HomeMy WebLinkAboutDSD-2021-086 - A 2021-042 - 29 Gruhn StREPORT TO:Committee of Adjustment
DATE OF MEETING:May18, 2021
SUBMITTED BY:vonWesterholt, Juliane,Senior Planner, 519-741-2200ext. 7157
PREPARED BY:Rice Menezes, Sheryl, Planning Technician (Zoning),
519-741-2200 ext. 7844
WARD(S) INVOLVED:10
DATE OF REPORT:May 7,2021
REPORT NO.:DSD 2021-086
SUBJECT:Minor Variance Application A2021-042
29 GruhnStreet
Owner –SCOR Holdings Inc
RECOMMENDATION:
That applicationA2021-042requesting permission construct a 2-storey additionon an
existing duplex dwelling having an existing easterly(left)side yard setback of 2.3 metres
rather than the required 3 metres; an existing westerly (right) side yard setback of0.7 metres
rather than the required 1.2 metres; and, an existing off-street parking space located in front
of the building having a lengthof 5.3 metres rather than the required 5.5 metres, be approved.
Location Map
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
BACKGROUND:
The property is designated asLow Rise Conservation in the KW Hospital Neighbourhood Plan of
the City’s Official Plan and identifiedas Major Transit Station AreaontheUrban Structure Map.
The property is zoned Residential Five (R-5)in By-law 85-1.
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
The intent of the Low Rise Conservation designation is to retain the existing low rise, low density
residential character of the neighbourhood. The existing duplexis a permitted use in the designation.
The proposed conversion from 1 ½ storey to full 2 storeyprovides another low rise housing option in
this neighbourhood.The proposed variance for the parking space will not be noticeable and would
continue to be compatible with the existinglow-rise character of the neighbourhood. Therefore, Planning
staff is of the opinion that the general intent of the Official Plan is maintained.
View of left side of building
View of right side of building
General Intent of the Zoning By-law
The intent of theside yard setback regulation is to ensure that the dwelling has sufficient separation
from abutting propertiesand provides for access to the rear yard. The existing dwelling has aleft side
of 2.3 metres to accommodate the driveway along the side of thehousewhich was permitted when the
house was built. It is considered legal under the Existing Use Clause. Thecurrentby-law requires a 3-
metre side yard setback for the building toaccommodate the driveway. Any new structures are required
nd
to be 3 metres from this sideyard. As the proposed addition is for a full 2storey on the existing first
storey, there are no concerns with impacting the existing drivewaywith the addition.
The right sideyard requires 1.2 metressetbackin the currentbylaw. However, the existing building
was constructedprior to this requirement and is legal under the Existing Use Clause. As noted above,
nd
the proposed addition to a full 2storey over the existing first storey, does not impact the ground floor
setback or access around the property. As noted in the elevation drawings submitted with the
application, there will be no windows on this side of the house and therefore it should not negatively
impact the property owners to the right.
Regarding the variance for the reduced depth of the existing parking space in front of the façade. As
the property is used for two dwelling units, having access to two separate parking spaces is preferable.
The variance is for a reduction of 0.2 metres which will continue toaccommodate a vehicle. There have
been no complaints received to date about this parking space.
Based on the above, staff is of the opinion that the general intent of the zoning by-law is met.
Is the Variance Minor?
As noted above, the proposed extension of the second floor from a1 ½-storeyto a full 2-storey structure
will not impact the use of the property on the ground floor and will maintainaccess to the rear yard. The
variance for the existing parking space in front of the building is to acknowledge an existing space with
can accommodate vehicles without impacting the neighbourhood. The variancesmaybe considered
minor.
Is the Variance Appropriate?
Based on above comments, staff is of the opinion that as the proposed variances will not negatively
impact the subject property nor the surrounding neighbourhood; andthat the variance is appropriate.
City Planning staff conducted a site inspection of the property on May 6, 2021.
Building Comments:The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance. Application
has been made for the addition to the duplex and is currently under review.
Transportation Comments:
Given the existing nature of the driveway, Transportation Services does not have any concerns with
theproposed application.
EngineeringComments:No concerns.
EnvironmentalPlanning:No concerns due to nature of application.
Heritage Planning: There are no heritage planning concerns. The Kitchener Cultural Heritage
Landscape Study (CHLS) dated December 2014 and prepared by The Landplan Collaborative Ltd.
was approved by Council in 2015. The CHLS serves to establish an inventory and was the first step
of a phased Cultural Heritage Landscape (CHL) conservation process. The property municipally
addressed as 29 Gruhn Street is located within the Gruhn Neighbourhood CHL. The City has
undertaken additional work on examining the CHL significance of the CHL area through its work on
drafting a new Secondary Plan for the Midtown area. For more information on the outcome of this
CHL analysis and the specific recommendations which may impact properties located within the
Gruhn Neighbourhood CHL, please visit the following link: www.kitchener.ca/npr.
STRATEGICPLAN ALIGNMENT:
This report supports the delivery of core services.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Capital Budget –The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget.
Operating Budget –The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
INFORM –This report has been posted to the City’s website with the agenda in advance of the
Committeeof Adjustmentmeeting.A notice signed was placed on the propertyadvising that a
Committee of Adjustment application has been received. The sign advisesinterested parties to find
additional information on the City’s website or by emailing the Planning Division. A notice of the
application was mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property.
PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES:
There are no previous reports/authoritiesrelated to this matter.
April 29, 2021
Dianna Saunderson
City of Kitchener File No.: D20-20/
200 King Street West VAR KIT GEN
P.O. Box 1118 (11) /54, KOLB CREEK SUBDIVISIN 30T 02206
Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7
Dear Ms. Saunderson:
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 2021-035 659 Stirling Avenue South No Concerns.
2) A 2021-036 30 Simeon Street No Concerns.
3) A 2021-037 40 Prueter Avenue No Concerns.
4) A 2021-038 47 Kilkerran Crescent No Concerns.
5) A 2021-039 78 Shanley Street No Concerns.
6) A 2021-040 59 Bechtel Drive No Concerns.
7) A 2021-041 63 Bechtel Drive No Concerns.
8) A 2021-042 29 Gruhn Street No Concerns.
9) A 2021-043 10 Eastwood Drive No Concerns.
10) A 2021-044 54 Park Street No Concerns.
11) A 2021-045 Blocks 3 & 4 Otterbein Drive No Concerns.
12) A 2021-046 162 Greenbrook Drive No Concerns.
tğŭĻ ƚŅ Ћ
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
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
CC:
Juliane von Westerholt, City of Kitchener
Christine Kompter, City of Kitchener
CofA@Kitchener.ca
Document Number: 3644828 2
Docs #3644828
May 6, 2021
Dianna Saunderson Via email only
City of Kitchener
200 King Street West
Kitchener, ON, N2G 4G7
Dear Ms. Saunderson,
Re: May 18, 2021 Committee of Adjustment Meeting
______________________________________________________________________
Applications for Minor Variance
A 2021-031 660 Avondale Avenue
A 2021-036 30 Simeon Street
A 2021-037 40 Prueter Avenue
A 2021-038 47 Kilkerran Crescent
A 2021-039 78 Shanley Street
A 2021-040 59 Bechtel Drive
A 2021-041 63 Bechtel Drive
A 2021-042 29 Gruhn Street
A 2021-043 10 Eastwood Drive
A 2021-044 54 Park Street
A 2021-045 Otterbein Road (Blocks 3 & 4)
Applications for Consent
B 2020-047 50 Brookside Crescent
B 2021-025 20 Sylvia Street
B 2021-026 41 Ardelt Place
B 2021-027 418 Alice Avenue
B 2021-028 564 & 592 Belmont Avenue West
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.
*These comments are respectfully submitted as advice and reflect resource concerns within the scope and mandate of Page 1 of 2
the Grand River Conservation Authority.
Sincerely,
Andrew Herreman, CPT
Resource Planning Technician
Grand River Conservation Authority