HomeMy WebLinkAboutDSD-2021-205 - B 2021-054 & A 2021-116 to 117 - 74 Rutherford DrREPORT TO:Committee of Adjustment
DATE OF MEETING:October 19, 2021
SUBMITTED BY:Bateman, Brian, Senior Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7869
PREPARED BY:Dumart, Craig, Senior Planner, Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7073
WARD(S) INVOLVED:Ward 2
DATE OF REPORT:October 8, 2021
REPORT NO.:DSD-2021-205
SUBJECT:Consent application B2021-054 & Minor Variance Applications
A2021-116 & A2021-117
74 Rutherford Drive
Owners – Pero and Mirjana Perencevic
Applicant – Boban Jakanovic
RECOMMENDATIONS:
A.That Consent Application B2021-054requesting consent to create a new lot for a semi-
detacheddwelling with a lot width of 14.32 metres, a depth of 60.35 metres, and an area of
864.57 square metres be refused;
B.That Minor Variance Application A2021-116requesting to reduce the required minimum lot
width for the retained lot proposed through B2021-054from 9.0metres to 8.53metres be
refused; and
C.That Minor Variance Application A2021-117 requesting to reduce the required minimum lot
width for the severed lot proposed through B2021-054 from 15.0 metres to 14.32 metres
be
refused.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
The applicantis requesting to sever an existing 22.85-metre-wide lot into two lots to allow for a future
semi-detached dwelling on a 14.32 metre wide lot (severed lands) and a single detached duplex
dwelling on 8.53metre wide lot(retained lands). The retain lot width does not meet the minimum lot
widthrequirementand the applicant is requesting relief from Section 38.2.1of Zoning By-law 85-1
to allow a single detached duplex dwelling to have a lot width of 8.53 m rather than the required 9.0
metrelot width. Furthermore, the proposed severed lot wouldnot meet the minimum lot width
requirement for semi-detacheddwellingsand the applicant is requesting relief from Section 38.2.2
of Zoning By-law 85-1 to allow a semi-detached dwelling to have a lot width of 14.32 metres (7.16m
for each dwelling)ratherthantherequired 15.0 metrelot width requirement(7.5m for each dwelling).
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Location Map:74 Rutherford Drive.
BACKGROUND:
The subject property is located near the intersection of Ruther Drive and Kinzie AvenueThe property
is generally rectangle in shape with a frontage along Rutherford Drive, 22.85 metres in widthwhich
generally reflects thegeneralsize of existing lotswidthson the street. The site is currently occupied
by a single detached dwelling and is surroundedby existing low-rise residential uses including single
detached dwellings, semi-detached dwellings, and multiple dwelling buildings.Theproperty is
designated as Low Rise Residential in the City’s Official Plan and identified as Community Areas on
the City’s Urban Structure Map.
The property is zoned as Residential Four Zone (R-4) in Zoning By-law 85-1.
REPORT:
Planning Comments:
In considering the four tests for minor variances as outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O.,
1990 Chap. P. 13, as amended, Planning staff offers the following comments:
Does the proposal maintain the general intent and purpose ofthe Official Plan?
Staff is of the opinion that the requested variances do not meet the general intent of the Official
Plan. Section 4.C.1.8. of the 2014 Official Plan states:
Where…minor variances are requested, proposed,or required to facilitate residential
intensification or a redevelopment of lands, the overall impact of the…minor variances will
be reviewed, but not limited to the following to ensure, that:
a)Any new buildings and any additions and/or modifications to existing buildings are
appropriate in massing and scale and are compatible with the built form and the
community character of the established neighbourhood.
b)...
c) ...
d)New buildings…. aresensitive to the exterior areas of adjacent properties and that
the appropriate screening and/or buffering is provided to mitigate any adverse
impacts, particularly with respect to privacy.
e) …
f)The impact of each special zoning regulation or variance will be reviewed prior to
formulating a recommendation to ensure that a deficiency in the one zoning
requirement does not compromise the site in achieving objectives of compatible and
appropriate site and neighbourhood design and does not create further zoning
deficiencies.
Furthermore, Section 4.C.1.9. of the 2014 Official Plan states:
Residential intensification and/or redevelopment within existing neighbourhoods will be
designed to respect existing character. A high degree of sensitivity to surrounding context is
important in considering compatibility.
Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposed variances will facilitate the creation of two lots and
construction of a single detached duplexdwelling,and semi-detacheddwelling that:
Is not compatible with the built form and the community character of the established
neighbourhood;
Results in lot widths and built forms that arenot similar to the adjacent property and will not
maintain the character of the streetscape and the neighbourhood;
Is not sensitive to the exterior areas of adjacent properties; and
Does not provide sensitivity to the surrounding context.
The proposed lot widths will create frontages dominated by garages and parking not in keeping
with the neighbourhood. Staff is of the opinion thatthe requested variances do not meet the
generalintent of the Official Plan.
Does the proposal maintain the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law?
The requested variances to allow for reduced lot widths for a single detached duplex dwellingof 8.53
metres rather than 9.0 metresand a semi-detached dwellingof 14.32 rather that 15.0 metresdo not
meet thegeneral intent of the Zoning By-law.The purpose of minimum lot width requirement is to
ensure lot widths are of adequate size to support anappropriatescaledbuilding envelope, parkingand
landscaping. Staff is of the opinion that an8.53-metre-widelot for a single detacheddwelling and a
14.53 metre wide lot for a semi-detached dwelling will be not provide for appropriatelysized lots nor
would the variances result in appropriately scaled dwellings. A 8.53 metre wide lot would result in a 6.13
metre wide dwelling with minimum 1.2 metre side yard setbacks and a 14.32 metre wide lot would result
in a 11.92 metre wide semi-detached dwelling (5.96 metresfor eachdwelling unit) with minimum 1.2
metre side yard setbacks. Staff are of the opinion that the requested variances do not provide for
adequate lot widths and donot meet the general intent of the Zoning By-law.
Is the proposal desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land?
Thevariances are not desirable for the appropriate development of the land. Instead, the variances
will create unacceptably adverse impacts on adjacent properties. The proposed lot widthswill
result in narrowlots and dwellings with frontages dominated by garages that are not appropriate
for the context of the existing neighbourhood.
City Planning staff conducted a site inspection of the property on October 6, 2021.
Existing single detached dwelling at 74 Rutherford Drive.
Consent Application – B2021-054
With respect to the criteria for the subdivision of land listed in Section 51(24) of the Planning Act,
R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13, staff is not satisfied that the creation of the lot fabric of the severedand retained
lots are desirable and appropriate.
Section 17.E.20.5. of City’s 2014 Official Plan states that:
Applications for consent to create new lots will only be granted where:
a)the lots comply with the policies of this Plan, any Community Plan and/or Secondary Plan,
and that the lots are in conformity with the Zoning By-law, or a minor variance has been
granted to correct any deficiencies;
b)the lots reflect the general scale and character of the established development pattern of
surrounding lands by taking into consideration lot frontages, areas, and configurations;
c) all of the criteria for plan of subdivision are given due consideration….
In this case, staff recommends that the Committee not grant the requested minor variances
necessary to facilitate the subject consent applications to create two new lots for the reasons noted
above. Furthermore, staff is of the opinion that the proposed lots do not reflect the general scale
and character of the established development pattern of surrounding lands since they do not
consider appropriate lot configurations. Moreover, the applications do not meet the criteria for plan
of subdivision outlined in Section 51 (24) off the Planning Act, especially with respect to:
(c) whether the plan conforms to the official plan and adjacent plans of subdivision, if any;
and
(f) the dimensions and shapes of the proposed lots.
Should the Committee wish to approve the subject applications, conditions should be imposed to
require elevation drawings, and landscape plans to minimize the negative impact on the residential
neighbourhood, in accordance with Section 4.C.1.7 of the 2014 Official Plan for the severed and
retained lands, in addition to the standard consent conditions and those conditions outlined in the
below department / agency comments.
Building Comments:
The Building Division has no objections to the proposed consent. Region of Waterloo and Area
Municipalities' Design Guidelines and Supplemental Specifications for Municipal Services (DGSSMS)
allows only one service per lot.Separate building permit(s) will be required for the demolition of the
existing building, as well as construction of the new residential buildings.
Transportation Services Comments:
Transportation Services does not have any concerns with the proposed application.
Heritage Planning Comments:
Heritage Planning staff has no concerns with this application.
Environmental Planning Comments:
Standard condition for a severance shall apply. The applicant shall enter into an agreement on
both severed and retained to do Tree Management Plan prior to issuance of a building permit.
Engineering Division Comments:
Severance of any blocks within the subject lands will require separate, individual service
connections for sanitary, storm, and water, in accordance with City policies.
The owner is required to make satisfactory financial arrangements with the Engineering
Division for the installation of new service connections that may be required to service this
property, all prior to severance approval. Our records indicate sanitary and water municipal
services are currently available to service this property. Any further enquiries in this regard
should be directed to Niall Melanson (niall.melanson@kitchener.ca).
The Owner shall extend the storm sewer or implement a suitable design solution for a sump
pump outlet to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering.
Any new driveways are to be built to City of Kitchener standards. All works are at the owner’s
expense and all work needs to be completed prior to occupancy of the building.
A servicing plan showing outlets to the municipal servicing system will be required to the
satisfaction of the Engineering Division prior to severance approval.
A Development Asset Drawing (digital AutoCAD) is required for the new site infrastructure
with corresponding layer names and asset information to the satisfaction of the Engineering
Division prior to severance approval.
The owner must ensure that the basement elevation of the building can be drained by gravity
to the street sewers. If this is not the case, then the owner would have topump the sewage
via a pump and forcemain to the property line and have a gravity sewer from the property
line to the street.
Parks and Cemeteries Comments
Cash-in-lieu of park land dedication will be required on the severed parcel as 1 new
development lot will be created. The cash-in-lieu dedication required is $6589.96. Park
Dedication is calculated at 5% of the new development lots only, with a land valuation
calculated by the lineal frontage of (14.326m) at a land value of $9,200 per frontage meter.
Two existing City-owned street trees (#139931 and #154915) will be impacted by the
proposed severance and future redevelopment. A Tree Protection and Enhancement Plan
showing suitable protection is required to the satisfaction of Parks & Cemeteries staff prior
to approval. Alternatively, a) replacement of 4 suitable trees can be shown on a Street Tree
Planting Plan following City of Kitchener Development Manual standards to the satisfaction
of Parks & Cemeteries staff or b) suitable financial compensation can be provided prior
clearance of Parks and Cemeteries conditions.
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:
There are no previous reports/authorities related to this matter.
Peter Ellis
519-503-2536
D20-20/21 KIT
October 12, 2021
Sarah Goldrup
Committee of Adjustment
City of Kitchener
P.O. Box 1118
200 King Street East
Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7
Re:Comments for Consent ApplicationB2021-044, B2021-046, B2021-
047, B2021-054, and B2021-055
Committee of Adjustment Hearing October 19,2021
CITY OF KITCHENER
B2021-044
51 Nelson Avenue
Parkwood Homes (KW) Ltd / John Mesina
The owner/applicant is proposing to sever the semi-detached dwelling into two legal
parcels.
Regional Fee:
The owner/applicant is required to submit the Regional consent review fee of $350.00
prior to final approval of the consent.
The Region has no objectionto the proposed application, subject to the following
conditions:
1)That prior to final approval, the owner/applicant submit the Regional consent
review fee of $350.00 per new lot created.
_____________________
Document Number: 3846480
B2021-046
74 Admiral Road
2611601 Ontario Inc.
The owner/applicant is proposing to sever the lot into two lots with the intention of
demolishing the current house and building semi-duplex dwelling on each lot.
Regional Fee:
The owner/applicant is required to submit the Regional consent review fee of $350.00
prior to final approval of the consent.
The Region has no objection
to the proposed application, subject to the following
condition:
1)That prior to final approval, the owner/applicant submit the Regional consent
review fee of $350.00 per new lot created.
___________________
B2021-047
81 Fifth Avenue
Branislav and Sanja Mikan / Boban Jokanovic (Agent)
The owner/applicant is proposing to sever the lot into two parcels to allow for the
development of two semi-detached dwellings.
Regional Fee:
The owner/applicant is required to submit the Regional consent review fee of $350.00
prior to final approval of the consent.
Airport Zoning (Advisory Comments):
There are no airport specific concerns for the above application. However, the
applicants must be advised that the subject lands are located within airport zoning
regulated area and specifically under the runway take-off approach surface.Therefore,
the lands and the proposed development are subject to all provisions and restrictions of
Airport Zoning regulations and Nav Canada.
For further information in this regard please contact:
Kevin B. Campbell, Project Manager, Airport Construction and Development
519.648.2256 ext. 8511 Email: KCampbell@regionofwaterloo.ca
The Region has no objectionto the proposed application, subject tothe following
condition:
1)That prior to final approval, the owner/applicant submit the Regional consent
review fee of $350.00 per new lot created.
Document Number: 3846480
________________
B2021-054
74 Rutherford Drive
Mirjana and Pero Perencevic / Boban Jokanovic(Agent)
The owner/applicant is proposing to sever the lot into two parcels.
Regional Fee:
The owner/applicant is required to submit the Regional consent review fee of $350.00
prior to final approval of the consent.
Airport Zoning (Advisory Comments):
There are no airport specific concerns for the above application. However, the
applicants must be advised that the subject lands are located within airport zoning
regulated area and specifically under the runway take-off approach surface. Therefore,
the lands and the proposed development are subject to all provisions and restrictions of
Airport Zoning regulations and Nav Canada.
For further information in this regard please contact:
Kevin B. Campbell, Project Manager, Airport Construction and Development
519.648.2256 ext. 8511 Email: KCampbell@regionofwaterloo.ca
The Region has no objectionto the proposed application, subject to the following
condition:
1)That prior to final approval, the owner/applicant submit the Regional consent
review fee of $350.00 per new lot created.
_____________
B2021-055
134 Woolwich Street
James and Sue Roberts / A. Sinclair and K. Wills (MHBC)
2
The owner/applicant is proposing to sever a 2,820marea from 134 Woolwich Street
and add the severed portion to 124 Woolwich Street.
Environmental Noise(Advisory Comments):
Regional Corridor Planning staff note that any future development on the lands to be
severed requiring a zone change or plan of condominium will be required to undertake
an environmental noise study to assess potential transportation related noise from the
municipal street system in the vicinity of the subject lands. The owners/applicants are
responsible to ensure that any future development does not have any environmental
noise impacts. Regional Staff may offer a more detailed evaluation and/or alternative
Document Number: 3846480
optionsonce more detailed development plans are availableshould future development
on the severed lands be considered.
The Region has no objectionto the proposed application.
General Comments
Any future development on the lands subject to the above-noted consent application will
be subject to the provisions of Regional Development Charge By-law 19-037 or any
successor thereof. Please accept this letter as our request for a copy of the staff reports,
decisions and minutes pertaining to each of the consent applications noted above. Should
you require Regional Staff to be in attendance at the meeting or have any questions,
please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned.
Yours truly,
Peter Ellis, MES
Principal Planner
Document Number: 3846480
October 07, 2021
Kristen Hilborn
City of KitchenerFile No.: D20-20/
200 King Street WestVAR KIT GEN
P.O. Box 1118
Kitchener, ONN2G 4G7(5)VAR KIT/ 388 TO 400 KING STREET EAST
MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT
(8)/VAR KIT,133 WELLINGTON STREET NORTH
1001235 ONTARIO LIMITED
(10,11) /VAR KIT, 75 79 LOUISA STREET
RANDALL MASYK
(14) /VAR KIT 134 WOOLWICH STREET 124
WOOLWICH STREET JAMES & SUE ROBERTS
(15)/52, 300 BRIDGE STREET EAST COLDPOINT
HOLDINGS
Dear Ms. Hilborn:
Re:Committee of Adjustment Applications Meeting October 19,2021, City of
Kitchener
Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and
have following comments:
1)A 2021-10525 Courtland Avenue EastNo concerns to the application
provided the parking spots/vehicles are located within the private property.
Imagery shows that currently the vehicles are being parked just abuttingthe
sidewalk. The staff notethat this property abutsa high traffic Regional road,and
isin close proximity of a high volume Regional road intersection. Therefore, it is
strongly re
manoeuvers safely without impacting the road traffic. Also,the owners must be
advised that a dedicated widening of 4.0m approximatelywouldbe required on
5ƚĭǒƒĻƓƷ bǒƒĬĻƩʹ ЌБЍЍЌЉВ
tğŭĻ Њ ƚŅ Ќ
any future development application(s)e.g. Site Plan, Consent. At such times in
future, the parking spots would be impacted accordingly.
2)A 2021-10637 Highland Road WestThe applicant is proposing an additional
house at the back of the property. There are no concerns to this application.
However, the owners are advised that a dedicated widening of 4.0m
approximately would be required on any future development application(s) e.g.
Site Plan, Consent.
3)A 2021-10726-28 Ellen Street WestNo concerns.
4)A 2021-108102 Fenwick CourtNo Concerns.
5)A 2021-109388 King Street EastNo Concerns.
6)A 2021-110125 Seabrook DriveNo Concernsto the application. However,
staff note that an education institution is considered as anoise sensitive land use
and may have impacts from theenvironmental noise sources in the vicinity.
7)A 2021-11152 Anvil StreetNo Concerns.
8)A 2021-112135 Wellington StreetNorth No Concerns.
9)A 2021-1131421 Victoria Street NorthNo Concerns.
10)A 2021-114 75 Louisa StreetNo Concerns.
11)A 2021-11579 Louisa StreetNo Concerns.
12)A 2021-11674 Rutherford Drive (Retained)No Concerns.
13)A 2021-117 74 Rutherford Drive (Severed) No Concerns.
14)A 2021-118 134 Woolwich Street No Concerns.
15)A 2021-119 300 Bridge Street East 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
2
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
3
October 8, 2021
Sarah Goldrup Via email only
City of Kitchener
200 King Street West
Kitchener, ON, N2G 4G7
Dear Ms. Goldrup,
Re:October 19,2021Committee of Adjustment Meeting
______________________________________________________________________
Applications for Minor Variance
A 2021-10525 Courtland Avenue EastA 2021-11152 Anvil Street
A 2021-10637 Highland Road WestA 2021-112135 Wellington Street North
A 2021-10726-28 Ellen Street WestA 2021-11475 Louisa Street
A 2021-108102 Fenwick CourtA 2021-11579 Louisa Street
A 2021-109388 King Street EastA 2021-11674 Rutherford Drive
A 2021-110125 Seabrook DriveA2021-11774 Rutherford Drive
Application for Consent
B 2021-04451 Nelson AvenueB 2021-050441 East Avenue
B 2021-04535 Coral Crescent B 2021-051945 Victoria StreetNorth
B 2021-04674 Admiral RoadB 2021-052961 Victoria StreetNorth
B 2021-04781 Fifth AvenueB 2021-05375 & 79 Louisa Street
B 2021-048441 East AvenueB 2021-05474 Rutherford Drive
B 2021-049441 East Avenue
The above-noted applications are located outside the Grand River Conservation Authority
areasof 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.