Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDSD-20-012 - A 2020-002 - 149 Roxborough AveStaff 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.