Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016-12-13 COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FOR THE CITY OF KITCHENER MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING HELD DECEMBER 13, 2016 MEMBERS PRESENT: Messrs. D. Cybalski, A. Head and B. McColl, Ms. J. Meader and Ms. P. Kohli. OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ms. J. von Westerholt, Senior Planner; Mr. D. Seller, Traffic & Parking Analyst; Mr. T. Brubacher, Committee Administrator; Ms. D. Saunderson, Secretary-Treasurer; and, Ms. H. Dyson, Administrative Clerk. Mr. D. Cybalski, Chair, called this meeting to order at 9:35 a.m. CHAIR AND VICE-CHAIR On motion by Mr. B. McColl It was resolved: That Mr. D. Cybalski be appointed Chair of the Committee of Adjustment and Mr. A. Head be appointed Vice-Chair of the Committee of Adjustment for a term to expire November 30, 2017. Carried MINUTES Moved by Ms. P. Kohli Seconded by Mr. B. McColl That the minutes of the regular meeting of the Committee of Adjustment held November 15, 2016, as mailed to the members, be accepted. Carried UNFINISHED BUSINESS MINOR VARIANCE 1. Submission No.: A 2016-116 Applicants: 2437612 Ontario Inc./1841949 Ontario Inc. Property Location: 58 Howe Drive Legal Description: Part Lot 47, German Company Tract, being Part 1 on Reference Plan 58R-13007 Appearances: In Support: M. Ellis Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission for the existing multi- residential dwelling (known as Block ‘A’ closest to Howe Drive) to have a front yard setback of 3.98m rather than the required 4.5m; and, a westerly side yard setback of 2.32m rather than the required 2.5m. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated November 4, 2016, advising in June 2014, the Committee issued approval for a variance on the property (Application: A 2014- 027) to permit a reduced rear yard setback of 1.5 metres, whereas 7.5 metres is required. The COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 374 -DECEMBER 13, 2016 1. Submission No.: A 2016-116 (Cont’d) subject property located at 58 Howe Drive is designated Low Rise Residential in the City’s Official Plan and zoned Residential Six Zone (R-6) in Zoning By-law 85-1. There are two recently constructed multiple dwellings on the subject property (referred to in this report as Building A & Building B), for which Building Permits were issued on May 29, 2015. The owner is requesting relief from Section 40.2.6 of the Zoning By-law to legalize a reduced front yard setback of 3.98 metres, whereas 4.5 metres is required; and, to legalize a reduced side yard setback of 2.32 metres, whereas 2.5 metres is required. The owner applied to legalize these variances to correct an error made during the foundation construction of the multiple dwelling located on the southern portion of the property (Building A). In considering the four tests for minor variances as outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O., 1990 Chap. P. 13, as amended, Planning staff offers the followingcomments. The 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. The minor change to the front and side yard setback will maintain the low density character of the property and surrounding neighbourhood. The proposed variance conforms to the designation and it is the opinion of staff that the requested variances are appropriate. The requested variance to legalize the front yard setback on the subject property at 3.98 metres from the front lot line, whereas 4.5 metres is required, meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The purpose of the front yard setback of 4.5 metres is to allow for sufficient separation between front lot line and the structure. It is the opinion of staff that legalizing the existing front yard setback of 3.98 metres on this property is appropriate as there is adequate separation distance between the front lot line and the existing structure. The requested variance to legalize the side yard setback of the subject property at 2.32 metres, whereas 2.5 metres is required, meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The purpose of a side yard setback of 2.5 metres is to provide adequate separation from neighbouring properties, to allow property owners enough space to maintain any exterior walls along the side lot line, and to provide enough room to access the rear yard. It is the opinion of staff that a 0.18 metre reduction in the side yard setback will still allow for adequate separation between neighbouring properties. There is an existing tree line and fence along a portion of the side yard lot line which mitigates any impacts of a reduced side yard setback. With regards to property maintenance and rear yard access, the reduced side yard setback would still allow enough space for the property owners to maintain the exterior side walls of Building A and to access the rear yard. The variances can be considered minor as the reduced front and side yard setback will not present any significant impacts to adjacent properties and the overall neighbourhood. The front yard setback encroaches 0.52 metres into the required front yard setback, maintaining sufficient separation between the front lot line and the structure. The side yard setback encroaches 0.18 metres into the required side yard setback, maintaining adequate separation between neighbouring properties, and allowing enough space for property maintenance on the exterior side walls and for access to the rear yard. The variances are appropriate development for the property and surrounding area. The proposed variances will not impact the character of the subject property or surrounding neighbourhood. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated October 31, 2016, advising they have no concerns with this application. The Committee considered comments from the Ministry of Transportation (MTO) advising they have no objection to the subject application. Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Ms. P. Kohli COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 375 -DECEMBER 13, 2016 1. Submission No.: A 2016-116 (Cont’d) That the application of 2437612 Ontario Inc./1841949 Ontario Inc. requesting permission for the existing multi-residential dwelling (known as Block ‘A’ closest to Howe Drive) to have a front yard setback of 3.98m rather than the required 4.5m; and, a westerly side yard setback of 2.32m rather than the required 2.5m, on Part Lot 47, German Company Tract, being Part 1 on Reference Plan 58R-13007, 58 Howe Drive, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED. 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. Pursuant to Section 45 of the Planning Act, all oral and written submissions were considered and taken into account as part of the Committee’s decision-making process with respect to the subject application. For more information please review the meeting minutes, which are available on the City’s website at www.kitchener.ca Carried Ms. J. Meader entered the meeting at this time. 2. Submission No.: A 2016-118 Applicant: Milestone Developments Inc. Property Location: 2 Willowrun Drive Legal Description: Lot 24, Registered Plan 58M-575 Appearances: In Support: P. Haramis Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to construct a single detached dwelling having a driveway located 7.69m from the intersection of Willowrun Drive and Grand Flats Trail rather than the required 9m. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated November 1, 2016, advising the subject property located at 2 Willowrun Drive is designated Low Rise Residential in the City’s Official Plan and is zoned Residential Four Zone (R-4) with Special Regulation Provision 597R in the City’s Zoning By-law. The subject property is located at the intersection of Grand Flats Trail and Willow Run Drive and the property currently contains no structures. The owner is requesting relief from section 6.1.1.1 b) iv) of the Zoning By-law for a driveway to be located 7.69 metres from the intersection of the street lines abutting a lot for a single detached dwelling, whereas the By-law requires 9 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 regarding the requested minor variances. The requested variance for the proposed location of the driveway to the intersecting street lines 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 will permit a reduced setback of the driveway to the intersecting street lines for the proposed townhouse dwelling. The minor change will maintain the low density character of the property and surrounding neighbourhood. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 376 -DECEMBER 13, 2016 2. Submission No.: A 2016-118 (Cont’d) The intent of the required 9 metre separation from the driveway to the intersection of the street lines abutting the corner lot is to ensure pedestrian and vehicular safety. It is staff’s opinion that the 1.31 metre reduction is minor and will not impact the property or access to the intersection and will therefore not compromise safety to pedestrians or vehicles. Transportation Planning staff has also indicated they have no concerns with the requested reduction of 9.0 metres to 7.69 metres. The variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The variance is considered minor as it is staff’s opinion that the proposed 7.69 metre setback from the intersecting street lines allows for sufficient separation from the driveway and as such, will not impact access or visibility to the intersection for vehicular and/or pedestrian traffic. The variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land as it is staff’s opinion that the requested variance will not impact the subject property, adjacent lands abutting intersection or safety of pedestrian or vehicular traffic. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated October 31, 2016, advising they have no concerns with this application. Mr. B. McColl noted in past applications similar in nature, a condition was imposed requiring the applicant to obtain a Building Permit. He requested, and it was agreed, that a condition requiring a Building Permit be included as part of the Committee’s decision. Mr. P. Haramis was in attendance in support of the subject application and the staff recommendation, adding he was not opposed to adding a condition to require a Building Permit. Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Ms. P. Kohli That the application of Milestone Developments Inc. requesting permission to construct a single detached dwelling having a driveway located 7.69m from the intersection of Willowrun Drive and Grand Flats Trail rather than the required 9m, on Lot 24, Registered Plan 58M-575, 2 Willowrun Drive, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following condition: 1. That the owner shall obtain a Building Permit for the proposed single detached dwelling. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance requested in this application is minor. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-Law and Official Plan is being maintained on the subject property. Pursuant to Section 45 of the Planning Act, all oral and written submissions were considered and taken into account as part of the Committee’s decision-making process with respect to the subject application. For more information please review the meeting minutes, which are available on the City’s website at www.kitchener.ca Carried 3. Submission No.: A 2016-119 Applicant: Milestone Developments Inc. Property Location: 79 Willowrun Drive Legal Description: Lot 41, Registered Plan 58M-575 Appearances: In Support: P. Haramis Contra: None Written Submissions: None COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 377 -DECEMBER 13, 2016 3. Submission No.: A 2016-119 (Cont’d) The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to construct a single detached dwelling having a driveway located 7.68m from the intersection of Willowrun Drive and Sandybay Avenue rather than the required 9m. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated November 1, 2016, advising the subject property located at 79 Willowrun Drive is designated Low Rise Residential in the City’s Official Plan and is zoned Residential Four Zone (R-4) with Special Regulation Provision 597R in the City’s Zoning By-law. The subject property is located at the intersection of Willow Run Drive and Sandybay Avenue and the property currently contains no structures. The owner is requesting relief from section 6.1.1.1 b) iv) of the Zoning By-law for a driveway to be located 7.68 metres from the intersection of the street lines abutting a lot for a single detached dwelling, whereas the By-law requires 9 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 regarding the requested minor variances. The requested variance for the proposed location of the driveway to the intersecting street lines 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 will permit a reduced setback of the driveway to the intersecting street lines for the proposed townhouse dwelling. The minor change will maintain the low density character of the property and surrounding neighbourhood. The intent of the required 9 metre separation from the driveway to the intersection of the street lines abutting the corner lot is to ensure pedestrian and vehicular safety. It is staff’s opinion that the 1.32 metre reduction is minor and will not impact the property or access to the intersection and will therefore not compromise safety to pedestrians or vehicles. Transportation Planning staff has also indicated they have no concerns with the requested reduction of 9.0 metres to 7.68 metres. The variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The variance is considered minor as it is staff’s opinion that the proposed 7.68 metre setback from the intersecting street lines allows for sufficient separation from the driveway and as such, will not impact access or visibility to the intersection for vehicular and/or pedestrian traffic. The variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land as it is staff’s opinion that the requested variance will not impact the subject property, adjacent lands abutting intersection or safety of pedestrian or vehicular traffic. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated October 31, 2016, advising they have no concerns with this application. Mr. B. McColl noted in past applications similar in nature, a condition was imposed requiring the applicant to obtain a Building Permit. He requested, and it was agreed, that a condition requiring a Building Permit be included as part of the Committee’s decision. Mr. P. Haramis was in attendance in support of the subject application and the staff recommendation, adding he was not opposed to adding a condition to require a Building Permit. Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Ms. P. Kohli That the application of Milestone Developments Inc. requesting permission to construct a single detached dwelling having a driveway located 7.68m from the intersection of Willowrun Drive and Sandybay Avenue rather than the required 9m, on Lot 41, Registered Plan 58M-575, 79 Willowrun Drive, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following condition: 1. That the owner shall obtain a Building Permit for the proposed single detached dwelling. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance requested in this application is minor. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 378 -DECEMBER 13, 2016 3. Submission No.: A 2016-119 (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. Pursuant to Section 45 of the Planning Act, all oral and written submissions were considered and taken into account as part of the Committee’s decision-making process with respect to the subject application. For more information please review the meeting minutes, which are available on the City’s website at www.kitchener.ca Carried 4. Submission No.: A 2016-120 Applicants: Zach and Stephanie Makrydakis Property Location: 418 Zeller Drive Legal Description: Part Block 10, Registered Plan 58M-367, being Part 16 on Reference Plan 58R-16593 Appearances: In Support: S. Bowen Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to construct an addition in the rear yard of an existing single detached dwelling having a rear yard setback of 5.75m rather than the required 7.5m. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated November 4, 2016, advising the subject property located at 418 Zeller Drive is designated Low Rise Residential in the City’s Official Plan and zoned Residential Three Zone (R-3) with Special Regulation 326R in Zoning By- law 85-1. There is an existing single detached dwelling on the subject property. The owner is requesting relief from Section 37.2.1 to permit a reduced rear yard setback of 5.75 metres to accommodate the proposed construction of a covered deck in the rear yard, whereas 7.5 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 followingcomments: The subject property is designated Low Rise Residential in the City’s Official Plan. The proposed variance meets the intent of the Official Plan, which encourages a range of housing forms that achieve an overall low density neighbourhood. The minor change to the rear yard setback will maintain the low density character of the property and surrounding neighbourhood. The proposed variance conforms to the designation and it is the opinion of staff that the requested variance is appropriate. The requested variance to legalize the location of the proposed covered deck at 5.75 metres from the rear lot line, whereas 7.5 metres is required, meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The purpose of a rear yard setback of 7.5 metres is to provide an outdoor amenity space as well as adequate separation from neighbouring properties. It is the opinion of staff that the proposed covered deck with a rear yard setback of 5.75 metres will continue to allow for an amenity space and will not impact adjacent properties. The variance can be considered minor as the reduced rear yard setback will not present any significant impacts to adjacent properties and the overall neighbourhood. The covered deck would encroach 1.75 metres into the required rear yard setback, maintaining a sufficient outdoor amenity feature, as the proposed covered deck serves as an amenity space. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 379 -DECEMBER 13, 2016 4. Submission No.: A 2016-120 (Cont’d) The variance is appropriate development for the property and surrounding area. The scale, massing and height of the proposed covered deck are appropriate and consistent with the existing single detached dwelling. The proposed variance will not impact the character of the subject property or surrounding neighbourhood. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated October 31, 2016, advising they have no concerns with this application. Moved by Ms. P. Kohli Seconded by Mr. A. Head That the application of Zach and Stephanie Makrydakis requesting permission to construct a covered deck in the rear yard of an existing single detached dwelling having a rear yard setback of 5.75m rather than the required 7.5m, on Part Block 10, Registered Plan 58M-367, being Part 16 on Reference Plan 58R-16593, 418 Zeller Drive, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following condition: 1. That the owners shall obtain a Building Permit for the construction of the proposed covered deck by June 30, 2017. 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. Pursuant to Section 45 of the Planning Act, all oral and written submissions were considered and taken into account as part of the Committee’s decision-making process with respect to the subject application. For more information please review the meeting minutes, which are available on the City’s website at www.kitchener.ca Carried The Committee recessed at 9:39 a.m. and re-convened at 10:06 a.m., Chaired by Mr. D. Cybalski with all members present. NEW BUSINESS MINOR VARIANCE 1. Submission No.: A 2016-130 Applicants: N. Skalkos and S. LeRiche Property Location: 224 River Road East Legal Description: Lot 57, Plan 937 Appearances: In Support: N. Skalkos Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to convert the garage into living space on an existing single detached dwelling having the required parking space located 3.8m from the street line rather than the required 6m. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 380 -DECEMBER 13, 2016 1. Submission No.: A 2016-130 (Cont’d) The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated December 2, 2016, advising the subject property located at 224 River Road East is designated Low Rise Residential in the City’s Official Plan and zoned Residential Three (R-3) in Zoning By-law 85-1. The property contains an existing single detached dwelling which is proposed to be converted into a duplex. To accommodate the second required parking space, the owner is requesting relief from Section 6.1.1.1 b) i) to locate the off-street parking space at a distance of 3.8 metres from the street line, 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 followingcomments: The subject property is designated Low Rise Residential in the City’s Official Plan. The proposed variance meets the intent of the Official Plan, which encourages a range of housing forms that achieve an overall low density neighbourhood. The minor change will maintain the low density character of the property and surrounding neighbourhood. The proposed variance conforms to the designation and it is the opinion of staff that the requested variance is appropriate. The requested variance to the legalize the 3.8 metre off-street parking space setback from the street line, whereas 6.0 metres is required, meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The intent of the 6.0 metre required setback is to allow for a vehicle to be safely parked on the driveway without affecting the City right-of-way and surrounding properties. It is the opinion of both Planning and Transportation staff that the 2.2 metre reduction in the parking setback is minor and will not affect the City right-of-way or neighbouring properties. As such, staff is satisfied the variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The variance can be considered minor as a 2.2 metres reduction in the parking space setback will not present any significant impacts to adjacent properties and the safety of the overall neighbourhood has not been compromised. The proposed variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land. The proposed variance should 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 November 23, 2016, advising they have no concerns with this application. Mr. N. Skalkos was in attendance in support of the subject application and the staff recommendation. Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Ms. P. Kohli That the application of Nick Skalkos and Sarah LeRiche requesting permission to convert the existing single detached dwelling into a duplex having the required off-street parking located 3.8m from the street line rather than the required 6m, on Lot 57, Plan 937, 224 River Road East, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following condition: 1. That the shall owner shall reinstate landscaping to any asphalt surface located in the westerly side yard between the front façade and the rear façade of the existing residential dwelling prior to September 1, 2017 to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance requested in this application is minor. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-Law and Official Plan is being maintained on the subject property. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 381 -DECEMBER 13, 2016 1. Submission No.: A 2016-130 (Cont’d) Pursuant to Section 45 of the Planning Act, all oral and written submissions were considered and taken into account as part of the Committee’s decision-making process with respect to the subject application. For more information please review the meeting minutes, which are available on the City’s website at www.kitchener.ca Carried 2. Submission No.: A 2016-131 Applicant: Tom and Betsy Pawson Property Location: 94 Chapel Street Legal Description: Part Lots 127, 128, 161 & 162, Plan 414 Appearances: In Support: T. Pawson Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to construct a dormer addition on an existing single detached dwelling having a westerly side yard setback of 0.6m rather than the required 1.2m; an easterly side yard setback of 2.56m rather than the required 13m; a front yard setback of 1.92m rather than the required 4.5m; a driveway width of 2.56m rather than the required 2.6m; and, a 2.59m encroachment into the Driveway Visibility Triangle (DVT) whereas the By-law does not permit encroachments into the DVT. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated December 5, 2016, advising the subject property is designated Low Rise Conservation-A in the City’s Central Frederick Secondary Plan and zoned Residential Five (R-5) with Special Use Provision 129U, which prohibits multiple dwellings. The lands are developed with an existing single detached dwelling. The owners are proposing to construct a dormer addition and as such, are requesting relief from Section 39.2.1 to legalize the existing front yard setback of 1.92 metres, whereas 4.5 metres is required; Section 39.2.1 to legalize the existing side yard setback of 0.6 metres, whereas 1.2 metres is required; Section 39.2.1 to legalize the existing side yard setback of 2.56 metres, whereas 3 metres is required where the driveway is located in the side yard; Section 5.3 to allow a portion of the existing covered porch to encroach 2.59 metres into the DVT, whereas no encroachments into the DVT are permitted; and, Section 6.1.1.1 b) ii) b) to legalize the existing driveway width of 2.56 metres, whereas 2.6 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 followingcomments. The subject property is designated Low Rise Conservation-A in the City’s Central Frederick Secondary Plan. The proposed variances meet the intent of the designation, which preserves the scale, use, and intensity of existing development. Given that the purpose of the requested variances is to legalize existing non-compliances, the minor changes will maintain the low density character of the property and surrounding neighbourhood. As such, staff is satisfied the proposed variances conform to the designation and it is the opinion of staff that the requested variances are appropriate. The requested variance to legalize the existing 1.92 metre front yard setback, whereas 4.5 metres is required, meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The intent of the 4.5 metre front yard setback is to provide separation between the structure and the street line. As this setback is existing, staff is satisfied the reduction of 2.58 metres from the required 4.5 metres will maintain adequate separation. The requested variance to legalize the existing 0.6 metre westerly side yard setback, whereas 1.2 metres is required, meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The intent of the 1.2 metre side yard setback is to ensure there is adequate separation between the dwelling and adjacent properties, as well as to maintain access to the rear yard. As this setback is existing, staff is satisfied there is adequate separation. Further, rear yard access is provided by the 2.56 metre easterly side yard on the opposite side of the house. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 382 -DECEMBER 13, 2016 2. Submission No.: A 2016-131 (Cont’d) The requested variance to legalize the existing 2.56 metre easterly side yard setback, whereas 3 metres is required where the driveway is located in the side yard, meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The intent of the 3 metre side yard setback is to ensure there is enough space for a legal driveway while maintaining separation between the building and neighbouring property. The applicant has also requested to legalize the existing driveway width of 2.56 metres, whereas 2.6 metres is required. As the proposed driveway width and side yard setback are both existing conditions, staff is satisfied the variances meet the intent of the Zoning By-law The requested variance to allow the existing covered porch to encroach 2.59 metres into the DVT meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The intent of the 4.57 metre DVT is to provide visibility for vehicles exiting the driveway and for pedestrians. Though the existing porch encroaches 2.59 metres into the DVT, visibility is maintained by the remaining 1.98 metre separation from the street and by the separation created by the City boulevard between the property line and the roadway. Further, staff notes that there is no pedestrian sidewalk located on this side of Chapel Street. As such, staff is satisfied the requested variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The variances can be considered minor as the reduced front and side yard setbacks, encroachment into the DVT, and reduced driveway width will not present any significant impacts to adjacent properties and the overall neighbourhood. The purpose of these variances is to legalize existing conditions in order to facilitate a minor expansion to the existing single detached dwelling. As such, the impact of these variances will be negligible. The proposed variances are appropriate for the development and use of the land, as the proposed residential use is a permitted use in the Zoning By-law. No major changes are proposed to the scale, massing and height of the subject building, therefore it 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 November 23, 2016, advising they have no concerns with this application. The Chair noted the written submission from a neighbouring property owner in support of the subject application. Mr. T. Pawson was in attendance in support of the subject application and the staff recommendation. Moved by Ms. J. Meader Seconded by Ms. P. Kohli That the application of Tom and Betsy Pawson requesting permission to construct a dormer addition on an existing single detached dwelling having a westerly side yard setback of 0.6m rather than the required 1.2m; an easterly side yard setback of 2.56m whereas the Bylaw requires a 3, setback when the driveway is located in the side yard; a front yard setback of 1.92m rather than the required 4.5m; a driveway width of 2.56m rather than the required 2.6m; and, for the existing porch to encroach 2.59m into the Driveway Visibility Triangle (DVT) whereas the By-law does not permit encroachments into the DVT, on Part Lots 127, 128, 161 & 162, Plan 414, 94 Chapel Street, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following condition: 1. That the owner shall obtain a Building Permit for the proposed dormer addition. 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. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 383 -DECEMBER 13, 2016 2. Submission No.: A 2016-131 (Cont’d) Pursuant to Section 45 of the Planning Act, all oral and written submissions were considered and taken into account as part of the Committee’s decision-making process with respect to the subject application. For more information please review the meeting minutes, which are available on the City’s website at www.kitchener.ca Carried 3. Submission No.: A 2016-132 Applicant: Ryan Gottwald Property Location: 15 Sweetbriar Drive Legal Description: Part Lot 86, Registered Plan 955, being Parts 2 & 3 on Reference Plan 58R-17397 Appearances: In Support: R. Gottwald Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to construct a covered porch in the rear yard of an existing single detached dwelling having a rear yard setback of 4.95m rather than the required 7.5m. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated December 1, 2016, advising the subject property located at 15 Sweetbriar Drive is zoned Residential Three (R-3) in the Zoning By-law 85-1 and designated Low Rise Residential in the City’s Official Plan. The subject property was severed from 204 Stonybrook Drive in 2011 (B 2011-054), and Application A 2011–065 legalized the deficient lot area of 400.13m². The owner is proposing to legalize an existing covered deck attached to the single detached dwelling that extends into the rear yard. The owner is seeking relief from Section 37.2.1 of the Zoning By-law to reduce the rear yard setback from 7.5 metres to 4.95 metres to legalize the covered deck. During a site inspection of the property, staff noticed that the existing stairs and railings are located in the Driveway Visibility Triangle (DVT). Staff is recommending additional relief from Section 5.3 of the Zoning By-law to allow the steps and railings greater than 0.9 metres in height to encroach within the 4.57 metres by 4.57 metres DVT whereas the Zoning By-law does not allow any objects 0.9 metres or greater in height to be located in the DVT. In considering the four tests for minor variances as outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O., 1990 Chap. P. 13, as amended, Planning staff offers the followingcomments. The 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. The covered deck, stairs and railings are existing and the proposed variances will permit a reduced minimum rear yard setback and legalize the stairs and railings while continuing to maintain the low density character of the property and surrounding neighbourhood. The proposed variances conform to the designation and it is the opinion of staff that the requested variances are appropriate. The requested variance to reduce the rear yard setback from 7.5 metres to 4.95 metres meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The intent of the 7.5 metre setback is to provide adequate amenity space in the rear yard. The reduction of 2.55 metres from the required 7.5 metres is minor as the covered deck is existing and the 4.95 metre rear yard setback provides sufficient amenity space in the rear yard. The proposed variance to allow the stairs and railings higher than 0.9 metres in height to encroach into the DVT will continue to allow the safe ingress and egress from the legal parking space located within the garage and meet the intent of the Zoning By-law. Transportation planning staff supports the requested variance to allow this DVT encroachment. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 384 -DECEMBER 13, 2016 3. Submission No.: A 2016-132 (Cont’d) The variances are considered minor. The covered deck does not extend the entire width of the house and there is ample amenity space in the rear yard. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance provides adequate amenity space and does not negatively affect the adjacent properties or surrounding neighbourhood. The stairs and railings located in the DVT are existing and will not have an impact on safe driving conditions on the subject lands. The variances will not negatively affect the adjacent properties or surrounding neighbourhood. The proposed variances are appropriate for the development and use of the land as the proposed residential use is a permitted use in the Zoning By-law. The proposed variances are appropriate and continue to maintain adequate rear yard separation, sufficient amenity space, and safe ingress and egress from the required legal parking space. The scale, massing and height of the covered deck and the existing stairs and railings located in the DVT do not negatively impact the character of the subject property or overall neighbourhood. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated November 23, 2016, advising they have no concerns with this application. In response to questions, Ms. von Westerholt advised Condition 2 in the staff report is intended to provide awareness to the property owner regarding the height of the hedge, noting the height would be enforceable through the condition. Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Ms. P. Kohli That the application of Ryan Gottwald requesting permission to legalize a covered porch in the rear yard of an existing single detached dwelling having a rear yard setback of 4.95m rather than the required 7.5m; and, to permit existing stairs and railing exceeding 0.9m in height to encroach into the 4.57m Driveway Visibility Triangle (DVT) whereas the By-law does not permit encroachments into the DVT, on Part Lot 86, Registered Plan 955, being Parts 2 & 3 on Reference Plan 58R-17397, 15 Sweetbriar Drive, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall obtain a Building Permit for the covered deck by July 1, 2017. 2. That the owner shall ensure the shrubs located on the north-westerly side of the driveway are maintained below 0.9m in height. 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. Pursuant to Section 45 of the Planning Act, all oral and written submissions were considered and taken into account as part of the Committee’s decision-making process with respect to the subject application. For more information please review the meeting minutes, which are available on the City’s website at www.kitchener.ca Carried 4. Submission No.: A 2016-133 Applicant: Maria Furtado and Bonnie Demelo Property Location: 223 Williamsburg Road Legal Description: Lot 133, Plan 1466 and Part Lot 6, Plan 1633 Appearances: In Support: D. Buzatu Contra: None COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 385 -DECEMBER 13, 2016 4. Submission No.: A 2016-133 (Cont’d) Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission for the existing single detached dwelling to have a driveway located 4.62m from the intersection of Marcon Court and Williamsburg Road rather than the required 9m setback; and, to have the driveway located within the Corner Visibility Triangle (CVT) whereas the By-law does not permit encroachments in the CVT. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated November 30, 2016, advising the subject property located at 223 Williamsburg Road is designated Low Rise Residential in the City’s Official Plan and is zoned Residential Four Zone (R-4) in the City’s Zoning By-law. The subject property is located at the intersection of Williamsburg Road and Marcon Court. The applicant is proposing to convert the existing single detached dwelling into a duplex dwelling. To legally convert the single to a duplex, the applicant must comply with current zoning and parking requirements and provide two legal parking spaces for the duplex dwelling. The subject property currently has a driveway located approximately 2.0 metres from the intersection of Williamsburg Road and Marcon Court. The applicant is planning to increase the setback from the intersection from 2.0 metres to 4.62 metres to allow a greater setback from the intersection than exists to permit safe ingress/egress to/from the driveway. The applicant is requesting relief from section 6.1.1.1 b) iv) of the Zoning By-law for a driveway to be located 4.62 metres from the intersection of the street lines, whereas the By-law requires 9 metres. Furthermore, the applicant is requesting relief from section 5.3 of the Zoning By-law to allow a parking space to encroach within the 7.5 metre by 7.5 metre Corner Visibility Triangle (CVT) whereas the Zoning By-law does not allow parking spaces to be located in the CVT. 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 location of the driveway to the intersecting street lines 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 variances will allow for two legal parking spaces and a reduced setback of the driveway to the intersecting street lines for the existing detached dwelling. No exterior alterations are proposed and the minor change to the driveway will maintain the low density character of the property and surrounding neighbourhood. The requested variance to reduce the setback of a driveway to an intersection meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The intent of the required 9 metre separation from the driveway to the intersection of the street lines is to ensure pedestrian and vehicular safety. The proposed setback of 4.62 metres from the intersection will provide more safety for pedestrians and vehicles than the current setback of the existing driveway which is approximately 2.0 metres from the intersection. Transportation Planning staff has also indicated that they have no concerns with the requested reduction of 9.0 metres to 4.62 metres. The requested variance to allow a parking space to encroach within the CVT meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The intent of the CVT is to provide visible site lines for pedestrians and vehicles. Currently there is a parking space located entirely in the CVT and the applicant’s proposal to reduce the location of the driveway setback from the intersection will also shift the location of the parking space in the CVT and provide more visible site lines for pedestrians and vehicles. It is staff’s opinion that the proposed variances will better the current situation and provide a safer intersection of pedestrian and vehicular traffic. The variances are considered minor as it is staff’s opinion that the proposed parking space in the CVT and the proposed 4.62 metre driveway setback from the intersection allows for more separation from the driveway to the intersection that is currently existing and as such, will not impact access or visibility to the intersection for vehicular and/or pedestrian traffic. The variances are appropriate for the development and use of the land as it is staff’s opinion that the requested variances will not impact the subject property, adjacent lands abutting intersection or safety of pedestrian or vehicular traffic. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 386 -DECEMBER 13, 2016 4. Submission No.: A 2016-133 (Cont’d) The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated November 23, 2016, advising they have no concerns with this application. Mr. D. Buzatu was in attendance in support of the subject application. He requested that the requirement related to the replacing City’s boulevard/driveway with grass/curb not be tied to obtaining a Building Permit. He indicated he was hoping to obtain a Building Permit over the winter months and he may have difficulties reinstating the curb/grass in inclement weather. Ms. von Westerholt supported the request, suggesting that Condition 2 be amended to reflect a deadline for completion of the work rather than obtaining a Building Permit. The Chair noted he was in support of staff’s suggestion, requesting that Condition 2 be amended to indicate the applicant would have until July 31, 2017 to complete the work as outlined, which was agreed upon by consensus by all the members. Moved by Ms. P. Kohli Seconded by Mr. B. McColl That the application of Maria Furtado and Bonnie Demelo requesting permission to convert the existing single detached dwelling into a duplex hving a driveway located 4.62m from the intersection of Marcon Court and Williamsburg Road rather than the required 9m setback; and, to have the driveway located within the Corner Visibility Triangle (CVT) whereas the By-law does not permit encroachments in the CVT, on Lot 133, Plan 1466 and Part Lot 6, Plan 1633, 223 Williamsburg Road, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall ensure all shrubs and vegetation located in the Corner Visibility Triangle (CVT) and the Driveway Visibility Triangle (DVT) along Marcon Court is removed prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. 2. That the owner shall ensure the City’s boulevard currently paved and located in the 4.62 metre driveway setback is removed and replaced with grass and the curb is reinstated to City of Kitchener standards to the satisfaction of the Director of Transportation Services prior to July 31, 2017. 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. Pursuant to Section 45 of the Planning Act, all oral and written submissions were considered and taken into account as part of the Committee’s decision-making process with respect to the subject application. For more information please review the meeting minutes, which are available on the City’s website at www.kitchener.ca Carried CONSENT APPLICATIONS: 1. Submission No.: B 2016-120 to B 2016-122 Applicant: Novacore (83 Elmsdale Dr.) Inc. Property Location: 83 Elmsdale Drive Legal Description: Part Lots 3 and 4, Plan 1021, Part Lot 1, Plan 1022 and Part Lot 3 Plan 1026 Appearances: In Support: H. Holbrook COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 387 -DECEMBER 13, 2016 1. Submission Nos.: B 2016-120 to B 2016-122 (Cont’d) Contra: M. Davis Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to sever 2 parcels of land for residential development and retaining 1 parcel for future commercial mixed-use development. Severed Parcel ‘A' identified on the plan submitted with the application will have a width on Elmsdale Drive of 46.7m, a northerly depth of 180.7m and an area of 0.96 ha, which will require a 4m wide easement at the rear of the property in favour of Parcel ‘B’ for servicing; and, a 5.05m wide easement on the southerly property line in favour of Parcels ‘B’ and ‘C’ for mutual access, fire routing and servicing. Severed Parcel ‘B' identified on the plan submitted with the application will have a width on Elmsdale Drive of 52.6m, a southerly depth of 164.6m and an area of 1.19 ha, which will require a 5.05m wide easement on the northerly property line in favour of Parcels ‘A’ and ‘C’ for mutual access, fire routing and services; and, an easement in favour of the Region of Waterloo for ground water monitoring wells. The retained land identified as Parcel ‘C’ on the plan submitted with the application will be irregular in shape having a width on Ottawa Street South of 265.4m and an area of 2.66 ha, which will require a 5.05m wide ‘L’ shaped easement having a width on Ottawa Street South in favour of Parcels ‘A’ and ‘B’ for mutual access, fire routing and servicing; and, an easement in favour of the Region of Waterloo for ground water monitoring wells. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated December 6, 2016, advising the owner is proposing to sever the subject lands into three separate parcels with access and servicing easements. The owner had previously applied for, and received, conditional approval for the same severance requests in July 2015 and April 2016. The applicant has since determined that they will not be able to fulfill all conditions of approval within the year deadline from the April 2016 approval and the applications have been re-submitted in order to extend the timelines. The subject property at 83 Elmsdale Drive is zoned Neighbourhood Shopping Centre Zone (C-2) with Special Regulation Provision 649R, Special Use Provision 436U and Holding Provision 71H. The subject property is designated Neighbourhood Mixed Use Centre (with Special Policy 54). The applicant is proposing to sever the subject property into three parcels that will be developed with multiple dwellings and commercial uses. Future severance of the lands was anticipated as a likely scenario when the zoning and designation were applied to the lands and was described in an Urban Design Brief considered together with the application. The proposed severance is in keeping with the configuration considered, and the proposed size and shape of the parcels will allow for development which will comply with the applicable regulations and policy. The proposed parcels are depicted on the Map above and described as follows: • Parcel ‘A’ (severed) is proposed to have an approximate width on Elmsdale Drive of 46.7 metres, a northerly depth of 180.7 metres and an area of 0.96 ha; • Parcel ‘B’ (severed) is proposed to have a width on Elmsdale Drive of 52.6 metres, a northerly depth of 176.3 metres and an area of 1.19 ha; and, • Parcel ‘C’ (retained) is proposed to have an irregular shape having a width on Ottawa Street of 265.4 metres, a northerly depth of 156.5 metres and an area of 2.66 ha. In addition, the applicant is requesting easements over the proposed severed and retained lands for the purposes mutual access, fire-routing, servicing and stormwater management purposes as follows: • a 4 metre wide easement along the easterly limits of Parcel ‘A’ in favour of Parcel ‘B’ for the purpose of stormwater conveyance; • a 5.05 metre wide easement along the south limits of Parcel ‘A’ in favour of Parcels ‘B’ and ‘C’ and the north limits of Parcel B in favour of Parcels ‘A’ and ‘C’ for the purposes of mutual access, fire routing and services; • a 10.1 metre wide east-west aligned easement through Parcel ‘C’ connecting to a 14.2 metre wide north-south aligned easement through Parcel ‘C’ in favour of Parcels A and B for the purpose of mutual access, fire routing and servicing; and, COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 388 -DECEMBER 13, 2016 1. Submission Nos.: B 2016-120 to B 2016-122 (Cont’d) • easements on Parcels ‘B’ and ‘C’ in favour of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo for the purpose of Regional access to existing groundwater monitoring wells on the property. With respect to the criteria for the subdivision of land listed in Section 51 (24) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13, the dimensions and shapes of the proposed lots are appropriate and suitable for the permitted use of the lands. The lands front on established public streets and all parcels of land can and will be serviced with independent and adequate service connections to municipal services. The newly created severed and retained lots will comply with the minimum lot width and lot area requirements of the Zoning By-law. The proposed severance and development concept submitted with this application are in keeping with the development concept considered in the Urban Design Brief adopted by City Council as part of the previous Zone Change and Official Plan Amendment approval process. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Planning, Development and Legislative Services, dated December 2, 2016, advising they have no objection to these applications subject to the following conditions: B 2016-120 (Parcel ‘A’): 1. That prior to final approval, the owner enter into a Registered Development Agreement that will require the owner of the parcel to provide a detailed stationary and traffic noise study, prior to site plan approval, and, if required, enter into a Registered Development Agreement with the Regional Municipality of Waterloo and/or City of Kitchener for implementation of the study’s recommendations. B 2016-121 (Parcel ‘B’) and B 2016-122 (Parcel ‘C’) 1. That the City of Kitchener grants the Regional Municipality of Waterloo a temporary easement, satisfactory to the Regional Solicitor, to the easterly monitoring well nests for ongoing access and monitoring until such time as the easterly well nests are moved offsite and the well nests decommissioned subject to terms and conditions satisfactory to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo. 2. That the owner grants a permanent easement to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo, satisfactory to the Regional Solicitor, for the purposes of ongoing access and monitoring for the monitoring wells adjacent to the Ottawa Street South road allowance on Parcel ‘B’ as generally illustrated on “Sketch showing Proposed Severance of Part of Lots 3 and 4, Municipal Compiled Plan 1021 and Part of Lot 1, Municipal Compiled Plan 1022 and Part of Lot 3, Municipal Compiled Plan 1026 in the City of Kitchener” File Number KIT-1021-PL- 16632 by ACI Survey Consultants dated June 15, 2015. 3. That the owner grants a permanent easement to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo, satisfactory to the Regional Solicitor, for the purposes of ongoing access and monitoring for the monitoring wells adjacent to the Ottawa Street South road allowance on Parcel ‘C’ as generally illustrated on “Sketch showing Proposed Severance of Part of Lots 3 and 4, Municipal Compiled Plan 1021 and Part of Lot 1, Municipal Compiled Plan 1022 and Part of Lot 3, Municipal Compiled Plan 1026 in the City of Kitchener” File Number KIT-1021-PL- 16632 by ACI Survey Consultants dated June 15, 2015. 4. That prior to final approval, the owner dedicate at no cost and free of encumbrances to the Region a road widening to be determined by an Ontario Land Surveyor (OLS) as illustrated in the Functional Servicing Report, Novacore Communities Corporation, Laurentian Commons, 83 Elmsdale Drive, Project Number 2012-0194-10, Figure 5 (Preliminary Functional Ottawa Street Design) prepared by WalterFedy dated November 28, 2013 (revised June 15, 2015). 5. That prior to final approval, the owner shall provide a Phase I and Phase II, if necessary, Environmental Site Assessment to the Region’s satisfaction in accordance with the Region’s ‘Implementation Guideline for Road Allowance Dedications On and Adjacent to Known and Potentially Contaminated Sites’ prior to the dedication of the road widening as noted in Condition 4. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 389 -DECEMBER 13, 2016 1. Submission Nos.: B 2016-120 to B 2016-122 (Cont’d) 6. That prior to final approval, the owner enter into a Registered Development Agreement for both Parcel ‘B’ and Parcel ‘C’ that will require the owner of the parcel to provide a detailed stationary and traffic noise study, prior to site plan approval, and, if required, enter into a Registered Development Agreement with the Regional Municipality of Waterloo and/or City of Kitchener for implementation of the study’s recommendations. Ms. H. Holbrook addressed the Committee in support of the subject application and the staff recommendation. She advised the subject applications before the Committee this date have been considered previously on two separate occasions, adding the applicant was not able to complete the necessary site remediation within the one-year time limit. She indicated the requests are exactly as they were in April 2015, the last time they were before the Committee. She further advised the requested conditions from the City and Public Agencies remain unchanged, save and except for the Region of Waterloo’s request for a noise exemption; however, the applicant is not opposed to the new requirement and will comply with the proposed condition. Mr. M. Davis, Sheridan Nurseries, advised he was in attendance this date for information purposes and was not in opposition to the subject applications. Submission No.: B 2016-120 Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Ms. P. Kohli That the application of Novacore (83 Elmsdale Dr.) Inc. requesting permission to sever a parcel of land identified as ‘Parcel A’ on the plan submitted with the application having a width on Elmsdale Drive of 46.7m, a northerly depth of 180.7m and an area of 0.96 ha; and, permission to grant a 4m wide easement at the rear of the property in favour of Parcel ‘B’ for servicing; and, an easement on the southerly property line having a width of 5.05m in favour of Parcels ‘B’ and ‘C’ for mutual access, fire routing and servicing, on Part Lots 3 and 4, Plan 1021, Part Lot 1, Plan 1022 and Part Lot 3, Plan 1026, 83 Elmsdale Drive, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall obtain a Tax Certificate from the City of Kitchener to verify that there are no outstanding taxes on the subject property to the satisfaction of the City’s Revenue Division. 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 make financial arrangements for the installation of all new service connections that may be required to the severed and retained lands to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Engineering. 4. That the owner shall provide a servicing plan showing outlets to the municipal servicing system along with the sanitary and storm sewer design sheets to the satisfaction of the City’s Director of Engineering. 5. As per the Public Sector Accounting Board (PSAB) S. 3150, the Development and Reconstruction As-Recorded Tracking Form is required to be filled out and submitted along with a digital submission of all AutoCAD drawings required for the site (Grading, Servicing etc.) with the corresponding correct layer names and numbering system to the satisfaction of the City’s Director of Engineering. 6. That the owners of the proposed dominant lands and servient lands, shall enter into a joint maintenance agreement, including cost sharing provisions, to be approved by the City Solicitor, to ensure that the servicing and access easements are maintained in perpetuity, which agreement shall be registered on title immediately following the Transfer Easement(s). COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 390 -DECEMBER 13, 2016 1. Submission Nos.: B 2016-120 to B 2016-122 (Cont’d) 7. That a satisfactory Solicitor’s Undertaking to register the approved Transfer Easement(s) and immediately thereafter, the approved joint maintenance agreement, shall be provided to the City Solicitor. 8. That the City Solicitor shall be provided with copies of the registered Transfer Easement(s) and joint maintenance agreement immediately following registration. 9. That the owner shall submit payment to the Region of Waterloo the Consent Application Review Fee of $350.00. 10. That the owner shall enter into a Registered Development Agreement that will require the owner of the parcel to provide a detailed stationary and traffic noise study, prior to Site Plan Approval, and, if required, enter into a Registered Development Agreement with the Regional Municipality of Waterloo and/or City of Kitchener for implementation of the study’s recommendations. 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 Section 53 of the Planning Act, all oral and written submissions were considered and taken into account as part of the Committee’s decision-making process with respect to the subject application. For more information please review the meeting minutes, which are available on the City’s website at www.kitchener.ca Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfil the above- noted conditions within one year of the date of giving notice of this decision. Pursuant to Subsection 43 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the decision of this Committee shall lapse two years from the date of approval, being December 13, 2018. Carried Submission No.: B 2016-121 Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Ms. P. Kohli That the application of Novacore (83 Elmsdale Dr.) Inc. requesting permission to permission to sever a parcel of land identified as ‘Parcel B’ on the plan submitted with the application having a width on Elmsdale Drive of 52.6m, a southerly depth of 164.6m and an area of 1.19 ha; and, permission to grant an easement on the northerly property line having a width of 5.05m in favour of Parcels ‘A’ and ‘C’ for mutual access, fire routing and services; and, an easement favour of the Region of Waterloo for ground water monitoring wells, on Part Lots 3 and 4, Plan 1021, Part Lot 1, Plan 1022 and Part Lot 3, Plan 1026, 83 Elmsdale Drive, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall obtain a Tax Certificate from the City of Kitchener to verify that there are no outstanding taxes on the subject property to the satisfaction of the City’s Revenue Division. 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. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 391 -DECEMBER 13, 2016 1. Submission Nos.: B 2016-120 to B 2016-122 (Cont’d) 3. That the owner shall make financial arrangements for the installation of all new service connections that may be required to the severed and retained lands to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Engineering. 4. That the owner shall provide a servicing plan showing outlets to the municipal servicing system along with the sanitary and storm sewer design sheets to the satisfaction of the City’s Director of Engineering. 5. As per the Public Sector Accounting Board (PSAB) S. 3150, the Development and Reconstruction As-Recorded Tracking Form is required to be filled out and submitted along with a digital submission of all AutoCAD drawings required for the site (Grading, Servicing etc.) with the corresponding correct layer names and numbering system to the satisfaction of the City’s Director of Engineering. 6. That the owners of the proposed dominant lands and servient lands, shall enter into a joint maintenance agreement, including cost sharing provisions, to be approved by the City Solicitor, to ensure that the access and servicing easement is maintained in perpetuity, which agreement shall be registered on title immediately following the Transfer Easement(s). 7. That a satisfactory Solicitor’s Undertaking to register the approved Transfer Easement(s) and immediately thereafter, the approved joint maintenance agreement, shall be provided to the City Solicitor. 8. That the City Solicitor shall be provided with copies of the registered Transfer Easement(s) and joint maintenance agreement immediately following registration. 9. That the owner shall grant the Regional Municipality of Waterloo a temporary easement, satisfactory to the Regional Solicitor, to the easterly monitoring well nests for ongoing access and monitoring until such time as the easterly well nests are moved offsite and the well nests decommissioned subject to terms and conditions satisfactory to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo. 10. That the owner shall grant a permanent easement to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo, satisfactory to the Regional Solicitor, for the purposes of ongoing access and monitoring for the monitoring wells adjacent to the Ottawa Street South road allowance on Parcel ‘B’ as generally illustrated on the “Sketch showing Proposed Severance of Part of Lots 3 and 4, Municipal Compiled Plan 1021 and Part of Lot 1, Municipal Compiled Plan 1022 and Part of Lot 3, Municipal Compiled Plan 1026 in the City of Kitchener” File Number KIT-1021-PL-16632 by ACI Survey Consultants, dated June 15, 2015. 11. That the owner shall grant a permanent easement to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo, satisfactory to the Regional Solicitor, for the purposes of ongoing access and monitoring for the monitoring wells adjacent to the Ottawa Street South road allowance on Parcel ‘C’ as generally illustrated on the “Sketch showing Proposed Severance of Part of Lots 3 and 4, Municipal Compiled Plan 1021 and Part of Lot 1, Municipal Compiled Plan 1022 and Part of Lot 3, Municipal Compiled Plan 1026 in the City of Kitchener” File Number KIT-1021-PL-16632 by ACI Survey Consultants, dated June 15, 2015. 12. That the owner shall dedicate, at no cost and free of encumbrances to the Region, a road widening to be determined by an Ontario Land Surveyor (OLS) as illustrated in the Functional Servicing Report, Novacore Communities Corporation, Laurentian Commons, 83 Elmsdale Drive, Project Number 2012-0194-10, Figure 5 (Preliminary Functional Ottawa Street Design) prepared by WalterFedy, dated November 28, 2013 (revised June 15, 2015). 13. That the owner shall provide a Phase I and Phase II, if necessary, Environmental Site Assessment to the Region’s satisfaction in accordance with the Region’s ‘Implementation Guideline for Road Allowance Dedications On and Adjacent to Known and Potentially Contaminated Sites’ prior to the dedication of the road widening, as noted in Condition 12 above. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 392 -DECEMBER 13, 2016 1. Submission Nos.: B 2016-120 to B 2016-122 (Cont’d) 14. That the owner shall enter into a Registered Development Agreement for both Parcel ‘B’ and Parcel ‘C’ that will require the owner of the parcel to provide a detailed stationary and traffic noise study, prior to Site Plan Approval, and, if required, enter into a Registered Development Agreement with the Regional Municipality of Waterloo and/or City of Kitchener for implementation of the study’s recommendations. 15. That the owner shall submit payment to the Region of Waterloo the Consent Application Review Fee of $350.00. 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 Section 53 of the Planning Act, all oral and written submissions were considered and taken into account as part of the Committee’s decision-making process with respect to the subject application. For more information please review the meeting minutes, which are available on the City’s website at www.kitchener.ca Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfil the above- noted conditions within one year of the date of giving notice of this decision. Pursuant to Subsection 43 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the decision of this Committee shall lapse two years from the date of approval, being December 13, 2018. Carried Submission No.: B 2016-122 Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Ms. P. Kohli That the application of Novacore (83 Elmsdale Dr.) Inc. requesting permission to grant an ‘L’ shaped easement having a width on Ottawa Street South of 10.1m over the retained land identified as Parcel ‘C’ in favour of Parcels ‘A’ and ‘B’ for mutual access, fire routing and servicing; and, an easement in favour of the Region of Waterloo for ground water monitoring wells, on Part Lots 3 and 4, Plan 1021, Part Lot 1, Plan 1022 and Part Lot 3, Plan 1026, 83 Elmsdale Drive, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: 1. 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. 2. That the owners of the proposed dominant lands and servient lands, shall enter into a joint maintenance agreement, including cost sharing provisions, to be approved by the City Solicitor, to ensure that the access and servicing easement is maintained in perpetuity, which agreement shall be registered on title immediately following the Transfer Easement(s). 3. That a satisfactory Solicitor’s Undertaking to register the approved Transfer Easement(s) and immediately thereafter, the approved joint maintenance agreement, shall be provided to the City Solicitor. 4. That the City Solicitor shall be provided with copies of the registered Transfer Easement(s) and joint maintenance agreement immediately following registration. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 393 -DECEMBER 13, 2016 1. Submission Nos.: B 2016-120 to B 2016-122 (Cont’d) 5. That the owner shall grant the Regional Municipality of Waterloo a temporary easement, satisfactory to the Regional Solicitor, to the easterly monitoring well nests for ongoing access and monitoring until such time as the easterly well nests are moved offsite and the well nests decommissioned subject to terms and conditions satisfactory to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo. 6. That the owner shall grant a permanent easement to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo, satisfactory to the Regional Solicitor, for the purposes of ongoing access and monitoring for the monitoring wells adjacent to the Ottawa Street South road allowance on Parcel ‘B’ as generally illustrated on the “Sketch showing Proposed Severance of Part of Lots 3 and 4, Municipal Compiled Plan 1021 and Part of Lot 1, Municipal Compiled Plan 1022 and Part of Lot 3, Municipal Compiled Plan 1026 in the City of Kitchener” File Number KIT-1021-PL-16632 by ACI Survey Consultants, dated June 15, 2015. 7. That the owner shall grant a permanent easement to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo, satisfactory to the Regional Solicitor, for the purposes of ongoing access and monitoring for the monitoring wells adjacent to the Ottawa Street South road allowance on Parcel ‘C’ as generally illustrated on the “Sketch showing Proposed Severance of Part of Lots 3 and 4, Municipal Compiled Plan 1021 and Part of Lot 1, Municipal Compiled Plan 1022 and Part of Lot 3, Municipal Compiled Plan 1026 in the City of Kitchener” File Number KIT-1021-PL-16632 by ACI Survey Consultants, dated June 15, 2015. 8. That the owner shall dedicate, at no cost and free of encumbrances to the Region, a road widening to be determined by an Ontario Land Surveyor (OLS) as illustrated in the Functional Servicing Report, Novacore Communities Corporation, Laurentian Commons, 83 Elmsdale Drive, Project Number 2012-0194-10, Figure 5 (Preliminary Functional Ottawa Street Design) prepared by WalterFedy, dated November 28, 2013 (revised June 15, 2015). 9. That the owner shall provide a Phase I and Phase II, if necessary, Environmental Site Assessment to the Region’s satisfaction in accordance with the Region’s ‘Implementation Guideline for Road Allowance Dedications On and Adjacent to Known and Potentially Contaminated Sites’ prior to the dedication of the road widening, as noted in Condition 12 above. 10. That the owner shall enter into a Registered Development Agreement for both Parcel ‘B’ and Parcel ‘C’ that will require the owner of the parcel to provide a detailed stationary and traffic noise study, prior to Site Plan Approval, and, if required, enter into a Registered Development Agreement with the Regional Municipality of Waterloo and/or City of Kitchener for implementation of the study’s recommendations. 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 Section 53 of the Planning Act, all oral and written submissions were considered and taken into account as part of the Committee’s decision-making process with respect to the subject application. For more information please review the meeting minutes, which are available on the City’s website at www.kitchener.ca 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. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 394 -DECEMBER 13, 2016 1. Submission Nos.: B 2016-120 to B 2016-122 (Cont’d) Pursuant to Subsection 43 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the decision of this Committee shall lapse two years from the date of approval, being December 13, 2018. Carried ADJOURNMENT On motion, the meeting adjourned at 10:46 a.m. Dated at the City of Kitchener this 13th day of December, 2016. Dianna Saunderson Secretary-Treasurer Committee of Adjustment