The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutDSD-2021-178 - A 2021-097 - 17-19 Peter StREPORT TO:Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING:September 21, 2021 SUBMITTED BY:Bateman Brian,Senior Planner, 519-741-2200ext. 7869 PREPARED BY:Thompson Lisa, Planning Technician, 519-741-2200 ext.7847 WARD(S) INVOLVED:Ward 9 DATE OF REPORT: August 30, 2021 REPORT NO.:DSD-21-178 SUBJECT:Minor Variance Application A2021-097 17-19 Peter Street Owner -Welcomehome Construction Applicant -Dave Aston, MHBC Planning RECOMMENDATION: That application A2021-097for relief from Section 6.1.2 a) of By-law 85-1 to provide 1.0 parking spaces per unit, rather than 1.25 spaces per unitbe approved subject to the following condition: 1.The owner shall submitand receive approval of a site plan application for a 10-unit back to back townhouse development. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: Theapplication is requesting relief from Section 6.1.2 a) of By-law 85-1, to provide 1.0 parking spaces per unit, rather than the required 1.25 spaces per unit. 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 at 17-19 Peter Street is designated asLow Rise Multiple Residential in the Cedar Hill Secondary Plan of the City’s Official Plan andisidentified asa Major Transit Station Areaon the City’s Urban StructureMap. The property is zoned as Residential Six (R-6)in Zoning By-law 85-1. REPORT: Planning Comments: The applicantis proposing to re-develop the subjectpropertywith 10back-to-back townhouse units. This will require the demolition of the existing building on the property. The applicant will be required to apply for Demolition Control and a demolition permit. Staff met with the owner inApril 2021to discuss possible options for a redevelopmentof the property. There were severalsite layoutoptionsreviewed, with the consensus being thata10-unitback-to-back stacked townhouse design was the most functional and appropriate for the site. This designprovides a street presence, on-site amenity space and an adequate number of parking spaces, in accordance with the City’s Urban Design Guidelines for the Central Neighbourhoods, and the R-6 zoning regulations. The proposed designofthe 10 back-to-back townhouse units willrequire a minor variance to reduce the requiredparking rate from 1.25 spaces per unit to 1.0 spaces per unit. Proposed Site Layout 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 property is designated as Low Rise Multiple Residential in the CedarHill Neighbourhood Plan. This designation supports a range of residential uses from single detached dwellings to multiple dwellings having a maximum floor space ratio of 0.6. The proposed 10-unit multiple dwelling is a permitted type of residential use and thefloor space ratio will notexceed 0.6. Staff is of the opinion that the intensification of a residential use on the property maintains the general intent of the Official Plan. General Intent of the Zoning By-law The property is zoned Residential Six (R-6) in By-law 85.1. This zoning category permits the use of the property for a multiple dwelling. The parking regulations in By-law 85-1 require 1.25 spaces per unit. However, the City’s new Zoning By-law (2019-051),will only require 1.0spaces per unitplus 10% visitorparking when it comes into effect for all residential properties. The intent of the parking regulationsin the zoning by-lawisto ensure that new developmentprovides an adequate supply of parking on site to avoid spill over onto neighbourhood streets. As this property is located within walking distance ofhigher order public transit facilities including the ION light rail system, and several major Grand River Transit routes, staff is satisfied that themodestparking reduction maintains the general intent of the zoning by-law. In addition, the proposed parking reduction is in keeping with the direction of the City’s new Comprehensive Zoning By-law, that will be applied to all residential properties in the City in the near future. Is the Variance Minor? Based on the location of the property being in close proximity to severalmodes of public transportation and10 parking spacesbeingprovided on site;staff consider the parking reduction to be minor. Is the Variance Appropriate? Staff consider the minor parking reduction to be appropriate for the re-development of the subject propertyas parking will be provided on site, public transit, employment opportunities and shopping are allwithin walking distance of the site. Building Comments: No Comments. Transportation Comments: The proposed parking rate of 1 parking space per unit and a minimum 15% visitor parking, each follow the intent of the future zoning by-law. Therefore, Transportation Servicescan support the requested parking reduction. Heritage Comments: 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 17-19 Peter Street. is located within the Cedar Hill 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 Cedar Hill/Schneider Creek area. For more information on the outcome of this CHL analysis and the specific recommendations which may impact properties located within the Cedar Hill Neighbourhood CHL, please visit the following link: www.kitchener.ca/npr. Engineering Comments: No Comments. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Capital Budget – Therecommendation 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 Adjustmentmeeting.A notice signed was placed on the propertyadvising 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/authoritiesrelated to this matter. September03, 2021 Kristen Hilborn City of KitchenerFile No.: D20-20/ 200 King Street WestVAR KIT GEN P.O. Box 1118 Kitchener, ONN2G 4G7(8)VAR KIT/ 16 TO 20 QUEEN STREET NORTH MOMENTUM DEVELOPMENTS (11)/28, 120 BULLOCK STREET HOMER WATSON BUSINESS PARK (12)/15 KIT/SEC WESTMOUNT AND BLOCK LINE WINSTON HALL NURSING HOME Dear Ms. Hilborn: Re:Committee of Adjustment Applications Meeting September,2021, City of Kitchener Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have following comments: A 2021-084(Amended)210 Tartan Avenue No Concerns. A 2021-09221 Nne Pines Road No Concerns. A 2021-0931248 Ottawa Street South There are no concernstotheminor variance application inthe existing conditions.However, the applicantsmust be advisedthata future road dedicationofapproximately1.2mmayberequired from the above propertyincase of anypotentialfuture development application, to complywiththe designated road width of30.48m for the Ottawa Street South(RR #04). At such times in future, the parking spots would have0.8mclearancefrom theOttawa Street propertyline. A2021-09450 Valleybrook Drive No Concerns. A 2021-0951791 Glasgow Street No Concerns. 5ƚĭǒƒĻƓƷ bǒƒĬĻƩʹ ЌБЉВВЎБ tğŭĻ Њ ƚŅ Ћ 6)A 2021-09661 Warren RoadNo Concerns. 7)A 2021-09717-19 Peter StreetNo Concerns. 8)A 2021-09816-20Queen Street NorthNo Concerns. 9)A 2021-099111 Gay CrescentNo Concerns. 10)A 2021-100(Updated) 932 Eaglecrest CourtNo Concerns. 11)A 2021-10120 Pearson Street & 160 Bullock StreetNo Concerns. 12)A 2021-102695 Block Line RoadNo Concerns. 13)A 2021-103 to 104331 & 341 Hesh CrescentNo Concerns. Please be advised that any development on the lands subject to the Applications noted above aresubject 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 developmentsprior to the issuance of a building permit. The comments contained in this letter pertain to the Application numberslistedabove. 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: Dianna Saunderson CofA@Kitchener.ca 2 September 9, 2021 Dianna Saunderson Via email only City of Kitchener 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON, N2G 4G7 Dear Ms. Saunderson, Re:September 21, 2021Committee of Adjustment Meeting ______________________________________________________________________ Applications for Minor Variance A 2021-084210 Tartan Avenue A 2021-09221 Nine Pines Road A 2021-0931248 Ottawa Street South A 2021-09450 Valleybrook Drive A 2021-0951791 Glasgow Street A 2021-09661 Warren Road A 2021-09717-19 Peter Street A 2021-09816-20 Queen Street North A 2021-099111 Gay Crescent A 2021-100932 Eaglecrest Court A 2021-10120 Pearson Street & 160 Bullock Street A 2021-102695 Block Line Road A 2021-103 to 104331 & 341 Hesh Crescent Application for Consent B 2021-043303 Park Street 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 aherreman@grandriver.ca. Sincerely, Andrew Herreman, CPT Resource Planning Technician Grand River Conservation Authority *These comments are respectfully submitted as advice and reflect resource concerns within the scope and mandate of Page 1of 1 the Grand River Conservation Authority.