The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutDSD-19-211 - A 2019-096 - 260 Frederick StREPORT TO:Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING:September 17, 2019 SUBMITTED BY:Juliane von Westerholt, Senior Planner -519-741-2200 ext. 7157 PREPARED BY:Sheryl Rice Menezes, Planning Technician –519-741-2200 ext. 7844 WARD:10 DATE OF REPORT:September 10,2019 REPORT #:DSD-19-211 SUBJECT:A 2019-096 Owner –John Mensink Refuse Subject Property 2014 aerial photo. REPORT Planning Comments: The property is zoned Commercial-Residential One(CR-1)with Special Provisions 114R and 128Uin By-law 85-1 and is designated as Low Density Commercial Residential in the Central Frederick Neighbourhood Plan.Staff visited the site on September 10,2019. The owner is requestingpermission to legalize an existingduplex having an existing driveway with a width of 11.8 m rather than the maximum permitted width of 6.4 metres; and, to allow the existing driveway to be comprised of three different materials whereas the By-lawrequires a driveway to be constructed from one consistent material. From a review of aerial photos, staff hasdetermined that the driveway widening occurred sometime between 2009 and 2012.This matter was brought to Enforcement staff’sattention by a complaint on this property, as well as other driveways on nearby lots in the area. 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. Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated as Low Density Commercial Residentialin the Official Plan.Although specific comments on driveway widenings are notaddressed in the Official Plan, the existing use as aduplex meetsthe intent of the designation, whichis to provide for a range of residential and office uses and encourages the conversation and continuance of the existing character and quality of the area.Therefore, the general intent of the Official Plan is maintained. Intent of the Zoning By-law The two proposed variances do not meet the general intent of the Zoning By-law. The intent of the regulation restricting the maximum driveway width to half of the frontage (or 8 metres, whichever is less) is to ensure that the streetscape is not dominated by driveways andthereforethe parking of motor vehicles. Having a driveway width of 11.8 metres on a 12.8-metrewide lot dominates the front yard of this duplex dwelling.In addition,the intent of the regulation to have the driveway constructed of the same material is to ensure that walkways are not used as driveways andaids Enforcement staff with enforcingwhat is and what is not a legal driveway.Staff is typically not in support of such requests,as the general intent of the Zoning By-law is not being met. Appropriate Development The proposed variances are not appropriate for the development of the property and streetscape. As noted above, it is staff’s opinion that adriveway width as requested, on this or any other residential lot, negatively affects the streetscape and therefore cannot be supported. Minor The widening of the driveway and therefore the parking of twovehicles along the westerly side lot line occurs at a setback of 3 metres from the front lot line and therefore the impact is somewhat mitigated by existing landscaping along the front lot line. In addition, Transportation Planning staff has indicated noconcern as this situation is an existing condition. For these reasons, staff is of the opinion that the application is minor. As the variances are all to reflect existing conditions, which until recently have been without complaint, should the Committee approve the requested variancesstaff recommends that approval be subject to the followingcondition: 1)That the existing landscaping be maintained as a visual barrier to the widened driveway / parking area and that any landscaping that occurs within the driveway visibility triangle (DVT) have a maximum height of 0.9 metres to avoid any obstruction to driver visibility. Building Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance. Transportation Services Comments: As this is an existing condition, Transportation Services has no concerns with the proposed application. It should be noted, however, that any landscaping that occurs within the driveway visibility triangle (DVT) have a maximum height of 0.9 metres to avoid any obstruction to driver visibility. Engineering Comments:No comments. Heritage Planning Comments:Heritage Planning staff has no concerns with the proposed minor variance application. 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 applicant is advised that the property municipally addressed as 260 Frederick Street 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. Environmental Planning Comments:No concerns. RECOMMENDATION: That application A 2019-096 requesting permission to legalize an existing duplex having a an existing driveway width of 11.8 m rather than the maximum permitted width of 6.4 metres; and, to allow the existing driveway to be comprised of three different materials whereas the By-law requires a driveway to be constructed from one consistent material be refused. Sheryl Rice Menezes, CPT Juliane von Westerholt, BES, MCIP, RPP Planning Technician (Zoning) Senior Planner August 28, 2019 Holly Dyson City of Kitchener File No.: D20-20/VAR KIT GEN 200 King Street West (8) / VAR KIT, Martea Developments P.O. Box 1118 (11) / 53 FAIRWAY, 470088 Ontario Ltd Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 Dear Ms. Dyson: Re: Committee of Adjustment Meeting on September 17, 2019, City of Kitchener Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have following comments: 1. A 2019-092 30 Dieppe Avenue No Concerns. 2. A 2019-093 155 Breckenridge Drive No Concerns. 3. A 2019-094 205 Strange Street No Concerns. 4. A 2019-095 43 Jack Avenue No Concerns. 5. A 2019-096 260 Frederick Street The applicant must obtain a Regional access permit to legalize the existing access. 6. A 2019-097 74 Ahrens Street West No Concerns. 7. A 2019-098 44 Breithaupt Street No Concerns. 8. A 2019-099 289 and 295 Sheldon Avenue North No Concerns. 9. A 2019-100 John Wallace Drive (Townhouse Block 1) No Concerns. 10. A 2019-101 360 River Trail Avenue No Concerns. 11. A 2019-102 165 Fairway Road North No Concerns. 12. A 2019-103 581 Strasburg Road No Concerns. 13. A 2019-104 & A 2019-105 193 Louisa Street There would be no concerns to the minor variance applications subject to the condition that the recommendations of the noise study as required for the Consent application can be implemented. 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. 5ƚĭǒƒĻƓƷ bǒƒĬĻƩʹ ЌЉВЊББЉ tğŭĻ Њ ƚŅ Ћ 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 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Resource Management DivisionCambridge, Ontario N1R 5W6 Andrew Herreman, Resource Planning Phone: (519) 621-2761 ext. 2228 Technician E-mail: aherreman@grandriver.ca PLAN REVIEW REPORT: City of Kitchener Holly Dyson DATE: YOUR FILE: September 9, 2019 See below Applications for Minor Variance: RE: A 2019-082 83 Elmsdale Drive A 2019-092 30 Dieppe Avenue A 2019-093 155 Breckenridge Drive A 2019-094 205 Strange Street A 2019-095 43 Jack Avenue A 2019-096 260 Frederick Street A 2019-097 74 Ahrens Street West A 2019-098 44 Breithaupt Street A 2019-099 289 & 295 Sheldon Avenue North A 2019-100 John Wallace Drive A 2019-101 360 Rivertrail Avenue A 2019-102 165 Fairway Drive Road North A 2019-103 581 Strasburg Road A 2019-104 & 105 193 Louisa Street Applications for Consent: B 2019-051 to 054 83 Elmsdale Drive B 2019-058 202 Montgomery Road B 2019-059 269 Trillium Drive B 2019-060 39 Belmont Avenue West B 2019-061 359 Alice Avenue B 2019-062 2727 Kingsway Drive B 2019-063 193 Louisa 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. Sincerely, Andrew Herreman, CPT Resource Planning Technician Grand River Conservation Authority Page 1 of 1 *These comments are respectfully submitted as advice and reflect resource concerns within the scope and mandate of the Grand River Conservation Authority.