HomeMy WebLinkAboutDSD-18-115 - A 2018-100 - 6 Southdale AveStaff Report
R
Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment
DATE OF MEETING: September 18, 2018
SUBMITTED BY: Juliane von Westerholt, Senior Planner - 519-741-2200 ext. 7157
PREPARED BY: Garett Stevenson, Planner - 519-741-2200 ext. 7070
WARD: 9
DATE OF REPORT: September 14, 2018
REPORT NUMBER: DSD -18-115
SUBJECT: Application A2018-100
6 Southdale Avenue
Citifield Property Initiative Inc.
Approve with conditions
5
+7 ]3
1
2
3 30
6
9
f3 5
13 7
13 8
11
e
/ 47 ]6
sa
\ > 5 66
66
61
t6
11 65
z6 76
s fis
u
24 Q
416 19
7s
ze
Q2 23
32
RB 27 85 /
436 31 36
89
Subject Property
Background
On February 21, 2017, the Committee of Adjustment approved Minor Variance Application A2017-
011 to seek relief of the rear yard setback of 7.5 metres to 5.25 metres, and permission to
calculate the Floor Space Ratio (FSR) using the entire property, not just the lands that are zoned
as Residential Six (R-6, 1 R). A site inspection was conducted on August 15, 2018.
Staff Report
Development Services Department
KacikmR
www.kitch ener. ca
Multiple Dwelling Building under Construction
Report:
Planning staff has been advised that the building has been constructed a 900 rotation to the
approved plans, resulting in the front doors for the upper units to be facing the side yards, rather
than the front and rear yards. An upper storey landing provides access to the elevated entries,
and one encroaches into one of the required sideyard setback.
Relief is being sought from Section 5.6.4.d) of Zoning By-law 85-1 which requires that porches
that are attached to the main building and which exceed 0.6 metres in height above finished grade
level, be in compliance with the setback provisions required for the dwelling for front, side and
rear yards in all other cases. Section 40.2.6 requires a 2.5 metre side yard setback for a multiple
dwelling, and only 1.8 metres is provided with the building as constructed.
As such, this application is seeking relief from Section 5.6.4.d) to permit an attached porch which
exceeds 0.6 metres in height above finished grade level, to be located 1.8 metres from the side
yard whereas 2.5 metres is required.
Planning Comments:
The property is zoned as Residential Six (R-6, 1 R) in Zoning By-law 85-1 and designated as Low
Rise Residential in the Official Plan. In considering the four tests for minor variances as outlined
Staff Report
Development Services Department
KacikmR
www.kitch ener. ca
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 general intent of the Official Plan. Low Rise Residential
Districts accommodate a full range of housing types. In these districts, the City favours the mixing
and integration of different forms of housing to achieve a low overall intensity of use. The creation
of additional housing in existing developed areas, through conversion, infill and redevelopment,
is favoured as an appropriate response to changing housing needs and to make better use of
existing infrastructure and public service facilities. This project provides compatible infill
residential development that is appropriate for the community.
The requested variance meets the general intent of the Zoning By-law. The intent of the side yard
setback for porches that are above 0.6 metres in height above finished grade is to ensure that
outdoor amenity areas are well separated from neighbouring properties. In this case, the stairs
and porches have been designed to meet the requirements of the Ontario Building Code for
access only, and are not designed to provide a larger amenity space. The stairway and the
landing will be located 1.8 metres from the property line and cannot project further into the side
yard. Through the site planning process, tree savings efforts were undertaken to preserve
boundary vegetation which provides additional screening.
The requested variance is minor. The requested variance is required so that the upper level units
will have entries in accordance with the Ontario Building Code. There are no adverse impacts
expected with the approval of the variance which would legalize the existing as -built condition.
The variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land. The requested variance will
rectify the non-compliant as -built condition.
Building Comments:
The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance.
Transportation Comments:
Transportation Services has no concerns with the proposed application.
Engineering Comments:
The Engineering Division has no objections to the proposed variance.
Heritage Comments:
Heritage Planning staff has no concerns with the subject application.
Environmental Planning Comments:
Environmental Planning Staff has no comments on the proposed application. Tree management
and storm water management issues are addressed as part of the site plan approval process.
Staff Report
Development Services Department
RECOMMENDATION:
KacikmR
www.kitch ener. ca
That Application A2018-100 requesting relief from Section 5.6.4.d) to permit an attached
porch which exceeds 0.6 metres in height above finished grade level, to be located 1.8
metres from the side yard whereas 2.5 metres is required, be approved.
Garett Stevenson, BES, MCI P, RPP
Planner
Juliane von Westerholt, BES, MCIP, RPP
Senior Planner
Region of Waterloo
August 31, 2018
Holly Dyson
City of Kitchener
200 King Street West
P.O. Box 1118
Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7
Dear Ms. Dyson:
PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT
AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES
150 Frederick Street, 8th Floor
Kitchener ON N2G 4A Canada
Telephone: 519-575-4400
TTY: 519-575-4608
Fax: 519-575-4449
www. reg i o n ofwate r l o o. ca
File: D20-20/VAR KIT GEN
(6)/55, 2589769 Ontario Corporation
(7) NAR KIT, Citified Property Initiative Inc.
(10) /04 Urban, Novacore Townhouses
(11) /VAR KIT, 2296093 Ontario Inc.
Re: Committee of Adjustment Meeting on September 18, 2018, City of
Kitchener.
Regional staff have reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment application(s) and
have the following comments:
1. 236 Mill Street (SG 2018-009): No concerns.
2. 1110 New Dundee Road (A 2018-095): No concerns.
3. 904 Magdalena Court (A 2018-096): No concerns.
4. 196 Hickson Drive (A 2018-097): No concerns.
5. 6 Waterwillow Court (A 2018-098): No concerns.
6. 161 Victoria Street South (A 2018-099): No concerns.
7. 6 Southdale Avenue (A 2018-100): No concerns.
8. 264 Lawrence Avenue (A 2018-101): No concerns.
9. 70 Windrush Trail (A 2018-102): No concerns.
10. 83 Elmsdale Drive (A 2018-103): No concerns.
11.387 King Street East (A 2018-104): No concerns.
12. Claremont Avenue (A 2018-105): No concerns.
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.
Document Number: 2815510
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
400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729
Grand River Conservation Authority Cambridge, Ontario N 1 R 5W6
Resource Management Division Phone: (519) 621-2761 ext. 2319
Trisha Hughes, Resource Planner Fax: (519) 621-4945
E-mail: thug hes(o)grand river.ca
PLAN REVIEW REPORT: City of Kitchener
Holly Dyson
DATE: YOUR FILE: GRCA FILE:
September 10, 2018 A 2018-100 - 6 Southdale Avenue A2018-100 - 6 Southdale Ave
RE: Application for Minor Variance A 2018-100
6 Southdale Avenue, City of Kitchener
Citified Property Initiative Inc.
GRCA COMMENT*:
The Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) has no objection to the above noted minor
variance. Please see our detailed comments below.
BACKGROUND:
1. Resource Issues:
Information currently available at this office indicates that a majority of the subject lands are
located within the floodplain of Shoemaker Creek. Consequently, this property is regulated
by the GRCA under Ontario Regulation 150/06 - Development, Interference with Wetlands
and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses Regulation.
2. Legislative/Policy Requirements and Implications:
This reach of floodplain is within a Two Zone Floodplain Policy Area. In designated Two
Zone Areas, the floodplain contains two sections - the floodway and the flood fringe. The
floodway is the area of the floodplain required to pass the flows of greatest depth and
velocity. No new development is permitted within the floodway. The flood fringe lies between
the floodway and the edge of the floodplain. Depths and velocities of flooding in the flood
fringe are much less than those in the floodway, allowing for limited development to occur.
The subject property contains both floodway and flood fringe.
It is our understanding that the purpose of this application is to construct a multi -residential
dwelling with a relief from the easterly side yard setback.
We have previously reviewed the proposed development through Site Plan Application
SP16/094/S/SG, and issued GRCA permit #256/17 to construct a multi -unit residential
building and a stormwater outlet. As such, we have no objection to the minor variance.
Please note that any future development within the regulated area will require prior written
approval from the GRCA in the form of a permit pursuant to Ontario Regulation 150/06.
Please consult with GRCA for future applications on this property.
3. Plan Review Fees:
We received a plan review fee for a previous Planning Act application, and will not charge
for our review of the current minor variance application.
Pagel of 2
*These comments are respectfuhZj submitted as advice and reflect resource concerns within the scope and mandate of the Grand River Conservation
Authorin,
We trust this information is of assistance. If you have any questions, or require additional
information, please contact the undersigned.
Sincerely,
� - t't
Trisha Hughes
Resource Planner
Grand River Conservation Authority
cc: Citified Property Initiative Inc. c/o Sean O'Neill, 25 Shadywood Lane, Cambridge, ON
N1 R 5S3
Labreche Patterson & Associates Inc. c/o Scott Patterson, 330 Trillium Drive, Unit F,
Kitchener, ON N2E 3J2
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