The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2016-01-19 COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FOR THE CITY OF KITCHENER MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING HELD JANUARY 19, 2016 MEMBERS PRESENT: Mr. D. Cybalski, Mr. B. McColl and Ms. P. Kohli. OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ms. J. von Westerholt, Senior Planner; Mr. D. Seller, Traffic & Parking Analyst; Ms. D. Saunderson, Secretary-Treasurer; and, Ms. H. Dyson, Administrative Clerk. Mr. D. Cybalski, Chair, called this meeting to order at 10:09 a.m. MINUTES Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Ms. P. Kohli That the minutes of the regular meeting of the Committee of Adjustment held December 8, 2015, as mailed to the members, and amended, be accepted. Carried NEW BUSINESS MINOR VARIANCE Submission No.: 1. A 2016-001 Applicant: Sheekeram Jamaludeen Property Location: 533 Victoria Street South Legal Description: Lot 59, Plan 645 Appearances: In Support: R. Doobey R. Gancewski Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to construct a second three- unit residential dwelling on the subject property having 8 off-street parking spaces rather than the required 9 off-street parking spaces. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated January 11, 2016, advising the subject property is located on the south side of Victoria Street South between Lawrence Avenue and Alice Avenue. Presently the site is developed with a triplex. The owner wishes to construct a second building on the property with an additional three units, for a total of six residential dwelling units on the property. The applicant is requesting relief from Section 6.1.2 of Zoning By-law 85-1 to allow a six-unit multiple dwelling to provide eight parking spaces, rather than the nine required 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. The variance meets the intent of the Official Plan for the following reasons. The subject property is designated Medium Rise Residential in both the existing and new Official Plans. This designation supports the increase in density on the site where multiple residential is intended to COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 19, 2016 - 2 - Submission No.: 1.A 2016-001 (Cont’d) be the predominant form of development. Additionally, redevelopment is intended to be located in areas where it can be combined with non-residential uses, transit stops and neighbourhood commercial sites. The location is within a reasonable walking distance of a significant commercial area, and has access to public transit very close to the building on Victoria Street South. The variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law for the following reasons. The parking requirement for multiple dwellings having 6-12 units is 1.5 spaces per unit. This requirement is to ensure there is adequate parking for each unit as well as supplying visitor parking on the site. The applicant is proposing to provide 8 parking spaces for 6 residential units, rather than the required 9 spaces. As each unit will be provided one parking space, with one visitor space and one barrier- free parking space on-site, staff is of the opinion that the minor reduction will not create a parking problem either on-site or in the surrounding neighbourhood. Furthermore, public transit is available very close to the building which may allow existing and/or future residents to not require a vehicle. The variance is minor for the following reasons. Each dwelling unit will have one parking space, public transit is readily available to residents of the development, and the property is within walking distance to the Highland Road commercial area. The loss of one parking space will not have any impact on adjacent properties and will allow for an appropriately-sized outdoor amenity area on site for the residents. The variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land for the following reasons. The zoning of the property permits the six-unit multiple dwelling and the proposed development complies with all zoning regulations, with the exception of the one parking space reduction. As adequate onsite parking will be provided along with a visitor parking space and a barrier-free parking space, staff considers the reduction of one parking space to be appropriate for the proposed development. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated December 22, 2015, advising they have no concerns with this application. Moved by Ms. P. Kohli Seconded by Mr. B. McColl That the application of Sheekeram Jamaludeen requesting permission to construct a second three-unit residential dwelling on the subject property having 8 off-street parking spaces rather than the required 9 off-street parking spaces, on Lot 59, Plan 645, 533 Victoria Street South, BE APPROVED Kitchener, Ontario, , subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall receive Site Plan approval by December 31, 2016 for the addition of three residential dwelling units that shall be in general accordance with the Plan submitted with the application, prepared by Ryszard Gancewki Architect, dated November 27, 2015, for a cantilevered building over the proposed parking area. 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.: 2. A 2016-002 Applicant: 765779 Ontario Limited Property Location: 140 Franklin Street North Legal Description: Lots 2 to 5 and Part Lot 6, Plan 887 and Part Lot 6, Plan 267 Appearances: In Support: P. Favot COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 19, 2016 - 3 - Submission No.: 2.A 2016-002 (Cont’d) Contra: W. Holland Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to convert existing storage space into two additional residential dwellings in an existing multi-residential dwelling having a Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 0.69 whereas the By-law permits a maximum FSR of 0.6; having the required off-street parking located 2m (6.561’) from the lot line abutting Shuh Avenue rather than the required 3m (9.842’); having an encroachment into the Driveway Visibility Triangle (DVT) whereas the By-law does not permit any encroachments into the DVT; and, to have 46 off-street parking spaces rather than the required 74 off-street parking spaces. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated January 8, 2016, advising the subject property is located at 140 Franklin Street North and currently has an existing 40 year old multiple dwelling building with a total of 40 residential units. The property is zoned Residential Six Zone (R-6) in the City’s Zoning By-law and designated Low Rise Residential in the City’s Official Plan. The owner of the property is proposing to create two additional residential dwelling units within the limits of the existing building. The owner is also proposing to reconfigure the north end of the existing parking lot within the existing asphalt area. As a result of the proposed development as mentioned above, the applicant is requesting the following: 1. Relief from Section 6.1.2 a) of the Zoning By-law to allow 46 off-street parking spaces for a total of 42 residential units rather than the required 74 off-street parking spaces; 2. Relief from Section 5.3 of the Zoning By-law to allow a portion of a parking space (or motor vehicle) to be located within the driveway visibility triangle (DVT); and, 3. Relief from Section 6.1.1.1 a) iv) of the Zoning By-law to allow a parking space to be setback 2.0 metres from the street line rather than the required 3.0 metres. In considering the four tests for minor variances as outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O., 1990 Chap. P. 13, as amended, Planning staff offers the following comments: Minor variance requests: 1. Relief from Section 6.1.2 a) of the Zoning By-law to allow 46 off-street parking spaces for a total of 42 residential units rather than the required 74 off-street parking spaces. Transportation policies in the Official Plan support a reduction of parking requirements for properties within an area where it can be demonstrated that such reductions will not negatively affect the community. The applicant advised that due to the demographic of the majority of the residents and a low rate of resident turnover as a result, the residential development has functioned well over the years and has not had any issues with parking in the past. In addition, Transportation staff advises that City records show that this existing residential development has been operating for a number of years and staff is not aware of any parking complaints related to this development. As such, it is staff’s opinion the requested variance will not impact the surrounding community and as such, meets the intent of the City’s Official Plan. The intent of Section 6 of the Zoning By-law is to ensure permitted uses have sufficient parking spaces on-site rather than potentially causing traffic impacts on adjacent properties, streets and the overall community. The applicant advised the residential development has a low rate of resident turnover and has functioned well without any concerns regarding parking. Transportation staff advises that City records show that this existing residential development has been operating for a number of years and staff is not aware of any parking complaints related to this development. It is staff’s opinion that the applicant has provided sufficient information which demonstrates that a parking reduction will not cause impacts to adjacent properties, streets or the overall community. As such, the variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. It is staff’s opinion that the variance request for a reduced parking requirement can be considered minor. It is staff’s opinion that the applicant has provided sufficient justification for a parking reduction which demonstrates there will be no impacts to the surrounding community. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 19, 2016 - 4 - Submission No.: 2.A 2016-002 (Cont’d) The variance request is appropriate for the development and use of the land. The applicant has advised that the residential development has a low rate of resident turnover and has functioned well in the past. As such, it is staff’s opinion that the reduction in the parking requirement is appropriate for this specific development. 2. Relief from Section 5.3 of the Zoning By-law to allow a portion of a parking space (or motor vehicle) to be located within the Driveway Visibility Triangle (DVT); and, 3. Relief from Section 6.1.1.1 a) iv) of the Zoning By-law to allow a parking space to be setback 2.0 metres from the street line rather than the required 3.0 metres. The Low Rise Residential designation in the City’s Official Plan shall accommodate a full range of housing types and favours the mixing and integration of different forms of housing. The applicant is requesting minor variances with the intent to continue the successful functioning of the residential use. It is staff’s opinion that the requested variances are consistent with the intent of the Official Plan. The intent of the parking setback and DVT regulations in the Zoning By-law is to allow vehicles to safely enter and exit the property without encumbrances to other vehicles, pedestrians or the streetscape. Transportation staff has reviewed the requested minor variances and advises that there is approximately a 4.0 metre buffer between the property line and the existing concrete sidewalk adjacent to Shuh Avenue, which will provide sufficient visibility of pedestrians and other vehicles. The reduced parking setback is minimal and will not cause any impact to the streetscape as there is sufficient space for the existing landscaping to provide a buffer between the parking space and the street line. As such, it is staff’s opinion that the requested variances meet the intent of the Zoning By-law. The variances can be considered minor as Transportation staff does not have concerns with the minimal reduction of the parking setback nor does staff have concerns with the existing and minor intrusions in the DVT. It is staff’s opinion that there is an appropriate buffer between the street and the proposed parking spaces for the site to continue to function successfully. The variances are appropriate for the development and use of the lands as staff is of the opinion that the requested variances are required for most appropriate design and successful functioning of the site. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated December 22, 2015, advising they have no concerns with this application. Mr. B. McColl requested clarification on the variance related to the DVT encroachment, noting the recommendation as outlined in the staff report may not limit the encroachment, as proposed on the plan provided with the application, from being altered. Mr. J. von Westerholt noted the plan submitted with the applicant indicating that the only encroachment proposed at this time is a very small corner at the front of the parking space. She indicated as a suggestion, the Committee could amend their decision to approve the variance generally in accordance with the plan submitted with the application. She further advised that the applicant would still need to finalize the Site Plan approval process. The Chair noted Condition 3 of the application indicating in his opinion, that an additional condition would not be required as staff would further review the parking, including the encroachment, through the Site Plan approval process. Mr. McColl acknowledged the comments made by the Chair and staff and requested an amendment be made to the staff recommendation to include reference to a “small encroachment” to provide further description to the type of encroachment that was receiving Committee approval. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 19, 2016 - 5 - Submission No.: 2.A 2016-002 (Cont’d) Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Ms. P. Kohli That the application of 765779 Ontario Limited requesting permission to convert existing storage space into two additional residential dwellings within an existing multi-residential dwelling having off-street parking located 2m (6.561’) from the lot line abutting Shuh Avenue rather than the required 3m (9.842’); a small encroachment into the Driveway Visibility Triangle (DVT) whereas the By-law does not permit any encroachments into the DVT; and, to have 46 off-street parking spaces rather than the required 74 off-street parking spaces, on Lots 2 to 5 and Part Lot 6, Plan 887 and Part Lot 6, Plan 267, 140 Franklin Street North, Kitchener, BE APPROVED Ontario, , subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall obtain a Building Permit from the City’s Building Division for the interior renovations to create two additional dwelling units. 2. That the owner shall obtain a Zoning (Occupancy) Certificate from the City’s Planning Division. 3. That the owner shall receive final approval for Site Plan Application SP15/109/F/ATP from the Manager of Site Development and Customer Service. 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 Submission No.: 3. A 2016-003 Applicant: 861543 Ontario Ltd. Property Location: 97 Ardelt Avenue Legal Description: Part Lot 4, Plan 1023 and Part Lot 6, Plan 1022 Appearances: In Support: E. Dahm Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to permit a warehouse / wholesale operation with a total Gross Floor Area (GFA) of 1,007 sq.m. (10839.258 sq.ft) to have accessory retail of furniture of approximately 186 sq.m. (2002.087 sq.ft), (18%), whereas the By- law does not permit warehouse/wholesale operations of less than 10,000 sq.m. to have accessory retail. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated January 11, 2016, advising the property is zoned M-2 (General Industrial) and has an Official Plan designation of General Industrial Employment. The applicant is requesting a minor variance to permit a warehouse/wholesale operation with a total Gross Floor Area (GFA) of 1,007 sq.m (10839 sq.ft) to have accessory retail of furniture of approximately 186 sq.m. (2002.87 sq.ft) (18%) whereas the By-law does not permit warehouse/wholesale operations less than 10,000 sq.m. to have accessory retail. 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. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 19, 2016 - 6 - Submission No.: 3.A 2016-003 (Cont’d) The variance meets the intent of the Official Plan. The intent of the General Industrial Employment designation is that uses are devoted primarily to manufacturing, storage and distribution of goods and services. The businesses are characterized by industrial operations with a commercial component which requires large areas for storage of goods such as building material, decorating supply sales and industrial office supply. This designation permits the accessory use of retail sales provided it is clearly subordinate to and supports the main use and is located on the same lot as the main use. The proposed accessory sale of patio furniture meets these criteria. The variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law and can be considered minor for the following reasons. The intent of the regulation limiting the floor area of accessory retail sales to businesses with larger gross floor areas is to ensure that the main use is an industrial business such as manufacturing, storage and/or distribution of goods or services. The sale of patio furniture is an item that requires a large area for storage/distribution and by limiting the accessory retail to 18% of the gross floor area, it is ensured that the main use will remain storage/distribution. The variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land based on the reasons noted above. The M-2 zone does permit some goods to be retailed at 100% gross floor area, such as, building material decorating supply sales, beverage making equipment sales, office supply sales and industrial equipment sales. The proposed goods for sale, patio furniture, is similar in scale to what is permitted in the zone and therefore staff is of the opinion that it is appropriate for the use of the subject multi-tenant industrial building and surrounding industrial neighbourhood. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated December 22, 2015, advising they have no concerns with this application. Mr. E. Dahm advised he was in attendance in support of the subject application and the staff recommendations. Mr. B. McColl questioned whether the April 1, 2016 deadline as outlined in Condition 4 was sufficient time to complete the conditions as outlined. Mr. Dahm noted that the timeline may be challenging, but he was of the opinion that it should be sufficient. Mr. McColl stated it may be more appropriate to extend the timeline by one month and requested an amendment to Condition 4 to extend the deadline to May 1, 2016, noting that the balance of the Condition would permit the applicant to seek a further extension from the Manager of Development Review, if required. Moved by Ms. P. Kohli Seconded by Mr. B. McColl That the application of 861543 Ontario Ltd. requesting permission to permit a warehouse / wholesale operation with a total Gross Floor Area (GFA) of 1,007 sq.m. (10839.258 sq.ft) to have accessory retail of furniture of approximately 186 sq.m. (2002.087 sq.ft), (18%), whereas the By-law does not permit warehouse / wholesale operations of less than 10,000 sq.m. to have accessory retail, on Part Lot 4, Plan 1023 and Part Lot 6, Plan 1022, 97 Ardelt Avenue, BE APPROVED Kitchener, Ontario, , subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall receive Site Plan approval from the Planning Division in order to review parking spaces on site for compliance. 2. That the owner shall obtain a Zoning (Occupancy) Certificate from the Planning Division for the proposed use. 3. That the owner shall obtain a Building Permit from the Building Division. 4. That the owner shall complete Conditions 1 to 3 by May 1, 2016. Any request for a time extension must be approved in writing by the Manager of Development Review (or designate) prior to the completion date set out in this decision. Failure to fulfill these conditions will result in this approval becoming null and void. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 19, 2016 - 7 - Submission No.: 3.A 2016-003 (Cont’d) It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance requested in this application is minor. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-Law and Official Plan is being maintained on the subject property. Carried Submission No.: 4. A 2016-004 Applicant: 121 & 151 Charles (the Tannery) Inc. Property Location: 151 Charles Street West & 36 Francis Street South Legal Description: Lots 110-116 and 131-138, Plan 375, being Part 1 on Reference Plan 58R-6449 Appearances: In Support: M. Bolen R. Theodosiou Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to locate outdoor storage equipment in the side yard abutting Victoria Street South, setback 0.1m (0.328’) from the street line rather than the required 6m (19.685’). The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated January 11, 2016, advising the subject property located at 151 Charles Street West and 36 Francis Street South is zoned Warehouse District Zone (D-6) in Zoning By-law 85-1 with Holding Provision 10H, Special Use 116U, and Special Regulation 105R, and are designated Warehouse District in the City’s Official Plan. The lands are developed with an existing mixed-use commercial/office building, known as the Tannery. The owner is proposing a brew pub on the subject lands and as such, requires relief from Section 17.3 to allow a reduced side yard abutting the street setback of 0.1 metres for outdoor storage (fermenter tanks), whereas 6.0 metres is required. Planning staff notes that if in the future the owner wishes to place signage on the proposed fermenter tanks, additional variances may be required as per the City’s Sign By-law. The owner received Committee of Adjustment approval in 2008 for a parking reduction and reduced front, side, and rear yard setbacks (A 2008-027). There is an existing fire escape adjacent to the planned location of the proposed fermenter tanks. This fire escape is no longer operational and now functions as an architectural feature on the building. 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 subject property is designated Warehouse District in the City’s Official Plan. The proposed variance meets the intent of the Official Plan, which plans this District to function as a transitional area between the Retail Core and the adjacent Service Commercial and General Industrial areas. The area is characterized by many large, old industrial buildings, which have the potential for conversion to other viable uses. Policy 8.6.4 speaks to the provision of restaurants within existing buildings in order to create a unique shopping experience, and specifically speaks to brew pubs as a complementary commercial use to the development of a tourist heritage museum. While this site does not contain a heritage museum, the proposed brew pub can be considered an appropriate use that is complementary to the existing commercial and office uses. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 19, 2016 - 8 - Submission No.: 4.A 2016-004 (Cont’d) Staff is satisfied the minor change will maintain the industrial character of the property and surrounding neighbourhood while complementing Kitchener’s industrial heritage. As such, the proposed variance conforms to the designation and it is the opinion of staff that the requested variance is appropriate. The requested variance to reduce the side yard abutting the street setback for outdoor storage from 6.0 metres to 0.1 metres meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The intent of the 6.0 metre setback is to provide separation between outdoor storage and the street line and to avoid negative impacts on the streetscape. The proposed outdoor fermenter tanks will not present any negative impacts on the streetscape, and further, will contribute to the unique industrial character of this area. The variances can be considered minor. Given that the existing building is permitted to be located 0 metres from the street line (A 2008-027), the reduced side yard abutting the street setback for outdoor storage will not present any significant impacts to adjacent properties or the streetscape that do not already exist. The proposed variances are appropriate for the development and use of the land as the proposed restaurant, manufacturing, and craftsman shop uses are permitted in the Zoning By-law. No changes are proposed to the scale, massing and height of the existing building, therefore the proposed fermenter tanks will not negatively impact the existing character of the subject property or surrounding neighbourhood. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated December 22, 2015, advising they have no concerns with this application. Messrs. M. Bolen and R. Theodosiou were in attendance in support of the subject application and the staff recommendation. In response to questions, Ms. J. von Westerholt noted for clarification, clearance for Condition 1 will only require Site Plan approval by June 2016, not full implementation. Moved by Ms. P. Kohli Seconded by Mr. B. McColl That the application of 121 & 151 Charles (the Tannery) Inc. requesting permission to locate outdoor storage equipment in the side yard abutting Victoria Street South, setback 0.1m (0.328’) from the street line rather than the required 6m (19.685’), on Lots 110-116, Plan 375, Lots 131-138, Part Charles Street, being Part 1 on Reference Plan 58R-6449, 151 Charles BE APPROVED Street West and 36 Francis Street South, Kitchener, Ontario, , subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall obtain Site Plan Approval to the satisfaction of the Manager of Site Development and Customer Service by June 2016. 2. That the owner shall ensure the reduced side yard abutting the street setback for outdoor storage applies only to the proposed fermenter tanks, as depicted on the Site Plan submitted with the application, prepared by Bolen Architecture Ltd., dated December 7, 2015. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance requested in this application is minor. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-Law and Official Plan is being maintained on the subject property. Carried COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 19, 2016 - 9 - Submission No.: 5. A 2016-005 Applicant: Activa Holdings Inc. Property Location: 115 South Creek Drive Legal Description: Block 190, Registered Plan 58M-541 Appearances: In Support: J. Malfara Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to construct a multi-unit residential development having a rear yard setback of 2.5m (8.202’) rather than the required 7.5m (24.606’); having a maximum height of 12m (39.370’) rather than the permitted maximum height of 10.5m (34.448’); and, to allow a maximum Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 0.73 whereas the By- law permits a maximum FSR of 0.6. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated January 11, 2016, advising the subject property located at 115 South Creek Drive is zoned Residential Six Zone (R-6) in Zoning By-law 85-1 and designated Low Rise Residential in the City’s Official Plan. The lands are currently vacant and are proposed to be developed with 54 back-to-back townhouse units fronting the street and 10 fourplex (quad) buildings toward the back of the site. As such, the owner is requesting relief of Section 40.6 to allow a reduced rear yard setback of 2.5 metres, whereas 7.5 metres is required; Section 40.6 to allow an increase in building height to 12 metres, whereas 10.5 metres is permitted; and Section 40.6 to allow an increase in maximum FSR to 0.73, whereas 0.6 is permitted. Site Plan Approval in Principle was granted on November 18, 2015, subject to Committee of Adjustment approval. 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 subject property is designated Low Rise Residential in the City’s Official Plan. The proposed variances meet the intent of the Official Plan, which encourages a range of housing forms that achieve an overall low density neighbourhood. Policy 3.1.2.2 restricts density to a maximum FSR of 0.6 and height to three stories at street elevation. The intent of this policy is to ensure the low density character of these areas is maintained. The back-to-back units fronting onto South Creek Drive and Meadowridge Street are proposed to be three-stories at street elevation, with the purpose of the requested height increase being to facilitate an enhanced roof design and to accommodate varying grades. As such, staff is satisfied the proposed increase in height and FSR will maintain the low density character of the neighbourhood and meets the intent of the Official Plan. The subject property is designated Low Rise Residential in the City’s new Official Plan which, while currently under appeal, contains a number of policies speaking to height and density in low rise residential areas. The Low Rise Residential land use designation will accommodate a full range of low density housing types including single detached dwellings, duplex dwellings, semi- detached dwellings, street townhouse dwellings, townhouse dwellings in a cluster development, low-rise multiple dwellings and special needs housing. Policy 15.D.3.11 applies a maximum FSR of 0.6, however site specific increases up to a maximum FSR of 0.75 may be considered where it can be demonstrated that the increase in the FSR is compatible and meets the general intent of the policies in this Plan. Further, Policy 15.D.3.12 states that relief from the maximum building height of three stories or 11 metres may be considered for properties with unusual grade conditions and for buildings and/or structures with increased floor-to-ceiling heights and architectural features, provided the increased building height is compatible with the built form and physical character of the neighbourhood. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 19, 2016 - 10 - Submission No.: 5.A 2016-005 (Cont’d) Staff is satisfied the minor changes will maintain the low density character of the property and surrounding neighbourhood. As such, the proposed variances conform to both the current and new Official Plan designations and it is staff’s opinion that the requested variances are appropriate. The requested variance to reduce the rear setback from 7.5 metres to 2.5 metres meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The intent of the 7.5 metre rear yard setback is to provide separation between the structure and adjacent properties, as well as to provide rear yard amenity space. Given this yard is located adjacent to a trail and functions more as a side yard due to the orientation of the lot, staff is satisfied the variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. Further, landscaped areas throughout the site will ensure adequate amenity space is provided. The requested variance to increase the maximum height to 12 metres, whereas 10.5 metres is permitted, meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The purpose of the 10.5 metre height allowance is to permit a range of housing types at a scale which is compatible with the existing adjacent low rise residential neighbourhood. The purpose of the requested height increase is to accommodate the varying grades in the Doon South area while facilitating an enhanced roof design. Staff is satisfied the requested variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law, as the back-to-back townhouse units will remain three stories at street elevation and maintain compatibility with the low rise residential neighbourhood. The requested variance to increase the maximum FSR from 0.6 to 0.73 meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The R-6 zone permits a range of housing types, and the intent of 0.6 FSR allowance is to ensure development occurs at a scale which is compatible with other low-rise housing forms in adjacent neighbourhoods. The proposed back-to-back townhouse units and quad buildings will provide a mix of housing types while maintaining compatibility with the low rise residential neighbourhood across the street. The variances can be considered minor as the reduced rear yard setback, increased FSR, and increased building height will not present any significant impacts to adjacent properties and the overall neighbourhood. The proposed variances are appropriate for the development and use of the land as the proposed multiple residence use is a permitted use in the Zoning By-law. Given that the property backs onto a multi-use trail, hydro corridor, and storm water management pond, staff is satisfied the proposed variances will not negatively impact the existing character of the subject property or surrounding neighbourhood. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated December 22, 2015, advising they have no concerns with this application. Moved by Ms. P. Kohli Seconded by Mr. B. McColl That the application of Activa Holdings Inc. requesting permission to construct a multi-unit residential development having a rear yard setback of 2.5m (8.202’) rather than the required 7.5m (24.606’); having a maximum height of 12m (39.370’) rather than the permitted maximum height of 10.5m (34.448’); and, to allow a maximum Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 0.73 whereas the By-law permits a maximum FSR of 0.6, on Block 190, Registered Plan 58M-541, 115 BE APPROVED South Creek Drive, Kitchener, Ontario, , subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall obtain the necessary Building Permits for the proposed development from the Building Division. 2. That the owner shall obtain Site Plan approval to the satisfaction of the Manager of Site Development and Customer Service. 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. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 19, 2016 - 11 - Submission No.: 5.A 2016-005 (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 Submission Nos.: 6. A 2016-006 to A 2016-012 Applicant: Tru-Villa Property Location: 161, 163, 165, 167, 169, 171 and 173 Seabrook Drive Legal Description: Lots 94, 93, 92, 91, 90, 89 and 88, Registered Plan 58M-562 Appearances: In Support: D. Riley T. Schnarr Contra: None Written Submissions: None Through application A 2016-006, 161 Seabrook Drive, the Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to construct a live/work townhouse unit having 45 sq.m. (484.376 sq.ft) of commercial space with 0 off-street parking spaces rather than the required 1 off-street parking space; and, to be located 13.98m (45.866’) from the street line on Glenvista Drive, whereas the By-law permits a maximum setback from a street line of 10m (32.808’); and, Through applications A 2016-007 to A 2016-012, for the properties municipally addressed as 163, 165, 167, 169, 171 and 173 Seabrook Drive, the Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to construct a live/work townhouse unit having 45 sq.m. (484.376 sq.ft) of commercial space with 0 off-street parking spaces rather than the required 1 off-street parking space. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated January 7, 2016, advising the subject properties located at 161-173 Seabrook Drive are zoned MU-1, 608R, 610R, 612R, 422U in the Zoning By-law and designated Mixed Use One in the Rosenberg Secondary Plan. The subject properties are located at the intersection of Seabrook Drive and Appleby Street with frontages on both Seabrook Drive and Glenvista Drive. The site currently contains no structures but is proposed to be constructed with mixed-use commercial-residential live/work units. Requested Minor Variances: A 2016-006 - 161Seabrook Drive: The owner is requesting relief from section 6.1.2 a) of the Zoning By-law to allow commercial units with 45 sq.m. or less to provide zero (0) commercial on-site parking spaces. Furthermore the applicant is requesting relief from Special Regulation 610R ii) of the Zoning By- law to allow a setback of 13.98m from a street line, rather than the maximum permitted setback of 10.0m. A 2016-007 to A 2016-012 – 163 to173 Seabrook Drive: The owner is requesting relief from section 6.1.2 a) of the Zoning By-law to allow commercial units with 45 sq.m. or less to provide zero (0) commercial on-site 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 variances: The variances meet the intent of the Official Plan. The Mixed Use One Rosenberg Secondary Plan designation is intended to provide a minimum amount of small-scale commercial uses at neighbourhood gateway locations supplemented with multiple residential and other non- residential uses. The minor variances to reduce onsite parking requirements for commercial units will allow the proposed development to meet the intent of the Official Plan. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 19, 2016 - 12 - Submission Nos.: 6.A 2016-006 to A 2016-012 (Cont’d) The proposed variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The intent of Section 6.1.2 a) is to regulate required parking spaces for customers based on the size of the business/use. The proposed mixed-used commercial units at 161-173 are proposed to be built as live/work units with small commercial units of 45 sq.m. or less on the ground floor and dwelling units located above. The required parking space for each unit will be provided internally in garages that are accessed off of Glenvista Drive. Due to the size of the commercial units, it is staff’s opinion the seven designated on-street parking spaces located on Seabrook Drive can accommodate commercial parking for commercial units with 45 sq.m. or less of commercial space. The internal parking space for each dwelling unit and the on-street parking provides adequate parking for the mixed- use live/work units and meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. Furthermore, the additional requested variance (A 2016-006) for 161 Seabrook Drive meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The intent of Special Regulation 610R ii) is to regulate the maximum setback of structures from the street line to 10m and encourage buildings to be built closer to the street line. Due to the irregular shaped ‘through-lot’, the building cannot technically meet the regulation; however, the ‘intent’ of the regulation is met. 161 Seabrook has frontage on two streets (Glenvista Drive at the rear and Seabrook Drive at the front). The building is proposed to be setback 1.92m off of Seabrook Drive and 13.98m off the street line at Glenvista Drive. Since the building is situated 1.98m from Seabrook Drive the intent of the regulation is clearly met. The variances are considered minor as it is staff’s opinion that the seven designated on-street parking spaces located on Seabrook can accommodate commercial parking for commercial units with 45 sq.m. or less of commercial space. The additional variance (A 2016-006) for 161 Seabrook Drive is considered minor as the building situated 1.98m from the front street line and 13.98m from the rear street is minor and meets the intent of the regulation. The variances are appropriate for the development and use of the lands as it is staff’s opinion that the requested variances will not impact the subject properties, adjacent lands or abutting intersection. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated December 22, 2015, advising they have no concerns with these applications. Messrs T. Schnarr and D. Riley were in attendance in support of the subject applications and staff recommendation. In response to questions, Ms. J. von Westerholt advised the units are intended to be live/work units with small scale businesses limited to the Uses outlined in the Zoning By-law and the Rosenberg Secondary Plan. Mr. Schnarr advised the units will be two fully functioning spaces with the ability for the owner to operate a business from the first floor unit, but would not prohibit either of the units to be income units and rented out for their intended purposes. He noted that Tru-Villa Homes have already built similar types of units in other municipalities which have been very successful to date. Questions were raised regarding the parking requirements and whether there was adequate parking in the area to manage any overflow. Ms. von Westerholt noted there was a lay-by on Seabrook Drive directly in front of the development that would provide ample room for overflow parking. She further advised the properties are through-lots with access on Seabrook Drive and Glenvista Crescent, noting the driveways in the rear of the property are intended for the residential units. Submission No. A 2016-006 Moved by Ms. P. Kohli Seconded by Mr. B. McColl That the application of Tru-Villa Inc. requesting permission to construct a live/work townhouse unit having 45 sq.m. (484.376 sq.ft) of commercial space with 0 off-street parking spaces rather than the required 1 off-street parking space; and, to be located 13.98m (45.866’) from the street line on Glenvista Drive, whereas the By-law permits a maximum setback from a street line of 10m (32.808’), on Lot 94, Registered Plan 58M-562, 161 Seabrook Drive, BE APPROVED Kitchener, Ontario, , subject to the following conditions: COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 19, 2016 - 13 - Submission Nos.: 6.A 2016-006 to A 2016-012 (Cont’d) 1. That the owner shall obtain a Building Permit for the proposed construction from the Building Division. 2. That the owner shall obtain Site Plan approval for the mixed-use commercial building on the subject property from the Manager of Site Development and Customer Service. 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 Submission No. A 2016-007 Moved by Ms. P. Kohli Seconded by Mr. B. McColl That the application of Tru-Villa Inc. requesting permission to construct a live/work townhouse unit having 45 sq.m. (484.376 sq.ft) of commercial space with 0 off-street parking spaces rather than the required 1 off-street parking space, on Lot 93, Registered Plan 58M-562, 163 BE APPROVED Seabrook Drive Kitchener, Ontario, , subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall obtain a Building Permit for the proposed construction from the Building Division 2. That the owner shall obtain Site Plan approval for the mixed-use commercial building on the subject property from the Manager of Site Development and Customer Service. 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 Submission No. A 2016-008 Moved by Ms. P. Kohli Seconded by Mr. B. McColl That the application of Tru-Villa Inc. requesting permission to construct a live/work townhouse unit having 45 sq.m. (484.376 sq.ft) of commercial space with 0 off-street parking spaces rather than the required 1 off-street parking space, on Lot 92, Registered Plan 58M-562, 165 Seabrook Drive BE APPROVED Kitchener, Ontario, , subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall obtain a Building Permit for the proposed construction from the Building Division 2. That the owner shall obtain Site Plan approval for the mixed-use commercial building on the subject property from the Manager of Site Development and Customer Service. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance requested in this application is minor. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 19, 2016 - 14 - Submission Nos.: 6.A 2016-006 to A 2016-012 (Cont’d) 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 2016-009 Moved by Ms. P. Kohli Seconded by Mr. B. McColl That the application of Tru-Villa Inc. requesting permission to construct a live/work townhouse unit having 45 sq.m. (484.376 sq.ft) of commercial space with 0 off-street parking spaces rather than the required 1 off-street parking space, on Lot 91, Registered Plan 58M-562, 167 BE APPROVED Seabrook Drive Kitchener, Ontario, , subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall obtain a Building Permit for the proposed construction from the Building Division 2. That the owner shall obtain Site Plan approval for the mixed-use commercial building on the subject property from the Manager of Site Development and Customer Service. 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 2016-010 Moved by Ms. P. Kohli Seconded by Mr. B. McColl That the application of Tru-Villa Inc. requesting permission to construct a live/work townhouse unit having 45 sq.m. (484.376 sq.ft) of commercial space with 0 off-street parking spaces rather than the required 1 off-street parking space, on Lot 90, Registered Plan 58M-562, 169 Seabrook Drive BE APPROVED Kitchener, Ontario, , subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall obtain a Building Permit for the proposed construction from the Building Division 2. That the owner shall obtain Site Plan approval for the mixed-use commercial building on the subject property from the Manager of Site Development and Customer Service. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance requested in this application is minor. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-Law and Official Plan is being maintained on the subject property. Carried COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 19, 2016 - 15 - Submission Nos.: 6.A 2016-006 to A 2016-012 (Cont’d) Submission No. A 2016-011 Moved by Ms. P. Kohli Seconded by Mr. B. McColl That the application of Tru-Villa Inc. requesting permission to construct a live/work townhouse unit having 45 sq.m. (484.376 sq.ft) of commercial space with 0 off-street parking spaces rather than the required 1 off-street parking space, on Lot 89, Registered Plan 58M-562, 171 Seabrook Drive BE APPROVED Kitchener, Ontario, , subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall obtain a Building Permit for the proposed construction from the Building Division 2. That the owner shall obtain Site Plan approval for the mixed-use commercial building on the subject property from the Manager of Site Development and Customer Service. 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 2016-012 Moved by Ms. P. Kohli Seconded by Mr. B. McColl That the application of Tru-Villa Inc. requesting permission to construct a live/work townhouse unit having 45 sq.m. (484.376 sq.ft) of commercial space with 0 off-street parking spaces rather than the required 1 off-street parking space, on Lot 88, Registered Plan 58M-562, 173 Seabrook Drive BE APPROVED Kitchener, Ontario, , subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall obtain a Building Permit for the proposed construction from the Building Division 2. That the owner shall obtain Site Plan approval for the mixed-use commercial building on the subject property from the Manager of Site Development and Customer Service. 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.: 7. A 2016-013 Applicant: Region of Waterloo Property Location: 230 Charles Street East Legal Description: Part Lot 18, Plan 364 and Part Lot 19, Plan 365 - and - COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 19, 2016 - 16 - Submission Nos.: 7.A 2016-013, A 2016-014 & A 2016-015 (Cont’d) Submission No.: A 2016-014 Applicant: Region of Waterloo Property Location: 495 Charles Street East Legal Description: Part Lot 25, Plan 404, being Parts 1 and 2 on Reference Plan 58R-10849 - and - Submission No.: A 2016-015 Applicant: Region of Waterloo Property Location: 495 Charles Street East Legal Description: Part Block G, Plan 1221 being Part 5 on Reference Plan 58R-17971 Appearances: In Support: R. Parent L. Puddicombe D. Finn D. Stubbs Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to construct a Traction Power Substation for Light Rail Transit (LRT) having a setback of 11m (36.089’) whereas the By-law permits a maximum setback of 7.5m (24.606’); a Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 0 rather than the required 1; having no façade openings whereas the By-law requires 40% of the façade to have openings every 4m (13.123’); having no façade height whereas the By-law requires a height of 6m (19.685’); and, a primary floor façade of 0 whereas the By-law requires 50% abutting a street line. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated January 8, 2016, advising the Region of Waterloo and GrandLinq have partnered to build Stage 1 of ION. ION is part of a Region-wide transit system that will connect rapid transit with a network of Grand River Transit (GRT) iXpress and local bus routes. Set to begin service in 2017, ION includes 19 kilometres of LRT from the Conestoga Mall transit terminal in Waterloo to the Fairview Park Mall transit terminal in Kitchener. The LRT vehicles will be powered by electricity, which will be distributed with a Traction Electrification System (TES) by the means of Traction Power System (TPS) and the Overhead Contact System (OCS). The TPS consists of the Traction Power Substations (TPSS) and the Traction Power Feeder System (TPFS). The applicant has requested several minor variance applications to permit the placement of Traction Power Substations (TPSS) along the LRT route on properties which are owned by the Region of Waterloo. Each TPSS is assembled offsite and transported to the final location. The buildings are roughly the size of a transport truck trailer. These TPSS buildings are considered a building under the Ontario Building Code, and require site plan approval where located outside of the public highway. Section 5.8 of Zoning By-law 85-1 permits the TPSS buildings to be located in any zone subject to; the use or building being in compliance with the most restrictive regulations contained in such zone, the parking requirements of Section 6.1 for such use, and subject to there being no outdoor storage of goods, materials or equipment in any yard abutting a Residential Zone. Applications: GrandLinq, on behalf of the Region of Waterloo, has filed three minor variance applications to resolve non-complying zoning regulations as follows: Application A 2016-013 (230 Charles Street East) is requesting relief from Section 55.2.1 of the Zoning By-law to permit a TPSS building 11.0 metres from the streetline whereas a maximum COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 19, 2016 - 17 - Submission Nos.: 7.A 2016-013, A 2016-014 & A 2016-015 (Cont’d) front yard of 7.5 metres is permitted, to have a TPSS building with no openings whereas 40% of the façade is required to have openings not more than 4.0 metres apart, to permit a TPSS building with a FSR of 0 whereas a minimum FSR of 1 is required, to permit a TPSS building with a façade height of 0 metres whereas 6.0 metres minimum is required, and to permit a TPSS building with a primary floor façade of 0 whereas 50% of the façade abutting a streetline is required. Application A 2016-014 (495 Charles St East) is requesting relief from Section 20.3.1 of the Zoning By-law to permit a TPSS building with a front yard setback of 4.5 m whereas 6.0 m is permitted; and, to have a TPSS building on a lot with a width of 14.068 metres whereas a minimum lot width of 15.0 metres is required. Application A 2016-015 (1605 Block Line Road) is requesting relief from Section 20.3.1 of the Zoning By-law to permit a TPSS building with a front yard setback of 2.5 m whereas 6.0 m is permitted. Planning Comments: The property municipally addressed as 230 Charles Street East is designated as Mixed Use Corridor in the King Street East Secondary Plan and zoned as High Intensity Mixed Use Corridor (MU-3) with Special Regulation Provision 544R. The property municipally addressed as 495 Charles Street East is designated as General Industrial in the Mill Courtland Woodside Park Secondary Plan and zoned as General Industrial (M-2) with Special Use Regulation 159U and Special Regulation Provision 1R. The property municipally addressed as 1605 Block Line Road is designated as General Industrial in the Mill Courtland Woodside Park Secondary Plan and zoned as General Industrial (M-2) with Special Regulation Provision 1R. 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 requested variances meet the intent of the Official Plan. The City’s Official Plan supports the development of public transit as an option for all residents. An efficient and effective public transit system is essential for residents who, through choice or necessity, do not have access to an automobile. In addition, an efficient public transit system can reduce the reliance on the automobile which can reduce the need for road capacity expansion, ease traffic congestion and reduce energy consumption and pollution. Similarly, the new Official Plan supports public transit by organizing intensification areas through a new Urban Structure that focuses growth along existing and planned transit corridors. ION will be a new convenient and efficient way to travel throughout the City and the Region. Kitchener is planned to have a population of 313,000 people with 130,000 jobs by 2031. ION will reduce traffic congestion, limit costly road expansions, limit sprawl and attract new employers. It will protect environmentally sensitive areas of our region, reduce greenhouse gas emissions for better air quality, protect ground water supply, and safeguard surrounding farmland. The requested variances are required to facilitate the TPSS buildings, which are required as a functional part of the LRT system. This critical infrastructure is required to have LRT operational, which overall, meets the goals and objections of the current and new Official Plan. The requested variances meet the intent of the Zoning By-law. While considered a building under the Ontario Building Code, the TPSSs are only a piece of critical infrastructure that is part of the larger LRT project. The zoning regulations are meant to apply to buildings that will have useable floor area that accommodate residential, commercial, and employment uses. Due to design considerations, safety regulations, and functional constraints, the design of the prefabricated TPSSs cannot be altered. There are also logistical considerations for the placements of the TPSSs on each site that have been predetermined by a variety of factors. Through the individual site planning processes for each TPSS site, design and place-making considerations are being addressed through landscaping, fencing, grading, public amenity areas, and other site-specific elements to achieve an aesthetically pleasing TPSS site where possible. The requested minor variances are minor. City Planning staff have encouraged locating the TPSSs on smaller parcels of publically-owned land where possible, and when located on larger COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 19, 2016 - 18 - Submission Nos.: 7.A 2016-013, A 2016-014 & A 2016-015 (Cont’d) parcels, to locate the TPSSs in such a way that the remaining property can accommodate comprehensive redevelopment. TPSSs are required to be equally spaced along the entire LRT route, and where possible, have been located away from public view. In areas where they will be more visible, additional landscape or design elements will be required to blend the TPSSs into the public realm. The variances are appropriate for the development and use of the land. The implementation and operation of ION rapid transit will influence the development and redevelopment of the central transit corridor. The variances will allow for the necessary infrastructure to be developed to power the ION system. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated December 22, 2015, advising they have no concerns with this application. Regarding applications A 2016-014 and A 2015-015, the Committee considered the report of the Grand River Conservation Authority, dated January 4, 2016, advising although they have no concerns with these applications, they noted the subject property is located within a Riverine Flooding Hazard and within the flood fringe of a Two-Zone Floodplain Policy Area. Consequently, the property is regulated by the GRCA under Ontario Regulation 150/06. Messrs. R. Parent, D. Stubbs and D. Finn and Ms. L. Puddicombe and were in attendance in support of the subject application and the staff recommendation. In response to questions, Ms. J. von Westerholt advised the requested variances for the subject properties are to accommodate the development of transformer substations for the ION Rapid Transit project. She noted that substations are due to be constructed throughout the City in various different Zones with varying requirements in the Zoning By-law for development. The applications for consideration this date request relief for the pending developments as required within the specific Zone where the property is located. Questions were raised regarding the design of the proposed structure; Mr. Parent advised they would be very similar to a hydro vault facility. Ms. von Westerholt indicated all of the sites are still subject to the Site Plan approval process. Submission No. A 2016-013 Moved by Ms. P. Kohli Seconded by Mr. B. McColl That the application of the Region of Waterloo requesting permission to construct a Traction Power Substation for Light Rail Transit (LRT) having a setback of 11m (36.089’) whereas the By-law permits a maximum setback of 7.5m (24.606’); a Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 0 rather than the required 1; having no façade openings whereas the By-law requires 40% of the façade to have openings every 4m (13.123’); having no façade height whereas the By-law requires a height of 6m (19.685’); and, a primary floor façade of 0 whereas the By-law requires 50% abutting a street line, on Part Lot 18, Plan 364 and Part Lot 19, Plan 365, 230 Charles BE APPROVED. Street East, Kitchener, Ontario, 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 COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 19, 2016 - 19 - Submission Nos.: 7.A 2016-013, A 2016-014 & A 2016-015 (Cont’d) Submission No. A 2016-014 Moved by Ms. P. Kohli Seconded by Mr. B. McColl That the application of the Region of Waterloo requesting permission to construct a Traction Power Substation for Light Rail Transit (LRT) having a front yard setback of 4.5m (14.763’) rather than the required 6m (19.685’); a lot width of 14.068m (46.213’) rather than the required 15m (49.212’); and, a rear yard setback of 2.5m (8.202’) rather than the required 7.5m (24.606’), on Part Lot 25, Plan 404, being Parts 1 and 2 on Reference Plan 58R-18049, 495 Charles Street BE APPROVED East, Kitchener, Ontario, . 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 Submission No. A 2016-015 Moved by Ms. P. Kohli Seconded by Mr. B. McColl That the application of the Region of Waterloo requesting permission to construct a Traction Power Substation for Light Rail Transit (LRT) having a front yard setback of 2.5m (8.202’) rather than the required 6m (19.685’), on Part Block G, Plan 1221, being Part 5 on Reference Plan 58R- BE APPROVED 17971, 1605 Block Line Road, Kitchener, Ontario, . 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.: 8. A 2016-016 Applicant: 324 Frederick St. Ltd. Property Location: 324 Frederick Street / 119 Filbert Street Legal Description: Part Lot 15, Plan 111 Appearances: In Support: A. Bast M. Warzecha Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to add a residential unit to an existing convenience retail / three-unit residential dwelling having the required off-street parking COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 19, 2016 - 20 - Submission No.: 8.A 2016-016 (Cont’d) located between the front façade and the street line, whereas the By-law does not permit parking between the building façade and street line; and, to have parking setback 0m from the street line rather than the required 3m (9.842’). The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated January 11, 2016, advising the subject property located at the west corner of Frederick and Filbert Streets is zoned Commercial Residential One (CR-1) with Special Regulation Provision 114R and Special Use Provisions 124U and 128U in Zoning By-law 85-1. The subject property is designated Low Density Commercial Residential in the City’s Official Plan and is located in the Central Frederick Secondary Plan with Special Policy 1 which permits convenience retail use at 324 Frederick Street. The subject property has a legal non-conforming parking requirement of 0 spaces for the existing three residential units and one commercial unit, as these uses were established prior to the parking regulations. Historically, parking has been provided on-site on non-complying pavement in the front yard and in the side yard abutting Filbert Street. Staff cannot support parking in the Corner Visibility Triangle (CVT) at the intersection of Frederick and Filbert Streets, or in the side yard abutting Filbert Street due to safety concerns. The pavement should therefore be removed from these areas. 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 subject property is designated Low Density Commercial Residential in the City’s Official Plan and is located in the Central Frederick Secondary Plan with Special Policy 1. The intent of the land use designation is to provide commercial residential uses which respect the role of Downtown Kitchener, the operational constraints of Frederick Street and the scale and use of the adjacent low rise, low density residential area. The applicant is requesting variances with the intent to continue the successful residential and convenience retail uses, respecting the scale and character of the surrounding neighbourhood. The proposed variances conform to the designation and it is the opinion of staff that the requested variances are appropriate. The intent of the parking setback regulation is to allow vehicles to safely enter and exit the property while maintaining adequate sight lines to other vehicles and pedestrians. Transportation Services staff has reviewed the requested minor variances and is satisfied that vehicular and pedestrian safety can be maintained, therefore the variances meet the intent of the Zoning By- law. The intent of the regulation to restrict parking between the building façade and street line along Frederick Street is to promote an active streetscape and pedestrian environment. As shown on the applicant’s parking plan, the principle building’s active front entrance and window will not be obstructed from view from the street by parking, thereby respecting and activating the street and improving current conditions. The variances are considered minor as permitting parking between the front façade and street line at a distance of 0 metres from the street line along Frederick Street should not present any significant impacts to adjacent properties and the overall neighbourhood. The variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land as the proposed parking arrangement allows vehicles to enter and exit the parking spaces at a location outside of the CVT at the intersection of Frederick and Filbert streets, improving current conditions. The requested variance does not present any significant impacts to adjacent properties and the overall neighbourhood. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated December 22, 2015, advising although they have no concerns with this application, they noted under a more extensive development application the Region of Waterloo will impose conditions. Regional conditions may include, but are not limited to, a road widening and daylight triangle dedication at the Frederick Street frontage of the property. Also, access to the property from Frederick Street would also be re-assessed at that time of a future development application. The Committee considered the report of the Grand River Conservation Authority, dated January 4, 2016, advising they have no concerns with this application. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 19, 2016 - 21 - Submission No.: 8.A 2016-016 (Cont’d) Mr. A. Bast was in attendance in support of the subject application. He requested clarification on Condition 1 related to Site Plan approval where it references removal of the existing asphalt. He indicated that he has no objections to the comments regarding the reinstatement of the CVT but he has some concerns with the requirement to remove the asphalt in that location. He indicated with staffs approval he would like consideration to be given to reinstating the CVT with hardscaping options, including things like: planter boxes, benches, etc. Ms. J. von Westerholt advised staff are requesting removal of the asphalt and reinstatement of the curb on Filbert Street to deter parking and re-establish the CVT. She indicated as part of Site Plan approval, staff will work with the applicant to determine an amenable solution. Mr. D. Seller advised Transportation staff have identified concerns with the Filbert Street access and the CVT. He stated the comments to reinstate the curb and install grass in the boulevard area are unlikely to change. Ms. von Westerholt commented Transportation Staff will be involved in the Site Plan approval process and further details regarding the Filbert Street access and CVT will be determined through that process. Mr. Bast advised he has no objections to the reinstatement of the CVT; he indicated his only concern with the Condition is the requirement to remove the asphalt. He noted that if staff are open to considering other alternatives, he has no objections to the staff recommendation. Moved by Ms. P. Kohli Seconded by Mr. B. McColl That the application of 324 Frederick St. Ltd. requesting permission to add a residential unit to an existing convenience retail / three-unit residential dwelling having the required off-street parking located between the front façade and the street line, whereas the By-law does not permit parking between the building façade and street line; and, to have parking setback 0m from the street line rather than the required 3m (9.842’), on Part Lot 15, Plan 111, 324 Frederick Street / 119 Filbert BE APPROVED Street, Kitchener, Ontario, , subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall receive Site Plan approval to the satisfaction of the Manager of Site Development and Customer Service. The Site Plan application shall include: a. That the existing access to Filbert Street be closed and curbing be reinstated. b. That asphalt be removed from the Corner Visibility Triangle (CVT) at Frederick and Filbert Streets and replaced with landscaping. c. That asphalt be removed from the side yard abutting Filbert Street and replaced with landscaping. 2. That the owner shall obtain an Occupancy (Zoning) Permit for the property for the new residential unit and limiting accessory uses to a maximum of 25 percent of the convenience retail floor area. 3. That the owner shall obtain a Building Permit for any interior renovation work from the Building Division. 4. That the owner shall complete Conditions 1 to 3 prior to September 1, 2016. Any request for a time extension must be approved in writing by the Manager of Development Review (or designate), prior to completion date set out in this decision. Failure to fulfill these conditions will result in this approval becoming null and void. 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. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 19, 2016 - 22 - Submission No.: 8.A 2016-016 (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 CONSENT APPLICATION: Submission No.: 1. B 2016-001 Applicant: Waterloo Standard Condominium Corp. 597 Property Location: 85 Gage Avenue Legal Description: Part Lot 13, Plan 402 Appearances: In Support: M. Zarkari L. Hrivnak Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to sever a parcel of land having a width of 5.66m (18.569’) a depth of 73.415m (240.862’) and an area of 485.1 sq.m. (5221.573 sq.ft) to be conveyed as a lot addition to 89 Gage Avenue to complete a residential condominium development. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated January 8, 2016, advising the subject properties are municipally addressed as 77-85 Gage Ave and 89 Gage Ave. 77-85 Gave Ave is developed with 28 cluster townhouse units and 89 Gage Ave is developed with a Single Detached Dwelling. The lands are zoned R-6 in Zoning By-law 85-1 and designated as Low Rise Residential the City’s Official Plan. The owner of 77-85 Gage Ave is requesting consent to allow a portion of their lands to be severed as a lot addition to 89 Gage Ave to allow for future development of the property. Planning Comments: The application proposes to sever a parcel of land from 77-85 Gage Avenue and add it to the abutting property at 89 Gage Avenue by way of a lot addition. The proposed parcel of land to be severed has a width of 5.66 metres, a depth of 73.415 metres, and an area of 485.1 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, Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposed severance conforms to the City’s Official Plan and that the configuration of the proposed lot addition can be considered appropriate for the use of the lands. Minor variances are required to bring the proposed lot addition into conformity with the Zoning By-law prior to the consent application being approved. Based on the foregoing, Planning staff recommends that this application be approved with conditions. Engineering Comments: • A surface drainage easement is required on 85 Gage Avenue for storm drainage flows from 89 Gage Avenue. One is also required on 89 Gage Avenue in favour of 85 Gage Avenue for drainage due to the effects of the stormwater management plan for the site. • A 5.0m wide easement in favour of 89 Gage Avenue centered over the existing sanitary sewer on 85 Gage Avenue is required for sanitary servicing. • A 5.0m wide easement in favour of 85 Gage Avenue is required over the existing fire hydrant and lead. • A 5.0m wide easement in favour of 89 Gage Avenue is required over the storm pipe from CBMH1 to MH2 and an easement is also required for the storm pipe connecting to the existing OGS unit from proposed CB3. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 19, 2016 - 23 - Submission No.: 1.B 2016-001 (Cont’d) • A reference plan detailing all easements for the property will be required to the satisfaction of the Engineering Division prior to severance approval. • A general servicing plan overlaid with the reference plan for all required easements will be required to the satisfaction of the Engineering Division prior to severance approval. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Planning, Development and Legislative Services, dated January 11, 2016, advising they have no objections to this application. Messrs. M. Zarkari and L. Hrivnak were in attendance in support of the subject application and the staff recommendation. The Chair requested clarification on the comments provided by Parks Operations related to Parkland dedication, noting that it has always been common practise for the City to request Parkland Dedication at the earliest stage in a proposed development. Ms. J. von Westerholt advised the application is unconventional in nature, noting that there are two different plans of Condominiums for the subject properties and the proposed severance is intended to correct errors in the staging process to complete both developments. She noted staff do not have any concerns with delaying the Parkland Dedication requirement to the Site Plan approval process. The Chair indicated it would be his preference to amend the staff recommendation to include an additional Condition requiring the applicant to make satisfactory financial arrangements through the Site Plan Approval process to ensure the dedication is received prior to the severance receiving final approval. In response to questions, Mr. Zarkari advised he should receive Site Plan approval within the required one-year time frame outlined by the Planning Act to complete the severance process. He indicated he had no objections to the proposed amendment to include the Condition for parkland dedication. Moved by Ms. P. Kohli Seconded by Mr. B. McColl That the application of Waterloo Standard Condominium Corp. 597 requesting permission to sever a parcel of land having a width of 5.66m (18.569’) a depth of 73.415m (240.862’) and an area of 485.1 sq.m. (5221.573 sq.ft) to be conveyed as a lot addition to 89 Gage Avenue to complete a residential condominium development, on Part Lot 13, Plan 402, 85 Gage Avenue, BE GRANTED Kitchener, Ontario, , 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 .dgn (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. 3. That the owner shall receive approval of a draft reference plan showing the proposed easements to the satisfaction of the City’s Director of Planning. 4. That the owner shall submit a servicing plan with the reference plan for all required easements to the satisfaction of the Engineering Division. 5. That the owners of the proposed dominant lands and servient lands shall enter into a Joint Maintenance Agreement to be approved by the City Solicitor, to ensure that the easements are maintained in perpetuity, which agreement shall be registered on title immediately following the Transfer Easements. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT JANUARY 19, 2016 - 24 - Submission No.: 1.B 2016-001 (Cont’d) 6. That a satisfactory Solicitor’s Undertaking to register the approved Transfer Easements, and immediately thereafter the approved Joint Maintenance Agreement be provided to the City Solicitor. 7. That the City Solicitor shall be provided with copies of the registered Transfer Easements and Joint Maintenance Agreement immediately following registration. 8. That the lands to be severed be added to the abutting lands and title be taken into identical ownership as the abutting lands. The deed for endorsement shall include that any subsequent conveyance of the parcel to be severed shall comply with Sections 50(3) and/or (5) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended. 9. That the owner’s solicitor shall provide a Solicitor’s Undertaking to register an Application Consolidation Parcels immediately following the registration of the Severance Deed and prior to any new applicable mortgages, and to provide a copy of the registered Application Consolidation Parcels to the City Solicitor within a reasonable time following registration. 10. That the owner shall remove or relocate the fence to the retained lands to the satisfaction of the City’s Director of Planning by May 1, 2016. 11. That the owner shall submit an updated Site Plan for 77-85 Gage Avenue to the satisfaction of the City’s Director of Planning by May 1, 2016. 12. That the owner shall amend the Condominium Declaration to include all easements to the satisfaction of City’s Director of Planning and the City Solicitor. 13. That through the Site Plan approval process the owner shall make satisfactory financial arrangements with Parks Operations for the payment of parkland dedication. 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 January 19, 2018. Carried ADJOURNMENT On motion, the meeting adjourned at 11:00 a.m. Dated at the City of Kitchener this 19th day of January, 2016. Dianna Saunderson Secretary-Treasurer Committee of Adjustment