The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutDSD-2021-46 - A 2021-027 - 573 Guelph Street REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment th DATE OF MEETING: April 20, 2021 SUBMITTED BY: von Westerholt, Juliane, Senior Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7157 PREPARED BY: Seyler, Tim, Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7860 WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 10 th DATE OF REPORT: April 9, 2021 REPORT NO.: DSD-2021-19 SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2021-027 573 Guelph Street Owner Milos Posavljak Applicant Ivana Cekic RECOMMENDATION: That application A2021-027 requesting permission to allow a semi detached dwelling to have a lot width of 14.96 metres whereas 15 metres is required, resulting in one of the semi- detached dwellings to have a lot width of 7.46 metres whereas 7.5 metres is required, and to permit side yard setbacks of 0.91 metres and 0.94 metres whereas 1.2 metres is required, be approved. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: The applicant is requesting relief from Section 38.2.2 of the Zoning By-law to permit a semi-detached dwelling with a lot width of 14.96 metres rather than the required 15 metres. This will result in one of the semi-detached dwellings having a lot width of 7.46 metres whereas 7.5 metres is required. Further relief is being sought to permit side yard setbacks of 0.91 metres and 0.94 metres rather than the required 1.2 metres for a semi-detached dwelling. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Location Map BACKGROUND: The property is designated as Low Rise Residential a Community Area The property is zoned as Residential Four Zone (R-4) in Zoning By-law 85-1. The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing single detached dwelling and build a purpose built, semi-detached dwelling on the property. The applicant will be applying for a severance application at a later date to sever the property once the foundation of the structure is created. 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 places emphasis on compatibility of building form with respect to massing, scale and design in order to support the successful integration of different housing types. It also places emphasis on the relationship of housing to adjacent buildings, streets and exterior areas. It is the opinion of staff that the requested variances are appropriate and continue to meet the general intent of the Official Plan. General Intent of the Zoning By-law The intent of the 15 metres lot width is to ensure adequate space for a semi-detached dwelling to be constructed, and provide adequate street facing built form presence along the streetscape. The reduction in lot width to 14.96 metres will be negligible and will not negatively affect the construction of the dwellings. The intent of the 1.2 metre side yard setback is to ensure there is adequate space to access the rear of the property. The 0.91 and 0.94 metre setback will still provide adequate access to each rear yard, and staff has no concerns. Staff is of the opinion that the reduction in the lot width and side yard setbacks meet the general intent of the Zoning By-law. Is the Variance Minor? The variances can be considered minor as it is the opinion of staff that the reduction in lot width from 15 metres to 14.96 metres is almost negligible in the context of the development. The side yard setbacks continue to accommodate the appropriate rear yard access. The setbacks of 0.91 and 0.94 metres for the side yards will not present any significant impacts to adjacent properties and the overall neighbourhood. Is the Variance Appropriate? The requested variances should not impact any of the adjacent properties or the surrounding neighbourhood. The scale, massing and height of the proposed addition is in keeping with the existing character of the subject property or surrounding neighbourhood. Therefore, the variances are appropriate for the development and use of the land. st City Planning staff conducted a site inspection of the property on March 31, 2021. Photo of Subject Property Building Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance provided building permit for the new semi-detached dwelling 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. Heritage Comments: Heritage Planning staff has no concerns with this application. Environmental Comments: Environmental Planning has no concerns with this application. 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 Committee of Adjustment meeting. A notice signed was placed on the property advising that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received. The sign advises interested parties to find 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/authorities related to this matter. Concept Layout 573 Guelph Street April 07, 2021 Holly Dyson City of Kitchener File No.: D20-20/ 200 King Street West VAR KIT GEN P.O. Box 1118 (6) 53 COURTLAND, 80 COURTLAND AVENUE Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 EAST 2441912 ONTARIO INC. (9) 53 FAIRWAY, SEC WOOLNER TRAIL AND FAIRWAY ROAD NORTH WCDSB Dear Ms. Dyson: Re: Committee of Adjustment Applications Meeting April 22, 2021, City of Kitchener Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have following updated comments: 1) A 2021-019 30 Waterbow Trail No Concerns. 2) A 2021-026 11 Whitney Place No Concerns. 3) A 2021-027 573 Guelph Street No Concerns. 4) A 2021-028 11 Springdale Drive No Concerns. 5) A 2021-029 20 Munroe Street No Concerns. 6) A 2021-030 80 Courtland Avenue East No Concerns. 7) A 2021-031 660 Avondale Avenue No Concerns. 8) A 2021-032 81 Waterloo Street No Concerns. 9) A 2021-033 Fairway & Woolner No Concerns. 10) A 2021-034 59 Carisbrook Drive No Concerns. Please be advised that any development on the lands subject to the Applications noted above are subject 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 5ƚĭǒƒĻƓƷ bǒƒĬĻƩʹ ЌЏЊЏЎВЉ tğŭĻ ƚŅ Ћ developments prior to the issuance of a building permit. The comments contained in this letter pertain to the Application numbers listed above. 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 2 Docs #3573963 April 8, 2021 Dianna Saunderson Via email only City of Kitchener 200 King StreetWest Kitchener, ON, N2G 4G7 Dear Ms. Saunderson, Re:April 20,2021Committee of Adjustment Meeting ______________________________________________________________________ Applications for Minor Variance A2021-01930 Waterbow Trail A2021-02611Whitney Place A2021-027573Guelph Street A2021-02811Springdale Drive A2021-02920Munroe Street A2021-03080Courtland Avenue East A2021-031660Avondale Avenue A2021-03281Waterloo Street Applications for Consent B2021-01583Elmsdale Drive B2021-01683Second Avenue B2021-01782Pattandon Avenue B2021-018-020942Doon Village Road B2021-021-023654Rockway Drive 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.