Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCSD-11-154 - Demolition Control - 731 Huron RoadJ Staff Reporf KITC;H~,~T~R Community Services Department www.kircnenerca REPORT T0: Community & Infrastructure Services Committee DATE OF MEETING: November 28, 2012 SUBMITTED BY: Alain Pinard, Director of Planning PREPARED BY: Mat Vaughan, Planning Technician - (519) 741-3400 ext. 3192 WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 5 DATE OF REPORT: November 15, 2011 REPORT NO.: CSD-11-154 SUBJECT: DEMOLITION CONTROL APPLICATION DC11119/HIMV 731 HURON ROAD HEATHSHORE HOMES LTD. ~~~ ~T~~i~w ~ t y~l ~d ~' ~~ ~` ~. ~-ubj~ct Lends .~ '~ h a~X~ f u r~d~ Tr RECOMMENDATION: That Demolition Control Application DC111191HIMV requesting permission to demolish one (1) single detached dwelling located at 731 Huron Road, owned by Heathshore Homes Ltd., be approved. BACKGROUND: The Community Services Department has received an application requesting the demolition of a single detached dwelling located at 731 Huron Road. The subject property is zoned Residential Three (R-3) in the Zoning By-law and designated Low Rise Residential in the City's Official 3-1 Location Map - 731 Huron Road J Staff Reporf KITC;H~,~T~R Community Services Department www.kircnenerca Plan. The Owner is not proposing to redevelop the property at this time but has indicated the future use would consist of a low rise residential development which is consistent with the policies of the Zoning By-law and Official Plan. REPORT: The owner is proposing to demolish the subject dwelling with the intent to redevelop the site in the future with low rise residential development. The owner does not have specific redevelopment plans at this time and has not submitted a formal building permit application for the proposed redevelopment. Circulation Comments: Planning staff circulated the application to internal departments. Their comments are attached as Appendix "B". Planning Analysis: Seven criteria, as outlined in Council Policy I-1010, are used to evaluate the appropriateness of an application to demolish a residential property in circumstances where no building permit will be issued for a new building on the site: 1. Property Subject to the Ontario Heritage Act The subject property is identified on the Heritage Kitchener Inventory of Historic Buildings. Heritage Planning staff conducted a site visit of the subject property in order to determine whether the property should be listed as anon-designated property of cultural heritage value or 3-2 Figure 1: Front view of property from Huron Road J Staff Reporf KITC;H~,~T~R Community Services Department www.kircnenerca interest on the Municipal Heritage Register. Upon evaluation, Heritage Planning staff confirmed that the property should not be listed. 2. Architectural and Historical Value Heritage Planning staff advise that although the property is identified on the Heritage Kitchener Inventory of Historic Buildings, further evaluation confirms that the property should not be listed as anon-designated property of cultural heritage value or interest on the Municipal Heritage Register. 3. Condition of the Dwelling A City Building Inspector examined the dwelling in October 2011 and advised that the single storey house is approximately 1,000 square feet. The property is serviced with hydro only, and has no storm, sanitary, gas, or water service at this time. There is a septic bed in the rear yard. The single family dwelling features fieldstone foundation with timber frame construction. The building has been damaged by fire and vandalism. Overall, the house appears to be about 80 years old and is in poor condition. The well needs to be decommissioned and the existing septic system will have to be investigated or decommissioned prior to any new development. The cost of repairing the damaged structure and finishes would be significant. 4. Impact of Demolition on Abutting Properties, streetscape, and Neighbourhood Stability The building proposed to be demolished is currently vacant, in poor condition and its removal will help address any safety concerns. Due to the proximity to Huron Road, the deteriorating condition of the house does not make a significant contribution to the streetscape and it is staff's opinion that the demolition will not negatively impact the abutting properties. The future redevelopment of the site will enhance the aesthetics of the large property and surrounding location making a positive contribution to the streetscape. 5. Timeframe of Redevelopment The applicant has stated that the timeframe for redevelopment is unknown at this time. 6. Proposed Use In Terms of Zoning and Compatibility with Adjacent Properties The owner does not have specific redevelopment plans in mind as yet but given the existing R-3 zoning, the likely redevelopment will be one of the permitted uses. 7. Neighbourhood Consultation On October 14, 2011, all property owners within 60 metres of the subject property were circulated an information letter giving a summary of the proposal and invited to submit comments. Planning staff received one phone call from a surrounding resident in favour of the demolition as a result of the circulation. ALIGNMENT WITH CITY OF KITCHENER STRATEGIC PLAN: The proposed demolition is required priorto the future redevelopment of the subject site and will align with the Kitchener Strategic Plan as it ensures the implementation of the community priority "Development"; with comprehensive redevelopment that is consistent with Provincial, Regional and City planning policies. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: No new or additional capital budget requests are expected with this recommendation. 3-3 J Staff Reporf KITC;H~,~T~R Community Services Department www.kircnenerca COMMUNITY ENGAGMENT: A neighbourhood circulation was made as part of this application to property owners within 60 metres of the subject property as the applicant has no immediate plans to redevelop the site. In addition to this circulation, all property owners within 60 metres of the subject property will receive notice of the date of the Committee meeting dealing with this demolition control application for information purposes. CONCLUSION: Planning staff have considered this application and are of the opinion that the proposed demolition is justified as the removal of the existing uninhabited single detached dwelling is required to implement the future redevelopment of the subject lands. This will remove a single detached dwelling that is in poor condition and will improve the safety of the area. REVIEWED BY: Della Ross, Manager of Development Review ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Jeff INillmer, Deputy CAO Community Services Department List of Attachments: • Appendix "A" -Demolition Plan • Appendix "B" -Internal agency comments 3-4 R~p~rfi N~. CS~~11~ 1 Appn~i~ `~" ~i~~or Kirci~~rr~~ ~ FEClGN1s', f,R,`~dGPF!1TY 0~ 1KAtEgt`r~ et •rr. ~. rs. xn x vn an .~ r k~Y: asTr<~:xs &ti'+rns c!; Tte?wv rJ~ e: uCSFF5 T hr~ C/,N BE %vkti`FRiE9 sr i!'xr El' Cs aaG 6Y Gx+a r~ R t"+1d;JiI. ii4 i'>:LYLLINti tiVHrY•cJ'ii.'4'Ttt>'3 'NC. ,/ /'11..Jt ovrwaio uHa e~nrerertm ~. J f/ f x~ f .,a, a f 'tti ~ .. .., ~~= 9t [` .t:.3.., f .rf~. ':~5_1ii 71:;7 1 ~ rrC ' ~f •.M +„ . tH. y. r :Y..ry:. 1 •. ........ n nJ i ::..a. ..rr. [t 'a A~:~i:.i ' ,s, y- t~.na i q~, ~.4i 1~ vy^• .._.,7 ?~J.'.. i~~.':~ ']::.. .$: F.7. 1~rOF ~,:{-1y1..R1.J7 , ~`i8~ -. 'i.f1 .i. .ie :1 .., 11.51 ..~~ _-~: ~~~~' /::.... f!~ ~ ?.5h ... .+I+.i1 ?i5h: t Vv-n:. ~,c.. ~ '.:i '-1 ~~'~.F: 34 ~ f~• ..-.. .i -.:. ...../~'A~~~; '=.... :` •'c `f :'1 n~ •3.1 ~4~pl` ~5. lr~ J, otJ •Ve;i ~.. -•~YI•.'.''-S `ti' •.:A.:1 ... 17 ;c1.., -i"fL .'J. .I?. lr Sfl i3 4 ~ .. .,..2 r. E C x+'711• ,•.. •v ,.a ~. J f, ,1 1E :St.f ,:7.3: . ;.v' 2t:.x . iU..:~ .:,9 •i ....... _~, ~ x.11 _ .. ~r Jff / fl I r '' ~ ry~•..: +,ev~ ~;w r'~ l :'t• ?1' zl'~ ~,-_, t - 3.5.5. ,5,: r~~ y ~ . yt.l.i? r r -~ ~r~ `!fi ~3L ~[maIEE. :a•.~77 •;d:.F':. ~.a,,.: n,rt ~ y - _ia _ati `I• rr r; ~, Yti.Pn _• 7 .-ae 1 ',75 ~_ .ss:..i. .3'?is x: ~:kJ i~'. = I. ..., .. -..y. '~ , ..5...- -:r.'~ 6 ;<' ~! •t •: r. ?19.3: .1iaM1•. •3'.^ r r'• r.`•= . !,~,. _,.~' ~ ""'' ~ ; ,~+ - LEGEND ,r ~t -. - • •FS-z ~, »~^-'+----~'. raxm 5LR'rFr uav:alcv' . v. RG ~~"'^^G^^^^^-- Fikl7 Ei1 ?'1:~5'r:Y i47xYk:,NS r'77 LOt Lim ;:,y ...~ !=jS:.4 ~i ti$ ~T:JiDdn iftaV EA2 _ :il JF` :'K $St~ - SS?~'• STwti57CFC fp{}h 8A'i ..?Z ~:I}:'•. .x7~.. i' ~• f ~ ~' ~ LdTCH PASi?i .t q ,r E // ~; _ S' GI -.ss ~.~ - ..;n ,?1 --_ OLS - l'Gi- STkN[F~! .a. M` ..... .:..1 :.:/.1: ~: eltT': H'!E°nY'F t,~~:,. .~ ?~.f; r:.~a i3 t{.:.~~ t %ti~ - CCk7 EFCR0~J3 iZ'; !f~?T i0 S'CLl . -a. ~ ~ iJ+: ~. ••i - CfCEI~ a YR`: ;NCT T6 SCJ.;°„} . _r~~ -••~' ,r J~ ~ ~^•}Y -^•- lwgf%L lfISA:U t1f£ ~ f ~ f!+•.r ~.-_..~. .---- - SJey!Tk9Y :tr;:R I.Et7L :.X• ~ .. ........... CAfy.,E 'Y ~f ..-., ~r r a~ • •~'1„ /1 J""~ ~ SUI~V~Y CC}N5UL7Ay75 j-~ t„•7 llk(FNlE: L.SNU $t1RYC!{)A5 ~` 3.•.`!YF+Y7lX5(. ti.~..1~1rt3P. yi ^w G4TC'.tJ11-!,1Yr I '~7V.?[3i7 ~ s}t7EK~i? Wff7 7PW •Yh-y5s<Y.LS'~'m 5FT.7¢I 'tFN.'4eEk Jp71 -5 ~a~co ~ ~ Fromm: Michelle Drake Sento Thursday, October ~7, ~O~ ~:~~ Ply Toy fat Gaughan Subject, R~: internal Circulation Demo ~. 73~ Hunan Rd.dac fat, Report No. C~Dm11~ ISM Appendix" " The property municipally addressed 7~ Nunn Road is identii"ied on the i~leritage Kitchener Inventar~ at Nistoric'~uildings, heritage Planning staff have conducted a site visit to evaluate the cultural heritage value and interest associated vuith the pr®perty. Photographs of the interior and exterior of the building ~vere obtained on the site visit. I-leritage Planning staff` note that the building does not rnerit listing or designation. ~s a result, heritage Punning staff have no concerns pith the proposed Derr®iition Control application. . I~iGhelle Michelie Drake {nee llvade~, ~E Heritage Planner Community Services Department Planning Division P. 519.741.2839 F. 519.741.2624 TTY. 1-866-969-9994 mich~Ile.drakeCa.kitchener.ca ~~~LESE i~TE H~ T E-~L DESS~~~ 10/31/2011 3 - Report N~. CSC-11- I ~ Rppendix ~~ ~~ . ~t~ a~ ~it~~~r ~i~ I~~lI, ~a~ ~i~g fit. ~~~ P.a. ~o~ ~ i~itcher~~r, aN N~ 47 cta~r a~ ~~r~: Eric Ries c: uj~: 7~ Duran ~a~~ ~ h~~e re~~e~ed ~e afare~ent~a~ed de.o~ ~.p~~~eat~a~ grad have the faa~.~.~ e~gi~eeri~ag ea~e~t~: ~. ~'he over is req~~red to ~~e ~at~~f~ctar~ ~~a~e~a~ ~rr~.~e~nent~ with the ~n~~neer~n~ ~~~~~~o~. far the re~.a~a ~d1ar cap~~:~ ~f e~it~ ser~~ce co~eetia~. to the sub~eet ~~idi~~. ~. dote, far ~~re de~reap~e~.t~ a~.~ red~.dant dr~~re~va~s ire to he c~a~ed nth yew eu~~ ar~d butter aid ~a~~ev~rd 1and~c~~~t~g~ ~1 to ~t~ of ~,tch~~.er st~.dards~ ~.t the o~er'~ ex~e~~e ~d a~1 eon~~eted ~r~or to the aee~.panc~r of the b~~d~~g. ~.e~~rds, ,~ ~~ ~ { uric ~~~, ~.~.`~'. ~ng~~eer~~ag Tecl~r~alogist ~:i~ec~~~i~s!De~~e~ap~r~7~~~~ E~~~~~~e~rin~~~et~~alitia~~s~~~ ~ 1 ~t73 I H~~~~or~ Raac~-d~j~ta,d~~ Re Qrt ~®, ~~ 1 ~ I p ~~ ~~ ~pp~n~~ City of Kitchener 2~O King St. vUest, 5~~' f~aor P.J. Box ~ 1 ~ ~ Kitchener, ®N N2G 4G7 ae~ October 2~, 201 ~ Toy fat Vaughan From: Trevor Qakley ~Co abject: ~3 HURON RD ~ Der~olition control A.pplicatian The fallowing is a brief summary of the general conditions of the building. Property Features: Single storey house, approximately ~,a00 SF. Detached brick shack containing well. Property is serviced with hydro only, no storm, sanitary, gas, or water at this time rear yard, 1~lell head in front yard on left side not yet capped or decommissioned. Haase Descr~ipfivn: Single family dwelling, damaged by fire and vandalism. Fieldstone foundation with timber frame construction Exterior Candifions: Exterior brick in fair condition, soffit, and fascia in poor condition Roof is in fair candition, insulation compromised by fire damage Foundation is deteriorating at front wall There is a septic bed in the lnterivr Condifions: forced air heating throughout, older oi! furnace. 0i! tank located in basement is empty. vvater pump and pressure tank located in basement Smoke and water damage evident throughout main floor. Left side of house, including kitchen, are heavily damaged by fire No evidence of major settling ar foundation movement. House is fully boarded up and uninhabitable. Overall Ol~servafions: The house appears to be about 3D years old and is generally in paorcondition. The well needs to be decommissioned and the existing septic system will have to be investigated or decommissioned prior to any new development. Overall candition. Poor !t is understood that the house in the current condition does not meet the needs of the owner. vile understand that the owner's intention is to demolish the existing house and redevelop lands as part of the adjacent subdivision. The Building Division has na objections to the demolition of this home. Please note that a demolition permit will be required, please contact 519-7~ ~ -2433 for mare information. Respectfully, Trevor Oakley, CET, CBCO, Municipal Building official ll 3-8~