Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAdjustment - 2000-10-03COA/2000-10-03 COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FOR THE CITY OF KITCHENER MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING HELD OCTOBER 3, 2000 MEMBERS PRESENT: Ms. S. Campbell and Messrs. B. Dahms and A. Galloway. OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ms. J. Given, Principal Planner, and Ms. J. Billett, Secretary-Treasurer. Mr. B. Dahms, Chair, called this meeting to order at 9:30 a.m. Moved by Ms. S. Campbell Seconded by Mr. A. Galloway That the minutes of the regular meeting of the Committee of Adjustment of September 12, 2000, as mailed to the members, be accepted. Carried UNFINISHED BUSINESS MINOR VARIANCE Submission No.: Applicant: Property Location: Legal Description: A 2000-047 Julius Sepa 86 Ross Avenue Part Lot 69, Re,qistered Plan 765 Appearances: In Support: Mr. J. Sepa 86 Ross Avenue Kitchener ON N2A 1V3 Contra: None Written Submissions: In Support: Mr. K. Weiler 23 Northville Drive Paris ON N3L 3S2 Contra: None This application was previously considered by the Committee at its meeting held on August 15, 2000, at which time the application was deferred to provide the applicant with an opportunity to obtain a survey clearly defining the location of the garage on the subject property, to ensure that the side of the garage along the lot line is maintenance free and to attempt to obtain a letter from the neighbouring property owner indicating no objection to the location of the garage. The Committee was previously advised that the applicant is requesting permission to legalize an existing garage having a sideyard setback of 0.427 m (1.4 ft.), rather than the required 1.2 m (4 ft.). Previous comments from the Department of Business & Planning Services, the Building Division, the Region of Waterloo Planning & Culture Department and the Grand River Conservation COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 359 OCTOBER 3, 2000 Authority, as documented in the minutes of the meeting held on August 15, 2000, were further considered this date. The Chair pointed out that Planning staff are recommending refusal of the Submission No.: A2000-047 (Cont'd) application. No further comments were forthcoming from City staff or any of the other agencies aforementioned. Mr. J. Sepa provided the Committee with a copy of a survey prepared by Guenther Rueb Surveying Limited, dated October 2, 2000, together with a letter from Mr. K. Weiler, owner of 271 Prospect Avenue. The Committee was also in receipt of pictures that Mr. J. Sepa had submitted at the meeting held on August 15, 2000. The Chair reviewed the application as considered at the meeting held on August 15th, noting that Committee of Adjustment approval had been previously approved for a .16 m setback with respect to a carport. The carport has since been enclosed on all sides, together with a 14 ft. addition, and is now considered an attached garage. The Chair referred to the new survey dated October 2nd and pointed out that irregardless of the eaves, the side of the garage is only .4 ft. from the side lot line which is closer than what was requested in the application. Mr. Sepa indicated that the variance of 0.16 m (0.53 ft.) originates from the previous Committee of Adjustment application with respect to the carport. In response to questioning, Mr. Sepa confirmed that the letter submitted this date was from the owner of the neighbouring property adjacent to the garage. Mr. Sepa further stated that the owner, Mr. Weiler, does not live at 271 Prospect Avenue; however, he had talked to him on one of his recent visits and obtained the letter in question. The Chair reviewed the comments of the owner of 271 Prospect Avenue, noting that the owner believes the construction of the fence and the garage to be on Julius Sepa's property and to be maintenance free on the side of the property at 271 Prospect Avenue. The Chair noted that Mr. Weiler has requested a copy of the survey and enquired if Mr. Sepa had provided him with a copy. Mr. Sepa advised that he had only obtained the survey this date and had not yet had an opportunity to provide Mr. Weiler with a copy. The Chair enquired if staff had any further comments and Ms. Given advised that the position of staff as noted in their written comments considered at the August 15th meeting, have not changed. The Chair commented that the garage is very close to the side lot line; however, pointed out that there is a distance of 6.62 ft. between the side lot line and the structure on the neighbouring property. In response to questioning, Mr. Sepa confirmed that the garage has a rear door which allows him access to the backyard. The Chair enquired what materials the wall along the side lot line has been constructed with and Mr. Sepa responded that the garage wall is primarily constructed of wood; however, there is fireproof drywall inside the wall and 1" maisonite panelling on the outside. Ms. S. Campbell referred to the fence between the wall of the garage and the side lot line and Mr. Sepa advised that there was no fence in this area. Ms. Campbell pointed out that the survey shows a fence and enquired if the fence was now gone and Mr. Sepa stated that the fence was not there. Mr. Sepa further advised that there is a fence beginning at the end of the garage and continuing approximately 20 ft. to the rear lot line. Mr. A. Galloway enquired if Mr. Sepa had downspouts from the eaves to prevent water running onto the neighbouring property and Mr. Sepa responded that the water runs off the roof. Ms. Campbell pointed out that the survey shows that the eaves encroach onto the neighbouring property and with the water running off the roof of the garage it would be going onto the neighbour's property. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 360 OCTOBER 3, 2000 Mr. A. Galloway stated that there were no encroachments as a result of the original carport construction and the encroachment only occurred when the garage was constructed. He stated that he had difficulty supporting the application as drainage is taking place on the neighbouring 1. Submission No.: A 2000-047 (Cont'd) property; access to the backyard is limited to a rear door of the garage; and the owner cannot maintain the side wall without entering onto the neighbouring property. The Chair stated that in the past, the Committee has approved variances of this nature within 2 ft. of the side lot line provided that the structure is constructed with non-combustible material. Given the circumstances of this application, the Chair stated that he was having difficulty supporting the application due to the closeness to the side lot line; the structure being primarily constructed of wood; and, drainage taking place onto the neighbouring property. Ms. S. Campbell stated that she was in agreement and was prepared to recommend refusal of the application. Moved by Ms. S. Campbell Seconded by Mr. A. Galloway That Minor Variance Application, Submission No. A 2000-047, as applied for by Julius Sepa, requesting permission to legalize an existing attached garage having a sideyard setback of 0.12 m (0.4 ft.), as shown on a survey prepared by Guenther Rueb Surveying Limited and dated October 2, 2000, rather than the required 1.2 m (4 ft.), on Part Lot 69, Registered Plan 765, 86 Ross Avenue, Kitchener, Ontario, BE REFUSED. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance requested in this application is 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 Municipal Plan are not being maintained on the subject property. Carried CONSENT Submission No.: Applicant: Property Location: Legal Description: B 2000-015 Cynthia Schilling 734 Glasgow Street Part of Lot 33, German Company Tract, designated as Parts 1, 2 & 3, Reference Plan 58R-10171 Appearances: In Support: None Contra: None Written Submissions: In Support: None Contra: None This application was initially considered at the Committee's March 21, 2000 meeting at which time part of the application requesting permission to quit claim a portion of an existing right-of-way was deferred to the Committee's meeting to be held on August 15, 2000. The purpose of the deferral was to allow further information to be provided by the applicant to staff of the Department of COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 361 OCTOBER 3, 2000 Business & Planning Services as to the reason for the quit claim and for a similar application to be submitted by the adjacent property owners of 744 Glasgow Street. Submission No.: B 2000-015(Cont'd) At the Committee's meeting of August 15, 2000 no one appeared in support of the application and the Committee was advised that no further response had been forthcoming by the applicant, nor had a further application by the owners of 744 Glasgow Street been submitted. The Committee was also in receipt of a letter dated June 5, 2000 addressed to the applicant, with a copy to the owner of 744 Glasgow Street, advising of the purpose for the deferral and the date for reconsideration of the matter. The Committee was in receipt of a further letter from the Secretary-Treasurer dated August 16, 2000 addressed to the applicant, with a copy to the owner of 744 Glasgow Street, again advising that the Committee had agreed to defer the application one more time to its meeting to be held on October 3, 2000. The applicant, together with the neighbouring property owner, were advised that if no further response was received and if no one appeared in support of the application this date, the Committee would consider the request for the quit claim to have been abandoned and would take action to dismiss that portion of the application. As no further response was forthcoming from either the applicant or the property owner of 744 Glasgow Street, the Committee considered the application to have been abandoned and supported dismissal of the application. Moved by Ms. S. Campbell Seconded by Mr. A. Galloway That part of Consent Application, Submission No. B 2000-015, as applied for by Cynthia Schilling, requesting permission to reduce an existing right-of-way by quit claiming approximately 14.3 m (46.92 ft.), being Part 3 as shown on the sketch submitted with the Consent Application, on Part of Lot 33, German Company Tract, designated as Parts 1, 2 and 3, Reference Plan 58R-10171, 734 Glasgow Street, Kitchener, Ontario, having been before the Committee of Adjustment on August 15 and October 3, 2000, with no one in attendance to support the request, is now considered to be abandoned, and is hereby DISMISSED. Carried Submission No.: Applicant: Property Location: Le.qal Description: B 2000-027 Edmund Ferrage 140 Heiman Street Subdivision of Lot 18, Part Lot 66, German Company Tract Appearances: In Support: Mr. E. Ferrage 185 Goulding Avenue Toronto ON M2R 2P3 Contra: None Written Submissions: In Support: None Contra: None At the Committee's meeting held on May 2, 2000 consideration was given to applications which propose to create 3 new lots (Consent Applications B 2000-025 to B 2000-027 inclusive); one for single residential use and two others each to contain one half of a semi-detached dwelling. Consent B 2000-027 represents one of the 2 lots to contain one half of the semi-detached dwelling and was deferred to the Committee's meeting to be held on July 18, 2000. The purpose COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 362 OCTOBER 3, 2000 of the deferral was to allow the location of the common wall between each half of the semi to be determined. Submission No.: B 2000-027(Cont'd) At the Committee's meeting held on July 18, 2000, staff of the Department of Business & Planning Services requested that the application be further deferred to the Committee's meeting scheduled for October 3, 2000. It is noted that the comments of the Department of Business & Planning Services submitted for the July 18th meeting originally requested deferral to the Committee's meeting to be held on November 21, 2000; however, at the July 18th meeting Planning staff amended their request for deferral to change the date from November 21st to October 3rd. Previous comments from the Department of Business & Planning Services, the Building Division, the Region of Waterloo Planning & Culture Department and the Grand River Conservation Authority, as documented in the minutes of the meeting held on May 2, 2000, were further considered this date. Revised comments from the Department of Business & Planning Services as documented in the minutes of the Committee's July 18th meeting, together with revised comments from the Region of Waterloo Planning & Culture Department dated September 28, 2000 in which they advised that they have no objection to application, were also considered this date. Mr. E. Ferrage advised that he was in attendance this date to object to a condition of approval with respect to Consent B 2000-025 previously considered and approved by the Committee at its meeting held on May 2, 2000. Specifically, Mr. Ferrage referred to Condition No. 3 which requires the roof over the patio at the rear of the single detached dwelling to be removed. Mr. Ferrage stated that he was in disagreement with this condition. The Secretary pointed out that the reason Mr. Ferrage had been requested to appear before the Committee this date was in respect to Consent Application B 2000-027 which was deferred to allow determination of the location of the common wall between the proposed semi-detached dwelling. Mr. E. Ferrage extended his apologies to the Committee and advised that he was not up-to-date with the proposed project. The Chair enquired if the foundation for the proposed semi-detached dwelling had been poured and Mr. Ferrage advised that it had only just been poured recently. The Chair advised that the Committee would require a survey to properly identify the location of the common party wall and enquired if Mr. Ferrage had obtained a survey. Mr. Ferrage advised that as the foundation had only just been poured he had not been able to obtain a survey. Accordingly, the Committee members agreed that consideration of Consent B 2000-027 would be premature at this time and suggested that the application be further deferred. Mr. Ferrage indicated his agreement with deferring the application and suggested that it be re- scheduled to the Committee's next meeting. By general consent, it was agreed that consideration of Consent Application B 2000-027 would be deferred to the Committee's next meeting to be held on October 24, 2000. Ms. S. Campbell referred to Mr. Ferrage's initial comments and questioned if it was Mr. Ferrage's intent not to comply with the condition of approval he had referred to with respect to Consent Application B 2000-025. Mr. Ferrage responded that he did not intend to comply with the condition to remove the roof over the patio. The Chair advised that if Mr. Ferrage did not comply with the condition a deed to effect the severance relative to Consent Application B 2000-025 would not be endorsed by the Committee. In response to an enquiry by Mr. Ferrage, Ms. J. Given advised that Mr. Ferrage had the option of applying to the Committee for a Change of Conditions with respect to Consent B 2000-025 or, alternatively, could apply for a minor variance with respect to the roof over the patio. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 363 OCTOBER 3, 2000 The Chair advised Mr. Ferrage to discuss the matter with Planning staff to determine his best course of action. Submission No.: Applicant: Property Location: Le.qal Description: B 2000-051 Humpty Dumpty Snack Foods Inc. 3065 King Street East Part of Lots 31 & 33, Municipal Compiled Plan 986 The Chair advised that the Committee was in receipt of a letter dated September 19, 2000 from Ms. D. Biuk, Green Scheels Pidgeon Planning Consultants Limited, in which she advised that the applicant is withdrawing the application. Accordingly, this application was not considered by the Committee. The Committee then recessed the meeting, temporarily, at 9:50 a.m., in order to consider applications for minor variance to the City of Kitchener's Fence By-law. This meeting reconvened at 10:55 a.m. NEW BUSINESS MINOR VARIANCE Submission No.: Applicant: Property Location: Le.qal Description: A 2000-068 Nurko Sokolovic 729 King Street East Lot 5, Re.qistered Plan 634 Appearances: In Support: Mr. N. Sokolovic 520 Hallmark Drive Waterloo ON N2K3P5 Contra: None Written Submissions: In Support: None Contra: None The Committee was advised that the lands involved in this application contain an existing restaurant/bar and the applicant is requesting permission to reduce the number of parking spaces required from 32 spaces to 10 spaces. The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Business & Planning Services in which they advised that the subject lands contain an existing two-storey building of which the ground floor is currently being used as a bar/restaurant. It is understood that this use has existed for approximately 30 years. Surrounding land uses include a mixture of service commercial uses, including automobile repair and retail uses. The property is located one lot removed from the corner of Stirling Avenue and King Street East. The owner has applied to permit a restaurant with a total of 10 parking spaces rather than the 32 spaces required by the Zoning By-law. The need for the variance has arisen out of a proposal to expand the existing restaurant and utilize the second floor of the building also for this purpose. In reviewing the City's property file, it would appear that the existing building is in fact larger than that specified in the application. An addition to the front of the building has increased the total gross floor area of the building to 266.4 square metres. The applicant has specified that the gross floor area is 238.4 square metres in the application, which would require 32 parking spaces. Staff would therefore calculate that the total number of parking spaces required would be 36 spaces, rather than the 32 spaces applied for in the application. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 364 OCTOBER 3, 2000 There are two previous minor variance approvals on this property related to parking. The first minor variance approval is A189/78, which permitted the required parking to be reduced from 14 spaces to 10 spaces in order to permit a front addition for an existing restaurant. The second minor variance approval is A84/80 which permitted the parking to be reduced from 24 spaces to 10 spaces in order to permit the construction of an addition and recognition of the existing Submission No.: A2000-068(Cont'd) restaurant and two apartments (it should be noted that this addition was never constructed). Both minor variances were variances to the previous Zoning By-law 4830. A front addition has been constructed although it is understood that the apartments no longer exist. Building renovations were apparently completed in 1995 and the second floor has been used as a restaurant since that time. However, minor variance approval for the use of the second floor for restaurant has never been applied for or approved. The owner now seeks to use the entire building for restaurant as mentioned above. Based on A189/78, parking for the ground floor use (147.8 square metres) as restaurant is legal. However, relief from required parking for use of the second floor as restaurant has never been requested or approved. Staff are concerned over the extent of the variance requested. Firstly, the impact of the variance is not minor in nature. A total of 16 additional parking spaces must be accommodated on the local street network in order to allow restaurant on the second floor as none of these spaces can be provided on site. In fact, the 10 spaces provided as specified in the application are extremely undersized and it is questionable if even this number is possible; 7 spaces are more likely possible and practical. This part of King Street East has limited on street parking and would experience relatively high traffic volumes. The adjacent Stirling Street also has limited on street parking in this location. The introduction of 16 additional parking spaces on the street network could be detrimental to neighbourhood amenity and could have the effect of dominating the limited existing on-street parking in this location and could result in illegal parking on neighbouring properties. For these reasons, the variance is not considered minor nor appropriate. Finally, the requested variance does not maintain the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law and Municipal Plan. The objective of the Municipal Plan is to ensure adequate parking standards are in place. The appropriate standard is in place in the Zoning By-law for restaurant and this standard has been applied for some time. The requested variance would not meet this objective. The 10 spaces provided for the entire building use as restaurant is well below that 36 spaces required in total and therefore does not meet the intent of the Zoning By-law. For all the above reasons, the Department of Business and Planning Services recommends that minor variance application, Submission No. A 2000-068, be refused. 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 cannot support the reduction of parking spaces from 32 to 10. The lack of on-street parking in this area cannot support the overflow of parking. The Committee noted the comments of the Planning & Culture Department, Region of Waterloo, in which they advised that Regional staff have reviewed the application and have no concerns; however, any development on the subject lands is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 99-038, or any successor thereof and may require the payment of Regional Development Charges for this development prior to the issuance of a building permit. The Committee noted the comments of the Grand River Conservation Authority in which they advised they have no comments or concerns with respect to this application. The Chair reviewed the staff comments, noting that staff are recommending refusal of the application and enquired if Mr. Sokolovic had anything further to add. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 365 OCTOBER 3, 2000 Mr. N. Sokolovic advised that he has owned the subject property since approximately 1989 and it has been used as a bar/restaurant on the main floor for the past 30 years, with tenants on the upper floors. Mr. Sokolovic stated that the current tenants of the main floor had requested him to Submission No.: A2000-068(Cont'd) renovate the upper floors for their use and in 1995 he undertook renovations and constructed an addition. Since 1995 the second floor has been used as a restaurant. In response to questioning, Mr. Sokolovic advised that the subject property is operated under the name of "Circus Room". Mr. Sokolovic further advised that his tenants had recently moved out on August 1st and he now has new tenants who have applied for an occupancy permit. It was through this application that a parking shortage was brought to his attention. Mr. Sokolovic stated that he was not aware that he should have applied for a minor variance for parking when he undertook the renovations. Mr. Sokolovic pointed out that in the neighbourhood there is approximately 40 spaces within a 2 block area that could be utilized by patrons of his restaurant. He advised that there are approximately 12 spaces on Stirling Avenue between King & Weber; 12 spaces on Fairview Avenue that accommodate 2 hour parking; 18 spaces on Pandora Avenue which is less than 2 blocks away from the restaurant; and approximately 8 -11 spaces on King Street that are metered parking. Ms. S. Campbell stated that she could not support a parking variance for a commercial business that requires 36 parking spaces, has only 7 spaces and expects to use residential streets to make up the difference in parking. Mr. Sokolovic maintained that he has 10 spaces available on site despite the comments of the Planning staff which indicate only 7 spaces may be available. Ms. S. Campbell stated that even with 10 spaces on site it would still mean 26 spaces would have to be accommodated on residential streets and this was not acceptable to her. Both the Chair and Mr. Galloway agreed with Ms. Campbell's comments and stated they were not prepared to support the application. Moved by Ms. S. Campbell Seconded by Mr. A. Galloway That Minor Variance Application, Submission No. A 2000-068, as applied for by Nurko Sokolovic, requesting permission to reduce the number of parking spaces required for a restaurant use from 36 spaces to 10 spaces, on Lot 5, Registered Plan 634, 729 King Street East, Kitchener, Ontario, BE REFUSED. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance requested in this application is 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 Municipal Plan is not being maintained on the subject property. Carried CONSENT Submission No.: Applicant: Property Location: Le.qal Description: Appearances: B 2000-069 Douglas & Roseann Keffer 103 Heiman Street Part of Lot 74, Subdivision of Lot 18, German Company Tract In Support: Mrs. R. Keffer COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 366 OCTOBER 3, 2000 103 Heiman Street Kitchener ON N2M 3L8 Contra: None Submission No.: B 2000-069(Cont'd) Written Submissions: In Support: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to create one new lot by severing a parcel of land and retaining a parcel of land having an area of 866.67 m2 (9,329.05 sq. ft.). The lands to be severed will have frontage on Heiman Street of 15.24 m (50 ft.), by a depth of 19.81 m (65 ft.), and an area of 301.93 m2 (3,250 sq. ft.) and will be developed with a single residential dwelling. The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Business & Planning Services in which they advised that the subject lands are approximately 1168.6 square metres (12,579.05 square feet) with 27.7 metres (90.96 feet) of frontage on Heiman Street. A single detached dwelling constructed in 1947 with a set back of approximately 35.66 metres (117 feet) presently occupies the site. The surrounding lands are developed with a variety of residential uses including single detached, semi-detached, and multiple dwelling uses. Application has been received for consent to sever a 301.9 square metre (3250 square feet) parcel with 15.24 metres (50 feet) of frontage on Heiman Street, from the northeast portion of the property. The retained parcel would have an area of 866.7 square metres (9329 square feet) with 40.96 feet of frontage on Heiman Street. The existing dwelling would remain on the retained parcel, would continue to gain access from Heiman Street and would continue to enjoy a substantial front yard. The existing lot is a large lot for this area of the City relative to the surrounding properties. Immediately across the street is a row housing development with frontages of approximately 6 metres (20 feet) to 14 metres (45 feet). The proposed severed lot appears to be compatible in this neighbourhood with respect to its frontage of 15.24 metres (50 feet). The proposed severed lot is considered to be a shallow lot however, it does conform with the Zoning By-law and would allow for the construction of a dwelling which would be considered to be an acceptable size. The variety of lot sizes also relates to the variety of housing types available in this neighbourhood. As stated there is a row house development located immediately across the street and the adjacent property to the east is developed with a townhouse development. The creation of this new lot would allow for infill in an existing developed area with the ability to create a smaller affordable home as encouraged through the City's Municipal Plan. As the proposed severance of 103 Heiman Street is in conformity with the Zoning By-law and is considered compatible with the existing residential uses and lot sizes of the neighbourhood, the Department of Business & Planning Services recommends that application B2000-69 be approved subject to the following conditions: 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 lands to be severed. That the owner make financial arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's General Manager of Public Works, for the installation of all new service connections to the severed and retained lands. That the owner 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 street trees, and a paved driveway ramp, on the severed and retained lands. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 367 OCTOBER 3, 2000 That satisfactory arrangements be made with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding Municipal property taxes and/or local improvement charges. 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. 1. Submission No.: B 2000-069(Cont'd) The Committee noted the comments of the Planning & Culture Department, Region of Waterloo, in which they advised that Regional staff have reviewed the application and have no concerns; however, any development on the subject lands is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 99-038, or any successor thereof and there may be a Regional fee assessed for development agreements, if required. The Committee noted the comments of the Grand River Conservation Authority in which they advised that they have no objection to the above noted application conditional upon the submission of a detailed plan to the Grand River Conservation Authority which illustrates the location of the new residence (and accessory structures) as well as existing and proposed grades. The Chair reviewed the staff comments, noting that staff are recommending approval of the application subject to certain conditions. Ms. J. Given advised that with respect to conditions 2 and 3 contained in the Planning staff report, the Public Works Department were unable to determine detailed locations for service connections and, accordingly, the two conditions are worded such that they apply to both the severed and retained lands. Ms. Given stated that it may not be necessary for these conditions to apply to the retained lands and, accordingly, requested that the Committee revise the two conditions to add the wording "if required" at the end of each condition. The Committee agreed to this request. The Chair enquired if Ms. Keffer had anything further to add and, with regard to Condition 1 of the Planning staff report which requires 5% cash-in-lieu contribution for park dedication, Mrs. R. Keffer enquired as to the amount that would have to be paid. The Chair advised that the cash-in-lieu contribution for park dedication is calculated based on the value of the lands to be severed and this would be determined by City staff. Mrs. Keffer advised that it was her and her husband's intent to give the severed parcel as a gift to their son and questioned if this condition would still apply under those circumstances. The Chair advised that the condition would still apply and explained that the concept behind such a condition relates to the fact that the applicant is increasing the number of building lots which decreases potential parkland and, accordingly, the cash-in-lieu contribution goes toward park development in other areas of the City. Mrs. Keffer referred to Condition No. 3 with regard to installation of boulevard landscaping and enquired if this would require them to include new trees where none currently exist. Ms. J. Given advised that the Public Works Department will determine whether or not any new trees will be required. In response to further questioning, Ms. J. Given advised that the applicant will be required to provide paved driveway ramps up to the City boulevards and provided Mrs. Keffer with the name of a contact person within the Public Works Department, who will assist with completion of the conditions. The Chair pointed out that the Grand River Conservation Authority has requested that the application be conditional upon submission of a detailed plan to the GRCA illustrating the location of the new residence, together with existing and proposed grades and enquired if Mrs. Keffer had discussed this issue with the GRCA. Mrs. Keffer advised that she had spoken with Ms. B. Doran of the GRCA and would be providing the detailed plan as requested. Moved by Mr. A. Galloway Seconded by Ms. S. Campbell That the application of Douglas & Roseann Keffer requesting permission to convey a parcel of land having frontage on Heiman Street of 15.24 m (50 ft.), by a depth of 19.81 m (65 ft.) and an area of 301.93 m2 (3,250 sq. ft.), on Part of Lot 74, Subdivision of Lot 18, German Company COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 368 OCTOBER 3, 2000 Tract, 103 Heiman Street, Kitchener, Ontario, BE GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: That the owner shall pay to the City of Kitchener a cash-in-lieu contribution for park dedication equal to 5% of the value of the lands to be severed. Submission No.: B 2000-069(Cont'd) That the owner shall make financial arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's General Manager of Public Works for the installation for all new service connections to the severed and retained lands, if required. 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 street trees and a paved driveway ramp on the severed and retained lands, if required. 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 to the Grand River Conservation Authority a detailed plan which illustrates the location of the new residence and accessory structures, together with existing and proposed grades. 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 two years from the date of approval, being October 3, 2002. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 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 the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Carried CONSENT & MINOR VARIANCE Submission Nos.: Applicant: Property Location: Le.qal Description: Appearances: In Support: B 2000-068 & A 2000-069 Wm. Roberts Electrical & Mechanical Inc. 85 Edwin Street & 216 St. Leger Street Part of Lot 10, Re.qistered Plan 671 Mr. S. Patterson Planning & Engineering Initiatives Ltd. 379 Queen Street South Kitchener ON N2G 1W6 Contra: None COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 369 OCTOBER 3, 2000 Written Submissions: In Support: Mr. J. Willmer Planning & Engineering Initiatives Ltd. 379 Queen Street South Kitchener ON N2G 1W6 Submission Nos.: B 2000-068 & A 2000-069(Cont'd) Contra: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to create one new lot by severing a parcel of land and retaining a parcel of land having an area of 1,058 m2 (11,388.59 sq. ft.). Both the lands to be severed and retained will contain a vacant industrial building formerly used as a contractor's establishment. A mutual right-of-way for access purpose between the 2 parcels is also requested. The lands to be retained will have frontage on St. Leger Street of 30.48 m (100 ft.). The lands to be severed will have frontage on Edwin Street of 30.48 m (100 ft.) and an area of 2,235 m2 (24,058.13 sq. ft.).In addition, the applicant is requesting the following variances from the City's Zoning By-law: · Severed lands: a) a frontyard setback of 4.45 m (14.6 ft.), rather than the required 6 m (19.68 ft.); b) to locate 1 parking space setback 0.5 m (1.64 ft.) from Edwin Street, rather than the required 3 m (9.84 ft.); and, c) to reduce the number of required parking spaces from 32 spaces to 28 spaces. · Retained lands: a) a southerly sideyard setback of 1.036 m (3.4 ft.), rather than the required 1.2 m (4 ft.); and, b) to allow rearyard motion egress (vehicles to back out of spaces) from 7 parking spaces adjacent to St. Leger Street. The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Business & Planning Services in which they advised that the subject property is a through lot with frontage on St. Leger Street and Edwin Street and is located between Blucher Boulevard and Hillview Street. The property is currently developed with two concrete block buildings, municipally known as 216 St. Leger Street and 85 Edwin Street, and associated parking and landscaped areas. The application for consent proposes to recognize 216 St. Leger Street and 85 Edwin Street as two separate parcels of land. It also proposes to create a mutual right-of-way in the rear yard of the proposed severed parcel in the location generally shown on the site plan dated September 5, 2000. In considering the application for consent, the following minor variances are required in order to bring the existing buildings and parking areas on the proposed severed and retained parcels into compliance with Zoning By-law 85-1. Parcel to be retained - 216 St. Leger Street: · A reduction of the minimum interior side yard requirement from 1.2 metres (3.94 feet) to 1.036 metres (3.4 feet). · To permit 7 existing parking spaces to exit onto St. Leger Street in a rearward motion rather than a forward motion. Parcel to be severed - 85 Edwin Street: · A reduction of the minimum front yard requirement from 6 metres (19.69 feet) to 4.45 metres (14.6 feet). · To permit 1 parking space to be located a minimum distance of 0.5 metres (1.64 feet) from the street line rather than the required 3 metres (9.84 feet). COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 370 OCTOBER 3, 2000 To permit a reduction of the required number of parking spaces for a contractor's establishment, or any other permitted use having the same or lesser parking requirement, from 32 parking spaces to 28 parking spaces, to recognize the existing number of parking spaces on the proposed severed parcel of land. 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, staff offers the following comments in relation to the requested variances. Submission Nos.: B 2000-068 & A 2000-069(Cont'd) The deficient side yard of the building with frontage on St. Leger Street abuts a parking lot on the property to the immediate south. Also, as the deficiency of 0.164 metres (0.53 feet) is not discernible the reduction will not adversely impact the neighbouring property or the character of the streetscape. The 7 existing parking spaces in front of the building fronting on St. Leger Street are located a minimum distance of 3 metres from the St. Leger street line. The abutting property to the north and properties across the street to the west also contain parking areas, which exit onto St. Leger in a rearward motion. As with the location of parking areas on properties fronting onto St. Leger Street, other industrial properties on Edwin Street also have parking areas which are not located a minimum distance of 3 metres from the street line. In both cases the location and functioning of the parking areas on the proposed severed and retained parcels of land will not negatively impact the streetscape. Both variances will allow the number of parking spaces, which can be provided on both parcels to be maximized. The deficiency in the front yard setback of the building fronting onto Edwin Street is only applicable to the portion of the building, which contains the entrance. The protrusion of the entrance into the required front yard setback is architecturally more pleasing than the flat exterior wall of a concrete block building. Staff are supportive of the variance to reduce the number of required parking spaces for a contractor's establishment, or any other use in the M-2 zone having the same or lesser parking requirement, as this will facilitate the reuse of the building by future tenants. The minor variances are desirable as they will legalize the location of the existing buildings and the existing parking provision and configuration on the subject lands. As the effects of the variances will be minor, the general intent of the Zoning By-law and Municipal Plan will be maintained. With the approval of the minor variances, the proposed severed and retained parcels will meet all zoning requirements. Accordingly, it would be appropriate to recommend the application for consent to recognize 85 Edwin Street and 216 St. Leger Street as two separate parcels of land. The consent to create the mutual right-of-way at the rear of 216 St. Leger Street is appropriate as it will facilitate the movement of traffic between the severed and retained parcels of land. The Department of Business and Planning Services recommends that Minor Variance Application A2000-069 be approved. The Department of Business and Planning Services recommends that Consent Application B2000-068 be approved subject to the following conditions: That Minor Variance Application A 2000-069 receive final approval. That satisfactory arrangements be made with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding Municipal property taxes and/or local improvement charges. 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 these applications. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 371 OCTOBER 3, 2000 The Committee noted the comments of the Planning & Culture Department, Region of Waterloo, in which they advised that with respect to Submission No. B 2000-068 the subject lands have a history of industrial use and have the potential for site contamination. As such, the Committee of Adjustment may wish to address the potential for contamination as part of the approval process. If the Committee decides to impose a Record of Site Condition or other similar requirements, it should be imposed as a condition of the Committee, with the Committee, not the Region, responsible for its release. As such, Regional staff have no objection to the approval of Consent 1. Submission Nos.: B 2000-068 & A 2000-069(Cont'd) B 2000-068; however, any future development on the lands subject to this consent application will be subject to the provisions of Regional Development Charge By-law 99-038, or any successor thereof and there may be a Regional fee assessed for development agreements if required. The Committee noted the comments of the Planning & Culture Department, Region of Waterloo, in which they advised that they have no concerns with Submission No. A 2000-069; however, any development on the subject lands is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 99-038, or any successor thereof and may require the payment of Regional Development Charges for this development prior to the issuance of a building permit. The Committee noted the comments of the Grand River Conservation Authority in which they advised that they have no objections to these applications. The Committee noted the comments of the Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro in which they request that approval of these applications be subject to the following conditions: That the Applicant make satisfactory arrangements with Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc. for the provision of electrical servicing to the lands to be retained before the severances are granted. That the Applicant make arrangements for the granting of any easements required by Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc. before the severances are granted. The Committee noted the written submission of Mr. J. Willmer, Planning & Engineering Initiatives Ltd., in which he advised that he wished to submit a revised severance plan dated October 2, 2000 in support of Consent Application B 2000-068. He pointed out that 2 minor revisions have been made to the plan; firstly, the line of severance has been moved approximately 2 m to the east to increase the rearyard depth of the retained lot; secondly, the width of the mutual right-of- way has been reduced to approximately 3.5 m on either side of the line of severance in order to increase the exclusive use portion of each proposed lot. The minor revisions have no effect on the requested variances in Submission No. A 2000-069. He further advised that discussions with respect to the revisions were undertaken with Planning Division staff and asks for the Committee's consideration of the revised plan. Copies of the revised plan were provided for the Committee's consideration this date. The Chair reviewed the staff comments, noting that staff are recommending approval of the applications subject to certain conditions and inquired if Mr. Patterson had anything further to add. Mr. S. Patterson advised that he had reviewed the staff comments and had nothing further to add. The Chair questioned if the service connections for both the severed and retained parcels were separate at this time. Mr. Patterson responded that it was his understanding that there was one service connection underground between the 2 parcels; however, it is intended that the severed and retained parcels have separate service connections. In this regard, he stated that he believed the conditions of Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro will serve to ensure this takes place. The Chair enquired if separate services for gas and water were in place. Mr. Patterson responded that he was unsure and had not received any comments with respect to this type of service. He stated that he believed them to be separate. Ms. J. Given suggested that the assumption could be made based on the fact that the Public Works Department did not impose any conditions in this regard that they have determined gas and water services to be separate. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 372 OCTOBER 3, 2000 She advised that in cases where property has frontage on 2 streets such services are usually separate. The Chair referred to the mutual right-of-way and requested clarification as to the extent of the right-of-way. Mr. Patterson reviewed the revised severance plan with the Committee, pointing out that the mutual right-of-way extends from between the two parcels out to St. Leger Street. The Chair enquired if staff have reviewed the revised severance plan and Ms. Given advised that they had and had no problem with the right-of-way as it was to be used for private purposes. 1. Submission Nos.: B 2000-068 & A 2000-069(Cont'd) Ms. Given referred to the second condition of Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro in which the applicant is to make arrangements for the granting of any easements required by Hydro and pointed out that if an easement were required the Committee would have to grant approval. Mr. A. Galloway questioned what exists between the two buildings with respect to hydro service at this time and Mr. Patterson responded that he believed the hydro service to be separate for both buildings and it was the applicant's intention that they have separate services. Mr. A. Galloway questioned the need for the granting of an easement if the two buildings had separate hydro service and Ms. Given responded that if the applicant is satisfied that the services are separate then granting of an easement would not be required. The Chair referred to an existing landing with steps that straddles the severance line and enquired if it was intended to remove the steps. Mr. Patterson acknowledged the existing steps and suggested that the issue of removal would have to be resolved between the landowners. Ms. J. Given referred to the Region of Waterloo comments with respect to the potential for site contamination and advised that the Committee should consider whether or not to impose a Record of Site Condition. In response to questioning, Mr. Patterson advised that the former use of the buildings was for a contractor's establishment and that it was possible such things as electrical supplies may have been stored on site. Following a brief discussion, it was agreed that as this application does not involve new development, rather than impose a condition for a Record of Site Condition to be undertaken now, the Committee would impose a condition requiring an agreement to be entered into for a Record of Site Condition to be completed if new development takes place on the property in future. The amendments to the Consent Application as outlined in the written comments of Mr. J. Willmer and as shown on the revised site plan dated October 2, 2000, were accepted by the Committee. Minor Variance A 2000-069 Moved by Ms. S. Campbell Seconded by Mr. A. Galloway That the application of Wm. Roberts Electrical & Mechanical Inc. requesting permission to convey a parcel of land, having variances on both the severed and retained parcels, as follows: Retained Lands (216 St. Leger Street): · having a southerly sideyard setback of 1.036 m (3.4 ft.), rather than the required 1.2 m (4 ft.); and, · to permit 7 existing parking spaces to exit onto St. Leger Street in a rearward motion, rather than in a forward motion; Severed Lands (85 Edwin Street): · having a frontyard setback of 4.45 m (14.6 ft.), rather than the required 6 m (19.68 ft.); COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 373 OCTOBER 3, 2000 to permit one parking space to be located a minimum distance of 0.5 m (1.64 ft.) from the lot line adjacent to Edwin Street, rather than the required 3 m (9.84 ft.); and, to permit reduction of the required number of parking spaces for a contractor's establishment, or any other permitted use having the same or lesser parking requirement, from 32 parking spaces to 28 parking spaces; on Part of Lot 10, Registered Plan 671, 85 Edwin Street and 216 St. Leger Street, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED. Submission Nos.: B 2000-068 & A 2000-069(Cont'd) 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 Municipal Plan are being maintained on the subject property. Carried Consent B 2000-068 Moved by Ms. S. Campbell Seconded by Mr. A. Galloway That the application of Wm. Roberts Electrical & Mechanical Inc. requesting permission to convey a parcel of land having frontage on Edwin Street of 30.48 m (100 ft.), by a depth of 71.5 m (234.58 ft.) and an area of 2,179.32 m2 (23,458.77 sq. ft.); and to grant a mutual right-of-way over the lands to be severed and the lands to be retained as shown on the revised severance plan dated October 2, 2000, in favour of each other for access purposes; on Part of Lot 10, Registered Plan 671, 85 Edwin Street and 216 St. Leger Street, Kitchener, Ontario, BE GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That Minor Variance Application, Submission No. A 2000-069, shall receive final approval. 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 enter into an agreement with the City of Kitchener, to be prepared by the City Solicitor and registered on title on both the severed and retained lands, which shall require that prior to the commencement of any grading on the site, and prior to the issuance of any building permits, the owner shall undertake a site assessment for both the severed and retained lands in accordance with the Guidelines for Use at Contaminated Sites in Ontario. A copy of the Record of Site Condition, acknowledged by the Ministry of Environment and Energy shall be provided to the City's Principal Planner. That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with Kitchener-Wilmot Inc. for the provision of electrical servicing to the lands to be retained. That the owner shall make arrangements for the granting of any easements required by Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc. 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 two years from the date of approval, being October 3, 2002. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 374 OCTOBER 3, 2000 It is the opinion of this Committee that: 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 the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Carried VALIDATION OF TITLE Submission No.: Applicant: Property Location: Le.qal Description: VT 2000-002 Randy McCullough 66 Stanley Avenue Part of Lot 23, Re.qistered Plan 675 Appearances: In Support: Mr. F. Heimbecker Barrister & Solicitor 295 Weber Street North Waterloo ON N2J 3H8 Mr. & Mrs. R. McCullough 8185 Wellington Road 109 R.R. 2 Arthur ON NOG lA0 Contra: None Written Submissions: In Support: Mr. F. Heimbecker Barrister & Solicitor 295 Weber Street North Waterloo ON N2J 3H8 Contra: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is seeking to validate the title of the subject property. The lands involved were the subject of previous land severance applications under the former Village of Bridgeport Committee of Adjustment which created 3 new lots and retained the property now known as 66 Stanley Avenue. Registered deeds with Committee of Adjustment endorsement exist for the 2 severed parcels lying to the south of the subject property. The 3rd severed parcel located to the rear of 66 Stanley Avenue appears not to have had deed endorsement. Rather a mortgage for the subject property given by the then owner was endorsed bringing into question the validity of 66 Stanley Avenue as a separate parcel. The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Business & Planning Services in which they advised that this application for Validation of Title pertains to 66 Stanley Avenue, containing a single detached dwelling. No certificate may be issued under Section 57 of the Planning Act unless the certificate conforms to the Municipal Plan and Zoning By-law. The single detached dwelling conforms with both the Municipal Plan and Zoning By-law and as such, the Department of Business and Planning Services has no concerns with the validation of title. The Department of Business & Planning Services recommends approval of Submission VT 2000-002. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 375 OCTOBER 3, 2000 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 Planning & Culture Department, Region of Waterloo, in which they advised that Regional staff have reviewed the application and have no concerns; however, any development on the subject lands is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 99-038, or any successor thereof and there may be a Regional fee assessed for development agreements, if required. Submission No.: VT2000-002(Cont'd) The Committee noted the comments of the Grand River Conservation Authority in which they advised that they have no objection to this application. The Committee noted the comments of Ms. L. MacDonald, Assistant City Solicitor, in which she advised that she has reviewed the material supplied by Fred Heimbecker with respect to the application for validation of 66 Stanley Avenue, Kitchener, as well as made her own enquiries at the Registry Office. In this regard, she confirmed the information supplied and provided the following information: · M. Feder Realty (Kitchener) Limited (hereinafter referred to as "Feder Realty") acquired 2 acres of land comprised of Part of Lot 23 on Oct. 31, 1967 as set out on survey dated Dec. 12, 1967 ("the lands"). · By Deed instrument #370170 Feder Realty transferred a 33 foot road widening to Village of Bridgeport along southerly part of lands. · May 3, 1968 Feder Realty mortgage with Huron and Erie Mortgage Corporation was registered as instrument #371240. Said Mortgage contained the endorsement of the Bridgeport Committee of Adjustment. · May 15, 1968 Feder Realty conveyed 70-72 Stanley Ave. to Hans Knepper by instrument # 371911 with Bridgeport Committee of Adjustment endorsement thereon. (Middle lot on east side.) · May 15, 1968 Feder Realty conveyed 78 Stanley Ave. to Andrew Nogy by instrument #371912 with Bridgeport Committee of Adjustment thereon. (Southern lot on east side) · July 18, 1968 Feder Realty conveyed 66 Stanley Ave to Bernard and Rosemary Stephenson by instrument #376775. (Northern lot on east side) The Stephenson's assumed Feder's mortgage with Huron and Erie Mortgage Corporation. No endorsement thereon. · Feb 28, 1992 Feder Realty conveyed the remaining portion of Lot 23 (west side of the lands) to John Zivanovic Holdings Limited by instrument #1108063. · Sept. 20, 1992 The Province registered a Certificate of Title with respect to lands being Part of Lot 23 sold to John Zivanovic Holdings as instrument #1231105. Based on all the information available Ms. MacDonald advised that she believes that a validation of title would be appropriate under the circumstances. The Committee was also in receipt of the following documentation, namely: · Village of Bridgeport Committee of Adjustment Notice dated January 20, 1968 · Village of Bridgeport Committee of Adjustment Minutes dated January 31, 1968 · A copy of a Plan of Survey dated December 12, 1967 showing the land involved marked in red. · A copy of Fred Heimbecker's search of title at the time his client purchased the relevant property on January 25, 1985. · A photocopy of a Declaration of Possession of the then owners of the property, Mike and Pauline Williams with respect to their occupation of the property since June 25, 1971 when they purchased it. · A photocopy of the response from the Zoning Administrator of the City of Kitchener back in January 25, 1985 with respect to the property. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 376 OCTOBER 3, 2000 · A photocopy of the material deposited by Fred Heimbecker against the title to the property on January 25, 1985 indicating the consent of the Village of Bridgeport Committee of Adjustment in respect of a mortgage given by the then owner of the property. · A current printout of the property to the rear of the three lots running down Stanley Avenue indicating the current owner. This property apparently has been the subject of a Certification of Title during the 1990's. · A photocopy of registered Deed No. 371911 which was registered on May 15, 1968. · A photocopy of registered Deed No. 371912 registered on May 15, 1968. · A photocopy of the Certificate of Title with respect to the westerly one-half of Lot 23, which was placed on that property by the Deputy Director of Land Registration on September 19, 1994. Submission No.: VT2000-002(Cont'd) The Committee noted the written submissions from Mr. F. Heimbecker dated August 31 and September 8, 2000, in which he advised that consents were endorsed on transfers on the 2 properties immediately to the south of the subject property. The registered deed 371911 relates to the land immediately to the south of 66 Stanley Avenue and the deed 371912 is in respect of the land immediately to the south of the lands described in 371911. Please note that the two Transfers, as well as the Mortgage registered on May 3, 1968 in respect of the 66 Stanley Avenue property all contain the Planning Act consent of the Village of Bridgeport Committee of Adjustment in similar format. I have included the Certificate of Title granted to John Zivanovic Holdings Limited for the purpose of indicating to you that the Province of Ontario Office of Land Registration has reached an independent conclusion as to the validity of the title to the westerly one-half of Lot 23. Section 14 of the Certification of Titles Act indicates clearly that upon the registration of the Certificate, it is to be conclusive that the title of the person named is the owner of the land, is absolute and indefeasible as regards the Crown and all other persons whomsoever subject only to the exceptions, limitations etc. mentioned therein. You will note that no where in the Schedule "B" to the Certificate of Title is there any mention with respect to potential violations of the Planning Act. In result, it can be fairly concluded that the Provincial Government felt that the approvals given by the Village of Bridgeport Land Division Committee effectively severed off in three parts the easterly one-half of Lot 23. My belief is that a Mortgage was stamped in respect of 66 Stanley Avenue rather than a Deed because the then owner, M. Feder Realty (Kitchener) Limited wanted to provide to the Stephensons an assumable mortgage when they purchased the property on July 18, 1968 (see my search notes). At that point in history, the assumption of mortgages was a popular procedure in residential real estate transactions. Although I commenced my practice in 1973, I am well aware that the practice adopted by a large number of municipalities in respect of the stamping of land division consent was that they would stamp whatever document in respect of the approved property that you showed up with first. In the case at hand, I believe the mortgage was the first tendered document, and the Committee responded accordingly. The property at 66 Stanley Avenue has existed as a separate entity with its own tax assessment for approximately thirty-two years. The intent here is to formalize a long standing existing situation, and avoid future concerns relating to title matters. My approach at the time of purchase by my clients in 1985 was to deposit on title the obvious approval of the Village of Bridgeport Committee of Adjustment in respect of the property in the form of the severance approval on the mortgage I have previously sent to you. Currently, a lawyer representing a purchaser from my clients is indicating that she would much prefer the matter formally resolved by an Application for Validation of Title. The Chair reviewed the staff comments, noting that staff are recommending approval of the application and enquired if Mr. Heimbecker had anything further to add. Mr. F. Heimbecker advised that he had reviewed the staff reports and had nothing further to add. The Committee having reviewed all evidence before it, agreed that Validation of Title should be granted. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 377 OCTOBER 3, 2000 Moved by Ms. S. Campbell Seconded by Mr. A. Galloway That the application of Randy McCullough requesting Validation of Title on Part of Lot 23, Registered Plan 675, 66 Stanley Avenue, Kitchener, Ontario, BE GRANTED. It is the opinion of this Committee that the requirements of the Zoning By-law, the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan are being maintained on the subject property. Carried ADJOURNMENT On motion, the meeting adjourned at 11:30 a.m. Dated at the City of Kitchener this 3rd day of October, 2000. J. Billett Secretary-Treasurer Committee of Adjustment