HomeMy WebLinkAboutAdjustment - 1999-10-26 FENCOA\1999-10-26-FENCE.doc
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT
FOR THE
CITY OF KITCHENER
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING HELD OCTOBER 26, 1999
MEMBERS PRESENT:
OFFICIALS PRESENT:
Messrs. W. Dahms, A. Galloway and P. Kruse.
Ms. J. Given, Principal Planner, Mr. L. Masseo, Intermediate Planner and
Ms. J. Billett, Secretary-Treasurer.
Mr. W. Dahms, Chair, called the meeting to order at 9:30 a.m.
This meeting of the Committee of Adjustment sitting as a Standing Committee of City Council was
called to consider applications regarding variances to Chapter 630 (Fences) of the City of Kitchener
Municipal Code. The Committee will not make a decision on these applications but rather will make a
recommendation which will be forwarded to the Committee of the Whole and Council for final
decision.
The Chair explained that the Committee's decisions with respect to fence variances are
recommendations to City Council and not a final decision. He advised that the Committee's
recommendations will be forwarded to City Council on Monday, November 1, 1999, at 7:00 p.m., and
the applicants may register with the City Clerk to appear at the meeting if desired.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
APPLICATION
Submission No.:
Applicant:
Property Location:
Le.qal Description:
F 13/99
Christine Thomas
462 Stirling Avenue South
Lot 30, Part Lot 31, Plan 652
Appearances:
In Support:
Ms. C. Thomas
462 Stirling Avenue South
Kitchener ON N2M 3J2
Ms. L. Knowlton
466 Stirling Avenue South
Kitchener ON N2M 3J2
Contra:
Mrs. L. Larouche
245 Highland Road East
Kitchener ON N2M 3W3
Other:
Mrs. P. Gribbon
463 Stirling Avenue South
Kitchener ON N2M 3J2
Written Submissions:
In Support:
Ms. K. Bimm
Enforcement Section
Department of Business & Planning Services
200 King Street West
Kitchener ON N2G 4G7
Contra: None
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 45 - OCTOBER 26, 1999
1. Submission No.: F 13/99 (Cont'd)
The Chair noted that at the Committee's October 5, 1999 meeting, this application was
deferred to allow the applicant to resolve the issue of the setback for the visibility triangle with
staff of the Traffic & Parking Division.
The Committee was previously advised that the applicant is requesting permission to legalize
an existing 1.72 meter (5.66 ft.) wooden fence, having a sideyard setback of 0 m from
Highland Road, rather than the required 4.5 m (14.76 ft.).
Previous comments from the Department of Business and Planning Services; Building
Division; Traffic & Parking Division; Assistant City Solicitor; Grand River Conservation
Authority; and Ms. K. Bimm; as documented in the minutes of the Committee's October 5,
1999 meeting were further considered this date.
The Committee also noted revised comments from the Traffic & Parking Analyst in which he
advised that the Traffic & Parking Division has re-reviewed the application and has no
concerns with the existing height of the fence but will require the fence be removed from the
driveway visibility triangle. This measurement is taken from the back edge of the sidewalk and
is measured 4.57 m back. We have spoken with the applicant and reiterated our request to
have the fence located 4.57 m back from the sidewalk.
The Chair enquired if the applicant had anything further to add and Ms. C. Thomas responded
that staff of the Traffic & Parking Division had attended the site and indicated that they still
wish to have the fence moved back 15 ft. and stated that she has agreed to do so.
The Chair requested clarification that the 15 ft. setback would be from Highland Road and Ms.
Thomas responded that was correct.
The Chair referred to the staff request to amend the application to show that the fence is
located on both the applicant's property and City property and requested clarification that this
had been dealt with at the Committee's October 5th meeting. The Secretary advised that was
correct and that the minutes of the October 5th meeting document Ms. Thomas' agreement to
the amendment. Ms. Thomas concurred that she has agreed to this amendment.
The Chair enquired if staff had any further comments and Ms. J. Given responded that the
previous comments of the Department of Business & Planning Services, as documented in the
October 5th minutes, still apply and staff have nothing further to add.
Ms. L. Larouche advised that she was a tenant of the neighbouring property and enquired
when the fence would be moved. She pointed out that, as it exists now, it is creating visibility
concerns when backing out of her driveway.
The Chair asked Ms. Thomas for comment and Ms. Thomas responded that she wished to
move the fence as soon as possible but exact timing would depend on arrangements that have
to be made with those she will be asking to assist her with the work. She further advised that
one of the conditions indicate the work must be completed by December 5, 1999 and assured
that the work would be completed by that date, if not sooner.
Ms. Thomas also enquired if it was necessary for her to contact the Traffic & Parking Division
when the work was completed and Ms. Given responded that staff would be following up with
the applicant to ensure that the work has been completed by the deadline date.
Moved by Mr. A. Galloway
Seconded by Mr. P. Kruse
That the application of Christine Thomas requesting permission to legalize an existing 1.72 m
(5.66 ft.) wooden fence located on both the applicant's property and City property, having a 0
m sideyard setback from Highland Road, rather than the required 4.5 m (14.76 ft.), on Lot 30
and Part Lot 31, Plan 652, 462 Stirling Avenue South, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED,
subject to the following conditions:
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 46 - OCTOBER 26, 1999
1. Submission No.: F 13/99 (Cont'd)
That the property owner shall enter into an encroachment agreement with the City of
Kitchener to legalize the location of the fence on City property prior to November 20,
1999. No extension to this completion date shall be granted unless approved in writing
by the City's Principal Planner prior to the completion date set out in this decision.
That the fence shall be modified to provide a 4.5 m visibility corner along Highland Road
and 4.5 m at the driveway of the neighbouring property, prior to December 5, 1999, to
the satisfaction of the Traffic & Parking Division. No extension to this completion date
shall be granted unless approved in writing by the City's Principal Planner prior to the
completion date set out in this decision.
It is the opinion of this Committee that:
1. The variance approved 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 Municipal Code Chapter 630
(Fence) is being maintained on the subject property.
Carried
The Chair pointed out to Ms. Thomas that the decision of the Committee is a recommendation
to Council, which will be considered at the Council meeting of November 1, 1999, at 7:00 p.m.
in the Council Chamber and advised that she may register as a delegation to appear before
Council at that time.
The Committee then recessed the meeting, temporarily, at 9:40 a.m. in order to consider applications
for Minor Variances to the City of Kitchener's Sign By-law. This meeting reconvened at 10:05 a.m.
APPLICATION
Submission No.:
Applicant:
Property Location:
Le.qal Description:
F 14/99
Gabe Daranyi
46 Chartwell Court
Lot 35, Registered Plan 1608
Appearances:
In Support:
Mr. G. Daranyi
46 Chartwell Court
Kitchener ON N2A 3M2
Contra: None
Written Submissions:
In Support: None
Contra: None
The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to legalize an existing
chain link fence along the westerly sideyard and rearyard up to the lot line, having a height of
1.52 m (5 ft.), rather than the required 0.91 m (3 ft.).
The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Business & Planning Services in
which they advised that the applicant is requesting permission to legalize an existing chain link
fence along the westerly sideyard and the rearyard to be located 0 metres from the lot line,
having a height of 1.52 metres (5 feet) rather than the permitted 0.91 metres (3 ft). It is noted that
variance approval is required only for that portion of the fence within 4.5 metres of the Chartwell
Court lot line.
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 47 - OCTOBER 26, 1999
1. Submission No.: F 14/99 (Cont'd)
The applicant constructed the 1.52 metre-high fence in the rearyard to provide a safe area for his
children to play.
The intent of the 4.5 metres setback is to maintain visibility for pedestrian and vehicular traffic. It
is noted that the fence is not located in the corner visibility triangle and therefore would not pose a
visibility concern for traffic turning at the intersection. Additionally, the fence is constructed of
chain link material and therefore would not appear to cause a visibility concern.
The Traffic Division has no concerns regarding visibility for the existing fence.
It is staff's opinion that the general intent of the by-law is being met. The variance could be
considered minor in nature as it will not adversely affect the neighbouring property, and it is
desirable for the development of the property.
The Department of Business and Planning Services recommends approval of the requested
variance relative to the fence as shown on the drawing submitted by the applicant.
The Committee noted the comments of the Director of Building in which he advised that the
Building Division has no concerns or comments with respect to this application.
The Committee noted the comments of the Traffic & Parking Analyst in which he advised that
the Traffic & Parking Division has reviewed this application and has no concerns with the
height or location of the existing fence.
The Committee noted the comments of the Grand River Conservation Authority in which they
advised that they have no objections or concerns with respect to this application.
The Chair reviewed the staff comments, noting that staff are recommending approval of the
minor variance and questioned if the applicant had anything further to add. Mr. G. Daranyi
responded that he had nothing further to add.
Mr. A. Galloway questioned if there were any sidewalks along side the fence and Mr. Daranyi
responded that there were.
The Chair enquired of staff if a condition should be imposed that would prohibit the growing of
any vegetation along the inside of the chain link fence and Ms. Given responded that staff
would not impose such a condition as there is additional legislation that would cover this issue
if necessary.
Moved by Mr. A. Galloway
Seconded by Mr. P. Kruse
That the application of Gabe Daranyi requesting permission to legalize an existing chain link
fence along the westerly sideyard and rearyard up to the lot line, having a height of 1.52 m (5
ft.), rather than the required 0.91 m (3 ft.), on Lot 35, Registered Plan 1608, 46 Chartwell
Court, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following condition:
That the variance as approved in this application shall apply only in accordance with the
drawings submitted with the application for Submission No. F 14/99.
It is the opinion of this Committee that:
1. The variance approved 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 Municipal Code Chapter 630
(Fence) is being maintained on the subject property.
Carried
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 48 - OCTOBER 26, 1999
Submission No.: F 14/99 (Cont'd)
The Chair pointed out to Mr. Daranyi that the decision of the Committee is a recommendation
to Council, which will be considered at the Council meeting of November 1, 1999, at 7:00 p.m.
in the Council Chamber and advised that he may register as a delegation to appear before
Council at that time.
ADJOURNMENT
On motion, the meeting adjourned at 10:10 a.m.
Dated at the City of Kitchener this 26th day of October, 1999.
J. Billett
Secretary-Treasurer
Committee of Adjustment
