The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutDSD-18-090 - A 2018-077 - 388-400 King St EREPORT TO:Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING:August 21, 2018 SUBMITTED BY:Juliane von Westerholt, Senior Planner -519-741-2200 ext.7157 PREPARED BY:Andrew Pinnell, Planner –519-741-2200 ext. 7668 WARD:10 DATE OF REPORT:August 14, 2018 REPORT #:DSD-18-090 SUBJECT:A2018-077–388 King Street East Applicant –MHBC Planning c/o Pierre Chauvin Owner –388 King Kitchener Inc. Approve Subject to Conditions REPORT Planning Comments: The subject property is located onthe northeastside of King Street West, between Cedar Street and Madison Avenue inthe King East Planning Community. The property contains two low-rise buildings that were converted from residential to commercial use and now appear run-down. The property is designated Mixed Use Corridor with SpecialPolicy1 in the King Street East SecondaryPlan,and Special Policy Area 58-Central Transit Corridor and Rapid Transit Station Study Areas (allwithin the 1994 Official Plan). The 2014 Official Plan has not yet been updated to include secondary plan areas. The property is zoned Medium Intensity Mixed Use Corridor (MU-2). Planning staff visited the site on May 30, 2018and July 26, 2018. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. In order to facilitate Site Plan ApplicationSP18/051/K/AP to allowthe development of a 7-storey mixed- use building with two,small ground floor retail units(total of 114 square metres);six upper storeys of residential use(12 dwelling units per floor for a total of 72 units);and an internal, main floor stackable parking system, theapplicant is requesting relief from the Zoning By-law via the subject Minor Variance Application.The Minor Variance Application requests the following relief: 1)48 off-street parking spaces (0.7 space/per-unit) for multiple dwelling units, whereas the Zoning By-law requires 72 off-street parking spaces (1.0 space/per-unit); 2)5off-street visitor parking spaces (i.e., 7% of required multiple dwelling parking), whereas the Zoning By-law requires 14 off-street visitor parking spaces (i.e., 20%); 3)0parkingspaces for 114 square metres of retail use, whereas the Zoning By-law requires 5 retail parkingspaces \[(114 square metres retail GFA / 20.0) –20%\]; and 4)Supported balconies in the rear yard whereas the By-law does not permit supported balconies in the rear yard. It should be noted that the variances have changed since the original applicationwas submitted: a)The original application had a variance for relief from barrier-free parking requirements. This variance has been removed since the plan has been modified to comply and relief is no longer necessary; and b)Originally Variance #3 requested a relief from retail parking space from 5 spaces to 2 spaces. However, the variance has been modified to now request0 parking spaces for retail use. 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 offersthe following comments. The parking relief variances, numbered as Variances1-3, above, meet the intent of the 1994 Official Plan and Zoning By-law, are minor, and desirable for the appropriate development of the land. Special Policy 58Area of the 1994 Official Plan states: 58.v)a) In areas that are intended to be the focus for intensification, development applications will support the planned function of Special Policy Area 58 and have regard for the following:…iv) be consistent with the Transit Oriented Development policies in i. to vii. below to ensure that development and/or redevelopment:...i. creates an interconnected and multi-modal street pattern that encourages walking, cycling or the use of transit and supports mixed use development;…iii. provides an appropriate mix of land uses, including a range of food destinations, that allows people to walk or take transit to work, and also provides for a variety of services and amenities that foster vibrant, transit supportive neighbourhoods;…iv. promotes medium and higher density development as close as possible to the transit stopto support higher frequency transit service and optimize transit rider convenience;…vii. provides access from various transportation modes to the transit facility, including consideration of pedestrians, bicycle parking, and where applicable, passenger transfer and commuter pick-up/drop off areas. As part of the Minor Variance Application, the applicant submitted a Parking Justification Report, prepared by MHBC Planning Limited, Revised August 2, 2018. Transportation Services staff (TS) reviewed this report and application and advisesthat considering the proximity of the proposed development to Downtown, transit infrastructure, on-street parking spaces, and other parking alternatives, TS has no concerns with the variances. Furthermore, as a condition ofthese variances, staff is recommending a condition to require the owner to enter into an agreement to be registered on the title of the property to require certain Transportation Demand Management measures are implemented to mitigate adverse impacts on adjacent properties and City-owned parking facilities, related to the parking reduction. Specifically, these measures include requirements for unbundled parking, secured bicycle parking spaces, and transit passes. In light of the Official Plan direction toensure that development within this area is consistent with Transit Oriented Development policies, staff’s review of the Parking Justification Report, and recommended conditions, Planning staff is of the opinion that the requested parking relief variancesare justified. Variance4meets the intent of the 1994 Official Plan and Zoning By-law, is minor, and desirable for the appropriate development of the land.The plan submitted with the application form shows balconies will be located 6.205 metresfrom the rear lot line. The building proper will be located a minimum of 7.5 metres from the rear lot line. It should be noted that the Zoning By-law allows balconies that are not supported by the ground to be located only 0.75 metres from the rear lot line. Staff is of the opinion that allowing supported balconies this distance from a residential zone(to the north)intended for medium density development will not have unacceptably adverse impacts on existing and proposed development. Variances 1 through 4 are desirablefor the appropriate development of the land since they will allow redevelopment of a property that is run-down with new, mixed-use, transit-oriented, pedestrian-friendly development that will help to achieve the City’s objectives for the Central Transit Corridor. Planning staff notes that the applicant has been advised that becausethe project has not yet received Approval in Principle of the Site Plan Application, if further relief is determined to be necessarythrough the Site Plan review, the applicantwillneed to reapply to the Committee of Adjustment for additional/different variances. For the abovementioned reasons, Planning staff is of the opinion that the variance requests are justified, subject to the conditions outlined below. Building Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance provided a building permit for the proposed new apartment building is obtained prior to construction. Please contact the Building Division @ 519-741- 2433 with any questions. Transportation Services Comments: 1)Parking ratio: Considering the location of the development and the proposed TDM measures, Transportation Services have no concerns with the proposed application subject to the following condition: A letter of understanding regarding the transit passes should be provided. 2)Visitor parking spaces: Given the proximity of the proposed development to Downtown Kitchener, to transit and other parking alternatives, Transportation Services have no concerns with the proposed application. 3)Retail parking spaces: Given the small size of the proposed retail space, its proximity to Downtown, to transit and other parking alternatives such as on-street parking spaces, Transportation Services have no concerns with the proposed application. 4)Balcony in the rear yard: Transportation Services have no concerns with the proposed application. Heritage Comments: Note that the subject property is located within the King Street East Secondary Plan. The applicant should be aware that the land use policies and zoning for the property and area are subject to change through an upcoming neighbourhood planning review (to stay informed, subscribe to https://www.kitchener.ca/en/city-services/neighbourhood-planning-reviews.aspx). As part of this review, the City will be proceeding with the next step of the cultural heritage landscape conservation process. The Kitchener Cultural Heritage Landscape Study (CHLS) dated December 2014 and prepared by the Landplan Collaborative Ltd. was approved by Council in 2015. The CHLS serves to establish an inventory. The CHLS was the first step of a phased Cultural Heritage Landscape (CHL) conservation process. The owner of the property municipally addressed 388 King Street East is advised that the property is located within the Central Frederick Neighbourhood CHL. The owner and the public will be consulted as the City considers listing CHLs on the Municipal Heritage Register, identifying CHLs in the Official Plan, and preparing action plans for each CHL with specific conservation options. Special Policy Area #58 provides the interim policy direction for how development applications will be evaluated until such time as the City completes the secondary plan review, including implementation of the Planning Around Rapid Transit Study (PARTS) Central Station recommendations. The subject site is within the Focus Area for intensification and as such, the associated policies should in part inform the ‘intent of the Official Plan’ consideration of the minor variance. Environmental Planning Comments: No environmental planning concerns as no new development/construction is proposed. RECOMMENDATION That Minor Variance Application A2018-077requesting to allow: 1)48 off-street parking spaces (0.7 space/per-unit) for multiple dwelling units, whereas the Zoning By-law requires 72 off-street parking spaces (1.0 space/per-unit); 2)5 off-street visitor parking spaces (i.e., 7% of required multiple dwelling parking), whereas the Zoning By-law requires 14 off-street visitor parking spaces (i.e., 20%); 3)0 parking spaces for 114 square metres of retail use, whereas the Zoning By-law requires 5 retail parking spaces \[(114 square metres retail GFA / 20.0) –20%\]; and 4)Supportedbalconies in the rear yard, whereas the By-law does not permit supported balconies in the rear yard; be approved, subject to the following conditions: 1.That the owner to enter into an agreement to be registered on the title of the property to require certain Transportation Demand Management measures are implemented to mitigate impacts from the parking reduction. Specifically, these measuresshallinclude requirements for unbundled parking, secured bicycle parking spaces, and transit passes, to the satisfaction of the Director of Transportation Services. 2.That the rear yard setback for balconies be in general conformity with the 6.205 metre setback shown on the plan submitted with the application form, to the satisfaction of the City’s Director of Planning. 3.That this approval shall apply only to the development proposed through Site Plan Application SP18/051/K/AP. 4.That all conditions shall be completed prior to August 21, 2019. Any request for a time extension must be approved in writing by the Manager ofDevelopment 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. Andrew Pinnell, MCIP, RPP Juliane von Westerholt, MCIP, RPP Planner Senior Planner Attach: Excerpt of Plan Submitted with Application Form August 13, 2018 Holly Dyson City of Kitchener 200 King Street West File: D20-20/VAR KIT GEN P.O. Box 1118 (1)/69, Great Canadian Holidays and Coaches. Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 (8) /29, Leo Wolynetz (9) /VAR KIT, 388-400 Mix Use Development (10) /63, Andrin City Centre Phase II (11) /12, Ormston Charlie, 508 New Dundee Dear Ms. Dyson: Re: Committee of Adjustment Meeting on August 21, 2018, City of Kitchener. Regional staff have reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment application(s) and have the following comments: 1. 333 Manitou Drive (SG 2018-008): No concerns, provided the sign is located entirely on private property. 2. 207 Centennial Court (A 2018-070): No concerns. 3. 545 Trillium Drive (A 2018-071): No concerns. 4. 47 Water Street North (A 2018-072): No concerns. 5. 42 Crosswinds Drive (A 2018-073): No concerns. 6. 390 Rivertrail Avenue (A 2018-074): No concerns. 7. 70 Dumart Place (A 2018-075): No concerns. 8. 295 Lancaster Street Unit B (A 2018-076): No concerns. However, the applicant is advised that a future development application on these lands will require dedicated road widening of 3.048m along Lancaster Street West and a daylight triangle of 7.62m at Lancaster/Elizabeth intersection. At such time in future, the proposed deck may be required to be removed/relocated or an encroachment 9. 388 King Street East (A 2018-077): No concerns. 10. 120 130 140 King Street East and 55 Duke Street (A 2018-078): No concerns. 11. Sportsman Hill Drive and Ridgemount Street (A 2018-079 thru 094): No concerns. 5ƚĭǒƒĻƓƷ bǒƒĬĻƩʹ ЋБЉЋАЍЋ Please be advised that any development on the subject lands is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 14-046 or any successor thereof and may require payment of Regional Development Charges for these development(s) prior to the issuance of a building permit. The comments contained in this letter pertain to the Application number(s) listed. If a site is subject to more than one application, additional comments may apply. Please forward any decisions on the above mentioned Application number(s) to the undersigned. Yours truly, Joginder Bhatia Transportation Planner (519) 575-4757 ext 3867 Grand River Conservation Authority 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Resource Management Division Cambridge, Ontario N1R 5W6 Trisha Hughes, Resource Planner Phone: (519) 621-2761 ext. 2319 E-mail: thughes@grandriver.ca PLAN REVIEW REPORT: City of Kitchener Holly Dyson DATE: August 10, 2018 YOUR FILE: See below Applications for Signs: RE: SG 2018-008 333 Manitou Drive Applications for Minor Variance: A 2018-070 207 Centennial Court A 2018-072 47 Water Street North A 2018-073 42 Crosswinds Drive A 2018-074 390 Rivertrail Avenue A 2018-075 70 Dumart Place A 2018-076 295 Lancaster Street West, Unit B A 2018-077 388-400 King Street East A 2018-078 120, 130, 140 King Street West, 31 Young Street & 55 Duke Street West A 2018-079 3 Ridgemount Street A 2018-080 11 Ridgemount Street A 2018-081 13 Ridgemount Street A 2018-082 21 Ridgemount Street A 2018-083 23 Ridgemount Street A 2018-084 31 Ridgemount Street A 2018-085 33 Ridgemount Street A 2018-086 41 Ridgemount Street A 2018-087 3 Sportsman Hill Drive A 2018-088 11 Sportsman Hill Drive A 2018-089 13 Sportsman Hill Drive A 2018-090 21 Sportsman Hill Drive A 2018-091 23 Sportsman Hill Drive A 2018-092 31 Sportsman Hill Drive A 2018-093 33 Sportsman Hill Drive A 2018-094 41 Sportsman Hill Drive Applications for Consent: B 2018-048 Weichel Street at Victoria Street South (amended) B 2018-049 Weichel Street at Victoria Street South (amended) B 2018-055 33 Second Avenue B 2018-056 63 Plymouth Road B 2018-057 103 Plymouth Road B 2018-062 560-632 Victoria Street North Page 1 of 2 *These comments are respectfully submitted as advice and reflect resource concerns within the scope and mandate of the Grand River Conservation Authority. GRCA COMMENT*: The above noted applications are located outside the Grand River Conservation Authority areas of interest. As such, we will not undertake a review of the applications and plan review fees will not be required. If you have any questions, or require additional information, please contact me. Sincerely, Trisha Hughes Resource Planner Grand River Conservation Authority Page 2 of 2 *These comments are respectfully submitted as advice and reflect resource concerns within the scope and mandate of the Grand River Conservation Authority.