Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAdjustment - 2013-04-16 COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FOR THE CITY OF KITCHENER MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING HELD APRIL 16, 2013 MEMBERS PRESENT: Messrs. A. Head and A. Lise and Ms. J. Meader OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ms. J. von Westerholt, Senior Planner, Mr. D. Seller, Traffic & Parking Analyst, Ms. D. Livingstone, Acting Secretary-Treasurer and Ms. H. Dyson, Administrative Clerk. Mr. A. Head, Vice-Chair, called this meeting to order at 10:00 a.m. MINUTES Moved by Mr. A. Lise Seconded by Ms. J. Meader That the minutes of the regular meeting of the Committee of Adjustment held March 19, 2013, as mailed to the members, be accepted. Carried APPOINTMENTS OF ACTING SECRETARY-TREASURERS Moved by Mr. A. Lise Seconded by Ms. J. Meader That Mr. C. Goodeve and Ms. D. Livingstone be appointed as Acting Secretary-Treasurers of the Committee of Adjustment. Carried NEW BUSINESS MINOR VARIANCE Submission No.: 1. A 2013-019 Applicant: Hallman Construction Limited Property Location: 348 Watervale Crescent Legal Description: Part Block 19, Registered Plan 58M-370, designated as Part 39 on Reference Plan 58R-17254 Appearances: In Support: M. Lippert Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to have a driveway access on a corner lot located 7.65m (25.1’) to the intersection of the street lines abutting the lot rather than the required 9m (29.53‘). The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated April 8, 2013, advising that the subject property is municipally addressed 348 Watervale Crescent and is located at the corner of Watervale Crescent and Watervale Drive. The property is zoned Residential Four (R-4) in the City’s Zoning By-law 85-1. Under the City’s Official Plan, the subject lands are designated Low Rise Residential. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 94 -APRIL 16, 2013 Submission No.: 1. A 2013-019 (Cont’d) The applicant is requesting relief from Section 6.1.1.1(b)(iv) of Zoning By-law 85-1 to permit an access driveway on a corner lot located 7.65 m to the intersection of the street lines abutting the lot. The applicant is seeking relief from the By-law in order to address the proposed location and design of the driveway for the subject property. Under Section 6.1.1.1(b)(iv) of Zoning By-law 85- 1, an access driveway on a corner lot shall not to be located closer than 9.0 metres to the intersection of the street lines abutting the lot. The proposed variance would address a 1.35 metre deficiency from the corner lot line to the driveway. Planning staff notes that the subject property is part of a registered plan of subdivision (58M-370) and falls within the Grand River South planning community. The surrounding neighbourhood consists predominantly of low density residential uses. 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 requested variance to permit driveway access 7.65 metres away from the corner lot line, meets the intent of the Official Plan. The intent of the Low Rise Residential land use designation is to allow for a full range of housing types to maintain a low overall intensity. The reduced distance of the access driveway should not impact: the overall intensity, the type of land use, or the adjacent residential areas. The requested variance to permit driveway access 7.65 metres away from the corner lot line, meets the intent of the Zoning Bylaw. The required 9.0 metre separation from the driveway to the intersecting streets is intended to ensure pedestrian and vehicular safety. The reduction of 1.35 metres from the required 9.0 metres is minor and should not: compromise vehicular/pedestrian safety; impact the property; or prevent access to the intersection. The requested variance is considered minor as the proposed 7.65 metres allows for sufficient separation from the driveway to the intersecting street lines abutting the corner lot. This variance should not have any impact regarding vehicular/pedestrian access to the intersection. Furthermore, the reduction of 1.35 metres will still allow for a 7.5 metre corner visibility triangle. The variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land. The requested variance should not impact any of the adjacent lands/uses, the subject property, nor the abutting intersection. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo Transportation Planner, dated March 26, 2013, advising that they have no concerns with this application. Moved by Mr. A. Lise Seconded by Ms. J. Meader That the application of Hallman Construction Limited requesting permission to have a driveway access on a corner lot located 7.65m (25.1’) to the intersection of the street lines abutting the lot rather than the required 9m (29.53‘), on Part Block 19, Registered Plan 58M-370, designated as BE Part 39 on Reference Plan 58R-17254, 348 Watervale Crescent, Kitchener, Ontario, APPROVED , subject to the following condition: 1. That the owner shall obtain a building permit from the City of Kitchener’s Building Division for the proposed residential dwelling. 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 COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 95 -APRIL 16, 2013 Submission No.: 2. A 2013-020 Applicant: Dandan Xu Property Location: 24 Amherst Drive Legal Description: Lot 104, Plan 578 Appearances: In Support: D. Xu J. Cooper Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to have an off-street parking space setback 2.2m (7.22’) from the street line rather than the required 6m (19.69‘); a driveway width that exceeds the width of an attached garage, at 8.3m (27.23‘) wide rather than the permitted maximum of 8m (26.25‘) wide; and a westerly side yard setback of 0m rather than the required 0.6m (1.97‘). The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated April 8, 2013, advising that the subject property is a single detached residential dwelling located at 24 Amherst Drive. It is zoned Residential Four (R4) with special regulation 319U in the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law 85-1 and designated Low Rise Residential according to the City’s Official Plan. The subject property is located on a corner lot as there is a registered road allowance (Drummond Drive), currently unconstructed. The applicant has advised that they propose to convert the garage into habitable space. As a result, the applicant is requesting to relocate the one required parking space for the single detached residential dwelling from the attached garage to the driveway. The applicant is also requesting to legalize an existing driveway that was illegally widened in the past. As such, the applicant is requesting relief from the following: 1. Relief from Subsection 6.1.1.1.b)i) of the Zoning By-Law to permit a required off-street parking space to be set back 2.20 metres away from the street line. Whereas the zoning by-law requires a minimum setback of 6.0 metres. 2. Relief from section 6.1.1.1.b)ii)e of the Zoning By-Law to allow a driveway width of 8.3 meters rather than the required 8.0 meters and a setback to the side lot line of 0 metre rather than the required 0.6 metre. Variance 1 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 followingcomments. The variance meets the intent of the Official Plan. The Low Rise Residential Designation encourages a full range of housing types and forms while achieving an overall low intensity of use. The proposed variance will legalize the required parking space and still be compatible with the Official Plan designation. The variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The intent of the 6.0 metres required setback is to allow for a vehicle to be safely parked on the driveway without encumbrance to City right-of-way and surrounding properties. Transportation Services staff is in support of the variance and further advise that the Driveway Visibility Triangle should be maintained and remain clear of any obstructions. It is Planning staff’s opinion that the 3.8 metres requested variance is minor since the required parking space can still be accommodated on site in a safe manner. The reduced setback from the street line will have minimal impact to adjacent lands and the overall neighbourhood. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 96 -APRIL 16, 2013 Submission No.: 1. A 2013-020 (Cont’d) The variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land as it is compatible with the surrounding low rise residential development. The requested minor variance is necessary as it will legalize the location of the required parking spot and will not impact the subject property, abutting intersection or adjacent lands and properties. Variance 2 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 followingcomments. The variance meets the intent of the Official Plan. The Low Rise Residential Designation encourages a full range of housing types and forms while achieving an overall low intensity of use. The proposed variance will legalize the existing widened driveway and will remain compatible with the Official Plan designation. The intent of the maximum 8 metres driveway width is to have an aesthetically pleasing streetscape by having an appropriate balance of driveway and front yard amenity space. This balance is maintained in the opinion of the Planning staff. The intent of the 0.6 metre setback from the side lot is to allow for better drainage along the side of the property and to provide a setback from the nearby property. Engineering staff has no concerns with the drainage of the property. It is the opinion of the Planning staff that the variance maintains the intent of the Zoning By-law. The 0.3 metre difference in the driveway width and 0.6 metre in the side setback are minor. Transportation Services staff has indicated that they would support this variance, too. The requested variance can be considered minor. The reduced driveway width and side setback are minimal. It is the opinion of the Planning and Transportation staff that there will be no impact to adjacent lands and the overall neighbourhood. The variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land as it is compatible with the surrounding low rise residential development. The requested minor variance is necessary as it will legalize the existing driveway and will not impact the subject property, abutting intersection or adjacent lands and properties. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo Transportation Planner, dated March 26, 2013, advising that they have no concerns with this application. Moved by Mr. A. Lise Seconded by Ms. J. Meader That the application of Dandan Xu requesting permission to have an off-street parking space setback 2.2m (7.22’) from the street line rather than the required 6m (19.69‘); a driveway width that exceeds the width of an attached garage, at 8.3m (27.23‘) wide rather than the permitted maximum of 8m (26.25‘) wide; and a westerly side yard setback of 0m rather than the required BE APPROVED 0.6m (1.97‘), on Lot 104, Plan 578, 24 Amherst Drive, Kitchener, Ontario, , subject to the following condition: 1. That the owner shall obtain a building permit from the City’s Building Division for the conversion of the garage to living space. 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 COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 97 -APRIL 16, 2013 CONSENT Submission No.: 1. B 2013-020 Applicant: Raymond Wrubel and Maciej Milczarczyk Property Location: 104 Scott Street Legal Description: Part Lot 4, Plan 364 and Part Lots 5 and 6, Plan 32 Appearances: In Support: S. Troister Contra: None Other: Written Submissions: J. Shannon The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to create a right-of-way in favour of abutting lands at 25 Irvin Street for driveway access to rear parking, having a width of 2 6.32m (20.76‘), by a depth of 14.93m (49.0‘) and an area of 94.35m (1017 sq. ft.). The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated April 9, 2013, advising that 104 Scott Street is located near the corner of Irvin and Scott Streets just south of Frederick Street and east of Weber Street at the edge of the Downtown in the Central Frederick Neighbourhood. It is designated Office-Residential Conversion in the Central Frederick Secondary Plan and zoned CR-3 with special uses and regulations. The applicant is requesting a consent for a 6.32 metre-wide by 14.93 metre-long right-of-way for driveway access in favour of 25 Irvin Street over 104 Scott Street. Both properties have existing buildings that are used for offices and a mutual driveway from Scott Street is utilized as access to the parking areas for each business as can be seen from Figure 2 below. The driveway is located on 104 Scott Street. This request was previously approved by the Committee through application B 2003-051. Unfortunately, the Certificate of Consent was never issued and the decision lapsed. As such, the applicant has applied to re-instate the approval. With respect to the consent for right-of-way, staff does not have any concerns with legally establishing the right for 25 Irvin Street to access the rear parking spaces via the shared driveway with 104 Scott Street. The two sites have functioned in this manner since approximately 1979/1980 and, as mentioned, the Committee had previously granted approval of this request through B 2003-051. The uses of these properties conform to the Central Frederick Secondary Plan policies contained within the City’s Official Plan and comply with the City’s Zoning By-law. 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, staff is satisfied that the creation of this easement is considered good planning that satisfies the policies of both the City’s Official Plan and the Provincial Policy Statement. The proposed easement is both necessary and appropriate for the continuation of the existing operations of the subject parcels of lands. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo Principal Planner, dated March 27, 2013, advising that they have no objection to this application. Mr. S. Troister addressed the Committee and referred to the conditions contained within the staff recommendation, indicating that a digital reference plan had been submitted during the first submission for consent of the subject property in 2001. Ms. J. von Westerholt confirmed that the Planning Department is in receipt of a digital reference plan for the subject property and suggested striking the condition. Mr. Troister indicated that he has been in conversation with Mr. S. Ross, Assistant City Solicitor, who has advised him that a joint maintenance agreement may not be required. He suggested modifying the condition by deleting ‘to be approved by the City Solicitor’ and adding ‘if required’ and ‘to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor’ immediately following the Transfer Easement. Ms. von Westerholt acknowledged that the City Solicitor may clear the condition for the joint maintenance agreement and indicated to the Committee that the amendments to the standard conditions were satisfactory. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 98 -APRIL 16, 2013 Submission No.: 1. B 2013-020 (Cont’d) Moved by Ms. J. Meader Seconded by Mr. A. Lise That the application of Raymond Wrubel and Maciej Milczarczyk requesting permission to create a right-of-way in favour of abutting lands at 25 Irvin Street for driveway access to rear parking, 2 having a width of 6.32m (20.76‘), by a depth of 14.93m (49.0‘) and an area of 94.35m (1017 sq. ft.), on Part Lot 4, Plan 364 and Part Lots 5 and 6, Plan 32, 104 Scott Street, Kitchener, Ontario, BE GRANTED , subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owners of the proposed dominant lands and servient lands shall enter into a joint maintenance agreement, if required by the City Solicitor, to ensure that the said easements are maintained in perpetuity, which agreement shall be registered on title immediately following the Transfer Easement to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor. 2. That a satisfactory Solicitor’s Undertaking to register the approved Transfer Easement and immediately thereafter, the approved joint maintenance agreement shall be provided to the City Solicitor. 3. That the City Solicitor shall be provided with copies of the registered Transfer Easement and joint maintenance agreement immediately following registration. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. 2. The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. 3. The use of the land in the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfill 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 April 16, 2015. Carried ADJOURNMENT On motion, the meeting adjourned at 10:15 p.m. Dated at the City of Kitchener this 16th day of April, 2013. Daphne Livingstone Acting Secretary-Treasurer Committee of Adjustment