Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAdjustment - 1998-06-09COA\1998-06-09 COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FOR THE CITY OF KITCHENER MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING HELD JUNE 9, 1998 MEMBERS PRESENT: Ms. S. Campbell, Mr. W. Dahms and Mr. A. Galloway OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ms. J. Given, Senior Planner, Mr. R. Morgan, Co-ordinator Administration, and Ms. D. H. Gilchrist, Secretary-Treasurer. Mr. W. Dahms, Chair, called the meeting to order at 10:30 a.m. MINUTES Moved by Ms. S. Campbell Seconded by Mr. A. Galloway That the minutes of the regular meeting of the Committee of Adjustment of May the members, be accepted. Carried MINOR VARIANCE APPLICATIONS Re: Submission No. A 34/98 - Kathy & Harry J. Smith, 24 Mitchell Street, Kitchener, Ontario Lot 5, Registered Plan 113, 24 Mitchell Street, Kitchener, Ontario. APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: Mr. H. Smith 24 Mitchell Street Kitchener, Ontario Zoning 12, 1998, as mailed to CONTRA: NONE WRITTENSUBMISSIONS: INSUPPORT: NONE CONTRA: NONE The Committee was advised that the applicants are requesting permission to provide two parking spaces in tandem for a single family dwelling and home business rather than two parking spaces side-by-side. The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Planning & Development in which they advised that the subject lands are the end property located on the north side of Mitchell Street and are presently developed with a single detached dwelling with an attached garage. The applicants are proposing to convert the existing attached garage to a home business (artisan's establishment), but would be unable to provide parking for the home business in accordance with the Zoning By-law. The artisan's establishment has existed at this location for a number of years but has not been operated as a home business. With the operation being conducted as a home business, it is necessary to provide an additional off-street parking space. C0~ITTEE OF ADJUST1MEi~T 194 JIJlgE 9. 1998 The Zoning By-law requires one parking space for the single detached dwelling and one parking space for the home business, both of which must be provided with a minimum of 6.0 metres setback from the property line and be located in such a manner as to enable access to the street without the necessity of moving another vehicle. The applicants are requesting a variance to allow the required parking spaces to be provided in tandem. The 1. Submission No. A 34/98 - Kathy & Harry J. Smith, cont'd application should be revised to include a variance to provide one of the required off-street parking spaces within 1 metre of the street line. The intent of the parking regulations is to allow vehicles unencumbered access to and from the subject property, to provide for an attractive streetscape in which required parking is not located ahead of the building line, and to reduce the need for on-street parking. In this particular instance, the applicants would not require use of their vehicle during business hours, thereby reducing the need to have unencumbered access to the required parking space for the single detached dwelling. In addition, the use of the parking space for the home business, located ahead of the required 6 metre setback, would only be periodic and would have no greater impact than use of this area by a visitor to the single detached dwelling or by a second vehicle. Further, on-street parking is not expected to be a problem as the existing driveway is sufficient in length to accommodate both of the required parking spaces behind the property line. Accordingly, the requested variance can be considered to uphold the general intent of both the Municipal Plan and Zoning By-law and can be considered as being minor in nature and appropriate for the subject lands. The Department of Planning and Development recommends approval of Minor Variance Application A34/98, as revised to include a variance to permit the provision of a required parking space within 1 metre of the property line, with the following condition: 1. That the owner obtain an occupancy permit for the proposed home business. The Committee noted the comments of the Traffic & Parking Division in which they advised that they have no concerns with the proposed tandem parking. The Committee noted the comments of the Grand River Conservation Authority in which they advised that they have no objections to the application. Moved by Mr. A. Galloway Seconded by Ms. S. Campbell That the application of Kathy & Harry Smith requesting permission to provide two parking spaces in tandem for a single family dwelling and home business rather than two parking spaces side-by-side with one parking space located 1 m (3.28 ft.) from the street line rather than the required 6m (19.69 ft.) on Lot 5, Registered Plan 113, 24 Mitchell Street, Kitchener, Ontario BE APPROVED, subject to the following condition: 1. That the owners shall obtain an occupancy permit for the proposed home business. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variances requested in this application are minor in nature. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Official Plan are being maintained on the subject property. Carried COk~ITTEE OF ADJUST1MEbIT 195 JUi~E 9. 1998 Submission No. A 35/98 - Zdeno Cycle Centre Ltd., R.R. 2 Breslau, Ontario Part 2 & 3, Reference Plan 58R-6975, 137B Bloomingdale Road, Kitchener, Ontario. APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: Mr. Z. Syrovy RR#2 Breslau, Ontario CONTRA: NONE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: IN SUPPORT: NONE CONTRA: NONE The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to expand a legal non- conforming single family dwelling by constructing an addition and a roofed porch. The property is legal non-conforming because it does not have frontage on a public street. The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Planning & Development in which they advised that the applicant requests permission to extend or enlarge the existing legal non- conforming building. The building is a single detached dwelling, which was built in 1950, on a lot which has no frontage on a public street. The lot was created by consent (B 9/92) together with a variance (A 24/92) from the provisions of the former zoning by-law (By-law 4830) which required frontage on a public street. The lot was rezoned into Comprehensive Zoning By-law 85-1 by By-law 94-183, making the lot legal non-conforming with respect to its lack of frontage. When the consent application was made in 1992, there were two dwellings on one lot, as two former lots had merged in title. Staff recommended against creation of the zero-frontage lot on the basis that it would perpetuate the existence of the dwelling, and that it could prejudice the potential for orderly infilling development in the future, contrary to the Bridgeport East Community Plan. The existing dwelling is a modest one-and-one-half storey dwelling with a building floor area of 88 m2 (950 sq. ft.). The current proposal would increase the floor area of the dwelling by 105 m2 (1135 sq. ft) which represents a 119% increase. The proposed roofed porch would add another 63 m~ (680 sq. ft.) for a total increase of 190%, or nearly three times the building floor area of the existing dwelling. This is a very substantial increase of both the area and the value of the building, and would most certainly have the effect of perpetuating the legal non-conforming use. Furthermore, this area has the potential for further residential development by plan of subdivision. The lands between Schaefer Park and the City's eastern limit are designated as Low Rise Residential in the official plan, and are zoned R-3 in the zoning by-law. Most existing buildings are close to Bloomingdale Road or along the slopes of the Grand River valley. There is a substantial area of rear land, as shown on the attached air photo, with potential for development. The subject dwelling and the one immediately south of it appear to be the only buildings which could prejudice the potential for orderly infilling development. The Department of Planning and Development recommends refusal of Submission A 35/98. If the Committee decides to approve Submission A 35/98, the decision should be subject to the following condition: 1. That the owner obtain approval from the Waterloo Regional Health Unit, confirming the COMHITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 196 JUlgE 9. 1998 adequacy of private water and sewage systems and provide written copies of such approvals to the City's Chief Building Official prior to the issuance of any building permits. 2. Submission No. A 35/98 - Zdeno Cycle Centre Ltd., cont'd The Committee noted the comments of the Director of Building in which he advised that a building permit is required to construct the new additions. The Chairman pointed out to Mr. Syrovy that the Department of Planning & Development is recommended that this application be refused. Mr. Syrovy responded that the house is too small for him to live in. He suggested that he could construct a smaller addition. He stated that he would be moving into the house in December. He advised that the house is approximately 800 sq. ft. and he needs to make it a little bigger for his family. Mr. J. Given suggested that staff would be opposed any addition. Staff were opposed to the consent and they are opposed to a minor variance which would perpetuate the legal non-conforming use. Ms. Given then displayed a large aerial photograph of the area and a brief review of the subject property and surrounding properties took place. Mr. A. Galloway stated that he understood the Planning Department's point of view; however, the City approved the Consent originally and the property does have some legal status. He advised that he looked favourably on the application. Ms. S. Campbell advised that she agreed with Mr. Galloway; however, she felt the proposed addition too large. She stated that she would be supportive of a smaller addition and it would be appropriate to see a new plan of the smaller addition. The Chairman stated that there seems to be no negative impact on the neighbours and he could support a smaller addition. He asked Mr. Syrovy if he would like consideration of this application deferred in order to produce plans for a smaller addition. Mr. Syrovy agreed to the deferral. Moved by Mr. A. Galloway Seconded by Ms. S. Campbell That consideration of Submission No. A 35/98 be deferred to the meeting of June 30, 1998, in order to allow the applicant to prepare plans for a smaller addition. Carried Submission No. A 36/98 - Andrew Nessner In Trust, c/o Box 2215, Kitchener, Ontario This application was considered in conjunction with Submission No. B 46~98 as described in the Minutes of Consent. Submission No. A 37~98 - Douglas & Sara Brown, 5-671 Glasgow Street, Kitchener, Ontario Re: Part Lot 41, Registered Plan 793, 5-671 Glasgow Street, Kitchener, Ontario. APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: St. Jacobs, Ontario Mr. T. Bauman 190 King Street South CONTRA: NONE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: IN SUPPORT: NONE CONTRA: NONE COHHITTEE OF ADJUST1MENT 197 JUlgE 9. 1998 The Committee was advised that the applicants are requesting permission to extend their eating area, at the rear of the house, which would have a rearyard of 6.62 m (21.72 ft.) rather than the required 7.5 m '24.61 ft.). 4. Submission No. A 37~98 - Douqlas & Sara Brown, cont'd The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Planning and Development in which they advised that the applicants are requesting permission to extend their eating area, at the rear of the house, which would have a rearyard of 6.62 m (21.72 ft.) rather than the required 7.5 m (24.61 ft.) The requested variance is for an addition to a s~ngle family dwelling. The addition to the eating area would encroach 0.88 m (2.89 ft.) into the required rearyard setback. This amount is a small percentage of the required setback and could be considered minor in nature. The rearyard abuts land zoned P-1 (Public Park) and consequently the proposed addition would not appear to adversely affect the enjoyment of the abutting property. Based on the above comments, it is the opinion of staff that the subject variance is appropriate development for the property, is minor in nature and meets the general intent of the Zoning By-law. The Department of Planning and Development recommends approval of A 37/98 as indicated on the drawing submitted by the applicant. Moved by Mr. A. Galloway Seconded by Ms. S. Campbell That the application of Douglas & Sara Brown requesting permission to extend their eating area, at the rear of the house, to have a rearyard of 6.62 m (21.72 ft.) rather than the required 7.5 m (24.61 ft.) on Part Lot 41, Registered Plan 793, 5-671 Glasgow Street, Kitchener, Ontario BE APPROVED subject to the following condition: That the variance as approved in this application shall apply to the proposed rear addition only as shown on the plans submitted with this application. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance requested in this application is minor in nature. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Official Plan are being maintained on the subject property. Carried Submission No. A 38/98 - Grace & Antonio Capa, 83 Calmcrest Drive, Kitchener, Ontario Lot 114, Registered Plan 1368, 83 Calmcrest Drive, Kitchener, Ontario APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: Ms. G. Capa 83 Calmcrest Drive Kitchener, Ontario CONTRA: NONE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: IN SUPPORT: NONE CONTRA: NONE COk~ITTEE OF ADJUST1MEbIT 198 JUi~E 9. 1998 The Committee was advised that the applicants are requesting permission to construct an addition on the easterly side of their home to have a sideyard of 0.92 m (3 ft.) rather than the required 1.2 m (4 ft.). 5. Submission No. A 38/98 - Grace & Antonio Capa, cont'd The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Planning & Development in which they advised that the applicants are requesting permission to construct an addition on the easterly side of their home to have a side yard of 0.9 m (3 ft) rather than the required 1.2 m (4 ft). The proposed addition would be constructed in the left side yard. It would measure 2.28 m (7.5 ft) wide and 6.4 m (21 ft) long. This addition will leave a reduced side yard setback of 0.9 m (3 ft) rather than the required 1.2 m (4 ft). The applicant advises the extra foot of width is required to make the addition functional. The location of the addition will not compromise the required parking space for the dwelling. As the addition will have a 0.9 m (3 ft) side yard, there will be adequate space for any required maintenance of the structure. The proposed addition does not appear to adversely affect the neighbouring property. Staff recommend approval of minor variance application A 38~98 as it is an appropriate and desirable use of the property. It appears there will be no negative impact on the neighbouring property and maintains the general intent and purpose of both the City's zoning by-law and municipal plan. The Committee noted the comments of the Director of Building in which he advised that a building permit is required to construct the new addition. There shall be no window/door openings in a wall located less than 1.2 m from the property line and a wall face shall have a 45 minute fire resistance rating. Moved by Ms. S. Campbell Seconded by Mr. A. Galloway That the application of Grace & Antonio Capa requesting permission to construct an addition on the easterly side of their home to have a sideyard of 0.92 m (3 ft.) rather than the required 1.2 m (4 ft.) on Lot 114, Registered Plan 1368, 83 Calmcrest Drive, Kitchener, Ontario BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owners shall obtain a building permit prior to constructing the addition. That a wall located less than 1.2 m (4 ft.) from the property line shall have no door or window openings and the wall face shall have a 45 minute fire resistance rating. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance requested in this application is minor in nature. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Official Plan are being maintained on the subject property. Carried Submission No. A 39/98 - Robert Holl, 57 McLeod Court, Kitchener, Ontario Lot 12, Registered Plan 1640, 57 McLeod Crt., Kitchener, Ontario. APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: Mr. R. Holl 57 McLeod Court Kitchener, Ontario COMHITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 199 JlJl~E 9~ 1998 CONTRA: NONE 6. Submission No. A 39/98 - Robert Holl, cont'd WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: IN SUPPORT: NONE CONTRA: NONE The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to construct a roof over his rear deck, to have a rearyard of 5.41 m (17.75 ft.) rather than the required 7.5 m (24.61 ft.). The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Planning & Development in which they advised that the applicant is currently constructing a deck in the rear yard and wishes to enclose part of it. A minor variance application has been submitted to allow a reduction in the rear yard set back for a portion of the deck to be enclosed. The sketch attached illustrates the set back as being 5.4 metres (17.75 feet) to the outer edge of the eave. The agenda indicates a requested reduction of 5.41 metres. Staff clarified the set back with the applicant, as 5.7 metres from the rear wall of the rear lot line. In this regard, the variance required is a reduction in the rear yard set back from 7.5 metres to 5.7 metres. There is no rear yard set back requirement for a deck as long as it is not greater than 0.6 metres above the finished grade and not enclosed. The existing deck is not greater than 0.6 metres above the finished grade and therefore complies. If the deck is enclosed, as proposed then the required rear yard set back is 7.5 metres, the same as that of the main dwelling. The set back will be 5.7 metres only at one corner of the covered deck. The property line is angled so that the opposite corner will be 7.0 metres from the rear property line. The dwelling most directly affected, to the rear of the addition, is also angled. In this regard, the minor variance requested is minor as the impact on the adjacent property owners is minimal due to the large lot width and configuration and orientation of the adjacent dwellings. The variance meets the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law as the separation distance between dwellings, due to the orientation of dwellings, maintains an adequate private amenity area for both the subject lands and adjacent lands. The variance is desirable for the appropriate development of the subject lands as the proposed addition is focused away from adjacent residential dwellings in the most appropriate location on the lot for an addition of this size. An addition to the east of the dwelling would be more intrusive for the adjacent property owners. Also, there is an existing easement to the east of the dwelling which cannot be constructed on. The Department of Planning and Development recommends approval of Submission A 39/98 only to the extent of the minor variance shown on the sketch submitted with the application. The Committee noted the comments of the Director of Building in which he advised that a building permit is required to construct the deck and roof. Moved by Mr. A. Galloway Seconded by Ms. S. Campbell That the application of Rob Holl requesting permission to construct a roof over the rear deck, to have a rearyard of 5.7 m (18.7 ft.) rather than the required 7.5 m (24.61 ft.) on Lot 12, Registered Plan 1640, 57 McLeod Crt., Kitchener, Ontario BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall obtain a building permit prior to constructing the deck and roof. That the variance as approved in this application shall apply to the roof over the deck to the extent as shown on the sketch submitted with this application. COMIMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 200 JUlgE 9. 1998 6. Submission No. A 39/98 - Robert Holl, cont'd It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance requested in this application is minor in nature. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Official Plan are being maintained on the subject property. Carried Submission No. A 40/98 - Trevor Grasley, 81 Jansen Avenue, Kitchener, Ontario Part Lot 24, Registered Plan 308, 81 Jansen Avenue, Kitchener, Ontario. APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: Mr. T. Grasley 81 Jansen Avenue Kitchener, Ontario CONTRA: NONE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: IN SUPPORT: NONE CONTRA: NONE The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to construct a detached garage to have a sideyard of 0.6 m (2 ft.) rather than the required 1.2 m (4 ft.). The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Planning & Development in which they advised that the applicant is requesting permission to construct a detached garage having a side yard of 0.6m (2 ft) rather than the required 1.2 m (4 ft). The proposed detached garage would measure 3.66 m (12 ft) wide and 9.75 m (32 ft) long. The 2 2 O garage would cover 35.67 m (384 ft ) which is under the 15 ~ accessory structure lot coverage requirement of the By-law. The applicant advises the driveway starts on the property line and having the garage 0.6m (2 ft) from the side property line would provide a more direct entrance into the garage. As the property is 8.6m (28.25 ft) wide, providing a 1.2 m (4 ft) side yard would make access to the detached garage difficult as well as restrict the useability of the rear yard. The proposed set back of 0.6m (2 ft) will allow sufficient room for any required exterior maintenance of the garage, and as such does not appear to adversely affect the neighbouring properties. Staff recommend approval of minor variance application A 40~98 as it is an appropriate and desirable use of the property. The proposed garage would not impact on the neighbouring properties, and maintains the general intent and purpose of both the City's zoning by-law and municipal plan. The Committee noted the comments of the Director of Building in which he advised that a building permit is required to construct the garage. There shall be no window/door openings in a wall located less than 4' from the property line. COMHITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 201 JUlgE 9. 1998 7. Submission No. A 40/98 - Trevor Grasley, cont'd Moved by Mr. A. Galloway Seconded by Ms. S. Campbell That the application of Trevor Grasley requesting permission to construct a detached garage to have a sideyard of 0.6 m (2 ft.) rather than the required 1.2 m (4 ft.) on Part Lot 24, Registered Plan 308, 81 Jansen Avenue, Kitchener, Ontario BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall obtain a building permit prior to constructing the garage. 2. That there shall be no window or door openings in a wall located less from the property line. than 1.2 m (4 ft.) It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance requested in this application is minor in nature. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Official Plan are being maintained on the subject property. Carried Submission No. A 41/98 - Lutheran Homes Kitchener-Waterloo, 2727 Kinqsway Drive, Kitchener, Ontario Part Lot 6, Municipal Compiled Plan 958, 2727 Kingsway Drive, Kitchener, Ontario. APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: Ms. D. Biuk 5-745 Bridge Street West Waterloo, Ontario CONTRA: NONE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: IN SUPPORT: NONE CONTRA: NONE The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission for two blocks of town houses to have rearyards of 6.4 m (21 ft.) rather than the required 7.5 m (24.61 ft.) and permission to locate an accessory building within the required 7.5 m (24.61 ft.) rearyard setback. The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Planning & Development in which they advised that the applicant is requesting permission for two blocks of townhouses to have rear yards of 6.4 metres (21 feet) rather than the required 7.5 metres (24.61 feet) and permission to locate an accessory building within the required 7.5 metres (24.61 feet) rear yard setback. The variance for the accessory building should be amended to request permission to locate the building 1.2 metres from the side yard, instead of the required 6.0 metre side yard setback, as this is considered a side yard. The subject site is located on Kingsway Drive and is surrounded by commercial and residential uses and parkland. The site recently received site plan approval for the development of 60 townhouse units, 30 small seniors apartment units and a large residential care facility. Townhouse units 45 to 51 received approval subject to receiving final approval of a minor variance for the deficient rear yard setbacks. COMHITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 202 JUlgE 9. 1998 8. Submission No. A 41/98 - Lutheran Homes Kitchener-Waterloo, cont'd The intent of the By-law requirement of 7.5 metres for a rear yard is to allow for an amenity area for the residential units as well as to maintain an appropriate separation distance from the properties in the rear. With respect to this application, all of the units (45 to 51) abut parkland and as such the reduction in rear yard setback will have no impact on the property in the rear. As well, the requested 6.4 metre rear yard would continue to provide sufficient amenity area. The applicant is also proposing to locate a 23.2 m2 (250 ft2) accessory building, 1.2 metres (3.93 feet) from the side lot line instead of the required 6.0 metres (19.7 feet). The Major Institutional Zone (I-3) currently does not have separate regulations for accessory buildings. The large setbacks are required to ensure that there is sufficient room for the maintenance of the structure as well as to reduce the impact of large institutional buildings on the neighbouring properties. The building in question is a relatively small shed which will be used to store gardening equipment. It will be abutting the rear yard of the lots fronting on Cedarwoods Crescent. The 1.2 metre setback of the proposed shed would still allow for the required maintenance of the structure. The impact of the proposal on the neighbouring properties would be negligible as the shed will be abutting an existing shed on the neighbouring lot. Further the applicant will be required to erect a visual barrier, a minimum of 1.8 metres in height thereby reducing the visual impact of the proposed shed. Accordingly, the requested variances can be considered to meet the general intent of both the Municipal Plan and the Zoning By-law and can be considered minor in nature and appropriate for the development of subject lands. The Department of Planning and Development recommends approval of Minor Variance Application A 41/98, as amended, applicable only to the Site Plan finally approved under application SP98/11/K/RM. The Committee noted the comments of the Director of Building in which he advised that a building permit is required for the new construction. At the request of Ms. Biuk, the Committee agreed to consider the amendment contained in the comments of the Department of Planning & Development. Mr. A. Galloway questioned staff as to whether this project is going through the site plan approval process. Ms. J. Given responded that they have received approval of their site plan, subject to final approval of this Minor Variance Application. Moved by Mr. A. Galloway Seconded by Ms. S. Campbell That the application of Lutheran Homes Kitchener-Waterloo requesting permission for two blocks of town houses to have rearyards of 6.4 m (21 ft.) rather than the required 7.5 m (24.61 ft.) and permission for an accessory building with a sideyard of 1.2 m (4 ft.) rather than the required 6m (19.69 ft.) on Part Lot 6, Municipal Compiled Plan 958, 2727 Kingsway Drive, Kitchener, Ontario BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That a building permit shal be obtained prior to construction. 2. That the variances as approved in this application shall be applicable finally approved under application SP 98/11/K/RM. only to the Site Plan It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance requested in this application is minor in nature. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Official Plan are COMIMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 203 JUlgE 9. 1998 being maintained on the subject property. Carried Submission No. A 42/98 - Gurdev Singh, 131 Victoria Street North, Kitchener, Ontario Lot 13 and Part Lot 12, Registered Plan 389, 131 Victoria Street North, Kitchener, Ontario. APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: Mr. R Hardie 260A Huron Road Kitchener, Ontario CONTRA: Mr. & Mrs. D. Coleman 32 Maynard Avenue Kitchener, Ontario WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: IN SUPPORT: NONE CONTRA: Mrs. M. Coleman 32 Maynard Avenue Kitchener, Ontario Mr. D. Coleman 32 Maynard Avenue Kitchener, Ontario OTHER: CN Rail 702-277 Front Street Toronto, Ontario The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to expand an existing legal non-conforming automobile repair business by adding automobile sales. The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Planning & Development in which they advised that the applicant requests permission to change the use of land to a use which is similar to the existing legal non-conforming use or is more compatible with the uses permitted by the by-law. The existing legal non-conforming use is a two-bay automobile service station. The proposal is to permit auto sales in addition to continuing the service station use. The subject property is a triangular corner lot bounded on the north by Victoria Street and on the east by Water Street. The existing 113 m2 building contains the service bays and office. The remainder of the site is asphalt surface. No building addition is proposed. Planning and Development staff find that the proposed use is similar to the existing use as the land use impacts of both uses are similar. Furthermore, auto sales is a compatible land use which is already permitted on the opposite side of Victoria Street on lands zoned Service Commercial (C-6). Nine parking spaces are required for the two proposed uses. Additional spaces may be provided for the display of vehicles for sale. At present, the site is asphalted from the sidewalk on Victoria Street to the sidewalk on Water Street. Approval is recommended on condition that a 1 metre wide curbed and landscaped area be provided along both street frontages, save and except for driveway access points. This will greatly improve site safety, as there is now a conflict between on-street vehicular traffic, pedestrian traffic on the sidewalks, and vehicles entering and exiting the site. The landscaped strip will also improve the appearance of the site. Approval is therefore recommended for the permission requested, in addition to a variance to reduce the parking setback from 3.0 m to 1.0 m along both Victoria Street and Water Street. The Department of Planning and Development recommends approval of Submission A 42/98, as COM]MITTEE OF ADJUSTMElqT 204 JIJlgE 9. 1998 amended, subject to the following condition: 9. Submission No. A 42/98 - Gurdev Sin.qh, cont'd That the site be developed and maintained to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Planning, Development and Design, in accordance with a site plan to be approved by the said Director, including demarcation of parking spaces, the installation of raised concrete curbing, and a 1.0 m wide landscaped area along both street frontages, save and except for driveway access points. Such works are to be completed by September 15, 1998. No extension to this completion date shall be granted unless approved in writing by the Director of Community Planning Development and Design prior to the completion date set out in this decision. The Committee noted the comments of the Director of Building in which he advised that a building permit is required for any new construction required to permit the new use. The Committee noted the comments of the Traffic & Parking Division in which they advised that, in order to prevent on-site parking/display from encroaching onto the sidewalk and public right-of-way, as frequently occurs at the car lot on the opposite side of Victoria Street, which creates on-going parking problems, it is recommended that a landscaping median defined with raised concrete curbing be installed along the street frontages. The Committee noted the comments of the Engineering Department, Region of Waterloo, in which they advised that, at this location, Victoria Street has an existing road allowance width of 66 ft. and a designated road allowance width of 86 ft.; therefore, a 10 ft. road widening is required from this property. A 25 ft. daylight triangle is also required at the intersection of Victoria Street and Water Street. However, it may not be appropriate to acquire the road widening and daylighting triangle under this application. The Committee reviewed the written submission of the Engineering Services, CN Rail in which they asked for certain conditions on the approval of this application. The Committee noted the written submissions of Mrs. M. Coleman and Mr. D. Coleman advising that Mrs. Coleman is the owner of 115 Victoria Street North and 123 Victoria Street North and that Mr. Coleman is the owner of 119 Victoria Street North and they are both opposed to this application. Mr. Hardie addressed the Committee stating that the nature of the application is to continue with the existing use and add auto sales. Mr. Hardie then read his planning report which was submitted with the application. Mr. Hardie advised that a similar application for a property at 181 Wellington Street North was approved by the Ontario Municipal Board. He stated that that property is in the same general area, being a transition area and the situation is similar. Mr. Hardie advised that the proposal is minor and compatible with the neighbourhood. Mr. Hardie then distributed parking layout plans. He stated that the property is almost entirely paved and access from the streets is almost entirely unrestricted. There is direct access from Victoria Street and two wide curb cuts along Water Street. He noted that the staff comments recommend a 1 m setback from Victoria Street and Water Street with the 1 m being landscaped. He advised that the owner is in agreement with that condition. Mr. Hardie then identified tandem parking on the plan, being spots 5, 6, 7 and 8 stating that this is an existing situation; it doesn't seem to interfere with access in anyway and the owner would like to keep those spaces. Mr. Hardie then advised that the by-law currently requires 8 parking spaces for the two bay garage and one additional space for the car sales office. Further, there are no changes proposed for the building. He also noted that the three residential dwellings on Victoria Street, adjacent to this property, are vacant and have been vacant for some time. Mr. Hardie concluded that there are no changes proposed for the property except landscaping and delineation of the parking spaces, which will improve the property and they wish to maintain the existing tandem parking. 9. Submission No. A 42/98 - Gurdev Sin.qh, cont'd Mr. Hardie then reviewed the written submission of CN Rail stating that there is no mutual property COk~ITTEE OF ADJUST1MEbIT 205 JUi~E 9. 1998 line with CN Rail. Mr. Hardie also reviewed the comments of the Regional Engineering Department noting that the road widening may not be appropriate. He advised that the owner will be agreeable to the daylighting triangle which is noted on the plan, but the ten foot road widening would be quite onerous. Mrs. Coleman addressed the Committee stating that she regretted that, prior to making this application, the applicant had not discussed his plans with her and her husband. She advised the Committee that she has a hearing impairment and didn't understand all of Mr. Hardie's presentation. She stated that their properties being vacant does not have any effect on this application. The Chairman questioned Mrs. Coleman, before hearing her submissions, whether she wanted a decision deferred because of her hearing impairment. Mrs. Coleman advised that that was not necessary, as Mr. Coleman could hear and could respond. Mrs. Coleman then read a written submission advising that she had purchased 123 Victoria Street North in 1986 and 115 Victoria Street North in 1981 and has since upgraded these properties. Mr. Coleman purchased 119 Victoria Street North in 1986. Mrs. Coleman stated that this is a special block zoned CR-3 and the Zoning & Official Plan are there for the protection of all property owners. Mrs. Coleman then reviewed the existing uses of the properties in the immediate area. Mrs. Coleman then questioned how many parking spaces are required for these uses and where they will be located. She stated that currently parking is wall to wall and many of these cars have for sales signs in their windows. This additional use would increase the value of the property at the expense of the neighbours. She stated that she was saddened to speak against a neighbour. She would like to work with the Planning Department to have the commercial zoning extended for the whole block. The Chairman questioned whether 123 Victoria Street North is currently used as a barber shop and Mrs. Coleman responded that it is not there any longer, as the realtor advised that it would sell better if it were vacant. Mr. A. Galloway questioned staff as to whether the zoning would allow the same uses in the whole block and Ms. Given responded that it would. Mr. Galloway then stated that it was unfortunate that Mrs. Coleman's properties do not have a legal non-conforming status, however; there was nothing in her presentation which would indicate that this application is anything other than appropriate. Ms. J. Given advised the Committee that staff had not had a chance to review the two site plans submitted by Mr. Hardie and requested that any approval be subject to final approval of a site plan by the Department of Planning & Development and the Traffic & Parking Division. Mr. Hardie noted that the applicant's preference was the parking arrangements showing 13 stalls. He advised that he had talked to Mr. K. Mayer this morning and he prefers this plan. Mrs. Coleman again addressed the Committee stating that it is her belief that this block is still in a residential mode and the Planning Department has not provided any help to change this. She stated that approval of this application provides no protection between the subject property and 123 Victoria Street North and she is concerned about her ability to enjoy her property. She questioned what was wrong with the current situation where the applicant has for sale signs in the car windows. She questioned why she should have to put up with noise and light from people selling cars at all hours of the day and night. She stated that everyone should have the same rights. The Chairman thanked everyone for attending the meeting this morning. He stated that the Committee is being asked to approve a use which is similar to the existing use. He felt that the test had been met in this application. The Chairman then raised the question whether the new use would perpetuate the legal non-conforming use and stated that there was no evidence put forward to prove this. The Chairman noted the Coleman's desire 9. Submission No. A 42/98 - Gurdev Sin,qh, cont'd to discuss the future use of this block and stated they should talk to other neighbours and with staff from the Department of Planning & Development. Mr. W. Dahms put forward a motion to approve the application with the condition requested by the Department of Planning & Development and with the dedication of the daylighting triangle to the Region of Waterloo as shown on the applicant's preferred site plan. COMHITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 206 JUlgE 9. 1998 At the request of Mr. Hardie the Committee agreed to also consider approval of a reduction in the required parking setback from 3 m to 1 m. Mr. Hardie explained that the only portion of the property where the 1 m setback would not be agreeable is adjacent to Water Street where there is the tandem parking. He explained that parking spaces 7 & 8 would be eliminated. Ms. J. Given noted that the recommendation includes everything except for driveway access points and staff would want a 1 m landscaping strip in that area. Mr. Galloway noted that he would want recommendation no. 1 of the Planning Department report included and any concerns that Mr. Hardie would have would have to be addressed by staff. Moved by Mr. W. Dahms Seconded by Ms. S. Campbell That the application of Gurdev Singh requesting permission to expand an existing legal non- conforming automobile repair business by adding automobile sales on Lot 13 and Part Lot 12, Registered Plan 389, 131 Victoria Street North, Kitchener, Ontario BE APPROVED, subject to the conditions noted below. It is the opinion of this Committee that the addition of automobile sales to this property is similar to the purpose for which the property was used on the day the by-law was passed. - AND FURTHER - That the application of Gurdev Singh requesting permission to locate parking 1 m (3.28 ft. from the property lines along Victoria Street and Water Street rather than the required 3 m (9.85 ft. on Lot 13 and Part Lot 12, Registered Plan 389, 131 Victoria Street North, Kitchener, Ontario BE APPROVED subject to the following conditions: That the owner shall convey to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo, without cost and free of encumbrance, a 25 ft. daylighting triangle at the intersection of Victoria Street and Water Street. That a site plan be developed and maintained to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Planning, Development and Design in accordance with a site plan to be approved by the said Director, including demarcation of parking spaces, the installation of raised concrete curbing and a 1 m wide landscaped area along both street frontages, save and except for driveway access points. Such works are to be completed by September 15, 1998. No extension to this completion date shall be granted unless approved in writing by the Director of Community Planning, Development and Design prior to September 15, 1998. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance requested in this application is minor in nature. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Official Plan are being maintained on the subject property. Carried 10. Submission No. A 43/98 - Cango Inc., 3600 Billings Court #109, Burlinqton, Ontario Part Lots 2 & 3, Plan 404 and Part Lot 206, Streets and Lanes, 851 King Street East, Kitchener, Ontario. APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: Mr. A. Reid c/o 109-3600 Billings Court Burlington, Ontario COHHITTEE OF ADJUST1MENT 207 JUlgE 9. 1998 CONTRA: NONE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: IN SUPPORT: NONE CONTRA: NONE The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission for a cooler, accessory to the restaurant, with a rearyard of 0 m rather than the required 7.5 m (24.61 ft.). The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Planning & Development in which they advised that the applicant is requesting permission for a cooler, accessary to the restaurant, with a rear yard of 0 metres rather than the required 7.5 metres (24.61 feet). This application should be amended to request permission for a cooler addition having a left side yard of 0 metres rather than the required 1.2 metres. Submission A 6~98 granted approval for a restaurant and deck with a rear yard of 0.4 metres and a left side yard of 0 metres. The applicant is now proposing to add a cooler to the left side of the building in order to improve the functionality of the restaurant. The proposed walk-in cooler is approximately 10.4 m-and will be accessed from inside the building. The intent of the 1.2 metre side yard request is to ensure that there is sufficient side yard remaining to allow exterior maintenance of the structure as well as to lessen the impact on the abutting properties. In this regard, as the proposed addition is relatively small at 10.4 m2 and only a small portion will be located on the lot line, the impact on the abutting property will be negligible and the ability to provide maintenance to the one storey structure will be maintained. The Department of Planning and Development recommends approval of Submission A 43/98 as amended requesting permission for an addition onto the existing building having a side yard setback of 0 metres rather than the required 1.2 metres. The Committee noted the comments of the Engineering Department, Region of Waterloo, in which they advised that issues related to road widening and access are being addressed through Site Plan application 97/27/K/RM. At the request of Mr. Reid, the Committee agreed to consider the amendment noted in the comments of the Department of Planning & Development. Moved by Mr. A. Galloway Seconded by Ms. S. Campbell That the application of Cango Inc. requesting permission for a cooler addition to the existing building, with a sideyard of 0 m rather than the required 1.2 m (4 ft.) on Part Lots 2 & 3, Plan 404 and Part Lot 206, Streets and Lanes, 851 King Street East, Kitchener, Ontario BE APPROVED. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance requested in this application is minor in nature. 10. Submission No. A 43/98 - Can,qo Inc., cont'd 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Official Plan are being maintained on the subject property. Carried COMIMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 208 JUlgE 9. 1998 11. Submission No. A 44/98 - John & Cathy Bonneville, 143 Pandora Avenue North, Kitchener, Ontario Lot 86, Registered Plan 284, 143 Pandora Avenue, Kitchener Ontario. APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: Mr. R. Wagner cio Pioneer Craftsman Ltd. 1244 Victoria Street north Kitchener, Ontario CONTRA: NONE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: IN SUPPORT: NONE CONTRA: NONE The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to construct a new front porch and roof with a setback from Pandora Avenue of 4.28 m (14.125 ft.) rather than the required 4.5 m (14.77 ft.). The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Planning & Development in which they advised that the applicants are requesting permission to construct a new front porch with a roof having a setback from Pandora Avenue of 4.28 m (14.125 ft.) rather than the required 4.5 m (14.77 ft.). A building permit was issued April 20, 1998 for the construction of a roofed front porch to be built directly on top of an existing previously unroofed porch. Because the new porch will be roofed, it may not be located within the required frontyard setback. During construction it was discovered that the frontyard setback is 4.3 m (14.13 ft.), being 0.19 m (.64 ft.) less than the required 4.5 m. Staff note that there is no survey for the subject property and it is the responsibility of the applicant to ensure the exact location of the lot lines. The reduction in the frontyard created by the porch would not appear to have an adverse impact on the streetscape and is not out of character for the neighbourhood, as many lots in the area have small frontyard setbacks. Further, it would not appear to affect the neighbouring property owners' enjoyment of their lands. Based on the above, it is the opinion of staff that the subject variance is minor in nature and the general intent of the by-law is being met. The Department of Planning & Development recommends approval of the variance as shown on the sketch submitted by the applicant. The Committee noted the comments of the Director of Building in which he advised that a building permit is required to construct the new porch. 11. Submission No. A 44/98 - John & Cathy Bonneville, Moved by Mr. A. Galloway Seconded by Ms. S. Campbell That the application of John & Cathy Bonneville requesting permission to construct a new front porch COMIMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 209 JUlgE 9. 1998 and roof with a setback from Pandora Avenue of 4.3 m (14.13 ft.) rather than the required 4.5 m (14.77 ft.) on Lot 86, Registered Plan 284, 143 Pandora Avenue, Kitchener, Ontario BE APPROVED, subject to the following condition: 1. That the variance as approved in this application shall apply to the proposed roofed porch only as shown on the plan submitted with this application. 2. That a building permit be obtained prior to constructing the roofed porch. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance requested in this application is minor in nature. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Official Plan are being maintained on the subject property. Carried CONSENT Submission No.'s B 46/98 & A 36/98 - Andrew Nessner In Trust, cio Box 2215, Kitchener, Ontario Re: Part Lots 27 & 28, Registered Plan 789, 419 & 425 Lancaster Street West, Kitchener, Ontario. APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: Mr. R. Lawson 370 Frederick Street Kitchener, Ontario CONTRA: NONE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: IN SUPPORT: NONE CONTRA: NONE The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to sever two properties so that each may be dealt with separately. The severed land, 419 Lancaster Street West, has a frontage on Lancaster Street of 15.54 m (51 ft.) by a depth of 78.26 m (256.76 ft.) and an area of 1,216.16 square meters (13,091.07 sq. ft.) and contains a six unit apartment building. The retained lands, 425 Lancaster Street West, also contain a six unit apartment building. The Committee of Adjustment deferred consideration of Submission No. B 46/98 to allow the applicant to amend the application to create mutual rights-of-way over the existing driveways. The applicant is now requesting these rights-of-way. The Committee of Adjustment also deferred consideration of Submission No. B 46/98 because there were parking variances on these properties. The applicant has now submitted Submission No. A 36/98 requesting legalization of off-street parking spaces located between the front of each building and the property line along Lancaster Street. 1. Submission No.'s B 46/98 & A 36/98 - Andrew Nessner In Trust, cont'd The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Planning & Development in which they advised that the applicant is requesting permission to sever the property at 419 and 425 Lancaster Street West. The proposed severed parcel will have a lot width of 15.54 metres (51 feet) and the proposed retained parcel will have a lot width of 17.98 metres (59 feet). Each of the proposed COMIMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 210 JUlgE 9. 1998 parcels currently contain a 6 unit apartment building with 2 units on each floor. Each building provides 6 parking spaces between the building and the front property line. The properties were built in 1960 under former By-law 3433 which required 1 parking space per unit; the 6 parking spaces provided for each building (12 in total) complied with the original zoning by-law requirements and also complies with the current Zoning By-law 85-1 for six spaces for each building. The required setback for parking under the former by-law was the same as the building line setback 68 feet from the centre line of the street at the time, or 35 feet from the original lot line. Six of the parking spaces, or portions thereof, were located ahead of the building line and did not comply with the requirements at the time. As a widening of varying width was subsequently taken from the property, those parking spaces within the front yard ranging from 20.27 feet from the current lot line at the northerly end of the site, to 28.55 feet at the southerly end were never legal. The current requirements for multiple dwellings are such that the required parking, except for visitor parking, cannot be situated between the facade of the building and the street, and in no case shall any parking be permitted within 3.0 metres of the street line. The applicant has filed a minor variance application requesting that all parking spaces be permitted in the front yard of the two proposed lots, between the buildings and the street line. Technically, only those spaces between the original setback in By-law 3433 require minor variance approval, as those behind this line would be considered legal non-conforming As the parking spaces have existed since the property was developed in 1960, the Department is prepared to support the minor variance application as there is no other location on site to provide the parking. The by-law is intended to govern the new construction of multiple dwellings. The applicant's agent has agreed to the road widening as requested by the Region. Staff note that with the requested widening, one of the existing parking spaces at 419 Lancaster St. W. would encroach into the widened portion of the right-of-way. As the current width of the parking spaces is more than sufficient, the owner is required to revise the demarcation of all the spaces to a width to 8.5 feet and move the spaces in order to provide all parking within his property, without any spaces located in the future road widening. The proposed lots comply in all other respects to the current zoning regulations. Further, the applicant has amended his consent application to provide a mutual rights-of-way totalling 12.19 metres in order to allow access over each other's property for ingress and egress. It is staff's position that the consent and minor variance applications represent good planning as each proposed lot can function independently when severed, with mutual rights-of-way and the minor variance meets the four tests set out in Section 45(1 ) of the Planning Act. 1. That Minor Variance Application A 36~98 be approved. 2. That Consent Application B 46/98, as amended, be approved as follows: 1 ) That Minor Variance Application A 36~98 be finally approved. 2) That satisfactory arrangements be made with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding Municipal property taxes and/or local improvement charges. 1. Submission No.'s B 46/98 & A 36/98 - Andrew Nessner In Trust, cont'd 3) That the owner demarcate all the parking spaces at 419 Lancaster St. W. to a width of 8.5 feet, to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Community Planning, Development and Design. 4) That a joint maintenance agreement, to be approved by the City Solicitor, be registered against title of both the severed and retained lands, to ensure that rights-of way for access to both properties are maintained in perpetuity. The Committee noted the comments of the Traffic & Parking Division in which they advised that it is COMHITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 211 JUlgE 9. 1998 assumed that a mutual right-of-way will be established over both severed parcels for the shared driveway entrance at Lancaster Street. It is also noted that the parking lot may not comply with the 3 m setback requirement. The Committee noted the comments of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo in which they advised that, at this location, a 10 ft. road widening would normally be required; however, a partial tapered widening has already been acquired from this property. Therefore, the exact widening to be conveyed to the Region will have to be determined by an Ontario Land Surveyor. As well, these properties currently operate with a substandard shared access to Lancaster Street. A Regional Road Entrance permit will be required to widen the existing access to a 7.629.0 throat width with a 6 m radii. Regional staff have no objection to the approval of this application subject to those conditions. When questioned by the Committee, Mr. Lawson advised that the applicant was in agreement with all of the recommended conditions. SUBMISSION NO. B 46/98 Moved by Ms. S Campbell Seconded by Mr. A. Galloway That the application of Andrew Nessner In Trust requesting permission to convey a parcel of land having a frontage on Lancaster Street of 15.54 m (51 ft.) by a depth of 78.26 m (256.76 ft.) and an area of 1,216.16 square meters (13,091.07 sq. ft.), subject to and together with a right-of-way for access to Lancaster Street on Part Lot 27, Registered Plan 789, 419 Lancaster Street West, Kitchener, Ontario, BE GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: That the owner shall convey to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo, without cost and free of encumbrance, the appropriate road widening across the Lancaster Street frontage of the severed and retained lands, as determined by an Ontario Land Surveyor. 2. That the owner shall obtain approval of a Regional Road Entrance permit. 3. That the owner shall receive final approval of Submission No. A 36~98. That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and/or local improvements charges. That the owner shall demarcate all the parking spaces at 419 Lancaster Street West, to a width of 8.5 ft., to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Community Planning, Development and Design. That the owner shall prepare a joint maintenance agreement, to be approved by the City Solicitor and registered on title of both the severed and retained lands, to ensure that rights- of-way for access to both properties are maintained in perpetuity. Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfil the above- noted conditions within one year of the date of giving notice of this decision. 1. Submission No.'s B 46/98 & A 36/98 - Andrew Nessner In Trust, cont'd Submission No. B 46/98, cont'd Pursuant to Subsection 43 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the decision of this Committee shall lapse 2 years from the date of approval, being June 9, 2000. It is the opinion of this Committee that: A plan of Subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. 2. The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the COMHITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 212 JUlgE 9. 1998 retained lands. The use of the land in this application conforms to the City of Kitchener Official Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Carried SUBMISSION NO. A 36/98 Moved by Ms. S. Campbell Seconded by Mr. A. Galloway That the application of Andrew Nessner In Trust requesting legalization of off-street parking spaces located between the front of each building and the property line along Lancaster Street on Part Lots 27 & 28, Registered Plan 789, 419 & 425 Lancaster Street West, Kitchener, Ontario BE APPROVED. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance requested in this application is minor in nature. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Official Plan are being maintained on the subject property. Carried Submission No. B 54/98 - George Voisin - 645 Westmount Road, East, Kitchener, Ontario Part Lot 35, German Company Tract, Being Part 8, Reference Plan 58R-10060, Future Eastforest Trail at Bankside Drive, Kitchener, Ontario. APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: Mr. V. Varga 107 Roseneath Crescent Kitchener, Ontario CONTRA: NONE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: IN SUPPORT: NONE CONTRA: NONE The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to convey a parcel of land having an area of 379 m2 (4,079.66 sq. ft.) as a lot addition to abutting land, to form a lot for a single family dwelling. The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Planning & Development in which they advised that the applicant is requesting permission to sever Part 9 from Part 11 on the sketch. The land to be severed, Part 9, is proposed as a lot addition with the abutting lands, part 8 and Block 67, Registered Plan 1738 to create one lot. The land to be retained, Part 11, 2. Submission No. B 54/98 - Geor.qe Voisin, cont'd is proposed as a lot addition with Part 10 to create a second lot. Both proposed lots will gain access to Eastforest Trail which is currently under construction. Parts 9 and 11 were intended as lot additions to Parts 8 and 10 respectively, with the severance of Part 8 from Part 10 under Consent Application B 42/97. However, Parts 9 and 11 inadvertently merged in title. Since Parts 9 and 11 have merged in title, the finalization of the lot additions cannot occur until Parts 9 and 11 are separated again, which is the purpose of this severance. Service connections for the two lots have COk~ITTEE OF ADJUST1MEbIT 213 JUi~E 9. 1998 already been provided for. The Department of Planning and Development has no objection to the proposed severance, the review of which has previously been considered through Consent application B 42/97. That application B 54~98 be approved subject to the following conditions: That the lands to be severed (Part 9 of the attached sketch) be added to the abutting lands described as part of Part 8 and Block 67, Registered Plan 1738 and that the retained lands (Part 11 of the attached sketch) be added to the abutting lands described as Part 10 and each title be taken in identical ownership as the abutting lands. Any subsequent conveyance of the parcels shall comply with Sections 50(3) and/or (5) of the Planning Act, 1996. That satisfactory arrangements be made with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding Municipal property taxes and/or local improvement charges. The Committee noted the comments of the Region of Waterloo in which they advised that they have no concerns with this application. Moved by Mr. A. Galloway Seconded by Ms. S. Campbell That the application of George Voisin requesting permission to convey a parcel of land having an area of 379 m2 (4079.66 sq. ft.) as a lot addition to abutting land on Part Lot 35, German Company Tract, Being Part 9, Reference Plan 58R-10060, Future Eastforest Trail at Bankside Drive, Kitchener, Ontario BE GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: That the lands to be severed (Part 9) shall be added to the abutting lands described as part of Part 8 of the attached sketch and Block 67, Registered Plan 1738 and that the retained lands (Part 11 ) shall be added to the abutting lands described as Part 10 of the attached sketch and each title be taken in identical ownership as the abutting lands. Any subsequent conveyance of the parcels shall comply with Sections 50(3) and/or (5) of the Planning Act, 1996. That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding Municipal property taxes and/or local improvement charges. Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfil the above- noted conditions within one year of the date of giving notice of this decision. Pursuant to Subsection 43 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the decision of this Committee shall lapse 2 years from the date of approval, being June 9, 2000. It is the opinion of this Committee that: A plan of Subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. Re: Submission No. B 54/98 - Geor,qe Voisin, cont'd The use of the land in this application conforms to the City of Kitchener Official Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Carried Submission No. B 55/98 - The Governing Council of the Salvation Army in Canada, 130 Duke Street East, Kitchener, Ontario Parts of Lots 7 & 8, Registered Plan 364, 79 Weber Street East and Part Lots 8 & 28, Registered Plan 364, 130 Duke Street East, Kitchener, Ontario. C0}~]MITTEE OF ADJUST1MENT 214 JUlgE 9. 1998 The Committee was in receipt of a request from the applicant's agent to defer consideration of this application to the meeting of June 30, 1998 and the Committee agreed to this request. Re: Submission No. B 56/98 - Oswenda Investments Limited c/o Daros Management Limited, 40 Constellation Court, Etobicoke, Ontario Part of Blocks B & C, Registered Plan 1240, 720 Westmount Road East, Kitchener, Ontario. APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: Mr G. Auer 582 Frederick Street Kitchener, Ontario CONTRA: NONE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: IN SUPPORT: NONE OTHER: NONE The Committee was advised that the applicant is proposing to sell the whole of Block B, Registered Plan 1240 and is requesting permission to retain a right-of-way over a portion of Block B and give the new owner of Block B a right-of-way over a portion of Block C, so that both properties can use the existing driveway which enters the property from Westmount Road. The Committee noted the comment of the Department of Planning & Development in which they advised that the subject lands are comprised of Blocks 'B' and 'C', Registered Plan 1240, and are located within a designated Neighbourhood Commercial District on Westmount Road, immediately east of Ottawa Street. Block 'C' is presently developed with a Neighbourhood Commercial plaza and associated parking and Block 'B' is presently undeveloped. The applicant, who currently owns both blocks, is proposing to establish rights-of-way for access over an existing driveway, in favour of both blocks. The purpose of establishing the right-of-way at this time is to facilitate the sale of Block 'B'. The proposed right-of-way would be established in two parts. The first, identified as Parcel 1 on the attached plan, is located over a portion of Block 'B' and would be retained by the land owner in favour of Block 'C'. The second, identified as Parcel 2 on the attached plan, is located over a portion of Block 'C' and would be granted in favour of the new owner of Block 'B'. This right-of-way would be conveyed in the future with the sale of Block 'B'. The size and location of the proposed rights-of-way are sufficient to accommodate full access to the existing development on Block 'C' and are expected to accommodate a range of access and site circulation options for any future development which may be approved on Block 'B' by way of Site Plan Application. 4. Submission No. B 56/98 - Oswenda Investments Limited, cont'd Accordingly, the Department of Planning and Development recommends approval of Consent Application B 56/98, subject to conditions. The Department of Planning and Development recommends that Consent Application B 56/98, be approved subject to the following conditions: That satisfactory arrangements be made with the City of Kitchener for payment of any outstanding Municipal property taxes and/or local improvement charges. That a joint maintenance agreement, to be approved by the City Solicitor, be registered against title of both the severed and retained lands, to ensure that rights-of-way for access to both properties are maintained in perpetuity. COk~ITTEE OF ADJUST1MEbIT 215 JUi~E 9. 1998 The Committee noted the comments of the Region of Waterloo in which they advised that they have no concerns with this application. Moved by Mr. A. Galloway Seconded by Ms. S. Campbell That the application of Oswenda Investments Limited requesting permission to retain a right-of-way over a portion of Block B and give the new owner of Block B a right-of-way over a portion of Block C on Part of Blocks B & C, Registered Plan 1240, 720 Westmount Road East, Kitchener, Ontario BE GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with the City of Kitchener for payment of any outstanding Municipal property taxes and/or local improvement charges. That the owner shall prepare a joint maintenance agreement, which shall be approved by the City Solicitor, and shall be registered against title of both the severed and retained lands, to ensure that rights-of-way for access to both properties are maintained in perpetuity. Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfil the above- noted conditions within one year of the date of giving notice of this decision. Pursuant to Subsection 43 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the decision of this Committee shall lapse 2 years from the date of approval, being June 9, 2000. It is the opinion of this Committee that: A plan of Subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. The use of the land in this application conforms to the City of Kitchener Official Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Carried CHANGE OF CONDITIONS APPLICATIONS 1. Submission No. C 2/98 to C 11/98 - George Voisin, 645 Westmount Road East, Kitchener, Ontario Re: Parts of Lot 35, German Company Tract, Future Eastforest Trail, Kitchener, Ontario. Submission No. C 2/98 to C 11/98 - Geor.qe Voisin, cont'd APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: CONTRA: WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: IN SUPPORT: CONTRA: Mr. V. Varga 107 Roseneath Crescent Kitchener, Ontario NONE NONE NONE COMHITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 216 JUlgE 9. 1998 The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to change a condition in each of Submission No. B 42/97 and B 49/97 to B 57/97 inclusive, which requires that Eastforest Trail be opened by by-law. He is requesting that the condition be changed to the following: "That the owner shall enter into an agreement with the City of Kitchener which states that no building permits shall be issued until Eastforest Trail has been completed and opened by by- law." The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Planning and Development in which they advised that Applications B-42/97 and B-49-57/98 were approved by the Committee of Adjustment on July 15, 1997, to create a number of lots for single detached dwellings fronting Eastforest Trail, which the City is constructing. When approval was given for these applications, it was intended that the construction begin in 1997; however, due to tendering problems, the construction did not begin until the spring of 1998. This delay in the road construction may cause a timing problem with the endorsement of deeds, given that each of the consents require that Eastforest Trail be constructed and open by By-law within the 1 year period for fulfilling conditions, which is July 25, 1998. This is likely to create a timing problem for these consents, which would be invalid if the conditions were not met within the prescribed one year. These applications seek approval to amend the wording of the condition related to the opening of Eastforest Trail so as to facilitate the finalizing of these severances. The proposed rewording would require an agreement requiring the opening of the road by by-law prior to the issuance of any building permits on each respective lot. This would maintain the original intent and allow the creation of the lots, as the by-law prescribes that "No lot shall have built upon it...unless the lot abuts a street." Staff support the requested change in the condition in each case as the original intent and zoning compliance is maintained. That C2-11/98 requesting permission to change condition 8 of Provisional Consent B-42/97 and Condition 8 of each of Provisional Consents B-49-57/98 be recommended so that the respective conditions will be revised to read as follows: "That the owner shall enter into an agreement with the City, to the satisfaction of the City solicitor, requiring that no building permits shall be issued for the lot until such time as Eastforest Trail from Highland Road to Bankside Drive is constructed and open by By-law of Council." The Committee considered the comments of the Region of Waterloo in which they advised that they have no objection to these applications. The Committee noted the comments of the Grand River Conservation Authority in which they advised that they have no concerns with these applications. 1. Submission No. C 2/98 to C 11/98 - Geor,qe Voisin, cont'd SUBMISSION NO. C 2/98 Moved by Mr. A. Galloway Seconded by Ms. S. Campbell That the application of George Voisin requesting permission to change condition no. 8 in Submission No. B 42/97 BE GRANTED, so that the condition now reads as follows: "That the owner shall enter into an agreement with the City, to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor, requiring that no building permits shall be issued for the lot until such time as Eastforest Trail from Highland Road to Bankside Drive is constructed and opened by By-law of COHHITTEE OF ADJUST1MENT 217 JUlgE 9. 1998 Council." Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfil the above- noted condition within one year of the date of giving notice of this decision. It is the opinion of this Committee that: A plan of Subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. The use of the land in this application conforms to the City of Kitchener Official Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Carried SUBMISSION NO. C 3/98 Moved by Mr. A. Galloway Seconded by Ms. S. Campbell That the application of George Voisin requesting permission to change condition no. 8 in Submission No. B 50/97 BE GRANTED, so that the condition now reads as follows: "That the owner shall enter into an agreement with the City to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor, requiring that no building permits shall be issued for the lot until such time as Eastforest Trail from Highland Road to Bankside Drive is constructed and opened by By-law of Council." Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfil the above- noted condition within one year of the date of giving notice of this decision. It is the opinion of this Committee that: A plan of Subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. The use of the land in this application conforms to the City of Kitchener Official Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Carried SUBMISSION NO. C 4/98 Moved by Mr.A. Galloway Seconded by Ms. S. Campbell That the application of George Voisin requesting permission to change condition no. 8 in Submission No. B 50/97 BE GRANTED, so that the condition now reads as follows: 1. Submission No. C 2/98 to C 11/98 - Geor,qe Voisin, cont'd Submission No. C 4/98, cont'd "That the owner shall enter into an agreement with the City to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor, requiring that no building permits shall be issued for the lot until such time as Eastforest Trail from Highland Road to Bankside Drive is constructed and opened by By-law of Council." COk~ITTEE OF ADJUST1MEbIT 218 JUi~E 9. 1998 Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfil the above- noted condition within one year of the date of giving notice of this decision. It is the opinion of this Committee that: A plan of Subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. The use of the land in this application conforms to the City of Kitchener Official Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Carried SUBMISSION NO. C 5/98 Moved by Mr. A. Galloway Seconded by Ms. S. Campbell That the application of George Voisin requesting permission to change condition no. 8 in Submission No. B 51/97 BE GRANTED, so that the condition now reads as follows: "That the owner shall enter into an agreement with the City to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor, requiring that no building permits shall be issued for the lot until such time as Eastforest Trail from Highland Road to Bankside Drive is constructed and opened by By-law of Council." Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfil the above- noted condition within one year of the date of giving notice of this decision. It is the opinion of this Committee that: A plan of Subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. The use of the land in this application conforms to the City of Kitchener Official Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Carried SUBMISSION NO. C 6~98 Moved by Mr.A. Galloway Seconded by Ms. S. Campbell That the application of George Voisin requesting permission to change condition no. 8 in Submission No. B 52/97 BE GRANTED, so that the condition now reads as follows: "That the owner shall enter into an agreement with the City to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor, requiring that no building permits shall be issued for the lot until such time as Eastforest Trail from Highland Road to Bankside Drive is constructed and opened by By-law of Council." 1. Submission No. C 2/98 to C 11/98 - Geor,qe Voisin, cont'd Submission No. C 6/98, cont'd COMHITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 219 JlJl~E 9~ 1998 Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfil the above- noted condition within one year of the date of giving notice of this decision. It is the opinion of this Committee that: A plan of Subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. The use of the land in this application conforms to the City of Kitchener Official Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Carried SUBMISSION NO. C 7/98 Moved by Mr. A. Galloway Seconded by Ms. S. Campbell That the application of George Voisin requesting permission to change condition no. 8 in Submission No. B 53/97 BE GRANTED, so that the condition now reads as follows: "That the owner shall enter into an agreement with the City to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor, requiring that no building permits shall be issued for the lot until such time as Eastforest Trail from Highland Road to Bankside Drive is constructed and opened by By-law of Council." Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfil the above- noted condition within one year of the date of giving notice of this decision. It is the opinion of this Committee that: A plan of Subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. The use of the land in this application conforms to the City of Kitchener Official Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Carried SUBMISSION NO. C 8/98 Moved by Mr.A. Galloway Seconded by Ms. S. Campbell That the application of George Voisin requesting permission to change condition no. 8 in Submission No. B 54/97 BE GRANTED, so that the condition now reads as follows: "That the owner shall enter into an agreement with the City to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor, requiring that no building permits shall be issued for the lot until such time as Eastforest Trail from Highland Road to Bankside Drive is constructed and opened by By-law of Council." Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfil the above- noted condition within one year of the date of giving notice of this decision. COMIMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 220 JUlgE 9. 1998 1. Submission No. C 2/98 to C 11/98 - Geor.qe Voisin, cont'd Submission No. C 8/98, cont'd It is the opinion of this Committee that: A plan of Subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. The use of the land in this application conforms to the City of Kitchener Official Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Carried SUBMISSION NO. C 9/98 Moved by Mr. A. Galloway Seconded by Ms. S. Campbell That the application of George Voisin requesting permission to change condition no. 8 in Submission No. B 55/97 BE GRANTED, so that the condition now reads as follows: "That the owner shall enter into an agreement with the City to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor, requiring that no building permits shall be issued for the lot until such time as Eastforest Trail from Highland Road to Bankside Drive is constructed and opened by By-law of Council." Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfil the above- noted condition within one year of the date of giving notice of this decision. It is the opinion of this Committee that: A plan of Subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. The use of the land in this application conforms to the City of Kitchener Official Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Carried SUBMISSION NO. C 10/98 Moved by Mr. A. Galloway Seconded by Ms. S. Campbell That the application of George Voisin requesting permission to change condition no. 8 in Submission No. B 56/97 BE GRANTED, so that the condition now reads as follows: "That the owner shall enter into an agreement with the City to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor, requiring that no building permits shall be issued for the lot until such time as Eastforest Trail from Highland Road to Bankside Drive is constructed and opened by By-law of Council." Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfil the above- noted condition within one year of the date of giving notice of this decision. COMIMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 221 JUlgE 9. 1998 It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. A plan of Subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. 1. Submission No. C 2/98 to C 11/98 - Geor.qe Voisin, cont'd Submission No. C 10/98, cont'd The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. The use of the land in this application conforms to the City of Kitchener Official Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Carried SUBMISSION NO. C 11/98 Moved by Mr. A. Galloway Seconded by Ms. S. Campbell That the application of George Voisin requesting permission to change condition no. 8 in Submission No. B 57/97 BE GRANTED, so that the condition now reads as follows: "That the owner shall enter into an agreement with the City to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor, requiring that no building permits shall be issued for the lot until such time as Eastforest Trail from Highland Road to Bankside Drive is constructed and opened by By-law of Council." Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfil the above- noted condition within one year of the date of giving notice of this decision. It is the opinion of this Committee that: A plan of Subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. The use of the land in this application conforms to the City of Kitchener Official Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Carried VALIDATION OF TITLE APPLICATIONS Submission No. VT 1/98 - Estate of Zenta Peters, Walter Inkis, Executor, 82 Oxford Street, Kitchener, Ontario Part Lot 77, Registered Plan 660, 86 Oxford Street, Kitchener, Ontario. APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: Mr. B. Wolf 82 Weber Street East Kitchener, Ontario COMIMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 222 JUlgE 9. 1998 CONTRA: WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: IN SUPPORT: CONTRA: NONE NONE NONE The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting validation of a transfer of land which took place on July 31, 1997, without Consent approval. The property has a frontage of 15.24 m (50 ft.) by a depth of 53.52 m (175.6 ft.) and an area of 815.69 m2 (8,780 sq. ft.). 1. Submission No. VT 1/98 - Estate of Zenta Peters, Walter Inkis, Executor, cont'd The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Planning and Development in which they advised that this application for Validation of Title pertains to 86 Oxford Street, containing a single detached dwelling and accessory garage. Zenta Peters became the owner of both 82 and 86 Oxford Street, which caused them to merge. In July, 1997, the estate of Zenta Peters transferred 86 Oxford Street by deed to Walter Inkas, without consent approval under Section 53 of the Planning Act. No certificate may be issued under Section 57 of the Planning Act unless the certificate conforms with the official plan and zoning by-law. The single detached dwelling conforms with the Official Plan, however, the sideyard of the detached garage is in contravention of the Zoning By-law requirement of 1.2 metres (4 feet), as it is located 1.38 feet from the side lot line of the lands subject to the validation of title. Accordingly, the certificate may be issued only upon final approval of a minor variance application to permit an accessory structure to have a sideyard of 0.42 metres (1.38 feet) rather than 1.2 metres (4 feet). Otherwise, the detached structure could be removed so as to comply. Staff note that it would appear as though a consent or validation of title certificate would be required relative to 82 Oxford Street as well. The Department of Planning and Development recommends approval of Submission VTl/98 subject only to final approval of a minor variance application to legalize a 0.42 metre sideyard for the existing detached garage or the removal of the detached garage. Mr. Wolf addressed the Committee advising that he had just received the staff comments and had not anticipated the minor variance. He felt that the application was straight forward and he was not sure of the applicability of the condition. The Chairman stated that he did not have a problem with recreating the lot itself but questioned whether creating the new lot would create a non-conforming situation. He stated that he was also concerned about the setback of the house at 82 Oxford Street. He questioned whether approving an application for Validation of Title, allowing the property to be dealt with separately, could be approved if it created minor variances. Mr. Wolf responded that this would be opening a pandoras box and questioned whether the properties had legal non-conforming status. He stated that the buildings were there prior to the by- law. He also advised that previously these were whole lots. In the 1960's, 50 ft. of the rear of the lots were severed to facilitate Bond Street and larger lots on Bond Street. These have always been separate lots and always have been treated as separate lots. He suggested not creating any new problems. Mr. Wolf suggested that it is a legal question whether these lots have legal non- conforming status. If they do not, staff can deal with this as a separate matter. Mr. Wolf suggested that this was a technical matter and that Zenta Peters conveyed and held part of a lot; however, if it had been a whole lot, there would be no problem. He stated that this is a technical matter and staff are creating unnecessary problems for the owner. He stated that this will recreate a situation that always was there. The Chairman stated that he appreciated Mr. Wolf's comments about the technical matter and questioned whether the sideyards would have complied in 1997. Mr. Wolf responded that in 1997 the Committee would have asked two questions: Does the property comply with the by-law or is it legal non-conforming? The Chairman then questioned whether, in a merger, the Iotline disappears. Mr. Wolf stated that this would be reconstituting the boundary but creating boundaries doesn't change legal non-conformity. The current rules would only apply if the applicant was constructing COHHITTEE OF ADJUST1MENT 223 JUlgE 9. 1998 something new. The Chairman noted that usually, when dealing with Applications for Consent, the Committee would ask for a companion minor variance relative to the severance line. The Chairman questioned what the timing was and whether this matter was urgent. Mr. Wolf advised that there is some urgency as there is an Offer to Purchase, scheduled to close next week. With a Validation of Title, there is no appealed period as this is a technical breach. Mr. Wolf suggested that the important question is whether or not the boundaries offend a by-law. If it is determined in law that the by-law is offended, then the applicant can bring an application. The other possibility is that the property has legal non- conforming status. The 1. Submission No. VT 1/98 - Estate of Zenta Peters, Walter Inkis, Executor, cont'd Chairman then questioned the legal non-conforming status and if the legal non-conforming status is not before the Committee, then it has to deal with the current requirements. Mr. A. Galloway stated that he has a concern with the creation of the lot and he would defer to staff comments. In the case of the merger, the line disappears and the property would have to comply with the current requirements or receive a minor variance approval. It was his belief that the non- conforming status disappear. Staff are recommending that a Minor Variance Application be submitted and Mr. Galloway advised that he was convinced that the Committee is creating a non- complying sideyard with the creation of the line. Ms. J. Given then read the provincial regulations dealing with Validation of Title in which it advised that there must be compliance with the existing zoning. Ms. J. Given stated that Validation of Title would also be required for 82 Oxford Street and this is also the opinion of the Legal Department. Ms. S. Campbell stated that she would not be comfortable approving this application conditionally. It was her view that there is need for the Committee to see an Application for Minor Variance prior to approving this application. Then Mr. Wolf questioned whether Applications for Minor Variance are needed for both properties and if it is needed for 82 Oxford Street a survey would be required which would be an additional expense for his client. It was then suggested that a validation certificate for 86 Oxford Street would validate that deed and the applicant could deal with 82 Oxford Street separately. Ms. J. Given stated that it seemed from discussion with our Legal staff that they would still require validation for 82 Oxford Street. Ms. S. Campbell stated that it was up to the agent to decide whether only 86 Oxford Street requires Validation of Title and that the second validation would be up to him. Ms. J. Given noted that a minor variance for the land which is the subject of the Application for Validation of Title is the only application which is currently required. Moved by Mr. A. Galloway Seconded by Ms. S. Campbell That consideration of Submission VT 1/98 be deferred to allow the applicant an opportunity to submit an Application for Minor Variance for 86 Oxford Street relative to the Iotline to be created between 82 & 86 Oxford Street. Carried Mr. B. Wolf requested that the motion include the garage only. ADJOURNMENT On Motion, the meeting adjourned at 12:35 p.m. Dated at the City of Kitchener this 9th day of June, 1998. D. H. Gilchrist C0}~]MITTEE OF ADJUST1MENT 224 JUlgE 9. 1998 Secretary-Treasurer Committee of Adjustment