HomeMy WebLinkAboutDSD-2024-414 - A 2024-068 - 22 Woodfern CourtStaff Report
Development Services Department www.kitchener.co
REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment
DATE OF MEETING: September 17, 2024
SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Manager, Development Approvals
519-741-2200 ext. 7765
PREPARED BY: Eric Schneider, Senior Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7843
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 6
DATE OF REPORT: September 4, 2024
REPORT NO.: DSD -2024-414
SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2024-068 — 22 Woodfern Court
RECOMMENDATION:
That Minor Variance Application A2024-068 for 22 Woodfern Court requesting relief
from Section 5.6 a), Table 5-5, of Zoning By-law 2019-051 to permit a reduction in the
number of required parking spaces from 34 to 20 parking spaces for 34 dwelling
units and a reduction in the number of required visitor spaces from 6 to 3 visitor
parking spaces to facilitate the conversion of the existing 17 -unit apartment building
into a combination of 34 new one -bedroom and studio dwelling units, in accordance
with Site Plan Application SP24/0521W/ES, BE APPROVED.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
• The purpose of this report is to review a minor variance application to facilitate the
redevelopment of a vacant multiple dwelling building by adding 17 units for a total of
34 dwelling units.
• The key finding of this report is that the requested variance meets 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 on the east side of Woodfern Court. The site directly abuts
the Grand River Transit Operations Centre located at 250 Strasburg Drive and there is an
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Page 33 of 267
existing noise wall on the abutting property line. The site also abuts City Neighbourhood
Park Elmsdale Park at 13 Elmsdale Drive.
Figure 1: Location Map
The subject property is identified as a `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 Five Zone (RES -5)' in Zoning By-law 2019-
051.
The purpose of the application is to facilitate the redevelopment of the lands by adding 17
dwelling units to a multiple dwelling building that previously contained 17 dwelling units, to
create a total of 34 dwelling units on site. The existing building is currently vacant. The
applicant proposes to redesign the interior of the existing building to add the units, no new
Gross Floor Area (GFA) is proposed.
Site Plan Application SP24/052/W/ES is currently under review.
Page 34 of 267
Figure 2: View of Existing Vacant Multiple Dwelling Building from Woodfern Court
(September 3, 2024)
Figure 3: View of Existing Parking Area and Noise Wall
(September 3, 2024)
Page 35 of 267
Figure 4: View of Rear of Existing Building
(September 3, 2024)
Page 36 of 267
Figure 5: Site Plan SP24/052M/ES
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 intent of the Low Rise Residential land use designation is to accommodate a full
range of low density housing types, including the proposed multiple dwelling use. The Low
Rise Residential designation encourages the mixing and integrating of different forms of
housing to achieve and maintain a low rise built form. The requested variance to facilitate
the redevelopment of the site by adding additional dwelling units maintains a low-rise form
of development, while the use of multiple dwelling is permitted and would remain as the
use on site. Planning Staff are of the opinion that the proposed development meets the
general intent of the Official Plan.
General Intent of the Zoning By-law
The intent of the regulation that requires 1 parking space per unit, and 0.15 visitor parking
spaces per unit is to ensure that there is adequate storage for motor vehicles on site.
Page 37 of 267
,Ile''-.
`tITr$TAT16TIM
'b /. 4 °q.,,,,
,}�,d /(y r� �✓J y.'
d":b' RE5'i VAI FES{,[ZBL2D`W151p
@IAIPN!I-
2�K.6 11s
Fbar Spam. Rett- 0.7
' 215E 8
� �o✓' -
'� �, k�".;�"
ArPds.I 11 it15„I,Irs A( RA�
+4W
�i�'f
A 1
a �p
f x, ska
�.�
•.. .,, j jx
NNIrow efUIs 7 IxlsN pr
I t r rdnt'+erslwrxuna v,6
1744m UnUr
34 CfnNv
`Nz
.,�-y.
E4 1 J
34 SPYu N&
TOal SpRulred
34
`„
,e Ip9114:11PIPGlu[ IING Nm".2
.� h Ivia9Y,4!
w.....
P .......,. /
�
•., ✓
,-
1wrr Pa,,J,g
MaPacss
P rrry P -
sp.—
1 � paces
�" .'
UFA tlV1vN
r.
rEs
PeA
f.15 q a”' N ,11 I d)
5
E
v
�pAAAI.k PAIkM
PN.kI Ions-
crF ecl arkl Rr �h'ed
CSk, of N.,al ^mq ilren'WInN spmces
b r
[;,paceN
w r
Igrkd I.G'r a
C
M 4,
I E P
17.ea IP1 rP
d''° nA+9cd-
Ips
P
—� b
�r
I AJh�rAljl VIE N GJ �C .��
/ P
nom
------ ---- -- ---- ------
._� r4 f IV h9fi
Ff aw. ,�
--- ------ --- r.f ��n-sa
f�ImssA 3lr MIs adxlrrl4F ru rP✓ (=V)
,1,,
.,
Id aPNua�a
uar za
r''Ji�
Cls, E 1V./cl. 10,1,3 IRs.fu ,e,.
E lkwx
Class 6 ElrAF, Parklrq PrvaW.mcf•
04iwa
%�,
SITEPLAN
KLVISEIu:
SITE PLAN APPLICATION No. SP 2410521lPJ/ES
AIF1: X40
m
PART rPl 012G 11F01.71 fJtL `1 AN IVO IN
WAdI-,R1, OD
CI I Y OF KI I I,rAi W14IR,'0101 t NAM( PAH l'YY
C,rft Inc`
/ ,�" /wr �w
Cyit"'{�i' of Kitchener
I)EVEL PMW SEIRV LS I.)EIPdsWWIENI
CAU IL4E:
24012_22N ,,de _SP
ry22 kpW��ddocdfftern
22 Wood Iem cd.
DATE: Aeuq M 2024
Figure 5: Site Plan SP24/052M/ES
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 intent of the Low Rise Residential land use designation is to accommodate a full
range of low density housing types, including the proposed multiple dwelling use. The Low
Rise Residential designation encourages the mixing and integrating of different forms of
housing to achieve and maintain a low rise built form. The requested variance to facilitate
the redevelopment of the site by adding additional dwelling units maintains a low-rise form
of development, while the use of multiple dwelling is permitted and would remain as the
use on site. Planning Staff are of the opinion that the proposed development meets the
general intent of the Official Plan.
General Intent of the Zoning By-law
The intent of the regulation that requires 1 parking space per unit, and 0.15 visitor parking
spaces per unit is to ensure that there is adequate storage for motor vehicles on site.
Page 37 of 267
While parking demands can fluctuate based on unit types, the Zoning By-law does not
differentiate between a studio or one -bedroom sized unit and larger family sized units (2-3
bedroom) in terms of minimum required parking per dwelling unit. The applicant is
proposing to offer studio and one -bedroom units as part of this development, which
typically carry a lesser parking demand and are more likely to be one person households.
To support and encourage alternative modes of transportation including active
transportation, secure bicycle parking is provided (23 Class A spaces) in excess of the
minimum required by the Zoning By-law (17 Class A spaces). In regards to public transit,
the subject lands are well served by GRT routes 3 and 16, and iXpress 205. In the opinion
of Planning Staff, the proposed provided parking of 20 resident spaces and 3 visitor
spaces for a total of 23 parking spaces is adequate for a 34 -unit multiple dwelling on the
subject lands with the provision of unbundled parking, and therefore meets the general
intent of the Zoning By-law.
Is/Are the Effects of the Variance(s) Minor?
Staff are of the opinion that the effects of the requested variance are minor, as the proposed
development would provide a balance of options for parking for some units, and alternative
transportation modes are provided and supported in the site location and design.
Is/Are the Variance(s) Desirable For The Appropriate Development or Use of the Land,
Building and/or Structure?
The lands are located close to commercial amenities and are well connected to bus transit
and active transportation routes. Accordingly, the requested variance for reduction in
vehicle parking is desirable and appropriate for the development of the lands with 34
dwelling units and will support the City's Housing Pledge.
Environmental Planning Comments:
No natural heritage features/functions on/adjacent to property. Compliance with Tree
Management Policy is addressed through Site Plan Application SP24/052/W/ES.
Heritage Planning Comments:
No Heritage comments or concerns.
Building Division Comments:
The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance provided a building permit
for the additional units being added to the existing apartment is obtained prior to construction.
Please contact the Building Division at building(a-)kitchener.ca with any questions.
Engineering Division Comments:
No concerns.
Parks/Operations Division Comments:
All Parks requirements will be addressed through the Site Plan Application
SP24/052/W/ES.
Page 38 of 267
Transportation Planning Comments:
Transportation Services reviewed the parking study that was submitted Paradigm
Transportation Solutions Limited and provided our comments in July 2024 as part of the
Stamp Plan `A' Site Plan Application process. Transportation Services supported the 22
parking spaces of which 3 are allocated for visitor parking.
Transportation Services recommends that the vehicle parking be unbundled and offered at
a separate cost to leasing or owning a unit. This approach is more equitable and effective
as tenants are not forced to pay for parking that they do not need.
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
Page 39 of 267
0-
•--` •--` o o
E
Lf) E a 0
N .y. y
-E N
N N
N N
N Lr) M E N (n N
N N N N
N N N N
N N d d
u)
O (D O N LfJ
C U
N
U U
Q Q
U U U U
m O. Q Q
0 0 0 0
Q Q O O
W
E
C ^'
O M
N
U U
U x Cn (n (n
(n (n
ELJA N
N N N
Z M
M N
N CO
N
J
X11 O
J
CO
n
M
T
_
toco
z
O
co
W
in
c
o o
w0
W
E
O
m J
o
'�
°) M a
.a
o o
N
0)
a Q
m H
Q
`o
sT it
o
>>
'0 0
= m a a
li 0, d
a a o o
OLLI
Cn
5
a
e
I..I..I
ID ID
a N N
V
[if
rmW
N II
U N
Q
U O C O
Q .0 d Y N Li Li
(6 (6 t6 t6
d d d d
N
Z
A►
(n
Q -o Cn
'= .� c
U a' v
(n ? an d a a) ,a)
v v v c�i
Lu
2
V/
Q v ami 2
j ami x
m °
m Y aNi Y Q O `m m
v v v v
��n
H
Z
m O_
`o w FO- r�i
H d co
v m m m
H m m m `)
m m m a0
v J
W
Lu J
�`�_�¢m
¢¢mm
4) Lu
'C ¢ a d
O
E Y
`m
a
D o m v) c�c
(n N J LL J Q G
m
Z CL
u) u) m o a Q
O CL m V F H
_m _m m m
U U U U
7
L
(`�
r
a
W
Y
Z
Z
V u)
0
Lu
a
V) O
<
Q
w
LLI
1P�a
w
�
Lu°
o
LoLo
O a
OJ�=
`5�0PG
m z
0
/A`�
a o
Z
W
W
W
`
<
N
0
/o
o o
J o
`
W
oOE
H LLIH
/
/
� I
0��� p�C
DOgs
/
o OOLI
I
W
W
/
�
I
O I
la
/
mP5
/
I
1
�QP�
►
i
N
//
O
2 Qco
/
►
I
O
cD
N
mPe-��
I
_�
�
((JJ
J
6i
ti
pZ=
e
N
o
Q
r
=-E
Im
o
c
p
e
�
07
.
I
a\
9996
o vA 3
O�1YA 3(f15'1NI
ISveils
NI
\ 02661j \
I
I
lo
O��Ovnti�
I
O
LANDSCAPED AREA
0691
`
c�asse
U
\
�\ PROPOSED SIDEWALK
_ J
I
LANDSCAPED
ARE
J/ O ds
N1.1.1 7'
<%� 'y f�
4A m
L
L
>dd0
'
g.23
Vs�`
0
0
WOODFERN COURT
O
O
N
N
04
04
August 26, 2024
Connie Owen
City of Kitchener
200 King Street West
P.O. Box 1118
Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7
File No.: D20-20/
VAR KIT GEN
PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT
AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES
150 Frederick Street, 8th Floor
Kitchener ON N2G U Canada
Telephone: 519-575-4400
TTY: 519-575-4608
Fax: 519-575-4449
www. reg i o n ofwate r l o o. ca
Subject: Committee of Adjustment Meeting September 17, 2024, City of Kitchener
Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and
have the following comments:
1) A 2024 - 068 — 22 Woodfern Court — No concerns
2) A 2024 - 069 — 68 West Acres Crescent — No concerns.
3) A 2024 - 070 — 47 Hugo Crescent — No concerns.
4) A 2024 - 071 — 509 Wilson Avenue — No concerns.
5) A 2024 - 072 — 565 Topper Woods Crescent — No concerns.
6) A 2024 - 073 — 109 Edgehill Drive — No concerns.
7) A 2024 - 074 — 177 Esson Street — No concerns.
8) A 2024 - 075 — 96 Wood Street — No concerns.
9) A 2024 - 076 — 332 Charles Street East - No concerns.
10)A 2024 - 077 — 525 Highland Road West — No concerns.
11)A 2024 — 078 — 15 Dellroy Avenue (retained) — No concerns.
12)A 2024 — 079 — 1055 Weber Street Easy (severed) — No concerns.
Document Number: 4766511
Page 41 of 267
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,
cry
Katrina Fluit
Transportation Planner
(226) 753-4808
M
Connie Owen, City of Kitchener
CofA(o)Kitchener. ca
Document Number: 4766511
Page 42 of 267
a:°1n,*nio,tra ion Centre: �1OO ('iyle iarox /,19 v1 I R I)W6
P hone: ) 0) 2 1 Feil firee-I 1 900 4/"?), i ax- 1�l 62 1 mAiwg r'arid IrhII'verca
x
August 30, 2024 via email
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 — September 17, 2024
Applications for Minor Variance
A 2024-068
22 Woodfern Court
A 2024-069
68 West Acres Crescent
A 2024-071
509 Wilson Avenue
A 2024-072
565 Topper Woods Crescent
A 2024-074
177 Esson Street
Applications for Consent
B 2024-017
135 Gateway Park Drive
B 2024-018
135 Gateway Park Drive
B 2024-023
Ridgemont Street
B 2024-024
525 Highland Road West
B 2024-025
15 Dellroy Avenue
A 2024-075
96 Wood Street
A 2024-076
332 Charles Street East
A 2024-077
525 Highland Road West
A 2024-078
15 Dellroy Avenue
A 2024-079
1055 Weber Street East
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 41/24 and, therefore, a permission
from GRCA is not required.
Should you have any questions, please contact me at aherreman(a-)_grandriver. ca or 519-621-
2763 ext. 2228.
Sincerely,
__�
9—,_
Andrew Herreman, CPT
Resource Planning Technician
Grand River Conservation Authority
raal�. ir�irr r tai Cc7i seI,vaIion �.�nhflira, r�Eac�.���O� II Im:7 OIIP Ill IO'r �6 b �anseivcit'on f',flt )o[c� ic's ( I IId — Al(110 w, ItiVP�,
Page 43 of 267
From:
To. Committee of Adhmtrnent (W)
sljll�ject: A2024468-22 Woodfem 01. O)ncerns
DaW Tuesday, September 10, 2024 9:31.29 AM
You don't often qet ernad frorn Learn wth s us jimportant
Hi there,, I've not ever sent all e-niail like this before so I apologise if Fill doln this wrong.
Fin a resident of Wooffern Crt and I have concerns about tile, "'Conditionally Approved Site
Ilam Application SP24/052PVV/E5" being proposed for 22 Woodfern C ft.
'rhe application listed doubling the units with half the required visitor parking and less than
6001/o increase in available parking overall,
My concerns, priniarfly stein fi-oill there being no available road site Parking or parking
alternatives in a residential neighbourhood with a large proportion of children. Tile park- ill
question is often filled with organized children's soccer several days a week.
With no alternative parking and double the residencies, there becomes a concern of the cul-de-
sac being overwhelmed with road side parking that would make it borderline impossible to
enter and exit the surrounding apartilients. Not to mention the heavily reduced visibility in a
children and pet heavy area making it significantly niore likely someone would becorne,
iqjured.
Additionally, those units are currently 2-3 bedroom units. Perfect for this area. The last thing
Kitchener needs is more cramped single bedroom units when farnilies are desperate to find
housing in tile current market. Keeping, inulti-bedroom units available, especially in this area,
is an important resource as they serve not only families, but also rooniniate agreements that
allow people to split the costs in a difficult economy. Replacing 2-3 bedroom units with I
bedroom units serves only to linlit the flexibility of said units while adding nothing to offset
that loss. Every 2 bedrooin call beconfe 2, rooill mates splittillg, rent, a I bedroom unit oil the
other hand has no ability to house a family.
In addition to all this, I know prior tenants ftoin 22 Woodfern that left the building, due to
power issues, lack of hot water, security concerns, lack of maintenance, and a multitude of
other issues that are currently working their way fluough the LT B system for compensation.
So an additional conceril becomes the rurits being "slurn lord' units that will not be properly
inall1tained (as evident by the lack of maintenance since ownership was taken by tile new
owners).
So we will go fioin having a building that is capable of adapting to a variety of tenant needs
,and situations with parking that allows for a car per wilt and guests when needed, to a building
craimiled ftill of inadequate units and an increase ill traffic and risk to the children ill the area
for absolutely no benefit to the public.
I can't find a single reason why this application should be approved and a large number of
reasons why it should not be.
Please advise how I should proceed as a concerned resident.
Page 44 of 267