Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAdjustment - 1999-11-16 FENCOA\1999-11-16-FENCE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FOR THE CITY OF KITCHENER MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING HELD NOVEMBER 16, 1999 MEMBERS PRESENT: Ms. S. Campbell and Messrs. W. Dahms and A. Galloway. OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ms. J. Given, Principal Planner and Ms. J. Billett, Secretary-Treasurer. Mr. W. Dahms, Chair, called this meeting to order at 10:05 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 29, 1999, at 7:00 a.m., and the applicants may register with the City Clerk to appear at the meeting if desired. APPLICATION Submission No.: Applicant: Property Location: Le.qal Description: F 15/99 Craig & Krista Reiber 145 Wilderness Drive Part Block 9, Plan 58M-15, Part 11 , R. P. 58R-10621 Appearances: In Support: Mr. & Mrs. C. Reiber 145 Wilderness Drive Kitchener ON N2E 3R8 Contra: None Written Submissions: In Support: None Contra: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to legalize an existing wooden fence along the westerly sideyard up to the lot line adjacent to Pine Martin Crescent, having a height of 1.82 m (6 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 fence located 0 metres from the southerly lot line and 0 metres from the lot line abutting Pine Martin Crescent, having a height of 1.83 metres (6 feet) rather than the permitted maximum height of 0.91 metres (3 feet). It is noted that variance approval is required only for that portion of the fence within 4.5 metres of the Pine Martin Crescent lot line, beyond which, the fence may be 1.83 metres in height. The applicants constructed the 1.82 metre-high fence to provide a secure area for their children. They also wish to provide privacy from neighbours walking their dogs and using the mailbox located near the property. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 50 - NOVEMBER 16, 1999 The intent of the 4.5 metre setback from the lot line is to maintain visibility for pedestrian and vehicular traffic. It is noted that the fence is not located in the corner visibility triangle of the two Submission No.: F 15/99 (Cont'd) intersecting streets and therefore would not pose a visibility concern for traffic turning at the intersection. However, the Traffic Division has concerns regarding visibility for cars using the neighbour's driveway located to the rear of the subject lot at 17 Pine Martin Crescent. The Traffic Division is recommending the fence be altered to include a 4.5 metre corner visibility triangle adjacent to 17 Pine Martin Crescent to provide sufficient visibility for vehicles exiting the property. Provided the 4.5 metre corner visibility triangle is created as recommended by the Traffic Division there will be no apparent impact on vehicular or pedestrian safety. Consequently the general intent and purpose of the Fence By-law will be maintained and the variance could be considered minor in nature, as it will not adversely affect the neighbouring property. The Department of Business and Planning Services recommends approval of the requested variance, as amended, for the fence shown on the submitted site plan provided the fence is altered to provide a 4.5 metre (15 foot) corner visibility triangle at the southwest corner of the subject property. 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 submission. 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 existing height of the fence, but will require that the fence be removed from the driveway visibility triangle of the neighbours driveway on Pine Martin Crescent. This measurement is taken from the back edge of the sidewalk and is measured 4.57 m back up both sides 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 approval of the minor variance is being recommended subject to the fence being altered to provide a 4.5 m (15 ft.) corner visibility triangle at the southwest corner of the subject property. The Chair enquired of Mr. Reiber if he was in agreement with staff's recommendation. Mr. C. Reiber responded that he did not disagree; however, he questioned if it would be possible to modify the fence to create a daylight triangle setback 16 ft. from the corner along the rear lot line adjacent to the driveway of 17 Pine Martin Crescent and setback 14ft from the corner along the westerly sideyard adjacent to Pine Martin Crescent The Chair requested staff to comment and Ms. J. Given responded that, while she could not speak directly for the Traffic & Parking Division, it would be her understanding that the 16 ft. setback along the rear lot line adjacent to the driveway of 17 Pine Martin Crescent would be critical in terms of visibility safety for those entering and exiting this driveway. The Chair enquired of Mr. Reiber if he was prepared to amend his application with respect to his proposed setbacks for the daylight triangle, being 16ft. on the neighbouring driveway side and 14 ft. on the other side, and Mr. Reiber responded that he would amend his application accordingly. Mr. C. Reiber questioned how long he would have to make the alterations to the fence following approval of his application. In this regard, Ms. Given responded that the Committee normally imposes a deadline date by which the modifications would have to be completed with an option to extend the deadline date if required. The Chair advised that the Committee's decision is a recommendation to City Council, who makes the final decision. He advised that the Committee's recommendation will go to Council on November 29, 1999. The Chair enquired of staff what would be appropriate to impose as a deadline date for the modifications to take place and Ms. Given responded that normally the deadline date is set for 1 or 2 months following final approval by Council. Mr. C. Reiber questioned if he went ahead with the modifications immediately and Council did not approve the Committee's recommendation what would happen in this instance. Mr. A. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT - 51 - NOVEMBER 16, 1999 Galloway stated that if Mr. Reiber proceeded with the modifications prior to Council's approval on November 29 it would be at his own risk. Submission No.: F 15/99 (Cont'd) Moved by Mr. A. Galloway Seconded by Ms. S. Campbell That the application of Craig and Krista Reiber requesting permission to legalize an existing fence along the westerly sideyard up to the lot line adjacent to Pine Martin Crescent, having a height of 1.82 m (6 ft.), rather than the required 0.91 m (3 ft.) on Part Block 9, Plan 58M-15, designated as Part 11, R.P. 58R-10621, 145 Wilderness Drive, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following condition: That the owner shall alter the fence to provide a corner driveway visibility triangle, setback 4.87 m (16 ft.) from the southwest corner along the rear lot line adjacent to the driveway of 17 Pine Martin Crescent and setback 4.26 m (14 ft.) from the southwest corner along the westerly sideyard adjacent to Pine Martin Crescent, prior to December 29, 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 Mr. and Mrs. Reiber that the decision of the Committee is a recommendation to Council, which will be considered at the Council meeting of November 29, 1999, at 7:00 p.m., in the Council Chamber and advised that they may register as a delegation to appear before Council at that time. ADJOURNMENT On motion, the meeting adjourned at 10:20 a.m. Dated at the City of Kitchener this 16th day of November, 1999. J. Billett Secretary-Treasurer Committee of Adjustment