The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutDSD-20-116 - A 2020-052 - 261 Woodbine AveREPORT TO:Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING:September 15, 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:5 DATE OF REPORT:September 3, 2020 REPORT #:DSD-20-116 SUBJECT:A2020-052–261 Woodbine Avenue Owner –Activa Holdings Applicant –Pierre Chauvin / Rachel Demmers (MHBC Planning) Approve Location Map: 261 Woodbine Ave REPORT Planning Comments: The subject property located at 261 Woodbine Avenueis zoned Residential Six(R-6)in Zoning By-law 85-1 and designated Low Rise Residential inthe City’s Official Plan.The subject property has received Approval in Principle (AIP) for a site plan with an 86-unit Multiple Dwelling. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. To accommodate the grading on the property and the configuration of the parking, the following variances are required: -Relief from Section 40.2.6 of the Zoning By-law to allow for a maximum building height of 11.3 metres for a Multiple Dwelling, rather than the required 10.5 metres; -Relief from the definition of‘Building Height’ in Section 4of the Zoning By-law to allow the vertical distance between the lowest finished grade and the uppermost point of the building to be 120% of the maximum building height rather than 110%; and, -Relief from Section 6.1.1.1 d) i) of the Zoning By-law to allow for the required parking not designated for visitor use to be located between the façade and the front lot line, whereas this is otherwise not permitted. Planning staff conducted a site inspection on September 2, 2020 Background on parking space location in front yard In the Zoning By-law, regular parking spaces (excludingvisitor) are not permitted to locate in the front yard of a lot, which is the space between the building and the front lot line. As shown on the site plan below, the subject property is proposed to have 4 regular parking spaces located in the ‘front yard’. Proposed Site Plan –the 4 parking spaces located in ‘front yard’ requiring a variance are highlighted.The other two variances relate to building height, resulting partially from steeper grades around units 7-70 (sloping down towards rear). Background on building height calculation In the Zoning By-law,building height is calculated from the highest point of finished grade around a building to the peak of the building. For example, if the maximum building height in a zone is 10.5 metres, that is the maximum distance that could be between the highestpoint of grade around a building to the peak of the building. To account for grade changes on a property, the Zoning By-law allows the distance between the lowest point of grade around the building and the peak of the building to be up to 110% of the maximum building height allowed in the zone. For example, if the maximum height allowed in a zone is 10.5 metres, the maximum height between the lowest point of grade and the peak of the roof could be 110% of that, or 11.55 metres. With respect to building height on the subject property, two variances are required. These variances are partially required because of slopes on the property, notably the 4 buildings containing units 7-70 on the site plan above. The first variance is to increase the overall building height in the zone (from highest point of grade) to 11.3 metres rather than the required 10.5 metres. Once 11.3 metres is established as the maximum building height in the zone, the second variance is requestingthat the distance from the lowest pointof grade to the peak of the roof be 120%of 11.3 metres, rather than 110%. In summary, with the requested variance, the maximum height from highest point of grade to peak of the roof would be 11.3 metres. The maximum height from lowestpoint of grade to peak of the roof will be 120% of the 11.3 metre maximum building height, which would be 13.56 metres. The table below summarizes the building height statistics. % from Lowest Finished Grade to Building Height from Building Height From Maximum Building Height of 11.3m Highest Finished GradeLowest Finished Grade requested through variance Building 210.9613.31118% Building 311.3013.42119% Building 411.0013.31118% Building 511.0813.54120% Building 610.4811.2099% Both variances are highlighted above. Buildings 2-6 comprise of units 7-86 shown on site plan. 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 offersthe following comments. 1.General Intent and Purpose of Official Plan Test The subject property is designated Low Rise Residential in the Official Plan. The intent of this designation is to encourage a range of different forms of housing to achieve a low density neighbourhood. The requested variances to accommodate the location of parking spaces in the front yard andtoincrease the maximum building heightare appropriate,as the development willmaintain the general intent and purpose of the Official Planwhich is a low-density residential development for this property.With respect to the building height, staff notes that the Official Plan allows for additional building height to be requested where there are steeper grades, which is the case for the subject property, as noted above. 2.General Intent and Purpose of Zoning By-law Test The requested variance to allow 4 regular parking spaces to locate in the front yard, whereas regular parking spaces are required to locate behind the façade of the principal building, meets the general intent of the Zoning By-law. The purpose of the By-law regulation requiring regular parking spaces to locate behind the face of the building is to shield parking spaces from the street. For the subject property, the 4 spaces are ‘tucked-in’ behind lots for single detached dwellings and will not be visible from the street (Woodbine Avenue). Staff is satisfied that the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law is met. The requested variance to increase the maximum building height in the zone to 11.3 metres rather than 10.5 metres, and to allow the maximum distance between the lowest point of grade and the peak of the roof to be 120% ofthe maximum building height rather than 110%, meets the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. The purpose of both of these regulations is to ensure that buildings are not ‘too tall’ for the low-rise residential zone from all sides of the building. Given some steeper grades on the subject property, the variances have been requested to accommodate these grades. Staff has no concerns with the request and is satisfied that the height of the building is appropriate for the zone and for the subject property. The tallest portions of the building will face the rear of the property which abuts a natural area, limiting the impacts of the increased height. 3.“Minor” Test The variancescan be considered minor as the additional building height is primarily located at the rear of the site, where there is a natural area abutting it. Therefore, there are limited impacts of the increased building height. The variance to locate 4 parking spaces in the front yard is also minor. While the location of the 4 spaces is technically within the front yard, these spaces will not be visible from the street. 4.Desirability for Appropriate Development or Use Test The requested variancesareappropriate for the development and use of the land,as the proposed development is consistent with the low-density development of the neighbourhood.The increased building height to accommodate some steeper grades on the property is appropriate for the development and use of the landand the four parking spaces located in the front yard are not visible from the street. Based on the foregoing, Planning staff recommends thatthis application be approved. Building Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variances. Transportation Services Comments: Transportation Services does not have any concerns with the proposed application. Heritage Comments: Heritage has no concerns with the proposed variances. Environmental Comments: Natural heritage and tree issues were addressed as part of DP 30T-01201 (most recently, Stage 11) and recent Site Plan Approval. RECOMMENDATION A.That Minor Variance Application A2020-052requesting relief from Section 40.2.6 of the Zoning By-law to allow for a maximum building height of 11.3 metres for a Multiple Dwelling rather than the required 10.5 metres,from the definition of ‘Building Height’ in Section 4 of the Zoning By-law to allow the vertical distance between the lowest finished grade and the uppermost point of the building to be 120% of the maximum building height rather than 110%,andfrom Section 6.1.1.1 d) i) of the Zoning By-law to allow for the required parking not designated for visitor use to be located between the façade and the front lot line, whereas this is otherwise not permitted,BE APPROVED. Richard Kelly-Ruetz, BES Juliane von Westerholt, BES, MCIP, RPP Planner Senior Planner August 31, 2020 Holly Dyson City of Kitchener File No.: D20-20/ 200 King Street West VAR KIT GEN P.O. Box 1118 4) VAR KIT, KANCO Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 6) 55, LIVIU CANANAU 8) HURON VILLAGE 30T 01201 9) 04 URBAN, 80 MCGEE AVENUE 22) VAR KIT, EMMANUEL BIBLE COLLEGE 23) 04 URBAN, 297 OTTAWA STREET S. Dear Ms. Dyson: Re: Committee of Adjustment Applications September 2020, City of Kitchener Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have following updated comments: 1) A 2020-045 1283 Victoria Street North No Concerns. 2) A 2020-046 221 Vanier Drive No Concerns. 3) A 2020-047 6 Pequegnat Avenue No Concerns. 4) A 2020-048 581 Strasburg Road No Concerns. 5) A 2020-049 26 6th Avenue No Concerns. 6) A 2020-050 598 604 608 Victoria Street South No Concerns. 7) A 2020-051 14 Tweedsmuir Court No Concerns. 8) A 2020-052 261 Woodbine Avenue No Concerns. 9) A 2020-053 80 McGee Avenue No Concerns. 10) A 2020-054 115 Parkvale Drive No Concerns. 11) A 2020-055 61 Irvin Street No Concerns. 12) A 2020-056 49 Lichty Crescent No Concerns. 5ƚĭǒƒĻƓƷ bǒƒĬĻƩʹ ЌЌБЎБЍЊ Ћ tğŭĻ Њ ƚŅ Ћ 13)A 2020-057114 Blair Creek DriveNo Concerns. 14) A 2020-058 64 Grand Flats Trail No Concerns. 15) A 2020-059 132 Wilhelm Street No Concerns. 16) A 2020-060 36 Jacob Gingrich Drive No Concerns. 17) A 2020-061 35 Sheldon Avenue North No Concerns. 18) A 2020-062 6 Willow Green Court No Concerns. 19) A 2020-063 353 Krug Street No Concerns. 20) A 2020-064 193 Strange Street No Concerns. 21) A 2020-065 192 Woolwich Street No Concerns. 22) A 2020-066 110 Fergus Avenue No Concerns. 23) A 2020-067 297 Ottawa Street South No Concerns. 24) A 2020-068 175 Queen Street North No Concerns. 25) A 2020-069 20 Hollybrook Trail No Concerns. 26) A 2020-070 43 Hollybrook Trail No Concerns. 27) A 2020-071 158 Pondcliffe Court No Concerns. 28) A 2020-072 900 Pondcliffe Court No Concerns. 29) A 2020-073 916 Pondcliffe Court No Concerns. 30) A 2020-074 31 Wilfong 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. Please forward any decision on the above mentioned application to the undersigned. Yours Truly, Joginder Bhatia Transportation Planner P (519) 575-4500 Ext 3867 C (226) 753-0368 September 3, 2020 Holly Dyson, Administrative Clerk Via email only Legislated Services, City of Kitchener 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON, N2G 4G7 Dear Ms. Dyson, Re:September 15, 2020 Committeeof Adjustment Meeting ______________________________________________________________________ Applications for Minor Variance Asareminder, the attachedletter from Nancy Davy, Director of Resource Managementwas circulated to municipalities to indicate that GRCAstaff do not have the capacity to review all minor variance applications at this time.If the City would like to request the review of a specific application, please contact the undersigned. Otherwise, minor variance circulations received by GRCA will not be reviewed at this time and comments will not be issued. Applications for Consent B2020-026225Fairway RoadSouth B2020-02711Chicopee Park Court B2020-02811Chicopee Park Court B2020-029442Old Chicopee Trail B2020-03058Barbara Crescent B2020-031500KarnStreet B2020-032160Strange Street B2020-0334Westgate Walk B2020-034to B2020-036956. 958, 960, 962 Glasgow Street B2020-0371541Highland Road West The above-noted consent 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 questionsor require additional information, please contact me at 519-621-2763 ext. 2228or aherreman@grandriver.ca. Sincerely, Andrew Herreman,CPT Resource Planning Technician Grand River Conservation Authority *These comments are respectfully submitted as advice and reflect resource concerns within the scope and mandate of Page 1of 1 the Grand River Conservation Authority.