HomeMy WebLinkAboutDSD-2021-132 - A 2021-052 - 74 Chestnut StStaff Report
De velo n7ent Services Dq,oartr7ent
REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment
DATE OF MEETING: July 20, 2021
L
l\[ [ c HEN I�
www. kitchener ca
SUBMITTED BY: Bateman, Brian, Senior Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7869
PREPARED BY: Rice Menezes, Sheryl, Planning Technician (Zoning),
519-741-2200 ext. 7844
WARD(S) INVOLVED: 10
DATE OF REPORT: July 14, 2021
REPORT NO.: DSD 2021-132
SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2021-052
DEFERRED from June 15, 2021 meeting
74 Chestnut Street
Owner —Annette and Raymond Higgins
RECOMMENDATION:
That application A2021-042 AMENDED to request permission to:
1) legalize the required one off-street parking space to be located 1.41 metres from the
property line abutting Mansion Street,
2) to construct a raised covered deck in the rear yard, having a height of 1.2 metres, to
be located 0.6 metres from the southerly lot line rather than the required 1.2 metres,
3) to construct a one and two-storey addition in the rear yard of an existing single
detached dwelling having a side yard abutting Mansion Street of 1.23 metres rather
than the required 4.5 metres,
4) to construct an uncovered porch, with a height greater than 0.6 metres above grade,
having a 0.92 metres setback from the Mansion Street lot line rather than the required
4.5 metres,
5) to allow the proposed addition and garage to encroach 1.71 metres into the Driveway
Visibility Triangle (DVT) whereas the By-law does not permit encroachments into the
DVT; and,
6) to permit a detached garage in the rear yard of an existing single detached dwelling to
be located 2.28 metres from the property line abutting Mansion Street rather than the
required 6 metres,
be APPROVED, subject to the following conditions:
1) That the detached garage maintains a minimum setback from the rear lot line of
2.6 metres,
2) That a building permit be obtained from the Building division; and,
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
3) That conditions 1 and 2 be completed by January 1, 2022. Any request for a time
extension must be approved in writing by the Manager of Development Review (or
designate) prior to completion date set out in this decision. Failure to complete
the conditions will result in this approval becoming null and void.
And further, that the request for permission to construct a detached carport to be located
1.74 metres from the Mansion Street lot line be REFUSED.
BACKGROUND:
Further to the June 15, 2021 Committee of Adjustment meeting (DSD report no. 2021-110) the owner
has consulted with Planning and Transportation Planning staff and amended his application to switch
the proposed detached garage and carport around as shown in the plan and elevation drawings
below.
Paved
HcirjiBaus�s ParuFi
Ira
New
Carport
Detm j — 45J6 d
It is noted that not all measurements to the lot line along Mansion Street are shown in the above
drawing. Instead the owner has supplied an email confirming the numbers which have been noted
in the Recommendation section above.
Based on the updated plan and measurements provided, staff are recommending that the application
be AMENDED to request permission as noted in the Recommendation section above.
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 A designation is to preserve the scale, use and intensity of the
existing neighbourhood. The subject single detached dwelling is existing and is a permitted use in the
designation. The proposed addition of living space, carport and garage continues to provide a low-rise
housing option in this neighbourhood. Therefore, Planning staff is of the opinion that the general intent
of the Official Plan is maintained.
General Intent of the Zoning By-law
Regarding the existing off-street parking space located 1.41 metres from the lot line abutting Mansion
Street rather than the required 6 metres, this is an existing situation and has not been a concern in the
past. Because of the size of the rear yard, it is not possible to locate the parking space further from the
Mansion Street lot line. Staff is of the opinion that this variance meets the general intent of the bylaw.
Regarding the proposed raised covered deck with a height of 1.2 metres above grade to be located 0.6
metres from the side lot line, the intent of the setback is to provide room for maintenance of the structure
and also to provide separation from neighbouring lot lines. The proposed 0.6 metres will permit
maintenance and continues to provide an adequate setback and minimal impact to the neighbouring
property.
Regarding the proposed building addition and detached garage, the updated drawing has moved the
addition and garage further back from the Mansion Street lot line and therefore reduced the
encroachment into the Daylight Visibility Triangle (DVT). As well, Transportation Planning staff have
noted that in the future CROZBY zoning of the property, the DVT regulation will be amended to be 3
metres by 4.57 metres and when it is in effect, the addition and garage will be located outside the new
DVT.
Regarding the detached garage, the applicant has been advised to consult with Building staff to ensure
that their definition of `detached' is met. Though the drawing shows the garage against the main
dwelling, this will have to be confirmed with Building if any separation is required. In regard to the
Zoning By-law, as long as they are not physically attached, then the garage is considered detached.
Based on the above comments, staff is of the opinion that the general intent of the Zoning By-law is met
for items #1 to #6 noted above.
Regarding the setback of the detached carport from the Mansion Street lot line, the intent of the setback
requirement for any detached structure (carport, garage or shed) from a street line is to ensure adequate
separation from the public streetscape and provide unobstructed viewing along the street. As the
proposed carport would not provide adequate separation from the street line and would block sunlight
to the neighbouring open porch staff are of the opinion that the intent of the regulation is not met for the
detached carport.
Is the Variance Minor?
As noted above, the variances #1 to 6 as amended through staffs recommendations meet the intent of
both the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law. As well, Transportation Planning staff are now in the
support of the variances. Staff is of the opinion that the variances are minor.
The variance for the detached carport is not considered minor because of its impact on the streetscape
as noted above.
Is the Variance Appropriate?
Staff is of the opinion that the existing off-street parking space and the proposed deck are appropriate
for the property and would not negatively impact the surrounding neighbourhood.
Regarding the proposed one and two-storey building addition and the detached garage, staff is of
the opinion the buildings as shown on the updated plan are better located on the property and
appropriate for the site.
It is noted that the detached carport is permitted to be located 0.6 metres from the rear lot line.
However, regarding its location 1.74 metres from the street line, staff is of the opinion that this
variance in not appropriate given the impacts it would have on the streetscape and reduction of
sunlight and view from the neighbouring porch. The bylaw requires a minimum of 4.5 metres from
the Mansion Street lot line for a shed or bldg. and a minimum of 6 metres for a building which
accommodates off-street parking. This would provide for a streetscape clear of buildings along the
street line and the proposed carport does not maintain the intent of the bylaw. Based on the above
test, Planning staff are not in support of the variance for the carport.
Google streetview (2020)
Building Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance provided
building permit for the additions to the single detached dwelling are obtained prior to any construction.
Please contact the Building Division @ building@kitchener.ca with any questions.
Transportation Comments: Transportation Planning staff have no concerns with the updated plan
and support the variances.
Engineering Comments: Engineering has no comments.
Environmental Planning: No concerns.
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 74 Chestnut Street is located within the Central Frederick Neighbourhood CHL. The
owner and the public will be consulted as the City considers listing CHLs on the Municipal Heritage
Register, identifying CHLs in the Official Plan, and preparing action plans for each CHL with specific
conservation options.
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 — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the
Committee of Adjustment meeting. A notice sign was placed on the property advising that a
Committee of Adjustment application has been received. The sign advises interested 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:
Committee of Adjustment application A2021-110 was considered on June 15, 2021 and was
deferred to the July meeting.
'Staff Report
`
De velo hent Services Departrnent www. kitchener. ca
REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment
DATE OF MEETING: June 15, 2021
SUBMITTED BY: von Westerholt, Juliane, Senior Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7157
PREPARED BY: Rice Menezes, Sheryl, Planning Technician (Zoning),
519-741-2200 ext. 7844
WARD(S) INVOLVED: 10
DATE OF REPORT: June 9, 2021
REPORT NO.: DSD 2021-110
SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2021-052
74 Chestnut Street
Owner—Annette and Raymond Higgins
RECOMMENDATION:
That application A2021-042 requesting permission to legalize the required one off-street
parking space to be located 1.41 metres from the property line abutting Mansion Street and
a raised covered deck in the rear yard, having a height of 1.2 metres, to be located 0.6 metres
from the southerly lot line rather than the required 1.2 metres; be APPROVED,
And further, that the request for permission to construct:
1) a detached garage in the rear yard of an existing single detached dwelling to be
located 1.41 metres from the property line abutting Mansion Street rather than the
required 6 metres,
2) a one and two-storey addition in the rear yard of an existing single detached dwelling
having a side yard abutting Mansion Street of 0.88 metres rather than the required 4.5
metres,
3) an uncovered porch having a 0 -metre setback from Mansion Street rather than the
required 4.5 metres; and,
4) to allow the proposed one and two-storey addition to encroach 3.57 metres into the
Driveway Visibility Triangle (DVT) whereas the By-law does not permit encroachments
into the DVT; be REFUSED.
*** 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 Conservation A in the Central Frederick Neighbourhood
Plan of the City's Official Plan and identified as Community Area on the Urban 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 A designation is to preserve the scale, use and intensity of the
existing neighbourhood. The subject single detached dwelling is existing and is a permitted use in the
designation. The proposed addition of living space, carport and garage continues to provide a low-rise
housing option in this neighbourhood. Therefore, Planning staff is of the opinion that the general intent
of the Official Plan is maintained.
General Intent of the Zoning By-law
Regarding the existing off-street parking space located 1.41 metres from the lot line abutting Mansion
Street rather than the required 6 metres, this is an existing situation and has not been a concern in the
past. Because of the size of the rear yard, it is not possible to locate the parking space further from the
Mansion Street lot line. Staff is of the opinion that this variance meets the general intent of the bylaw.
Regarding the proposed raised covered deck with a height of 1.2 metres above grade, to be located
0.6 metres from the side lot line, the 1.2 metre setback is required in order to provide room for
maintenance of the structure and also to provide separation from neighbouring lot lines. The proposed
0.6 metres will permit maintenance and continues to provide an adequate setback which appears
unlikely to negatively impact the neighbouring property.
Regarding the proposed building addition, it is noted that though staff could support a setback of 0.88
metres for the 2 -storey addition, there is a more onerous variance for the addition as it is located 3.57
metres into the required 4.57 metres DVT. Staff do not support new structures that are substantially
located in DVTs. As above variances, #2 to 4, are part of the same addition, staff is unable to support
them as there is concern with new structures being located in a DVT and therefore the general intent is
not being maintained.
Regarding the proposed garage, at 1.41 metre setback, it is noted that it is also substantially located
inside a DVT. In addition, Transportation Planning staff has advised that in the future a sidewalk will be
proposed for this block. This would add to safety concerns for pedestrians using the sidewalk and
vehicles backing out of driveway and garage on the property and therefore does not meet the general
intent of the Zoning by-law.
Based on the above comments regarding the building addition and the garage, staff is of the opinion
that the general intent of the Zoning By-law is not maintained.
I
View of existing parking area from Mansion Street
(existing deck and one -storey addition to be demolished)
Is the Variance Minor?
As noted above, the existing off-street parking space and the proposed deck meet the general intent of
the bylaw and staff considers these variances to be minor.
Regarding the proposed new dwelling addition and garage, both of which would be substantially located
inside the required 4.57 metres DVTs, staff are of the opinion that the variances cannot be considered
minor by Planning or Transportation Planning staff.
Is the Variance ADDroariate?
Staff is of the opinion that the off-street parking space and the proposed deck are appropriate for the
property and would not negatively impact the surrounding neighbourhood.
Regarding the proposed building additions, staff is of the opinion that these variances are in two
DVTs, and this would have an impact for driver's visibility and creates a safety hazard. Therefore, it
is staff's opinion that the variances are not appropriate for the subject property or the neighbourhood.
City Planning staff conducted a site inspection of the property May 29, 2021
View from corner of Chestnut and Mansion Streets
It is noted that before the application was accepted staff advised that we could not support the
variances in the DVTs. It would have been preferable to meet with the applicant and with
Transportation Planning staff to determine if modifications could have been made to the proposal
that staff could support, such as having no interior wall for the garage, so that it acts more as a
carport across both parking spaces. Should the applicant wish to defer this application, City staff
are available to meet to discuss if modifications to the proposal could be supported.
Building Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance provided
building permit for the addition to the single detached dwelling is obtained prior to any construction.
Please contact the Building Division @ building@kitchener.ca with any questions.
Transportation Comments: Transportation Services can support a 1.41 metre parking space
setback from the required 6.0 metre parking setback.
However, Transportation Services cannot support the new building addition as proposed in the
application, to be located within 3.57 metres of the required 4.57 metre DVT. It is our opinion that
the DVT encroachment is not minor and is creating an unsafe situation. Also, Transportation
Services cannot support the new garage as noted in the application, as there is an encroachment of
approximately 3.16 metres into the required 4.57 metre DVT by a solid wall of the proposed garage.
Engineering Comments: Engineering has no comments.
Environmental Planning: No concerns.
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 74 Chestnut Street is located within the Central Frederick Neighbourhood CHL. The
owner and the public will be consulted as the City considers listing CHLs on the Municipal Heritage
Register, identifying CHLs in the Official Plan, and preparing action plans for each CHL with specific
conservation options.
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 — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the
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
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/authorities related to this matter.
PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT
AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES
150 Frederick Street, Sth Floor
Kitchener ON N2G 4A Canada
Region of Waterloo Telephone: 519-575-4400
TTY: 519-575-4608
Fax: 519-575-4449
www. reg i o n ofwate r l o o. ca
May 31, 2021
Kristen Hilborn
City of Kitchener File No.: D20-20/
200 King Street West VAR KIT GEN
P.O. Box 1118 (11, 12)/VAR KIT, 269 271 MADISON AVE S.
Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 184 MILL STREET 389160 ONTARIO LIMITED
(13, 14)/04 Urban,
297 OTTAWA STREET S. JEREMY
KRYGSMAN ANDREW STEINBACCH
Dear Ms. Hilborn:
Re: Committee of Adjustment Applications Meeting June 15, 2021, City of Kitchener
Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have
following comments:
1) A 2021-047
— 68 Guerin Avenue — No Concerns.
2) A 2021-048
— 93 Michener Crescent — No Concerns.
3) A 2021-049
— 279 Sheldon Avenue North — No Concerns.
4) A 2021-050
— 4 Dekay Street — No Concerns.
5) A 2021-051
— 185 Simeon Street — No Concerns.
6) A 2021-052
— 74 Chestnut Street — No Concerns.
7) A 2021-053
— 12 Blucher Street — No Concerns.
8) A 2021-054
— 74 Paddock Court (Final) — No Concerns.
9) A 2021-055
— 41 Heiman Street — No Concerns.
10) A 2021-056
— 29 Brunswick Avenue — No Concerns.
11) A 2021-057
— 269-271 Madison Avenue South — No Concerns.
12) A 2021-058
— 184 Mill Street — No Concerns.
Document Number: 3679127
Page of 2
13) A 2021-059 — 297 Ottawa Street South (Retained) — No Concerns.
14) A 2021-060 — 297 Ottawa Street South (Severed) — 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
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, A
Joginder Bhatia
Transportation Planner
C (226) 753-0368
CC:
CofA(a)Kitchener. ca
2
atrd Rp,@�
Administration Centre: 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Cambridge, ON N1 R 5W6
n w
Phone: 519-621-2761 Toll free: 1-866-900-4722 Fax: 519-621-4844 www.grandriver.ca
0
tion
July
July 9, 2021
Dianna Saunderson Via email only
City of Kitchener
200 King Street West
Kitchener, ON, N2G 4G7
Dear Ms. Saunderson,
Re: July 20, 2021 Committee of Adjustment Meeting
Applications for Minor Variance
A 2021-052
74 Chestnut Street
A 2021-061
29 Floral Crescent
A 2021-062
316 Quaiser Court
A 2021-063
48 Martin Street
A 2021-064
34 Uxbridge Crescent
A 2021-065
117 Golden Meadow Crescent
A 2021-066
195 Yellow Birch Drive
A 2021-067
806 Belmont Avenue West
A 2021-068
71 Massey Avenue
A 2021-069
926 & 936 King Street East
A 2021-070
124 Walter Street
A 2021-071
19 Anson Court
A 2021-072
53 Plaza Court
A 2021-073
538 Victoria Street South
A 2021-074
42 Florence Avenue
A 2021-075
10 Pearson Street
A 2021-076
61 Strange Street
A 2021-077
102 Waterloo Street
A 2021-078
102 Waterloo Street
A 2021-079
& A2021-080
1170 King Street East & 815 & 825 Weber Street East
Applications for Consent
B 2021-036
301 Thaler Avenue
B 2021-037
362 Lancaster Street West
B 2021-038
257 Dumfries Avenue
B 2021-039
102 Waterloo Street
`These comments are respectfully submitted as advice and reflect resource concerns within the scope and mandate of Pagel of 2
the Grand River Conservation Authority.
Member of Conservation Ontario, representing Ontario's 36 Conservation Authorities I The Grand — A Canadian Heritage River
Applications for Consent (Continued)
B 2021-040 1170 King Street East, 815 & 825 Weber Street East
B 2021-041 1170 King Street East, 815 & 825 Weber Street East
The above -noted 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 aherremana_grand river. ca.
Sincerely,
Andrew Herreman, CPT
Resource Planning Technician
Grand River Conservation Authority
June 12, 2021
Committee of Adjustment
City of Kitchener
Re: A 2021-052 - 74 Chestnut Street
Dear Committee of Adjustment:
We respect the Planning Department's goals of maintaining zoning regulations but our property is unique
in its age and characteristics that warrants exceptions. Ours is a century old neighbourhood that was
developed before zoning regulations came into play. Many of the buildings on Mansion Street, including
our property, have minimal to no setbacks from the street property lines making compliance to setbacks
and DVT regulations impossible. Example photos are attached to this letter.
We took ownership of this property in May, 2020 and have since been improving the property's
landscaping, upgraded the windows and front door and continue to refinish the original wood floors and
trim. We hope to demolish the unattractive rear yard deck, current house extension and shed and replace
them with a detached garage with carport, and a two-storey extension, with a small raised deck. The
asphalt driveway will be replaced with paving bricks.
Figure 2 May 2020
Figure 1 June 2021
Request for relief from the 4.57 m driveway visibility triangle
Currently the driveway visibility triangles on both sides of the driveway are obstructed. The left side is
obstructed by the house and porch of 127 Mansion Street. The right side is obstructed by the deck that is
to be demolished.
Pictures
The Planner's report has stated that they cannot support the new garage as there is an encroachment of
approximately 3.16 metres into the required 4.57 m DVT by a solid wall of the proposed garage. That DVT
is already obstructed by the house and porch of 127 Mansion St. The wall of the garage does not worsen
the visibility condition. The right side condition will be improved by the new construction with the new
extension in line with the existing house. As a result, 2.1 metres of visibility to the DVT will be added. The
existing right of way is 4 metres wide making a safe viewing area which is the intent of the DVT. Our
property is also corner lot that has a 4 way stop at the intersection that calms automobile speeds
minimizing safety risks.
Page 2
Figure 3 Left Side DVT
Page 3
-P" lrr
Figure 4 Right Side DVT
Page 4
We draw the committee's attention to similar applications for relief from DVT for were approved by the
committee. Application A2020-083 - 44 Breithaupt Street saw the approval of a porch and stairs 1.52
metres above grade located within the DVT:
Figure 5 44 Breithaupt St
Application A2020-067 - 297 Ottawa Street South saw the approval of legalizing an existing driveway
contained within the DVT.
Request for relief to permit an uncovered porch that is 0.0 metres from a side yard abutting a
street whereas 4.5 metres is required.
The intent of this zoning law is to maintain a consistent uniform buildings site line along the street. This is
consistent with neighboring buildings (127 Mansion) and is an improved condition for this property as
the existing deck encroaches the right of way by 1 metres. The committee also approved similar variance
for applications A2020-083 - 44 Breithaupt Street mentioned above. The condominium complex at 120
Mansion was obviously allowed the same variance when they added two storeys to the existing building
that has no setback from the Mansion Street right of way.
Page 5
Thanks for considering our application. We ask the committee to primarily approve the variances to allow
the construction of the garage/carport. We also request that the committee consider the variances to
allow the construction of building addition or approve what variance would be permitted so we could
adjust our plans.
Thanks,
Additional Photos attached:
Page 6
lo��Wi-
�i
^�:\a�� , ``� *.
LI
D
F
E
73 Locust - Mansion Street Driveway - No room for sidewalk
Page 9