Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAdjustment - 2012-02-21COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FOR THE CITY OF KITCHENER MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 21, 2012 MEMBERS PRESENT: Messrs. A. Head, A. Lise and B. McColl OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ms. J. von Westerholt, Senior Planner, Mr. J. Lewis, Traffic & Parking Analyst, Mr. D. Seller, Traffic & Parking Analyst, Mr. S. Bassanese, Urban Designer, Ms. H. Holbrook, Planner, Ms. D. Saunderson, Secretary-Treasurer and Ms. H. Dyson, Administrative Clerk Mr. A. Head, Vice-Chair, called this meeting to order at 10:13 a.m. MINUTES Moved by Mr. A. Lise Seconded by Mr. B. McColl That the minutes of the regular meeting of the Committee of Adjustment, of January 17, 2012, as mailed to the members, be accepted. Carried NEW BUSINESS MINOR VARIANCE 1. Submission No.: Applicant: Property Location: Legal Description: Appearances: In Support: Contra: A 2012-003 Robert & Colleen Brittian 14 Old Cottage Place Part Lot 125, German Company Tract M. Sonnenberg None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to construct a single family dwelling on a lot having a width of 51.1m (167.65`) rather than the required 60m (196.85`); permission to have a southerly side yard setback of 6.09m (19.98`) and a northerly side yard setback of 6.65m (21.81`) rather than the required 7.5m (24.60`); permission for the proposed detached garage to have a southerly side yard setback of 3.06m (10.04`) rather than the required 7.5m (24.60`); and, permission for the lot size to be 0.3 hectares in size whereas the By-law requires a minimum of 0.4 hectares. The existing dwelling will be demolished. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated February 10, 2012, advising that the subject property is zoned Agricultural Zone (A-1 ), and Existing Use (E-1) Zone in the Zoning By-law and designated Low Rise Residential in the City's Official Plan. The site contains an existing singled detached dwelling. The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing singled detached dwelling and build a new singled detached dwelling. The applicant is proposing a minimum side yard COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 43 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 Submission No.: A 2012-003 (Cont'd setback of 6.65 metres (left side yard of proposed single detached dwelling), 6.09 metres (right side yard of proposed single detached dwelling) and 3.06 metres (right side yard of proposed detached garage) whereas the By-law requires a minimum side yard setback of 7.5 metres. The applicant is also proposing a minimum lot width of 51 metres whereas the By-law requires a minimum lot width of 60 metres. This request recognizes an existing legal non-conforming minimum lot width. The applicant is also proposing a minimum lot area of 0.33 hectares where the By-law requires a minimum lot area of 0.4 hectares. This request recognizes an existing legal non-conforming minimum lot area. Staff note that municipal services exist on Old Cottage Place, however the road is not yet owned by the City and is presently under the ownership of an adjacent developer (Activa). To proceed with the construction of the proposed single detached dwelling, the owner would be required to make arrangements with Activa to connect to these municipal services until such a time that the City assumes ownership of the road. 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 offers the following comments regarding the requested minor variance: The requested reduced minimum side yard setbacks, reduced minimum lot width variance and reduced lot area variance meet the intent of the Official Plan. The Low Rise Residential designation recognizes the existing scale of residential development and allows for modest alterations. The proposed variances will permit the reduced minimum side yards, reduced minimum lot width and reduced minimum lot area and will maintain the low density character of the property and surrounding neighbourhood. The purpose of the required 7.5 metres side yard setback is to allow for adequate separation from the abutting property and sufficient access to the rear yard for maintenance and emergency purposes. The requested 6.09 metre and 6.65 metre minimum side yard setback (for the proposed single detached dwelling), and 3.06 metre minimum side yard setback (for the proposed detached garage) will provide adequate separation from adjacent properties and continue to be used to access the rear of the property. Staff conducted a site visit concludes that sufficient space will be maintained for access from the front portion to the rear portion of the subject property and vice versa. There are several trees located on the subject lands that may be affected as a result of the construction of a new single detached dwelling. A Tree Preservation/Enhancement Plan will be required. The requested minor variance for a reduced minimum lot width yard recognizes an existing situation. The requested minor variance for a reduced minimum lot area recognizes an existing situation. Staff is of the opinion that the requested minor variances are in conformity with the intent of the Zoning By-law. The variances are considered minor. Staff is of the opinion that access to the rear yard will be maintained with the reduced side yard setbacks. The requested reduced lot width and lot area variances are recognized as existing conditions. The requested variances will not negatively affect the adjacent properties or surrounding neighbourhood. The proposed variances are appropriate for the development and use of the land as the proposed residential use is a permitted use in the Zoning By-law. The proposed variances will allow the owner to build a dwelling that can be used year-round and that will better suit the surrounding neighbourhood. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo Transportation Planner, dated February 10, 2012, advising that they have no concerns with this application. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 44 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 Submission No.: A 2012-003 (Cont'd The Committee considered the report from the Grand River Conservation Authority Resource Planner, dated February 3, 2012, advising that they have no objection to the approval of the above-noted minor variance application subject to the issuance of a Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses permit from GRCA for construction of the house and associated works within the regulated area. Moved by Mr. A. Lise Seconded by Mr. B. McColl That the application of Robert & Colleen Brittian, requesting permission to construct a single family dwelling on a lot having a width of 51.1m (167.65`) rather than the required 60m (196.85`); permission for the proposed single detached dwelling to have a southerly side yard setback of 6.09m (19.98`) and a northerly side yard setback of 6.65m (21.81`) rather than the required 7.5m (24.60`); permission for the proposed detached garage to have a southerly side yard setback of 3.06m (10.04`) rather than the required 7.5m (24.60`); and, permission for the lot size to be 0.3 hectares in size whereas the By-law requires a minimum of 0.4 hectares, on Part Lot 125, German Company Tract, 14 Old Cottage Place, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: That the owner shall prepare and submit, to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Planning, a Tree Preservation/Enhancement Plan for the subject lands in accordance with the City's Tree Management Policy, prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. The Plan must include, among other matters, the identification of a proposed building envelope/work zone, landscaped area, and vegetation to be preserved. Any alteration or improvement to the lands including grading, tree removal and the application or issuance of any building permits shall be in compliance with the approved plan. Any changes or revisions to the plan require the approval of the City's Director of Planning. 2. That the owner shall obtain an approved Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses permit from the GRCA for construction of the house and associated works within the regulated area, prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. 3. That the owner shall make satisfactory financial arrangements for municipal servicing in the form of a security with the subdivision developer (Activa) to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering by July 31, 2012 It is the opinion of this Committee that: The variance requested in this application is minor. 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 2. Submission No.: A 2012-007 Applicant: Pidel Developments Inc. Property Location: 494 Zeller Drive Legal Description: Lot 3, Registered Plan 58M-508 Appearances: In Support: B. Beatty COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 45 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 2. Submission No.: A 2012-007 (Cont'dl Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting legalization of a single family dwelling under construction having a rear yard setback of 7.34m (24.08') rather than the required 7.5m (24.60`). The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated January 25, 2012, advising that the subject property is municipally addressed as 494 Zeller Drive, which is located slightly North of the Zeller Drive and Pebble Creek Drive intersection. This previously undeveloped lot is currently in the process of the construction of a single detached dwelling. The subject land is zoned Residential 4 (R-4) in the City of Kitchener By-law 85-1 and designated Low Rise Residential in the City of Kitchener Official Plan. The applicant has discovered a deficiency in the minimum rear yard setback requirements while completing an "as-built" survey of the foundation of the future single detached dwelling currently under construction. The applicant is requesting a minor variance to allow a 7.34 metre rear yard setback whereas Zoning By-law 85-1 requires a minimum 7.5 metre rear yard setback. 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 offers the following comments. The variance meets the intent of the Official Plan. The intent of this designation is to accommodate a full range of housing types to achieve an overall low density. The proposed variance does not alter any form or characteristic of the house approved by the development application and continues to achieve the intent of the low density designation. The variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The purpose of a 7.5 metres rear- yard setback is to provide an outdoor amenity space as well as to provide adequate separation from neighbouring properties. It is staff's opinion that arear-yard setback of 7.34 metres would continue to allow for sufficient outdoor amenity space to be provided and would continue to provide adequate separation from neighbouring lands, thus minimizing the impact on adjacent properties. The variance is considered minor as there will be adequate separation between the built form on this property to abutting residential properties. The rear wall of the house is only 0.16 metres closer to the abutting property than as required by the minimum rear yard setback as set out in the Zoning By-law. As such, the variances will have minimal impact on adjacent lands. The variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land since the proposed variance does not alter any form or characteristic of the development from when the development application was approved. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo Transportation Planner, dated February 10, 2012, advising that they have no concerns with this application. Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Mr. A. Lise That the application of Pidel Developments Inc., requesting legalization of a single family dwelling under construction having a rear yard setback of 7.34m (24.08') rather than the required 7.5m (24.60`), on Lot 3, Registered Plan 58M-508, 494 Zeller Drive, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 46 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 2. Submission No.: A 2012-007 (Cont'dl It is the opinion of this Committee that: The variance requested in this application is minor. 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 2012-008 Applicant: Will-O Homes Property Location: 275 Old Huron Road Legal Description: Part Lot 11, Biehn's Tract Appearances: In Support: K. Murphy K. Smith Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to construct a multi-residential dwelling having a side yard setback abutting Battler Road of 0.75m (2.46') rather than the required 4.5m (14.76'); and, permission to have a rear yard setback of 1.2m rather than the required 7.5m (24.60`). The existing single family dwelling will be demolished. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated February 10, 2012, advising that the subject property located at 275 Old Huron Road is zoned Residential Six (R-6) in the Zoning By-law 85-1 and designated Low Rise Residential in the City's Official Plan. The applicant is proposing to redevelop the subject property with 28 stacked townhouse units as permitted in the Zoning By-law and Official Plan. The site is an irregularly shape due to a portion of land acquired for a daylight triangle at the intersection of Huron Road and Battler Road. As such, the redevelopment plan will require relief from Section 40.2.6 of the Zoning By-law 85-1 where the proposed side yard setback abutting a street (Battler Road) is 0.75 metres rather than the required 4.5 metres; and the proposed rear yard setback (abutting Huron Road) is 1.2 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 offers the following comments: The variances meet the intent of the Official Plan. The Low Rise Residential designation recognizes the existing scale of residential development and allows for a variety of low density residential uses including stacked townhouse units. The proposed development is consistent with the Low Rise Residential designation. The variances meet the intent of the Zoning By-law. 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 staffs opinion that a reduced rear yard setback of 1.2 metres is appropriate for this redevelopment because the proposed rear decks provide COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 47 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 3. Submission No.: A 2012-008 (Confd) outdoor amenity space. As well, the rear yard abuts a remnant piece of land that runs along Huron Road allowing adequate separation from the street and neighbouring properties. The side yard setback abutting a street (Battler Road) is proposed to be 0.75 metres rather than the required 4.5 metres. Land was acquired for a daylight triangle at the intersection of Huron and Battler Roads which resulted in an irregularly shaped site. As such, the proposed 0.75 metre side yard setback only occurs at the corner of the property where the road intersects. The proposed side yard setback abutting Battler Road is approximately 7 metres, which is more than the required 4.5 metres side yard setback abutting a street. It is staffs opinion that there is sufficient side yard setback to allow for comprehensive redevelopment of the subject lands. The variances are considered minor as there is adequate separation from the proposed redevelopment to abutting residential properties and as such will have no impact to adjacent lands. The variances are appropriate for the development and use of the land as it is staff's opinion that the proposed redevelopment plan is the most appropriate considering the irregular shape of the site. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo Transportation Planner, dated February 10, 2012, advising that they have no concerns with this application. The Committee considered the report from the Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) Resource Planner, dated February 3, 2012, advising that they have no objections to the above noted minor variance application as proposed in the circulated material. They note that sufficient information has been received to verify that based on the best information available, at this time, the floodplain of Strasburg Creek is not located on this property. As such, this property is not regulated by the GRCA and a permit for the proposed development will not be required. Moved by Mr. A. Lise Seconded by Mr. B. McColl That the application of Will-O Homes, requesting permission to construct amulti- residential dwelling having a side yard setback abutting Battler Road of 0.75m (2.46') rather than the required 4.5m (14.76'); and, permission to have a rear yard setback of 1.2m rather than the required 7.5m (24.60`), Part Lot 11, Biehn's Tract, 275 Old Huron Road, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance requested in this application is minor. 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 2012-009 Applicant: Garnice & Calvin Bowyer Property Location: 244 Woolwich Street Leaal Description: Part Lot 124. German Comoanv Tract Appearances: In Support: M. Nunes COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 48 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 4. Submission No.: A 2012-009 (Cont'dl Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to construct an addition on an existing single family dwelling on a lot having a width of 32m (104.97') rather than the required 60m (196.85`); permission to have a northerly side yard setback of 1.2m (19.98`) rather than the required 7.5m (24.60`); and, permission for the lot size to be 0.2075 hectares in size whereas the By-law requires a minimum 0.4 hectares. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated January 25, 2012, advising that the subject property is situated at 244 Woolwich Street, which is located slightly South of the Woolwich Street and Falconridge Drive intersection. The property contains an existing single detached dwelling constructed in 1962. The subject land is zoned Agricultural (A-1) in the City of Kitchener By-law 85-1 and designated Low Rise Residential in the City of Kitchener Official Plan. It should be noted that the existing property and lot do not comply with Zoning By-law regulations for minimum lot area and minimum lot width. It should also be noted that the Woolwich Street right-of-way is owned by the City of Waterloo. The applicant has plans to expand the existing single detached dwelling by building an addition. However, the property will have a new owner as of February 1, 2012. The construction of the new addition will result in a deficiency in the minimum north side yard setback requirements. As mentioned, the existing property does not comply with minimum lot area and minimum lot width requirements. In order to legalize the proposed addition and existing lot, the applicant has submitted this minor variance application to obtain relief from the Zoning By-law regulations. The applicant is requesting the following three variances: 1. a minimum lot area of 0.2075 hectares, whereas the ZBL requires 0.4 hectares, 2. a minimum lot width of 32.0 metres, whereas the ZBL requires 60.0 metres, 3. a minimum northerly side yard of 1.2 metres, whereas the ZBL requires 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 offers the following comments. The variance meets the intent of the Official Plan. The intent of this designation is to accommodate a full range of housing types to achieve an overall low density. It should be noted that the Official Plan designation of Low Rise Residential is not in harmony with the Agricultural (A-1) zoning of the property. The Zoning By-law has not been updated so as to harmonize with the Low Rise Residential designation of the property. However, the current and proposed use of the property is permitted under the A-1 zoning. Even though the Zoning By-law is not in harmony with the Official Plan designation, as long as the property continues to be used as a single detached dwelling, the long-term goals for the subject lands as prescribed in the Official Plan is still maintained. This occurrence will continue until such time as the City updates its Zoning By-law. The dwelling will continue to achieve an overall low density even with the proposed addition allowed by the subject variances. The variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-Law since the intent of the minimum lot area is to ensure that an adequately sized septic field can be located on the property with the required setback to structures, neighbouring properties, and private water facilities. The property is currently served by a private septic field and well that has existed since the 1960s. The applicant has advised that the setback of the existing COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 49 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 4. Submission No.: A 2012-009 (Cont'dl septic field to the rear of the proposed addition will be only 2 metres, whereas 5 metres of minimum setback is required by the Building Code. The applicant has expressed preference of connecting with the municipal sanitary sewer and has commented that he will request a connection to the sanitary sewer once it is extended down Falconridge Drive for the neighbouring property. The City's Building Division has commented that the applicant is required to either connect to the municipal sanitary sewer or install a new private on-site sewage system that fulfils the setback requirements of the Building Code. The City of Waterloo provides water service to the property. The intent of the minimum lot width of the Agricultural (A-1) zoning is to ensure that the property maintains a rural character. The dwellings along this portion of Woolwich Street have existed for decades and have created asuburban-style residential streetscape. With the long term Official Plan goal being Low Rise Residential, allowing the continuation of suburban-style residential development is desirable. The purpose of any side yard setback is to maintain adequate separation from neighbouring properties. It is staff's opinion that the northerly side-yard setback of 1.2 metres would not negatively impact the neighbouring property. The variance is considered minor since the proposed lot area and width have already been existing. The proposed 1.2 metre northerly side yard setback is typical of a residential area. As mentioned, the area presently maintains a residential character more than agricultural character and therefore the variances will have minimal impact to adjacent lands. The variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land as the addition is a main floor addition. Since no height is added, the proposed addition will still maintain characteristics of a low rise residential dwelling. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo Transportation Planner, dated February 10, 2012, advising that they have no concerns with this application. Moved by Mr. B. McCall Seconded by Mr. A. Lise That the application of Garnice & Calvin Bowyer, requesting permission to construct an addition on an existing single family dwelling on a lot having a width of 32m (104.97') rather than the required 60m (196.85`); permission to have a northerly side yard setback of 1.2m (19.98`) rather than the required 7.5m (24.60`); and, permission for the lot size to be 0.2075 hectares in size whereas the By-law requires a minimum 0.4 hectares, on Part Lot 124, German Company Tract, 244 Woolwich Street, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: That the owner shall connect to the City's municipal sanitary sewer or install a new private on-site sewage system in accordance with Division B Part 8 of the Building Code and obtain any required permits associated with either process, to the satisfaction of the Chief Building Official, prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. 2. That the owner shall prepare and submit, to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Planning, a Tree Preservation/Enhancement Plan for the subject lands in accordance with the City's Tree Management Policy, prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. The Plan must include, among other matters, the identification of a proposed building envelope/work zone, landscaped area, and vegetation to be preserved. Any alteration or improvement to the lands including grading, tree removal and the application or issuance of any building permits shall be in compliance with the approved plan. Any changes or revisions to the plan require the approval of the City's Director of Planning. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 50 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 4. Submission No.: A 2012-009 (Cont'dl It is the opinion of this Committee that: The variance requested in this application is minor. 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 5. Submission No.: A 2012-010 Applicant: Dash Realty Ltd. Property Location: 672-692 King Street West & 8 & 12 Louisa Street Legal Description: Lots 368, 369 & 370 and Part Lot 371, Plan 376 -and- Submission No.: A 2012-011 Applicant: Winston Paul Weir Property Location: 18 Louisa Street Legal Description: Lot 371, Plan 376 Appearances: In Support: A. Bousfield D. Haghani Contra: R. Zettl G. Kukuric S. Keul Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to construct an 8 storey multi-residential building and a 3 unit multiple dwelling unit on an irregular shaped lot. For the purpose of this development currently under Site Plan review, the development will require variances for an easterly rear yard setback of 2m (6.56') rather than the required 7.5m (24.6'). This setback is currently operating as a side yard for 18 Louisa Street. This development will also require permission for a northerly setback of 2.9m (9.5') abutting a residential zone rather than the required 7.5m (24.6'); and, permission to provide off-street parking to be located on a property that is zoned residential, whereas the By-law requires off-street parking to be located on the same lot as the use requiring parking or a lot within the same zone, a Commercial, commercial- residential. industrial or downtown zone. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated February 10, 2012, advising that the subject properties are located at the northwest corner of King Street West and Louisa Street. Together the properties comprise 3,611 square metres in area and have 51 metres of frontage on King Street West and 78 metres of frontage on Louisa Street. In total there are six buildings currently used for residential and commercial purposes occupying the properties. The buildings were originally constructed in the 1930s. The properties subject to application A 2012-010 (672-692 King Street West and 8 and 12 Louisa Street) and surrounding properties along King Street West are designated Mixed Use Corridor in the Municipal Plan. These properties and adjacent properties along King Street West are zoned Medium Intensity Mixed Use Corridor (MU-2) Zone in COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 51 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 5. Submission Nos.: A 2012-010 & A 2012-011 (Cont'dl the Zoning By-law. 8 and 12 Louisa Street are also subject to Holding Provision 6H in the Zoning By-law. The property subject to application A 2012-011 (18 Louisa Street) and adjacent properties to the north and east are designated Low Rise Conservation in the Municipal Plan and are zoned Residential Five (R-5) Zone in the Zoning By-law. A Site Plan application (SP10/046/K/EB) was approved in principle in 2010 for the redevelopment of 672-692 King Street West and 8 and 12 Louisa Street for an eight storey commercial-residential building, conditional upon Committee of Adjustment approval for a deficient side yard abutting the residentially zoned properties to the north. In July 2010 the Committee of Adjustment approved the required minor variance application A 2010-047 and stipulated that the decision applied only to the site plan finally approved under Application SP10/046/K/EB. Since then, a new Site Plan application (SP11/103/K/HH) was submitted and approved in principle for the consolidated redevelopment of 672-692 King Street West, 8 and 12 Louisa with 18 Louisa Street. That development application is similar to SP10/046/K/EB; an eight storey commercial-residential building, with a three unit street townhouse development to be located on 18 Louisa Street. The approval in principle of SP11/103/K/HH is conditional upon a new Committee of Adjustment approval for the same deficient yard abutting the residentially zoned properties to the north as was previously approved by the Committee for A 2010-047 as well as for the other minor variances sought through applications A 2012-010 and A 2012-011. Before final Site Plan Approval can be issued Committee of Adjustment approval is required. The applicant is requesting a minor variance to allow an easterly setback of 2 metres on 18 Louisa Street whereas Zoning By-law 85-1 requires a minimum 7.5 metre setback. The applicant is also requesting the following minor variances for both 672-692 King St Wand 8,12 Louisa and 18 Louisa Street: a northerly setback of 2.9 metres rather than the required minimum 7.5 metre setback and permission to provide off-street parking to be located on a residentially zoned property, whereas the By-law requires off-street parking to be located on the same lot as the use requiring parking or a lot within the same zone, a Commercial, commercial-residential, industrial or downtown zone. 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 variances meet the intent of the Official Plan for the following reasons. The properties subject to application A 2012-010 (672-692 King Street West and 8 and 12 Louisa Street) are designated Mixed Use Corridor in the Municipal Plan, which is intended to serve adjacent residential neighbourhoods by providing a balanced distribution of commercial, institutional and residential uses. The policies support intensive transit-supportive development. The proposed intensification of the subject lands for both commercial and residential uses serves the surrounding area and supports transit, therefore maintains the intent of the Official Plan. The property subject to application A2012-011 (18 Louisa Street) is designated Low Rise Conservation in the Municipal Plan, which is intended to retain the existing low rise, low density residential character of the neighbourhood. The proposed development on 18 Louisa Street is a two storey, three unit multiple dwelling, which is in line with the scale and range of uses permitted by the land use designation and therefore maintains the intent of the Official Plan. The variances meet the intent of the Zoning By-law for the following reasons. The purpose of the minimum setback from residentially zoned properties requirement is to provide adequate separation between residential properties and commercial and mixed use buildings for compatibility reasons. Given that there is a laneway between the residentially zoned properties and the subject site, some separation is already provided. When taken in combination with the width of the laneway, the requested 2.9 metres setback would result in 7.5 metres of separation distance as required. Therefore, this COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 52 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 5. Submission Nos.: A 2012-010 & A 2012-011 (Cont'dl proposed variance maintains the intent of the Zoning By-law. The required variance for the reduced easterly yard on 18 Louisa Street is required because of a technicality in the Zoning By-law that stipulates that upon consolidation that yard would become the rear yard by definition. At that time, a minimum rear yard setback of 7.5 metres would be required. Given that the easterly yard functions as a side yard between 18 Louisa Street and 24 Louisa Street and would satisfy the minimum side yard requirement of 1.5 metres, the proposed easterly yard variance maintains the intent of the Zoning By-law. The required variance to permit parking to be located on a residentially zoned property is required because 18 Louisa Street is residentially zoned, and some of the required parking for the consolidated development is proposed to be located on this property. The general intent of the parking regulations in the Zoning By-law is to ensure that all required parking for a development is provided on the same property as the use requiring the parking, or in limited circumstances to permit offsite parking agreements. Once consolidation occurs an offsite parking agreement will not be necessary because all of the required parking for the consolidated redevelopment will be provided on the same property, and as such the general intent of the Zoning By-law will be maintained. The yard deficiency of 4.6 metres from the laneway lot line would not be discernable from the adjacent residential uses on Shanley Street because most of these properties have accessory buildings at or very close to their rear lot lines abutting the laneway. Therefore, the variance is minor. The requested 2.0 metre easterly yard (between 18 Louisa Street and 24 Louisa Street) would be minor because it is similar to the existing yard between the detached garage on 18 Louisa Street and the property line, and would also be similar in size to the existing yard on 24 Louisa Street. The requested variance to permit required parking on the residentially zoned property would be minor because the majority of required parking is to be provided below grade and as such has little to no impact on the function or appearance of the property from the street or adjacent properties. The variances are appropriate for the development and use of the land because the variances allow for intensification of the site in a form that is appropriately setback and compatible with abutting residential areas. The development addresses a unique site circumstance (the laneway) and incorporates it in the development considerations for the site. It is also worth noting that additional compatibility measures will be considered through the Site Plan approval process. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo Transportation Planner, dated February 10, 2012, advising that they have no concerns with this application. Ms. H. Holbrook gave a brief summary on the applications noting that the applicant previously came to the Committee in 2010 and received approval for the northerly setback deficiency abutting the residential zoned properties for an eight storey multi- residential building. She noted that the approval was conditional on the 2010 Site Plan Application. Ms. Holbrook advised that since then the applicant has put in an offer of purchase on 18 Louisa Street and is before the Committee requesting variances for the consolidated redevelopment of 672-692 King Street West, 8 and 12 Louisa with 18 Louisa Street. She stated that with the consolidation, an additional variance would be required to legalize a rear yard setback which is currently operating as a side yard on 18 Louisa Street. She noted that staff are in support of the of the requested variances noting that the northerly side yard is abutting a laneway and the proposed reduction of 2.9 metres in combination with the laneway would provide the separation distance of 7.5 metres between this property and the residential properties on Shanley Street. Ms. R. Zettl expressed concerns with the proposed development, advising that she owns 29 Shanley Street, which is adjacent to 18 Louisa Street. She advised that when she purchased her property she had done significant research into the area and purchased her property with the assumption that the permitted Zoning would only provide for single family homes. She stated that initially when this application was considered in 2010 she was not opposed to the development of the 8-storey residential COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 53 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 5. Submission Nos.: A 2012-010 & A 2012-011 (Cont'dl building recognizing that infill in the Downtown was being promoted. She noted that the applicant has since then acquired 18 Lousia Street as a money saving measure to assist with parking and the construction of an underground parking garage. Ms. Zettl stated that, in her opinion, consolidation of the parcels and the additional variances are no longer minor in nature. She advised that her greatest concern is with the variance for the northerly setback and what it would do to their quality of life. She noted in her opinion that a building of this size would likely cause significant shading in their rear yards and could potentially affect their property values. Mr. G. Kukuric and Ms. S. Keul were in attendance in opposition and expressed further concerns regarding water drainage and the buildings height perceptions due to the significant grade change between Louisa Street and Shanley Street. Ms. Holbrook advised that the proposed development has been designed so the majority of the building mass will be located closer to the roadway rather than the laneway. She stated that the northerly variance being requested will only be required for the first floor of the 8-storey development. The proposal for 18 Louisa Street is a 3 unit stacked townhouse that will also be located closer to Louisa Street rather than the laneway. Ms. Zettl stated that she is not opposed to development and is supportive of the 8- storey multi-residential building; but is opposed to development on 18 Louisa Street, noting that in her opinion this application would not be compatible with the surrounding residential neighbourhood. Ms. Holbrook advised that 18 Louisa Street is zoned R-5, the Zoning permits a 3-storey multi-residential dwelling and the applicant would not require a variance for this type of dwelling, if it was constructed independently of this development. The Chair stated for clarification that as part of the Site Plan review process the applicant will be required to deal with many of the concerns addressed by the neighbours. He stated that landscaping and the proposed 3m landscaping buffer in his opinion would provide an additional buffer between the new development and the residential properties on Shanley Street. He further advised that the applicant has already received the required variance approval for the 8-storey building and the Committee cannot reconsider what has already been approved. Mr. A. Lise stated that in his opinion the northerly setback cannot be considered minor in nature. He stated that although a portion of the development already received Committee approval he could not support the approval of the applications before the Committee this date. Ms. von Westerholt stated for clarification that the Committee is responsible for considering the variances and whether they are minor in nature and not the proposed design. She advised that with the 2.95m setback in combination with the laneway, the required 7.5m setback is being achieved. Mr. Lise further advised that the setback reductions in his opinion do not take into consideration the required amenity space that will be required for the residents of this development. Mr. Bousfield stated that through exterior balconies and terraces, including the front and year yards of 18 Louisa Street, the City's required outdoor amenity spaces are being achieved. Ms. Zettl further advised that she is concerned about what kind of precedence this would be setting by approving this type of development in an R-5 zone. The Chair commented that many of the concerns that have been discussed are requirements for the Site Plan approval process and staff are responsible for approving and monitoring those requirements. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 54 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 5. Submission Nos.: A 2012-010 & A 2012-011 (Cont'dl Mr. B. McColl noted that although he was sympathetic to frustrations and concerns addressed by the neighbours, he stated that the Province has mandated intensification in the downtown core; these applications are a means of achieving those goals. He stated that he is not in support of neighbourhood erosion; however, approving the application for 18 Louisa Street would approve a similar footprint that currently exists. Mr. McColl then put forward a motion to approve this application which was voted on and carried with Mr. Lise in opposition. Submission No. A 2012-010 Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Mr. A. Head That the application of Dash Realty Ltd., requesting permission to construct an 8-storey multi-residential building on an irregular shaped lot and for the purpose of this development currently under Site Plan review, this development will require permission for a northerly setback of 2.9m (9.5') abutting a residential zone rather than the required 7.5m (24.6'); and, permission to provide required off-street parking to be located on a residential zoned property, whereas the By-law requires off-street parking to be located on the same lot as the use requiring parking or a lot within the same zone, a commercial, commercial-residential, industrial or downtown zone, on Lots 368, 369 & 370 and Part Lot 371, Plan 376, 672-692 King Street West and 8 & 12 Louisa Street, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following condition: That the owner shall receive final approval of Site Plan Application SP/11/103/K/HH. It is the opinion of this Committee that: The variance requested in this application is minor. 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 2012-011 Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Mr. A. Head That the application of Winston Paul Weir, requesting permission to construct a 2-storey multiple dwelling unit and for the purpose of this development currently under Site Plan review, the development will require variances for an easterly rear yard setback of 2m (6.56') rather than the required 7.5m (24.6'), which is currently operating as a side yard for 18 Louisa Street; permission for a northerly setback of 2.9m (9.5') abutting a residential zone rather than the required 7.5m (24.6'); and, permission to provide required off-street parking to be located on a residential zoned property, whereas the By-law requires off-street parking to be located on the same lot as the use requiring the parking or a lot within the same zone, a commercial, commercial-residential, industrial or downtown zone, on Lot 371, Plan 376, 18 Louisa Street, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following condition: That the owner shall receive final approval of Site Plan Application SP/11/103/K/HH. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 55 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 5. Submission Nos.: A 2012-010 & A 2012-011 (Cont'dl Submission No. A 2012-011 (Cont'd) It is the opinion of this Committee that: The variance requested in this application is minor. 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 6. Submission No.: A 2012-012 Applicant: Filan Inc. Property Location: 37 Bruce Street Legal Description: Part Lot 6, Plan 764 Appearances: In Support: None Contra: None Written Submissions: None As no one appeared in support of this application, the Committee agreed to defer its consideration of this application to its meeting scheduled for March 20, 2012. CONSENT 1. Submission No.: B 2011-048 Applicant: Suncor Energy Inc. Property Location: 4319 & 4341 King Street East Legal Description: Part Lot 9, Beasley's Broken Front Concession Appearances: In Support: P. Park S. Bannister 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 King Street East of 60.975m (200.05`), a depth of 65.99m (216.5`), and an area of 4023.74 sq. m. (43311.176 sq.ft.). The retained land will have a width on King Street East of 56.3m (184.71`), a depth of 65.97m (216.44`) and an area of 3714.11 sq. m. (39978.347 sq.ft). The retained land will continue to be used as a gas bar and carwash; the use of the severed land is unknown at this time. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated February 14, 2012, advising that report B 2011-048 was presented to the Committee of Adjustment on September 20, 2011. At the request of the applicant, the report was deferred to the October 18, 2011 meeting to allow time for the owner to discuss Regional conditions COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 56 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 Submission No.: B 2011-048 (Cont'd with Regional staff. At the October 21, 2012 meeting, the report was further deferred to the February 21, 2012 meeting to allow for notification and recirculation of the application. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated September 12, 2012, advising that the subject property is located near the intersection of Sportsworld Drive and King Street East and is comprised of two former commercial lots, with civic addresses 4341 King Street East and 4319 King Street East. The property addressed as 4341 King Street East was previously used as a Sunoco gas station and is currently vacant. The property addressed as 4319 is currently used as a Petro Canada gas station. Suncor Energy Inc. is now the owner of both properties and at the time of the purchase, the titles for the two properties were registered in the same name and therefore the two properties have merged on title. In order to sell either property individually, the owner requires consent to sever the property back into the original two lots as required by the Planning Act. The property is designated as Service Commercial in the City's Official Plan and zoned Arterial Commercial Six (C-6) in By-law 85-1. The applicant is requesting consent to sever the property back into the original two lots, which was the situation until the titles were merged. The proposed retained parcel is addressed as 4319 King Street East. The proposed lot would be an interior lot with approximately 56 metres of frontage on King Street East. The proposed lot would have a lot depth of approximately 66 metres. The proposed lot area of the retained parcel is 0.37 hectares in size. The proposed severed parcel is addressed as 4341 King Street East. The proposed interior lot would have approximately 60 metres of frontage onto King Street East, with an approximate lot depth of 66 metres. The proposed lot area of the severed parcel is 0.40 hectares. 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, Planning Staff are satisfied that the creation of the severed lot is desirable and appropriate. The merging of the lots was unintentional and was not merged as a requirement of a previous planning approval. The proposed lots (retained and severed) are of the same shape and size as the lots which previously existed. Both lots are currently adequately serviced by municipal servicing and each lot fronts on a public road that is maintained year-round by the City. The current use of the lots (gas station and vacant) is compatible with the intent of the Official Plan and Zoning Bylaw. The proposed consent is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) issued under Subsection 3 (1) of the Act, and conforms to, or does not conflict with any applicable provincial plan or policy. Further the severance will allow for the sale and eventual redevelopment of 4341 King Street East. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Planning, Housing & Community Services, dated February 15, 2012 application was deferred from the September 12, 2011 Committee of Adjustment meeting, subject to further discussion with Regional staff pertaining to the Region's road widening conditions. Transportation Planning They further advised that King Street East (Regional Road No. 8) has an existing road allowance width of approximately 41.90 metres and a designated width in the Regional Official Policies Plan (ROPP) of 45.00 metres; therefore, a 1.55 metre (45.OOm - 41.90m /2= 1.55m) road widening is required for both frontages of the severed and retained lands. The exact road allowance width is to be confirmed by an Ontario Land Surveyor. The land must be conveyed to the Region of Waterloo for road allowance purposes and must be conveyed without cost and free of encumbrance. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 57 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 Submission No.: B 2011-048 (Cont'd The applicant shall engage an Ontario Land Surveyor (OLS) to prepare a draft Reference Plan which illustrates the required road allowance widening. Prior to registering the Reference Plan the OLS should submit a draft copy of the plan for review to Regional Transportation Planning. Upon review and approval of the draft Reference Plan, 4 copies of the registered Reference Plan are to be provided to Transportation Planning. The Applicant's Solicitor shall prepare the Land Transfer document and submit the appropriate documentation to the Region's Property Legal Assistant for registration. The applicant has provided a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment to the satisfaction of the Region's Senior Project Manager, Environmental, Corporate Services. No further action is required related to potential contamination within the existing road allowance for the lands that are required to be conveyed to the Region for road widening purposes. The Region has no objections to this application subject to the following condition: 1. That prior to final approval, for both the severed and retained lands, the owner provide an approximate 1.55 metre widening on King Street East (Regional Road No. 8) to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo and must be conveyed without cost to the Region and free of encumbrance. Along with a registerable deed to convey the road widening, the applicant must provide a mylar copy of the registered reference plan at no expense to the Region. Moved by Mr. A. Lise Seconded by Mr. B. McColl That the application of Suncor Energy Inc., requesting permission to sever a parcel of land having a width on King Street East of 60.975m (200.05`), a depth of 65.99m (216.5`), and an area of 4023.74 sq. m. (43311.176 sq.ft.), on Part Lot 9, Beasley's Broken Front Concession, 4341 King Street East ,Kitchener, Ontario, BE GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall make arrangements satisfactory to 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 must be submitted according to the City of Kitchener's Digital Design Standards to the satisfaction of the City's Mapping Technologist. 3. That the owner shall make arrangements financial or otherwise for the relocation of any existing City-owned street furniture, transit shelters, signs, hydrants, utility poles, wires or lines, as required, to the satisfaction of Engineering Services. 4. That the owner shall provide an approximate 1.55 metre widening on King Street East (Regional Road No. 8) to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo, for both the severed and retained lands. Along with a registerable deed to convey the road widening, the applicant must provide a mylar copy of the registered reference plan at no cost to the Region. 5. That the owner shall complete a Phase I/II Environmental Site Assessment for the approximate 1.55 metre widening to be conveyed to the Region across the severed and retained lands. If the Environmental Site Assessment Report concludes contamination has been found on the road widening portion, the owner will be required to remove the contamination. Alternatively the owner must provide the Region with sufficient funds (based on Regional estimates) to clean up the contamination. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 58 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 Submission No.: B 2011-048 (Cont'd) 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 February 21, 2014. Carried 2. Submission No.: Applicant: Property Location: Legal Description: Appearances: In Support: Contra: B 2012-005 Pillie Hess 709 Frederick Street Part Lot 50, Plan 764 S. O'Neill None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to sever a parcel of land so each half can be dealt with separately. The land to be severed will have a width on Frederick Street of 15.195m (49.85'), a depth of 39.30m (128.93') and an area of 597.16 sq. m. (6427.77 sq. ft.). The retained land will have a width on Frederick Street of 15.195m (49.85'), a depth of 39.30m (128.93') and an area of 597.16 sq. m. (6427.77 sq. ft.). The current residential /home business will be demolished to accommodate asemi-detached dwelling. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated February 8, 2012, advising that the subject property is located on the south side of Frederick Street between River Road and Lois Street. The subject property is municipally addressed as 709 Frederick Street and legally described as Part Lot 50, Registered Plan 764. It contains a single detached dwelling built in 1961 with an attached commercial office addition. The site also has some significant vegetation. Surrounding properties are comprised of low density residential land uses, primarily one and one-and-a-half storey single detached dwellings. This property is relatively large with 30.4 metres of frontage along Frederick Street, a depth of 39.3 metres for an area of 1194.7 square metres (1.2 ha). The City's Official Plan designates the property as Low Rise Residential and is zoned Residential Five (R- 5)with special regulation provision 182U. The applicant is requesting consent to sever a lot measuring 15.2 metres wide by 39.3 metres long while retaining a lot also measuring 15.2 metres wide by 39.3 metres long. The intent is to create two separate lots each containing asemi-detached dwelling. The existing structure is proposed to be demolished to make way for the new construction. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 59 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 2. Submission No.: B 2012-005 (Cont'dl Staff has no major concerns with the application as it represents a moderate form of infill with lot widths and lot areas that meet the Zoning By-law regulations; however, staff is requesting that the applicant submit a site plan of the proposed semi-detached dwellings along with building elevations as a condition of consent approval. Staff would like to ensure that any technical matters, building aesthetics and potential impacts are addressed or mitigated. The City's Official Plan grants authority for staff to request a plan for minor variance and consent applications. 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 both the severed and retained parcels are in conformity with the City's Official Plan and Zoning By-law, the dimensions and shapes of the proposed lots are appropriate and suitable for the proposed use of the lands, the lands front on an established public street, and both parcels of land can be serviced with independent and adequate service connections to municipal services. Also, the resultant lots will be compatible in size with the lots in the surrounding area. Staff is further of the opinion that the proposal is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2005 and conforms to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2006. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Planning, Housing & Community Services, dated February 15, 2012, advising that Due to the high traffic volumes on Frederick Street, the applicant is required to prepare a Transportation Noise Study to indicate the methods to be used to abate noise levels for the severed and retained lands from traffic noise generated on this road and if necessary, shall enter into a registered agreement with the City of Kitchener to provide for the implementation of the approved study. Transportation Noise Studies shall be completed as per Regional Guideline "Regional Municipality of Waterloo Implementation Guideline for Noise Policies" dated July 14, 1999 and the Noise Consultant must be on the Region's pre-approved list. The Region requires 4 copies complete with a signed Consultant's Declaration and Owner's Statement. The further advised that the subject property is listed in the Region's Threat's Inventory Database as having potential contamination as it was a former animal hospital, namely Blue Cross Animal Hospital. In accordance with the Region's Guideline entitled "Implementation Guideline for the Review of Development Applications on or Adjacent to Known and Potentially Contaminated Sites", a Record of Site Condition (RSC) is required for both the severed and retained portions prior to final approval. An RSC shall be filed with the Ministry of Environment (MOE) and an acknowledgement letter provided to the Region. The Region has no objections to this application, subject to the following conditions: That prior to final approval, the applicant submits a Transportation Noise Study to assess noise levels and indicate to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo methods to be used to abate traffic noise levels from Frederick Street for both the retained and severed lands. If necessary the applicant shall enter into a registered agreement with the City of Kitchener to provide for the implementation of the approved study. Transportation Noise Studies shall be completed as per Regional Guideline "Regional Municipality of Waterloo Implementation Guideline for Noise Policies" dated July 14, 1999 and the Noise Consultant must be on the Region's pre-approved list. The Region requires 4 copies complete with a signed Consultant's Declaration and Owner's Statement, and, 2. That prior to final approval, the applicant completes a Record of Site Condition for both the retained and severed lands in accordance with Ontario Regulation 153/04. In the event the Record of Site Condition is audited, the Regional Municipality of Waterloo must be advised by the Ministry of the Environment that COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 60 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 2. Submission No.: B 2012-005 (Cont'd) the requirements of an audit, if any, are completed to the satisfaction of the Ministry of the Environment. Two (2) copies of the completed Record of Site Condition and Ministry acknowledgment must be forwarded to the Regional Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services. The Committee considered correspondence from Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc., dated February 8, 2012, advising that any approval of this application should include conditions that require the applicants to make satisfactory arrangements with Hydro for the provision of separate electrical servicing to the land to be severed and retained, including granting any easements that they may require. Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Mr. A. Lise That the application of Pillie Hess requesting permission to sever a parcel of land having a width on Frederick Street of 15.195m (49.85'), a depth of 39.30m (128.93') and an area of 597.16 sq. m. (6427.77 sq. ft.), on Part Lot 50, Plan 764, 709 Frederick Street, Kitchener, Ontario, BE GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall make arrangements satisfactory to 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 must be submitted according to the City of Kitchener's Digital Design 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 in the amount of $6989.70. 4. That the owner shall apply for and receive approval for demolition control and obtain a demolition permit from the City. 5. That the owner shall make financial arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering Services, for the removal of redundant service connections and the installation of new service connections to the severed lands and retained lands. 6. That the owner shall close any redundant driveways with new boulevard landscaping, to City of Kitchener standards and any new driveways are to be built to City of Kitchener standards at grade with the sidewalk. All work shall be completed at the owner's expense and shall be completed prior to occupancy of the buildings. 7. That the owner prior to any grading or the application or issuance of a building permit, shall enter into an agreement with the City of Kitchener to be prepared by the City Solicitor and registered on title which shall include the following: "That prior to any grading or issuance of a building permit the owner shall submit plans for both the severed and retained lands, prepared by a qualified consultant, to the satisfaction and approval of the City's Director of Planning in consultation with the City's Director of Engineering showing: (i) the proposed location of all buildings and parking (including accessory buildings and structures), decks and driveways; (ii) the location of any existing buildings or structures and asphalt to be removed or relocated; (iii) the proposed grades and drainage; COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 61 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 2. Submission No.: B 2012-005 (Cont'dl (iv) the location of all trees to be preserved, removed or potentially impacted on or adjacent to the subject lands, including notations of their size, species and condition; (v) justification for any trees to be removed; (vi) outline tree protection measures for trees to be preserved; (vii) building elevations; and (viii) site servicing" 8. That the owner shall submit a Transportation Noise Study to assess noise levels and indicate to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo methods to be used to abate traffic noise levels from Frederick Street for both the retained and severed lands. If necessary the applicant shall enter into a registered agreement with the City of Kitchener to provide for the implementation of the approved study. Transportation Noise Studies shall be completed as per Regional Guideline "Regional Municipality of Waterloo Implementation Guideline for Noise Policies" dated July 14, 1999 and the Noise Consultant must be on the Region's pre- approved list. The Region requires 4 copies complete with a signed Consultant's Declaration and Owner's Statement. 9. That the owner shall complete a Record of Site Condition for both the retained and severed lands in accordance with Ontario Regulation 153/04. In the event the Record of Site Condition is audited, the Regional Municipality of Waterloo must be advised by the Ministry of the Environment that the requirements of an audit, if any, are completed to the satisfaction of the Ministry of the Environment. Two (2) copies of the completed Record of Site Condition and Ministry acknowledgment must be forwarded to the Regional Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services. 10. That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc. for the provision of separate 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: 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 February 21, 2014. Carried COMBINED APPLICATIONS Submission Nos.: B 2012-006, B 2012-007, A 2012-013, A 2012-014 & A 2012-015 Applicant: Snider Corporation Property Location: 51-53 Pine Street Legal Description: Part Lots 313 & 314, Plan 385 COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 62 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 1. Submission Nos.: B 2012-006, B 2012-007, A 2012-013, A 2012-014 & A 2012-015 (Cont'd) Appearances: In Support: K. Murphy H. Handy G. Snider Contra: N. Amaral A. Spencer M. Penney R. Hunter Written Submissions: D. Longpre A. Wardrop J. Ashton F. Lusby & C. McCluskey The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to create 2 new lots for residential use and retain one residential lot. The retained lot will have a frontage on Pine Street of 9.121m (29.92'), a northerly depth of 29.2m (95.8') and an area of 227 sq. m. (2443.40 sq.ft). The retained land will contain an existing 3 storey multi-residential building. The retained land will also require variances for permission for the area of Lot 1 to be 227 sq.m. (2443.40 sq.ft) rather than the required 235 sq. m. (2529.51 sq. ft.); permission for an easterly side yard setback of 1.38 m rather than the required 3m (9.84'); permission for a rear yard setback of 5.7m (18.7') rather than the required 7.5m (24.6'); and, permission for the driveway to have a width of 2.4m (7.87') rather than the required 2.6m (8.53'). Through applications B 2012-006 and B 2012-007, the applicant is requesting to create two parcels of land, Lot 2 containing an existing semi-detached dwelling and Lot 3 for the construction of a duplex. New Lot 2 will have a frontage on Pine Street of 8.295m (27.21`) a depth of 29.2m (95.8`) and an area of 281 sq. m. (3024.65 sq.ft.). Lot 2 will require easements for maintenance in favour of the retained land and an easement in favour of Lot 3 for Engineering Services. Lot 2 will also require a variance for permission to locate the 2 required off-street parking spaces located within 6m (19.68') of the street line. New Lot 3 will be an L shaped lot, having a width on Pine Street of 4.5m (14.76'), a depth of 40.2m (131.88') and an area of 500 sq.m. (5381.95 sq.ft). This parcel requires a variance for a lot having a width of 4.5m (14.76') rather than the required 9m (29.52'); and, permission to provide a rear yard setback of 1.2m (3.93') rather than the required 7.5m (24.6'). The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division dated, February 15, 2012, advising that the subject applications relate to 51-53 Pine Street. This lot currently contains asemi-detached dwelling located on one lot. The owner is proposing to sever the parcel of land into three lots. Lots 1 and 2 would each contain one half of the semi-detached dwelling, and each half is proposed to be duplexed. Lot 3 would contain a stand alone duplex dwelling. Easements and variances are also being sought. The building was originally constructed around 1930. Through discussion with staff in Planning and Transportation Planning, the applicant has made a number of changes to the proposed concept plan. The changes include a reorientation of parking spaces on Lot 1 and Lot 3 and shifting the location of the future dwelling on Lot 3 so that a larger private amenity space is provided. The changes do not impact the requested consents or variances; however staff recommend that a condition be included to ensure that the final parking layout is consistent with layout proposed in the revised concept plan, or in an alternative orientation to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Transportation Planning. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 63 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 1. Submission Nos.: B 2012-006, B 2012-007, A 2012-013, A 2012-014 & A 2012-015 (Cont'd) Lot 1 (A2012-013) The retained lot will have a frontage on Pine Street of 9.121 m a depth of 29.2m and an area of 227 m2. These lands will contain half the existing semi-detached dwelling. The retained land will require variances as follows: 1. to reduce the area from 235m2 to 227m2 2. to permit a rear yard setback of 5.7m rather than the required 7.5m, 3. to permit an easterly side yard setback of 1.38m rather than the required 3.Om, 4. to permit the driveway to have a width of 2.4m rather than the required 2.6m. With regards to the variances requested for Lot 1, Planning staff offers the following comments 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. The lands are designated Low Rise Conservation in the K-W Hospital Secondary Plan which encourages the retention of existing housing stock, the subdivision of the existing housing to create multiple unit dwellings. Semi-detached and duplex dwellings are permitted under this designation, therefore, the intent of the Official Plan is maintained. Lot 1 is zoned Residential Five Zone (R-5). This zoning permits semi-detached dwellings and duplexes. Four variances to the zoning by-law are being sought for this pa rce I. The applicant is seeking a reduction from 235m2 to 227 m2, which represents a reduction of 8m2. The intent of the lot area is to ensure that the lot is large enough to accommodate a dwelling, parking and private amenity space. This is an existing lot which has an existing dwelling and an existing shared driveway. While, the reduced lot size is the result of consent application B2012-006 and B2012-007, through the redesigned concept plan appropriate parking and a rear yard amenity space has been provided. Staff is of the opinion that the reduced lot size meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The applicant is seeking a reduction of the rear yard setback from 7.5m to 5.77m. The proposed variance is the result of the related severances. The intent of the rear yard setback regulation is to ensure adequate private amenity space for residents, and 8.19m of private amenity space is provided. The reduction is only needed due to the existing porch. This porch also functions as amenity space, and staff are of the opinion that a suitable rear yard space has been provided for residents and that the intent of the by-law is maintained. The applicant is seeking a reduction to the required easterly side yard setback from 3.Om to 1.37m. This is an existing situation, and is not changed as a result of related severances. The intent of the side yard setback of 3.Om is to ensure sufficient width to accommodate parking between the side of the dwelling and the property line. In this case, parking for the dwelling is not proposed to be located between the side of the dwelling and the property line. In fact, because of the existing right-of-way, vehicles may not park between 53 Pine Street and the neighbour at 55 Pine Street. The required parking spaces are proposed to be located in front of and behind the existing dwelling. For the above reasons, staff is of the opinion that the intent of the by-law is maintained. The applicant is seeking a reduction to the width of a driveway from 2.6m to 2.4m. This is an existing situation and will not change as a result of the related severance applications. The intent of a 2.6 metre driveway is to accommodate adequate width for a single drive aisle. The majority of the driveway does achieve a minimum width of 2.6 metres and the reduced width only extends for a short distance due to the chimney. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 64 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 1. Submission Nos.: B 2012-006, B 2012-007, A 2012-013, A 2012-014 & A 2012-015 (Cont'd) The existing driveway and right-of-way situation has existed for many years and staff is satisfied that residents will be able to gain access to parking in the rear parking space with the existing driveway and right-of-way width. Staff is of the opinion that the intent of the by-law is maintained. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed variances are minor and are appropriate for the development and use of the lands. The variances to lot size and rear yard setback are the result of the severance, however staff is of the opinion that the lot is appropriately sized to accommodate the dwelling, parking and outdoor amenity space, and further that the rear yard space provided will be sufficient to meet the needs of future residents. Further, the side yard setback and width of the driveway are both existing situations. Staff is of the opinion that as vehicles will not be able to park beside the dwelling, as the reduced width of the driveway only extends for a very short distance, and as this situation has existed for many years, that the variances are minor and are appropriate. In addition to the foregoing, there is a hydro pole located in front of 53 Pine Street. The guy wire for this pole is blocking the location of the parking stall to be located in front of the dwelling. Staff has spoken to the applicant in this regard, and they have agreed to make appropriate arrangements with KW Hydro to relocate the hydro pole and/or the guy wire to a location that does not conflict with the proposed driveway location. A condition is recommended in this regard. Lot 2 (A2012-014 & B2012-006) Lot 2 currently contains half of the existing semi-detached dwelling and has frontage on Pine Street of 8.295m a depth of 29.2m and an area of 281 m2. Two easements are proposed over Lot 2. The first is a 1.2m wide maintenance easement in favour of the retained lands for maintenance of the porch and vestibule. The second is a 1.5m wide easement in favour of Lot 3 for maintenance of services. Lot 2 requires a variance to permit both of the required off-street parking spaces to be located within 6m of the streetline, whereas the zoning by-law only permits one space to be located within 6m of the streetline. With regards to the variances requested for Lot 2, Planning staff offer the following comments 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. Variance - A2012-013 The lands are designated Low Rise Conservation in the K-W Hospital Secondary Plan which encourages the retention of existing housing stock and the subdivision of existing housing stock to create multiple unit dwellings. Semi-detached and duplex dwellings are permitted under this designation, and therefore, the intent of the Official Plan is maintained. Lot 2 is zoned Residential Five Zone (R-5). This zoning permits semi-detached dwellings and duplexes. The zoning by-law requires that two parking spaces be provided for a duplex dwelling, permits these spaces to be located in tandem, and permits one of the spaces to be located within 6m of the streetline. For non-duplexed dwellings, the by-law requires that the required space be setback 6m from the streetline, so that there is room between a garage and the street for a vehicle to park in the driveway, allowing space for visitor parking, or for future duplexing of the dwelling (which is permitted in almost all residential zones). The intent of the duplex parking regulations is to provide added flexibility for property owners wishing to convert existing dwellings to duplexes. On this lot, there is not sufficient space between the existing dwelling and the street to accommodate a longer driveway, and there is no garage provided. However, the two required parking spaces can be accommodated in the proposed double driveway. The width of the proposed driveway conforms to zoning regulations, and staff is of the opinion that the variance meets the intent of the zoning by-law. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 65 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 1. Submission Nos.: B 2012-006, B 2012-007, A 2012-013, A 2012-014 & A 2012-015 (Cont'd) Staff is of the opinion that the proposed variance is minor and is appropriate for the development and use of the lands. The proposed driveway and will accommodate the off-site parking and a double driveway is permitted under the current zoning regulations. Severance of Lot 2 from Lot 1 - B2012-006 The existing building on the site was originally designed and has functioned as a semi- detached dwelling since about 1930, and was likely originally two lots which merged under a previous owner. The applicant is proposing to sever parcel so that each half of the dwelling is located on its own lot. The proposed property line is irregular as the owner is proposing that that the new lot line will follow the demising wall in the interior of the dwelling, which is not directly in the centre of the building and proposes to retain the entirety of the front porch with Lot 1. While staff generally prefers straight lot lines, in this instance the somewhat irregular lot line can be supported as it serves a logical and specific function of preserving the integrity of the existing building, without requiring major renovations to interior space. Staff also understands that this situation has persisted for many years. While there area number of variances required (as discussed previously) staff is of the opinion that the proposed severance is appropriate. The applicant also proposes that the steps leading up to the side porch on Lot 2 will need to be reworked so that they do not extend beyond the proposed property line and so that they will comply with zoning regulations of section 5.6. Staff recommends that a condition be included which requires the submission of a drawing showing the proposed location of the steps to ensure they are within the lot and comply with regulations. Maintenance Easement The proposed 1.2 metres wide maintenance easement is required over Lot 2 in favour of Lot 1, as the front porch and vestibule to be retained with Lot 1 are located at the proposed lot line. The vestibule is permitted to have a Om setback as this is a semi- detached dwelling. The porch is also permitted to be setback Om from the property line, as it is not higher than 0.6 m or enclosed. However, where a portion of the building does not adjoin the neighbouring building it is good practice fora maintenance easement to be registered on title to allow the owner to access to the outside wall for maintenance purposes. Servicing Easement A 1.5 metre wide servicing easement is required over Lot 2, in favour of Lot 3, to allow the maintenance of services which are proposed to be located within the driveway portion of Lot 3. Meritech has completed a technical memorandum with respect to the servicing of Lot 3 and find that services can be installed at sufficient depth and will not undermine any existing or proposed structures. They note that the services can be maintained or reconstructed through the use of a trench box, however recommend that a 1.5m wide maintenance easement be provided over Lot 2 in favour of Lot 3. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed consent is consistent with the policy statements issued under subsection 3(1) of the Act, conforms to or does not conflict with any applicable provincial plan or plans. This proposal represents the appropriate intensification and infill. Staff recognizes that this building has existed as asemi-detached dwelling for many years and was likely originally located on two lots which merged in title. Staff is satisfied with the proposed lot configuration, subject to approval of the requested variances, as well as the proposed easements. 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 (Lot 2) and retained parcels (Lot 1) are in conformity with the City's Official Plan, the dimensions and shapes of the proposed lots are appropriate and suitable for the existing uses and proposed use of the lands, and the proposed lot depth is consistent with that of the neighbouring lot at 55 Pine Street. The lands front onto an established public street, and both parcels of land are serviced with independent and COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 66 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 1. Submission Nos.: B 2012-006, B 2012-007, A 2012-013, A 2012-014 & A 2012-015 (Cont'd) adequate service connections to municipal services. Staff is satisfied that the easements are desirable and appropriate, and that the configuration can be considered appropriate for the development of the lands. Lot 3 (A2012-015 & B2012-007) Lot 3 is proposed to be severed from Lots 1 and 2 and will have a frontage on Pine Street of 4.5m and a depth of 40.2m and is proposed to contain a duplex. This lot is proposed to be a `flag lot' and if approved will have a narrow and deep frontage onto the public street with the developable area of the lot located behind the existing semi- detached dwelling. While `flag-lots' are not atypical lot configuration, each is considered based on its own merits. In considering `flag-lots' special consideration must be given to address emergency access, engineering, transportation planning and land use planning matters. Fire staff has given consideration to the application. They have two areas of concern the first is ensuring that the 60m hose will extend from a truck parked on the street to all parts on the building. Staff has measured the length from the street to the rear of the building and this is within the 60 metre hose length. A condition of approval is recommended to require the owner to verify. The second is ensuring that the address sign is clearly posted and visible from the street to ensure that the property can easily be found by emergency services staff (fire, police, EMS). The applicant is proposing to install an address sign near the street, possibly together with mail boxes for the proposed units. Staff is of the opinion that this solution is appropriate (as does Canada Post) and recommends that a condition be included requiring that the content and location of the address sign be approved by Planning and Fire staff, in consultation with Canada Post prior to occupancy of the duplex dwellings. Engineering staff has reviewed the site servicing memorandum prepared by Meritech and concur with the findings of the study. In addition to the comments provided below, Engineering staff notes that a Geotechnical Investigation will be required to be completed to ensure that infiltration is possible on the site for the sump pump discharge. If the soils are not conducive to infiltration then the soil must be removed, suitable soil must be put in place and approved prior to engineering sign off. In addition, in accordance with the recommendations of Meritech's study, maintenance and reconstruction of site services shall require the use of a trench box. Conditions have been included in this regard. Transportation Planning staff has reviewed the site and find that there are no major concerns with respect to vehicular access to the site. The two required parking spaces can be provided, and while is recognized that vehicles will need to back out of the driveway onto the street, it is typical for residents to back either into or out of private driveways. Planning staff has considered whether the proposed lot configuration is compatible with neighbourhood and appropriate in this location. Staff finds that in this instance it is both compatible and appropriate. From a streetscape perspective, the creation of the flag lot will provide for a building that does not have traditional street frontage, however the building will be partially visible from the street in its proposed location and there will be an independent driveway connection. There are many trees around the edge of the property. Environmental Planning staff recommends that the owner be required to prepare a Tree Preservation Plan, prior to the issuance of any building permits. This plan must provide justification for any trees to be removed, and protection measures for all trees to be retained and additional or enhanced landscaping to replace trees and vegetation proposed to be removed. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 67 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 1. Submission Nos.: B 2012-006, B 2012-007, A 2012-013, A 2012-014 & A 2012-015 (Cont'd) The proposed lot and dwelling is located behind 51 and 53 Pine Street. Therefore, this dwelling will have the greatest impact on the dwellings from which is it being severed. Staff is of the opinion that Lots 1 and 2, will each still have a reasonable outdoor amenity space. The side yard of Lot 3 will abut the rear yards of Lots 1 and 2, however, in this instance this is not significantly different from any other flankage lot where the side of a dwelling abuts the rear yard of a dwelling behind it. The rear yard of the proposed lot will be generally coincident with the rear yard of 55 Pine Street, resulting in a similar situation as exists today. The other surrounding land uses include Mount Hope Cemetery, KCI playfields, and City owned access to the playfields, and beyond that a private commercial parking lot. These land uses will not be negatively impacted by the proposed lot configuration. Planning staff requests that building elevation drawings for the duplex be submitted prior to the issuance of a building permit. These drawings should demonstrate that the duplex conforms to the design standards and policies of the City's Official Plan and Urban Design Standards, including items such as compatibility, building materials, etc. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed consent is consistent with the policy statements issued under subsection 3(1) of the Act, conforms to or does not conflict with any applicable provincial plan or plans. This proposal represents the appropriate intensification and infill. 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 the severed and retained parcels are in conformity with the City's Official Plan, the dimension and shape of the proposed lots are appropriate and suitable for the proposed use of the lands, the lands front on an established public street, and can be serviced with independent and adequate service connections to municipal services. Also, the resultant lots will be compatible with the lots in the surrounding area. Staff is of the opinion that in this circumstance, and as there are no concerns from an emergency, transportation, engineering, planning or compatibility perspective, the proposed lot should be approved. Two variances are being sought for Lot 3. The first is a request to reduce the minimum lot width from 9m to 4.5m, and to reduce the rear yard setback from 7.5m to 1.2m. With regards to the variances requested for Lot 3, Planning staff offers the following comments 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. The lands are designated Low Rise Conservation in the K-W Hospital Secondary Plan which permits duplex dwellings and permits the creation of new housing through redevelopment at no greater than the existing scale and intensity of development. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed duplex is in keeping with the low-rise scale established in this neighbourhood. Further, while this represents infill development it is consistent with densities found within the neighbourhood. Therefore, the intent of the Official Plan is maintained. The intent of the zoning by-law regulations which require a minimum lot width of 9.Om is to ensure that a lot is of sufficient size to accommodate a detached dwelling. In this case, as the dwelling is oriented to the rear of the site, the lot is suitably sized for a detached dwelling. Further, the proposed 4.5 metre width is sufficient to accommodate a driveway and the required underground servicing for the dwelling. As such staff is of the opinion that the intent of the zoning by-law is maintained. The intent of the rear yard setback of 7.5 metres is to ensure there is adequate private amenity space for residents. In this case, the rear yard functions as a side yard and the side yard as a rear yard. The minimum side yard setback in the R-5 zone is 1.2 metres and staff is of the opinion that the intent of the zoning by-law is maintained. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 68 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 1. Submission Nos.: B 2012-006, B 2012-007, A 2012-013, A 2012-014 & A 2012-015 (Cont'dl The proposed lot width provides sufficient space to accommodate servicing and a driveway for the proposed duplex dwelling and the rear portion of the lot is suitably sized for the proposed dwelling. The lot will have sufficient private amenity space, and the orientation of the dwelling and outdoor space limits the impact to neighbouring properties. Therefore, Staff is of the opinion that the variances are minor and are appropriate for the development and use of the lands. Building Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed applications for Lot 1. No concerns with Lot 2 provided a site servicing permit is issued to disconnect from Lot 1's service connections and to install new water and sanitary lines. No concerns with Lot 3 provided the designer must ensure compliance with fire resistance ratings and unprotected openings for the wall faces with setback of 1.2m from the new property lines. Traffic Comments: Transportation Planning has no concerns with the proposed severance. However, Transportation Planning notes, the width of the driveway between Lot 1 and the adjacent property to be narrow at 2.45m Transportation Planning feels that the width is adequate to accommodate the vehicular movement to the rear of Lot 1. Additionally, Transportation Planning will require a parking plan to be submitted to the satisfaction of the Director of Transportation Planning showing all the required parking spaces for Lot 1, Lot 2 and Lot 3. Engineering Comments: • Servicing: The owner is required to make satisfactory financial arrangements with the Engineering Division for the removal of any redundant service connections and the installation of new ones that may be required to service this property, all prior to Committee of Adjustment approval. Our records indicate municipal services are currently available to service this property. Any further enquiries in this regard should be directed to Katie Pietrzak (519-741-3400 ext. 3328). • Servicing: A servicing plan showing outlets to the municipal servicing system along with the sanitary and storm sewer design sheets will be required to the satisfaction of the Engineering Division prior to Committee of Adjustment approval. The sanitary peak flow must also be submitted to the Engineering Division to run the sanitary capacity modeling. • Severance: The proponent is advised that future severance of any blocks within the subject lands would require separate, individual service connections for sanitary and water, in accordance with City policies. • Erosion and Sedimentation Control: An Erosion and Sedimentation Control plan will be required to the satisfaction of the Engineering Division prior to Committee of Adjustment approval. • Letter of Permission: If it is shown on the plans that site servicing works and grading will encroach onto neighbouring lands, the City of Kitchener will require a letter of permission from each property owner affected by the proposed works. The letters of permission must be received by the Engineering Division prior to acceptance of grading control plan, erosion and sedimentation control plan, site servicing plan, storm water management plan and the storm water management report. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 69 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 1. Submission Nos.: B 2012-006, B 2012-007, A 2012-013, A 2012-014 & A 2012-015 (Cont'd) • Driveways: Any redundant driveways are to be closed with new curb and gutter and boulevard landscaping, all to City of Kitchener standards and any new driveways are to be built to City of Kitchener standards at grade with the existing sidewalk. All works is at the owner's expense and all work needs to be completed prior to occupancy of the building. • PSAB: As per the Public Sector Accounting Board (PSAB) S. 3150 the Development and Reconstruction As-Recorded Tracking Form is required to be filled out and submitted along with a digital submission of all AutoCad drawings required for the site (Grading, Servicing etc.) with the corresponding correct layer names and numbering system to the satisfaction of the Engineering Division prior to Committee of Adjustment approval. • Driveway Entrance: Engineering's standard for entrance width is 9m wide with all 3 services running to the property at the rear, and 7.1 is adequate for only sanitary and water. Storm is not required only when the owner has a geotechnical report stating the soils are free draining. Engineering is satisfied with the proposed lot width of 4.5m subject to the owner demonstrating that all the required services and utilities can be accommodated within the proposed corridor. • Sanitary Sewer: The owner must ensure that the basement elevation of the house can be drained by gravity to the street sewers. If this is not the case, then the owner would have to pump the sewage via a pump and forcemain to the property line and have a gravity sewer from the property line to the street. • Easement: You may require a servicing easement and/or and access easement based on your consultants design. Parks Comments: A cash-in-lieu parkland dedication is required for the severance of Lot 3 in the amount of $7,400.00. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Planning, Housing & Community Services, dated February 15, 2012, advising that the subject land is located in close proximity to the Light Rail Transit route on King Street West and located within the Grand River Hospital and King/Allan Rapid Transit Station Areas. The Station Areas are anticipated to intensify by providing for more compact densities to support the viability of Rapid Transit service levels. Sourcewater Protection The subject land are located in Wellhead Protection Sensitivity Area (WPSA) No. 4 in the Regional Official Plan (ROP). The purpose of this designation and the associated policies contained in the ROP is to protect the Region's long-term municipal groundwater supplies. The subject lands are identified in the Region's Threats Inventory Database and City of Kitchener Official Plan as being adjacent to a former landfill municipally addressed as 27 Pine Street. In accordance with the Region's Guideline entitled "Implementation Guideline for the Review of Development Applications on or Adjacent to Known and Potentially Contaminated Sites", a Record of Site Condition (RSC) is required for both the severed and retained portions prior to final approval. An RSC shall be filed with the Ministry of Environment (MOE) and an acknowledgement letter provided to the Region. The Region has no objection to applications B 2012-006 and B2012-007 subject to the following condition: COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 70 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 1. Submission Nos.: B 2012-006, B 2012-007, A 2012-013, A 2012-014 & A 2012-015 (Cont'd) That prior to final approval, the applicant completes a Record of Site Condition for the severed and retained lands in accordance with Ontario Regulation 153/04. In the event the Record of Site Condition is audited, the Regional Municipality of Waterloo must be advised by the Ministry of the Environment that the requirements of an audit, if any, are completed to the satisfaction of the Ministry of the Environment. Two (2) copies of the completed Record of Site Condition and Ministry acknowledgment must be forwarded to the Regional Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services. The Committee considered correspondence from Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc., dated February 8, 2012, advising that any approval of this application should include conditions that require the applicants to make satisfactory arrangements with Hydro for the provision of separate electrical servicing to the land to be severed and retained, including granting any easements that they may require. Mr. N. Amaral provided the Committee with a hand out containing photos of the subject property and written submissions from the neighbours in opposition to these applications. He stated that he has been retained by Mr. Spencer and Ms. Penney who own the property at 55 Pine Street who are in opposition to these applications. Mr. Amaral advised that the neighbours have concerns regarding potential drainage problems; increased traffic driving to the rear of Lot 1; the proposed reduction in the driveway width; parking; and, the significant increase in residents that would be living at a dwelling that is currently asemi-detached dwelling. He further advised that the variances required to permit the severance applications, in his opinion, should not be deemed minor in nature as the reductions are decreases of 26% and 55% to accommodate the new lot areas. Mr. Amaral stated that there are a number of vacant homes in the area already and stated, in his opinion, that such an increased intensification is not required and not compatible with the adjacent properties. Ms. von Westerholt stated that the Lots 1 and 2 are currently semi-detached dwellings and if the owner would like to convert them from single family homes into duplexes they would not require permission of this Committee. She indicated that the only real increase in intensification would be the creation of Lot 3. She stated that the subject property and the adjacent property, 55 Pine Street, currently have an easement registered on title for shared driveway. She further advised that the proposed applications would actually reduce the amount of cars driving down the shared laneway as the application has proposed to move one of the two required parking spaces from the rear of Lot 1 to the front yard of the property. Mr. Spencer stated that the current easement does not go the entire length of the house and anyone wishing to park in the rear of the Lot 1 would have to drive over a portion of his property to access the proposed parking space. Mr. Amaral further advised that his clients have two small children and they have additional concerns for safety with cars parking in the rear of the subject property. In response to questions regarding the City's policies on the creation of a `flag lot', Ms. von Westerholt advised that each `flag lot' needs to be evaluated on its own merit and each one is given extensive consideration. She stated that there is no policy encouraging this type of development as intensification, but if they meet all the required regulations staff can support them. Mr. H. Handy provided some additional clarification, noting that the applicant has had several meetings with the City and many of the concerns mentioned by the neighbour have already been addressed. He advised that, in his opinion, the proposed duplexes are compatible with the adjacent properties as there are several other mixed uses within the vicinity of the subject property. He indicated that the properties experiencing the greatest impacts from the creation of Lot 3 are Lots 1 & 2, as there is a vacant field to the rear of the property currently. He further advised that the applicant already shares COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 71 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 1. Submission Nos.: B 2012-006, B 2012-007, A 2012-013, A 2012-014 & A 2012-015 (Cont'd) an existing driveway with the owner at 55 Pine Street, and portions of that shared driveway are gravel; and the owner has proposed to pave the driveway to improve the driveway condition. Mr. G. Snider advised that he has tried to work with the neighbour at 55 Pine Street regarding the shared driveway, noting that the neighbour owns three cars and with his permission, has been parking one of his vehicles in the shared easement for the time being while renovations have been occurring on the semis. He indicated that he has tried to offer the neighbours solutions regarding their potential safety concerns, noting that the walkway next to their home could be raised a few inches to prevent people from being able to drive on that portion. The Chair stated there are strict requirements regarding drainage and new development and staff will ensure that any drainage concerns will be dealt with through the required planning approvals. He further advised that the Committee needs to consider applications that support Downtown intensification as outlined in the Provincial Policy Statement and this application is a means of achieving those Provincial mandates. Mr. McColl expressed his concerns for the proposed development and creation of Lot 3. He advised that he understands the mandate of the province to increase development in the City's core; however, the variances requested are in his opinion significantly large and would not be required if Lot 3 was not being proposed. He indicated that he could support the application if it was only the severance of Lots 1 & 2, but he could not support the creation of a third lot. In response to questions, Mr. Lewis advised that the proposed driveway width reduction would accommodate a personal vehicle. He reiterated that there is currently an existing shared right-of-way between the subject property and 55 Pine Street. In response to statements regarding compatibility, Ms. von Westerholt advised that the property adjacent to 51-53 Pine Street to the south is a parking lot, to the rear of the subject property is an open field; and, to the north is 55 Pine Street, followed by a cemetery. She noted that the proposed duplexes would be considered compatible with the other residential properties within the vicinity. Mr. Lise stated that he could support the proposed applications, noting that any of the concerns expressed by the neighbours would be dealt with through the planning approval process. He stated that the proposed duplexes in his opinion are compatible with the neighbourhood. Mr. Lise then put forward a motion to approve this application which was voted on and carried with Mr. McColl in opposition. Submission No. B 2012-006 Moved by Mr. A. Lise Seconded by Mr. A. Head That the application of the Snider Corporation, requesting permission to sever a parcel of land having a width on Pine Street of 8.295m (27.21`), a depth of 29.264m (96.01`) and an area of 281 sq. m. (3024.65 sq.ft.); permission to create a maintenance easement having a width of 1.2m (3.937`) in favour of the retained; and, permission to create an easement having a width of 1.5m (4.92`) in favour of Lot 3 for Engineering Services, on Part Lots 313 & 314, Plan 385, 51-53 Pine Street, Kitchener, Ontario, BE GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall make arrangements satisfactory to the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and/or local improvement charges. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 72 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 1. Submission Nos.: B 2012-006, B 2012-007, A 2012-013, A 2012-014 & A 2012-015 (Cont'd) Submission No. B 2012-006 (Cont'd) 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 arrangements financial or otherwise, to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Engineering Services for: a. the relocation of any existing City-owned street furniture, transit shelters, signs, hydrants, utility poles, wires or lines, as required, in consultation with the appropriate City department, Regional department or agency. b. the removal of any redundant service connections and the installation of new ones that may be required to service the severed and retained lands. c. the installation, to City standards, of boulevard landscaping including street trees, and a paved driveway ramp, on the severed lands and retained lands. d. the closure of any redundant driveways with new curb and gutter and boulevard landscaping, all to City of Kitchener standards and any new driveways are to be built to City of Kitchener standards at grade with the existing sidewalk. That the owner shall submit to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Engineering Services the following: a. a Servicing Plan showing outlets to the municipal servicing system along with the sanitary and storm sewer design sheets. b. an Erosion and Sedimentation Control plan. Further, if it is shown on the plans that site servicing works and grading will encroach onto neighbouring lands, the City of Kitchener will require a letter of permission from each property owner affected by the proposed works. The letters of permission must be received by the Engineering Division prior to acceptance of any required grading control plan, erosion and sedimentation control plan, site servicing plan, storm water management plan and the storm water management report. 5. That the owner shall submit and complete a Reconstruction As-Recorded Tracking Form as per the Public Sector Accounting Board (PSAB) S. 3150 a Development along with a digital submission of all Auto Cad drawings required for the site (Grading, Servicing etc.) with the corresponding correct layer names, and numbering system to the satisfaction of City's Engineering Services. 6. That the owner shall confirm that the sanitary flow for the proposed dwelling can be drained by gravity to the municipal sewers. Should the owner not be able to demonstrate that the site can be serviced by gravity, the owner shall be required to provide adequate sanitary disposal to the satisfaction of Engineering Services. 7. That the owner shall enter into an agreement with the City of Kitchener to be prepared by the City Solicitor and registered on title of the severed lands which shall include the following: COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 73 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 1. Submission Nos.: B 2012-006, B 2012-007, A 2012-013, A 2012-014 & A 2012-015 (Cont'd) Submission No. B 2012-006 (Cont'd) a) That prior to any grading or the application or issuance of a building permit, the owner shall submit a plan, prepared by a qualified consultant, to the satisfaction and approval of the City's Director of Planning showing: (i) the location of all buildings (including accessory buildings and structures), porches, decks and driveways; (ii) the proposed location of a pedestrian connection from the sidewalk/parking to the primary entrance, and the orientation of the relocated steps; (iii) the location of any existing buildings or structures to be removed or relocated; (iv) the proposed grades and drainage; (v) the location of all trees to be preserved, removed or potentially impacted on or adjacent to the subject lands, including notations of their size, species and condition; (vi) justification for any trees to be removed; and (vii) outline tree protection measures for trees to be preserved. Any alteration or improvement to the lands including grading, tree removal and the application or issuance of any building permits shall be in compliance with the approved plan. Any changes or revisions to the plan require the approval of the City's Director of Planning. b) The owner agrees that in accordance with the recommendations of the Water and Servicing Report prepared by Meritech, dated January 16, 2012, a trench box shall be used for the maintenance or reconstruction of any services benefitting from the servicing easement located along the southern property line. 8. That the owner shall provide a draft reference plan showing the proposed easements to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Planning. 9. That for each easement: a) the owners of the proposed dominant lands and servient lands shall enter into a joint maintenance agreement, to be approved by the City Solicitor, to ensure that the easement is maintained in perpetuity, which agreement shall be registered on title immediately following the Transfer Easement(s); b) a satisfactory Solicitor's Undertaking to register the approved Transfer Easement(s) and immediately thereafter, the approved joint maintenance agreement, be provided to the City Solicitor; c) the owner shall provide the City Solicitor with copies of the registered Transfer Easement(s) and joint maintenance agreement immediately following registration. 10. That the owner shall fulfil all conditions of application B 2012-007. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 74 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 1. Submission Nos.: B 2012-006, B 2012-007, A 2012-013, A 2012-014 & A 2012-015 (Cont'd) Submission No. B 2012-006 (Cont'd) 11. That the owner shall complete a Record of Site Condition for the severed and retained lands in accordance with Ontario Regulation 153/04. In the event the Record of Site Condition is audited, the Regional Municipality of Waterloo must be advised by the Ministry of the Environment that the requirements of an audit, if any, are completed to the satisfaction of the Ministry of the Environment. Two (2) copies of the completed Record of Site Condition and Ministry acknowledgment must be forwarded to the Regional Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services. 12. That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc. for the provision of separate 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: 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 February 21, 2014. Carried Submission No. B 2012-007 Moved by Mr. A. Lise Seconded by Mr. A. Head That the application of the Snider Corporation, requesting permission to sever an `L' shaped parcel of land having a width on Pine Street of 4.5m (14.76'), a depth of 40.243m (132.03') and an area of 500.9 sq. m. (5391.643 sq.ft), on Part Lots 313 & 314, Plan 385, 51-53 Pine Street, Kitchener, Kitchener, Ontario, BE GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: That the owner shall make arrangements satisfactory to 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 arrangements financial or otherwise, to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Engineering Services for: COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 75 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 1. Submission Nos.: B 2012-006, B 2012-007, A 2012-013, A 2012-014 & A 2012-015 (Cont'dl Submission No. B 2012-007 (Cont'd) a) the relocation of any existing City-owned street furniture, transit shelters, signs, hydrants, utility poles, wires or lines, as required, in consultation with the appropriate City department, Regional department or agency. b) the removal of any redundant service connections and the installation of new ones that may be required to service the severed and retained lands. c) the installation, to City standards, of boulevard landscaping including street trees, and a paved driveway ramp, on the severed lands and retained lands. d) the closure of any redundant driveways with new curb and gutter and boulevard landscaping, all to City of Kitchener standards and any new driveways are to be built to City of Kitchener standards at grade with the existing sidewalk. 4. That the owner shall submit to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Engineering Services the following: a) a Servicing Plan showing outlets to the municipal servicing system along with the sanitary and storm sewer design sheets. b) an Erosion and Sedimentation Control plan. c) a Geotechnical Investigation, prepared by a qualified geotechnical engineer, which demonstrates that site soils are conducive to infiltration. If soils are not conducive to infiltration, the owner agrees that existing soils will be removed and replaced with suitable soils. Further, if it is shown on the plans that site servicing works and grading will encroach onto neighbouring lands, the City of Kitchener will require a letter of permission from each property owner affected by the proposed works. The letters of permission must be received by the Engineering Division prior to acceptance of any required grading control plan, erosion and sedimentation control plan, site servicing plan, storm water management plan and the storm water management report. 5. That the owner shall submit and complete a Reconstruction As-Recorded Tracking Form as per the Public Sector Accounting Board (PSAB) S. 3150 a Development along with a digital submission of all Auto Cad drawings required for the site (Grading, Servicing etc.) with the corresponding correct layer names, and numbering system to the satisfaction of City's Engineering Services. 6. That the owner shall confirm that the sanitary flow for the proposed dwelling can be drained by gravity to the municipal sewers. Should the owner not be able to demonstrate that the site can be serviced by gravity, the owner shall be required to provide adequate sanitary disposal to the satisfaction of Engineering Services. 7. That the owner shall confirm to the satisfaction of the City's Fire Chief, that the dwelling is located so that a 60 m preconnect hose may be used to fight fires. 8. That the owner shall confirm to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Engineering Services that all services and utilities can be accommodated within the 4.5 metre driveway width. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 76 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 1. Submission Nos.: B 2012-006, B 2012-007, A 2012-013, A 2012-014 & A 2012-015 (Cont'd) Submission No. B 2012-007 (Cont'd) 9. That the owner shall enter into an agreement with the City of Kitchener to be prepared by the City Solicitor and registered on title of the severed lands which shall include the following: a) That prior to any grading or the application or issuance of a building permit, the owner shall submit a plan, prepared by a qualified consultant, to the satisfaction and approval of the City's Director of Planning showing: (i) the location of all buildings (including accessory buildings and structures), porches, decks and driveways; (ii) the location of any existing buildings or structures to be removed or relocated; (iii) the proposed grades and drainage; (iv) the location of all trees to be preserved, removed or potentially impacted on or adjacent to the subject lands, including notations of their size, species and condition; (v) justification for any trees to be removed; (vi) outline tree protection measures for trees to be preserved; and (vii) additional and enhanced landscaping to replace any trees or vegetation being removed. Such additional landscaping shall be focused along the perimeter of the property and in the rear yard amenity area. Any alteration or improvement to the lands including grading, tree removal and the application or issuance of any building permits shall be in compliance with the approved plan. Any changes or revisions to the plan require the approval of the City's Director of Planning. b) That prior to occupancy, the owner shall submit a location plan and design for an addressing sign and mailbox locations, both of which must be clearly visible from the street, and which meet the criteria of the City's Fire Department and Canada Post. The owner agrees that this plan shall be approved and implemented to the satisfaction of the City's Fire Chief and the Director of Planning in consultation with Canada Post. c) That prior to issuance of a building permit, the owner shall submit Building Elevation drawings (and a 3D Massing Model) to the satisfaction of the City's Manager of Site Development and Customer Service, which demonstrates how the proposed elevations of the duplex will meet the intent the City of Kitchener Official Plan and Urban Design Manual. Further, the owner agrees to implement the approved design. d) The owner agrees that in accordance with the recommendations of the Water and Servicing Report prepared by Meritech, dated January 16, 2012, a trench box shall be used for the maintenance or reconstruction of all services. 10. That the owner shall pay to the City of Kitchener acash-in-lieu contribution for park dedication of $7,400.00. 11. That the owner shall fulfil all conditions of application B 2012-006. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 77 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 1. Submission Nos.: B 2012-006, B 2012-007, A 2012-013, A 2012-014 & A 2012-015 (Cont'd) Submission No. B 2012-007 ICont'd 12. That the owner shall complete a Record of Site Condition for the severed and retained lands in accordance with Ontario Regulation 153/04. In the event the Record of Site Condition is audited, the Regional Municipality of Waterloo must be advised by the Ministry of the Environment that the requirements of an audit, if any, are completed to the satisfaction of the Ministry of the Environment. Two (2) copies of the completed Record of Site Condition and Ministry acknowledgment must be forwarded to the Regional Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services. 13. That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc. for the provision of separate 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: 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 February 21, 2014. Carried Submission No. A 2012-013 Moved by Mr. A. Lise Seconded by Mr. A. Head That the application of the Snider Corporation, requesting permission for a lot having an area of 227 sq.m. (2443.40 sq.ft) rather than the required 235 sq. m. (2529.51 sq. ft.); permission for an easterly side yard setback of 1.38 m rather than the required 3m (9.84'); permission for a rear yard setback of 5.7m (18.7') rather than the required 7.5m (24.6'); and, permission for the driveway to have a width of 2.4m (7.87') rather than the required 2.6m (8.53'), on Part Lots 313 & 314, Plan 385, 51-53 Pine Street, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: That the owner shall submit and implement a parking plan for Lot 1, prior to occupancy. The layout shall be consistent with layout proposed in the revised concept plan, or in an alternative orientation to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Planning. 2. That the owner shall relocate the hydro pole and/or guy wire so that the second parking space may be installed in front of the dwelling, prior to issuance of a building permit to permit the dwelling to be duplexed. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 78 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 1. Submission Nos.: B 2012-006, B 2012-007, A 2012-013, A 2012-014 & A 2012-015 (Cont'd) Submission No. A 2012-013 (Cont'd) It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance requested in this application is minor. 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 2012-014 Moved by Mr. A. Lise Seconded by Mr. A. Head That the application of the Snider Corporation, requesting permission to locate the 2 required off-street parking spaces within 6m (19.68') of the street line, whereas the By- law only permits one space to be located within 6m (19.68') of the street line, on Part Lots 313 & 314, Plan 385, 51-53 Pine Street, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following condition: 1. That the owner shall submit and implement a parking plan for Lot 2, prior to occupancy. The layout shall be consistent with layout proposed in the revised concept plan, or in an alternative orientation to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Planning. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance requested in this application is minor 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 2012-015 Moved by Mr. A. Lise Seconded by Mr. A. Head That the application of the Snider Corporation, requesting permission for a lot having a width of 4.5m (14.76') rather than the required 9m (29.52'); and, permission to provide a rear yard setback of 1.2m (3.93') rather than the required 7.5m (24.6'), on Part Lots 313 & 314, Plan 385, 51-53 Pine Street, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following condition: 1. That the owner shall submit and implement a parking plan for Lot 3, prior to occupancy. The layout shall be consistent with layout proposed in the revised concept plan, or in an alternative orientation to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Planning. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 79 FEBRUARY 21, 2012 1. Submission Nos.: B 2012-006, B 2012-007, A 2012-013, A 2012-014 & A 2012-015 (Cont'd) Submission No. A 2012-0141Cont'd) It is the opinion of this Committee that: The variance requested in this application is minor. 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 ADJOURNMENT On motion, the meeting adjourned at 12:05 p.m. Dated at the City of Kitchener this 21st day of February, 2012. Dianna Saunderson Secretary-Treasurer Committee of Adjustment