Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
CA Agenda - 2020-01-21
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT UNFINISHED BUSINESS AGENDA January 21, 2020 - 10:00 a.m. MINOR VARIANCE APPLICATIONS: 1. Submission No.: A 2019-103 Applicant: Trez MR Holdings (Ontario Ltd) Property Location: 581 Strasburg Road Legal Description: Block N, Plan 1335 Permission to construct a 2 -storey addition on an existing 3 -storey multi -residential dwelling, increasing the units from 21 to a total of 35 residential units having 35 off-street parking spaces (1.03 spaces/per unit) rather than the required 62 off-street parking spaces (1.75 spaces/per unit). 2. Submission No.: A 2019-108 Applicants: Robert and Linda Nelson Property Location: 41 Moore Avenue Legal Description: Part Lots 1-5, Part Lots 8-13 and Part of Lane, Registered Plan 283 Permission to construct a duplex on a lot having a width of 4.57m rather than the required 9m; and, a front yard setback of 45m rather than the maximum permitted front yard setback of 4.67m. CONSENT APPLICATION: 1. Submission Nos.: B 2019-074 & B 2019-075 Applicant: Gatekey Aggregates Inc. Property Location: 32 Forwell Road Legal Description: Part Lot 121, German Company Tract Permission to sever two parcels of land located in the northerly rear yard, Parcel 1 having a width of 128m, a depth of 126m and an area of 1.20ha to be conveyed as a lot addition to the adjacent property municipally addressed as 80-88 Centennial Road; and, Parcel 2 having a width of 84m, a depth of 163m and an area of 1.33ha to be conveyed as a lot addition to the adjacent property municipally addressed as 36 Centennial Road. THE CITY OF KITCHENER Kitchener City Hall COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 200 King St NOTICE OF HEARING Box 1118 Kitchener ON N2G 4G7 �IT{'� it ��' Pursuant to the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, 519-741-2200 ext. 7594 As amended and Ontario Regulations 197/96 and 200/96, as amended. holly. dyson@kitchener.ca TAKE NOTICE THAT the Committee of Adjustment for the City of Kitchener will meet on TUESDAY, January 21, 2020, commencing at 10:00 a.m. in the Council Chamber, 2nd Floor, Kitchener City Hall, 200 King Street West, Kitchener for the purpose of hearing the following applications for Minor Variance and/or Consent. Applicants must attend this meeting in person or by agent or solicitor. You have received this notice pertaining to the application number referenced on the front of your envelope as a courtesy. Anyone having an interest in any of these applications may attend this meeting. Please note this meeting is open to the public and may be recorded. Copies of written submissions and public agencies' comments are available on Friday afternoon prior to the meeting on the City of Kitchener website www.kitchener.ca. Comments will be available using the calendar of events, see the meeting date for more details. APPLICATIONS FOR MINOR VARIANCE AND / OR CONSENT PURSUANT TO THE PLANNING ACT A 2020-001 - 618 King Street West Permission for an existing 920 sq.m. office building to have 832 sq.m. office use and 88 sq.m. restaurant (cafe) use with 31 off-street parking spaces rather than the required 33 off-street parking spaces. A 2020-002 - 149 Roxborough Avenue Permission to construct a one storey sunroom addition in the easterly yard on an existing single detached dwelling containing a home office to have a rear yard setback of 4.48m rather than the required 7.5m under Zoning By-law 85-1 in current force and effect; and, permission under Zoning By-law 2019-051 to have a rear yard setback of 4.48m rather than the required 7.5m; a building height of less than 11 m whereas the By-law requires a minimum building height of 11m; a Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of less than 0.6m whereas the By-law requires a minimum FSR of 0.6; having 0 off-street barrier -free parking spaces rather than the required 1 off-street barrier -free parking space; having 0 Class A and Class B bicycle parking spaces rather than the required 1 Class A bicycle parking space and 3 Class B bicycle parking spaces; a southerly side yard setback of 1.6m abutting a residential zone rather than the required 7.5m; to permit a non-residential use that does not abut the entire length of the street line facade whereas the By-law requires a non-residential use to abut the entire length of the street line fagade; to have a ground floor street line fagade width as a percentage of the width of the abutting a street line of less than 50% whereas the By-law requires a minimum of 50% on the Highland Road West frontage; and, to have a minimum street line fagade opening of less than 50% whereas a minimum of 50% is required on the Highland Road West and Roxborough Avenue frontages. A 2020-003 - 5 Manitou Drive Permission for an existing mixed -used building to provide no minimum Gross Floor Area (GFA) for a "retail" outlet whereas the By-law requires a minimum 1,500 sq.m. devoted to "retail" use; and, permission to allow a "Dwelling Unit" as a permitted use on the second floor only and that the total Floor Space Ratio (FSR) for all dwelling units shall be a maximum of 2.0. A 2020-004 - 30 Saddlebrook Court Permission to construct a townhouse development having a Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 0.63 rather than the maximum 0.6 FSR permitted; and, to have 142 off-street parking spaces rather than the required 144 off- street parking spaces. Page 1 of 3 A 2020-005 - 196 Grand Flats Trail Permission to construct a single detached dwelling having a driveway located 7.85m from the intersection of Grand Flats Trail and Rivertrail Avenue rather than the required setback of 9m. A 2020-006 - 95 Crosswinds Drive Permission to construct a single detached dwelling having an easterly side yard setback of 1.25m rather than the required 1.5m. A 2020-007 - 78 Valleybrook Drive Permission to construct a single detached dwelling having an easterly side yard setback of 0.82m rather than the required 1.2m. B 2020-001 to B 2020-004 - 1250, 1270 & 1314 Fischer Hallman Road Permission to sever 3 parcels of land, Lots 1 and 3 on the plan submitted with the application are intended for future development and Lot 4 is intended to be deemed open space. The retained land Lot 2 on the plan submitted with the application is also intended for future development. Permission is also being requested to grant easements to facilitate the future development over the three severed parcels for access, servicing and stormwater purposes. Permission will also be required to grant an easement over Lot 4 (open space) for the purpose of stormwater management. The dimensions of the lots are approximately proposed as follows.. B 2020-001 - Lot 1 on the plan submitted with the application (Corner of Fischer -Hallman Road and Bleams Road) Frontage: 74.5m Area: 0.794 hectares B 2020-002 - Lot 2 on the plan submitted with the application Frontage: 207.4m Area: 3.195 hectares B 2020-003 - Lot 3 on the plan submitted with the application (irregular in shape) Frontage: 39.3m Area: 1.903 hectares B 2020-004 - Lot 4 on the plan submitted with the application Frontage: 11.27m Area: 0.792 hectares • additional information is available at the Legislated Services Department, 2nd Floor, City Hall, 200 King Street West, Kitchener (519-741-2200 ext.7594). • copies of written submissions/public agencies' comments are available on Friday afternoon prior to the meeting on the City of Kitchener website www.kitchener.ca in the calendar of events, see the meeting date for more details. • anyone having an interest in any of these applications may attend this meeting. • a person or public body that files an appeal of a consent decision of the Committee of Adjustment must make written submissions to the Committee before the Committee gives or refuses to give a Provisional Consent otherwise the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal LPAT) may dismiss the appeal. • any personal information received in relation to this meeting is collected under the authority s. 28(2) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, and will be used by the City of Kitchener to process Committee of Adjustment applications. Questions about the collection of information should be directed to Holly Dyson at holly.dyson(a)kitchener.ca. Page 2of3 if you wish to be notified of a decision you must make a written request to the Secretary -Treasurer, Committee of Adjustment, City Hall, 200 King St. W., Kitchener ON, N2G 4G7; this request also entitles you to be advised of a possible Local Planning Appeal Tribunal hearing; even if you are the successful party you should make this request as the decision could be appealed by the applicant or another party. Dated the 3rd day of January 2020. Dianna Saunderson Secretary -Treasurer Committee of Adjustment THIS NOTICE OF HEARING IS BEING SENT TO YOU AS A COURTESY. THE PRESCRIBED NOTICE OF HEARING FOR THIS COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT MEETING WAS PUBLISHED IN THE RECORD ON JANUARY 3, 2020. Page 3 of 3 Staff Repod Development Services Department K;`�FR www.ki tch en er. ca REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: January 21, 2020 SUBMITTED BY: Juliane von Westerholt, Senior Planner - 519-741-2200 ext. 7157 PREPARED BY: Andrew Pinnell, Senior Planner — 519-741-2200 ext. 7668 WARD: 6 DATE OF REPORT: January 14, 2020 REPORT #: DSD -20-009 SUBJECT: A2019-103 — 581 Strasburg Road Applicant — GSP Group Inc. c/o Valerie Schmidt Owner — Trez MR Holdings (Ontario) Ltd. Approve Subject to Conditions rg REPORT Planning Comments: The subject property is located on Strasburg Road, north of Block Line Road, in the Alpine Planning Community. The subject property is designated Medium Rise Residential in the Official Plan and is part of a Community Node Urban Structure component. The property is zoned Residential Eight (R-8) in By- law 85-1. Low Rise Residential development (existing semi-detached dwellings) is located to the north and east, while Medium Rise Residential development (existing 95 -unit multiple dwelling and planned 107 -unit multiple dwelling) is located immediately to the south. Planning staff visited the site on September 9, 2019 and January 2, 2020. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. The property is developed with a 2.5 storey, 21 -unit multiple dwelling. A Site Plan Application (file SP19/093/S/LT) received approval in principle on December 6, 2019, which would allow the construction of a two storey addition (14 units) on top of the existing building and would allow a renovation of the building's interior to achieve a 4.5 storey, 35 -unit multiple dwelling. The owner is seeking approval of a minor variance in order to reduce the number of required parking spaces from 61 (1.75 spaces per unit) to 35 (1.0 spaces per unit). It should be noted that a 36th "compact" space is provided, but this does not count as a required space for zoning by-law purposes, due to the insufficient size. Planning staff understands that of the 36 proposed parking spaces: • 35 count towards required parking under the zoning by-law • 29 are for residents • 4 are for visitors • 2 are barrier -free • 1 is compact (does not count towards required parking) The subject application was heard at the September 17, 2019 Committee of Adjustment meeting and deferred, pending the owner obtaining approval in principle. At the September 17, 2019 meeting, the Committee was advised that the final matters to be resolved as part of the site plan application were tree management, stormwater management, and parking during the construction phase. Since that time, the City has granted approval in principle to site plan application SP19/093/S/AP. The matter of construction phase parking was adequately addressed in advance of approval in principle, and stormwater management and tree management were addressed through development conditions. General Intent and Purpose of Official Plan and Zoning By-law Tests Section 13.C.8.2. of the Official Plan states: The City may consider adjustments to parking requirements for properties within an area or areas, where the City is satisfied that adequate alternative parking facilities are available, where developments adopt transportation demand management (TDM) measures or where sufficient transit exists or is to be provided. In this case, the applicant has provided a Parking Study, prepared by Paradigm Transportation Solutions Ltd., dated July 2019, which states that the parking demand can be accommodated by the proposed supply. It should be noted that the property is on a local bus route and within 250 metres of an Xpress transit route and other local routes. To support the reduced parking, the Parking Study suggests that the higher number of proposed bicycle parking spaces may reduce parking demand. Bicycle parking will be implemented through the Site Plan process. It also recommends that parking be "unbundled" (i.e., be charged separately to tenants and not connected to the ownership / rental of residential units). In this regard, planning staff recommends a condition to require an agreement for unbundled parking. Therefore, the variance meets the general intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law. "Minor" Test The variance is minor in that it will not create unacceptably adverse impacts on adjacent uses or lands. The parking study suggests that the proposed development will be able to accommodate the required parking on the site, despite the parking reduction. Desirability for Appropriate Development or Use Test The variance will support the ongoing maintenance and stability of the existing housing stock reusing and adapting the housing stock through renovation, conversion, and rehabilitation, as encouraged through Policy 4.C.1.10. of the Official Plan. Moreover, the variance would facilitate transit -supportive intensification of a property that is within a land use designation and zone that supports relatively high higher floor space ratio (massing). Therefore, the variance is desirable for the appropriate development of the land. For the abovementioned reasons, Planning staff is of the opinion that the variance request is justified, subject to the conditions outlined below. Building Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance Transportation Services Comments: Based on the justification provided by the applicant, Transportation Services can support the proposed parking rate for this application. Engineering Comments: No Engineering concerns. Heritage Comments: No heritage planning concerns. Environmental Planning Comments: Tree Management Policy requirements is / will be addressed through the site plan process. RECOMMENDATION That Minor Variance Application A2019-103 requesting to reduce the number of required parking spaces from 61 (1.75 spaces per unit) to 35 (1.0 spaces per unit), be approved, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall enter into an agreement with the City of Kitchener to be prepared by the City Solicitor and registered on the title of the property to require unbundled parking, such agreement to be to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor and Director of Transportation Services, and 2. That this approval shall apply only to the development proposed through Site Plan Application SP19/093/S/LT. Andrew Pinnell, MCIP, RPP Planner Attach: • Site Plan Submitted with Application Form Juliane von Westerholt, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner ri -Low: o IL 0 Staff Report Development Services Department 1 :.x www.ki tch en er. c a REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: September 17, 2019 SUBMITTED BY: Juliane von Westerholt, Senior Planner - 519-741-2200 ext. 7157 PREPARED BY: Andrew Pinnell, Planner — 519-741-2200 ext. 7668 WARD: 6 DATE OF REPORT: September 10, 2019 REPORT #: DSD -19-218 SUBJECT: A2019-103 — 581 Strasburg Road Applicant — GSP Group Inc. c/o Valerie Schmidt Owner — Trez MR Holdings (Ontario) Ltd. Approve Subject to Conditions REPORT Planning Comments: The subject property is located on Strasburg Road, north of Block Line Road, in the Alpine Planning Community. The subject property is designated Medium Rise Residential in the Official Plan and is part of a Community Node Urban Structure component. The property is zoned Residential Eight (R-8) in By- law 85-1. Low Rise Residential development (existing semi-detached dwellings) is located to the north and east, while Medium Rise Residential development (existing 95 -unit multiple dwelling and planned 107 -unit multiple dwelling) is located immediately to the south. Planning staff visited the site on September 9, 2019. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. The property is developed with a 2.5 storey, 21 -unit multiple dwelling. A Site Plan Application (file SP19/093/S/LT) has been submitted to the City which proposes to add a two storey addition on top of the existing building and to renovate the building's interior to achieve a 4.5 storey, 35 -unit multiple dwelling. The owner is seeking approval of a minor variance in order to reduce the number of required parking spaces from 61 (1.75 spaces per unit) to 35 (1.0 spaces per unit). It should be noted that a 36th "compact" space is provided, but this does not count as a required space for zoning by-law purposes, due to the insufficient size. Planning staff understands that of the 36 proposed parking spaces: • 35 count towards required parking under the zoning by-law • 29 are for residents • 4 are for visitors • 2 are barrier -free • 1 is compact (does not count towards required parking) General Intent and Purpose of Official Plan and Zoning By-law Tests Section 13.C.8.2. of the Official Plan states: The City may consider adjustments to parking requirements for properties within an area or areas, where the City is satisfied that adequate alternative parking facilities are available, where developments adopt transportation demand management (TDM) measures or where sufficient transit exists or is to be provided. In this case, the applicant has provided a Parking Study, prepared by Paradigm Transportation Solutions Ltd., dated July 2019, which states that the parking demand can be accommodated by the proposed supply. It should be noted that the property is on a local bus route and within 250 metres of an Npress transit route and other local routes. To support the reduced parking, the Parking Study suggests that the higher number of proposed bicycle parking spaces may reduce parking demand. Bicycle parking will be implemented through the Site Plan process. It also recommends that parking be "unbundled" (i.e., be charged separately to tenants and not connected to the ownership / rental of residential units). In this regard, planning staff recommends a condition to require an agreement for unbundled parking. Therefore, the variance meets the intent of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law. "Minor" Test The variance is minor in that it will not create unacceptably adverse impacts on adjacent uses or lands. The parking study suggests that the proposed development will be able to accommodate the required parking on the site, despite the parking reduction. Desirability for Appropriate Development or Use Test The variance will support the ongoing maintenance and stability of the existing housing stock reusing and adapting the housing stock through renovation, conversion, and rehabilitation, as encouraged through Policy 4.C.1.10. of the Official Plan. Moreover, the variance would facilitate transit -supportive intensification of a property that is within a land use designation and zone that supports relatively high higher floor space ratio (massing). Therefore, the variance is desirable for the appropriate development of the land. For the abovementioned reasons, Planning staff is of the opinion that the variance request is justified, subject to the conditions outlined below. Building Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance. Transportation Services Comments: Based on the justification provided by the applicant, parking rate for this application. Engineering Comments: No Engineering concerns. Heritage Comments: No heritage planning concerns. Transportation Services can support the proposed Environmental Planning Comments: Tree Management Policy requirements is / will be addressed through the site plan process. RECOMMENDATION That Minor Variance Application A2019-103 requesting to reduce the number of required parking spaces from 61 (1.75 spaces per unit) to 35 (1.0 spaces per unit), be approved, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall enter into an agreement with the City of Kitchener to be prepared by the City Solicitor and registered on the title of the property to require unbundled parking, such agreement to be to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor and Director of Transportation Services, and 2. That this approval shall apply only to the development proposed through Site Plan Application SP19/093/S/LT. Andrew Pinnell, MCIP, RPP Planner Attach: • Site Plan Submitted with Application Form Juliane von Westerholt, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner Region of Waterloo August 28, 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 (8) / VAR KIT, Martea Developments (11) / 53 FAIRWAY, 470088 Ontario Ltd 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. Document Number: 3091880 Page 1 of 2 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 Division Cambridge, Ontario N 1 R 5W6 Andrew Herreman, Resource Planning Phone: (519) 621-2761 ext. 2228 Technician E-mail: aherreman@grand river. ca PLAN REVIEW REPORT: City of Kitchener Holly Dyson DATE: January 7, 2020 YOUR FILE: See below RE: Applications for Minor Variance: A 2019-103 581 Strasburg Road A 2019-108 41 Moore Avenue A 2020-001 618 King Street West A 2020-002 149 Roxborough Avenue A 2020-003 5 Manitou Drive A 2020-004 30 Saddlebrook Court A 2020-005 196 Grand Flats Trail A 2020-006 95 Crosswinds Drive A 2020-007 78 Valleybrook Drive 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 *These comments are respectfully submitted as advice and reflect resource concerns within the scope Page 1 of 1 and mandate of the Grand River Conservation Authority. Staff Report Development Services Department 1 R www.ki tch en er. c a REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: January 21, 2020 SUBMITTED BY: Juliane von Westerholt, Senior Planner - 519-741-2200 ext. 7157 PREPARED BY: Andrew Pinnell, Senior Planner — 519-741-2200 ext. 7668 WARD: 10 DATE OF REPORT: January 14, 2020 REPORT #: DSD -20-010 SUBJECT: A2019-108 — 41 Moore Ave Owners — Robert and Linda Nelson Approve Subject to Conditions yam°` go REPORT Planning Comments: The property is located on the west side of Moore Avenue, between Louisa Street and Wellington Street, in the KW Hospital Planning Community. The property is comprised partly of the eastern portion of a former public laneway, which used to run between King Street and Moore Avenue. Another portion of the lane, beginning at the rear lot line of the subject property and extending to King Street remains open and public. The subject property is surrounded by the rear yards of those properties fronting onto Louisa and Wellington Streets. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. The subject property was formerly used for warehousing, but is currently vacant and vegetated. Retaining walls outline large sections of the north, south, and west property boundaries. The property is 1,255 square metres in area and has 4.57m of frontage on Moore Avenue (the width of the former laneway). A right-of-way for access to the two abutting properties on Moore Street, addressed as 37 and 43 Moore Street, remains in effect. The property is designated Low Rise Conservation in the KW Hospital Secondary Plan and is zoned Residential Five (R-5), with Special Use Provision 129U (prevents triplexes) in the Zoning By-law. Planning staff visited the site on September 23, 2019 and January 2, 2020. At the October 15, 2019 Committee of Adjustment Meeting, in order to facilitate the development of a duplex, the applicant requested minor variances to allow: 1. a minimum lot width of 4.57 metres, whereas the Zoning By-law requires 9.0 metres, and 2. a maximum front yard of 45.0 metres, whereas the Zoning By-law requires 4.67 metres. At this meeting, Planning staff recommended approval subject to conditions, being satisfied that the variances met the four legislative tests. Staff was of the opinion that the variances were desirable for the appropriate development of the land and that they would not cause unacceptably adverse impacts on adjacent properties. After hearing a number of delegations from neighbours, the Committee of Adjustment decided to defer the application to the January 21, 2020 meeting, in order to allow an opportunity for the applicant to prepare revised plans and discuss the application and revised plans with the neighbours. At that time, the applicant advised that the plans included with the application form (i.e., Version #1) did not fully represent what he planned to construct. Accordingly, on December 12, 2019, Planning staff hosted a meeting at City Hall with the neighbours, the applicant, and the ward councillor (Councillor Marsh), and discussed the application and revised site plan and elevation drawings (i.e., Version #2). Approximately 14 neighbours attended. At the meeting, the applicant confirmed that he is now planning to construct a single detached dwelling, rather than a duplex. The notes taken by staff at this meeting are attached. The following documents were posted to the City's website on December 18, 2019: • Staff report dated October 9, 2019, • Committee of Adjustment minutes of October 15, 2019. • Version #2 drawings, • Preliminary Tree Report & Plan, and • Neighbours Meeting notes of December 12, 2019. On January 9, 2020, the applicant submitted a further revised site plan and elevation drawings in response to the comments expressed by staff and the neighbours at the December 12th meeting (see Version #3, attached). The below chart summarizes the evolution of the development concept for the site: Planning staff is of the opinion that the development concept has evolved positively from Version #1 through to Version #3, such that the variances meet these tests in a more fulsome manner. Version #1 (provided Version #2 (shared at Version #3 (received with original Dec 12, 2019 on Jan 9, 2020 and application form in neighbours meeting attached to subject October 2019) and posted on City report) website Dwelling Type Duplex Single Detached Single Detached Building Type Two-storey Back -split Back -split Approx. Building 10. Om (32.7 ft) 7.6m (25 ft) 6.7m (22 ft) Height Building Cladding All sides: combination Front: brick All sides: brick of brick & vinyl siding Rear & sides: vinyl (front also includes siding stone) Front Yard Setback 51.22m 38.86m 38.86m Northerly Side Yard 3.13m 3.77m 4.75m Setback Southerly Side Yard 3.14m 3.60m 2.60m (reduced to save Setback walnut tree abutting northerly side lot line) Planning staff is of the opinion that the development concept has evolved positively from Version #1 through to Version #3, such that the variances meet these tests in a more fulsome manner. Planning staff applauds the applicant for his willingness to attend the meeting with the neighbours, contribute to meaningful discussion about the development concept, and make an effort to address a number of the neighbours' concerns. In deciding the subject application, the Committee ought to keep in mind the purpose of the requested variances, which is simply to legalize the existing lot width for an existing lot and allow an increased front yard setback, in order to allow the lot to be developed with a low density residential use that is a permitted use within the zoning by-law. It should be noted that these variances are being considered under By-law 85-1, rather than 2019-051 (CRoZBy), because the subject area is within a Secondary Plan area and CRoZBy does not apply to secondary plan areas. The KW Hospital Secondary Plan proposes to rezone the subject lands to RES - 3 (159)(160). This proposed zoning would allow the very similar uses to the current zoning. It should also be noted that in accordance with the RIENS study recommendation and Section 39.2.1 and Appendix `H' of By-law 85-1, the maximum front yard (i.e., 4.67 metres) is calculated by averaging the front yards of the abutting lots (i.e., 37 Moore Avenue and 43 Moore Avenue) and adding 1.0 metre. General Intent and Purpose of Official Plan Test The Low Rise Conservation designation policies state that single detached dwellings are a permitted use. In addition, the KW Hospital Secondary Plan aims to retain the existing low rise, low density residential character of the neighbourhood. Accordingly, the variances meet the general intent of the Official Plan. General Intent and Purpose of Zoning By-law Test The intent of the 9.0 metre lot width regulation is to ensure that an appropriately sized building can be placed on the property. In this case, although the technical lot width is only 4.57 metres, the lot widens to about 20 metres at approximately 28 metres from the front lot line (due to its irregular shape). This lot width is more than sufficient to support the development of a single detached dwelling and associated parking, landscaped area, etc. The intent of the maximum front yard requirement is to ensure a consistent streetwall / streetscape is established, for neighbourhood character purposes. In this case, a dwelling that fits into the existing streetscape cannot be constructed on the property due to the lack of frontage. However, a building can be constructed completely outside of the streetscape. If a variance is approved, the construction of a single detached dwelling will not create a streetscape that is inconsistent or that degrades streetscape character. The variances meet the general intent of the Zoning By-law for the reasons cited above "Minor" Test The revised plans provided suggest that the subject property will be able to easily accommodate a single detached dwelling, appropriate setbacks, and all facilities required to support the use, including parking, landscaping, amenity space, etc. On-site trees would be protected to the extent possible and off-site trees would be fully protected through a recommended tree preservation plan condition. A City Urban Designer has already reviewed an Arborist Report prepared by Natural Resource Solutions Inc., on behalf of the applicant, dated January 2020. This report outlines tree protection measures and is acceptable to City staff. Planning staff recommends that the recommendations of the Arborist Report be implemented through approval conditions. Also, the variances would facilitate a low density use that is permitted by the current and proposed zoning. In this regard, the variances are minor in that they will not create unacceptably adverse impacts on adjacent uses or lands. Desirability for Appropriate Development or Use Test The variances would facilitate low-density infill development of a permitted use, in an appropriate manner. Also, by authorizing the variances, the owner would be required to undertake a Record of Site Condition as part of the future building permit process, including possible remediation as a result of former warehouse operations. This would improve the environmental condition of the property. Planning staff is of the opinion that the variances are appropriate for the desirable development of the land. Planning staff is satisfied that as long as the recommended conditions are imposed to require a site plan, elevation drawings, and a tree management plan, to the satisfaction of staff, that the variances are justified. Building Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance provided the building permit for the new residential building is obtained prior to construction. Record of Site Condition will be required to develop this site with a residential use Please contact the Building Division @ 519-741-2433 with any questions. Transportation Services Comments: Transportation Services has no concerns with the subject application. Engineering Comments: No Engineering concerns. Heritage Comments: Heritage Planning staff has no concerns with this 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 41 Moore Avenue is located within the Mt Hope/Breithaupt 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: The standard tree management condition to enter into an agreement is to be registered on the title of the property to complete and implement a Tree Preservation / Enhancement Plan prior to the issuance of any building permit, and maintain that plan for the life of the development. Shared ownership trees will be an issue for the proposed development. Fire Services: Preparation of a fire route plan is not required for a single detached dwelling. However, should the dwelling be converted to a duplex or other multi -unit dwelling in the future, a fire route plan will be required. RECOMMENDATION That Minor Variance Application A2019-108, requesting to relief from Section 39.2.1 of Zoning By- law 85-1, to allow: A. a minimum lot width of 4.57 metres, whereas the Zoning By-law requires 9.0 metres, and B. a maximum front yard of 45.0 metres, whereas the Zoning By-law requires 4.67 metres be approved, subject to the following conditions: That prior to issuance of a building permit for a dwelling, the owner shall submit a site plan drawing and elevation drawings for all sides of the dwelling, to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Planning. Additionally, the owner shall obtain a building permit from the City's Building Division and the above mentioned drawings shall be implemented through the building permit process, to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Planning and City's Chief Building Official. This minor variance approval shall apply only to the dwelling constructed and maintained in general accordance with said plans, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning. 2. Prior to the commencement of grading on the subject property, the owner shall enter into an agreement with the City of Kitchener to be prepared by the City Solicitor and registered on title of the subject property, which shall include the following: a. That the owner shall prepare an Arborist Report, for the subject property in accordance with the City's Tree Management Policy, to be approved by the City's Director of Planning and where necessary, implemented prior to any grading, servicing, tree removal or the issuance of building permits. The report shall address, among other matters, the identification of a proposed building envelope/work zone, landscaped area and vegetation to be preserved. b. The owner further agrees to implement the approved Arborist Report, including the recommendations and tree protection measures outlined in the report. No changes to the said report shall be granted except with the prior approval of the City's Director of Planning. c. The owner agrees to maintain the subject property, in accordance with the approved Arborist Report, for the life the development. 3. Prior to issuance of a building permit for a building on the subject property, the owner shall install municipal address signage in an appropriate location on the subject property that is visible from Moore Avenue, to the satisfaction of the City's Chief Fire Official. Andrew Pinnell, MCIP, RPP Planner Juliane von Westerholt, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner Attach: • Revised drawings provided by subject property owner, submitted January 9, 2020 • Notes from December 12, 2019 Meeting with Neighbours 5c I wo b� i N?%.TWg N2i052',WW___ I S, d rW Flom =- 18 10C a� Par rzri 2 ZZ W 3 �m y �VVi Lt Q ix M v m r � T V b Z rP� gg z d " m fil X FFri r G4 O In z Z 3a n• y °_ 9:xs I 0 � n I �I € y I� Z wsi I I ag J mm I� E � 3 — — — — — — — — — — — — I 0 n -. Ai I I I I I lu ! 9 ! I I I W 1m aC . X I� x o I 41A 2 I L I � � • I �,rsm 4bN6111LHG 8Ef 1 G c A C) l I I uooy C 90 °Q"li0 My ��ou of cz: < D y I> of© a m D z 1 .szM 1 8j C- w °' m r LA 1 a g MOORE AVENUE 1 - d m � � � auum m � a rzri 2 ZZ W 3 �m y �VVi Lt Q ix M v r � T V b Z gg z d " m fil X FFri r G4 O In z Z 3a n• y °_ 9:xs a 0 � n IN �I € y M Z m $ ag J mm 3 § § \ ^ / § L. j f | § \ . f» §k w 2 ! !k (,\ I21 A § : t� . * § t m §| { z J � / . . !■! i . � . � $ � � : � /� ■� | I|| ! } � ( �\ . � � ... � \ . C - p \ § , �E ,\ §§ ------------------- §.1 - !) .1 ■ . §) ' } ^ � ( - z� k « z 2 7 ! \ 7 , Ck: | § LU ( � mz ` c - U- 2 LLI & . . §.1 - !) .1 ■ . )} § k § � OC)~ | 0) � � ! \ § . � W) 21 � E 7! 7 2 w ° !\� ,| 2 ■ \& $ j 0 $ w ! k ! .| , 4( q: k !°° !° Meeting Notes (Dec 12 2019) Neighbourhood Meeting — December 12, 2019 City staff in attendance: Andrew Pinnell; luliane VonWesterholt; Richard Kelly-Ruetz; Sandro Bassanese Counciiiors in attendance: Councillor Sarah Marsh Applicant: Robert Nelson Location: Conestoga Room (City Hall) INTRODUCTION f BACKGROUND luhane (Cityl: introduced staff in attendance and purpose of meeting Andrew tlaty): Provided background inrormation on property. Applicant proposed new dwelling on unusually shaped lot with frontage on Moore Avenue that does not meet zoning by-law lot width requirements; minor variance required to legalize lot width. Minor variance application went to Committee of Adjustment in October 2019. The Committee heard comments from neighbours and directed staff to hold meeting to go over the revised site drawing for the single detached house. (Andrew showed up-to-date drawings to meeting ottendeesl. The proposed dwelling is shorter than the dwelling. proposed in October (-25 feet rather than "32 feet). (Discussion took place on location of property line relative to retaining wait(sj on side of subject propertyl. Property is not currently proposer] to be used as a duplex; zoning could permit future conversion to duplex. (Applicant confirmed he does not intend to duplex at this time]. Hobert (Appiicantl: Added that roof pitch will be further lowered from drawings avaiiabie tonight. Andrew (City): Provided overview of comments from other agencies. Single dwelling proposed is acceptable to Kitchener Fire. For environmental matters, a Tree Management Plan (TMP) will be required through the minor variance application (Sondro confirmed receipt of TMP and will review as port of opplico tion). Resident (33 Louisa Street): Inquired on shadow impacts. Andrew (City): Responded to shadow inquiry. Explained that a Shadow Impact Study is not a requirement for a Single Detached Dwelling and will not be required with this application. Andrew (city}: [Continued discussing comments from otheragenctesi. Trie Building uivision will require a Record of Site Condition to be completed prior to obtaining a building permit for the new dwelling. This wifi assess any potential contamination on the property. Property is on record as having a previous warehouse use. Andrew (Cityl: Have received direction from the Director of Parks & Cemeteries that City staff does not recommend a City park (dog park, etc.) at this location due to a number of factors such as: small size, visMinry, emergency access, sorely, err. 1 L1+Scdoimer: these notes are not verbor,m and ony intended to generofy copture the items discussers at the meeting on December i2rh. Meeting Notes (Dec 12 2015) Andrew (City): There are utility poles on the property; Bell Canada has indicated they have been in contact with the applicant regarding their relocation prior to construction of the proposed dwelling. r Resident (35 Louisa Street): (ii Understands that density is objective of planning framework. However, with this neighbourhood intensifying (i.e. new condos), there are too few park spaces. (2) The variance Is not 'minor'. (3) Loss of sunlight is a concern — existing tree on site blocks sunlight. (4) The proposed development is more than what's appropriate for the site (S) Anticipates fire access to the site to be a challenge (bi Concerns with obtaining notes from this meeting only the Friday before the ianuary Committee of Adjustment meeting. (7) Concerns with being 'sold' a site plan at this meeting. How can we be certain that developer will implement plan before neighbourhood tonight? (Andrew (City) confirmed that architectural control' can be added as a condition of the minor variance approval. This wit! 'tie` the site pian before the neighbourhood tonight to the approvoi process and even tualbuilding permit) (Further discussion took place between Resident (35 Louisa Street), Resident (39 Louisa Street) and applicant regarding additional tweaks Ito the elevation drawings. Applicont mentioned that he was adding brick along sides of house, and lowering the pitch on the roof. Sandra (City[ added that windows can be changed to improve privacy. He suggested that the windows be a transom style to allow light in while mointarning privacy. Revised drowings con be mode available in advance of Committee of Adjustment meeting, depending on applicant's ability to prepare oheod of time). Further concerns raised around timingof releasing updates to plans to the neighbourhood. Andrew (City): Confirmed that by December 20`', Planning staff can make available: (1) the notes from this meeting, (21 any updated drawings (if availablel, and (3) the tree management plan. Resident (4i Louisa Street): asked if Landscape Pian will be a requirement of the approval. Raised concerns about overtook from new dwelling into abutting rear yards and discussed that landscaping can potentially mitigate some of those concerns. overall, it is not ideal to lose views of green space. Councillor Sarah Marsh: asked if staff could require a Landscape Plan for this application. Andrew (City): Explained that for a single detached dwelling, staff will not be recommending requiring a Landscape Plan. Added that Committee is free to add additional conditions, as they see fit, following feedback from attendees at the upcoming Committee or Adjustment meeting. Resident (18 Wellington St Ni: (1) Appreciates applicant's willingness to share plans with neighbourhood and openness to making changes (2) The lot in question in an unusual shape and everyone is grappling with it. is it an appropriate lot for new residential development? Andrew (City): Explained that staff has been grappling with the same issues. Through staff's review of this application, staff also has a desire to make it the best it can be. 2 aasdaimer. mese notes ore not verborin ondonig urrended ro generolr coprure the items discussed or lire meer,ng on December i2th. Meeting Motes (Dec 12 2019) Resident (39 Louisa Street): Asked applicant if they intend to duplex the unit; and if they would be prepared to sell the land to neighbourhood residents. lApp&cont indicated he does not intend to duplex. Added that he would be open to selling the property to interested neighbours). Resident (39 Union Street East): Explained that he lives further away from the subject property, and that his father lives beside It. Explained how his father is open to this change and is accepting of the proposal. Does not think a dog park or community garden Is the best fit for the property. Resident 13-3 Louisa street!; & Resident 141 Louisa street): Inquired about mecnanics of acquiring property from applicant and adding portions of It to their respective backyards. (lulione10ty) and Sondra (City) exploined that this would be somewhat complex, but could be done thought a separate Committee of Adjustment process. Discussion took place on possibility thot deeper lots created jrom the possible purchase of this property could facilitate rear yard additions on existing dwellings). Resident (33 Louisa Street): Explained that she plans on 'living in her house for 2S years. She appreciates the greenspace that is on the subject property. She prefers a single detached dwelling over a duplex (lulione (staff) clarified that the property couldstill be converted to a duplex in the future). Inquired about extent of architectural control; if architectural control Is added as a condition of the minor variance approval, is it tired to the property lndefinitelye Andrew (City): All variance approvals are tied to the property. If property Is sold and new owner wishes to construct a dwelling, they either (1) must build in accordance with approved variance, approved building elevations, and "tree management plan or (2) must apply for a new minor variance application. Resident (11 Braun street): How do the new tiny mouse rules apply to this property? Richard (City): The new regulations for detached additional dwelling units have been drafted and will iikeiy be applied to this property. it is likely that an additional minor variance would be required for a detached unit in the rear as the lot width would be insufficient. Resident (11 Braun Street): Discussed Idea that applicantcould sever portion of rearyard, and sell,iconvey to neighbouring properties to use as vehicle parking for their (future) tiny houses. Robert (Applicant): Indicated a preference to only selling the lot in its entirety, 4 sold at all. Preference is to build home using plans before residents tonight, with further tweaks. Resident (41 Louisa Street): Asked applicant tar clantication on location at side property lines. )Applicant indicated that 3.7m side yard setbock is measured from exterior wall of proposed house to outside of retaining walls bordering property]. Resident (49 Louisa Street): Thanked applicant for attending. Asked applicant about any trees being removed with new dwelling. (Applicont is anticipating removing I tree in the centre of property, and 1 on the side of the property]. 3 Oisclarmer: these notes are not verbolo'n and only wended to generolly copture the items d+scussedat the meetng on December 22th. Meeting Notes (Dec 12 2019) CONCLUDING REMARKS City staff and Counciffor Marsh thanked residents for attending the meeting and for providing input to this planning process. iuf lane reiterated that by December 20th, the following items will be available to those in the neighbourhood: (ij Tree management pian (2) Drawings (as up-to-date as possible) and (3) Meeting notes. u scr'amer: rhese notes ore not verboten and only intended to generohl capture the gems arscussedor rhe meeivig on december i2rh. Staff Report Development Services Department 1 R www.ki tch en er. c a REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: October 15, 2019 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: October 9, 2019 REPORT #: DSD -19-239 SUBJECT: A2019-108 — 41 Moore Ave Owners — Robert and Linda Nelson Approve Subject to Conditions yam°` go REPORT Planning Comments: The property is located on the west side of Moore Avenue, between Louisa Street and Wellington Street, in the KW Hospital Planning Community. The property is comprised partly of the eastern portion of a former public laneway, which used to run between King Street and Moore Avenue. Another portion of the lane, beginning at the rear lot line of the subject property and extending to King Street remains open and public. The subject property is surrounded by the rear yards of those properties fronting onto Louisa and Wellington Streets. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. The subject property was formerly used for warehousing, but is currently vacant and vegetated. Retaining walls outline large sections of the north, south, and west property boundaries. The property is 1,255 square metres in area and has 4.57m of frontage on Moore Avenue (the width of the former laneway). A right-of-way for access to the two abutting properties on Moore Street, addressed as 37 and 43 Moore Street, remains in effect. The property is designated Low Rise Conservation in the KW Hospital Secondary Plan and is zoned Residential Five (R-5), with Special Use Provision 129U (prevents triplexes) in the Zoning By-law. Planning staff visited the site on September 23, 2019. In order to facilitate the development of a duplex, the applicant is requesting a minor variance to allow: 1. a minimum lot width of 4.57 metres, whereas the Zoning By-law requires 9.0 metres, and 2. a maximum front yard of 45.0 metres, whereas the Zoning By-law requires 4.67 metres. It should be noted that the City's Residential Intensification in Existing Neighbourhoods Study (RIENS) resulted in a zoning regulation that would prevent a garage from projecting beyond the front facade of the habitable portion of the duplex (regulation 5.51D). Although the plans submitted with the application form show a design that does not comply with this regulation, the owner has confirmed to Planning staff these plans are conceptual and are provided simply to demonstrate that a duplex could fit on the subject lot. The owner further stated that he intends to change the design of the proposed home to a back -split layout with no garages. If this occurs, the duplex could be shorter than proposed in the plans submitted (6-7 metres in height, rather than 9.5 metres). That said, the zoning would allow for many layouts / design options for a duplex, as long as the regulations are complied with, including a max height requirement of 10.5 metres. Note that the design/layout provided as part of a future building permit application would be required to comply with the above noted regulation. The subject variances are being considered under By-law 85-1, rather than 2019-051 (CRoZBy), because the subject area is within a Secondary Plan area and CRoZBy does not apply to secondary plan areas. The KW Hospital Secondary Plan and associated zoning is currently being reviewed, but a new secondary plan has not yet been proposed. It should also be noted that in this case, in accordance with the RIENS study recommendation and Section 39.2.1 and Appendix `H' of By-law 85-1, the maximum front yard (i.e., 4.67 metres) is calculated by averaging the front yards of the abutting lots (i.e., 37 Moore Avenue and 43 Moore Avenue) and adding 1.0 metre. General Intent and Purpose of Official Plan Test The Low Rise Conservation designation policies state that duplex dwellings are a permitted use. In addition, the KW Hospital Secondary Plan aims to retain the existing low rise, low density residential character of the neighbourhood. Accordingly, the variances meet the general intent of the Official Plan. General Intent and Purpose of Zoning By-law Test The intent of the 9.0 metre lot width regulation is to ensure that an appropriately sized building can be placed on the property. In this case, although the technical lot width is only 4.57 metres, the lot widens to about 20 metres at approximately 28 metres from the front lot line (due to its irregular shape). This lot width is more than sufficient to support the development of a duplex and associated parking, landscaped area, etc. The intent of the maximum front yard requirement is to ensure a consistent streetwall / streetscape is established, for neighbourhood character purposes. In this case, a dwelling that fits into the existing streetscape cannot be constructed on the property due to the lack of frontage. However, a building can be constructed completely outside of the streetscape. If a variance is approved, the construction of a duplex will not create a streetscape that is inconsistent or that degrades streetscape character. The variances meet the general intent of the Zoning By-law for the reasons cited above. "Minor" Test The plan provided suggests that the subject property will be able to accommodate a duplex, appropriate setbacks, and all facilities required to support the use, including parking, landscaping, amenity space, etc. On-site trees would be protected to the extent possible and off-site trees would be fully protected through a recommended tree preservation plan condition. Also, the variances would facilitate a low rise use that is permitted by the current zoning. In this regard, the variances are minor in that they will not create unacceptably adverse impacts on adjacent uses or lands. Desirability for Appropriate Development or Use Test The variances would facilitate low-density infill development of a permitted use, in an appropriate manner. Also, by authorizing the variances, the owner would be required to undertake a Record of Site Condition as part of the future building permit process, including possible remediation as a result of former warehouse operations. This would improve the environmental condition of the property. Planning staff is of the opinion that the variances are appropriate for the desirable development of the land. For the abovementioned reasons, Planning staff is of the opinion that the variance requests should be approved, subject to the conditions outlined below. Building Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance provided the building permit for the new residential building is obtained prior to construction. Record of Site Condition will be required to develop this site with a residential use Please contact the Building Division @ 519-741-2433 with any questions. Transportation Services Comments: Transportation Services has no concerns with the subject application. Engineering Comments: No Engineering concerns. Heritage Comments: Heritage Planning staff has no concerns with this 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 41 Moore Avenue is located within the Mt Hope/Breithaupt 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: Standard tree management condition to enter into an agreement to be registered on the title of the property to complete and implement a Tree Preservation / Enhancement Plan prior to the issuance of any building permit, and maintain that plan for the life of the development. Shared ownership trees will be an issue for the proposed development. Fire Services: For infill projects, Fire Services has accepted a maximum of 105 metres, and can accept it in this case. Furthermore, City by-laws require the address of the building to be visible from the street and, as such, the owner is required to erect a sign at the entrance from the road. Also, the owner must demonstrate that 60 metres of preconnect hose will reach all areas of the units from the street. RECOMMENDATION That Minor Variance Application A2019-108 requesting to relief from Zoning By-law 85-1 to allow: A. a minimum lot width of 4.57 metres, whereas the Zoning By-law requires 9.0 metres, and B. a maximum front yard of 45.0 metres, whereas the Zoning By-law requires 4.67 metres be approved, subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to issuance of a building permit for a building on the subject property, the owner shall install municipal address signage in an appropriate location on the subject property that is visible from Moore Avenue, to the satisfaction of the City's Chief Fire Official. 2. Prior to issuance of a building permit for a building on the subject property, the owner shall prepare and submit a fire route plan, implement the plan as part of the building permit process, and maintain the plan for the life of the development, to the satisfaction of the City's Chief Fire Official. 3. Prior to the commencement of grading on the subject property, the owner shall enter into an agreement with the City of Kitchener to be prepared by the City Solicitor and registered on title of the subject property, which shall include the following: a. That the owner shall prepare a Tree Preservation Plan for the subject property in accordance with the City's Tree Management Policy, to be approved by the City's Director of Planning and where necessary, implemented prior to any grading, servicing, tree removal or the issuance of building permits. Such plans shall include, among other matters, the identification of a proposed building envelope/work zone, landscaped area and vegetation to be preserved. b. The owner further agrees to implement the approved Tree Preservation Plan. No changes to the said plan shall be granted except with the prior approval of the City's Director of Planning. c. The owner agrees to maintain the subject property, in accordance with the approved Tree Preservation Plan, for the life the development. Andrew Pinnell, MCIP, RPP Planner Juliane von Westerholt, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner Attach: • "Existing Site Plan" submitted with application form 7 I . • m .. \ x §r m, r § E--/---------- -.__- -m --- --g \q 1-4� \z u t & C� C� � L ------------------- m_GSLMm w � % ( / §� / w| � !� |� = w M % j \ 4 *{ �Z.. MOSRIC AVC\ kE Region of Waterloo September 26, 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 Re: Committee of Adjustment Meeting on October 15, 2019, City of Kitchener Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have following comments: 1. A 2019-106 — 78 Castlebay Street— No Concerns. 2. A 2019-107 — 38 Gordon Avenue — No Concerns. 3. A 2019-108 — 41 Moore Avenue — No Concerns. 4. A 2019-109 — 26 Baird Avenue — No Concerns. 5. A 2019-110 — 330 Manitou Drive Unit C — 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 Document Number: 3115951 Page 1 of 1 Grand River Conservation Authority 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Resource Management Division Cambridge, Ontario N 1 R 5W6 Andrew Herreman, Resource Planning Phone: (519) 621-2761 ext. 2228 Technician E-mail: aherreman@grand river. ca PLAN REVIEW REPORT: City of Kitchener Holly Dyson DATE: January 7, 2020 YOUR FILE: See below RE: Applications for Minor Variance: A 2019-103 581 Strasburg Road A 2019-108 41 Moore Avenue A 2020-001 618 King Street West A 2020-002 149 Roxborough Avenue A 2020-003 5 Manitou Drive A 2020-004 30 Saddlebrook Court A 2020-005 196 Grand Flats Trail A 2020-006 95 Crosswinds Drive A 2020-007 78 Valleybrook Drive 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 *These comments are respectfully submitted as advice and reflect resource concerns within the scope Page 1 of 1 and mandate of the Grand River Conservation Authority. To Whom it May Concern; Andrew Pinnel (planner, Planning Division, COK) andrew.pinnel@kitchener.ca 519-741- 2200 ext. 7668 Dianna Saunderson From; Note: deadline for submissions unknown dianna.saunderson(@kitchener.ca Re: 2019-108 41 Moore Ave Application for Minor Variance, site plan, related issues submission (subsequent to conversation with Andrew Pinnell on 08OC2019) Procedural: -insufficient time before hearing for all interested parties (incl., COK Fire, EMS, Water and sewer, Snow/Maintenance) and affected area residents to respond responsibly and completely. -when was the application made? Is it accurate? -sign went up/notices prepared 27SE2019, only 18 days (into statutory holiday) for parties to respond. INSUFFICIENT TIME! -site plan submitted; -is it the truly intended plan or a facsimile/other? (formally submitted and paid for?) -does not reflect/indicate the complicated terrain (actual property line vis a vis existing concrete walls on three sides of lot) nor existing, abutting structures (multiple fences, garages, hydro poles etc...) Variances: -neither are 'minor', roughly 100% and 1000% respectively -and in COMBINATION are far more contrary to by-law rationale, and create a problematic if not dangerous bottleneck with regard to issues raised below Other COK Departments (consulted? Conclusions?) -Fire and EMS: -there has been a fire on this property previously causing damage and threats to adjacent properties (c. 1993??) and revealed commensurate challenges in Fire response. -even a future, closer hydrant (if not buried in snow) would not improve responder's access through snowbanks, parked or incapacitated vehicles or other potential obstacles along narrow laneway past bracketing homes and garages and driveways/parking/their cars. -Water/Sewer/Storm drains and Road Maintenance/snow removal -where/how will so many sq. ft. of snow and ice be deposited? And what equipment and intrusion onto Moore Ave. would it entail -would it present problems when this concrete wall enclosed envelope's snow melts and proceeds downslope to Moore Ave. and homes to either side of the laneway? Environmental Impacts: -how would mature walnut trees be affected (#1 at wall to the west at City laneway from King St., and #2 further northeast on Louisa resident's rear yard) -who owns west wall tree (and fence, and wall)? This is an unresolved dispute. (Tammy Shirle of 33 Louisa St./ Mike Niederer COK). -is a tree/root preservation review not warranted? -will structure(s) vents/exhausts and 1.2 M proximity to longstanding walls/fences/garages etc... present other negative environmental or health issues (and in conjunction with snow, shade...)? Residential Impacts (hardly limited to those below listed): -X notices issued multiplied by # of occupants per home would result for many people and households considerable and cumulative negative impact (inclluding concomitant real-estate and financial loss), -Louisa St. properties adjacent have tiny back yards (mine 18 ft in depth north to south, wall/fence and garage on west and east respectively). The proposed structure would block nearly all of the remaining sunlight to my grass, gardens and my only south facing windows. Others face near identical impacts given 1.2m offset indicated. Construction/Future Logistical -has any consideration/consultation with regard to the ongoing condominium project underway (across Moore St./Google parking lot) and that project's entry/exit and 'corner park' implications, including further congestion -how might the construction purported in the application itself affect or imperil Occupants and property of Moore Ave. 'Choke Point' owners? Has any action been specifically taken to apprise these profoundly impacted? Previous Negative ruling with regard to essentially identical Application for Adjustment -what was the reasoning supporting that determination, and is this available to all parties, and how? -what, if anything has changed (materially or policywise... ) since that judgement? I realize that these are a great many questions. I believe they merit consideration and investigation if not outright answers or solutions. GIVEN THE GREAT COMPLEXITY AND BROAD IMPACT OF THIS APPLICATION, we respectfully request that the hearing for this application be (if not denied) DEFERRED TO ALLOW SUFFICIENT TIME FOR ALL CONCERNED to address the points raised above. Sincerely, To: The City of Kitchener Committee of Adjustment Meeting Tuesday October 15, 2019 Council Chamber, Kitchener City Hall RE: Application for minor variance (zoning) A2019-108-41 Moore Avenue. The application requests permission to construct a duplex on a lot having a width of 4.57m rather than the required 9m; and, a front yard setback of 45m rather than the maximum permitted front yard setback of 4.67m. The application is essentially identical in its request to the application A2008-026, considered by the Committee of Adjustment on May 20, 2008, which was refused. It was the opinion of the Committee that the variance was not minor in nature. Moreover, the 2008 application was not desirable for the appropriate development of the property. There are three major concerns we have with this application. First, we participated in the conversation held in 2008 for this application, which in part focused on fire safety. While our neighbours who witnessed the fire that destroyed the previous building have since passed, I recall their description of the difficulties the fire fighters had in tackling the blaze given limited frontage access to the building. The proposed building plans indicate buildings would be 3.14m from the north and south property lines, which is less than 3m from the existing concrete retaining walls. This would not provide sufficient room for emergency access, placing several residential homes at risk. Second, we have been patiently in conversation with Municipal Law Enforcement Officer Mike Niederer regarding determination of where precisely the property line for 41 Moore falls. In particular, there is some confusion regarding responsibility for the broken fence and large walnut tree that is atop the wall at the end of the City's alley. Once this is settled we will have better sense of the implications of the building plan. With the short notice of this application we have not been able to finalize those conversations or properly review existing land surveys. Third, it is not clear to us how final these plans are for the proposed duplex. We are very concerned that expansions or revisions will not require consultations with members of the community. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, October 9, 2019 Re: Application for Minor Variance A-2019-108-41 Moore Avenue From: This letter is in response to the above proposed application to construct a duplex at 41 Moore Avenue. The application requests permission to construct a duplex on a lot having a width of 4.57m rather than the required 9m; and a front yard setback of 45m rather than the maximum permitted front yard setback of 4.67m. This irregular shaped property consists of a long shared laneway bracketed between two existing homes (37 & 43 Moore Street, garage and parking in their rear yards) opening to a larger parcel of land in the centre of the Moore/Wellington/King/Louisa Street block. This property abuts the rear yards of the surrounding homes. The King Street border is a 15+ foot retaining wall to elevated properties above. We have the following comments and concerns regarding this application. This Minor Variance Application request is nearly identical in its request to the 2008 application which was denied citing the variance was not minor in nature and the application was not desirable for the appropriate development of the property. This current application is also not minor in nature and would not be desirable for the appropriate development of the property. The size of the building footprint and the height of the building (9m/30 feet) is too large and intrusive for this property. Multiple vehicle parking and usage is also not desirable. 2. Entrance/laneway: This property has no visibility from the street. The existing lane is shared by the two adjacent homes (37 & 43 Moore). The lane is narrow and paved to the maximum (43 Moore) touching the home's sidewalk and stairs and there is limited ability to widen into the side yard (37 Moore). There is no ability to widen this laneway sufficiently to permit two-way traffic and/or emergency vehicles and widening would encroach on these properties. 3. Fire/EMS: Just prior to our purchase in, there was a fire at one of the now demolished single story warehouses at oore and the fire truck was unable to get into the property via the laneway to contain the fire and the fire spread to surrounding garages. Our garage was one of these. Rear yards of the surrounding properties are no more than 15 or 20 feet in depth and garages, sheds, and fences are in immediate proximity (less than 10 feet) from the proposed building. Should snow bank accumulation or a vehicle impede or block access, there is a real potential for this to occur again due to the depth of this property and" land -locked" nature of proposed building. The closest fire hydrant is at Moore and Louisa Streets. EMS as per above, limited or potential impeded access. 4. Privacy/Suitability: Our primary concerned is with privacy and the suitability of this property for residency. The rear yards of the surrounding properties are already very small (15 or 20 feet depth) and look out/face into this property. Proposed side setback of 3.1 m / 10 feet is insufficient to have a sense of privacy in one's back yard and property lines have shifted over time which may leave this setback considerably less. Privacy for the tenants of this proposed duplex and the privacy of the surrounding neighbours would be compromised resulting in loss of enjoyment for all. 5. Sunlight reduction/Light pollution: The height of the proposed building (9m / 30 feet) will result in a significant loss of sunlight to the surrounding homes and rear yards which are already very small (15 to 20 feet in depth). Conversely, outdoor and interior building lighting would shine into our yard and bedrooms and the surrounding homes. 6. Vehicle noise/exhaust fumes: Noise and exhaust from vehicles on the property would effectively be in the rear yard of the surrounding properties. 7. Trees: The health of the roots and overhang of large trees on the surrounding properties (Walnut, Red Maple, and existing Maple on property) would be compromised by the foundation and paved parking area. Hydro pole with overhead telephone services wires located on this property are connected to the surrounding homes and would need to be relocated. 8. For future consideration: This has been a stable block of single family homes with recent and coming intensive high-rise residential development in the surrounding blocks. Public green space is sorely absent in the "Mid -Town" area. Further consultation is requested with the City Parks Department to consider purchasing this parcel for a playground, park, dog park or community garden and a query will be made to the owners of the property to determine interest in selling to the City of Kitchener or possibly adjoining residents to expand their rear yards. With limited notice of this hearing, these conversations have not been finalized. For the above reasons, we respectfully request that Application A-2019-108 — 41 Moore be declined. Staff Report K R Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: January 21, 2020 SUBMITTED BY: Juliane von Westerholt, Senior Planner - 519-741-2200 ext. 7157 PREPARED BY: Katie Anderl, Senior Planner— 519-741-2200 ext. 7987 WARD: #1 DATE OF REPORT: January 13, 2020 REPORT #: DSD -20-018 SUBJECT: B2019-074 — B2019-075 32 Forwell Road Owner — Gatekey Aggregates Inc Approve with Conditions 'S Kolb Park Parcel C: Parkland Dedication k1 h l r'M Parcel A: Lot Addition to Parcel B: 36 Centennial Rd Lot Addition to y _ 80 Centennial Rd Cy'S �i + , rtF GRAND RN NORTH + 1 I F Lands to be retained Map 1 — Location Map REPORT *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Planning Comments: The subject lands are located at 32 Forwell Road. The majority of the property is designated General Industrial Employment and zoned General Industrial (M-2) with Special Regulations 31R, 55U affecting portions of the lands in By-law 85-1, and EMP -2 (General Industrial Employment) with Site Specific Regulations 89 and 44 affecting portions of the lands in By-law 2019-051. Lands located in close proximity to the Grand River are designated Natural Heritage Conservation and zoned Hazard Land Zone (P-3) in By-law 85-1, and NHC-1 with Environmental Overlays in By-law 2019-051. A guided site walk was conducted on September 4, 2019. The subject lands have an overall area of 23.81 hectares and are currently under-utilized. The applicant has submitted a Master Development Plan demonstrating that the proposed lot additions will allow the balance of the lands to be developed with additional industrial uses. Staff is satisfied that the orientation of the lot additions will provide for sufficient flexibility for the future development and/or subdivision of the retained lands. The applicant is proposing to sever two parcels of land as lot additions to adjoining industrial lands at 36 Centennial Road and 80 Centennial Road. These are shown as Parcel A and Parcel B on Map 1 and the Updated Severance Sketch attached to this report. The Severance Sketch has been updated from the version previously circulated to include Parcel C, which represents the lands that will be conveyed to the City as parkland dedication. A Draft Reference Plan should be prepared based on the updated Severance Sketch, to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Planning, and a condition has been included in this regard. In support of the application a Vegetation Management Plan, Geotechnical Slope Stability Investigation and an Environmental Constraints Plan, were submitted to define the limits of the developable area and to establish the lot boundaries which are outside the areas of environmental constraints. The application was deferred in December 2019 to allow the applicant to provide additional information regarding the Erosion Hazard Limit and the Slope Stability Setback. The owner has completed additional fieldwork and a topographic survey. This information was combined with the Slope Stability Assessment to determine the precise location of the erosion hazard limit and slope stability setback (which defines the limit of development and the eastern limit of Parcel B). The updated plans have been approved by the Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) and are also acceptable to the City's Environmental Planner. As a result of this work, the eastern limit of the proposed lot addition to 80 Centennial Road has been revised to coincide with the recommended slope stability setback and buffer, and the Severance Sketch, Master Development Plan and Environmental Constraints Plan (as submitted December 18, 2019) have been updated accordingly. Therefore, the entirety of the lands to be conveyed are outside the area of the environmental constraints. Prior to initiation of any site development works, grading or issuance of a building permit on the lands to be severed or lands to be retained, Site Plan Approval is required, and a condition is recommended in this regard. The City of Kitchener Parks staff has requested the dedication of land to fulfill parkland dedication requirements for the proposed severances. The City of Kitchener wishes to secure lands to permit the long-term, future extension of the Walter Bean Trail, through Kolb Park and along the top of the river bank through Parcel C. The current Walter Bean Trail alignment is along Centennial Road and Forwell Road (shown on Map 1) and is less desirable than a route which will continue along the river to the extent possible. Investigations and study will be required as part of future development(s) for the remainder of the trail alignment through the retained lands. Potential alignments that may be evaluated could be a trail that continues along the Grand River, or which may turn west, south of Parcel C, connecting to Forwell Road. A number of conditions are recommended to facilitate the parkland dedication. First, the parcel to be dedicated includes the area of environmental constraints (Grand River Valley), and a 6 metre Erosion Access Buffer which is beyond the stable top of slope, and is regulated by the GRCA. The 6 metre access buffer is the preferred location of the future trail extension, however the GRCA requires an addendum to the Slope Stability Assessment confirming that construction of a trail in this location will not impact the stability of the slope. Prior to endorsement of the deed, the City must be satisfied that the GRCA will be able to support the trail within the Erosion Access Buffer. A condition has been included in this regard. Second, the City must also be satisfied that the lands conveyed are uncontaminated. As such, prior to acceptance of Parcel C into the City's ownership, a Record of Site Condition (RSC) is required. The timing associated with completion of an RSC is uncertain and may take more than a year to complete. Therefore, the City is recommending that a modified Subdivision Agreement is registered on title of the lands to be retained to facilitate this conveyance. A Letter of Credit guaranteeing the completion of the RSC, and an Acknowledgement and Direction to register a Transfer is required to facilitate this approach. These steps will ensure that the lands will be conveyed to the City, and that the City can secure an RSC before accepting the lands. With respect to the criteria for the subdivision of land listed in Section 51(24) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposed lot additions conform to the City's Official Plan and will allow for orderly development that is compatible with the existing industrial area. The dimensions the retained lands and resultant lots comply with regulations of By-law 85-1 and 2019-051 and the parcels are appropriate and suitable for the existing and future use of the lands. The resulting parcels front onto established public streets, and the lands are serviced with independent and adequate connections to municipal services. Staff is of the opinion that the proposal is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and conforms to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. Based on the foregoing, staff recommends that the applications be approved, subject to conditions_ Operations (Design and Development) Comments: Parkland dedication is required for the application taken as land. The policy standard rate of 2% under the Established Industrial Areas will apply, with the land area for dedication representing 0.048ha of the severed lands. The City does not normally accept hazard lands as parkland dedication; however, the 2% land dedication is not sufficient to satisfy the land requirement for a desired trail connection along the river to the Walter Bean Trail. In this instance, Parks will accept hazard lands as parkland dedication, provided the trail connection can be located within the 6m Erosion Access Allowance, subject to approval by the GRCA. Building Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed consent applications. Transportation Services Comments: Transportation Services has no concerns with the proposed for lot additions to 36 and 80 Centennial Road. However, a further comments and discussion will be provided should the applicant proceed with future development described through the Master Concept Plan. Engineering Services Comments: Engineering has no comments or concerns with the proposed lot additions. All properties (32 Forwell Rd, 36 Centennial Rd and 80 Centennial Rd) have the necessary services. If development is proposed in the future, additional comments and/or requirements will be identified through the associated development applications. Region of Waterloo Comments: Regional staff have no objection to the subject applications. RECOMMENDATIONS: A. That Application B2019-074 requesting consent to sever a parcel of land having a width of approximately 84 metres and an area of approximately 1.33 hectares, (shown as Parcel A on the severance sketch attached to report DSD20-018) to be conveyed as a lot addition to 36 Centennial Road, be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the Owner shall obtain a tax certificate from the City of Kitchener to verify that there are no outstanding taxes on the subject property to the satisfaction of the City's Revenue Division. 2. That the Owner provide a digital file of the deposited reference plan(s) prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor in .dwg (AutoCad) or .dgn (Microstation) format, as well as two full size paper copies of the plan(s). The digital file needs to be submitted according to the City of Kitchener's Digital Submission Standards to the satisfaction of the City's Mapping Technologist. 3. That the draft reference plan showing the proposed lot additions and parkland dedication (being Parcel A, Parcel B and Parcel C generally as shown on the severance sketch attached to report DSD20-018) be submitted and approved by the City's Director of Planning, in consultation with the City's Director of Parks and Cemeteries. 4. That the Owner agrees to submit an Addendum to the Slope Stability Assessment prepared by Chung and Vander Doelen Engineering Ltd. (dated November 1, 2019, and updated December 2019) to confirm that construction of a trail within the 6 metre Erosion Access Allowance, shown on Drawing 3, would not impact the slope, to the satisfaction of the Grand River Conservation Authority. 5. That the lands to be severed be added to the abutting lands (being 36 Centennial Road) and title be taken into identical ownership as the abutting lands. The deed for endorsement shall include that any subsequent conveyance of the parcel to be severed shall comply with Sections 50(3) and/or (5) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended. 6. That the Owner's Solicitor shall provide a Solicitor's Undertaking to register an Application Consolidation Parcels immediately following the registration of the Severance Deed and prior to any new applicable mortgages, and to provide a copy of the registered Application Consolidation Parcels to the City Solicitor within a reasonable time following registration. 7. That the Owner shall enter into a Modified Subdivision Agreement with the City of Kitchener to be prepared by the City Solicitor and registered on title of the severed and retained lands which shall include the following condition: a) That prior to initiation of any site development works, grading or issuance of a building permit the Owner agrees to submit and receive approval of a Site Plan to the satisfaction of the City's Manager of Site Development and Customer Service, which reflects, at minimum, any proposed changes to lot size and/or any proposed changes to site operation. 8. That the Owner shall enter into a Modified Subdivision Agreement with the City of Kitchener to be prepared by the City Solicitor and registered on title of the lands to be retained which shall include the following conditions (subject to any necessary amendments to parcel descriptions based on deposited reference plan), and shall submit the Letter of Credit, and Acknowledgment and Direction identified therein: a. The Owner agrees that parkland dedication requirements for both Parcel A and Parcel B shall be fulfilled by the dedication of Parcel C to the City of Kitchener at no cost and free of encumbrances. The Owner agrees that Parcel C shall be dedicated to the City upon satisfactory completion of a Record of Site Condition and in accordance with the terms of this registered Agreement. b. The Owner shall deliver to the City, together with the executed copy of this Agreement, a Letter of Credit in the amount of $30,000.00, to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor, to be held for use by the City to complete a Record of Site Condition should one not be completed by the Owner in accordance with the terms of this registered Agreement. a. The Owner agrees to complete a Record of Site Condition by January 31, 2022 for the lands to be dedicated. Should the Record of Site Condition not be received to the satisfaction of the City's Solicitor by January 31, 2022, the City may use the Letter of Credit to have a Record of Site Condition completed. The City, its employees, agents or contractors may, at the City's sole option enter on the lands and so complete the required works to the extent of the monies received under the Letter of Credit. The Letter of Credit, or any portion of the Letter of Credit not otherwise spent by the City to complete the required works herein, shall be released by the City when the required Record of Site Condition has been completed to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor. b. The Owner shall deliver to the City, together with the executed copy of this Agreement, an executed Acknowledgment and Direction to be prepared by the City Solicitor authorizing the City and its solicitor to electronically register a Transfer of title to the lands to be dedicated, in favour of the City, in the event of default by the Owner to complete the Record of Site Condition and convey title to said lands to the City in accordance with the terms and provisions of this registered Agreement. B. That Application B2019-075 requesting consent to sever a parcel of land having a width of approximately 118 metres and an area of approximately 1.06 hectares, (shown as Parcel B on the severance sketch attached to report DSD20-018) to be conveyed as a lot addition to 80 Centennial Road, be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the Owner shall obtain a tax certificate from the City of Kitchener to verify that there are no outstanding taxes on the subject property to the satisfaction of the City's Revenue Division. 2. That the Owner provide a digital file of the deposited reference plan(s) prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor in .dwg (AutoCad) or .dgn (Microstation) format, as well as two full size paper copies of the plan(s). The digital file needs to be submitted according to the City of Kitchener's Digital Submission Standards to the satisfaction of the City's Mapping Technologist. 3. That the draft reference plan showing the proposed lot additions and parkland dedication (being Parcel A, Parcel B and Parcel C generally as shown on the severance sketch attached to report DSD20-018) be submitted and approved by the City's Director of Planning, in consultation with the City's Director of Parks and Cemeteries. 4. That the Owner agrees to submit an Addendum to the Slope Stability Assessment prepared by Chung and Vander Doelen Engineering Ltd. (dated November 1, 2019, and updated December 2019) to confirm that construction of a trail within the 6 metre Erosion Access Allowance, shown on Drawing 3, would not impact the slope, to the satisfaction of the Grand River Conservation Authority. 5. That the lands to be severed be added to the abutting lands (being 80 Centennial Road) and title be taken into identical ownership as the abutting lands. The deed for endorsement shall include that any subsequent conveyance of the parcel to be severed shall comply with Sections 50(3) and/or (5) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended. 6. That the Owner's Solicitor shall provide a Solicitor's Undertaking to register an Application Consolidation Parcels immediately following the registration of the Severance Deed and prior to any new applicable mortgages, and to provide a copy of the registered Application Consolidation Parcels to the City Solicitor within a reasonable time following registration. 7. That the Owner shall enter into a Modified Subdivision Agreement with the City of Kitchener to be prepared by the City Solicitor and registered on title of the severed and retained lands which shall include the following condition: b) That prior to initiation of any site development works, grading or issuance of a building permit the Owner agrees to submit and receive approval of a Site Plan to the satisfaction of the City's Manager of Site Development and Customer Service, which reflects, at minimum, any proposed changes to lot size and/or any proposed changes to site operation. 8. That the Owner shall enter into a Modified Subdivision Agreement with the City of Kitchener to be prepared by the City Solicitor and registered on title of the lands to be retained which shall include the following conditions (subject to any necessary amendments to parcel descriptions based on deposited reference plan), and shall submit the Letter of Credit, and Acknowledgment and Direction identified therein: a. The Owner agrees that parkland dedication requirements for both Parcel A and Parcel B shall be fulfilled by the dedication of Parcel C to the City of Kitchener at no cost and free of encumbrances. The Owner agrees that Parcel C shall be dedicated to the City upon satisfactory completion of a Record of Site Condition and in accordance with the terms of this registered Agreement. b. The Owner shall deliver to the City, together with the executed copy of this Agreement, a Letter of Credit in the amount of $30,000.00, to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor, to be held for use by the City to complete a Record of Site Condition should one not be completed by the Owner in accordance with the terms of this registered Agreement. c. The Owner agrees to complete a Record of Site Condition by January 31, 2022 for the lands to be dedicated. Should the Record of Site Condition not be received to the satisfaction of the City's Solicitor by January 31, 2022, the City may use the Letter of Credit to have a Record of Site Condition completed. The City, its employees, agents or contractors may, at the City's sole option enter on the lands and so complete the required works to the extent of the monies received under the Letter of Credit. The Letter of Credit, or any portion of the Letter of Credit not otherwise spent by the City to complete the required works herein, shall be released by the City when the required Record of Site Condition has been completed to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor. d. The Owner shall deliver to the City, together with the executed copy of this Agreement, an executed Acknowledgment and Direction to be prepared by the City Solicitor authorizing the City and its solicitor to electronically register a Transfer of title to the lands to be dedicated, in favour of the City, in the event of default by the Owner to complete the Record of Site Condition and convey title to said lands to the City in accordance with the terms and provisions of this registered Agreement. Katie Anderl, MICP, RPP Senior Planner Attachments: Revised Severance Sketch Juliane von Westerholt, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner Staff Report Development Services Department REPORT TO: DATE OF MEETING: SUBMITTED BY: PREPARED BY: WARD: DATE OF REPORT: REPORT #: SUBJECT: K R www.kitchenerca Committee of Adjustment December 10, 2019 Juliane von Westerholt, Senior Planner - 519-741-2200 ext. 7157 Katie Anderl, Senior Planner— 519-741-2200 ext. 7987 #1 December 2, 2019 DSD19-282 B2019-074 — B2019-075 32 Forwell Road Owner — Gatekey Aggregates Inc Defer Map 1 — Location Map *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. REPORT Planning Comments: The subject lands are located at 32 Forwell Road. The lands are designated and zoned for industrial uses and contain a ready -mix concrete plant, however large areas of the site are under-utilized. The applicant is proposing to sever the lands into several individual parcels for future development, and as a first step they are requesting Consent to convey two parcels of land as lot additions to adjoining industrial lands at 36 and 80 Centennial Rd. The property is located adjacent to the Grand River, contain steep embankments, and are regulated by the Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA). A number of documents were submitted in support of the consent application including a Vegetation Management Plan, Geotechnical Slope Stability Investigation and an Environmental Constraints Plan. The supporting documentation has been circulated to commenting City Divisions & Agencies. Through review of the documentation, the GRCA, the Region, City Parks and City Planning Staff have requested that the application be deferred so that the applicant may provide additional information regarding the Erosion Hazard Limit and Slope Stability Setback. These limits are requested to be shown on the supporting drawings in order to allow commenting authorities to complete their review. This information will define the limit of development and the location of the proposed lot line for Lot Addition 2. Parks staff is also interested in securing a parkland dedication along the Grand River to allow for a future extension of the Walter Bean Trail. The exact location of such a trail connection and the associated land dedication relies on the GRCA's review and approval of the extent of slope and flood erosion hazards. At the time of writing, the applicant is actively completing additional on-site investigations, and staff anticipate that this information should be available and reviewed for a Committee Meeting early in the winter. Based on the foregoing, staff recommends that the applications be deferred for a period of up to 3 months (March 17, 2020), but that they be permitted to return sooner. Operations (Design and Development) Comments: Requests deferral of the application. Building Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed consent applications. Transportation Services Comments: Transportation Services has no objections to the proposed consent applications. Engineering Services Comments: Engineering Services has no objections to the proposed consent applications. Region of Waterloo Comments: The subject lands at 32 Forwell Road are identified as a High Threat in the Region's Threats Inventory Database. The adjacent lands at 80-88 and 20 & 36 Centennial Road are identified as a High Threat and Known Threat in the Region's Threats Inventory Database. The threat indicators are associated with the former and existing industrial uses on the property including the storage of underground tanks. Regional Staff acknowledges that the Environmental Screening Questionnaire submitted with the subject application has indicated that environmental documents (i.e. a Phase I and II Environmental Site Assessment) have been prepared or issued for the property. Regional Staff has requested these studies from the owner/applicant. Regional Staff requests deferral of the subject applications for 32 Forwell Drive to allow Regional Staff to review any associated environmental documents to determine whether a Record of Site Condition is warranted to assess potential contamination issues on the subject lands. RECOMMENDATIONS: That Applications B2019-074 and B2019-075 be deferred for a period of up to 3 months (March 17, 2020), but that they be permitted to return sooner. Katie Anderl, MICP, RPP Juliane von Westerholt, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner Senior Planner Region of Waterloo Holly Dyson Committee of Adjustment City of Kitchener P.O. Box 1118 200 King Street East Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES Community Planning 150 Frederick Street 8th Floor Kitchener Ontario N2G 4A Canada Telephone: 519-575-4400 TTY: 519-575-4608 Fax: 519-575-4466 www. reg i o nofwate rl oo. ca Matthew Colley 575-4757 ext. 3210 D20-20/19 KIT January 10, 2020 Re: Comments for Consent Application B2019-074 to 62019- 075 and B2020-001 through B2020-004 Committee of Adjustment Hearing January 21, 2020 CITY OF KITCHENER B2019-074 and B2019-075 32 Forwell Road Gatekey Aggregates Inc. c/o Justin Bischoff The owner/applicant is proposing two severances from 32 Forwell Road to be added as lot additions to existing abutting lots at 80-88 Centennial Road and 20 & 36 Centennial Road. Regional staff have no objection to the subject applications. B2020-001 to B2020-004 1250, 1270 and 1314 Fischer Hallman Road WAM Fischer -Hallman GP Inc. / One Properties The owner/applicant is proposing consent applications to sever three parcels of land, retaining one parcel, and to facilitate easements over the parcels for access, stormwater and servicing. The subject lands are located at the southeast corner of Fischer Hallman Road and Bleams Road and are subject to Site Plan Approval application SP18/083/F/AP and recently received Council approval to re -zone the lands to a site-specific "Mixed -Use Two" zone with special use regulations. The Zoning By-law Amendment application has been appealed and is currently proceeding through the LPAT process. Document Number: 3190214 Version: 1 Regional Comments: Regional Staff, in consultation with the City of Kitchener, are requesting a deferral of the subject applications for one month. This deferral is to allow Regional Staff additional time to review the subject applications in further detail and consult with the owner/applicant and City Staff to outline conditions of final approval. Regional Staff require additional time to address concerns related to the proposed access roundabout at Fischer -Hallman, site servicing for the subject lands and other relevant matters. Regional Staff request deferral of the subject applications General Comments Any future development on the lands subject to the above -noted consent application(s) will be subject to the provisions of Regional Development Charge By-law 19-037 or any successor thereof. Please accept this letter as our request for a copy of the staff reports, decisions and minutes pertaining to each of the consent applications noted above. Should you require Regional Staff to be in attendance at the meeting or have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Yours truly, Matthew Colley Planner Document Number: 3190214 Version: 1 Grand River Conservation Authority 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Resource Management Division Cambridge, Ontario N 1 R 5W6 Melissa Larion, Supervisor of Resource Phone: (519) 621-2761 ext. 2247 Planning Fax: (519) 621-4945 E-mail: mlarion@grandriver.ca PLAN REVIEW REPORT: City of Kitchener Holly Dyson DATE: December 2, 2019 YOUR FILE: B 2019-074 & B 2019-075 GRCA FILE: B2019-074 & B2019-075 — 32 Forwell Road RE: Applications for Consent B 2019-074 & B 2019-075 32 Forwell Road, City of Kitchener Gatekey Aggregates Inc. GRCA COMMENT: The Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) recommends deferral of these consent applications to allow the applicant to provide additional information outlined below. BACKGROUND: 1. Resource Issues Information currently available at this office indicates that the subject property contains the erosion hazard, river valley and floodplain associated with the Grand River and Kolb Creek as well as the regulated allowances adjacent to these features. The property also contains the regulated allowance to wetlands located on adjacent properties. Based on our review of Figure 1, prepared by IBI Group, dated October 15, 2019: • The proposed lands to be severed and added to 36 Centennial Road are located outside the GRCA regulated area. • The proposed lands to be severed and added to 80 Centennial Road contain the erosion hazard, the Grand River valley as well as the allowance to these feature and the floodplain. A copy of our resource mapping is attached. 2. Legislative/Policy Requirements and Implications Due to the presence of the resource features noted above, a portion of the property is regulated by the GRCA under Ontario Regulation 150/06 — Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses Regulation. In accordance with GRCA and Provincial Policy, new development, including the creation of new lots, is not permitted in the floodplain or erosion hazards. Upon review of the submitted materials, the proposed applications will not create any new lots as the severed portions are to be added to existing lots. It should also be noted that no new hazards will be added to 80 Centennial Road as both properties already contain a portion of the hazards that are also on the lands to be severed. Page 1 of 2 Based on our review of the Concept Plan, we note that a portion of the land to be added to 80 Centennial Road is within the regulated area. Our current mapping indicates that the property is already developed and contains an area outside of the regulation limit on the existing and proposed lot addition for potential future development. Although GRCA staff do not object to the lot addition concept, we are recommending deferral of these applications to allow the applicant to provide additional information that may impact the lot lines associated with the lot additions. The requested information is listed below: • A Site Plan showing the top of stable slope and the applicable setback that was identified in the submitted Slope Stability Assessment (prepared by Chung & Vander Doelen Engineering Ltd., dated November 1, 2019) We also understand that the City of Kitchener Multi -use Pathways and Trails Master Plan (MMM Group and Ecoplans Limited, 2012) identified a proposed multi -use pathway along the Grand River in this area. If a trail is planned in this location, we request that the trail be included on the Site Plan noted above. The trail and associated grading should be located outside of the identified erosion hazard and setback. Once the additional information is submitted, GRCA staff will undertake a full review of the application and provide further comments. Any future development on the subject lands within the regulated area will require the prior issuance of a GRCA permit pursuant to Ontario Regulation 150/06. The permit process involves the submission of a permit application to this office, the review of the application by Authority staff and the subsequent approval/refusal of the permit application by the GRCA. 3. Plan Review Fees These consent applications will be reviewed together and will only require one plan review fee. The applicable plan review fee is the major consent application review fee of $1,060.00. The applicant will be invoiced in the amount of $1,060.00 by copy of this correspondence. We trust this information is of assistance. If you have any questions or require additional information please contact the undersigned. Sincerely, Melissa Larion, MA, MCIP, RPP Supervisor of Resource Planning Grand River Conservation Authority Encl. * These comments are respectfully submitted as advice and reflect resource concerns within the scope and mandate of the Grand River Conservation Authority. Page 2 of 2 M LL Z U E ' ` O LL E O 4— L) U Z `d)L Q U� N� OQ :te' C7 U L Q Q -`oE Q --u�Ea o� LL C z U U a, N N U o f w E up n -0 _ a) co (D C L w t r n C m -O 4% v C7 0 o Q _ C7 c c y `° ¢ N p cu C c a — E o E E a ° o__ (0 ] p w a) a) Q a) ¢ a (2 N .N . m o p L ,n v N N Q a ° (aj a Of n o f i. o o m E a y a 3 L) U o a m (7 N LL cn ❑ w N a a U m N x m L7 4) (D o a) Q p o m N c �� a m> ° °> w w w (.0 w c "2 _ p m N�o' 0 N N N L1.� �417:10 > wa) w N y c r o° o 'k N LL C Ir (L' w J J J J d 11rr1}__ (1 - °-�, fn p`J o,� l7F `v �Q o22..° n C� \\ 1 I.:.I li C14 tl- U U H m� m Esau u _ i° E "o,z a � nJ U O w U5 c-t z Z (D r / QI r J +n� j�• o /(p10N r 4, ` • > (D S a 21 J � + f r r. ^� it 1 y. A. Fo oa S '• L� � I - tD L� �•' f � � � �' y ` � tee. ,� � �" C.) Bell Canada Right of Way Floor 2, 140 Bayfield Street Barrie, Ontario L4M 3131 November 28, 2019 City of Kitchener 200 King Street West Kitchener, Ontario N2G 4137 Tel: 705-722-2264 Fax: 705-726-4600 E-mail: charleyne.hall@bell.ca E-mail Only: Holly Dyson — holly. dyson @ kitchener.ca Subject: Applications for Consent B2019-074 and B2019-075 32 Forwell Road Kitchener Bell File: 519-19-546 Thank you for your correspondence dated November 26, 2019. Subsequent to review by our local engineering department, Bell Canada has identified that we require protection for existing facilities. On the attached sketch, the red line indicates the approximate location of active, critical infrastructure. Located on the property 32 Forwell Road, Bell Canada's facilities provide essential access to the network. Of major concern is the ability to access our equipment, particularly in the event of an interruption, or emergency, that would require Bell Canada to restore service to regular telephone lines, alarm services, internet access, and most importantly ensure the continuity of 911 service. Bell Canada requests a 3.Om wide strip to measure 1.5m on either side of the buried facilities, as can be reasonably accommodated. In regards to the buried plant, it may be necessary for a surveyor to arrange for a cable locate to identify its precise location. Since the intention of the requested easement is to protect the integrity of the existing facilities and preserve many services, we request that the cost associated with registration be the responsibility of the landowner. We hope this proposal meets with your approval and request a copy of the decision. Should our request receive approval, we look forward to the owner's solicitor contacting us with a draft reference plan and accompanying draft easement documents for our approval prior to registration, along with an acknowledgement and direction for our execution. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me. Yours truly, a"17V W Charleyne Hall Right of Way Associate 1 Staff Repod Development Services Department 1 w►r: � .R www.kitch en er. ca REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: January 21, 2020 SUBMITTED BY: Juliane von Westerholt, Senior Planner - 519-741-2200 ext. 7157 PREPARED BY: Richard Kelly-Ruetz, Planner — 519-741-2200 ext. 7110 WARD: 10 DATE OF REPORT: January 10, 2020 REPORT #: DSD -20-011 SUBJECT: A2020-001 — 618 King Street West Owner — Cliff Rego / 2607330 Ontario Inc. Applicant — Greg Piccini (MartinSimmons Architects Inc.) Approve REPORT Planning Comments: c;na! r Location Map: 618 King Street West The subject property located at 618 King Street West is zoned Medium Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU -2) with Special Use Provision 401 U in Zoning By-law 85-1, and designated Mixed Use Corridor in the City's K -W Hospital Neighbourhood Plan for Land Use. The existing building on the property contains office and restaurant uses. To facilitate the issuance of a permit for a facia sign and Zoning (Occupancy) Certificate for a Restaurant on the property, a minor variance is required for parking. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. As such, the applicant is requesting relief from Section 6.1.2 of the Zoning By-law to permit a 920 square metre building with 832 square metres of office and 88 square metres of restaurant to have a total of 31 parking spaces, whereas 33 are required. Staff notes that the lot to the rear (19-21 Moore Avenue) is the location of most of the 31 existing parking spaces; the City has a site plan on record recognizing such spaces. 618 King Street West City Planning staff conducted a site inspection of the property on January 3, 2020. 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 offers the following comments. 1. General Intent and Purpose of Official Plan Test The subject property is designated Mixed Use Corridor in the City's K -W Hospital Neighbourhood Plan for Land Use. The intent of this designation is to serve the adjacent residential neighbourhoods and employment areas and allow for intensive, transit supportive development residential neighbourhoods and employment areas and allow for intensive, transit supportive development. encourage a range of different forms of housing to achieve a low density neighbourhood. A broad range of commercial uses are permitted. The site is well served by transit and the mix of uses can serve the adjacent residential neighbourhood. As such, the requested variance to reduce the amount of required parking is in keeping with the general intent of the Mixed Use Corridor designation. 2. General Intent and Purpose of Zoning By-law Test The purpose of the parking space requirement is to ensure that sufficient parking spaces are available for uses on a property; in this case, the two uses in question are office and restaurant. Staff is satisfied that the reduction in required parking spaces from 33 spaces to 31 spaces meets the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law as the site is well -served by transit (LRT & bus) and within close walking distance of the downtown core and several established neighbourhoods. Staff has no concerns with the number of available parking spaces (31) for this building and its uses. 3. "Minor" Test The variance can be considered minor as the reduced parking space requirement of 31 spaces, rather than the required 33 spaces is a small reduction, one that is warranted as the site is located near an LRT station stop (Central Station) and has frontage on King Street, which is well -served by other transit. Staff is satisfied that the 2 space parking reduction is minor. 4. Desirability for Appropriate Development or Use Test The requested variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land, as the requested parking reduction of 2 spaces will facilitate multiple uses in one building, and staff is satisfied that there will continue to be sufficient parking spaces available for the building, as it is well served by transit. Based on the foregoing, Planning staff recommends that this application be approved. Building Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance. Transportation Services Comments: As this is an existing condition, Transportation Services does not have any concerns with the proposed application. Heritage Comments: No Heritage Planning concerns. Environmental Comments: No environmental planning concerns. RECOMMENDATION A. That Minor Variance Application A2020-001 requesting relief from Section 6.1.2 of the Zoning By-law to permit a 920 square metre building with 832 square metres of office and 88 square metres of restaurant to have a total of 31 parking spaces, whereas 33 are required, be approved. Richard Kelly-Ruetz, BES Planner Juliane von Westerholt, BES, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner Region of Waterloo January 03, 2020 Holly Dyson City of Kitchener 200 King Street West P.O. Box 1118 Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 Dear Ms. Dyson: File No.: D20-20/ VAR KIT GEN 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 Re: Committee of Adjustment Meeting on January 21, 2020, City of Kitchener Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have following comments: 1) A 2020-001 — 618 King Street West — No Concerns. 2) A 2020-002 — 149 Roxborough Avenue — No Concerns. However, the owner is advised that a future development application for the above property may require the dedication of a 7.62 metre daylight triangle at the northeast corner of the property. 3) A 2020-003 — 5 Manitou Drive — No Concerns. However, the owner is advised that a dwelling located within the property boundaries of the stationary source is not considered as a noise sensitive land use for the purposes of this application. 4) A 2020-004 — 30 Saddlebrook Court — No Concerns. 5) A 2020-005 — 196 grand Flats Trail — No Concerns. 6) A 2020-006 — 95 Crosswinds Drive — No Concerns. 7) A 2020-007 — 78 Valleybrook Drive — No Concerns. Please be advised that any development on the lands subject to the Applications noted above are subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 14-046 or any successor thereof and may require the 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 above. If a site is subject to more than one application, additional comments may apply. Document Number: 3186251 Page 1 of 2 Please forward any decision on the above mentioned application to the undersigned. Yours Truly, p� �-7- ` Joginder Bhatia Transportation Planner (519) 575-4500 Ext 3867 Grand River Conservation Authority 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Resource Management Division Cambridge, Ontario N 1 R 5W6 Andrew Herreman, Resource Planning Phone: (519) 621-2761 ext. 2228 Technician E-mail: aherreman@grand river. ca PLAN REVIEW REPORT: City of Kitchener Holly Dyson DATE: January 7, 2020 YOUR FILE: See below RE: Applications for Minor Variance: A 2019-103 581 Strasburg Road A 2019-108 41 Moore Avenue A 2020-001 618 King Street West A 2020-002 149 Roxborough Avenue A 2020-003 5 Manitou Drive A 2020-004 30 Saddlebrook Court A 2020-005 196 Grand Flats Trail A 2020-006 95 Crosswinds Drive A 2020-007 78 Valleybrook Drive 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 *These comments are respectfully submitted as advice and reflect resource concerns within the scope Page 1 of 1 and mandate of the Grand River Conservation Authority. Staff Report Dcvolopment Services Department K_R www.ki tch en er. c a REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: January 21, 2020 SUBMITTED BY: Juliane von Westerholt, Senior Planner - 519-741-2200 ext. 7157 PREPARED BY: Richard Kelly-Ruetz, Planner — 519-741-2200 ext. 7110 WARD: 9 DATE OF REPORT: January 10, 2020 REPORT #: DSD -20-012 SUBJECT: A2020-002 — 149 Roxborough Avenue Owner — Witold Wilczynski; Barbara Wilczynski Approve with Condition Location Map: 149 Roxborough Avenue REPORT Planning Comments: The subject property located at 149 Roxborough Avenue is zoned Residential Five (R-5) with Special Use Provision 327U in Zoning By-law 85-1 and designated Mixed Use in the City's Official Plan. In Zoning By-law 2019-051 (currently under appeal), the property is zoned Mixed Use Two (MIX -2) with Site Specific Regulation (62) and (98). The property contains a hair salon (Personal Services) use on a portion of the ground floor, and one dwelling unit. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Background In 2003, Council approved a Zoning By-law Amendment for the subject property permitting Personal Services within the existing building, which would otherwise not have been permitted by the R-5 zoning. The amendment was brought forward to facilitate the use of a hair salon on the property, which remains today. Over the last several years, the City's 2014 Official Plan and related Zoning By-law 2019-051 (currently under appeal) designated and zoned this section of Highland Road West mixed use. The City's vision for properties in this area are that they transition to a mix of residential and non-residential uses at a higher density (i.e. buildings of more than 3 stories in height). As a result, the implementing MIX -2 zoning from Zoning By-law 2019-051 (currently under appeal) introduces a range of zoning regulations to encourage mixed use development such as minimum densities, a range of permitted non-residential uses, minimum building heights, and various other new urban design regulations. In contrast, the existing residential zoning is focused on traditional residential uses and related zoning regulations (setbacks, parking, etc.). The current property owner(s), who reside in the dwelling and operate the hair salon use are proposing a rear yard addition to the residential portion of the dwelling. The addition would be a part of the dwelling unit on the property, and the existing hair salon would remain in its current location on the ground floor. Variances from Zoning By-law 85-1 and from Zoning By-law 2019-051 (currently under appeal) have been requested to facilitate the proposed addition. Location of proposed addition Variances from Zonina By-law 85-1 The applicant is requesting relief from Section 39.2.1 of Zoning By-law 85-1 to permit an addition to have a rear yard of 4.48 metres, whereas 7.5 metres is required. Variance from Zoning By-law 2019-051 (currently under appeal) As discussed, the `new' MIX -2 zoning on the property implements the Official Plan by introducing a range of new non-residential uses to the property and new zoning regulations to facilitate a denser, mixed use form. The applicant is proposing an addition to an existing mixed use building and as such, the totality of the building does not meet all the requirements of the MIX -2 zone. PARKING Sp ACE 7 - 4m x 5-5m (TYP.) EXISTING SRH ALT DRIVE I PARKING SPACE w TREE E%I$TING LANDSCAPING - - O O� I o pprax.locatian Jof hair salon h xlsnNc EEivice (ground floor) TREE = PRDP DSEU AOOITIDh1 EXISTING GARDEN (GRIXIND LEVEL) AREA -50m2 Location of proposed addition Variances from Zonina By-law 85-1 The applicant is requesting relief from Section 39.2.1 of Zoning By-law 85-1 to permit an addition to have a rear yard of 4.48 metres, whereas 7.5 metres is required. Variance from Zoning By-law 2019-051 (currently under appeal) As discussed, the `new' MIX -2 zoning on the property implements the Official Plan by introducing a range of new non-residential uses to the property and new zoning regulations to facilitate a denser, mixed use form. The applicant is proposing an addition to an existing mixed use building and as such, the totality of the building does not meet all the requirements of the MIX -2 zone. Therefore, the applicant is requesting the following relief from By-law 2019-051: 1. Section 8.3 to have a rear yard setback of 4.48 metres, whereas 7.5 metres is required; 2. Section 8.3 of to have a yard setback abutting a residential zone of 1.6 metres, whereas 7.5 metres is required; 3. Section 8.2(2) to have a permitted non-residential use that does not abut the entire length of the street line facade, whereas the zoning requires that the permitted non-residential use abuts the entire length of the street line facade; 4. Section 8.3 to have a building height of less than 11 metres, whereas a minimum building height of 11 metres is required; 5. Section 8.3 to have a floor space ratio of less than 0.6, whereas a minimum floor space ratio of 0.6 is required; 6. Section 8.3 to have a ground floor street line facade width as a percent of the width of the abutting street line of less than 50%, whereas a minimum of 50% is required for the Highland Road West frontage; 7. Section 8.3 to have a minimum percent street line facade opening of less than 50%, whereas a minimum of 50% is required for the Highland Road West and Roxborough Avenue frontages; 8. Section 5.9 g) to have 0 barrier -free parking spaces, whereas 1 is required; 9. Section 5.6 to have 0 Class A Bicycle Parking Stalls, whereas 1 is required; and, 10. Section 5.6 to have 0 Class B Bicycle Parking Stalls, whereas 3 are required. 149 Roxborough Avenue City Planning staff conducted a site inspection of the property on January 7, 2020. 10-4 ovL@ 11 \ .'� n Y U _ Lit AL 149 Roxborough Avenue City Planning staff conducted a site inspection of the property on January 7, 2020. 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 offers the following comments. 1. General Intent and Purpose of Official Plan Test The subject property is designated Mixed Use in the Official Plan. The intent of this designation is to achieve an appropriate mix of commercial, residential and institutional uses. The requested variances required to construct a residential addition meets the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan as the property is, and will continue to be mixed use, which is the Plan's vision for this area of the City. 2. General Intent and Purpose of Zoning By-law Test Zoning By-law 85-1 The purpose of a rear yard setback of 7.5 metres is to provide an outdoor amenity space, as well as adequate separation from neighbouring properties. The applicant intends to construct a one -storey sunroom. This will contribute to amenity space on the property. With regards to separation from adjacent properties, the addition abuts 2 properties. On each of these 2 properties, the lot line that the proposed addition abuts is a side lot line. A 4.48 metre setback from a side lot line is reasonable; many zones in the City permit a 1.2 metre side yard setback. Staff has no concerns with any negative impacts to adjacent properties. Therefore, the requested variance to permit a rear yard setback of 4.48 metres, whereas 7.5 metres is required, meets the general intent of the Zoning By-law. Zoning By-law 2019-051 (currently under appeal) As discussed, the applicant is requesting 10 variances from Zoning By-law 2019-051. This may seem significant for a minor variance request. However, as the following will analyse, the primary catalyst for this number of variances is the recent change to the City's land use planning framework which has begun to implement the City's long-term mixed use vision for this section of Highland Road West. On the whole, the variances are justified because it is an existing building, and the addition does not impede the City's long-term vision. The first requested variance from By-law 2019-051 is to have a rear yard setback of 4.48 metres, whereas 7.5 metres is required. The justification for this variance is the same as the analysis undertaken for Zoning By-law 85-1 above. For the same reasons, staff is satisfied that the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law is met. The second requested variance from By-law 2019-051 is to have a yard setback abutting a residential zone of 1.6 metres, whereas 7.5 metres is required. The intent of this regulation is to provide some separation between mixed use properties and residential properties. The area in question is highlighted below: Setback to adjacent residential / mixed use property pprox, location y i f hair salon1 (ground floor)°s"W° ``i{°E lTREE Fx.TFHt OP uw�faon EpstrrG cARUEN I AJXX DON (C�O ND i ► r A.34n2 J IT �aP _ I Setback to adjacent residential / mixed use property The adjacent property is also proposed to be zoned mixed use in the new Zoning By-law. As the adjacent property is currently residential, this variance is required. Once the new Zoning By-law is fully in effect, the adjacent property will be zoned mixed use. A 1.6 metre building setback from one mixed use property to another is reasonable and will maintain sufficient separation between both properties. As such, this variance meets the general intent and purpose of the By-law. Variances 3 through 7 are related to built -form regulations. The new MIX -2 zoning proposes a number of new `design oriented' regulations, such as minimum facade openings, minimum building heights, etc. The intent of these regulations is to implement the City's mixed use vision for this area. Variances 3 through 7 are as follows: 3. to have a permitted non-residential use that does not abut the entire length of the street line facade, whereas the zoning requires that the permitted non-residential use abuts the entire length of the street line facade; 4. to have a building height of less than 11 metres, whereas a minimum building height of 11 metres is required; 5. to have a floor space ratio of less than 0.6, whereas a minimum floor space ratio of 0.6 is required; 6. to have a ground floor street line facade width as a percent of the width of the abutting street line of less than 50%, whereas a minimum of 50% is required for the Highland Road West frontage; and, 7. to have a minimum percent street line facade opening of less than 50%, whereas a minimum of 50% is required for the Highland Road West and Roxborough Avenue frontages. Staff is satisfied that the intent of the Zoning By-law is met for variances 3 through 7, as a large portion of the building is existing, it is a residential addition, and the existing building is already a mixed use building which is in keeping with the City's long-term vision for this area. The residential addition does not impede said vision. Variances 8 through 10 from By-law 2019-51 are related to parking requirements. The variances are as follows: 8. to have 0 barrier -free parking spaces, whereas 1 is required; 9. to have 0 Class A Bicycle Parking Stalls, whereas 1 is required; and, 10. to have 0 Class B Bicycle Parking Stalls, whereas 3 are required. The intent of these three regulations is to provide sufficient parking options for non-residential uses. As previously discussed, the subject property received approval in 2003 to permit a personal services use on the ground floor. The applicant is currently proposing a residential addition; the extent and nature of the personal services (non-residential) use is unchanged. As such, staff does not believe it is reasonable to retroactively impose the above parking requirements for a use on a property that is not impacted by the proposed residential addition. Therefore, on account of the non-residential use being unchanged as a result of this application, staff is satisfied that the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law is met. Staff notes that a condition of approval will be added to this minor variance application to require the applicant to apply for a site plan application to recognize the parking layout for this site. This is because 1 parking space is being removed to make room for the proposed addition, and this space is one of -4 on the site which serve the commercial use. In summary, if the applicant was developing an undeveloped site, it is not likely that staff could support each of these variances; however, because this is an area planned to be in transition and the existing building is remaining, it is reasonable to permit an addition of this nature and facilitate this through the minor variance process. 8. "Minor" Test The variance can be considered minor as the residential addition will not present any significant impacts to adjacent properties or the overall neighbourhood. 9. Desirability for Appropriate Development or Use Test The requested variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land, as the residential addition to an existing mixed use building facilitates the continued existence of the residential use while maintaining the non-residential portion of the property. This area of Highland Road West is intended (long-term) to transition to a higher density, mixed use neighbourhood, and the proposed addition which will maintain the existing mixed use building is in keeping with these long-term objectives. Based on the foregoing, Planning staff recommends that this application be approved, with condition. Building Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance provided a building permit for the addition to the existing building is obtained prior to construction. Please contact the Building Division @ 519-741- 2433 with any questions. Transportation Services Comments: Transportation Services has no concerns with the proposed application. Heritage Comments: No Heritage Planning concerns. Environmental Comments: No natural heritage / environmental planning issues with any new construction (sunroom addition). However, the City street tree on Roxborough should be protected from any construction activities i storage of materials that might impact tree or its root structure. RECOMMENDATION A. That Minor Variance Application A2020-002 requesting: Relief from the following Section of Zoning By-law 85-1: Section 39.2.1 to permit a rear yard addition to have a rear yard setback of 4.48 metres, whereas 7.5 metres is required. Relief from the following Sections of Zoning By-law 2019-051 (currently under appeal): 1. Section 8.3 to have a rear yard setback of 4.48 metres, whereas 7.5 metres is required; 2. Section 8.3 of to have a yard setback abutting a residential zone of 1.6 metres, whereas 7.5 metres is required; 3. Section 8.2(2) to have a permitted non-residential use that does not abut the entire length of the street line fagade, whereas the zoning requires that the permitted non-residential use abuts the entire length of the street line fagade; 4. Section 8.3 to have a building height of less than 11 metres, whereas a minimum building height of 11 metres is required; 5. Section 8.3 to have a floor space ratio of less than 0.6, whereas a minimum floor space ratio of 0.6 is required; 6. Section 8.3 to have a ground floor street line fagade width as a percent of the width of the abutting street line of less than 50%, whereas a minimum of 50% is required for the Highland Road West frontage; 7. Section 8.3 to have a minimum percent street line fagade opening of less than 50%, whereas a minimum of 50% is required for the Highland Road West and Roxborough Avenue frontages; 8. Section 5.9 g) to have 0 barrier -free parking spaces, whereas 1 is required; 9. Section 5.6 to have 0 Class A Bicycle Parking Stalls, whereas 1 is required; and, 10. Section 5.6 to have 0 Class B Bicycle Parking Stalls, whereas 3 are required. Be approved, subject to the following: That the minor variances to Zoning By-law 2019-051 shall become effective only at such time as Zoning By-law 2019-051 comes into force, pursuant to Section 34 (30) of the Planning Act, R.S.S. 1990, c. P 13, as amended, and the variances shall be deemed to have come into force as of the date of this decision, And subject to the following condition: 1. That the owner apply for a Site Plan application to the satisfaction of the Manager of Site Development and Customer Service. Richard Kelly-Ruetz, BES Planner Juliane von Westerholt, BES, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner Region of Waterloo January 03, 2020 Holly Dyson City of Kitchener 200 King Street West P.O. Box 1118 Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 Dear Ms. Dyson: File No.: D20-20/ VAR KIT GEN 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 Re: Committee of Adjustment Meeting on January 21, 2020, City of Kitchener Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have following comments: 1) A 2020-001 — 618 King Street West — No Concerns. 2) A 2020-002 — 149 Roxborough Avenue — No Concerns. However, the owner is advised that a future development application for the above property may require the dedication of a 7.62 metre daylight triangle at the northeast corner of the property. 3) A 2020-003 — 5 Manitou Drive — No Concerns. However, the owner is advised that a dwelling located within the property boundaries of the stationary source is not considered as a noise sensitive land use for the purposes of this application. 4) A 2020-004 — 30 Saddlebrook Court — No Concerns. 5) A 2020-005 — 196 grand Flats Trail — No Concerns. 6) A 2020-006 — 95 Crosswinds Drive — No Concerns. 7) A 2020-007 — 78 Valleybrook Drive — No Concerns. Please be advised that any development on the lands subject to the Applications noted above are subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 14-046 or any successor thereof and may require the 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 above. If a site is subject to more than one application, additional comments may apply. Document Number: 3186251 Page 1 of 2 Please forward any decision on the above mentioned application to the undersigned. Yours Truly, p� �-7- ` Joginder Bhatia Transportation Planner (519) 575-4500 Ext 3867 Grand River Conservation Authority 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Resource Management Division Cambridge, Ontario N 1 R 5W6 Andrew Herreman, Resource Planning Phone: (519) 621-2761 ext. 2228 Technician E-mail: aherreman@grand river. ca PLAN REVIEW REPORT: City of Kitchener Holly Dyson DATE: January 7, 2020 YOUR FILE: See below RE: Applications for Minor Variance: A 2019-103 581 Strasburg Road A 2019-108 41 Moore Avenue A 2020-001 618 King Street West A 2020-002 149 Roxborough Avenue A 2020-003 5 Manitou Drive A 2020-004 30 Saddlebrook Court A 2020-005 196 Grand Flats Trail A 2020-006 95 Crosswinds Drive A 2020-007 78 Valleybrook Drive 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 *These comments are respectfully submitted as advice and reflect resource concerns within the scope Page 1 of 1 and mandate of the Grand River Conservation Authority. Staff Report wR Development Services Department wwwkltchener.ca REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: January 21, 2020 SUBMITTED BY: Juliane von Westerholt, Senior Planner - 519-741-2200 ext. 7157 PREPARED BY: Garett Stevenson, Senior Planner — 519-741-2200 ext. 7070 WARD: 3 DATE OF REPORT: January 10, 2020 REPORT NUMBER: DSD -20-013 SUBJECT: Application A2020-003 5 Manitou Drive Owner — 5 Manitou Drive Inc. Applicant — Scott Patterson, Patterson Planning Consultants Inc. Approve, with conditions t errs rr - •� '�,ri� ��� _ � row - at..AS e ` - ►n t ext - 1� r r 7115,�, Ft� ;, Subject Property Report: The property is currently development with a commercial building containing multiple commercial units. The applicant has requested relief from Section 13A.2 of the zoning by-law to permit no minimum gross floor area devoted to retail uses, whereas a minimum gross floor area of 1500 square metres is required for an individual outlet. The application also seeks to add "Dwelling Unit" as a Staff Report Development Services Department K"'""' NFR wwwki tchenr. ca permitted use in a mixed use building which contains at least one other non-residential use, and such dwelling unit would not be permitted on the ground floor, and the total floor area for all dwelling units shall not exceed a FSR of 2.0. A site inspection was conducted on January 10, 2020. Existing Building: 5 Manitou Drive Planning Comments: The property is identified as an Urban Corridor Intensification Area and designated as Commercial in the Official Plan. The lands are currently zoned as Commercial Campus Zone (C-8) with Special Regulation 297R (permits certain commercial uses to have a floor space of up to 5,550 square metres) and Special Use Provision 112U (permits two additional uses being Convenience Retail and Personal Services). 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 offers the following comments. 1. General Intent of the Official Plan Urban Corridors are generally linear in form and are located along existing or planned transit corridors. They are intended to have strong pedestrian linkages and be integrated with neighbouring residential and employment uses. The planned function of Urban Corridors is to provide for a range of retail and commercial uses and intensification opportunities that should be transit -supportive. Urban Corridors function as the spine of a community as well as a destination for surrounding neighbourhoods. Lands designated as Commercial are intended to provide for a range of retail and service commercial uses that cater primarily to the weekly and daily needs of residents within the surrounding neighbourhoods. Permitted uses on lands designated Commercial and identified as an Urban Corridor may include dwelling units, where appropriate, provided that they are located in the same building as compatible commercial uses and are not located on the ground floor. The total maximum Floor Space Ratio for the dwelling unit portion of a building is 2.0. Staff Report Development Services Department K"'""' NFR wwwki tchenr. ca The application also seeks to add "Dwelling Unit" as a permitted use in a mixed use building which contains at least one other non-residential use, and such dwelling unit would not be permitted on the ground floor, and the total floor area for all dwelling units shall not exceed a FSR of 2.0. The requested variances meet the general intent of the Official Plan. The Official Plan policies for this property, approved in 2014, have changed and are not reflected in the current zoning regulations that apply to this property. Official Plan policies applicable to these lands state that individual retail outlets, including food store outlets, will have no gross floor area restrictions. Additionally, dwelling units are now a permitted use in the Official Plan for these lands. For these reasons, Planning Staff is of the opinion that the general intent of the Official Plan is maintained. 2. General Intent of the Zoning By-law The intent of the minimum floor area for retail uses is to require the property to be used for retail uses, including larger retail uses. Existing uses on the property include smaller commercial and office uses that have an accessory retail component. There are also existing retail uses. Collectively, all of the existing uses, including retail and commercial and office uses with an accessory retail component, make up a large portion of the uses on the property. While there is not a single large retail use, combined there is a large portion of the building that is used for retail uses. The requested variance would permit smaller retail uses that are a similar scale to other uses on the property. Planning Staff is also of the opinion that the requested minor variance meets the general intent of the Zoning By-law. The floor space limitations and permitted uses (excluding residential uses) in the Commercial Campus Zone (C-8) were applied to properties prior to the 2014 Official Plan, which now includes a new Urban Structure which provides guidance on growth management and structure for the City's Urban Area. With the new direction on growth management in the Official Plan, retail and commercial floor area regulations are no longer applied in Zoning By-law 2019-051 (CRoZBy) for lands designated as Commercial within the Urban Corridor intensification area. However, the subject lands are not regulated by CRoZBy as they are adjacent to the Block Line and Fairway stations areas and will be further reviewed as part of a future station area planning exercise. As such, the current zoning of the property does not align with the Official Plan approved in 2014. In other locations in the City, outside of station area plan areas, lands that are identified as an Urban Corridor intensification area and designated as Commercial in the Official Plan, were zoned as General Commercial (COM -2) in CRoZBy. The requested variances align with the permitted uses and regulation in the new COM -2 zone, which will likely apply to these lands once they are rezoned. 3. Is the Variance Minor? The requested variances would permit new commercial uses and also allow for residential uses in mixed use buildings which are not on the ground floor, with a maximum residential FSR of 2.0. Planning Staff is of the opinion that the requested minor variances are minor and will permit the implementation of the 2014 Official Plan in advance of the full completion of the CRoZBy and station area planning projects. Staff Report Development Services Department 4. Is the Variance Appropriate? K"'""' NFR wwwki tchenr. ca Mixed use buildings, with a residential component, align with the planned function for the lands and Planning Staff is of the opinion that the variances are appropriate as they will help implement the long-term vision for these lands. Building Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance. Transportation Comments: Transportation Services has no concerns with the proposed application. Heritage Comments: Heritage Planning staff has reviewed the minor variance application and has no concerns. Engineering Comments: Engineering staff has no objections to the proposed variance. Engineering requirements will be satisfied through a future site plan approval process. Operations Comments: Operations staff has no objections to the proposed variances. Parkland dedication will be satisfied through the site plan approval process. Environmental Planning Comments: Environmental Planning staff has no objections to the proposed variance. RECOMMENDATION: I. That Application A2020-003, requesting relief from Section 13A.2 of the zoning by- law to permit no minimum gross floor area devoted to retail uses, whereas a minimum gross floor area of 1500 square metres is required for an individual outlet, be approved. II. That Application A2020-003, seeking to add "Dwelling Unit" as a permitted use, be approved subject to the following: A dwelling unit is permitted only within a mixed use building containing at least one other non-residential use, ii. A dwelling unit is not permitted on the ground floor of a building, and iii. The total maximum floor area for all dwelling units shall not exceed a FSR of 2.0. Garett Stevenson, B.E.S., MCIP, RPP Juliane von Westerholt, B.E.S., MCIP, RPP Senior Planner Senior Planner Region of Waterloo January 03, 2020 Holly Dyson City of Kitchener 200 King Street West P.O. Box 1118 Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 Dear Ms. Dyson: File No.: D20-20/ VAR KIT GEN 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 Re: Committee of Adjustment Meeting on January 21, 2020, City of Kitchener Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have following comments: 1) A 2020-001 — 618 King Street West — No Concerns. 2) A 2020-002 — 149 Roxborough Avenue — No Concerns. However, the owner is advised that a future development application for the above property may require the dedication of a 7.62 metre daylight triangle at the northeast corner of the property. 3) A 2020-003 — 5 Manitou Drive — No Concerns. However, the owner is advised that a dwelling located within the property boundaries of the stationary source is not considered as a noise sensitive land use for the purposes of this application. 4) A 2020-004 — 30 Saddlebrook Court — No Concerns. 5) A 2020-005 — 196 grand Flats Trail — No Concerns. 6) A 2020-006 — 95 Crosswinds Drive — No Concerns. 7) A 2020-007 — 78 Valleybrook Drive — No Concerns. Please be advised that any development on the lands subject to the Applications noted above are subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 14-046 or any successor thereof and may require the 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 above. If a site is subject to more than one application, additional comments may apply. Document Number: 3186251 Page 1 of 2 Please forward any decision on the above mentioned application to the undersigned. Yours Truly, p� �-7- ` Joginder Bhatia Transportation Planner (519) 575-4500 Ext 3867 Grand River Conservation Authority 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Resource Management Division Cambridge, Ontario N 1 R 5W6 Andrew Herreman, Resource Planning Phone: (519) 621-2761 ext. 2228 Technician E-mail: aherreman@grand river. ca PLAN REVIEW REPORT: City of Kitchener Holly Dyson DATE: January 7, 2020 YOUR FILE: See below RE: Applications for Minor Variance: A 2019-103 581 Strasburg Road A 2019-108 41 Moore Avenue A 2020-001 618 King Street West A 2020-002 149 Roxborough Avenue A 2020-003 5 Manitou Drive A 2020-004 30 Saddlebrook Court A 2020-005 196 Grand Flats Trail A 2020-006 95 Crosswinds Drive A 2020-007 78 Valleybrook Drive 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 *These comments are respectfully submitted as advice and reflect resource concerns within the scope Page 1 of 1 and mandate of the Grand River Conservation Authority. Staff Report Development Services Department wwwkitchener.ca REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: January 21, 2020 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: January 10, 2020 REPORT NUMBER: DSD -20-014 SUBJECT: Application A2020-004 30 Saddlebrook Court Owner — Freure Promontory Inc. Approve 0,-0 } 1� Subject Lands: 30 Saddlebrook Court TI V Staff Report Development Services Department K_x wwwkitchener. ca Photo: Subject lands (December 21, 2019) Report: The subject lands are designated Low Rise Residential in the City's Official Plan and zoned Residential Six Zone (R-6) in Zoning By-law 85-1 with Special Regulation Provision 698R. The owner has received Site Plan Approval in Principle for a 96 -unit townhouse development, subject to approval of the following minor variances: 1. To permit a maximum floor space ratio of 0.65 rather than 0.60; and 2. To permit a minimum of 142 parking spaces rather than 144. 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 offers the following comments. 1. Maximum Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 0.65 rather than 0.60 General Intent of the Official Plan: The Low Rise Residential designation accommodates a full range of low-density housing types including cluster townhouse dwellings and permits a floor space ratio of 0.6 and up to 0.75 where it is compatible. The applicant has indicated that all units are designed as two storey units, however, where basements allow for lookout or walkouts, the entire basement level is included in the FSR calculation, this has resulted in a calculation of 0.03 above the permitted FSR. Staff notes that the applicant is seeking an increase to 0.65 rather than 0.63 to provide for additional flexibility during construction. The proposed increase in FSR is very small and will generally not be perceivable as it permits additional walkouts and lookout and does not affect the street elevation. Staff is of the opinion that the built form is compatible with surrounding development and that the general intent of the Official Plan is maintained. Staff Report Development Services Department K"'""' NFR wwwki tchenr. ca General Intent of the Zoning By-law: The general intent of a floor space ratio is to ensure that a site is developed at a scale that is appropriate in the context of the surrounding neighbourhood. The proposed two-storey townhouses are low-rise, and dwellings will comply with maximum building heights and minimum setbacks. Staff notes that Special Regulation 698R imposes a maximum height of 9.65 for units near the existing house at 760 Huron Road, and the applicant has confirmed that all units will comply with height and setback regulations. The minor increase to FSR is due to grading conditions that allow for units to have lookout and walkout basements, which must be included in the FSR, however the resulting built form is compatible with surrounding development. Staff is of the opinion that the intent of the zoning by-law is maintained. Variance is Minor: Staff is of the opinion that the proposed 0.05 increase to the FSR is minor. This small increase is not visually perceptible and represents only about 500 m2 in a development having an overall GFA of 18,573m2. Variance is Appropriate: The proposed variance allows the developer to make good use of existing grading conditions, and allows additional light and access to basements. All units are designed as two storey units, and comply with setback and height restrictions and the overall development is compatible with surrounding land uses. Therefore, staff is of the opinion that the variance is appropriate. 2. Minimum of 142 parking spaces rather than 144: General Intent of the Official Plan: Official Plan policies support providing adequate parking for all developments. The applicant is proposing to reduce the number of required parking spaces from 144 to 142. While the by-law considers that 142 parking spaces are provided, each dwelling unit has been designed to include a single car garage as well as a single car driveway, thereby potentially accommodating two vehicles. However only one of these parking spaces is counted in parking calculations. While the driveway does not officially count towards the parking, in practice it does provide one additional parking space for each unit, and a few units (units 41 — 43) have double length driveways. Should residents use these non -official spaces, there are actually 241 spaces available rather than 142. Therefore, staff is of the opinion that the proposed development will provide adequate parking and that the general intent of the Official Plan is maintained. General Intent of the Zoning By-law: The intent of the parking regulations is to ensure an adequate amount of parking is provided. As discussed above, staff is of the opinion that the proposed development will provide adequate parking and that the general intent of the zoning by-law is maintained. Variance is Minor: The proposed reduction of two parking spaces is minimal, and while not officially counted, each unit has the possibility of accommodating parking for 2 (or more) vehicles in addition to the visitor parking dispersed throughout the site. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed parking reduction is minor. Staff Report Development Services Department K"'""' NFR wwwki tchenr. ca Variance is Appropriate: Through background studies for the CRoZBy project, detailed consideration was given to parking ratios for residential developments. Due to an increased priority being placed on transit and other alternative modes of transportation, staff is recommending an overall lower parking ratio than is currently required. While CRoZBy does not apply to the subject lands, staff is of the opinion that a lower parking rate overall is appropriate for residential developments. The site is located in a developing neighbourhood which has good access to transit routes, pedestrian and cycling infrastructure, schools, community spaces, and future commercial development, which will contribute to a community that is less reliant on the private automobile. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed variance is appropriate for the development and use of the lands. Building Comments: The Building Division has no objections. Transportation Comments: Transportation Services does not have any concerns with the proposed parking variance. Engineering Comments: Engineering has no concerns with the proposed severance. RECOMMENDATION: That Application A2020-004 requesting relief from section 40.2.6 of the Zoning By-law to permit a Floor Space Ratio of 0.65 whereas the Zoning By-law permits 0.60; and relief from section 6.1.2.a to permit a minimum of 142 parking spaces whereas 144 spaces are required be approved. Katie Anderl, B.E.S., MCIP, RPP Senior Planner Juliane von Westerholt, B.E.S., MCIP, RPP Senior Planner Region of Waterloo January 03, 2020 Holly Dyson City of Kitchener 200 King Street West P.O. Box 1118 Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 Dear Ms. Dyson: File No.: D20-20/ VAR KIT GEN 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 Re: Committee of Adjustment Meeting on January 21, 2020, City of Kitchener Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have following comments: 1) A 2020-001 — 618 King Street West — No Concerns. 2) A 2020-002 — 149 Roxborough Avenue — No Concerns. However, the owner is advised that a future development application for the above property may require the dedication of a 7.62 metre daylight triangle at the northeast corner of the property. 3) A 2020-003 — 5 Manitou Drive — No Concerns. However, the owner is advised that a dwelling located within the property boundaries of the stationary source is not considered as a noise sensitive land use for the purposes of this application. 4) A 2020-004 — 30 Saddlebrook Court — No Concerns. 5) A 2020-005 — 196 grand Flats Trail — No Concerns. 6) A 2020-006 — 95 Crosswinds Drive — No Concerns. 7) A 2020-007 — 78 Valleybrook Drive — No Concerns. Please be advised that any development on the lands subject to the Applications noted above are subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 14-046 or any successor thereof and may require the 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 above. If a site is subject to more than one application, additional comments may apply. Document Number: 3186251 Page 1 of 2 Please forward any decision on the above mentioned application to the undersigned. Yours Truly, p� �-7- ` Joginder Bhatia Transportation Planner (519) 575-4500 Ext 3867 Grand River Conservation Authority 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Resource Management Division Cambridge, Ontario N 1 R 5W6 Andrew Herreman, Resource Planning Phone: (519) 621-2761 ext. 2228 Technician E-mail: aherreman@grand river. ca PLAN REVIEW REPORT: City of Kitchener Holly Dyson DATE: January 7, 2020 YOUR FILE: See below RE: Applications for Minor Variance: A 2019-103 581 Strasburg Road A 2019-108 41 Moore Avenue A 2020-001 618 King Street West A 2020-002 149 Roxborough Avenue A 2020-003 5 Manitou Drive A 2020-004 30 Saddlebrook Court A 2020-005 196 Grand Flats Trail A 2020-006 95 Crosswinds Drive A 2020-007 78 Valleybrook Drive 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 *These comments are respectfully submitted as advice and reflect resource concerns within the scope Page 1 of 1 and mandate of the Grand River Conservation Authority. Staff Repod Development Services Department I KNxc Nr.R www.kitch en er. ca REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: January 21St, 2020 SUBMITTED BY: Juliane von Westerholt, Senior Planner - 519-741-2200 ext. 7157 PREPARED BY: Jenna Daum — Technical Assistant - 519-741-2200 ext.7760 WARD: DATE OF REPORT: REPORT #: SUBJECT: 2 January 13th, 2020 DSD -20-015 A 2020-005 — 196 Grand Flats Trail Owner — Fusion Homes Approve without Conditions ,,nad undue Y,..,- IF Gran" �1a'�s Tra Location Map: 196 Grand Flats Trail *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. REPORT Planning Comments: The subject property located at 196 Grand Flats Trail is zoned Residential Four (R-4) with special regulations 597R in Zoning By-law 85-1 and is designated Low Rise Residential in the Official Plan. City Planning staff conducted a site inspection of the property on January 10, 2020. The applicant is requesting relief from Section 6.1.1.1.b) iv) of the Zoning By-law to locate a driveway 7.85 metres from the intersection of street lines abutting the lot rather than the required setback of 9 metres. View from Grand Flats Trail 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 offers the following comments: General Intent of the Official Plan The subject property is designated Low Rise Residential in the Official Plan. The Residential designation in the Official Plan places emphasis on compatibility of building form with respect to massing, scale and design in order to support the successful integration of different housing types. It also places emphasis on the relationship of housing to adjacent buildings, streets and exterior areas. It is the opinion of staff that the requested variance is appropriate, and meets the general intent of the Official Plan. General Intent of the Zoning By-law The intent of the 9.0 metre setback is to ensure that vehicles entering and exiting a driveway near the intersection can do so safely. As a corner lot the location of the garage and driveway necessitated a slight variance. It is not anticipated that the proposed driveway will create an obstruction to visibility and not expected to result in any negative impacts on the adjacent residential properties. Therefore, the general intent of the Zoning Bylaw continues to be maintained. Minor The reduction in setback of 1.15 metres is a small reduction that can be considered minor as it is not expected to cause any obstructions in the Corner Visibility Triangle (CVT) and will continue to allow vehicles to safety ingress/egress the site. Appropriate and Desirable The requested variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land as the revised garage space may accommodate most personal passenger vehicles. Staff is of the opinion that the variance will cause no negative impacts on the surrounding properties within the neighbourhood. Based on the foregoing, Planning staff recommends that this application be approved. Building Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance. A revision to the original application will be required. Please contact the Building Division @ 519-741-2433 with any questions. Transportation Services Comments: Transportation Services has no concerns with the proposed distance from driveway to street corner intersection of 7.85m. RECOMMENDATION: That minor variance application A2020-005 requesting permission for a single detached dwelling under construction to have a driveway located 7.85m from the intersection of Grand Flats Trail and Rivertrail Avenue, whereas a setback of 9 metres is required be approved. Jenna Daum Juliane von Westerholt, BES, MCIP, RPP Technical Assistant (Planning and Zoning) Senior Planner Region of Waterloo January 03, 2020 Holly Dyson City of Kitchener 200 King Street West P.O. Box 1118 Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 Dear Ms. Dyson: File No.: D20-20/ VAR KIT GEN 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 Re: Committee of Adjustment Meeting on January 21, 2020, City of Kitchener Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have following comments: 1) A 2020-001 — 618 King Street West — No Concerns. 2) A 2020-002 — 149 Roxborough Avenue — No Concerns. However, the owner is advised that a future development application for the above property may require the dedication of a 7.62 metre daylight triangle at the northeast corner of the property. 3) A 2020-003 — 5 Manitou Drive — No Concerns. However, the owner is advised that a dwelling located within the property boundaries of the stationary source is not considered as a noise sensitive land use for the purposes of this application. 4) A 2020-004 — 30 Saddlebrook Court — No Concerns. 5) A 2020-005 — 196 grand Flats Trail — No Concerns. 6) A 2020-006 — 95 Crosswinds Drive — No Concerns. 7) A 2020-007 — 78 Valleybrook Drive — No Concerns. Please be advised that any development on the lands subject to the Applications noted above are subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 14-046 or any successor thereof and may require the 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 above. If a site is subject to more than one application, additional comments may apply. Document Number: 3186251 Page 1 of 2 Please forward any decision on the above mentioned application to the undersigned. Yours Truly, p� �-7- ` Joginder Bhatia Transportation Planner (519) 575-4500 Ext 3867 Grand River Conservation Authority 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Resource Management Division Cambridge, Ontario N 1 R 5W6 Andrew Herreman, Resource Planning Phone: (519) 621-2761 ext. 2228 Technician E-mail: aherreman@grand river. ca PLAN REVIEW REPORT: City of Kitchener Holly Dyson DATE: January 7, 2020 YOUR FILE: See below RE: Applications for Minor Variance: A 2019-103 581 Strasburg Road A 2019-108 41 Moore Avenue A 2020-001 618 King Street West A 2020-002 149 Roxborough Avenue A 2020-003 5 Manitou Drive A 2020-004 30 Saddlebrook Court A 2020-005 196 Grand Flats Trail A 2020-006 95 Crosswinds Drive A 2020-007 78 Valleybrook Drive 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 *These comments are respectfully submitted as advice and reflect resource concerns within the scope Page 1 of 1 and mandate of the Grand River Conservation Authority. Staff Repod Development Services Department I KNxc Nr.R www.kitch en er. ca REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: January 21, 2020 SUBMITTED BY: Juliane von Westerholt, Senior Planner - 519-741-2200 ext. 7157 PREPARED BY: Nicholas Godfrey, Technical Assistant— 519-741-2200 ext. 7071 WARD: 2 DATE OF REPORT: December 27th, 2019 REPORT #: DSD -20-016 SUBJECT: A2020-006 — 95 Crosswinds Dr. Applicant — Patrick Haramis (OLS) Property Owners - Milestone Developments Inc. Recommendation: Approve REPORT Planning Comments: The subject property located at 95 Crosswinds Drive is zoned Residential Four (R-4) with Special Regulation Provision 597R in Zoning By -Law 85-1 and designated Low Rise Residential in the City's 2014 Official Plan. The applicant is proposing to construct a single -detached dwelling and is requesting relief from Section 38.2.1 b) of the Zoning By-law to allow for a side yard setback of 1.25 metres, whereas 1.5 metres is required. Staff notes that the other side yard setback is permitted by the Zoning By-law to be between 0.0 and 0.2 metres and as such is proposed at 0.1 metres for the subject property. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. City Planning staff conducted a site inspection of the property on January 10th, 2020. 95 Crosswinds Drive 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. 1. Meets the General Intent of the Official Plan Test The subject property is designated Low Rise Residential in the City's 2014 Official Plan, which allows low density forms of housing such as single -detached dwellings. The requested variance is appropriate and would continue to maintain the low density character of the property and surrounding neighbourhood. The requested variance will not significantly change the existing conditions and it is the opinion of staff that the variation is appropriate, and meets the general intent of the Official Plan. 2. General Intent and Purpose of Zoning By-law Test The requested variance to have a side yard setback of 1.25 metres rather than the required 1.5 metres meets the general intent of the Zoning By-law. The intent of the 1.5 metre side yard setback is to allow for sufficient separation from neighbouring properties, maintenance of side walls/eaves, and access to the rear yard in cases where the other side yard has a setback between 0.0 to 0.2 metres, which is the case for the proposed dwelling on the subject property. Staff notes that the standard side yard setback is 1.2 metres, and the proposed 1.25 metre setback exceeds this. As such, it is the opinion of staff that the 0.25 metre variance meets the general intent of the Zoning By- law. '®>I N77'34'25'W 10.5}2 A' Property Survey Setbacks 3. Is the Variance "Minor" Test Staff is of the opinion that requested variance is minor as the approval of a reduced side yard setback will not cause any significant impacts to the subject property or surrounding neighbourhood. 4. Is the Variance Appropriate Test The requested variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land, as the proposed single detached dwelling is consistent with the low density development of the neighbourhood. Based on the foregoing, Planning staff recommends that this application be approved. Building Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance provided a building permit for the new single detached dwelling is obtained prior to construction. Please contact the Building Division @ 519-741-2433 with any questions. Transportation Services Comments: Transportation Services has no concerns with the proposed application. Engineering Comments: Engineering has no concerns with the proposed application. RECOMMENDATION That Minor Variance Application A2020-006 requesting to relief from Zoning By-law 85-1 Section 38.2.1 b) to allow a side -yard setback of 1.25 metres rather than the required 1.5 metres be approved. Nicholas Godfrey, MA Juliane von Westerholt, MCIP, RPP Technical Assistant (Planning & Zoning) Senior Planner Region of Waterloo January 03, 2020 Holly Dyson City of Kitchener 200 King Street West P.O. Box 1118 Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 Dear Ms. Dyson: File No.: D20-20/ VAR KIT GEN 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 Re: Committee of Adjustment Meeting on January 21, 2020, City of Kitchener Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have following comments: 1) A 2020-001 — 618 King Street West — No Concerns. 2) A 2020-002 — 149 Roxborough Avenue — No Concerns. However, the owner is advised that a future development application for the above property may require the dedication of a 7.62 metre daylight triangle at the northeast corner of the property. 3) A 2020-003 — 5 Manitou Drive — No Concerns. However, the owner is advised that a dwelling located within the property boundaries of the stationary source is not considered as a noise sensitive land use for the purposes of this application. 4) A 2020-004 — 30 Saddlebrook Court — No Concerns. 5) A 2020-005 — 196 grand Flats Trail — No Concerns. 6) A 2020-006 — 95 Crosswinds Drive — No Concerns. 7) A 2020-007 — 78 Valleybrook Drive — No Concerns. Please be advised that any development on the lands subject to the Applications noted above are subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 14-046 or any successor thereof and may require the 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 above. If a site is subject to more than one application, additional comments may apply. Document Number: 3186251 Page 1 of 2 Please forward any decision on the above mentioned application to the undersigned. Yours Truly, p� �-7- ` Joginder Bhatia Transportation Planner (519) 575-4500 Ext 3867 Grand River Conservation Authority 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Resource Management Division Cambridge, Ontario N 1 R 5W6 Andrew Herreman, Resource Planning Phone: (519) 621-2761 ext. 2228 Technician E-mail: aherreman@grand river. ca PLAN REVIEW REPORT: City of Kitchener Holly Dyson DATE: January 7, 2020 YOUR FILE: See below RE: Applications for Minor Variance: A 2019-103 581 Strasburg Road A 2019-108 41 Moore Avenue A 2020-001 618 King Street West A 2020-002 149 Roxborough Avenue A 2020-003 5 Manitou Drive A 2020-004 30 Saddlebrook Court A 2020-005 196 Grand Flats Trail A 2020-006 95 Crosswinds Drive A 2020-007 78 Valleybrook Drive 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 *These comments are respectfully submitted as advice and reflect resource concerns within the scope Page 1 of 1 and mandate of the Grand River Conservation Authority. Staff Report Development Services Department REPORT TO: DATE OF MEETING SUBMITTED BY: PREPARED BY: WARD: DATE OF REPORT: REPORT #: SUBJECT: 1 w_R www.ki tch en er. c a Committee of Adjustment January 21, 2020 Juliane von Westerholt, Senior Planner - 519-741-2200 ext. 7157 Nicholas Godfrey, Technical Assistant— 519-741-2200 ext. 7071 2 December 27, 2019 DSD -20-017 A2020-007— 78 Valleybrook Drive Applicant — Patrick Haramis (OLS) Property Owner - Milestone Developments Inc. Racnmmanrla+inn• Onnmva Location Map: 78 Valleybrook Drive REPORT Planning Comments: The subject property located at 78 Valleybrook Drive is zoned Residential Four (R-4) with Special Regulation Provision 597R in Zoning By -Law 85-1 and designated Low Rise Residential in the City's 2014 Official Plan. The applicant is proposing to construct a single -detached dwelling and is requesting relief from Section 38.2.1 b) of the Zoning By-law to allow for a side yard setback of 0.82 metres, whereas 1.2 metres is required. Staff notes that the other side yard setback for the proposed property is 1.55 metres. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. City Planning staff conducted a site inspection of the property on January 10th, 2020. 78 Valleybrook Drive 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. 1. Meets the General Intent of the Official Plan Test The subject property is designated Low Rise Residential in both the City's 2014 Official Plan, which allows low density forms of housing such as single -detached dwellings. The requested variance is appropriate and would continue to maintain the low density character of the property and surrounding neighbourhood. The requested variance will not significantly change the existing conditions and it is the opinion of staff that the variance is appropriate, and meet the general intent of the Official Plan. 2. General Intent and Purpose of Zoning By-law Test The requested variance to have a side yard setback of 0.82 metres rather than the required 1.20 metres meets the general intent of the Zoning By-law. The intent of the 1.2 metre side yard setback is to allow for sufficient separation from neighbouring properties, maintenance of side walls/eaves, and access to the rear yard in cases where the other side yard has a setback between 0.0 to 0.2 metres. Staff notes that the standard side yard setback is 1.2 metres, and the proposed 1.55 metre setback on the opposite side exceeds this. As such, it is the opinion of staff that the 0.38 metre variance meets the general intent of the Zoning By-law. iw. I L_H I 11 1w X11 -3Lid fell — — 1 IL Ii c a I 11 _31C IL 11 __� 11 - 1 1 I 11 H[ IN 11 !l i..i 1 II v 0 +s = J I IF i 'L A —1 I II — IN IN I I. w — I 11 T L 11 11 1 -- k, 1 -n I 11 - d _ 11 Uo l 11 11 'WA .0 Y LI it 1 I 1- 1� i 1i 9l A r- i LI Ii IL 1 1 II 10 6_l v H Property Survey: 0.82 metre setback 3. Is the Variance "Minor" Test Staff is of the opinion that requested variance is minor as the approval of a reduced side yard setback will not cause any significant impacts to the subject property or surrounding neighbourhood. 4. Is the Variance Appropriate Test The requested variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land, as the proposed single detached dwelling is consistent with the low density development of the neighbourhood. Based on the foregoing, Planning staff recommends that this application be approved. Building Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance provided a building permit for the new single detached dwelling is obtained prior to construction. Please contact the Building Division @ 519-741-2433 with any questions. Transportation Services Comments: Transportation Services has no concerns with the proposed application. Engineering Comments: Engineering has no concerns with the proposed application. RECOMMENDATION That Minor Variance Application A2020-007 requesting to relief from Zoning By-law 85-1 Section 38.2.1 b) to allow a side -yard setback of 0.82 metres rather than the required 1.2 metres be approved. Nicholas Godfrey, MA Juliane von Westerholt, MCIP, RPP Technical Assistant (Planning & Zoning) Senior Planner Region of Waterloo January 03, 2020 Holly Dyson City of Kitchener 200 King Street West P.O. Box 1118 Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 Dear Ms. Dyson: File No.: D20-20/ VAR KIT GEN 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 Re: Committee of Adjustment Meeting on January 21, 2020, City of Kitchener Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have following comments: 1) A 2020-001 — 618 King Street West — No Concerns. 2) A 2020-002 — 149 Roxborough Avenue — No Concerns. However, the owner is advised that a future development application for the above property may require the dedication of a 7.62 metre daylight triangle at the northeast corner of the property. 3) A 2020-003 — 5 Manitou Drive — No Concerns. However, the owner is advised that a dwelling located within the property boundaries of the stationary source is not considered as a noise sensitive land use for the purposes of this application. 4) A 2020-004 — 30 Saddlebrook Court — No Concerns. 5) A 2020-005 — 196 grand Flats Trail — No Concerns. 6) A 2020-006 — 95 Crosswinds Drive — No Concerns. 7) A 2020-007 — 78 Valleybrook Drive — No Concerns. Please be advised that any development on the lands subject to the Applications noted above are subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 14-046 or any successor thereof and may require the 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 above. If a site is subject to more than one application, additional comments may apply. Document Number: 3186251 Page 1 of 2 Please forward any decision on the above mentioned application to the undersigned. Yours Truly, p� �-7- ` Joginder Bhatia Transportation Planner (519) 575-4500 Ext 3867 Grand River Conservation Authority 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Resource Management Division Cambridge, Ontario N 1 R 5W6 Andrew Herreman, Resource Planning Phone: (519) 621-2761 ext. 2228 Technician E-mail: aherreman@grand river. ca PLAN REVIEW REPORT: City of Kitchener Holly Dyson DATE: January 7, 2020 YOUR FILE: See below RE: Applications for Minor Variance: A 2019-103 581 Strasburg Road A 2019-108 41 Moore Avenue A 2020-001 618 King Street West A 2020-002 149 Roxborough Avenue A 2020-003 5 Manitou Drive A 2020-004 30 Saddlebrook Court A 2020-005 196 Grand Flats Trail A 2020-006 95 Crosswinds Drive A 2020-007 78 Valleybrook Drive 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 *These comments are respectfully submitted as advice and reflect resource concerns within the scope Page 1 of 1 and mandate of the Grand River Conservation Authority. Staff Report Deveiopment Services Department 1 R www.ki tch en er. c a REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: January 21, 2020 SUBMITTED BY: Juliane von Westerholt, Senior Planner — 519-741-2200 ext. 7157 PREPARED BY: Andrew Pinnell, Senior Planner — 519-741-2200 ex. 7668 WARD: 5 DATE OF REPORT: January 14, 2020 REPORT #: DSD -20-019 SUBJECT: B2020-001 - B2020-004 — 1250, 1270, & 1314 Fischer -Hallman Road Owners — WAM Fischer -Hallman G.P. Inc. Defer REPORT Planning Comments: Site Location and Context: The subject property is located on the east side of Fischer -Hallman Road, at the northern gateway to the Rosenberg Secondary Plan Area. The property does not contain any buildings. The property is composed of 3 formerly individual properties that have been consolidated. Although the property has three separate addresses, the property is now one lot. The owner / applicant, WAM Fischer -Hallman GP Inc. (also known as One Properties), assembled the three properties in order to develop them comprehensively. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. The subject lands are adjacent to the main branch of Strasburg Creek and the Strasburg Creek Provincially Significant Wetland Complex (PSW). The lands on the west side of Fischer -Hallman Road are designated High Density Residential within the Rosenberg Secondary Plan and are mostly undeveloped. Huron Business Park is located to the northeast and contains a range of uses, including industrial, office, and religious institution. Planning staff visited the site on January 2, 2020. Zoning By-law Amendment and Appeal In 2016, the Owner submitted a zoning by-law amendment (ZBA) to change the zoning of the property from Business Park zones to several variations of the Medium Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU - 2). In addition, the ZBA sought to rezone lands with environmental significance, by protecting them with Hazard Land zoning (P-3) for their conservation. This change would bring the zoning into conformity with the Mixed Use Two Official Plan designation of the Rosenberg Secondary Plan. The main purpose of the ZBA was to allow the development of the lands with a mixed-use development concept, to be implemented through a site plan approval process. The development concept features the following: • First Phase (centre of site): Development of approximately 7,300 square metres (80,000 sq.ft.) of commercial floor area, including a 3,340 square metre (36,000 sq.ft.) food store and several attached non-food retail units, and 3 stand-alone commercial buildings with multiple tenants in each. • Second Phase (south end of site): Development of three 10-12 storey apartment buildings comprising 418 total dwelling units with both underground and structured parking. • Third Phase (north end of site): Development of a 6-10 storey mixed-use building (office/retail and residential) at the north end of the site that will be oriented to both the Fischer -Hallman and Bleams frontages. In September 2018, City Council approved the ZBA. However, in October 2018, the ZBA was appealed to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT) by a nearby developer. A hearing was held in August 2019 and a decision from LPAT is currently pending. Site Plan Application In July 2018, the owner submitted a Site Plan Application (SP) for the first phase of development, as described above (Site Plan Application SP18/083/F/AP). The SP also includes development of private roads into the site from Bleams Road and Fischer -Hallman Road. The site plan has evolved positively through the application review, though it remains under review (approval in principle has not yet been granted) pending resolution of certain technical matters, most notably the design for the access at the south end of the site, and how this may impact building locations. The Application (Consent Application) At this time the owner is requesting approval of the subject consent application in order to assist in implementing the above noted vision for the site. The subject consent application would divide the property into 4 lots, thereby allowing other developers to purchase and develop different areas of the property. The subject consent application requests both the creation of lots and the establishment of easements for common features, as follows: 1. Creation of Lots Note: the below lot Lot Lot Area in Lot Frontage Existing Use Proposed numbers correspond Type Hectares (B = Bleams; 2 Use to the lots shown on Access 3 F = Fischer - Easement 4 Stormwater the severance sketch 1 and 3 Easement 5 Hallman 3 1 and 2 Lot 1 Severed 0.794 74.5 (B) Vacant Residential / 1 2 and 3 Easement 8 Servicing 2 Commercial Lot 2 Retained 3.195 207.4 F Vacant Commercial Lot 3 Severed 1.903 39.3 (F) Vacant Residential Lot 4 Severed 0.792 11.3 (F) Vacant Natural Heritage Conservation 2. Establishment of Specific Easements Note: the below easement numbers do not correspond to the severance sketch, and are provided for identification purposes only. These specific easements will be defined at a later date, via approval conditions Easement Purpose Servient Lot (i.e., the lot that is subject to the easement) Dominant Lot(s) (i.e., the lot that benefits from the easement) Easement 1 Access 1 2 and 3 Easement 2 Access 2 1 and 3 Easement 3 Access 3 1 and 2 Easement 4 Stormwater 2 1 and 3 Easement 5 Stormwater 3 1 and 2 Easement 6 Stormwater 4 1, 2, and 3 Easement 7 Servicing 1 2 and 3 Easement 8 Servicing 2 1 and 3 Easement 9 Servicing 3 1 and 2 Note that although specific easements are requested, these are to be defined as approval conditions, at a later date, rather than as part of the present application review. Specific easements are necessary because the property, as a whole, when developed, is proposed to function as a unit with common facilities and services. Establishing specific easements will ensure that when the site is divided into 4 lots, the site continues to function as a unit, despite separate ownership of the lots. Region of Waterloo's Request for Deferral The Region provided comments on January 10, 2020, requesting deferral of the applications for one month, in order to allow Region staff additional time to review the subject applications in further detail, and consult with the owner/applicant and City staff, to outline approval conditions (see below Region comments). City Planning staff is amenable to Region's request for a deferral and, subsequently, is recommending that the application be deferred to the February 18, 2020 Committee of Adjustment meeting. Region of Waterloo Comments: Regional Staff, in consultation with the City of Kitchener, are requesting a deferral of the subject applications for one month. This deferral is to allow Regional Staff additional time to review the subject applications in further detail and consult with the owner/applicant and City Staff to outline conditions of final approval. Regional Staff require additional time to address concerns related to the proposed access roundabout at Fischer -Hallman, site servicing for the subject lands and other relevant matters. Regional Staff request deferral of the subject applications. RECOMMENDATION A. That Consent Application B2020-001 requesting consent to: a. create a new lot (i.e., Lot 1) with a lot width of approximately 74.5 metres along Bleams Road and an area of approximately 0.8 hectares, and b. create easements over Lot 1, be deferred to the February 18, 2020 Committee of Adiustment meeting. B. That Consent Application B2020-002 requesting consent to: a. create easements over the retained lot (i.e., Lot 2), be deferred to the February 18, 2020 Committee of Adiustment meeting. C. That Consent Application B2020-003 requesting consent to: a. create a new lot (i.e., Lot 3) with a lot width of approximately 39.3 metres along Fischer - Hallman Road and an area of approximately 1.9 hectares, and b. create easements over Lot 3, be deferred to the February 18, 2020 Committee of Adiustment meeting. D. That Consent Application B2020-004 requesting consent to: a. create a new lot (i.e., Lot 4) with a lot width of approximately 11.3 metres along Fischer - Hallman Road and an area of approximately 0.8 hectares, and b. create easements over Lot 4, be deferred to the February 18, 2020 Committee of Adiustment meeting. Andrew Pinnell, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner Juliane von Westerholt, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner Attachments: • Consent Sketch submitted with application form Consent Sketch submitted with application form `°r 4 Mp PAWL F CONSENT SKETCH CI F KIT�CHENEIR 1171 1250, 1270, AND 1314 FISCHER HALLMAN ROAD wAM FISCHER HALLMAN G.P. . W w e,,r,&Us fuW --------------------- ;,•=„� ----- ----- _ r LANDS: TOO BE SEVERED -441 t o r s ! LOT 1 . llwW.A 1 -DECISIONS #1 and #4 r� car r 40.794ha I-1.962ac e 1 LW i�~Rutr OF LOT s RFOISIRFR'S PLAN Pi 1471 CITY OF KITCHENER ! a 1 RgeRl rAiNIR 4 el�W :i 1 ; eCrw �Po v swaiaRv rarmm�e PRAF Region of Waterloo Holly Dyson Committee of Adjustment City of Kitchener P.O. Box 1118 200 King Street East Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES Community Planning 150 Frederick Street 8th Floor Kitchener Ontario N2G 4A Canada Telephone: 519-575-4400 TTY: 519-575-4608 Fax: 519-575-4466 www. reg i o nofwate rl oo. ca Matthew Colley 575-4757 ext. 3210 D20-20/19 KIT January 10, 2020 Re: Comments for Consent Application B2019-074 to 62019- 075 and B2020-001 through B2020-004 Committee of Adjustment Hearing January 21, 2020 CITY OF KITCHENER B2019-074 and B2019-075 32 Forwell Road Gatekey Aggregates Inc. c/o Justin Bischoff The owner/applicant is proposing two severances from 32 Forwell Road to be added as lot additions to existing abutting lots at 80-88 Centennial Road and 20 & 36 Centennial Road. Regional staff have no objection to the subject applications. B2020-001 to B2020-004 1250, 1270 and 1314 Fischer Hallman Road WAM Fischer -Hallman GP Inc. / One Properties The owner/applicant is proposing consent applications to sever three parcels of land, retaining one parcel, and to facilitate easements over the parcels for access, stormwater and servicing. The subject lands are located at the southeast corner of Fischer Hallman Road and Bleams Road and are subject to Site Plan Approval application SP18/083/F/AP and recently received Council approval to re -zone the lands to a site-specific "Mixed -Use Two" zone with special use regulations. The Zoning By-law Amendment application has been appealed and is currently proceeding through the LPAT process. Document Number: 3190214 Version: 1 Regional Comments: Regional Staff, in consultation with the City of Kitchener, are requesting a deferral of the subject applications for one month. This deferral is to allow Regional Staff additional time to review the subject applications in further detail and consult with the owner/applicant and City Staff to outline conditions of final approval. Regional Staff require additional time to address concerns related to the proposed access roundabout at Fischer -Hallman, site servicing for the subject lands and other relevant matters. Regional Staff request deferral of the subject applications General Comments Any future development on the lands subject to the above -noted consent application(s) will be subject to the provisions of Regional Development Charge By-law 19-037 or any successor thereof. Please accept this letter as our request for a copy of the staff reports, decisions and minutes pertaining to each of the consent applications noted above. Should you require Regional Staff to be in attendance at the meeting or have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Yours truly, Matthew Colley Planner Document Number: 3190214 Version: 1 Grand River Conservation Authority 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Resource Management Division Cambridge, Ontario N1 R 5W6 Melissa Larion, Supervisor of Resource Phone: (519) 621-2761 ext. 2247 Planning Fax: (519) 621-4945 E-mail: mlarion@grand river.ca PLAN REVIEW REPORT: City of Kitchener Holly Dyson DATE: January 9, 2019 YOUR FILE: B 2020-001 to B2020-004 GRCA FILE: B 2020-001 to B2020-004 RE: Applications for Consent B2020-001 to B2020-004 1250, 1270 and 1314 Fischer Hallman Road WAM Fischer -Hallman GP Inc./One Properties GRCA COMMENT: The Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) has no objection to the approval of the consent applications. BACKGROUND: 1. Resource Issues Information currently available at this office indicates that the subject lands contain erosion hazard and its associated allowance as well as the allowance to a wetland located on an adjacent property. A copy of our resource mapping is attached for your reference. 2. Legislative/Policy Requirements and Implications Due to the presence of the resource features noted above, a portion of the property is regulated by the GRCA under Ontario Regulation 150/06 — Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses Regulation. Any future development on within the regulated area will require the prior issuance of a GRCA permit pursuant to Ontario Regulation 150/06. The permit process involves the submission of a permit application to this office, the review of the application by Authority staff and the subsequent approval/refusal of the permit application by the GRCA. As part of a recent permit approval (GRCA Permit 514/19), GRCA reviewed both a satisfactory Environmental Impact Study and a geotechnical analysis which identified the stable top of slope and a 6 metre access allowance. The Consent Sketch (prepared by Speight, Van Nostrand and Gibson Ltd.) is consistent with the approved geotechnical analysis in that Lot 4 contains all of the erosion hazard, the 6 metre access allowance and the regulated area to the wetland. It is our understanding that Lot 4 will not be developed and zoned as "Natural Heritage Conservation". Only Lots 1 to 3 will be permitted to be developed. As noted previously, any future development will need to conform to the Alder Creek Watershed Study and Upper Strasburg Creek Subwatershed Plan. Page 1 of 2 3. Plan Review Fees These consent applications were reviewed together and will only require one plan review fee. The applicable plan review fee is the minor consent application review fee of $420.00, which the applicant will be invoiced by copy of this correspondence. We trust this information is of assistance. If you have any questions or require additional information please contact the undersigned. Sincerely, Melissa Larion, MA, MCIP, RPP Supervisor of Resource Planning Grand River Conservation Authority Encl. cc: WAM Fischer -Hallman G.P. Inc. c/o J. Marshall — Suite 2710, 333 Bay Street, Toronto, ON M5H 2R2 Mathew Campbell, Zelinka Priamo Ltd. (email) Andrew Pinnell, City of Kitchener (email) * These comments are respectfully submitted as advice and reflect resource concerns within the scope and mandate of the Grand River Conservation Authority. Page 2 of 2 ON m Z m n O ON 0 _ LL U Q o� 0. 0 0 E -6 >Q m O L Q 3oE-vv`on N fl�0 uj O U U 6 o~�rE vm� m N — o ° m (� t -_ C CU D m a C� o �° Q C� �_ ami mF `� a s ocu O N Q .� Q -o a� w -o m v r y m m () m o Q Q � Q o `o o n A E '�' v=3Ib02 J (D E d C) N L N u L y w `.' v N r (7 C� m o C7 o w cn m w W - o - C O w o a-°i a-°i E ` '� CD Qin Q in .( .( .( .(D Q g Y ` - o = A O p m m m° �? °' n Q Q' ao °� ao 4 o w` w` w` w` N Q u o A - U p co o) o) m S w w Q U) n O n o O F(D(D(D o a o .`__ Y Y Y Y v J J J J d C14 06N m N N Z 10 DD DD n ��v_oa a��a m Ln ° v LLE av 0. vv U uUS v F v Z r b'.Apw ♦ � 1 7 � O ° ��• 0 Ls- u o r s Tphs•9'J�LE ORFS O- V � O Z yJj CSP.., U