Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDSD-19-115 - A 2019-044 - 107-109 North Hill PlaceStaff Repod Development Services Department REPORT TO: DATE OF MEETING: SUBMITTED BY: PREPARED BY: WARD: DATE OF REPORT: REPORT #: SUBJECT: I K;< -,\FR www.ki tch en er. ca Committee of Adjustment May 21, 2019 Juliane von Westerholt, Senior Planner - 519-741-2200 ext. 7157 Andrew Pinnell, Planner— 519-741-2200 ex. 7668 2 May 10, 2019 DSD -19-115 A2019-044 — 107-109 North Hill Place Owners — Gerald and Leanne Leeman Approve Without Conditions REPORT Planning Comments: The subject property is located at the east end of North Hill Place (NHP) near Chicopee Ski Hill, in the Centreville Chicopee Planning Community. The subject property is owned by Gerald and Leanne Leeman, and contains a single detached dwelling constructed in approximately 1962 and an accessory building containing a garage and one dwelling unit (i.e., garden suite) that was constructed in approximately 2006. The property is designated Low Rise Residential in the Official Plan and is zoned Residential Three (R-3), with Special Regulation Provision *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. 432R, and Temporary Use Provision 10T. On May 6, 2019, Planning staff conducted a site inspection of the subject property. In June 2005, the owners applied for a Zoning By-law Amendment (ZBA) to allow a garden suite on a temporary basis. City Council passed a Temporary Use By-law, allowing a garden suite for a period of 10 years (until June 20, 2015). In addition, Council approved Special Regulation Provision 432R, which states, "one new building having a maximum ground floor area of 113 square metres and a maximum height of 7.5 metres is permitted on a lot that does not have frontage on a street provided that the lot has access to a street over a registered right-of-way." After obtaining approval of the ZBA, the owners constructed the accessory building for the garden suite, and the owners' mother took up residence. In August 2014, the owners sought to sever original property to create the subject lot. However, the property was considered legal non -conforming because it did not have frontage on a public street (NHP is classified as a public lane, not a public street, because of its narrow width). To address this issue, the Committee of Adjustment granted permission, along with consent, to change the configuration of the original property in order to facilitate the creation of the subject lot. In April 2015, the Committee approved a minor variance for relief from 10T to allow the existing garden suite to be permitted until June 20, 2018 — an extension of approximately 3 years. This extension allowed the owners' mother to remain in her residence within the garden suite. In April 2019, the owners, desiring to maintain compliance with City regulations and allow their mother to continue living in the garden suite, contacted Planning staff to request another extension of 10T. However, at that time, the relief provided in the April 2015 approval had already lapsed (in June 2018). Additionally, 10T had already expired without any request or opportunity to extend its effectiveness. At that time, it was determined by Planning staff that the dwelling unit within the accessory building had become non -complying as of June 20, 2018. Staff also determined that, in this case, except for the date, the most technically accurate term to describe the requested use is Coach House Dwelling Unit (Coach House), which "means a dwelling unit within an accessory building or portion thereof existing on January 24, 1994" (Section 4.2 of Zoning By-law 85-1). The R-3 zoning of the subject property permits a Coach House. However, because the accessory building, within which the Coach House is requested to be legalized, was constructed after 1994, a Coach House is technically not permitted. That stated, the accessory building proposed to contain the dwelling unit is permitted (via Special Regulation Provision 432R). As a result of discussions with Planning staff, the owners submitted Application A2019-044, requesting permission under Section 45(2)(b) of the Planning Act, to allow a dwelling unit within a portion of an existing accessory building. Section 45(2)(b) of the Planning Act states, "In addition to its powers under subsection (1), the committee, upon any such application .... where the uses of land, buildings or structures permitted in the by-law are defined in general terms, may permit the use of any land, building or structure for any purpose that, in the opinion of the committee, conforms with the uses permitted in the by-law." This section provides the Committee of Adjustment with the authority to permit the use of any building for any purpose that conforms with the uses in the applicable zone. It should be noted that this request is not a minor variance under Section 45(1) of the Planning Act; the 4 -part test for variances does not apply (e.g., maintenance of the general intent and purpose of the official plan). In this regard, Planning staff offers the following comments. The requested use conforms with the uses permitted in Section 37.1 of Zoning By-law 85-1 (i.e., R-3 Zone). The requested use should be a perceived as a slight variation on the permitted Coach House use. A Coach House is a permitted use in the R-3 Zone. The only difference between the requested use and a Coach House is that the latter must be established within a building constructed prior to 1994. Inherently, and most importantly, both uses involve "a dwelling unit within an accessory building or portion thereof." In this case, no purpose is served in requiring the use to be located within an accessory building constructed prior to 1994, especially since the building was legally established through City Council's approval of ZBA in 2006. The use has been operating without issue since that time (approx. 13 years). The Province's direction regarding secondary dwelling units should be noted be noted: • The Provincial Policy Statement, 2014 states, 1.4.3 Planning authorities shall provide for an appropriate range and mix of housing types and densities to meet projected requirements of current and future residents of the regional market area by: ... b. permitting and facilitating: ... 2. all forms of residential intensification, including second units, and redevelopment in accordance with policy 1.1.3.3." (emphasis added). • The Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2017 states, "2.2.1.4. Applying the policies of this Plan will support the achievement of complete communities that:... c) provide a diverse range and mix of housing options, including second units and affordable housing, to accommodate people at all stages of life, and to accommodate the needs of all household sizes and incomes" (emphasis added). • The Planning Act states, "16(3) An official plan shall contain policies that authorize the use of a second residential unit..." Moreover, Section 4.C.1.24. of the City's Official Plan contains policies to permit stand alone secondary dwelling units, such as a dwelling unit within an accessory building, subject to a Zoning By-law Amendment and appropriate zoning regulations being in place. The City's Comprehensive Review of the Zoning By-law (CRoZBy) may implement this policy when the residential zones are established, as early as October of this year. Until such time as the Zoning By-law is updated to allow second dwelling units within accessory buildings, the subject application will legalize the requested use, if approved. In conclusion, the request for permission represents good planning since it will allow a slightly increased resident density to be maintained within a low density residential zone, without any negative impacts on adjacent properties, by allowing an elderly family member to continue to live in her residence, close to her family, without disruption. Heritage Planning Comments: No heritage planning concerns. Environmental Planning Comments: No environmental planning concerns. Building Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance. Fire Services Comments: Because the owners are simply seeking to legalize an existing building on the property, not build a new one, Fire Services does not object to this application. Although North Hill Place is a dead end street that is more than 150m long, the building in question represents an existing condition and a fire hydrant is located at the end of the street. Transportation Services Comments: Transportation Services have no concerns with the proposed application. Engineering Comments: No concerns. RECOMMENDATION That Application A2019-044, requesting permission under Section 45(2)(b) of the Planning Act, to allow a dwelling unit within a portion of an existing accessory building, be approved, without conditions. Andrew Pinnell, MCIP, RPP Planner Attachment: • Sketch submitted with application form Juliane von Westerholt, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner Sketch Submitted with Application A2019-044 Region of Waterloo May 03, 2019 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, Sth 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 No.: D20-20/VAR KIT GEN (2) 06 BENTON/Frederick Victoria Business Centre (15) 08 WEBER KIT, Kiah Group Inc. Re: Committee of Adjustment Meeting on May 21, 2019, City of Kitchener Regional staff have reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have following comments: 1. SG 2019-009 — 760 Commonwealth Crescent — No Concerns. 2. SG 2019-010 — 907 Frederick Street — There are no concerns to the sign variance for the sign mounted on the building, mentioned in the application. However, it is noted that there is another ground mounted business sign which is encroaching into Victoria Street right-of-way. The owner should confirm if there is an existing encroachment agreement in place. If not, the same would be required with the Region. 3. SG 2019-011 — 524 Belmont Avenue West— No Concerns. 4. A 2019-039 — 121 Arrowhead Crescent — No Concerns. 5. A 2019-040 — 18 Rosedale Avenue — No Concerns. 6. A 2019-041 — 555 King Street East — No Concerns. 7. A 2019-042 — 244-260 Shoemaker Street—No Concerns. 8. A 2019-043 — 170 Rivertrail Avenue — No Concerns. 9. A 2019-044 — 109 North Hill Place — No Concerns. 10.A 2019-045 — 52 South Drive — No Concerns. 11.A 2019-046 — 18 Guelph Street — No Concerns. 12.A 2019-047 — 945 Robert Ferrie Drive — No Concerns. 13.A 2019-048 — 28 Stirling Avenue South— No Concerns. 14.A 2019-049 — 101-115 Margaret Avenue — No Concerns. 15.A 2019-050 — 149-151 Ontario Street North / 21 Weber Street West: There are no concerns to the minor variance application. However, the owner is advised Document Number: 2997610 Page 1 of 2 that any development application on the above development would require dedicated road widening of approximately 3.0 metre along the entire property frontage along Weber Street (RR #08). 16.A 2019-051 — 25 Vanier Drive — 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 developments prior to the issuance of a building permit. The comments contained in this letter pertain to the Application numbers listed. If a site is subject to more than one application, additional comments may apply. Please forward any decisions on the above mentioned Application numbers to the undersigned. Yours Truly, Joginder Bhatia Transportation Planner (519) 575-4500 Ext 3867 Grand River Conservation Authority Resource Management Division Andrew Herreman, Resource Planning Technician 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Cambridge, Ontario N 1 R 5W6 Phone: (519) 621-2761 ext. 2228 E-mail: aherreman(u-)grandriver.ca PLAN REVIEW REPORT: City of Kitchener Holly Dyson DATE: May 13, 2019 YOUR FILE: See below RE: Applications for Minor Variance: SG 2019-009 760 Commonwealth Crescent SG 2019-010 907 Frederick Street, Units 3-5 SG 2019-011 524 Belmont Avenue West A 2019-038 128 Mill Street A 2019-039 121 Arrowhead Crescent A 2019-040 18 Rosedale Avenue A 2019-041 555 King Street East A 2019-042 244 and 260 Shoemaker Street A 2019-043 170 Rivertrail Place A 2019-044 107-109 North Hill Place A 2019-045 52 South Drive A 2019-046 18 Guelph Street A 2019-047 945 Robert Ferrie Drive A 2019-048 28 Stirling Avenue South A 2019-049 101-115 Margaret Avenue A 2019-050 149-151 Ontario Street North/21 Weber Street West A 2019-051 25 Vanier Drive Applications for Consent: B 2019-014 128 Mill Street B 2019-015 23-25 Wendy Crescent B 2019-016 52 Wilhelm Street B 2019-017 177 Fifth Avenue B 2019-018 69 Amherst Drive/118 Doon Valley Drive B 2019-020 28 Burgetz Avenue B 2019-021 20-24 Breithaupt Street B 2019-022 20-24 Breithaupt Street B 2019-023 26, 43, 47, 53, 55 Wellington Avenue North, 2, 12 Moore Avenue, 20-24 Breithaupt Street 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. 'These comments are respectfully submitted as advice and reflect resource concerns within the scope and mandate of the Page 1 of 2 Grand River Conservation Authority Sincerely, Andrew Herreman, CPT Resource Planning Technician Grand River Conservation Authority 'These comments are respectfully submitted as advice and reflect resource concerns within the scope and mandate of the Page 2 of 2 Grand River Conservation Authority.