Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDSD-2021-32 - A 2021-018 - 130 Samuel StREPORT TO:Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING:March 16, 2021 SUBMITTED BY:vonWesterholt, Juliane,Senior Planner, 519-741-2200ext. 7157 PREPARED BY:Rice Menezes, Sheryl, Planning Technician (Zoning), 519-741-2200 ext. 7844 WARD(S) INVOLVED:10 DATE OF REPORT:March 8, 2021 REPORT NO.:DSD 2021-32 SUBJECT:Minor Variance Application A2021-018 130 Samuel Street Owner – Katherine Robertson and Sarah Robertson Applicant – Iain Kent / Eagleview Construction RECOMMENDATION: That applicationA2021-018 requesting permission to demolish and reconstruct an existing one-storey garage in the rear yard of an existing single detached dwelling having a southerly side yard setback for the proposed garage of 0.203 metres rather than the required 0.6 metres; and, for the detached garage to have a maximum fascia height of 3.82 metres rather than the permitted maximum of 3 metres, be approved,subject to the following conditions: 1)That a building permit is obtained from the Building Division to itssatisfaction; 2)That in light of the treed nature of the property and the proximity of trees in shared ownership, the owner shall prepare a Tree Preservation Plan for the lands in accordance with the City’s Tree Management Policy, to be approved by the City’s Director ofPlanning and where necessary, implemented prior to any demolition, grading, tree removal or the issuance of building permits. Such plans shall include, among other matters, the identification of a proposed building envelope/work zone, building elevation drawings, landscaped area and vegetation to be removed and/or preserved. The owner further agrees to implement the approved plan. No changes to the said plan shall be granted except with the prior approval of the City’s Director of Planning; and, 3)That conditions 1and 2 above be completed by August 1, 2021. Any request for a time extension must be approved in writing by the Manager of Development Review (or designate) prior to completion date set out in this decision. Failure to complete the conditions will result in this approval becoming null and void. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. BACKGROUND: The property is designated as Low Rise Residential in the City’s Official Plan andidentified as a Community Area on the Urban StructureMap. The property is zoned asResidential Four (R-4) in Zoning By-law 85-1. Location Map REPORT: Planning Comments: In considering the four tests for minor variances as outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O., 1990 Chap. P. 13, as amended, Planning staff offers the following comments: General Intent of the Official Plan Theintent of the Low Rise Residential designation is to accommodate a range of low density housing types which includes single detached dwellings. The designation supports maintaining a low-rise built form and the proposed detached garage with a height of one-storey maintains this form. Therefore, Planning staff is of the opinion that the general intent of the Official Plan is maintained. Photo of Subject Property General Intent of the Zoning By-law The intent of the 0.6 metre side yard setback for adetached garage is to ensure that the structure can be maintained. Though the proposed 0.203 metre side yard setback does not permit maintenance without going onto the abutting property; it is noted that the building can be constructed of maintenance free material which will not require encroaching onto abutting lands. As well, the applicant has noted on the drawings that any eaves along the side property line willnot encroach over the property line. The existing structure, whichhas been there for some time, is located at a 0.2 metre setback and the proposed building is no more onerous that what currently exists. The intent of the maximum 3-metre fascia height is to ensure that the structure has a lower roof massing that the main dwelling and therefore it willnot dominate the property. The proposed 3.82-metre fascia height is at the rear of the structure and occurs because of a grading difference along the proposed structure from front to back. The view from the street is not impacted by the increase in fascia height at the rear of the building. Based on the above, staff is of the opinion that the general intent of the zoning by-law ismaintainedfor both variances. Is the Variance Minor? Regarding the existing garage, it is noted that there has been no concerns or complaints received to date. Regarding the proposed garage, the drawings submitted with the application indicate the structure will be longer in depth by 1.58 metres at the rear of the structure. This is minor when compared to the overall length of the subject property and provided the structure is built with maintenance-free materials, there are no concerns with the proposal. Regarding the variance for an increase of 0.82 metre in fascia height at the rear of the structure, it is noted that it is only the rear of the structure that requires the variance because of grading differences in the rear yard. Based on the fascia height and the size of the lot, staff hasno concerns with this requested variance. Staff is of the opinion that the two variances areminor. Is the Variance Appropriate? As noted above, the two variances are considered minor. The view from the street, and from the neighbours abutting the property, do not appear to be negatively impacted by the proposed replacement garage. Staff is of the opinion that the variances are appropriate for development of the residential property as they do not impact the surroundingneighbourhood. City Planning staff conducted a site inspection of the property on March 4, 2021. Building Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance provided building permit for the detached garage is obtained prior to construction. Please contact the Building Division @ building@kitchener.ca with any questions. Transportation Comments: Transportation Services does not have any concerns with the proposed application. Engineering Comments: Engineering has no comments. HeritagePlanning: The Kitchener Cultural Heritage Landscape Study (CHLS) dated December 2014 and prepared by The Landplan Collaborative Ltd. was approved by Council in 2015. The CHLS serves to establish an inventory and was the first step of a phased Cultural Heritage Landscape (CHL) conservation process. The property municipally addressed as 130 Samuel Street is located within the Central Frederick Neighbourhood CHL. The owner and the public will be consulted as the City considers listing CHLs on the Municipal Heritage Register, identifying CHLs in the Official Plan, and preparing action plans for each CHL with specific conservation options. Environmental Planning: That in light of the treed nature of the property and the proximity of trees in shared ownership, the ownershall prepare aTree Preservation Plan for the lands in accordance with the City’s Tree Management Policy. Details as noted in Condition #2 above. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Capital Budget – The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget. Operating Budget – The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM – This report has been posted to the City’s website with the agenda in advance of the Committeeof Adjustmentmeeting.A notice signed was placed on the propertyadvising that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received. The sign advisesinterested parties to find additional information on the City’s website or by emailing the Planning Division. A notice of the application was mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property. PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: There are no previous reports/authoritiesrelated to this matter. February23, 2021 Holly Dyson City of KitchenerFile No.: D20-20/ 200 King Street WestVAR KIT GEN P.O. Box 1118(1)VAR KIT, MADISON AVE DEV CORP Kitchener, ONN2G 4G7 51 & 53 DAVID STREET (13)08 KING KIT, SPORTSWORLD CROSSING AND CHRISTIAN HORIZIONS (14) 06 HIGHLAND, SAVIC HOMES LIMITED (24, 25) VAR KIT, 172 WINDALE CRESCENT JASPAL VIRK Dear Ms. Dyson: Re:Committee of Adjustment Applications Meeting March16,2021, City of Kitchener Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have following updated comments: 1)A2021-01051 David StreetNo Concerns. 2)A2021-01155 Franklin StreetSouthNo Concerns. 3)A2021-01239 Crosby DriveNo Concerns. 4)A2021-0132 Crosswinds DriveNo Concerns. 5)A 2021-014247 LydiaStreet No Concerns. 6)A 2021-01511 Ian Ormston DriveNo Concerns. 7)A 2021-016241 Simeon StreetNo Concerns. 8)A 2021-01790 Duchess AvenueNo Concerns. 9)A 2021-018130 Samuel StreetNo Concerns. 10)A 2021-01930 Waterbow TrailNo Concerns. 11)A 2021-02025 Margaret AvenueNo Concerns. 12)A 2021-021331 Driftwood DriveNo Concerns. 13)A 2021-0224278 King Street EastNo Concerns. 14)A 2021-0231430 HighlandRoad WestNo Concerns. 15)A 2021-024172 Windale Crescent (Retained)No Concerns. Document Number: 35739631 Docs #3573963 16)A 2021-025172 Windale Crescent (Severed)No Concerns. Please be advised that any development on the lands subject to the Applications noted above aresubject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 14-046 or any successor thereof and may require the payment of Regional Development Charges for these developmentsprior to the issuance of a building permit. The comments contained in this letter pertain to the Application numberslistedabove. If a site is subject to more than one application, additional comments may apply. Please forward any decision on the above mentioned application to the undersigned. Yours Truly, Joginder Bhatia Transportation Planner C (226) 753-0368 Document Number: 35739632 Docs #3573963 March 4, 2021 Holly Dyson, Administrative Clerk Via email only Legislated Services, City of Kitchener 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON, N2G 4G7 Dear Ms. Dyson, Re:March 15,2021Committee of Adjustment Meeting ______________________________________________________________________ Applications for Minor Variance A 2021-01051David StreetA2021-018130Samuel Street A 2021-01155Franklin Street SouthA2021-01930Waterbow Trail A 2021-01239Crosby DriveA2021-02025Margaret Avenue A 2021-0132Crosswinds DriveA2021-021331Driftwood Drive A2021-014247Lydia StreetA2021-0224278King Street East A2021-01511IanOrmston DriveA2021-0231430Highland Road West A2021-016241Simeon StreetA2021-024172WindaleCrescent A2021-01790Duchess AvenueA2021-025172WindaleCrescent Applications for Consent B 2021-009104Fifth Avenue B 2021-01054Third Avenue B 2021-012140-142 Weichel Street B 2021-013146-148 Weichel Street B2021-014172WindaleCrescent The above-noted consent applications are located outside the Grand River Conservation Authority areas of interest. As such, we will not undertake a review of the applications and plan review fees will not be required. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me at 519-621-2763 ext. 2228 or aherreman@grandriver.ca. Sincerely, Andrew Herreman, CPT Resource Planning Technician Grand River Conservation Authority *These comments are respectfully submitted as advice and reflect resource concerns within the scope and mandate of Page 1of 1 the Grand River Conservation Authority.