Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAdjustment - 2013-12-10 COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FOR THE CITY OF KITCHENER MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING HELD DECEMBER 10,2013 MEMBERS PRESENT: Messrs. D. Cybalski,A. Head,A. Lise, B. McColl and Ms.J. Meader. OFFICIALS PRESENT: Mr. B. Bateman, Senior Planner, Ms. K. Anderl, Senior Planner, Ms. B. Steiner, Senior Environmental Planner, Mr. D. Pimentel, Traffic Technologist, Mr. G. Stevenson, Planner, Ms. D. Saunderson, Secretary- Treasurer, and Ms. H. Dyson, Administrative Clerk. Mr. D. Cybalski, Chair, called this meeting to order at 9:55 a.m. CHAIR AND VICE-CHAIR Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Ms.J. Meader That Mr. D. Cybalski be appointed Chair of the Committee of Adjustment and Mr.A. Head be appointed Vice-Chair of the Committee of Adjustment for a term to expire November 30,2014. This meeting temporarily recessed at 9:59 a.m. to consider applications under Chapter 630 (Fences) and Chapter 680 (Signs)of the City of Kitchener's Municipal Code and reconvened at 10:07 a.m.with all members present. MINUTES Moved by Mr.A. Lise Seconded by Mr. B. McColl That the minutes of the regular meeting of the Committee of Adjustment held November 19, 2013, as mailed to the members, be accepted. Carried NEW BUSINESS MINOR VARIANCE 1. Submission No.: A 2013-057 Applicants: Red Pony Flats Inc. Property Location: 581 Strasburg Road Legal Description: Block N, Plan 1335 Appearances: In Support: A. Sumner C. Fernandes Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to construct a two-storey addition on an existing two-storey apartment building increasing the number of dwelling units from 21 to 43, having the required off-street parking to be located between the fapade and the front lot line whereas the By-law does not permit parking between the fapade and the front lot line; and, the required off-street parking and required visitor parking to be located within the minimum front yard setback of 7.5m (24.606'), whereas the By-law does not permit any parking within the minimum front yard setback. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -245- DECEMBER 10,2013 1. Submission No.: A 2013-057 (Cont'd) The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated November 29, 2013, advising that the subject property is zoned Residential Eight (R-8) in the Zoning By-law 85-1 and designated Mixed Use Node in the City's Official Plan. The applicant has submitted a site plan application that proposes two additional storeys to the existing two-storey multiple dwelling building resulting in 43 residential units in total. The site plan has been thoroughly reviewed by the Site Plan Review Committee and has been `Approved in Principle' by the Manager of Site Development and Customer Service. Prior to final site plan approval, the applicant is seeking relief from Section 6.1.1.1 d) i) of the Zoning By-law 85-1 to allow required off-street parking to be located between the fapade and the front lot line and to allow required off-street parking to be located within the required 7.5 metres front yard setback; and relief from Section 6.1.1.1 d) ii)to allow visitor parking to be located within the required 7.5 metres minimum front 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 Mixed Use Node designation in the City's Official Plan is intended to serve an inter- neighbourhood function and allow for intensive, transit supportive development in a compact form. The policies noted under this designation support the proposed residential development that will be compatible with the surrounding residential neighbourhoods and of an appropriate height and density in relation to adjacent low rise residential development. The requested minor variances are required to support the proposed residential development. As such, it is staffs opinion that the requested minor variances to address the existing location of the parking spaces meet the intent of the Official Plan policies within the Mixed Use Node designation. The intent of Section 6.1.1.1 of the Zoning By-law is to ensure that parking spaces required for any development are appropriately located on site. Currently there are parking spaces located within the building fapade and front lot that do not encumber the residential development or adjacent properties. Staff has reviewed the proposed site plan and it has been determined that the location of the new parking spaces is the most appropriate for the site layout and will be adequately buffered from the street. As such, it is staffs opinion that the requested minor variances meet the intent of the Zoning By-law. The requested variances can be considered minor as it is staffs opinion that the variances to an extent, address an existing parking situation. It has been determined through the site plan approval process that the location of the new parking spaces is appropriate for the layout of the site. The newly proposed parking layout will accommodate all of the required parking for the proposed development and will provide adequate functionality of the site. The requested variances are appropriate for the development and use of the land. Staff is of the opinion that the site will function appropriately as the newly proposed parking layout will accommodate all of the required parking for the proposed development and the location has been determined to be most appropriate for the site layout through the site plan approval process. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated November 28,2013, advising that they have no concerns with this application. The Committee considered correspondence from Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc., dated November 26, 2013, requesting that approval of this application include conditions that require the applicant to make satisfactory arrangements with Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro for the provision of upgraded electrical servicing, to construct a two-storey addition on top of the existing building; and, driveways to be located so as to clear submersible transformer vaults and to provide minimum clearance of 1.0m to all poles, anchors and street light standards. Moved by Mr.A. Head Seconded by Mr. B. McColl COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -246- DECEMBER 10,2013 1. Submission No.: A 2013-057 (Cont'd) That the application of Red Pony Flats Inc. requesting permission to construct a two-storey addition on an existing two-storey apartment building increasing the number of dwelling units from 21 to 43, having the required off-street parking to be located between the fapade and the front lot line whereas the By-law does not permit parking between the fapade and the front lot line; and, the required off-street parking and required visitor parking to be located within the minimum front yard setback of 7.5m (24.606'), whereas the By-law does not permit any parking within the minimum front yard setback, on Block N, Plan 1335, 581 Strasburg Road, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED,subject to the following conditions. 1. That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc. for the provision of upgraded electrical servicing, to construct a two-storey addition on top of the existing building. 2. That the owner shall ensure that all driveways will be located clear of all Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro's submersible transformer vaults and provide a minimum of a 1 m (3.28') clearance to all hydro poles and street light standards. 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 2. Submission No.: A 2013-058 Applicants: Ron &Anne Mailloux Property Location: 542 Rush Meadow Crescent Legal Description: Part of Block 6, Registered Plan 58M-293, being Part 36 on Reference Plan 58R-14157 Appearances: In Support: R. Mailloux Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicants are requesting permission to construct a shed having a height of the underside of the facia of 3.97m (13.02') rather than the permitted maximum height of the underside of the facia of 3m (9.84'). The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division,dated December 2,2013, advising that the subject property is municipally addressed 542 Rush Meadow Crescent and is located near the intersection of Rush Meadow Street and Rush Meadow Crescent. The property is zoned Residential Three (R-3) in the City's Zoning By-law 85-1. Under the City's Official Plan, the subject lands are designated Low Rise Residential. The applicant is requesting relief from section 5.5.2 of Zoning By-law 85-1 to permit an accessory building with a rear height of 3.97 metres, whereas Zoning By-law 85-1 requires a maximum accessory building height of 3.0 metres. The accessory building height is measured from the grade to the underside of the fascia. 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 subject lands are designed Low Rise Residential in the Official Plan which permits low rise housing such as the single detached dwelling on the lot, in addition to accessory buildings in the COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -247- DECEMBER 10,2013 2. Submission No.: A 2013-058 (Cont'd) rear and side yards. Staff is of the opinion that the variance for the accessory building height meets the intent of the Official Plan. The variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law as the purpose of variances is to permit an accessory building with a rear height of 3.97 metres from the underside of the fascia to grade, rather than the maximum 3 metres. The lot on which the accessory building is proposed has a significant change of grade from the front to the rear of the lot, which impacts the height of the accessory building. Staff is of the opinion that the height of the accessory building will not have an adverse impact on the street view. From the street, the accessory building will have a height of 2.89 metres, which is permitted in the Zoning By-Law. As such, it is staff's opinion that the request for the abovementioned accessory building height is appropriate, and that the proposed building height meets the intent of the Zoning By-Law. The variance request for an increase in the height of an accessory building is considered minor as the development maintains an appropriate height from the view of the street.As a result of the grading on this site,the rear portion of the accessory building is proposed to exceed the allowable maximum height of 3.0 metres from the underside of the fascia to grade. This variance, as a result, is considered minor, as Staff do not believe that this development will negatively impact the neighbourhood. The variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land, as the request for an increased allowable height for an accessory building recognizes that there is a significant grade change on the property, and that it does not negatively impact the subject property, streetscape or surrounding neighbourhood. As a result, Staff believe that the variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land, and that the variance be approved The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated November 28,2013, advising that they have no concerns with this application. Mr. Mailloux questioned whether the shape of the shedwould impact the Committee's approval of the variance. He noted that he was hoping to change the shape of the shed from a 10 foot by 10 foot square shed to a 9 foot by 12 foot rectangle. He advised that the actual height and size of the shed is unchanged from what was initally requested. Mr. Bateman advised that the change would not impact the variance being proposed. Moved by Mr.A. Lise Seconded by Mr. B. McColl That the application of Ron and Anne Mailloux requesting permission to construct a shed having a height of the underside of the facia of 3.97m (13.02') rather than the permitted maximum height of the underside of the facia of 3m (9.84'), on Part of Block 6, Registered Plan 58M-293, being Part 36 on Reference Plan 58R-14157, 542 Rush Meadow Crescent, 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 3. Submission No.: A 2013-059 Applicants: Daniel Pelkman Property Location: 1082 Wilson Avenue Legal Description: Part Lot 10, Plan 1522 COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -248- DECEMBER 10,2013 3. Submission No.: A 2013-059 (Cont'd) Mr. A. Head declared a pecuniary interest with this application, as his firm is representing the applicant on this matter and did not participate in any discussion or voting with respect to this application. Appearances: In Support: D. Pelkman S. Head Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to construct an addition that would increase the footprint of the existing legal non-conforming residence by 25%. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division,dated December 2,2013, advising that the subject property is located near the Grand River adjacent to Homer Watson Park. The property is designated Open Space and zoned Open Space Zone (P-2) and is located in an Environmentally Sensitive Policy Area (ESPA). The current residential building is considered legal non-conforming and was originally constructed approximately 150 years ago. Section 45(2) of the Planning Act allows the Committee to permit an enlargement or extension to legal non- conforming building. Applications for permission do not require that the four tests for a minor variance be met. Consideration of such applications is based upon the desirability for the development of the property in question and impact on the surrounding area. In this regard, the proposed expansion needs to be evaluated in the context of the ESPA, the Grand River Conservation Area's regulated area (due to proximity to the Grand River and steep slopes), heritage interest in the existing structure, and any land use implications the dwelling may have on the surrounding land uses. The lands are designated Open Space because they are located in an ESPA. The City of Kitchener's Official Plan refers to policies of the Regional Official Policies Plan (ROPP) with respect to development in ESPA's. In the ROPP the lands are within a designated ESPA, and in the new Regional Official Plan (ROP) (currently under appeal), the lands are designated Core Environmental Feature. ROPP and ROP policies permit minor alterations to Legal Non- Conforming Structures subject to the completion of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to identify appropriate buffers and enhancements to ecological functions. Planning staff have spoken to Regional Planning staff. Regional staff have verbally indicated that due to the ESPA they will require the completion of a Scoped Environmental Impact Study. Formal Regional comments will be provided directly to the Committee. The City's new Official Plan (2nd draft) designates these lands Natural Heritage Conservation. Policy 15.D.9.8 contemplates permitting the expansion of a legally existing building within lands designated as Natural Heritage Conservation provided that it can be demonstrated through an EIS that the objectives of the designation can be met, and that the proposed expansion will not have a negative impact on the natural heritage feature. As per the policies, staff recommend that a condition be added requiring the completion of a Scoped Environmental Impact Statement to the satisfaction of the Region of Waterloo and the Grand River Conservation Authority, in consultation with the City of Kitchener, to demonstrate that the proposed addition to the legal non-conforming house will not have a negative impact on the natural heritage features and that appropriate buffers are applied. If an EIS is not accepted, the condition should specify that a building permit for expansion should not be granted. This would not preclude renovations to the existing dwelling—without expansion. In advance of submission of this application, the owner consulted with Heritage Planning Staff, who completed a cultural heritage resource evaluation form for the property municipally addressed as 1082 Wilson Avenue. The evaluation found that the original building was of log construction, which represents a rare and early material and method of construction. Unfortunately, the integrity has been compromised by previous alterations. The evaluation concluded that steps would not be taken to list the property on the Municipal Heritage Register or designate the property under the Ontario Heritage Act.As a result, Heritage Planning staff has no concerns with the proposed extension of legal non-conforming use. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -249- DECEMBER 10,2013 3. Submission No.: A 2013-059 (Cont'd) The dwelling is currently serviced by a septic system. Official Plan policy (Current OP Part 2 — 4.1.6, New OP 14.C.1.1) permits existing lots in unserviced developed areas to be on individual septic systems where they will not result in an unacceptable level of environmental impact. Should the owner be required to expand or replace the existing septic system as a result of the proposed expansion, the owner will be required to obtain a Septic Permit, which may require further investigations and approvals. Subject to the discussion from commenting departments and agencies, and the satisfactory provision of the technical documentation, planning staff are of the opinion that it would be appropriate to grant permission for an expansion of the existing legal non-conforming dwelling. As per the applicant's request, the expansion should be limited to no more than 25% of the existing building footprint. The owner has indicated that the ground floor of the existing building is approximately 82m2 and a 25% addition represents 20.5m2 expansion to the building's footprint. Based on the application,the owner is also contemplating that renovations may expand the upper level to a full second storey, so that the gross floor area of the dwelling is expanded from 123.1m2 to 200m2. Given that the impact to the ESPA is generally related to the building's footprint, staff are of the opinion that it would also be appropriate to permit a full build-out of the second floor. Therefore,staff recommend that a condition of approval be added requiring that the owner demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Planning that the expansion to the building footprint not exceed 20.5m2 and that the total GFA of the building not exceed 200m2, prior to the issuance of a building permit. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated November 28,2013, advising that they have no concerns with this application. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Principal Planner, dated November 29, 2013, advising that the subject lands are within a Core Environmental Feature as designated by the Regional Official Plan (ROP). Regional staff have no objection to this application,subject to the following Conditions: 1. That prior to final approval, the owner/developer submit a scoped Environmental Impact Study(EIS)or similar study such as a letter report from a qualified ecological consultant to the satisfaction of the Region or enter into a registered development agreement with the City of Kitchener to ensure that prior to issuance of building permit, a scoped EIS or similar study such as a letter report from a qualified ecological consultant is submitted and the recommendations are implemented to the Region's satisfaction; and, 2. That prior to final approval, the owner/developer enters into a registered development agreement with the City of Kitchener to agree that the following noise warning clause be included in all offers of purchase and sale, and/or rental agreements for all residential units: "Due to the proximity to the adjacent industrial use, sound levels at times may be audible and may cause concern to some individuals". The Committee considered the report of the Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA), dated November 27, 2013, advising that although they have no concerns with this application, they noted that a GRCA permit will be required for this development, as the subject property contains steep slopes and erosion hazard, as well as the allowances adjacent to these features. Consequently, the subject property is regulated by the GRCA under Ontario Regulation 150/06. Any future development within the regulated area on the subject lands will require the prior issuance of a permit pursuant to Ontario Regulation 150/06. Mr. S. Head circulated correspondence to the Committee from the GRCA dated November 27, 2013, advising that they have no objection to the proposed application. In addition, he circulated photos of the subject property identifying the area in which the applicant is proposing to construct the addition. He advised that that applicant's initial application was to request the demolition and reconstruction of the existing dwelling, which staff indicated they would be unable to support due to the legal non-conforming status of the property. He indicated that the applicant has taken into consideration staff's position and has put forward the proposed application being considered this date for an addition on the property that is 11 feet by 25 feet in size. He highlighted the photos circulated to the Committee, advising that the applicant intends to construct the addition on the side of the home where there is a significant distance from the structure and the wooded area. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -250- DECEMBER 10,2013 3. Submission No.: A 2013-059 (Cont'd) Mr. Head expressed further concerns with the proposed conditions from the City and the Region requesting the applicant to complete an EIS, indicating that, in his opinion, the work required to complete the study is costly and unwarranted due to the location of the proposed addition. He noted that the GRCA has advised that they have no objection to the subject application pending the applicant obtain a GRCA permit for the proposed works. In response to questions, Mr. Head advised that the applicant is requesting that the Committee approve the application without Clauses A and D in Condition 1 of the staff recommendation, or Condition 1 being requested by the Region. Ms. K. Anderl advised that the subject property is located in an Environmentally Sensitive Policy Area (ESPA), and within the City's Official Plan and the New Regional Official Plan, any minor alterations to Legal Non-Conforming Structures are subject to the completion of an EIS. She noted the Region's comments, advising that Regional staff indicated that they have discussed the situation with the Developer's agent and have clarified that a scoped EIS is not specifically required, but rather a similar study, such as a letter report from a qualified ecological consultant, would be sufficient. She further advised that the request for a scoped EIS is to ensure that the addition will not adversely impact the existing woodlot. In response to questions, Ms. B. Steiner advised that a scoped EIS would require the applicant to obtain a letter report from a qualified ecological consultant, addressing the four areas identified by the Region in their circulated comments. She further advised that the applicant is being requested to enter into a development agreement to ensure that the Committee's approval and the Building Permit process are interrelated, pending the property is sold and the new owner would like to proceed with a similar addition. Mr. Head advised that the applicant has not yet applied for a Building permit because the permit would be subject to the Committee's approval. He expressed further concerns that the requirement for the scoped EIS is onerous and costly for the applicant. He stated that if the Committee was willing to approve the application, he suggested that they could approve the application with a condition that the approval is as per the plan submitted with the application. Ms. Anderl advised that staff is not willing to amend their recommendation to remove the condition requiring the applicant to complete an EIS. The dwelling is within an ESPA and the City's Official Plan and the new Regional Official Plan have policies in place with regards to development within ESPA's and have requested conditions that would support those policies. Mr. McColl advised that he is supportive of environmental issues; however, the GRCA has indicated that they have no objections to the proposed application pending the applicant apply for GRCA development permit. He further advised that the photos provided by the applicant demonstrate that there is significant space between the existing dwelling and the forested area. He stated that he would be willing to support the proposed addition to the existing Legal Non- conforming structure as per the plan submitted with the application. He further advised that he supports the Region's request for a Noise Warning Clause, but could not support approval of Clauses A and D in Condition 1 of Staff's recommendation requiring the applicant to complete a scoped EIS. Mr. McColl brought forward a motion to approve Application A 2013-059 with Condition 1 from the staff report including Clauses C and B, including Condition 2 from the Region requiring the applicant to agree to a Noise Warning clause; and, an additional condition that the Committee's approval is as per the plan submitted with the application. The motion was then voted on and Carried. Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Mr.A. Lise That the application of Daniel Pelkman requesting permission to construct an addition that would increase the footprint of the existing legal non-conforming residence by 25%,on Part Lot 10, Plan 1522, 1082 Wilson Avenue, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That Application A 2013-059 be approved, as per the plan submitted with the application. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -251 - DECEMBER 10,2013 3. Submission No.: A 2013-059 (Cont'd) 2. That the owner agrees, by February 1, 2014, and prior to the issuance of any building permits for the expansion of the subject dwelling,to enter into an agreement satisfactory to the City Solicitor,which shall contain the following clauses: a. That prior to the issuance of a building permit for the expansion of the dwelling, the owner shall obtain any required permits from the Grand River Conservation Authority. b. That prior to the issuance of a building permit, the owner demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Planning that the expansion to the building footprint not exceed 20.5 sq.m and that the total GFA of the building not exceed 200 sq.m. 3. That the owner shall enter into a registered development agreement with the City of Kitchener to agree that the following noise warning clause be included in all offers of purchase and sale,and/or rental agreements for all residential units: "Due to the proximity to the adjacent industrial use, sound levels at times may be audible and may cause concern to some individuals". It is the opinion of this Committee that the expansion of the legal non-conforming use by adding an addition that would increase the footprint of the existing legal non-conforming residence by 25% is in keeping with the use of the property on the day the by-law prohibiting this use was passed and is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. Carried CONSENT 1. Submission No.: B 2013-056 Applicant: Dorothy Bell Property Location: 73 Bridge Street Legal Description: Part of Peter Hornings Tract The Committee was in receipt of e-mail correspondence from the applicants advising that they do not wish of proceed with this application; consequently, this application was considered to be withdrawn. COMBINED APPLICATIONS 1. Submission Nos.: B 2013-055&A 2013-056 Applicants: David& Mary Jane Lehman Property Location: 87 Ellis Avenue Legal Description: Part Lot 24, Plan of Subdivision of Lot 4, German Company Tract Appearances: In Support: D. Lehmann 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 Raitar Avenue of 21.2m (69.553'), a depth of 14.6m (47.9') and an area of 334.3 sq.m. (3598.375 sq.ft.). Permission is also being requested to construct a semi-detached dwelling on the severed lot having a front yard setback for a porch that is less than 0.6m (1.968') in height of 2.Om(6.56')rather than the required 3.Om (9.84'); a rear yard setback of 1.8m (5.905') rather than the required 7.5m (24.606'); a front yard setback of 3.1m (10.170') rather than the required 4.5m (14.763'); and, off-street parking to be located Om from the street line where as the By-law requires a minimum of 6m (19.685'). The retained land will have a width on Ellis Avenue of 14.992m(49.186')a depth of 24.5 (80.38'); and an area of 360 sq.m. (3875.008 sq.ft.). COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -252- DECEMBER 10,2013 1. Submission Nos.: B 2013-055&A 2013-056 (Cont'd) Permission is also being requested for the retained land to have a lot width of 14.8m (48.556') measured at the 6m setback line rather than the required 15m (49.212'); a side yard setback abutting a street of 2.033m (6.67') rather than the required 4.5m (14.763'); a rear yard setback of 3.5m (11.482') rather than the required 7.5m (24.606); a setback for a garage of 3.2m (10.498') rather than the required 6.Om (19.685); off-street parking being located Om from the street line rather than the required 6.Om (19.685'); and, relief is being sought for the existing driveway located on the west side of the property to have a reduced driveway visibility triangle as a portion of the required 4.5m (14.763') driveway visibility triangle would be located on the severed land. The retained land will continue to be used as a duplex. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated November 29, 2013, advising that the subject property is located on Ellis Avenue. The property is a rectangular shaped corner lot. The property contains a two-storey duplex dwelling. The subject lands are designated Low Rise Residential in the City's Official Plan and zoned Residential Six (R-6)with Special Regulation Provision 422R in the City's Zoning By-law. Consent Application B 2013-055: Through consent application B2013-055, the owner is proposing to sever a portion of the rear yard of 87 Ellis Avenue (an area measuring 21.2 metres by 14.6 metres, totalling 334.3 square metres) to create a new residential lot for a proposed semi-detached dwelling. The retained lot would continue to contain an existing duplex dwelling, and have 14.992 metres of frontage on Ellis Avenue, a new lot depth of 24.5 metres and a new lot area of 360 square metres. With respect to the criteria for the subdivision of land listed in Section 51 (24)of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13, the uses of the severed and retained parcels are in conformity with the City's Official Plan, the dimensions and shapes of the proposed lot is appropriate and suitable for the existing and proposed use, the lands front on an established public street, and adequate utilities and municipal services are available. Minor variance application A 2013-056: Minor variance application A 2013-056 is requested to facilitate the proposed consent application. Severed Lot: The severed lands are proposed to contain a semi-detached dwelling. The applicant will require the following variances in order to facilitate their proposed development: • A minimum front yard setback from a porch (that is less than 0.6 metres in height) of 2 metres,whereas Section 5.6.a.4 of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law requires a setback of 3 metres; • A minimum rear yard setback for a semi-detached dwelling of 1.8 metres,whereas Section 40.3 of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law requires 7.5 metres; • An minimum off-street parking space setback from a street line of 0 metres, whereas Section 6.1.b.i of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law requires 6 metres; • A minimum front yard setback for a semi-detached building of 3.1 metres, whereas Section 40.3 of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law requires 4.5 metres. Retained Lot: The existing duplex dwelling has several legal non-complying zoning regulations. Should application B2013-055 be approved, additional variances will also be required including: • A minimum lot width for a duplex dwelling of 14.8 metres,whereas Section 40.2 of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law requires 15 metres; • A minimum side yard abutting a street setback for a duplex dwelling of 2.03 metres, whereas Section 40.2 of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law requires 4.5 metres; COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -253- DECEMBER 10,2013 1. Submission Nos.: B 2013-055&A 2013-056 (Cont'd) • A minimum rear yard setback for a duplex dwelling of 3.5 metres,whereas Section 40.2 of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law requires 7.5 metres; • A minimum parking space setback within a garage for a duplex dwelling of 3.2 metres, whereas Section 40.2 of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law requires 6.0 metres; • A minimum parking space setback of 0 metres, whereas Section 6.1.b.i of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law requires 6.0 metres; • Relief from Section 5.3 of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law to allow an obstruction greater than 0.9 metres within the existing Driveway Visibility Triangle for the duplex dwelling. Planning Analysis: In 2005, the landowner applied for a zone change (By-law 2005-32, S.3) and was approved to create a five (5) unit street fronting townhouse units (SP05/60/E/CB). Both the By-law and site plan are attached at the end of this report. In 2008, the landowner decided to phase development and proceeded with the construction of a duplex dwelling first with the intent of adding the remaining units over time. He has since changed his mind and has now decided to apply for a severance application wanting to construct a semi-detached dwelling. The subject severance application (82013-055) and subsequent minor variance application (A2013-056) are required to proceed with the development of the rear portion of the lands into a semi-detached dwelling. As the landowner is proposing to develop the property as something different than was originally approved for in 2005 and for which 422R would apply, there are a number of resulting minor variances required to permit the proposed semi-detached dwelling development. It should be noted through this analysis that the proposed development would result in a residential unit density that is less than what was approved in 2005. The requested minor variances for a reduced minimum front yard, rear yard and location of an off-street parking space of the severed lands and the requested minor variances for the reduced minimum lot width, side yard abutting a street, rear yard, location of an off-street parking space, and allowance for an obstruction within a Driveway Visibility Triangle for the retained lands 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 are in keeping with the intent of the approved zoning by-law amendment By-law 2005-32, S.3. and maintain the low density character of the property and surrounding neighbourhood. The requested minor variances for a reduced minimum front yard, rear yard and location of an off-street parking space of the severed lands and the requested minor variances for the reduced minimum lot width, side yard abutting a street, rear yard, location of an off-street parking space, and allowance for an obstruction within a Driveway Visibility Triangle for the retained lands meet the intent of the Zoning By-law. Special provision 422R permits a range of reduced setback and parking space location requirements for a multiple dwelling. It is staffs opinion that the proposed variances are in keeping with the planned function and scale of the approved zoning for this property. The requested minor variances for a reduced minimum front yard, rear yard and location of an off-street parking space for the severed lands and the requested minor variances for the reduced minimum lot width, side yard abutting a street, rear yard, location of an off-street parking space, and allowance for an obstruction within a Driveway Visibility Triangle for the retained lands both are considered minor. Special Regulation Provision 422R for a multiple dwelling proposal would have allowed similar reduced building setbacks and parking regulations. Consequently, the minimum front yard, rear yard and location of off-street parking variances will have no additional impact on the adjacent lands and overall neighbourhood than what has been already approved. Likewise, the proposed setbacks are similar to neighbouring buildings, and help to create a stronger relationship between the proposed buildings and street. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -254- DECEMBER 10,2013 1. Submission Nos.: B 2013-055&A 2013-056 (Cont'd) The requested minor variances for a reduced minimum front yard, rear yard and location of an off-street parking space for the severed lands and the requested minor variances for the reduced minimum lot width, side yard abutting a street, rear yard, location of an off-street parking space, and allowance for an obstruction within a Driveway Visibility Triangle for the retained lands are appropriate and will provide a similar lot size and lot width compared to what currently exists within the community. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed variances are consistent with the low density development of the neighbourhood and will add to the flow of the building massing along Raitar Avenue. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Principal Planner, dated November 29, 2013, advising that they have no objection to Submission B 2013-055 subject to the following condition: 1. That prior to final approval, the owner/developer enters into a registered development with the Region of Waterloo to agree that the following noise warning clause be included in all offers of purchase and sale, and/or rental agreements for all residential units on both the severed and retained lands: "Due to the proximity to Weber Street West (Regional Road No. 8), projected noise levels on this property may exceed the Noise Level Objectives approved by the Regional Municipality of Waterloo and may cause concern to some individuals." The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo Transportation Planner, dated November 28,2013,advising that they have no concerns with Submission No.A 2013-055. The Committee considered the report of Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro, dated November 26, 2013, advising that they request that approval of these applications be subject to the following conditions: 1. That the applicant shall make satisfactory arrangements with Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc. for the provision of electrical servicing to the lands to be severed before the severances are granted. 2. That the applicant shall make satisfactory arrangements with Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc. for the granting of any easements required by Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc. before the severances are granted. 3. Driveways will be located so as to clear Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc. submersible transformer vaults and provide a minimum of 1.0m clearance to all poles and street light standards. Mr. A. Lise advised that at the November 19, 2013 meeting, the Committee considered applications similar in nature to what the applicant is proposing through these applications, and he was opposed to the approval. He stated that he is of the opinion, that these applications do not meet the intentions of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) for intensification, and the variances being requested are not minor in nature. Mr. B. Bateman advised that the property is designated Low Rise Residential in the City's Official Plan and zoned Residential Six R-6 with Special Regulation Provision 422R. He stated that the applicant had previously received Site Plan approval for a 5-unit townhome development that has a greater density that what has been applied for this date. He noted that the applicant would be permitted to obtain a building permit for that approved site plan development, but has chosen to propose a semi-detached dwelling rather than proceeding with the previously approved development. He stated that, in his opinion, the currently proposed development would have a lesser impact on the surrounding neighbourhood than the previously approved townhome development. Mr. Lise stated that any information pertaining to approved Site Plans or Special Regulations should be noted in the staff report to assist the Committee in making an informed decision. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -255- DECEMBER 10,2013 1. Submission Nos.: B 2013-055&A 2013-056 (Cont'd) In response to questions, Mr. Bateman advised that the requirement for the Tree Management/ Enhancement Plan is a requirement under the City's Official Plan for this type of development, and thus staff have included the requirement in Condition 9 requiring the applicant to undertake is as part of their development agreement. In response to questions, Mr. D. Pimentel advised that Transportation Planning staff are of the opinion that the reduction for a parking setback is more favourable than a variance for the length of the driveway because it would keep the driveway visibility triangle free of encumbrance. Mr. A. Head put forward a motion to approved applications B 2013-055 and A 2013-056, as outlined in the staff report with an amendment to remove Clauses `iv' and `v' referring to the Tree Enhancement Plan from Condition 9, and to include the Conditions outlined by the Region of Waterloo and Kitchener Wilmot Hydro. Ms. J. Meader put forward a suggestion that Conditions 1 and 5 in the staff report could be combined as they are similar in nature and would likely be cleared as one instance. Mr. Head accepted Ms. Meader's suggestion and amended his initial motion to combine Conditions 1 and 5. The motion was then voted on and Carried,with Mr. Lise voting in opposition. Submission No. B 2013-055 Moved by Mr.A. Head Seconded by Ms.J. Meader That the application of David and Mary Jane Lehmann requesting permission to sever a parcel of land having a width on Raitar Avenue of 21.2m (69.553'), a depth of 14.6m (47.9') and an area of 334.3 sq.m. (3598.375 sq.ft.), on Part Lot 24, Plan of Subdivision Lot 4, German Company Tract, 87 Ellis Avenue, Kitchener, Ontario, BE GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner make financial arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering Services, for the removal of any redundant service connections and installation of all new service connections that may be required to service this property to the severed lands and retained lands. 2. That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements be made with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and/or local improvement charges. 3. That the owner shall pay to the City of Kitchener a cash-in-lieu contribution for park dedication equal to 5%of the value of the lands to be severed. 4. That the owner shall provide a digital file of the deposited reference plan(s) prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor in .dwg (AutoCad) or Agn (Microstation) format, as well as one full size paper copy of the plan(s). The digital file needs to be submitted according to the City of Kitchener's Digital Submission Standards to the satisfaction of the City's Mapping Technologist. 5. That the owner shall provide a servicing plan showing outlets to the municipal servicing system along with the sanitary and storm sewer design sheets will be required as well as to the satisfaction of the Engineering Division. 6. That the owner shall submit a complete Development and Reconstruction As-Recorded Tracking Form (as per the Public Sector Accounting Board (PSAB) S. 3150) together 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 Director of Engineering Services. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -256- DECEMBER 10,2013 1. Submission Nos.: B 2013-055&A 2013-056 (Cont'd) 7. That the owner shall demonstrate that adequate and appropriate sump pump outlet can be provided to the site to the satisfaction of City's Engineering Services, and a. That, in the event that the municipal storm sewer must be extended to service the subject development, a certificate of approval for sewage works will be required by the Ministry of Environment in accordance with Section 53 of the Ontario Water Resources Act, to the satisfaction of Engineering Services. 8. 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 lot which shall include the following: "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 proposed location of all buildings (including accessory buildings and structures), decks and driveways. (ii) the location of any existing buildings or structures to be removed or relocated. (iii) the proposed grades and drainage. 9. That the owner shall enter into a registered development agreement with the Region of Waterloo to agree that the following noise warning clause be included in all offers of purchase and sale, and / or rental agreements for all residential units on both the severed and retained lands: "Due to the proximity to Weber Street West (Regional Road No. 8), projected noise levels on this property may exceed the Noise Level Objectives approved by the Regional Municipality of Waterloo and may cause concern to some individuals". 10. That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc. for the provision of electrical servicing to the lands to be severed before the severances are granted. 11. That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc. for the granting of any easements required by Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc. before the severances are granted. 12. That the owner shall ensure that all driveways will be located clear of any Kitchener- Wilmot Hydro Inc. submersible transformer vaults and provide a minimum of 1.0m clearance to all poles and street light standards. 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 December 10,2015. Carried COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -257- DECEMBER 10,2013 1. Submission Nos.: B 2013-055&A 2013-056 (Cont'd) Submission No.A 2013-056 Moved by Mr.A. Head Seconded by Ms.J. Meader That the application of David and Mary Jane Lehmann requesting permission to sever a parcel of land to construct a semi-detached dwelling on the severed parcel having a front yard setback for a porch that is less than 0.6m (1.968') in height of 2.Om (6.56') rather than the required 3.Om (9.84'); a rear yard setback of 1.8m (5.905') rather than the required 7.5m (24.606'); a front yard setback of 3.1m (10.170') rather than the required 4.5m (14.763'); and, off-street parking to be located Om from the street line where as the By-law requires a minimum of 6m (19.685'). Permission is also being requested for the retained land to have a lot width of 14.8m (48.556') measured at the 6m setback line rather than the required 15m (49.212'); a side yard setback abutting a street of 2.033m (6.67') rather than the required 4.5m (14.763'); a rear yard setback of 3.5m (11.482') rather than the required 7.5m (24.606'); a setback for a garage of 3.2m (10.498') rather than the required 6.Om (19.685'); off-street parking being located Om from the street line rather than the required 6.Om (19.685); and, relief is being sought for the existing driveway on the duplex to have an obstruction greater than 0.9m (2.952')within the driveway visibility triangle, on Part Lot 24, Plan of Subdivision of Lot 4, German Company Tract, 87 Ellis Avenue, 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 2. Submission Nos.: B 2013-057,A 2013-060&A 2013-061 Applicants: Lucas Rowe Property Location: 449 Stirling Avenue South Legal Description: Part Lot 18, Plan 25 Appearances: In Support: L. Rowe Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to sever a parcel of land for the construction of a semi-detached residential development so each half of can be dealt with separately.The severed land will have a width on Stirling Avenue South of 6.695m (21.965'), by a depth of 35.576m (116.719') and an area of 244.5sq.m. (2631.776 sq.ft.). Permission is also being requested to grant a maintenance and encroachment easement, on the severed land in favour of the retained land, having a width of 1.2m (3.937'), a depth of 5m (16.404') and an area of 0.558 sq.m. (6 sq.ft). The retained lot will have a width on Stirling Avenue South of 7.021 m (23.034'), by a depth of 35.576m (116.719`) and an area of 257.10 sq.m. (2767.401 sq.ft.). The severed land will require a minor variance to permit a lot width of 6.695m (21.965')rather than the required 7.5m (24.606'); and, a side yard setback of 1.04m (3.412') rather than the required 1.2m (3.93'). The retained land will required a variance to permit a lot width of 7.02m (23.03') rather than the required 7.5m (24.606'); and off-street parking being located 4.85m (15.912') from the street line rather than the required 6.Om (19.685'). The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division,dated December 3,2013, advising that the subject property is municipally addressed as 449 Stirling Avenue South and is developed COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -258- DECEMBER 10,2013 2. Submission Nos.: B 2013-057,A 2013-060&A 2013-061 (Cont'd) with an existing residential dwelling unit. An attached addition is currently under construction and will contain a second dwelling unit. As a result, the building is now a semi-detached dwelling. The existing property is 501.6 square metres in area with 13.716 metres of frontage on Stirling Avenue South and a lot depth of 36.576 metres. The applicant is requesting consent to sever the lot essentially in half (along the common wall of the semi-detached dwelling) in order to allow separate ownership of each semi-detached dwelling unit. Minor variances for the retained and severed lands, as well as a maintenance and encroachment easement, are also requested. The property is designated as Low Rise Residential in the City's Official Plan and zoned Residential Six (R-6) in the City's Zoning By-law. Application A2013-042 was approved which legalized the existing deficient side yard on the retained lands. Requested Consent(Application B 2013-057): The application proposes to sever a 244.5 square metre lot with a 6.695 metre lot width and a lot depth of 36.576 metres. The proposed retained lot is 257.1 square metres in area with a 7.021 metre lot width and a lot depth of 36.576 metres. The proposed severance would have the effect of allowing individual ownership of each semi-detached house. 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 is of the opinion that the proposed severance conforms to the City's Official Plan and that the configuration of the proposed lots can be considered appropriate for the use of the lands. 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. Minor variances are required to bring the proposed lots into conformity with the Zoning By-law prior to the consent application being approved. Requested Maintenance and Encroachment Easement(Application B 2013-057): As shown on the proposed severance sketch a 1.2 metre wide maintenance and encroachment easement is requested for the exterior portion of the common wall which is located on the proposed property line. Planning Staff are supportive of the easement as proposed. As portions of the common wall are located on the property line and are exterior, access for maintenance and encroachment for eaves is required. Requested Minor Variance (Application A 2013-060—Severed Lands): Relief is being sought from Section 40.2.3 to permit a semi-detached dwelling unit on the severed lands with a lot frontage of 6.695 whereas 7.5 metres is required, and a side yard setback of 1.04 metres whereas 1.2 metres is required. The side yard setback is requested to accommodate an error made during the pouring of the foundation. 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 for the retained lands: The requested variances meet the intent of the Official Plan. The Low Rise Residential designation recognizes the existing scale of residential development. The intent is to accommodate a full range of housing types to achieve an overall low density and the proposed development will not affect such density.The proposed variances to reduce the lot width and side yard are appropriate. The requested lot width variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The intent of the minimum lot width is to ensure that a semi-detached dwelling unit in a Residential Six (R-6)zone can be adequately provided on a lot, including all related uses such as landscape areas and parking. The minimum lot width ensures that in addition to parking areas, landscape areas can also be provided in the front yard. As the addition (severed portion of the semi-detached dwelling) is set back 13.3 metres form the street line, two parking spaces can be legally provided and arranged in tandem. This will ensure that no parking is provided within the proposed easement area and that a landscape area can be provided in the front yard. Staff are supportive the proposed lot width subject to a condition regulating a maximum driveway width of 3.3 metres (50%of the proposed lot width). COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -259- DECEMBER 10,2013 2. Submission Nos.: B 2013-057,A 2013-060&A 2013-061 (Cont'd) The requested side yard setback variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The intent of the side yard setback is to ensure adequate separation from adjacent properties. The proposed side yard variance legalizes an existing condition and still provides sufficient separation from the adjacent property. The requested variances are minor. By regulating the maximum driveway width to 3.3 metres, an adequate landscape area can be provided in the front yard. The requested side yard setback is minor and legalizes an existing condition. The variances are appropriate for the development and use of the land. The variances will allow for the legal consent of the property to create individual ownership of each semi-detached dwelling unit. Requested Minor Variance (Application A 2013-061 —Retained Lands): Relief is being sought from Section 40.2.3 to permit a semi-detached dwelling unit on the retained lands with a lot frontage of 7.021 whereas 7.5 metres is required. Secondary, relief is being sought from Section 6.1.1.1.b.i. to permit a parking setback of 4.85 metres whereas 6.0 metres is required. 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 for the retained lands: The requested variances meet the intent of the Official Plan. The Low Rise Residential designation recognizes the existing scale of residential development. The intent is to accommodate a full range of housing types to achieve an overall low density and the proposed development will not affect such density. The proposed variances to reduce the lot width and parking setback are appropriate. The requested variances meet the intent of the Zoning By-law. The intent of the minimum lot width is to ensure that a semi-detached dwelling unit in a Residential Six (R-6) zone can be adequately provided on a lot, including all related uses such as landscape areas and parking. The minimum lot width ensures that in addition to parking areas, landscape areas can also be provided in the front yard. As the existing dwelling (retained portion of the semi-detached dwelling) is set back 10.35 metres form the street line, two parking spaces cannot be legally provided and arranged in tandem. As such, a second parking space (visitor) must be provided beside the required parking space. Staff are supportive of the proposed lot width as the Zoning By-law requires for a lot less than 10.4 metres, that a driveway cannot have a width greater than 5.2 metres and must be setback from each side lot line a minimum of 0.6 metres. This will ensure that a landscape buffer strip will be provided on each side of the driveway. The requested parking setback is required as the driveway and parking area for the retained lands must be provided in front of the existing building. Transportation Services staff have reviewed the proposed plan and support a further setback reduction to 3.65 metres to accommodate a sidewalk at the front of the dwelling leading to the principle entrance from the parking area. A condition is proposed to ensure that the sidewalk be provided. An amendment to the application is also outlined to facilitate the suggested setback of 3.65 metres. The requested variances are minor. The parking setback will accommodate a required off-street parking space and one visitor parking space and will allow for sufficient room for a pedestrian connection at the entrance of the building. Landscape buffer strips and parking areas can still be provided in the front yard with the proposed reduced lot width. The variances are appropriate for the development and use of the land. The variances will allow for the legal consent of the property to create individual ownership of each semi-detached dwelling unit. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Principal Planner, dated November 29, 2013, advising that they have no objection to Submission B 2013-057 subject to the following condition: COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -260- DECEMBER 10,2013 2. Submission Nos.: B 2013-057,A 2013-060&A 2013-061 (Cont'd) 1. That prior to final approval, the owner/developer enters into a registered development with the City of Kitchener to agree that the following noise warning clause be included in all offers of purchase and sale, and/or rental agreements for all residential units on both the severed and retained lands: "Due to the proximity to Stirling Avenue South and Highland Road East, projected noise levels on this property may exceed the Noise Level Objectives approved by the Regional Municipality of Waterloo and may cause concern to some individuals". The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo Transportation Planner, dated November 28, 2013, advising that they have no concerns with Submission Nos.A 2013-060 and A 2013-061. Mr. G. Stevenson requested an amendment to staffs recommendation, noting that the parkland dedication was incorrectly reflected as $9,752.00; whereas, the actual amount of parkland dedication is $3,079.70. He further advised that the recommendation should also include a condition for a noise warning clause as requested by the Region of Waterloo. Mr. L. Rowe advised that he was in support of staffs recommended approval. He requested clarification on whether the staff would consider amending their recommendation to permit the two proposed parking spaces side by side on the severed lot. He noted that there would be sufficient space for side-by-side parking on the severed lot if parking was permitted to encroach onto the maintenance easement. He stated that, in his opinion, side-by-side parking on the severed lot would not hinder the maintenance requirement of the proposed easement. In response to questions, Mr. Stevenson advised that the minimum lot width ensures that, in addition to parking areas, an adequate landscaped area can also be provided in the front yard. He noted that staff are supportive of two parking spaces being arranged side-by-side on the retained lot because there is insufficient space to legally provide parking in tandem; however, the dwelling on the severed lot provides for sufficient space for tandem parking which would also permit landscaping between the two asphalt driveways, improving the aesthetics on the property. He noted that staff are not be willing to amend the recommendation to permit side- by-side parking on the severed lot and have requested a revised parking plan to demonstrate the off-street parking spaces as part of approval for the minor variances. Mr. D. Pimentel advised that Transportation Planning staff would not be able to support parking on the proposed maintenance and encroachment easement. He noted that the applicant is only required to provide one off-street parking space for each property. Both the severed and retained land has sufficient space to provide a second off-street parking space, outside of the proposed easement. Submission No. B 2013-057 Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Mr.A. Head That the application of Lucas Rowe requesting permission to sever a parcel of land having a width on Stirling Avenue South of 6.695m (21.965'), by a depth of 35.576m (116.719') and an area of 244.5sq.m. (2631.776 sq.ft.); and, to grant a maintenance and encroachment easement, on the severed land in favour of the retained land, having a width of 1.2m (3.937'), a depth of 5m (16.404') and an area of 0.558 sq.m. (6 sq.ft), on Part Lot 18, Plan 25, 449 Stirling Avenue South, Kitchener, Ontario, BE GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding Municipal property taxes and/or local improvement charges. 2. That the owner shall provide a digital file of the deposited reference plan(s) prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor in .dwg (AutoCad) or Agn (Microstation) format, as well as two full sized paper copies of the plan(s). The digital file needs to be submitted according to the City of Kitchener's Digital Submission Standards to the satisfaction of the City's Mapping Technologist. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -261 - DECEMBER 10,2013 2. Submission Nos.: B 2013-057,A 2013-060&A 2013-061 (Cont'd) 5. That the owner pay to the City of Kitchener a cash-in-lieu contribution for park dedication equal to 5% of the value of the lands to be severed in the amount of $3079.70. 6. That the owner make financial arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering Services, for the installation of all new service connections to the (severed lands and/or retained) lands. 7. That the owner make financial arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering Services for the installation, to City standards, of boulevard landscaping including street trees, and a paved driveway ramp, on the (severed lands and/or retained) lands. 8. That the owner make financial arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering Services for the removal of any redundant service connections to the (severed lands and/or retained) lands. 9. That 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 severance approval. 10. That appropriate arrangements are made to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering Services, to provide a storm sewer service to the (severed lands and/or retained) lands. Said arrangements shall be approved by the City's Director of Engineering Services and agreeable to the Owner. 11. That the owners of the proposed dominant lands and servient lands, enter into a joint maintenance agreement to be approved by the City Solicitor, to ensure that the (right-of- way for access / easement) is maintained in perpetuity, which agreement shall be registered on title immediately following the Transfer Easement(s). 12. That 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. 13. The City Solicitor shall be provided with copies of the registered Transfer Easement(s) and joint maintenance agreement immediately following registration. 14. That the owner shall enter into a registered development agreement with the City of Kitchener to agree that the following noise warning clause be included in all offers of purchase and sale, and / or rental agreements for the residential units on both the severed and retained lands: "Due to the proximity to Stirling Avenue South and Highland Road East, project noise levels on this property may exceed the Noise Level Objectives approved by the Regional Municipality of Waterloo and may cause concern to some individuals". 15. That Minor Variance Application 2013-060 for the severed lands is approved as proposed, including all conditions. 16. That Minor Variance Application 2013-061 for the retained lands is approved as amended, including all conditions. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. 2. The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -262- DECEMBER 10,2013 2. Submission Nos.: B 2013-057,A 2013-060&A 2013-061 (Cont'd) 3. The use of the land in the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfil the above- noted conditions within one year of the date of giving notice of this decision. Pursuant to Subsection 43 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the decision of this Committee shall lapse two years from the date of approval, being December 10,2015. Carried Submission No.A 2013-060 Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Mr.A. Head That the application of Lucas Rowe requesting permission to sever a parcel of land for the construction of a semi-detached residential development so each half of can be dealt with separately. The severed land will require a minor variance to permit a lot width of 6.695m (21.965') rather than the required 7.5m (24.606'); and, a side yard setback of 1.04m (3.412') rather than the required 1.2m (3.93'), on Part Lot 18, Registered Plan 25, 449 Stirling Avenue South, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall provide a revised plan, subject to approval by the City's Director of Transportation Services, showing a driveway with a maximum driveway width of 3.3 metres. 2. That the owner shall provide a signed Solicitor's Undertaking, to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor, agreeing to construct the driveway for the severed lands in accordance with the approved plan. 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 2013-061 Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Mr.A. Head That the application of Lucas Rowe requesting permission to sever a parcel of land for the construction of a semi-detached residential development so each half of can be dealt with separately. The retained land will required a variance to permit a lot width of 7.02m (23.03') rather than the required 7.5m (24.606'); and off-street parking being located 3.65m (11.975') from the street line rather than the required 6.Om (19.685'), on Part Lot 18, Registered Plan 25, 449 Stirling Avenue South, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall provide a revised plan, subject to approval by the City's Direction of Transportation Services, showing two off-street parking spaces located 3.65 metres from the street line with a 1.2 metre sidewalk located between the parking area and the principle entrance of the building. 2. That the owner shall provide a signed Solicitor's Undertaking, to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor, agreeing to construct the driveway and sidewalk for the retained lands in accordance with the approved plan. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -263- DECEMBER 10,2013 2. Submission Nos.: B 2013-057,A 2013-060&A 2013-061 (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 ADJOURNMENT On motion,the meeting adjourned at 11:00 a.m. Dated at the City of Kitchener this 10th day of December,2013. Dianna Saunderson Secretary-Treasurer Committee of Adjustment