Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAdjustment - 1998-12-08COA\1998-12-08 COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FOR THE CITY OF KITCHENER MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING HELD DECEMBER 8, 1998 MEMBERS PRESENT: and P. Kruse. OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ms. S. Campbell and Messrs. W. Dahms, A. Galloway, S. Kay Ms. J. Given, Senior Planner and Ms. D. H. Gilchrist, Secretary-Treasurer. APPOINTMENT OF CHAIR AND VICE-CHAIR Moved by Ms. S. Campbell Seconded by Mr. P. Kruse That Mr. W. Dahms be appointed Chair of the Committee of Adjustment for a term to expire November 30, 1999. Moved by Ms. S. Campbell Seconded by Mr. P. Kruse Carried Carried Mr. W. Dahms, Chair, called the meeting to order at 9:30 a.m. MINUTES Moved by Mr. W. Dahms Seconded by Mr. P. Kruse That the minutes of the regular meeting of the Committee of Adjustment of November 17, 1998, as mailed to the members, be accepted. UNFINISHED BUSINESS MINOR VARIANCE Rez APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: CONTRA: WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: IN SUPPORT: CONTRA: Carried Submission No. A 140/97 -Tallpines Health Centre Incorporated, 123 Pioneer Drive, Kitchener, Ontario Parts 1 - 14, Reference Plan 58R-10809, 10 Pioneer Drive, Kitchener, Ontario. Dr. M. Shelley 10 Pioneer Drive Kitchener, Ontario NONE NONE NONE That Mr. S. Kay be appointed Vice-Chair of the Committee of Adjustment for a term to expire November 30, 1999. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 360 DECEMBER 8, 1998 The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to locate the required off-street parking 1.7 m (5.57 ft.), for 6 parking spaces, from the lot line along Pioneer Drive and 1 m (3.28 ft.), for 5 parking spaces, from the Iotline along Pioneer Drive rather than the required 3 m (9.84 ft.). Dr. Shelley addressed the Committee advising that this application is no longer required and the application is withdrawn. Submission No. A 85/98 - Mary Sellner & Margaret Sellner, 357 Weber Street West, Kitchener, Ontario. Re: APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: NONE CONTRA: NONE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: IN SUPPORT: NONE CONTRA: NONE Lot 8, Registered Plan 373, 357 Weber Street West, Kitchener, Ontario. As no one appeared in support of the is application, the Committee agreed to defer consideration of this application to the meeting of January 26, 1999, peremptory. Submission No. A 89/98, A 90/98, A 91/98, A 94/98 & A 95/98 - Activa Holdin.qs Inc., 735 Brid.qe Street West, Waterloo, Ontario Re: Part 1, Reference Plan 58R-10623, 81 Activa Avenue, Part 68, Reference Plan 58R-10623, 70 Activa Avenue, Part 38, Reference Plan 58R-10623, 5 Activa Avenue, Part 47, Reference Plan 58R-10622, 54 Bush Clover Crescent and Part 48, Reference Plan 58R-10622, 36 Bush Clover Crescent, Kitchener, Ontario. APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: Ms. S. Xeni Decora Homes Inc. 735 Bridge Street West Waterloo, Ontario CONTRA: NONE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: IN SUPPORT: NONE CONTRA: NONE The Committee was advised that, in Submission No. A 89/98, the applicant is requesting permission to locate the driveway 9.08 m (29.79 ft.) from the intersection rather than the required 12 m (40 ft.). The Committee was advised that, in Submission No. A 90/98, the applicant is requesting permission to locate the driveway 7.5 m (24.61 ft.) from the intersection rather than the required 12 m (40 ft.) and permission for a rearyard of 6.14 m (20.15 ft.) rather than the required 7.5 m (24.61 ft.). The Committee was advised that, in Submission No. A 91/98, the applicant is requesting permission to locate the driveway 7.26 m (23.82 ft.) from the intersection rather than the required 12 m (40 ft.) and permission for a setback on the flanking side of 3.64 m (11.95 ft.) rather than the required 4.5 m (14.77 ft.) COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 361 DECEMBER 8, 1998 The Committee was advised that, in Submission No. A 94/98, the applicant is requesting permission to locate the driveway 7.85 m (25.76 ft.) from the intersection rather than the required 12 m (40 ft.). The Committee was advised that, in Submission No. A 95/98, the applicant is requesting permission for a single family dwelling having a setback on the flanking side of 4 m (13.13 ft.) rather than the required 4.5 m (14.77 ft.) and permission for the driveway to be setback 8.38 m (27.5 ft.) from the intersection rather than the required 12 m (40 ft.). Submission No. A 89/98, A 90/98, A 91/98, A 94/98 & A 95/98 - Activa Holdin.qs Inc., cont'd The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Business & Planning Services in which they advised that all of the lots affected by the subject applications are undeveloped corner lots located within the Laurentian Forest subdivision in the Laurentian West community. The lands are designated Low Rise Residential by the City's Municipal Plan and are zoned R-4 according to Zoning By-law 85-1. The subject lots are part of a group of 19 undersized lots created in 1997 and subsequently legalized by way of Minor Variance application. The plan of subdivision was draft approved on March 21, 1996 with a number of "lotless blocks". The purpose of the Iotless blocks is to allow the developer to re-subdivide those blocks into individual lots at a later date in order to better respond to customer demand in terms of dwelling type and lot size. The re-subdivision of the Iotless blocks into individual lots would occur via the Part Lot Control process after the plan has been registered, in accordance with the regulations of the Zoning By-law. In order to reduce the timing between plan registration and the sale of lots to the ultimate consumer, the developer "pre-serviced" the subdivision in accordance with City Council policy. In this particular instance, engineering drawings for all underground services were prepared based on the land surveyor's interpretation of the maximum number of lots able to be created under the zoning regulations. The engineering drawings were then submitted to and approved by the City's Public Works Department and subsequently, all underground services were installed. Upon submission of the Part Lot Control application, the Business and Planning Services Department determined that the surveyor had mis-interpreted the requirements for minimum corner lot width and lot area. However, since the underground services had been installed with prior City approval, Minor Variance applications were supported and approved by the Committee of Adjustment to legalize the deficient corner lots. The subdivision process has since been changed to ensure this situation is not repeated. On February 4, 1997, the Committee of Adjustment approved a number of Minor Variance applications to reduce the minimum corner lot widths for the subject lots. Accordingly, Minor Variance applications A 89/98, A 90/98, A 91/98, A 94/98 and A 95/98 should be revised to delete the request to reduce the minimum corner lot width to 12.5 metres. Most of the original 19 undersized corner lots have now been developed, many with additional Minor Variance approvals to reduce the required distance between a driveway and an intersection. With these last corner lots about to be built upon, it has been determined that the configuration of each lot is also such that an attached garage cannot be provided on the flanking side in accordance with the minimum side yard and required parking space setback requirements of the Zoning By-law. Accordingly, the applicant has requested the following minor variances: Application Address Requested Minor Variance A89/98 81 ActivaAvenue - reduction in minimum distance between driveway and intersection from 12.0 metres to 9.08 metres A 90/98 70 Activa Avenue reduction in minimum distance between driveway and intersection from 12.0 metres to 7.5 metres and reduction in minimum rear yard from 7.5 metres to 6.14 metres COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 362 DECEMBER 8, 1998 A 91/98 5 Activa Avenue A 94/98 54 Bush Clover Crescent reduction in minimum distance between driveway and intersection from 12.0 metres to 7.26 metres and reduction of minimum side yard abutting a street from 4.5 metres to 3.64 metres - reduction in minimum distance between driveway and intersection from 12.0 metres to 7.85 metres Submission No. A 89/98, A 90/98, A 91/98, A 94/98 & A 95/98 - Activa Holdin.qs Inc., cont'd A 95/98 36 Bush Clover Crescent - reduction in minimum distance between driveway and intersection from 12.0 metres to 8.38 metres and reduction of minimum side yard abutting a street from 4.5 metres to 4.0 metres The Department of Business and Planning Services normally does not support reductions in the distance between the driveway and the intersection if it is possible to comply with the Zoning By-law by revising the house plan and providing a driveway on the flanking side. However, in these instances, the lot widths are such that they do not provide sufficient depth to provide an attached garage on the flanking side in accordance with the minimum side yard and required parking space setback requirements of the Zoning By-law. In order to comply with the Zoning By-law, the proposed houses must either be constructed without attached garages or minor variances must be approved to permit a reduction in the required parking space setback. Since all houses in the subdivision have been constructed with attached garages, it would be both out of character for the area and difficult to market the new homes if these corner lots were to be constructed without garages. In addition, a reduction in the setback of the required parking space from the street line would result in a driveway with insufficient length to accommodate off-street parking for a second vehicle, which could have significant implications on the existing streetscape due to lack of parking opportunities. The shape and width of two of the existing lots is also such that they do not provide sufficient depth for reasonably sized dwellings to be constructed without encroaching into the required side yard abutting a street. With the requested minor variance to reduce the minimum side yard abutting a street, the proposed dwellings would still be set back sufficiently from the streetline and would have little, if any, impact on the existing streetscape of the subdivision. For the reasons set out above, the proposed minor variances can be considered to maintain the general intent of both the Municipal Plan and the Zoning By-law, to be minor in nature, and appropriate for the development of the subject lands. The Department of Business Planning Services recommends approval of Minor Variance Applications A 89/98, A 90/98, A 91/98, A 94/98 and A 95/98, as revised to delete the requested minor variance with respect to the minimum corner lot width. The Committee noted the comments of the Traffic & Parking Division in which they advised that the Division does not support the proposed reductions in the setback of driveways from intersections. This condition can create potential traffic operating problems, particularly on a collector road where traffic activity is typically higher. It is recommended that the driveway locations be revised to meet the by-law requirements for each of the subject applications. The Committee noted the comments of the Traffic Division, Engineering Department, Region of Waterloo, in which they advised that they have no concerns with these applications. Mr. W. Dahms reviewed the public agencies' comments with Ms. Xeni, which had been received a month ago. He noted that no revised comments had been received. Ms. Xeni advised that she had reviewed the comments of the Department of Business & Planning Services which gives a good review of the situation which brought these applications before this Committee. She advised that, if these applications are not approved, the driveways would have to be moved to the flanking side. The driveways on the flanking side would not be long enough, which would result in cars overhanging the sidewalk and parking COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 363 DECEMBER 8, 1998 on the street. She noted that most homes have two cars. If garages aren't included with these homes there would be problems with marketing them. If they did sell, they would have a lower assessed value and consequently lower property taxes. Ms. Xeni advised that she could see no other way around the problem. 3. Submission No. A 89/98, A 90/98, A 91/98, A 94/98 & A 95/98 - Activa Holdin.qs Inc., cont'd Mr. S. Kay suggested locating garages on the flanking side. He advised that his biggest concern was with the comments of the Traffic & Parking Division. He advised Ms. Xeni that he thought she would have discussed this matter with Traffic staff. Mr. Kay stated that he would rather approve variances for sideyards and/or rearyards for garages on the flanking side then the current variances for driveways. Ms. Xeni advised that she had considered garages on the flanking side but a 6 m setback could not be achieved. Mr. Kay then suggested that Ms. Xeni should have met with Traffic staff to discuss each individual situation to come up with specific solutions with each. Mr. Dahms agreed that he thought there would be more analysis with these situations. Mr. P. Kruse questioned Ms. J. Given as to whether Planning staff are aware of the Traffic comments when they write their own comments. Ms. Given advised that the Traffic comments are known when Planning staff write their comments and the traffic comments are taken into consideration. Ms. Given advised of all the matters taken into consideration and how the Department's opinion was arrived at. Mr. S. Kay questioned whether traffic flow and stop signs have been taken into consideration by Planning staff and Ms. Given advised that they were not. Ms. Given then explained why a 6 m setback is required for parking. She advised that a corner lot is so restricted that putting a garage in the rearyard would eliminate most of the outdoor amenity area. Ms. S. Campbell stated that she agreed with Mr. Kay that traffic flow and stop signs are relevant. She advised that she didn't know how busy these streets are. Ms. Given noted that most of these streets are 20 m wide and would therefore be collector roads. This meeting adjourned at 10:05 a.m. to allow the Committee to consider variances to the City's Sign By- law and to request a member of staff from the Traffic and Parking Division to attend this meeting. APPLICATIONS This meeting recommenced at 10:30 a.m. Submission No. A 99~98 - Zoltan & Aranka Komaromi, 206 Laurentian Drive, Kitchener, Ontario Mr. S. Kay declared a pecuniary interest in this application as his law firm has acted for the applicants' family and did not participate in any discussion or voting with respect to this application. APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: Mr. Z. Komaromi 206 Laurentian Drive Kitchener, Ontario CONTRA: NONE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: IN SUPPORT: NONE CONTRA: NONE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 364 DECEMBER 8, 1998 The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to locate two parking spaces in the driveway with a setback from the property line along Laurentian Drive of 2.2 m (7.2 ft.) rather than the required 6 m (19.69 ft.). The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Business & Planning Services in which they advised that this application seeks approval to allow the required parking space for a single detached dwelling to be located 2.71 metres (7.21 feet) from the street line rather than 6.0 metres (19.68 feet). 1. Submission No. A 99~98 - Zoltan & Aranka Komaromi, cont'd This property was the subject of similar application in May, 1997, after the owner had illegally converted the garage space to accommodate a home business and then sought Committee of Adjustment approval to legalize the required parking for both the residence and home business ahead of the 6.0 metre setback. The Committee of Adjustment refused this application. Staff recommended refusal on the basis that the application was not desirable for the appropriate development of the property, as several business were operating from the premises, and the conversion of the garage to home business space had resulted in property standards violations for the storing of materials outside. Staff suggested that the home business had outgrown its suitability as a home business and was impacting the neighbourhood; as it could not comply with the home business regulations, and recommended that it be relocated to a zone permitting the commercial use. According to understanding of staff, the home business has been relocated and the Department has no outstanding violations on the property. Since the garage parking space be application seeks the location of the space was converted to interior living space, the owner is requesting that the required legally established in the driveway, 2.71 metres (7.21 feet) from the lot line. While the approval for two spaces to be located ahead of the setback, the by-law only regulates required space, which is one space for a single detached dwelling. While staff do not condone the illegal removal of the required parking space without prior approval, its deconversion now will have some economic impacts on the owner. The intent of the setback requirement in the by-law is to promote visually attractive streetscapes which are not obliterated by parked vehicles. However, since the by-law does not prevent vehicles from parking ahead of the building line, the end result is often the same, with vehicles parking in the driveway on an ongoing basis. Accordingly, staff can argue that the variance is minor and maintains the intent of the by-law, provided the dwelling continues to be used only for a single detached dwelling, and provided the relief is only relative to the one parking space required for a single detached dwelling. The Department of Planning and Development recommends approval of Minor Variance Application A 99/98, to locate one required parking space for a single detached dwelling 2.71 metres from the lot line rather than 6.0 metres. The Committee noted the comments of the Traffic & Parking Division in which they advised that the existing driveway is not wide enough to accommodate two legal sized parking stalls and there is insufficient length to accommodate two spaces in tandem. The driveway would have to be widened to a minimum of 5.2 m to provide two parking spaces. The Committee noted the comments of the Transportation Division, Engineering Department, Region of Waterloo, in which they advised that they have no concerns with this application. Mr. W. Dahms reviewed the comments received from the public agencies, with Mr. Komaromi. With respect to the comments of the Traffic & Parking Division, Ms. Given advised that she believes that the Traffic & Parking Division had been confused by the request for two parking spaces. The Zoning By- law only requires one parking space for a single family dwelling and the applicant doesn't require approval for the second parking space. She noted that the application had been submitted because the parking space was too close to the street and not behind the building line as required in the by-law. It was noted that, in fact, the parking space would be located 1.68 m from the Iotline. It was agreed that COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 365 DECEMBER 8, 1998 the application would be amended accordingly. 1. Submission No. A 99~98 - Zoltan & Aranka Komaromi, cont'd Moved by Ms. S. Campbell Seconded by Mr. P. Kruse That the application of Zoltan & Aranka Komaromi requesting permission to locate one required parking space in the driveway with a setback from the property line along Laurentian Drive of 1.68 m (5.52 ft.) rather than the required 6 m (19.69 ft.) on Lot 152, Plan 1368, 206 Laurentian Drive, Kitchener, Ontario BE APPROVED. 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 Mr. Komaromi advised that he wanted to remove the brick wall on one side of the driveway to widen it to allow for two parking spaces and he was advised that he could, subject to any other necessary approvals, do that; however, it was only necessary to receive approval of one parking space from the Committee as that is all the by-law requires. Submission No. A 100/98 - William & Verna Doucet, 70 Catherine Street, New Hamburq, Ontario Part Lots 14 & 15, Registered Plan 577, 19-19A Horning Drive, Kitchener, Ontario. APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: Ms. V. Doucet 70 Catherine Street New Hamburg ON CONTRA: NONE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: IN SUPPORT: NONE CONTRA: NONE The Committee was advised that the applicants are requesting permission for a lot width for the severed lands of 15.2 m (49.87 ft.) and a lot width for the retained lands of 20.3 m (66.61 ft.) rather than the required 35.6 m (116.8 ft.) The Committee noted the comments of the Business & Planning Services Department in which they advised that there are two dwellings on the subject property. The previously approved severance would establish a separate lot for each dwelling. No new development is proposed. The property is within the floodway of the Grand River and is therefore designated as Open Space in the COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 366 DECEMBER 8, 1998 City's Official Plan. A previous Consent Application (B 25/91) proposed to sever a vacant lot for development and retain the two dwellings on one lot. That application was recommended for refusal, as it was considered inappropriate to allow new residential development in the floodplain. The application was subsequently withdrawn. The E 1 Zone regulation for minimum lot width requires that lot width existing on the date the E-1 Zone was applied to the land, which was October 11, 1994. The intent of the regulation was to prevent the creation of new vacant 2. Submission No. A 100/98 - William & Verna Doucet, cont'd lots. Approval of the lot width variance, to reduce the required lot width from 35.6 m to 20.36 m for the retained lot and 15.24 m for the severed lot, is required as a condition of consent. Staff have no concerns with approval of such a variance as it maintains the intent of the by-law and official plan and the proposed lot widths are compatible with lots in the vicinity. The Committee noted the comments of the Transportation Division, Engineering Department, Region of Waterloo, in which they advised that they have no concerns with this application. The Committee considered the comments of Ms. G. Yeung, Senior Resource Planner, Grand River Conservation Authority, in which she advised that, although the subject lands lie entirely within the Regulatory Floodplain for the Grand River. The Grand River Conservation Authority does not object to the approval of the Minor Variance Application. The residential development of single residences already exists on both parcels and the minor variance was recognize frontage requirements for the lots based on existing conditions. Moved by Mr. A. Galloway Seconded by Ms. S. Campbell That the application of William & Verna Doucet requesting permission for a lot width for the severed lands of 15.24 m (50 ft.) and a lot width for the retained lands of 20.36 m (66.8 ft.) rather than the required 35.6 m (116.8 ft. on Lot 14 & Part Lots 13 & 15, 19 & 19A Horning Drive, Kitchener, Ontario BE APPROVED. 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 Submission No. A 101/98 - Michael Clark & Michelle Freeman, 275 Fergus Avenue, Kitchener, Ontario Re: Part Lot 2, Registered Plan 742, 275 Fergus Avenue, Kitchener, Ontario. APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: Mr. Michael Clark 275 Fergus Avenue Kitchener, Ontario CONTRA: NONE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 367 DECEMBER 8, 1998 IN SUPPORT: NONE CONTRA: NONE The Committee was advised that the applicants are requesting permission to provide two parking spaces in the driveway with a setback of 2.57 m (8.41 ft.) from the Iotline along Fergus Avenue rather than the required 6 m (19.69 ft.). The Committee noted the comments of the Business & Planning Services Department in which they advised that the subject lands are located on Fergus Avenue, between Thaler Avenue and Rutherford Drive. The property is approximately 12,000 square feet and zoned R-4 according to Zoning By-law 85-1. The property is oresently developed with a single detached dwelling. 3. Submission No. A 101/98 - Michael Clark & Michelle Freeman, cont'd The applicants intend to convert their garage into a living space. The garage is currently used as storage because the house has no basement. By converting the garage into a new living space, the legal parking space for the dwelling will be removed. The applicants are requesting permission to provide two parking spaces in the driveway with a setback of 2.57 metres (8.41 feet) from the lot line along Fergus Avenue rather than the required 6 metres (19.69 feet). It should be noted that the by-law only requires one parking space to be 6.0 metres from the front lot line. The intent of the 6.0 metre setback is twofold; firstly, for aesthetic reasons, to promote visually attractive streetscapes which are not obliterated by parking vehicles, and secondly, the 6.0 metres allows for a second car to be accommodated on the lot. By converting the garage into a living space, the parking area would create an inconsistent streetscape as the neighbouring houses sustain the 6.0 metre setback requirement. Despite the fact that the existing driveway is 5.79 metres (19 feet) in width, sufficient to provide two legal parking spaces side by side, the Department typically does not support the elimination of the parking space setback of 6.0 metres unless a compelling reason exists why compliance cannot be achieved. On the basis of the above comments, staff are of the opinion that this application does not meet the intent of the zoning by-law. The Department of Planning and Development recommends refusal of Submission A 101/98. The Committee noted the comments of the Traffic & Parking Division in which they advised that they have reviewed the application and, despite the deficiency in the setback from Fergus Avenue, the existing driveway will safely accommodate two vehicles. The Committee noted the comments of the Director of Building, in which he advised that a building permit is required to convert the garage into living space. Mr. Clark addressed the Committee and advised that they have been parking in front of the property to this time. The garage has been used as storage space, upto this time. He advised that they want to convert the garage to living space because they have no basement. He also advised that they had a fire, where they had storage. He noted that they have spoken with their neighbours who are in support of their request. He noted that the application will increase the value of the property, it would provide more living space and it would improve the look of the property. Moved by Mr. P. Kruse Seconded by Mr. A. Galloway That the application of Michael Clark & Michelle Freeman requesting permission to provide the one required parking space in the driveway with a setback of 2.57 m (8.41 ft.) from the Iotline along Fergus Avenue rather than the required 6 m (19.69 ft.) on Part Lot 2, Registered Plan 742, 275 Fergus Avenue, Kitchener BE APPROVED. 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. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 368 DECEMBER 8, 1998 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 102/98 - Akeel Carberry, 557 Windjammer Way, Waterloo, Ontario Re: Lot 3, Registered Plan 428, 234 Frederick Street, Kitchener, Ontario. APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: Mr. W. Rabley & Ms. A. Carberry 557 Windjammer Way Waterloo, Ontario 4. Submission No. A 102/98 -Akeel Carberry, cont'd Brock Lasso 28 Bloomingdale Road Kitchener ON N2K 1A2 CONTRA: NONE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: IN SUPPORT: NONE CONTRA: NONE The Committee was advised that the applicant is proposing to convert the 1st and 2nd floors of the building to commercial use. The ration of floor area to lot area would be 0.42 rather than the permitted 0.33 m. The Committee noted the comments of the Business & Planning Services Department in which they advised that the applicant is requesting an increase in the maximum floor space ratio devoted to commercial uses from 0.33 to 0.42 for the purposes of converting a single detached dwelling into lawyers' offices. The main structure of the existing dwelling was constructed in the 1890's and is situated within an enclave of designated heritage buildings along Frederick Street. Detailed Secondary Plan policies and special zoning regulations and special use policies were imposed on the subject property and surrounding properties. The special policies were imposed to encourage the retention of the existing structures and to restrict commercial uses to Iow traffic generators in an effort to maintain the integrity of the two-lane road and the character of the area. The Secondary Plan limits the maximum floor space ratio for commercial uses in any new structure to 0.33 times the lot area. The proposed increase in the floor space ratio respects these objectives as the structure is being retained and converted and occupied by a commercial use which is a Iow traffic generator. The 0.33 floor space ratio was developed as a calculated average of all existing building stock within this designation. While certain properties would exceed the average in gross floor area, others would be lower than the average. In view of this, the general intent and purpose of the Municipal Plan and the zoning by-law are maintained. The proposed variance is minor since the changes proposed to the existing structure will be internal, thus having minimal impact on the surrounding area. The variance is desirable for the appropriate development of the subject lands as the proposal retains the heritage structure and maintains the character of the area. A site plan application is under review to convert the building to commercial while maintaining one residential unit. The applicant intents on converting the entire building to offices, if this application is successful. The proposed offices will require 13 on-site parking spaces. However, after reviewing the plan the parking layout does not meet city standards and three of the spaces do not comply with the design standards in the zoning by-law. The City's Transportation Department has advised that proposed spaces one to three cannot exit the site in a forward motion and are therefore not functional and parking space 13 will interfere with traffic entering and exiting the site. In view of this, a variance is required to COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 369 DECEMBER 8, 1998 reduce the parking required from 13 to 9 spaces. Given that no notice has been given on the reduction in parking, the committee should consider whether further notice is required. The reduction in the number of parking spaces is minor due to the location and proximity of the property to the downtown and the availability of transit service. The reduction in the number of parking spaces is desirable for the appropriate development of the subject lands since it will permit the retention and conversion of a heritage structure. The general intent of the zoning by-law is maintained since the parking requirement for offices is calculated on a gross floor area basis and a large portion of the structure in this instance will not be used for offices. Included in the gross floor area calculation is an enclosed porch which will not be used for offices, three washrooms and a kitchen. The Department of Business and Planning Services recommends approval of Submission A 102/98. 4. Submission No. A 102/98 -Akeel Carberry, cont'd The Committee noted the comments of the Traffic & Parking Division, in which they advised that the Division has reviewed the application and has the following concerns. Proposed parking space no. 13 is not functional. Spaces 1,2 & 3, in the driveway, would not permit vehicles to exit in a forward motion, due to the restricted turning area in the rear. This deficiency of four spaces would leave only 9 legal spaces with the lack of on-street parking and the nearest public parking facility over a half a kilometre away there would be no alternative for overflow parking which could result in parking on adjacent residential streets. Due to the various deficiencies the Division can not support this application. The Committee noted the comments of the Director of Building in which he advised that a building permit is required to convert the residential building to law offices. The Committee noted the comments of the Transportation Division, Engineering Department, Region of Waterloo, in which they advised that, at this location, Frederick Street has a existing road allowance width of approximately 46 ft.. In order to accommodate future widenings at the intersection of Frederick and Lancaster Street, the road allowance widening is required. This widening is comprise of approximately 14 ft. at the easterly limit and 18 ft. at the westerly limit of this property. The exact amount of widening will need to be determined by an Ontario Land Surveyor. It may not be appropriate to acquire the road widening under this application; however, the applicant should be made aware that any future development application will require dedication of the road widening. The Chairman addressed the parking issue outlined in both the Department of Business & Planning Services comments and the Traffic & Parking Division comments. Mr. B. Lasso reviewed the situation on the property with respect to the proposed parking. The question was raised as to whether an amendment to this application was required to reduce the parking spaces to 9 from the required 13. Mr. W. Rabley also explained the situation with respect to parking on the property. Ms. A. Carberry advised that they are still trying to provide adequate parking, as eventually they want to lease the top floor. When questioned by the Committee Ms. Carberry advised that they want to maximize the look of the heritage building. They want to maintain the look of the building for the sake of the neighbours and themselves and they don't want to offend the neighbours. The Committee then discussed whether or not the application should be amended for 9 parking spaces and Ms. Carberry advised that they want to provide the 13 parking spaces that are required. Mr. A. Galloway advised that he would be prepared to deal with the application that was before the Committee today and he did not want to consider an amendment as it should be recirculated. Moved by Mr. A. Galloway Seconded by Mr. S. Kay That the application of Akeel Carberry proposing to convert the 1st and 2nd floors of the building to commercial use, with a floor space ratio of 0.42 rather than the permitted 0.33 on Lot 3, Registered Plan 428, 234 Frederick Street, Kitchener, Ontario BE APPROVED. It is the opinion of this Committee that: COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 370 DECEMBER 8, 1998 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 89/98, A 90/98, A 91/98, A 94/98 & A 95/98 - Activa Holdin.qs Inc., 735 Brid.qe Street West, Waterloo, Ontario, cont'd Part 1, Reference Plan 58R-10623, 81 Activa Avenue, Part 68, Reference Plan 58R-10623, 70 Activa Avenue, Part 38, Reference Plan 58R-10623, 5 Activa Avenue, Part 47, Reference Plan 58R-10622, 54 Bush Clover Crescent and Part 48, Reference Plan 58R-10622, 36 Bush Clover Crescent, Kitchener, Ontario. Consideration of these applications was reconvened and, in attendance at this time were Ms. S. Xeni in support of the application along with Ms. J. Given, Senior Planner and Mr. K. Mayer, Traffic Analyst. Mr. Mayer addressed the Committee and advised that the Division has reviewed many of these applications in the last few years. They are concerned about how traffic operates at these intersections. He noted that turning signals can confuse other motorists at these intersections. He also noted that vehicles queued at stop signs may block the driveway so that people can't turn. Mr. P. Kruse questioned how busy these streets are and Mr. Mayer noted that the volumes are fairly high and that Activa Avenue is a major street. Mr. Kruse then questioned whether these situations were less than ideal or dangerous. Mr. Mayer noted that they are always less than ideal but he couldn't say exactly how dangerous they would be. He noted that there is always the possibility of accidents. When questioned by the Committee Mr. Mayer advised that if there is any potential safety problems with an application, the Division would always taken the conservative side. Mr. S. Kay questioned the applications on Hackberry and Bush Clover and to whether these are any different because of the streets that they front onto. Mr. Mayer advised that the daily traffic volumes would be less on Hackberry Street and Bush Clover Crescent; however, it would be difficult to determine if incidents would be less here than on Activa Avenue. Less busy streets do not mean that the problem does not exist. Ms. Xeni commented that this kind of thing happens whether the lot meets the by-law or not and it depends a great deal on whether we are talking about good drivers or bad drivers. She noted that corner lots have traffic situations whether then meet the by-law or not. Mr. A. Galloway stated that he felt that the applicant has options to meet the by-law which are better options than the variances proposed. The Committee then dealt with each application in turn and reviewed the variances requested in each. The Committee then rendered the following decisions. Submission No. A 89/98 Moved by Mr. A. Galloway Seconded by Ms. S. Campbell That the application of Activa Holdings Inc. requesting permission to locate the driveway 9.08 m (29.79 ft.) from the intersection rather than the required 12 m (40 ft.) on Part Block 14, Registered Plan 58M-15, Being Part 1, Reference Plan 58R-10623, 81 Activa Avenue, Kitchener, Ontario BE REFUSED. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variances requested in this application are not minor in nature. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 371 DECEMBER 8, 1998 2. This application is not 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 not being maintained on the subject property. Carried 3. Submission No. A 89/98, A 90/98, A 91/98, A 94/98 & A 95/98 - Activa Holdin.qs Inc., cont'd Submission No. A 90/98 Moved by Ms. S. Campbell Seconded by Ms. S. Kay That the application of Activa Holdings Inc. requesting permission to locate the driveway 7.5 m (24.61 ft.) from the intersection rather than the required 12 m (40 ft.) and permission for a rearyard of 6.14 m (20.15 ft.) rather than the required 7.5 m (24.61 ft.) on Part Block 4, Registered Plan 58M-15 being Part 68, Reference Plan 58R-10623, 70 Activa Avenue, Kitchener, Ontario BE REFUSED. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variances requested in this application are not minor in nature. 2. This application is not 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 not being maintained on the subject property. Carried Submission No. A 91/98 Moved by Ms. A. Galloway Seconded by Mr. S. Campbell That the application of Activa Holdings Inc. requesting permission to locate the driveway 7.26 m (23.82 ft.) from the intersection rather than the required 12 m (40 ft.) and permission for a setback on the flanking side of 3.64 m (11.95 ft.) rather than the required 4.5 m (14.77 ft.) on Part Block 17, Registered Plan 58M- 15, Being Part 38, Reference Plan 58R-10623, 5 Activa Avenue, Kitchener, Ontario BE REFUSED. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variances requested in this application are not minor in nature. 2. This application is not 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 not being maintained on the subject property. Carried Submission No. A 94/98 Moved by Ms. S. Campbell Seconded by Mr. A. Galloway COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 372 DECEMBER 8, 1998 That the application of Activa Holdings Inc. requesting permission to locate the driveway 7.85 m (25.76 ft.) from the intersection rather than the required 12 m (40 ft.) on Part 47, Reference Plan 58R-10622, 54 Bush Clover Crescent, Kitchener, Ontario REFUSED. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variances requested in this application are not minor in nature. 2. This application is not 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 not being maintained on the subject property. Carried 3. Submission No. A 89/98, A 90/98, A 91/98, A 94/98 & A 95/98 - Activa Holdin.qs Inc., cont'd Submission No. A 95/98 Moved by Ms. S. Campbell Seconded by Mr. A. Galloway That the application of Activa Holdings Inc. requesting permission for a single family dwelling having a setback on the flanking side of 4 m (13.13 ft.) rather than the required 4.5 m (14.77 ft.) and permission for the driveway to be setback 8.38 m (27.5 ft.) from the intersection rather than the required 12 m (40 ft.) on Part Block 9, Registered Plan 58M-18, Being Part 48, Reference Plan 58R-10622, 36 Bush Clover Crescent, Kitchener, Ontario BE REFUSED. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variances requested in this application are not minor in nature. 2. This application is not 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 not being maintained on the subject property. Carried Ms. S. Campbell requested that Traffic staff attend Committee of Adjustment meeting when their comments recommend refusal of applications. Submission No. A 103/98 - David Stiller, 81 Morgan Avenue, Kitchener, Ontario APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: Mr. D. Stiller 81 Morgan Avenue Kitchener, Ontario CONTRA: NONE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: IN SUPPORT: NONE CONTRA: NONE The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to construct an addition on the northwest corner of the house to have a setback from Fairway Road of 4.5 m (14.77 ft.) rather than the required 12 (39.37 ft.) and a setback from Morgan Avenue of 0.5 m (1.64 ft.) rather than the required 4.5 COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 373 DECEMBER 8, 1998 m (14.77 ft.). The Committee noted the comments of the Business & Planning Services Department in which they advised that the applicant is requesting variances from the regulations contained in Zoning By-law 85-1 to reduce the minimum front yard (at Morgan Avenue) from the required 4.5 metres to 0.5 metres, and to reduce the minimum setback from an Arterial Road (Fairway Road) from 12.0 metres to 4.5 metres. The applicant proposes to construct an addition to an existing single detached dwelling. The subject land is located at the corner of Fairway Road (Regional Road) and Morgan Avenue. The lot is triangular in shape, and has been reduced in terms of area in the past by widenings taken for both Fairway Road and Morgan Avenue. Previously approved Applications for Minor Variance (file no.'s A 41/93 and A 21/96) included the construction of two rear additions and a front addition. The total gross floor area of the dwelling now stands at 105.7 square metres (1138 square feet). With the new addition, the total floor area will be 114.1 square metres (1228 square feet). 5. Submission No. A 103/98 - David Stiller, cont'd It should be noted that in addition to the required minor variances to the minimum front yard and minimum setback from an Arterial Road, a variance will also be required to allow the addition to project into a corner visibility triangle by approximately 1.2 metres (4 feet). This triangle is defined as that area established at 7.5 metres (24.6 feet) from the intersection of Fairway Road and Morgan Avenue. Staff of the Transportation Divisions of the City and the Region have both indicated that they do not support the encroachment of the addition into the corner visibility triangle. Transportation staff consider that, given that the addition is proposed immediately adjacent to where road improvements might occur in future i.e. widening of the north bound-right turn lane off Fairway Road, the proposed addition might represent a hazard for driver visibility at this intersection. In addition, the Regional Official Policies Plan states that the ultimate width of Fairway Road should be 30.48 metres. According to the Region, an additional 2.1 metre road widening will be required from the subject lands in future in order to achieve the ultimate width. As a result of any further road widening, the corner visibility triangle would then be located further into the subject lands, with the effect that the proposed addition would project even further into the corner visibility triangle. Due to the concerns raised by the City and Region's Transportation Division, staff do not support the approval of this application. The application does not maintain the general intent and purpose of the By- law and Municipal Plan, is not considered to be minor in nature, nor is considered desirable for the appropriate development and use of the land. The Department of Business and Planning Services recommends refusal of Submission A 103/98. The Committee noted the comments of the Traffic & Parking Division, in which they advised that the Division can not support the proposed addition as designed, as it encroaches into the daylight triangle. This could restrict future road improvements at the intersection of Morgan Avenue and Fairway Road by either the Region or the City. He pointed out that the existing wooden fence and the chainlink fence which runs along Fairway Road, is situated on Regional Property and may not be in compliance with the current by-law regulations. The Committee noted the comments of the Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro in which they advised that they have been in contact with Mr. Stiller regarding this application. As a condition of approval to this submission, Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro requires the incoming service and meter equipment to remain on an outside wall. The Committee noted the comments of the Director of Building in which he advised that a building permit is required to construct the addition. The Chairman reviewed the comments of the public agencies and advised Mr. Stiller that they would like to hear his submissions as to why the application should be approved. Mr. Stiller advised that originally they were looking to improve the look of the house with respect to the COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 374 DECEMBER 8, 1998 pitch of the roof. He didn't think it would affect the visibility of traffic from Fairway Road. He advised that it is intended to add space to the bathroom and to allow for a laundry room and they are looking for 8 ft. ceilings instead of the current 5 ft. 8 inch ceilings. Mr. Stiller then displayed photographs of the house through the stages of the various additions. Mr. S. Kay questioned staff as to whether the addition would be within the daylighting triangle even without the widening and Ms. Given responded that it would. Mr. Stiller stated that the felt the trees would be more of an obstruction than the addition. Mr. A. Galloway stated that given the public agencies' comments, he would have a problem supporting the addition. Mr. S. Kay suggested deferring this matter to allow the applicant an opportunity to discuss his proposal with Planning & Traffic staff. Mr. Stiller agreed to this deferral. 5. Submission No. A 103/98 - David Stiller, cont'd It was agreed by all parties that consideration of this application be deferred to the Committee of Adjustment meeting scheduled for January 26, 1999 in order to allow the applicant an opportunity to further discuss his proposal with staff of the Traffic & Parking Division and the Department of Business & Planning Services. 6. Submission No. A 104/98 - Eric Bedard, 83 Gruhn Street, Kitchener, Ontario Re: Part Lot 9, Registered Plan 387, 83 Gruhn Street, Kitchener, Ontario. APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: Mr. E. Bedard 83 Gruhn Street Kitchener, Ontario CONTRA: NONE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: IN SUPPORT: NONE CONTRA: NONE The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to provide two parking spaces in the driveway to have widths of 2.29 m (7.5 ft.) rather than the required 2.59 m (8.5 ft.) with a setback of 0 m from Gruhn Street rather than the required 6 m (19.69 ft.). The Committee noted the comments of the Business & Planning Services Department in which they advised that the applicant has requested a variance to allow the parking of two vehicles in parking spaces 7.5 feet wide, located up to the front lot line. The subject property contains a single detached dwelling. Neither the west side yard of 3.50 feet nor the east side yard of 8.06 feet is wide enough to accommodate a parking space. Two parking spaces have been provided between the dwelling and the street. The spaces are paved with interlocking brick; both the side yard and the remainder of the front yard are landscaped. By-law regulations state that the one parking space required for a single detached dwelling be set back 6.0 m from the front lot line. It is not possible to provide such a parking space given the location of the dwelling. The variance is desirable for the appropriate development and use of the land; as it is reasonable to allow the occupant to provide on-site parking spaces, provided they do not significantly impact the streetscape. In this case, the impact on the streetscape is minor because of the co-ordination of landscaping and interlocking brick. In staff's opinion, the proposal would maintain the general intent and purpose of the by-law and official plan; as the width of the parking area is less than 50% of the width of the lot. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 375 DECEMBER 8, 1998 No variance is required for the width of the parking area; as the by-law does not establish a minimum width for the second (i.e. non-required) parking space. The application should be amended accordingly. The variance is recommended as in the opinion of staff, it satisfies the four tests set out in S. 45 of the Planning Act. The Department of Business & Planning Services and Development recommends approval of Submission A 104/98, to allow two parking spaces to be located zero metres from the street line, whereas the by-law requires a setback of 6.0 metres, subject to the following terms: 1. That the total width of the parking spaces not exceed 50% of the lot width. The Committee noted the comments of the Traffic & Parking Division in which they advised that they have reviewed this application and have no concerns with the existing driveway configuration. 6. Submission No. A 104/98 - Eric Bedard, cont'd Moved by Ms. S. Campbell Seconded by Mr. P. Kruse That the application of Eric Bedard requesting permission to provide one required parking space in the driveway with a setback of 0 m from Gruhn Street rather than the required 6 m (19.69 ft.) on Part Lot 9, Registered Plan 387, 83 Gruhn Street, Kitchener, Ontario BE APPROVED; subject to the following condition: 1. That the total width of the parking spaces shall not exceed 50% of the lot width. 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 Submission No. A 105/98 - Mike Voll Investments, 104-420 Weber Street North, Waterloo, Ontario Part Block E, Registered Plan 1170, 50 Midland Drive, Kitchener, Ontario. APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: NONE CONTRA: NONE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: IN SUPPORT: NONE CONTRA: NONE As no one appeared in support of this application, the Committee agreed to defer consideration to the meeting scheduled for Tuesday January 26, 1999. Submission No. A 107/98 - Cydev Holdings Inc., 1120 Victoria Street North, Kitchener, Ontario Re: Part Lot 59, German Company tract, being Part 3, Reference Plan 58R-8513, Woolwich Street, Kitchener, Ontario. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 376 DECEMBER 8, 1998 APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: Mr. J. Laurin JC Homes Inc. 1120 Victoria Street North #202 Kitchener ON N2B 3T2 CONTRA: NONE WRITTENSUBMISSIONS: INSUPPORT: NONE CONTRA: NONE At the request of Mr. Laurin, the Committee agreed to defer consideration of this application to the meeting of Tuesday January 26, 1999. Submission No. A 108/98 - Shell Canada Products Limited, 90 Sheppard Avenue East, Suite 600, Toronto, Ontario Re: Part Lots 23 & 24, Beasley's Broken Front Concession, 4574 King Street East, Kitchener, Ontario. APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: Mr. F. O'Grady J and B Engineering Inc. 5734 Yonge Street Toronto, Ontario CONTRA: Mr. R. Vanderwerff 24 Marquette Drive Kitchener, Ontario WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: IN SUPPORT: NONE CONTRA: NONE The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting legalization of an accessory shed having a rearyard of 0.3048 m (1 ft.) rather than the required 7.5 m (24.61 ft.). The Committee noted the comments of the Business & Planning Services Department in which they advised that the applicant is requesting a reduction in the rear yard setback from 7.5 metres to 0.3 metres to legalize a small accessory building 5.76 square metres in area. The subject property was developed in 1987 with an automatic car wash, gas bar and a convenience retail outlet, which contains a drive-through window. The applicant previously received Committee of Adjustment approval for a reduction to the parking and stacking requirements and to the rear yard setback. The subject land is a corner lot having frontage on two streets. The by-law defines the front lot line as a lot line which has the smallest frontage and the rear lot line is the lot line opposite the front lot line. The property was developed oriented to King Street, the side lot line, and a variance was previously approved to reduce the rear yard setback from 7.5 metres to 3.0 metres for the car wash use, which allowed for this orientation. The intent of side and rear yard setbacks in the zoning by-law is to maintain an adequate separation distance between structures for fire, safety and aesthetic reasons. While the zoning by-law treats accessory buildings in residential zones differently than the main structure, in industrial and commercial COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 377 DECEMBER 8, 1998 zones accessory buildings are not regulated separately. However, the need for more lenient regulations for small accessory buildings in commercial and industrial zones is currently under review. In view of the forgoing, the reduction in the rear yard setback from 7.5 metres to 0.3 metres, for a building 5.76 square metres in area, meets the general intent and purpose of the zoning by-law and is minor. The existing location of the accessory building is desirable for the appropriate development of the lands as it is located adjacent to the main building it serves, the carwash; and would not adversely impact any nearby residential development. The Department of Business and Planning Services recommends approval of Submission A 108/98 only to the extent shown on the plan dated January 1, 1997. The Committee noted the comments of the Transportation Division, Engineering Department, Region of Waterloo, in which they advised that they have no concerns with this application. Mr. Vanderwerff addressed the Committee advising that there have been many variances already approved on this property and it was his opinion that the application was not minor in nature. He noted that this was a major entrance from the 401 and that area should be landscaped. It was Mr. Vanderwerff's opinion that this application does not implement the policies contained in the City's official plan. 9. Submission No. A 108/98 - Shell Canada Products Limited, cont'd A discussion took place with respect to the nature and use of the building and Mr. A. Galloway questioned whether this shed was beside the car wash and whether it was visible from the street. Mr. O'Grady responded to Mr. Galloway's question stating that the shed is beside the car wash and is not visible from the street. Moved by Mr. A. Galloway Seconded by Mr. S. Kay That the application of Shell Canada Products Limited requesting legalization of an accessory shed having a rearyard of 0.3048 m (1 ft.) rather than the required 7.5 m (24.61 ft.) on Part Lots 23 & 24, Beasley's Broken Front Concession 4574 King Street East, Kitchener, Ontario BE APPROVED, subject to the following condition: That the variance as approved in this application shall apply to the location of existing shed to the extent as shown on the plan dated January 1, 1997. 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 CONSENT Submission No. B 80/98 - Luis Machado, 145 Victoria Street South, Kitchener, Ontario Re: Lots 23 & 24, Registered Plan 49, 141-145 Victoria Street South, Kitchener, Ontario. APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: Mr. Claude Lapointe 720 Westmount Road East COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 378 DECEMBER 8, 1998 Kitchener, Ontario Mr. M. Woschnigg R.R. #7 Guelph, Ontario Lap Phan Tham & Tieu Nga Tham 835 Stirling Avenue South Kitchener, Ontario CONTRA: NONE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: IN SUPPORT: NONE CONTRA: NONE The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to sever a parcel of land having a frontage on Victoria Street of 14.4 m (47.25 ft.) by a depth of 25.9 m (84.98 ft.) and having an area of 373 m2 (4,015.07 sq. ft.), subject to a right-of-way over the retained lands and together with a right-of-way in favour of the retained lands for a driveway. 1. Submission No. B 80/98 - Luis Machado, cont'd The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Business & Planning Services in which they advised that the applicant is requesting permission to sever a property into two separate parcels while maintaining a mutual right-of-way in favour of both properties for access to the site from Victoria Street and to allow access to parking. The land to be retained (141 Victoria Street South) has a building which contains one residential dwelling unit (92.9 square metres in area) and two commercial units (having a total of 90 square meters) which are currently vacant. The retained lands can successfully accommodate five on-site parking spaces. This would allow for one of the vacant units to be occupied as a convenience retail outlet and the other as a personal service use or a financial establishment. The land to be severed (145 Victoria Street South has a structure which contains one residential unit (120 square metres in area) and a convenience retail outlet (84 square metres in area). The land to be severed has the ability to provide parking in excess of the by-law requirements. In order to determine the acceptability and limits of the right-of-way a sketch illustrating parking for both properties was prepared by the Department and dated November 4, 1998. The limits of the requested right-of-way should be revised to reflect this plan. Also, to ensure adequate on-site circulation and to identify on-site parking spaces for each use, the access to the site should be defined as illustrated on the attached plan, the parking area paved and the parking spaces demarcated. A grading plan will also be required for approved by the City's Chief Building Official and the Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA). A permit will also be required from the GRCA prior to any on-site grading. A Regional Road Access Permit will also be required to define the access. The Region has identified that the lands are located adjacent to lands which have a high risk of contamination. The Region has also advised they do not know if the contamination on the adjacent site would pose a health or safety risk to the lands proposed to be severed. Since the severance is not proposing any new development, it is the Department's position that there is no new risk; and as a result, staff do not believe there is a need for imposing conditions related to this issue. The Department of Business and Planning Services has no objections to the application if the right-of-way reflects the area noted on the attached sketch dated, November 4, 1998 and the site works are undertaken as noted above. Each of the severed and retained lands comply in all respects with the COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 379 DECEMBER 8, 1998 zoning by-law, or are considered legal, non-conforming. The Department of Business and Planning Services recommends approval of Submission B 80/98, as amended, 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 the owner submit and obtain approval of a Grading and Drainage Control Plan from the City's Chief Building Official and the Grand River Conservation Authority. That the owner obtain a Fill, Construction and Alteration to Waterways Permit from the Grand River Conservation Authority, if required. That the owner develop the parking area in accordance with the attached plan dated November 4, 1998 and in accordance with the approved Grading and Drainage Control Plan or alternatively that a cost estimate to cover the cost of access improvements, grading, asphalt, demarcation of the parking area, and landscaping, as shown on the plan dated November 4, 1998, be completed and a letter of credit be submitted to cover 100% of the cost of the site development works, all to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning. 1. Submission No. B 80/98 - Luis Machado, cont'd That the owners of the land to be retained and the land to be severed enter into an agreement, to be approved by the City Solicitor, which will ensure that rights-of-way for access and a joint maintenance agreement for both properties are maintained in perpetuity, and provide confirmation that said agreement has been registered against the title of both properties. The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Planning & Culture, Region of Waterloo, in which they advised that, in accordance with the Region's delegated responsibilities to comment on development applications on behalf of the Province, please be advised that the subject lands are located adjacent to lands which have been identified as having a high risk of contamination in the Region's Contaminant Sources Inventory. Regional staff do not know if the contamination suspected on the adjacent lands would pose a health or safety risk to the proposed use of the property. As the subject lands are not located within a Regional Wellfield, the Region of Waterloo does not have a direct Corporate interest which would result in the Region requesting a Record of Site Condition being imposed on its behalf. At this location, a 10 ft. road widening and a 25 ft. daylighting triangle at the intersection of Victoria Street and Theresa Street would not normally be required; however, due to the location of the existing buildings the road widening will not be acquired under this application. If the existing buildings are removed under a future application, the road widening and daylight triangle will be acquired at that time. A Regional Road Entrance Permit will be required designating this access as a mutual access. The width of the access from the property line to the curb on Victoria Street should not be less than the existing 6 m. The Region's standard access width for this type of development is 7.6 m; however, it appears that this width cannot be accommodated. The Committee considered the comments of Ms. G. Yeung, Senior Resource Planner, Grand River Conservation Authority, in which she advised that, although much of the proposed retained parcel lies within the Regulatory Floodplain for Schneider Creek, The Grand River Conservation Authority does not object to the approval of this application. Although a new lot is being created development currently exists on both parcels. The Committee noted a further written submission from Ms. G. Yeung, Grand River Conservation Authority, dated December 3, 1998, in which she advised that, further to the comments of November 4, 1998, the applicant has submitted a topographic survey of the subject properties indicating existing grades. Such a survey serves to refine the location of the Regulatory Floodline as identified on their mapping. In this case, their mapping showed a portion of the property to be on the very edge of the floodplain. The survey indicates COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 380 DECEMBER 8, 1998 that all grades are above that of the Regulatory Floodline elevation and on that basis a Fill, Construction and Alteration to Waterways Permit is not required for the development of the access roadway and parking area behind the existing dwelling. The Chairman noted the comments of the Business & Planning Services Department which asks for an amendment to the rights-of-way. Ms. Given explained the need for the amended right-of-way. The Committee agreed to consider the amendment to the application as outlined in the comments of the Department of Business & Planning Services with respect to expanding the right-of-way on the lands to be retained as shown on the site plan attached to the comments of the Department, dated November 4, 1998. A brief discussion took place with the applicant's agent in this regard and he agreed to the amendment. Moved by Mr. P. Kruse Seconded by Mr. A. Galloway That the application of Louis Machado requesting permission to sever a parcel of land having a frontage on Victoria Street of 14.4 m (47.25 ft.) by a depth of 25.9 m (84.98 ft.) and having an area of 373 m2 (4,015.07 sq. ft.), subject to a right-of-way over the retained lands and together with a right-of-way in favour of the retained lands for a driveway, on Lots 23 & 24, Registered Plan 49, 141-145 Victoria Street South, Kitchener Ontario, BE GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: 1. Submission No. B 80/98 - Luis Machado, cont'd That the owner shall obtain a Regional Road Entrance Permit designating the access as a mutual access. 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. That the owner shall submit and obtain approval of a Grading and Drainage Control Plan from the City's Chief Building Official and the Grand River Conservation Authority. That the owner shall obtain a Fill, Construction and Alteration to Waterways Permit from the Grand River Conservation Authority, if required. That the owner shall develop the parking area in accordance with the plan dated November 4, 1998, attached to comments of the Department of Business & Planning Services, and, in accordance with approved Grading and Drainage Control Plan or alternatively that a cost estimate to cover the cost of access improvements, grading, asphalt, demarcation of the parking area, and landscaping, as shown on the plan dated November 4, 1998, be completed and a letter of credit be submitted to cover 100% of the cost of the site development works, all to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning. That the owners of the lands to be retained and the lands to be severed shall enter into an agreement, to be approved by the City Solicitor, which will ensure that rights-of-way for access and a joint maintenance agreement for both properties are maintained in perpetuity, and provide confirmation that said agreement has been registered against the title of both properties. 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 December 8, 2000. 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. The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 381 DECEMBER 8, 1998 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 81/98 - Douglas Roy & Christine Susan Weber, 2 Sunrise Drive, Kitchener, Ontario Re: APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: Part Lot 3, Registered Plan 939, 2 Sunrise Drive, Kitchener, Ontario. Mr. & Mrs. D. Weber 2 Sunrise Drive Kitchener, Ontario CONTRA: NONE WRITTENSUBMISSIONS: INSUPPORT: NONE CONTRA: NONE 2. Submission No. B 81/98 - Douqlas Roy & Christine Susan Weber, cont'd The Committee was advised that the applicants are requesting permission to sever a parcel of land to create a new building lot. The severed parcel will have frontage on Matthew Street of 20.571 m (64.49 ft.) by a depth of 26.478 m (86.87 ft.) and having an area of 464.64 m (5000.5 sq. ft.). The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Business & Planning Services in which they advised that the subject lot is located at the northeast corner of Sunrise Drive and Matthew Street and contains a single detached dwelling accessing Sunrise Drive. The applicants are requesting permission to sever the rear of the lot, to create a new lot having frontage on Matthew Street of 20.571 metres (67.49 feet), a depth ranging from 23.918 metres (78.47 feet) to 26.478 metres (86.87 feet) and an area of 464.6 square metres (5,001.08 square feet). The proposed severed parcel is currently vacant and the proposed use is a single detached dwelling. The proposed retained lands would have frontage along Sunrise Drive of approximately 20.6 metres (67.6 feet), a depth of 27.341 metres (89.7 feet) and an area of 577.9 square metres (6,220.67 square feet). The severance provides for the proper and orderly development of lands. Both lots comply with all regulations of the R-3 Zone. The Department of Business and Planning Services recommends approval of the application B 81/98 subject to the following conditions: 1) That the owner pay to the City of Kitchener a cash-in-lieu contribution for park dedication equal to 5% of the value of the land to be severed. 2) That the owner make financial arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's General Manager of Public Works for the installation of new service connections to the severed lands. 3) That the owner make financial arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's General Manager of Public Work for the installation, to City standards, of boulevard landscaping including trees, driveway ramp, and driveway culvert on the severed lands. 4) That satisfactory arrangements be made with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and/or local improvement charges. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 382 DECEMBER 8, 1998 The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Planning & Culture, Region of Waterloo, in which they advised that staff have reviewed this application and have no concern. The Chairman reviewed the recommended conditions of the Department of Business & Planning Services with the applicants and Mr. Weber questioned the parkland dedication; as he believed it had already been paid through a previous development process. Ms. J. Given suggested adding the words "if required" to the end of condition no. 1 and she would verify whether the parkland dedication had been paid for this land already. Moved by Ms. S. Campbell Seconded by Mr. S. Kay That the application of Douglas Roy & Christine Susan Weber requesting permission to convey a parcel of land having a frontage on Matthew Street of 20.571 m (64.49 ft.) by a depth of 26.478 m (86.87 ft.) and having an area of 464.64 m (5000.5 sq. ft.) on Part Lot 3, Registered Plan 939, 2 Sunrise Drive, Kitchener, Ontario BE GRANTED subject to the following conditions: That the owner shall pay to the City of Kitchener a cash-in-lieu of parkland dedication equal to 5% of the value of the land to be severed, if required. That the owner shall make financial arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's General Manager of Public Works for the installation of new service connections to the severed lands. 2. Submission No. B 81/98 - Douqlas Roy & Christine Susan Weber, cont'd 3. That the owner shall make financial arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's General Manager of Public Works for the installation, to City standards, of boulevard landscaping including trees, driveway ramp, and driveway culvert on the severed lands. 4. 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 December 8, 2000. 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. 2. The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. 3. The use of the land in this application conforms to the City of Kitchener Official Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Carried 3. Submission No. B 82/98 - John & Penny Cecconi, 10 St. Emilion Place, Kitchener, Ontario Part Lot 4, Registered Plan 1571, 10 St. Emilion Place, Kitchener, Ontario. Re: APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: Mr. W. Brubacher, O.L.S. 15-550 Trillium Drive Kitchener, Ontario COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 383 DECEMBER 8, 1998 CONTRA: NONE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: IN SUPPORT: NONE CONTRA: NONE The Committee was advised that the applicants are requesting permission to sever a parcel of land having an area of 216.3 m2 (2,328.2 sq. ft.) to be conveyed as a lot addition to 970 Doon Village Road. The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Business & Planning Services in which they advised that the applicant is requesting permission to sever a small parcel of land located adjacent to the easterly side of St. Emilion Place, having 70.96 metres (232.8 feet) of frontage on St. Emilion Place, a depth of approximately 3.2 metres (10.5 feet), and an area of 216.3 square metres (2,328.2 square feet). The proposed severed parcel which is zoned R-2 is a remnant strip of property that forms part of the lot at 10 St. Emilion Place. The rear of this parcel is sloped upwards to a knoll and is supported, in part, with a retaining wall of large boulders. Part of this strip and part of the City's adjacent boulevard is well landscaped with evergreens and Iow lying shrubs. The proposed severed parcel is to be added to the property at 970 Doon Village Road. There is no development proposed for the severed parcel. The proposed retained parcel at 10 St. Emilion Place contains a single detached dwelling and is zoned R-3. This parcel has a frontage of 25.38 metres (83.27 feet) on St. Emilion Place, a depth ranging from 67.927 metres (222.87 feet) to 93.231 metres (305.86 feet) and a lot area of 2,809.8 square metres (30,245.4 square feet) in full compliance with the by-law. 3. Submission No. B 82/98 - John & Penny Cecconi, cont'd The lot at 970 Doon Village Road, to which the severed lands are to be added, is zoned R-2 and contains an older single detached dwelling. The proposed severed parcel has the appearance of belonging to 970 Doon Village Road. It is noted that the large boulders used as a retaining wall will be bisected by this new severance line. Staff note that a specific condition related to this is included in the Residential Subdivision Agreement pertaining to Lot 4, being 10 St. Emilion Place. Said Clause 59 states the following: "The Subdivider agrees that the maintenance of any side slopes and/or retaining wall as required through the approved engineering design within the part of Lot 4 paralleling the south side of the proposed cul-de- sac, shall be the future responsibility of the owner of Lot 4 unless the affected part is severed for consolidation with abutting lands in which case said maintenance responsibility shall be binding upon the successors on title of the relevant lands so severed and consolidated." This condition is brought forward at this time for the prospective purchaser's information. The severance provides for the proper, orderly merging and consolidation of the remnant with adjacent lands. The retained parcel complies with all regulations of the R-3 Zone. The Department of Business and Planning Services recommends approval of Application B 82/98 subject to the following conditions: 1) That satisfactory arrangements be made with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and/or local improvement charges. 2) That the lands to be severed be added to the abutting lands municipally addressed as 970 Doon Village Road and title be taken in identical ownership as the abutting lands. Any subsequent conveyance of the parcel to be severed shall comply with Sections 50 (3) and/or (5) of the Planning Act, 1996. The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Planning & Culture, Region of Waterloo, in which they advised that staff have reviewed this application and have no concerns. The Chairman reviewed the recommended conditions of the Department of Planning & Development with COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 384 DECEMBER 8, 1998 Mr. Brubacher who advised that he had no concerns with them. Moved by Mr. P. Kruse Seconded by Ms. S. Campbell That the application of John & Penny Cecconi requesting permission to sever a parcel of land having an area of 216.3 m2 (2,328.2 sq. ft.) to be conveyed as a lot addition to 970 Doon Village Road on Part Lot 4, Registered Plan 1571, 10 St. Emilion Place, Kitchener, Ontario BE GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: That owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and/or local improvement charges. That the lands to be severed in this application shall be added to the abutting lands, municipally addressed as 970 Doon Village Road and title be taken in identical ownership as the abutting lands; Sub-Sections 50 (3) and/or (5) of the Planning Act applies to any subsequent conveyance of or transaction involving the parcel of land that is the subject of this consent. 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. 3. Submission No. B 82/98 - John & Penny Cecconi, 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 December 8, 2000. 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. 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. B 83198 - Income Trust Company in Liquidation, cio Casimir Banas, 6 Dartnell Road, Hamilton, Ontario Re: Part Lots 16 & 17, Plan 365, Being Parts 4 & 5, Reference Plan 58R-4758 & Part Lot 17 & 18, Plan 365, Being Parts 1,2 & 3, Reference Plan 58R-4758. APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: NONE CONTRA: NONE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: IN SUPPORT: NONE CONTRA: NONE As no one appeared in support of this application, the Committee agreed to defer consideration of this application to the meeting of January 26, 1999. Submission No. B 84/98, B 85/98, B 86/98 & A 109/98 - 826534 Ontario Limited, 690 Fountain Street North, Cambrid.qe, Ontario COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 385 DECEMBER 8, 1998 Re: Part Lot 9, Beasley's Broken Front Concession, Being Part 1, Reference Plan 58R-10948. APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: Mr. W. Green 5-745 Bridge Street West Waterloo, Ontario Mr. P. Gates 690 Fountain Street Cambridge, Ontario CONTRA: Mr. P. Vanderwerff Pinegrove Community Association 24 Marquette Drive Kitchener, Ontario Mr. Scherer 267 Edgehill Drive Kitchener, Ontario Submission No. B 84/98, B 85/98, B 86/98 & A 109/98 - 826534 Ontario Limited, cont'd WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: IN SUPPORT: NONE CONTRA: Mr. P. Vanderwerff Pinegrove Community Association 24 Marquette Drive Kitchener, Ontario The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to sever three parcels of land, one to be a lot addition and the other two as lots for residential development. One of the residential lots will have an area of 1,875 m2 (20,183 sq. ft.) rather than the required 2,023 m2 (21,776.11 sq. ft.). The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Business & Planning Services in which they advised that Consent Applications, B-85/98 and B-86/98 seek approval to sever two lots on the south side of Edgehill Drive near Baxter Place, adjacent to a number of lots previously created through the consent process. These lands are zoned R-2 with a special regulation requiring consideration of a GRCA Fill Permit, increasing the minimum front yard and increasing the minimum lot size to 2023 square metres (1/2 acre). The third consent application would serve to sever a 509 square metre parcel of land to be added to the rear of the residential lot at 267 Edgehill Drive, having the effect of squaring off the rear lot line. The severed lands in this application are zoned Open Space Zone (P-2) as the current lot line reflects the location of the Grand River Scheduled Fill Line. For all consent applications, the retained lands are those on which a golf course is under construction. The lot to be severed under application B-85/98 complies with the lot width and lot area requirements of 30.0 metres and 2023 square metres, whereas the lot to be created under application B-86/98 complies with the lot width requirement but would have a lot area of 1875 square metres. Minor variance application A 106/98 seeks approval for such reduction in lot area. These lands have been the subject of a number of prior consent applications. Most recently, consent applications B-1/97 & B-2/97 were approved in February, 1997 but deeds were not endorsed. Instead, at COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 386 DECEMBER 8, 1998 about the time of the lapsing of the time period for fulfilling conditions, the owners began to explore the development of a golf course on lower lands, zoned Open Space Zone (P-2) and Hazard Land Zone (P- 3). A site plan agreement is registered against the property, which does not include any development on the lands which are the subject of the consent applications for the two new residential lots. However, the lands subject to application B-84/98 do form part of the approved site plan in that they are part of a sloped area on the site which was to be a landscaped buffer area intended to minimize the visual impact of the private driveway for the golf course from the neighbouring property, 267 Edgehill Drive. This is the lot to which the severed lands are to be added. It should be noted that in the event of approval of this consent, the obligation of the registered owner of the golf course property to install any landscaping or undertake any works within these severed lands would be removed, even though they are currently part of the registered development agreement. Prior to deed endorsement, a supplementary site plan agreement would be required, to modify the boundary of the golf course site and in doing so, remove any condition requiring landscaping from within the lands to be severed under B-84/98. It should also be noted relative to B-84/98 that since the severed lands are zoned P-2, while they may form part of the residential lot, no portion of the severed lands may be used for any residential use, including accessory uses such as a shed. Any modifications to the grading within the Grand River Scheduled Fill Area is under the jurisdiction of the Grand River Conservation Authority. Many of the matters which were required as conditions of approval of the previous consents still apply some of which are briefly noted below. Provided all conditions are met, staff are satisfied that the consent applications allow for the completion of the residential streetscape along the south side of Edgehill Drive, as long anticipated in the Official Plan, and more recently, enabled by the zoning by-law. The minor variance application to reduce the lot area of the Submission No. B 84/98, B 85/98, B 86/98 & A 109/98 - 826534 Ontario Limited, cont'd proposed residential lot is minor as it still provides a substantially sized residential property which meets the lot width requirement. It maintains the intent of the zoning by-law and official plan, which was to require that all new infill lots maintain the character of the existing lots in the community, which have a range of lot sizes, most of which are very similar to that which is being proposed. The construction of dwellings on these two lots will be desirable for the community to bring closure to a history of uncertainty about the final development of these lands. The Municipal Plan contains a policy which requires the submission of a slope stability study for the entire slope. A Slope Stability Assessment was prepared by England Naylor Engineering Ltd. dated March, 1995 for the purpose of dealing with consent application B-78/95, which was reviewed by the Grand River Conservation Authority and the City's engineer and Chief Building Official. Since only one cross section was taken through the subject property, the City will require written documentation that the conclusions of the slope stability study and/or subsequent studies submitted in support of the golf course site plan, are equally applicable to the severed lands and allow the intended development. The Chief Building Official advises that a recognized geotechnical engineer will be required to be retained to inspect the foundation soils at the time of excavation prior to concrete being poured, to confirm the adequacy of those soils for the intended loads, and submitted to the Chief Building Official. The soils engineer is to consult with and verify the structural engineer's design information for the foundation to ensure that all issues have been addressed by the engineer in the design drawings at application for building permit. The grading and drainage control plan must be coordinated with the design requirements of the structural engineer and soils engineers reports and approved prior to permit issuance. Further, according to a noise study prepared for the Ontario Municipal Board hearing dealing with the entire Pioneer Tower West community, the severed lands are located within an area having an unacceptable noise level relative to the MOEE guidelines, generated from the Pioneer Sportsman Club. The level of noise generation may have changed since the original study due to on-site restrictions; however, there is a need to confirm that the noise levels are acceptable prior to deed endorsement. Further, a noise warning clause is recommended for inclusion in the Offers of Purchase and Sale Agreements, consistent with the OMB approvals and conditions. A. That Minor Variance Application A-109/98 be approved without conditions. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 387 DECEMBER 8, 1998 B.That B-84/98 be approved subject to the following conditions: That the lands to be severed be added to the abutting lands municipally addressed as 267 Edgehill Drive and title be taken in identical ownership as the abutting lands. Any subsequent conveyance of the parcel to be severed shall comply with Sections 50(3) and/or (5) of the Planning Act, 1995. C. That B-86/98 be approved subject to the following additional condition: 1. That Minor Variance Application A 109/98 receive final approval. D. That B-85/98 and B-86/98 be approved subject to the following conditions: That the owner shall provide documentation to the satisfaction of the City's Chief Building Official that the geotechnical information and conclusions provided in the March, 1995 geotechnical report prepared by England Naylor Engineering Ltd. and/or any subsequent reports, apply to the development of the two proposed lots and verify their acceptability for development. That the owner shall provide a certificate from an accredited acoustical engineer, to the satisfaction of the City of Kitchener's Director of Planning, verifying that the noise on any part of the severed lands, emanating from the discharge of firearms on the Pioneer Sportsman Club property does not exceed 60 dBA. Submission No. B 84/98, B 85/98, B 86/98 & A 109/98 - 826534 Ontario Limited, cont'd That the owner enter into an agreement with the City of Kitchener, to the satisfaction of the City's Solicitor, to include the following in all Offers of Purchase and Sale Agreements respecting the severed lands: "Perspective purchasers are advised that the noise emanating from the Pioneer Sportsman Club, a gun club, which is in proximity to this property, may periodically interfere with the enjoyment of outdoor activity for certain individuals." That the owner make satisfactory arrangements with the City's Department of Public Works for the installation, to City standards, of boulevard landscaping, paved driveway ramps and driveway culvert on the severed lands. That the owner shall submit for the review and approval of the City's Chief Building Official, a geotechnical investigation completed by a professional engineer indicating the suitability of the site for private, in-ground sewage disposal systems, with the geotechnical investigations including an engineered site specific plan for each proposed lot and containing the following: a) Scaled drawings of the building envelope with driveway and auxiliary facilities; b) Locations of water supply; c) Detailed drawings of each sewage system specifically designed for each lot, with manholes required and cross-sectional drawings if lot elevating is supposed; d) Grading and drainage plan. That the owner shall make arrangements with the City's Department of Finance for the payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and/or local improvement charges. That the owner apply for and receive approval of a revised site plan under Site Plan Application SP 97/21/E/JG to modify the subject property and any associated conditions accordingly and that a Supplementary Agreement be prepared to reflect the modified approval. The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Planning & Culture, Region of Waterloo, in which they advised that an Ontario Municipal Board decision on the Pioneer Tower West Community, in COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 388 DECEMBER 8, 1998 February 1997, determined 60 dBA was the acceptable noise level from the Pioneer Sportsmen Club in the community. Lands under 60 dBA are considered acceptable for development with a noise warning clause on title to the lands. Regional staff have viewed the noise impact report, Pioneer Sportsmen Club, Pioneer Tower West Community, City of Kitchener by J.F. Coulter Associates Limited to determine the noise impact from the Pioneer Sportsmen Club on the proposed lots and cannot determine whether the noise from the Sportsmen Club will exceed 60 dBA on these lands. Therefore, Regional staff would recommend that prior to approval of these applications, the owner submit a certification by a noise consultant, with the noise levels do not exceed 60 dBA. Until the noise issue has been clarified, Regional staff feel that the principle of development has not been determined. Regional staff recommend deferral of the applications until the principle of development, through certification that the noise on the lands does not exceed 60 dBA, is determined. If it is determined that the noise level on these lands does not 60 dBA, the owner will be required to enter into an agreement with the City of Kitchener to include a noise warning clause in all agreements of purchase and sale and or rental agreements. As well, the approval authority should be assured that the appropriate study/report have been submitted to ensure the appropriateness of the lots on private services. Submission No. B 84/98, B 85/98, B 86/98 & A 109/98 - 826534 Ontario Limited, cont'd To conclude, Regional staff recommend deferral of the application until the owner submits a certification by a noise consultant that the noise on the lands does not exceed 60 dBA and is therefore suitable for development from a noise perspective. Once this certification is received, and the principle of development is determined, Regional staff have no objection to the subsequent approval of the application subject to the enter into of an agreement with the City of Kitchener with respect to a noise warning clause in all Agreements of Purchase & Sale and/or Rental Agreements. The Committee considered the comments of Ms. G. Yeung, a Senior Resource Planner, Grand River Conservation Authority in which he advised that the Authority does not object to the approval of the Severance Applications. Due to the concurrent development an extensive background on this property, she recommended that the severance approval be subject to the following conditions: The development and approval of a grading plan indicating an existing and proposed form of rates for the lots and the location of the GRCA Regulatory Fill Line for the Grand River Scheduled Fill Area. Location of structures and septic systems should also be included. Confirmation that the geotechnical information and conclusion provided in the March 19, 1995 Geo-Technical Report previously prepared for this site and further report provided for the construction of the access roadway into the riveredge golf course, apply to the development of the two proposed lots and the proposed reconfiguration of the third lot. A Fill, Construction & Alteration to Waterways Permit Application for future grading in the Grand River Scheduled Fill Area, if necessary. Ms. Yeung noted that the rear portion of the proposed severed lot lies within the Scheduled Fill Area for the Grand River. This was due to the presence of steep slopes associated with the Grand River Valley. Final configuration of the slopes and the stability of the existing and proposed slopes has been subject to much study. Through the work done for severance applications B 1/97 & B 2/97 and more recently for the construction of the access driveway for the golf course, or any other applicable studies, we would like confirmation that the grading is suitable in compaction and extent to support the proposed residential development and will not adversely affect existing stability on the lot accepting the addition. The area in the vicinity of the lot has been filled and graded to some extent with approval of Fill, Construction & Alteration to Waterways Permit 40/98 for the development of the retained lands. If the grading is to be completed soon, it may be done so with a revised grading plan being submitted which would then become the new schedule to the existing permit. If the new owners of the proposed lots or current owner of a lot to which land is being added, undertake grading and/or filling within the schedule COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 389 DECEMBER 8, 1998 area, a new permit will be required in their name. A new permit will also be required if the grading is not completed before permit 40/98 expires in March, 2000. Mr. W. Green addressed the Committee giving some background on the previous applications. He advised that a golf course has been built on the retained lands this summer. He noted that, through the site plan approval, the previous consent conditions were satisfied or included in an agreement. Mr. Green then explained that the two new lots proposed are zoned R-2 and the use is permitted. He noted that a minor variance is required to permit the area of one of the lots. He advised that the owner is exercising caution to ensure that the driveway for the golf course remains on golf course land. Mr. Green then addressed the Committee with respect to the noise condition recommended by staff. He felt that the condition for the noise certificate was not required, as certification has been met on lands much closer to the source of noise. With respect to the City's requested condition no. 5, dealing with private septic systems, Mr. Green requested that the condition be required to be fulfilled prior to building permit issuance; as they don't know exactly who is going to buy these lots or exactly where, on the lots, the houses will go. With respect to Mr. Green's first request, Ms. J. Given advised that it is not staff's Submission No. B 84/98, B 85/98, B 86/98 & A 109/98 - 826534 Ontario Limited, cont'd responsibility to interpret whether someone elses certification for noise applies to these properties. With regard to private sewage disposal, this is always requested as a condition of consent, as it is important to know that the lot can support such a system prior to the lot being created. The Committee then reviewed the wording of condition no. 5 and amended the wording. Ms. Given pointed out that this condition was imposed in the last application from this property as it was requested by the Region. Ms. S. Scherer addressed the Committee advising that she is the owner of 267 Edgehill Drive and will receive the lot addition. She referred to a letter from her lawyer to the Committee of Adjustment with respect to pending litigation, which she advised could change the whole scenario of these applications. The Committee noted that it was not in receipt of a letter from her lawyer and Ms. J. Given provided the Committee with her faxed copy of the letter. In response, Mr. Green responded that he didn't think the Committee of Adjustment should open itself up to the litigation. The owner has an obligation to proceed with this consent, and if the litigation or negotiation/mediation changes things, then they would not get their deeds endorsed. Mr. Vanderwerff addressed the Committee advising that he is present on behalf of the Pinegrove Neighbourhood Association. He advised that complaints have been filed with the Minister of the Environment about wells in the area and he asked that the Committee defer consideration of these applications pending the outcome of the complaint resolution by the Ministry. He also advised that he was of the opinion that violations to the tree cutting by-law have taken place and that the Region is investigating these potential violations. In response, Mr. Green advised that the Ministry of the Environment is following up on complaints filed and they will investigate and report on this matter and it is not the place of the Committee of Adjustment to intervene. With respect to violations to the tree cutting by-law, the Region hasn't dealt with their request at this time. That Committee will deal with the matter and it is not the place of the Committee of Adjustment to deal with tree cutting violations. He also advised that it has nothing to do with the lands zoned R2 at the top of the hill. Mr. P. Kruse stated that the legal issue is not before this Committee. He noted that the Ministry of the Environment is dealing with the wells and the Region is dealing with their tree cutting by-law and these are not matters for this Committee. Mr. Kruse put forward a motion to approve all applications subject to the City's condition no. 5 being amended as previously discussed and the imposition of the remainder of the City requested conditions along with the Grand River Conservation Authority requested conditions. Mr. A. Galloway advised that he was in support of the motion and that he hadn't heard anything at this meeting to convince him that these applications shouldn't be dealt with this date. Submission No. B 84/98 COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 390 DECEMBER 8, 1998 Moved by Mr. P. Kruse Seconded by Mr. A. Galloway That the application of 826534 Ontario requesting permission to convey a parcel of land having an area of 509 m2 (5,479 sq. ft.) as a lot addition to 267 Edgehill Drive on Part of Lot 9, Beasley's Broken Front C oncession, 245 Edgehill Drive, Kitchener, Ontario, BE GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: That the lands to severed in this application shall be added to the abutting lands, municipally known as 267 Edgehill Drive, and title shall be taken in identical ownership as the abutting lands; subsections 50(3) and/or (5) of the Planning Act applies to any subsequent conveyance of or transaction involving the parcel of land that is the subject of this consent. Submission No. B 84/98, B 85/98, B 86/98 & A 109/98 - 826534 Ontario Limited, cont'd Submission No. B 84/98, cont'd That the owner shall develop and receive approval of a grading plan indicating existing and proposed final grades of the lot and the location of the Grand River Conservation Authority Regulatory Flow Line for the Grand River Scheduled Fill Area. The location of structures and septic systems shall also be included in this plan. That the owner shall provide the Grand River Conservation Authority with confirmation that the geotechnical information and conclusion provided in the March 19, 1995 geotechnical report, previously prepared for the site and further reports, provided for the construction of the access roadway into the Riveredge Golf Course apply to the development of the two proposed lots and the proposed reconfiguration of the third lot. That the owner shall submit A Fill, Construction & Alteration to Waterways Permit Application for future grading in the Grand River Scheduled Area, to the Grand River Conservation Authority, if necessary. 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 December 8, 2000. 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. 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. B 85~98 Moved by Mr. P. Kruse Seconded by Mr. A. Galloway That the application of 826534 Ontario requesting permission to convey a parcel of land having a frontage on Edgehill Drive of 35 m (114.83 ft.) by a depth of 60 m (196.85 ft.) and having an area of 2,023 m2 (21,776.11 sq. ft.) on Part Lot 9, Beasley's Broken Front Concession, 245 Edgehill Drive, Kitchener, COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 391 DECEMBER 8, 1998 Ontario BE GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: That the owner shall develop and receive approval of a grading plan indicating existing and proposed final grades of the lot and the location of the Grand River Conservation Authority Regulatory Fill Line for the Grand River Scheduled Fill Area. The location of structures and septic systems shall also be included in this plan. That the owner shall provide the Grand River Conservation Authority with confirmation that the geotechnical information and conclusion provided in the March 19, 1995 geotechnical report, previously prepared for the site and further reports, provided for the construction of the access roadway into the Riveredge Golf Course apply to the development of the two proposed lots and the proposed reconfiguration of the third lot. That the owner shall submit a Fill, Construction & Alteration to Waterways Permit Application for future grading in the Grand River Scheduled Area, to the Grand River Conservation Authority, if necessary. Submission No. B 84/98, B 85/98, B 86/98 & A 109/98 - 826534 Ontario Limited, cont'd Submission No. B 85/98, cont'd That the owner shall provide documentation to the satisfaction of the City's Chief Building Official that the geotechnical information and conclusion provided in the March, 1995 geotechnical report, prepared by England Naylor Engineering Ltd. and/or any subsequent reports, applied to the development of the two proposed lots and thereby their acceptability for development. That the owner shall provide a certificate from an accredited acoustical engineer, to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Planning, verifying that the noise on any part of the severed lands emanating from the discharge of firearms on the Pioneer Sportsmen Club property, does not exceed 60 dBA. That the owner shall enter into an agreement with the City of Kitchener, to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor, to include the following in all offers of Purchase and Sale Agreements and/or Rental Agreements respecting the severed lands; "Perspective purchasers are advised that the noise emanating from the Pioneer Sportsmen Club, a gun club, which is in proximity to this property, may periodically interfere with the enjoyment of outdoor activity for certain individuals" That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with the City's Department of Public Works for the installation, to City standards, of boulevard landscaping, paved driveway ramp and driveway culvert on the severed lands. That the owner shall submit for the review of the City's Chief Building Official, a geotechnical investigation completed by a professional engineer indicating the suitability of the site for private, in-ground sewage disposal systems. That the owner shall make arrangement with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and/or local improvement charges. 10. That the owner shall apply for and receive approval of a revised site plan under Site Plan Application SP 97/21/E/JG to modify the subject property and any associated conditions accordingly and that a supplementary agreement shall be prepared to reflect a modified approval. 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 December 8, 2000. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 392 DECEMBER 8, 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. 2. The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. 3. 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 84/98, B 85/98, B 86/98 & A 109/98 - 826534 Ontario Limited, cont'd Submission No. B 86/98 Moved by Mr. P. Kruse Moved by Mr. A. Galloway That the application of 826534 Ontario requesting permission to convey a parcel of land having a frontage on Edgehill Drive of 35 m (114.83 ft.) by a depth of 57.5 m (188.65 ft.) and having an area of 1,875 m2 (20,183 sq. ft.) on Part Lot 9, Beasley's Broken Front Concession, 245 Edgehill Drive, Kitchener, Ontario BE GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: That the owner shall develop and receive approval of a grading plan indicating existing and proposed final grades of the lot and the location of the Grand River Conservation Authority Regulatory Fill Line for the Grand River Scheduled Fill Area. The location of structures and septic systems shall also be included in this plan. That the owner shall provide the Grand River Conservation Authority with confirmation that the geotechnical information and conclusion provided in the March 19, 1995 geotechnical report, previously prepared for the site and further reports, provided for the construction of the access roadway into the Riveredge Golf Course apply to the development of the two proposed lots and the proposed reconfiguration of the third lot. That the owner shall submit a Fill, Construction & Alteration to Waterways Permit Application for future grading in the Grand River Scheduled Area, to the Grand River Conservation Authority, if necessary. That the owner shall provide documentation to the satisfaction of the City's Chief Building Official that the geotechnical information and conclusion provided in the March, 1995 geotechnical report, prepared by England Naylor Engineering Ltd. and/or any subsequent reports, applied to the development of the two proposed lots and thereby their acceptability for development. That the owner shall provide a certificate from an accredited acoustical engineer, to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Planning, verifying that the noise on any part of the severed lands, emanating from the discharge of firearms on the Pioneer Sportsmen Club property, does not exceed 60 dBA. That the owner shall enter into an agreement with the City of Kitchener, to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor, to include the following in all offers of Purchase and Sale Agreement and/or Rental Agreement respecting the severed lands; "Perspective purchasers are advised that the noise emanating from the Pioneer Sportsmen Club, a gun club, which is in proximity to this property, may periodically interfere with the enjoyment of outdoor activity for certain individuals" COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 393 DECEMBER 8, 1998 That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with the City's Department of Public Works for the installation, to City standards, of boulevard landscaping, paved driveway ramp and driveway culvert on the severed lands. That the owner shall submit for the review of the City's Chief Building Official, a geotechnical investigation completed by a professional engineer indicating the suitability of the site for private, in-ground sewage disposal systems. That the owner shall make arrangement with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and/or local improvement charges. 10. That the owner shall apply for and receive approval of a revised site plan under Site Plan Application SP 97/21/E/JG to modify the subject property and any associated conditions accordingly and that a supplementary agreement shall be prepared to reflect a modified approval. Submission No. B 84/98, B 85/98, B 86/98 & A 109/98 - 826534 Ontario Limited, cont'd Submission No. B 86/98 11. That the owner shall receive final approval of Submission No. A 109/98. 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 December 8, 2000. 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. 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. A 109/98 Moved by Mr. Mr. P. Kruse Moved by Mr. A. Galloway That the application of 826534 Ontario requesting permission for a residential lot having an area of 1,875 m2 (20,183 sq. ft.) rather than the required 2,023 m2 (21,776.11 sq. ft.) on Part Lot 9, Beasley's Broken Front Concession, 245 Edgehill Drive, Kitchener, Ontario BE APPROVED. 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 6. Submission No. B 87/98 - 1232118 Ontario Inc., 45 Otonabee Drive, COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 394 DECEMBER 8, 1998 Kitchener, Ontario Re: Lot 13, Registrar's Compiled Plan 1489, 45 Otonabee Drive, Kitchener. APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: Mr. J. Nanson 181 Frederick Street Kitchener, Ontario CONTRA: NONE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS: IN SUPPORT: NONE CONTRA: NONE The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to give the abutting property owner a 4.5 m (14.77 ft.) wide storm sewer easement. 6. Submission No. B 87/98 - 1232118 Ontario Inc., cont'd The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Business & Planning Services in which they advised that the applicant is requesting permission to establish a storm sewer easement in favour of the owners of the land at 111 Bleams Road. The 4.5 metre wide easement is located along the entire southerly limit of 45 Otonabee Drive property. It provides a storm sewer access outlet for the rear parking and driveway area of 111 Bleams Road to Otonabee Drive. As a result of the construction of a new industrial building and parking area at the rear of 111 Bleams Road, no appropriate sewer outlet meeting engineering slope requirements from the rear of this property was available to Bleams Road. Accordingly, arrangements were made with the owners of 45 Otonabee Drive for storm sewer access. The storm sewer has already been installed. As the easement is not for City purposes, the Public Works Department has no concerns. The easement has no impact on any other planning related matters. The easement provides for the proper and orderly servicing of abutting lands and as such, staff have no concerns. The Department of Business and Planning Services recommends approval of Application B 87/98, without conditions. The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Planning & Culture, Region of Waterloo, in which they advised that staff have reviewed this application and have no concerns. The Committee noted the comments of Ms. G. Yeung, Senior Resource Planner, Grand River Conservation Authority in which she advised that the Authority has no resource concerns and no objections to this application. Moved by Mr. W. Dahms Seconded by Mr. S. Kay That the application of 1232118 Ontario Inc. requesting permission to give the abutting property owner a 4.5 m (14.77 ft.) wide storm sewer easement on Lot 13, Registrar's Compiled Plan 1489, 45 Otonabee Drive, Kitchener BE GRANTED. 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 December 8, 2000. 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. The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. 3. The use of the land in this application conforms to the City of Kitchener Official Plan and the COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 395 DECEMBER 8, 1998 Re: Regional Official Policies Plan. Carried Submission No. B 88/98 & A 106/98 - The General Church of Canada, 279 Burnhamthorpe Road, Etobicoke, Ontario Part Lot 3, Beasley's New Survey, 262 Dodge Drive, Kitchener, Ontario. APPEARANCES: IN SUPPORT: Mr. R. Kauk 442 Caryndale Drive Kitchener, Ontario CONTRA: NONE WRITTENSUBMISSIONS: INSUPPORT: NONE CONTRA: NONE 7. Submission No. B 88/98 & A 106/98 - The General Church of Canada, cont'd The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to sever a parcel of land having an area of 1.73 hectares (4.5 acres) containing the house, barn & outbuildings. Permission for the lot area of 1.73 hectares is required as the by-law only permits a lot area of 1.2 hectares. At the request of Mr. Kauk, the Committee agreed to defer consideration of this application until June 15, 1999. ADJOURNMENT On Motion the meeting adjourned at 1:00 p.m. D. H. Gilchrist Secretary-Treasurer Committee of Adjustment