Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCA Agenda - 2023-07-181 KiTc�ivER Committee of Adjustment Agenda Tuesday, July 18, 2023, 10:00 a.m. -12:00 p.m. Council Chambers City of Kitchener 200 King Street W, Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 (Pursuant to the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13, as amended, and Ontario Regulations 197/96 and 200/96, as amended) TAKE NOTICE THAT the Committee of Adjustment for the City of Kitchener will meet in Council Chambers, 2nd Floor, Kitchener City Hall, 200 King Street West, on TUESDAY, JULY 18, 2023, commencing at 10:00 a.m. for the purpose of hearing the following applications for Minor Variance and/or Consent. Applicants or Agents must attend in support of the application. This is a public meeting, anyone having an interest in any of these applications may make oral submission at the meeting or provide a written submission for Committee consideration. Please note this is a public meeting and will be livestreamed and archived at www.kitchener.ca/watchnow The complete agenda, including staff reports will be available online the Friday prior to the week of the meeting date. Pages 1. COMMENCEMENT 2. MINUTES 3. DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST AND THE GENERAL NATURE THEREOF Members of Council and members of the City's local boards/committees are required to file a written statement when they have a conflict of interest. If a conflict is declared please visit www.kitchener.ca/conflict to submit your written form. 4. APPLICATIONS FOR MINOR VARIANCE AND/ OR CONSENT PURSUANT TO THE PLANNING ACT 5. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 5.1 A 2023-068 - 35 Maywood Road, DSD -2023-278, DSD -2023-318 6 Requesting a minor variance to the Zoning By-law to permit an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) to be 62% of the building floor area of the principal dwelling rather than the permitted 50% or 80 sq.m, whichever is the less, to facilitate the conversion of an existing detached garage having an area of 61 sq. m, into an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Detached) in the rear yard of the property. 5.2 A 2023-043 — 300 Countrystone Crescent, DSD -2023-149, DSD -2023- 22 319 Requesting a minor variance to the Zoning By-law to permit the construction of an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Detached) in the rear yard of an existing detaching dwelling on a lot having an area of 383.6sq.m rather than the required 395sq.m, a lot width of 10.9m rather than the required 13.1 m; and, to permit 2 parking spaces rather than the required 3 parking spaces. 6. NEW BUSINESS 6.1 A 2023-076 - 912 Otterbein Court, DSD -2023-310 41 Requesting a minor variance to the Zoning By-law to permit a rear yard setback of 3.Om rather than the required 7.5m, to facilitate the construction of an attached, covered, unenclosed roof structure in the rear yard of an existing single detached dwelling. 6.2 A 2023-077 - 176 Indian Road, DSD -2023-306 52 Requesting a minor variance to the Zoning By-law to permit a rear yard setback of 3.81m rather than the required 7.5m, to facilitate the conversion of a single detached dwelling with one Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Attached) into a single detached dwelling with two Additional Dwelling Units (ADU) (Attached). 6.3 A 2023-078 - 35 Fifth Avenue, DSD -2023-313 64 Requesting a minor variance to the Zoning By-law to permit a lot width of 12.Om rather than the required 13.1m, and, to permit a garage width of 6.5m rather than the permitted 4.9m, to facilitate the conversion of a single detached dwelling into a single detached dwelling with two Additional Dwelling Units (ADUs) (Attached). 6.4 A 2023-079 - 55 Rockcliffe Drive, DSD -2023-304 75 Requesting a minor variance to the Zoning By-law to permit an external unit to have a lot width of 7.5m rather than the required 9.5m; and, an easterly side yard setback of 1.25m rather than the required 2.5m, to facilitate the construction of an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Attached) within an existing street townhouse dwelling. Page 2 of 230 6.5 A 2023-080 - 15 Dellroy Avenue, DSD -2023-314 86 Requesting a minor variance to the Zoning By-law to facilitate the construction an 18 -storey mixed-use building with residential and commercial uses having a front yard setback of 1.0m rather than the required 3.0m, a northerly side yard setback of O.Om for covered bike parking rather than the required 4.5m; to permit 0.6 parking spaces per dwelling unit rather than the required 1 parking space per dwelling unit, and 0.08 visitor parking spaces per dwelling unit rather than the required 0.10 visitor parking spaces per dwelling unit; to permit support columns to encroach into the Driveway Visibility Triangles (DVT) abutting Weber Street East, whereas the By-law does not permit encroachments into the DVT; to permit the second floor of the proposed building to encroach into a DVT whereas the Zoning By-law does not permit obstructions within a DVT, except for objects 0.9m or less in height from the ground or objects higher than 5.Om in height from the ground; and, to permit parking spaces and drive aisles to be located on the ground floor of a multiple dwelling building not entirely behind the area on the ground floor devoted to permitted uses abutting a street line facade whereas the Zoning By- law requires that all parking spaces and drive aisles on the ground floor of a multiple dwelling building be located entirely behind the area on the ground floor devoted to permitted uses abutting a street line facade. 6.6 A 2023-081 - 333 Pine Valley Drive, DSD -2023-301 97 Requesting a minor variance to the Zoning By-law to permit an accessory structure to have a height of 4.5m to the underside of the fascia rather than the maximum permitted 3.0m, to facilitate the construction of a cabana structure in the rear of the property. 6.7 A 2023-082 - 685 Frederick Street, DSD -2023-311 106 Requesting a minor variance to the Zoning By-law to permit an easterly side yard setback of 1.0m rather than the required 1.2m, to facilitate the construction of an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Detached) in the rear yard of the property. 6.8 A 2023-083 - 15 Kenora Drive, DSD -2023-308 115 Requesting a minor variance to the Zoning By-law to permit a required parking space to be located 2.6m from the street (property) line rather than the required 6.0m, to facilitate the conversion of an attached garage into a living space; and, to permit an existing accessory structure (a shed) in the exterior side yard, whereas the Zoning By-law does not permit accessory structures in the exterior side yard. Page 3 of 230 6.9 A 2023-084 - 151 Frederick Street, DSD -2023-292 125 Requesting a minor variance to Zoning By-law 85-1 to permit a restaurant patio to be located in the side yard abutting Irvine Street having a 22.Om setback from a 'Residentially Zoned' property rather than the minimum required 30.0m. 6.10 A 2023-085 - 920 Keewatin Place, DSD -2023-307 134 Requesting a minor variance to the Zoning By-law to permit an accessory structure (Garden Arbour) to be located within the front yard whereas the Zoning By-law does not permit accessory structures in the front yard. 6.11 A 2023-086 - 59 Graber Place, DSD -2023-302 182 Requesting a minor variance to the Zoning By-law to permit an accessory outdoor storage for 'utility' use in a yard abutting a residential zone, whereas the Zoning By-law does not permit accessory outdoor storage for'utility' use in a yard abutting a residential zone. 6.12 B 2023-025 - 97 Second Avenue, DSD -2023-298 193 Requesting consent to sever a parcel of land having a width of 9.4m, a depth of 40.Om and an area of 377sq.m. The retained land will have a width of 13.1m, a depth of 40.Om and an area of 525sq.m. The severed land is proposed for a single detached dwelling, while the retained land will contain the existing single detached dwelling. 6.13 B 2023-026 & A 2023-087 - 30-40 Margaret Avenue, DSD -2023-312 209 Requesting consent to sever a parcel of land identified as Part 2 on Reference Plan 58R-17705, having a width of 1.8m, a depth of 57.5m, and an area of 103.5sq.m, to be conveyed as a lot addition to the adjacent properties municipally addressed as 12 Margaret Avenue and 116 Queen Street North, in order for the entirety of an existing shared access lane to be under the ownership of the Church of the Good Shepherd. A minor variance to Zoning By-law 85-1 is also requested, to permit access steps with a height of 1.2m within 3.Om of a street line, whereas the Zoning By-law only permits steps with a maximum height of 0.6m within 3.Om of a street line; to permit 1.1 parking spaces per dwelling unit rather than the required 1.25 parking spaces per dwelling unit; to permit 12.9% of the total required parking to be designated for visitor use rather than the minimum required 20%; and, to permit an easterly side yard setback of 3.6m rather than the required 6.0m; and, to permit a front yard setback of 3.47m rather than the required 4.5m, to facilitate the construction of 47 dwelling units having 23 rear lane access townhouses facing Margaret Avenue, and 24 townhouse units facing an internal private lane, in accordance with Site Plan Application SP22/187/M/AP. 7. ADJOURNMENT Page 4 of 230 8. PLANNING ACT INFORMATION • Additional information is available at the Legislated Services Department, 2nd Floor, City Hall, 200 King Street West, Kitchener (519- 741-2203). Copies of written submissions/public agencies' comments are available the Friday afternoon prior to the meeting on the City of Kitchener website www.kitchener.ca in the online Council and Committee calendar; see the meeting date for more details. Anyone having an interest in any of these applications may attend this meeting. Only the Applicant, Minister, specified person (as defined in Section 1 of the Planning Act) or public body that has an interest in the matter has the right to appeal of decisions of the Committee of Adjustment. These parties must make written submissions to the Committee prior to the Committee granting or refusing Provisional Consent otherwise, the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT) may dismiss the appeal. Any personal information received in relation to this meeting is collected under the authority s. 28(2) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, and will be used by the City of Kitchener to process Committee of Adjustment applications. Questions about the collection of information should be directed to Marilyn Mills at marilyn.mills(a)kitchener.ca. If you wish to be notified of a decision, you must make a written request to the Secretary -Treasurer, Committee of Adjustment, City Hall, 200 King St. W., Kitchener ON, N2G 4G7. The Notice of Hearing for this meeting was published in the Record on the 30th day of June, 2023. Marilyn Mills Secretary -Treasurer Committee of Adjustment Page 5 of 230 Staff Report Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: July 18, 2023 SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Interim Manager, Development Review, 519- 741-2200 ext. 7765 PREPARED BY: Tina, Malone -Wright, Interim Manager, Development Review, 519- 741-2200 ext. 7765 WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 3 DATE OF REPORT: July 11, 2023 REPORT NO.: DSD -2023-318 SUBJECT: Update Report Minor Variance Application A2023-068 — 35 Maywood Road RECOMMENDATION: That Minor Variance Application A2023-068 for 35 Maywood Road requesting relief from Section 4.12.3 g) of Zoning By-law 2019-051, to permit an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Detached) to be 62% of the building floor area of the principal dwelling instead of the maximum permitted 50% to facilitate the conversion of an existing detached garage, 61 square metres in area, into a detached Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) in the rear yard of the subject property, generally in accordance with drawings prepared by Green Target Engineering, dated January 25, 2023, BE APPROVED REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: The purpose of the Minor Variance Application is to permit the conversion of an existing detached garage into an ADU (Detached). The conversion to an ADU (Detached) is proposed for the entirety of the garage. The building floor area of the principal dwelling (excluding the basement) is 100.06 square metres, and the building floor area of the proposed ADU (existing garage) is 61.04 square metres. Zoning by-law 2019-051 Section 4.12.3 g) states that the building floor area for a ADU (detached) shall not exceed 50% of the building floor area of the principal dwelling, or 80 square metres, whichever is the less. Accordingly, a minor variance is requested to permit the proposed ADU to be 62% and 61 square metres of the building floor area of the principal dwelling instead of the maximum permitted building floor area indicated in Section 4.12.3 g). BACKGROUND: Minor Variance A2023-068 was deferred from June 20, 2023 Committee of Adjustment Agenda for the following reasons: • There were concerns that the principal dwelling on the subject property was being used as a 'Lodging House,' which use does not permit an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Detached). • The Committee requested that the applicant submit internal plans to assist the Committee's consideration of privacy concerns outlined in a written submission. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 6 of 230 REPORT: Planning Comments: HY1 PROPERTY LINEN 39'2930'E 125.59' Figure 1 — Site Plan In response to the reasons for Deferral, Planning Staff offer the following comments: 1. Use of Principal Dwelling for a Lodging House City staff inspected the principal dwelling on Thursday, June 22, 2023. The Upper Unit has 4 tenants living in 2 bedrooms with 2 beds in each bedroom. The Lower Unit has 3 tenants and 2 bedrooms with 2 beds in one room and 1 bed in the other room. There is one (1) lease for the Upper Unit and there is one (1) lease for the lower unit. By-law Enforcement Staff found no evidence of a Lodging House. 2. Internal Plans and Privacy Concerns The Committee received a written submission indicating privacy concerns and asked that the Applicant provide internal plans to assist in the Committee's consideration of the application. "If the applicant is able to get approval for the additional 11 % of space it is going to directly affect our privacy and sightlines even more than the allotted 50%." The Applicant discussed the Deferral with Planning Staff after the meeting and advised that they do not have internal plans yet as they were waiting to obtain the Committee's approval before incurring additional expense. The proposal is to utilize the entirety of the existing detached garage for the Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Detached) in accordance with Ontario Building Code. The following should be noted: • The conversion involves an existing detached garage (existing accessory structure). The conversion will be done in accordance with Ontario Building Code which will regulate unprotected openings adjacent to lot lines. • The proposed Detached ADU will meet the following: a) The maximum permitted building height for an ADU without alterations to the existing detached structure. Page 7 of 230 15.2 [4.911 _ f PRCPf RTY DNf N6?367p F i3s S: PROPO5EQAQU_,--�`,.� ' 1 PISTING y f PARKING] k_ PARKING2 �`` pph'ENS1 'I EXISTING GARAGE WALL BE CONVERTED TO ASPHALT DRIVEJJAY L ----, �r y ® ADDITIONAL DWELIJNG LIMIT (DETACHED) - �' I" a - �3. •.- ,_ - - _ 3T.T08'3I1997.r5,5d] U-� +.97 EXISTING MAIN HOUSE \� 'ASPHALT PRGRCSED U DRIVEWAY i `_ .... N y PLAN 849 ,.,9 .- �. k Is3 5 o +s, p — g{ EXISTING LOT 147 15.07 o_ 35 MAYWOOD ROAD KITCHENER. ON I I. 'r — y .0 119 119 99mP,kD "O 8551 N - 'PRbPOSED HAD➢ Sl1RFACE WALKWAY PROPERTY LINEN 39'2930'E 125.59' Figure 1 — Site Plan In response to the reasons for Deferral, Planning Staff offer the following comments: 1. Use of Principal Dwelling for a Lodging House City staff inspected the principal dwelling on Thursday, June 22, 2023. The Upper Unit has 4 tenants living in 2 bedrooms with 2 beds in each bedroom. The Lower Unit has 3 tenants and 2 bedrooms with 2 beds in one room and 1 bed in the other room. There is one (1) lease for the Upper Unit and there is one (1) lease for the lower unit. By-law Enforcement Staff found no evidence of a Lodging House. 2. Internal Plans and Privacy Concerns The Committee received a written submission indicating privacy concerns and asked that the Applicant provide internal plans to assist in the Committee's consideration of the application. "If the applicant is able to get approval for the additional 11 % of space it is going to directly affect our privacy and sightlines even more than the allotted 50%." The Applicant discussed the Deferral with Planning Staff after the meeting and advised that they do not have internal plans yet as they were waiting to obtain the Committee's approval before incurring additional expense. The proposal is to utilize the entirety of the existing detached garage for the Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Detached) in accordance with Ontario Building Code. The following should be noted: • The conversion involves an existing detached garage (existing accessory structure). The conversion will be done in accordance with Ontario Building Code which will regulate unprotected openings adjacent to lot lines. • The proposed Detached ADU will meet the following: a) The maximum permitted building height for an ADU without alterations to the existing detached structure. Page 7 of 230 b) The minimum required setbacks for a Detached ADU. The rear yard and left side yard setbacks of the existing garage exceed the 0.6 metre minimum requirement stated in Section 4.12.3 j), as the setbacks are 3.9 metres and 0.69 metres, respectively. No minor variance is being requested. c) The size of the existing detached garage is 61 square metres which meets the maximum size of a Detached ADU of 80 square metres. A minor variance is required as the proposed Detached ADU will exceed the size relative to the principal dwelling. The intent of this regulation is to ensure that the Detached ADU is secondary and accessory to the principal dwelling. Staff is of the opinion that this minor variance meets the 4 tests of the Planning Act as discussed in Staff Report DSD -2023-278. The Applicant's are proposing to utilize an existing detached garage, which will meet the maximum building height, minimum setbacks for Detached ADUs, and under the maximum size of 80 square metres for a Detached ADU. Planning Staff are satisfied that the Minor Variance to permit an existing detached garage to be converted to a Detached ADU, being 62% of the Principal Dwelling instead of the maximum 50%, will not impact sightlines and increase privacy concerns. PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: • Planning Act • Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2020) • A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 • Regional Official Plan • Official Plan (2014) • Zoning By-law 2019-051 • DSD -2023-278 Page 8 of 230 Staff Report r NJ :R Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: June 20, 2023 SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Interim Manager, Development Review 519-741-2200 ext. 7765 PREPARED BY: Raida, Chowdhury, Student Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7078 WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 3 DATE OF REPORT: June 7, 2023 REPORT NO.: DSD -2023-278 SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2023-068 — 35 Maywood Road RECOMMENDATION: That Minor Variance Application A2023-068 for 35 Maywood Road requesting relief from Section 4.12.3 g) of Zoning By-law 2019-051, to permit an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Detached) to be 62% of the building floor area of the principal dwelling instead of the maximum permitted 50% to facilitate the conversion of an existing detached garage, 61 square metres in area, into a detached Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) in the rear yard of the subject property, generally in accordance with drawings prepared by Green Target Engineering, dated January 25, 2023, BE APPROVED. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to review a minor variance to permit the conversion of an existing detached garage into a detached ADU. • The key finding of this report is that the minor variance meets the four tests of the Planning Act. • There are no financial implications. • Community engagement included a notice sign being placed on the property advising that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received, notice of the application was mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property and this report was posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Committee of Adjustment meeting. • This report supports the delivery of core services. BACKGROUND: The subject property is located south of the intersection between Maywood Road and Gerard Avenue. It is a rectangular lot with a single detached residential property that contains two dwellings and a detached garage located in the rear yard of the property. The subject property is identified as `Community Areas' on Map 2 — Urban Structure and is designated `Low Rise Residential' on Map 3 — Land Use in the City's 2014 Official Plan. The property is zoned `Low Rise Residential Two Zone (RES -2)' in Zoning By-law 2019-051. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 9 of 230 The purpose of the application is to review a minor variance to permit the conversion of an existing detached garage into an ADU (Detached). The conversion to an ADU (Detached) is proposed for the entirety of the garage. The building floor area of the principal dwelling (excluding the basement) is 100.06 square metres, and the building floor area of the proposed ADU (existing garage) is 61.04 square metres. Zoning by-law 2019-051 Section 4.12.3 g) states that the building floor area for a ADU (detached) shall not exceed 50% of the building floor area of the principal dwelling, or 80 square meters, whichever is the less. Accordingly, a minor variance is requested to permit the proposed ADU to be 62% and 61 square metres of the building floor area of the principal dwelling instead of the maximum permitted building floor area indicated in Section 4.12.3 g). The rear yard and left side yard setbacks of the existing garage exceed the 0.6 metre minimum requirement stated in Zoning by-law 2019-051 Section 4.12.3 j), as the setbacks are 3.90 metres and 0.69 metres, respectively. The proposed asphalt walkway meets the minimum width of 1.1 metres stated in Zoning by-law 2019-051 Section 4.12.3 n). Figure 1 — Ariel Photo of Subject Property Page 10 of 230 11noi E55 sl H �. � —• � � �Hw�Nrr uAr x�zasve r R ICLCN NC R[9LARCNCHI _ auto-L�('xu rYAF & N�1F:WKxYGY LVLL OEP 4E 9Rffd6TENE uLACfE39MYS1RJCTLNq {81.MAI T9THv9A WT89N ilEPR9PPRN iwma Figure 2 — Site Plan Staff visited the subject property on June 2, 2023. — q EAST.=IPE HY¶RRR �f o f5gJE4Fw Arai %Ext 2A, m1,a 110 CE9�lI1tW WlE 1DIIT5137 � Fn.ax na .creulrnxr /.1G REEN TARGET ENGINEERING Gxr. -M;c CNCiv[CRrv9�ti LHf 19:8 ti p.RRl0.B9AL'-Ax' T9PCxr9.Cx wx�L _ - iFL N:aNM31�ee'aroriw �91ER PROPOSED SECOND DWELLING UNIT AT M MAY'NOOD ROAD KITCHEN€R. Ou 5 TE F -AN Al _{uF:AtlP :0.1E:NM fS f]IQ] Figure 3 — Existing Detached Garage Photo from Site Visit Page 11 of 230 PPrrP F IFIkIIDINTICNI + it - 111u EXISTING AUdN HGDSE RAN 699 c LOT 167 — NITCCCNENER. ON� 11noi E55 sl H �. � —• � � �Hw�Nrr uAr x�zasve r R ICLCN NC R[9LARCNCHI _ auto-L�('xu rYAF & N�1F:WKxYGY LVLL OEP 4E 9Rffd6TENE uLACfE39MYS1RJCTLNq {81.MAI T9THv9A WT89N ilEPR9PPRN iwma Figure 2 — Site Plan Staff visited the subject property on June 2, 2023. — q EAST.=IPE HY¶RRR �f o f5gJE4Fw Arai %Ext 2A, m1,a 110 CE9�lI1tW WlE 1DIIT5137 � Fn.ax na .creulrnxr /.1G REEN TARGET ENGINEERING Gxr. -M;c CNCiv[CRrv9�ti LHf 19:8 ti p.RRl0.B9AL'-Ax' T9PCxr9.Cx wx�L _ - iFL N:aNM31�ee'aroriw �91ER PROPOSED SECOND DWELLING UNIT AT M MAY'NOOD ROAD KITCHEN€R. Ou 5 TE F -AN Al _{uF:AtlP :0.1E:NM fS f]IQ] Figure 3 — Existing Detached Garage Photo from Site Visit Page 11 of 230 Figure 4 — Front View Photo from Site Visit REPORT: Planning Comments: In considering the four tests for the 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 subject property is designated `Low Rise Residential' on Map 3 — Land Use. This designation places emphasis on compatibility of building form with respect to massing, scale and design in order to support the successful integration of different housing types. It also places emphasis on the relationship of housing to adjacent buildings, streets and exterior areas. The proposed use of the property conforms to the designation, and it is the opinion of staff the requested variance to be able to convert an existing garage to a detached ADU meets the general intent of the Official Plan. General Intent of the Zoning By-law The intent of the maximum building floor area requirement is to ensure that the detached ADU is subordinate to the principal dwelling, with respect to scale. The detached garage is 2.88 metres in height, and the principal dwelling is 5.03 metres in height. The building floor area of the proposed ADU is 61.04 square metres, and the building floor area of the principal dwelling is 100.06 square metres. Given the size of the detached garage and that it is smaller relative to the principal dwelling, staff is of the opinion that the requested variance meets the general intent of the Zoning By-law. Page 12 of 230 Is/Are the Effects of the Variance(s) Minor? The variance can be considered minor as the conversion to a detached ADU is proposed for an existing detached garage, and there are no new structures proposed. It is the opinion of the staff that as several of the existing setbacks exceed the minimum requirements, the effects of the proposed ADU on surrounding properties is minimal. The difference between the proposed ADU building floor area and the maximum requirement is 12%, while the total building floor area (61.04 square metres) is smaller than the maximum of 80 square metres. Is/Are the Variance(s) Desirable For The Appropriate Development or Use of the Land. Building and/or Structure? The variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land. The requested variance should not impact any of the adjacent properties or the surrounding neighbourhood as there are no new structures proposed. The scale of the proposed ADU will not negatively impact the existing character of the subject property or surrounding neighbourhood and will support a gentle intensification of housing by facilitating the construction of an ADU on the subject property containing a dwelling unit. Environmental Planning Comments: Environmental Planning has no natural heritage concerns or tree management concerns. Heritage Planning Comments: Heritage Planning has no concerns. Building Division Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance provided building permit to convert the garage structure into an ADU unit is obtained prior to construction. Please contact the Building Division at building(a)kitchener.ca with any questions. Engineering Division Comments: Engineering Division has no concerns. Parks/Operations Division Comments: Parkland Dedication is not required for the proposed Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU). There are two existing City-owned street trees that will be impacted by the proposed driveway widening associated with the development and these trees should be protected to City standards throughout construction as per Chapter 690 of the current Property Maintenance By-law. Suitable arrangements including the submission and approval of a Tree Protection and Enhancement Plan showing full protection for existing trees; an ISA valuation of City-owned trees and any required securities or compensation for removed trees will be required to the satisfaction of Parks and Cemeteries prior to the issuance of a Building Permit or curb cut permit. Please see Urban Design Manual Part C, Section 13 and www.kitchener.ca/treemanagement. Transportation Planning Comments: Transportation Planning has no concerns. Infrastructure Services Comments: A curb cut permit would not be approved for any driveway widening of the City apron because of impacts to the tree root zone. GRCA Comments: The GRCA has no concerns. Region of Waterloo Comments: The Region of Waterloo has no concerns. Page 13 of 230 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: • Planning Act • Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2020) • A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 • Regional Official Plan • Official Plan (2014) • Zoning By-law 2019-051 Page 14 of 230 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, 2023 /_1IROTi1Wer City of Kitchener File No.: D20-20/ 200 King Street West VAR KIT GEN P.O. Box 1118 (1) 56 BLEAMS, 232 BLEAMS ROAD BICORP Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 DESIGN AKA 1813124 ONTARIO INC (2) VAR KIT, 35 BELMONT AVENUE EAST AZZA MADAN I (5) 58 KIT, BLEAMS ROCKWOOD ERINBROOK ACTIVA GROUP (8) 58 KIT, 30T-07205 SCHLEGEL URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION Subject: Committee of Adjustment Meeting May 16, 2023 City of Kitchener Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have following comments: 1) A 2023 - 063 — 232 Bleams Road — No Concerns. 2) A 2023 - 064 — 35 Belmont Avenue West — No Concerns. 3) A 2023 - 065 — 26 Siebert Avenue — No Concerns. 4) A 2023 - 066 — 82 South Drive — No Concerns. 5) A 2023 — 067 — 1198 Fischer -Hallman Road — No Concerns. 6) A 2023 - 068 — 35 Maywood Road — No Concerns. 7) A 2023 - 069 — 213 Mill Street — No Concerns. 8) A 2023 - 070 — 1950 Fischer -Hallman Road — No Concerns. 9) A 2023 - 071 — 228 Connaught Street (Retained) — No Concerns. 10) A 2023 - 072 — 228 Connaught Street (Severed) — No Concerns. Document Number: 4398774 Page 1 of 2 Page 15 of 230 11) A 2023 — 073 to 075 — 180 Zeller Drive — No Concerns. Please be advised that any development on the subject lands is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 19-037 or any successor thereof and may require 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. If a site is subject to more than one application, additional comments may apply. Please forward any decisions on the above mentioned Application numbers to the undersigned. Yours Truly, Joginder Bhatia Transportation Planner C (226) 753-0368 CC: Marilyn Mills, City of Kitchener CofA(a)Kitchener. ca 2 Page 16 of 230 June 2, 2023 Administration Centre: 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Cambridge, ON N1 R 5W6 Phone: 519-621-2761 Toll free: 1-866-900-4722 Fax: 519-621-4844 www.grandriver.ca Marilyn Mills Secretary -Treasurer Committee of Adjustment City of Kitchener 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON, N2G 4G7 Dear Marilyn Mills, Re: Committee of Adjustment Meeting — June 20, 2023 Applications for Minor Variance A 2023-057 84 Maple Hill Drive A 2023-063 232 Bleams Road A 2023-064 35 Belmont Avenue West A 2023-065 26 Siebert Avenue A 2023-066 82 South Drive A 2023-067 1198 Fischer Hallman Road A 2023-068 35 Maywood Road Applications for Consent B 2023-021 46 Second Avenue B 2023-022 228 Connaught Street B 2023-023 to B 2023-024 180 Zeller Drive via email A 2023-069 213 Mill Street A 2023-070 1950 Fischer Hallman Road A 2023-071 228 Connaught Street A 2023-072 228 Connaught Street A 2023-073 to A 2023-075 180 Zeller Drive Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff has reviewed the above -noted applications. GRCA has no objection to the approval of the above applications. The subject properties do not contain any natural hazards such as watercourses, floodplains, shorelines, wetlands, or valley slopes. The properties are not subject to Ontario Regulation 150/06 and, therefore, a permission from GRCA is not required. Should you have any questions, please contact me at aherremana-grand river. ca or 519- 621-2763 ext. 2228. Sincerely, Andrew Herreman, CPT Resource Planning Technician Grand River Conservation Authority Member of Conservation Ontario, representing Ontario's 36 Conservation Authorities I The Grand — A Canadian Heritage River Page 17 of 230 From: To: Committee of Adiustment (SM) Subject: Committee of Adjustment Meeting - June 20, 2023 - 35 Maywood Rd Date: Monday, June 19, 2023 11:46:57 AM Good morning, I received a notification of an ADU application from a neighboring property at 35 Maywood Rd. The variance is for allowing the owner to build an ADU out of his garage that exceeds the 50% maximum ADU size. My concerns (and many other neighbors' concerns) are that this property is not being utilized by the owner. It is being rented to 8-10 individuals, at times even more. The neighborhood is not zoned for a rooming house, nor does this lifestyle fit into the framework of the area. Watching tenants walk up to the house at all hours with suitcases as if they are hostel guests. They are standing in the driveway into the middle of the night on their phones without concern for the neighbors because there is no privacy in the home due to the large number of people living there. One tenant even mentioned that he sleeps in the furnace room. There are often times shopping carts left on the boulevard/driveway, garbage bags out scattered on the driveway, snow not being shoveled in the winter, very rare lawn maintenance. There is no pride of ownership as is evident by almost every other residence in the neighborhood. The reason being, there is no owner present. It is a rooming house with no care for the neighbors. If the landlord were to rent the house to a family, and some care was put into the property, there would be less concern by the neighbors. If this ADU passes, we are all very concerned that there will be 12 or more single individuals living at that property. That is unacceptable. have zero faith that the owner of this property will use this house for anything less than a hostel for college students. While this group may be quiet this month, who's to say that the next month's group won't cause more issues in the area. At the very least, this owner should be afforded no leniency on the ADU requirements and forced to minimize the footprint of the garage to the permitted area of 50% of the house size. This is a family neighborhood, young and old, from multiple countries and backgrounds. Not a neighborhood for a hostel with 10 college guys living in it. Regards, Garrett Weinhardt Page 18 of 230 Page 19 of 230 From: To: Committee of Adiustment (SM) Subject: Re: Application No. A 2023-068 - 35 Maywood Rd Date: Monday, June 19, 2023 3:08:43 PM Apologies my message was sent prematurely. Please see the email below for conclusion. Good afternoon, As per the subject line I am writing in regards to application A 2023-068. I reside al and so am the direct neighbour with the lot in question, and the proposed ADU is adjacent to our backyard. I have a number of concerns as not only the direct neighbour but a member of our neighbourhood. My first concern is that the landlord at 35 Maywood Rd is not adhering to the laws regarding rental properties, specifically in our zoning area (identified as R-2 in the posted Staff Report on page 1 under Background). Bylaw 2019-051 Table 7-1 shows that in our area Lodging Houses are not permitted. It is my understanding that a lodging house contains 4+ people per unit who share a kitchen/bathroom. 35 Maywood Rd contains two rental units and I have confirmed with tenants that 7 people reside upstairs. I believe 3-5 people reside in the basement unit. This is not only against bylaw regulations (especially considering a license is needing for lodging houses) but is also a large safety concern with regards to fire safety etc. While this is not an issue for the Commitee of Adjustment directly (it will be a separate thing we take up with Bylaw), I do believe that this information is important background. It is my concern that the property management will get worse not better with an additional rental unit, and thus I do not believe that there should be any leniency with the bylaw. I believe that if the variance is permitted the landlord will use the additional space to fit as many people as possible into the new unit - the additional 118 square feet could add another bedroom to an already extremely overcrowded lot. My other concern is with regards to the justification for the size of the building. I understand that the current garage is 61% of the main dwelling and so the applicant is asking for an exception to build an ADU slightly bigger than the allotted 50% in the bylaw. In the report made by the city there were no concerns with regards to the variance and it was stated that it would not affect adjacent properties or the neighbourhood. However, in the section General Intent of the Zoning Bylaw, for explanation it states that the garage is 2.88 metres high and the main dwelling is 5.03 metres high. Yes the garage is just over half the height of the house, however this does not take into consideration any future building plans. If this variance is approved and the landlord builds up, then the argument that the garage is much smaller than the house in height and square footage does not hold. It also directly affects my family as the proposed ADU is approximately 2 feet from our fence line. It overlooks our backyard and particularly our children's play structure. If the applicant is able to get approval for the additional 11% of space it is going to directly affect our privacy and sightlines even more than the allotted 50%. I understand that from the perspective of the city, Councillors, and Committee of Adjustment members this minor variance is just that, something that is small and will not have much of an Page 20 of 230 effect of the surrounding neighbourhood. And I would wholeheartedly agree if the applicant had been managing the property well from the beginning with respect to the neighbourhood. But unfortunately, that has not been the case. It is my wish as an adjacent neighbour to the property that this application not be approved, as I don't believe an exception has been earned and I have many concerns about this project moving forward. Thank you for your time, Christine Olah Page 21 of 230 Staff Report Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: July 18, 2023 SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Interim Manager, Development Review 519-741-2200 ext. 7765 PREPARED BY: Arwa Alzoor, Planning Technician, Site Development, 519-741-2200 ext. 7847 WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 7 DATE OF REPORT: July 13, 2028 REPORT NO.: DSD -2023-319 SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2023-043 - 300 Countrystone Crescent RECOMMENDATION: That Minor Variance Application A2023-043 for 300 Countrystone Crescent requesting relief from the following sections of Zoning By-law 2019-051: i) Section 4.12.3 i) to permit a lot width of 10.9 metres instead of the minimum required lot width of 13.1 metres; ii) Section 4.12.3 h) to permit a lot area of 383.6 square metres instead of the minimum required lot area of 395 square metres; and iii) Section 5.6 table 5-5, to permit two (2) parking spaces instead of the minimum required three (3) parking spaces; To facilitate an Additional Dwelling Unit (Detached) to the existing Single Detached Dwelling with one Additional Dwelling Unit (Attached) (Duplex) to have 3 dwelling units in total on the lot, in accordance with drawings prepared by Fine Line Drafting & Design Inc., dated March 15, 2023, BE APPROVED subject to the following conditions: 1. That the property owner shall modify the existing driveway to provide a driveway and a distinguishable unobstructed walkway to the proposed Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Detached) in accordance with the Regulations of Zoning By-law 2019-051 by July 19, 2024. Any request for a time extension must be approved in writing by the Manager of Development Review prior to completion date set out in this decision. Failure to complete the condition will result in this approval becoming null and void. 2. That the Owner applicant submits the Minor Variance Application Review Fee of $300.00 to the Grand River Conservation Authority. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to review minor variances to allow for one extra Additional Unit (Detached) in existing Single Detached Dwelling with One Additional Dwelling Unit (Attached) (3 units in total) in a smaller lot area and lot width than the required and one less parking space. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 22 of 230 • The key finding of this report is that the requested minor variances meet the 4 tests of the Planning Act. • There are no financial implications. • Community engagement included a notice of the application mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property and this report was posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Committee of Adjustment meeting. • This report supports the delivery of core services. BACKGROUND: The subject property is located in the Highland West Community and on the south side of Countrystone Crescent and backs onto the Henry Sturm Greenway and Natural Area. It currently contains a two storey Single Detached Dwelling with One Additional Dwelling Unit (Attached). 4., 2a J 31 27 .`"/(" 315 Henry Sturm Greenway - Resurrectam 3111 3n7 4 F 4'.3 ('r 3&3. X01 324 . 147 1 i i G 32f1 d 294 295 "Ga311; 2i7\ 38]�� t1 3p9 A GDS 704 as Y 2 92 I �80162264 272276 Henry'Sturm Greenway f `-..S� f2esurredlon Natural Area 225 Huck Park Greenway Figure 1 — Location Map G Huck Park Natural Area 231 i 1 ss 145 The subject property is identified as `Community Areas' on Map 2 — Urban Structure and is designated `Low Rise Residential' on Map 3 — Land Use in the City's 2014 Official Plan. The property is zoned `Low Rise Residential Four Zone (RES -4)' in Zoning By-law 2019-051. Minor Variance A2023-043 was deferred from April's Committee of Adjustment Agenda as it came to the attention of Planning Staff after receiving and accepting the Minor Variance Application that one of the dwelling units was operating a `Day Care' home business would not be permitted on a property containing three (3 )dwelling units. The Applicant has advised that the tenant operating the `Day Care' home business has since moved out of the dwelling unit. Accordingly, the Minor Variance Application to permit an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU)(Detached) can now be considered by the Committee of Adjustment. The purpose of this application is to review an application to facilitate an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Detached) to be constructed in the rear yard. The existing lot does not meet the minimum requirements for lot width and lot area to permit the Detached ADU. • To permit a minimum lot area of 383.6 square metres instead of 395 square metres Page 23 of 230 • To permit a minimum lot width of 10.9 metres instead of 13.1 metres. Zoning By-law 2019-051 permits driveways in this area of the City to be as wide as the attached garage states. The driveway may extend beyond the width of the attached garage to a maximum total width of 50% of the lot; and shall be located no closer than the required side yard setback of the dwelling. Further: "e) The driveway shall be comprised of a material that is consistent throughout the driveway, and that is distinguishable from all other ground cover or surfacing including landscaping or walkways within the front yard, interior side yard, exterior side yard, or rear yard. " With the lot being 10.9 metres in width the driveway is able to be as wide as the attached garage to a maximum of 50% of the lot, or 5.45 metres, and shall be no closer to the required side yard setback. The proposed site plan shows the that the driveway is proposed to be 4.6 metres in width with a distinguishable walkway of 1.1 metres which is required by Section 4.12.3 n) of Zoning By-law 2019- 051. n) an unobstructed walkway that is a minimum 1.1 metres in width shall be provided from a street to the additional dwelling unit (detached). The walkway shall not be located within a required parking space. N52'23'33"E 10.973 m 1.21m50rm= JR {I$TING YEWA ' V�'xry1°•F ,r R �+J" �ry1J—'i ,r,rl ¢_ . '' IT s.s•'� ",'n' ,ter: '.�,.y'' ,�,•, 1.21 m Figure 2 — Proposed Driveway PAIN Based on the proposed plan for parking the applicant can accommodate 2 parking spaces, one (1) in the attached garage and one (1) in the driveway, instead of the minimum required 3 parking spaces. As ADUs (Detached) are no longer subject to Site Plan Approval, staff recommends that as a Condition of Approval of the minor variances that the driveway and walkway are modified to meet the requirements of Zoning By-law 2019-051. Page 24 of 230 May 2014 See more dates Figure 3 — Front View of 300 Countrystone Crescent (Google Maps — May 2014) _ %, Ail/ Aim Figure 4 — Aerial View of 300 Countrystone Crescent (OnPoint 2022) Page 25 of 230 I . 'r r ..:=47 Figure 5 — Proposed Site Plan Page 26 of 230 Z 0 F_ d LU J LJJ H Z Q W LL Figure 6 — Front Elevation REPORT: Planning Comments: [AW FLOOR WALL a MAI N F LOOR '-I In considering the four tests for the 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 subject property is designated `Low Rise Residential'. This designation places emphasis on accommodating a full range of low density housing type which includes single detached dwellings, additional dwelling units, attached and detached. The city will encourage and support the mixing and integrating of innovative and different forms of housing to achieve and maintain a low-rise built form. Policy 4.C.1.24 of the City's Official Plan states that: "4.C.1.24. The City, in accordance with Planning Act and other applicable legislation, will permit a stand-alone additional dwelling unit (detached), as an ancillary use to single detached dwellings, semi -detach dwellings and street townhouse dwellings. The following criteria will be considered as the basis for permitting an additional dwelling unit (detached). a) the use is subordinate to the main dwelling on the lot; b) the use can be integrated into its surroundings with negligible visual impact to the streetscape; c) the use is compatible in design and scale with the built form on the lot and the surrounding residential neighbourhood in terms of massing, height and visual appearance; and, d) other requirements such as servicing, parking, access, stormwater management, tree preservation, landscaping and the provision of amenity areas." The proposed variances meet the general intent of the Official Plan. General Intent of the Zoning By-law The intent of the zoning regulations for Detached ADUs are to ensure a property can function appropriately and still provide sufficient amenity space, landscaped area, fire emergency access, and sufficient parking. With the reduced lot area and width, the property will still have sufficient amenity area and side yard setbacks of the principal dwelling of 1.2 metres are provided to allow for Page 27 of 230 access to the rear yard from both sides. Two (2) parking spaces will be sufficient given the property's location and access to active and public transportation. It is staff's opinion that the variances meet the general intent of the Zoning By-law. Is/Are the Effects of the Variance(s) Minor? The size of the subject property will be able to accommodate a duplex and Detached ADU in the rear yard in addition to providing a sufficient amenity area and 2 parking spaces which are supported by Transportation Services. The location of the property is close to Ira Needles Blvd (200 metres away) which is a Regional Road and considered to be a primary Multi -Use Pathway/Connection that is well service by public transportation. It is the staff's opinion that the effects of the variances may be considered minor. Is/Are the Variance(s) Desirable For The Appropriate Development or Use of the Land, Building and/or Structure? Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposed variances are desirable and appropriate as they will facilitate a form of gentle intensification of the subject property with the development of an additional dwelling in the rear yard that is compatible with the neighbourhood and will make use of existing infrastructure. Environmental Planning Comments: No natural heritage concerns or tree management concerns. Heritage Planning Comments: No heritage concerns. Building Division Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance provided building permit for the ADU unit is obtained prior to construction. Please contact the Building Division at building(akitchener.ca with any questions. Engineering Division Comments: No comment. Parks/Operations Division Comments: No concerns, no comments. Transportation Planning Comments: To facilitate the proposed Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU), Transportation Services can support the 2 parking spaces, where 3 spaces are required. Region of Waterloo Comments: No Concerns to the application. However, the applicants are advised that they are responsible to ensure that the proposed development does not have any environmental noise impacts, both on-site and off- site. GRCA Comments: The Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) has no objection to the proposed minor variance application. Page 28 of 230 GRCA Comments: GRCA has reviewed this application under the Mandatory Programs and Services Regulation (Ontario Regulation 686/21), including acting on behalf of the Province regarding natural hazards identified in Section 3.1 of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS, 2020), as a regulatory authority under Ontario Regulation 150/06, and as a public body under the Planning Act as per our CA Board approved policies. Information currently available at this office indicates that the subject property contains the regulated allowance adjacent to a watercourse. A copy of our resource mapping is attached. Due to the presence of the watercourse allowance, a portion of the property is regulated by the GRCA under Ontario Regulation 150/06 - Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses Regulation. Any future development or other alteration within the regulated area will require prior written approval from GRCA in the form of a permit pursuant to Ontario Regulation 150/06. The proposed minor variance application requests permission to allow an Additional Dwelling Unit on a lot with an area of 383.6 square metres rather than 395 square metres, a lot width of 10.9 metres rather than 13.1 metres frontage; and to permit two parking spaces rather than the required three parking spaces. GRCA has no objection to the requested variances but we note that a GRCA permit under Ontario Regulation 150/06 will be required for the proposed Additional Dwelling Unit. The applicant can submit a GRCA permit application online here: https://apps.grandriver.ca/Permits Consistent with GRCA's 2023 approved fee schedule, this application is considered a `minor' minor variance and the applicant will be invoiced in the amount of $300.00 for the GRCA's review of this application. 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: • Planning Act • Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2020) • A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 • Regional Official Plan • Official Plan (2014) • Zoning By-law 2019-051 • DSD -2023-149 Page 29 of 230 Optional/Situational Conditions for Minor Variances Where there are trees on or adjacent to the subject lands that could be negatively impacted as a result of the variance (and related work) proposed. Prior to the issuance of a Demolition and/or Building Permit: a) the Owner shall prepare a Tree Preservation/Enhancement Plan, in accordance with the City's Tree Management Policy, to the satisfaction of and approval by the City's Supervisor, Site Plans. Such plans shall include, among other matters, the identification of a proposed building envelope/work zone, a landscaped area, and the vegetation to be preserved. If necessary, the plan shall include required mitigation and or compensation measures. b) The Owner shall implement the approved Tree Preservation/Enhancement Plan, prior to any tree removal, grading, servicing or the issuance of any demolition and/or building permits, to the satisfaction of the City's Supervisor, Site Plans. No changes to the said plan shall be granted except with the prior approval of the City's Supervisor, Site Plans. Page 30 of 230 Staff Report Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: April 18, 2023 SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Interim Manager, Development Review 519-741-2200 ext. 7765 PREPARED BY: Arwa Alzoor, Planning Technician, Site Development, 519-741-2200 ext. 7847 WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 7 DATE OF REPORT: March 23, 2023 REPORT NO.: DSD -2023-149 SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2023-043 - 300 Countrystone Crescent RECOMMENDATION: Zoning By-law 2019-051 That Minor Variance Application A2023-043 for 300 Countrystone Crescent requesting relief from the following sections of Zoning By-law 2019-051: i) Section 4.12.3 i) to permit a minimum lot width of 10.9 metres instead of the required minimum lot width of 13.1 metres; ii) Section 4.12.3 h) to permit a lot area of 383 square metres instead of the minimum required lot area of 395 square metres; and iii) Section 5.6 table 5-5 to permit 2 parking spaces instead of the minimum required 3 parking spaces; to facilitate the development of an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Detached) in the rear yard of a property containing an existing Single Detached Dwelling with an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Attached) (Duplex dwelling), in accordance with drawings prepared by Fine Line Drafting & Design Inc., dated March 15, 2023, BE DEFERRED TO A MEETING DATE AGREED TO BY THE APPLICANT. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: The purpose of this report is to recommend Deferral of minor variances to facilitate the development of an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Detached) in the rear yard of a property containing an existing Single Detached Dwelling with an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Attached) (Duplex dwelling). There are no financial implications. Community engagement included a notice sign being placed on the property advising that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received, notice of the application was mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property and this report was posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Committee of Adjustment meeting. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 31 of 230 • This report supports the delivery of core services. BACKGROUND: The subject property is located north of Victoria Street South and east of Ira Needles Boulevard. It currently contains two-storey Single Detached Dwelling with one Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Attached). Figure 1 - Location on Zoning Map Figure 2 - Location on Google Earth The subject property is identified as `Community Areas' on Map 2 — Urban Structure and is designated `Low Rise Residential' on Map 3 — Land Use in the City's 2014 Official Plan. The property is zoned `Low Rise Residential Four Zone (RES -4)' in Zoning By-law 2019-051. The purpose of this application is to facilitate the development of an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Detached) in the rear yard of the subject property. The following minor variances are required. • To permit a lot area of 383 square metres instead of minimum required 395 square metres; • To permit a lot width of 10.9 metres instead of minimum required 13.1 metres; • To permit 2 parking spaces instead of the minimum required 3 parking spaces, one for each dwelling unit. One parking space will be located in the attached garage and the second parking space will be located on the driveway. Page 32 of 230 n .._ TIO MAIN F11 11 WALL — 108'-8318" 0 F]F m W ILL Z� © �I MA1N FL11QR L. ♦� — — — — L100'-8318" Figure 4 - Elevation drawing of the proposed ADU (Detached) Since the application was submitted, Planning staff were informed that one of the dwelling units currently operates a `home business'. In order to facilitate the development of the ADU (Detached), the `home business' may be required to be removed or an additional minor variance may be required to permit the `home business' to operate in a dwelling unit which is not a single detached dwelling. The applicant has asked that Minor Variance Application A2023-043 be deferred in order to determine if they would like to proceed with the minor variance as requested or revise their application to include the minor variance for the `home business'. 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: • Planning Act • Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2020) • A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 • Regional Official Plan • Official Plan (2014) • Zoning By-law 2019-051 Page 33 of 230 Region of Waterloo March 29, 2023 Alison Fox City of Kitchener 200 King Street West P.O. Box 1118 Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES 150 Frederick Street, Sth Floor Kitchener ON N2G 4A Canada Telephone: 519-575-4400 TTY: 519-575-4608 Fax: 519-575-4449 www. reg i o n ofwate r l o o. ca File No.: D20-20/ VAR KIT GEN (9) 58 KIT, 1200 FISCHER HALLMAN ROAD BERNIE NIMER Subject: Committee of Adjustment Meeting April 18, 2023 City of Kitchener Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have following comments: 1) A 2023 - 040 — 245 Wellington Street North — No Concerns. 2) A 2023 - 041 — 45 Bond Street — No Concerns. 3) A 2023 - 042 — 100 Monteagle Crescent — No Concerns to the application. However, the applicants are advise that they are responsible to ensure that the proposed development does not have any environmental noise impacts, both on- site and off-site. 4) A 2023 - 043 — 300 Countrystone Crescent — No Concerns to the application. However, the applicants are advise that they are responsible to ensure that the proposed development does not have any environmental noise impacts, both on- site and off-site. 5) A 2023 — 044 — 230 Black Walnut Place — No Concerns. 6) A 2023 - 045 — 125 Hickson Drive — No Concerns. 7) A 2023 - 046 — 74 Carnaby Crescent — No Concerns to the application. However, the applicants are advise that they are responsible to ensure that the proposed development does not have any environmental noise impacts, both on-site and off-site. 8) A 2023 - 047 — 744 King Street East — No Concerns. Document Number: 4346109 Page 1 of 2 Page 34 of 230 9) A 2023 - 048 — 1200 Fischer -Hallman Road — No Concerns. 10) A 2023 - 049 — 37 Manitou Drive — No Concerns. 11) A 2023 - 050 — 92 Arnold Street — No Concerns. 12) A 2023 - 051 — 110 Clark Avenue — No Concerns. 13) A 2023 - 052 — 306 Wellington Street North — No Concerns to the application. However, the applicants are advise that they are responsible to ensure that the proposed development does not have any environmental noise impacts, both on- site and off-site. Please be advised that any development on the subject lands is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 19-037 or any successor thereof and may require 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. If a site is subject to more than one application, additional comments may apply. Please forward any decisions on the above mentioned Application numbers to the undersigned. Yours Truly, Joginder Bhatia Transportation Planner C (226) 753-0368 CC: Marilyn Mills, City of Kitchener CofA(a)Kitchener. ca 2 Page 35 of 230 April 3, 2023 Administration Centre: 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Cambridge, ON N1 R 5W6 Phone: 519-621-2761 Toll free: 1-866-900-4722 Fax: 519-621-4844 www.grandriver.ca GRCA File: A2023-043 — 300 Countrystone Crescent Marilyn Mills Secretary -Treasurer Committee of Adjustment City of Kitchener 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 Dear Marilyn Mills, Re: Application for Minor Variance A2023-043 300 Countrystone Crescent, City of Kitchener Dharmarajan Peruman via email Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff has reviewed the above -noted minor variance application. Recommendation The Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) has no objection to the proposed minor variance application. GRCA Comments GRCA has reviewed this application under the Mandatory Programs and Services Regulation (Ontario Regulation 686/21), including acting on behalf of the Province regarding natural hazards identified in Section 3.1 of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS, 2020), as a regulatory authority under Ontario Regulation 150/06, and as a public body under the Planning Act as per our CA Board approved policies. Information currently available at this office indicates that the subject property contains the regulated allowance adjacent to a watercourse. A copy of our resource mapping is attached. Due to the presence of the watercourse allowance, a portion of the property is regulated by the GRCA under Ontario Regulation 150/06 - Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses Regulation. Any future development or other alteration within the regulated area will require prior written approval from GRCA in the form of a permit pursuant to Ontario Regulation 150/06. The proposed minor variance application requests permission to allow an Additional Dwelling Unit on a lot with an area of 383.6 square metres rather than 395 square metres, a lot width of 10.9 metres rather than 13.1 metres frontage; and to permit two parking spaces rather than the required three parking spaces. GRCA has no objection Member of Conservation Ontario, representing Ontario's 36 Conservation Authorities I The Grand — A Canadian Heritage River Page 36 of 230 to the requested variances but we note that a GRCA permit under Ontario Regulation 150/06 will be required for the proposed Additional Dwelling Unit. The applicant can submit a GRCA permit application online here: https://apps.grand river.ca/Perm its. Consistent with GRCA's 2023 approved fee schedule, this application is considered a `minor' minor variance and the applicant will be invoiced in the amount of $300.00 for the GRCA's review of this application. For Municipal Consideration Please be advised that on January 1, 2023, a new Minister's regulation (Ontario Regulation 596/22: Prescribed Acts — Subsections 21.1.1 (1.1) and 21.1.2 (1.1) of the Conservation Authorities Act) came into effect. As a result, non -mandatory technical review services that the GRCA formerly provided under agreement with some municipalities (e.g., technical reviews related to natural heritage and select aspects of stormwater management) will no longer be provided. Should you have any questions, please contact me at 519-621-2763 ext. 2228 or aherreman@grand river. ca. Sincerely, Andrew Herreman, CPT Resource Planning Technician Grand River Conservation Authority Enclosed: GRCA Mapping Copy: Dharmarajan Peruman (via email) Rodney Friesen, Fine Line Drafting & Design Inc. (via email) Page 37 of 230 J l t I i TIBM i - L O .. O N O O Q LL Q Q �. ��>/ LJ_ 0 O w CU o O �+ U /cu V N O N to M � U O U M � (7 M E N O N J l t I i TIBM i - J Q LL Q m o m _ Q U z m O Q (7 E Q `o E Q 0 Q N U d Y Y U o C� o �° Q (D C .� D N F Q _ Q co E d y a) a) 6 >6 U .0 6 O Q U Q U d' Q -O O O N O L C 0 d N NN O E Q N J J> > Q (D E N (D C? O (Dw U) D w w Y� a C? U° O a)d' C E ` '� .m' �? `� m m m Q(D C f Q Q w w Q U) °' ( in O (D s in o ��wwww O� � WD N��s -o a) a) O Q > w J J J J d O N N U) U) 00 ,0 ir J From: Johnston. Jeremiah (MTO) To: Clerks (SM); Committee of Adjustment (SM) Cc: Alison Fox; Andrew Pinnell Subject: RE: Clerks CoK has shared the folder "Committee of Adjustment - Applications" with you. Date: Monday, March 27, 2023 11:30:31 AM Attachments: Comments sent to Kitchener 299 Ottawa Street North (Consent) 12 08 22.odf Hello, B 2023-018 - 299 Ottawa Street North MTO provided one condition of consent in the attached email. Upon registration of the consent, and after registration of the parcels, the property owner shall make an application for MTO Building and Land use permit(s). MTO comments provided in pre con should be attached should be added to the file. MTO has no requirements for these applications: A 2023-040 - 245 Wellington Street North A 2023-041 - 45 Bond Street A 2023-042 - 100 Monteagle Crescent A 2023-043 - 300 Countrystone Crescent A 2023-044 - 230 Black Walnut Place A 2023-045 - 125 Hickson Drive A 2023-046 - 74 Carnaby Crescent A 2023-047 - 744 King Street East A 2023-048 - 1200 Fischer Hallman Road A2023-049- 37 Manitou Drive A 2023-050 - 92 Arnold Street A 2023-051 - 110 Clark Avenue A 2023-052 - 306 Wellington Street North B 2023-016 - 73 Second Avenue B 2023-017 - 23 & 25 Elmsdale Drive Thank you, Jeremiah Johnston Corridor Management Planner Corridor Management Section Ministry of Transportation Operations Branch West 659 Exeter Road, London, ON N6E 1L3 M: (226)-980-6407 From: mail@sf-notifications.com <mail@sf-notifications.com> Sent: March 24, 2023 4:14 PM Page 39 of 230 To: Johnston, Jeremiah (MTC) <Jeremiah.Johnston@ontario.ca> Subject: Clerks CoK has shared the folder 'Committee of Adjustment - Applications' with you. CAUTION -- EXTERNAL E-MAIL - Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender. Clerks CoK has shared the folder Committee of Adjustment - Applications with you. Note From Clerks: Attached are the Committee of Adjustment Applications for the City of Kitchener - Meeting date April 18, 2023. Please remember, your email address is your username to log in. If you are unable to log in select "Forgot my Pass word". Please note for those who comment regularly an additional email will follow advising you of the comment deadline. You will need to download any files you would like to retain, as they will be deleted from this program when the applications for the next month are circulated. If you require any further assistance, please email CofAQ)kitchener.ca Thank you. ShareFile is a tool for sending, receiving, and organizing your business files online. It can be used as a password -protected area for sharing information with clients and partners, and it's an easy way to send files that are too large to e-mail. Trouble with the above link? You can copy and paste the following URL into your web browser: https://kitchener.sharefile. corn/f/fobed bd7-dcf7-4e15-80bd-ea0254e34363 Powered By Citrix ShareFile 202:' Page 40 of 230 Staff Report r NJ :R Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: July 18, 2023 SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Interim Manager, Development Review 519-741-2200 ext. 7765 PREPARED BY: Tara Zhang, Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7760 WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 1 DATE OF REPORT: July 5, 2023 REPORT NO.: DSD -2023-310 SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2023-076 — 912 Otterbein Court RECOMMENDATION: That Minor Variance Application A2023-076 for 912 Otterbein Court requesting relief from Section 7.3, Table 7-2, of Zoning By-law 2019-051, to permit a rear yard setback of 3 metres instead of the minimum required rear yard setback of 7.5 metres to facilitate the construction of an attached covered, unenclosed structure in the rear yard of an existing single detached dwelling, BE APPROVED. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to review a minor variance application to permit the construction of an attached covered, unenclosed structure in the rear yard. • There are no financial implications. • Community engagement included a notice sign being placed on the property advising that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received, notice of the application was mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property and this report was posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Committee of Adjustment meeting. • This report supports the delivery of core services. BACKGROUND: The subject property is in the Grand River North neighbourhood located adjacent to the Blue Springs Woods on Otterbein Court. The subject property is identified as `Community Areas' on Map 2 — Urban Structure and is designated `Low Rise Residential' on Map 3 — Land Use in the City's 2014 Official Plan. The property is zoned `Low Rise Residential Two Zone (RES -2)' in Zoning By-law 2019- 051. City staff has conducted a site visit on June 301h, 2023. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 41 of 230 272 ;15 2741 2,0 4 ae �1n'i j 1 ;I•;IC szs.: i i Ii�Ilyll I $: 14 _o0 2'12 :SUa 311 3'Ia 4 t� 2 +' T T1 ,,, 'J •:15 � � :i'13 3'17 :S2' r' acla Figure 1: Site location and map Figure 2: Front view of the dwelling - P2.27 -qtr •9 �"•\ b a�a ED R .gam CTURE Ni t Figure 3: Covered structure location shown on site plan Page 42 of 230 Figure 4: Elevation view of the covered structure REPORT: Planning Comments: In considering the four tests for the 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 Staff is of the opinion that the unenclosed, covered structure meets the general intent of the Official Plan. The subject property is designated `Low Rise Residential' in the City's Official Plan. The intent of this designation is to emphasize the compatibility of building form with respect to massing, scale and design in order to support the successful integration of different building types. It also places emphasis on the relationship of buildings to adjacent properties, streets, and exterior areas. General Intent of the Zoning By-law The intent of the rear yard setback is to ensure adequate separation from adjacent properties and to ensure there is appropriate amenity space for residence. Since the rear yard is adjacent to the Blue Springs Woods, staff does not have concerns for in adequate space for other residential properties. The unenclosed, covered structure will support the amenity area on site for the residents. Is/Are the Effects of the Variance(s) Minor? Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance is minor as the reduced rear yard does not have any significant impacts to adjacent properties or the overall neighbourhood. Is/Are the Variance(s) Desirable For The Appropriate Development or Use of the Land, Building and/or Structure? Staff is of the opinion that the variance is appropriate for the development of the land as it is located in the rear yard, away from public view and increases the enjoyment of the residential property. Page 43 of 230 Environmental Planning Comments: No concerns. Heritage Planning Comments: No concerns. Building Division Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance provided a building permit for the new roof structure is obtained prior to construction. Please contact the Building Division at building(o-)-kitchener.ca with any questions. Engineering Division Comments: No comment. Parks/Operations Division Comments: No concerns, no comments. Transportation Planning Comments: No concerns. GRCA Comments: We have no concerns with the unenclosed structure. We'd request that the applicant ensures that drainage (i.e., eaves and down spots) is directed away from rear retaining wall to prevent impacts to the wall and/or wetland. A GRCA permit is not required for the structure. 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. CONSULT — If applicable. COLLABORATE — If applicable. ENTRUST — If applicable. PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: Planning Act Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2020) Page 44 of 230 • A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 • Regional Official Plan • Official Plan (2014) • Zoning By-law 2019-051 Page 45 of 230 Region of Waterloo June 30, 2023 /_1IROTi1Wer City of Kitchener 200 King Street West P.O. Box 1118 Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES 150 Frederick Street, Sth Floor Kitchener ON N2G 4A Canada Telephone: 519-575-4400 TTY: 519-575-4608 Fax: 519-575-4449 www. reg i o n ofwate r l o o. ca File No.: D20-20/ VAR KIT GEN (5) 08 WEBER KIT, 15 DELLROY AVENUE 2296342 ONTARIO INCORPORATED (12) VAR KIT, 30 AND 40 MARGARET AVENUE ACTIVA HOLDINGS Subject: Committee of Adjustment Meeting July 18, 2023, City of Kitchener Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have the following comments: 1) A 2023 - 076 — 912 Otterbein Court — No Concerns. 2) A 2023 - 077 — 176 Indian Road — No Concerns. 3) A 2023 - 078 — 35 Fifth Avenue — There are no conditions for this application. However, the owners are advised that the proposed and existing dwelling(s) on the subject lands would have impacts from the transportation noise in the vicinity. The owners are responsible for ensuring that the subject development does not have any environmental noise impacts. In the absence of a detailed noise study, the staff strongly recommend that all dwelling units be installed with air -ducted heating and ventilation system, suitably sized and designed for the provision of central air conditioning. This will avoid retrofit at any later application stage, e.g. Consent/Condo. There are no airport -specific concerns for the proposed development. However, the owners are advised that the subject lands are located within the Airport Zoning Regulated area and specifically under the runway take-off/approach surface; and, as such, subject to all provisions of the Airport Zoning Regulations. 4) A 2023 - 079 — 55 Rockcliffe Drive — No Concerns. Document Number: 4421509 Page 1 of 3 Page 46 of 230 5) A 2023 — 080 — 15 Dellroy Avenue — The Regional staff do not support this minor variance application. Any structures within the Daylight Triangle (DLT) and any encroachment under, at or above the ground within the Regional right of way, including the daylight triangle (including the lands to be dedicated to the Region), will not be allowed. The buildings and the site must be designed accordingly. Airport Zoning (Advisory): The owners/applicants are also advised that the subject property falls within the Region of Waterloo Zoning Regulated Area, specifically under the Take- off/Approach Surface for Runway 08. Using the Region of Waterloo International Airport Zoning Regulations (AZR) online tool (https://www.waterlooairport.ca/en/about-vkf/airport-zoning-regulations- update.aspx), the permitted building height for the subject property is 399.5m Above Sea Level (ASL), the maximum building height is 75.5m based on a maximum ground level of 324m ASL. Please ensure that the building heights for the proposed development comply with the Region of Waterloo Airport zoning and height restrictions. The Region of Waterloo International Airport AZR also regulates any construction of towers/cranes for a proposed development. Any proposed development at this location must ensure that construction towers/cranes also comply with the Region of Waterloo International AZR. 6) A 2023 - 081 — 333 Pine Valley Drive — No Concerns. 7) A 2023 - 082 — 685 Frederick Street — No Concerns. 8) A 2023 - 083 — 15 Kenora Drive— No concerns/conditions for this application. Staff note that the subject lands are located within the Airport Zoning Regulated area and specifically under the runway take-off/approach surface; and, as such, subject to all provisions of the Airport Zoning Regulations. 9) A 2023 - 084 — 151 Frederick Street — There are no conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that they are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any environmental noise impacts (both on-site and off-site). 10) A 2023 - 085 — 920 Keewatin Place — No Concerns. 11) A 2023 — 086 — 59 Graber Place — Although there are no conditions for this application, the staff note that there are noise -sensitive land uses, specifically the backyards of many residential dwellings, in the immediate vicinity of the subject lands, which may have impacts from the noise from the proposed storage related activities. The staff recommend that the City staff look into this as deemed appropriate. 2 Page 47 of 230 12) A 2023 — 087 — 30-40 Margaret Avenue — No Concerns. Please be advised that any development on the subject lands is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 19-037 or any successor thereof and may require 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. If a site is subject to more than one application, additional comments may apply. Please forward any decisions on the above-mentioned Application numbers to the undersigned. Yours Truly, Joginder Bhatia Transportation Planner C (226) 753-0368 CC: Marilyn Mills, City of Kitchener CofA(a)Kitchener. ca 3 Page 48 of 230 June 26, 2023 Administration Centre: 400 Clyde Road, P.J. Box 729 Cambridge, ON N1 R 5W6 Phone: 519-621-2761 Toll free: 1-866-900-4722 Fax:519-621-4844 www.grandriver.ca Committee of Adjustment City of Kitchener 200 King Street West Kitchener ON N2G 4V6 CofA(a)kitchener.ca Re: Minor Variance Application A2023-076 912 Otterbein Court, Kitchener Stan & Sharon Pilecki Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff have reviewed the above -noted application for a covered unenclosed structure. Recommendation The GRCA has no concerns with the application. Documents Reviewed by Staff Staff have reviewed the drawings (Hickory Dickory Decks, revised May 5, 2023) submitted with this application. GRCA Comments The GRCA has reviewed this application under Ontario Regulation 686/21, acting on behalf of the Province regarding natural hazards identified in Section 3.1 of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS, 2020), as well as in accordance with Ontario Regulation 150/06 and GRCA's Board approved policies. Information currently available at our office indicates that the subject lands are adjacent to a wetland. Page 1 of 2 Member of Conservation Ontario, representing Ontario's 36 Conservation Authorities I The Grand — A Canadian Heritage River Page 49 of 230 We have no concerns with the unenclosed structure. We'd request that the applicant ensures that drainage (i.e. eaves and downspots) is directed away from the rear retaining wall to prevent impacts to the wall and/or the wetland. A GRCA permit is not required for the structure. This will be considered a `minor' minor variance application. Consistent with GRCA's 2023 approved fee schedule, we will invoice the applicant $300 for our review. We trust this information is of assistance. If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact me at 519-621-2763 ext. 2292 or theywood(a)grand river. ca. Sincerely, Trevor Heywood Resource Planner Grand River Conservation Authority Encl. Resource Mapping cc: Shawntanna Atkinson, Hickory Dickory Decks Page 2 of 2 Page 50 of 230 y N N Z V sv n 0 0� . U Q N 7 Q O Q O O O fl € 0— -,F - 4-v U C� m v�o Q 3 N (7 (r cLi L Q Q 3 `O E r c- = E o. o Yn 0 O U� Q YY o~ �aE ll�0 og� s L-- rc 0,4T n m cu CU 0 CN � m w (D (D Q � .� Q o .D E o E i° `ovo0 -w 3' C� N O w m m 0 �� m o Q Q Q o o o w m�Q� .>_?. v- 3 (6 U J Q E a O o o r > o L v - N (7 O ° o (7 0 LL In w w - o - C CO o m m Qin Q in .� .� .� .� Q s= g Y `= o = A 0 m m m �? ° n Q Q T °�' T > o w w w w N ��Q "o A� -- U I m m m w w Q U) - n On o O o 0 0 0 o a v Q�'�'�O®®®®Q LU JJJJd �NaI U'F`w .. >.�m N m �`0 1OOA N Z10 DD DD N� LL �oa n �q a v G U O u U z.2. v F v s Z O O N C TTT O ZT C O 1 B r I N I Q O �° M O �y `z m N W V r r ro ro m 0 @) Z N U n m Staff Report r NJ :R Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: July 18, 2023 SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Interim Manager, Development Review 519-741-2200 ext. 7765 PREPARED BY: Gaurang Khandelwal, Planner (Policy), 519-741-2200 ext. 7611 WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 1 DATE OF REPORT: July 5, 2023 REPORT NO.: DSD -2023-306 SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2023-077 — 176 Indian Road RECOMMENDATION: That Minor Variance Application A2023-077 for 176 Indian Road requesting relief from Section 7.3, Table 7-2, of Zoning By-law 2019-051, to permit a rear yard setback of 3.8 metres instead of the minimum required rear yard setback of 7.5 metres to facilitate the construction of an addition to convert an existing single detached dwelling with one (1) Additional Dwelling Unit (Attached) to a single detached dwelling with two (2) Additional Dwelling Units (Attached) generally in accordance with drawings prepared by Fine Line Drafting & Design Inc., dated June 2023, BE APPROVED. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to review a minor variance to facilitate the development of an addition to convert an existing single detached dwelling with one Additional Dwelling Unit (attached) to a single detached dwelling with two Additional Dwelling Units (attached). • The key finding of this report is that the requested minor variance meet the 4 tests of the Planning Act. • There are no financial implications. • Community engagement included a notice sign being placed on the property advising that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received, notice of the application was mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property and this report was posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Committee of Adjustment meeting. • This report supports the delivery of core services. BACKGROUND: The subject property is located at the north-west corner of Indian Road and Queenston Drive intersection, in the Heritage Park planning community. The surrounding context comprises of primarily low-rise residential uses. Grand River Collegiate Institute is located across the road (Indian Road) from the subject property. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 52 of 230 Location Map — 176 Indian Road Photo of Subject Property The subject property is identified as `Community Areas' on Map 2 — Urban Structure and is designated `Low Rise Residential' on Map 3 — Land Use in the City's 2014 Official Plan. The property is zoned `Low Rise Residential Two Zone (RES -2)' in Zoning By-law 2019-051. The purpose of the application is to facilitate the construction of an addition in the rear yard of an existing single detached dwelling with one Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Attached) and convert it to a single detached dwelling with two ADUs (Attached). Page 53 of 230 Location of Requested Minor Variance The applicant intends to construct a two-storey addition consisting of an attached garage with two parking spaces on the first storey and an ADU (attached) on the second storey above the attached garage. The existing shed is proposed to be removed to facilitate this addition. City Planning staff conducted a site visit on June 30th, 2023. au�eN57ON DRIVE Proposed Site Plan FfiONT ELEVATION l REAR RF ATION RIGHT FI ATiON Elevation drawings showing the proposed addition to the existing single detached dwelling ,-, 3D renderings of the proposed addition Page 54 of 230 REPORT: Planning Comments: In considering the four tests for the 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 subject property is identified as `Community Areas' on Map 2 — Urban Structure and is designated `Low Rise Residential' on Map 3 — Land Use in the City of Kitchener Official Plan. The intent of the Low Rise Residential designation is to accommodate a full range of low density housing types including single detached dwellings and ADUs. Official Plan policy 4.C.1.8 details criteria that should be considered where a minor variance is requested. Subsections `c', `d' and `e' specify that the requested variances should ensure that "new additions and modifications to existing buildings are to be directed to the rear yard and are to be discouraged in the front yard and side yard abutting a street, except where it can be demonstrated that the addition and/or modification is compatible in scale, massing, design and character of adjacent properties and is in keeping with the character of the streetscape", "new buildings, additions, modifications and conversions are sensitive 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", and that "the lands can function appropriately and not create unacceptable adverse impacts for adjacent properties by providing both an appropriate number of parking spaces and an appropriate landscaped/amenity area on the site". Official Plan policy 4.C.1.23. further maintains that the City will permit the addition of an ADU (attached) where desirable and appropriate to provide alternate housing options to Kitchener homeowners and residents. Staff are of the opinion that permitting the requested variance would facilitate the use of the addition as an ADU (attached) with the required parking spaces on-site, providing a form of gentle density to the community while preserving the low density character of the neighbourhood. Staff are also of the opinion that the existing landscaping and siting of the proposed addition along Indian Road would provide an adequate amenity area on the property, as well as maintain the functioning of the property and adjacent dwellings. Staff are of the opinion that the requested variance meet the intent of the Official Plan. General Intent of the Zoning By-law The subject property is zoned `Low Rise Residential Two Zone (RES -2)' in Zoning By-law 2019-051. The intent of minimum rear yard setback requirements is to ensure provision of adequately sized outdoor amenity areas and privacy with adjacent properties. The proposed window openings on the second storey of the addition are oriented towards Indian Road and the rear yard of 124 Queenston Drive. The window openings along 124 Queenston Drive are for the living space and kitchen of the ADU (attached). No window openings are proposed along 180 Indian Road. The reduced rear yard setback is sensitive to the exterior areas of the adjacent properties and overlook concerns are insignificant. Furthermore, with the removal of the existing shed in the rear yard and a large front and exterior side yard, there is adequate amenity area for the proposed single detached dwelling with two ADUs (attached). Is/Are the Effects of the Variance(s) Minor? Planning staff is of the opinion that the requested variance is minor, in that it will not cause unacceptable adverse impacts on adjacent properties. No compatibility or privacy concerns are identified with the requested rear yard setback reductions, because of building design measures and orientation relative to adjacent properties. Amenity areas will be provided in interior, rear and exterior side yards. Page 55 of 230 Is/Are the Variance(s) Desirable For The Appropriate Development or Use of the Land, Building and/or Structure? Planning staff is of the opinion that the variance to reduce the minimum rear yard setback is appropriate for the desirable development of the lands. The applicant has demonstrated through building and site design, that the proposed addition will not have adverse impacts on privacy of adjacent properties and will be compatible with the character of the neighborhood. In addition, the variance would facilitate gentle intensification within an established neighbourhood. Environmental Planning Comments: No concerns Heritage Planning Comments: No heritage concerns Building Division Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance provided building permit for the addition and change of use to a triplex is obtained prior to construction. Please contact the Building Division at building(o)kitchener.ca with any questions. Engineering Division Comments: No Comment Parks/Operations Division Comments: There is an existing City -owned street tree that will be impacted by the proposed driveway widening associated with the development and this tree should be protected to City standards throughout construction as per Chapter 690 of the current Property Maintenance By-law. Suitable arrangements including the submission and approval of a Tree Protection and Enhancement Plan showing full protection for existing trees; an ISA valuation of City -owned trees and any required securities or compensation for removed trees will be required to the satisfaction of Parks and Cemeteries prior to the issuance of a Building Permit or curb cut permit. Please see Urban Design Manual Part C, Section 13 and www.kitchener.ca/treemanaaement Transportation Planning Comments: Transportation Services have no concerns with the proposed application. Region of Waterloo Comments: No Concerns. GRCA Comments: GRCA has no objection to the approval of the above applications. The subject properties do not contain any natural hazards such as watercourses, floodplains, shorelines, wetlands, or valley slopes. The properties are not subject to Ontario Regulation 150/06 and, therefore, a permission from GRCA is not required. Enova Power Corp Comments: The proposed addition at 176 Indian Road will conflict with the existing meter location for this property. The property owner will need to relocate the existing meters to the north wall of the new addition. Customer/contractor is to contact Enova Power to arrange for re -location of the existing service meters. https://enovapower.com/service-request-form-engineering-victoria-street-office/ The link about is to our service request form on our web site. Page 56 of 230 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: • Planning Act • Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2020) • A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 • Regional Official Plan • Official Plan (2014) • Zoning By-law 2019-051 ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A — Site Plan of proposed addition for 176 Indian Road Page 57 of 230 Attachment A - Site Plan of proposed addition for 176 Indian Road z E GVGtl NVIGNI 0 z z L9 z CL CL QF) 0 LLJ LLI LLI ZZL 7;1 t m zi GVGtl NVIGNI cr, 3U - — — — — — — — — — — — — — ----------- oa 6z 17� IL — — —°+_— — — — --------------- - - — - - ---------- Nd Et4l:Z ZT-90-U07 Page 58 of 230 z CL CL QF) 0 LLI 7;1 t vi 1z ash cr, 3U - — — — — — — — — — — — — — ----------- oa 6z 17� IL — — —°+_— — — — --------------- - - — - - ---------- Nd Et4l:Z ZT-90-U07 Page 58 of 230 a 7;1 7 V 1z ID Hill u I I I cr, 3U - — — — — — — — — — — — — — ----------- oa 6z 17� IL — — —°+_— — — — --------------- - - — - - ---------- Nd Et4l:Z ZT-90-U07 Page 58 of 230 Region of Waterloo June 30, 2023 /_1IROTi1Wer City of Kitchener 200 King Street West P.O. Box 1118 Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES 150 Frederick Street, Sth Floor Kitchener ON N2G 4A Canada Telephone: 519-575-4400 TTY: 519-575-4608 Fax: 519-575-4449 www. reg i o n ofwate r l o o. ca File No.: D20-20/ VAR KIT GEN (5) 08 WEBER KIT, 15 DELLROY AVENUE 2296342 ONTARIO INCORPORATED (12) VAR KIT, 30 AND 40 MARGARET AVENUE ACTIVA HOLDINGS Subject: Committee of Adjustment Meeting July 18, 2023, City of Kitchener Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have the following comments: 1) A 2023 - 076 — 912 Otterbein Court — No Concerns. 2) A 2023 - 077 — 176 Indian Road — No Concerns. 3) A 2023 - 078 — 35 Fifth Avenue — There are no conditions for this application. However, the owners are advised that the proposed and existing dwelling(s) on the subject lands would have impacts from the transportation noise in the vicinity. The owners are responsible for ensuring that the subject development does not have any environmental noise impacts. In the absence of a detailed noise study, the staff strongly recommend that all dwelling units be installed with air -ducted heating and ventilation system, suitably sized and designed for the provision of central air conditioning. This will avoid retrofit at any later application stage, e.g. Consent/Condo. There are no airport -specific concerns for the proposed development. However, the owners are advised that the subject lands are located within the Airport Zoning Regulated area and specifically under the runway take-off/approach surface; and, as such, subject to all provisions of the Airport Zoning Regulations. 4) A 2023 - 079 — 55 Rockcliffe Drive — No Concerns. Document Number: 4421509 Page 1 of 3 Page 59 of 230 5) A 2023 — 080 — 15 Dellroy Avenue — The Regional staff do not support this minor variance application. Any structures within the Daylight Triangle (DLT) and any encroachment under, at or above the ground within the Regional right of way, including the daylight triangle (including the lands to be dedicated to the Region), will not be allowed. The buildings and the site must be designed accordingly. Airport Zoning (Advisory): The owners/applicants are also advised that the subject property falls within the Region of Waterloo Zoning Regulated Area, specifically under the Take- off/Approach Surface for Runway 08. Using the Region of Waterloo International Airport Zoning Regulations (AZR) online tool (https://www.waterlooairport.ca/en/about-vkf/airport-zoning-regulations- update.aspx), the permitted building height for the subject property is 399.5m Above Sea Level (ASL), the maximum building height is 75.5m based on a maximum ground level of 324m ASL. Please ensure that the building heights for the proposed development comply with the Region of Waterloo Airport zoning and height restrictions. The Region of Waterloo International Airport AZR also regulates any construction of towers/cranes for a proposed development. Any proposed development at this location must ensure that construction towers/cranes also comply with the Region of Waterloo International AZR. 6) A 2023 - 081 — 333 Pine Valley Drive — No Concerns. 7) A 2023 - 082 — 685 Frederick Street — No Concerns. 8) A 2023 - 083 — 15 Kenora Drive— No concerns/conditions for this application. Staff note that the subject lands are located within the Airport Zoning Regulated area and specifically under the runway take-off/approach surface; and, as such, subject to all provisions of the Airport Zoning Regulations. 9) A 2023 - 084 — 151 Frederick Street — There are no conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that they are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any environmental noise impacts (both on-site and off-site). 10) A 2023 - 085 — 920 Keewatin Place — No Concerns. 11) A 2023 — 086 — 59 Graber Place — Although there are no conditions for this application, the staff note that there are noise -sensitive land uses, specifically the backyards of many residential dwellings, in the immediate vicinity of the subject lands, which may have impacts from the noise from the proposed storage related activities. The staff recommend that the City staff look into this as deemed appropriate. 2 Page 60 of 230 12) A 2023 — 087 — 30-40 Margaret Avenue — No Concerns. Please be advised that any development on the subject lands is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 19-037 or any successor thereof and may require 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. If a site is subject to more than one application, additional comments may apply. Please forward any decisions on the above-mentioned Application numbers to the undersigned. Yours Truly, Joginder Bhatia Transportation Planner C (226) 753-0368 CC: Marilyn Mills, City of Kitchener CofA(a)Kitchener. ca 3 Page 61 of 230 June 29, 2023 Administration Centre: 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Cambridge, ON N1 R 5W6 Phone: 519-621-2761 Toll free: 1-866-900-4722 Fax: 519-621-4844 www.grandriver.ca Marilyn Mills Secretary -Treasurer Committee of Adjustment City of Kitchener 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON, N2G 4G7 Dear Marilyn Mills, Re: Committee of Adjustment Meeting — July 18, 2023 Applications for Minor Variance A 2023-077 176 Indian Road A 2023-078 35 Fifth Avenue A 2023-079 55 Rockcliffe Drive A 2023-080 15 Dellroy Avenue A 2023-081 333 Pine Valley Drive A 2023-082 685 Frederick Street A 2023-083 15 Kenora Drive A 2023-084 151 Frederick Street A 2023-085 920 Keewatin Place A 2023-087 30-40 Margaret Avenue Applications for Consent B 2023-025 97 Second Avenue B 2023-026 30-40 Margaret Avenue via email Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff has reviewed the above -noted applications. GRCA has no objection to the approval of the above applications. The subject properties do not contain any natural hazards such as watercourses, floodplains, shorelines, wetlands, or valley slopes. The properties are not subject to Ontario Regulation 150/06 and, therefore, a permission from GRCA is not required. Should you have any questions, please contact me at aherremana-q rand river. ca or 519- 621-2763 ext. 2228. Sincerely, Andrew Herreman, CPT Resource Planning Technician Grand River Conservation Authority Member of Conservation Ontario, representing Ontario's 36 Conservation Authorities I The Grand — A Canadian Heritage River Page 62 of 230 Marilyn Mills From: John Theriault <john.theriault@enovapower.com> Sent: Monday, June 26, 2023 3:21 PM To: Committee of Adjustment (SM) Cc: Shevan Mustafa; Shaun Wang Subject: Service conflicts at these locations - Attention - Alison Fox Attachments: A 2023-077 - 176 Indian Road.pdf Hello Alison: The proposed addition at 176 Indian Road will conflict with the existing meter location for this property. The property owner will need to relocate the existing meters to the north wall of the new addition. Customer ? contractor to contact Enova Power to arrange for re -location of the existing service meters. https://enovapower.com/service-request-form-engineering-victoria-street-office/ The link about is to our service request form on our web site. If you have any questions please contact me to discuss. Thanks. John Theriault I Service Design Supervisor I Enova Power Corp. Direct Number: 519-745-4771 x-6240 Mobile Number: 519-572-0377 iohn.theriaultCcDenovapower.com enovapower.com Kitchener -Wilmot Hydro and Waterloo North Hydro have merged and are now Enova Power Corp. For more information on Enova visit our new website at enovapower.com. [A This correspondence is directed in confidence solely to the addressees listed above. It may contain personal or confidential information and may not otherwise be distributed, copied or used by the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete the e-mail and any attachments and notify the sender immediately. Click on the link to read the additional disclaimer: https.Ilenovapower.com/disclaimer Page 63 of 230 Staff Report Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: July 18, 2023 SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Interim Manager, Development Review, 519-741-2200 ext. 7765 PREPARED BY: Sheryl Rice Menezes, Planning Technician (Zoning) 519-741-2200 ext. 7844 WARD(S) INVOLVED: 3 DATE OF REPORT: July 6, 2023 REPORT NO.: DSD -2023-313 SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2023-078 — 35 Fifth Avenue RECOMMENDATION: That Minor Variance Application A2023-078 for 35 Fifth Avenue requesting relief from Section 4.12.2 e) of Zoning By-law 2019-051 to permit a lot width of 12.2 metres instead of the minimum required 13.1 metres and relief from Section 5.4, Table 5-3, of Zoning By-law 2019- 051 to permit a garage width of 66% (6.5 metres) instead of the maximum permitted 40% (4.8 metres), to facilitate the demolition of an existing dwelling and the construction of a new single detached dwelling with two attached Additional Dwelling Units (ADUs) (Attached), for a total of 3 dwelling units, generally in accordance with the drawings prepared by AH+ Architects, dated August 1, 2019, BE REFUSED. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to review a minor variance application to construct a new building containing three dwelling units with a lot width of 12.2 metres and a garage width of 6.5 metres. • The key finding of this report is that the requested minor variances do not meet all the four tests of the Planning Act. • There are no financial implications. • Community engagement included a notice sign being placed on the property advising that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received, notice of the application was mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property and this report was posted on the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Committee of Adjustment meeting. • This report supports the delivery of core services. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 64 of 230 BACKGROUND: The subject property is located on the east side of Fifth Avenue, south of Kingsway Drive. 11 Q Boo kmae .,-,/Base Maps Figure 1: Aerial photo with subject property highlighted 4V The property is identified as `Community Area' on Map 2 — Urban Structure and is designated `Low Rise Residential' on Map 3 — Land Use in the City's 2014 Official Plan. It is zoned `Low Rise Residential Four Zone (RES -4)' in Zoning By-law 2019-051. It is noted that the property is within Appendix `C' and `D' areas of Zoning By-law 2019-051 which contains more restrictive regulations, for front yard setbacks, garage width and building heights, than areas outside the subject Appendices. This is to maintain the existing built form so that new developments are compatible and do not dominate the streetscape. The applicant proposes to demolish an existing single detached dwelling and construct a new single detached dwelling with two attached Additional Dwelling Units (ADU) (Attached) for a total of 3 dwelling units, to have a lot with of 12.2 metres rather than the required 13.1 metres and to have a garage width of 6.5 metres (65%) rather than the permitted 4.8 metres (40%). It is noted that the mail out to abutting property owners and the advertisement in The Record mentioned that the existing building was proposed to remain. However, the application indicated that the existing dwelling was proposed to be demolished and a new building to be constructed in its place. The notice placed on the on the lawn sign correctly noted that the removal of the existing building. There has been much consultation with the applicant over the built form and its layout. Changes were made to the roof line, to flatten it, in order that it would comply with the maximum permitted building height in the established neighbourhood. Page 65 of 230 The applicant has also been made aware, that despite the walkout and basement area, that the maximum number of dwelling units permitted in the proposed building is three (3). The applicant has advised, as indicated on the submitted drawings, that the unfinished basement level is for storage and service space only. Staff have advised that four dwelling units would require different variances which would not be supported by staff. Staff visited the site on June 30, 2023. Figure 2: Street view of Subject Property — 35 Fifth Ave Page 66 of 230 Figure 3: Street view and Relationship to Adjacent Properties ROOF HEIGHT 1264 1 M" I -b%o' 3., WEST ELEVATION Figure 4: Side elevation of proposed 3 -storey building with walk out basement (garage to the right). Page 67 of 230 REPORT: Planning Comments: In considering the four tests for the minor variances as outlined in Section 46(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 Residential designation is to accommodate a full range of low- density housing types which may include single detached dwellings with additional dwelling units. The mixing and integrating of innovative and different forms of housing to achieve and maintain a low-rise built form is supported. The variances meet the intent of the Official Plan. General Intent of the Zoning By-law The intent of the regulation regarding lot width is to ensure that dwellings with three units have sufficient lot width for the structure setbacks, for parking and for amenity area. The proposed variance is for a lot width of 12.2 metres rather than the required 13.1 metres. By itself, the lot width is considered a minor variance of 0.9 metre and staff are of the opinion that the intent of the lot width variance is met. Staff are of the opinion that a lot width could support a building with 3 dwelling units, however, it is not of an appropriate width to accommodate the proposed built form. The intent of the regulation regarding a maximum of 40% garage width of the building facade is to ensure that garages do that dominate the property or the streetscape. The applicant is requesting a garage width of 65% (6.5 metres) of the building fagade where only a maximum of 40% (4.8 metres) garage width is permitted in the Appendix `C' area of Zoning By-law 2019-051. This regulation has been in place since last year, March 21, 2022. Staff must consider the intent of this newer regulation to ensure the changes in the by-law are consistent going forward. Staff are of the opinion that the general intent of this regulation as it applies to properties in Appendix `C' — Central Neighbourhood is not met. Is/Are the Effects of the Variance(s) Minor? The effect of the reduced lot width to permit 3 dwelling units on one(1) lot impacts the fagade width which in turn affects the maximum garage width permitted in order to provide 2 parking spaces with unobstructed access. The variance's impacts, to permit an increased garage width and consequently a driveway width which is the same with as the garage width, are not considered minor and overall appear to be an overdevelopment of the property. The requested garage/driveway width of 6.5 metres exceeds the width of two (2) side by side parking spaces of 5.2 metres and contribute to excessive driveway width which would negatively impact the vision for an enhanced streetscape. Is/Are the Variance(s) Desirable For The Appropriate Development or Use of the Land, Building and/or Structure? As noted above, the combined variances create a garage/driveway/parking layout that does not meet the intent of the new zoning by-law for this Appendix `C' - Central Neighbourhood area. Staff are of the opinion that the variances together create a development that is not appropriate and desirable for the use of this property in the subject area. Page 68 of 230 Figure 5: Proposed front fagade with Garage Width of 65% rl�PERSPECTiVES In summary, it is staff's opinion that the proposed dwelling, with an increased garage width, is an over development of the subject property. It has not been demonstrated why it is not possible to construct a more compatible building, with 3 dwelling units, on a lot of 12.2 metres instead of 13.1 metres and comply with all other regulations of the Zoning By-law. Planning staff recommends that the variances be `Refused'. Heritage Planning Comments: No concerns. Environmental Planning Comments: No concerns. Building Division Comments: No objections to the proposed variance provided building permit for the new residential is obtained prior to construction. Please contact the Building Division at build ing(a)kitchener.ca with any questions. Engineering Division Comments: No Comments. Transportation Planning Division Comments: Transportation Services have no concerns with the proposed application. Parks and Cemeteries Division Comments: There is an existing City -owned street tree that will be impacted by the proposed driveway widening associated with the development and this tree should be protected to City standards throughout construction as per Chapter 690 of the current Property Maintenance Page 69 of 230 By-law. Suitable arrangements including the submission and approval of a Tree Protection and Enhancement Plan showing full protection for existing trees; an ISA valuation of City - owned trees and any required securities or compensation for removed trees will be required to the satisfaction of Parks and Cemeteries prior to the issuance of a Building Permit or curb cut permit. Please see Urban Design Manual Part C, Section 13 and www.kitchener.ca/treemanagement Region of Waterloo Comments: There are no conditions for this application. However, the owners are advised that the proposed and existing dwelling(s) on the subject lands would have impacts from the transportation noise in the vicinity. The owners are responsible for ensuring that the subject development does not have any environmental noise impacts. In the absence of a detailed noise study, the staff strongly recommend that all dwelling units be installed with air -ducted heating and ventilation system, suitably sized and designed for the provision of central air conditioning. This will avoid retrofit at any later application stage, e.g., Consent/Condo. 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 advised 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: • Planning Act • Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2020) • A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 • Regional Official Plan • Official Plan (2014) • Zoning By-law 2019-051 Page 70 of 230 Region of Waterloo June 30, 2023 /_1IROTi1Wer City of Kitchener 200 King Street West P.O. Box 1118 Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES 150 Frederick Street, Sth Floor Kitchener ON N2G 4A Canada Telephone: 519-575-4400 TTY: 519-575-4608 Fax: 519-575-4449 www. reg i o n ofwate r l o o. ca File No.: D20-20/ VAR KIT GEN (5) 08 WEBER KIT, 15 DELLROY AVENUE 2296342 ONTARIO INCORPORATED (12) VAR KIT, 30 AND 40 MARGARET AVENUE ACTIVA HOLDINGS Subject: Committee of Adjustment Meeting July 18, 2023, City of Kitchener Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have the following comments: 1) A 2023 - 076 — 912 Otterbein Court — No Concerns. 2) A 2023 - 077 — 176 Indian Road — No Concerns. 3) A 2023 - 078 — 35 Fifth Avenue — There are no conditions for this application. However, the owners are advised that the proposed and existing dwelling(s) on the subject lands would have impacts from the transportation noise in the vicinity. The owners are responsible for ensuring that the subject development does not have any environmental noise impacts. In the absence of a detailed noise study, the staff strongly recommend that all dwelling units be installed with air -ducted heating and ventilation system, suitably sized and designed for the provision of central air conditioning. This will avoid retrofit at any later application stage, e.g. Consent/Condo. There are no airport -specific concerns for the proposed development. However, the owners are advised that the subject lands are located within the Airport Zoning Regulated area and specifically under the runway take-off/approach surface; and, as such, subject to all provisions of the Airport Zoning Regulations. 4) A 2023 - 079 — 55 Rockcliffe Drive — No Concerns. Document Number: 4421509 Page 1 of 3 Page 71 of 230 5) A 2023 — 080 — 15 Dellroy Avenue — The Regional staff do not support this minor variance application. Any structures within the Daylight Triangle (DLT) and any encroachment under, at or above the ground within the Regional right of way, including the daylight triangle (including the lands to be dedicated to the Region), will not be allowed. The buildings and the site must be designed accordingly. Airport Zoning (Advisory): The owners/applicants are also advised that the subject property falls within the Region of Waterloo Zoning Regulated Area, specifically under the Take- off/Approach Surface for Runway 08. Using the Region of Waterloo International Airport Zoning Regulations (AZR) online tool (https://www.waterlooairport.ca/en/about-vkf/airport-zoning-regulations- update.aspx), the permitted building height for the subject property is 399.5m Above Sea Level (ASL), the maximum building height is 75.5m based on a maximum ground level of 324m ASL. Please ensure that the building heights for the proposed development comply with the Region of Waterloo Airport zoning and height restrictions. The Region of Waterloo International Airport AZR also regulates any construction of towers/cranes for a proposed development. Any proposed development at this location must ensure that construction towers/cranes also comply with the Region of Waterloo International AZR. 6) A 2023 - 081 — 333 Pine Valley Drive — No Concerns. 7) A 2023 - 082 — 685 Frederick Street — No Concerns. 8) A 2023 - 083 — 15 Kenora Drive— No concerns/conditions for this application. Staff note that the subject lands are located within the Airport Zoning Regulated area and specifically under the runway take-off/approach surface; and, as such, subject to all provisions of the Airport Zoning Regulations. 9) A 2023 - 084 — 151 Frederick Street — There are no conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that they are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any environmental noise impacts (both on-site and off-site). 10) A 2023 - 085 — 920 Keewatin Place — No Concerns. 11) A 2023 — 086 — 59 Graber Place — Although there are no conditions for this application, the staff note that there are noise -sensitive land uses, specifically the backyards of many residential dwellings, in the immediate vicinity of the subject lands, which may have impacts from the noise from the proposed storage related activities. The staff recommend that the City staff look into this as deemed appropriate. 2 Page 72 of 230 12) A 2023 — 087 — 30-40 Margaret Avenue — No Concerns. Please be advised that any development on the subject lands is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 19-037 or any successor thereof and may require 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. If a site is subject to more than one application, additional comments may apply. Please forward any decisions on the above-mentioned Application numbers to the undersigned. Yours Truly, Joginder Bhatia Transportation Planner C (226) 753-0368 CC: Marilyn Mills, City of Kitchener CofA(a)Kitchener. ca 3 Page 73 of 230 June 29, 2023 Administration Centre: 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Cambridge, ON N1 R 5W6 Phone: 519-621-2761 Toll free: 1-866-900-4722 Fax: 519-621-4844 www.grandriver.ca Marilyn Mills Secretary -Treasurer Committee of Adjustment City of Kitchener 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON, N2G 4G7 Dear Marilyn Mills, Re: Committee of Adjustment Meeting — July 18, 2023 Applications for Minor Variance A 2023-077 176 Indian Road A 2023-078 35 Fifth Avenue A 2023-079 55 Rockcliffe Drive A 2023-080 15 Dellroy Avenue A 2023-081 333 Pine Valley Drive A 2023-082 685 Frederick Street A 2023-083 15 Kenora Drive A 2023-084 151 Frederick Street A 2023-085 920 Keewatin Place A 2023-087 30-40 Margaret Avenue Applications for Consent B 2023-025 97 Second Avenue B 2023-026 30-40 Margaret Avenue via email Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff has reviewed the above -noted applications. GRCA has no objection to the approval of the above applications. The subject properties do not contain any natural hazards such as watercourses, floodplains, shorelines, wetlands, or valley slopes. The properties are not subject to Ontario Regulation 150/06 and, therefore, a permission from GRCA is not required. Should you have any questions, please contact me at aherremana-q rand river. ca or 519- 621-2763 ext. 2228. Sincerely, Andrew Herreman, CPT Resource Planning Technician Grand River Conservation Authority Member of Conservation Ontario, representing Ontario's 36 Conservation Authorities I The Grand — A Canadian Heritage River Page 74 of 230 Staff Report r NJ :R Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: July 18, 2023 SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Interim Manager, Development Review 519-741-2200 ext. 7765 PREPARED BY: Raida Chowdhury, Student Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7078 WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 5 DATE OF REPORT: June 30, 2023 REPORT NO.: DSD -2023-304 SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2023-079 — 55 Rockcliffe Drive RECOMMENDATION: That Minor Variance Application A2023-079 for 55 Rockcliffe Drive requesting relief from Section 7.3, Table 7-4, of Zoning By-law 2019-051, to permit a minimum lot width for an external street townhouse unit of 7.5 metres instead of the minimum required 9.5 metres, and to permit an interior side yard setback of 1.2 metres instead of the minimum required 2.5 metres, to facilitate one Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Attached), generally in accordance with drawings prepared by Dawn Design Studios, dated April 19, 2023, BE APPROVED. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to review a minor variance to permit the creation of one Additional Dwelling Unit (Attached) within an existing townhouse dwelling. • The key finding of this report is that the minor variance meets the four tests of the Planning Act. • There are no financial implications. • Community engagement included a notice sign being placed on the property advising that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received, notice of the application was mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property and this report was posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Committee of Adjustment meeting. • This report supports the delivery of core services. BACKGROUND: The subject property is located near the intersection of Rockcliffe Drive and Newcastle Drive. The subject property is identified as `Community Areas' on Map 2 — Urban Structure and is designated `Low Rise Residential' on Map 3 — Land Use in the City's 2014 Official Plan. The property is zoned `Low Rise Residential Five Zone (RES -5)' in Zoning By-law 2019-051. The subject property currently contains a townhouse dwelling unit and it is the end unit of a block of 4 townhouse dwellings. The proposed Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Attached) would be located within the basement of the existing townhouse dwelling on the subject property. The interior side yard is 1.2 metres and the lot width of the subject property is 7.5 metres. Accordingly, minor *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 75 of 230 variances are requested to permit the minimum interior side yard setback to be 1.2 metres and the minimum lot width (external unit) to be 7.5 metres, rather than the required 2.5 metres and 9.5 metres, respectively, indicated in Zoning By-law 2019-051 Section 7.3. While the regulations set out in Section 7.3 do not apply to existing townhouse dwellings on existing lots, the proposed ADU (attached) would be a new addition, and as such, minor variances are required. The proposed alterations to the exterior of the dwelling are a window, window well, and a door at grade. These additions are proposed for the left side of the unit, facing the existing side yard entrance walkway. Vk 0 36 05" jet Figure 1 — Aerial Photo of Subject Property Page 76 of 230 55 ROCKCLIFFE DRIVE TOTAL GROSS F:,OOR AREA 1212E SOM SECOND DWELLING LINK [EASEMENT: 40.05 SCMi COMMON AREA/LAUNDRY (EASEMENT): 4.33 SQM EASEMENT TOTAL AREA 483E SQM GR ND FLOOR AREA 55.05 SOM SECOND RDOR ARE/' 6E.23 5O+1 Enw�e a4Rc�>G PARKING REQUIREMENT' 2 PARK OPROVIDED:?(ONE IN GARAGE aoNEONDRIVEWAY) SIDE LOT LINE E6000 ( XISTING TWO STOREY ARAG. f DRIVEWAY }� DETACHED HWS T A5 I� LAN 5$R.14$ IMARY LHmaNCF i dIA --D IMAPV IHTRANCE I'� 47 T 23 @ T22 m b.4b m E E rKalr rnRD _ — _ _ — _ _ — — _ SIDE LOT LINE SITE PLANU 1 SCALE -1.9U mcaErmmeNwN PEs 1N DE 0.�swa °'" 55 ROCKCLIFFF DRIVE R DER b FN ETREET 6 PTP^ CUREIT n.` d,� SITE PLAN N[ X2 r TEL. 6aT KR. 442T;flb] i0i 1252 1:90 2023-OM19 y EMAIL Info0�daxnd 'g /T�] Uy{/ pgESyGLDaxnDg0001 TA G5 9VprtEOr0Pt5KNWEA"ArvRe eflO. ROQFP xG1M Wpu�H gns.� '_ SECTION Q DOOR 2 SCALE 12 =1' 0' SIDE ELEVATION 1 SCALE: 3196" Figure 2 — Site Plan AuowAeLE uNPaorFOEo oPlr.+cs zPvaEr unnmNc wsuNa 12 En �;rve AI—EEOPENINGS 5].@6EOeT AQIIAL XENI— S0.P35OR ® ® 7 RN. SEND0.0. 1■��II { LRACf -------- ------------------ ry LxR.w Dlv9ns swa m Inc. --=Z 55 ROCKCLIFFE DRIVE ILJ 6FERN ,ELT gw iaw�y�,a a ,. SIDE ELEVATION D PWN pN, L5Y 1%2 TEL 611 292 4421; 64l 10T 5252 As iad'ca[ed 2023-04-19 EL /A EMAIL- rdo�dawnd Ig H Ivj E—DaxmfieslPn . 900i TA GS Figure 3 — Side Elevation Drawing Staff visited the subject property on June 28, 2023. Page 77 of 230 Figure 4 — Front View Photo from Site Visit Page 78 of 230 Figure 5 — Interior Side Yard Setback Photo from Site Visit REPORT: Planning Comments: In considering the four tests for the 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 subject property is designated `Low Rise Residential' in the City's Official Plan. This designation places emphasis on compatibility of building form with respect to massing, scale, and design in order to support the successful integration of different housing types. The proposed ADU (Attached) is a permitted use and conforms to the land use designation, as the low-rise built form is maintained, and the gentle intensification of housing is supported. Therefore, the minor variance meets the general intent of the Official Plan. General Intent of the Zoning By-law Minimum Interior Side Yard Setback: The intent of the 2.5 metre interior side yard setback requirement is to ensure that there is adequate access to the rear yard and distance between adjacent properties. The existing interior side yard setback of 1.2 metres currently provides adequate access to the rear yard, and the proposed door to the ADU (attached) is proposed to be at grade, so there will be no obstructions to rear yard access. As such, staff are of the opinion that the 1.2 metre setback meets the general intent of the Zoning By-law. Page 79 of 230 Minimum Lot Width (External Unit): The intent of the 9.5 metre minimum lot width requirement is to ensure that the lot is of adequate size for the external townhouse dwelling unit with the required interior side yard setback of 2.5 metres. When the townhouse dwelling was constructed the minimum lot width and side yard setback were 7.5 metres and 1.2 metres respectively. Duplexing was also permitted in Zoning By-law 85-1. Staff is of the opinion that this size lot will continue to function appropriately with an ADU and that the variance for lot width meets the general intent of the Zoning By-law. Is/Are the Effects of the Variance(s) Minor? The variance can be considered minor as the proposed ADU (attached) would be within the basement portion of an existing townhouse dwelling, and therefore there are no new structures proposed. It is the opinion of staff that as the proposed door is at grade, and the existing interior side yard setback provides adequate rear yard access, the effect on adjacent properties would be minimal and therefore will not negatively impact the existing character of the subject property or surrounding neighbourhood. Is/Are the Variance(s) Desirable For The Appropriate Development or Use of the Land, Building and/or Structure? The variance is appropriate for the development and use of the lot as it will facilitate a gentle intensification of the existing townhouse dwelling with minimal alterations to the exterior of the existing unit, which include a window and a door at grade in the side yard. Environmental Planning Comments: Environmental Planning has no concerns. Heritage Planning Comments: Heritage Planning has no concerns. Building Division Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance. An application has been made to change the use to a duplex and it is currently under review. Engineering Division Comments: Engineering Division has no concerns. Parks/Operations Division Comments: Parks/Operations Division has no concerns. Transportation Planning Comments: Transportation Planning has no concerns. Region of Waterloo Comments: The Region of Waterloo has no concerns. Grand River Conservation Authority Comments: Grand River Conservation Authority has no concerns. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Capital Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget. Page 80 of 230 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: • Planning Act • Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2020) • A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 • Regional Official Plan • Official Plan (2014) • Zoning By-law 2019-051 Page 81 of 230 Region of Waterloo June 30, 2023 /_1IROTi1Wer City of Kitchener 200 King Street West P.O. Box 1118 Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES 150 Frederick Street, Sth Floor Kitchener ON N2G 4A Canada Telephone: 519-575-4400 TTY: 519-575-4608 Fax: 519-575-4449 www. reg i o n ofwate r l o o. ca File No.: D20-20/ VAR KIT GEN (5) 08 WEBER KIT, 15 DELLROY AVENUE 2296342 ONTARIO INCORPORATED (12) VAR KIT, 30 AND 40 MARGARET AVENUE ACTIVA HOLDINGS Subject: Committee of Adjustment Meeting July 18, 2023, City of Kitchener Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have the following comments: 1) A 2023 - 076 — 912 Otterbein Court — No Concerns. 2) A 2023 - 077 — 176 Indian Road — No Concerns. 3) A 2023 - 078 — 35 Fifth Avenue — There are no conditions for this application. However, the owners are advised that the proposed and existing dwelling(s) on the subject lands would have impacts from the transportation noise in the vicinity. The owners are responsible for ensuring that the subject development does not have any environmental noise impacts. In the absence of a detailed noise study, the staff strongly recommend that all dwelling units be installed with air -ducted heating and ventilation system, suitably sized and designed for the provision of central air conditioning. This will avoid retrofit at any later application stage, e.g. Consent/Condo. There are no airport -specific concerns for the proposed development. However, the owners are advised that the subject lands are located within the Airport Zoning Regulated area and specifically under the runway take-off/approach surface; and, as such, subject to all provisions of the Airport Zoning Regulations. 4) A 2023 - 079 — 55 Rockcliffe Drive — No Concerns. Document Number: 4421509 Page 1 of 3 Page 82 of 230 5) A 2023 — 080 — 15 Dellroy Avenue — The Regional staff do not support this minor variance application. Any structures within the Daylight Triangle (DLT) and any encroachment under, at or above the ground within the Regional right of way, including the daylight triangle (including the lands to be dedicated to the Region), will not be allowed. The buildings and the site must be designed accordingly. Airport Zoning (Advisory): The owners/applicants are also advised that the subject property falls within the Region of Waterloo Zoning Regulated Area, specifically under the Take- off/Approach Surface for Runway 08. Using the Region of Waterloo International Airport Zoning Regulations (AZR) online tool (https://www.waterlooairport.ca/en/about-vkf/airport-zoning-regulations- update.aspx), the permitted building height for the subject property is 399.5m Above Sea Level (ASL), the maximum building height is 75.5m based on a maximum ground level of 324m ASL. Please ensure that the building heights for the proposed development comply with the Region of Waterloo Airport zoning and height restrictions. The Region of Waterloo International Airport AZR also regulates any construction of towers/cranes for a proposed development. Any proposed development at this location must ensure that construction towers/cranes also comply with the Region of Waterloo International AZR. 6) A 2023 - 081 — 333 Pine Valley Drive — No Concerns. 7) A 2023 - 082 — 685 Frederick Street — No Concerns. 8) A 2023 - 083 — 15 Kenora Drive— No concerns/conditions for this application. Staff note that the subject lands are located within the Airport Zoning Regulated area and specifically under the runway take-off/approach surface; and, as such, subject to all provisions of the Airport Zoning Regulations. 9) A 2023 - 084 — 151 Frederick Street — There are no conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that they are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any environmental noise impacts (both on-site and off-site). 10) A 2023 - 085 — 920 Keewatin Place — No Concerns. 11) A 2023 — 086 — 59 Graber Place — Although there are no conditions for this application, the staff note that there are noise -sensitive land uses, specifically the backyards of many residential dwellings, in the immediate vicinity of the subject lands, which may have impacts from the noise from the proposed storage related activities. The staff recommend that the City staff look into this as deemed appropriate. 2 Page 83 of 230 12) A 2023 — 087 — 30-40 Margaret Avenue — No Concerns. Please be advised that any development on the subject lands is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 19-037 or any successor thereof and may require 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. If a site is subject to more than one application, additional comments may apply. Please forward any decisions on the above-mentioned Application numbers to the undersigned. Yours Truly, Joginder Bhatia Transportation Planner C (226) 753-0368 CC: Marilyn Mills, City of Kitchener CofA(a)Kitchener. ca 3 Page 84 of 230 June 29, 2023 Administration Centre: 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Cambridge, ON N1 R 5W6 Phone: 519-621-2761 Toll free: 1-866-900-4722 Fax: 519-621-4844 www.grandriver.ca Marilyn Mills Secretary -Treasurer Committee of Adjustment City of Kitchener 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON, N2G 4G7 Dear Marilyn Mills, Re: Committee of Adjustment Meeting — July 18, 2023 Applications for Minor Variance A 2023-077 176 Indian Road A 2023-078 35 Fifth Avenue A 2023-079 55 Rockcliffe Drive A 2023-080 15 Dellroy Avenue A 2023-081 333 Pine Valley Drive A 2023-082 685 Frederick Street A 2023-083 15 Kenora Drive A 2023-084 151 Frederick Street A 2023-085 920 Keewatin Place A 2023-087 30-40 Margaret Avenue Applications for Consent B 2023-025 97 Second Avenue B 2023-026 30-40 Margaret Avenue via email Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff has reviewed the above -noted applications. GRCA has no objection to the approval of the above applications. The subject properties do not contain any natural hazards such as watercourses, floodplains, shorelines, wetlands, or valley slopes. The properties are not subject to Ontario Regulation 150/06 and, therefore, a permission from GRCA is not required. Should you have any questions, please contact me at aherremana-q rand river. ca or 519- 621-2763 ext. 2228. Sincerely, Andrew Herreman, CPT Resource Planning Technician Grand River Conservation Authority Member of Conservation Ontario, representing Ontario's 36 Conservation Authorities I The Grand — A Canadian Heritage River Page 85 of 230 Staff Report Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: July 18, 2023 SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Interim Manager, Development Review 519-741-2200 ext. 7765 PREPARED BY: Brian Bateman, Senior Planner, 519-741-2200 x7869 WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 2 DATE OF REPORT: July 5, 2023 REPORT NO.: DSD -2023-314 SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2023-080 - 15 Dellroy Avenue RECOMMENDATION: That Minor Variance Application A2023-080 for 15 Dellroy Avenue requesting relief from the following sections of Zoning By-law 2019-051: i) Requesting relief from Section 7.3, Table 7-6, to permit a front yard setback of 1 metre instead of the minimum required front yard setback of 3 metres and to permit an interior side yard setback of 0 metres instead of the minimum required interior side yard setback of 4.5 metres; ii) Requesting relief from Section 5.6, Table 5-5, to allow 0.6 parking spaces per dwelling unit (167 parking spaces) and 0.08 visitor parking spaces per dwelling unit (24 parking spaces) instead of the minimum required 1 parking space per dwelling unit (277 parking spaces) and 0.10 visitor parking spaces per dwelling unit (28 parking spaces); iii) Requesting relief from Section 5.3.4 b) ii) to allow parking spaces and drive aisles on the ground floor of a multiple dwelling building to be not entirely behind the area on the ground floor devoted to permitted uses abutting a street line facade, whereas the by-law requires all parking spaces and drive aisles to be behind the area devoted to permitted uses abutting a street line facade; and iv) Requesting relief from section 4.5 a) to allow encroachments into the Driveway Visibility Triangle (DVT) abutting Weber Street East whereas no encroachments into the Driveway Visibility Triangle (DVT) are allowed in; to facilitate the development of an 18 -storey mixed-use building with residential and commercial uses while retaining the existing 6 -storey apartment building in accordance with Site Plan Application SP22/158/D/BB, BE DEFERRED to a future meeting date agreeable to the Applicant. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to review and recommend Deferral of a Minor Variance Application to facilitate the development of an 18 -storey mixed use building on the subject property. • Site Plan Application SP22/158/D/BB to facilitate the proposed development has received Conditional Approval. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 86 of 230 • Region of Waterloo Staff have identified some potential concerns with the DVT Minor Variance due to a proposed road widening along Weber Street East. The Applicant is agreeable to some more detailed work being completed by an Ontario Land Surveyor to establish the road widening and confirm the location of the proposed building relative to the new lot line and CVT and DVT. • Community engagement included a notice sign being placed on the property advising that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received, notice of the application was mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property and this report was posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Committee of Adjustment meeting. • There are no financial implications. • This report supports the delivery of core services. BACKGROUND: The subject property, municipally known as 15 Dellroy Avenue, is located at the intersection of Dellroy Avenue and Weber Street East. The subject property before the required 1.7 metre Weber Street East road widening is 5,720 m2 or 0.572 hectares and roughly square in shape with 73.1 metres of frontage along Weber Street East and 76.7 metres of frontage along Dellroy Avenue (see Image 1 above). After the required road widening, the subject property is 5,587 m2 or 0.55 hectares with the same frontage along Weber Street East and 75 metres along Dellroy Avenue. Subject i arc^ -a . 4. 22` �t A 7 weber StreF- Image 1 —15 Dellroy Avenue Page 87 of 230 Currently there is an existing 6 -storey apartment building on the subject property fronting onto Dellroy Avenue which was originally constructed in the 1970s (see Image 2). Surface parking located in the northwestern corner of the site is accessed from Dellroy Avenue to the north of the existing apartment building (Underground parking is accessed via Weber Street East to the east of the existing building. A grassed, sloped area covers the eastern half of the property (see Image 1). This area includes an L-shaped existing foundation wall within the eastern portion of the front yard and the northern portion of the interior side yard. The foundation wall was originally intended to support the construction of a second apartment building in an abandoned second phase of the project, and had been covered by the grassed, sloped area to maintain a safe condition on site. The applicant is proposing to construct an 18 -storey mixed-use building with a 4 -storey podium fronting Weber Street East while retaining an existing 6 -storey, 46 dwelling unit apartment building and associated underground parking structure. The new building will include 231 dwelling units in the tower and podium. 200 parking spaces are proposed at the surface and underground for all uses on the site. Specifically, 71 parking spaces are proposed on a reconfigured surface parking area, which is accessed via the existing Dellroy Avenue surface parking access and via a new Weber Street East access to facilitate fire truck movements. 109 parking spaces are provided in two underground levels via a new dedicated access from Weber Street East and 20 parking spaces are provided under the existing 6 -storey apartment building, accessed via the existing Dellroy Avenue access, and connected to the new underground parking structure on the second underground level. The applicant is in discussions with the Ministry of Transportation (Ontario) in consideration of a long-term lease of the vacant MTO lands directly across Dellroy Avenue for up to 120 additional surface parking spaces. Any such leased parking is not permitted to count toward meeting Zoning By -Law requirements. Page 88 of 230 iO Q z z Y LU F REPORT: ii i H H H DELLROY r AVENUE 121 ri rr J tic.p. EYI sr FTrul .uxerc.�N- culEalwc = � s MI}N NO, 15 IX* J k I 911 61.1 pig I ibl [.Ly6kYRlYQM�d` i . � I + N1NfrifF Af41A I`{II I $ ❑ 1e STOMAYAi'[Ian EI2*1I&VM4SrWf d - ■� 31 IIESIGEhRL4L u1BT: lA 1b, Coff1 aaarl.0 COlMi�6lAL if 9M1�1GOfIN16 flLli mum.N Imlfi9he ffi. I•. r I . Image 3 — Proposed Site Development aj� :�,}� •-c mx � �4 W x LILI I sr snr. [Y c¢umrrua W W N.. § W tl x GWa Planning Comments Minor Variance Applications In considering the four tests for the 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 subject property is shown within an `Urban Corridor' on Map 2 and designated `High Rise Residential' on Map 3 of the City of Kitchener Official Plan. Lands shown within `Urban Corridors' are `Intensification Areas' intended "to have strong pedestrian linkages and be integrated with neighbouring residential and employment uses' as well as to `provide for a range of retail and commercial uses and intensification opportunities that should be transit supportive." Lands designated `High Rise Residential' "will primarily accommodate high density multiple dwellings... to achieve a high intensity of residential use"." All development and redevelopment must have a Floor Space Ratio between 2.0 and 4.0. The minor variances to facilitate this development will meet the intent of the Official Plan. Page 89 of 230 General Intent of the Zoning By-law The subject property is zoned `RES -7: High Rise Residential Seven Zone', under Zoning By-law 2019-051, which permits `Multiple Dwelling' and a range of non-residential uses. This zone category requires a minimum Front Yard and Exterior Yard Setback of 3.0 metres and a minimum Interior Side Yard Setback of 4.5 metres. Section 5 of the Zoning By-law (Parking, Loading, and Stacking) requires 1.0 parking spaces per dwelling unit plus 0.1 per dwelling unit of visitor parking and 1.0 parking spaces per 33 m2 of non-residential GFA. It further requires that ground floor parking spaces and drive aisles for multiple dwelling buildings be located entirely behind permitted uses abutting the street line fagade of the building, such as the proposed residential and non-residential uses, except for access. Section 4 of the Zoning By -Law (General Regulations) requires driveway visibility triangles at all driveway accesses and restricts any obstructions to visibility, including buildings, except for objects 0.9 metres or less in height from the ground or objects higher than 5 metres in height from the ground. The minor variances have been reviewed in the context of Site Plan Application SP22/158/D/BB to ensure that the proposal and built form support the planned function of the land use designation and intent of the zone category and Zoning By-law. Accordingly, the intent of the Zoning By-law will be maintained. Is/Are the Effects of the Variance(s) Minor? The effects of the variances will be minor. The proposed development has been reviewed to ensure that it is compatible in built form and can function appropriately on the subject lands. A Transportation Impact Study and Parking Study has been submitted and accepted by Transportation Planning Staff. Also as Site Plan Application SP22/158/D/BB, to facilitate this development, has received conditional approval, the effects of the variances will be minor. Is/Are the Variance(s) Desirable For The Appropriate Development or Use of the Land, Building and/or Structure? The minor variances are desirable and appropriate as they will facilitate the development of an 18 - storey mixed-use building with a 4 -storey podium fronting Weber Street East while retaining an existing 6 -storey, 46 dwelling unit apartment building and associated underground parking structure. The new building will provide an additional 231 dwelling units, for a total of 277 dwelling units and support the City's Housing Pledge. Environmental Planning Comments: No concerns. Heritage Planning Comments: No concerns. Building Division Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variances provided a building permit for the new residential building is obtained prior to construction. Please contact the Building Division at building(d)-kitchener.ca with any questions. Engineering Division Comments: No concerns. Parks/Operations Division Comments: No concerns Transportation Planning Comments: It should be noted that Paradigm Transportation Transportation Impact Study and Parking Study, Solutions Limited submitted (November 2022) a which was reviewed by Transportation Services. Page 90 of 230 Transportation Services staff have dealt with the applicant regarding the proposed parking rate and encroachments into the driveway visibility triangles and are supportive of both. Grand River Conservation Authority Comments: No objections or concerns. Region of Waterloo Comments: The Regional staff do not support this minor variance application. Any structures within the Daylight Triangle (DLT) and any encroachment under, at or above the ground within the Regional right of way, including the daylight triangle (including the lands to be dedicated to the Region), will not be allowed. The buildings and the site must be designed accordingly. Planning Staff Comments: Site Plan Application SP22/158/D/BB received Conditional Approval on May 15, 2023. During the review of the Site Plan there was considerable dialogue with the Region with respect to the required road widenings, the location of the building and proposed landscaping within the Regional Road allowance. There are 2 triangles in this location, a Corner Visibility Triangle (CVT) and a Driveway Visibility Triangle (DVT). The DVT's apply to the driveway entrances, whereas the CVT applies to the corner of Weber Street Eat and Dellroy Avenue. The applicant has requested a Minor Variance with respect to the Driveway Visibility Triangle (DVT). Some survey work needs to be done to confirm the road widening and the impacts to the proposed development. In any case, the applicant can confirm that building will be adjusted to comply with the Regional CVT. However, in the absence of this more detailed survey work to establish the road widening and confirm the location of the proposed building relative to the new lot line and CVT and DVT, the Applicant has requested to defer this application. Corner Visibility Area - means the area formed within a corner lot by two triangles, where the intersecting street lines form the legs of each triangle, and the triangles extend from the street Iinepoint of intersection. Corner Visibility Triangle — means a triangular area formed within a corner lot by the intersecting street lines or the projections thereof, and a straight line connecting them from their point of intersection. Driveway Visibility Triangle — means a triangular area formed within a lot by the intersection of an edge of a driveway and a lot line, or the projections thereof, and a straight line connecting them from their point of intersection. Airport Zoning (Advisory): The owners/applicants are also advised that the subject property falls within the Region of Waterloo Zoning Regulated Area, specifically under the Take-off/Approach Surface for Runway 08. Using the Region of Waterloo International Airport Zoning Regulations (AZR) online tool (https://www.waterlooairport.ca/en/about-vkf/airport-zoning-regulations-update.aspx), the permitted building height for the subject property is 399.5m Above Sea Level (ASL), the maximum building height is 75.5m based on a maximum ground level of 324m ASL. Please ensure that the building heights for the proposed development comply with the Region of Waterloo Airport zoning and height restrictions. The Region of Waterloo International Airport AZR also regulates any construction of towers/cranes for a proposed development. Any proposed development at this location must ensure that construction towers/cranes also comply with the Region of Waterloo International AZR. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services. Page 91 of 230 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: • Planning Act • Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2020) • A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 • Regional Official Plan (ROP) • ROPA 6 • Official Plan (2014) • Zoning By-law 2019-051 Page 92 of 230 Region of Waterloo June 30, 2023 /_1IROTi1Wer City of Kitchener 200 King Street West P.O. Box 1118 Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES 150 Frederick Street, Sth Floor Kitchener ON N2G 4A Canada Telephone: 519-575-4400 TTY: 519-575-4608 Fax: 519-575-4449 www. reg i o n ofwate r l o o. ca File No.: D20-20/ VAR KIT GEN (5) 08 WEBER KIT, 15 DELLROY AVENUE 2296342 ONTARIO INCORPORATED (12) VAR KIT, 30 AND 40 MARGARET AVENUE ACTIVA HOLDINGS Subject: Committee of Adjustment Meeting July 18, 2023, City of Kitchener Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have the following comments: 1) A 2023 - 076 — 912 Otterbein Court — No Concerns. 2) A 2023 - 077 — 176 Indian Road — No Concerns. 3) A 2023 - 078 — 35 Fifth Avenue — There are no conditions for this application. However, the owners are advised that the proposed and existing dwelling(s) on the subject lands would have impacts from the transportation noise in the vicinity. The owners are responsible for ensuring that the subject development does not have any environmental noise impacts. In the absence of a detailed noise study, the staff strongly recommend that all dwelling units be installed with air -ducted heating and ventilation system, suitably sized and designed for the provision of central air conditioning. This will avoid retrofit at any later application stage, e.g. Consent/Condo. There are no airport -specific concerns for the proposed development. However, the owners are advised that the subject lands are located within the Airport Zoning Regulated area and specifically under the runway take-off/approach surface; and, as such, subject to all provisions of the Airport Zoning Regulations. 4) A 2023 - 079 — 55 Rockcliffe Drive — No Concerns. Document Number: 4421509 Page 1 of 3 Page 93 of 230 5) A 2023 — 080 — 15 Dellroy Avenue — The Regional staff do not support this minor variance application. Any structures within the Daylight Triangle (DLT) and any encroachment under, at or above the ground within the Regional right of way, including the daylight triangle (including the lands to be dedicated to the Region), will not be allowed. The buildings and the site must be designed accordingly. Airport Zoning (Advisory): The owners/applicants are also advised that the subject property falls within the Region of Waterloo Zoning Regulated Area, specifically under the Take- off/Approach Surface for Runway 08. Using the Region of Waterloo International Airport Zoning Regulations (AZR) online tool (https://www.waterlooairport.ca/en/about-vkf/airport-zoning-regulations- update.aspx), the permitted building height for the subject property is 399.5m Above Sea Level (ASL), the maximum building height is 75.5m based on a maximum ground level of 324m ASL. Please ensure that the building heights for the proposed development comply with the Region of Waterloo Airport zoning and height restrictions. The Region of Waterloo International Airport AZR also regulates any construction of towers/cranes for a proposed development. Any proposed development at this location must ensure that construction towers/cranes also comply with the Region of Waterloo International AZR. 6) A 2023 - 081 — 333 Pine Valley Drive — No Concerns. 7) A 2023 - 082 — 685 Frederick Street — No Concerns. 8) A 2023 - 083 — 15 Kenora Drive— No concerns/conditions for this application. Staff note that the subject lands are located within the Airport Zoning Regulated area and specifically under the runway take-off/approach surface; and, as such, subject to all provisions of the Airport Zoning Regulations. 9) A 2023 - 084 — 151 Frederick Street — There are no conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that they are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any environmental noise impacts (both on-site and off-site). 10) A 2023 - 085 — 920 Keewatin Place — No Concerns. 11) A 2023 — 086 — 59 Graber Place — Although there are no conditions for this application, the staff note that there are noise -sensitive land uses, specifically the backyards of many residential dwellings, in the immediate vicinity of the subject lands, which may have impacts from the noise from the proposed storage related activities. The staff recommend that the City staff look into this as deemed appropriate. 2 Page 94 of 230 12) A 2023 — 087 — 30-40 Margaret Avenue — No Concerns. Please be advised that any development on the subject lands is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 19-037 or any successor thereof and may require 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. If a site is subject to more than one application, additional comments may apply. Please forward any decisions on the above-mentioned Application numbers to the undersigned. Yours Truly, Joginder Bhatia Transportation Planner C (226) 753-0368 CC: Marilyn Mills, City of Kitchener CofA(a)Kitchener. ca 3 Page 95 of 230 June 29, 2023 Administration Centre: 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Cambridge, ON N1 R 5W6 Phone: 519-621-2761 Toll free: 1-866-900-4722 Fax: 519-621-4844 www.grandriver.ca Marilyn Mills Secretary -Treasurer Committee of Adjustment City of Kitchener 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON, N2G 4G7 Dear Marilyn Mills, Re: Committee of Adjustment Meeting — July 18, 2023 Applications for Minor Variance A 2023-077 176 Indian Road A 2023-078 35 Fifth Avenue A 2023-079 55 Rockcliffe Drive A 2023-080 15 Dellroy Avenue A 2023-081 333 Pine Valley Drive A 2023-082 685 Frederick Street A 2023-083 15 Kenora Drive A 2023-084 151 Frederick Street A 2023-085 920 Keewatin Place A 2023-087 30-40 Margaret Avenue Applications for Consent B 2023-025 97 Second Avenue B 2023-026 30-40 Margaret Avenue via email Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff has reviewed the above -noted applications. GRCA has no objection to the approval of the above applications. The subject properties do not contain any natural hazards such as watercourses, floodplains, shorelines, wetlands, or valley slopes. The properties are not subject to Ontario Regulation 150/06 and, therefore, a permission from GRCA is not required. Should you have any questions, please contact me at aherremana-q rand river. ca or 519- 621-2763 ext. 2228. Sincerely, Andrew Herreman, CPT Resource Planning Technician Grand River Conservation Authority Member of Conservation Ontario, representing Ontario's 36 Conservation Authorities I The Grand — A Canadian Heritage River Page 96 of 230 Staff Report r NJ :R Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: July 18, 2023 SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Interim Manager, Development Review 519-741-2200 ext. 7765 PREPARED BY: Adam Zufferli, Student Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7074 WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 4 DATE OF REPORT: June 30, 2023 REPORT NO.: DSD -2023-301 SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2023-081 — 333 Pine Valley Drive RECOMMENDATION: That Minor Variance Application A2023-081 for 333 Pine Valley Drive requesting relief from Section 4.1 d) of Zoning By-law 2019-051, to permit a detached accessory structure to have a maximum height of 4.5 metres to the underside of the fascia instead of the maximum permitted 3 metres, generally in accordance with drawings prepared by Arcadia Design, dated April 11, 2023, BE APPROVED. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to review a minor variance application to permit the construction of a detached accessory structure on the property. • The key finding of this report is that the minor variance meets the four tests of the Planning Act. • There are no financial implications. • Community engagement included a notice sign being placed on the property advising that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received, notice of the application was mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property and this report was posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Committee of Adjustment meeting. • This report supports the delivery of core services. BACKGROUND: The subject property is located on Pine Valley Drive between Apple Ridge Drive and Ridgemere Court. The current use of the property is a single -detached dwelling The subject property is identified as `Community Area' on Map 2 — Urban Structure and is designated `Low Rise Residential' on Map 3 — Land Use in the City's 2014 Official Plan. The property is zoned `Low Rise Residential Four Zone (RES -4)' in Zoning By-law 2019-051. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 97 of 230 Figure 1 — 333 Pine Valley Drive (Subject Property) Figure 2 — Rear Yard of Subject Property The application is requesting relief from Section 4.1 d) of Zoning By-law 2019-051 to permit a detached accessory structure to have a maximum height of 4.5 metres to the underside of the fascia instead of the maximum permitted 3 metres. The requested minor variance will facilitate the Page 98 of 230 construction of a pool deck and cabana in the rear yard of the property. Due to the grading of the rear yard of the property, the rear portion of the structure will be 4.5 metres in height to the underside of the fascia, however the front portion of the structure will maintain the maximum permitted 3.0 metres in height to the underside of the fascia. This is illustrated in Attachment `B'. REPORT: Planning Comments: In considering the four tests for the 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 subject property is designated `Low Rise Residential' in the City's Official Plan. The intent of this designation is to emphasize the compatibility of building form with respect to massing, scale and design in order to support the successful integration of different building types. It also places emphasis on the relationship of buildings to adjacent properties, streets, and exterior areas. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance to facilitate the construction of a detached accessory structure conforms to the general intent of the Official Plan. General Intent of the Zoning By-law The intent of Section 4.1 d) of Zoning By-law 2019-051 which limits the height to the underside of the fascia to 3 metres is to ensure that accessory structures are not excessive in height and to ensure that neighbouring properties do not face blank walls. Due to the slope of the subject property, the rear portion of the rear yard is significantly lower than the front portion of the rear yard. As such, the rear wall of the accessory structure must be 1.5 metres longer than the front wall. The structure meets the 3 metres height maximum to the underside of the fascia at the front wall. There are also no properties adjacent to the rear property line, meaning no neighbours would be impacted by the variance. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance meets the general intent of the Zoning By-law. Is/Are the Effects of the Variance(s) Minor? Staff is of the opinion that the effects of the variance are minor. The structure will be setback from the side lot line 1.9 metres at the shortest height and setback 6.6 metres from the side lot line at the highest height. The increase in height to the underside of the fascia of 1.5 metres will really only impact the view of the property from the rear, where there are no adjacent neighbouring properties. The height of the proposed accessory structure will be compatible with existing buildings on the subject property and will not conflict with the character of the surrounding neighbourhood. Is/Are the Variance(s) Desirable For The Appropriate Development or Use of the Land, Building and/or Structure? Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land. The height, scale, and massing of the proposed detached accessory structure are compatible with the existing character of the surrounding neighbourhood. Environmental Planning Comments: No comments. Heritage Planning Comments: No comments. Page 99 of 230 Building Division Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance provided building permit for the new pool cabana is obtained prior to construction. Please contact the Building Division at building(ukitchener.ca with any questions. Engineering Division Comments: No comments. Parks/Operations Division Comments: No comments. Transportation Planning Comments: No comments. 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: • Planning Act • Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2020) • A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 • Regional Official Plan • Official Plan (2014) • Zoning By-law 2019-051 ATTACHMENTS: Page 100 of 230 Attachment A — Full Site Sketch 1 CABANA REAR Attachment B — Rear of Pool Cabana as a W o a ( p 11 g DA&C.M. av afi. v.�i.y ogre m... ra. FLLL 81fESKETCH Ar oe�acewre SSS Rne Valley QMe Nirch.ieeo, Ort ,•�. r�, taBPNN REPR t:Cl Page 101 of 230 Region of Waterloo June 30, 2023 /_1IROTi1Wer City of Kitchener 200 King Street West P.O. Box 1118 Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES 150 Frederick Street, Sth Floor Kitchener ON N2G 4A Canada Telephone: 519-575-4400 TTY: 519-575-4608 Fax: 519-575-4449 www. reg i o n ofwate r l o o. ca File No.: D20-20/ VAR KIT GEN (5) 08 WEBER KIT, 15 DELLROY AVENUE 2296342 ONTARIO INCORPORATED (12) VAR KIT, 30 AND 40 MARGARET AVENUE ACTIVA HOLDINGS Subject: Committee of Adjustment Meeting July 18, 2023, City of Kitchener Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have the following comments: 1) A 2023 - 076 — 912 Otterbein Court — No Concerns. 2) A 2023 - 077 — 176 Indian Road — No Concerns. 3) A 2023 - 078 — 35 Fifth Avenue — There are no conditions for this application. However, the owners are advised that the proposed and existing dwelling(s) on the subject lands would have impacts from the transportation noise in the vicinity. The owners are responsible for ensuring that the subject development does not have any environmental noise impacts. In the absence of a detailed noise study, the staff strongly recommend that all dwelling units be installed with air -ducted heating and ventilation system, suitably sized and designed for the provision of central air conditioning. This will avoid retrofit at any later application stage, e.g. Consent/Condo. There are no airport -specific concerns for the proposed development. However, the owners are advised that the subject lands are located within the Airport Zoning Regulated area and specifically under the runway take-off/approach surface; and, as such, subject to all provisions of the Airport Zoning Regulations. 4) A 2023 - 079 — 55 Rockcliffe Drive — No Concerns. Document Number: 4421509 Page 1 of 3 Page 102 of 230 5) A 2023 — 080 — 15 Dellroy Avenue — The Regional staff do not support this minor variance application. Any structures within the Daylight Triangle (DLT) and any encroachment under, at or above the ground within the Regional right of way, including the daylight triangle (including the lands to be dedicated to the Region), will not be allowed. The buildings and the site must be designed accordingly. Airport Zoning (Advisory): The owners/applicants are also advised that the subject property falls within the Region of Waterloo Zoning Regulated Area, specifically under the Take- off/Approach Surface for Runway 08. Using the Region of Waterloo International Airport Zoning Regulations (AZR) online tool (https://www.waterlooairport.ca/en/about-vkf/airport-zoning-regulations- update.aspx), the permitted building height for the subject property is 399.5m Above Sea Level (ASL), the maximum building height is 75.5m based on a maximum ground level of 324m ASL. Please ensure that the building heights for the proposed development comply with the Region of Waterloo Airport zoning and height restrictions. The Region of Waterloo International Airport AZR also regulates any construction of towers/cranes for a proposed development. Any proposed development at this location must ensure that construction towers/cranes also comply with the Region of Waterloo International AZR. 6) A 2023 - 081 — 333 Pine Valley Drive — No Concerns. 7) A 2023 - 082 — 685 Frederick Street — No Concerns. 8) A 2023 - 083 — 15 Kenora Drive— No concerns/conditions for this application. Staff note that the subject lands are located within the Airport Zoning Regulated area and specifically under the runway take-off/approach surface; and, as such, subject to all provisions of the Airport Zoning Regulations. 9) A 2023 - 084 — 151 Frederick Street — There are no conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that they are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any environmental noise impacts (both on-site and off-site). 10) A 2023 - 085 — 920 Keewatin Place — No Concerns. 11) A 2023 — 086 — 59 Graber Place — Although there are no conditions for this application, the staff note that there are noise -sensitive land uses, specifically the backyards of many residential dwellings, in the immediate vicinity of the subject lands, which may have impacts from the noise from the proposed storage related activities. The staff recommend that the City staff look into this as deemed appropriate. 2 Page 103 of 230 12) A 2023 — 087 — 30-40 Margaret Avenue — No Concerns. Please be advised that any development on the subject lands is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 19-037 or any successor thereof and may require 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. If a site is subject to more than one application, additional comments may apply. Please forward any decisions on the above-mentioned Application numbers to the undersigned. Yours Truly, Joginder Bhatia Transportation Planner C (226) 753-0368 CC: Marilyn Mills, City of Kitchener CofA(a)Kitchener. ca 3 Page 104 of 230 June 29, 2023 Administration Centre: 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Cambridge, ON N1 R 5W6 Phone: 519-621-2761 Toll free: 1-866-900-4722 Fax: 519-621-4844 www.grandriver.ca Marilyn Mills Secretary -Treasurer Committee of Adjustment City of Kitchener 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON, N2G 4G7 Dear Marilyn Mills, Re: Committee of Adjustment Meeting — July 18, 2023 Applications for Minor Variance A 2023-077 176 Indian Road A 2023-078 35 Fifth Avenue A 2023-079 55 Rockcliffe Drive A 2023-080 15 Dellroy Avenue A 2023-081 333 Pine Valley Drive A 2023-082 685 Frederick Street A 2023-083 15 Kenora Drive A 2023-084 151 Frederick Street A 2023-085 920 Keewatin Place A 2023-087 30-40 Margaret Avenue Applications for Consent B 2023-025 97 Second Avenue B 2023-026 30-40 Margaret Avenue via email Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff has reviewed the above -noted applications. GRCA has no objection to the approval of the above applications. The subject properties do not contain any natural hazards such as watercourses, floodplains, shorelines, wetlands, or valley slopes. The properties are not subject to Ontario Regulation 150/06 and, therefore, a permission from GRCA is not required. Should you have any questions, please contact me at aherremana-q rand river. ca or 519- 621-2763 ext. 2228. Sincerely, Andrew Herreman, CPT Resource Planning Technician Grand River Conservation Authority Member of Conservation Ontario, representing Ontario's 36 Conservation Authorities I The Grand — A Canadian Heritage River Page 105 of 230 Staff Report r NJ :R Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: July 18, 2023 SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Interim Manager, Development Review 519-741-2200 ext. 7765 PREPARED BY: Tara Zhang, Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7760 WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 1 DATE OF REPORT: July 5, 2023 REPORT NO.: DSD -2023-311 SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2023-082 — 685 Frederick Street RECOMMENDATION: That Minor Variance Application A2023-082 for 685 Frederick Street requesting relief from Section 4.12.3.1 a) a. of Zoning By-law 2019-051, to permit the principal dwelling to have a side yard setback of 1 metre instead of the minimum required side yard setback of 1.2 metres to facilitate the development of an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Detached) in the rear yard, BE APPROVED. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to review a minor variance to permit the construction of an Additional Dwelling Unit (Detached) in the rear yard. • There are no financial implications. • Community engagement included a notice sign being placed on the property advising that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received, notice of the application was mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property and this report was posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Committee of Adjustment meeting. • This report supports the delivery of core services. BACKGROUND: The subject property is in the Rosemount neighbourhood with the closest intersection at Frederick Street and River Road East. The subject property is identified as `Community Areas' on Map 2 — Urban Structure and is designated `Low Rise Residential' on Map 3 — Land Use in the City's 2014 Official Plan. The property is zoned `Low Rise Residential Two Zone (RES -2)' in Zoning By-law 2019- 051. City staff has conducted a site visit on June 301h, 2023. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 106 of 230 55.'1 511 51;I 511 X21 T1 .I '1,'11 ' � 7j.'I A\ 698 4 727 721 ,�1 r 715 7. ?';I? 711 ;§ ii $I;I 171 1 51 -77 141 137117 s _ t 'I •.I :I fi 127 s` I ° 'I'I? ,'151 J 2:3 .1111 o 22 71 T ,.. •'`-1� nib, ill '.32 5 .. 3:32 11 W :32'I 10 :322 "� y l7 s 31 Figure 1: Map location of 385 Frederick St Figure 2: Front view of the property during site visit Page 107 of 230 Figure 3: Proposed site plan I "1 Page 108 of 230 REPORT: Planning Comments: In considering the four tests for the 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 Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance to recognize the principal dwelling's existing side yard setback meets general intent of the Official Plan. The subject property is designated `Low Rise Residential' in the City's Official Plan. The intent of this designation is to emphasize the compatibility of building form with respect to massing, scale and design in order to support the successful integration of different building types. It also places emphasis on the relationship of buildings to adjacent properties, streets, and exterior areas. General Intent of the Zoning By-law The general intent of the principal dwelling's 1.2 metre side yard setback is to provide adequate space for emergency access to the rear yard. The proposed site plan demonstrates that the 1.1 metre minimum walkway will be located on the West side of the property, providing an unobstructed walkway leading to the entrance of the Additional Dwelling Unit. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed Additional Dwelling Unit (Detached) meets the general intent of the Zoning By-law. Is/Are the Effects of the Variance(s) Minor? Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance is minor as the principal dwelling is already existing, no changes will be conducted on the East side of the building. Is/Are the Variance(s) Desirable For The Appropriate Development or Use of the Land, Building and/or Structure? Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance is appropriate for the development of the land as it is an existing dwelling unit with no exterior changes. The proposed Additional Dwelling Unit (Detached) meets all zoning regulations and promotes a gentle intensification in the neighbourhood without any impacts to neighbouring properties. Environmental Planning Comments: No concerns. Heritage Planning Comments: No concerns. Building Division Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance. A Building Permit Application has been made for the detached additional unit and it is currently under review. Engineering Division Comments: No comment. Parks/Operations Division Comments: No concerns, no comments. Transportation Planning Comments: Transportation Services have no concerns with the proposed application. As a cautionary note, while tandem parking is permitted, triple tandem parking may become problematic at times for residents. Page 109 of 230 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: • Planning Act • Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2020) • A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 • Regional Official Plan • Official Plan (2014) • Zoning By-law 2019-051 Page 110 of 230 Region of Waterloo June 30, 2023 /_1IROTi1Wer City of Kitchener 200 King Street West P.O. Box 1118 Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES 150 Frederick Street, Sth Floor Kitchener ON N2G 4A Canada Telephone: 519-575-4400 TTY: 519-575-4608 Fax: 519-575-4449 www. reg i o n ofwate r l o o. ca File No.: D20-20/ VAR KIT GEN (5) 08 WEBER KIT, 15 DELLROY AVENUE 2296342 ONTARIO INCORPORATED (12) VAR KIT, 30 AND 40 MARGARET AVENUE ACTIVA HOLDINGS Subject: Committee of Adjustment Meeting July 18, 2023, City of Kitchener Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have the following comments: 1) A 2023 - 076 — 912 Otterbein Court — No Concerns. 2) A 2023 - 077 — 176 Indian Road — No Concerns. 3) A 2023 - 078 — 35 Fifth Avenue — There are no conditions for this application. However, the owners are advised that the proposed and existing dwelling(s) on the subject lands would have impacts from the transportation noise in the vicinity. The owners are responsible for ensuring that the subject development does not have any environmental noise impacts. In the absence of a detailed noise study, the staff strongly recommend that all dwelling units be installed with air -ducted heating and ventilation system, suitably sized and designed for the provision of central air conditioning. This will avoid retrofit at any later application stage, e.g. Consent/Condo. There are no airport -specific concerns for the proposed development. However, the owners are advised that the subject lands are located within the Airport Zoning Regulated area and specifically under the runway take-off/approach surface; and, as such, subject to all provisions of the Airport Zoning Regulations. 4) A 2023 - 079 — 55 Rockcliffe Drive — No Concerns. Document Number: 4421509 Page 1 of 3 Page 111 of 230 5) A 2023 — 080 — 15 Dellroy Avenue — The Regional staff do not support this minor variance application. Any structures within the Daylight Triangle (DLT) and any encroachment under, at or above the ground within the Regional right of way, including the daylight triangle (including the lands to be dedicated to the Region), will not be allowed. The buildings and the site must be designed accordingly. Airport Zoning (Advisory): The owners/applicants are also advised that the subject property falls within the Region of Waterloo Zoning Regulated Area, specifically under the Take- off/Approach Surface for Runway 08. Using the Region of Waterloo International Airport Zoning Regulations (AZR) online tool (https://www.waterlooairport.ca/en/about-vkf/airport-zoning-regulations- update.aspx), the permitted building height for the subject property is 399.5m Above Sea Level (ASL), the maximum building height is 75.5m based on a maximum ground level of 324m ASL. Please ensure that the building heights for the proposed development comply with the Region of Waterloo Airport zoning and height restrictions. The Region of Waterloo International Airport AZR also regulates any construction of towers/cranes for a proposed development. Any proposed development at this location must ensure that construction towers/cranes also comply with the Region of Waterloo International AZR. 6) A 2023 - 081 — 333 Pine Valley Drive — No Concerns. 7) A 2023 - 082 — 685 Frederick Street — No Concerns. 8) A 2023 - 083 — 15 Kenora Drive— No concerns/conditions for this application. Staff note that the subject lands are located within the Airport Zoning Regulated area and specifically under the runway take-off/approach surface; and, as such, subject to all provisions of the Airport Zoning Regulations. 9) A 2023 - 084 — 151 Frederick Street — There are no conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that they are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any environmental noise impacts (both on-site and off-site). 10) A 2023 - 085 — 920 Keewatin Place — No Concerns. 11) A 2023 — 086 — 59 Graber Place — Although there are no conditions for this application, the staff note that there are noise -sensitive land uses, specifically the backyards of many residential dwellings, in the immediate vicinity of the subject lands, which may have impacts from the noise from the proposed storage related activities. The staff recommend that the City staff look into this as deemed appropriate. 2 Page 112 of 230 12) A 2023 — 087 — 30-40 Margaret Avenue — No Concerns. Please be advised that any development on the subject lands is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 19-037 or any successor thereof and may require 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. If a site is subject to more than one application, additional comments may apply. Please forward any decisions on the above-mentioned Application numbers to the undersigned. Yours Truly, Joginder Bhatia Transportation Planner C (226) 753-0368 CC: Marilyn Mills, City of Kitchener CofA(a)Kitchener. ca 3 Page 113 of 230 June 29, 2023 Administration Centre: 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Cambridge, ON N1 R 5W6 Phone: 519-621-2761 Toll free: 1-866-900-4722 Fax: 519-621-4844 www.grandriver.ca Marilyn Mills Secretary -Treasurer Committee of Adjustment City of Kitchener 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON, N2G 4G7 Dear Marilyn Mills, Re: Committee of Adjustment Meeting — July 18, 2023 Applications for Minor Variance A 2023-077 176 Indian Road A 2023-078 35 Fifth Avenue A 2023-079 55 Rockcliffe Drive A 2023-080 15 Dellroy Avenue A 2023-081 333 Pine Valley Drive A 2023-082 685 Frederick Street A 2023-083 15 Kenora Drive A 2023-084 151 Frederick Street A 2023-085 920 Keewatin Place A 2023-087 30-40 Margaret Avenue Applications for Consent B 2023-025 97 Second Avenue B 2023-026 30-40 Margaret Avenue via email Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff has reviewed the above -noted applications. GRCA has no objection to the approval of the above applications. The subject properties do not contain any natural hazards such as watercourses, floodplains, shorelines, wetlands, or valley slopes. The properties are not subject to Ontario Regulation 150/06 and, therefore, a permission from GRCA is not required. Should you have any questions, please contact me at aherremana-q rand river. ca or 519- 621-2763 ext. 2228. Sincerely, Andrew Herreman, CPT Resource Planning Technician Grand River Conservation Authority Member of Conservation Ontario, representing Ontario's 36 Conservation Authorities I The Grand — A Canadian Heritage River Page 114 of 230 Staff Report r NJ :R Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: July 18, 2023 SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Interim Manager, Development Review 519-741-2200 ext. 7765 PREPARED BY: Raida Chowdhury, Student Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7078 WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 2 DATE OF REPORT: July 4, 2023 REPORT NO.: DSD -2023-308 SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2023-083 — 15 Kenora Drive RECOMMENDATION: That Minor Variance Application A2023-083 for 15 Kenora Drive requesting relief from the following sections of Zoning By-law 2019-051: i) Section 5.3.3 a) i) to permit a required parking space to be located 2.6 metres from the street (property) line instead of the minimum required 6 metres to facilitate the conversion of the attached garage into living space for the existing single detached dwelling; and ii) Section 4.1 e) to permit an accessory structure in the exterior side yard, whereas the Zoning By-law does not permit accessory structures in the exterior side yard; generally in accordance with drawings prepared by JR Design and Consultants, dated January 2023, BE APPROVED. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to review minor variances to permit an existing accessory structure in the exterior side yard, as well as the conversion of an attached garage into living space. • The key finding of this report is that the minor variances meet the four tests of the Planning Act • There are no financial implications. • Community engagement included a notice sign being placed on the property advising that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received, notice of the application was mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property and this report was posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Committee of Adjustment meeting. • This report supports the delivery of core services. BACKGROUND: The subject property is a rectangular through lot which fronts Kenora Drive and Wren Place. The subject property is identified as `Community Areas' on Map 2 — Urban Structure and is designated `Low Rise Residential' on Map 3 — Land Use in the City's 2014 Official Plan. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 115 of 230 The property is zoned `Low Rise Residential Two Zone (RES -2)' in Zoning By-law 2019-051. The purpose of the application is to review minor variances to allow the conversion of an attached garage into living space, as well as to allow an existing accessory structure in the exterior side yard. The attached garage is currently 6 metres from the street line and is proposed to be converted into additional living space. The required parking space to replace the garage is proposed to be in the driveway and will be located 2.6 metres from the street (property) line. The subject property also contains an accessory structure (shed) in the exterior right side yard, which is currently used for pool maintenance. The accessory structure (shed) is approximately 4 square metres in area. Accordingly, minor variances are requested to permit that the required parking space be located 2.6 metres from the street (property) line, instead of the minimum required 6 metres indicated in Section 5.3.3 a) i) of Zoning By-law 2019-051, and to permit the accessory structure (shed) in the exterior side yard, whereas the structure is prohibited by Section 4.1 e) of Zoning By-law 2019-051. The existing accessory structure (storage shed) located within the driveway, abutting the subject property, is to be demolished. Figure 1 — Ariel Photo of Subject Property Page 116 of 230 KENORA DRIVE Figure 2 — Site Plan ING Ca ynndale �a nn�.c rww+ urtu� ux* i5 nMiIG GRM gMa[HR, iMMd Figure 3 — Front View Photo from Site Visit Page 117 of 230 Figure 4 — Existing Accessory Structure (Shed) in Exterior Side Yard REPORT: Planning Comments: In considering the four tests for the 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 subject property is designated `Low Rise Residential' on Map 3 — Land Use. The intent of the Low Rise Residential designation is to permit a variety of low-density residential uses with an emphasis on compatibility with the built form, height, massing, scale, and design. The proposed required parking space does not conflict with low-rise built form of the neighbourhood, as several adjacent properties currently use their driveways for this purpose. Given that the existing accessory structure (shed) is inferior to the subject property, and the exterior is comprised of the same material as the existing fence, staff are of the opinion that it aligns with the general intent of the Official Plan. General Intent of the Zoning By-law Minimum Parking Space Distance from Street (Property) Line The intent of the 6 metre distance from the street (property) line is to ensure that there is adequate space for additional cars, and that street parking is limited. The proposed parking space in the driveway provides adequate space for the required parking space, and when the accessory structure (storage shed) in the driveway abutting the subject property is demolished, there will be adequate space for an additional parking space. As such, staff are of the opinion that the minor variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. Page 118 of 230 Accessory Structure in the Exterior Side Yard The intent of prohibiting accessory structures in the exterior side yard is to ensure that there are no visibility issues regarding the principal dwelling. The existing accessory structure (shed) is inferior to the principal dwelling, as it is 4 square metres in area. The exterior of the accessory structure corresponds with the existing fence, and there is landscaping around the structure, so there are no visibility issues regarding the size of the structure or design. As such, staff are of the opinion that the minor variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. Is/Are the Effects of the Variance(s) Minor? The variances can be considered minor as the driveway on the subject property is currently used for parking space, and the accessory structure (shed) is an existing use which serves a purpose in its existing location, as it used for pool maintenance. As such, the effect on adjacent properties and neighbourhood built form compatibility is minimal. Is/Are the Variance(s) Desirable For The Appropriate Development or Use of the Land, Building and/or Structure? The variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land. The requested variances should not impact any of the adjacent properties or the surrounding neighbourhood as the uses are existing, and the proposed development is the conversion of an existing garage. Environmental Planning Comments: Environmental Planning has no concerns. Heritage Planning Comments: Heritage Planning has no concerns. Building Division Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance. Application has been made for the addition to the existing single detached dwelling and it is currently under review. Engineering Division Comments: Engineering Division has no concerns. Parks/Operations Division Comments: Parks Division has no concerns. Transportation Planning Comments: Transportation Services supports a 2.6 metre parking setback from the required 6.0 metre setback. Grand River Conservation Authority Comments: Grand River Conservation Authority has no concerns. Region of Waterloo Comments: No concerns/conditions for this application. Staff note that the subject lands are located within the Airport Zoning Regulated area and specifically under the runway take-off/approach surface; and, as such, subject to all provisions of the Airport Zoning Regulations. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Capital Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget. Page 119 of 230 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: • Planning Act • Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2020) • A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 • Regional Official Plan • Official Plan (2014) • Zoning By-law 2019-051 Page 120 of 230 Region of Waterloo June 30, 2023 /_1IROTi1Wer City of Kitchener 200 King Street West P.O. Box 1118 Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES 150 Frederick Street, Sth Floor Kitchener ON N2G 4A Canada Telephone: 519-575-4400 TTY: 519-575-4608 Fax: 519-575-4449 www. reg i o n ofwate r l o o. ca File No.: D20-20/ VAR KIT GEN (5) 08 WEBER KIT, 15 DELLROY AVENUE 2296342 ONTARIO INCORPORATED (12) VAR KIT, 30 AND 40 MARGARET AVENUE ACTIVA HOLDINGS Subject: Committee of Adjustment Meeting July 18, 2023, City of Kitchener Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have the following comments: 1) A 2023 - 076 — 912 Otterbein Court — No Concerns. 2) A 2023 - 077 — 176 Indian Road — No Concerns. 3) A 2023 - 078 — 35 Fifth Avenue — There are no conditions for this application. However, the owners are advised that the proposed and existing dwelling(s) on the subject lands would have impacts from the transportation noise in the vicinity. The owners are responsible for ensuring that the subject development does not have any environmental noise impacts. In the absence of a detailed noise study, the staff strongly recommend that all dwelling units be installed with air -ducted heating and ventilation system, suitably sized and designed for the provision of central air conditioning. This will avoid retrofit at any later application stage, e.g. Consent/Condo. There are no airport -specific concerns for the proposed development. However, the owners are advised that the subject lands are located within the Airport Zoning Regulated area and specifically under the runway take-off/approach surface; and, as such, subject to all provisions of the Airport Zoning Regulations. 4) A 2023 - 079 — 55 Rockcliffe Drive — No Concerns. Document Number: 4421509 Page 1 of 3 Page 121 of 230 5) A 2023 — 080 — 15 Dellroy Avenue — The Regional staff do not support this minor variance application. Any structures within the Daylight Triangle (DLT) and any encroachment under, at or above the ground within the Regional right of way, including the daylight triangle (including the lands to be dedicated to the Region), will not be allowed. The buildings and the site must be designed accordingly. Airport Zoning (Advisory): The owners/applicants are also advised that the subject property falls within the Region of Waterloo Zoning Regulated Area, specifically under the Take- off/Approach Surface for Runway 08. Using the Region of Waterloo International Airport Zoning Regulations (AZR) online tool (https://www.waterlooairport.ca/en/about-vkf/airport-zoning-regulations- update.aspx), the permitted building height for the subject property is 399.5m Above Sea Level (ASL), the maximum building height is 75.5m based on a maximum ground level of 324m ASL. Please ensure that the building heights for the proposed development comply with the Region of Waterloo Airport zoning and height restrictions. The Region of Waterloo International Airport AZR also regulates any construction of towers/cranes for a proposed development. Any proposed development at this location must ensure that construction towers/cranes also comply with the Region of Waterloo International AZR. 6) A 2023 - 081 — 333 Pine Valley Drive — No Concerns. 7) A 2023 - 082 — 685 Frederick Street — No Concerns. 8) A 2023 - 083 — 15 Kenora Drive— No concerns/conditions for this application. Staff note that the subject lands are located within the Airport Zoning Regulated area and specifically under the runway take-off/approach surface; and, as such, subject to all provisions of the Airport Zoning Regulations. 9) A 2023 - 084 — 151 Frederick Street — There are no conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that they are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any environmental noise impacts (both on-site and off-site). 10) A 2023 - 085 — 920 Keewatin Place — No Concerns. 11) A 2023 — 086 — 59 Graber Place — Although there are no conditions for this application, the staff note that there are noise -sensitive land uses, specifically the backyards of many residential dwellings, in the immediate vicinity of the subject lands, which may have impacts from the noise from the proposed storage related activities. The staff recommend that the City staff look into this as deemed appropriate. 2 Page 122 of 230 12) A 2023 — 087 — 30-40 Margaret Avenue — No Concerns. Please be advised that any development on the subject lands is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 19-037 or any successor thereof and may require 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. If a site is subject to more than one application, additional comments may apply. Please forward any decisions on the above-mentioned Application numbers to the undersigned. Yours Truly, Joginder Bhatia Transportation Planner C (226) 753-0368 CC: Marilyn Mills, City of Kitchener CofA(a)Kitchener. ca 3 Page 123 of 230 June 29, 2023 Administration Centre: 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Cambridge, ON N1 R 5W6 Phone: 519-621-2761 Toll free: 1-866-900-4722 Fax: 519-621-4844 www.grandriver.ca Marilyn Mills Secretary -Treasurer Committee of Adjustment City of Kitchener 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON, N2G 4G7 Dear Marilyn Mills, Re: Committee of Adjustment Meeting — July 18, 2023 Applications for Minor Variance A 2023-077 176 Indian Road A 2023-078 35 Fifth Avenue A 2023-079 55 Rockcliffe Drive A 2023-080 15 Dellroy Avenue A 2023-081 333 Pine Valley Drive A 2023-082 685 Frederick Street A 2023-083 15 Kenora Drive A 2023-084 151 Frederick Street A 2023-085 920 Keewatin Place A 2023-087 30-40 Margaret Avenue Applications for Consent B 2023-025 97 Second Avenue B 2023-026 30-40 Margaret Avenue via email Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff has reviewed the above -noted applications. GRCA has no objection to the approval of the above applications. The subject properties do not contain any natural hazards such as watercourses, floodplains, shorelines, wetlands, or valley slopes. The properties are not subject to Ontario Regulation 150/06 and, therefore, a permission from GRCA is not required. Should you have any questions, please contact me at aherremana-q rand river. ca or 519- 621-2763 ext. 2228. Sincerely, Andrew Herreman, CPT Resource Planning Technician Grand River Conservation Authority Member of Conservation Ontario, representing Ontario's 36 Conservation Authorities I The Grand — A Canadian Heritage River Page 124 of 230 Staff Report r NJ :R Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: July 18, 2023 SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Interim Manager, Development Review 519-741-2200 ext. 7765 PREPARED BY: Arwa Alzoor, Planning Technician (Site Development) 519-741-2200 ext. 7847 WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 10 DATE OF REPORT: June 22, 2023 REPORT NO.: DSD -2023-292 SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2023-084 - 151 Frederick Street RECOMMENDATION: That Minor Variance Application A2023-084 for 151 Frederick Street requesting relief from Section 5.613 a) of Zoning By-law 85-1 to allow a restaurant patio to be located 22 metres from Residentially zoned property instead of the minimum required 30 metres, to facilitate adding an outdoor restaurant patio in the exterior side yard of a building that contains an existing restaurant use, generally in accordance with drawings prepared by Dfy Studio, dated May 12, 2023, BE APPROVED. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to recommend approval of a minor variance to facilitate adding a restaurant patio in the exterior side yard of an existing building with a restaurant use. • The key finding of this report is that the requested minor variances meet the 4 tests of the Planning Act. • There are no financial implications. • Community engagement included a notice sign being placed on the property advising that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received, notice of the application was mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property and this report was posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Committee of Adjustment meeting. • This report supports the delivery of core services. BACKGROUND: The subject property is located west of Lancaster Street East on Frederick Street. It currently contains a mixed-use commercial building and a restaurant on the under-ground/ground floor. The subject property is identified as a `Major Transit Station Area' on Map 2 — Urban Structure and is designated `High Density Commercial Residential' on Map 20 Central Frederick Neighbourhood Plan - City's Secondary Plan 1994 Official Plan. The property is zoned `Commercial Residential Three Zone CR -3 (125U)' in Zoning By-law 85-1 *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 125 of 230 The purpose of the application is to add a restaurant patio in the exterior yard of an existing building for use by an existing restaurant. The restaurant patio is proposed to be located 22 metres from Residentially zoned property rather than the required 30.0 metres in Zoning By-law 85-1. PRUNE SrREET PRC*DSED PAM LAYOUT SK.f s�•e r-0• � RSl9t' D f y stud THREE NRETANS 351 FfffAEWX ST 16ffcKIE d.ON �t�1+iti7 W� y� raGcfr m�. .,7+r DMWWG7ME PATIO PLAN PAVOSUMMARY m� tl CIF TABLEs po'x4 " S R 17F SEhTS; 7k K. Planning staff conducted a site inspection on Friday, June 301h, 2023 Page 126 of 230 �� ss �-•� tec m 159 ` t` 155 f� WBL rf 0 fi2�lef10� •�2✓ f' � yt55 t loo R g nal � Police Services t9 I nt a f 'se s � tv \ -hiss .-Central Division, � to 4 J �{" iia 13F 11 GENTFiAL 133 22 13t vj 16 17 729 26 21 39 16 15. 2✓ 66 CR3 12H Il'\2RC 9� / 29 ' f1 �'t v`k t Figure 1 - Aerial image of the subject Figure 2 - Location on the zoning map property The purpose of the application is to add a restaurant patio in the exterior yard of an existing building for use by an existing restaurant. The restaurant patio is proposed to be located 22 metres from Residentially zoned property rather than the required 30.0 metres in Zoning By-law 85-1. PRUNE SrREET PRC*DSED PAM LAYOUT SK.f s�•e r-0• � RSl9t' D f y stud THREE NRETANS 351 FfffAEWX ST 16ffcKIE d.ON �t�1+iti7 W� y� raGcfr m�. .,7+r DMWWG7ME PATIO PLAN PAVOSUMMARY m� tl CIF TABLEs po'x4 " S R 17F SEhTS; 7k K. Planning staff conducted a site inspection on Friday, June 301h, 2023 Page 126 of 230 C-. Figure 3 - The front view of the building, which will contain the proposed restaurant patio REPORT: Planning Comments: Figure 4 - The location of the proposed patio In considering the four tests for the 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 It is the intent of the High Density Commercial -Residential designation to allow redevelopment for multiple dwellings and limited commercial use at high densities. Permitted commercial uses are restricted to offices, office support services, restaurants, medical laboratories, funeral homes, financial establishments, day care facilities, health offices, health clinics, parking facility, club facilities, tourist homes, studios, religious institutions, educational establishments, a limited amount of personal services and convenience retail. Land uses may be segregated in separate buildings or integrated in a mixed use development. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance maintains the general intent of the Official Plan. General Intent of the Zoning By-law The intent of the Zoning regulation, to regulate the distance a restaurant patio can be located from a residential zone, is to provide protection from noise, increased restaurant traffic and provide privacy protection to the residential area. The proposed patio will be located 22 metres from the residential properties on Irvin Street, which in the opinion of staff be of sufficient distance to provide for noise control and maintain privacy. Based on the above, the variance will maintain the general intent of the Zoning By-law. Is/Are the Effects of the Variance(s) Minor? The proposed restaurant patio will be located 8.0 metres closer than the required distance to the residential zone (30 metres). The existing parking garage structure to the building will also provide a barrier between the proposed patio and the residentially zoned property and will assist in regulating Page 127 of 230 the traffic to and from the property. Staff consider the requested variances to be minor as there will be no impact on abutting properties, and the location of the restaurant is existing. Is/Are the Variance(s) Desirable For The Appropriate Development or Use of the Land. Building and/or Structure? Staff consider the variances to be desirable and appropriate as they will facilitate the addition of an outdoor patio for an existing restaurant on the subject property. Staff are satisfied that the location of the patio is in an appropriate location on the subject property. Environmental Planning Comments: There are no trees or natural features/functions on site. No concerns. Heritage Planning 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 151 Frederick 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. Building Division Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance. Application has been made for the outdoor patio for a restaurant is currently under review. Engineering Division Comments: No comments Parks/Operations Division Comments: No concerns, no comments Transportation Planning Comments: Transportation Services have no concerns with the proposed application Region of Waterloo Comments: There are no conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that they are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any environmental noise impacts (both on-site and off-site). Grand River Conservation Authority Comments: GRCA has no objection to the approval of the above applications. The subject properties do not contain any natural hazards such as watercourses, floodplains, shorelines, wetlands, or valley slopes. The properties are not subject to Ontario Regulation 150/06 and, therefore, permission from GRCA is not required. 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. Page 128 of 230 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: • Planning Act • Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2020) • A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 • Regional Official Plan • Official Plan (2014) • Map 20 Central Frederick Neighbourhood Plan - City's Secondary Plan 1994 Official Plan • Zoning By-law 85-1 Page 129 of 230 Region of Waterloo June 30, 2023 /_1IROTi1Wer City of Kitchener 200 King Street West P.O. Box 1118 Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES 150 Frederick Street, Sth Floor Kitchener ON N2G 4A Canada Telephone: 519-575-4400 TTY: 519-575-4608 Fax: 519-575-4449 www. reg i o n ofwate r l o o. ca File No.: D20-20/ VAR KIT GEN (5) 08 WEBER KIT, 15 DELLROY AVENUE 2296342 ONTARIO INCORPORATED (12) VAR KIT, 30 AND 40 MARGARET AVENUE ACTIVA HOLDINGS Subject: Committee of Adjustment Meeting July 18, 2023, City of Kitchener Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have the following comments: 1) A 2023 - 076 — 912 Otterbein Court — No Concerns. 2) A 2023 - 077 — 176 Indian Road — No Concerns. 3) A 2023 - 078 — 35 Fifth Avenue — There are no conditions for this application. However, the owners are advised that the proposed and existing dwelling(s) on the subject lands would have impacts from the transportation noise in the vicinity. The owners are responsible for ensuring that the subject development does not have any environmental noise impacts. In the absence of a detailed noise study, the staff strongly recommend that all dwelling units be installed with air -ducted heating and ventilation system, suitably sized and designed for the provision of central air conditioning. This will avoid retrofit at any later application stage, e.g. Consent/Condo. There are no airport -specific concerns for the proposed development. However, the owners are advised that the subject lands are located within the Airport Zoning Regulated area and specifically under the runway take-off/approach surface; and, as such, subject to all provisions of the Airport Zoning Regulations. 4) A 2023 - 079 — 55 Rockcliffe Drive — No Concerns. Document Number: 4421509 Page 1 of 3 Page 130 of 230 5) A 2023 — 080 — 15 Dellroy Avenue — The Regional staff do not support this minor variance application. Any structures within the Daylight Triangle (DLT) and any encroachment under, at or above the ground within the Regional right of way, including the daylight triangle (including the lands to be dedicated to the Region), will not be allowed. The buildings and the site must be designed accordingly. Airport Zoning (Advisory): The owners/applicants are also advised that the subject property falls within the Region of Waterloo Zoning Regulated Area, specifically under the Take- off/Approach Surface for Runway 08. Using the Region of Waterloo International Airport Zoning Regulations (AZR) online tool (https://www.waterlooairport.ca/en/about-vkf/airport-zoning-regulations- update.aspx), the permitted building height for the subject property is 399.5m Above Sea Level (ASL), the maximum building height is 75.5m based on a maximum ground level of 324m ASL. Please ensure that the building heights for the proposed development comply with the Region of Waterloo Airport zoning and height restrictions. The Region of Waterloo International Airport AZR also regulates any construction of towers/cranes for a proposed development. Any proposed development at this location must ensure that construction towers/cranes also comply with the Region of Waterloo International AZR. 6) A 2023 - 081 — 333 Pine Valley Drive — No Concerns. 7) A 2023 - 082 — 685 Frederick Street — No Concerns. 8) A 2023 - 083 — 15 Kenora Drive— No concerns/conditions for this application. Staff note that the subject lands are located within the Airport Zoning Regulated area and specifically under the runway take-off/approach surface; and, as such, subject to all provisions of the Airport Zoning Regulations. 9) A 2023 - 084 — 151 Frederick Street — There are no conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that they are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any environmental noise impacts (both on-site and off-site). 10) A 2023 - 085 — 920 Keewatin Place — No Concerns. 11) A 2023 — 086 — 59 Graber Place — Although there are no conditions for this application, the staff note that there are noise -sensitive land uses, specifically the backyards of many residential dwellings, in the immediate vicinity of the subject lands, which may have impacts from the noise from the proposed storage related activities. The staff recommend that the City staff look into this as deemed appropriate. 2 Page 131 of 230 12) A 2023 — 087 — 30-40 Margaret Avenue — No Concerns. Please be advised that any development on the subject lands is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 19-037 or any successor thereof and may require 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. If a site is subject to more than one application, additional comments may apply. Please forward any decisions on the above-mentioned Application numbers to the undersigned. Yours Truly, Joginder Bhatia Transportation Planner C (226) 753-0368 CC: Marilyn Mills, City of Kitchener CofA(a)Kitchener. ca 3 Page 132 of 230 June 29, 2023 Administration Centre: 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Cambridge, ON N1 R 5W6 Phone: 519-621-2761 Toll free: 1-866-900-4722 Fax: 519-621-4844 www.grandriver.ca Marilyn Mills Secretary -Treasurer Committee of Adjustment City of Kitchener 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON, N2G 4G7 Dear Marilyn Mills, Re: Committee of Adjustment Meeting — July 18, 2023 Applications for Minor Variance A 2023-077 176 Indian Road A 2023-078 35 Fifth Avenue A 2023-079 55 Rockcliffe Drive A 2023-080 15 Dellroy Avenue A 2023-081 333 Pine Valley Drive A 2023-082 685 Frederick Street A 2023-083 15 Kenora Drive A 2023-084 151 Frederick Street A 2023-085 920 Keewatin Place A 2023-087 30-40 Margaret Avenue Applications for Consent B 2023-025 97 Second Avenue B 2023-026 30-40 Margaret Avenue via email Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff has reviewed the above -noted applications. GRCA has no objection to the approval of the above applications. The subject properties do not contain any natural hazards such as watercourses, floodplains, shorelines, wetlands, or valley slopes. The properties are not subject to Ontario Regulation 150/06 and, therefore, a permission from GRCA is not required. Should you have any questions, please contact me at aherremana-q rand river. ca or 519- 621-2763 ext. 2228. Sincerely, Andrew Herreman, CPT Resource Planning Technician Grand River Conservation Authority Member of Conservation Ontario, representing Ontario's 36 Conservation Authorities I The Grand — A Canadian Heritage River Page 133 of 230 Staff Report Dbvelo n7ent Services Department REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: July 18, 2023 www. kitchener ca SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Interim Manager, Development Review 519-741-2200 ext. 7765 PREPARED BY: Eric Schneider, Senior Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7843 WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 1 DATE OF REPORT: July 7, 2023 REPORT NO.: DSD -2023-307 SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2023-085 - 920 Keewatin Place RECOMMENDATION: That Minor Variance Application A2023-085 for 920 Keewatin Place requesting relief from Section 4.1 e) of Zoning By-law 2019-051 to permit an existing accessory structure, a garden arbour, to be located within a front yard whereas the by-law does not permit accessory structures in the front yard, generally in accordance with the drawings submitted with Minor Variance Application A2023-085, BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner modify the accessory structure to permit 50% transparency on the side of the structure facing the North property line, to the satisfaction of the Manager of Development Review. 2. That the owner relocate the accessory structure to be located a minimum of 0.6 metres from any interior side lot line, to the satisfaction of the Manager of Development Review. 3. That the property owner shall complete the work, identified in Conditions No. 1 and No. 2 above, by October 27, 2023. Any request for a time extension must be approved in writing by the Manager of Development Review prior to completion date set out in this decision. Failure to complete the condition will result in this approval becoming null and void. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to review an application for minor variance to permit an existing accessory structure (Arbour) in the front yard of the subject property. • There are no financial implications. • Community engagement included a notice sign being placed on the property advising that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received, notice of the application was mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property and this report was posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Committee of Adjustment meeting. City staff met with adjacent residents on a virtual meeting to discuss the application. • This report supports the delivery of core services. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 134 of 230 BACKGROUND: The subject property is located at the end of a cul-de-sac and is an irregular shaped lot. The subject property currently contains a single detached dwelling. In 2022 the applicant made an inquiry to the Planning Division about the placement of a garden arbour within the front yard. Staff advised of the regulations that would apply under Zoning By-law 85-1, in effect at that time and under "dual testing" of both Zoning By-laws during an appeal period that affected (new) Zoning By-law 2019-051 as it applies to Residential zones. Once the applicant erected the garden arbour, Zoning By-law 2019-051 had come into full force and effect within Residential zones. Zoning By-law 2019-051 considers this type of feature to be an "Accessory Structure" based on Section 3 (Definitions). The City's Planning Division has paid the fee for minor variance for this application to account for the misinterpretation during the appeal period. City Planning Staff have met with affected residents to understand concerns and try to mitigate adverse impacts. The transparency of materials facing abutting properties and setback of the structure were identified as key areas of impact. City Staff have included a recommendation that includes conditions for changes to be made to the setback of the structure to the North property line and the transparency of the structure's North side. Accessory buildings and structures are most commonly sheds or detached garages. The structure on the subject lands was built as a garden arbour, with a pergola roof and open on 3 sides. The side facing the interior side lot line to the north has been fitted with fence panels. Staff have received feedback from neighbours advising of visual impacts due to the structure's close proximity to the lot line and the visual impact of the fence panels on the side. Staff is recommending 50% transparency on the side, to maintain a level of openness to be expected from a garden arbour structure. Staff is also recommending a minimum setback of 0.6 metres to provide an appropriate buffer and mitigate impacts to the abutting lands. Figure 1: Location of Subject Property Page 135 of 230 Figure 2: View of Existing Accessory Structure (June 30, 2023) The subject property is identified as `Community Areas' on Map 2 — Urban Structure and is designated `Low Rise Residential' on Map 3 — Land Use in the City's 2014 Official Plan. The property is zoned `Low Rise Residential Two Zone (RES -2)' in Zoning By-law 2019-051. The purpose of the application is to recognize an existing garden arbour (accessory structure) within the front yard of a detached dwelling. Page 136 of 230 Figure 3: View of Existing Detached Dwelling (June 30, 2023) REPORT: Planning Comments: In considering the four tests for the 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 subject lands are designated `Low Rise Residential' in the City's Official Plan. This land use designation supports a range of low-rise dwellings such as detached dwellings, semi-detached dwellings, and multiple dwellings. The use of the property as a detached dwelling is not proposed to change as part of this application. In the opinion of Staff, the request for an accessory structure within the front yard of a detached dwelling meets the intent of the Official Plan. General Intent of the Zoning By-law The intent of the regulation that prohibits accessory buildings and structures in the front yard is to maintain an aesthetically pleasing streetscape, and to preserve visibility triangles for movement of pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists. In regards to an aesthetically pleasing streetscape, Staff identifies that the accessory structure appears as an extension of the rear yard fence. The structure protrudes into the front yard only slightly and is roughly in line with the existing front porch and steps. It is well set back from the street line (approximately 6 metres). In regards to visibility, staff have confirmed the structure is outside of any Driveway Visibility Triangles (DVTs) on the subject lands Page 137 of 230 or neighbouring lands. Therefore, Staff are of the opinion that that the requested variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. Is/Are the Effects of the Variance(s) Minor? The accessory building does not cause any loss of functionality or use of the subject lands or the abutting lands. The aesthetic effects are minor in the opinion of Planning Staff. Planning Staff is of the opinion that the effects of the variance are minor. Is/Are the Variance(s) Desirable For The Appropriate Development or Use of the Land, Building and/or Structure? The requested variance to recognize an existing accessory structure in the front yard of an existing detached dwelling is considered appropriate for the use of the land, as it recognizes the entrance to a fenced rear yard to be slightly within the front yard. The use of the subject lands is maintained, and the accessory structure does not prevent the use or future redevelopment of abutting lands. Environmental Planning Comments: No environmental planning concerns. Heritage Planning Comments: No heritage planning concerns. Building Division Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance. Engineering Division Comments: No engineering concerns. Parks/Operations Division Comments: No parks/operations concerns. Transportation Planning Comments: Transportation Services have no concerns with the proposed application. 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. CONSULT — Staff met (virtual meeting) with abutting residents to discuss concerns Page 138 of 230 PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: • Planning Act • Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2020) • A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 • Regional Official Plan • Official Plan (2014) • Zoning By-law 2019-051 ATTACHMENTS: No attachments. Page 139 of 230 Region of Waterloo June 30, 2023 /_1IROTi1Wer City of Kitchener 200 King Street West P.O. Box 1118 Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES 150 Frederick Street, Sth Floor Kitchener ON N2G 4A Canada Telephone: 519-575-4400 TTY: 519-575-4608 Fax: 519-575-4449 www. reg i o n ofwate r l o o. ca File No.: D20-20/ VAR KIT GEN (5) 08 WEBER KIT, 15 DELLROY AVENUE 2296342 ONTARIO INCORPORATED (12) VAR KIT, 30 AND 40 MARGARET AVENUE ACTIVA HOLDINGS Subject: Committee of Adjustment Meeting July 18, 2023, City of Kitchener Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have the following comments: 1) A 2023 - 076 — 912 Otterbein Court — No Concerns. 2) A 2023 - 077 — 176 Indian Road — No Concerns. 3) A 2023 - 078 — 35 Fifth Avenue — There are no conditions for this application. However, the owners are advised that the proposed and existing dwelling(s) on the subject lands would have impacts from the transportation noise in the vicinity. The owners are responsible for ensuring that the subject development does not have any environmental noise impacts. In the absence of a detailed noise study, the staff strongly recommend that all dwelling units be installed with air -ducted heating and ventilation system, suitably sized and designed for the provision of central air conditioning. This will avoid retrofit at any later application stage, e.g. Consent/Condo. There are no airport -specific concerns for the proposed development. However, the owners are advised that the subject lands are located within the Airport Zoning Regulated area and specifically under the runway take-off/approach surface; and, as such, subject to all provisions of the Airport Zoning Regulations. 4) A 2023 - 079 — 55 Rockcliffe Drive — No Concerns. Document Number: 4421509 Page 1 of 3 Page 140 of 230 5) A 2023 — 080 — 15 Dellroy Avenue — The Regional staff do not support this minor variance application. Any structures within the Daylight Triangle (DLT) and any encroachment under, at or above the ground within the Regional right of way, including the daylight triangle (including the lands to be dedicated to the Region), will not be allowed. The buildings and the site must be designed accordingly. Airport Zoning (Advisory): The owners/applicants are also advised that the subject property falls within the Region of Waterloo Zoning Regulated Area, specifically under the Take- off/Approach Surface for Runway 08. Using the Region of Waterloo International Airport Zoning Regulations (AZR) online tool (https://www.waterlooairport.ca/en/about-vkf/airport-zoning-regulations- update.aspx), the permitted building height for the subject property is 399.5m Above Sea Level (ASL), the maximum building height is 75.5m based on a maximum ground level of 324m ASL. Please ensure that the building heights for the proposed development comply with the Region of Waterloo Airport zoning and height restrictions. The Region of Waterloo International Airport AZR also regulates any construction of towers/cranes for a proposed development. Any proposed development at this location must ensure that construction towers/cranes also comply with the Region of Waterloo International AZR. 6) A 2023 - 081 — 333 Pine Valley Drive — No Concerns. 7) A 2023 - 082 — 685 Frederick Street — No Concerns. 8) A 2023 - 083 — 15 Kenora Drive— No concerns/conditions for this application. Staff note that the subject lands are located within the Airport Zoning Regulated area and specifically under the runway take-off/approach surface; and, as such, subject to all provisions of the Airport Zoning Regulations. 9) A 2023 - 084 — 151 Frederick Street — There are no conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that they are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any environmental noise impacts (both on-site and off-site). 10) A 2023 - 085 — 920 Keewatin Place — No Concerns. 11) A 2023 — 086 — 59 Graber Place — Although there are no conditions for this application, the staff note that there are noise -sensitive land uses, specifically the backyards of many residential dwellings, in the immediate vicinity of the subject lands, which may have impacts from the noise from the proposed storage related activities. The staff recommend that the City staff look into this as deemed appropriate. 2 Page 141 of 230 12) A 2023 — 087 — 30-40 Margaret Avenue — No Concerns. Please be advised that any development on the subject lands is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 19-037 or any successor thereof and may require 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. If a site is subject to more than one application, additional comments may apply. Please forward any decisions on the above-mentioned Application numbers to the undersigned. Yours Truly, Joginder Bhatia Transportation Planner C (226) 753-0368 CC: Marilyn Mills, City of Kitchener CofA(a)Kitchener. ca 3 Page 142 of 230 June 29, 2023 Administration Centre: 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Cambridge, ON N1 R 5W6 Phone: 519-621-2761 Toll free: 1-866-900-4722 Fax: 519-621-4844 www.grandriver.ca Marilyn Mills Secretary -Treasurer Committee of Adjustment City of Kitchener 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON, N2G 4G7 Dear Marilyn Mills, Re: Committee of Adjustment Meeting — July 18, 2023 Applications for Minor Variance A 2023-077 176 Indian Road A 2023-078 35 Fifth Avenue A 2023-079 55 Rockcliffe Drive A 2023-080 15 Dellroy Avenue A 2023-081 333 Pine Valley Drive A 2023-082 685 Frederick Street A 2023-083 15 Kenora Drive A 2023-084 151 Frederick Street A 2023-085 920 Keewatin Place A 2023-087 30-40 Margaret Avenue Applications for Consent B 2023-025 97 Second Avenue B 2023-026 30-40 Margaret Avenue via email Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff has reviewed the above -noted applications. GRCA has no objection to the approval of the above applications. The subject properties do not contain any natural hazards such as watercourses, floodplains, shorelines, wetlands, or valley slopes. The properties are not subject to Ontario Regulation 150/06 and, therefore, a permission from GRCA is not required. Should you have any questions, please contact me at aherremana-q rand river. ca or 519- 621-2763 ext. 2228. Sincerely, Andrew Herreman, CPT Resource Planning Technician Grand River Conservation Authority Member of Conservation Ontario, representing Ontario's 36 Conservation Authorities I The Grand — A Canadian Heritage River Page 143 of 230 I Accessory Structure 920 Keewatin Place, Kitchener July 04, 2023 To: Members of the Committee of Adjustment: We are Elaine and Dario Cecchin, and we are writing to express our objection to the application for minor variance. We have standing in the matter as next door neighbours who are directly affected by the appearance, placement and impacts of the accessory structure. We also have standing as parties who were denied an arbour when we consulted with Planning approximately one year ago. We enquired with Planning about our proposed arbour in fulsome detail and in writing. We provided a picture of the arbour and a sketch of where it would be placed. In turn, we received unambiguous guidance from Planning which we accepted as a responsible resident would. Yet, the Applicant's request for minor zoning variance is before you not because of merit above our proposed arbour. Rather, the applications is the result of an error or miscommunication. While we have no ability for redress, you are being asked to permit the structure to stand as a result of a mistake, initially, and as a convenient fix, subsequently. It amounts to an unfair and arbitrary application of the Zoning Bylaw. Right: Our proposed arbour - to be built by Heritage Design ^F" The situation is rendered even more inequitable when our proposed arbour was significantly less impactful in mass, visibility, and presence. Whereas our arbour would have been subordinate to the surroundings, the Applicant's structure imposes heavily on the small front yard and the streetscape. Page 144 of 230 The Structure's Unsuitability for the Front Yard We wish to emphasis that our opposition is not simply a question of principle —that, if we can't have it, neither should they. Rather, we might have been amenable to the variance if the structure had not been so disproportionately large, visually incongruent, and placed next to the property line such that we cannot escape from viewing it. If the structure had truly been an arbour, then we would have recognized it as a decorative feature rather than a hulking built form that intrudes heavily on the streetscape. There are several reasons to believe that the structure is unsuitable: 1. It is disproportionately large. 2. It has irregular workmanship. 3. There is virtually no setback from our property. It has incurred on our property once, already, and risks re - incurring. 4. It is not a commonly recognized lawn feature. 5. It has the form, function and stated purpose of a privacy screen. Finally, due to the interaction of the aforementioned characteristics, we contend that the structure does not pass the Four Tests. Namely, pressed against the property line, the structure's tall wall -of --wood looms over our front yard and is poised to incur on our property, again. In our view, it has an antagonistic posture that is unsettling for us and incompatible with the friendly, family oriented neighbourhood. Although the structure is called an "arbour," nothing similar in form and location can be found on a front lawn in the immediate and extended neighbourhood. Before proceeding to a discussion of the structure's characteristics, we will provide some background about our proposed arbour that was denied by the Municipality. It is important to understand the impacts on us, in particular our inability to achieve parity with the Applicant should the variance be permitted. Background Our proposed arbour had the intent of concealing the Applicant's hazardous and irregularly built fence that was erected in 2022. On our side of the fence, nails and screws protruded through the lumber. It posed a risk of injury to children, pets and wildlife that inadvertently brushed against it. In addition to the hazards, the fence displayed irregular workmanship due to a number of characteristics some which are depicted in the photographs on the following page. We were counseled to build a parallel fence to conceal the irregularities and hazards. However, because of the pie -slice configuration of our lots, the Applicants' fence extended past the front corner of our house by 13 feet. We were restricted to a three- foot -fence beyond that point. Because we could not build an arbour, nor an eight -foot -high fence, we had to settle for the least desirable option — to build a three -foot -high fence. While it would not completely conceal the Applicant's fence, it could at least mitigate the hazards. We spent a lot of money for a three -foot -high fence that was well-built but ultimately inadequate for the purpose. V N uJ 2 Page 145 of 230 3 i Above Left: Nails and screws protruded through the lumber. Above Right: A 1x6 deck board was used as stringer instead of conventional 2x4 or 2x6 boards. Because it was too short, a random piece of lumber was joined to it by a diagonal board that also served as a brace. Even if we were now permitted either to extend an 8 -feet -high fence or build an arbour, we would not be able to afford it. There was already a considerable expense for the three -foot -high fence. Then, we would have to incur removal costs. We will be aggrieved monetarily because we will not be able to have parity with the Applicant without considerable additional expense. 1. The Structure is Disproportionately Large Constructed of thick timbers including 2x6's and 2x8's, the structure has a heavy, bulky mass. Measured from the top it has the following approximate dimensions: 8 -feet -high; 7 -feet -wide; and 8 -feet -long. The north -side is enclosed by lengths of 2 -inch wide boards some of which appear discoloured. With an area of approximately 56 square feet, it takes up about 15 per cent of the Applicant's front lawn. It projects approximately 12 feet into the front yard. Page 146 of 230 From the vantage point of our yard, it would not be unreasonable to say that the structure has the constitution and appearance of a shed or large crate. It presents as a tall "wall -of -wood" that is highly distinctive and jarring at first sight. Its physical nature suggests something that would belong in the backyard or side -yard, not the front. The structure's imposing bearing is exasperated by the existing fence. In 2022, the applicant built an 8 -foot -high fence on their side -yard. Because of the pie -slice configuration of our lots, the Applicant's fence extends 13 feet past the front corner of our house. As a result, this portion of the fence is fully visible from our yard and the street. 4r -- X ��� ---- ,—, �� .•waw, 4 The structure's wall -of -wood is aligned exactly with the fence along the property line. The structure and fence are only about three feet apart, and they are made of similar materials. The structure's bulk and placement corresponds with the fence to create a striking massing at the front our property. Together, the fence and structure present as a tall, extended wood barrier. To us, it has a fortress -like appearance that would more properly fit an industrial or commercial area. 2. The Structure Has Irregular Workmanship Most of the irregularities stem from when the Applicant built the structure such that the joists at the top overhung our property. To correct the incursion, the Applicant cut off the ends and pushed the base of the structure toward their side. Two metal bars were hammered into the ground to act as a makeshift brace against the base — to keep it from moving back. Furthermore, when the structure was pushed into its current location, the posts on the south -side appear to have gone askew. Finally, unrelated to the incursion, some of the boards that enclose the north -side of the structure are of an inconsistent colour or shading. Right: Metal bars inserted into the ground to hold the structure in place. Page 147 of 230 Right: The ends of the joists were cut-off. The joists are asymmetrical and unfinished it appearance. Above: The posts appear to have gone askew after the structure was pushed away from the property line. 5 Right: Several boards on the left side of structure are discoloured, perhaps as a result of creosote. It should be noted that the posts are not anchored on cement piles as might be expected in the construction of such a large form. It was built substantively in the driveway and carried to the location by three men. This action may have resulted in a weakening and destabilization of the posts and frame as the men attempted to maneuver it around obstacles. The aforementioned irregularities are on our side of the structure and, accordingly, are highly visible from our property and street. The workmanship casts the structure as something that would not normally be displayed in a location of prominence. Rather, it attracts attention and becomes even more incongruent with the streetscape. Page 148 of 230 IA 3. There is Virtually No Setback from the Property Line Although the Applicant had exact knowledge of where the property line was located, it was overlooked, remarkably. As discussed above, the structure was erected such that the joists on top overhung the property line. Instead of moving the structure the required distance away, the Applicant undertook the unconventional tact of cutting off the ends of the joists and minimally pushing the base from the property line. But, the base was not completely lifted above grade when it was pushed away. The two posts on the south -side of the structure remained partially buried due to the higher elevation in grade at that point. As such, the base became somewhat compressed when the north -side of the structure was pushed toward the buried posts on the south -side — which, in turn, resulted in the posts going askew. To prevent the compressed base from springing back toward the property line, the Applicant took the further unconventional tact of hammering two metal bars into the ground to act as a makeshift brace to keep the base in place. Above Left & Right: Current location of structure relative to the Applicant's stringline. The cut joists on top of the structure extend to the stringline. Bottom Left: Metal braces at the base of the structure. This bracing technique does not inspire confidence for long-term stability. Page 149 of 230 There is no margin for error. While the base is a minimally away from the property line, the overhead joists extend right to it. With little displacement, the structure will likely spring back to our property once again. The metal braces at the base are tenuous at best. After a few cycles of freeze and thaw, the soil will loosen sufficiently for the braces to let go. We reasonably fear that the structure will once again incur on our property and a property -line dispute will ensue. In addition to the risk of repeated incursion, the lack of setback raises question about whether there is adequate room for routine maintenance. Grass -cutting is a case in point. It was not until June 9 that the grass was cut on the north -side of the structure - at about the time the application for minor variance was made. Although routine landscaping is not inconsequential for neighbours, most importantly, it is representative of the kinds of expected and unexpected maintenance issues that can arise. Yet, there is no ready access to the north -side of the structure, thereby causing maintenance to be foregone or delayed. To reiterate, our concern is not simply about landscaping. it is about gaining proper access to all sides of the structure to conduct repairs and maintenance that may be required. 7 Finally, with almost zero setback, there is no buffer to provide a little distance and a visual break. Even if the Applicant was amenable to installing some landscaped screening for our benefit, it would not be possible. As a result, the structure is fully visible from our yard and the street. The structure — in its full mass and irregular workmanship - is thrust before our view and the streetscape as conspicuously as it could possibly be. 4. The Structure is Not a Commonly Recognized Front Yard Feature Although the application refers to the structure as an "arbour;' we contend that it is inconsistent with a commonly recognized arbour or similar structure. Arbours may range somewhat in size and style, but they do not resemble the subject structure. We begin with a definition of an "arbour" from the Mirriam Webster on-line dictionary. An arbour is defined as "a shelter of vines or branches or of latticework covered with climbing shrubs or vines." Please refer to photograph below Page 150 of 230 When "arbour" is queried on the Internet, structures highly t,r>~:tyd consistent with the dictionary representation come up. The = man Family Handyman (on right) is a case in point. The Home Home - Outdoors - Yard 6 Carden Structures Depot presents further examples. • See Appendix A for arbours sold by Home Depot. All of the Home Depot's arbours are similar in size and constitution as the ones depicted by Merriam -Webster and the Family Handyman. None come close to the Applicant's structure. We recognize that the Home Depot may not be an "authority" on the form and function of arbours. But, as a large-scale retailer, it is attuned to the public's understanding of the subject. Whether an arbour is covered by vegetation or lattice, it has an open, airy form that is made of light -weight materials. Its function is to enhance or accent the softscapes — to be subordinate to the environment and blend with it. M What Is An Arbor: What To Know Before You Buy (- Kimberley McCee It is not our intent to dwell on definitions of an arbour and semantics. It is simply a starting place to call into question the merits of the Applicant's structure as a front yard feature. We have looked extensively throughout the City. In recent weeks we focused our search on the immediate and extended neighbourhood yet found nothing that resembled the Applicant's structure. We saw a handful of lawn features that were consistent with Merriam -Webster, Family Handyman, and Home Depot. But, even these are rare. • Please see Appendix B for a depiction of the search area and photographs of the 10 arbours located. Page 151 of 230 The arbour located at 15 Dineen Crt. (Right) is typical of the lawn features located. It will be noted that the arbours in our neighbourhood project minimally into their respective yards. They have a narrow profile — approximately 2 to 3 feet long and 4 feet wide. Furthermore, the sides are only partially enclosed. They are constructed of light -weight components. None abut a neighbouring property. They are truly decorative or ornamental in nature. Subordinate to the surroundings, they serve to accent and enhance the softscapes. There seems to be an intuitive understanding among neighbourhood residents of what comprises an appropriate front -yard feature. There is also a commonly held understanding that large built forms belong in the back- and side -yards, not the front. We do not exaggerate when we say the Applicants' structure is a complete outlier in form and bulk that can be found in no front yard in our neighourhood. 1] Lawn feature at 15 Dineen Crt. 5. The Structure has the Form, Function, and Stated Purpose of a Privacy Screen In the application for minor variance, the Applicant suggests that the structure has a dual purpose: esthetics and privacy. The Applicant writes, "the initial purpose of the arbor was to enhance our property and replace the privacy trees that were planted a couple of years ago..." The alignment of the structure with our patio area would tend to support the Applicant's stated purpose of privacy. The north side of the structure is enclosed completely by the "wall - of -wood." We cannot see beyond the "wall -of -wood". The appearance and location of the structure would fit the definition of Privacy Screen in the Municipal Code: ...a visual barrier used to shield any part of a yard from view from any adjacent parcel of land or highway. The definition proceeds to state that a building, trellis, arbor, pergola, arch, gazebo, or obelisk are not considered privacy screens. However, as explained above, we would argue that the structure is not actually an arbour or commonly recognized lawn feature. A genuine arbour might be partially enclosed by vines and plants or by trellis, but not completely covered by lumber. In our estimation, the Applicant's structure was minimally given some attributes of a lawn feature of sorts as a pretence for a privacy screen. Below: Neighbourhood arbours that help provide privacy in conjunction with plants and bushes. Page 152 of 230 Left: 179 Carson Drive Right: 280 Keewatin Avenue 10 Whereas an arbour that serves the purpose of privacy is accessorized with climbing vines and plants, the Applicant's structure attempts to achieve privacy by itself. For that reason, the structure must assume the form that it has — a tall wall -of --wood. A variance under the Zoning Bylaw for a structure that has the appearance, size, and stated purpose of a privacy screen is to create a violation under the Municipal Code. The proper replanting of a few cedar trees would provide a more esthetically pleasing form of privacy. Moreover, there is risk of the structure becoming a full-fledged fence where the 3 -foot gap between the structure and existing fence is filled with a small panel of wood. The structure's wall -of -wood and the fence are lined -up squarely along the property line. The materials are the same. It would not take much for the small space to be covered. There would result an 8 -foot -high fence that projects 12 feet into the front yard — all under the pretext of an "arbour". JAW, 7�i� Above Left: The distance between the privacy barrier and fence is only about 3 feet. They are aligned directly on the property line. Above Right: A simulated but realistic depiction of the gap if it is filled in. Page 153 of 230 Even as a privacy screen, alone, we argue that there are more appropriate, less visually incongruent options available. In the same search area for arbours discussed in part 4 above and in Appendix B, we found even fewer privacy screens on front lawns — only three. They are illustrated in the photographs below. Left: 18 Strathcona Cr. Right: 8 Nipigon St. Neither of the three abut a nieghbour's property and they project minimally into the front yard. Further, with thin profiles, they are barely noticeable. We do not know whether these structures are strictly permitted according to the Municipal Code. But, even if they were in violation, we see how an exception or variance would be allowable and even desirable. They are tasteful and do not present unacceptable visual impacts on adjoining properties. 45 Nipigon St. 11 Above: 331 Carson Dr. The privacy screen on the left at 45 Nipigon St. is actually in the side -yard, not the front. It is, however, an example of a privacy screen that would be a good fit on the front yard, likely with the full concurrence of neighbours given the quality of its build. As a privacy screen, the subject structure is a complete outlier and over -the -top. Nothing similar could be found in our search area. More appropriate options are available. A less bulky form could be set further within the subject property rather than pressed up against the neighbour's yard. Indeed, it would be rare to find a tall wall -of -wood on the property line either as a privacy s(Xeen 194 OYr230 12 The Four Tests The structure's various characteristics render it an inappropriate form for the Applicant's front yard. We do not believe that structure meets the requirements of all parts of the Four Tests for minor zoning variance. 1. Is the proposed variance in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law? Whereas accessory structures should normally be restricted to back and side -yards, there may exist circumstances related to size, appearance or location that would not result in grave incompatibility with the Zoning Bylaw if they were built on front yards. • Because of its disproportionate size and placement next to the property -line, the subject structure is highly visible to the adjacent property (us) and the street, especially on the north and east sides. There is no screening or buffering to moderate its visual encroachment on the neighbouring property and streetscape. • The irregular workmanship does not lend itself to a place of prominence such as the front yard. • Its bulk and the wall -of -wood that encloses the north side give the structure the constitution and appearance of a shed, or a crate, or otherwise a built form that would be expected on a back or side -yard, not the front. • The structure cannot be considered to be an arbour or commonly recognized lawn and yard feature. Rather than accenting the small, landscaped area, it dominates it. 2. Does the proposed variance maintain the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan? The Official Plan requires that new buildings, additions, and/or modification to existing buildings are appropriate in massing and scale and are compatible with the built form and the community character of the established neighborhood. • Whereas a structure that is truly an arbour or commonly recognized lawn feature might normally be compatible with the streetscape and the community character, the subject structure is a complete outlier. Nothing of its size, bulk and appearance can be found on a front yard in the immediate and extended neighbourhood. • In correspondence with the existing fence, the structure presents as something fortress -like — an entrance into a barricaded property that would more properly fit a commercial or industrial area. The structure dominates its environment rather than being subordinate to it. • The irregular workmanship sets the arbour in stark contrast to the modest, but well-appointed yards of the neighbourhood. • The totality of characteristics related to size, appearance and placement casts the structure as highly incongruent and disharmonious with the streetscape and neighbourhood character. 3. Is the variance desirable for the appropriate development or use of the land, building or structure? We believe that the structure is unacceptably detrimental to the adjacent property (us) and the larger public interest. • Unmitigated by buffering and screening, the structure's bulk, irregular workmanship and placement next to the property line present an inescapable visual affront to the next door neighbour (us). • Difficulty accessing the north -side of the structure may cause required repair and maintenance to be foregone or delayed. • The structure has already incurred on our property. Due to the unconventional and tenuous manner in which the structure is held in place with virtually no setback, the structure is poised to re -incur on our property. Page 155 of 230 13 • The structure has the form, function and stated purpose of a privacy screen. To permit a variance under the Zoning Bylaw is to cause an infraction under the Municipal Code. Privacy can be readily achieved by a few cedar trees or by more appropriate options as currently exist in the neighborhood. • A variance would create an unfavourable precedent for similar structures to be built on front yards where none currently exist. 4. Is the variance minor in nature? In light of the multiplicity of issues described in our submission, we contend that the variance is major in nature. The structure righty belongs in a back or side -yard as required by the Zoning Bylaw. We do not find any mitigating quality in terms of appearance, size, and placement that reasonably suggests it is suitable for a front yard. The Applicant, themselves, appear to have recognized that the structure has a harsh aspect that needed to be tempered. To that end, on their side only, the Applicant installed a decorative metal insert on the interior of the north - side wall. While the Applicant may enjoy some relief from the structure's visual impact, we and the neighbourhood must endure an entirely different vista. From our side, the view is one of a large, looming wall -of -wood that is accentuated by irregular workmanship. The form and appearance of the structure is true to its purpose as revealed , on the application for minor variance. The application states that the purpose ti for the structure is "to enhance our property..." and "making our property much better." Although there is a concern for the enhancement of the};j Applicant's own property, no mention is made of concern for other properties. AGO M - Above: ornamental metal insert. Once the north -side was covered with lumber, the insert became visible only for the Applicants. The Applicant has the right to enhance their property. But, it cannot be done at the expense of other properties. In the design, construction, and placement of the structure, the Applicant needed to show a modicum of regard for the impacts on the neighbour and the neighbourhood. We are left to accept that the structure was built with the same disregard for the impacts on others as the fence with protruding nails. in our view, the structure — like the fence — has an antagonistic, harsh posture that is exceedingly inconsistent with the friendly, family- oriented neighbourhood. Pressed against the property line, it presents as an unsettling visual encroachment that looms over our lot and threatens to incur on it. Page 156 of 230 14 Conclusion Although our opposition it is not solely a question of principle and inequity, these factors are not inconsequential, either. To allow the Applicant's structure to stand in error would be highly inequitable when our proposed structure was significantly more consistent with commonly recognized lawn features. Because we could not build an arbour, we accepted a less desirable option at great expense. In fairness, we should be allowed to build an arbour of own with the applicable fees waived. But, even if we could have parity with the applicant, we cannot afford it. We have too much money already sunk with the three-foot fence. We would be monetarily aggrieved if the Applicant was allowed to keep the structure under the circumstances that ours was denied. We return to the structure's merit as a front yard feature. It is difficult to fathom how the Applicant's structure could be permitted on an exemption basis in light of the reasonable alternatives: • Our proposed arbour that was denied. • Commonly recognized lawn features in the media/Internet. • Arbours and Lawn features that currently exist in the neighbourhood M Right: Lawn feature we were denied Left: Lawn features found in the neighbourhood — 236 Nomad Ct. Below Right: Commonly recognized lawn feature Below left: What is asked to stand as an acceptable front lawn feature Nama-Ouldaefa- Yard•Gafdf St—t 1 What Is An Arbor: What To Know Before You Buy Kimberley McGee Page 157 of 230 The Applicant's structure is "over -the -top" in comparison to either of the three alternatives. It is a leap in mass, size and visual encroachment into the streetscape that cannot be reconciled with even a generous notion of what might be allowed. To permit the structure to remain as a convenient fix to an error would result in an inappropriate application of the Zoning Bylaw given the imbalance with what was disallowed and what is currently found in the neighbourhood. We are sympathetic to the fact of an error. Municipal employees have a difficult, complex, job in which multiple interests need to be balanced. We all make mistakes in our professional lives. Our concern is not that an error was made but rather with the way that you are asked to resolve it. It cannot be overlooked that the Applicant sought guidance before building the structure. This is not a situation in which permission was requested after the fact. Rather, this is a case in which there was ample opportunity to influence the outcome. Even if the Applicant insisted on building a lawn feature of sorts, Planning could have counselled the Applicant about building a structure in a manner that better considered the interests of neighbours, thereby making the structure more amenable to a minor variance. Even then, the $1,600 application fee for minor variance would have presented an impediment. But, the fee was waived, and the structure was built without any influence from Planning that might have led to a moderation in some of the structure's questionable attributes — disproportionate bulk, wall -of -wood, placement on the property -line. With Planning's influence, for example, the structure could have been built with a setback to allow some visual separation and room for screening to temper the "wall -of -wood." Instead, the structure was built with only the Applicant's interests fulfilled —to enhance "their" property, solely. We ask the Committee of Adjustment to reject the request for minor variance as a convenient fix to an impactful problem. This situation calls for a complete "do -over" — to restore the original conditions and to proceed from that point in a deliberate and methodical manner that balances all interests. Yes, the Applicant may need to be given compensation for time and materials. This would be fair and appropriate. In that way, a more suitable lawn feature would result, if any at all. It would also remove the appearance of a pecuniary interest. There would be no reason to think that the application is being approved as a financial consideration — that the structure is approved less on its merits and more so to avoid a financial outlay for a mistake. To preserve the integrity of the planning process, including the fair application of the Zoning Bylaws, this matter should be resolved by ordering the structure removed with appropriate restitution to the Applicant. The process should be re -commenced with proper guidance and the option for the Applicant to proceed to a minor variance in consequence of the guidance and the requirement to pay the $1,600.00 fee. We look forward to addressing the Committee of Adjustment at the forthcoming meeting. We would be glad to respond to any questions you may have. Sincerely, Elaine and Dario Cecchin 15 Page 158 of 230 Irl l■r Irl Iry Ir, 1■1 Ir, Irl Irl 6.1 vna Carolina 57"L x 24W x 88"H Embossed Vinyl Arbor, Brown MOdel # VA84070 I SKU # 1000778810 **** (251 $517 V FREE DoM y J FREE ship ihint,,h r Appendix A — Arbours Sold by Home Depot Peak Gardenware 97 -inch H x 24 - inch Depth Steel Garden Arbor (Adjustable Width 36 -inch, 42-inc... Madel # 7461 I SKU # 1001208495 **** (12) $149 ... V DeIwm Ti WYr mohP* V tetmihener Costway 8'4" High x 47" Wide Steel Garden Arch Rose Arbor Climbing Plant Garden Medd # 642922 I SKU # 1001698190 *tt>M* Q7 $149 �/ Stdndar0 Def1'etY V FKEE Shp Ip K#chi— vita Springwood 63"1 x 46"W x 92"H Cedar Arbor, Golden Brown MocM * VA68900 I SKU # 1001535017 R**** (I) $1,239 0°ad V Standard Daf—y W FREE Shipt6Kitchener Visa Westwood 47"L x 18"W x 86"H Cedar Arbor. Golden Brown Model#VAOUN l SKU#100071L845 *R**• (159) $469 10—ch V FREE 6Nr+ary V FREE Ship to KIII het ❑ cohtnale n ❑ Compare t7 ❑ compete Q ❑ compare Q ❑ compare C7 vna Athens 39"L x 23"W x 81"H Vinyl Arbor, White MOWI VA60111 I SKU # 1000791736 iii *+ (229) vna Rosewood 47"L x 24'W x 89"H Cedar Arbor, Golden Brown Model # VA68894 I SKU # 1 0 0 0 71184 6 ****. r112) vna London 45"L x 21"W x 84"H Vinyl Arbor_ White Madel # VA66102-1 I SKU # 1000693972 $249 P1. V FREE DeWeu V FREE Srap M KKll— V 7 Compare Vita Collingwood 43"L x 23"W x 81" CodarArbor, Golden Brown Model # VA68893 I SKU # 1001719606 ****s (2) vita Vienna 49"L x 24"W x 92"H Vinyl Arbor. White Model # VA68144 I SKU # 1000701733 ****, (57) $449 V FREE Dehh,,y V FREE Stop to Mcheher -1 -1 IE _ r ��I 1 f� II� ��4I Vita Dublin 45"L x 21"W x 82"H Vinyl Arbor, While Moda#VA68101-1 I SKU#1000770814 ****• (891 Vita Sierra 39"L x 23"W x 81"H Embossed Vinyl Arbor, Brown Model # VA68106 I SKU # 10111441908 ****. (21) 16 G% ❑ Compare V ❑ C-- Q ❑ Compare V Outsunny 84 75" x 19" Garden Arch with Gate Door Decor Climbing Planter Frame Model # 844287 1 SKU 9 1001698806 **i (3) $329 °gad, ✓Sbadard Dell ✓ ME Shp to nghiii vna Fairfield 58"L x 32"W x 87"H Vinyl Arbor. White Mods # VA84225 I SKU * 1001441905 *** (2> $929earn V Standard Defter' J FREE Ship to Ktchmer vna Fairfield 581 x 32'W x 87"H Vinyl Arbor with Trim Kit. White Madel # VA84228-2 I SKU # 1000732022 **** (1) $1,029 O V FREE Shp to Kdchom ❑ cohoii. C2 ❑ compma q ❑ compare CO ❑ compare q ❑ compare 7� vna 45"L x 23"W x 34" H Cardiff vna Wesihaven 57"L x 24"W x 88"H Vinyl Arbor. While Vinyl Arbor White 1 vna Nantucket Deluxe 60"L x 30"W x 94"H Vinyl Arbor, White vita Florence 49"L x 24"W x 88"H Vinyl Arbor White Page 159 of 230 101 vna Livingston 49"L x 24"W x 92"H Vinyl Arbor.. White 1 vna Nantucket Deluxe 60"L x 30"W x 94"H Vinyl Arbor, White vita Florence 49"L x 24"W x 88"H Vinyl Arbor White Page 159 of 230 17 Appendix B - Search Area for Similar Structures We looked extensively throughout the City of Kitchener to determine the kinds of garden features could be found on front yards. We found no structure similar to the Applicant's. In recent weeks we focused our search to the immediate and extended neighbourhood as depicted in the map below. The search area consisted of Grand River North and most of Heritage Park. It is bounded by Otterbein on the north, Ottawa to the east, River and Carson on the south, and Rothsay on the West. 0 GRAND ROVER NORT, 4 Gealnd Rtrt! Artm _.. . Greot Ck cowl.rc— " Keewatin Place We found only a handful of arbour -like structures on front yards. And, none were of the mass and size of the subject structure. The following page illustrates the entirety of arbours found -10 of them. It will be noted that they project minimally into their respective front yards. They have a small provifile — approximately 2 to 3 long and 4 feet wide. Furthermore, they are not closed -in, but mostly open. They are constructed of light -weight components. Finally, none abut a neighbouring property. Page 160 of 230 Arbours & Lawn Features Found in the Neighbourhood 280 Keewatin Ave. 105 Westchester Dr. 179 Carson Dr. 215 Lorraine Ave. 236 Nomad Ct. 75 Tecumseh Cr. 18 Page 161 of 230 48 Denlow St. 15 Dineen Crt. 82 Strathcona Cres. 547 Otterbein Rd 19 �1 Page 162 of 230 From: Sent: Thursday, June 8, 2023 10:22 AM To: Garett Stevenson <Garett.Stevenson@kitchener.ca> Subject: Accessory Structure at 920 Keewatin Place Good morning, Mr. Stevenson. I am writing for an update on this matter. It was suggested by Officer Stott that I correspond directly with you because your department is involved once again. After the matter was referred to your department by Enforcement, the accessory structure was deemed to be in violation of the zoning by-law. Officer Stott was going to be working with Mr. Bradbury to seek compliance. Subsequently, we heard that the matter was escalated to the Director of Enforcement. Now, it's back to you, apparently. We initiated the complaint about 7 weeks ago when we saw that Mr. Bradbury built a structure on his front lawn that was the same as one that we had been previously denied. As such, we rightly have standing in this matter and merit being kept informed. Yet, seven weeks have gone by and the only feedback we've received is contradictory and ambiguous. Respectfully, could we please receive a substantive update as soon as possible. Please refer to the attachment for some photographs and commentary. We'd be glad to meet with you. Alternatively, you may call us at 613-922-1893. Sincerely, Page 163 of 230 Elaine and Dario Cecchin Page 164 of 230 Appendix — Photographs The Fence at 920 Keewatin Place I Mr. Bradbury built a fence in the spring of 2022 in the side yard between our two properties. On our side of the fence there are countless nails and screws that protrude through the lumber along the entire length. In addition to the hazards, the fence was rendered exceedingly unsightly by a number of characteristics some of which are depicted by the photographs below. The hazards and disfigurements give the impression of being purposely done. i I R Right: The protruding nails are a hazard to children, wildlife and pets that might inadvertently brush up against the fence. A real estate agent advised us to conceal Mr. Bradbury's fence with one of our own. Accordingly, we built an 8 -foot -high fence parallel to Mr. Bradbury's. Because of the pie -shaped configuration of our lots, Mr. Bradbury's fence extended past the corner of our house by eight feet. As such, our 8 -foot -high fence could only be built to the corner of our house. Left: A 1x6 deck board was used as stringer instead of conventional 2x4 or 2x6 lumber. Because it was too short, a random piece of lumber was joined to it by a diagonal board that also served as a kind of brace against the ground. Metal posts resembling parking sign posts were used instead of conventional 4x4 or 6x6 posts. As a result, the fence wobbled and shook. It needed to be braced in unconventional methods in several locations. a I 0 Page 165 of 230 Our Fence and Intended Pergola Right: The intent of the pergola was to hide the portion of Mr. Bradbury's fence that extended past the corner of our house, where we were limited to a three-foot- high fence. Because we could not build a pergola, we built the fence to only a three-foot height. It was not ideal but at least it mitigated the hazards. We have consistently abided by Municipal by- laws and the guidance given us by Planning and Enforcement. Even if we were now allowed to build a pergola or 8 -foot -high fence, we would not be able to afford it. Our resources were expended on the three -foot -high fence, which was expensive. To install a pergola or higher fence, we would have to incur the sunk costs of the existing fence and the cost of its removal — all on top of the cost of the pergola. M i Left: This is the pergola that we wanted built by Heritage Design — a highly reputable and skilled company. It has small foot print — about 4 feet by 4. Its sides were mostly open. It had the appearance of an ornamental and decorative feature rather than a "structure". Mr. Bradbury's pergola is nowhere in the same league in appearance, design, and quality of build as this one. Yet, ours was not permitted. In fairness to the municipality and the planner who counselled us, to the best of our research, neither our intended pergola nor Mr. Bradbury's can be found in a front yard of a residence in the City of Kitchener. We looked extensively, but could find none, remarkably. Page 166 of 230 3 The incursion of Mr. Bradbury's Pergola on our Property After Mr. Bradbury built his fence in May 2022, he retained some of the property line markers, presumably for the pergola he installed most recently. yj'Te �C 1r �� y41t 9/�f h ter., 1� i .i In August 2021, we had our property surveyed in preparation for landscaping later in the year. The survey was conducted by JD Barnes - a certified Ontario land surveyor. Mr. Bradbury relied on the surveyed lot line to install his fence posts. The pieces of rebar covered by water bottles were inserted by Mr. Bradbury for his current and future reference of the lot line. Mr. Bradbury's property line markers existed at the time the pergola was built. As such, Mr. Bradbury knew exactly where the property line was located Page 167 of 230 4 We recreated the property line from metal markers embedded in the ground by the surveyor. When a straight piece of lumber is extended perpendicular to the property line, it is seen that the arbour on the front side crosses the property line by approximately 4 inches. When a straight piece of lumber is extended perpendicular to the property line, it is seen that the arbour on the other side crosses the property line by about 2 inches. w Page 168 of 230 The Pergola is Unsightly and Poorly Built Mr. Bradbury saw us scrutinize the placement of the pergola relative to the property line. He obviously concurred with our findings because he soon after cut the tips of the arbours and pushed the pergola toward his house. Two metal bars were hammered into the ground to keep the structure from being pulled back. Note: the pergola is not anchored on cement piers. It is a floating structure. 5 Metal Rods What kind of construction technique is this? It does not even rise to the level of amateurish. It will not hold the pergola in place indefinitely. The pergola will slide back onto our side, eventually, when the soil loosens. There is potential for a property line dispute. Mr. Bradbury has incentive to keep the structure on his side while this matter is under consideration. If it is decided in his favour, we anticipate that Mr. Bradbury will not rectify another incursion outside of litigation or the threat thereof. Cut Ends The cut arbours render the structure asymmetrical and unfinished. The arbours on Mr. Bradbury's side remain intact. To build a pergola in this manner would be shameful to a professional. Right: The pergola's posts on Mr. Bradbury's side went askew after the structure was pushed onto the right side of the property line. They are no longer perpendicular to the top of the structure and the ground. Page 169 of 230 Right: the pergola takes up about one-third of the remaining front yard. It is disproportionately large and overbearing. R Left: The completed version of the pergola has vertical boards that completely enclose the side. Some of the boards are defaced by creosote. It has the appearance of a wooden crate. Below Left: String line and rebar are becoming increasingly obscured by uncut grass on Mr. Bradbury's side. A tripping and impalement hazard is in the making. Below Right: While our side of the pergola is becoming increasingly unsightly due to the overgrown grass, Mr. Bradbury's side is short and neat. I How does Mr. Bradbury intend on cutting the overgrown grass on his side of the pergola? As it stands, the grass is on the cusp of a Property Standards violation. Mr. Bradbury will not be allowed on our property to cut the grass. Similarly, we will not incur on Mr. Bradbury's property. Will the municipality enforce the Property Standards bylaw and how will Mr. Bradbury comply? Page 170 of 230 The Pergola is in effect an 8 -foot -high Fence in Disguise 7 The distance between the pergola's post and that of the fence is only about 3-4 feet. They are aligned directly on the property line. We would not be surprised to see the gap filled with a short section offence in the near future. Once the gap is bridged, there is created an 8 -foot -high fence that extends about 12 feet into the front yard. The pergola is looking increasingly like a fence. Left: A simulated but realistic depiction of the gap after it is filled in. Will the municipality enforce the Fence bylaw? Page 171 of 230 From: To: Committee of Adiustment (SM) Subject: Submission to Committee of Adjustment Re: A 2023 085 - Application for Minor Variance Date: July 9, 2023 11:49:31 AM To Whom It May Concern: As homeowners and residents of Keewatin Place in Kitchener, we are writing in regard to the application for a Minor Variance to the Zoning Bylaw, A 2023 - 085, 920 Keewatin Place. We object to the application, and respectfully ask that the Committee of Adjustment fully and completely reject the request. Our understanding is that permission was sought by the homeowner(s) of this property to construct a garden arbour in the front yard of the property. We further understand that permission was granted erroneously by the City of Kitchener. As such, a structure was erected on the property owner's front lawn that does not meet what we understand to be the standards and rules of the Zoning By-law regarding the installation of accessory structures in the front yard of a residential property. In addition to this, the structure in question does not in any way, shape or form resemble what would commonly be recognized as a garden arbour. It is more akin to an unenclosed storage shed, a fence extension, a lean-to, or a shelter. From our property sightline, and in our opinion, what the homeowner has erected appears to be neither decorative, nor functional, and in no way enhances the neighbourhood or dare we say, the homeowner's property itself. It is an obtrusive, unattractive, over -sized, imposing wooden structure, and serves to detract from the otherwise attractive, well-groomed streetscape of our small Court. We purchased this home approximately five years ago, and have been impressed with the generous consideration shown by other neighbours on our Court, when landscaping and enhancements were planned and implemented on their properties. We know for a fact that some neighbours have gone to significant additional expense with their projects to ensure that the work done not only meets or exceeds all Zoning Bylaws and municipal rules and requirements, but is also unobtrusive, attractive, non -disruptive, and at the end of the day, only adds to the value and enjoyment of neighbouring homeowners' properties through quality of design, workmanship and placement. In our opinion, the sightlines of the so-called "garden arbour" at 920 Keewatin Place, from the street, and from the front porches and patios of others on this small, friendly street, do nothing to enhance the streetscape, and by extension, the property values of others on the Court. The structure also appears to be extremely tight to the property line. We do not profess to be experts in these matters, but we believe "set -backs" are required and rigorously enforced. We question the correctness of the set -back of this particular structure. If these homeowners wish to add a small garden arbour to their property that abides by the City of Kitchener's recognized and existing criteria for an allowable front yard structure, we would likely have no objection. Since we have lived here, the homeowner(s) have been attentive to the landscaping and upkeep of their front yard. But to do so, from our perspective, they would need to remove the large, obtrusive structure they have erected under the guise of being a garden arbour and re -start the process (approval, design and construction). If they are granted "special permission" to keep, or even modify, the structure as it exists currently, it Page 172 of 230 would be highly unfair to others in the neighbourhood who HAVE, in good faith, respectfully complied with the rules and by-laws in place (even when incurring additional expense to do so) and it could set a dangerous precedent for future projects in our immediate community, and the City at large. In closing, we request that the Committee of Adjustments DENY the applicant's request for a minor variance and further instruct the homeowner(s) to completely remove this large, obtrusive structure from their front yard, without delay. Thank you. Ron and Kathleen Clark, Page 173 of 230 From: To: Committee of Adiustment (SM) Cc: Subject: 920 Keewatin Place - application for a minor zoning variance Date: July 10, 2023 12:44:45 PM To whomsoever this may concern: We are writing today in reference to the Application for a Minor Variance to the Zoning Bylaw A 2023-085 for 920 Keewatin Place as homeowners and residents of the court. As we understand it, permission was sought by the homeowners of 920 Keewatin Place to construct some sort of arbour on the front yard of their property and that the permission was granted in error by the City in, what we perceive to be in violation of the Bylaw. We have always felt very welcome on this court, and are very proud of our courteous and well meaning neighbors, who have become our friends and everyone is very respectful of each other's properties and we believe that adds to our enjoyment of the court. So, in our opinion, as the arbor adds no value at all to the streetscape in any way and does in fact not meet the requirements of the zoning by-law, granting permission to keep the structure as is might be setting a bad precedent for future projects on our little court and the community at large. And it would be unfair too, to the otherwise very respectful and law abiding denizens of the court. In conclusion, we respectfully ask that the Committee of Adjustments consider denying the application. Thank you. With best regards, Karthik Ramakrishnan and Roshini Sreenivas Be at least as kind to the Earth as it is to you. Do not hit print. Page 174 of 230 From: _ To: Committee of Adiustment (SM) Subject: 920 Keewatin PI Date: July 10, 2023 9:14:16 PM To whom it may concern, I am opposing the Minor variance to the zoning by-law to permit an accessory structure (Garden Arbour) within the front yard at 920 Keewatin Pl. I live in the neighborhood and I have seen the structure. I can not describe what it even is. It definitely is not an Arbour. There is clearly a by law against structures in front yards for a reason and the wood wall is an eye sore. I have seen many other beautiful Arbours in the neighborhood but this is not one of them. Odette Lehman Eff�ao Mail on Android Page 175 of 230 Chantelle James and Ian Harrower July 11, 2023 Committee of Adjustment City Of Kitchener 200 King St W Kitchener, ON Regarding: variance request A 2023-085 for 920 Keewatin PI, requesting variance for accessory building (garden arbour) to be built in the front yard We strongly object to the applicant's request for the already -installed front yard structure. First, this structure is not a garden arbour but a fence. Garden arbours are lightweight, airy structures with open sides designed for plants to grow on. The structure the applicant has built is extremely large and is obviously designed as a privacy fence. From most angles, it looks like a fence. According to section 630.1.8 of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code, a fence is defined as: a barrier, including one for noise attenuation, or any structure except a structural part of a building, that wholly or partially screens from view, encloses or divides a yard or other land or any portion thereof, prevents access by people or animals, or marks or substantially marks the boundary between adjoining land. A fence shall include: (a) every post, door, gate, or closure that adjoins, abuts, or attaches thereto; (b) a railing, guard, or structure joined to, or directly around or on a deck or porch provided that such material does not form a component of a fully enclosed deck or fully enclosed porch; and (c) any component or element that physically or visually combines with or appears to contribute to the use or purpose of the fence whether attached thereto or self - supported. This structure meets the definition of subsection (c) and therefore should be subject to the fencing bylaw. Note that this structure cannot be considered a privacy screen, since according to section 630.1.21 of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code: "privacy screen" means a visual barrier used to shield any part of a yard from view from any adjacent parcel of land or highway. Notwithstanding any other portion of this definition, a privacy screen shall not include: (a) self -supported hedges, trees, or other vegetation; (b) a building, trellis, arbor, pergola, arch, gazebo, or obelisk; or (c) anything 8 feet (2.44 metres) or less in height from grade unless such thing is a component or element that physically or visually combines with or appears to Page 176 of 230 contribute to the use or purposes of the privacy screen whether attached thereto or self -supported. The applicant's structure appears to be constructed in a similar manner to the previously -constructed fence extending rearwards from the front of the house, and visually combines with it. Therefore, it is a fence. This structure is also poorly constructed as it does not have proper footings. An eight foot tall by eight foot wide fence structure needs fence posts for stability and security. Not including them means that this structure has been constructed with poor workmanship, in contravention of subsection (b) of section 630.2.3 of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code, which states: No person shall erect, construct, maintain, have, own, allow to remain, fail to remove, or permit or cause to be erected, maintained, or constructed any fence that has: (a) been constructed or partially constructed of materials that are not suitable or sufficient for the purpose for which they have been used; (b) been constructed with poor workmanship, or (c) not been maintained in a safe manner. We recognize that the Committee of Adjustment could still issue a variance for this structure, possibly with conditions. However, we strongly object to such a variance especially with conditions. If the structure were to remain, the applicant will be unable to tend to the lawn and weeds between the structure and the property line shared with 916 Keewatin PI, in contravention of subsection (c) of City of Kitchener Municipal Code section 665.6.1, which states: Exterior property areas shall be maintained in a safe condition and so as not detract from the neighbouring environment, including but not limited to the removal of: a) rubbish, garbage, waste, litter, and debris; b) trees, bushes, and hedges including any branches or limbs thereof which are dead, decayed or damaged, and brush; c) noxious weeds pursuant to the Weed Control Act, R. S. 0. 1990, c. W.5 and any excessive growth of other weeds, grass, and bushes; d) wrecked, dismantled, inoperative, discarded, or unlicensed vehicles, trailers, machinery or parts thereof, except in an establishment licensed or authorized to conduct a salvage, wrecking, or repair business and then only if such establishment conforms with any relevant by-laws, statutes, or regulations; and e) dilapidated or collapsed buildings, structures or erections, and the filling in or protecting of any unprotected well. The only way that portion of the applicant's property can be tended is if the applicant or their delegates trespass onto 916's property, 916 tends to that portion of 920's property, or the City of Kitchener tends to that part of the property. The applicant has been involved in conflicts with several neighbours on the street, including ourselves, and there is a long history of bylaw and police calls either from or about the applicant. The applicant has been in a particularly heated conflict with the neighbours at 916. The owners of 916 are under absolutely no obligation to either allow the applicant or their agents onto their property to tend to the applicant's property or Page 177 of 230 to tend to the property themselves. Any such activity by either side would result in either a police call or a lawsuit for trespassing. This has happened before: such incidents are detailed in judgement Cecchin v Lander, 2019 Canl-l1 131883 (ON SCSM), located at https:Hcanlii.ca/t/05vm8, against Marcel Bradbury (an occupant of 920). Having the City come and tend to this part of the applicant's property would be an extremely wasteful use of City resources. Therefore, those grasses and weeds will grow to unsightly heights in full view of the street. This is unacceptable for the health and property values of everyone else on the street and is not in keeping with the character of the neighbourhood. We would also like to remind the Committee of Adjustment of a previous request for variances by 920 (A 2019-062). One request, to park on the side yard next to the property line shared by 920 and us at 921 Keewatin PI, was denied, but the applicant still parked there after the denial before a fence was built. When we contacted the city to complain about this and other problems, as we had been told to do during the CoA meeting of July 19, 2019, nothing changed and eventually a city employee told us not to contact them about the issues again. Another of the applicant's variance requests was approved with the condition that they provide a parking plan. The applicant did provide such a plan but did not and has not implemented it. We were also harassed by the applicant: after we told them we would oppose their variance requests, they filed a police report falsely accusing one of us of vandalism. Other harassing incidents included calling the police to accuse us of spying when we took our dog out to the boulevard circle to pee and to play Pokemon Go; flashing vehicle lights and honking a vehicle horn at midnight when we did the same; and calling the police to accuse us of harassment when we took photos of parking violations to report the violations to the City. It was an awful time. We just wanted the applicant to follow the rules, and we were harassed and bullied in return. We raise these issues because that entire experience is likely to be repeated if the structure is approved, especially if it is approved with conditions. The applicant may adhere to the letter and not the spirit of the conditions or may only give the appearance of adhering to the conditions. We are concerned that the applicant may seek to increase rather than attempt to lower tensions with their neighbours, and may bully and harass neighbours until the applicant gets their way. We have no reason to believe that the applicant will behave any differently than they did in 2019 with respect to this structure, if it is approved. The only difference would be which neighbour is on the receiving end of the applicant's bullying. That experience also demonstrated that we cannot rely on the City to enforce rules and regulations related to this structure, and that we will have no recourse if the applicant does not follow bylaw or variance conditions. In conclusion: good fences make good neighbours, but this structure is not a good fence. Please do not approve the variance request. Allowing that structure to remain will only increase Page 178 of 230 tensions on this street and result in a lowering of our property values. We hope that if the variance request is denied, the applicant will be required to remove the structure. We understand that the applicant desires privacy from 916 and vice versa, but a fence, especially a fence structure like the one built by the applicant, is an inappropriate solution. The best solution to the privacy concerns would be a bush or shrubbery. Emerald cedars are the usual recommendation but they are notoriously difficult to grow. Perhaps a columnar oak, maple, or yew would be a good choice for that location. Thank you for your consideration. Page 179 of 230 From: - To: Committee of Adiustment (SM) Subject: 920 Keewatin PI Kitchener Date: July 11, 2023 11:10:15 PM To Whom It May Concern This email is about the structure on the front lawn at 920 Keewatin Pl. First and foremost a structure of this nature should not or better yet is not permissible on the front lawn in a residential neighbourhood. It is a cumbersome and ugly box. It is not a gazebo. By permitting this you are opening up a can of worms (for lack of a better expression). You will be creating havoc for yourselves with similar situations in the future and other neighbourhoods. As a neighbour in the immediate area I can simply say I do not appreciate what this thing is let alone where it is situated. I hope the committee can come to a conclusion that suits the neighbours and convey to the specific homeowner what their reasoning is based on the city's own related guidelines and rules. Sincerely Gar Dines Wiw Page 180 of 230 From: To: Committee of Adiustment (SM) Subject: Regarding : A 2023 085 - Application for Minor Variance Date: July 12, 2023 10:48:56 AM To the concerned authority, This email is in regard to the Application for a minor variance to the Zoning Bylaw by 920 Keewatin Pl. We are homeowners of 909 Keewatin PI and would like to express our opinion about the above request. We feel that the structure built is too bold for a decorative Garden Arbor. The fact that it does not meet the requirements of the zoning by-law is concerning to us as residents of this small and friendly court. We would think that it's only fair to obey the by-laws and rules in place without any variance. These sensible rules make sure our neighborhood and community remain beautiful and safe for all families as it is now. We would have no objections if anybody has a front yard structure that is fully compliant. And we are afraid that this approval can set a bad example for the community. We request the City to please reconsider the decision that approved this non compliant structure. Thanks, Jithu James and Chinnu Thomas Page 181 of 230 Staff Report Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: July 18, 2023 SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Interim Manager, Development Review 519-741-2200 ext. 7765 PREPARED BY: Adam Zufferli, Student Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7074 WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 2 DATE OF REPORT: June 30, 2023 REPORT NO.: DSD -2023-302 SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2023-086 — 59 Graber Place RECOMMENDATION: That Minor Variance Application A2023-086 for 59 Graber Place requesting relief from Section 4.15.7 b) of Zoning By-law 2019-051, to permit accessory outdoor storage areas for a public utility in a yard abutting a residential zone in accordance with Section 4.18 of Zoning By-law 2019-051, and generally in accordance with drawings prepared by GSP Group, dated October 2022 and, BE APPROVED. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report to review an application for a minor variance to permit the use of land in yards abutting residential zones for outdoor storage. • The key finding of this report is that the minor variance meets the four tests of the Planning Act. • There are no financial implications. • Community engagement included a notice sign being placed on the property advising that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received, notice of the application was mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property and this report was posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Committee of Adjustment meeting. • This report supports the delivery of core services. BACKGROUND: The subject property is located on Graber Place between Dreger Avenue and Conestoga Expressway. The current use of the lands is for a hydroelectric power station which supplies power to the surrounding neighbourhood. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 182 of 230 Figure 1: Subject Site — 59 Graber PI Figure 2: Location of Outdoor Storage Areas The subject property is identified as `Green Areas' on Map 2 — Urban Structure and is designated `Open Space' on Map 3 — Land Use in the City's 2014 Official Plan. Page 183 of 230 The property is zoned `Open Space Greenways Zone (OSR-2)' in Zoning By-law 2019-051. The application is requesting relief from section 4.15.7 b) in Zoning By-law 2019-051 to permit accessory outdoor storage areas in a yard abutting a residential zone, which is currently not a permitted use. The minor variance to permit accessory outdoor storage areas in a yard abutting a residential zone is to allow the storage of hydroelectric -related materials on the subject site. The minor variance will support the continued operations of the public utility on the subject site. REPORT: Planning Comments: In considering the four tests for the 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 subject property is designated `Open Space' in the City's Official Plan. This designation permits essential public services, including the current hydroelectric power station. The general intent of the `Open Space' land use is to provide lands for parks and other open space uses such as public utility to deliver key infrastructure and services to the City. The minor variance would support the continued operations of the public utility and the delivery of key services to the Stanley Park neighbourhood. Staff is of the opinion that the minor variance meets the general intent of the Official Plan. General Intent of the Zoning By-law The subject property is zoned `OSR-2' in Zoning By-law 2019-051. The purpose of the OSR-2 zone is to provide for green space and buffers as a part of a comprehensive and connected open space system. The zone permits land uses that are not park or active recreation, but which form part of the overall open space system. Section 4.15.7 b) states that public utilities may be permitted within any zone, but accessory outdoor storage shall not be located within any yard abutting a residential zone. The intent is to ensure adequate separation of uses between the public utility use and the residential use, and to ensure that the public utility causes minimal interference with the privacy and enjoyment of neighboring residential properties. In this case, the edge of the property is lined with trees, creating a privacy barrier between residential dwellings and the subject site. The drawings in `Attachment A' also show that setbacks between the storage area and residential lot lines range between 40.3 and 67.2 metres, which are large enough to minimize impact of accessory outdoor storage on the adjacent residential properties. Staff is of the opinion that the minor variance meets the general intent of the Zoning By-law. Is/Are the Effects of the Variance(s) Minor? Staff is of the opinion that the effect of the variance is minor. The drawings in `Attachment A' show that the accessory outdoor storage areas are set back at least 40.3 metres and at most 67.2 metres from adjacent residential properties, which will ensure that noise impacts are minimized. The Owner will need to ensure that a `Visual Barrier' in accordance with Section 4.18 in Zoning By-law 2019- 051 is provided. "4.18 VISUAL BARRIER Where a visual barrier is required, it shall be a minimum height of 1.8 metres above ground level, and shall be an opaque screen consisting of materials such as a wall, fence, trees, shrubs, and/or earth berms." As shown in `Figure 2' above, the property line between the adjacent residential properties is lined with trees, which will eliminate any visual interferences that the accessory outdoor storage may Page 184 of 230 present on the neighbouring properties and satisfy Section 4.18. The Visual Barrier will need to be maintained to ensure the Minor Variance does not become null and void. Is/Are the Variance(s) Desirable For The Appropriate Development or Use of the Land. Building and/or Structure? Staff is of the opinion that the variance desirable for the appropriate development of the land. The accessory outdoor storage will support the continued operation of the hydroelectric power station on the subject site. The hydroelectric power station is an essential public utility which provides power to the Stanley Park neighbourhood. The accessory outdoor storage areas are also set back at least 40.3 metres from adjacent residential properties, which will minimize visual and noise impacts on the adjacent neighbourhood. Environmental Planning Comments: Grand River Conservation Authority has noted that some of the proposed outdoor storage is within the area regulated by the GRCA under O. Reg. 150/06. The proposed outdoor storage is adequately set back from the natural hazard features. As such, the GRCA has no objection to the approval of the minor variance application. Heritage Planning Comments: No comments. Building Division Comments: No comments. Engineering Division Comments: No comments. Parks/Operations Division Comments: No comments. Transportation Planning Comments: No comments. Region of Waterloo Comments: Although there are no conditions for this application, the staff note that there are noise -sensitive land uses, specifically the backyards of many residential dwellings, in the immediate vicinity of the subject lands, which may have impacts from the noise from the proposed storage related activities. The staff recommend that the City staff look into this as deemed appropriate. 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 Page 185 of 230 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: • Planning Act • Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2020) • A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 • Regional Official Plan • Official Plan (2014) • Zoning By-law 2019-051 ATTACHMENTS: Conceptual Design_s 59 Graber Place, Kitchener �ny„au`r. A2l'-�efr'L7af ln�ys. Attachment A — Site Plan Page 186 of 230 Region of Waterloo June 30, 2023 /_1IROTi1Wer City of Kitchener 200 King Street West P.O. Box 1118 Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES 150 Frederick Street, Sth Floor Kitchener ON N2G 4A Canada Telephone: 519-575-4400 TTY: 519-575-4608 Fax: 519-575-4449 www. reg i o n ofwate r l o o. ca File No.: D20-20/ VAR KIT GEN (5) 08 WEBER KIT, 15 DELLROY AVENUE 2296342 ONTARIO INCORPORATED (12) VAR KIT, 30 AND 40 MARGARET AVENUE ACTIVA HOLDINGS Subject: Committee of Adjustment Meeting July 18, 2023, City of Kitchener Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have the following comments: 1) A 2023 - 076 — 912 Otterbein Court — No Concerns. 2) A 2023 - 077 — 176 Indian Road — No Concerns. 3) A 2023 - 078 — 35 Fifth Avenue — There are no conditions for this application. However, the owners are advised that the proposed and existing dwelling(s) on the subject lands would have impacts from the transportation noise in the vicinity. The owners are responsible for ensuring that the subject development does not have any environmental noise impacts. In the absence of a detailed noise study, the staff strongly recommend that all dwelling units be installed with air -ducted heating and ventilation system, suitably sized and designed for the provision of central air conditioning. This will avoid retrofit at any later application stage, e.g. Consent/Condo. There are no airport -specific concerns for the proposed development. However, the owners are advised that the subject lands are located within the Airport Zoning Regulated area and specifically under the runway take-off/approach surface; and, as such, subject to all provisions of the Airport Zoning Regulations. 4) A 2023 - 079 — 55 Rockcliffe Drive — No Concerns. Document Number: 4421509 Page 1 of 3 Page 187 of 230 5) A 2023 — 080 — 15 Dellroy Avenue — The Regional staff do not support this minor variance application. Any structures within the Daylight Triangle (DLT) and any encroachment under, at or above the ground within the Regional right of way, including the daylight triangle (including the lands to be dedicated to the Region), will not be allowed. The buildings and the site must be designed accordingly. Airport Zoning (Advisory): The owners/applicants are also advised that the subject property falls within the Region of Waterloo Zoning Regulated Area, specifically under the Take- off/Approach Surface for Runway 08. Using the Region of Waterloo International Airport Zoning Regulations (AZR) online tool (https://www.waterlooairport.ca/en/about-vkf/airport-zoning-regulations- update.aspx), the permitted building height for the subject property is 399.5m Above Sea Level (ASL), the maximum building height is 75.5m based on a maximum ground level of 324m ASL. Please ensure that the building heights for the proposed development comply with the Region of Waterloo Airport zoning and height restrictions. The Region of Waterloo International Airport AZR also regulates any construction of towers/cranes for a proposed development. Any proposed development at this location must ensure that construction towers/cranes also comply with the Region of Waterloo International AZR. 6) A 2023 - 081 — 333 Pine Valley Drive — No Concerns. 7) A 2023 - 082 — 685 Frederick Street — No Concerns. 8) A 2023 - 083 — 15 Kenora Drive— No concerns/conditions for this application. Staff note that the subject lands are located within the Airport Zoning Regulated area and specifically under the runway take-off/approach surface; and, as such, subject to all provisions of the Airport Zoning Regulations. 9) A 2023 - 084 — 151 Frederick Street — There are no conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that they are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any environmental noise impacts (both on-site and off-site). 10) A 2023 - 085 — 920 Keewatin Place — No Concerns. 11) A 2023 — 086 — 59 Graber Place — Although there are no conditions for this application, the staff note that there are noise -sensitive land uses, specifically the backyards of many residential dwellings, in the immediate vicinity of the subject lands, which may have impacts from the noise from the proposed storage related activities. The staff recommend that the City staff look into this as deemed appropriate. 2 Page 188 of 230 12) A 2023 — 087 — 30-40 Margaret Avenue — No Concerns. Please be advised that any development on the subject lands is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 19-037 or any successor thereof and may require 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. If a site is subject to more than one application, additional comments may apply. Please forward any decisions on the above-mentioned Application numbers to the undersigned. Yours Truly, Joginder Bhatia Transportation Planner C (226) 753-0368 CC: Marilyn Mills, City of Kitchener CofA(a)Kitchener. ca 3 Page 189 of 230 June 29, 2023 Administration Centre: 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Cambridge, ON N1 R 5W6 Phone: 519-621-2761 Toll free: 1-866-900-4722 Fax: 519-621-4844 www.grandriver.ca GRCA File: A2023-086 — 59 Graber Place Marilyn Mills Secretary -Treasurer Committee of Adjustment City of Kitchener 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 Dear Marilyn Mills, Re: Application for Minor Variance A2023-086 59 Graber Place, City of Kitchener Enova Power Corp. via email Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff has reviewed the above -noted minor variance application. Recommendation The Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) has no objection to the proposed minor variance application. GRCA Comments GRCA has reviewed this application under the Mandatory Programs and Services Regulation (Ontario Regulation 686/21), including acting on behalf of the Province regarding natural hazards identified in Section 3.1 of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS, 2020), as a regulatory authority under Ontario Regulation 150/06, and as a public body under the Planning Act as per our CA Board approved policies. Information currently available at this office indicates that the subject property contains the regulated allowance adjacent to a watercourse, floodplain, and wetland. A copy of GRCA's resource mapping is attached. Due to the presence of the features noted above, a portion of the property is regulated by the GRCA under Ontario Regulation 150/06 - Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses Regulation. Any future development or other alteration within the regulated area will require prior written approval from GRCA in the form of a permit pursuant to Ontario Regulation 150/06. The proposed minor variance application requests permission to allow outdoor storage in the areas identified in the circulated sketch (Conceptual Design, dated October 2022, prepared by GSP Group). Some of the outdoor storage is within the regulated area but Member of Conservation Ontario, representing Ontario's 36 Conservation Authorities I The Grand — A Canadian Heritage River Page 190 of 230 the storage is adequately setback from the adjacent natural hazard features. As such, the GRCA has no objection to the approval of the minor variance application. Consistent with GRCA's 2023 approved fee schedule, this application is considered a `minor' minor variance and the applicant will be invoiced in the amount of $300.00 for the GRCA's review of this application. For Municipal Consideration Please be advised that on January 1, 2023, a new Minister's regulation (Ontario Regulation 596/22: Prescribed Acts — Subsections 21.1.1 (1.1) and 21.1.2 (1.1) of the Conservation Authorities Act) came into effect. As a result, non -mandatory technical review services that the GRCA formerly provided under agreement with some municipalities (e.g., technical reviews related to natural heritage and select aspects of stormwater management) will no longer be provided. Should you have any questions, please contact me at 519-621-2763 ext. 2228 or aherreman@g randriver.ca. Sincerely, Andrew Herreman, CPT Resource Planning Technician Grand River Conservation Authority Enclosed: GRCA Mapping Copy: Enova Power Corp. (via email) Brandon Flewwelling, GSP Group (via email) Page 191 of 230 y --i N M Z V n O L iy U z o �m�v _"a `oma N 7 N U Q (7 C� �0 Q €>emas - 4-v > Q �a L U C) 2081 U� v m�y �,ovNt r -op cu C) E2 U C � D -o I (J a o ° Q (D -o��a �A o� cu N L y m m U �� m o Q Q U Q ° o C 0 w ��Qm ;�> s �3 C� N J Q E a U o o o L> o L y v e 5`. a - (6 N s= (7 U °' o (7 o w Un 0 w - „ co - co C 1 0 m ` m Qin Q in .� .� .� .� Q � = g Y ` _ = A O CO m m m° ° n Q Q' ( (D ° o w w w w N Q A -- U m m m�� w w Q n n O n o O� o o o o 2 2 30: a 0--- C) .__ v y v u v g o a 2 6 6 6 6 6 � o Q o `0 1 w (n (n y n (7 v_o?�a2mo n F N t Q - E _ m o O n �20m�- '^v'^ G U O u U S S v F v s Z C7 4 � Q l k o m i E 'r' _ ... ~ jam.. Lo r �3 nroyv. 1� �s a � N N O O V L � x� o us O d�P z w Sx!] U n m Staff Report Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: July 18, 2023 SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Interim Manager, Development Review 519-741-2200 ext. 7765 PREPARED BY: Craig Dumart, Senior Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7073 WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 3 DATE OF REPORT: July 5, 2023 REPORT NO.: DSD -2023-298 SUBJECT: Consent Application B2023-025 - 97 Second Avenue RECOMMENDATION: That Consent Application B2023-025 for 97 Second Avenue requesting consent to sever a parcel of land having a lot width of 9.4 metres, a lot depth of 40.5, metres and a lot area of 377 square metres, BE APPROVED subject to the following conditions: 1. That the Owner's solicitor shall provide draft transfer documents and associated fees for the Certificate of Official to the satisfaction of the Secretary -Treasurer and City Solicitor, if required. 2. That the Owner shall obtain a tax certificate from the City of Kitchener to verify that there are no outstanding taxes on the subject property(ies) to the satisfaction of the City's Revenue Division. 3. That the owner provides a digital file of the deposited reference plan(s) prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor in PDF and either .dwg (AutoCad) or .dgn (Microstation) format, as well as two full size paper copies of the plan(s). The digital file needs to be submitted according to the City of Kitchener's Digital Submission Standards to the satisfaction of the City's Mapping Technologist. 4. That the Owner provides a servicing plan showing outlets to the municipal servicing system to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services. 5. That the Owner submit a Development Asset Drawing (digital AutoCAD) for the site (servicing, SWM etc.) with corresponding layer names and asset information to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Engineering Services, prior to deed endorsement. 6. That the Owner makes financial arrangements for the installation of any new service connections to the severed and/or retained lands to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Engineering Services. 7. That any new driveways are to be built to City of Kitchener standards at the Owner's *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 193 of 230 expense prior to occupancy of the building to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Engineering Services. 8. That the Owner provides confirmation that the basement elevation can be drained by gravity to the street sewers to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Engineering Services. If this is not the case, then the owner will need to pump the sewage via a pump and forcemain to the property line and have a gravity sewer from the property line to the street to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Engineering Services. 9. That the owner pay to the City of Kitchener a cash -in -lieu contribution for park dedication of $11,862.00. 10. That the property owner obtains a Demolition Permit, for the accessory structure proposed to be demolished, to the satisfaction of the Chief Building Official, and removes the existing accessory structure prior to deed endorsement. 11. That at the sole option of the City's Director of Planning, the Owner shall enter into an agreement with the City of Kitchener, to be prepared by the City Solicitor, to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor and the City's Director of Planning, which shall include the following: a) That prior to any grading, servicing or the application or issuance of a building permit, the owner shall submit a plan, prepared by a qualified consultant, to the satisfaction and approval of the City's Supervisor, Site Plans showing: (i) the proposed location of all buildings (including accessory buildings and structures), decks and driveways; (ii) the location of any existing buildings or structures to be removed or relocated; (iii) the proposed grades and drainage; (iv) the location of all trees to be preserved, removed or potentially impacted on or adjacent to the subject lands, including notations of their size, species and condition; (v) justification for any trees to be removed; and (vi) outline tree protection measures for trees to be preserved; and (vii) building elevation drawings. (viii) If necessary, the plan shall include required mitigation and or compensation measures. (ix) That the approved elevation drawings shall be implemented as approved or be substantively similar to the approved elevations as part of issuance of any building permit(s). b) Any alteration or improvement to the lands including grading, servicing, tree removal and the application or issuance of any building permits shall be in compliance with the approved plan. Any changes or revisions to the plan require the approval of the City's Supervisor, Site Plans. 12. That, prior to final approval, the applicant submits the Consent Application Review Fee of $350.00 to the Region of Waterloo. 13. That prior to final approval, the Owner/Applicant enter into a registered development agreement with the City of Kitchener, to the satisfaction of the Region of Waterloo, that includes the following noise mitigation and warning clauses in all agreements of Offers of Purchase and Sale and Lease/Rental Agreements: Page 194 of 230 a) For the Severed lands: i) The dwelling will be fitted with a forced air -ducted heating system suitably sized and designed with provision for the installation of air conditioning in future at the occupant's discretion. ii) The following noise warning clause will be included in all offers of purchase and sale and lease/rental agreements for the Severed lands: "The purchasers/tenants are advised that sound levels due to increasing road traffic Highway 7/8 may occasionally interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants as the sound levels may exceed the sound level limits of the Waterloo Region and the Ministry of the Environment Conservation and Parks (MECP)." "This dwelling has been fitted with a forced air -ducted heating system and has been designed with the provision of adding central air conditioning at the occupant's discretion. Installation of central air conditioning by the occupant in low and medium -density developments will allow windows and exterior doors to remain closed, thereby ensuring that the indoor sound levels are within the sound level limits of the Waterloo Region and the Ministry of the Environment Conservation and Parks (MECP). " b) For the Retained lands: i) The following noise -warning clause shall be included in all offers of purchase and sale and lease/rental agreements for the Retained lands: "The purchasers/tenants are advised that sound levels due to increasing road traffic Highway 7/8 may occasionally interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants as the sound levels may exceed the sound level limits of the Waterloo Region and the Ministry of the Environment Conservation and Parks (MECP)." REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to review an application for consent to sever a residential lot containing a single detached dwelling into two lots to allow for a new detached dwelling to be constructed on the severed lands. • There are no financial implications. • Community engagement included a notice sign being placed on the property advising that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received, notice of the application was mailed to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property and this report was posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Committee of Adjustment meeting. • This report supports the delivery of core services. BACKGROUND: The subject property is an interior lot located on the east side of Second Avenue between Kingsway Drive and Connaught Street. The surrounding neighbourhood consists of a variety of residential uses such as single detached dwellings, semi-detached dwellings, and multiple dwellings that vary in lot size and area. Page 195 of 230 Figure 1: Location map- 97 Second Avenue The subject property is identified as `Community Area' on Map 2 —Urban Structure and is designated `Low Rise Residential' on Map 3 — Land Use in the City's 2014 Official Plan. The property is zoned `Low Rise Residential Four Zone (RES -4)' in Zoning By-law 2019-051. The purpose of the application is to sever a residential lot containing an existing single detached dwelling into two lots to allow for a new detached dwelling to be constructed on the severed lands. The existing detached accessory structure is proposed to be demolished while the existing single detached dwelling will remain on the retained lands. The severed lot would have a lot frontage on 9.4 metres, a lot depth of 40.5 metres and an area of 377 square metres, while the retained lot would have a lot frontage 13.1 metres, a lot depth of 40.5 metres and an area of 525 square metres. Staff visited the subject property on June 28, 2023. Figure 2: Existing Single Detached Dwelling at 97 Second Avenue Page 196 of 230 ate, O L1J Z Q L 0 L. cc w Z REPORT: Planning Comments: F 4 HCARD iFFCwr,F CMAIN LMS FENCE ON LITE {` 44E d'.. � � I NW46'M** arsYoSwn„ �*Qsr1 Figure 3: Severance Sketch In considering all the relevant Provincial legislation, Regional and City policies and regulations, Planning staff offer the following comments: Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2020) The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) provides policy direction on matters of provincial interest related to land use planning and development. Section 1.4.3(b) of the PPS promotes all types of residential intensification, and sets out a policy framework for sustainable healthy, liveable and safe communities. The PPS promotes efficient development and land use patterns, as well as accommodating an appropriate mix of affordable and market-based residential dwelling types with other land uses, while supporting the environment, public health and safety. Provincial policies promote the integration of land use planning, growth management, transit -supportive development, intensification, and infrastructure planning to achieve cost-effective development patterns, optimization of transit investments, and standards to minimize land consumption and servicing costs. Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposed application will facilitate a form of gentle intensification of the subject property with the creation of new lot for a future duplex dwelling that is compatible with the surrounding community and will make use of the existing infrastructure. No new public roads would be required for the proposed development. Planning staff is of the opinion that this proposal is consistent with the PPS. A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 The Growth Plan supports the development of complete and compact communities that are designed to support healthy and active living, make efficient use of land and infrastructure, provide for a range Page 197 of 230 �o ¢ and j PAWr, Ma' _X'ZW ar N66'47`1Q'W aa+ao r E 40.05ew I °orw Dpm LINK fEN E CHAIN LINK fENM 9___—___ 41 {� a SEVERED LOT AREA; 377m' FiN 225$7-OC?7 ASM4ki C04 (�tj EX. y VIr fL r r^ t � — 3 i 20.57 OCHiHFfF- �RQPOSE DRIVEWAY r> i a4E STOREY RETAINED LOT , FENCE AREA: 525m RAE VIN YDWELLINED DWELLING -------- Planning Comments: F 4 HCARD iFFCwr,F CMAIN LMS FENCE ON LITE {` 44E d'.. � � I NW46'M** arsYoSwn„ �*Qsr1 Figure 3: Severance Sketch In considering all the relevant Provincial legislation, Regional and City policies and regulations, Planning staff offer the following comments: Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2020) The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) provides policy direction on matters of provincial interest related to land use planning and development. Section 1.4.3(b) of the PPS promotes all types of residential intensification, and sets out a policy framework for sustainable healthy, liveable and safe communities. The PPS promotes efficient development and land use patterns, as well as accommodating an appropriate mix of affordable and market-based residential dwelling types with other land uses, while supporting the environment, public health and safety. Provincial policies promote the integration of land use planning, growth management, transit -supportive development, intensification, and infrastructure planning to achieve cost-effective development patterns, optimization of transit investments, and standards to minimize land consumption and servicing costs. Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposed application will facilitate a form of gentle intensification of the subject property with the creation of new lot for a future duplex dwelling that is compatible with the surrounding community and will make use of the existing infrastructure. No new public roads would be required for the proposed development. Planning staff is of the opinion that this proposal is consistent with the PPS. A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 The Growth Plan supports the development of complete and compact communities that are designed to support healthy and active living, make efficient use of land and infrastructure, provide for a range Page 197 of 230 and mix of housing types, jobs, and services, at densities and in locations which support transit viability and active transportation. The subject lands are in close proximity to transit and the subject lands are in closer proximity to trails and parks. Policy 2.2.6.1(a) Municipalities will support housing choice through the achievement of the minimum intensification and targets in this plan by identifying a diverse range and mix of housing options and densities, including additional residential units and affordable housing to meet projected needs of current and future residents. The subject lands are located within the City's delineated built up area. The proposed development represents gentle intensification and will contribute towards achieving the City's intensification density targets. The severance application will help make efficient use of existing infrastructure, parks, roads, trails and transit. Planning staff is of the opinion that the development proposal conforms to the Growth Plan. Regional Official Plan (ROP): Urban Area policies of the ROP identify that the focus of the Region's future growth will be within the Urban Area. The subject lands are designated Built -Up Area in the ROP. The proposed development conforms to Policy 2.C.2 of the ROP as this neighbourhood provides for the physical infrastructure and community infrastructure to support the proposed residential development, including transportation networks, municipal drinking -water supply and wastewater systems, and a broad range of social and public health services. Regional policies require Area Municipalities to plan for a range of housing in terms of form, tenure, density and affordability to satisfy the various physical, social, economic and personal support needs of current and future residents. Planning staff are of the opinion that the severance application conforms to the Regional Official Plan. City's Official Plan (2014) The subject property is identified as `Community Area' on Map 2 — Urban Structure and is designated `Low Rise Residential' on Map 3 — Land Use in the City's Official Plan. Section 17.E.20.5 of the Official Plan implements Section 51 of the Planning Act and contains policies regarding infill development and lot creation (Consent Policies).These policies state the following: "17.E.20.5 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; d) the lot will have frontage on a public street; e) municipal water services are available; f) municipal sanitary services are available except in accordance with Policy 14.C.1.19; Page 198 of 230 g) a Plan of Subdivision or Condominium has been deemed not to be necessary for proper and orderly development; and, h) the lot(s) will not restrict the ultimate development of adjacent properties." The proposed lot widths and lot areas of the proposed severed and retained lots will meet the minimum `RES -4' zone lot width and lot area requirements and minor variances are not required. Planning staff is of the opinion that the size, dimension and shape of the proposed lots are suitable for the use of the lands and compatible with the surrounding neighbourhood which is developed with single detached, semi detached and multiple dwellings with lots sizes that vary in width, depth, and area. The lands front onto a public street and full services are available. There are no natural heritage features that would be impacted by the proposed consent application. Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposed severance conforms with the City of Kitchener Official Plan. Zoning By-law 2019-051 The subject property is zoned as `Low Rise Residential Four Zone (RES -4)' in Zoning By-law 2019- 051. The `RES -4' zone permits a range of low density dwelling types such as duplex dwellings. The `RES -4' Zone requires a minimum lot width of 9 metres (internal lots) and 12.8 metres (corner lots) and minimum lot area of 235 square metres for duplex dwellings. The proposed lot widths and lot areas of the proposed severed and retained lots meet the minimum `RES -4' zone lot width and lot area requirements. Planning Conclusions/Comments: 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 satisfied that the creation of the severed lot is desirable and appropriate. The uses of both the severed and retained parcels are in conformity with the City's Official Plan and Zoning By-law. Planning staff is of the opinion that the size, dimension and shape of the proposed lots are suitable for the use of the lands and compatible with the surrounding community. There are existing schools within the neighbourhood. Staff is further of the opinion that the proposal is consistent with the Region of Waterloo Official Plan, the Provincial Policy Statement, conforms to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe and is good planning and in the public interest. Environmental Planning Comments: The following condition should be applied: 1. That at the sole option of the City's Director of Planning, the Owner shall enter into an agreement with the City of Kitchener, to be prepared by the City Solicitor, to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor and the City's Director of Planning, which shall include the following: a) That prior to any grading, servicing or the application or issuance of a building permit, the owner shall submit a plan, prepared by a qualified consultant, to the satisfaction and approval of the City's Supervisor, Site Plans showing: (i) the proposed location of all buildings (including accessory buildings and structures), decks and driveways; (ii) the location of any existing buildings or structures to be removed or relocated; (iii) the proposed grades and drainage; (iv) the location of all trees to be preserved, removed or potentially impacted on or adjacent to the subject lands, including notations of their size, species and condition; (v) justification for any trees to be removed; and (vi) outline tree protection measures for trees to be preserved; and (vii) building elevation drawings. (viii) If necessary, the plan shall include required mitigation and or compensation measures. Page 199 of 230 (ix) That the approved elevation drawings shall be implemented as approved or be substantively similar to the approved elevations as part of issuance of any building permit(s). b) Any alteration or improvement to the lands including grading, servicing, tree removal and the application or issuance of any building permits shall be in compliance with the approved plan. Any changes or revisions to the plan require the approval of the City's Supervisor, Site Plans. Heritage Planning Comments: No heritage concerns. Building Division 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 accessory structure, as well as construction of the new residential building. 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, storm 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). • 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 municipal sanitary sewer. If basement finished floor elevations do not allow for gravity drainage to the existing municipal sanitary system, the owner will have to pump the sewage to achieve gravity drainage from the property line to the municipal sanitary sewer in the right of way. Parks/Operations Division Comments: Cash -in -lieu of park land dedication will be required on the severed parcel as one (1) new development lot will be created. The cash -in -lieu dedication required is $11,862.00. Transportation Planning Comments: Transportation Services have no concerns with the proposed application. Region of Waterloo Comments: The applicant is proposing to sever a parcel of land for residential purposes. The severed parcel will have a lot frontage of 9.4m, a lot depth of 40.05 m and a lot area of 377 square metres. The retained lands will have a lot frontage of 13.1m, a lot depth of 40.05m and a lot area of 525 square metres. The applicant proposes to retain the existing dwelling and frame shed on site and has proposed residential uses on the severed parcel. Page 200 of 230 Regional Cultural Heritage: Due to the nature of the application, an Archaeological Assessment is not required at this time. The owner/applicant is advised that an Archaeological Assessment prepared by a Licensed Archaeologist is required in the future should a planning act application be required as the site is located in a Part V area and is within proximity to known archaeological resources. Regional Fee: The owner/applicant is required to submit the Regional consent review fee of $350.00 prior to final approval of the consent. Corridor Planning: Both severed and retained residential lots may have impacts from road noise on Conestoga Parkway (Highway 7/8). To address this concern, the following conditions shall be secured through a registered agreement with the City of Kitchener, to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo for both retained and severed lots: The following conditions should be applied: 1. That prior to final approval, the owner/applicant submit the Regional consent review fee of $350.00. 2. That prior to final approval, the Owner/Applicant enter into a registered development agreement with the City of Kitchener, to the satisfaction of the Region of Waterloo, that includes the following noise mitigation and warning clauses in all agreements of Offers of Purchase and Sale and Lease/Rental Agreements: a) For the Severed lands: i) The dwelling will be fitted with a forced air -ducted heating system suitably sized and designed with provision for the installation of air conditioning in future at the occupant's discretion. ii) The following noise warning clause will be included in all offers of purchase and sale and lease/rental agreements for the severed lands: "The purchasers/tenants are advised that sound levels due to increasing road traffic Highway 7/8 may occasionally interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants as the sound levels may exceed the sound level limits of the Waterloo Region and the Ministry of the Environment Conservation and Parks (MECP). " "This dwelling has been fitted with a forced air -ducted heating system and has been designed with the provision of adding central air conditioning at the occupant's discretion. Installation of central air conditioning by the occupant in low and medium -density developments will allow windows and exterior doors to remain closed, thereby ensuring that the indoor sound levels are within the sound level limits of the Waterloo Region and the Ministry of the Environment Conservation and Parks (MECP)." b) For the Retained lands: i) The following noise -warning clause shall be included in all offers of purchase and sale and lease/rental agreements for the retained lands: "The purchasers/tenants are advised that sound levels due to increasing road traffic Highway 7/8 may occasionally interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants as Page 201 of 230 the sound levels may exceed the sound level limits of the Waterloo Region and the Ministry of the Environment Conservation and Parks (MECP)." 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: • Planning Act • Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2020) • A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 • Regional Official Plan (ROP) • Official Plan (2014) • Zoning By-law 2019-051 Page 202 of 230 N,4*+V- Region of Waterloo Marilyn Mills, Secretary Treasurer Committee of Adjustment City of Kitchener P.O. Box 1118 200 King Street East Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES Community Planning 150 Frederick Street 8th Floor Kitchener Ontario N2G 4A Canada Telephone: 519-575-4400 TTY: 519-575-4608 Fax: 519-575-4466 www. regionofwaterloo.ca Melissa Mohr 226-752-8622 D20-20/23 KIT July 4, 2023 Re: Comments for Consent Applications B2023-0019 and B2023-020 Committee of Adjustment Hearing July 16, 2023 CITY OF KITCHENER B2023-025 97 Second Avenue Musaab Saaub, Saif Saab, Manaf Saab (Owners) C/O Douglas Stewart (Arcadis Professional Services (Canada) Ltd. — Authorized Agent) The applicant is proposing to sever a parcel of land for residential purposes. The severed parcel will have a lot frontage of 9.4m, a lot depth of 40.05 m and a lot area of 377 square metres. The retained lands will have a lot frontage of 13.1 m, a lot depth of 40.05m and a lot area of 525 square metres. The applicant proposes to retain the existing dwelling and frame shed on site and has proposed residential uses on the severed parcel. Regional Cultural Heritage: Due to the nature of the application, an Archaeological Assessment is not required at this time. The owner/applicant is advised that an Archaeological Assessment prepared by a Licenced Archaeologist is required in the future should a planning act application be required as the site is located in a Part V area and is within proximity to known archaeological resources. Regional Fee: The owner/applicant is required to submit the Regional consent review fee of $350.00 prior to final approval of the consent. Document Number: 4423945 Version: 1 Page 203 of 230 Corridor Planning: Both severed and retained residential lots may have impacts from road noise on Conestoga Parkway (Highway 7/8). To address this concern, the following conditions shall be secured through a registered agreement with the City of Kitchener, to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo for both retained and severed lots: Severed Lot a) The dwelling will be fitted with a forced air -ducted heating system suitably sized and designed with provision for the installation of air conditioning in future at the occupant's discretion. b) The following noise warning clause will be included in all offers of purchase and sale and lease/rental agreements: "The purchasers/tenants are advised that sound levels due to increasing road traffic Highway 7/8 may occasionally interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants as the sound levels may exceed the sound level limits of the Waterloo Region and the Ministry of the Environment Conservation and Parks (MECP). "This dwelling has been fitted with a forced air -ducted heating system and has been designed with the provision of adding central air conditioning at the occupant's discretion. Installation of central air conditioning by the occupant in low and medium - density developments will allow windows and exterior doors to remain closed, thereby ensuring that the indoor sound levels are within the sound level limits of the Waterloo Region and the Ministry of the Environment Conservation and Parks (MECP)." Retained Lot The following noise -warning clause will be included in all offers of purchase and sale and lease/rental agreements: "The purchasers/tenants are advised that sound levels due to increasing road traffic Highway 7/8 may occasionally interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants as the sound levels may exceed the sound level limits of the Waterloo Region and the Ministry of the Environment Conservation and Parks (MECP)." The Region has no objection to 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; 2) That prior to final approval, the Owner/Applicant enter into a registered development agreement with the City of Kitchener, to the satisfaction of the Region of Waterloo, Document Number: 4423945 Version: 1 Page 204 of 230 that includes the following noise mitigation and warning clauses in all agreements of Offers of Purchase and Sale and Lease/Rental Agreements: a) For the severed lands: i) The dwelling will be fitted with a forced air -ducted heating system suitably sized and designed with provision for the installation of air conditioning in future at the occupant's discretion. ii) The following noise warning clause will be included in all offers of purchase and sale and lease/rental agreements for the severed lands: "The purchasers/tenants are advised that sound levels due to increasing road traffic Highway 7/8 may occasionally interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants as the sound levels may exceed the sound level limits of the Waterloo Region and the Ministry of the Environment Conservation and Parks (MECP). "This dwelling has been fitted with a forced air -ducted heating system and has been designed with the provision of adding central air conditioning at the occupant's discretion. Installation of central air conditioning by the occupant in low and medium -density developments will allow windows and exterior doors to remain closed, thereby ensuring that the indoor sound levels are within the sound level limits of the Waterloo Region and the Ministry of the Environment Conservation and Parks (MECP)." b) For the retained lands: i) The following noise -warning clause shall be included in all offers of purchase and sale and lease/rental agreements for the retained lands: "The purchasers/tenants are advised that sound levels due to increasing road traffic Highway 7/8 may occasionally interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants as the sound levels may exceed the sound level limits of the Waterloo Region and the Ministry of the Environment Conservation and Parks (MECP)." B2023-026 30-40 Margaret Avenue Activa Holdings Inc. / Alex Sumner (Owner) C/O MHBC Planning/Pierre Chauvin/Rachel Wolffe — Authorized Agent) The applicant is proposing a lot addition. The applicant has proposed to sever a 1.829m, 0.01 ha parcel of land to add to the adjacent Church of the Good Shepard. 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 conditions: Document Number: 4423945 Version: 1 Page 205 of 230 1. That prior to final approval, the owner/applicant submit the Regional consent review fee of $350.00; 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, Melissa Mohr, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner Document Number: 4423945 Version: 1 Page 206 of 230 June 29, 2023 Administration Centre: 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Cambridge, ON N1 R 5W6 Phone: 519-621-2761 Toll free: 1-866-900-4722 Fax: 519-621-4844 www.grandriver.ca Marilyn Mills Secretary -Treasurer Committee of Adjustment City of Kitchener 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON, N2G 4G7 Dear Marilyn Mills, Re: Committee of Adjustment Meeting — July 18, 2023 Applications for Minor Variance A 2023-077 176 Indian Road A 2023-078 35 Fifth Avenue A 2023-079 55 Rockcliffe Drive A 2023-080 15 Dellroy Avenue A 2023-081 333 Pine Valley Drive A 2023-082 685 Frederick Street A 2023-083 15 Kenora Drive A 2023-084 151 Frederick Street A 2023-085 920 Keewatin Place A 2023-087 30-40 Margaret Avenue Applications for Consent B 2023-025 97 Second Avenue B 2023-026 30-40 Margaret Avenue via email Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff has reviewed the above -noted applications. GRCA has no objection to the approval of the above applications. The subject properties do not contain any natural hazards such as watercourses, floodplains, shorelines, wetlands, or valley slopes. The properties are not subject to Ontario Regulation 150/06 and, therefore, a permission from GRCA is not required. Should you have any questions, please contact me at aherremana-q rand river. ca or 519- 621-2763 ext. 2228. Sincerely, Andrew Herreman, CPT Resource Planning Technician Grand River Conservation Authority Member of Conservation Ontario, representing Ontario's 36 Conservation Authorities I The Grand — A Canadian Heritage River Page 207 of 230 From: ARABIA Gabriel To: =�f A4ii�crmrnr fSM) subject: City of Kitchener-972AVE -B 2023-025 Date: July 5, 2023 11:99:17 AM -hme°ts. Hello, We are in receipt of your Application for Consent, B 2023-025 dated June 23rd, 2023. We have reviewed the documents concerningthe noted Application and have no comments or concerns at this time. Our prelimina , nnfim considers s affecting Hydro One's'HIEh Voltage Facilities and corridor Lands' only- For nH.For proposals affecting 'Low Voltage Distribution Facilities' please consult your local area Distribution Supplier. To confirm if Hydro One is your local distributor please follow the following link: turn 11www.hvdroone.com/StnrmCemer3/ Please select "Search" and locate address in question by entering the address or by zooming in and out of the map N. ? Q hyd ro MENU HELP SEARCH one Customers Affected: O >5000 0 501-5000 0 51-500 a 21-50 IO —20 Q Multiple () Crew — Service Area 0 4 4ttaw Montreal Hun[+v:le 417 417 400 11 ° O h C dmf � a 41fi 4 Or is Kawartha Lakes 400 � � t5 Burlir Peterbgrough Kin sell�ville •d •'� ns w. In—, worse own • 40 • , yramp o Toronto dr10£ • Kftcoe ° ississauga p . a Ilton GOO �2 ° ° Rochester 7 _.. _ 14U31 ✓ Mao data @2019 Gentle 50. km � Terms of tlse Report a n error If Hydro One is your local area Distribution Supplier, please contact Customer Service at 1-888-664-9376 or e-mail Customei-Communications(R1 HvdroOne.com to be connected to your Local Operations Centre Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Thank you, Dennis De Rango Specialized Services Team Lead, Real Estate Department Hydro One Networks Inc. Tel: (905)946-6237 Email: Dennis DeRango(d HydroOne tom This email and any attached files are privileged and may contain confidential info rnation intended only for the person or persons named above. Any other distribution, reproduction, copying, disclosure, or other dissemination is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply email and delete the transmission received by you. This statement applies to the initial email as well as any and all copies (replies and/or forwards) of the initial email Page 208 of 230 Staff Report Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: July 18, 2023 SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Interim Manager, Development Review 519-741-2200 ext. 7765 PREPARED BY: Eric Schneider, Senior Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7843 WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 10 DATE OF REPORT: July 7, 2023 REPORT NO.: DSD -2023-312 SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2023-087 - 30-40 Margaret Avenue Consent Application B2023-026 - 30-40 Margaret Avenue RECOMMENDATION: Minor Variance Application A2023-087 A. That Minor Variance Application A2023-087 for 30-40 Margaret Avenue requesting relief from the following sections of Zoning By-law 85-1: i) Section 5.6.1 a) to permit steps with a height of 1.2 metres within 3 metres of a street line, whereas a maximum of height of steps of 0.6 metres within 3 metres of a street line is permitted; ii) Section 6.2 a) to permit a parking requirement of 1.14 parking spaces per dwelling unit (54 parking spaces), instead of the minimum required 1.25 parking spaces per unit (59 parking spaces); iii) Section 6.2 b) vi) c) to permit a visitor parking rate of 12.9% (7 parking spaces) instead of the minimum required 20% visitor parking rate (11 parking spaces); iv) Section 42.6 to permit an interior side yard setback of 3.6 metres instead of the minimum required interior side yard setback of 6 metres; v) Special Regulation Provision 551 R to permit a front yard setback of 3.4 metres instead of the minimum required front yard setback of 4.5 metres; to facilitate a multiple residential development in accordance with Site Plan Application SP22/187/M/AP, BE APPROVED. Consent Application B2023-026 B. That Consent Application B2023-026 requesting consent to sever a parcel of land as a lot addition to 12 Margaret Avenue/116 Queen Street North having a lot width of 1.8 metres, a lot depth of 57.5 metres and a lot area of 103.5 square metres, BE APPROVED subject to the following conditions: 1. That the Owner's solicitor shall provide draft transfer documents and associated fees for the Certificate of Official to the satisfaction of the Secretary -Treasurer and City Solicitor, *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 209 of 230 if required. 2. That the Owner shall obtain a tax certificate from the City of Kitchener to verify that there are no outstanding taxes on the subject property(ies) to the satisfaction of the City's Revenue Division. 3. That the owner provides a digital file of the deposited reference plan(s) prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor in PDF and either .dwg (AutoCad) or .dgn (Microstation) format, as well as two full size paper copies of the plan(s). The digital file needs to be submitted according to the City of Kitchener's Digital Submission Standards to the satisfaction of the City's Mapping Technologist. 4. That the lands to be severed be added to the abutting lands and title be taken into identical ownership as the abutting lands. The deed for endorsement shall include that any subsequent conveyance of the parcel to be severed shall comply with Sections 50(3) and/or (5) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. PA 3, as amended. 5. That the owner's Solicitor shall provide a Solicitor's Undertaking to register an Application Consolidation Parcels immediately following the registration of the Severance Deed and prior to any new applicable mortgages, and to provide a copy of the registered Application Consolidation Parcels to the City Solicitor within a reasonable time following registration. 6. That, prior to final approval, the applicant submits the Consent Application Review Fee of $350.00 to the Region of Waterloo. 7. That the Owner shall grant Metrolinx an environmental easement over the Retained Lands for operational emissions, to the satisfaction of Metrolinx. 8. That the Owner shall provide confirmation to Metrolinx for the Retained Lands, that the following warning clause has been inserted into all Development Agreements, Offers to Purchase, and Agreements of Purchase and Sale or Lease of each dwelling unit within 300 metres of the Railway Corridor, to the satisfaction of Metrolinx: "Warning: The Applicant is advised that the subject land is located within Metrolinx's 300 metres railway corridor zone of influence and as such is advised that Metrolinx and its assigns and successors in interest has or have a right-of-way within 300 metres from the subject land. The Applicant is further advised that there may be alterations to or expansions of the rail or other transit facilities on such right-of-way in the future including the possibility that Metrolinx or any railway entering into an agreement with Metrolinx to use the right-of-way or their assigns or successors as aforesaid may expand or alter their operations, which expansion or alteration may affect the environment of the occupants in the vicinity, notwithstanding the inclusion of any noise and vibration attenuating measures in the design of the development and individual lots, blocks or units." REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: The purpose of this report is to review an application for minor variance to facilitate the construction of 47 townhouse units in a multiple residential development, and an application for consent for a lot addition to facilitate a land transfer for an access lane. There are no financial implications. Community engagement included a notice sign being placed on the property advising that a Committee of Adjustment application has been received, notice of the application was mailed Page 210 of 230 to all property owners within 30 metres of the subject property and this report was posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Committee of Adjustment meeting. • This report supports the delivery of core services. BACKGROUND: The subject property is located on the North side of Margaret Avenue between Victoria Street North and Queen Street North. The lot is irregular in shape and is currently vacant. Figure 1: Location of Subject Property Through Site Plan Application SP22/187/M/AP, the applicant is dedicating approximately 0.1 hectares of land for parkland to the City on the eastern side of the subject property as part of parkland dedication requirements (shown in hatched on site plan below). To the east of the proposed park, there is a 1.8 metre strip of land owned by applicant Activa Holdings Inc. that is subject to easement Instrument No. 1411856 which acts as a shared access easement between the subject lands and the adjacent property at 12 Margaret Avenue/116 Queen Street North owned by Church of the Good Shepherd. Page 211 of 230 .eNp�un.+i. t 1 Re56tuiW� MARGARLT AVENUE �w a� N69°1' - a SITE STATISTICS ZoNhy-ReddemlW Zan®Eight R$ PAq Requlrad- 59 spaces X1,25 spacrosu.lq MULTI -RESIDENTIAL (wBh Spacial RsguWa 551Ry Patking PmNded-54 f1,I spa_,s,H) NumbnfUnlet-47 NOTE, 'mVim- im�mI��.�' ParkipgSpace Minirnam Di„ensians- 2.6m c 5,5m Number ofVisitor SpacesRequired-11 spaces (20%d IPP Ided apaoss) -ALL ASPHALT AREAS TO BE DEFINED WITH 0,15M HIGH Lo1A2•-1Z,210,gm° Bartter Fme R9qulred-3spa's (4%ofmqulrM) Numher.f Vlsltor Spaces Provldad-7 sexes POURED CONCRETE CURRING But JI" C ... mgs- 4,015,.'(32, 0%) Bartley Free P,wMW-35pxes(1 Type A+2 Type 51 ROdIug HeIght(Mo,)-13,5m -PRIVATE CAR 'AGE COLLECTION I.—I apsd Area. 6,0160(49.2%) Bicycle Par'dpg Pmdd,d-53 spaces{47-CI­ A, 6 -Class B) Floor Sp—UI-09 * FIRE ROUTSNO PARKINGBARRIER.FREE PARKING SIGN Asph.V H.,d Sudxerea- A2,18OW(17,9%) 'MINOR VARIANCE APPLICATION- REQUIREDAS AN APPROVAL CONDI TION in ge-imiM REVISED: i�➢7i:1G�l SITEPLAN � Imnthaf 0 5 1®5 8 LOTS 193-198 211-213 AND PART OF LOTS 199-203.214-218: REGISTERED PLAN 374 ACTIVA HOLDINGS INE SCALE I', 800 City of Kitchener CAD FILE: 30-40 MARGARET AVENUE PROPOSED DATE: MAY B, 2023 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT 3P22137IA*.DI PARK (-0.1 ha) 9;If 41111 Il f Ifi L ao,u�o spm Mum. No. Iib L c11 MARGARLT AVENUE �w a� N69°1' - a SITE STATISTICS ZoNhy-ReddemlW Zan®Eight R$ PAq Requlrad- 59 spaces X1,25 spacrosu.lq MULTI -RESIDENTIAL (wBh Spacial RsguWa 551Ry Patking PmNded-54 f1,I spa_,s,H) NumbnfUnlet-47 NOTE, CofAAppllcellm- ParkipgSpace Minirnam Di„ensians- 2.6m c 5,5m Number ofVisitor SpacesRequired-11 spaces (20%d IPP Ided apaoss) -ALL ASPHALT AREAS TO BE DEFINED WITH 0,15M HIGH Lo1A2•-1Z,210,gm° Bartter Fme R9qulred-3spa's (4%ofmqulrM) Numher.f Vlsltor Spaces Provldad-7 sexes POURED CONCRETE CURRING But JI" C ... mgs- 4,015,.'(32, 0%) Bartley Free P,wMW-35pxes(1 Type A+2 Type 51 ROdIug HeIght(Mo,)-13,5m -PRIVATE CAR 'AGE COLLECTION I.—I apsd Area. 6,0160(49.2%) Bicycle Par'dpg Pmdd,d-53 spaces{47-CI­ A, 6 -Class B) Floor Sp—UI-09 * FIRE ROUTSNO PARKINGBARRIER.FREE PARKING SIGN Asph.V H.,d Sudxerea- A2,18OW(17,9%) 'MINOR VARIANCE APPLICATION- REQUIREDAS AN APPROVAL CONDI TION REVISED: SITE PLAN APPLICATION: SP22/187/M/AP SITEPLAN � Imnthaf 0 5 1®5 8 LOTS 193-198 211-213 AND PART OF LOTS 199-203.214-218: REGISTERED PLAN 374 ACTIVA HOLDINGS INE SCALE I', 800 City of Kitchener CAD FILE: 30-40 MARGARET AVENUE PROPOSED DATE: MAY B, 2023 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT 3P22137IA*.DI Figure 2: Site Plan SP22/187/M/AP (Conditional Approval) Figure 3: Detail View of SP22/187/M/AP showing lands to be conveyed Page 212 of 230 N69°1' - - 3.389 1A29 3.60 TOaC N C V CExIJ EA PTO eupeH � Imnthaf 8 y PROPOSED a+ 3a PARK (-0.1 ha) 3:� Il f L ao,u�o spm Mum. No. Iib L c11 set rdnm.�awz� '�r, utano+.e +wren..p ? "�" ti s Hao R �e 3.3 VV D 6E 5 t � 6 I 4 5] 6 7D 2. j 1111P 29.TM1 .., Figure 3: Detail View of SP22/187/M/AP showing lands to be conveyed Page 212 of 230 The subject property is identified as `Major Transit Station Area' on Map 2 — Urban Structure and is designated `Medium Density Multiple Residential' on Map 9 — Civic Centre Secondary Plan in the City's Official Plan. The property is zoned `Residential Eight Zone (R-8)' with Special Regulation Provision 551 R in Zoning By-law 85-1. The purpose of the application is to facilitate the development of the lands with 47 townhouse units in a multiple dwelling development, and to facilitate the access to adjacent lands through a land transfer. Figure 4: View of Vacant Site (June 30, 2023) REPORT: Planning Comments Minor Variance Application A2023-087: In considering the four tests for the 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 "Medium Density Multiple Residential" land use designation within the Civic Centre Secondary Plan area is to permit some integrated, medium density redevelopment on Margaret Avenue and Queen Street North while maintaining the overall residential character of the neighbourhood. The design of the townhouse development, including building type and materials, Page 213 of 230 have been considered through a Heritage Impact Assessment completed as part of the site plan approval process. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed development will provide an opportunity for redevelopment while maintaining the residential character of the neighbourhood, and therefore the requested variances meet the general intent of the Official Plan. General Intent of the Zoning By-law Front yard setback The intent of the regulation that requires a front yard setback of 4.5 metres is to allow for sufficient separation of buildings from the street line, and to provide for adequate front yard area. Due to the irregular shape of the rear lot line, the proposed placement of townhouse blocks facing the rear lot line is designed to adequately buffer and separate them from the existing residential lots on Ellen Street West. It is preferred to maintain this buffer from the rear lot lines of Ellen, to provide for adequate separation of buildings. The requested variances are required for Blocks E and H. The two inner blocks (F and G) are meeting the minimum front yard setback requirement. Staff is satisfied that the proposed front yard of 3.4 metres for a portion of the frontage of the lot is adequate for front yard area on this unit typology. The front yards are proposed to be integrated with the streetscape (an additional 2 metres of land between the front lot line and the existing municipal sidewalk) by providing plantings and walkways leading from unit entrances to the municipal sidewalk. Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance for reduction to front yard setback meets the general intent of the Zoning By-law. Figure 5: Rendering of proposed buildings along Margaret Avenue (Martin Simmons Sweers) Interior side yard setback The intent of the regulation that requires an interior side yard setback of 6 metres is to provide an adequate separation of buildings, address privacy concerns, and provide for site functionality. The proposed side yard setback of 3.6 metres is caused by the land conveyance of parkland to the City on the Eastern side of the subject property. The 3.6 metre setback is calculated post conveyance of land. Prior to the conveyance of parkland, the building setback to the side property line is approximately 26 metres. Staff acknowledge that the interior side yard requirement when abutting an integrated park feature is different in nature than if it were to be abutting another potential development lot. Staff are satisfied that the proposed 3.6 metre interior side yard setback to the new interior lot line abutting the parklands is adequate to provide building separation, address privacy Page 214 of 230 concerns, and provide for site functionality. Therefore, Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance for reduction to interior side yard setback meets the general intent of the Zoning By-law. Parking Reduction (Overall and Visitor) The intent of the regulations for minimum parking and visitor parking is to provide for adequate vehicle storage on site. The subject lands are zoned under By-law 85-1, which has parking rates that were established prior to the construction and operation of the region's light rail transit system. The subject lands are now located within a Major Transit Station Area and are approximately 600 metres walking distance from the Kitchener City Hall Ion Station Stop. Lands within an MTSA are appropriate for consideration of reductions to overall and visitor parking rates as greater transit options and active transportation options can facilitate a more diverse modal split of transportation for future residents. In addition, cycling lanes are currently being constructed on Margaret Avenue across the street from the subject lands. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed rate of 1.1 spaces per unit for overall parking (54 parking) and 12.9% (7 visitor spaces) will provide adequate vehicle storage for the proposed 47 residential units based on the location of the site and the building typology. Therefore, Staff is of the opinion that the requested variances for parking reduction meets the general intent of the Zoning By-law. Access Steps The intent of the regulation that restricts the height of steps to 0.6 metres within 3 metres of a street line is to maintain visibility for pedestrians, cyclists and motorists and to maintain an adequate separation between private property and the public realm. The access design on the subject lands allows for an adequate Driveway Visibility Triangle, and ample separation of the access steps/unit entrances from the two proposed vehicular access aisles. Staff is satisfied that the requested variance will not cause visibility concerns. Therefore, Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance for an increase in height of access steps within 3 metres of a street line meets the general intent of the Zoning By-law. Is/Are the Effects of the Variance(s) Minor? The effects of the requested variances are not expected to cause adverse impacts to the abutting lands or surrounding neighbourhood. Staff are of the opinion that effects of the variances are minor. Is/Are the Variance(s) Desirable For The Appropriate Development or Use of the Land, Building and/or Structure? The proposed development makes use of the existing vacant lands within an established neighbourhood and is appropriate for the use of the lands based on the land use and designation in the Civic Centre Secondary Plan area. The requested variances to facilitate this development are appropriate when considering the site context, features, and location within the central part of the City. Staff are of the opinion that the requested variances are desirable for the appropriate development and use of the lands. Page 215 of 230 I m I P I W I fl I PARTi MARGARET In xmaiuo ivn iN� ... AVENUE N M1 LANOSSURJECTTO SEVERANCE 7101 ELLIN — LOT X224 — �g � dpJl LOT 223 W ! }';I I I m I P I W I fl I PARTi MARGARET In xmaiuo ivn iN� ... AVENUE N M1 LANOSSURJECTTO SEVERANCE 7101 225 �..� — LOT X224 — W LOT 223 W srReEr 0 � •• — — lhdae Bawib l7L SIA! w � N j � �i I � I� 341 � tors ra; raA rp N1{ rn, N4 Rll RrR JiJ aaxt w,mtr� III � a II � � � I � it ,�� 1 22% ,wovwrcrionrRa ry3rAmrmra T F I IUWeWrwua I I I FF 9 I OS I 5 EI I m I P I W I fl I PARTi MARGARET In xmaiuo ivn iN� ... AVENUE N M1 LANOSSURJECTTO SEVERANCE 7101 225 �..� — LOT X224 — W LOT 223 W 0 � •• — — lhdae Bawib l7L SIA! Figure 6: Severance Sketch (Stantec Geomatics Ltd.) Planning Comments Consent Application B2023-026: In considering all the relevant Provincial legislation, Regional and City policies and regulations, Planning staff offer the following comments: Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2014) The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) provides policy direction on matters of provincial interest related to land use planning and development. Section 1.4.3(b) of the PPS promotes all types of residential intensification, and sets out a policy framework for sustainable healthy, liveable and safe communities. The PPS promotes efficient development and land use patterns, as well as accommodating an appropriate mix of affordable and market-based residential dwelling types with other land uses, while supporting the environment, public health and safety. Provincial policies promote the integration of land use planning, growth management, transit -supportive development, intensification, and infrastructure planning to achieve cost-effective development patterns, optimization of transit investments, and standards to minimize land consumption and servicing costs. Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposed application will accommodate an appropriate mix of residential dwelling types by providing a townhouse multiple dwelling building typology. This type of development is compatible with the surrounding community and will make use of the existing infrastructure. No new public roads would be required for the proposed development. Planning staff is of the opinion that this proposal is consistent with the PPS. A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 The Growth Plan supports the development of complete and compact communities that are designed to support healthy and active living, make efficient use of land and infrastructure, provide for a range and mix of housing types, jobs, and services, at densities and in locations which support transit viability and active transportation. The subject lands are in close proximity to transit and the subject lands are in closer proximity to trails and parks. Policy 2.2.6.1(a) Municipalities will support housing choice through the achievement of the minimum intensification and targets in this plan by identifying a diverse range and mix of housing options and Page 216 of 230 densities, including additional residential units and affordable housing to meet projected needs of current and future residents. The subject lands are located within the City's delineated built up area. The proposed development represents intensification and will contribute towards achieving the City's intensification density targets. The severance application will help make efficient use of existing infrastructure, parks, roads, trails and transit. Planning staff is of the opinion that the development proposal conforms to the Growth Plan. Regional Official Plan (ROP): Urban Area policies of the ROP identify that the focus of the Region's future growth will be within the Urban Area. The subject lands are designated Built -Up Area in the ROP. The proposed development conforms to Policy 2.D.1 of the ROP as this neighbourhood provides for the physical infrastructure and community infrastructure to support the proposed residential development, including transportation networks, municipal drinking -water supply and wastewater systems, and a broad range of social and public health services. Regional policies require Area Municipalities to plan for a range of housing in terms of form, tenure, density and affordability to satisfy the various physical, social, economic and personal support needs of current and future residents. Planning staff are of the opinion that the severance application conforms to the Regional Official Plan. City's Official Plan (2014) The subject property is identified as `Major Transit Station Area' on Map 2 — Urban Structure and is designated `Medium Density Multiple Dwelling' on Map 9 — Civic Centre Secondary Plan in the City's Official Plan. Section 17.E.20.4 of the Official Plan discusses consent applications for boundary adjustments "17.E.20.4 Consents may be permitted for the creation of a new lot, boundary adjustments, rights of -way, easements, long-term leases and to convey additional lands to an abutting lot provided an undersized lot is not created. No new development lot will be created for this boundary adjustment. Staff are of the opinion that the proposed consent conforms to the City's Official Plan. Zoning By-law 85-1 The subject property is zoned as `Residential Eight Zone (R-8)' with Special Regulation Provision 551 R in Zoning By-law 85-1. The proposed boundary adjustment for lands to be conveyed to the church property at 12 Margaret Avenue/116 Queen Street North of 1.8 metres in width does not result in a noncompliance of the minimum lot width or lot area requirements in effect on the subject lands. Staff are of the opinion that the proposed boundary adjustment conforms to the City's Zoning By-law. Planning Conclusions/Comments: 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 satisfied that the proposed boundary adjustment is desirable and appropriate. Environmental Planning Comments: No natural heritage issues. Heritage Planning Comments: The subject properties are designated under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act and are located within the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District. There are no concerns with the proposed variances to parking, the side yard setback, or the maximum height of access steps. Page 217 of 230 There are no concerns with the proposed variance to the front yard setback provided that the front streetscape layout can still support an appropriate level of landscaping in order to ensure the new development established a strong relationship to the street, per the requirements of the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Plan. Other heritage concerns and requirements are being addressed through SP22/187/M/AP. Building Division Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance provided building permits for the townhouses are obtained prior to construction. Please contact the Building Division at buildings-kitchener.ca with any questions. The Building Division has no objections to the proposed consent. Engineering Division Comments: As this is a land transfer between two existing properties Engineering has no concerns. Parks/Operations Division Comments: Parks and Cemeteries concerns and requirements have been addressed through SP22/187/M/AP. Transportation Planning Comments: Minor Variance: Based on the 54 parking spaces being provided for 47 units (1.14 spaces per unit), of which 7 (12.9%) parking spaces are allocated to visitor parking, Transportation Services are supportive of these parking rates. Consent: Transportation Services have no concerns with the proposed application. Region of Waterloo Comments: The Region has no objection to 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 Metrolinx Comments: Metrolinx is in receipt of the consent and minor variance application for 30-40 Margaret Ave, Kitchener. Metrolinx understands the consent application is for a proposed lot addition (1.82 m by 0.01 hectares) to 12 Margaret Ave, from the adjacent parcel, in order to allow the entirety of the existing access lane to be under ownership of the Church of the Good Shepard. We understand the minor variance application is to facilitate reductions as they relate to parking, front yard setback, side yard setback and access step projections for the proposed townhouse development. Metrolinx's comments on the subject application are noted below: The subject property is located within 300m of Metrolinx's Guelph Subdivision which carries Metrolinx's Kitchener GO Train service. As per section 3.9 of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities and Railway Association of Canada's Guidelines for New Development in Proximity to Railway Operations, the Owner shall grant Metrolinx an environmental easement for operational emissions. The environmental easement provides clear notification to those who may acquire an interest in the subject property and reduces the potential for future land use conflicts. The environmental easement shall be registered on title of the subject property. A copy of the form of easement is included for the Owner's information. The applicant may contact Farah. Farog ue(a-)_metroli nx.com with questions and to initiate the registration process. (It should be noted that the registration process can take up to 6 weeks). Metrolinx notes that they are a stakeholder that has provided comments on the comprehensive application including Site Plan Application. If the easement has not yet been initiated, Page 218 of 230 please do so by contacting the above. If the easement has already been initiated, the lot lines may need to be adjusted according to the proposed consent. The Proponent shall provide confirmation to Metrolinx, that the following warning clause has been inserted into all Development Agreements, Offers to Purchase, and Agreements of Purchase and Sale or Lease of each dwelling unit within 300 metres of the Railway Corridor "Warning: The Applicant is advised that the subject land is located within Metrolinx's 300 metres railway corridor zone of influence and as such is advised that Metrolinx and its assigns and successors in interest has or have a right-of-way within 300 metres from the subject land. The Applicant is further advised that there may be alterations to or expansions of the rail or other transit facilities on such right-of-way in the future including the possibility that Metrolinx or any railway entering into an agreement with Metrolinx to use the right-of-way or their assigns or successors as aforesaid may expand or alter their operations, which expansion or alteration may affect the environment of the occupants in the vicinity, notwithstanding the inclusion of any noise and vibration attenuating measures in the design of the development and individual lots, blocks or units." 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: • Planning Act • Provincial Policy Statement (PPS 2020) • A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 • Regional Official Plan (ROP) • Official Plan (2014) • Zoning By-law 85-1 ATTACHMENTS: No attachments. Page 219 of 230 N,4*+V- Region of Waterloo Marilyn Mills, Secretary Treasurer Committee of Adjustment City of Kitchener P.O. Box 1118 200 King Street East Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES Community Planning 150 Frederick Street 8th Floor Kitchener Ontario N2G 4A Canada Telephone: 519-575-4400 TTY: 519-575-4608 Fax: 519-575-4466 www. regionofwaterloo.ca Melissa Mohr 226-752-8622 D20-20/23 KIT July 4, 2023 Re: Comments for Consent Applications B2023-0019 and B2023-020 Committee of Adjustment Hearing July 16, 2023 CITY OF KITCHENER B2023-025 97 Second Avenue Musaab Saaub, Saif Saab, Manaf Saab (Owners) C/O Douglas Stewart (Arcadis Professional Services (Canada) Ltd. — Authorized Agent) The applicant is proposing to sever a parcel of land for residential purposes. The severed parcel will have a lot frontage of 9.4m, a lot depth of 40.05 m and a lot area of 377 square metres. The retained lands will have a lot frontage of 13.1 m, a lot depth of 40.05m and a lot area of 525 square metres. The applicant proposes to retain the existing dwelling and frame shed on site and has proposed residential uses on the severed parcel. Regional Cultural Heritage: Due to the nature of the application, an Archaeological Assessment is not required at this time. The owner/applicant is advised that an Archaeological Assessment prepared by a Licenced Archaeologist is required in the future should a planning act application be required as the site is located in a Part V area and is within proximity to known archaeological resources. Regional Fee: The owner/applicant is required to submit the Regional consent review fee of $350.00 prior to final approval of the consent. Document Number: 4423945 Version: 1 Page 220 of 230 Corridor Planning: Both severed and retained residential lots may have impacts from road noise on Conestoga Parkway (Highway 7/8). To address this concern, the following conditions shall be secured through a registered agreement with the City of Kitchener, to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo for both retained and severed lots: Severed Lot a) The dwelling will be fitted with a forced air -ducted heating system suitably sized and designed with provision for the installation of air conditioning in future at the occupant's discretion. b) The following noise warning clause will be included in all offers of purchase and sale and lease/rental agreements: "The purchasers/tenants are advised that sound levels due to increasing road traffic Highway 7/8 may occasionally interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants as the sound levels may exceed the sound level limits of the Waterloo Region and the Ministry of the Environment Conservation and Parks (MECP). "This dwelling has been fitted with a forced air -ducted heating system and has been designed with the provision of adding central air conditioning at the occupant's discretion. Installation of central air conditioning by the occupant in low and medium - density developments will allow windows and exterior doors to remain closed, thereby ensuring that the indoor sound levels are within the sound level limits of the Waterloo Region and the Ministry of the Environment Conservation and Parks (MECP)." Retained Lot The following noise -warning clause will be included in all offers of purchase and sale and lease/rental agreements: "The purchasers/tenants are advised that sound levels due to increasing road traffic Highway 7/8 may occasionally interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants as the sound levels may exceed the sound level limits of the Waterloo Region and the Ministry of the Environment Conservation and Parks (MECP)." The Region has no objection to 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; 2) That prior to final approval, the Owner/Applicant enter into a registered development agreement with the City of Kitchener, to the satisfaction of the Region of Waterloo, Document Number: 4423945 Version: 1 Page 221 of 230 that includes the following noise mitigation and warning clauses in all agreements of Offers of Purchase and Sale and Lease/Rental Agreements: a) For the severed lands: i) The dwelling will be fitted with a forced air -ducted heating system suitably sized and designed with provision for the installation of air conditioning in future at the occupant's discretion. ii) The following noise warning clause will be included in all offers of purchase and sale and lease/rental agreements for the severed lands: "The purchasers/tenants are advised that sound levels due to increasing road traffic Highway 7/8 may occasionally interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants as the sound levels may exceed the sound level limits of the Waterloo Region and the Ministry of the Environment Conservation and Parks (MECP). "This dwelling has been fitted with a forced air -ducted heating system and has been designed with the provision of adding central air conditioning at the occupant's discretion. Installation of central air conditioning by the occupant in low and medium -density developments will allow windows and exterior doors to remain closed, thereby ensuring that the indoor sound levels are within the sound level limits of the Waterloo Region and the Ministry of the Environment Conservation and Parks (MECP)." b) For the retained lands: i) The following noise -warning clause shall be included in all offers of purchase and sale and lease/rental agreements for the retained lands: "The purchasers/tenants are advised that sound levels due to increasing road traffic Highway 7/8 may occasionally interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants as the sound levels may exceed the sound level limits of the Waterloo Region and the Ministry of the Environment Conservation and Parks (MECP)." B2023-026 30-40 Margaret Avenue Activa Holdings Inc. / Alex Sumner (Owner) C/O MHBC Planning/Pierre Chauvin/Rachel Wolffe — Authorized Agent) The applicant is proposing a lot addition. The applicant has proposed to sever a 1.829m, 0.01 ha parcel of land to add to the adjacent Church of the Good Shepard. 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 conditions: Document Number: 4423945 Version: 1 Page 222 of 230 1. That prior to final approval, the owner/applicant submit the Regional consent review fee of $350.00; 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, Melissa Mohr, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner Document Number: 4423945 Version: 1 Page 223 of 230 Region of Waterloo June 30, 2023 /_1IROTi1Wer City of Kitchener 200 King Street West P.O. Box 1118 Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES 150 Frederick Street, Sth Floor Kitchener ON N2G 4A Canada Telephone: 519-575-4400 TTY: 519-575-4608 Fax: 519-575-4449 www. reg i o n ofwate r l o o. ca File No.: D20-20/ VAR KIT GEN (5) 08 WEBER KIT, 15 DELLROY AVENUE 2296342 ONTARIO INCORPORATED (12) VAR KIT, 30 AND 40 MARGARET AVENUE ACTIVA HOLDINGS Subject: Committee of Adjustment Meeting July 18, 2023, City of Kitchener Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have the following comments: 1) A 2023 - 076 — 912 Otterbein Court — No Concerns. 2) A 2023 - 077 — 176 Indian Road — No Concerns. 3) A 2023 - 078 — 35 Fifth Avenue — There are no conditions for this application. However, the owners are advised that the proposed and existing dwelling(s) on the subject lands would have impacts from the transportation noise in the vicinity. The owners are responsible for ensuring that the subject development does not have any environmental noise impacts. In the absence of a detailed noise study, the staff strongly recommend that all dwelling units be installed with air -ducted heating and ventilation system, suitably sized and designed for the provision of central air conditioning. This will avoid retrofit at any later application stage, e.g. Consent/Condo. There are no airport -specific concerns for the proposed development. However, the owners are advised that the subject lands are located within the Airport Zoning Regulated area and specifically under the runway take-off/approach surface; and, as such, subject to all provisions of the Airport Zoning Regulations. 4) A 2023 - 079 — 55 Rockcliffe Drive — No Concerns. Document Number: 4421509 Page 1 of 3 Page 224 of 230 5) A 2023 — 080 — 15 Dellroy Avenue — The Regional staff do not support this minor variance application. Any structures within the Daylight Triangle (DLT) and any encroachment under, at or above the ground within the Regional right of way, including the daylight triangle (including the lands to be dedicated to the Region), will not be allowed. The buildings and the site must be designed accordingly. Airport Zoning (Advisory): The owners/applicants are also advised that the subject property falls within the Region of Waterloo Zoning Regulated Area, specifically under the Take- off/Approach Surface for Runway 08. Using the Region of Waterloo International Airport Zoning Regulations (AZR) online tool (https://www.waterlooairport.ca/en/about-vkf/airport-zoning-regulations- update.aspx), the permitted building height for the subject property is 399.5m Above Sea Level (ASL), the maximum building height is 75.5m based on a maximum ground level of 324m ASL. Please ensure that the building heights for the proposed development comply with the Region of Waterloo Airport zoning and height restrictions. The Region of Waterloo International Airport AZR also regulates any construction of towers/cranes for a proposed development. Any proposed development at this location must ensure that construction towers/cranes also comply with the Region of Waterloo International AZR. 6) A 2023 - 081 — 333 Pine Valley Drive — No Concerns. 7) A 2023 - 082 — 685 Frederick Street — No Concerns. 8) A 2023 - 083 — 15 Kenora Drive— No concerns/conditions for this application. Staff note that the subject lands are located within the Airport Zoning Regulated area and specifically under the runway take-off/approach surface; and, as such, subject to all provisions of the Airport Zoning Regulations. 9) A 2023 - 084 — 151 Frederick Street — There are no conditions for this application. However, the applicants are advised that they are responsible for ensuring that the proposed development does not have any environmental noise impacts (both on-site and off-site). 10) A 2023 - 085 — 920 Keewatin Place — No Concerns. 11) A 2023 — 086 — 59 Graber Place — Although there are no conditions for this application, the staff note that there are noise -sensitive land uses, specifically the backyards of many residential dwellings, in the immediate vicinity of the subject lands, which may have impacts from the noise from the proposed storage related activities. The staff recommend that the City staff look into this as deemed appropriate. 2 Page 225 of 230 12) A 2023 — 087 — 30-40 Margaret Avenue — No Concerns. Please be advised that any development on the subject lands is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 19-037 or any successor thereof and may require 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. If a site is subject to more than one application, additional comments may apply. Please forward any decisions on the above-mentioned Application numbers to the undersigned. Yours Truly, Joginder Bhatia Transportation Planner C (226) 753-0368 CC: Marilyn Mills, City of Kitchener CofA(a)Kitchener. ca 3 Page 226 of 230 June 29, 2023 Administration Centre: 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Cambridge, ON N1 R 5W6 Phone: 519-621-2761 Toll free: 1-866-900-4722 Fax: 519-621-4844 www.grandriver.ca Marilyn Mills Secretary -Treasurer Committee of Adjustment City of Kitchener 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON, N2G 4G7 Dear Marilyn Mills, Re: Committee of Adjustment Meeting — July 18, 2023 Applications for Minor Variance A 2023-077 176 Indian Road A 2023-078 35 Fifth Avenue A 2023-079 55 Rockcliffe Drive A 2023-080 15 Dellroy Avenue A 2023-081 333 Pine Valley Drive A 2023-082 685 Frederick Street A 2023-083 15 Kenora Drive A 2023-084 151 Frederick Street A 2023-085 920 Keewatin Place A 2023-087 30-40 Margaret Avenue Applications for Consent B 2023-025 97 Second Avenue B 2023-026 30-40 Margaret Avenue via email Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff has reviewed the above -noted applications. GRCA has no objection to the approval of the above applications. The subject properties do not contain any natural hazards such as watercourses, floodplains, shorelines, wetlands, or valley slopes. The properties are not subject to Ontario Regulation 150/06 and, therefore, a permission from GRCA is not required. Should you have any questions, please contact me at aherremana-q rand river. ca or 519- 621-2763 ext. 2228. Sincerely, Andrew Herreman, CPT Resource Planning Technician Grand River Conservation Authority Member of Conservation Ontario, representing Ontario's 36 Conservation Authorities I The Grand — A Canadian Heritage River Page 227 of 230 From: ARABIA Gabriel To: =nf A4ii�crmenr fSM) subject: 11,0—h—, -30.90 Margaret Ave - &20L3-026 Date: July 5, 2023 11:97:07 AM —hme°ts. Hello, Weare in receipt 11 1111 Application for Consent, B-2023-026 dated June 23rd, 2023. We have reviewed the documents concerning the noted Application and have no comments or concerns at this time. Our prelimina , nsiders s affecting Hvdro One's'HIEh Vokaee Facilities and corridor Lands' only- For nH.For proposals affecting 'Low Voltage Distribution Facilities' please consult your local area Distribution Supplier. To confrm if Hydro One is your local distributor please follow the following link: urn. www.hvdroone.cnm/StnrmCemer3/ Please select "Search" and locate address in question by entering the address or by zooming in and out of the map N. ? Q hyd ro MENU HELP SEARCH one Customers Affected: O >5000 0 501-5000 0 51-500 a 21-50 —20 Q Multiple () Crew — Service Area 0 4 Ottaw Montreal Hun[+v:le 417 417 400 11 ° O h C dmf � a 41fi 4 0�r is Kawartha Lakes 400 � obyarouqln PeteKin i3efl�ville Fifl •d •'� ns w. ego dwar worse own • 40 • , yramp o Toronto O O drlD£ • Kftcoe ississauga p . a Ilton G!2 7.. OO ° ° Rochester _ 14M ✓ Mao data @2019 Oracle 50. km � Terms of Ilse Report a man error If Hydro One is your local area Distribution Supplier, please contact Customer Service at 1-888-664-9376 or e-mail Customei-Communications(R1 HvdroOne.com to be connected to your Local Operations Centre Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Thank you, Dennis De Rango Specialized Services Team Lead, Real Estate Department Hydro One Networks Inc. Tel: (905)946-6237 Email: Dennis DeRango(d HydroOne rom This email and any attached files are privileged and may contain confidential information intended only for the person or persons named above. Any other distribution, reproduction, copying, disclosure, or other dissemination is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply email and delete the transmission received by you. This statement applies to the initial email as well as any and all copies (replies and/or forwards) of the initial email Page 228 of 230 :0t: METROLINX To: Committee of Adjustments, City of Kitchener From: Adjacent Developments GO Expansion - Third Party Projects Review - Metrolinx Date: June 301h, 2023 Re: B-2023-026 & A-2023-087 - 30-40 Margaret Ave, Kitchener Metrolinx is in receipt of the consent and minor variance application for 30-40 Margaret Ave, Kitchener. Metrolinx understands the consent application is for a proposed lot addition (1.82 m by 0.01 hectares) to 12 Margaret Ave, from the adjacent parcel, in order to allow the entirety of the existing access lane to be under ownership of the Church of the Good Shepard. We understand the minor variance application is to facilitate reductions as they relate to parking, front yard setback, side yard setback and access step projections for the proposed townhouse development. Metrolinx's comments on the subject application are noted below: • The subject property is located within 300m of Metrolinx's Guelph Subdivision which carries Metrolinx's Kitchener GO Train service. As per section 3.9 of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities and Railway Association of Canada's Guidelines for New Development in Proximity to Railway Operations, the Owner shall grant Metrolinx an environmental easement for operational emissions. The environmental easement provides clear notification to those who may acquire an interest in the subject property and reduces the potential for future land use conflicts. The environmental easement shall be registered on title of the subject property. A copy of the form of easement is included for the Owner's information. The applicant may contact Farah.Faroque@metrolinx.com with questions and to initiate the registration process. (It should be noted that the registration process can take up to 6 weeks). o Metrolinx notes that they are a stakeholder that has provided comments on the comprehensive application including Site Plan Application. If the easement has not yet been initiated, please do so by contacting the above. If the easement has already been initiated, the lot lines may need to be adjusted according to the proposed consent. The Proponent shall provide confirmation to Metrolinx, that the following warning clause has been inserted into all Development Agreements, Offers to Purchase, and Agreements of Purchase and Sale or Lease of each dwelling unit within 300 metres of the Railway Corridor o Warning: The Applicant is advised that the subject land is located within Metrolinx's 300 metres railway corridor zone of influence and as such is advised that Metrolinx and its assigns and successors in interest has or have a right-of-way within 300 metres from the subject land. The Applicant is further advised that there may be alterations to or expansions of the rail or other transit facilities on such right-of-way in the future including the possibility that Metrolinx or any railway entering into an agreement with Metrolinx to use the right-of- way or their assigns or successors as aforesaid may expand or alter their operations, which expansion or alteration may affect the environment of the occupants in the vicinity, notwithstanding the inclusion of any noise and vibration attenuating measures in the design of the development and individual lots, blocks or units. Should you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Best regards, Farah Faroque Project Analyst, Third Party Projects Review Metrolinx 10 Bay Street I Toronto I Ontario I M5J 2N8 Page 229 of 230 :00: METROLINX Form of Easement WHEREAS the Transferor is the owner of those lands legally described in the Properties section of the Transfer Easement to which this Schedule is attached (the "Easement Lands"); IN CONSIDERATION OF the sum of TWO DOLLARS ($2.00) and such other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged by the Transferor, the Transferor transfers to the Transferee, and its successors and assigns, a permanent and perpetual non-exclusive easement or right and interest in the nature of a permanent and perpetual non-exclusive easement over, under, along and upon the whole of the Easement Lands and every part thereof for the purposes of discharging, emitting, releasing or venting thereon or otherwise affecting the Easement Lands at any time during the day or night with noise, vibration and other sounds and emissions of every nature and kind whatsoever, including fumes, odours, dust, smoke, gaseous and particulate matter, electromagnetic interference and stray current but excluding spills, arising from or out of, or in connection with, any and all present and future railway or other transit facilities and operations upon the lands of the Transferee and including, without limitation, all such facilities and operations presently existing and all future renovations, additions, expansions and other changes to such facilities and all future expansions, extensions, increases, enlargement and other changes to such operations (herein collectively called the "Operational Emissions"). THIS Easement and all rights and obligations arising from same shall extend to, be binding upon and enure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective officers, directors, shareholders, agents, employees, servants, tenants, sub -tenants, customers, licensees and other operators, occupants and invitees and each of its or their respective heirs, executors, legal personal representatives, successors and assigns. The covenants and obligations of each party hereto, if more than one person, shall be joint and several. Easement in gross. Page 230 of 230