The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2017-05-16COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FOR THE CITY OF KITCHENER MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING HELD MAY 16, 2017 MEMBERS PRESENT: Messrs. D. Cybalski and 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 10:05 a.m. MINUTES Moved by Ms. P. Kohli Seconded by Mr. B. McColl That the minutes of the regular meeting of the Committee of Adjustment held April 18, 2017, as circulated to the members, be accepted. Carried kiI47A-.11bylkil*Itw khIIki101:AT/MVle1 kiIN2 1. Submission No.: A 2016-085 (Amended) Applicants: Shane Bainbridge and Taylor Pihura Property Location: 171 Templewood Drive Legal Description: Lot 39, Registered Plan 58M-572 Appearances: In Support: S. Little P. Viidik J. Harding Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised the applicants are requesting permission to legalize a single detached dwelling having the required off-street parking space located 0.1m from the front line rather than the required setback of 6m. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated May 8, 2017, advising the subject property is designated Low Rise Residential in both the 1994 and 2014 Official Plans and zoned Residential Four Zone (R-4) in the City's Zoning By-law. The site is currently developed with a single detached dwelling. The owners are requesting relief of Section 6.1.1.1 b) of Zoning By-law 85-1 to permit the required off-street parking space to be located 0.6 metres from the street line, whereas 6 metres is required. Upon further review, Planning staff identified the minimum parking space length of 5.5 metres was not properly subtracted from the 6.1 metre driveway length to determine the actual distance between the parking space and the front property line. As such, staff recommends the decision be modified to permit an off-street parking setback of 0.6 metres, whereas 6 metres is required. In June 2016, the owner at the time (Kenmore Homes (Waterloo Region) Inc.), originally applied for a minor variance to permit an internal parking space with a reduced length of 5.18 metres, COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 71 - MAY 16, 2017 i��1•7 �T1�[•Ti1��7i�_��iZ[:�i�:�'i(K.Ti�iir whereas a minimum length of 5.49 metres is required. Through review of the application, City Building staff identified that the Ontario Building Code would require a landing for the four -rise set of stairs, as proposed on the applicant's plans. As such, the garage and stairs were required to be redesigned in order to comply with the Building Code. This necessary redesign had a direct impact on the size of the parking space within the garage as well as the extent of relief required. At that time, Planning staff recommended deferral until such time as a revised plan showing a design that is in compliance with the Building Code had been prepared and the required relief determined. Upon receipt of the revised plan, Planning and Transportation Services staff did not support the extent of relief required to accommodate the legal parking space in the garage. As such, the applicant has resubmitted an amended application to permit the off-street parking space to be located in the driveway. 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 both the City's 2014 Official Plan and 1994 Official Plan. The 2014 Official Plan Designation is in effect; however, a significant number of Low Rise Residential policies from the 2014 Official Plan are under appeal and therefore are not being relied upon for this report. Instead, Low Rise Residential Policy 3.1.2.1 from the 1994 Official Plan which allows for low density forms of housing such as single detached dwellings is being relied upon to determine whether the proposed variances meet the general intent of the Official Plan. It is Planning staffs opinion that the proposed variance meets the intent of the Official Plan which encourages a range of different forms of housing to achieve a low density neighbourhood. The minor change to permit a reduced off-street parking setback will maintain the low density character of the property and surrounding neighbourhood. The proposed variance conforms to the designation and it is further the opinion of staff that the requested variances are appropriate. The requested variance to reduce the off-street parking space from 6.0 metres to 0.6 metres from the street line meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The reduction of 5.4 metres from the required 6 metres is minor. The intent of the 6 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. Transportation Services staff supports a 5.4 metre reduction from the required 6 metre parking setback. The variances can be considered minor as it is staff's opinion the required parking space can still be accommodated on-site in a safe manner. The reduced parking space setback of 0.6 metres will not present any significant impacts to adjacent properties or the overall neighbourhood. The variances are appropriate for the development and use of the land. The requested variances should not negatively impact any adjacent properties or the surrounding neighbourhood. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated April 25, 2017, advising they have no concerns with this application. Ms. S. Little and Ms. J. Harding were in attendance on behalf of the applicants in support of the subject application and staff recommendation. The Chair noted the proposed amendment as outlined in the Report to change the required off- street parking space located 0.6m from the front line rather than 0.1m as outlined in the application. Ms. Little noted she was in support of the proposed amendment. Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Ms. P. Kohli That the application of Shane Bainbridge and Taylor Pihura requesting permission to legalize a single detached dwelling having the required off-street parking space located 0.6m from the street line rather than the required setback of 6m, on Lot 39, Registered Plan 58M-572, 171 Templewood Drive, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -72- MAY 16, 2017 Submission No.: A 2016-085 (Cont'd) It is the opinion of this Committee that: 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 wwvv.kitchener.ca Carried Submission No.: A 2017-029 Applicant: 2522935 Ontario Inc. Property Location: 14 Valleybrook Drive Legal Description: Lot 162, Registered Plan 58M-597 Appearances: In Support: P. Clarke Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to construct a single detached dwelling having a garage width of 72.5% of the front fapade whereas the By-law permits a maximum garage width of 70% of the front fapade. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated May 8, 2017, advising the subject property is zoned Residential Four Zone (R-4), with special regulation provision 597R. It is designated Low Rise Residential in both the 1994 Official Plan, and the 2014 Official Plan. The applicant is requesting permission to construct a single detached dwelling with a double -car garage. The applicant is requesting relief from Section 5.5A.1 of the Zoning By-law to allow for a garage width of 6.15 metres, which is 72.5% of the width of the front fapade, rather than the maximum permitted width of 70%. The subject property is designated Low Rise Residential in both the City's 2014 Official Plan and 1994 Official Plan. A significant number of Low Rise Residential policies from the 2014 Official Plan are under appeal, therefore the policies of the 1994 Official Plan are to be considered for this report. The Residential designation in the 1994 Official Plan favours the mixing and integration of different forms of housing to achieve a low overall intensity of use. It is of the opinion of staff that the requested variance will not compromise this or any other policies of the Low Rise Residential designation, and therefore meets the intent of the Official Plan. The proposed variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The intent of the zoning regulation that restricts garage width to 70% of the front fapade is to ensure that the garage portion of a dwelling does not dominate the streetscape. The proposed single detached dwelling contains qualities and design features that will provide street presence and ensure that the garage portion of the dwelling does not dominate the streetscape. Firstly, the dwelling contains a large usable front porch that is covered and is flush with the garage. This front porch will provide a significant contribution to street presence and aesthetics. Secondly, the upper floor located above the garage contains large windows that face the street that also contribute to a desirable street presence. With the aforementioned qualities proposed, the dwelling achieves adequate street presence and therefore meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -73- MAY 16, 2017 2. Submission No.: A 2017-029 (Cont'd) The proposed variance is considered appropriate for the development and use of the lands. The variance proposed results in a minor design change and does not have a significant effect on the use or development of the property. The proposed variance can be considered minor for the following reasons. The proposed garage width of 72.5% of the front fapade represents just a 2.5% increase from what is permitted under applicable law. When translated to a measurement, this figure comes out to only 0.21 metres. This figure is considered minimal when compared to the total width of the garage and the lot, and does not constitute a major increase in garage width in the opinion of staff. Based on the above comments, staff is of the opinion that the variance requested is minor, meets the general intent of the Zoning By-law and Official Plan, and is appropriate for the lot and surrounding neighbourhood. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated April 25, 2017, advising they have no concerns with this application. Mr. P. Clarke was in attendance in support of the subject application and staff recommendation. Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Ms. P. Kohli That the application of 2522935 Ontario Inc. requesting permission to construct a single detached dwelling having a garage width of 72.5% of the front fapade whereas the By-law permits a maximum garage width of 70% of the front fapade, on Lot 162, Registered Plan 58M- 597, 14 Valleybrook Drive, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance requested in this application is minor. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By -Law and Official Plan is being maintained on the subject property. 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 Submission Nos.: A 2017-030 Applicants: 2326035 Ontario Inc. Property Location: 4 Chestnut Street Legal Description: Part Lot 245, Plan 374, being Parts 3 & 4 on Reference Plan 58R- 18621 9FIN E Submission Nos.: A 2017-031 Applicant: 2326035 Ontario Inc. Property Location: 8 Chestnut Street Legal Description: Part Lot 245, Plan 374, being Part 5 on Reference Plan 58R-18621 Appearances: In Support: S. O'Neill S. Patterson Contra: A. Broderick COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -74- MAY 16, 2017 3. Submission Nos.: A 2017-030 & A 2017-031 (Cont'd) Written Submissions: P. and R. Grobe Regarding Application A 2017-030, the Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to convert an existing duplex into a triplex having a side yard abutting Victoria Street North of 1.85m rather than the required 4.5m; and, lot area of 440 sq.m. rather than the required 495 sq.m. Regarding Application A 2017-031, the Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to convert an existing duplex into a triplex having lot area of 490 sq.m. rather than the required 495 sq.m. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated May 5, 2017, advising the subject properties are municipally addressed as 4 and 8 Chestnut Street, zoned Residential Five (R-5) in the Zoning By-law, and designated Low Rise Conservation `B' in the Central Frederick Secondary Plan for Land Use. The subject lands are currently developed with duplexed dwellings and the owner is requesting to add a third unit, thereby triggering a minor variance requirement. Accordingly, the applicant is requesting relief from Section 39.2.4 of the Zoning By-law to permit a reduction in the required minimum lot area of 495 square metres for a 3 -unit dwelling to 440 and 490 square metres for 4 and 8 Chestnut Street, respectively. In addition, the applicant is requesting relief from Section 39.2.4 to legalize a side yard setback abutting Victoria Street for 4 Chestnut of 1.85 metres rather than the required 4.5 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 for lot area and side yard abutting a street. The requested variances meet the intent of the Central Frederick Secondary Plan. The designation of Low Rise Conservation `B' permits "... the creation of additional residential units through conversion of the existing residential structures..." up to maximum of 3 units providing the low rise residential nature and character of the neighbourhood is maintained. The owner is not proposing to expand the building, the third unit will not be visible from the street and the dwellings have been designed and constructed in accordance with approved building elevation drawings in order to be compatible with and maintain the character of the neighbourhood. The proposed variances meet the intent of the Zoning By-law. The R-5 zoning category permits the use of a 3 -unit dwelling in accordance with zoning regulations. The intent of requiring 490 square metres of lot area for 3 units is to ensure sites are large enough to accommodate three parking spaces. Both properties have two legal parking spaces in the garage and each property has room between the garage and lot line to accommodate one additional parking space. Staff is requesting the submission of site and landscaping plans as conditions of variance approval to control the function, design and aesthetics of the additional parking space. Accordingly, the reduction in lot area is considered minor and will not impede the orderly function of the site. The variance required for the side yard abutting Victoria Street is due to the dedication of land to the Region for a daylighting triangle creating an angular lot line. This has resulted in a building that is now closer to the lot line and does not comply with the setback requirement. Staff is of the opinion the requested variance is appropriate, recognizing an existing situation and will not negatively affect adjacent properties. The proposed variances are appropriate for use of the land and are considered minor as both the Secondary Plan and implementing zoning permits a 3 -unit dwelling. Moreover, the owner is not proposing to expand the dwelling to accommodate the third dwelling unit. As such, the scale, massing, and height of the existing building are appropriate and consistent with the character of the existing neighbourhood. As noted, staff will address the provision of parking through site planning and landscaping provisions. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated April 25, 2017, advising they have no concerns with this application. The Committee considered comments from a neighbouring property owner, dated May 9, 2017 in opposition of the applications. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -75- MAY 16, 2017 3. Submission Nos.: A 2017-030 & A 2017-031 (Cont'd) Mr. S. Patterson was in attendance in support of the subject application and staff recommendation. Ms. A. Broderick was in attendance in opposition to the subject application. She noted it was her understanding that triplexes were not permitted on Chestnut Street, and questioned why the subject properties were permitted to be triplexes. The Chair noted the Zoning on the subject properties would have to support a triplex and the requirements for that use. In response to questions, Ms. von Westerholt stated hydro meters are not regulated by the Building Code, adding although staff identified the applicant had installed more than 2 metres, the approvals in place for the development are for a duplex. Mr. Patterson noted when the Building Inspector was on site, they had discussed the possibility of constructing a triplex and that resulted in further consultation. Ms. von Westerholt further advised had the applicant initially identified the proposed development as a triplex, he would have been subject to site plan approval. She noted Planning staff have attempted to address that issue by requesting a condition for site plan approval, which has been outlined in the staff recommendation. Mr. B. McColl expressed concerns with the subject applications, noting it appears the applicant has attempted to circumvent the proper approval process, adding the proposed development seems to have always been intended as a triplex. Submission No.: A 2017-030 Moved by Ms. P. Kohli Seconded by Mr. B. McColl That the application of 2326035 Ontario Inc. requesting permission to convert an existing duplex into a triplex having a side yard abutting Victoria Street North of 1.85m rather than the required 4.5m; and, lot area of 440 sq.m. rather than the required 495 sq.m., on Part Lot 245, Plan 374, being Parts 3 & 4 on Reference Plan 58R-18621, 4 Chestnut Street, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: That the owner shall obtain a Building Permit for the additional unit to the satisfaction of the Chief Building Official by September 30, 2017. 2. That the owner shall submit a site plan to the satisfaction of the Manager of Site Development & Customer Service in consultation with the Director of Transportation Services and the Region of Waterloo. 3. That the owner shall submit a Landscape Plan to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 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 wwvv.kitchener.ca Carried Submission No.: A 2017-031 Moved by Ms. P. Kohli Seconded by Mr. B. McColl COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -76- Submission 76 - Submission Nos.: A 2017-030 & A 2017-031 (Cont'd) MAY 16, 2017 That the application of 2326035 Ontario Inc. requesting permission to convert an existing duplex into a triplex having lot area of 490 sq.m rather than the required 495 sq.m., on Part Lot 245, Plan 374, being Part 5 on Reference Plan 58R-18621, 8 Chestnut Street, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: That the owner shall obtain a Building Permit for the additional unit to the satisfaction of the Chief Building Official by September 30, 2017. 2. That the owner shall submit a site plan to the satisfaction of the Manager of Site Development & Customer Service in consultation with the Director of Transportation Services and the Region of Waterloo. 3. That the owner shall submit a Landscape Plan to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 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 wwvv.kitchener.ca Carried Submission Nos.: A 2017-032 Applicant: 563 Highland Rd. West Ltd. Property Location: 563 Highland Road West Legal Description: Part Lot 21, Plan 1004, being Parts 5 & 6 on Reference Plan 58R- 5638 Appearances: In Support: H. Holbrook M. DesRosiers C. Kimpson Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to add `Commercial Recreation' as a permitted use, specifically indoor recreation games including laser tag, escape rooms and paintball in an existing retail plaza. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated May 8, 2017, advising the subject property is zoned Neighbourhood Shopping Centre Zone (C-2), designated Mixed Use in the 2014 Official Plan, and Mixed Use Node in the 1994 Official Plan. The applicant is requesting permission to add Commercial Recreation as a permitted use. The applicant is requesting relief from Section 8-1 of the Zoning By-law in order to allow this use. The subject property is designated Mixed Use in the current Official Plan (2014), and Mixed Use Node in the previous Official Plan (1994). The policies for Mixed Use in the 2014 Official Plan are under appeal. As a result, staff will be relying on the mixed use policies in the 1994 Official Plan to determine conformity. In the 1994 Official Plan, Mixed Use Node policies allow for a full range COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -77- MAY 16, 2017 4. Submission No.: A 2017-032 (Cont'd) of commercial uses, including neighbourhood -level entertainment. This policy has been applied to permit Commercial Recreation use in the Mixed Use Corridor zones (MU -1, MU -2, MU -3). The 2014 Official Plan contains policies in the implementation section which are in effect to allow the Committee of Adjustment to grant change -of -use minor variances when the use is considered to be similar and/or more compatible, and ensuring the use does not cause an increase of nuisance factors, such as noise and odours. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed use is similar, compatible, and will not cause an increase in the aforementioned nuisance factors. Therefore, the proposed variance meets the intent of the Official Plan. The proposed variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The intent of omitting commercial recreation as a permitted use from the C-2 Zone is to protect surrounding residential areas from the nuisance that certain outdoor commercial recreation uses (e.g. golf course, ski hill) can cause such as noise, odors and outdoor lighting at night. However, the proposal on this lot is to use the basement of an existing commercial plaza for commercial recreation uses such as an escape room or laser tag. It is the opinion of staff that the proposed location of commercial recreation uses in the basement of an existing commercial plaza will not have an adverse impact on the surrounding residential areas and therefore meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The proposed variance is considered appropriate for the development and use of the lands. The subject property has been operating as a commercial plaza since 1987 and possesses a large parking lot. Parking regulations were confirmed to comply with the plaza parking rate in the Zoning By-law through a Stamp Plan B application that was approved in 2016. The variance is considered minor as staff is of the opinion the addition of commercial recreation as a permitted use will not disrupt the way in which the commercial plaza is currently operating. The potential impacts of a commercial recreation business operating in the basement of the plaza are also considered to be minor. Based on the above comments, staff is of the opinion that the variance requested is minor, meets the general intent of the Zoning By-law and Official Plan, and is appropriate for the lot and surrounding neighbourhood. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated April 25, 2017, advising they have no concerns with this application. Ms. H. Holbrook and Ms. M. DesRosiers were in attendance in support of the subject application. Ms. Holbrook provided a brief summary of the subject application, noting they are in support of the staff recommendation. Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Ms. P. Kohli That the application of 563 Highland Rd. West Ltd. requesting permission to add `Commercial Recreation' as a permitted use, specifically indoor recreation games including laser tag, escape rooms and paintball in an existing retail plaza, on Part Lot 21, Plan 1004, being Parts 5 & 6 on Reference Plan 58R-5638, 563 Highland Road West, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall obtain a Zoning (Occupancy) Certificate from the Planning Division. 2. That the owner ensures any Commercial Recreation business operates fully within an enclosed building. 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 -78- Submission 78 - Submission No.: A 2017-032 (Cont'd) MAY 16, 2017 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 Submission Nos.: Applicant: Property Location Legal Description; Appearances: A 2017-034 Sunset Door Inc. 80 Dumart Place Part Lot 112, German Plan 58R-4941 In Support: C. Leite L. Wand Contra: None Written Submissions: None Carried Company Tract, being Part 1 on Reference The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission for an existing auto repair and storage business to have 15 off-street parking spaces rather than the required 17 off-street parking spaces; and, for 3 of those spaces to be located within the building behind lift hoists whereas the By-law requires all off-street parking spaces to be accessed independently. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated May 9, 2017, advising the subject property is zoned Business Park One (B-1) under By-law 85-1 and is designated Business Park in the 1994 Official Plan and Business Park Employment in the 2014 Official Plan. The owner is requesting permission for an existing auto repair and storage business to have 15 off-street parking spaces rather than the required 17 off-street parking spaces; and, for 3 of those spaces to be located within the building behind lift hoists whereas the By-law requires all off-street parking spaces to be accessed independently. 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 Business Park in the 1994 Official Plan and Business Park Employment in the 2014 Official Plan. The 2014 Official Plan designation is in effect; however, a significant number of policies from the plan are under appeal and therefore are not being relied upon for this report. Instead, Business Park policies from the 1994 Official Plan are being relied upon to determine whether the proposed variances meet the general intent of the Official Plan. The Business Park designation permits a wide variety of industrial businesses typically found in industrial areas such as uses relating to motor vehicle service. Properties in close proximity to residential areas are subject to buffering requirements and the existing lot has in place landscape screening along a portion of the rear lot that abuts a residential zone. Based on the above, it is Planning staffs opinion that the proposed variances meet the intent of the Official Plan. The variances meet the intent of the Zoning By-law and can be considered minor. The proposed parking reduction of two spaces is minor as there will be 15 spaces for the one business owner who acknowledged that there are only two mechanics working on the vehicles. In regards to the three parking spaces behind the hoists, it is the employees who will move the vehicles into the building and therefore there is no impact on the public using the property as they can park in any of the eleven spaces outside of the building. The variances are appropriate development for the subject property and surrounding neighbourhood. As noted above, the Official Plan and Zoning By-law both permit the repair of motor vehicles. It is staffs opinion that a parking reduction of two spaces, with three spaces inside the building, will not appear to impact the property or the surrounding streetscape. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -79- MAY 16, 2017 5. Submission No.: A 2017-034 (Cont'd) It is noted there is an existing parking space in the drive aisle leading into the property. This space does not comply with regulations and is not shown on the property site plan attached to the subject application. Part of the site plan update will require removal of the demarcation for this non -complying parking space. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated April 25, 2017, advising they have no concerns with this application. Mr. C. Leite and Ms. L. Wand were in attendance in support of the subject application and staff recommendation. In response to questions, Mr. Leite confirmed the existing business has been in operation since November 2016. He stated there are currently 18 off-street parking spaces on-site, adding 4 parking spaces would be lost due to the installation of barrier -free parking spaces. Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Ms. P. Kohli That the application of Sunset Door Inc. requesting permission for an existing auto repair and storage business to have 15 off-street parking spaces rather than the required 17 off-street parking spaces; and, for 3 of those spaces to be located within the building behind lift hoists whereas the By-law requires all off-street parking spaces to be accessed independently, on Part Lot 112, German Company Tract, being Part 1 on Reference Plan 58R-4941, 80 Dumart Place, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall obtain a Zoning (Occupancy) Certificate and a Sign Permit from the Planning Division. 2. That the owner shall obtain an update to the approved Site Plan from the Planning Division. 3. That the owner shall obtain a Building Permit from the Building Division. 4. That Conditions 1 to 3 above shall be completed no later than September 1, 2017. Any request for a time extension must be approved in writing by the Manager of Development Review (or designate) prior to completion date as 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. 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 Submission No.: A 2017-035 Applicant: St. Jude's Student Services Inc. Property Location: 888 Trillium Drive Leaal Description: Part Lot 12. Plan 1471. beina Part 5 on Reference Plan 58R-7426 Appearances: In Support: L. Thompson COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -80- MAY 16, 2017 6. Submission Nos.: A 2017-035 (Cont'd) Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to allow an Educational Establishment to occupy 100% of the Gross Floor Area (GFA) in an existing building currently Zoned B-2, 351U, which would include a future Phase 2 addition to the building, previously approved through Site Plan application SP99/47/T/PB, dated February 24, 2000, amended by Site Plan SP14/082/T/LT, dated August 27, 2014. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated May 1, 2017, advising the applicant is seeking relief from Appendix C, Special Use Provision 351U of By-law 85-1 to allow an Educational Establishment to occupy 100 per cent of the gross floor area which includes the future Phase 2 addition to the existing educational establishment, as shown on the previously approved site plan (SP99/47/T/PB) dated Feb. 24, 2000, amended by site plan SP14/082/T/LT, dated Aug. 27, 2014. In considering the four tests for minor variances as outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O., 1990 Chap. P. 13, as amended, Planning staff offer the following comments. The subject property was originally developed as an educational establishment through site plan approval in 1999. In the site plan approval, a Phase 2 `Future Development' area was approved to allow for the expansion of the educational establishment. At the time the school was approved and built, the 1994 Official Plan designation of the property was Business Park, which permitted the educational establishment. Portions of the City's 2014 Official Plan are in effect, which changed the designation of the property to Business Park Employment which would not permit a new educational establishment on the property. Staff is of the opinion that the expansion of the legally existing educational establishment is in keeping with the intent of the Official Plan, as the use has been in existence on the property since 1999 and was developed with approval for a future expansion of the use and no new educational establishment is being proposed. The variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law for the following reasons. The property is zoned B-2 with two special use provisions. Special Use Provision 351U permits an educational establishment or religious institution to occupy 100 percent of gross floor area that existed on or before October 28, 2013. The existing educational establishment on the property was built in 2000 with site plan approval to develop a future Phase 2 addition to the educational establishment. A technical by-law amendment in 2015 (By-law 2015-068) revised the special use provision to only allow `existing floor area' for educational establishments and religious institutions in the Business Park Zones. This By-law amendment inadvertently took away the approved development rights for this property. Reinstating the development rights through the minor variance to allow the property to be developed in accordance with the previously approved site plan for the Phase 2 addition to the educational establishment is in keeping with the intent of the Zoning By-law. The variance is minor for the following reasons. As the Phase 2 development was previously approved through the site plan process, reinstating the development rights is considered minor. The variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land for the following reasons. The educational establishment was built on the subject property in 2000 with approval for a future Phase 2 expansion. Allowing the expansion will not have any impact on the property or surrounding properties and is appropriate for the site. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated April 25, 2017, advising they have no concerns with this application. The Committee considered the report of the Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA), dated May 5, 2017, advising although they have no objection to this application, they noted a portion of the subject property is within the allowance adjacent to a wetland. Consequently, the property is regulated by the GRCA under Ontario Regulation 150/06. They advised that GRCA Permit #490/14 for the construction of the proposed addition expired on September 30, 2016. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 81 - MAY 16, 2017 Submission No.: A 2017-035 (Cont'd) Moved by Ms. P. Kohli Seconded by Mr. B. McColl That the application of St. Jude's Student Services Inc. requesting permission to allow an Educational Establishment to occupy 100% of the Gross Floor Area (GFA) in an existing building currently Zoned B-2, 351U, which would include a future Phase 2 addition to the building, previously approved through Site Plan application SP99/47/T/PB, dated February 24, 2000, amended by Site Plan SP14/082/T/LT, dated August 27, 2014, on Part Lot 12, Plan 1471, being Part 5 on Reference Plan 58R-7426, 888 Trillium Drive, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following condition: Notwithstanding Special Use Provision 351U of By-law 85-1, an educational establishment shall be permitted to occupy 100 percent of the gross floor area, which includes the future Phase 2 expansion, provided the Phase 2 expansion is constructed in accordance with the previously approved site plan application SP99/47/T/PB dated Feb. 24, 2000, amended by site plan SP14/082/T/LT, dated Aug. 27, 2014. No additional floor area for an educational establishment shall be permitted beyond that approved in the existing site plans of record. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 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 Submission Nos.: A 2017-036 Applicant: 15 Millwood Crescent (Kitchener) Limited Property Location: 15 Millwood Crescent Legal Description: Block B, Plan 1404 Appearances: In Support: S. Litt P. Chauvin Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to construct a multi -residential townhouse development having 1.1 off-street parking spaces/per unit (108 spaces) rather than the required 1.5 off-street spaces/per unit (146 spaces); to provide 10% of the required off-street visitor parking spaces (11 spaces) rather than the required 20% (30 spaces); to provide 8 off- street parking spaces for parallel parking having a length of 6m rather than the required 6.7m; and, 2 off-street 90 -degree angled parking spaces having dimensions of 2.4m wide x 4.8m length rather than the required 2.6m width x 5.5m length. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated May 8, 2017, advising the subject property located at 15 Millwood Crescent is designated Low Rise Residential in both the 1994 and 2014 Official Plans, and zoned Residential Six Zone (R-6) in Zoning By-law 85-1. The property is currently developed with an existing 50 -unit multiple dwelling (cluster townhouse) development. The owner is proposing to convert the existing two storey buildings into stacked COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -82- MAY 16, 2017 /��1 ••"T i11�C•77 � C�G`�iZrQ1XLY(K.TiTiC units, increasing the total number of units on-site to 97. As such, the owner is requesting relief from Section 6.1.2 a) to permit a reduced off-street parking rate of 1.1 spaces per unit, whereas 1.5 spaces per unit is required, resulting in 108 parking spaces rather than the required 146; Section 6.1.2 b)(vi)B) to permit a reduced visitor parking rate of 10% of the proposed required parking, whereas 20% is required, resulting in 11 visitor spaces rather than the required 30; Section 6.1.1.2 c) to permit eight parallel `Compact Car' spaces with a minimum length of 6 metres, whereas 6.7 metres is required; and, Section 6.1.1.2 d) to permit two 90 degree `Compact Car' spaces with a minimum width of 2.4 metres and length of 4.8 metres, whereas a minimum width of 2.6 metres and length of 5.5 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 following comments. The subject property is designated Low Rise Residential in both the City's 2014 Official Plan and 1994 Official Plan. The 2014 Official Plan Designation is in effect; however, a significant number of Low Rise Residential policies from the 2014 Official Plan are under appeal and therefore are not being relied upon for this report. Instead, Low Rise Residential Policy 3.1.2.1 from the 1994 Official Plan which allows for low density forms of housing such as single detached dwellings, duplex dwellings, semi-detached dwellings, and low rise multiple dwellings is being relied upon to determine whether the proposed variances meet the general intent of the Official Plan. It is Planning staff's opinion the proposed variance meets the intent of the Official Plan which encourages a range of different forms of housing to achieve a low density neighbourhood. The reduction in parking rate and inclusion of compact car parking spaces will continue to maintain the low density character of the property and surrounding neighbourhood. As such, the proposed variances conform to the designation and it is the opinion of staff that the requested variance is appropriate. The requested variances to reduce the parking rate to 1.1 spaces per unit, whereas 1.5 spaces per unit is required, and to designate 10% of the proposed parking as visitor parking, whereas 20% is required, meet the intent of the Zoning By-law. The purpose of the 1.5 parking space per unit regulation is to ensure there is adequate parking provided for residents of multiple dwellings as well as visitors. The rate of 1.1 spaces per unit continues to provide sufficient parking for residents, and will provide 0.1 spaces per unit (10%) for designated visitor parking. To support the proposed parking reduction, the owner undertook a Parking Utilization Study and completed the City of Kitchener Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Checklist. The Checklist provides the option to include TDM measures with a development which would allow for a reduction in the required parking spaces. The owner proposes to provide additional bicycle parking spaces above what is required in the Urban Design Manual for the subject site. The owner proposes to provide Grand River Transit bus passes at a rate of 1 bus pass per unit for 2 years, and designate two parking spaces as car share spaces. Furthermore, the owner is proposing that the rental agreement between the tenant and property owner notes the cost of a parking space and the ability for tenants to opt in or out of having a parking space. In summary, the owner has proposed several TDM measures on-site and has demonstrated through the Parking Utilization Study that the number of provided parking spaces will adequately accommodate the proposed number of units. As such, staff is satisfied that a reduction of the parking rate to 1.1 spaces per unit will provide adequate parking for the residents and visitors of the proposed multiple dwelling, therefore meeting the intent of the Zoning By-law. The requested variance to reduce the parallel and 90 degree parking space sizes in order to accommodate 10 `Compact Car' parking spaces on site meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The intent of the minimum 2.4 metre x 6.7 metre dimensions for parallel parking spaces and 2.6 metre x 5.5 metre dimensions for 90 -degree parking spaces is to ensure vehicles of various sizes can fit in the space, as these are the dimensions for standard parking spaces. However, the 10 proposed `Compact Car' spaces will be signed and designated specifically for smaller vehicles, with the balance of the parking on site to accommodate a standard or larger size vehicle. As such, staff is satisfied the request meets the intent of the By-law, as sufficient parking for a range of vehicle sizes will be provided in addition to the spaces designated `Compact Car.' The variances can be considered minor as the reduced parking rates for resident and visitor parking, and reduced parking space dimensions to accommodate `Compact Car' parking will not present any significant impacts to adjacent properties or the overall neighbourhood. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -83- MAY 16, 2017 Submission No.: A 2017-036 (Cont'd The proposed 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 or the abutting intersection. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated April 25, 2017, advising they have no concerns with this application. Messrs. S. Litt and P. Chauvin were in attendance in support of the subject application. Mr. Chauvin indicated the proposed development has already received site plan approval, noting they are in support of the recommendation as outlined in the staff report. Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Ms. P. Kohli That the application of 15 Millwood Crescent (Kitchener) Limited requesting permission to construct a multi -residential townhouse development having 1.1 off-street parking spaces/per unit (108 spaces) rather than the required 1.5 off-street spaces/per unit (146 spaces); to provide 10% of the required off-street visitor parking spaces (11 spaces) rather than the required 20% (30 spaces); to provide 8 off-street parking spaces for parallel parking having a length of 6m rather than the required 6.7m; and, 2 off-street 90 -degree angled parking spaces having dimensions of 2.4m wide x 4.8m length rather than the required 2.6m width x 5.5m length, on Block B, Plan 1404, 15 Millwood Crescent, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following condition: That the owner shall agree to finalize details on how each Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Measure will be implemented and maintained to the satisfaction of the Director of Transportation Services and the City Solicitor. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 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 Submission Nos.: A 2017-037 Applicant: Deer Ridge Heights Inc. Property Location: 340 Joseph Schoerg Crescent Legal Description: Lot 8, Registered Plan 58M-553 Appearances: In Support: L. Paleczny E. Bender Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to construct a single detached dwelling having a front yard setback of 5.5m rather than the required 10m; and, to have a parking structure (garage) to be located closer to the front lot line than a porch which does not extend the full length across the width of the dwelling. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -84- MAY 16, 2017 :��1 ••"T i11�C•77 � C�G`�iZrQ1X�L(K.TiTiC The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated May 8, 2017, advising the subject property is zoned Residential Three Zone (R-3) with Special Regulations 250R, 253R and 280R and is designated Low Rise Residential in both the 1994 and 2014 Official Plans. The property is currently vacant and the owner is proposing to construct a single detached dwelling. It is noted that this property obtained variance approval in February 2017 (A 2017-018) for a reduced front yard setback. This application adds an additional variance for a parking structure (garage) setback. The owner is requesting permission to construct a single detached dwelling having a front yard setback of 5.5 metres rather than the required 10 metres; and, to have a parking structure (garage) to be located closer to the front lot line than a porch that does not extend across the full width of the dwelling. 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 both the 1994 and 2014 Official Plans. The 2014 Official Plan designation is in effect; however, a significant number of Low Rise Residential policies from the 2014 plan are under appeal and therefore are not being relied upon for this report. Instead, staff is reviewing Low Rise Residential Policy 3.1.2.1 from the 1994 Official Plan which permits low density forms of housing such as single detached. It is staffs opinion that the proposed variances meet the intent of the 1994 Official Plan which encourages a range of different forms of housing to achieve a low density neighbourhood. The requested variances meet the intent of the Zoning By-law. The special regulation on the property for a 10 -metre front yard setback was established for heritage purposes, as the property is located within the Pioneer Tower West cultural heritage landscape area. Heritage Staff has indicated they have no concerns with the proposed variance. The proposed variance therefore meets the intent of the Zoning By-law as it maintains the setback for houses already established on the street and which contributes to the cultural heritage landscape. The intent of the special regulation that a parking structure (garage) not project in front of the main dwelling or a porch that extends across the full width of the dwelling is to ensure the garage does not dominate the streetscape. The proposed garage does project in front of the main dwelling but is located behind the porch which does not extend across the full width of the house. As shown in the drawings attached to the application, the design of the porch is in keeping with the Georgian designed architecture of the home and consequently Heritage staff has no concerns. Staff note that to the right of the porch on the main floor is the dining room and by not having the porch extend across the fapade, more natural light enters these windows as it is not reduced by a roofed porch. Based on above, the intent of the Zoning By-law is met for both requested variances. The variances can be considered minor as the reduced front yard setback will not present any significant impacts to adjacent properties and the overall neighbourhood. The requested setback of 5.5 metres will be in line with the setbacks of future buildings on adjacent properties based on their existing R-3 zoning. In regards to the garage projection, as noted above, the request is in keeping with the intent of the regulations and can be considered minor. The variances are appropriate development for the property and surrounding streetscape. As well, staff is of the opinion that 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 April 25, 2017, advising they have no concerns with this application. Messrs. L. Paleczny and E. Bender were in attendance in support of the subject application and staff recommendation. Mr. Bender requested clarification on Condition 2 as outlined in the staff recommendation, noting no building or grade changes being permitted beyond fenced limit, adding it was unclear why a condition was being imposed through this decision regarding an adjacent property. The Chair noted the aerial photograph of the site indicated there appeared to be tree preservation required at the very rear of the subject property and the condition is intended to ensure protection of those features. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -85- MAY 16, 2017 Submission No.: A 2017-037 (Cont'd) Moved by Ms. P. Kohli Seconded by Mr. B. McColl That the application of Deer Ridge Heights Inc. requesting permission to construct a single detached dwelling having a front yard setback of 5.5m rather than the required 10m. and, to permit a parking structure (garage) to be located closer to the front lot line than the porch which does not extend the full length across the width of the dwelling, on Lot 8, Registered Plan 58M-553, 340 Joseph Schoerg Crescent, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: That the owner shall obtain a Building Permit from the Building Division. 2. That the owner shall ensure that no building or grade changes permitted beyond fenced limit as noted on approved tree preservation limit in southeast corner of lot (Detailed Vegetation Plan for Draft Plan of Subdivision 30T-96004); unless otherwise approved. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 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 Submission Nos.: A 2017-038 Applicant: 2522935 Ontario Inc. Property Location: 6 Crosswinds Drive Legal Description: Lot 47, Registered Plan 58M-597 Appearances: In Support: P. Clarke Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to construct a single detached dwelling having a garage width of 6.15m, which is 72.5% of the front fapade whereas the By-law permits a maximum garage width of 70% of the front fapade. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated May 8, 2017, advising the subject property located at 6 Crosswinds Dr. is zoned Residential Four Zone (R-4), with special regulation provision 597R. It is designated Low Rise Residential in both the current Official Plan, and the new Official Plan (in effect). The applicant is requesting permission to construct a single detached dwelling with a double -car garage. The applicant is requesting relief from Section 5.5A.1 of the Zoning By-law to allow for a garage width of 6.15 metres, which is 72.5% of the width of the front facade, rather than the maximum permitted width of 70%. In considering the four tests for minor variances as outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O., 1990 Chap. P. 13, as amended, Planning staff offer the following comments. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -86- MAY 16, 2017 9. Submission No.: A 2017-038 (Cont'd) The subject property is designated Low Rise Residential in both the City's 2014 Official Plan and 1994 Official Plan. It should be noted that a significant number of Low Rise Residential policies from the 2014 Official Plan are under appeal; however, the appealed policies do not affect this report. The Residential designation in the 2014 Official Plan places emphasis on compatibility of building form with respect to massing, scale and design in order to support the successful integration of different housing types. It also places emphasis on the relationship of housing to adjacent buildings, streets and exterior areas. The proposed variance conforms to the designation and it is the opinion of staff the requested variance is appropriate. The requested variance to permit a garage width of 6.15 metres, which is 72.5% of the width of the front fapade, meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The intent of the maximum permitted width of 70% is to ensure that the garage doesn't overshadow the streetscape. The proposed single detached dwelling plans incorporate specific design features such as a useable front porch, and large second storey windows above the garage to maintain the streetscape aspect of the neighbourhood. As such, staff is satisfied the requested variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The variance can be considered minor as the increase in garage width will not present any significant impacts to adjacent properties and the overall neighbourhood. The variance can be considered minor as the increase from the permitted 70% garage width to the requested 72.5% garage width is 0.21 meters. In the opinion of staff, this increase is considered minimal when compared to the total width of the garage and lot. The variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land. The requested variance should not impact the existing character of the surrounding neighbourhood. Based on the above comments, staff is of the opinion that the variance requested is minor, meets the general intent of the Zoning By-law and Official Plan, and is appropriate for the lot and surrounding neighbourhood. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated April 25, 2017, advising they have no concerns with this application. Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Ms. P. Kohli That the application of 2522935 Ontario Inc. requesting permission to construct a single detached dwelling having a garage width of 6.15m, which is 72.5% of the front fapade, whereas the By-law permits a maximum garage width of 70% of the front fapade, on Lot 47, Registered Plan 58M-597, 6 Crosswinds Drive, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance requested in this application is minor. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By -Law and Official Plan is being maintained on the subject property. 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 COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -87- MAY 16, 2017 10. Submission Nos.: A 2017-039 Applicant: 2522935 Ontario Inc. Property Location: 80 Crosswinds Drive Legal Description: Lot 186, Registered Plan 58M-597 Appearances: In Support: P. Clarke Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to construct a single detached dwelling having a garage width of 6.12m, which is 72.2% of the front fapade whereas the By-law permits a maximum garage width of 70% of the front fapade. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated May 8, 2017, advising the subject property located at 80 Crosswinds Drive is zoned Residential Four Zone (R-4), with special regulation provision 597R. It is designated Low Rise Residential in both the current Official Plan, and the new Official Plan (in effect). The applicant is requesting permission to construct a single detached dwelling with a double -car garage. The applicant is requesting relief from Section 5.5A.1 of the Zoning By-law to allow for a garage width of 6.12 metres, which is 72.2% of the width of the front facade, rather than the maximum permitted width of 70%. In considering the four tests for minor variances as outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O., 1990 Chap. P. 13, as amended, Planning staff offer the following comments. The subject property is designated Low Rise Residential in both the City's 2014 Official Plan and 1994 Official Plan. It should be noted that a significant number of Low Rise Residential policies from the 2014 Official Plan are under appeal, however the appealed policies do not affect this report. The Residential designation in the 2014 Official Plan places emphasis on compatibility of building form with respect to massing, scale and design in order to support the successful integration of different housing types. It also places emphasis on the relationship of housing to adjacent buildings, streets and exterior areas. The proposed variance conforms to the designation and it is the opinion of staff the requested variance is appropriate. The requested variance to permit a garage width of 6.12 metres, which is 72.2% of the width of the front fapade, meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The intent of the maximum permitted width of 70% is to ensure that the garage doesn't overshadow the streetscape. The proposed single detached dwelling plans incorporate specific design features such as a useable front porch, and large second storey windows above the garage to maintain the streetscape aspect of the neighbourhood. As such, staff is satisfied the requested variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The variance can be considered minor as the increase in garage width will not present any significant impacts to adjacent properties and the overall neighbourhood. The variance can be considered minor as the increase from the permitted 70% garage width to the requested 72.2% garage width is 0.18 meters. In the opinion of staff this increase is considered minimal when compared to the total width of the garage and lot. The variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land. The requested variance should not impact the existing character of the surrounding neighbourhood. Based on the above comments, staff is of the opinion that the variance requested is minor, meets the general intent of the Zoning By-law and Official Plan, and is appropriate for the lot and surrounding neighbourhood. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -88- MAY 16, 2017 10. Submission No.: A 2017-039 (Cont'd) The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated April 25, 2017, advising they have no concerns with this application. Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Ms. P. Kohli That the application of 2522935 Ontario Inc. requesting permission to construct a single detached dwelling having a garage width of 6.12m, which is 72.2% of the front fapade, whereas the By-law permits a maximum garage width of 70% of the front fapade, on Lot 186, Registered Plan 58M-597, 80 Crosswinds Drive, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 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 11. Submission Nos.: A 2017-040 Applicant: Leah Walter Property Location: 193 Palmer Avenue Legal Description: Lot 3, Plan 239 Appearances: In Support: L. Walter Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to remove and reconstruct an addition in the rear yard of an existing single detached dwelling having a rear yard setback of 6m rather than the required 7.5m; and, a northerly side yard setback of 0.6m rather than the required 1.2m. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated May 4, 2017, advising the subject property located at 193 Palmer Avenue is zoned Residential Five (R-5) in the Zoning By- law 85-1 and designated Low Rise Conservation in the City's Official Plan. The applicant is proposing to demolish an existing 1 -storey addition and rebuild a 1 -storey addition to the single detached dwelling. The proposed building addition on the subject property will no longer meet the requirements of Section 39.2.1 and 39.2.1 a) of the Zoning By-law. The applicant is requesting relief from Section 39.2.1 of the Zoning By-law to allow an addition to have a rear yard setback of 6.0 metres rather than the required 7.5 metres. Furthermore, the applicant is requesting additional relief from Section 39.2.1 a) of the Zoning By-law to allow an addition to have a side yard setback of 0.6 metres rather that the required 1.2 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 offer the following comments. The subject property is designated Low Rise Conservation in the Mill Courtland Woodside Park Neighbouhood Secondary Plan. The proposed variance meets the intent of the designation, which preserves the scale, use and intensity of existing development. The minor change to the COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -89- MAY 16, 2017 11. Submission No.: A 2017-040 (Cont'd) rear yard and side yard setbacks will 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 permit a rear yard setback of 6.0 metres meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The intent of the 7.5 metre rear yard setback requirement is to provide amenity space in the rear yard and to ensure there is adequate separation between the dwelling and adjacent properties. The reduction of 1.5 metres is minor as the 6.0 metre setback will continue to provide sufficient amenity space and adequate separation between the dwelling and neighbouring properties. Furthermore, the purpose of a side yard setback of 1.2 metres is to allow adequate space for the owner to provide maintenance to the subject dwelling and to permit access to and from the rear yard. The proposed side yard setback of 0.6 metres will still allow the owner to perform maintenance work to the existing dwelling and allow adequate access space to the rear yard. As such, staff is satisfied the requested variances meet the intent of the Zoning By-law The variances can be considered minor as the reduced rear yard setback of 6.0 metres and reduced side yard setback of 0.6 metres will not present any significant impacts to adjacent properties and the overall neighbourhood. The variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land. The requested variance should not impact the existing character of the surrounding neighbourhood. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated April 25, 2017, advising they have no concerns with this application. Ms. L. Walter was in attendance in support of the subject application and staff recommendation. Moved by Ms. P. Kohli Seconded by Mr. B. McColl That the application of Leah Walter requesting permission to remove and reconstruct an addition in the rear yard of an existing single detached dwelling having a rear yard setback of 6m rather than the required 7.5m; and, a northerly side yard setback of 0.6m rather than the required 1.2m., on Lot 3, Plan 239, 193 Palmer Avenue, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following condition: That the owner shall obtain a Building Permit from the City's Building Division for the proposed addition by October 1, 2017. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 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 COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT _90- MAY 16, 2017 12. Submission Nos.: A 2017-041 Applicant: 1888181 Ontario Inc. Property Location: 165-171 King Street West Legal Description: Part Lots 13 and 14, Plan 380 Appearances: In Support: K. Shah J. Clinckett Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to construct a third storey on an existing department retail space to convert the building into high tech office space/store fronts having a height of 12.19m for a building setback less than 6m from King Street rather than the permitted maximum height of 12m; to permit a Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 3.52 rather than the permitted maximum 2.0; and, to provide 0 off-street parking spaces rather than the required 1 off- street parking space. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated May 8, 2017, advising the subject property is located at 165 King Street West and was formerly used as Budd's Department Store. The property contains a commercial building with a two-storey fapade on King Street West and is three stories on Hall's Lane in the rear. The new property owner is proposing to redevelop the site with high-tech office uses and two commercial units fronting King Street West. The building originally had a third storey, which was destroyed by fire in the 1960's. The owner plans to reinstate this floor with elevations reflecting the original design. In order to redevelop this property, the owner is requesting minor variances as follows: 1. to permit a maximum building elevation of 12.19 metres for a portion of a building setback less than 6.0 metres from King Street, whereas section 14.3 permits a maximum building elevation of 12.0 metres; 2. to permit a Floor Space Ratio of 3.52 whereas section 14.3 of the zoning by-law permits a maximum of 2.0; and, 3. to permit 0 parking spaces whereas sections 14.3 and 6.1 requires 1 parking space. 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. Variance 1: The applicant is proposing to permit a maximum building elevation of 12.19 metres for the portion of the building setback less than 6.0 metres from King Street, whereas a maximum of 12.0 metres is permitted. The subject lands are designated City Centre District in the Official Plan (2014). Policies of the City Centre District indicate that fapade and building heights should maintain a human -scaled form along the street. The 12.0 metre building elevation in the Zoning By-law is intended to achieve a human -scaled form. There is no maximum building height; however, buildings must be stepped back 6.0 metres from King Street before the height may increase further. The applicant has requested a slight increase to the building height in order to allow for third floor ceiling heights that are consistent with contemporary office floorplates, and to provide for a parapet and building style that will reflect the historical design of the building. The proposed building height is similar to the 3 -storey neighbouring building at 173-181 King Street West. Staff is of the opinion that an increase in building elevation from 12.0 to 12.19 metres will not be perceptible and the building elevation will provide for a human -scaled form along the street. Based on the foregoing, staff is of the opinion that the intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law are maintained that the variance is minor and that it is appropriate for the development and use of the lands. As part of the renovation and redevelopment, the corrugated metal `Budd's' sign will be removed from the building and the original brick fapade, which has been preserved under the sign, will be exposed. As a condition of approval, Planning staff requires site plan approval (Stamped Plan B) COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 91 - MAY 16, 2017 12. Submission No.: A 2017-041 (Cont'd) to allow Urban Design staff to review and approve the proposed building elevations. The developer has also indicated they intend to provide a number of desirable building features including: indoor bicyle parking; shower and change facilities; a green wall; a wastewater heat recovery system; solar panels; and, a public art installation in the common vestibule. Staff has recommended a condition of approval requiring that the owner enter into an agreement with the City to implement these features. Variance 2: The applicant is proposing to increase the Floor Space Ratio (FSR) to permit the proposed redevelopment and to reinstate the third floor of the subject building lost to fire in the 1960's. Had the floor been reinstated in the 1960's when it was destroyed by fire, today it would be considered legal non -conforming. The City's planning framework is currently in a state of transition; new Official Plan policies are in place but we are still operating under zoning regulations that related to the previous Official Plan. While the requested variance to the FSR appears to be fairly significant, the need for a variance is a result of the zoning regulations not having `caught -up' to the new Official Plan policy, and the unique grades of the site. The intent of the FSR regulations in the Zoning By-law is to implement the FSR policies of the Official Plan. The 2014 Official Plan permits an FSR of 3.0. The current Zoning By-law only permits an FSR of 2.0; however, through the ongoing review of the Zoning By-law, the FSR will be increased to 3.0 in order to align with, and implement, Official Plan policy. FSR is a numerical representation of scale, and works together with maximum building height to regulate the massiveness of buildings and to articulate what is considered appropriate built form. In this case, an FSR of 3.0 is intended to achieve a building which contributes to an active, pedestrian -friendly and historically appropriate streetscape. The FSR of 3.0 allows for a three storey building with 100% coverage of each floor, which is effectively what is proposed. However, because the change in grade between King Street West and Halls Lane represent a full storey, the FSR calculation technically includes the entire basement floor, even though it is not visible and does not have an impact on the public realm. If the entire basement level were to be below grade (and if the site were flat) the FSR, with the proposed third floor, would be 2.76 and would comply with the policies of the Official Plan. From King Street West, which is the public realm, the massing and scale of the building maintain the intent of the 3.0 FSR. The proposed increase in FSR will allow the reinstatement of a third floor, which was a feature of the original building and allow for a three-storey elevation, which is typical along King Street and which will provide for an attractive, historically appropriate and pedestrian -friendly streetscape. Based on the foregoing, staff is of the opinion that the intent of both the Official Plan and Zoning By-law are maintained, that the variance is minor and that it is appropriate to the development and use of the lands. Variance 3: The applicant is proposing to reduce the required number of parking spaces from 1 to 0. The building currently has one covered outdoor parking space available via Halls Lane; however, the owner would like to use this space as a loading/delivery space rather than a parkng space. Official Plan policies for the Urban Growth Centre prioritizes pedestrian, cycling and transit over vehicular circulation. The building plans submitted in support of the application illustrate 10 indoor bicycle stalls in a secure bike room. There are also shower facilities provided for staff who may wish to use an active mode of transportation to get to work. The proposed Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures, together with the central downtown location, great access to existing public transit facilities, and the future rapid transit, as well as close proximity of municipal parking facilities will lessen the demand for on-site parking. Based on the foregoing, staff are of the opinion that the intent of the Official Plan is maintained. Zoning By-law regulations of the D-1 Zone require no parking for certain types of uses including retail and restaurant, and no parking is required for uses located within the existing portion of the building. In addition, downtown parking regulations exempt the first 465m2 of new floor space from any parking requirements. As such, the intent of the Zoning By-law is to encourage certain uses (such as restaurant and retail) by requiring no parking, recognize that parking may not be available on sites containing existing buildings and providing a significant reduction in parking for other uses (such as office), to encourage redevelopment including small increases in floor space. As discussed above, given the proximity to transit and TDM measures staff are of the opinion that the proposed reduction maintains the intent of the Zoning By-law. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -92- MAY 16, 2017 12. Submission No.: A 2017-041 (Cont'd) Planning and Transportation Services staff are of the opinion that the difference between 1 and 0 parking spaces is negligible as there will be no expectation for staff to drive to work. Parking will not be available on-site for the vast majority of workers and visitors to these premises. Further, it is likely that there will be regular deliveries (e.g. courier and office supplies) made to future office tenants, as well as any future restaurant or retail tenants, and having a loading space will help to fulfill this operational need. Based on the foregoing, staff are of the opinion that the proposed variance is minor and appropriate for the development and use of the lands. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated April 25, 2017, advising they have no concerns with this application. Messrs J. Clinckett and K. Shaw were in attendance in support of the subject application and staff recommendation. Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Ms. P. Kohli That the application of 1888181 Ontario Inc. requesting permission to construct a third storey on an existing department retail space to convert the building into high tech office space/store fronts having a building height of 12.19m for a building having a setback less than 6m from King Street rather than the permitted maximum height of 12m; to permit a Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 3.52 rather than the permitted maximum 2.0; and, to provide 0 off-street parking spaces rather than the required 1 off-street parking space, on Part Lots 13 and 14, Plan 380, 165-171 King Street West, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: That the owner shall obtain a Building Permit for the proposed third storey and interior renovations of the building. 2. That the owner shall obtain Site Plan Approval to the satisfaction of the City's Manager of Site Development and Customer Service. Any required site development works shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Manager of Site Development and Customer Service. Failure to fulfill this condition will result in this approval becoming null and void. 3. That the owner shall enter into an agreement with the City of Kitchener to be prepared by the City Solicitor and registered on title of the subject lands, agreeing to incorporate the following features into the building design: a. solar panels; b. a living wall; c. a waste water heat recovery system; d. secure indoor bicycle parking; e. shower and change facilities; and, f. a public art feature in the publically accessible King Street West vestibule. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 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 COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -93- MAY 16, 2017 13. Submission Nos.: A 2017-042 Applicant: 29 Brick Street (Kitchener) Limited Property Location: 29 Brick Street Legal Description: Part Lot 20 and Lots 21 & 22, Plan 316 Appearances: In Support: S. Litt P. Chauvin W. Heidi Contra: T. Schroecker G. Sawyer Written Submissions: R. Quehl The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to construct 3 additional residential units within an existing 15 -unit 3 -storey multi -residential dwelling having 17 off-street parking spaces (0.94 spaces/per unit) rather than the required 23 off-street parking spaces (1.25 spaces/per unit). The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated May 10, 2017, advising the subject property is located on the south side of Brick Street in the King Street East Planning Community. The property contains a 2.5 storey, 15 -unit multiple dwelling. The property is designated Medium Density Multiple Residential in the King Street East Secondary Plan contained within the 1994 Official Plan (which allows mid -rise multiple dwellings), and is zoned Residential Eight (R-8) in the Zoning By-law. The owner has filed a Site Plan Application (Application# SP17/004/B/AP) to complete internal renovations to the existing building so as to create 3 additional dwelling units (18 units total). The proposed renovations are considered an intensification of the property. No exterior additions are proposed. The Site Plan has been recently Approved in Principle. In order to facilitate the above noted intensification, the applicant is requesting a variance from Section 6.1.2a) of the Zoning By-law to reduce the off-street parking requirement for a multiple dwelling from 1.25 parking spaces per unit (23 spaces) to 0.94 parking spaces per unit (17 spaces). In support of the application, MHBC Planning has submitted a parking study/parking reduction justification letter which has been reviewed by the City's Transportation Services Division. 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 land use designation of the secondary plan contained within the 1994 Official Plan and the parking policies of the 2014 Official Plan. Policy 13.C.8.2 of the 2014 Official Plan states: The City may consider adjustments to parking requirements for properties within an area or areas, where the City is satisfied that adequate alternative parking facilities are available, where developments adopt transportation demand management (TDM) measures or where sufficient transit exists or is to be provided. In this case, Transportation Services advises that `based on the parking study completed, TDM measures (unbundling parking spaces), and being located less than 800 metres from a future ION stop, the proposed variance is acceptable.' Staff recommends that a condition be imposed to ensure that such TDM measures are adequately implemented, to the satisfaction of Transportation Services. Additionally, the 2014 Official Plan states that: 4.C.1.10 Where appropriate, and without limiting opportunities for intensification, the City will encourage and support the ongoing maintenance and stability of existing housing stock in the city by ... supporting the reuse and adaption of the housing stock through renovation, conversion and rehabilitation. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -94- MAY 16, 2017 i[c�171 •T51mM � _��iZ�QiLyl(K.Ti�ire In this case, the subject application represents appropriate intensification and encourages the maintenance and stability of existing housing stock through renovation and adaption. The variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law for the following reasons. The purpose of establishing minimum parking requirements is to ensure that adequate on-site parking is provided for a given land use. In this case, the applicant has demonstrated that due to the proximity of higher -order transit, Transportation Demand Management measures, and preparation of a site- specific parking study, a lower minimum parking requirement is warranted. The variance is minor since it does not create unacceptably adverse impacts on adjacent properties; staff is satisfied that the site will continue to provide adequate on-site parking. The variance is desirable for the appropriate development of the land since it will facilitate appropriate intensification that is sensitive to the surrounding development. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated April 25, 2017, advising they have no concerns with this application. Ms. W. Heidi and Messrs. S. Litt and P. Chauvin were in attendance in support of the subject application and staff recommendation. Mr. Chauvin provided a brief summary of the application, noting the subject property is within walking distance of the new ION Station. Ms. G. Sawyer was in attendance in opposition of the subject application. She expressed concerns with the parking study review, stating a number of units in the building are currently vacant, which is the reason for the appearance of underutilization. She stated in her opinion, there is insufficient parking on site to support the existing units and the applicant is proposing 3 additional units. Mr. T. Schroecker was in attendance in opposition of the subject application. He expressed concerns with the data outlined in the traffic study that would support approval of a parking reduction. He noted he has lived at the property since 1995 and there have always been issues related to insufficient parking, noting at times he has had to park in the fire lane due to lack of available parking spaces. He stated in his opinion, with an increase in residential units it will only add to issues related to insufficient parking. He indicated the current property owner purchased the property in 2016 and since that date, there have been a number of issues between the landlord and existing tenants on-site. He requested the application be deferred until a proper parking analysis can be completed by the City, and the pending landlord -tenant tribunals currently in review are resolved, prior to granting a parking reduction. He indicated he was also in attendance on behalf of Mr. R. Quehl, another resident of the building, and read/circulated a letter in opposition to the subject application. In response to questions, Mr. D. Seller advised Transportation Services staff reviewed the traffic study provided by MHBC Planning, stating it is consistent with other parking studies completed for similar applications. He noted a parking review was conducted on 4 separate occasions on behalf of the applicant, and the data received supports the proposed parking reduction. The Chair stated although he sympathized with the various concerns raised by the tenants of the subject property regarding living conditions during renovations, the Committee may only consider the merits of the subject application in relation to the parking reduction. He stated in his opinion, the application is minor in nature; the City has requirements for intensification, and due to the building's proximity to the future ION Station, the parking reduction is justified. Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Ms. P. Kohli That the application of 29 Brick Street (Kitchener) Limited requesting permission to construct 3 additional residential units within an existing 15 -unit 2.5 -storey multi -residential dwelling having 17 off-street parking spaces (0.94 spaces/per unit) rather than the required 23 off-street parking spaces (1.25 spaces/per unit), on Part Lot 20 and Lots 21 & 22, Plan 316, 29 Brick Street, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall obtain a Zoning (Occupancy) Certificate from the City's Planning Division. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -95- MAY 16, 2017 13. Submission No.: A 2017-042 (Cont'd) 2. That, if required by the City's Transportation Services, the owner shall enter into an agreement with the City of Kitchener, to be prepared by the City Solicitor, to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Transportation Services, and registered on the title of the subject property. Said agreement shall ensure that Transportation Demand Management measures are implemented, including, but not limited to unbundling of parking spaces. 3. That the owner shall obtain final approval of Site Plan Application SP17/004/B/AP from the City's Manager of Site Development and Customer Service. 4. That Conditions 1 to 3 above shall be completed prior to May 16, 2018. 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. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 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 14. Submission Nos.: A 2017-043 Applicant: Creston McKee, Lisa Collins, Fern Collins and Gord Collins Property Location: 3-258 Edgewater Crescent Legal Description: Waterloo Condominium Plan 483, Level 1, Unit 2, Appearances: In Support: P. McKee Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised the applicants are requesting permission to construct an outdoor patio area on an existing single detached dwelling having a rear yard setback of 1.48m rather than the required 7.0m. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated May 8, 2017, advising the application is proposing to permit a covered outdoor deck in the required rear yard, located within 1.485 metres (4' 10 1/2") from the rear property line whereas as 7.0 metres is required as per Section 5.6A.4 and Section 381 R of Appendix D of Zoning By-law 85-1. The property is designated as Low Rise Residential in the Official Plan and zoned as Residential Six (R-6) with Special Regulation Provision 381 R. 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 variance meets the intent of the new Official Plan. The subject application has been considered under the policies of the City's new 2014 Official Plan. Where policies of the 2014 Official Plan were specifically appealed, those specific policies are not in effect. Low Rise COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -96- MAY 16, 2017 14. Submission No.: A 2017-043 (Cont'd) Residential and Housing objectives and policies that are in effect were considered for this application. The Low Rise Residential designation recognizes the existing scale of residential development and allows for modest alterations. The proposed variance will not impact the low density character of the property and will not impact the surrounding neighbourhood. The requested variances meet the intent of the Zoning By-law. The intent of the 4.0 metres rear yard setback is to provide outdoor amenity space as well as adequate separation from neighbouring properties. It is staffs opinion that the proposed covered deck within the rear yard will continue to provide outdoor amenity space. It is noted that a future trail is planned adjacent to the rear of the subject property within the City -owned trail block. The requested variance is minor. It is staff's opinion that the reduced rear yard setback for a proposed covered deck is minimal and will not impact the adjacent properties. The proposed location of the covered deck is within the residentially zoned property and not within the City - owned lands zoned as Hazard Land (P-3). The variances are appropriate for the development and use of the land. It is staff's opinion that the proposed deck is appropriately designed for the property and will provide outdoor amenity space for the owner. As such, the reduced rear yard setback will have no impact to adjacent lands. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated April 25, 2017, advising while they have no concerns with this application they noted the subject property is located within the Outer Surface of Airport Zoning Regulated area. Therefore, the occupants of the dwelling may be subject to presence and noise due to flying aircraft. The Committee considered the report of the Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA), dated May 5, 2017, advising although they have no objection to this application, they noted a portion of the subject property is within the allowance adjacent to the erosion hazard associated with the Grand River. Consequently, the property is regulated by the GRCA under Ontario Regulation 150/06. Mr. P. McKee was in attendance in support of the subject application and staff recommendation. The Chair noted the comments from the GRCA and requested and amendment to the recommendation to include obtaining the necessary approvals from the GRCA Mr. B. McColl noted the application is fairly minor. He requested a further amendment to include a condition requiring the applicant to obtain a building permit. Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Ms. P. Kohli That the application of Creston McKee, Lisa Collins, Fern Collins and Gord Collins requesting permission to construct an outdoor patio area on an existing single detached dwelling having a rear yard setback of 1.48m rather than the required 7.0m, on Waterloo Condominium Plan 483, Level 1, Unit 2, 3-258 Edgewater Crescent, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall obtain the required permit(s) from the Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA). 2. That the owner shall obtain a Building Permit from the City's Building Division for the proposed outdoor patio 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. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -97- MAY 16, 2017 14. Submission No.: A 2017-043 (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 15. Submission Nos.: A 2017-044 Applicant: Bryan Crook and Teresa Leslie Property Location: 157 East Avenue Legal Description: Part Lot 61, Plan 301 Appearances: In Support: M. Choi S. Burrows Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised the applicants are requesting permission to convert an existing single detached dwelling into a duplex having 2 off-street parking spaces located 3.2m from the front lot line rather than the required 6m; a northerly side yard setback for the proposed addition of 1.06m rather than the required 1.2m; and, to permit a driveway located 0.3m from the northerly side lot line rather than the required 0.6m. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated May 10, 2017, advising the subject property is located on the west side of East Avenue between Frederick Street and Krug Street in the Central Frederick Planning Community. The property contains a brick clad, single detached dwelling with an attached garage. The property is designated Low Rise Conservation A in the Central Frederick Secondary Plan contained within the 1994 Official Plan and is zoned Residential Five (R-5) with Special Use Provision 129U, which prohibits triplexes with the R-5 Zone. The applicants are proposing to convert the single detached dwelling into a duplex. The renovations to facilitate this change include converting the existing attached garage to living space. To complete the conversion, the owner is requesting the following variances to the Zoning By-law: 1. requesting permission to allow 2 parking spaces for a duplex dwelling to be located on a driveway 3.2 metres from the street line, whereas the Section 6.1.1.1 b)i) of the Zoning By- law allows only one of the required parking spaces to be located less than 6 metres from the street line; 2. requesting permission to allow a driveway to be located 0.30 metres from the side lot line, whereas Section 6.1.1.1b)ii)e) of the Zoning By-law requires a 0.6 metre driveway setback; and, 3. requesting permission to allow a minimum side yard of 1.06 metres for an existing one - storey portion of a dwelling and second floor addition, whereas Section 39.2.1 the Zoning By-law requires a minimum side yard of 1.2 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. It should be noted that secondary plans, including the Central Frederick Secondary Plan which applies to the subject property for the land use designation, was not part of the 2014 Official Plan, but continues to be part of the 1994 Official Plan. However, it should also be noted that certain policies within the 2014 Official Plan do apply, such as those policies within the Housing and Parking sections. In this case, both plans are being relied upon to determine whether the subject variances meet the intent of the Official Plan. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -98- MAY 16, 2017 15. Submission No.: A 2017-044 (Cont'd) Variance 1 meets the intent of the Central Frederick Secondary Plan contained within the 1994 Official Plan, the parking policies of the 2014 Official Plan, and the Zoning By-law since it would allow for appropriate intensification of the property and would not require an additional driveway widening variance (the maximum required driveway width is approximately 6.9 metres, whereas a driveway of only 5.8 metres is proposed). It should be noted that the Zoning requirement to locate 1 parking space at least 6 metres from the street line applies to required off-street parking only; there is no prohibition on parking vehicles on a driveway. Variance 2 meets the intent of the Central Frederick Secondary Plan contained within the 1994 Official Plan, parking policies of the 2014 Official Plans, and Zoning By-law since adequate snow storage is available on the south side of the proposed driveway and an adequate 0.3 metre buffer to the neighbouring property is maintained. Variance 3 meets the intent of the Central Frederick Secondary Plan contained within the 1994 Official Plan, the housing policies of the 2014 Official Plan, and Zoning By-law for the following reasons. The 2014 Official Plan has much to say with respect to residential intensification, such as: 4.C.1.7 The City may require... elevation drawings... to support and demonstrate that a proposed development or redevelopment is compatible with respect to built form, architectural design, landscaping, screening and/or buffering. These requirements are intended to address the relationship to adjacent residential development, to ensure compatibility with the existing built form and the community character of the established neighbourhood and to minimize adverse impacts. 4.C.1.8 Where... minor variances... are requested, proposed or required to facilitate residential intensification or a redevelopment of lands, the overall impact of the ...minor variances will be reviewed, but not limited to the following to ensure, that: a) Any new buildings and any additions and/or modifications to existing buildings are appropriate in massing and scale and are compatible with the built form and the community character of the established neighbourhood. e) New buildings, additions, modifications and conversions are sensitive to the exterior areas of adjacent properties and that the appropriate screening and/or buffering is provided to mitigate any adverse impacts, particularly with respect to privacy. Additionally, the 2014 Official Plan states that: 4.C.1.10 Where appropriate, and without limiting opportunities for intensification, the City will encourage and support the ongoing maintenance and stability of existing housing stock in the city by ... supporting the reuse and adaption of the housing stock through renovation, conversion and rehabilitation. In order to ensure that the proposed addition is compatible and appropriate in terms of built form, scale, and community character, Planning staff recommends a condition be imposed to require elevation drawings for the proposed garage addition. Variances 1 and 2 are minor because they do not cause unacceptably adverse impacts on adjacent properties. Variance 3 is minor as long as the above noted condition is implemented. Variances 1, 2 and 3 are desirable for the appropriate development of the land since they will facilitate appropriate intensification in a manner that supports the reuse and adaption of the existing housing stock through renovation and conversion. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated April 25, 2017, advising they have no concerns with this application. Ms. M. Choi and Mr. S. Burrows were in attendance in support of the subject application and staff recommendation. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT _99- MAY 16, 2017 ib Y�1•T51 Mire The Chair expressed concerns that there are no elevation drawings included with the subject application to further understand the impacts of the proposed variance. Ms. von Westerholt stated staff have requested a site plan and elevation drawings as a condition of the recommended approval. In response to questions, Mr. D. Seller advised Transportation services staff have no objections to the proposed tandem parking. Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Ms. P. Kohli That the application of Bryan Crook and Teresa Leslie requesting permission to convert an existing single detached dwelling into a duplex having 2 off-street parking spaces located 3.2m from the street line rather than the required 6m; a northerly side yard setback for the proposed addition of 1.06m rather than the required 1.2m; and, to permit a driveway located 0.3m from the northerly side lot line rather than the required 0.6m, on Part Lot 61, Plan 301, 157 East Avenue, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: That the owner shall submit and obtain approval of elevation drawings for the front and side of the proposed addition to the dwelling from the City's Director of Planning. 2. That the owner shall obtain a Building Permit for the proposed addition and conversion from the City's Building Division. The elevation drawings approved through Condition 1 above shall be implemented through said Building Permit process. 3. That Conditions 1 and 2 above shall be completed prior to May 16, 2018. 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. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 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 APPLICATION: Submission No.: B 2017-006 Applicant: Mary Cikic Property Location: 239 Wellington Street North Legal Description: Lot 97, Registered Plan 376 Appearances: In Support: M. Cikic L. Collins Contra: P. Lavery-Verkley J. Russell Written Submissions: None COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -100- MAY 16, 2017 i��1•7 HT1 Ire The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to sever a parcel of land having a width of 10.059m, a depth of 48.217m and an area of 492.9 sq.m. The retained lands will have a width of 10.058m, a depth of 48.217m and an area of 492.8 sq.m. The existing single detached dwelling will be demolished. The lots are intended for the construction of residential duplexes. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated May 4, 2017, advising the application is proposing to sever the existing property into two separate lots that will have frontage onto Wellington Street North. The existing dwelling is proposed to be removed, and a new duplex is proposed for each new lot. The existing property has a lot width of 20.117 metres (66 feet). The application proposed to sever the lot roughly in half. The retained lands are proposed to have a lot width of 10.058 metres, a lot depth of 48.217 metres, and a lot area of 492.8 square metres. The severed lot is proposed to have a lot width of 10.059 metres, a lot depth of 48.217 metres and a lot area of 492.9 square metres. The subject property is designated as Low Rise Residential in the City's Official Plan and zoned as Residential Five (R-5) in the Zoning By-law. With respect to the criteria for the subdivision of land listed in Section 51 (24) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposed severance conforms to the City's Official Plan and will allow for orderly development that is compatible with the existing community. The subject application has been considered under the policies of the City's new 2014 Official Plan. Low Rise Residential and Housing objectives and policies that are in effect were considered for this application. The Official Plan supports an appropriate range, variety and mix of housing types and styles, densities, tenure and affordability to satisfy the varying housing needs of our community through all stages of life. The City favours a land use pattern which mixes and disperses a full range of housing types and styles both across the city as a whole and within neighbourhoods. The severed and retained lots are proposed to be developed with a compatible residential duplex use. Planning staff is recommending conditions requiring a site plan as well as building elevations to ensure that the proposed duplexes are compatible with the design and character of the surrounding community. The severed and retained lots comply with the regulations of the Residential Five (R-5) zone. Staff is further of the opinion that the proposal is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and conforms to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Planning, Development and Legislative Services, dated May 9, 2017, advising they have no objection to this application, subject to the following conditions: 1. That, prior to final approval, the applicant submits payment to the Region of Waterloo the Consent application review fee of $350.00. 2. That, prior to final approval, the applicant enter into a Registered Development Agreement with the Region of Waterloo to include the following conditions in all offers of purchase/sale, or rental agreements for all residential units on both the severed and retained lots: That all units be constructed with a forced air -ducted heating system suitably sized and designed to permit the future installation of a central air conditioning system by the occupants. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 101 - MAY 16, 2017 1. Submission No.: B 2017-006 (Cont'd) Purchasers/tenants are advised that sound levels due to increasing road traffic on Wellington Street North and rail noise from the CN Railway may interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants as the sound levels exceed the sound level limits of the Region of Waterloo and the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change (MOECC). This dwelling has been fitted with a forced air -ducted heating system and has been designed with the provision of adding central air conditioning at the occupant's discretion. Installation of central air conditioning by the occupant in low and medium density developments will allow windows and exterior doors to remain closed, thereby ensuring that the indoor sound levels are within the sound level limits of the Region of Waterloo and the Environment and Climate Change (MOECC). Warning: Canadian National Railways or its assigns or it assigns or successors in interest has or have a rights-of-way within 300 metres from the land the subject thereof. There may be alterations to or expansions of the railway facilities on such rights-of-way in the future including the possibility that the railway or its assigns or successors as aforesaid may expand its operations, which expansion may affect the living environment of the residents in the vicinity, notwithstanding the inclusion of any noise and vibration attenuating measures in the design of the development and individual dwelling(s). CNR will not be responsible for any complaints or claims arising from use of such facilities and/or operations on, over or under the aforesaid rights-of-way. Ms. M. Cikic was in attendance in support of the subject application and the staff recommendation. The Chair noted the comments from the Region of Waterloo and requested an amendment to the staff recommendation to include the Regional conditions as requested. Ms. P. Lavery-Verkley and Ms. J. Russell stated they were in attendance this date to receive clarification on the subject application. Ms. Lavery-Verkley noted she had spoken with City staff prior to this date and they indicated the applicant was proposing the driveway access to the subject property from a lane at the rear of the subject property. She noted she has no objections to the proposed development pending that is still the intentions of the applicant. Ms. M. Cikic advised the intentions this date is to provide access to the subject properties through the rear laneway. Mr. B. McColl noted the comments of the City's Parks Operations department regarding a parkland dedication requirement. He indicated it appears there was a clerical error and the condition was omitted from the staff recommendation. He requested an amendment to include a condition to make satisfactory financial arrangements for parkland dedication. Submission No.: B 2017-006 Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Ms. P. Kohli That the application of Mary Cikic requesting permission to sever a parcel of land having a width of 10.059m, a depth of 48.217m and an area of 492.9 sq.m., on Lot 97, Registered Plan 376, 239 Wellington Street North, 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 Agn (Microstation) format, as well as two full sized paper copies of the plan(s). The digital file needs to be submitted according to the City of Kitchener's Digital Submission Standards to the satisfaction of the City's Mapping Technologist. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -102- MAY 16, 2017 1. Submission No.: B 2017-006 (Cont'd) 3. That the owner shall submit a site plan showing the location of the proposed duplex dwelling on both the severed and retained lots, along with elevation drawings, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning, illustrating that the proposed dwellings will be compatible with the neighbourhood in terms of massing, scale and design, and that the drawings be approved prior to the issuance of any building permit. 4. That the owner shall make financial arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering Services for the installation of all new service connections and the removal of redundant services to the retained lands. 5. That the owner shall make arrangements, financial or otherwise, for the relocation of any existing City -owned street furniture, signs, hydrants, utility poles, wires or lines, as required, to the satisfaction of the appropriate City department. 6. That the owner shall provide a servicing plan and grading plan showing outlets to the municipal servicing system to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services for the retained lands. 7. That the owner shall submit a complete Development and Reconstruction As -Recorded Tracking Form (as per the Public Sector Accounting Board (PSAB) S. 3150) together with a digital submission of all AutoCAD drawings required for the site (Grading, Servicing etc.) with the corresponding correct layer names and numbering system to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services for the retained lands. 8. That the owner shall provide Engineering Services staff with confirmation that the basement elevation of the house can be drained by gravity to the street sewers, to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services. Where this cannot be achieved, the owner is required to pump the sewage via a pump and forcemain to the property line and have a gravity sewer from the property line to the street, at the cost of the owner. 9. That the owner shall pay to the City of Kitchener a cash -in -lieu contribution for park dedication on the severed parcel equal in the amount of $4,627.14. The park land dedication is calculated at the residential rate of 5% of the per metre lineal frontage land value for the severed portion. 10. That the owner shall enter into an agreement with the City of Kitchener to be prepared by the City Solicitor and registered on title of the severed and retained lands which shall include the following: a. That the owner shall prepare a Tree Preservation/Enhancement Plan for the severed and retained lands in accordance with the City's Tree Management Policy, to be approved by the City's Director of Planning and the Director of Operations, and where necessary, implemented prior to any grading, tree removal or the issuance of building permits. Such plans shall include, among other matters, the identification of a proposed building envelope/work zone, landscaped area and vegetation (including street trees) to be preserved. b. The owner further agrees to implement the approved plan. No changes to the said plan shall be granted except with the prior approval of the City's Director of Planning and the Director of Operations. 11. That the owner shall submit payment to the Region of Waterloo the Consent Application Review Fee of $350.00. 12. That the owner shall enter into a Registered Development Agreement with the Region of Waterloo to include the following conditions in all offers of purchase/sale, or rental agreements for all residential units on both the severed and retained lots: a. That all units be constructed with a forced air -ducted heating system suitably sized and designed to permit the future installation of a central air conditioning system by the occupants. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -103- MAY 16, 2017 Submission No.: B 2017-006 (Cont'd) Purchasers/tenants are advised that sound levels due to increasing road traffic on Wellington Street North and rail noise from the CN Railway may interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants as the sound levels exceed the sound level limits of the Region of Waterloo and the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change (MOECC). This dwelling has been fitted with a forced air -ducted heating system and has been designed with the provision of adding central air conditioning at the occupant's discretion. Installation of central air conditioning by the occupant in low and medium density developments will allow windows and exterior doors to remain closed, thereby ensuring that the indoor sound levels are within the sound level limits of the Region of Waterloo and the Environment and Climate Change (MOECC). C. Warning: Canadian National Railways or its assigns or successors in interest has or have a rights-of-way within 300 metres from the land the subject thereof. There may be alterations to or expansions of the railway facilities on such rights- of-way in the future including the possibility that the railway or its assigns or successors as aforesaid may expand its operations, which expansion may affect the living environment of the residents in the vicinity, notwithstanding the inclusion of any noise and vibration attenuating measures in the design of the development and individual dwelling(s). CNR will not be responsible for any complaints or claims arising from use of such facilities and/or operations on, over or under the aforesaid rights-of-way. It is the opinion of this Committee that: A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. 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 May 16, 2019. Carried COMBINED APPLICATIONS: Submission Nos.: B 2017-007, B 2017-008 and A 2017-045 Applicant: Jason Malfara Property Location: 739 Rockway Drive Legal Description: Part Lot 33, Plan 649 Appearances: In Support: J. Malfara Contra: V. Scott Written Submissions: None COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -104- MAY 16, 2017 mr The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to sever two parcels of land intended for semi-detached dwellings and retain one parcel with a single detached dwelling. Severed Parcel 1 on the plan submitted with the application, proposed for a semi-detached dwelling to have a width on Rockway Drive of 13.8m, a westerly depth on Doon Road of 27.066m and an area of 317.9 sq.m. Severed Parcel 2 on the plan submitted with the application, proposed for a semi-detached dwelling to have a width on Rockway Drive of 7.577m, a depth of 26.210m and an area of 198.5 sq.m. The retained land proposed for a single detached dwelling will have a width on Rockway Drive of 9.52m, a depth of 26.518m and an area of 252.7 sq.m. Permission is also being requested for easements having a width of 3m across the rear of Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 for storm services. Parcel 2 will also require a minor variance to permit a lot area of 198 sq.m. rather than the required 235 sq.m. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated May 5, 2017, advising the subject property is designated Low Rise Residential in the City's 2014 Official Plan and zoned Residential Four Zone (R-4) in Zoning By-law 85-1. The lands are currently developed with an existing semi-detached house. The existing development of the neighbourhood consists of a mix of single detached dwellings, semi-detached dwellings, and low rise multiple dwellings. Lot sizes vary in width, depth, and area. The owner is requesting permission to sever the subject lands with the intent to redevelop the severed lands with semi-detached dwellings and redevelop the retained lands with a single detached dwelling (B 2017-007 and B 2017-008). The first severed lot (Parcel 1, semi-detached dwelling) would have a lot width of 15.176 metres, a depth ranging between 27.066 metres and 26.210 metres, and an area of 317.9 square metres. The second severed lot (Parcel 2, semi- detached dwelling) would have a lot width of 7.577 metres, a depth ranging between 26.518 metres and 26.210 metres, and an area of 198.5 square metres. The retained lot would have a lot width of 9.520 metres, a depth ranging between 26.902 metres and 26.518 metres, and an area of 252.7 square metres. The owner has applied to create a 3.0 metre -wide easement over the severed lands (Parcels 1 and 2) for a private storm water easement. In addition, the owner has submitted the following minor variance application: A 2017-045 (severed lot, Parcel 2, semi-detached dwelling) — requesting relief from Section 38.2.2 to permit a lot area of 198.5 square metres for a semi-detached dwelling, whereas the Zoning By-law requires a minimum lot area of 235 square metres. Consent Applications — B 2017-007 & B 2017-008: With respect to the criteria for the subdivision of land listed in Section 51(24) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990. c.P. 13, the uses of both the severed and retained parcels are in conformity with the City's Official Plan and meet the intent of Zoning By-law 85-1. A minor variance to permit a reduce lot area for semi-detached dwelling has been requested. Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposal conforms with the regulations of the Residential Four Zone (R-4), subject to approval of the concurrent minor variance application. The proposed severances conform to the City's 2014 Official Plan and the configuration of the proposed lots can be considered appropriate for the use of the lands. The proposed lots conform to policy 17.E.20.5 of the 2014 Official Plan. Both the retained and severed lots reflect the general scale and character of the established development pattern of surrounding lands. Based on the foregoing, Planning staff recommends that Consent Applications B 2017-007 and B 2017-008, requesting consent to sever the subject property into three lots to facilitate the redevelopment of the severed lands and retained lands, be approved, subject to the conditions listed in the Recommendation section of the staff report. Minor Variance Application — A 2017-045: 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 both the City's 2014 Official Plan and 1994 Official Plan. The 2014 Official Plan Designation is in effect; however, a significant number of Low Rise Residential policies from the 2014 Official Plan are under appeal and therefore are COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -105- MAY 16, 2017 Submission Nos.: B 2017-007. B 2017-008 & A 2017-045 (Cont'd not being relied upon for this report. Instead, Low Rise Residential Policy 3.1.2.1 from the 1994 Official Plan which allows for low density forms of housing such as single detached dwellings and semi-detached dwellings is being relied upon to determine whether the proposed variances meet the general intent of the Official Plan. It is Planning staffs opinion that the proposed variance meets the intent of the Official Plan which encourages a range of different forms of housing to achieve a low density neighbourhood. The minor change to the lot area will maintain the low density character of the property and surrounding neighbourhood, which is characterized by a variety of lot sizes and built form options. The proposed variance conforms to the designation and it is the further opinion of staff that the requested variance is appropriate. The requested variance to permit a reduced lot area of 198.5 square metres for the proposed severed parcel 2, whereas 235 square metres is required, meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The purpose of the minimum 235 square metre lot area requirement is to ensure the lot is of adequate size to support a building envelope and parking, as well as to provide adequate amenity space on site. The proposed semi-detached dwelling meets all other zoning regulations with regards to setbacks and lot width and provides a generous amount of amenity space in the rear yard. As such, staff is satisfied the reduction of 36.5 square metres meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The variance can be considered minor as the proposed semi-detached dwelling reduced lot area will not present any significant impacts to adjacent properties or the overall neighbourhood. The proposed semi-detached dwelling use will provide a new housing form at a scale and density that is appropriate for the context of the existing neighbourhood, which consists of single detached dwellings and multiple dwellings. The requested variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land. The redevelopment of these properties will be sympathetic to the surrounding area and bring a new context -appropriate unit type to the neighbourhood. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Planning, Development and Legislative Services, dated May 9, 2017, advising they have no objection to Applications B 2017- 007 and B 2017-008, subject to the following conditions: That, prior to final approval, the applicant submits payment to the Region of Waterloo the Consent application review fee of $350.00 per lot. One fee has been received, so only one fee is outstanding at this time. 2. That, prior to final approval, the applicant enter into a Registered Development Agreement with the Region of Waterloo to include for the provision of noise attenuation measures, including the provision of central air conditioning systems, and the inclusion of the following noise warning clauses in all offers of purchase/sale, or rental agreements for all residential units on both the severed and retained lots: Purchasers/tenants are advised that sound levels due to increasing road traffic on King Street East and Highway 7/8 may occasionally interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants as the sound levels exceed the sound level limits of the Region of Waterloo and the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change. Purchasers /tenants are advised that despite the inclusion of noise control features in the building unit, sound levels due to increasing road traffic on King Street East and Highway 7/8 may on occasions interfere with the dwelling occupants as the sound levels exceed the sound level limits of the Region of Waterloo and the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change. This dwelling unit has been supplied with a central air conditioning system which will allow windows and exterior doors to remain closed. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated April 25, 2017, advising they have no concerns with Application A 2017-045. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -106- MAY 16, 2017 Submission Nos.: B 2017-007, B 2017-008 & A 2017-045 (Cont'd) Ms. J. von Westerholt requested an amendment to Condition 4 of the staff recommendation to provide further clarification related to the expectation. She requested Condition 4 state: "That the owner shall submit an Arborist's report to the satisfaction of the City's Urban Designer." Mr. J. Malfara was in attendance in support of the subject applications and staff recommendations. He requested clarification on the requirement to obtain an Arborist's report. In response, Ms. von Westerholt stated Parks Operations staff would require a review of the trees on the subject property to determine the health of the trees. The Chair noted the comments from the Region of Waterloo and requested the conditions be included as part of the Committee's decision. Submission No.: B 2017-007 Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Ms. P. Kohli That the application of Jason Malfara requesting permission to sever a parcel of land identified as Parcel 1 on the plan submitted with the application, proposed for a semi-detached dwelling to have a width on Rockway Drive of 13.8m, a westerly depth on Doon Road of 27.066m and an area of 317.9 sq.m.; and, to grant easement having a width of 3m across the rear of the property for storm services, on Part Lot 33, Plan 649, 739 Rockway 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(ies) 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 Agn (Microstation) format, as well as two full sized paper copies of the plan(s). The digital file needs to be submitted according to the City of Kitchener's Digital Submission Standards to the satisfaction of the City's Mapping Technologist. 3. That Minor Variance Application A 2017-045 shall receive full and final approval. 4. That the owner shall submit a site layout plan and elevation drawings to the satisfaction of the City's Manager of Site Development and Customer Service. 5. That the owner shall submit an Arborist's report to the satisfaction of the City's Urban Designer. 6. That the owner shall enter into an agreement with the City of Kitchener to be prepared by the City Solicitor and registered on title of the severed and retained lands which shall include the following: That prior to any grading or the application or issuance of a building permit, the owner shall submit a plan, prepared by a qualified consultant, to the satisfaction and approval of the City's Director of Planning showing: (i) the proposed location of all buildings (including accessory buildings and structures), decks and driveways; (ii) the location of any existing buildings or structures to be removed or relocated; (iii) the proposed grades and drainage; (iv) the location of all trees to be preserved, removed or potentially impacted on or adjacent to the subject lands, including notations of their size, species and condition; (v) justification for any trees to be removed; (vi) outline tree protection measures for trees to be preserved; and, (vii) building elevation drawings. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -107- MAY 16, 2017 1. Submission Nos.: B 2017-007, B 2017-008 & A 2017-045 (Cont'd) Any alteration or improvement to the lands including grading, tree removal and the application or issuance of any building permits shall be in compliance with the approved plan. Any changes or revisions to the plan require the approval of the City's Director of Planning. C. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, the owner is required to achieve a Street Tree Planting Plan approved by the Director of Operations. The Street Tree Planting Plan shall identify root habitat zones conforming to Section M of the Development Manual, along the subject land's Doon Road and Rockway Drive street frontages for the purpose of creating the conditions for street tree establishment in accordance with the City's current requirements for development applications. d. Prior to obtaining an Occupancy Permit, the owner is required to fully implement the approved Street Tree Planting Plan including the construction of root habitat zones, to the satisfaction of the Director of Operations. 7. That the owner shall enter into an agreement with the City of Kitchener to be prepared by the City Solicitor and registered on title of the severed and retained lands which shall include the following: That the owner shall prepare a Tree Preservation/Enhancement Plan for the severed and retained lands in accordance with the City's Tree Management Policy, to be approved by the City's Director of Planning and where necessary, implemented prior to any grading, tree removal or the issuance of building permits. Such plans shall include, among other matters, the identification of a proposed building envelope/work zone, landscaped area and vegetation to be preserved. The owner further agrees to implement the approved plan. No changes to the said plan shall be granted except with the prior approval of the City's Director of Planning. 8. That the owner shall pay to the City of Kitchener a cash -in -lieu contribution for park dedication on the severed parcel equal in the amount of $8,948.38. The park land dedication is calculated at the residential rate of 5% of the per metre lineal frontage land value for the severed portion. 9. That the owner shall make financial arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering Division for the installation of any new service connections to the severed and/or retained lands. 10. That the owner shall make financial arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering Services for the installation, to City standards, of boulevard landscaping including street trees, and a paved driveway ramp, on the severed lands. 11. That any new driveways be built to City of Kitchener standards at the owner's expense prior to occupancy of the building to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering Division. 12. That the owner shall provide a servicing plan showing outlets to the municipal servicing system to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services. 13. That the owner shall submit a complete Development and Reconstruction As -Recorded Tracking Form (as per the Public Sector Accounting Board (PSAB) S. 3150) together with a digital submission of all AutoCAD drawings required for the site (Grading, Servicing etc.) with the corresponding correct layer names and numbering system to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services. 14. That the owner shall provide Engineering Services staff with confirmation that the basement elevation can be drained by gravity to the street sewers. If this is not the case, then the owner would have to pump the sewage via a pump and forcemain to the property line and have a gravity sewer from the property line to the street to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -108- MAY 16, 2017 Submission Nos.: B 2017-007, B 2017-008 & A 2017-045 (Cont'd) 15. That the owner shall submit payment to the Region of Waterloo the Consent Application Review Fee of $350.00. 16. That the owner shall enter into a Registered Development Agreement with the Region of Waterloo to include for the provision of noise attenuation measures, including the provision of central air conditioning systems, and the inclusion of the following noise warning clauses in all offers of purchase/sale, or rental agreements for all residential units on both the severed and retained lots: "Purchasers/tenants are advised that sound levels due to increasing road traffic on King Street East and Highway 7/8 may occasionally interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants as the sound levels exceed the sound level limits of the Region of Waterloo and the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change. Purchasers /tenants are advised that despite the inclusion of noise control features in the building unit, sound levels due to increasing road traffic on King Street East and Highway 7/8 may on occasions interfere with the dwelling occupants as the sound levels exceed the sound level limits of the Region of Waterloo and the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change. This dwelling unit has been supplied with a central air conditioning system which will allow windows and exterior doors to remain closed." It is the opinion of this Committee that: 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 May 16, 2019. Carried Submission No.: B 2017-008 Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Ms. P. Kohli That the application of Jason Malfara requesting permission to sever a parcel of land identified as Parcel 2 on the plan submitted with the application, proposed for a semi-detached dwelling to have a width on Rockway Drive of 7.577m, a depth of 26.210m and an area of 198.5 sq.m.; and, to grant an easement having a width of 3m across the rear of the property for storm services, on Lot 33, Plan 649, 739 Rockway Drive, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: 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(ies) to the satisfaction of the City's Revenue Division. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -109- MAY 16, 2017 Submission Nos.: B 2017-007, B 2017-008 & A 2017-045 (Cont'd) 2. That the owner shall provide a digital file of the deposited reference plan(s) prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor in .dwg (AutoCad) or Agn (Microstation) format, as well as two full sized paper copies of the plan(s). The digital file needs to be submitted according to the City of Kitchener's Digital Submission Standards to the satisfaction of the City's Mapping Technologist. 3. That Minor Variance Application A 2017-045 shall receive full and final approval. 4. That the owner shall submit a site layout plan and elevation drawings to the satisfaction of the City's Manager of Site Development and Customer Service; 5. That the owner shall submit an Arborist's report to the satisfaction of the City's Urban Designer. 6. That the owner shall enter into an agreement with the City of Kitchener to be prepared by the City Solicitor and registered on title of the severed and retained lands which shall include the following: That prior to any grading or the application or issuance of a building permit, the owner shall submit a plan, prepared by a qualified consultant, to the satisfaction and approval of the City's Director of Planning showing: (i) the proposed location of all buildings (including accessory buildings and structures), decks and driveways; (ii) the location of any existing buildings or structures to be removed or relocated; (iii) the proposed grades and drainage; (iv) the location of all trees to be preserved, removed or potentially impacted on or adjacent to the subject lands, including notations of their size, species and condition; (v) justification for any trees to be removed; (vi) outline tree protection measures for trees to be preserved; and, (vii) building elevation drawings. Any alteration or improvement to the lands including grading, tree removal and the application or issuance of any building permits shall be in compliance with the approved plan. Any changes or revisions to the plan require the approval of the City's Director of Planning. C. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, the owner is required to achieve a Street Tree Planting Plan approved by the Director of Operations. The Street Tree Planting Plan shall identify root habitat zones conforming to Section M of the Development Manual, along the subject land's Doon Road and Rockway Drive street frontages for the purpose of creating the conditions for street tree establishment in accordance with the City's current requirements for development applications. Prior to obtaining an Occupancy Permit, the owner is required to fully implement the approved Street Tree Planting Plan including the construction of root habitat zones, to the satisfaction of the Director of Operations. 7. That the owner shall enter into an agreement with the City of Kitchener to be prepared by the City Solicitor and registered on title of the severed and retained lands which shall include the following: That the owner shall prepare a Tree Preservation/Enhancement Plan for the severed and retained lands in accordance with the City's Tree Management Policy, to be approved by the City's Director of Planning and where necessary, implemented prior to any grading, tree removal or the issuance of building permits. Such plans shall include, among other matters, the identification of a proposed building envelope/work zone, landscaped area and vegetation to be preserved. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -110- MAY 16, 2017 1. Submission Nos.: B 2017-007, B 2017-008 & A 2017-045 (Cont'd) b. The owner further agrees to implement the approved plan. No changes to the said plan shall be granted except with the prior approval of the City's Director of Planning. 8. That the owner shall pay to the City of Kitchener a cash -in -lieu contribution for park dedication on the severed parcel equal in the amount of $8,948.38. The park land dedication is calculated at the residential rate of 5% of the per metre lineal frontage land value for the severed portion. 9. That the owner shall make financial arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering Services Division for the installation of any new service connections to the severed and/or retained lands. 10. That the owner shall make financial arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering Services Division for the installation, to City standards, of boulevard landscaping including street trees, and a paved driveway ramp, on the severed lands. 11. That any new driveways be built to City of Kitchener standards at the owner's expense prior to occupancy of the building to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering Division. 12. That the owner shall provide a servicing plan showing outlets to the municipal servicing system to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services. 13. That the owner shall submit a complete Development and Reconstruction As -Recorded Tracking Form (as per the Public Sector Accounting Board (PSAB) S. 3150) together with a digital submission of all AutoCAD drawings required for the site (Grading, Servicing etc.) with the corresponding correct layer names and numbering system to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services. 14. That the owner shall provide Engineering Services staff with confirmation that the basement elevation can be drained by gravity to the street sewers. If this is not the case, then the owner would have to pump the sewage via a pump and forcemain to the property line and have a gravity sewer from the property line to the street to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services. 15. That the owner shall enter into a Registered Development Agreement with the Region of Waterloo to include for the provision of noise attenuation measures, including the provision of central air conditioning systems, and the inclusion of the following noise warning clauses in all offers of purchase/sale, or rental agreements for all residential units on both the severed and retained lots: "Purchasers/tenants are advised that sound levels due to increasing road traffic on King Street East and Highway 7/8 may occasionally interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants as the sound levels exceed the sound level limits of the Region of Waterloo and the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change. Purchasers /tenants are advised that despite the inclusion of noise control features in the building unit, sound levels due to increasing road traffic on King Street East and Highway 7/8 may on occasions interfere with the dwelling occupants as the sound levels exceed the sound level limits of the Region of Waterloo and the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change. This dwelling unit has been supplied with a central air conditioning system which will allow windows and exterior doors to remain closed." It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. 2. The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -111 - MAY 16, 2017 1. Submission Nos.: B 2017-007, B 2017-008 & A 2017-045 (Cont'd) 3. The use of the land in the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Pursuant to 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 May 16, 2019. Carried Submission No.: A 2017-045 Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Ms. P. Kohli That the application of Jason Malfara requesting permission for proposed Parcel 2 on the plan submitted with the application to have a lot area of 198.5 sq.m. rather than the required 235 sq.m., on Part Lot 33, Plan 649, 739 Rockway Drive, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance requested in this application is minor. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By -Law and Official Plan is being maintained on the subject property. 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 Submission Nos.: B 2017-009 and A 2017-046 Applicant: Miroslav Orasanin Property Location: 43 Barclay Avenue Legal Description: Part Lots 302 to 306, Plan 230 Appearances: In Support: N. Orasanin Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to sever a parcel of land having a width on South Drive of 12.51m, a northerly depth of 21.726m and an area of 244.8 sq.m. The retained land will have a width on Barclay Avenue of 12.978m, a depth of 22.186m and an area of 282.8 sq.m. Permission is also being requested to legalize a northerly side yard for the existing dwelling on the retained land of 0.76m rather than the required 1.2m. Both parcels are intended for residential use. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -112- MAY 16, 2017 I►al�tn@1_117rl Mr The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated May 5, 2017, advising the subject property is designated as Low Rise Residential in the 2014 Official Plan and zoned Residential Five Zone (R-5) in the Zoning By-law. The subject property is a through -lot with frontage on both Barclay Avenue and South Drive. The applicant is requesting consent to sever the subject property into two lots. The severed lot would have a frontage along South Drive and the retained lot would have frontage along Barclay Avenue. The existing development of the neighbourhood consists of a mix of single detached dwellings, and low rise multiple dwellings. Lot sizes vary in width, depth, and area. The applicant is requesting consent to sever the subject property into two lots (B 2017-009). The severed lot would have a frontage of 12.978 metres, a depth of 22.186 metres, and an area of 282.8 square metres to accommodate the existing single detached dwelling, while the retained lot would have a frontage of 12.51 metres, depth of 21.725 metres, and an area of 244.8 square metres to accommodate a single detached dwelling. In addition, the owner has submitted the following minor variance application: Minor Variance - A 2017-046: The applicant is seeking relief from Section 39.2.1 of the Zoning By-law to legalize a side yard setback of 0.76 metres whereas the Zoning By-law requires a 1.2 metre side yard setback. Consent - B 2017-009: 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, both the severed and retained parcels are in conformity with the City's Official Plan and Zoning By-law 85-1. A minor variance to legalize the existing side yard setback of the retained lands has been requested. Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposal conforms with the regulations of the Residential Five Zone (R-5), subject to approval of the concurrent minor variance application. The proposed severance conforms to the City's Official Plan and the configuration of the proposed lots can be considered appropriate for the use of the lands. The lots conform to policy 17.E.20.5 of the Official Plan. Both the retained and severed lots reflect the general scale and character of the established development pattern of surrounding lands. Minor Variance — A 2017-046 - 43 Barclay Avenue: The applicant is seeking relief from Section 39.2.1 of the Zoning By-law to legalize a side yard setback of 0.76 metres whereas the Zoning By-law requires a 1.2 metre side yard setback. In considering the four tests for minor variances as outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O., 1990 Chap. P. 13, as amended, Planning staff offers the following comments for the retained lands. The subject property is designated Low Rise Residential in both the City's 2014 Official Plan and 1994 Official Plan. The 2014 Official Plan Designation is in effect; however, a significant number of Low Rise Residential policies from the 2014 Official Plan are under appeal and therefore are not being relied upon for this report. Instead, Low Rise Residential Policy 3.1.2.1 from the 1994 Official Plan which allows for low density forms of housing such as single detached dwellings and semi-detached dwellings is being relied upon to determine whether the proposed variances meet the general intent of the Official Plan. It is Planning staffs opinion that the proposed variance meets the intent of the Official Plan which encourages a range of different forms of housing to achieve a low density neighbourhood. The requested variance to permit a reduced minimum side yard setback is appropriate and continues to maintain the low density character of the property and surrounding neighbourhood, which is characterized by a variety of lot sizes and built form options. The proposed variance conforms to the designation and it is the further opinion of staff that the requested variance is appropriate. The requested variance to legalize the existing side yard setback of 0.76 metres rather than the required 1.2 metre setback meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The right side yard setback of 0.76 metres is historical and is not changing as a result of the proposed severance. The intent of the 1.2 metre setback is to provide access to the rear yard and sufficient space for maintenance of the dwelling. Rear yard access will be provided through the 4.99 metre side yard on the COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -113- MAY 16, 2017 2. Submission Nos.: B 2017-009 & A 2017-046 (Cont'd) opposite side of the house, thus meeting the intent of the Zoning By-law. The proposed variance should not have any impact on the adjacent residential properties. Based on the foregoing, staff is of the opinion that the intent of the Zoning By-law is maintained. The variance can be considered minor as the reduced side yard setback is existing. The reduced setback will not present any significant impacts to adjacent properties or the overall character of the neighbourhood and is considered good planning. The proposed variance is appropriate. Legalizing the existing setback will not negatively impact the character of the subject property or surrounding neighbourhood. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Planning, Development and Legislative Services, dated May 9 2017, advising they have no objection to Application B 2017- 009, subject to the following condition: 1. That, prior to final approval, the applicant submits payment to the Region of Waterloo the Consent application review fee of $350.00. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated April 25, 2017, advising they have no concerns with Application A 2017-046. Mr. N. Orasanin was in attendance in support of the subject application and staff recommendation. Submission No.: B 2017-009 Moved by Ms. P. Kohli Seconded by Mr. B. McColl That the application of Miroslav Orasanin requesting permission to sever a parcel of land having a width on South Drive of 12.51m, a northerly depth of 21.726m and an area of 244.8 sq.m., on Part Lots 302 to 306, Plan 230, 43 Barclay Avenue, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding Municipal property taxes and/or local improvement charges. 2. That the owner shall provide a digital file of the deposited reference plan(s) prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor in .dwg (AutoCad) or Agn (Microstation) format, as well as two full sized paper copies of the plan(s). The digital file needs to be submitted according to the City of Kitchener's Digital Submission Standards to the satisfaction of the City's Mapping Technologist. 3. That Minor Variance Application A 2017-046 shall receive final approval. 4. That the owner shall pay to the City of Kitchener a cash -in -lieu contribution for park dedication equal in the amount of $5,805.66. which is required on the severed parcel as a new developable lot will be created by the severance. The park land dedication is calculated at the residential rate of 5% of the per metre lineal frontage land value for the severed portion. 5. That the owner shall make financial arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering Services Division for the installation of any new service connections to the severed and/or retained lands. 6. That the owner shall make financial arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering Services Division for the installation, to City standards, of boulevard landscaping including street trees, and a paved driveway ramp, on the severed lands. 7. That any new driveways be built to City of Kitchener standards at the owner's expense prior to occupancy of the building to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering Services Division. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -114- MAY 16, 2017 2. Submission Nos.: B 2017-009 & A 2017-046 (Cont'd) 8. That the owner shall provide a servicing plan showing outlets to the municipal servicing system to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services. 9. That the owner shall submit a complete Development and Reconstruction As -Recorded Tracking Form (as per the Public Sector Accounting Board (PSAB) S. 3150) together with a digital submission of all AutoCAD drawings required for the site (Grading, Servicing etc.) with the corresponding correct layer names and numbering system to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services. 10. That the owner shall provide Engineering Services staff with confirmation that the basement elevation can be drained by gravity to the street sewers. If this is not the case, then the owner would have to pump the sewage via a pump and forcemain to the property line and have a gravity sewer from the property line to the street to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services. 11. That the owner shall enter into an agreement with the City of Kitchener to be prepared by the City Solicitor and registered on title of the severed lands which shall include the following: a. That the owner shall prepare a Tree Preservation/Enhancement Plan for the severed and retained lands in accordance with the City's Tree Management Policy, to be approved by the City's Director of Planning and where necessary, implemented prior to any grading, tree removal or the issuance of building permits. Such plans shall include, among other matters, the identification of a proposed building envelope/work zone, landscaped area and vegetation to be preserved. b. The owner further agrees to implement the approved plan. No changes to the said plan shall be granted except with the prior approval of the City's Director of Planning. 12. 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 May 16, 2019. Carried Submission No.: A 2017-046 Moved by Ms. P. Kohli Seconded by Mr. B. McColl COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -115- MAY 16, 2017 Submission Nos.: B 2017-009 & A 2017-046 (Cont'd) That the application of Miroslav Orasanin requesting permission to to legalize a northerly side yard for the existing dwelling on the retained land of 0.76m rather than the required 1.2m., on Part Lots 302 to 306, Plan 230, 43 Barclay Avenue, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 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 Submission Nos.: B 2017-010, A 2017-047 and A 2017-048 Applicant: Sean O'Rourke Property Location: 6 Pequegnat Avenue Legal Description: Part Lot 26, Plan 111 Appearances: In Support: S. O'Rourke B. Martin M. Crosby G. Scheels Contra: J. Ryrie T. & K. Staley M. Dickinson A. Broderick B. Blake J. & J. Chelsom Written Submissions: J. Ryrie The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to sever a parcel of land having a width on Mansion Street of 16.99m, an easterly depth of 20.98m and an area of 307.03 sq.m. The retained land will have a width on Pequegnat Avenue of 20.48m, a northerly depth on Mansion Street of 21.77m and an area of 396.11 sq.m. Permission is also being requested for the retained land to have a westerly side yard setback of 3.01m rather than the required 4.5m; a rear yard setback of 0.90m rather than the required 7.5m; to permit an encroachment into the Driveway Visibility Triangle (DVT) whereas the By-law does not permit encroachments into the DVT; and, to permit an attached garage located in the rear yard whereas the By-law does not permit attached garages to be located in the rear yard. The severed land will also require permission for a front yard setback of 1.58m rather than the required 4.5m; an encroachment into the DVT whereas the By-law does not permit encroachments into the DVT; and, to permit a 3.42m setback from the street line for an attached garage rather than the required 6m. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated May 8, 2017, advising the subject property is designated Low Rise Conservation -A in the City's Central Frederick Secondary Plan and zoned Residential Five Zone (R-5) in Zoning By-law 85-1 with Special Use Provision 129U, which prohibits 3 -unit multiple dwellings. City records indicate the lands are currently developed with an existing duplex, which has fallen into disrepair. The surrounding neighbourhood contains a mix of low rise residential land uses, predominantly in the form of single detached dwellings and some duplex dwellings. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -116- MAY 16, 2017 3. Submission Nos.: B 2017-010. A 2017-047 & A 2017-048 (Cont'd) The owner is requesting permission to sever the subject lands with the intent to redevelop both the severed and retained lands with new purpose built duplexes (B 2017-010). The retained lot would have a lot width of 19.8 metres, a depth ranging between 21.423 metres and 24.683 metres, and an area of 396.11 square metres. The severed lot would have a lot width of 17.4 metres, depth ranging between 16.48 metres and 20.98 metres, and an area of 307.03 square metres. In addition, the owner has submitted the following minor variance applications: A 2017-047 (retained lot) — requesting relief from Section 39.2.1 to permit a reduced side yard abutting the street setback of 3.01 metres, whereas 4.5 metres is required; Section 39.2.1 to permit a reduced rear yard setback of 0.9 metres, whereas 7.5 metres is required; and, Section 5.3 to permit a 1.45 metre encroachment into the Driveway Visibility Triangle (DVT). A fourth variance was applied for to permit an attached garage in the rear yard; however, there is no regulation in Zoning By-law 85-1 prohibiting this. Therefore the variance is not required. As such, staff recommends the decision be modified to exclude this request. A 2017-048 (severed lot) — requesting relief from Section 39.2.1 to permit a reduced front yard setback of 1.58 metres, whereas 4.5 metres is required; Section 6.1.1.1 b) i) to permit the off- street parking space to be located 3.42 metres from the street line, whereas 6 metres is required; and, Section 5.3 to permit a 2.89 metre encroachment into the driveway visibility triangle. Consent - B 2017-010 With respect to the criteria for the subdivision of land listed in Section 51(24) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990. c.P. 13, the uses of both the severed and retained parcels are in conformity with the Provincial Policy Statement (2014) and the City's Official Plan and meet the intent of Zoning By- law 85-1. In addition, both parcels comply with the minimum lot width and area regulations of the R-5 zone. Minor variances to permit reduced front, side yard abutting the street, and off-street parking setbacks, as well as DVT encroachments, have been requested for the severed and retained lands. Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposal conforms with the regulations of the Residential Four Zone (R-5), subject to approval of the concurrent minor variance applications. The proposed severance conforms to the City's Official Plan and the configuration of the lots can be considered appropriate for the use of the lands. In addition, the lotting fabric is appropriate for the context of the neighbourhood, which consists of a mix of lot sizes and setbacks. The lot size and duplexes proposed for both the severed and retained lands is consistent with other lots in the neighbourhood, including those fronting on Mansion Street, Chestnut Street, and Gordon Avenue. Based on the foregoing, Planning staff recommends that Consent Application B 2017-010, requesting consent to sever the subject property into two lots to facilitate the redevelopment of the severed lands, be approved, subject to the conditions listed in the Recommendation section of the staff report. Minor Variance Applications — A 2017-047 and A 2017-048 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 Conservation -A in the City's Central Frederick Secondary Plan. The proposed variances meet the intent of the Official Plan, which is to preserve the scale, use and intensity of existing development. Permitted uses are restricted to single detached dwellings, semi-detached dwellings, duplex dwellings, small lodging houses, small residential care facilities, private home day care and home businesses, and triplexes existing on the date of the approval of the original Central Frederick Secondary Plan. The minor changes will maintain the low density character of the property and surrounding neighbourhood. The proposed duplex use and variances conform to the Low Rise Conservation -A designation and it is the opinion of staff that the requested variances are appropriate. Staff further note that the requested variances are unrelated to the duplex use, as these variances would be required if single detached dwellings were proposed. The requested variance to reduce the rear yard setback of the retained lot from 7.5 metres to 0.9 metres meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The intent of the 7.5 metre rear yard setback is to COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -117- MAY 16, 2017 c�IVIrrMe, �r.__ire provide adequate amenity space in the rear yard and separation between the building and neighbouring properties. In order to maintain a front yard setback from Pequegnat Avenue that is consistent with the setbacks of other dwellings, the applicant has designed the site such that the building is pushed farther back from the street, resulting in the reduced rear yard setback. In lieu of amenity space in the rear yard as a result of this design consideration, amenity space will be provided in the front yard, a portion of the rear yard, and on private balconies. In addition, two City parks (Mansion Green and Weber Park), are within walking distance of the subject lands. As such, staff is satisfied the request meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The applicant has also designed the building with a reduced side yard abutting the street setback of 3.01 metres from Mansion Street, whereas 4.5 metres is required. This will maintain a setback that is consistent with existing dwellings fronting on Mansion Street. The intent of the 4.5 metre setback is to ensure there is adequate separation between the building and the street line. Staff is satisfied the requested 3.01 metres will continue to provide adequate separation between the building and the street line. Therefore the requested variances meet the intent of the Zoning By- law. The requested variance to permit a reduced front yard setback of 1.58 metres for the severed lot, whereas 4.5 metres is required, meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. Similar to the reduced side yard abutting the street setback proposed for the retained lot, the applicant has designed the building so the severed lot with a front yard setback is similar to the existing dwellings along the same side of Mansion Street. The intent of the required the 4.5 metre setback is to ensure there is adequate separation between the building and the street line. Given that the setback is consistent with other dwellings in the neighbourhood and the proposed 1.58 metre setback will continue to provide separation between the dwelling and the street, staff is satisfied the requested variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The requested variance to permit a reduced off-street parking setback of 3.42 metres, whereas 6 metres is required, meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The intent of the 6 metre setback is to allow for a vehicle to be safely parked on the driveway without affecting the City right-of-way, pedestrian sidewalk, or surrounding properties. The legal parking space for each unit in the proposed duplexes will be provided within the garage and not arranged in tandem. Further, there is no sidewalk located on this side of Mansion Street; therefore, there is no risk of vehicle overhang. Lastly, the proposed garages will be recessed behind the habitable portion of the dwellings, and will be replacing an existing two -car garage on site. As such, staff is satisfied the proposed variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The requested variances to permit 1.52 metre (retained lot) and 2.96 metre (severed lot) encroachments into the DVT meet 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 proposed development will encroach into the visibility triangle, visibility will be maintained by the remaining 3.05 metre (retained lot) and 1.61 metre (severed lot) separation from the street. Separation created by the City boulevard between the property line and the roadway will also ensure there is adequate visibility. Further, staff notes that there is no pedestrian sidewalk located on this side of Mansion 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 rear yard and side yard abutting the street setback (retained lot), reduced front yard and off-street parking setback (severed lot), and DVT encroachments will not present any significant impacts to adjacent properties and the overall neighbourhood, as the intent is to develop these lands while respecting the established street line setbacks in the neighbourhood. The proposed duplex use will provide a compatible housing form at a scale and density that is appropriate for the context of the existing neighbourhood. The proposed variances are appropriate for the development and use of the land. This design, with a larger front yard on Pequegnat Avenue and reduced front and side yard abutting the street setbacks along Mansion Street, is consistent with the setbacks of existing dwellings on these streets and is compatible with the existing character of the neighbourhood. As such, staff is of the opinion that the requested variances are appropriate. Further, the proposed duplex use is a permitted use in the Zoning By-law and will not negatively impact the existing character of the subject property or surrounding neighbourhood. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -118- MAY 16, 2017 3. Submission Nos.: B 2017-010. A 2017-047 & A 2017-048 (Cont'd) The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Planning, Development and Legislative Services, dated February 8, 2017, advising they have no objection to Application B 2017-010, subject to the following condition: 1. That, prior to final approval, the applicant submits payment to the Region of Waterloo the Consent Application Review Fee of $350.00. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated April 25, 2017, advising they have no concerns with Applications A 2017-047 and A 2017-048. The Committee considered comments from a neighbouring property owner, dated May 9, 2017 in opposition of the applications. The Committee considered comments from a neighbouring property owner, dated May 9, 2017 in opposition of the applications. Messrs G. Sheels, S. O'Rourke, B. Martin and M. Crosby were in attendance in support of the subject applications and the staff recommendation. Mr. G. Sheels provided a summary of the subject application, noting the subject property is a large corner lot with frontage on Pequegnat Avenue and Mansion Street. He stated currently there is a duplex on the property that will be demolished and the applicant intends to construct two new purpose-built duplexes on the severed and retained lands. He indicated the lots are Zoned R-5 and support the proposed use. He stated the applicant has worked with City staff to achieve a design they believe is complimentary to the neighbourhood that respects existing setbacks of the other dwellings on Pequegnat Avenue and Mansion Street. Mr. Sheels further advised the proposed buildings are generally in the same location as the existing buildings, noting the applicant has worked towards consistency with regards to massing and location of the dwellings in comparison to the neighbouring properties. In addition, he stated the applicant has endeavored to work within the recommendations outlined in the Residential Intensification in Established Neighbourhoods (RIENS) for the proposed development by mimicking the existing street edge. Mr. J. Ryrie addressed the Committee in opposition to the subject applications. He stated he has been a member of the community for 37 years and the proposal before the Committee this date in his opinion, does not support the character of the neighbourhood. He expressed concerns with the staff report, noting in his opinion, there were inaccuracies when reviewing the proposal, and the development may adversely impact the neighbourhood. He circulated photos this date to the Committee demonstrating the current conditions on the subject property. He expressed concerns with regards to: lotting fabric not being compatible with the neighbourhood; the variances and whether they meet the intent of the Official Plan; the reduction of the rear yard setback from 7.5m to Om, noting the intention of a rear yard setback being for amenity space; the reduction of greenspaces the side yard setback abutting a street and the notion that it is similar to those on neighbouring properties and the visual impact on the streetscape; the encroachments into the DVT and concerns for safety of pedestrians and motorists; the reduction in a front yard setback; reference to the RIENS study; and, the proposal being positive infill development. Mr. Ryrie stated the neighbourhood would like to see the property redeveloped; however, the proposed development in his opinion, cannot be considered `normal' in comparison to the neighbourhood. Ms. A. Broderick addressed the Committee in opposition to the subject application, noting she was in agreement with Mr. Ryrie's presentation and the concerns already raised regarding the proposed development. She expressed further concerns with the traffic volumes on Mansion Street, noting there are no sidewalks on this section and she has concerns with the location of the garages and safety of children who cross the street on their way to school. She stated in her opinion, the proposed development would not be compatible with the existing neighbourhood as the proposed duplexes are not consistent with other dwellings in the vicinity. She stated in her opinion, there are too many units being proposed in a small space. She further advised while she is not opposed to the property being redeveloped, she felt the proposal this date was not the right solution. Ms. K. Staley was in attendance in opposition to the subject application. She indicated the subject property has been identified as a large not, noting in her opinion, it is no larger than any of the lots on Pequegnat Avenue. She expressed concerns with the safety at the intersection of Pequegnat Avenue and Mansion Street, indicating the proposed dwelling would block sight lines on an already busy street. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -119- MAY 16, 2017 c�IWIrrMe, �r.__ire Mr. T. Staley addressed the Committee in opposition to the subject applications. He indicated the proposal before the Committee this date is not intended to integrate with the neighbourhood. He stated the development would adversely impact the quality of life of the residents living in the neighbourhood. He further advised in his opinion, the variances are not minor. He stated the RIENS proposal does speak to infill projects; however, the development being considered this date does not meet the criteria outlined in that Study. Mr. M. Dickinson was in attendance in opposition to the subject applications. He indicated he is in support of the revitalization of the subject property; however, it would be his preference to see it replaced with another single detached dwelling. He expressed concerns with the height of the proposed dwellings, loss of greenspace on the subject property, increased traffic, garbage and site lines from the existing properties. Ms. B. Blake addressed the Committee in opposition to the subject applications. She acknowledged the concerns raised by the other neighbours, indicating she has lived in the neighbourhood for over 30 years and the development being proposed this date in her opinion, is not appropriate. The Chair questioned whether the property was within the Civic Centre Hertiage District, noting there were no comments received from Heritage Planning staff. Ms. Staley indicated the property was outside of the District, noting the boundary is Lancaster Street. In response to questions, Ms. J. von Westerholt noted whenever a property is subject to a development application and there are trees on-site, it is a standard condition to request a tree preservation plan. Ms. von Westerholt stated for clarification, there have been a number of concerns raised regarding the proposed development in relation to the RIENS study, indicating the proposals outlined in the report have no status as of yet as they have not been incorporated in the Zoning By-law. She acknowledged the concerns raised regarding the lack of sidewalk on Mansion Street, advising she can confirm it has been identified as a Priority 1 location for the installation of a new sidewalk and pending the Committee's wish, an additional condition could be added as part of the Committee's decision to require cash -in -lieu for the sidewalk in the amount of $3,100. In response to questions, Ms. von Westerholt indicated the staff report makes reference to the RIENS study as the principals outlined in the report are also good planning principals and were considered as part of the staff recommendation. She noted one of the reasons staff encouraged the applicant to move the building closer to Mansion Street was to maintain the setbacks with the neighbouring properties, immediately adjacent. She further advised that although the report makes reference to the Study, there was not a complete reliance on recommendations as it has not yet been incorporated into the Zoning By-law. Questions were raised regarding precedence and whether approving the subject applications would allow further developments similar in nature throughout the neighbourhood. The Chair noted the Committee must consider each application on its own merit. The Chair acknowledged the concerns raised by the neighbourhood. He stated in his opinion, the proposal is a gross over -intensification of the subject property. He stated concerns with the encroachment into the DVT, indicating the report has not adequately addressed justification for the encroachment and he was unable to support it. He further advised he does not believe the proposal is compatible with the fabric of the neighbourhood. Mr. Sheels indicated the applicant has another possible option for improving the encroachment into DVT, noting there is a possibility of cantilevering the second floor to provide greater visibility in the DVT. Mr. B. McColl stated in his opinion, the proposed variances are not minor and the scale and massing are not compatible with the existing neighbourhood. Submission No.: B 2017-010 Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Ms. P. Kohli COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -120- MAY 16, 2017 c�IWIrrMe, �r.__ire That the application of CPM Construction Management Inc. requesting permission to sever a parcel of land having a width on Mansion Street of 16.99m, an easterly depth of 20.98m and an area of 307.03 sq.m. The retained land will have a width on Pequegnat Avenue of 20.48m, a northerly depth on Mansion Street of 21.77m and an area of 396.11 sq.m., on Part Lot 26, Plan 111, 6 Pequegnat Avenue, Kitchener, Ontario, BE REFUSED. It is in the opinion of the Committee that the proposed development is a gross intensification of the subject property and is not suitable for the purpose for which it is to be subdivided. Pursuant to Section 53 of the Planning Act, the Committee considered all oral and written submissions received from neighbouring property owners in opposition to the subject Consent application. The concerns related to: the required variances not being minor; compatibility with the surrounding area; compliance with the Official Plan; increased density and traffic; and, the appearance of the streetscape. The concerns were considered and taken into account as part of the Committee's decision-making process, which resulted in the refusal of the subject application. For more information please review the meeting minutes, which are available on the City's website at www.kitchener.ca Carried Submission No.: A 2017-047 Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Ms. P. Kohli That the application of CPM Construction Management Inc. requesting permission for the retained land (Consent Application B 2017-010) to have a westerly side yard setback abutting Mansion Street of 3.01m rather than the required 4.5m; a rear yard setback of 0.90m rather than the required 7.5m; and, to permit a 1.45m encroachment into the Driveway Visibility Triangle (DVT) whereas the By-law does not permit encroachments into the DVT, on Part Lot 26, Plan 111, 6 Pequegnat Avenue, Kitchener, Ontario, BE REFUSED. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variances requested in this application are not minor. 2. This application is not desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By -Law and Official Plan is not being maintained on the subject property. Pursuant to Section 45 of the Planning Act, the Committee considered all oral and written submissions received from neighbouring property owners in opposition to the subject Minor Variance application. The concerns related to: the variances not being minor; compatibility with the surrounding area; compliance with the Official Plan; increased density and traffic; and, the appearance of the streetscape. The concerns were considered and taken into account as part of the Committee's decision-making process, which resulted in the refusal of the subject application. For more information please review the meeting minutes, which are available on the City's website at www.kitchener.ca Carried Submission No.: A 2017-048 Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Ms. P. Kohli That the application of CPM Construction Management Inc. requesting permission for the severed land (Consent Application B 2017-010) to have a front yard setback of 1.58m rather than the required 4.5m; a 2.89m encroachment into the Driveway Visibility Triangle (DVT) whereas the By-law does not permit encroachments into the DVT; and, to permit off-street parking to be located 3.42m setback from the street line rather than the required 6m, on Part Lot 26, Plan 111, 6 Pequegnat Avenue, Kitchener, Ontario, BE REFUSED. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 121 - MAY 16, 2017 Submission Nos.: B 2017-010, A 2017-047 & A 2017-048 (Cont'd) It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variances requested in this application are not minor. 2. This application is not desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By -Law and Official Plan is not being maintained on the subject property. Pursuant to Section 45 of the Planning Act, the Committee considered all oral and written submissions received from neighbouring property owners in opposition to the subject Minor Variance application. The concerns related to: the variances not being minor; compatibility with the surrounding area; compliance with the Official Plan; increased density and traffic; and, the appearance of the streetscape. The concerns were considered and taken into account as part of the Committee's decision-making process, which resulted in the refusal of the subject application. For more information please review the meeting minutes, which are available on the City's website at www.kitchener.ca Carried Submission Nos.: B 2017-011 and A 2017-049 Applicant: City Smiles Dentistry Property Location: 655 King Street West/10 Wellington Street South Legal Description: Part Lots 31 and 32, Plan 377 Appearances: In Support: None Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to sever a parcel of land municipally addressed as 10 Wellington Street South, having a width on Wellington Street South of 12.329m, a depth of 20.117m and an area of 247.9 sq.m. The retained land, an `L' shaped parcel municipally addressed as 655 King Street West, has a width on King Street West of 15.425m, a depth of 50.344m and an area of 885.9 sq.m. Permission is also being requested for 10 Wellington Street South to permit a 1.89m encroachment into the Driveway Visibility Triangle (DVT) whereas the By-law does not permit encroachments into the DVT; to locate an off-street parking space 4m from the street line rather than the required 6m setback; to permit a parking space having a width of 2.53m rather than the required 2.6m; to allow a driveway width of 2.53m rather than the required 2.6m; to permit 1 off-street parking space for a duplex rather than the required 2 off-street parking spaces; to permit a front yard setback of 2.58m rather than the required 4.5m; a rear yard setback of 3.49m rather than the required 7.5m; and, to permit a northerly side yard setback for the driveway of 2.53m rather than the required 3m. The Committee considered the report of the Planning Division, dated February 13, 2017, advising the subject property is located at 655 King Street West and 10 Wellington Street South. It is an irregular-shaped parcel resulting from the inadvertent merging of two lots on title. The applicant is requesting consent to sever the lots so that they are in independent ownership, but along different lot lines. While there are no physical changes proposed to the subject lands, because the new lots must conform to current zoning regulations, minor variances are required for the house and future lot at 10 Wellington Street South. The applicant has also requested a reduction to the number of parking spaces for the duplex (from 2 to 1). Today, the parking requirement for 10 Wellington Street South is met as 2 parking spaces are provided at the parking lot of 655 King Street West. The applicant would like to explore whether they may be able to meet parking requirements on-site, without requiring an off-site parking agreement. One solution may be the creation of a new parking space in the rear yard of 10 Wellington Street South, with access off the private driveway (to become part of 655 King Street West). If this is the preferred solution, the applicant will need to create a right-of-way over the driveway in favour of 10 Wellington Street COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT -122- MAY 16, 2017 Submission Nos.: B 2017-011 &A 2017-049 (Cont'd) South to ensure access to the space in perpetuity. Creation of the right-of-way requires an additional application to the Committee of Adjustment and must be advertised. As such, staff recommends that the applications be deferred to allow the owner time to submit an application to request the required right-of-way. The Committee agreed to defer consideration of the subject applications to the July 18, 2016 Committee of Adjustment meeting, or sooner depending on when the applicant is able to find a suitable solution related to off-street parking. ADJOURNMENT On motion, the meeting adjourned at 12:13 p.m. Dated at the City of Kitchener this 16th day of May, 2017. Dianna Saunderson Secretary -Treasurer Committee of Adjustment