HomeMy WebLinkAboutDSD-20-167 - A 2020-081 - 825 King St WStaff Report
Development Services Department
J
KIR
wwwki tch en er. c a
REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment
DATE OF MEETING: October 20, 2020
SUBMITTED BY: Juliane von Westerholt, Senior Planner - 519-741-2200 ext. 7157
PREPARED BY: Lisa Thompson, Planning Technician — 519-741-2200 ext. 7847
WARD: 9
DATE OF REPORT: October 9, 2020
REPORT #: DSD -20-167
SUBJECT: A2020-081 — 825 King Street West
Applicant - T. Johns Consulting Group Ltd. (Katelyn Gillis)
Owner — Indwell Community Homes
Approve Subject to Conditions
Aerial view of subject property
REPORT
Google Street View image of subject property
Planning Comments:
The subject property is located at 825 King Street West, at the intersection of King and Green Streets
in the K -W Hospital Neighbourhood. The property is designated Mixed Use Corridor in the K -W Hospital
Secondary Plan and is zoned Medium Intensity Mixed Use Corridor (MU -2) in Zoning By-law 85-1.
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
The applicant is proposing to redevelop the former St. Mark's Lutheran Church into a 43 -unit affordable
rental housing project. The owner has submitted a site plan application for the development which is
presently under review. As a condition of the variance, site plan approval will be required.
The redevelopment of the former church will include a vertical building addition as well as interior
renovations to create the rental units as well as common spaces within the building.
Staff conducted a site visit on October 2, 2020.
The owner has requested relief from the following Sections in Zoning By-law 85-1:
1. Section 54.2.1 - to allow a rear yard setback of 1.18 metres, rather than the required 7.5 metres*;
2. Section 6.1.1.1. a) iv) - to allow a landscape buffer having a width of 2.25 metres, rather than the
required 3.0 metres*;
3. Section 6.1.1.1. a) v) - to allow parking spaces to have a setback of 2.25 metres from the property line,
rather than the required 4.5 metres*.
4. Section 6.1.1.1. d) i) - to allow residential parking to be located between the fagade and front lot line,
rather than behind the building fagade*;
5. Section 6.1.1.2. d) - to allow parking spaces to be 2.4 metres wide and 5.5 metres long, rather than the
required 2.6 metres wide and 5.5 metres long*;
6. Section 6.1.2 a) - to allow a residential parking requirement of 0.29 spaces per unit, rather than the
required 1 space per unit; and,
7. Section 6.1.2 b) vi) A) - to provide 0% visitor parking spaces, rather than the required 15% visitor
parking.
*Note - Variances 1 to 5 are required to recognize the existing site condition.
General Intent and Purpose of Official Plan Test
The City's Official Plan (OP) identifies the subject property as part of the K -W Hospital Neighbourhood
Secondary Plan, and within the Secondary Plan, the property is designated as Mixed Use Corridor. The
intent of the OP is to provide a range and mix of housing types, including affordable housing, and the intent
of the Mixed Use Corridor designation is to allow intensive, transit supportive development. Policy 4.C.1.19
provides the City's support for affordable housing located in close proximity to public transit, commercial
uses and other compatible non-residential land uses.
The subject property is located on the ION transit route, very close to a station stop and is within a 5 minute
transit ride or approximately 15 minute walk to downtown Kitchener where there are many shopping and
recreational activities readily available. The subject property is also located within a convenient walking
distance to a number of community facilities and services, including medical, educational and recreational.
As such, the property and its location can support the proposed intensification without having any significant
impact to the neighbourhood.
Additionally, the redevelopment proposes a vertical building addition that will complement the existing
culturally significant building and will be compatible with the surrounding area. The proposed addition will
maintain a similar form, massing and use of exterior materials as the existing building and will not change
the building's ground floor setback to the property lines.
Based on the foregoing, Planning staff is of the opinion that all of the requested variances meet the general
intent and purpose of the Official Plan, K -W Hospital Neighbourhood Secondary Plan and Mixed Use
Corridor designation.
General Intent and Purpose of Zoning By-law Test
The subject property is zoned MU -2 in Zoning By-law 85-1. The general intent and purpose of the
zoning category is to ensure developments are of an appropriate size with adequate setbacks and
parking to support the use.
As noted earlier in the report, the following five variances are to recognize existing site conditions and
are required due to the change of use from religious institution to multiple dwelling.
1. Section 54.2.1 -to allow a rear yard setback of 1.18 metres, rather than the required 7.5 metres:
• The reduced rear yard setback allows the existing culturally significant building to be redeveloped
while maintaining its heritage significance.
2. Section 6.1.1.1. a) iv) - to allow a landscape buffer having a width of 2.25 metres, rather than the
required 3.0 metres:
• The reduced landscape buffer is an existing condition created by the construction of the ION transit
system and a road widening being taken across the frontage of the property.
3. Section 6.1.1.1. a) v) - to allow parking spaces to have a setback of 2.25 metres from the property line,
rather than the required 4.5 metres:
• The reduced parking setback is an existing condition that was created through construction of the
ION transit system and the road widening taken across the frontage of the property.
4. Section 6.1.1.1. d) i) - to allow residential parking to be located between the facade and front lot line,
rather than behind the building fagade:
• The existing parking lot on the King Street frontage is existing and will remain for the multiple
dwelling.
5. Section 6.1.1.2. d) - to allow parking spaces to be 2.4 metres wide and 5.5 metres long, rather than the
required 2.6 metres wide and 5.5 metres long:
• Each of the existing parking spaces is slightly undersized at 2.4m wide rather than 2.6m wide and
have been used in that condition for countless years without incident.
Each of the above noted variances meet the general intent of the City's Zoning By-law, are minor and are
appropriate for the conversion of the property to an affordable housing multiple dwelling.
General Intent and Purpose of Zoning By-law Test
6. Section 6.1.2 a) - to allow a residential parking requirement of 0.29 spaces per unit, rather than the
required 1 space per unit; and,
7. Section 6.1.2 b) vi) A) - to provide 0% visitor parking spaces, rather than the required 15% visitor
parking.
The City's zoning by-law requires parking and visitor parking on multiple dwelling sites to provide
adequate facilities on site for tenants and visitors without impacting surrounding properties or streets.
The applicant has advised that the majority of tenants for the proposed affordable housing development
are typically individuals with low income and/or disabilities who rely on active transportation, personal
mobility devices and transit. As such, their access to vehicle ownership is limited. To provide the
required 43 parking spaces on site (including 7 required visitor spaces) would be an inefficient use of
urban lands being that the property is in such close proximity to major public transportation services.
The applicant has advised that the average functional parking ratio between Indwell's existing multiple
dwelling properties in Hamilton, London and Woodstock is 0.09 vehicles per unit.
Based on the foregoing, staff is of the opinion that variances 6 and 7 meet the general intent of the
City's Zoning By-law.
"Minor" Test
Variances 6 and 7, to reduce the number of both tenant and visitor parking spaces are considered minor
as the existing parking provided on site will adequately support the needs of the purpose-built affordable
rental use. The Parking Study and Transportation Demand Management Report have estimated the
average maximum parking demand for the site to be 0.17 spaces per unit (7 spaces). With 12 spaces
provided on site, the property being located on the ION and GRT transit systems, in close proximity to
a wide range of land uses, an extensive pedestrian network, and paid parking in surface lots, staff
considers the variances to be minor.
Desirability for Appropriate Development of the Land Test
Variances 6 and 7, are desirable for the affordable housing development on the property as they
eliminate the need to create more asphalt surface parking. This will allow greater opportunity to provide
outdoor amenity area and landscaping to better support the needs of the residents, while making use
of an existing parking lot. Through the parking study, it has been determined that the twelve existing
parking spaces will be sufficient to support the needs of the proposed use.
For the abovementioned reasons, Planning staff is of the opinion that variances 6 and 7 are both
appropriate and justified and will be subject to the conditions outlined in the Recommendation Section
below.
Building Comments:
The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance.
Transportation Services Comments:
After reviewing the Parking Study and Transportation Demand Management Plan (August 2020)
submitted by Paradigm Transportation Solutions, Transportation Services offer the following
comments.
Paradigms report speaks to alternative modes of transportation to reduce vehicle trips such as;
pedestrian walkability, easily accessible existing transit routes and long-term (Class A) bicycle parking
spaces. Couple this with vehicle parking being charged as an extra cost to tenants and parking analysis
from proxy sites, based on the proposed use, Transportation Services can support the proposed
variance to reduce on-site parking based on Paradigms analysis. Also, Transportation Services can
support the zero visitors parking being proposed based, on the availability of short-term parking in the
area and have no concerns with the existing parking space width of 2.4 metres.
Engineering Comments:
Engineering recommends the applicant hires a consultant to determine the adequacy of existing
services for proposed use. If it is determined upgrades are required, off-site works will be required as
mentioned below.
The owner is required to make satisfactory financial arrangements with the Engineering Division for
the installation of new ones that may be required to service this property, all prior to severance
approval. Our records indicate sanitary and water municipal services are currently available to service
this property. Any further enquiries in this regard should be directed to Eric Riek (519-741-2200 ext.
7330).
If existing services are deemed adequate, Engineering has no further comments or concerns
Heritage Comments:
The property is identified on the Heritage Kitchener Inventory of Historic Buildings as a property
of interest. A Heritage Impact Assessment has been submitted as part of a Site Plan application
and was considered by the Heritage Kitchener committee on October 6, 2020. Given that the
existing building is proposed to be retained in situ and that the variances applied for do not
negatively impact the heritage value of the property municipally addressed as 825 King Street
West, Heritage Planning staff does not have concern with the proposed variances.
RECOMMENDATION
That Minor Variance Application A2020-081 requesting relief from:
1. Section 54.2.1 - to allow a rear yard setback of 1.18 metres, rather than the required 7.5 metres;
2. Section 6.1.1.1. a) iv) - to allow a landscape buffer having a width of 2.25 metres, rather than the
required 3.0 metres;
3. Section 6.1.1.1. a) v) - to allow parking spaces to have a setback of 2.25 metres from the property line,
rather than the required 4.5 metres;
4. Section 6.1.1.1. d) i) - to allow residential parking to be located between the fagade and front lot line,
rather than behind the building fagade;
5. Section 6.1.1.2. d) - to allow parking spaces to be 2.4 metres wide and 5.5 metres long, rather than the
required 2.6 metres wide and 5.5 metres long;
6. Section 6.1.2 a) - to allow a residential parking requirement of 0.29 spaces per unit, rather than the
required 1 space per unit; and,
7. Section 6.1.2 b) vi) A) - to provide 0% visitor parking spaces, rather than the required 15% visitor
parking
all be approved, subject to the following conditions:
1. That the owner shall obtain approval of site plan application SP20/44/K/LT to the satisfaction of
the City's Manager of Site Development and Customer Service.
2. That the owner shall obtain final approval of the Heritage Impact Assessment from the City's
Director of Planning.
L&,a Th&mpw-w
Lisa Thompson, CPT
Planning Technician
Juliane von Westerholt, MCIP, RPP
Senior Planner
Region of Waterloo
September 30, 2020
Holly Dyson
City of Kitchener
200 King Street West
P.O. Box 1118
Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7
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
7) St. John Bapt. Romanian, 1996-053
8) 15 KING KIT, LUTHERAN HOMES
Dear Ms. Dyson:
Re: Committee of Adjustment Applications October 2020, City of Kitchener
Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have
following updated comments:
1)
CC 2020-004
— 56 Roos Street — No Concerns.
2)
A 2020-075 —
44 Martin Street — No Concerns.
3)
A 2020-076 —
632 Beckview Crescent — No Concerns.
4)
A 2020-077 —
177 Wilderness Drive — No Concerns.
5)
A 2020-078 —
28 Valencia Avenue — No Concerns.
6)
A 2020-079 —
368 Wellington Street North — No Concerns.
7)
A 2020-080 —
335 Lancaster Street West — No Concerns.
8)
A 2020-081 —
825 King Street West — No Concerns.
9)
A 2020-082 —
293 Blucher Boulevard — No Concerns.
10) A 2020-083 —
44 Breithaupt Street — No Concerns.
11) A 2020-084 —
517 Old Cottage Close — No Concerns.
12) A 2020-085 &
A2020-086 — 124 Mill Street — 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
Document Number: 3413295
Page 1 of 2
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
October 8, 2020
Administration Centre: 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Cambridge, ON N1 R 5W6
Phone: 519-621-2761 Toll free: 1-866-900-4722 Fax: 519-621-4844 www.grandriver.ca
Holly Dyson, Administrative Clerk Via email only
Legislated Services, City of Kitchener
200 King Street West
Kitchener, ON, N2G 4G7
Dear Ms. Dyson,
Re: October 20, 2020 Committee of Adjustment Meeting
Applications for Minor Variance
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
B 2020-026
225
Fairway Road South
B 2020-033
4 Westgate
Walk
B 2020-039
518
Bridgeport Road East
B 2020-040
518
Bridgeport Road East
B 2020-041
122-124
Mill Street
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 questions or require additional information,
please contact me at 519-621-2763 ext. 2228 or aherremana-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 1 of 1
the Grand River Conservation Authority.
Member of Conservation Ontario, representing Ontario's 36 Conservation Authorities I The Grand - A Canadian Heritage River
Holly Dyson
From: Dianna Saunderson
Sent: 14 October, 2020 11:26 AM
To: Holly Dyson
Subject: FW: [EXTERNAL] Re: Note of Support - Indwell Project on King - A 2020-081
Here is his mailing address details.
Thanks,
Dianna Saunderson, AMP
Committee Administrator I Corporate Services City of Kitchener
519-741-2200 ext. 7277 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 Dianna.Saunderson@kitchener.ca
From:
Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 11:23 AM
To: Dianna Saunderson <Dianna.Saunderson@kitchener.ca>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Note of Support - Indwell Project on King - A 2020-081
Hi Dianna,
My contact details are as follows:
Let me know if you need anything else.
Sean
On Wed, Oct 14, 2020 at 11:20 AM Dianna Saunderson <Dianna.Saunderson@kitchener.ca> wrote:
Good Morning-,
Thank you for your email. To be able to circulate your letter of support to the Committee members I will require your full contact
information as you would be listed as an interested party and also be entitled to a decision following the committee
meeting. Please note as this is a public planning meeting I would not be able to protect that information if requested.
Regards,
1
Dianna Saunderson, AMP
Committee Administrator I Corporate Services City of Kitchener
519-741-2200 ext. 7277 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 Dianna.Saunderson@kitchener.ca
From:
Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2020 11:14 AM
To: Dianna Saunderson <Dianna.Saunderson@kitchener.ca>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Note of Support - Indwell Project on King - A 2020-081
Hello,
I'm writing in support of application A 2020-081 by Indwell for their St. Mark's Lutheran Church development.
I live around the corner from this project, on Gruhn Street, and am thrilled at the prospect of having Indwell as a
neighbour.
Indwell provides exceptional housing for their residents and are good community members.
I hope this letter of support bears weight in your consideration, as my understanding of their requested variances is
that they are minor, particularly in comparison to the benefits of speeding along a project such as this.
Thank you,
2
Holly Dyson
From: Dianna Saunderson
Sent: 15 October, 2020 11:24 AM
To: Holly Dyson
Subject: FW: [EXTERNAL] Project A2020-081/Indwell
From:
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 10:41 AM
To: Dianna Saunderson <Dianna.Saunderson@kitchener.ca>
Cc:
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Project A2020-081/Indwell
Good morning Ms. Saunderson,
I am writing in regards to Indwell's proposal (A2020-081) that is going to Committee of Adjustment this month. I am in
strong support of this project and believe the requests for the variances in the report are all reasonable. I urge the
committee to approve the project so Indwell can help provide badly needed affordable housing to our community as
soon as possible. Thank you.
Community Builder
Building Community Together
Holly Dyson
From: Dianna Saunderson
Sent: 15 October, 2020 11:24 AM
To: Holly Dyson
Subject: FW: [EXTERNAL] A 2020-081 Indwell
From:
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 10:47 AM
To: Dianna Saunderson <Dianna.Saunderson@kitchener.ca>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] A 2020-081 Indwell
Dianna
You are aware of Indwell and the excellent work they do in providing low cost housing and services.
You also are aware that they are making a presentation to the Committee of Adjustment for some
minor variances on the site. This email is in total support of the Indwell vision, and the variances they
are requesting. For far too long, we have let "red tape" and bureaucracy hamper, and delay, and
prevent action on the need to address poverty and homelessness in our community. I ask the
committee to whole heartedly support the vision of Indwell, mine, and our community.