Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAdjustment - 2010-09-21COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FOR THE CITY OF KITCHENER MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING HELD SEPTEMBER 21, 2010 MEMBERS PRESENT: Ms. C. Balcerczyk and Messrs A. Head and M. Hiscott OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ms. J. von Westerholt, Senior Planner, Mr. S. Bassanese, Urban Designer, Mr. J. Lewis, Traffic Technologist, Ms. D. Gilchrist, Secretary-Treasurer, and Ms. D. Saunderson, Administrative Clerk Mr. A. Head, Vice Chair, called this meeting to order at 10:05 a.m. MINUTES Moved by Mr. M. Hiscott Seconded by Ms. C. Balcerczyk That the minutes of the regular meeting of the Committee of Adjustment, of August 17, 2010, as mailed to the members, be accepted. Carried NEW BUSINESS MINOR VARIANCE 1. Submission No.: A 2010-053 Applicant: Roslyn Verity Property Location: 89 Highland Road East Leaal Description: Part Lot 365. Subdivision of Lot 17. German Company Tract Appearances: In Support: R. Verity Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to convert a duplex to a triplex with 2 of the 3 required parking spaces to be provided in tandem, one in the garage and one immediately in front of the garage in the existing driveway, rather than the parking space in the garage having uninhibited ingress and egress to/from the street. The Committee considered the report of the Development and Technical Services Department, dated September 13, 2010, advising that at the meeting of the Committee of Adjustment on August 17, 2010, Application A2010-053 was deferred to the September 21, 2010 meeting to allow for the advertisement of the amended application. The owner is proposing to convert the existing duplex dwelling located at 89 Highland Road East to a triplex, hereby increases the parking requirement from two to three off- street parking stalls. In order to provide three parking stalls within the existing paved driveway with sufficient width and setback for access, the owner requires permission to provide two of the three required parking spaces in tandem, one in the garage and one immediately in front of the garage in the existing driveway, rather than the parking space in the garage having uninhibited ingress and egress to/from the street. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 163 SEPTEMBER 21, 2010 Submission No.: A 2010-053. Cont'd The owner is requesting a variance from Section 6.1.1.b.ii to allow for a triplex to have two off-street parking spaces arranged in tandem where as By-law 85-1 only allows for two off-street parking spaces in tandem for duplex dwellings or semi-detached houses containing two dwelling units. The property is designated Low Rise Residential in the Official Plan and zoned Residential Five (R-5) in the Zoning By-law. In considering the four tests for minor variances as outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O., 1990 Chap. P. 13, as amended, Planning staff offer the following comments; The Low Rise Residential designation recognizes the existing scale of residential development and allows for a variety of low density residential uses. The requested variance to allow for the conversion from a duplex to a triplex is consistent in form and use with other development in the area. There are no exterior renovations proposed and no additional paved area is required to accommodate the required three off-street parking stalls. The proposal meets the intent of the Zoning By-law because all off-street parking spaces will be setback more than 3.0 metres from the street line. The By-law requires a setback of 3.0 metres for multiple dwellings in order to provide an adequate buffer between the parking area and the street to maintain the appearance of the existing streetscape. The subject property currently contains a driveway that is approximately 6.0 metres wide and approximately 13.7 metres long. The By-law requires one off- street parking space for each dwelling unit within a three unit multiple dwelling, for a total of three parking spaces. All three off-street parking spaces will be located more than the required 3.0 metres from the street line with two parking spaces arranged in tandem, thereby satisfying the intention of the By-law. Staff is of the opinion that the variance requested is minor because parking can still be accommodated on-site. The proposed tandem parking will not have an adverse impact on the neighbourhood. The variance is considered desirable because it will not alter the appearance of the dwelling from the street line and the character of the neighbourhood will be maintained. The proposed parking arrangement is appropriate for the development and the use of the land as a triplex dwelling building is appropriate. In addition, the subject property will be able to accommodate all required off-street parking stalls. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo Transportation Planner, dated September 10, 2010, advising that have no concerns with this application. Moved by Mr. M. Hiscott Seconded by Ms.C. Balcerczyk That the application of Roslyn Verity requesting permission to convert a duplex to a triplex with 2 of the 3 required parking spaces to be provided in tandem, one in the garage and one immediately in front of the garage in the existing driveway, rather than the parking space in the garage having uninhibited ingress and egress to/from the street, on Part Lot 365, Subdivision of Lot 17, German Company Tract, 89 Highland Road East, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following condition: 1. That the owner shall obtain an Occupancy Permit from the City's Planning Division for the proposed triplex. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 164 SEPTEMBER 21, 2010 Submission No.: A 2010-053, Cont'd It is the opinion of this Committee that: The variance requested in this application is minor in nature. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Official Plan is being maintained on the subject property. Carried Submission No.: A 2010-054 Applicant: Savic Homes Limited Property Location: 55 Mooregate Crescent Legal Description: Lot 13, Plan 1268 Appearances: In Support: B. Bruce Contra: D. Curko Written Submissions: D. Curko The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to develop a 31 unit townhouse complex at the bend of Mooregate Crescent, to have a front yard setback from Mooregate Crescent of 3 m. (9.84') rather than the required 4.5 m. (14.76) m.; a side yard setback of 3 m. (9.84') rather than the required 6 m. (19.68'); a rear yard setback of 3m. (9.84') rather than the required 7.5 m. (24.6'); and, a side yard abutting a street of 2.1 m. (6.88') rather than the required 4.5 m. (14.76'). The Committee considered the report of the Development and Technical Services Department, dated September 13, 2010, advising that the subject property is located at 55 Mooregate Crescent and is currently occupied by 14 street-fronting townhomes that were constructed approximately ten (10) years ago. The subject property is designated as High Rise Residential in the City's Official Plan and is zoned Residential Nine Zone (R-9) in By-law 85-1. Staff visited the site on September 10, 2010. The applicant is requesting relief from Section 43 of the Zoning By-law to permit the following in order to facilitate the development of cluster townhomes in the rear portion of the property: 1) to allow a front yard setback of 3.0 metres rather than 4.5 metres; 2) to allow a side yard abutting a street of 2.1 metres rather than 4.5 metres; 3) to allow a side yard setback of 3.0 metres rather than 6.0 metres; and, 4) to allow a rear yard setback of 3.0 metres rather than 7.5 metres. In October 2007, the Committee conditionally approved these same variances for the development of twenty-five (25) townhouses proposed for the rear portion of this property. Condition No.1 of that decision, requiring that final site plan approval be obtained for the proposed 25 townhouse dwellings, remains outstanding. The subject property was recently purchased by a new owner who is looking to add six (6) bachelor units to one of the townhouse blocks. While this addition will not affect the building footprints proposed by the previous owner, it does increase the number of units proposed to 31, whereas the previous decision by Committee was based on a plan with 25 units. One additional parking space is required with the proposed addition of the six (6) bachelor units. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 165 SEPTEMBER 21, 2010 Submission No.: A 2010-054. Cont'd Staff notes that the plan submitted with this minor variance application makes reference to easements on the site, and includes dimensions of individual unit widths with dashed lines that appear to represent an intended future property line. Staff notes that Part Lot Control and Condominium Exemption applications were made by the previous owner for this site, but were refused by staff in 2009. Accordingly, staff's review of this application should not be interpreted to include the "proposed" easements and internal divisions noted on this plan, which will have to be reviewed by a future condominium application process. Staff also notes that there is an existing Bell Canada easement approximately one (1) metre in width that runs along the two interior lot lines of this property. In the interest of condensing this report, staff's evaluation of the variances requested have been grouped together into one summary of the four tests, as opposed to looking at each of the four requested variances separately. Planning staff offer the following comments in consideration of the four tests for minor variances as outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O., 1990 Chap. P. 13, as amended: The lands are designated High Rise Residential in the Official Plan (OP), which is intended to support the development of a limited range of housing types at a high intensity of use. The application OP policies specifically state that the net residential density in the High Rise Residential District shall not be less than 100 units per hectare. The High-Rise Residential designation further requires a minimum Floor Space Ratio (FSR) on each site of 1.0 times covered, with a maximum FSR of 4.0 times coverage. The development of the subject parcel of land as proposed with the variances requested achieves an overall FSR of 1.0, which satisfies the minimum required density found in the OP. Therefore the application meets the intent of the Official Plan. The buildings proposed to be developed in the rear portion the site are organized so that they will front onto an internal private roadway, flanking the public street on both sides of the site. The by-law requires setbacks for the front yard and side yards abutting a street of 4.5 metres. The purpose of this setback is to ensure that buildings are an adequate distance from the public right-of-way so that driveway visibility triangles are maintained, to provide reasonable front yards and to establish a uniform minimum setback to give consistency to the streetscape. With regards to this particular site, the proposed buildings will not block required driveway visibility triangles for the two new proposed entrances. In the area immediately surrounding the subject site are a number of high-rise apartment buildings and cluster-townhouse dwellings, many with parking areas immediately abutting the roadway. The proposed development includes visitor parking located centrally to the site, but this configuration of the internal roadway results in the building footprints being located closer to the roadway. Staff recommends that each end unit abutting the public roadway have an architecturally enhanced side fagade, which could include articulated building elevation, enhanced windows such as bay windows, keystones or gabled windows and a continuation of materials from the front of the unit. Such elements will help improve the streetscape and the overall look and feel of the development. In order to implement this recommendation, staff feels that it would be appropriate to require that the owner, as a condition of the minor variance, prepare building elevations including an upgraded design for building edges along the street frontages. These elevation designs would be to the satisfaction of the Supervisor of Site Plan Development, and their review and approval would be done through the Site Plan Approval process. The third and fourth variances being sought are reductions in setback for the side and rear yards. The purpose of the rear yard setback is to allow the unit sufficient private amenity space, while both the rear and side yard setbacks are intended to allow adequate distance separation between neighbours for privacy purposes as well as to allow access for maintenance purposes. The owner is proposing a private rear yard amenity space for each of the proposed units of approximately 18 m2, which would provide a reasonably sized patio area in a high density development. This proposal also includes a common amenity area for residents central to the site. Given that this COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 166 SEPTEMBER 21, 2010 Submission No.: A 2010-054. Cont'd development proposes two-storey townhouse dwellings, staff does not feel that the setback reductions will cause significant privacy concerns for the cluster townhouse developments adjacent to the site. The proposed setbacks also allow for enough space for maintenance easements to be provided, should the owner pursue a Common Element Condominium for the site at a later date. Therefore, staff feels that the proposed variances meet the intent of the zoning by-law. Planning staff feels that the requested variances should not negatively impact development on neighbouring lands and will allow adequate separations between the buildings and the public roadway, and between the proposed buildings and those on neighbouring properties. Staff is of the opinion that permitting the reduced front yard and side yard abutting the street will not have a negative impact on the local streetscape, and permitting reduced rear and side yard variances will allow a private `patio style' rear yard for these high- density townhouse dwellings, whose occupants will also have access to a common amenity area on the property. As such, staff feels that the proposed variances are appropriate for the development and use of these lands as a high density cluster- townhouse development. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo Transportation Planner, dated September 10, 2010, advising that have no concerns with this application. The Committee considered the written submission of a neighbour in opposition to this application. Mr. Curko, president of Waterloo North Condominium Corporation #52 addressed the Committee outlining the concerns outlined in his written submission. He stated that there are a large number of developments in this area. He advised that although he does want to see Mr. Savic build a complex on this site, which will enhance the look of the property, he was of the opinion that 31 units will be detrimental because it will bring at least 62 cars to the property in addition to visitors' cars. He noted that there is only a small area of on-street parking spaces in the vicinity and the City's By-law officers regularly ticket for illegal on-street parking. Further, on-street parking inhibits the ability of emergency vehicles reaching properties on Mooregate Crescent. There have been stolen cars left in this area and have had to have cars in their parking lot ticketed for using their visitor parking. Mr. Curko also stated that he is concerned about the design of the development and asks that only 25 units be permitted, as 31 units will require the removal of trees that now form a buffer. Ms. von Westerholt advises that the zoning on this property would allow 100 units per hectare and this area is intended for higher density development with a floor space ratio of 1. She stated that 31 units is the minimum amount of units that can be developed on this property. Mr. Bruce explained that the variances being requested have nothing to do with parking on this site. He stated that they are providing 1.75 parking spaces per unit, which is the by-law requirement; and, as part of the site plan approval process, they will be providing afire route on the property. Further, he advised that 31 units is the minimum number of units permitted on this site. Moved by Mr. M. Hiscott Seconded by Ms. C. Balcerczyk That the application of Savic Homes Limited requesting permission to develop a 31 unit townhouse complex at the bend of Mooregate Crescent, to have a front yard setback from Mooregate Crescent of 3 m. (9.84') rather than the required 4.5 m. (14.76) m.; a side yard setback of 3 m. (9.84') rather than the required 6 m. (19.68'); a rear yard setback of 3m. (9.84') rather than the required 7.5 m. (24.6'); and, a side yard abutting a street of 2.1 m. (6.88') rather than the required 4.5 m. (14.76'), on Lot 13, Plan 1268, 55 COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 167 SEPTEMBER 21, 2010 2. Submission No.: A 2010-054, Cont'd Mooregate Crescent, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: That the owner shall receive final Site Plan Approval for the proposed cluster townhouse development, largely in keeping with the drawing attached to the application form, dated August 2010. 2. That the owner shall submit for approval, building elevations showing an upgraded design for units adjacent to public roadways to the satisfaction of the Supervisor of Site Plan Development, and that the required Section 41 Development Agreement shall include conditions to ensure the approved elevations are implemented. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance requested in this application is minor in nature. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Official Plan is being maintained on the subject property. Carried 3. Submission No.: A 2010-055 Applicant: Access Self Storage Property Location: 50 Ottawa Street South Legal Description: Lots 1-11, Plan 262, Part Lot 486, Streets & Lanes and Part Park Lot 25, Plan 404, being Parts 2-5 & 7, Reference Plan 58R-2633 Appearances: In Support: E. Saulesleja Contra: None Written Submissions: None Based on the staff recommendation, to which Mr. Saulesleja agreed, the Committee agreed to defer its consideration of this application to its meeting scheduled for Tuesday October 19, 2010, to allow the owner an opportunity to revise the on-site parking plan and prepare an addendum to the Parking Justification Study as requested by Transportation Planning Staff. 4. Submission No.: A 2010-056 Applicant: Alexandra Hardy Property Location: 173 Benton Street Legal Description: Part Lot 257, Municipal Complied Plan of Lot 17, German Company Tract Appearances: In Support: A. Hardy Contra: None Written Submissions: None COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 168 SEPTEMBER 21, 2010 Submission No.: A 2010-056. Cont'd The Committee was advised that the applicants are requesting permission to construct a covered porch in the side yard abutting Whitney Place, to have a rear yard of 5.04 m. (16.53') rather than the required 7.5 m. (24.6'). The Committee considered the report of the Development and Technical Services Department, dated August 9, 2010, advising that the subject property located at 173 Benton Street is zoned Residential Five (R-5) in the Zoning By-law and designated Low Rise Conservation in the Mill Courtland Woodside Park Neighbourhood Secondary Plan in the City's Official Plan. This subject property is a corner lot and is developed with a single detached dwelling. The owner is proposing to replace the existing covered porch located in the side yard with a new larger covered porch that will encroach into the required rear yard setback. Relief is required from Section 39.2.1 of the Zoning By-law to allow a 5.04 metres rear yard setback rather than the required 7.5 metres. In addition, this application also includes a request to legalize the existing side yard setback and rear yard setback of the existing dwelling building. Relief is being sought from Section 39.2.1 of the Zoning By-law to allow a side yard setback of 0.8 metres rather than the required 1.2 metres and allow a rear yard setback of 1.9 metres rather than the required 7.5 metres. In considering the four tests for minor variances as outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O., 1990 Chap. P. 13, as amended, Planning staff offer the following comments regarding the requested minor variance: The requested minor variances meet the intent of the Official Plan. The applicant is proposing to maintain the single detached dwelling which is a permitted use within the Low Rise Conservation designation. The proposed new porch will replace a deteriorating unsafe covered porch structure and will continue to maintain the intent of the Official Plan. The resultant form and scale of the building will not change and maintains consistency with other development in the area. The request for a reduction in the rear yard setback meets the intent of the Zoning By- law as the purpose of a 7.5 metres rear yard setback is to provide an outdoor amenity space, as well as adequate separation from neighbouring properties. It is staff's opinion that a setback of the proposed covered porch at 5.04 metres would continue to allow outdoor amenity space to be provided and the impact on neighbouring properties is minimal. The additional requested variances pertaining to the existing dwelling recognize an existing situation and staff are of the opinion that approval of this application will legalize the existing side yard and rear yard setbacks. The requested variance pertaining to the new covered porch structure is considered minor as there will be adequate separation from the abutting residential properties and as such will likely have minimal impact to adjacent lands. The approval of the requested variances pertaining to the existing building will legalize an existing situation. Staff are of the opinion that the requested variances are minor in nature. The variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land as the proposed covered porch will replace an old deteriorating unsafe existing structure and will compliment the streetscape and overall appearance of the dwelling located at the corner of Benton Street and Whitney Place. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo Transportation Planner, dated September 10, 2010, advising that they have no concerns with this application. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 169 SEPTEMBER 21, 2010 Submission No.: A 2010-056, Cont'd Moved by Ms. C. Balcerczyk Seconded by Mr. M. Hiscott That the application of Alexandra Hardy requesting permission to construct a covered porch in the side yard abutting Whitney Place, to have a rear yard of 5.04 m. (16.53') rather than the required 7.5 m. (24.6') and legalization of an existing dwelling having a side yard set back of 0.8 m (2.62') rather than the required 1.2 m (3.93') and a rear yard of 1.9 m (6.23') rather than the required 7.5 m (24.6'), on Part Lot 257, Municipal Complied Plan of Lot 17, German Company Tract, 173 Benton Street, Kitchener Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following condition: That the owner shall obtained Building Permit #116269 from the City's Building Division for the proposed covered porch. It is the opinion of this Committee that: The variance requested in this application is minor in nature. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Official Plan is being maintained on the subject property. Carried Submission No.: A 2010-057 Applicant: Karen & Hendrick Low Property Location: 34 York Street Leaal Description: Part Lot 12 & 13, Plan 217 Appearances: In Support: J. Miller Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicants are requesting permission to add a third storey to the existing single family dwelling on a lot having and area of 211.9 sq. m. (2,280.94 sq. ft.) rather than the required 235 sq. m. (2,529.6 sq. ft.); with the dwelling having: a front yard setback from York Street of 0.94 m. (3.08') rather than the required 4.5 m. (14.76'), a side yard setback of 0.21 m. (0.69') rather than the required 1.2 m. (3.93') and a rear yard setback of 4.45 m. (14.6') rather than the required 7.5 m. (24.6'). The Committee considered the report of the Development and Technical Services Department, dated September 13, 2010, advising that the subject property is located at 34 York Street and contains a single detached dwelling. The property is zoned Residential Five (R-5) in the Zoning By-law 85-1 and designated as Low Rise Conservation in the K-W Hospital Neighbourhood Secondary Plan of the City's Official Plan. The applicant is proposing to construct a third storey addition onto the existing building which will provide additional living space. Relief is being sought from Section 39.2 of the Zoning By-law 85-1 to allow for the following: a) A lot area of 211.9 square metres rather than the required 235.0 square metres; b) A rear yard setback of 4.45 metres rather than the required 7.5 metres; c) Aside yard setback of 0.21 metres rather than the required 1.2 metres and d) A front yard setback of 0.94 metres rather than the required 4.5 metres. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 170 SEPTEMBER 21, 2010 Submission No.: A 2010-057. Cont'd The applicant has not applied for a building permit to construct the third storey addition and as such will be made a condition of approval of this application. In considering the four tests for minor variances as outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O., 1990 Chap. P. 13, as amended, Planning staff offer the following comments regarding the requested minor variance: The requested minor variances meet the intent of the Official Plan. The applicant is proposing to maintain the single detached dwelling which is a permitted use within the Low Rise Conservation designation. The third storey addition will continue to maintain the intent of the Official plan and the resultant form and scale of the building will be consistent with other development in the area. The requested minor variances for a lot area of 211.9 square metres rather than the required 235.0 square metres, a rear yard setback of 4.45 metres rather than the required 7.5 metres, a side yard setback of 0.21 metres rather than the required 1.2 metres and a front yard setback of 0.94 metres rather than the required 4.5 metres, all recognize an existing situation and staff are of the opinion that the third storey addition will not adversely affect the subject property nor will it interfere with the functionality of the surrounding neighbourhood. Staff are of the opinion that the requested minor variances conform with the intent of the Zoning By-law 85-1. The applicant is proposing to construct a third storey addition onto the existing single detached dwelling to provide for additional living space. The applicant has advised that the third storey addition will not exceed the maximum building height of 10.5 metres as required in the Zoning By-law 85-1. Staff is of the opinion that requested variances are minor and the approval of this applicant will legalize an existing situation. The requested minor variances will not affect the subject or the adjacent properties. The requested minor variances are appropriate for the development and use of the land as it will allow the subject property to blend well with the balance of dwellings within the neighbourhood. The building design, setbacks, parcel size and current use are common with the adjacent properties. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo Transportation Planner, dated September 10, 2010, advising that they have no concerns with this application. Moved by Mr. M. Hiscott Seconded by Ms. C. Balcerczyk That the application of Karen & Hendrick Low requesting permission to add a third storey to the existing single family dwelling on a lot having and area of 211.9 sq. m. (2,280.94 sq. ft.) rather than the required 235 sq. m. (2,529.6 sq. ft.); with the dwelling having: a front yard setback from York Street of 0.94 m. (3.08') rather than the required 4.5 m. (14.76'), a side yard setback of 0.21 m. (0.69') rather than the required 1.2 m. (3.93') and a rear yard setback of 4.45 m. (14.6') rather than the required 7.5 m. (24.6'), on Part Lot 12 & 13, Plan 217, 34 York Street, Kitchener Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following condition: 1. That the owners shall obtain a building permit from the City's Building Division for the proposed third storey addition. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance requested in this application is minor in nature. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 171 SEPTEMBER 21, 2010 Submission No.: A 2010-057, Cont'd 3. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Official Plan is being maintained on the subject property. Carried Submission No.: A 2010-059 Applicant: City of Kitchener Property Location: 104 to 122 King Street West Legal Description: Alley, Plan 362, Lots 1-3 & 7-8, Plan 362, Lot 5, North side of King Street, Plan 401, Part Lot 3W, Plan 401, as in Instrument No. 1282803, Parts 1 & 2, Plan 58R-4454, Parts 4,5 & 7, Plan 58R-1391, Part Lot 7, between Young Street and Ontario Street, Plan 401, Parts 1-5, Plan 58R-12515, together with Instrument No. 1495049, except easement therein, re: Parts 3 & 4, Plan 58R-5636, subject to and together with Instrument No. 1495048, except easement therein re: Parts 5 & 7, Plan 58R-4454, subject to and together with Instrument No. 1495053, except easement therein re Parts 1 & 5, 58R-4454, City of Kitchener, Regional Municipality of Waterloo; and Part Lot 3W, Plan 401, Parts 5 & 6, Plan 58r-13462, subject to Instrument A72006, City of Kitchener, Regional Municipality of Waterloo, Appearances: In Support: L. Klein G. D'Jambroso Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to develop a 14 storey (plus Mechanical Room) building, to contain high density residential, retail and parking, with the 12th to 14th storeys to be located within the 45 degree horizontal distance of the vertical projection of the street line on the opposite side of King Street; whereas the zoning by-law does not permit such an intrusion into the vertical projection. The Committee considered the report of the Development and Technical Services Department, dated September 16, 2010, advising that the subject site is comprised of several properties occupying almost the entire City block bounded by Duke Street West, Young Street, King Street West and Ontario Street North. The site is located downtown and is commonly referred to as the City Centre or Centre Block. The City of Kitchener assembled numerous properties over a number of years to create this consolidated site in 2000. In 2006 Council prepared a Terms of Reference for redevelopment of the subject site. Council endorsed Andrin Investments Limited's proposal for ahigh-quality, mixed-use development which includes nearly 400 residential units, live-work opportunities, ground floor retail, and public and private outdoor spaces. In 2009 Council finalized the land purchase and sale agreement between the City and Andrin Investments Limited. In 2010 aPre-submission Consultation Meeting was held for the Site Plan application for the redevelopment of the subject site. Through the review of the preliminary submission planning staff identified that the proposal was not compliant with the applicable building elevation regulation in the Zoning By-law and identified the requirement for this minor variance application accordingly. Of note, the Site Plan application and this minor variance application exclude the parcels of land municipally addressed as 140, 144-150, 156-158 King Street West and 11 Young Street (the existing building commonly known as the Mayfair Hotel).The subject site is approximately one hectare in area and has approximately 55 metres of COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 172 SEPTEMBER 21, 2010 6. Submission No.: A 2010-059. Cont'd frontage on King Street West, 77 metres of frontage on Young Street and 92 metres of frontage on Duke Street. It is currently used as a municipal surface parking lot. The surrounding area is comprised of a mix of uses. Along King Street West there are a range of commercial and residential uses (with shops at grade and offices or residential units above). Immediately across Young Street is City Hall and across Duke Street there is a church, offices and downtown community centre. In the same block, along the Ontario Street frontage there are several buildings used for various commercial purposes, with some residential units located in upper storeys. The subject site and surrounding properties are designated Retail Core in the Official Plan and are within the City Centre Downtown Design District. Duke Street is the limit of the Retail Core land use designation. Properties on the opposite side of Duke Street are designated Office District, although these lands are also within the City Centre Downtown Design District. The subject site and surrounding properties within the block are zoned Retail Core (D-1) Zone in the Zoning By-law. Properties on the opposite side of Duke Street are zoned Office District (D-4) Zone in the Zoning By-law. The redevelopment of the subject site as proposed requires Committee of Adjustment approval for the following zoning deficiencies. The applicant is requesting the following minor variances: To permit a maximum building height of 40 metres for a building located at a horizontal distance of 31.74 metres from the vertical projection of the street line on the opposite side of King Street whereas Zoning By-law 85-1 requires a maximum building height of 31.74 metres for buildings located at a horizontal distance of 31.74 metres from the vertical projection of the street line on the opposite side of King Street; To permit a maximum building height of 46 metres for a building located at a horizontal distance of 37.2 metres from the vertical projection of the street line on the opposite side of King Street whereas Zoning By-law 85-1 requires a maximum building height of 37.2 metres for buildings located at a horizontal distance of 37.2 metres from the vertical projection of the street line on the opposite side of King Street; and To permit a maximum building height of 50 metres for a building located at a horizontal distance of 44.8 metres from the vertical projection of the street line on the opposite side of King Street whereas Zoning By-law 85-1 requires a maximum building height of 44.8 metres for buildings located at a horizontal distance of 44.8 metres from the vertical projection of the street line on the opposite side of King Street. The following table summarizes the application Horizontal distance from the vertical projection of the street line on the opposite side of King Street Maximum Building Height As per the zoning by-law Proposed Maximum Building Height 31.74 metres 31.74 metres 40 metres 37.2 metres 37.2 metres 46 metres 44.8 metres 44.8 metres 50 metres In considering the four tests for minor variances as outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O., 1990 Chap. P. 13, as amended, Planning staff offer the following comments. The general intent of the City Centre District downtown design policies pertaining to building massing is to achieve a lively commercial street front along King Street by requiring pedestrian-scaled building massing along the base of buildings, with upper storeys being setback and well articulated. The proposal maintains a pedestrian scaled fagade height (no greater than four storeys) along King Street and upper storeys are stepped back appropriately so as not to impede on pedestrian comfort. Therefore the general intent of the Official Plan is maintained. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 173 SEPTEMBER 21, 2010 Submission No.: A 2010-059. Cont'd The general intent of the Zoning By-law provision pertaining to building elevation is to implement the Official Plan policy for building massing as outlined above. It is a regulation intended to require greater setbacks for upper storeys so as to maintain a 45 degree angular plane projection from the street line on the opposite side of King Street. The proposal generally meets this intent because the base portion of the building is pedestrian scaled and any massing above the fourth storey is stepped back an adequate distance from the King Street street line. The proposed setback of upper storeys is sufficient to maintain the pedestrian scale along King Street and therefore the general intent of the Zoning By-law is maintained. The variances are minor because the only portions of the building proposed along King Street that project into the required 45 degree angular plane are small portions of the twelfth, thirteenth and fourteenth storeys and a small portion of the rooftop mechanical unit. The impact of this minor encroachment into the required angular plane is negligible and is not perceptible from the street level along King Street. The variances are appropriate for the development and use of the land because they would allow for significant mixed use intensification of an underutilized block in the City's core. A primary objective of the City's Official Plan is to make the downtown a great place for people and to promote the downtown as the major multi-use focus of community life and commerce for the City and the Region. The primary objective of the Downtown Strategic Plan is to make downtown an attractive place for people. The strategy is focused on attracting investment and residents to our downtown core. A key goal of the Kitchener Growth Management Strategy is to create vibrant urban places. The proposed Site Plan application supports all of the above noted goals and objectives and therefore the variance required for Site Plan approval is appropriate for the development and use of the subject land. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo Transportation Planner, dated September 10, 2010, advising that they have no objections to this application, but future development applications may require provisions for transit amenities, potentially including a shelter. The Region may possibly require addition dedicated land widening along Duke Street from this property, for the Region of Waterloo for the future Rapid Transit (RT) Project. Exact amount of dedicated land widening and / or other easements for RT project (if required) will be determined at Preliminary Design Stage of the future RT project. Mr. Klein provided the Committee members with drawings of the proposed development, as related to the variance requested; one of the drawings being an elevation drawing of the building viewed from King Street. Mr. Klein noted that people walking on the north side of King Street would not be able to see the tower and people walking on the south side of King Street would not see very much of the tower given that there will be a 4 storey portion of the building immediately adjacent to King Street. Moved by Mr. M. Hiscott Seconded by Ms. C. Balcerczyk That the application of the City of Kitchener requesting permission for a maximum building height of 40 m for a building located at a horizontal distance of 31.74 m from the vertical projection of the street line on the opposite side of King Street, whereas a maximum building height of 31.74 m for buildings located at a horizontal distance of 31.74 m from the projection of the street line on the opposite side of King Street is required; permission for a maximum building height of 46 m for a building located at a horizontal distance of 37.2 m from the vertical projection of the street line on the opposite side of King Street, whereas a maximum building height of 37.2 m for buildings located at a horizontal distance of 37.2 m from the vertical projection of the street line on the opposite side of King Street is required; and, permission for a maximum building height of 50 m for a building located at a horizontal distance of 44.8 m from the vertical projection of the street line on the opposite side of King Street, whereas a maximum COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 174 SEPTEMBER 21, 2010 Submission No.: A 2010-059, Cont'd building height of 44.8m for buildings located at a horizontal distance of 44.8 m from the vertical projection of the street line on the opposite side of King Street is required, on Alley, Plan 362, Lots 1-3 & 7-8, Plan 362, Lot 5, North side of King Street, Plan 401, Part Lot 3W, Plan 401, as in Instrument No. 1282803, Parts 1 & 2, Plan 58R-4454, Parts 4,5 & 7, Plan 58R-1391, Part Lot 7, between Young Street and Ontario Street, Plan 401, Parts 1-5, Plan 58R-12515, together with Instrument No. 1495049, except easement therein, re: Parts 3 & 4, Plan 58R-5636, subject to and together with Instrument No. 1495048, except easement therein re: Parts 5 & 7, Plan 58R-4454, subject to and together with Instrument No. 1495053, except easement therein re Parts 1 & 5, 58R-4454, City of Kitchener, Regional Municipality of Waterloo; and Part Lot 3W, Plan 401, Parts 5 & 6, Plan 58r-13462, subject to Instrument A72006, City of Kitchener, Regional Municipality of Waterloo, 104 to 122 King Street West, Kitchener Ontario, BE APPROVED. It is the opinion of this Committee that: The variance requested in this application is minor in nature. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Official Plan is being maintained on the subject property. Carried CONSENT Submission Nos.: B 2010-029 to B 2010-039 Applicant: 970722 Ontario Inc. Property Location: Isaiah Crescent Leaal Description: Block 141, 58M-451 Appearances: In Support: C. Pidgeon Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to sever 11 parcels of land from the rear of lots fronting on Isaiah Drive to be added to the rear of lots fronting onto Isaiah Crescent, in order to create large enough lots for residential development. The severed parcels will have the following dimensions: B 2010 - 029: a width on Isaiah Crescent of 11.008 m. (36.11') and a depth of 17.449 m. (57.24'); B 2010 - 030: a width of 9.19 m. (30.1') and a depth of 11.023 m. (36.16'); B 2010 - 031: a width of 9.19 m. (30.1') and a depth of 11.038 m. (36.21'); B 2010 - 032: a width of 9.19 m. (30.1') and a depth of 11.054 m. (36.26'); B 2010 - 033: a width of 9.19 m. (30.1') and a depth of 11.069 m. (36.31'); B 2010 - 034: a width of 9.19 m. (30.1') and a depth of 11.084 m. (36.36'); B 2010 - 035: a width of 9.19 m. (30.1') and a depth of 11.1 m. (36.41'); B 2010 - 036: a width of 9.724 m. (31.9') and a depth of 11.124 m. (36.49'); B 2010 - 037: a width of 10.708 m. (35.13') and a depth of 10.749 m. (35.26'); B 2010 - 038: a width of 8.952 m. (29.37'), a depth of 17.368 m. (56.98') and having an irregular shape; B 2010 - 039: a width of 8.067 m. (26.46'), a depth of 31.075 m. (101.95') and having an irregular shape. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 175 SEPTEMBER 21, 2010 Submission Nos.: B 2010-029 to B 2010-039. cont'd The retained land will be the remainder of Block 141, Registered Plan 58M-451, to be developed as part of a residential subdivision. The Committee considered the report of the Development & Technical Services Department, dated August 5, 2010, advising that the subject lands are legally described as Block 141, 58M-451 in the Eby Estate Plan of Subdivision in the Laurentian West Planning Community. This parcel of land is a future development block that was to be merged with Blocks 102 to 112 in the Talm Plan of Subdivision. The subject lands are designated Low Rise Residential in the City's Official Plan/Laurentian West Community Plan and zoned Residential Four (R-4). Surrounding land use is characterized as low rise residential. The applicant is proposing to convey eleven (11) lot additions to Blocks 102 to112, in order to create eleven (11) single detached lots. This is necessary in order to create adequately sized lots that were planned for through the respective plans of subdivision following through with a condition imposed through the Subdivision Agreement; and, as a result staff has no concerns. With respect to the criteria for the subdivision of land listed in Section 51 (24) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13, the proposed uses of the lands to be severed are in conformity with the City's Official Plan and the Provincial Policy Statement. The aforementioned lot additions are to facilitate the development of single detached lots that are fully serviced and have frontage onto a public street. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Planning, Housing & Community Services, dated September 15, 2010, in which they advise that they have no objections to these applications. Submission No. B 2010-029 Moved by Ms. C. Balcerczyk Seconded by Mr. M. Hiscott That the application of 970722 Ontario Inc. requesting permission to sever a parcel of land having width of 11.008 m. (36.11') and a depth of 17.449 m. (57.24'), to be conveyed as a lot addition to 586 Isaiah Crescent (Block 102, Registered Plan 58M- 497), on Part Block 141, Registered Plan 58M-451, being Part 1 Reference Plan 58R- 16754, Isaiah Crescent, Kitchener, Ontario, BE GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and or local improvement charges. 2. That the owner shall provide the Secretary-Treasurer with a digital file of the deposited reference plan(s) prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor in .dwg (AutoCAd) or .dgn (Microstation) format, as well as 2 full size paper copies of the plan(s). The digital file shall be submitted according to the City of Kitchener's Digital Submission Standards to the satisfaction of the City's Mapping Technologist. 3. That the owner's Solicitor shall provide the City Solicitor with a Solicitor's Undertaking to register an Application Consolidation Parcels immediately following the registration of the Severance Deed and prior to any new applicable mortgages, and to provide a copy of the registered Application Consolidation Parcels to the City Solicitor within a reasonable time following registration. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 176 SEPTEMBER 21, 2010 Submission Nos.: B 2010-029 to B 2010-039, cont'd Submission No. B 2010-029, cont'd It is the opinion of this Committee that: A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. 2. The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. 3. The use of the land in the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfil the above-noted conditions within one year of the date of giving notice of this decision. Pursuant to Subsection 43 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the decision of this Committee shall lapse two years from the date of approval, being September 21, 2012. Carried Submission No. B 2010-030 Moved by Ms. C. Balcerczyk Seconded by Mr. M. Hiscott That the application of 970722 Ontario Inc. requesting permission to sever a parcel of land having a width of 9.19 m. (30.1') and a depth of 11.023 m. (36.16'), to be conveyed as a lot addition to 582 Isaiah Crescent (Block 103, Registered Plan 58M-497), on Part Block 141, Registered Plan 58M-451, being Part 2, Reference Plan 58R-16754, Isaiah Crescent, Kitchener, Ontario, BE GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and or local improvement charges. 2. That the owner shall provide the Secretary-Treasurer with a digital file of the deposited reference plan(s) prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor in .dwg (AutoCAd) or .dgn (Microstation) format, as well as 2 full size paper copies of the plan(s). The digital file shall be submitted according to the City of Kitchener's Digital Submission Standards to the satisfaction of the City's Mapping Technologist. 3. That the owner's Solicitor shall provide the City Solicitor with a Solicitor's Undertaking to register an Application Consolidation Parcels immediately following the registration of the Severance Deed and prior to any new applicable mortgages, and to provide a copy of the registered Application Consolidation Parcels to the City Solicitor within a reasonable time following registration. It is the opinion of this Committee that: A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. 2. The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. 3. The use of the land in the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 177 SEPTEMBER 21, 2010 Submission Nos.: B 2010-029 to B 2010-039, cont'd Submission No. B 2010-030, cont'd Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfil the above-noted conditions within one year of the date of giving notice of this decision. Pursuant to Subsection 43 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the decision of this Committee shall lapse two years from the date of approval, being September 21, 2012. Carried Submission No. B 2010-031 Moved by Ms. C. Balcerczyk Seconded by Mr. M. Hiscott That the application of 970722 Ontario Inc. requesting permission to sever a parcel of land having a width of 9.19 m. (30.1') and a depth of 11.038 m. (36.21'), to be conveyed as a lot addition to 578 Isaiah Crescent (Block 104, Registered Plan 58M-497) on Part Block 141, Registered Plan 58M-451, being Part 3, 58R-16754, Isaiah Crescent, Kitchener, Ontario, BE GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and or local improvement charges. 2. That the owner shall provide the Secretary-Treasurer with a digital file of the deposited reference plan(s) prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor in .dwg (AutoCAd) or .dgn (Microstation) format, as well as 2 full size paper copies of the plan(s). The digital file shall be submitted according to the City of Kitchener's Digital Submission Standards to the satisfaction of the City's Mapping Technologist. 3. That the owner's Solicitor shall provide the City Solicitor with a Solicitor's Undertaking to register an Application Consolidation Parcels immediately following the registration of the Severance Deed and prior to any new applicable mortgages, and to provide a copy of the registered Application Consolidation Parcels to the City Solicitor within a reasonable time following registration. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. 2. The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. 3. The use of the land in the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfil the above-noted conditions within one year of the date of giving notice of this decision. Pursuant to Subsection 43 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the decision of this Committee shall lapse two years from the date of approval, being September 21, 2012. Carried COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 178 SEPTEMBER 21, 2010 Submission Nos.: B 2010-029 to B 2010-039, cont'd Submission No. B 2010-032 Moved by Ms. C. Balcerczyk Seconded by Mr. M. Hiscott That the application of 970722 Ontario Inc. requesting permission to sever a parcel of land having a width of 9.19 m. (30.1') and a depth of 11.054 m. (36.26'), to be conveyed as a lot addition to 574 Isaiah Crescent (Block 105, Registered Plan 58M-497), on Part Block 141, Registered Plan 58M-451, being Part 4, Reference Plan 58R-16754, Isaiah Crescent, Kitchener, Ontario, BE GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and or local improvement charges. 2. That the owner shall provide the Secretary-Treasurer with a digital file of the deposited reference plan(s) prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor in .dwg (AutoCAd) or .dgn (Microstation) format, as well as 2 full size paper copies of the plan(s). The digital file shall be submitted according to the City of Kitchener's Digital Submission Standards to the satisfaction of the City's Mapping Technologist. 3. That the owner's Solicitor shall provide the City Solicitor with a Solicitor's Undertaking to register an Application Consolidation Parcels immediately following the registration of the Severance Deed and prior to any new applicable mortgages, and to provide a copy of the registered Application Consolidation Parcels to the City Solicitor within a reasonable time following registration. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. 2. The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. 3. The use of the land in the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfil the above-noted conditions within one year of the date of giving notice of this decision. Pursuant to Subsection 43 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the decision of this Committee shall lapse two years from the date of approval, being September 21, 2012. Carried Submission No. B 2010-033 Moved by Ms. C. Balcerczyk Seconded by Mr. M. Hiscott That the application of 970722 Ontario Inc. requesting permission to sever a parcel of land having a width of 9.19 m. (30.1') and a depth of 11.069 m. (36.31'), to be conveyed as a lot addition to 570 Isaiah Crescent (Block 106, Registered Plan 58M-497), on Part Block 141, Registered Plan 58M-451, being Part 5, Reference Plan 58R-16754, Isaiah Crescent, Kitchener, Ontario, BE GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 179 SEPTEMBER 21, 2010 Submission Nos.: B 2010-029 to B 2010-039, cont'd Submission No. B 2010-033, cont'd That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and or local improvement charges. 2. That the owner shall provide the Secretary-Treasurer with a digital file of the deposited reference plan(s) prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor in .dwg (AutoCAd) or .dgn (Microstation) format, as well as 2 full size paper copies of the plan(s). The digital file shall be submitted according to the City of Kitchener's Digital Submission Standards to the satisfaction of the City's Mapping Technologist. 3. That the owner's Solicitor shall provide the City Solicitor with a Solicitor's Undertaking to register an Application Consolidation Parcels immediately following the registration of the Severance Deed and prior to any new applicable mortgages, and to provide a copy of the registered Application Consolidation Parcels to the City Solicitor within a reasonable time following registration. It is the opinion of this Committee that: A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. 2. The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. 3. The use of the land in the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfil the above-noted conditions within one year of the date of giving notice of this decision. Pursuant to Subsection 43 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the decision of this Committee shall lapse two years from the date of approval, being September 21, 2012. Carried Submission No. B 2010-034 Moved by Ms. C. Balcerczyk Seconded by Mr. M. Hiscott That the application of 970722 Ontario Inc. requesting permission to sever a parcel of land having a width of 9.19 m. (30.1') and a depth of 11.084 m. (36.36'), to be conveyed as a lot addition to 566 Isaiah Crescent (Block 107, Registered Plan 58M-497), on Part Block 141, Registered Plan 58M-451, being Part 6, Reference Plan 58R-16754, Isaiah Crescent, Kitchener, Ontario, BE GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and or local improvement charges. 2. That the owner shall provide the Secretary-Treasurer with a digital file of the deposited reference plan(s) prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor in .dwg (AutoCAd) or .dgn (Microstation) format, as well as 2 full size paper copies of the plan(s). The digital file shall be submitted according to the City of Kitchener's Digital Submission Standards to the satisfaction of the City's Mapping Technologist. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 180 SEPTEMBER 21, 2010 Submission Nos.: B 2010-029 to B 2010-039, cont'd Submission No. B 2010-034, cont'd 3. That the owner's Solicitor shall provide the City Solicitor with a Solicitor's Undertaking to register an Application Consolidation Parcels immediately following the registration of the Severance Deed and prior to any new applicable mortgages, and to provide a copy of the registered Application Consolidation Parcels to the City Solicitor within a reasonable time following registration. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. 2. The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. 3. The use of the land in the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfil the above-noted conditions within one year of the date of giving notice of this decision. Pursuant to Subsection 43 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the decision of this Committee shall lapse two years from the date of approval, being September 21, 2012. Carried Submission No. B 2010-035 Moved by Ms. C. Balcerczyk Seconded by Mr. M. Hiscott That the application of 970722 Ontario Inc. requesting permission to sever a parcel of land having a width of 9.19 m. (30.1') and a depth of 11.1 m. (36.41'), to be conveyed as a lot addition to 562 Isaiah Crescent (Block 108, Registered Plan 58M-497) on Part Block 141, Registered Plan 58M-451, being Part 7, Reference Plan 58R-16754, Isaiah Crescent, Kitchener, Ontario, BE GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and or local improvement charges. 2. That the owner shall provide the Secretary-Treasurer with a digital file of the deposited reference plan(s) prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor in .dwg (AutoCAd) or .dgn (Microstation) format, as well as 2 full size paper copies of the plan(s). The digital file shall be submitted according to the City of Kitchener's Digital Submission Standards to the satisfaction of the City's Mapping Technologist. 3. That the owner's Solicitor shall provide the City Solicitor with a Solicitor's Undertaking to register an Application Consolidation Parcels immediately following the registration of the Severance Deed and prior to any new applicable mortgages, and to provide a copy of the registered Application Consolidation Parcels to the City Solicitor within a reasonable time following registration. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 181 SEPTEMBER 21, 2010 Submission Nos.: B 2010-029 to B 2010-039, cont'd Submission No. B 2010-035, cont'd 2. The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. 3. The use of the land in the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfil the above-noted conditions within one year of the date of giving notice of this decision. Pursuant to Subsection 43 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the decision of this Committee shall lapse two years from the date of approval, being September 21, 2012. Carried Submission No. B 2010-036 Moved by Ms. C. Balcerczyk Seconded by Mr. M. Hiscott That the application of 970722 Ontario Inc. requesting permission to sever a parcel of land having a width of 9.724 m. (31.9') and a depth of 11.124 m. (36.49'), to be conveyed as a lot addition to 558 Isaiah Crescent (Block 109, Registered Plan 58M- 497), on Part Block 141, Reference Plan 58M-451, being Part 8, Reference Plan 58R- 16754, Isaiah Crescent, Kitchener, Ontario, BE GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and or local improvement charges. 2. That the owner shall provide the Secretary-Treasurer with a digital file of the deposited reference plan(s) prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor in .dwg (AutoCAd) or .dgn (Microstation) format, as well as 2 full size paper copies of the plan(s). The digital file shall be submitted according to the City of Kitchener's Digital Submission Standards to the satisfaction of the City's Mapping Technologist. 3. That the owner's Solicitor shall provide the City Solicitor with a Solicitor's Undertaking to register an Application Consolidation Parcels immediately following the registration of the Severance Deed and prior to any new applicable mortgages, and to provide a copy of the registered Application Consolidation Parcels to the City Solicitor within a reasonable time following registration. It is the opinion of this Committee that: A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. 2. The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. 3. The use of the land in the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 182 SEPTEMBER 21, 2010 Submission Nos.: B 2010-029 to B 2010-039, cont'd Submission No. B 2010-036, cont'd Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfil the above-noted conditions within one year of the date of giving notice of this decision. Pursuant to Subsection 43 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the decision of this Committee shall lapse two years from the date of approval, being September 21, 2012. Carried Submission No. B 2010-037 Moved by Ms. C. Balcerczyk Seconded by Mr. M. Hiscott That the application of 970722 Ontario Inc. requesting permission to sever a parcel of land having a width of 10.708 m. (35.13') and a depth of 10.749 m. (35.26'), to be conveyed as a lot addition to 554 Isaiah Crescent (Block 110, Registered Plan 58M- 497), on Part Block 141, Registered Plan 58M-451, being Part 9, Reference Plan 58R- 16754, Isaiah Crescent, Kitchener, Ontario, BE GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and or local improvement charges. 2. That the owner shall provide the Secretary-Treasurer with a digital file of the deposited reference plan(s) prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor in .dwg (AutoCAd) or .dgn (Microstation) format, as well as 2 full size paper copies of the plan(s). The digital file shall be submitted according to the City of Kitchener's Digital Submission Standards to the satisfaction of the City's Mapping Technologist. 3. That the owner's Solicitor shall provide the City Solicitor with a Solicitor's Undertaking to register an Application Consolidation Parcels immediately following the registration of the Severance Deed and prior to any new applicable mortgages, and to provide a copy of the registered Application Consolidation Parcels to the City Solicitor within a reasonable time following registration. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. 2. The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. 3. The use of the land in the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfil the above-noted conditions within one year of the date of giving notice of this decision. Pursuant to Subsection 43 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the decision of this Committee shall lapse two years from the date of approval, being September 21, 2012. Carried COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 183 SEPTEMBER 21, 2010 Submission Nos.: B 2010-029 to B 2010-039, cont'd Submission No. B 2010-038 Moved by Ms. C. Balcerczyk Seconded by Mr. M. Hiscott That the application of 970722 Ontario Inc. requesting permission to sever a parcel of land having a width of 8.952 m. (29.37'), a depth of 17.368 m. (56.98') and having an irregular shape, to be conveyed as a lot addition to 550 Isaiah Crescent (on Part 10, Registered Plan 58M-497), on Part Block 141, Registered Plan 58M-451, being Part 9, Reference Plan 58R-16754, Isaiah Crescent, Kitchener, Ontario, BE GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and or local improvement charges. 2. That the owner shall provide the Secretary-Treasurer with a digital file of the deposited reference plan(s) prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor in .dwg (AutoCAd) or .dgn (Microstation) format, as well as 2 full size paper copies of the plan(s). The digital file shall be submitted according to the City of Kitchener's Digital Submission Standards to the satisfaction of the City's Mapping Technologist. 3. That the owner's Solicitor shall provide the City Solicitor with a Solicitor's Undertaking to register an Application Consolidation Parcels immediately following the registration of the Severance Deed and prior to any new applicable mortgages, and to provide a copy of the registered Application Consolidation Parcels to the City Solicitor within a reasonable time following registration. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. 2. The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. 3. The use of the land in the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfil the above-noted conditions within one year of the date of giving notice of this decision. Pursuant to Subsection 43 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the decision of this Committee shall lapse two years from the date of approval, being September 21, 2012. Carried Submission No. B 2010-039 Moved by Ms. C. Balcerczyk Seconded by Mr. M. Hiscott That the application of 970722 Ontario Inc. requesting permission to sever a parcel of land having a width of 8.067 m. (26.46'), a depth of 31.075 m. (101.95') and having an irregular shape, to be conveyed as a lot addition to Blocks 112 & 113, Registered Plan 58M-497, on Part Block 141, Registered Plan 58M-451, being Part 11, Reference Plan 16753, Isaiah Crescent, Kitchener, Ontario, BE GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 184 Submission Nos.: B 2010-029 to B 2010-039, cont'd Submission No. B 2010-039, cont'd SEPTEMBER 21, 2010 That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and or local improvement charges. 2. That the owner shall provide the Secretary-Treasurer with a digital file of the deposited reference plan(s) prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor in .dwg (AutoCAd) or .dgn (Microstation) format, as well as 2 full size paper copies of the plan(s). The digital file shall be submitted according to the City of Kitchener's Digital Submission Standards to the satisfaction of the City's Mapping Technologist. 3. That the owner's Solicitor shall provide the City Solicitor with a Solicitor's Undertaking to register an Application Consolidation Parcels immediately following the registration of the Severance Deed and prior to any new applicable mortgages, and to provide a copy of the registered Application Consolidation Parcels to the City Solicitor within a reasonable time following registration. It is the opinion of this Committee that 1. A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. 2. The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. 3. The use of the land in the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfil the above-noted conditions within one year of the date of giving notice of this decision. Pursuant to Subsection 43 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the decision of this Committee shall lapse two years from the date of approval, being September 21, 2012. Carried Submission Nos.: B 2010-042 Applicant: John Sajkunovic Property Location: 79 Florence Avenue Leaal Description: Lot 65 & Part Lot 64, Reaistered Plan 308 Appearances: In Support: R. Sajkunovic Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to sever a parcel of land having a width on Florence Avenue of 8.534 m. (28`) by a depth of 36.719 m.(120.46`) and an area of 313.5 sq. m. (3374.59 sq. ft.). The retained land will have exactly the same measurements. Asemi-detached building will be constructed on the property with one semi-detached dwelling unit being located on each of the severed and retained land. Each semi-detached dwelling unit will be divided into a duplex. The Committee considered the report of the Development & Technical Services Department, dated August 5, 2010, advising that the subject property is located on the COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 185 SEPTEMBER 21, 2010 Submission Nos.: B 2010-042, cont'd southeast side of Florence Avenue between Huber Street and Walker Street. The property is rectangular in shape, possesses 17.1 metres of frontage on Florence Avenue and is 626.4 square metres in area. The property contained a single detached dwelling until earlier this year when it was demolished in order to allow for the construction of asemi-detached dwelling. The semi-detached dwelling is currently under construction and is nearing completion as of the date of writing this report. The subject property is designated Low Rise Residential in the Official Plan and is zoned Residential Four (R-4) in the Zoning By-law. The surrounding area is composed of a mix of residential land uses including single detached dwellings, semi-detached dwellings, triplexes and larger multiple residential developments. The property immediately to the southwest contains athree-storey multiple residential development, while the property to the northeast contains a duplex. Staff notes that asemi-detached dwelling is defined as "a building divided vertically into two semi-detached houses by a common wall which prevents internal access between semi-detached house. Each semi-detached dwelling unit shall be designed to be located on a separate lot having access to and frontage on a public street." Under the Zoning By-law, asemi-detached house, being that part of asemi-detached dwelling on one side of the common wall, may contain one or two dwelling units. The owner is requesting consent to sever the subject property in such a way as to allow for separate ownership of each semi-detached house (the existing lot would be severed approximately in half). Each proposed lot would be approximately the same area and dimensions and would result in a symmetrical property division of the semi-detached dwelling. The proposed severance would result in two lots that both comply with the Zoning By-law. Each semi-detached house is planned to contain two dwelling units. Each semi- detached house is planned to provide two parking spaces in accordance with the Zoning By-law: one space within the attached garage and one space on the driveway, as is permitted for semi-detached dwellings containing two dwelling units. One proposed lot would have a lot width of 8.5 metres, a lot depth of 36.7 metres, and an area of approximately 313.3 square metres. The other proposed lot would have a lot width of 8.5 metres, a lot depth of 36.7 metres, and an area of approximately 313.2 square metres. With respect to the criteria for the subdivision of land listed in Section 51 (24) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13, the uses of both proposed parcels are in conformity with the City's Official Plan, the dimensions and shapes of the proposed lots are appropriate and suitable for the proposed use, the lands front on an established public street, and adequate utilities and municipal services are available. Also, the proposed lots are compatible in size with the lots in the surrounding area. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Planning, Housing & Community Services, dated September 15, 2010, in which they advise that due to the existing traffic volumes on Weber Street East, the owner /applicant shall prepare a Noise Study to indicate the methods to be used to abate noise levels for all residential lots adjacent to Weber Street East from traffic noise generated on this road and if necessary, shall enter into a registered agreement with the Regional Municipality of Waterloo to provide for the implementation of the approved study. The study must be completed enlisted on the Region's list of pre-qualified transportation noise consultants. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 186 SEPTEMBER 21, 2010 2. Submission Nos.: B 2010-042, cont'd Regional staff has no objections to this application subject to the following: 1. That prior to final approval, the owner prepare a Noise Study, to the satisfaction of the Regional Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services, to indicate to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo methods to be used to abate traffic noise levels from Weber Street East and is necessary, the owner shall enter into an agreement with the Regional Municipality of Waterloo to provide for implementation of the approved noise study attenuation measure prior to final approval. Mr. Sajkunovic advised that he was not in agreement with the Region's request for a noise study; however, following a brief recess, Mr. Sajkunovic advised that Committee that he was not opposed to the requested condition. Moved by Ms. C. Balcerczyk Seconded by Mr. M. Hiscott That the application of John Sajkunovic requesting permission to sever a parcel of land having a width on Florence Avenue of 8.534 m (28`) by a depth of 36.719 m (120.46`) and an area of 313.5 sq. m. (3374.59 sq. ft.), on Lot 65 & Part Lot 64, Registered Plan 308, 79 Florence Avenue, Kitchener, Ontario, BE GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and or local improvement charges. 2. That the owner shall provide the Secretary-Treasurer with a digital file of the deposited reference plan(s) prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor in .dwg (AutoCAd) or .dgn (Microstation) format, as well as 2 full size paper copies of the plan(s). The digital file shall be submitted according to the City of Kitchener's Digital Submission Standards to the satisfaction of the City's Mapping Technologist. 3. That the owner shall make financial arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Engineering Services for the removal of any redundant service connections and the installation of new ones that may be required to service the severed and retained lands. 4. That the owner shall, at his expense, close any redundant driveways, install new boulevard landscaping, and construct any new driveways at grade with the sidewalk, to City of Kitchener standards, to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Engineering Services. 5. That the owner shall prepare a Noise Study, to the satisfaction of the Regional Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services, to indicate to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo methods to be used to abate traffic noise levels from Weber Street East and if necessary, the owner shall enter into an agreement with the Regional Municipality of Waterloo to provide for implementation of the approved noise study attenuation measures; or any other arrangements respecting noise that would be satisfactory to the Region of Waterloo. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. 2. The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 187 SEPTEMBER 21, 2010 Submission Nos.: B 2010-042, cont'd 3. The use of the land in the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfil the above-noted conditions within one year of the date of giving notice of this decision. Pursuant to Subsection 43 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the decision of this Committee shall lapse two years from the date of approval, being September 21, 2012. Carried COMBINED APPLICATION 1. Submission Nos.: Applicant: Property Location: Legal Description: Appearances: In Support: Contra: B 2010-041 A 2010-058 Tolga Ifran 68 Guerin Avenue Part Lot 1, Plan 589 T. Ifran S. O'Neill D. Suggitt Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to sever a parcel of land having a width on Jansen Avenue of 11.571 m. (37.96`) by a depth of 21.683 m. (71.13`) and having an area of 260.4 sq. m. (2803.01 sq. ft.) to be used as a semi-detached dwelling unit. The retained land will have a width on Jansen Avenue of 17.8 m. (58.39`), a depth along Guerin Avenue of 21.683 m. (71.13`) and an area of 376.2 sq. m. (4049.51 sq. ft.). The proposed use of the property is asemi-detached dwelling unit. The severed and retained lands each require a rear yard variance such that the rear yard (yard opposite from Jansen Avenue) will be 1.3 m. (4.26`) for the severed land and 1.4 m. (4.59`) for the retained land, rather than the required 7.5 m. (24.6'). The retained land also requires approval of an off-street parking space located in the driveway to have a setback from Jansen Avenue of 2.1 m. (6.88`) rather than the required 6 m. (19.68`). The Committee considered the report of the Development & Technical Services Department, dated September 13, 2010, advising that the subject property is located at the corner of Guerin Avenue and Jansen Avenue. The property is designated Low Rise Residential in the City's Official Plan and zoned Residential Four (R-4) in the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law 85-1. The property features 21.683 metres of frontage onto Guerin Avenue and 29.371 metres of frontage onto Jansen Avenue and has a lot area of 656.6 square metres. The property contains asemi-detached dwelling. The surrounding land use is a mixture of residential types including single and semi- detached dwellings, townhouse dwellings, and low-rise multiple dwelling buildings. The applicant is requesting consent to sever a lot that is 280.4 square metres that will have 11.571 metres of frontage onto Jansen Ave and will contain one half (one residential unit) of the existing semi-detached dwelling. The retained lot is proposed to contain the other semi-detached unit (one residential unit). The retained lot will have 21.683 metres of frontage onto Guerin Avenue and 17.8 metres onto Jansen Avenue. Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) The PPS provides policy direction on matters of provincial interest related to land use planning and development. The PPS sets the policy foundations for regulating the development and use of land. The key objectives include: building strong communities; COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 188 SEPTEMBER 21, 2010 Submission Nos.: B 2010-041 A 2010-058. cont'd wise use and management of resources; and protecting public health and safety. In that regard, this proposal conforms with the PPS as it is a way of creating new and affordable infill housing that is not disruptive to the neighbourhood while utilizing existing infrastructure. Consent Considerations With respect to the criteria for the subdivision of land listed in Section 51(24) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13, the uses of both the severed and retained parcels are in conformity with the City's Municipal Plan, the dimensions and shapes of the proposed lots are appropriate and suitable for the existing use of the lands, and the lands front on an established public street. The severed and retained lots will be compatible in size with the lots in the surrounding area and the lot area and width of both the retained and severed lots exceed the minimum requirements of the Zoning By- law. The nearby neighbourhood contains a mix of dwelling types including single and semi- detached dwellings, street fronting townhouses, and low-rise multiple residents buildings, on varying lot sizes. The lands are fully serviced and no new construction is proposed. The Applicant is applying for consent to sever in order to convey each semi- detached dwelling individually. Minor Variance Considerations In addition to the consent application, the Applicant has submitted a minor variance application for the following; Relief is being sought from Section 38.2.1 of the City's Zoning By-law to allow for a rear yard setback of 1.3 metres whereas 7.5 metres is required for the severed lot. Relief is being sought from Section 38.2.1 of the City's Zoning By-law to allow for a rear yard setback of 1.4 metres whereas 7.5 metres is required for the retained lot. Relief is being sought from Section 6.1.1.1.b.i of the City's Zoning By-law to allow for an off-street required parking space setback of 2.1 metres whereas 6.0 metres is required for the retained lot. The above noted variances are only required if the consent is approved as the existing building conforms to the By-law. If the consent is approved, a new lot will be created and the legal location of the side, front, and rear yards will change, as defined in the City's Zoning By-law. The parking setback requirement will come into affect for the retained lot because the Zoning By-law requires that all off-street parking must be fully provided on each individual lot, where currently all off-street parking is provided on the proposed lands to be severed. In considering the four tests for minor variances for the rear yard setback as outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O., 1990 Chap. P. 13, as amended, Planning staff offer the following comments; The variance meets the intent of the Official Plan. The Low Rise Residential designation recognizes the existing scale of residential development. The intent is to accommodate a full range of housing types to achieve an overall low density and the proposed development will not affect such density. The proposed variance to legalize the existing rear yard is appropriate. The variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law as the intent of the 7.5 metres minimum rear yard set back is to allow for outdoor amenity space. The side yard abutting a street for the retained lands and the side yard for the severed lands provide adequate outdoor private amenity space for the inhabitants of each unit. The variance is considered minor as the intent of the rear yard variance is to legalize an existing situation. There will be no changes to the building as a result of this variance. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 189 SEPTEMBER 21, 2010 Submission Nos.: B 2010-041 A 2010-058. cont'd The side, rear, and front yards will change if the consent is approved, thereby requiring the variance. The variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land as the intent of the variance is to legalize an existing situation within an established neighbourhood and no adverse impacts are anticipated as a result of the variance. In considering the four tests for minor variances for the required off-street parking setback as outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O., 1990 Chap. P. 13, as amended, Planning staff offer the following comments; The requested variances meet the intent of the Official Plan. The proposed variance will allow for an off-street parking space to be provided on both the retained and severed lot. The proposed variance meets the intent of the Official Plan as it does not affect the subject property's compliance to its designation as Low Rise Residential. The intent of the requirement for a minimum setback of 6.0 metres for an off-street parking space is to facilitate a streetscape where the active living areas, such as front doors and porches, are featured closer to the street than parked cars. On this particular lot, the side yard abutting Guerin Avenue is where the active living space is located, including the front door and active amenity space. Parking a vehicle in the driveway in front of a dwelling is not out of character in the immediate vicinity of the subject property, and the reduced setback as proposed would not create a situation where sight-lines were obstructed for vehicles backing out of the driveways of adjacent properties. The variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The variance is minor because the Applicant is legalizing an existing dwelling that meets the intents of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law. The Applicant is making an application for consent to sever for conveyance purposes and the existing driveway meets the regulations of the By-law prior to consent. The variance is considered desirable and appropriate for the development and the use of the land. The proposed parking space is in the front yard and is consistent with the established development within the neighbourhood and no adverse impacts are anticipated as a result of the variance. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo Transportation Planner, dated September 10, 2010, advising that they have no concerns with this application. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Planning, Housing & Community Services, dated September 15, 2010, in which they advise that the subject site is location across the street from an area recorded as a former landfill by the Ministry of the Environment and has been identified in the Region's Threats Inventory Database as a known contaminated site. The Region's Implementation Guidelines for the Review of Development Applications on or Adjacent to Known and Potentially Contaminated Sites (Guidelines) triggers the need for a Record of site Condition (RSC) where a consent to divide a sensitive use into new lots is adjacent to a known contaminated site. The definition for "adjacent" allows consideration to be given to intervening road. Regional staff have no information indicating if the contamination is migrating off site to the subject lands. Further, Regional staff do not have information indicating if the contamination would pose a health or safety risk to the proposed use of the subject lands. It is difficult to determine if the property is considered adjacent to the site without knowing the nature /extent of the former landfill and / or the potential for migration. As such, the Region's Implementation Guideline may not apply in these circumstances. However, the Region is obligated, through its Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) (1996) with the Province, to indentify the need for soil contamination studies as part of its delegated review function for the Ministry of the Environment. Given the property is outside of a wellfield and it is questionable if the current Guideline applies there is no COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 190 SEPTEMBER 21, 2010 Submission Nos.: B 2010-041 A 2010-058. cont'd Regional corporate interest to request a RSC imposed on its behalf. As such, the Region is identifying the need for the study in accordance with its MOU and the Committee may choose to impose the Record of Site Condition as a condition of approval. If the Committee decides to impose a Record of Site Condition or other similar requirements, it should be imposed as a condition of the Committee, with the Committee, not the Region, responsible for its release. The Region has no objections to this application. The Committee considered correspondence from Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc., dated September 7, 2010, advising that any approval of this application should include conditions that require the applicants to make satisfactory arrangements with Hydro for the provision of electrical servicing to this land, including granting any easements that they may require. They also note that the owner will be required to provide a minimum of 1.Om clearance from the edge of the proposed driveways, existing transformers and street light poles. Ms. Suggitt, a neighbouring property owner, advised the Committee of her concern with water running onto her property from the subject property. The downspout has been directed to her property. Mr. Tolga advised that the contractor who installed the eaves and downspout has been called back to the property as the work has not been properly completed. Further Mr. Tolga advised that he has an approved grading plan that sill has to be completed, which will ensure that drainage will be directed away from Ms. Suggitt's property. Staff advised that the owner would have submitted and received approval of a grading plan prior to receiving a building permit. Mr. O'Neill apologized for the drainage problem and at the request of the Committee, agreed to provide Ms. Suggitt with a copy of the approved grading plan. The Committee suggested to Ms. Suggitt that she discuss the grading plan with the building Inspector who will be able to explain it to her. Submission No. B 2010-041 Moved by Mr. M. Hiscott Seconded by Ms. C. Balcerczyk That the application of Tolga Ifran requesting permission to sever a parcel of land having a width on Jansen Avenue of 11.571 m. (37.96`) by a depth of 21.683 m. (71.13`) and having an area of 260.4 sq. m. (2803.01 sq. ft.), on Part Lot 1, Plan 589, 68 Guerin Avenue, Kitchener, Ontario, BE GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and or local improvement charges. 2. That the owner shall provide the Secretary-Treasurer with a digital file of the deposited reference plan(s) prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor in .dwg (AutoCAd) or .dgn (Microstation) format, as well as 2 full size paper copies of the plan(s). The digital file shall be submitted according to the City of Kitchener's Digital Submission Standards to the satisfaction of the City's Mapping Technologist. 3 That the owner shall pay to the City of Kitchener acash-in-lieu contribution for park dedication equal to 5% of the value of the lands to be severed. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 191 SEPTEMBER 21, 2010 Submission Nos.: B 2010-041 A 2010-058, cont'd Submission No. B 2010-041, cont'd 4. That the owner shall make financial arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering Services, for the installation of: all new service connections, new curb and gutter, boulevard landscaping including street trees, and a paved driveway ramp, on the severed lands. 5. That Application for Minor Variance A2010-058 is approved in It's entirety. 6. That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc. for the provision of electrical servicing to the severed and retained lands, including the granting of any easements they may require. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. 2. The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. 3. The use of the land in the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfil the above-noted conditions within one year of the date of giving notice of this decision. Pursuant to Subsection 43 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the decision of this Committee shall lapse two years from the date of approval, being September 21, 2012. Submission No. A 2010-058 Carried Moved by Mr. M. Hiscott Seconded by Ms. C. Balcerczyk That the application of the Tolga Ifran requesting permission for the severed land to have a rear yard of 1.3 m. (4.26`) rather than the required 7.5m (24.6') and the retained land to have a rear yard of 1.4 m. (4.59`) rather than the required 7.5 m. (24.6') ;and, the retained land to have an off-street parking space located in the driveway with a setback from Jansen Avenue of 2.1 m. (6.88`) rather than the required 6 m. (19.68`), on Part Lot 1, Plan 589, 68 Guerin Avenue, Kitchener Ontario, BE APPROVED. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance requested in this application is minor in nature. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Official Plan is being maintained on the subject property. Carried COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 192 SEPTEMBER 21, 2010 ADJOURNMENT On motion, the meeting adjourned at 10:47 a.m. Dated at the City of Kitchener this 21st day of September, 2010. Dianne H. Gilchrist Secretary-Treasurer Committee of Adjustment