Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014-06-17 COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FOR THE CITY OF KITCHENER MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING HELD JUNE 17,2014 MEMBERS PRESENT: Messrs. D. Cybalski,A. Head and B. McColl. OFFICIALS PRESENT: Mr. B. Bateman, Senior Planner; Mr. D. Pimentel, Traffic Technologist; Ms. D. Saunderson, Secretary-Treasurer; and, Ms. H. Dyson, Administrative Clerk. Mr. D. Cybalski, Chair, called this meeting to order at 10:05 a.m. MINUTES Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Mr.A. Head That the minutes of the regular meeting of the Committee of Adjustment held May 20,2014, as mailed to the members, be accepted. Carried NEW BUSINESS MINOR VARIANCE 1. Submission No.: A 2014-025 Applicant: Rockway Holdings Limited Property Location: 70 Willowrun Drive Legal Description: Part Lot 117, Plan 591, Part Lot 9, being Parts 3, 4 and 5 on Reference Plan 58R-17541, Block 149, Draft Plan of Subdivision 30T-1020270 Appearances: In Support: L. Kotseff B. Montgomery Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to construct a multi- residential town home development with a Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 0.93 rather than the required maximum allowed FSR of 0.6. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated June 4, 2014, advising that the subject property is zoned Residential Six Zone (R-6)with Special Provisions 596R, 597R and 419U in the Zoning By-law and is designated Low Rise Residential in the City's Official Plan. The property is currently a vacant, unregistered Block in Plan of Subdivision 30T-10202. The subject property has frontage on Fairway Road North and Old Zeller Drive and backs onto a park block and future low rise residential development as planned through the subdivision. The owner is proposing a multiple residential development containing a mixture of residential building forms such as standard townhouse and stacked townhouse units. The site plan for the proposed development shown below has been `Approved in Principle' by the Manager of Site Development and Customer Service. In March of this year, the Committee of Adjustment approved a minor variance application for the subject development which included yard and parking setback reductions and a parking rate reduction. It has since come to the staff's attention there was a misunderstanding of how the COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -93- JUNE 17,2014 1. Submission No.: A 2014-025 (Cont'd) Floor Space Ratio-the figure obtained when the total building floor area on a lot/block is divided by the lot/block area-is calculated which has resulted in a FSR that exceeds what is permitted in the zoning. Consequently, the owner is requesting relief from Section 40.2.6 of the Zoning By- law to allow a Floor Space Ratio (FSR)of 0.93 rather than the required 0.6. Through this variance application, it should be noted that there are no changes proposed to the approved site plan application with regard to the exterior or interior of the buildings, the built form of the planned structure, no additional dwelling units proposed and no changes proposed to the on-site facilities such as parking, access, landscaped areas etc. It is important to recognize that the site has a Special Regulation Provision 596R that allows for an increased building height of up to 12 metres (for architectural purposes)rather than the principle zoning requirement for the R- 6 Zone of 10.5 metres which would in return allow for increased building floor area. 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: Housing policies in the Official Plan favour a land use pattern which mixes and disperses a full range of housing types within neighbourhoods. The site design of these different housing types shall emphasize compatibility of built form, with respect to massing, scale, design and the relationship of housing to adjacent buildings, streets and exterior areas. The subject lands are designated Low Rise Residential (LLR) in the City's Official Plan. The general intent of FSR requirements in the LLR designation is to regulate the massing and scale of a development to ensure compatibility with surrounding areas. To further ensure compatibility, the LLR designation does not allow residential buildings to exceed three storeys in height. The policies in this designation further refine the intent of the housing policies as previously mentioned. The owner is proposing a multiple residential development containing a mixture of housing types such as standard townhouse and stacked townhouse units. The buildings that have the greatest massing and scale are located along the Fairway Road North frontage to create a consistent built form pattern and reinforce the street edge. Buildings that have a low rise built form are located adjacent to future low rise residential development to guarantee appropriate transition between properties. The owner has also advised that the exterior form of the buildings within the proposed development includes a maximum of three storeys, in compliance with the LLR designation. It is staff's opinion that urban design considerations have been addressed to ensure the development is compatible with adjacent low rise residential exterior areas and primary streets and as such meets the general intent of the Official Plan. The intent of the FSR regulation in the Zoning By-law is to ensure the new development is of a scale and massing that is compatible with the surrounding low rise residential neighbourhood. The owner submitted a site plan that proposes a multiple residential development with a mix of housing types. The buildings with the greatest scale and massing will be located adjacent to Fairway Road North and the buildings with low rise residential built form will be located adjacent to future low rise residential development. It is staff's opinion that this location and orientation of buildings on site will have minimal impacts on the surrounding future low rise residential development. In addition, Special Regulation Provision 596R allows a multiple dwelling to be a maximum building height of 12 metres (for architectural purposes)rather than the principle zoning requirement of 10.5 metres. It is staffs opinion that this in turn allowed for increased building floor area which also contributed to an increased FSR for the site. As such, it is staff's opinion that the requested variance for increased FSR is appropriate and meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The proposed variance can be considered minor and appropriate for the development and use of the land for the above-noted reasons. It is staffs opinion that the proposed minor variance will have minimal impact of the surrounding future low rise residential development due to the location and orientation of buildings proposed on site. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated June 2,2014, advising that they have no concerns with this application. Mr. L. Kotseff and Mr. B. Montgomery provided a summary of the application and reasons for the requested variance, noting that they were in support of the staff recommendation. Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Mr.A. Head COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -94- JUNE 17,2014 1. Submission No.: A 2014-025 (Cont'd) That the application of Rockway Holdings Limited requesting permission to construct a multi- residential town home development with a Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 0.93 rather than the required maximum allowed FSR of 0.6, on Part Lot 117, Plan 591, Part Lot 9, being Parts 3, 4 and 5 on Reference Plan 58R-17541, Block 149, Draft Plan of Subdivision 30T-1020270, 70 Willowrun Drive, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED subject to the following condition: 1. That approval of Minor Variance application A 2014-025 shall only apply to the site plan associated with Site Plan Application SP13/075/W/ATP. 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 2014-026 Applicant: Tru-Villa Inc. Property Location: 258 Seabrook Drive Legal Description: Lot 10, Registered Plan 58M-563 Appearances: In Support: D. Riley Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to construct a single detached dwelling having a rear yard setback of 5.7m (18.7') rather than the required 7.Om (22.965'). The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated May 21, 2014, advising that the subject property is zoned Residential Six (R-6) in the Zoning By-law and designated Low Density Residential Two in the Rosenberg Secondary Plan. The site currently is not developed, but is planned to contain a single detached dwelling. Due to the angled configuration of the lot, the owner is seeking relief from Section 606R of the Zoning By-law in order to permit a reduction in rear yard setback for a single-detached dwelling to 5.70 metres whereas 7.0 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 offers the following comments regarding the requested minor variance: The requested variance for the proposed rear yard variance to build a single detached dwelling meets the intent of the Official Plan. The Low Density Residential Two designation allows for the development of single detached dwellings, duplex dwellings, semi-detached dwellings, townhouse dwellings and low-rise multiple dwellings. The minor change will conform to the low density character of the property and surrounding neighbourhood. The proposed variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law.The purpose of a rear yard setback of 7.0 metres is to provide amenity space and to ensure there is adequate separation from adjacent residential properties. The proposed rear yard setback of 5.70 metres will still allow for an amenity space. It should also be noted that the property abuts an Urban Green, and also that the rear lot line is angled in such a way that the lot depth ranges between 25.5 metres along the westerly lot line and 38.85 metres along the easterly lot line. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -95- JUNE 17,2014 2. Submission No.: A 2014-026 (Cont'd) The variance is considered minor. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance will still provide an adequately sized rear yard and will not negatively affect adjacent properties or surrounding neighbourhood as it backs onto green space. The proposed variance is 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 variance will allow the owner to continue the development of similarly sized residential units along Seabrook Drive. The scale, massing and height of the single-detached dwelling are appropriate and consistent with the character of the proposed neighbourhood. The proposed variance will not impact the existing character of the subject property or surrounding neighbourhood. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated June 2,2014, advising that they have no concerns with this application. Moved by Mr.A. Head Seconded by Mr. B. McColl That the application of Tru-Villa Inc. requesting permission to construct a single detached dwelling having a rear yard setback of 5.7m (18.7') rather than the required 7.Om (22.965'), on Lot 10, Registered Plan 58M-563, 258 Seabrook Drive, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following condition: 1. That the owner shall obtain a building permit from the City's Building Division prior to construction. 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 2014-027 Applicant: Howe Brownstones Inc. Property Location: 58 Howe Drive Legal Description: Part Lot 47, German Company Tract Appearances: In Support: S. Litt Contra: G. Beckner Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to construct multi- residential building with a rear yard setback of 1.5m (4.92') rather than the required 7.5m (24.606'). The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated May 21, 2014, advising that the subject property is zoned Residential Six(R-6)in the Zoning By-law and designated Low Rise Residential in the City's Official Plan. The site contains an existing one-storey single detached dwelling with accessory structures in the rear yard to be demolished. The owner has submitted and received site plan approval in principle for a multiple dwelling containing twenty-four (24) residential units (SP13/104/H/MV). The owner is requesting relief from Section 40.2.6 to permit a minimum rear yard setback of 1.50 metres whereas 7.50 metres is required. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -96- JUNE 17,2014 3. Submission No.: A 2014-027 (Cont'd) 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 variance for the proposed reduced rear yard to build a new multiple dwelling meets the intent of the Official Plan. The Low Rise Residential designation recognizes the existing scale of residential development and allows for appropriately scaled infill development. The variance will permit a reduced rear yard setback for the proposed new development. The minor change will maintain the low density character of the property and surrounding neighbourhood. The proposed variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law.The purpose of a rear yard setback of 7.50 metres is to provide amenity space and establish adequate separation between abutting properties. The proposed rear yard setback of 1.50 metres is considered appropriate in this case as the property abuts parkland that will be dedicated to the City. The variance is considered minor. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance is minor as any impacts associated with the variance are considered minimal because it backs onto City parkland. The proposed variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land as the proposed multiple dwelling is a permitted use in the Zoning By-law. The proposed variance will allow the owner to develop an under-utilized lot. The scale, massing and height of the new development are appropriate and consistent with the Zoning By-law. The proposed variance will not impact the existing character of the subject property or surrounding neighbourhood. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated June 2,2014, advising that they have no concerns with this application. The Committee was in receipt of comments from the Ministry of Transportation Ontario (MTO), dated June 9, 2014, advising that although they do not object to this application as the proposed setback to the building from Highway 7 & 8 meets MTO's 14.0 minimum, MTO permits are required prior to any construction or grading taking place. Mr. S. Litt provided an overview of the proposed application and noted that he was in support of staffs recommendation. Mr. G. Beckner, neighbouring property owner, was in attendance in opposition to the subject application. He noted that the property currently contains a single detached dwelling and the applicant is proposing to build two multi-residential properties in the rear of his property that, is his opinion,will negatively impact his outdoor amenity space. The Chair stated that the proposed development is compliant with the Zoning By-law except for the requested rear yard deficiency. He noted that the Committee only has the authority approve or refuse the merits of the application. He indicated that the applicant would be permitted to obtain a building permit for the proposed development if the City was not seeking a dedication of land as the applicant's contribution to parkland dedication. The Chair noted the comments from the MTO and requested that a condition be added to the recommendation to include the requirement for an MTO permit. Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Mr.A. Head That the application of Howe Brownstones Inc. requesting permission to construct multi- residential development, associated with Site Plan Application (SP13/104/H/MV),with a rear yard setback of 1.5m (4.92') rather than the required 7.5m (24.606'), on Part Lot 47, German Company Tract, 58 Howe Drive, Kitchener, Ontario BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -97- JUNE 17,2014 3. Submission No.: A 2014-027 (Cont'd) 1. That the owner shall obtain a building permit from the City's Building Division prior to construction. 2. That the owner shall obtain Ministry of Transportation Ontario (MTO) permits prior to any construction or grading taking place. 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 4. Submission No.: A 2014-028 Applicants: Katherine Larson and Urs Hengartner Property Location: 780 Belmont Avenue West Legal Description: Lot 104 and Part Lot 102, Plan 203 Appearances: In Support: U. Hengartner T. Bauman Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicants are requesting permission to construct a rear yard addition on an existing single detached dwelling having the required off-street parking space located 1.79m (5.872')from the front street line rather than the required 6.Om (19.685'). The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated May 21, 2014, advising that the subject property is zoned Residential Three (R-3) in the Zoning By-law and designated Low Rise Residential in the City's Official Plan. The site contains an existing single detached dwelling. The owner is requesting relief from Section 6.1.1.1.b.i of the Zoning By-law to permit a reduction in parking setback from the front street line to 1.79 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 offers the following comments regarding the requested minor variance: The requested variance for the proposed parking setback to build a powder room into a section of the existing garage meets 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 variance in conjunction with the proposed alteration will permit a reduced parking setback on the property's driveway considering that the dimensions of the garage would not be compliant with zoning standards but still have the ability to fit a small vehicle. The minor change will maintain the low density character of the property and surrounding neighbourhood. The proposed variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The purpose of this section of the Zoning By-law is to primarily provide a legally dimensioned parking space on the subject property, and secondarily to provide it in such a way that it does not affect the streetscape and view sheds. The proposed parking setback of 1.79 metres will still allow the owner to have a legally- dimensioned primary parking space on their private driveway without overhanging onto the sidewalk,while also retaining the ability to park a small vehicle in the garage. The variance is considered minor. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance will still allow for adequate parking on the property and will not negatively affect the adjacent properties or surrounding neighbourhood. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -98- JUNE 17,2014 4. Submission No.: A 2014-028 (Cont'd) The proposed variance is 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 variance will allow the owner to obtain a zoning-compliant primary parking space on their driveway. The proposed variance will not impact the existing character of the subject property or surrounding neighbourhood considering similar parking habits on the street. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated June 2,2014, advising that they have no concerns with this application. Moved by Mr.A. Head Seconded by Mr. B. McColl That the application of Katherine Larson and Urs Hengartner requesting permission to construct a rear yard addition on an existing single detached dwelling having the required off-street parking space located 1.79m (5.872')from the front street line rather than the required 6.Om (19.685'), on Lot 104 and Part Lot 102, Plan 203, 780 Belmont Avenue West, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED,subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall obtain a building permit from the City's Building Division prior to construction. 2. That the owner shall maintain the regulations regarding the driveway visibility triangle, which includes trimming the hedge on the western side of the property to a height less than 0.9 metres from grade to satisfy Section 5.3 of the Zoning By-law, to the satisfaction of Transportation Services. 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 5. Submission No.: A 2014-029 Applicant: 1179471 Ontario Inc. Property Location: 10 Executive Place Legal Description: Lot 17, Plan 1650 Appearances: In Support: J. MacDonald J. Ernewein T. Nyp Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to construct a commercial training facility with a gross floor area of 1960 sq.m. having 46 off-street parking spaces rather than the required 86 off-street parking spaces; and, having 2 barrier-free parking spaces rather than the required 4 barrier-free parking spaces. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated June 4, 2014, advising that the subject property is zoned Arterial Commercial Zone (C-6) in the Zoning By-law with a Special Use Provision (65U) and Special Regulation Provision (64R), and designated Commercial Corridor in the City's Official Plan. The site is currently vacant. The owner has recently submitted a site plan application for a commercial recreational facility on the subject lands (SP14/062/E/MV). The owner is requesting relief from Section 6.1.2.a) of the City of Kitchener COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT _99- JUNE 17,2014 5. Submission No.: A 2014-029 (Cont'd) Zoning By-law to reduce the number of required parking spaces for a commercial recreation facility with a gross floor area of 1960 square metres from eighty-six (86) parking spaces to forty- six (46) parking spaces; and is also requesting relief from Section 6.7.1 of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law to reduce the number of require barrier free parking spaces for a commercial recreation facility with a gross floor area of 1960 square metres from four (4) barrier free parking spaces to two (2)barrier free parking spaces. 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 parking space requirement variance meets the intent of the Official Plan. Section 8.5.2 of the City of Kitchener Official Plan allows consideration of reduced parking requirements for properties within areas, where it can be demonstrated that such reductions will not negatively affect the community. Staff is of the opinion that a reduction of 40 parking spaces for the commercial recreational use will not interfere with or be detrimental to the proposed operations or with the surrounding community. The variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The intent of the parking regulations in the Zoning By-law is to ensure that there is adequate parking on a site to meet the needs of users. Planning staff is of the opinion that a reduction of 40 parking spaces meets the intent of the Zoning By-law to ensure that there is adequate parking to meet the needs of the site, with the proposed commercial recreational use. The proposed variance can be considered minor and appropriate for the development and use of the lands. The proposed use is compatible with the surrounding commercial and employment uses. Staff feel that the variance will aid in increasing the usability of a site, and will make efficient use of the proposed parking spaces.The majority of the users/visitors coming to and from the site will be travelling by bus. The proposed use will have teams visiting the site together and therefore staff anticipates a reduction in automobile traffic. Transportation staff has met with the owner and are in support of the proposed variances to reduce the required parking on-site. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated June 2,2014, advising that they have no concerns with this application. In response to questions, the Chair noted that the condition requiring the applicant to obtain a building permit is a standard condition. The condition ensures that the applicant is aware that a decision of the Committee is not approval to begin construction without obtaining a building permit. The Chair noted concerns regarding the off-street parking variance, and requested clarification from staff on whether the recommended definition of Commercial Recreation Facility was descriptive enough to ensure that any future uses of the property would have enough off-street parking. Mr. Bateman advised that staff attempted to narrow down the description as much as possible to ensure that variance approval was appropriate for the proposed use. He noted that staff also tried to ensure that the current owner is also not overly restricted in their proposed use of the facility. The Chair suggested an amendment to substitute "commercial recreation facility" with "baseball training facility and related auxiliary uses". Both Staff and the applicant were satisfied with the proposed amendment. Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Mr.A. Head That the application of 1179471 Ontario Inc requesting permission to construct a baseball training facility and related auxiliary uses with a gross floor area of 1960 sq.m. having 46 off-street parking spaces rather than the required 86 off-street parking spaces; and, having 2 barrier-free parking spaces rather than the required 4 barrier-free parking spaces, on Lot 17, Plan 1650, 10 Executive Place, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED,subject to the following condition: COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 100- JUNE 17,2014 5. Submission No.: A 2014-029 (Cont'd) 1. That the owner shall obtain a building permit from the City's Building Division for the proposed commercial recreational centre. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variances requested in this application are 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 2014-030 Applicants: Christina and Mike Panayi Property Location: 74 Canters Close Legal Description: Lot 27, Plan 1740 Appearances: In Support: L. Proulx Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicants are requesting permission to legalize an existing private well whereas the By-law does not permit private wells for water supply where municipal water services are available. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated June 9, 2014, advising that the property is zoned Residential One (R-1) in By-law 85-1 and has an Official Plan designation of Limited Service Residential. The owners are requesting permission to legalize an existing private well. Section 5.27 of the Zoning By-law does not permit private wells for water supply where municipal water services are available. The property contains a single detached dwelling which was built in 2004 and has a connection to municipal water. The well was constructed in approximately 2008 for outdoor use for landscaping purposes only. Ministry of the Environment approval for the well was obtained. 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 proposed minor variance does not meet the intent of the Zoning By-law. The By-law regulation prohibits the installation of new wells where municipal water supply is readily available within the City. The intent of the By-law is to discourage the construction of private wells whether for landscaping purposes or for use in their dwelling. It is felt that by prohibiting private wells reduces the risk of contamination possibly seeping into the ground water helping to ensure that the current supply of high quality ground water is maintained. The drilling, construction and decommissioning of private wells are regulated by the Ministry of Environment.The Wells Regulation (Reg. 903), under the Ontario Water Resources Act, enforces strict standards for the construction of private wells. This act licenses well drillers, specifies well construction standards, and identifies when and how wells need to be decommissioned. Because this Act is administered and enforced by the Province, municipalities have limited to no jurisdiction to establish drilling and construction standards or methods for private wells. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated June 2,2014, advising that they have no concerns with this application. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 101 - JUNE 17,2014 6. Submission No.: A 2014-030 (Cont'd) Mr. L. Proulx was in attendance in support of the subject application and advised that he was in opposition to staffs recommendation to refuse the application. He noted that the applicant installed a well at the recommendation of a landscaper as a means of irrigation and is solely using it for landscaping purposes. He stated that there are four reasons, to his knowledge, that public wells have been discouraged, including: source water conservation; safe-guarding public health; source water protection; and, unlawful cross-contamination. He noted that these concerns are not relevant in this situation as the well is strictly for landscaping irrigation. He further advised that the applicant obtained a permit from the Ministry of the Environment and was not aware that a permit from the City was also required. The Chair expressed concerns that the Committee may be establishing precedence by approving the proposed minor variance application. Mr. B. McColl advised that it is his understanding that wells have been discouraged due to concerns regarding abandonment and/or poor maintenance. He indicated in this situation that the applicant is proposing to use the well for landscaping, not as a potable water source. He noted that he would be willing to consider applications in the future that are similar in nature on a case-by-case basis and would be willing to support the proposed variance as requested. Mr. A. Head advised that he would not be willing to support the application as requested. He noted that the Committee does not have enough background knowledge on the approved By-law restricting wells where there are municipal water services available and the reason for the By-law being adopted. He further advised that he is also concerned with what precedence may be set by approving the subject application. A motion was brought forward by Mr.A. Head to refuse the application as requested. Moved by Mr.A. Head Seconded by Mr. D. Cybalski That the application of Christina and Mike Panayi requesting permission to legalize an existing private well whereas the By-law does not permit private wells for water supply where municipal water services are available, on Lot 27, Plan 1740, 74 Canters Close, Kitchener, Ontario, BE REFUSED. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance requested in this application is not minor. 2. This application is not 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 not being maintained on the subject property. Carried 7. Submission No.: A 2014-031 Applicants: 2312991 Ontario Inc. c/o CUPE Local 1883 Property Location: 451 Ottawa Street South Legal Description: Part Lot 23, Plan 791, being Part 2 on Reference Plan 58R-3719 Appearances: In Support: T. Hardacre Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to legalize an existing mixed use office building that will be used for a `Private Club' having a northerly side yard setback of 1.1m (3.6') rather than the required 1.2m (3.937'); and, having 7 off-street parking spaces rather than the required 22 off-street parking spaces. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 102- JUNE 17,2014 7. Submission No.: A 2014-031 (Cont'd) The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated June 9, 2014, advising that the subject property is municipally addressed as 451 Ottawa Street South and is currently developed with a two storey building with a legal non-conforming seven space parking lot. The current owner is requesting relief to reduce the off-street parking rate for a Private Club use and to legalize an existing deficient side yard setback. The subject property is designated General Industrial in the City's Official Plan and zoned General Industrial (M-2) in the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law 85-1. The proposed use of the building as a Private Club conforms to the Official Plan and is a permitted use in the Zoning By- law. To facilitate the proposed Private Club use at 451 Ottawa Street South, the following minor variances are required and are requested with this application: i. relief from Section 6.2.1.a of Zoning By-law 85-1 to provide 7 off-street parking spaces whereas 23 spaces are required; and, ii. relief from Section 20.3.1 to provide a side yard setback of 1.1 metres whereas 1.2 metres is required. Side Yard Setback In considering the four tests for minor variances for the requested reduced side yard setback as outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O., 1990 Chap. P. 13, as amended, Planning staff offer the following comments; The requested variance meets the intent of the Official Plan. Lands that are designated as General Industrial act as a buffer or transition area between more intensive industrial uses and residential uses. The variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law as the intent side yard setback is to allow for buffering as well as amenity and landscaping areas. The existing side yard setback provides ample room for appropriate buffering such as landscaping. The variance is minor as the intent of the requested side yard setback variance is to legalize an existing situation. The majority of the building is outside of the required side yard setback and the deficiency is limited to the rear corner of the existing building only. The variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land as the intent of the variance is to legalize an existing situation within an established neighbourhood and no adverse impacts are anticipated as a result of the variance. Off-Street Parking Variance In considering the four tests for minor variances for the reduction in off-street parking from the required 23 to 7 spaces as outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O., 1990 Chap. P. 13, as amended, Planning staff offer the following comments; The requested variances meet the intent of the Official Plan. The Official Plan supports development and redevelopment in the General Industrial district that acts as buffer between more intensive industrial uses and residential communities. The demand for parking for the proposed Private Club use can be fully accommodated on-site within the two existing parking lots. The intent of the off-street parking regulations is to ensure that adequate off-street parking is provided to accommodate the parking needs of the use. Transportation Planning has reviewed this application and has no concerns with the proposed reduction in parking requirements. The variance is minor because the proposed Private Club use will not have a parking demand greater than 7 spaces at any given time. The previously existing residential unit has been removed from the second storey of this building.The current owner is proposing to use the space only part-time and will not hold large scaled meetings at this location. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 103- JUNE 17,2014 7. Submission No.: A 2014-031 (Cont'd) The variance is considered desirable and appropriate for the development and the use of the land. The existing off-street parking lots at the front and rear of this building provide sufficient parking to meet the demand of the new owner's proposal for a Private Club. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated June 2, 2014, advising that at this section of Regional Road 04 (Ottawa Street South), the existing road allowance width is 23.165m (76ft), while the designated road allowance width is 26.213m (86ft) in accordance with the Regional Official Policies Plan (ROPP). Under a future development application (Site Plan, Consent,Zone Change, OPA), a 3.048m(11 Oft)road widening dedication will be required across the Ottawa Street South frontage of this property. Given that this is a Minor Variance application, the road widening is not required at this time.Also, a number of property features (signage, landscaping, parking spaces, and curbing) may encroach onto the Ottawa Street South right-of-way after the road widening is taken. These features must be removed after the road widening or an encroachment agreement will be required. Mr. T. Hardacre was in attendance in support of the proposed application and advised that he is in support of the staff recommendation. In response to questions, Mr. Hardacre advised that the property was purchased for use by CUPE Local 1883 as their Union office and is only intended as their administrative office space. He further advised that any meetings called for the union membership in its entirety will be located at a separate facility. The Chair noted concerns regarding the off-street parking variance, and requested clarification from staff on whether the recommended definition of `Private Club' was descriptive enough to ensure that any future uses of the property would have enough off-street parking. Mr. Bateman advised that staff attempted to narrow down the description as much as possible to ensure that variance approval was appropriate for the proposed use. He noted that staff also tried to ensure that the current owner is also not overly restricted in their proposed use of the facility. The Chair suggested an amendment to substitute `Private Club'with "office facilities for a `Private Club' and related auxiliary uses". Both Staff and the applicant were satisfied with the proposed amendment. Moved by Mr.A. Head Seconded by Mr. B. McColl That the application of 2312991 Ontario Inc. c/o CUPE Local 1883 requesting permission to legalize an existing mixed use office building that will be used for office facilities for a `Private Club' and related auxiliary uses having a southerly side yard setback of 1.1m (3.6') rather than the required 1.2m(3.937'); and, having 7 off-street parking spaces rather than the required 22 off- street parking spaces (as shown on the plan submitted with the application), on Part Lot 23, Plan 791, being Part 2 on Reference Plan 58R-3719, 451 Ottawa Street South, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED,subject to the following condition: 1. That the owner shall provide written confirmation from a qualified designer to ensure that there are no openings within a fire compartment within 1.2 metres of the side property line to the satisfaction of the City's Building Division. 2. That the owner shall submit an Occupancy Certificate application for the proposed Private Club use to the satisfaction of the City's Planning Division. 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. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 104- JUNE 17,2014 7. Submission No.: A 2014-031 (Cont'd) 3. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-Law and Official Plan is being maintained on the subject property. Carried ADJOURNMENT On motion,the meeting adjourned at 10:47 a.m. Dated at the City of Kitchener this 17th day of June, 2014. Dianna Saunderson Secretary-Treasurer Committee of Adjustment