The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutDSD-19-215 - A 2019-100 - John Wallace DrREPORT TO:Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING:September17, 2019 SUBMITTED BY:Juliane von Westerholt, Senior Planner -519-741-2200 ext.7157 PREPARED BY:Katie Anderl, Senior Planner –519-741-2200 ext. 7987 WARD:#5 DATE OF REPORT:September9, 2019 REPORT #:DSD-19-215 SUBJECT:A2019-100–John Wallace Drive (Block 1, Stage 2 30T-07205) Owner–Schlegel Urban Developments Corporation Applicant –Fusion Homes Recommendation–Approve Location Map:Block 1, Stage 1 (30T-07205) *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Image 1: Subject Lands (Block 1, Stage 2). Photo taken September 5, 2019. REPORT Planning Comments: The subject property is located within the Wallaceton subdivision (30T-07205) as shown on the Location Mapabove. The lands are zoned Residential Eight Zone (R-8) with Special Regulation 502R. The parcel of landis proposed to be developed with a stacked townhouse development containing 54 dwelling units. The proposed development has received Site Plan Approval in Principle from the Site Plan Review Committee, however this approval is subject to the owner receiving approval of the proposed minor variances for a reduction to parking and obstructions within thecornervisibility triangle. The proposed development complies with all other zoning regulations including setbacks, height and density (FSR). More specifically, the Owner is requesting the following minor variances: 1.Relief from Special Regulation Provision 502Rto permit a parking ratio of 1.15spaces per unit, rather than 1.25spaces per unit; and 2.Relief from section. 5.3to permita 0.5 m obstructionin the cornervisibilitytriangles, whereas no obstructionispermitted. 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. Variance 1: Parking Reduction The applicant is proposing to reduce therequired parking ratio from 1.25spacesper unitto 1.15 spaces per unit. This parking ratio would allow for 1 space per unit and 0.15 visitor spaces per unit. The proposed ratio representsan overall parking requirement of 62 spaces rather than 68 spaces. General Intent of the Official Plan The subject lands are designated Medium Rise Residential in the Official Plan, and the proposed land use conforms to the designation.Official Plan policies also support the provision of adequate parking, in such as way that will maximize the efficient use of land, and promote active transportation and the use of public transit. The subject site islocated in close proximity to planned transit routes, on and off road cycling facilities, iswithin walking distance of parks, schools and planned commercial facilities, and fronts onto a street which does not have private driveways, but rather has a significant amount of on-street parking. Such measureswill help reduce on site parking demands, and staff is of the opinion that the proposed parking reduction maintains the general intent of the Official Plan. General Intent of the Zoning By-law The intent of the minimum parking requirement for dwelling units is to ensure there is sufficient on-site parkingand other transportation optionsavailable to meet the transportation needs of residents and visitors to the site. The subject site is located in close proximity to planned transit, andis in proximity to existing and planned active transportation routes(include bike lanes, sidewalks and a multi-use pathway network).The Site Plan includes28 secure, weather protectedbike parking spaces as well astraditional bike racks, which aligns with the bike parking requirementsdeveloped through the Comprehensive Review of the Zoning By-law. The surrounding neighbourhood is very walkable and contains a planned mix of uses including schools, parks, a new community centre, anda large mixed-use node at the intersection of Fischer Hallman Road and Huron Road.Staff is of the opinion thatresidents are less likely to require apersonal vehicle (and associated parking spaces) for daily transportation needsin this neighbourhood,than in many other suburban locations, and that the intent of the by-law is maintained. Is the Variance Minor? Given the characteristics of the developmentand surrounding area, and proximity to transit as well as active transportation facilities, staff isof the opinion that the proposed variance will provide a sufficient supply of parking for future residents and visitors to the site. Based on the foregoing, staff is of the opinion that the variance is minor. Is the Variance Appropriate? The proposed development is in a locationandbeing designed so that there is a reduced need for residents to own private automobiles, which is expected to result in fewer on-site parking spaces being required for the proposeddevelopment. Further, the proposed reduction aligns with the parking regulationsproposed as part of the Comprehensive Review of the Zoning By-law.Based on the foregoing, staff is of the opinion that the variance is appropriate for the development and use of the lands. Variance 2:Obstruction in Driveway Visibility Triangle The applicant is requesting permission for front porches to encroach 0.5 metres into the 7.5 metre corner visibility triangle. General Intent of the Official Plan Urban Design policies of the Official Plan indicate that in Suburban Neighbourhoods, the City’s primary focus isto create diverse, attractive, walkable neighbourhoods that contribute to complete and healthy communities. The intent of thesepolicies is to ensure that new buildings are designed to enhance pedestrian usability, respects and reinforce human scale, create attractive streetscapes and contribute to rich and vibrant urban places.The proposed porches, located close to the street, enhance and create an interesting streetscape,while helping to contribute to the pedestrian experience. Staff is of the opinion that the general intent of the Official Plan is maintained. General Intent of the Zoning By-law The intent of a cornervisibility triangle is to ensure that drivers exiting a site have an unobstructed view of traffic and pedestrians before pulling into the street.The applicant has indicated that the subject porchesarenot more than 0.9 metres in height and that anyrailing will be designed so that visibility is not fully obstructed. Further, the encroachment is limited to 0.5 metres, and the area of encroachment is onto a street with wide boulevards, further increasing sightlines. Based on the foregoing, staff is of the opinion that the general intent of the by-law is maintained. Is the Variance Minor? As the porchesonly causeaminimal obstruction, staff is of the opinion that the variance is minor. Is the Variance Appropriate? The proposed porchesare an urban design feature which contribute to the streetscape andonly cause a small obstruction. Further, the dimensions of a corner visibility triangle have beenreduced from 7.5 m to 7.0 m through the Comprehensive Review of the Zoning By-law, and the proposed porch design complies with theseregulations. Based on the foregoing, staff is of the opinion that the proposed variance is appropriate for the development and use of the lands. Based on the foregoing, staff recommends that the proposed minorvariancesbe approved. Building Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance. Transportation Services Comments: Transportation Services can support the proposed reduction in parking for the subject property as it aligns with the required parking rates that will be governed by the City of Kitchener’s new zoning by-law (CRoZBy) and due to the fact that additional secured bicycle parking and storage will be provided on- site. Additionally, Transportation Services can also support the reduced corner visibility triangle (CVT) as the encroachment into the CVT will be at a maximum height of 0.9 metres, which will allow for adequate visibility for drivers. The CVT will also be reduced to 7.0 metres by 7.0 metres through the City of Kitchener’s new zoning by-law. Engineering Comments: Engineering has no concerns with the subject application. RECOMMENDATION That application A2019-100requesting relief from special regulation provision 502Rto permit a residential parking rate of 1.15spaces per unit rather than 1.25spacesper unit;andfrom s. 5.3 to permit an obstructions (0.5 metre porch encroachment) to be located within the cornervisibility triangles, whereas no obstructions are permitted,be approved, subject to the following condition: 1.That the subject variances shall apply to the site layout considered through Site Plan Application SP19/076/J/KA. Katie Anderl, MCIP, RPP Juliane von Westerholt, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner 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.