent whereas the By-law permits a maximum
net floor area ratio of 45 percent; as it relates to a proposed new residential dwelling.
(East District, Ward 4)
Agent, Vincent presented the application.
Will, of Honeybourne, also representing another resident of the street was concerned with the
shadowing onto his property. The neighbour also asked if a privacy fence will be added.
Requested also to receive the arborist report for viewing.
Agent, advised a fence will be erected.
The Secretary-Treasurer advised that the resident can request to view the arborist report to
view.
There were no further comments from members of the public.
Moved by: Arun Prasad
Seconded by: Jeamie Reingold
THAT Application No. A/176/16, submitted by Qiao Chen owner(s) of 19 Honeybourne
Crescent Markham, PLAN 4949 LOT 118, requesting relief from the requirements of By-law No.
1229, as amended, to permit the following:
Infill By-law 99-90, Section 1.2 (vi): a maximum net floor area ratio of 49.94 percent whereas
the By-law permits a maximum net floor area ratio of 45 percent; as it relates to a proposed
new residential dwelling. The variance requests be approved for the following reasons:
(a) In the opinion of the Committee, the general intent and purpose of the By-law will be
maintained;
(b) In the opinion of the Committee, the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan will
be maintained;
Committee of Adjustment Minutes
Wednesday, February 8, 2017
Page 7
(c) In the opinion of the Committee, the granting of the variance is desirable for the
appropriate development of the lot;
(d) In the opinion of the Committee, the requested variance is minor in nature.
Subject to the following conditions
1. That the variances apply only to the proposed development as long as it remains;
2. That the variances apply only to the subject development, in substantial conformity with
the plan(s) attached as “Appendix B” to this Staff Report, to the satisfaction of the
Director of Planning and Urban Design or designate;
3. That a Tree Assessment and Preservation Plan, prepared by a qualified arborist in
accordance with the City’s Streetscape Manual (2009), as amended, be submitted for
review and approved by the City, and that the Secretary-Treasurer receive written
confirmation from the Director of Planning and Urban Design or designate that this
condition has been fulfilled to his/her satisfaction of, and that any detailed Siting, Lot
Grading and Servicing Plan required as a condition of approval reflects the Tree
Assessment and Preservation Plan.
4. That prior to the commencement of construction or demolition, tree protection be erected
around all trees on site, including street trees, in accordance with the City’s Streetscape
Manual (2009) as amended, and inspected by City Staff to the satisfaction of the
Director of Planning and Urban Design or their designate.
5. That tree replacements be provided and/or tree replacement fees be paid to the City if
required in accordance with the Tree Assessment and Preservation Plan, and that the
Secretary-Treasurer receive written confirmation that this condition has been fulfilled to
the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Urban Design or designate;
6. That a detailed Siting, Lot Grading and Servicing Plan designed and stamped by a
Professional Engineer/Ontario Land Surveyor/Landscape Architect be submitted to the
satisfaction of the Director of Engineering, and that the Secretary-Treasurer receive
written confirmation that this condition has been fulfilled to the satisfaction of the Director
of Engineering or designate;
The Committee, in making its decision on this matter, took into consideration the oral and
written comments submitted on the application. Overall, the Committee was satisfied with the
changes to the application and the fencing to be added to the property to alleviate a resident
concern of privacy.
Resolution Carried
6.
A/188/16
Owner Name: Mark Roche
Agent Name: Gregory Design Group (Russ Gregory)
Address: 32 Washington St, Markham
PL 18 BLK D PT LT 11 PT LT 12 PL 65R27604 PT 1
Committee of Adjustment Minutes
Wednesday, February 8, 2017
Page 8
PURPOSE OF THE APPLICATION:
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 45 (2)(a)(i) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13, as
amended, the applicant is requesting to permit an extension/enlargement of the existing legal
non-conforming use, specifically, an addition to the rear of the existing dwelling comprising a
maximum total gross floor area of 316.14m2. (Heritage District, Ward 4)
Agent, Russ Gregory, presented the application, explaining that the property was legal nonconfirming and therefore residential standards do not apply as presented at the last Committee.
There were no members of the public present to speak to the application.
Committee member, Gary Muller, concluded it was a zoning anomaly.
The agent agreed with the condition imposed.
Moved by: Gary Muller
Seconded by: Michael Visconti
THAT Application No. A/188/16, submitted by Mark Roche owner(s) of 32 Washington Street
Markham, PL 18 BLK D PT LT 11 PT LT 12 PL 65R27604 PT 1, requesting relief from the
requirements of By-law No. 1229, as amended, to permit the following:
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 45 (2)(a)(i) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13, as
amended, the applicant is requesting to permit an extension/enlargement of the existing legal
non-conforming use, specifically, an addition to the rear of the existing dwelling comprising a
maximum total gross floor area of 316.14m2.
The variance request be approved.
Subject to the following conditions:
1. The variance applies only to the proposed development as long as it remains;
2. That the variance applies only to the subject development, in substantial conformity with the
site plan and elevations attached as “Figures 2 & 3 ” to this Staff Report and dated
November 14, 2016, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Urban Design or
designate;
3. That the owner obtain Site Plan Endorsement for the proposed development.
The variance request was approved for the following reason:
The Committee deemed the request to comply with Section 45 (2)(a)(i) of the Planning Act,
R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13 and were satisfied with the enlargement/extension of the building.
The Committee, in making its decision on this matter, took into consideration the written
comments received on the application. There were no persons in attendance at the meeting
who spoke on the matter. The Committee considered the request as a zoning anomaly and felt
the request was reasonable.
Resolution Carried
NEW BUSINESS:
1.
B/27/16
Committee of Adjustment Minutes
Wednesday, February 8, 2017
Page 9
Owner Name: 2407011 Ontario Inc. (Mohammed Rawra)
Agent Name: 2407011 Ontario Inc. (Mohammed Rawra)
Address: 23 Water St, Markham
PLAN 18 PT BLK N
The owner (s) are requesting provisional consent to:
a) sever and convey a parcel of land with approximate area of 73.2 m2 and lot frontage of 5.88
(Part 1);
b) sever and convey a parcel of land with approximate area of 66.6m2 and lot frontage of 5.33m
(Part 2);
c) sever and convey a parcel of land with approximate area of 66.2m2 and lot frontage of 5.18m
(Part 3);
d) sever and convey a parcel of land with approximate area of 66.2m2 and lot frontage of 5.18m
(Part 4);
e) sever and convey a parcel of land with approximate area of 66.2m2 and lot frontage of 5.18m
(Part 5);
f) sever and convey a parcel of land with approximate area of 66.2m2 and lot frontage of 5.18m
(Part 6);
g) sever and convey a parcel of land with approximate area of 66.6m2 and lot frontage of 5.33m
(Part 7);
h) sever and convey a parcel of land with approximate area of 73.2m2 and lot frontage of 5.88m
(Part 8);
i) retain a parcel of land with an approximate area of 697.2m2 and lot frontage of 8.52m (Part
9).
(Heritage District, Ward 4)
Representative, Mohamed Rawra, presented the application. Advised that a draft plan of
condominium and site plan have been submitted. Advised that they cannot submit for part lot
control as the lot is a block on a registered plan from the 1800s of 1900s.
Chris Free, 145 Kreighoff, was concerned that they already had permission to build.
Committee member, Gary Muller, advised that the request dealt with ownership, not the built
structure.
There were no further comments from members of the public.
The representative agreed with the conditions.
Moved by: Gary Muller
Seconded by: Michael Visconti
THAT Application No. B/27/16, submitted by 2407011 Ontario Inc. (Mohammed Rawra)
owner(s) of 23 Water St, PLAN 18 PT BLK N, requesting provisional consent to:
a) sever and convey a parcel of land with approximate area of 73.2 m2 and lot frontage of
5.88(Part 1);
b) sever and convey a parcel of land with approximate area of 66.6m2 and lot frontage of 5.33m
(Part 2);
Committee of Adjustment Minutes
Wednesday, February 8, 2017
Page 10
c) sever and convey a parcel of land with approximate area of 66.2m2 and lot frontage of 5.18m
(Part 3);
d) sever and convey a parcel of land with approximate area of 66.2m2 and lot frontage of 5.18m
(Part 4);
e) sever and convey a parcel of land with approximate area of 66.2m2 and lot frontage of 5.18m
(Part 5);
f) sever and convey a parcel of land with approximate area of 66.2m2 and lot frontage of 5.18m
(Part 6);
g) sever and convey a parcel of land with approximate area of 66.6m2 and lot frontage of 5.33m
(Part 7);
h) sever and convey a parcel of land with approximate area of 73.2m2 and lot frontage of 5.88m
(Part 8);
i) while retaining a parcel of land with an approximate area of 697.2m2 and lot frontage of 8.52m
(Part 9).
The consent request be approved subject to the following conditions:
1. Payment of all outstanding realty taxes and local improvements charges owing to date
against both the subject and retained parcels;
2. Submission to the Secretary-Treasurer of the required transfer, in duplicate, conveying
the subject lands, and issuance by the Secretary Treasurer of the certificate required
under subsection 53(42) of the Planning Act;
3. Submission to the Secretary-Treasurer of seven white prints of a deposited reference
plan showing the subject land, which conforms substantially to the application as
submitted; and
4. Subsection 50(3) or 50(5) of the Planning Act shall apply to any subsequent conveyance
of or transaction involving the parcels of land that are the subject of these consents
5. Payment of the required conveyance Fee for the creation of residential lots per City of
Markham Fee By-law 211-83, as amended.
The Committee, in making its decision on this matter, took into consideration the oral and
written comments submitted on the application. Overall the Committee in making its decision
felt the requests were not related to development but rather a technical matter for ownership.
Resolution Carried
2.
A/194/16
Owner Name: Monique Jacob
Agent Name: Gregory Design Group (Russ Gregory)
Address: 1 Hollingham Rd, Markham
PLAN 65M2248 LOT 68
The owner (s) are requesting relief from the requirements of By-law 118-79, as amended
to permit:
a) Deck By-law 142-95, Section 2.2 (b) (i):
a maximum deck projection of 3.70 metres; whereas, the By-law permits a maximum
deck projection of 3.0 metres for a deck in excess of 1.0 metres in height above the
lowest ground surface at all points around the perimeter of the platform; as it relates to
an existing deck. (Central District, Ward 2)
Committee of Adjustment Minutes
Wednesday, February 8, 2017
Page 11
Agent, Russ Gregory, presented the application. Advised that the structure is partially built. A
trellis to be added, no roof or doors were proposed.
Resident, representing residents on Nadine Cres, spoke in opposition of the application.
Displayed images of the structure. Concerned with privacy and did not feel it was a deck.
Advised that the plans submitted do not show a trellis feature.
Committee member Gary Muller, advised that if approved the plans are tied to the approval and
no trellis is located on the plans. Motioned deferral to add trellis to the plans.
Committee member Arun Prasad, advised to speak to the neighbours and show the updated
plans prior to coming back to the Committee.
Moved by: Gary Muller
Seconded by: Arun Prasad
THAT Application No. A/194/16, submitted by Monique Jacob owner(s) of 1 Hollingham Road
Markham, PLAN 65M2248 LOT 68, requesting relief from the requirements of By-law No. 11879, as amended, to permit the following:
Deck By-law 142-95, Section 2.2 (b) (i): a maximum deck projection of 3.70 metres; whereas,
the By-law permits a maximum deck projection of 3.0 metres for a deck in excess of 1.0 metres
in height above the lowest ground surface at all points around the perimeter of the platform. as
it relates to an existing deck.
The variance request be deferred sine die.
Resolution Carried
3.
A/195/16
Owner Name: Mehdi Dadar
Agent Name: MEHDI DADAR
Address: 35 Snowshoe Cres, Thornhill
PLAN M1412 N PT LOT 168 RS66R6017 PART 9
The owner (s) are requesting relief from the requirements of By-law 2571, as amended to
permit:
a) Amending By-law 118-71, Section 1 (a):
a second dwelling unit (basement apartment); whereas, the By-law permits no more than
one single detached dwelling on one lot;
b) Parking By-law 28-97, Section 3.0:
a minimum of 2 parking spaces whereas the by-law requires a minimum of 3 parking
spaces; as it relates to an existing basement apartment.
(West District, Ward 1)
Representative presented the application.
Resident, Snowshoe Crescent, advised that the garbage and un-cut grass is a common issue
on the lot. Advised that the house was previously rented and not taken care of.
Committee of Adjustment Minutes
Wednesday, February 8, 2017
Page 12
Resident, Don of Snowshoe Crescent, advised that the homes are linked townhomes. Advised
that the size of home was small. Felt the home was a rooming house. Advised that the
driveway can only accommodate 1 car. Advised that by adding a basement apartment, it
increased the amount of people in the area and decreases property values.
Joe of Snowshoe Crescent, advised of the disrepair of the home. Advised that in 2009 was a
grow-op.
Edward, 35 Snowshoe Crescent, tenant of the basement, advised on a limited pension and this
is affordable. Understood that changes are required to legalize.
The Committee members were concerned with the maintenance of the home.
Representative advised that the occupant upstairs was responsible for the maintenance of the
home.
Committee member Michael Visconti, advised that the owner must maintain the property. With
the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) and affordable housing, the Committee of Adjustment is a
way of legalizing to comply with the PPS.
Moved By: Michael Visconti
Seconded by: Gary Muller
THAT Application No. A/195/16, submitted by Mehdi Dadar owner(s) of 35 Snowshoe Crescent
Thornhill, PLAN M1412 N PT LOT 168 RS66R6017 PART 9, requesting relief from the
requirements of By-law No. 2571, as amended, to permit the following:
a) Amending By-law 118-71, Section 1 (a): a second dwelling unit (basement apartment);
whereas, the By-law permits no more than one single detached dwelling on one lot,
b) Parking By-law 28-97, Section 3.0: a minimum of 2 parking spaces whereas the by-law
requires a minimum of 3 parking spaces;
as it relates to an existing basement
apartment.
These variance requests be approved for the following reasons:
(a) In the opinion of the Committee, the general intent and purpose of the By-law will be
maintained;
(b) In the opinion of the Committee, the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan will
be maintained;
(c) In the opinion of the Committee, the granting of the variance is desirable for the
appropriate development of the lot;
(d) In the opinion of the Committee, the requested variance is minor in nature.
Subject to the following conditions:
1. The variances apply only to the proposed development as long as it remains;
2. That the variances apply only to the subject development, in substantial conformity with
the plan(s) attached as “Appendix B” to this Staff Report , to the satisfaction of the
Director of Planning and Urban Design or designate;
3. That the owner submit, if required by the Chief Building Official, a third-party report
prepared by an architect or professional engineer licensed in the Province of Ontario, to
Committee of Adjustment Minutes
Wednesday, February 8, 2017
Page 13
assess compliance of existing construction with the provisions of the Ontario Building
Code, and in particular relating to the change of use from a dwelling containing a single
suite to a dwelling containing more than one suite.
4. That the Owner register the home as a two-unit house with the City of Markham Fire &
Emergency Services Department, and satisfy any and all conditions for registration, to
the satisfaction of the Fire Chief.
The Committee, in making its decision on this matter, took into consideration the oral and
written comments submitted on the application. The Committee in making its decision felt
the request was in line with the Provincial Policy Statement for affordable housing.
Resolution Carried
4.
A/196/16
Owner Name: Xue Ming Yu
Agent Name: Ally Yi
Address: 17 Towne Crt, Markham
PLAN M1368 LOT 10
The owner (s) are requesting relief from the requirements of By-law 11-72, as amended to
permit:
a) Schedule 'B':
a minimum side yard setback of 4' – 2” whereas the By-law requires a minimum side
yard setback of 6 feet;
b) Schedule 'B':
a minimum rear yard setback of 21' – 5” whereas the By-law requires a minimum rear
yard setback of 25 feet;
c) Schedule 'B':
a maximum building height of 28' – 2” whereas the By-law permits a maximum building
height of 25 feet;
d) Schedule 'B':
a maximum lot coverage of 35.16 percent whereas the By-law permits a maximum lot
coverage of 33 1/3 percent;
e) Schedule ‘B’:
a minimum front yard setback of 20' - 1 ¾”, whereas the By-law requires a minimum
front yard setback of 27’-0”;
f) Section 3.7:
a maximum 20” permitted encroachment for eaves and gutters, whereas the By-law
permits a maximum encroachment of 18' for eaves and gutters; “
g) Section 3.7:
a maximum of 12’- 9 ¼” permitted encroachment for rear yard stairs, whereas the By-law
permits a maximum encroachment of 5’-0” into a front or rear yard for an uncovered
platform (including steps); as they relate to a proposed new residential dwelling.
(Central District, Ward 3)
Ally, representative, presented the application.
Committee of Adjustment Minutes
Wednesday, February 8, 2017
Page 14
Julie Sellery, Gainsville resident, objected to size, coverage and height.
Mark, 4 Callahan Road, against the seven variances, not minor and too many. Advised a large
home can be built on the lot already.
Tantan, of Towne Court, presented a powerpoint presentation. Shadowing shown if the
dwelling is built and the impacts to his home. Advised concerned with lack of sunlight to his
home if the home is built.
Carolyn, Gainsville, advised that this would be the largest and widest home in the area. Visually
distracting and safety concern.
Chris Free, 145 Kreighhoff, seven variances was not minor. Felt height was measured
incorrectly, displayed definition of height. Felt the lot was lacking soft landscaping. Advised of
water table deficiency in the area.
Jeremy/Natasha, Town Court, footprint of home too large. Concerned also with the trees that
may be impacted. Also concerned with drainage and area easement.
Committee members felt it was a large request and massive building. Advised to reduce
variances and be more sympathetic to the neighbourhood. The Committee would like to see the
amount of variances reduced and the size of each variance reduced.
Moved by: Gary Muller
Seconded by: Jeamie Reingold
THAT Application No. A/196/16, submitted by Xue Ming Yu owner(s) of 17 Towne Court
Markham, PLAN M1368 LOT 10, requesting relief from the requirements of By-law No. 11-72,
as amended, to permit the following:
a) Schedule 'B': a minimum side yard setback of 4' – 2” whereas the By-law requires a
minimum side yard setback of 6 feet;
b) Schedule 'B': a minimum rear yard setback of 21' – 5” whereas the By-law requires a
minimum rear yard setback of 25 feet;
c) Schedule 'B':
a maximum building height of 28' – 2” whereas the By-law permits a
maximum building height of 25 feet;
d) Schedule 'B': a maximum lot coverage of 35.16 percent whereas the By-law permits a
maximum lot coverage of 33 1/3 percent;
e) Schedule ‘B’: a minimum front yard setback of 20' - 1 ¾”, whereas the By-law requires
a minimum front yard setback of 27’-0”;
Section 3.7:
a maximum 20' permitted
encroachment for eaves and gutters, whereas the By-law permits a maximum
encroachment of 18' for eaves and gutters;
f) Section 3.7:
a maximum of 12’- 9 ¼” permitted encroachment for rear yard stairs,
whereas the By-law permits a maximum encroachment of 5’-0” into a front or rear yard
for an uncovered platform (including steps);
These variance requests be deferred sine die.
Resolution Carried
Committee of Adjustment Minutes
Wednesday, February 8, 2017
5.
Page 15
A/197/16
Owner Name: King Square Ltd. (Wenyi Wang)
Agent Name: Envest Canada Co. Ltd. (Wenxi Fang)
Address: 9390 Woodbine Ave, Markham
PLAN 65M3925 PT BLK 1 RP 65R34025 PTS 1 AND 2
The owner (s) are requesting relief from the requirements of By-law 165-80, as amended
to permit:
a) Section 6.1.1 (b):
to permit a 'Commercial Club'; whereas, the By-law does not permit a 'Commercial
Club' use.
b) Parking By-law 28-97, Table B;
a parking standard for a 'Commercial Club' being 1 parking space per 30 square metres
of net floor area; whereas, the By-law requires a parking standard of 1 parking space per
25 square metres of net floor area for all uses not specified in Table B.
The purpose of this application is to permit a 'Commercial club'; whereas, a 'Private Club'
amongst other uses are already permitted.
(West District, Ward 2)
The owner requested a deferral via email.
Moved by: Michael Visconti
Seconded by: Gary Muller
THAT Application No. A/197/16, submitted by King Square Ltd. (Wenyi Wang) owner(s) of 9390
Woodbine Avenue Markham, PLAN 65M3925 PT BLK 1 RP 65R34025 PTS 1 AND 2,
requesting relief from the requirements of By-law No. 165-80, as amended, to permit the
following:
a) Section 6.1.1 (b): to permit a 'Commercial Club'; whereas, the By-law does not permit
a 'Commercial Club' use.
b) Parking By-law 28-97, Table B; a parking standard for a 'Commercial Club' being 1
parking space per 30 square metres of net floor area; whereas, the By-law requires a
parking standard of 1 parking space per 25 square metres of net floor area for all uses
not specified in Table B.
These variance requests be deferred sine die.
Resolution Carried
6.
A/199/16
Owner Name: Stephen & Gabriele Tar
Agent Name: Gregory Design Group (Russ Gregory)
Committee of Adjustment Minutes
Wednesday, February 8, 2017
Page 16
Address: 175 Main St, Markham
PLAN 18 PT LOT 4 BLK K
The ower (s) are requesting relief from the requirements of By-law 1229, as amended to
permit:
a) Infill By-law 99-90, Section 1.2 (iii):
a maximum building depth of 29.50m whereas the By-law permits a maximum building
depth of 16.8m;
b) Infill By-law 99-90, Section 1.2 (vi):
a maximum net floor area ratio of 56 percent whereas the By-law permits a maximum
net floor area ratio of 45 percent;
c) Amending By-law 53-94, Section 1.2 (b):
a Home Occupation use to occupy up to 49 percent of the of the total combined Gross
Floor Area of the dwelling unit whereas the By-law permits a Home Occupation use to
occupy 25 percent of the total combined Gross Floor Area of the dwelling unit; as it
relates to an addition to the existing dwelling. (Heritage District, Ward 4)
Russ, Agent, presented the application. Advised of the commercialization of Main Street.
Chris Free, Krieghoff Avenue, concerned with low water table in the area, the depth variance
and floor area increase. Asked what guarantee there would be some soft surface landscaping?
Russ, advised that that the floor area relates to a loft space. Advised that engineering will
review the water patterns, and runoff.
Chair, asked if the parking was being complied with?
Russ, advised that according to his calculation: without the garage it was a 29% floor area ratio,
with the garage 23% floor area ratio. The 49% was recommended by Heritage Markham.
There were no further comments from members of the public.
The Committee felt that due to the heritage area, variances can be viewed differently. Overall
felt that the addition would enhance the community.
Moved by: Gary Muller
Seconded by: Jeamie Reingold
THAT Application No. A/199/16, submitted by Gabriele Tar Stephen Tar owner(s) of 175 Main
Street N Markham, PLAN 18 PT LOT 4 BLK K, requesting relief from the requirements of By-law
No. 1229, as amended, to permit the following:
a) Infill By-law 99-90, Section 1.2 (iii): a maximum building depth of 29.50m whereas the
By-law permits a maximum building depth of 16.8m;
b) Infill By-law 99-90, Section 1.2 (vi): a maximum net floor area ratio of 56 percent
whereas the By-law permits a maximum net floor area ratio of 45 percent;
c) Amending By-law 53-94, Section 1.2 (b): a Home Occupation use (office) to occupy up
to 49 percent of the of the total combined Gross Floor Area of the dwelling unit whereas
Committee of Adjustment Minutes
Wednesday, February 8, 2017
Page 17
the By-law permits a Home Occupation use to occupy 25 percent of the total combined
Gross Floor Area of the dwelling unit;
as it relates to an addition to the existing dwelling. These variance requests be approved
for the following reasons:
(a) In the opinion of the Committee, the general intent and purpose of the By-law will be
maintained;
(b) In the opinion of the Committee, the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan will
be maintained;
(c) In the opinion of the Committee, the granting of the variance is desirable for the
appropriate development of the lot;
(d) In the opinion of the Committee, the requested variance is minor in nature.
Subject to the following conditions:
1. The variances apply only to the proposed development as long as it remains;
2. That the variances apply only to the subject development, in substantial conformity
with the plan(s) attached as “Appendix A” to this Staff Report and received by the
Development Services on December 12, 2016, to the satisfaction of the Director of
Planning and Urban Design or designate;
3. That the owner enter into Heritage Conservation Easement Agreement with the
City to the satisfaction of the Manager of Heritage Planning;
4. That the owner obtain Site Plan Endorsement for the proposed development.
The Committee, in making its decision on this matter, took into consideration the oral and
written comments submitted on the application. The Committee felt that the heritage
conservation area variance requests are different than other requests outside the heritage area,
as the constraints are unique to the area. Overall the Committee felt the requests would
enhance the area and beautify the neighbourhood.
Resolution Carried
Adjournment
1. Next Meeting: February 22, 2017
2. Adjournment: 9:44pm.