HomeMy WebLinkAboutCA Agenda - 2025-05-201
KITc�ivER
Committee of Adjustment
Agenda
Tuesday, May 20, 2025, 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, MAY 20, 2025,
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 an 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 2025-021 - 2880 King Street East, DSD -2025-234 6
Requesting a minor variance to permit a parking requirement of 27
parking spaces rather than the minimum required 44 parking spaces to
recognize the parking configuration for the existing commercial retail
plaza on the subject property in accordance with Site Plan Application
SPB24/097/K/AS.
6. NEW BUSINESS
6.1 A 2025-043 & A 2025-044 - 82 Brunswick Avenue, DSD -2025-211 24
Requesting minor variances to permit a minimum front yard landscaping
area of 15% rather than the minimum required 20%; to permit a driveway
width of 5.2m rather than the maximum permitted 3m; and, to permit a
rear yard setback of 6.6m rather than the minimum required 7.5m to
facilitate the construction of a semi-detached dwelling containing 4 units.
In future, this parcel is proposed to be severed from the property
municipally addressed as 84 Brunswick Avenue, so each lot can be dealt
with separately.
6.2 A 2025-045 -191 Morgan Avenue, DSD -2025-224 63
Requesting minor variances to Zoning By-law 2019-051 to permit a
parking requirement of 16 parking spaces rather than the minimum
required 32 parking spaces to facilitate the development of 11 new
dwelling units within an existing building having 18 dwelling units, for a
total of 29 dwelling units in accordance with Site Plan Application
SP24/086/M/BB.
6.3 A 2025-046 - 241 Huck Crescent, DSD -2025-209 73
Requesting minor variances to permit an addition of a deck to have a
rear yard setback of 3.9m rather than the minimum required 4.0m; and,
to permit an addition (a sunroom) to have a rear yard setback of 4.8m
rather than the minimum required 7.5m.
6.4 A 2025-047 -14 Jansen Avenue, DSD -2025-235 83
Requesting minor variances to permit a northerly side yard setback of
3.2m rather than the minimum required 7.5m; and, to permit a parking
requirement of 8 parking spaces rather than the minimum required 16
parking spaces to facilitate a 2 -storey addition at the rear of the existing
building for the expansion of an existing daycare use in accordance with
Site Plan Application SPF25/003/J.
Page 2 of 246
6.5 A 2025-048 - 24 Amherst Drive, DSD -2025-226 94
Requesting minor variances to permit a driveway width of 8.3m rather
than the maximum permitted driveway width of 8m; and, to permit a
southerly side yard setback of Om rather than the minimum required 1.2m
to recognize an existing driveway, and to facilitate the conversion of the
existing garage into an entry area for an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU)
(Attached).
6.6 A 2025-049 - 42 Orchard Mill Crescent, DSD -2025-227 111
Requesting a minor variance to permit a southerly side yard setback of
Om rather than the required 1.2m to recognize an existing driveway and
to facilitate the conversion of the existing garage into an entry area for an
Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Attached).
6.7 A 2025-050 - 244 Samuel Street, DSD -2025-223 120
Requesting a minor variance to permit a single detached dwelling to have
a driveway width of 8m (68% of the lot width) rather than the maximum
permitted 4.7m (40% of the lot width); and, to permit a driveway to be
located 0.5m from the rear lot line rather than the minimum required
setback of 1.2m to facilitate the enlargement of the existing driveway.
6.8 A 2025-051 - 503 Victoria Street North, DSD -2025-230 131
Requesting minor variances to Zoning By-law 85-1 to permit an
unobstructed walkway to overlap with the driveway whereas the Zoning
By-law does not permit this; to permit a driveway to be comprised of the
same material as the unobstructed walkway whereas the Zoning By-law
does not permit this; to permit a residential building without central air
conditioning, double -glazed windows, and EW1 exterior walls to be
located 3.8m from an Arterial Road rather than the minimum permitted
12m; and, to permit a driveway width of 2.2m rather than the minimum
required 2.6m to facilitate use of the existing building for a Single
Detached Dwelling with 2 Additional Dwelling Units (ADU)(Attached) as a
Triplex Use.
6.9 A 2025-052 & A 2025-053 - 573 & 575 Guelph Street, DSD -2025-205 147
Requesting minor variances to permit lot widths of 7.4m rather than the
minimum required 7.5m; and, to permit side yard setbacks of 0.9m rather
than the minimum required 1.2m to recognize the existing semi-detached
dwellings.
Page 3 of 246
6.10 B 2025-014 - Part 3, Reference Plan 58R-7207, DSD -2025-231 162
Requesting consent to sever a triangular-shaped parcel of land
measuring 35.8m by 14.3m by 27.6m, having an area of 180.2 sq.m. to
convey as a lot addition to the property municipally addressed as 508
Fall Harvest Place, as shown on a survey sketch prepared by Guenther
Rueb Surveying Limited, dated March 19, 2025 attached to the
application.
6.11 B 2025-015 - Part 3, Reference Plan 58R-7207, DSD -2025-232 182
Requesting consent to sever an irregular-shaped parcel of land
measuring 20.3m by 15.8m by 14.3m by 27.6m, having an area of 342.5
sq.m. to convey as a lot addition to the property municipally addressed
as 512 Fall Harvest Place, as shown on a survey sketch prepared by
Guenther Rueb Surveying Limited, dated March 19, 2025 attached to the
application.
6.12 B 2025-016 -1950 Fischer Hallman Road, DSD -2025-210 202
Requesting consent to permit a long-term lease for a period greater than
21 years for a building and drive-through occupied by the 'McDonald's
Restaurant' on the property municipally addressed as 1950 Fischer
Hallman Road.
6.13 B 2025-017 & A 2025-054 - 864 King Street Vilest, DSD -2025-229 218
Requesting consent to sever an irregular-shaped parcel of land
measuring 2.2m by 90.4m, having an area of 3,045.1 sq.m. and is
proposed to be redeveloped with a 45 storey -tower building. The retained
land will have a width of 54.7m, a depth of 70.5m and an area of 3,259.6
sq.m. and is proposed for a future high-density development. Minor
variances are also being requested for the severed lands to permit a front
yard width on King Street West of 2.28m rather than the required 48.0m;
to permit a side yard setback (southerly property line, middle) of Om
rather than the required 3m; a side yard setback (westerly property line,
interior) of Om rather than the required 3m; a minimum physical
separation for storeys 7-12 (southerly property line, middle) of Om rather
than the required 6m; a minimum physical separation for storeys 7-12
(westerly property line, interior) of Om, rather than the required 6m; a
minimum physical separation for storeys 13-18 (westerly property,
interior) of 6.1m rather than the required 9m; a minimum physical
separation for storeys 19-36 (westerly property line, interior) of 6.1m
rather than the requiredl2m; and, a minimum physical separation for
storeys 37-45 (westerly property line, interior) of 6.1 m rather than the
required 15m.
7. ADJOURNMENT
Page 4 of 246
8. PLANNING ACT INFORMATION
• Additional information is available at the Legislated Services
Department, 2nd Floor, Kitchener City Hall, 200 King Street West,
Kitchener 519-741-2203 or by emailing CofA(a)kitchener.ca.
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/meetings 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, Kitchener City
Hall, 200 King St. W., Kitchener ON, N2G 4G7.
The Notice of Hearing for this meeting was published in the Record on the 2nd
day of May, 2025.
Marilyn Mills
Secretary -Treasurer
Committee of Adjustment
Page 5 of 246
Staff Report
r
JR
Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment
DATE OF MEETING: May 20, 2025
SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Manager, Development Approvals
519-783-8913
PREPARED BY: Adiva Saadat, Planner, 519-783-7658
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 2
DATE OF REPORT: May 9, 2025
REPORT NO.: DSD -2025-234
SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2025-021 — 2880 King Street East
RECOMMENDATION:
That Minor Variance Application A2025-021 for 2880 King Street East requesting
relief from Section 5.6 a), Table 5-5, of Zoning By-law 2019-051, to permit a parking
requirement of 27 parking spaces instead of the minimum required 44 parking
spaces, to recognize the existing parking supply and configuration for the building
on the subject property, with a maximum of 3 restaurant units, in accordance with
Site Plan Application SPB24/097/K/AS, BE APPROVED.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
• The purpose of this report is to review a Minor Variance Application to recognize the
existing parking supply and configuration for the existing building on the subject
property.
• The key finding of this report is that the requested minor variance meets all 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 King Street East where it merges into Weber Street
East and intersects with the Highway 8 access. It is in the Centreville Chicopee
neighbourhood which is comprised of commercial and residential uses.
*** 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 246
Figure 1: Location Map — 2880 King Street East (Outlined in Red)
The subject property is identified as `Urban Corridor' on Map 2 — Urban Structure and is
designated `Commercial' on Map 3 — Land Use in the City's 2014 Official Plan.
The property is zoned `General Commercial Zone (COM -2)' in Zoning By-law 2019-051.
The purpose of the application is to recognize the existing parking supply for the existing
building on the subject property which will allow the continued operation of businesses,
including the leasing of one of the units for a new restaurant use.
In Zoning By-law 85-1, Section 6.1.2 (a), required 1 parking space for each 22 square
metres of gross floor area for a multi -unit building. This required 27 parking spaces to be
provided on site, and 27 parking spaces were provided for and approved as a part of a
Site Plan Application on November 25,1991.
As Zoning By-law 2019-051 has come into effect, the multi -unit parking rate applies only to
a maximum of 30% of the building being used for restaurant use according to Section 5.6,
table 5-5 (3) a.
(3) The following shall only apply to a multi -unit building or multi -unit development with a
gross floor area of 1,000 square metres or less where the multi -unit parking rate
applies:
Page 7 of 246
a. Restaurant and health clinic shall each only be permitted to use the multi -unit
parking rate up to a maximum of 30 percent of the gross floor area of the multi -unit
building or multi -unit development. Parking space requirements for additional gross
floor area shall be in accordance with the individual rate identified in Table 5-5;
Any additional restaurant space beyond this threshold of 30% must meet the restaurant
parking requirement, which is 1 parking space per 7.5 square metres of gross floor area.
Since a new restaurant is being proposed on the site, the overall parking requirement has
increased under the current Zoning By-law beyond what has been functioning under the
approved existing plan from 1991. This increase is due to the maximum 30% of the total
restaurant use to be calculated at a multi -unit parking rate and the remaining restaurant
use to be calculated under individual restaurant use parking rate, which requires more
parking than the multi -unit parking rate.
Below is a breakdown of the parking calculation:
There are 5 units in the building.
A — Restaurant 152.3 m2
B — Retail 81 m2
C — Retail 84.79 m2
D — Proposed restaurant 106.8 m2
E — Restaurant 175.11 m2
Total retail use: (81 m2 +84.79 m2) = 165.79m2
Total restaurant use: (600 m2 - 165.79m2) = 434.21 m2
The maximum 30% of the building GFA which is 180m2 of restaurant and 165.79m2 non -
restaurant Unit B and C qualifies for the multi -unit rate.
Multi -Unit Rate:
(180m2 restaurant + 165.79m2 non -restaurant unit B and C) - 35 m2 = 10 spaces
Remaining restaurant area that exceeds the 180m2 multi -unit threshold
434.21 M2_ 180 m2 = 254.21 m2
Individual rate for the remaining
(254.21 m2 _ 7.5 m2) = 33.89 (round up to 34 spaces)
Total Parking Calculation
• Multi -Unit Rate: 10 spaces
• New remaining restaurant space: 34 spaces
Total: 10 + 34 = 44 spaces
Under the previous Zoning By-law 85-1 parking regulations, on which the site was
originally built, increased parking requirements would not have applied with the addition of
a restaurant use. Due to site constraints now, there is insufficient space to provide the
Page 8 of 246
required number of parking spaces required by Zoning By-law 2019-051. As a result of the
increased parking requirement and insufficient space to provide the required parking, the
applicant is seeking a minor variance to recognize the existing parking supply to allow the
proposed business to continue operation with the existing parking supply. The applicant
has submitted Site Plan Application SPB24/097/K/AS, and it is currently under review.
Minor Variance A2025-021 was deferred from March 18, 2025, Committee of Adjustment
Agenda to the September 16, 2025, Committee of Adjustment Agenda, or sooner,
to allow the Applicant time to complete a Parking Justification Study, to the satisfaction of
the Director of Transportation Services.
Transportation Planning Staff conducted an informal parking study for 1 hour during the
peak hour when all on-site businesses were open. The site visit confirmed that parking
spaces were available during this period. With the proposed additional of bicycle parking
and the availability of nearby on -street parking, any modest increase in parking demand
can be sufficiently accommodated. As such, Transportation Services has no concerns and
is able to support the Minor Variance Application.
��•� xom asax�P1cnPEo�nRE(. - 3999 Q
EXISTING BUILDING
�m
h ASPHALT
®��STR�'f'rE`gsT vw�nrmme I f—
&�O Rq[5£D ISwMo
S�ryQ
yCING STREET EAST
SITE PLAN
REVISED UFG&DESITE PLAN DESCRIAPPLICPTION No.
0 5 10 15 2D 25 LEGAL ilESGRIPTiON
OWNERS NAME: ARVINDER PABAY
SCALE City of Kitchener IND r1G
SP DYVG
STREET EAST,IUTCHENER DATE r}3-0325 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT
Figure 2: Site Plan in Accordance with SPB24/097/K/AS
Planning Staff conducted a site visit on May 5, 2025
Page 9 of 246
Figure 3: Existing Site Conditions as of May 5, 2025
Page 10 of 246
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 general intent of the `Commercial' land use designation is to support economic activity
by ensuring accessible and well distributed services for businesses, employees and
visitors. The proposed variance will maintain the site's commercial viability and function
and will ensure continued operation without reducing service availability.
Policy 13.C.8.2 allow the City to consider variances to the parking requirements provided
certain criteria are met.
13.C.8.2. The City may consider adjustments to parking requirements for properties
within an area or areas, where the City is satisfied that adequate
alternative parking facilities are available, where developments adopt
transportation demand management (TDM) measures or where sufficient
transit exists or is to be provided.
The property is in close proximity to sufficient transit and will adopt TDM measures
through the Site Plan Approval process. Staff is in opinion that requested variance meets
the general intent of the Official Plan.
General Intent of the Zoning By-law
The general intent of the minimum parking requirement is to ensure sufficient parking
spaces are available for employees and customers. The existing parking configuration and
supply has been functioning adequately for several years. The applicant is proposing to
include 2 Class 8 and 5 Class A bicycle parking stalls including shower and change
facilities to encourage the use of active transportation to decrease the need for parking
requirements on site.
Further, staff note that the Site Plan application SPB24/097/K/AS includes a requirement
that all Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures are to be implemented
through the site plan approval process. The applicant has informed staff that they are
committed to the continued implementation of TDM measures.
Accordingly, it is staff's opinion that the variance will maintain the general intent of the
Zoning By-law.
Is/Are the Effects of the Variance(s) Minor?
The effects of the requested variance are anticipated to be minor in nature. The applicant
will be providing 5 Class A bicycle parking spaces and TDM measures including shower
and change facilities for the employees that will be placed at the back of the building. The
existing parking supply should be sufficient for the existing businesses so as not to
Page 11 of 246
negatively impact abutting properties. Therefore, staff are of the opinion that the requested
variance satisfies the `minor' test to recognize the existing parking supply.
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 is desirable and appropriate, as it will
recognize the existing parking supply and will allow continued operation of businesses on
the subject property and support economic activity.
Environmental Planning Comments:
No comments or concerns.
Heritage Planning Comments:
No comments or concerns.
Building Division Comments:
No comments or concerns.
Engineering Division Comments:
No comments or concerns.
Parks and Cemeteries/Forestry Division Comments:
No comments or concerns.
Transportation Planning Comments:
Transportation Services have been in contact with the applicant and City Planning staff
regarding this property and Transportation Services have no concerns with the requested
parking variance.
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.
Page 12 of 246
PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES:
• Planning Act
• Provincial Planning Statement (PPS 2024)
• Regional Official Plan
• Official Plan (2014)
• Zoning By-law 2019-051
Page 13 of 246
Staff Report
r
JR
Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment
DATE OF MEETING: March 18, 2025
SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Manager, Development Approvals
519-783-8913
PREPARED BY: Adiva Saadat, Planner, 519-783-7658
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 2
DATE OF REPORT: March 4, 2025
REPORT NO.: DSD -2025-115
SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2025-021 — 2880 King Street East
RECOMMENDATION:
That Minor Variance Application A2025-021 for 2880 King Street East requesting
relief from Section 5.6, Table 5-5, of Zoning By-law 2019-051, to permit a parking
requirement of 27 parking spaces instead of the minimum required 44 parking
spaces, to recognize the parking configuration for the existing building on the
subject property, BE DEFERRED to the September 16, 2025 Committee of
Adjustment Meeting, or sooner, to allow the Applicant time to complete a Parking
Justification Study, to the satisfaction of the Director of Transportation Services.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
• The purpose of this report is to review a minor variance application to recognize the
parking configuration and supply for the existing building on the subject property.
• The key finding of this report is that Staff are unable to determine whether the
variance would meet the four tests in the absence of a Parking Justification Study.
• 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 King Street East where it merges into Weber Street
East and intersects with the Highway 8 access. It is in the Centreville Chicopee
neighbourhood which is comprised of commercial and residential uses.
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Page 14 of 246
Figure 1: Location Map — 2880 King Street East (Outlined in Red)
The subject property is identified as `Urban Corridor' on Map 2 — Urban Structure and is
designated `Commercial' on Map 3 — Land Use in the City's 2014 Official Plan.
The property is zoned `General Commercial (COM -2)' in Zoning By-law 2019-051.
The purpose of the application is to recognize the existing parking supply for the existing
building on the subject property which will allow the continued operation of businesses.
In the Zoning By-law 85-1 Section 6.1.2 (a), the multi -unit parking requirement is 1 parking
space per 22 square metres. This required 27 parking spaces for the site, and it was
provided for and approved as a part of the Site Plan Application in November 25, 1991. As
per Zoning By-law 2019-051 has come into effect, the multi -unit parking rate applies only
to a maximum of 30% of total restaurant use according to Section 5.6, table 5-5 (3) a.
(3) The following shall only apply to a multi -unit building or multi -unit development with
a gross floor area of 1,000 square metres or less where the multi -unit parking rate
applies:
a. Restaurant and health clinic shall each only be permitted to use the multi -unit
parking rate up to a maximum of 30 percent of the gross floor area of the
multi -unit building or multi -unit development. Parking space requirements for
additional gross floor area shall be in accordance with the individual rate
identified in Table 5-5;
Page 15 of 246
Any additional restaurant space beyond this threshold of 30% must meet the restaurant
parking requirement, which is 1 parking space per 7.5 square metres.
Since a new restaurant is being proposed on the site, the overall parking requirement has
increased under the current Zoning By-law beyond what has been functioning under the
approved existing plan from 1991. This increase is due to the maximum 30% of the total
restaurant use to be calculated at a multi -unit parking rate and the remaining restaurant
use to be calculated under individual restaurant use parking rate, which requires more
parking than the multi -unit parking rate.
Below is a breakdown of the parking calculation:
There are 5 units in the building.
A — Restaurant 152.3 m2
B — Retail 81 m2
C — Retail 84.79 m2
D — Proposed restaurant 106.8 m2
E — Restaurant 175.11 m2
Total retail use: (81 m2 +84.79 m2) = 165.79m2
Total restaurant use: (600 m2 - 165.79m2) = 434.21 m2
The maximum 30% of the building GFA which is 180m2 of restaurant and 165.79m2 non -
restaurant Unit B and C qualifies for the multi -unit rate.
Multi -Unit Rate:
(180m2 restaurant + 165.79m2 non -restaurant unit B and C) _ 35 m2 = 10 spaces
Remaining restaurant area that exceeds the 180m2 multi -unit threshold
434.21 M2_ 180 m2 = 254.21 m2
Individual rate for the remaining
(254.21 m2 _ 7.5 m2) = 33.89 (round up to 34 spaces)
Total Parking Calculation
• Multi -Unit Rate: 10 spaces
• New remaining restaurant space: 34 spaces
Total: 10 + 34 = 44 spaces
Under the previous Zoning By-law 85-1 parking regulations, on which the site was
originally built, increased parking requirements would not have applied.
Due to site constraints, there is insufficient space to provide the required number of
parking spaces required by Zoning By-law 2019-051 Section 5.6, table 5-5 (3) a. As a
result of the increased parking requirement, due to the addition of a new restaurant use
Page 16 of 246
and insufficient space, the applicant is seeking a minor variance to recognize the existing
parking supply.
Notice of Minor Variance Application
Upon further review of the parking requirements and discussion with Transportation
Planning staff, it was determined that based on the proposed new restaurant use in the
building, the parking requirement is in fact 44 parking spaces and not the 35 parking
spaces that was advertised. No further notice is deemed to be required as the request to
recognize 27 parking spaces has not changed.
The applicant has submitted site plan application SPB24/097/K/AS and it is currently
under review. Through the review of the Minor Variance Application, a Parking Justification
Study has been requested by Transportation Services staff. The Site Plan Application will
be put on hold until such time as the Minor Variance Application is considered.
SITE PLAN
UI.�i5 WK ARYWC -.1 '
� +r.en��xswco�scR
G i 10 ILS 76 25
City of Kitchener
Figure 2: Site Plan in Accordance with SPB24/097/K/AS
Planning Staff conducted a site visit on February 27, 2025
Page 17 of 246
Figure 3: Existing Site Conditions as of February 27, 2025
REPORT:
Planning Comments:
In accordance with the comments of Transportation Services Staff below, Planning staff is
recommending a deferral of Minor Variance Application A2025-021 for 6 months, or
sooner, to allow the Applicant time to prepare a Parking Justification Study.
Environmental Planning Comments:
No comments or concerns.
Heritage Planning Comments:
No comments or concerns.
Building Division Comments:
No comments or concerns.
Engineering Division Comments:
No comments or concerns.
Parks and Cemeteries/Forestry Division Comments:
No comments or concerns.
Page 18 of 246
Transportation Planning Comments:
City Transportation Staff recommends a Parking Study is prepared by the Applicant to
support the application. Based on a high-level internal review of expected parking
demand, City Transportation Staff expect that the expected parking demand will be unable
to be accommodated within the site and the demand may be greater than the by-law
requirement.
It is noted that in multi -unit commercial buildings, a lower parking supply can be
accommodated as the various functions will have peak parking demands at different times.
An accounting or doctor's office will have a different peak than a restaurant. Therefore, the
site does not need to accommodate the total peak parking demands of each use at the
same time.
However, restaurants generate very large traffic volumes and have a greater parking
demand per square metre compared to other land uses. If the building is primarily
occupied by restaurant land uses, the restaurant parking rate should be applied so parking
can be sufficiently accommodated on site.
Due to the interconnected nature of the site with adjacent private developments, City
Transportation staff advise that any excess parking demand is currently/may be burdened
by adjacent developments in the near term. In the future, if the adjacent properties
redevelop or in a dispute, access to these spaces may not be possible. While excess
parking can be accommodated on Centreville Street, visitors new to the site may not be
familiar with how to access the roadway unless they are familiar with the area.
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 Planning Statement (PPS 2024)
• Regional Official Plan
• Official Plan (2014)
• Zoning By-law 2019-051
Page 19 of 246
Region of Waterloo
March 4, 2025
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 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
Subject: Committee of Adjustment Meeting March 18, 2025, City of Kitchener
Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and
have the following comments:
1) A 2025 — 013
— 160 Grand River Boulevard - No Concerns
2) A 2025 — 014
— 51 Meadowridge Street - No Concerns
3) A 2025 — 015
— 1180 Union Street - No Concerns
4) A 2025 — 016
— 45-53 Courtland Avenue East - No Concerns
5) A 2025 — 017
— 1157 & 1175 Weber Street East- No Concerns
6) A 2025 —018
- 60 Wellington Street North - No Concerns
7) A 2025 — 019
- 114 Madison Avenue South- No Concerns
8) A 2025 — 020
- 15 Palace Street - No Concerns
9) A 2025 - 021
- 2880 King Street East — No Concerns
10)A 2025-022 -
25 Haldimand Street - — No Concerns
11)A 2025-023 -
140 Byron Avenue — No Concerns
12)A 2025-024 -
507 Stirling Avenue South— No Concerns
13)A 2025-025 -
93-95 Kinzie Avenue— No Concerns
14)A 2025-026 -
250 Frederick Street — No Concerns
15)A 2025-027- 13 Chicopee Park Court — No Concerns
16)A 2024-096 -
165 Fairway Road North — No Concerns
Document Number: 4920494 Version: 1
Page 20 of 246
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,
-Tfo�—
Tanikia Kinear, C.E.T.
Senior Transportation Planner
(519) 897-5691
Document Number: 4920494 Version: 1
Page 21 of 246
March 3, 2025
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 — March 18, 2025
Applications for Minor Variance
A 2024-096
165 Fairway Road North
A 2025-013
160 Grand River Boulevard
A 2025-014
51 Meadowridge Street
A 2025-015
1180 Union Street
A 2025-016
45-53 Courtland Avenue East
A 2025-017
1157-1175 Weber Street East
A 2025-018
60 Wellington Street North
A 2025-019
114 Madison Avenue South
A 2025-020
15 Palace Street
A 2025-021
2880 King Street East
A 2025-022
25 Haldimand Street
A 2025-023
140 Byron Avenue
A 2025-024
507 Stirling Avenue South
A 2025-025
93-95 Kinzie Avenue
A 2025-026
250 Frederick Street
A 2025-027
13 Chicopee Park Court
Applications for Consent
B 2025-006 142 Carson Drive
B 2025-007 13 Chicopee Park Court
B2025-008 11a & 11b Chicopee Park Court
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 41/24 and, therefore, a
permission from GRCA is not required.
Member of Conservation Ontario, representing Ontario's 36 Conservation Authorities I The Grand — A Canadian Heritage River
Page 22 of 246
Should you have any questions, please contact me at aherreman(c-grandriver.ca or 519-
621-2763 ext. 2228.
Sincerely,
Andrew Herreman, CPT
Resource Planning Technician
Grand River Conservation Authority
Page 23 of 246
Staff Report
r
JR
Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment
DATE OF MEETING: May 20, 2025
SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Manager, Development Approvals
519-783-8913
PREPARED BY: Evan Wittmann, Senior Planner, 519-783-8523
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 10
DATE OF REPORT: May 7, 2025
REPORT NO.: DSD -2025-211
SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2025-043 — 82 Brunswick Avenue
(Future Retained Parcel)
Minor Variance Application A2025-044 — 82 Brunswick Avenue
(Future Severed Parcel / 84 Brunswick Avenue)
RECOMMENDATION:
A. Minor Variance Application A2025-043 - 82 Brunswick Avenue (Future Retained
Parcel
That Minor Variance Application A2025-043 for 82 Brunswick Avenue (Future
Retained Parcel) requesting relief from the following sections of Zoning By-law
2019-051:
i) Section 4.12.2.h) to permit a minimum front yard landscaped area of 15%
instead of the minimum required 20%;
ii) Section 5.4, Table 5-3, to permit a maximum driveway width of 5.2 metres
instead of the maximum permitted 3 metres; and
iii) Section 7.3, Table 7-3, to permit a minimum rear yard setback of 6.6 metres
instead of the minimum required 7.5 metres;
to facilitate the development of a Semi -Detached Dwelling with three (3)
Additional Dwelling Units (ADU) (Attached) in each half of the Semi -Detached
Dwelling, for a total of eight (8) dwelling units, generally in accordance with
drawings prepared by Southwood Homes, dated March 27, 2025, BE REFUSED.
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Page 24 of 246
B. Minor Variance Application A2025-044 - 82 Brunswick Avenue (Future Severed
Parcel / 84 Brunswick Avenue)
That Minor Variance Application A2025-044 for 82 Brunswick Avenue (Future
Severed Parcel / 84 Brunswick Avenue) requesting relief from the following
sections of Zoning By-law 2019-051:
i) Section 4.12.2.h) to permit a minimum front yard landscaped area of 17%
instead of the minimum required 20%;
ii) Section 5.4, Table 5-3, to permit a maximum driveway width of 5.2 metres
instead of the maximum permitted 3 metre; and
iii) Section 7.3, Table 7-3, to permit a minimum rear yard setback of 5.1 metres
instead of the minimum required 7.5 metres;
to facilitate the development of a Semi -Detached Dwelling with three (3)
Additional Dwelling Units (ADU) (Attached) in each half of the Semi -Detached
Dwelling, for a total of eight (8) dwelling units, generally in accordance with
drawings prepared by Southwood Homes, dated March 27, 2025, BE REFUSED.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
• The purpose of this report is to review and make recommendations on minor variance
applications for the future Severed and Retained Parcels at 82 Brunswick Avenue to
facilitate the creation of a Semi -Detached Dwelling with four dwelling units on each
side.
• The key finding of this report is that the two minor variance applications do not meet
the `four tests' of the Planning Act and refusal is recommended.
• 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 eastern side of Brunswick Avenue between
Hartwood Avenue and Guelph Street within the "Fairfield" community. The subject
property currently features a 1.5 storey single detached dwelling and has a frontage of
approximately 15 metres and depth of approximately 30 metres. The surrounding area is
generally characterised by low-rise housing, with notable exceptions being the abutting
"Margaret Place" apartment buildings, each being 18 storeys tall. The parking areas of the
Margaret Place property abuts the eastern and southern edges of the subject property. A
short distance north of the subject property is large commercial property, currently
tenanted by Giant Tiger. The Breithaupt Centre is a short distance from the subject
property, across Margaret Avenue to the northeast.
Page 25 of 246
Figure 1: Aerial View Of The Subject Property (in Red)
Figure 2: Subject Property, View From Street (Taken May 2, 2025)
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.
Page 26 of 246
The subject property is zoned `Low Rise Residential Four Zone (RES -4)' in Zoning By-law
2019-051. This zone permits semi-detached dwellings on lots with a lot width of 7.5 metres
and lot area of 210 m2, which are met by the proposed lot configuration and would be
implemented by a future Consent Application.
The purpose of the applications is to vary the `RES -4' Zone requirements for minimum rear
yard setback, minimum front yard landscaping, and maximum drive -way width to facilitate
the development of a Semi -Detached Dwelling with three (3) Additional Dwelling Units
(ADU) (Attached) in each half of the Semi -Detached Dwelling, for a total of eight (8)
dwelling units.
Figure 3: Zoning By -Law
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 Official Plan provides several policies regarding the intensification of low rise
residential areas, with more specific direction to the requested variances, being to the rear
yard setback, front yard landscaping, and driveway width.
Page 27 of 246
Of particular relevance to this application is Policy 4.C.1.8, which provides specific policy
direction for minor variance applications proposing residential intensification:
4. C.1.8. Where a special zoning regulation(s) or minor variance(s) is/are requested,
proposed or required to facilitate residential intensification or a
redevelopment of lands, the overall impact of the special zoning regulation(s)
or minor variance(s) will be reviewed, but not limited to the following to
ensure, that.-
e)
hat:
e) 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.
f) The impact of each special zoning regulation or variance will be
reviewed prior to formulating a recommendation to ensure that a
deficiency in the one zoning requirement does not compromise the
site in achieving objectives of compatible and appropriate site and
neighbourhood design and does not create further zoning
deficiencies.
Regarding policy 4.C.1.8.e), two (2) of the requested variances reduce the amount of
landscaped and amenity areas on the property: the rear yard setback reduction and
reduction to minimum front yard landscaping. The variances would reduce both the size of
the rear yard and the usable amenity space or green area in the front yard. The reduction
in front yard landscaping is also predominately due to the requested variance for the
widened driveway, which would also suggest that the site is not large enough to
accommodate the required parking and maintain an appropriate rear yard or the amount of
landscaped area in the front yard.
As indicated in policy 4.C.1.8.f), one zoning deficiency should not create additional zoning
deficiencies. The requested variance to reduce the front yard landscaped area is caused
by the requested variance to widen the driveway beyond the maximum permitted width.
The Official Plan provides policy direction on the compatibility of residential intensification
with the existing character of the neighbourhood. Policy 4.C.1.9 states:
4. C.1.9. Residential intensification and/or redevelopment within existing
neighbourhoods will be designed to respect existing character. A high
degree of sensitivity to surrounding context is important in considering
compatibility.
Examining the existing context of Brunswick Avenue, while the predominant driveway form
is single loaded, there are examples of double wide driveways. In instances where a
double wide driveway is present, the lot features a single detached dwelling. These single
detached lots are large enough to accommodate both parking and landscaping in the front
yard. A side-by-side, double wide driveway at the front of the dwelling is generally
uncharacteristic of the surrounding neighbourhood.
Page 28 of 246
Additional policy direction regarding compatibility is provided in the Low Rise Residential
land use designation policies, specifically 15.D.3.3:
15. D.3.3. To support the successful integration of different housing types, specifically
multiple residential developments, through new development/redevelopment
and/or residential intensification, within lands designated Low Rise
Residential, Medium Rise Residential or High Rise Residential, the City will
apply design principles in accordance with the Urban Design Policies in
Section 11. An emphasis will be placed on.-
b)
n:
b) the relationship of housing to adjacent buildings, streets and exterior
areas,
c) adequate and appropriate parking areas are provided on site, and,
d) adequate and appropriate amenity areas and landscaped areas are
provided on site.
Policy 15.D.3.3 further emphasizes the appropriateness of parking areas, amenity areas,
and landscaped areas in Low Rise Residential areas. Widening the driveway will have an
adverse impact on the streetscape, and reductions to both the front and rear landscaped
and amenity areas results in areas inadequate for four dwelling units.
Based on the above review, the requested variances do not meet the intent of the
Official Plan.
General Intent of the Zoning By-law
The intent of the maximum driveway width is to maintain the relationship between
residential properties and the streetscape, avoiding neighbourhoods that are dominated by
paved surfaces. This is facilitated by the deliberate departure from the previous driveway
maximum of Zoning By-law 85-1. In Zoning By-law 81-5, the maximum permitted driveway
width was 5.2 metres, which was revised down to the current maximum driveway width of
40% of the lot width in established neighbourhood areas. The requested increase to the
maximum driveway width is contrary to the intent of the current Zoning By-law.
In context, the reduction to front yard landscaped area is due to the widened driveway,
creating a front yard condition that is primarily paved. Reducing the landscaped area to
provide additional parking area does not follow the intent of the Zoning By-law.
The intent of the rear yard setback is to ensure both sufficient distance from lot lines to
ensure privacy to abutting properties, and to provide private, outdoor amenity space to the
lot. The need for reductions to the rear yard setbacks are due to the angle of the rear lot
line. For the future severed lot, the setback is 5.1 metres at its shortest point, which
continues to increase until reaching 6.6 metres at its longest. The average rear yard
setback is roughly 5.8 metres, which results in a rear yard area of approximately 43
square metres. The minimum rear yard size as calculated by the required zone provisions
is 56.25 square metres (7.5 metres x 7.5 metres). The 43 square metres that would be
provided is 76% the area of the typical requirement. Based on the intent of the rear yard
Page 29 of 246
setback, the reduction results in an area that does not provide appropriate outdoor
amenity area for a primary dwelling and three ADU's.
For the future retained lot, the setback is 6.6 metres at its shortest point, which continues
to increase until reaching 8.5 metres at its longest. The average rear yard setback is
roughly 7.6 metres, which is above the minimum requirement of 7.5 metres. For this lot,
the reduction to the rear yard effectively meets the intent of the Zoning By-law.
341.49
3414
x 5R
1R
341.64_ ��fty�ao ,'R 341.64.
UNIT 4 _ WNIZ 4
ACCESS _ A6CESS
Figure 4: Rear Yard Setback Measurements
I
Based on the above review, the requested variances, aside from the 6.6 metre rear
yard setback, do not meet the intent of the Zoning By-law.
Is/Are the Effects of the Variance(s) Minor?
Regarding the variances to increase the maximum driveway width, the maximum driveway
width is to be 40% of the frontage of the property. Based on the future intent to sever, two
lots of 7.5 metres are proposed. 40% of the 7.5 metre frontage results in a maximum
driveway width of 3 metres; large enough for one parking space. The requested increase
to 5.2 metres, or 70% of the frontage, which is nearly double the maximum width
permitted, is to facilitate side-by-side parking. While functionally this is a convenient option
for a building with multiple units to avoid parking conflicts, it presents a scenario where a
significant portion of the front yard is a paved surface.
The increased driveway width has a compounding effect, resulting in the need to reduce
the minimum front yard landscaped areas for both future lots. While in some scenarios a
reduced front yard landscaped area may be appropriate, needing to reduce landscaped
area for additional parking is not a desirable corresponding variance.
Page 30 of 246
As noted in the above analysis regarding the intent of the Zoning By-law, the future
retained parcel and 6.6 metre rear yard setback is generally technical in nature due to the
angled rear lot line and would be considered minor.
Overall, the requested variances, aside from the rear yard reduction to 6.6 metres, are
not minor in nature.
Is/Are the Variance(s) Desirable For The Appropriate Development or Use of the Land,
Building and/or Structure?
In addition to the individual review of each variance, it is important to consider the
variances in aggregate. While up to four units are permitted on residential properties in the
City, it must be demonstrated that the property in question can reasonably accommodate
that level of density. The applicant has prepared a concept plan that demonstrates an
eight -unit development that could be constructed with no variances. This alternative
concept is generally undesirable, as several of the units, such as the detached ADUs, are
very small in size.
Although eight (8) units would not be feasible without variances, a semi-detached dwelling
with two attached Additional Dwelling Units, for a total of six (6) units, could be constructed
without the need for any variances and would provide more livable units than the as -of -
right eight -unit concept. Understanding that appropriate redevelopment is possible on the
subject property without need for variances reflects negatively on the desirability of the
variances.
By increasing the driveway width, the front yard will largely be paved area. Increasing the
amount of hard surface on a property has negative environmental and streetscape
impacts. Additionally, by increasing the driveway width, a street tree will need to be
removed, which is not a desirable outcome and not supported by the City's Forestry
Division.
Overall, the requested variances are not desirable for the appropriate
redevelopment of the property.
Environmental Planning Comments:
Environmental Planning is not in support of any variances to reduce required landscape
area as permeable area and soil volume will be reduced negatively impacting water
infiltration and the survival of street trees. Arborist's Report required to assess impacts to
vegetation at 305-315 Maragret Ave (their required Landscape Plan).
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 new semi-detached building and detached ADUs is obtained prior to construction.
Please contact the Building Division at building(a)kitchener.ca with any questions.
Page 31 of 246
Engineering Division Comments:
No Engineering comments or concerns.
Parks and Cemeteries/Forestry Division Comments:
There is an existing City -owned street tree within the boulevard on Brunswick Avenue. It is
expected that all City owned tree assets will be fully protected to City standards throughout
demolition and construction as per Chapter 690 of the current Property Maintenance By-
law. No revisions to the existing driveway or boulevard apron will be permitted without
Forestry approval. Tree Protection and Enhancement Plans to Forestry's satisfaction will
be required outlining complete protection of City assets prior to any demolition or building
permits being issued.
Transportation Planning Comments:
No Transportation comments or concerns.
Enova Power:
Following the property severance, each municipal address must have an individual hydro
service. The meter base for the accessory dwelling unit (ADU) must be located in the
same area as the front units.
Region Comments:
No Region comments or 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 41/24 and, therefore, a
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.
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.
Page 32 of 246
PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES:
• Planning Act
• Provincial Planning Statement (PPS 2024)
• Regional Official Plan
• Official Plan (2014)
• Zoning By-law 2019-051
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A — Site Plan
Page 33 of 246
ATTACHMENT A
out wood -orr nc
a 4 - I- C_ T U R A L D E 5 1 h
NJS:=6i*_51 A'wi:i_�rtx�ad:ertrcce vvrvrsaJT.a:u.i-c n..:a ::9
Site Plan
6; ;'.,.rjnSWICk. Avenve, Kirchener ON
X4
Page 34 of 246
May 6, 2025
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 May 20, City of Kitchener
Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and
have the following comments:
1) A 2025 —
043
— 82 Brunswick Avenue — No Concerns
2) A 2025 —
044
— 84 Brunswick Avenue — No Concerns
3) A 2025 —
045
— 191 Morgan Avenue — No Concerns
4) A 2025 —
046
— 241 Huck Cresent — No Concerns
5) A 2025 —
047
— 14 Jansen Avenue — No Concerns
6) A 2025 —
048
— 24 Amherst Drive — No Concerns
7) A 2025 —
049
— 42 Orchard Mill Cresent — No Concerns
8) A 2025 —
050
— 244 Samuel Street — No Concerns
9) A 2025 —
051
— 503 Victoria Street North — No Concerns
10)A 2025 —
052
— 573 Guelph Street — No Concerns
11)A 2025 —
053
— 575 Guelph Street — No Concerns
12)A 2025 —
054
— 864 King Street West — 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.
Document Number: 4976854
Page 35 of 246
Please forward any decisions on the above-mentioned Application numbers to the
undersigned.
Yours Truly,
Joshua Beech Falshaw
Transportation Planner
jbeechfalshaw@regionofwaterloo.ca
Document Number: 4976854
Page 36 of 246
May 5, 2025
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 — May 20, 2025
Applications for Minor Variance
A 2025-021
2880 King Street East
A 2025-043
82 Brunswick Avenue
A 2025-044
84 Brunswick Avenue
A 2025-045
191 Morgan Avenue
A 2025-046
241 Huck Crescent
A 2025-047
14 Jansen Avenue
A 2025-048
24 Amherst Drive
Applications for Consent
B 2025-016 1950 Fischer Hallman Road
B 2025-017 864 King Street West
via email
A 2025-049
42 Orchard Mill Crescent
A 2025-050
244 Samuel Street
A 2025-051
503 Victoria Street North
A 2025-052
573 Guelph Street
A 2025-053
575 Guelph Street
A 2025-054
864 King Street West
Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff have 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 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 37 of 246
From:
Pui Ming Leung
To:
Committee of Adiustment (SM)
Subject:
Comments, Enova Power, April 2025
Date:
Monday, May 5, 2025 9:51:20 AM
Attachments:
11111j)d
in
The following are the comments for Committee of Adjustment applications -April 2025.
82 / 84 Brunswick Ave:
Following the property severance, each municipal address must have an individual hydro
service. The meter base for the accessory dwelling unit (ADU) must be located in the same
area as the front units.
573/575 Guelph St:
The meter base for each unit must be installed at the front of the house. Installation on the
side wall is not permitted due to insufficient clearance.
864 King St W:
The building must maintain a minimum clearance of 5.5 meters plus required working space
from the primary hydro pole line. Refer to Standard D11111 for guidance. Additional
requirements can be found in the document:
Tech nical-Guidelines-for-properties-in-Kitchener-and-Wilmot-over-400-Amperes-rev-3-feb-
13-2024. pdf
Reminder for all applications:
Customers must submit a Service Request for any new hydro service connection or upgrade
using the following link:
Service Request Form - Engineering (Victoria Street Office) - Enova Power
Thanks,
Pui Ming Leung (she/her) I Design Technologist
Direct Number: 226-896-2200 (EXT 6205)
Mobile Number: 519-589-2659
puimin_.la eunq(a enovapower.com
301 Victoria Street South, Kitchener, Ontario, N2G 41_2
enovapower.com
UJ
This correspondence is directed in confidence solely to the addressees listed above. It may
Page 38 of 246
contain personal or confidential information and may not otherwise be distributed, copied or
used by the intended recipient. Ifyou 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 39 of 246
N
O
r O
7 7 Wlqr—
ll
W Z °❑ a o d
F2w Z W ~per w
W a O w U 2 f z z O z
o=p �w w3a §wzr o
a 0 2 Z Q Z F> x>w O H 2 K U D Z
O H m
Q W H ❑ Z❑ w J y O
_ ~ ~ ~l 3 O
Z W J
O 7 a O p N w m m
�
Omq W ' Q Y2zv^
p2U U O N> U
oyovz w H �W¢ w=p WO- J
Q
N
J Om mfn W J W yaz W mp oJFQa m N N
OJ Z OF x O W W W m W O Q N N w w
Q° O w v Q Q LL ? z m W z z to V Q m O Z /
z, yrs w ' wo z Y
y> O j mow yZ Ola-~ U V r �m a W z04
y°1 �
CK�� 7yLLJ
w0 aa¢ -w LL pw ouz O M
m z o v w¢ O=W w w 00
��Ro _ov� �a ua- a n� ozm°n ¢ ¢ U) s
maa(7 ~» my,y �xQ h m� Um COO y fail W w
N Z~ z m 0 N J~ W N a = W ¢ j° F F Z W Z U (7
O 2ND w°z c°)o .0 Z, 3<w z yz 0i0os o°p o Z m 3
zo 0, Y H f7 0> r W wo w w y N V N F 7 7 Q 3
Z LLU W Q W QO ZNa m OO w 2N W KKa'2 �� LNL m N VJ (7
O W S H N ❑ o m m O U ❑ w F fn w W
LU
- OUZ OU w O (N
Z
Z<MZ❑ OOy o >zO ZmmNOUOW U) W a
xwW=WO 6ZW GzV ZmU Q J
vJ ¢ W Z O ❑L) l_L¢ W W F jH aa v,
mLLO O Uwm w mz > Va O
°
¢¢ O J m Z CO Z W Z O a
O 0 W2ZWOWO00QOOJOm
zf2nz3a14 Ll UUaU Nm z
Z of 2
R O
S x
3
T'yQ6/ �i� Wfn W�
a
w £
a V s°
Cys l >On N z rc
�aa o�
K 6 K O K O a
T pp N
w
3 0 0 b
cC k-11 S
U
LD f — c~i w a Z G
m
Uw r N 14
7 V W \ W
mar m
a\
N Z \
o \
U
Z W
O - ~
At O
e
e
F
\ NZ \.
\ T
~ / W
U W
N O
z Z
� LL
r
H
O
J
a
Objection to Minor Variance Applications A2025-043 and A2025-044 - 82
Brunswick Ave
Dear Committee of Adjustment,
am writing to formally object to Minor Variance Applications A2025-043 and A2025-044
regarding the proposed developments at 82 Brunswick Avenue.
As a nearby resident, I have strong concerns about the negative impact these
applications will have on our street and community:
1. Overdevelopment and Poor Living Conditions - Proposing two semi-detached
homes with possible three Additional Dwelling Units in each half -a total of 12 units -on
one lot is extreme. These will be small, crowded units with limited outdoor space,
creating poor living conditions and encouraging "transient tenancy". This does not
address the housing crisis meaningfully or sustainably.
2. We Need Family -Oriented Housing, Not Investor Units - There are already many
condos and small rental units being developed in the area. What we lack are homes
that support families -spaces with yards, privacy, and room to grow. Rebuilding a single-
family home or a modest triplex would still add resale and long-term value for new
owners without harming the character or livability of the neighbourhood.
3. Affordability of Single -Family Homes - Allowing investors to densify lots at this
scale will inflate land values, making it even harder for everyday families to afford a
home. Protecting space for traditional single-family or modest multi -family housing
keeps ownership within reach for young families and future generations.
4. Traffic and Safety Risks on a Narrow Street - Brunswick Avenue is a very narrow
street, and adding this many new units will significantly increase traffic and on -street
parking. This poses a serious safety concern -especially for the many children who live
and play on this street. Adding multiple wide driveways and allowing rear yard variances
that reduce buffer space only worsens the situation.
5. Loss of Green Space and Neighbourhood Value - The proposed reductions in front
yard landscaping (15 percent and 17 percent) and increased driveway widths (5.2m) will
replace green space with pavement, degrading the visual appeal of the area and
contributing to urban runoff. These changes erode the value and integrity of a
neighbourhood that people genuinely want to live in and call home.
6. Communities, Not Commodities - These types of developments are driven by real
estate investors, not families. They are changing the face of our neighbourhoods -from
livable communities into congested, fragmented rental zones. Let high-density living
remain in high-rise zones -not quiet residential streets where people are trying to build
lives and futures.
Page 41 of 246
7. Loss of Appeal Rights Under Bill 23 - As a resident, I am deeply concerned that
under Bill 23, neighbours like myself no longer have the legal right to appeal this
decision. This severely limits public accountability and leaves residents powerless to
prevent developments that damage their communities. I urge the Committee to weigh
this inequity heavily when making its decision.
For these reasons, I respectfully request that the Committee deny the requested
variances. I also ask to be notified of the Committee's decision.
Sincerely,
Kendra Elizabeth Bester
Page 42 of 246
From:
To: Committee of Adjustment (SM)
Subject. Objection to Minor Variance Applications A 2025443 & A 2 02 5-044 — 82 & 84 Orunswick Avenue
Date: Monday, May 5, 2025 9:47:40 PM
You don't often get email from
Dear Committee Members,
I am writing as a long-term resident of to formally express my
objection to the minor variance applications A 2025-043 and A 2025-044 concerning the
properties at 82 and 84 Brunswick Avenue (Potential Future Severed Lot).
While I understand the need for strategic urban growth and densification, I am very concerned
that the proposed variances and associated redevelopment plans are excessive for this modest
residential street and will have serious and lasting impacts on neighbourhood safety, livability,
and character.
These applications would permit the construction of two semi-detached dwellings containing
a total of 8 residential units, where currently there is only a single-family bungalow. This
dramatic increase in density is not in keeping with the established pattern of development on
Brunswick Avenue, and the proposed variances further compound the problem.
My main concerns are as follows:
Parking and Traffic Congestion:
The proposal includes only 4 parking spaces for 8 units, which will force tenants and
visitors to park on the street. Brunswick Avenue is only 7 meters wide in front of 82
Brunswick Avenue, making it already difficult for vehicles to pass safely. Additional
on -street parking will reduce visibility, hinder traffic flow, and block access for
emergency or service vehicles.
2. Pedestrian Safety on an Incomplete Sidewalk Network:
Brunswick Avenue does not have a complete sidewalk, forcing pedestrians
including children and persons with disabilities (both of whom live in my household)--
to
ouseholdto walk directly on the street. Increased on -street parking and vehicle traffic will
significantly raise the risk of pedestrian accidents and reduce safety for the most
vulnerable road users.
3. Snow Removal and Emergency Access:
During the winter months, snowbanks further narrow the street. The addition of parked
vehicles will impede snow clearing operations, potentially compromising access for
emergency vehicles and making the street dangerous for all users.
4. Environmental and Noise Buffer Loss:
The development will require the removal of several large, mature trees. These trees
provide more than aesthetic and environmental benefits—they also act as a natural
noise barrier between Brunswick Avenue and the two large apartment buildings on
Margaret Avenue. Removing them will increase noise pollution for nearby residents
and reduce the privacy and quiet enjoyment of our properties.
Page 43 of 246
5. Loss of Green Space and Neighbourhood Character:
The requested variances include a reduction in front yard landscaping to as little as
15%, the widening of driveways beyond zoning limits, and a reduction in rear yard
setbacks. These changes would result in a built form that is out of scale with the
existing neighbourhood, eroding its character and replacing usable green space with
pavement and building mass.
6. Not a Minor Adjustment:
Taken individually, each variance may seem modest. But together, they represent a
significant deviation from the zoning by-law's intent. Approving these changes would
effectively redefine what's permissible in our neighbourhood, paving the way for further
over -intensification.
In summary, I strongly urge the Committee to deny these variance requests and encourage a
more appropriately scaled development that preserves safety, neighbourhood character, and
environmental quality.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. I would welcome the opportunity to speak further
or appear at the public hearing.
Sincerely,
Marc Charette
Page 44 of 246
From:
To: Committee of Adiustment (SM)
Subject: Re: Written Submission for Application A 2025-043 and A 2025-044
Date: Tuesday, May 6, 2025 5:24:08 PM
Hi Connie,
Thank you for forwarding these. We'd be happy to have a conversation with the neighbours to
help address their concerns — please feel free to pass along my email so we can connect
directly if that is allowed.
It's worth clarifying that many of the issues raised seem to relate more to the zoning by-law
itself rather than our proposed development. For example, the by-law requires only two
parking spaces for four units, so we are not seeking a parking reduction, only a minor variance
for driveway widening. Snow removal and sidewalk maintenance fall outside our control, and
any trees being removed are private and located within our property boundaries.
Additionally, the zoning designation (Res -4) permits four units per lot, and I want to clarify that
our proposal is for eight units in total — not twelve, as noted in one of the objection emails.
We share the view that family-oriented housing is important, which is why our plan includes a
mix of larger two- and three-bedroom units alongside more affordable one -bedroom options.
We believe this approach, though requiring minor variances, results in a more desirable
outcome compared to the detached ADU option we previously submitted, which would not
require variances but offers less housing diversity and much smaller units.
Thanks again for facilitating this dialogue — we look forward to working together to address
these concerns.
Amy
From: Committee of Adjustment (SM)
Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2025 1:34 PM
To:
Subject: Written Submission for Application A 2025-043 and A 2025-044
Good afternoon,
I am attaching another written submission received for your application for the upcoming Committee
of Adjustment meeting.
Page 45 of 246
Connie Owen.
Administrative Clerk I Legislated Services I City of Kitchener
519-741-2203 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 cofana kitchen er.ca
Page 46 of 246
From:
To: Committee of Adiustment (SM): Committee of Adiustment (5M)
Subject-. Opposition to Variance Applications A2025-043 & A2025-044
Date: Thursday, May 8, 2025 10.31:.03 AM
IYou don't often get email from Learn why this is im op rtant
Dear Members of the Committee,
I am writing to formally oppose minor variance applications A2025-043 and A2025-044,
which propose replacing a single-family home on our street with a semi-detached structure
containing eight individual residential units and only four parking spaces. This development is
incompatible with the character, infrastructure, and true housing needs of our neighborhood.
As someone who has lived on this street for over 20 years—and whose family has been part of
this commiunty for more than 84 years—I speak on behalf of a neighborhood committed to
preserving its century homes, strong community ties, and family -friendly environment.
Key concerns with this proposal include:
■ Over -Intensification and Misaligned Housing: Units between 500-1,040 square feet
are not suitable for families and would likely attract transient or student tenants. This
location is not close to the universities or colleges and does not support the style of
higher -density student housing.
Parking and Traffic Safety: Only four parking spaces for eight units is imsafe and
unrealistic. Our street allows parking on only one side and becomes a single lane during
winter due to snow accumulation. We also lack a sidewalk on one side of the street.
Traffic and parking congestion from new tenants and guests will significantly impact
safety—especially for the many children in the area. Additionally, our street sees heavy
pedestrian traffic due to foot access to the nearby Giant Tiger store, increasing the risk
to pedestrians.
• Property Neglect and Transient Tenancy: Multi -tint rentals are often poorly
maintained. We are already seeing this throughout the city and recently in our own
neighborhood with the new builds at 271 and 273 Hartwood. Issues include improper
garbage disposal, overgrown lawns, and poor snow removal—all signs of a lack of long-
term investment in the community.
Loss of Neighborhood Character: This area is known for its family homes and
heritage charm. Allowing eight small units in place of one home fundamentally changes
the character of our street and community—not for the better.
We urge you to reject these applications. If redevelopment must occur, each sena-detached
unit should serve a single family resulting in a total of two units, not eight. This would
support the type of housing our community needs while preserving the integrity of the
neighborhood.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Kelly Targosz Valdez
Page 47 of 246
May 9, 2025
Re: A2025-043 - 82 Brunswick Avenue
A2025-044 - 82 Brunswick Avenue
Dear Committee of Adjustment members,
As a long-time resident of Brunswick Avenue, living at for 16 years,
and only moving due to two untimely deaths resulting in a move to the family farm in 2024,
1 continue to be part of Brunswick Avenue community.
I offer the following submissions for your consideration:
1. Inadequate parking
The four parking spots on the submitted design are each 2.6 meters (8.5 feet)
wide.
b. My minivan is 5.5 feet wide. The driver door when opened is 3 feet, for a
total of 8.5 feet. The proposed driveways are not wide enough for four side
by side parking spots.
c. The two spaces labelled "concrete walkway" beside the driveways will more
than likely be used as driveway because the proposed driveways are not wide
enough to accommodate the opening and closing of vehicle doors. The little
green strip in the middle of the two driveways, with no measurement being
provided, will more than likely become paved and used as a driveway to
accommodate the inadequate driveway width. Because of the practical
impacts, 5% and 3% reductions at first blush sound minor, but are in fact
significant.
d. Driveway width minimums have been set by the City and allow for vehicles to
adequately fit on a driveway. The requested variances do not meet the
intent of the City's zoning by-law as vehicles will not be able to use the
driveway well, the two inner parking spots will have difficulty entering and
exiting their vehicle depending on how the two outside vehicles park on the
driveway and the size of each vehicle. The result is that more vehicles will
likely use the road for parking. Due to these impacts, this variance request is
not minor in nature and does not meet the intent of the zoning by-law.
2. Street Parking Impact
a. Street parking is currently permitted on one side of the street. Brunswick
Avenue is narrow and according to the Geographic Information system (GIS)
used by the City, the pavement width is 7 meters (22.97 feet).
Page 48 of 246
b. Without adequate parking on site, the street becomes more congested with
cars being parked on the street and then by-law has to be called to issue
tickets when the street is used as a driveway. This is not a developer issue
because they are likely out of the picture, this is left to the neighbourhood to
manage.
c. More importantly, vehicles parked on the street become safety issues and
site line issues for crossing the street. With Giant Tiger nearby, Brunswick
Avenue's one sidewalk on the west side of the street is well used.
3. 271-273 Hartwood Avenue — four units with insufficient parking
a. This is a recent development around the corner from Brunswick Avenue, this
development has four units. The proposed development is double. I have
observed on countless occasions six (6) vehicles on the driveway and front
walk; the front walk is used as a driveway. If vehicles aren't in the driveway
the vehicles are parked on the street using the street as a driveway.
Attached is a picture of the property from Google Maps. The only front yard
green space is on the City's right of way.
4. Changes to the Region's Waste Management collection in 2026
a. The design does not incorporate garages or storage areas at the rear or the
side of the property for bikes, waste, snow shovels, toys, recycling, etc.
b. The walkways are 1.1 m (110cm) at the side and rear of the building to access
the side and rear units.
c. In March 2026 the Region is moving to a cart -based collection system. The
default (large) garbage cart is 68cm wide and 69cm in depth. The small black
garbage cart and green cart for organics are 48 cm wide and 62cm in depth.
Where will these carts go? Attached are the sizes of the carts from the
Region's website.
d. In addition to black and green carts, there is blue box recycling.
These variance requests are significant because there are eight proposed
Dwelling Units where: the front yard is parking, the side yard is 110cm is
labelled a "walkway" for the side and rear units. What is not shown on the
design is that the green space at the rear of the yard is sloped and is a
downward gradient to the rear property line.
5. Negative Impact to Environment & Community
When combined, the proposed variances remove almost all green space, and
what is labelled as green space will likely be paved over to accommodate for
lack of parking and amenities. If this application proceeds the City should
Page 49 of 246
ensure that this property is reviewed so the appropriate storm water rates
are applied to this development.
b. The existing, mature tree canopy at the side and rear of the property act as a
natural buffer to the large apartment building at the rear of the property. The
destruction of trees is concerning and in direct contrast to the City's Official
Plan (Section 8.C.2 — Urban Forests).
c. The rear yard setback requests are 12% and 32%. This is a sloped area leading
to storm water drains located just beyond the rear property line. Regardless
of the slope, this becomes a small property when a disproportionately large
building is taking up most of the space within the property lines, making the
reduced setbacks substantial in nature.
d. The side yard setbacks do not accommodate for air conditioning units, lawn
mowers if not kept on site, people moving furniture to and from the four of
the eight units.
The developer's response to this Committee will be that "we are in a housing crisis".
A housing crisis does not allow a developer to provide little to no green space,
remove tree canopy acting as a natural buffer, and negatively impact storm water
runoff. A housing crisis does not excuse a developer from respecting set -backs that
have been set by the City of Kitchener to foster good planning, a place to call home,
and community.
Request:
• To deny applications A2025-043 and A2025-044 as the variances: are not desirable,
are in no way minor in nature, and do not come close to meeting the intent of the
City's Official Plan or current zoning by-law.
There are meaningful ways the City can increase density, but these two applications only
serve the developer in maximizing profits at the expense of the community.
Respectfully,
Cory Shang
Cory Shantz
Attachments: Google Map Street View — 2023 of 271 Hartwood and 273 Hartwood Avenue
2026 Curbside Collection Changes— Region of Waterloo website
Page 50 of 246
Page 51 of 246
517125, 10:56 AM
Region of Waterloo
2026 Curbside Collection Changes - Region of Waterloo
2026 Curbside Collection Changes
Overview
In March 2026, the Region of Waterloo will be changing to cart -based collection for
garbage and organics.
The Region provides curbside collection service to approximately 161,000 single-
family homes, duplexes, and 3 -to -6 -unit buildings, as well as 8,500 multi -family
units and townhouse complexes that meet truck -access criteria.
Currently, most of the collection is done manually, by lifting waste materials and
placing them into the collection trucks. By switching to cart -based collection, the
Region will improve worker safety, operational efficiency, and cut down on waste
collection day litter.
Download the Waste Whiz app to receive notifications on the cart rollout.
Come see the carts!
Waste Management staff will be out in the community at various events throughout
the transition process.
Upcoming events are listed below:
• Waste Discovery Day; Saturday, 9 a.m. - 1 p.m., 925 Erb St. W. Waterloo, Gate
#1
Cart selection
When will residents be able to select their carts?
For garbage collection, the large black cart is the default size, Residents will have
the option to choose the smaller size in June and July. There is no selection for the
green cart, which only comes in one size.
When and how will the carts be delivered to residents?
Chat
https:llwww. reg ion ofwaterloo.ca'en1living-here12026-curbside-col lection-changes. aspx
Page 52 of 246
517!25, 10:56 AM 2026 Curbside Collection Changes - Region of Waterloo
Black and green carts will be delivered free of ch Chat ptuNclties before
March of 2026.
Information kits will be provided with the carts and include instructions and tips on
cart usage.
Cart sizes
Below are the sizes and dimensions for the various carts available. The large black
cart is the default size, and residents will have the option to choose the smaller size
if they wish. There is only one size for the green cart and food scraps container.
® Optional size
120L Black cart Black cart Green cart
garbage garbage garbage organics
can (large) (small)
Garbage can is not provided. Nath Moth 4MCI
l rn+
Fm We reference only. so cm 48 orn
Height
neem
Is' g'1
Height " Height Helght Height
04— 111 em g8 em go em
a Depth 8Depth 62 Depth g2 om
The large black cart fits the equivalent of three full bags of garbage.
Measurements: 69 cm (D) x 68 cm (W) x 111 cm (H)
The small black cart is optional, and can be chosen by residents if they prefer a
smaller size. It fits the equivalent of one full bag of garbage.
Measurements: 62 cm (D) x 48 cm (W) x 96 cm (H)
The green cart comes in one size.
Measurements: 62 cm (D) x 48 cm (W) x 98 cm (H)
The food scraps container comes in one size.
Measurements: 30 cm (D) x 22 cm (W) x 24 cm (H)
Food Scraps Container
(Default)
Chat
h €tps:llwrnu.reg ionofwaterl oo.ea'e nll i vino -h e rei2026-curbside-coil ection-ch anges.as px
Page 53 of 246
P
Chat
h €tps:llwrnu.reg ionofwaterl oo.ea'e nll i vino -h e rei2026-curbside-coil ection-ch anges.as px
Page 53 of 246
object to this proposal because on traffic risk on a narrow st they would be small unit only
suitable for individuals the is a family oriented. Area. it would not fit in with the style of our.
Neighborhood. Eight units in one small space would be overcrowded
C. Knox
Page 54 of 246
Application for the Adjustments (A2025-043) and (A2025-044
I along with my husband and our two children live the proposed site of 82 and 84 Brunswick
Avenue. As a family and neighbourhood residents of 15 years, we welcome a multi -family build in
that site to help address the growing housing crisis; however, we feel the scope and design of the
project would not fit into our existing neighbourhood without significant loss on our part. We
believe that this property, to safety be added to our neighbourhood could only have a maximum of
4 separate units. I offer the following submissions for your consideration:
a) Inadequate Parking by eliminating the front of the yard and replacing it with 4 parking spots
at 2.6 meters each
a. The front yard does not have enough space for the four proposed parking spots and
by-law does not permit this type of parking.
b. A similar building around the corner at 271-273 Hartwood has a similar issue with 4
units being built and the front driveway is only permitted one car/driveway with an
additional car along the boulevard. Over -crowding is a real issue and the
neighbours often resort to calling by-law to issue tickets. 82 and 84 Brunswick is
set to have up to 8 units and I find it very hard to believe that only 2 of them will have
cars and there is no boulevard for additional space here. Please note, there is not
green space on in these photos.
271-273 Hartwood
c. There are several successful multi -family dwellings on Brunswick that all provide
adequate rear parking for their inhabitants, rather than flooding the front with
parking that could be used as a model to fit in better with the neighbourhood and be
a safer solution than just ignoring the problem
Triplex 43 Brunswick Ave
Sixplex and its rear parking 111 Brunswick Ave. 242 Ahrens St. W.
Page 55 of 246
Street parking impact
The remainder of residents and their visitors will need to park on our street, which is
narrow. The width is only 7 meters and only permits parking on one side. Furthermore,
this street is narrowing toward the end with Giant Tiger, which results in pedestrians,
with no available sidewalk to walk, ride, scooter down the street for the remainder of
the way to Hartwood and Giant Tiger. This is a popular route for shoppers and children
on their way to the nearby schools, and additional parked cars and traffic would pose a
significant risk to them. Giant Tiger delivery trucks also use this road to access the rear
of the building for deliveries. This can be very difficult in the winter at which time the
road frequently is narrowed to one lane. By-law will need to be contacted in order to
issue tickets.
Typical street parking on Brunswick Ave #82 upper left of picture. Winter 2024-2025 road reduced to one lane due to
excessive snow. Had to be trucked away and street eventually widened.
Negative Impact of the rear yard set back of 5.1 meters and 6.6 meters, rather than the required 7.5
meters.
a. Our backyards have an old retaining wall holding up the soil and structures and moving
a large building back further into the backyard would put extreme pressure on the
already compromised structures. The retaining wall on our property has been tipping
over for years but we were in the process of digging out the shrubs that the former
owner of 82 Brunswick planted to replace the wall. It will need to be redone to support
such a structure.
Retaining walls in rear of 82 and 86 Brunswick
b. The small slip of land they suggest keeping as a small backyard is at the bottom of the
retaining wall of the 315 Margaret Avenue apartment complex known as Margaret Place.
Above this wall is their substantial parking lot and in the winter their snow is piled up
along with wall and often pushed over between their retaining wall and our backyard
fence. When the storm drain is blocked or overloaded, it is common for both our
backyards to flood in the spring or freeze in the winter. This area has significant soil
erosion.
Page 56 of 246
Loss of Privacy with the building right next to us
Furthest part of the backyard 82 Brunswick Ave.
The proposal is so massive that they suggest having a 1.1 m wide walkway along each
side of the building to access the back entrances without mention on a fence to
separate it from our property. This would have the walkway go directly behind our front
garden, shed and down the existing retaining wall to reach the rear basement
entrances.
Directly behind that shed is where the path with no fence is proposed. This is where my teenaged daughters pends
a great deal of her time — seen here with her not so helpful brother (hat)
b. The building at 271-273 Hartwood has a similar pathwaywhich has been reported by
their direct neighbours to be problematic when people move in an out of the building
with large pieces of furniture. Even getting the lawnmower into the backyard requires
them to lift over the recycling bins, air conditioners and a retaining wall to access the
backyard. This building do not have rear entrance tenants such as the ones proposed
at 82 and 84 Brunswick.
Small path to rear of 271 Hartwood
c. Our home has most of the windows on the Southeastern side of the property and
because the current building is smaller, we do not need to keep our curtains drawn.
This allows the light into our house and provides cherished views of our garden, bird
bath and feeders
Page 57 of 246
d. Homes on Brunswick tend to be old brick homes that are set back from the road,
however this proposal puts concrete and asphalt right to the road and nearly to the
back of the property. This does not provide any usable outdoor living space for the
residents they are hoping to attract. No family would be looking for a building that they
can only access through narrow paths. No outdoor space for parking, bikes, strollers
etc.
Loss of Greenery and a Mature Canopy
a. There are currently 7 mature trees and countless shrubs, bushes and plants on
the property at 82 Brunswick. There were more but they lost 2 mature trees to
the Ash Borer Beetle, as did our property several years ago which was a natural
loss that could not be prevented. However, it is a choice to remove these trees
for this project and our neighbourhood would not be the same without them.
82 Brunswick Street view Leaves filling in May 14, 2025 Full summer coverage from yard #86
Our naturally protected view from our back porch
b. Currently these trees, 3 seasons of the year, create a natural screen from the
large apartment buildings behind us on Margaret Avenue. These trees also act
as buffer to the noise from the parking lot and the echo that is caused by the
looming buildings behind us. It would be heartbreaking to see so many
beautiful trees go when the building could be made smaller to accommodate an
appropriate number of units and not encroach on so many trees.
Garbage and snow removal
a. Since there is no space for garages or sheds, the garbage cans will need to be stored
either on the front driveway area or along the narrow paths going to the back of the house.
b. We are about to switch to cart -based collection (2026) which will only leave 42cm of path
for people to walk, not to mention look terrible at the front of 8 houses. Currently garbage is
a huge issue at 271-273 Hartwood, with the renters frequently putting garbage out on the
Page 58 of 246
wrong days and then leaving it along the road instead of taking it back in. A number of times
animals have ripped into these bags and garbage has been strewn around the street.
Property owners did not clean it up; the neighbours did it. And only through their constant
vigilance do they stop it from happening again. However, even last week (May 9, 2025) too
many bags were put out for collection
c. Last winter we had snowbanks of nearly 5 feet along our driveway. Where will
their snow go?
Brunswick winter 2023 had average snowbanks
d. The developer will not be here to manage the building. Leaving us as the
neighbours to deal with people putting their garbage out wrong, calling by-law
when the parking becomes a problem, the constant turn over of temporary
tenants moving in and out regularly. The plan has too many issues to offer 8
units in a space with no parking, no yard space and no one to maintain the
building. This is happening all over the city under the guise of creating homes to
meet the demand caused by the housing crisis. Buildings are going up all over
town, small, quickly built and poorly managed by investors from another city are
overcrowding otherwise peaceful and flourishing neighbourhoods. We have
multi -family homes on this street; they have been built into the fabric of the
neighbourhood with adequate parking and front lawns have drawn the families
that are not in a position to buy their first home.
We moved to this 15 years ago thinking it was a starter home but stayed because of the incredible
neighbourhood we joined. This little narrow section of Brunswick is very close. We help each
other, watch out for one another, water each others' plants and house sit for each other. Our
children often are running across the street to play together (mine to babysit as they are the oldest
in our end of Brunswick now), ride bikes and migrate from one backyard trampoline to another's
swing set. It is truly an ideal and we are worried that the city will allow a greedy developer to place
Page 59 of 246
a monstrosity, amongst some century old homes. We were drawn to Brunswick's charm, the
greenery and family-oriented vibes, but we stayed for the neighbourhood we built together.
I would like to formally request this committee to deny applications A2025-043 and A2025-044 as
the variances have too many units to have their parking and waste collection needs met; the loss of
the mature trees that filter sound and provide a sheltering canopy would be devastating, it does not
meet current zoning by-law, and it would overwhelm a small and symbiotic street.
Sincerely,
Maggie Wright
Page 60 of 246
From:
To: Committee of Adjustment (SM)
Subject: 82 Brunswick Avenue Variance
Date: Thursday, May 15, 2025 1:42:35 PM
Attachments: Minor Variance Applications A20254M and A2025 -{K4 reoardina the proposed developments at 82 Brunswick
Avenue.pdf
IYou don't often get email from . Learn why this is important
Iii Tin writing to you in regards to the Minor Variance Applications A2025-043 and A2025-044 regarding the proposed
developments at 82 Brunswick Avenue just don't do it! We don't need 16 people on one tiny lot and 16 ears on the road
hitting our children
Page 61 of 246
Dear Committee of Adjustment,
I am writing to formally object to Minor Variance Applications A2025-043 and A2025-044
regarding the proposed developments at 82 Brunswick Avenue.
As a nearby resident, I have concerns about the cumulative impact of these variances:
1. Reduced Landscaping (15% and 17%) — Reducing the front yard landscaping below
the minimum 20% will negatively impact the streetscape and neighbourhood aesthetics,
diminishing green space and increasing hard surface runoff.
2. Excessive Driveway Width (5.2 metres) — The proposed driveway widths exceed the
bylaw maximum of 3 metres, which could lead to loss of soft landscaping, more front
yard paving, and increased on -street parking pressure.
3. Reduced Rear Yard Setbacks (S.Om and 5.1m) — Shortened rear yard setbacks from the
required 7.5 metres will reduce privacy and negatively affect the livability of both the
new dwellings and neighbouring properties.
4. Over -Intensification — Constructing two semi-detached dwellings with three Additional
Dwelling Units in each half (a total of 12 units) is a significant intensification on what is
currently a single lot. This raises concerns about traffic, noise, waste management, and
neighbourhood character.
Given these issues, I respectfully request that the Committee deny the requested variances. I
also request to be notified of the decision regarding these applications.
Sincerely,
Zach Schnarr
Page 62 of 246
Staff Report
r
JR
Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment
DATE OF MEETING: May 20, 2025
SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Manager, Development Approvals
519-783-8913
PREPARED BY: Brian Bateman, Senior Planner, 519-783-8905
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 2
DATE OF REPORT: May 8, 2025
REPORT NO.: DSD -2025-224
SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2025-045 —191 Morgan Avenue
RECOMMENDATION:
That Minor Variance Application A2025-045 for 191 Morgan Avenue requesting relief
from Section 5.6 a), Table 5-5, of Zoning By-law 2019-051 to permit a parking
requirement of 16 parking spaces instead of the minimum required 32 parking
spaces, to facilitate the development of 11 new dwelling units within an existing
building having 18 dwelling units, for a total of 29 dwelling units, in accordance with
Site Plan Application SP24/086/M/BB, BE APPROVED.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
• The purpose of this report is to assess a request to support a minor variance for
reduced parking to facilitate the construction of 11 new dwelling units through the re-
configuration of three-bedroom units to one -bedroom within an existing multiple
dwelling units for a total unit count of 29 dwelling units.
• The key finding of this report is that staff can support a reduction based on several
supporting measures outlined in a Parking Justification Brief prepared by Croziers.
• 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 191 Morgan Avenue in Centreville -Chicopee
Neighbourhood. It is an existing 18 -unit multiple residential dwelling.
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Page 63 of 246
1 ` 91
94
81
'•rl
89 95
99,t.10
d; i � Fire S
Rf1 �� 25
302 r'
wfr �1 3014•-
_r7,
Figure 1 — Aerial Photo of Subject Site and Area
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 Zone (RES -5)' in Zoning By-law 2019-051.
Page 64 of 246
Figure 2 — Photo of 191 Morgan Avenue
The owner is proposing interior renovations to re -configure existing 3 -bedroom units into 3
one -bedroom units thus increasing the overall unit count to 29. There are only 16 existing
parking spaces thus a minor variance for reduced parking is required. In support of the
application, the owner has submitted a Parking Justification Brief (March 2025) prepared
by Crozier. The Brief has been reviewed and accepted by Transportation Planning staff.
Although there are no exterior alterations being proposed, a Site Plan Application is
required and has been filed under SP24/086/M/BB (Figure 3). It has received `Conditional
Approval'.
A site visit occurred on May 4, 2025, and sign installed (see Figure 2).
Page 65 of 246
MULTI -RESIDENTIAL
NmberofUnis- 16EKnfigUd.111N-UMr
Parking Requr d
Total Numberof FhW..dUnit= 29 U,&
I=gads Unit {61= 65w s
a Spacey 1 8 2 Bed unit f211= 21 Spaces
Total Spaces Required =
29 Spaces
Parkig Prwided-
oar
0 Spaeey Baeti. uM C81
0 spaces
0.75 Spacey 1 8 2 Bed Urv6I211
16 spaces
Toil Spaces Pm ded=
a e1,
Vnbr Parking Requic4
0.15 spacev Ifni[ R9j (4.35j 5 Spaces
V b, Padang Provided-
5 Spaces
ParUj Space Minimum Dimmsiw
2-fxa x 5.5m
Barter Free Parkig Requred-
191 Morgan Avenue
4% of P..kLd Parking=
a 1
a r g
a
L
T1pe'B' Barer Free Pr 166 -
0 Space
T.ul PW nq Provided-
a
!` _
EV Parking Required-�,�
20%of Required Prk:ng
rlw,
EV Pag Provided
6spaces
6 Spaces [Fubael
SITE STATISTICS
zmyy- Resi l-tal RESS {LHL 2019G511
MULTI -RESIDENTIAL
NmberofUnis- 16EKnfigUd.111N-UMr
Parking Requr d
Total Numberof FhW..dUnit= 29 U,&
I=gads Unit {61= 65w s
a Spacey 1 8 2 Bed unit f211= 21 Spaces
Total Spaces Required =
29 Spaces
Parkig Prwided-
�-
0 Spaeey Baeti. uM C81
0 spaces
0.75 Spacey 1 8 2 Bed Urv6I211
16 spaces
Toil Spaces Pm ded=
16 Spaces
Vnbr Parking Requic4
0.15 spacev Ifni[ R9j (4.35j 5 Spaces
V b, Padang Provided-
5 Spaces
ParUj Space Minimum Dimmsiw
2-fxa x 5.5m
Barter Free Parkig Requred-
191 Morgan Avenue
4% of P..kLd Parking=
1Sl—
Type 'A'BanierFreePrmided-
1Space
T1pe'B' Barer Free Pr 166 -
0 Space
T.ul PW nq Provided-
21 Spanes
Ao�,Aarev.uy
----------
-------------
----'---- --�_ -$$ -
a --`� - = -----
STING3STOREY
MUU LTIPLE DWEW NG
1611N R.`. Eltl.^.TING, 2@ UN R.", PRO PO.^aIDF
CK,
ll P
V
YEC
E[ni rarEe^Jufnrw+. 1� � m
Figure 3 — Site Plan
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 (Map 3).
Low Rise Residential areas are intended to accommodate a full range of low-density
housing types including single detached, semi-detached, townhouse, and low-rise multiple
dwellings. The Low Rise Residential designation states that 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. As this is an existing building being intensified through
interior renovations, it would meet the intent of the land use.
The City's Official Plan contains policies to develop, support, and maintain a complete,
convenient, accessible and integrated transportation system that incorporates active
transportation, public transit, and accommodates vehicular traffic.
Page 66 of 246
REVISED:
SITE PLAN APPLIGA70N No- 5P##4##/)W
�-
® 0123456788=0
1
e,m ualx'n'A
N THE C T" � OF IVTCHESER REGIONA. 4UtiICIPA'Tr OF YVA'ERLOD
1400213586 Ontario Inc.
City of Kitchener
CRI7EILE
3l'34Sbi,@I
191 Morgan Avenue
DATE: May 7,2025
p�,rr.,. r+�aer .ate
DEVELOPMENT SERV C ES DEPARTM ENI
`'-�� `--_ ___
e•,@are„
•xnExrdrar�
erNrs..o
!` _
EV Parking Required-�,�
20%of Required Prk:ng
rlw,
EV Pag Provided
6spaces
6 Spaces [Fubael
SITE STATISTICS
zmyy- Resi l-tal RESS {LHL 2019G511
Class ABigde Paki,g Required-
,
0-5 space=1 Ur:
15si—
LW Ama-2&35�
Class Bi yde Parlun;
i55paces
Floorspace RaAo- 16212m'.2B35.97W
=057 {EA j
8FW
Rqund-
Class B Bicyde Palin; Required-
65paces
LadsraI Area-
(1283-19.,145.2%
Class BBicyde Pa+kn; Frovid=_d-
6Hocps
H
ASphafi+HaM Surtace Area-
(98474 m')34.9%
Figure 3 — Site Plan
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 (Map 3).
Low Rise Residential areas are intended to accommodate a full range of low-density
housing types including single detached, semi-detached, townhouse, and low-rise multiple
dwellings. The Low Rise Residential designation states that 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. As this is an existing building being intensified through
interior renovations, it would meet the intent of the land use.
The City's Official Plan contains policies to develop, support, and maintain a complete,
convenient, accessible and integrated transportation system that incorporates active
transportation, public transit, and accommodates vehicular traffic.
Page 66 of 246
REVISED:
SITE PLAN APPLIGA70N No- 5P##4##/)W
SITE PLAN
® 0123456788=0
'AR_ OF LCT 3 F -AN 9N9 ART OF LOT' F JAN 985, PART OF BOCK E PLAN 115
SCALE ,-3So
N THE C T" � OF IVTCHESER REGIONA. 4UtiICIPA'Tr OF YVA'ERLOD
1400213586 Ontario Inc.
City of Kitchener
CRI7EILE
3l'34Sbi,@I
191 Morgan Avenue
DATE: May 7,2025
DEVELOPMENT SERV C ES DEPARTM ENI
Figure 3 — Site Plan
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 (Map 3).
Low Rise Residential areas are intended to accommodate a full range of low-density
housing types including single detached, semi-detached, townhouse, and low-rise multiple
dwellings. The Low Rise Residential designation states that 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. As this is an existing building being intensified through
interior renovations, it would meet the intent of the land use.
The City's Official Plan contains policies to develop, support, and maintain a complete,
convenient, accessible and integrated transportation system that incorporates active
transportation, public transit, and accommodates vehicular traffic.
Page 66 of 246
Regarding alternate modes of transportation, objectives of the Official Plan include
promoting land use planning and development that is integrated and conducive to the
efficient and effective operation of public transit and encourages increased ridership of the
public transit system. The City shall promote and encourage walking and cycling as safe
and convenient modes of transportation.
The proposed development aims to increase density on an existing site that is served well
by public transit, and within walking distance to the Fairview Station Stop. The proposed
development is required to provide safe, secure bicycle storage and other TDM measures
to encourage active transportation and use of public transit..
Policy 13C.6.2 of the Official Plan states, "the City may consider adjustments to parking
requirements for properties within an area or areas, where the City is satisfied that
adequate alternative parking facilities are available, where developments adopt
transportation demand management (TDM) measures or where sufficient transit exists or
is to be provided." In support of a reduced parking rate, the applicant has submitted a
Parking Justification Brief prepared by Crozier. It has been reviewed by Transportation
staff. The study indicates the proposed parking reduction could be supported given
location next to bus routes and shopping, policies that support alternate modes of travel
and implementation of (TDM) measures. Staff can support the requested parking reduction
as outlined in Transportation Planning staff comments below in the `Staff Comments'
section.
Given all the above, staff are of the opinion that the requested parking variance meets the
general intent of transportation policies of the City's Official Plan.
General Intent of the Zoning By-law
The intent of parking regulations is to ensure developments are adequately parked to
avoid spillover onto streets or adjacent properties. Given location, proximity to public
transportation, adoption of TDM measures and signage requirements outlined in the
Parking Justification Brief, staff can support the reduction and are generally satisfied the
intent of the by-law is being maintained.
Is/Are the Effects of the Variance(s) Minor?
Providing the owner follows through with all the measures outlined in the Parking
Justification Brief, staff are confident the variance is considered minor.
Is/Are the Variance(s) Desirable For The Appropriate Development or Use of the Land,
Building and/or Structure?
Given location and proximity to public transportation, adoption of TDM measures and
signage, the parking variance is considered both desirable and appropriate for the
proposed development and use of land.
Environmental Planning Comments:
No concerns.
Heritage Planning Comments:
The property is located adjacent to the Walter Bean Trail Cultural Heritage Landscape
(CHL). The Kitchener Cultural Heritage Landscape Study (CHLS) dated December 2014
Page 67 of 246
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.
Building Division Comments:
The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance provided a building permit
for the interior alterations to create additional units is obtained prior to construction. Please
contact the Building Division at building(o)kitchener.ca with any questions.
Engineering Division Comments:
No concerns.
Parks and Cemeteries/Forestry Division Comments:
All Parks requirements will be addressed through Site Plan Application SP24/086/M/BB.
Transportation Planning Comments:
Transportation Services staff reviewed the Parking Justification Brief submitted by Crozier
(March 2025) and can support the proposed reduction in parking supply based on the
proposed Visitor On -Site Parking Management measures.
The dimensions of the proposed Class `A' bicycle parking lockers were reviewed and
despite the triangular shape, the lockers have an increased length over by-law
requirements and is expected to sufficiently accommodate most bicycles.
GRCA
No concerns.
Region
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.
Page 68 of 246
PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES:
• Planning Act
• Provincial Planning Statement (PPS 2024)
• Regional Official Plan
• Official Plan (2014)
• Zoning By-law 2019-051
Page 69 of 246
May 6, 2025
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 May 20, City of Kitchener
Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and
have the following comments:
1) A 2025 —
043
— 82 Brunswick Avenue — No Concerns
2) A 2025 —
044
— 84 Brunswick Avenue — No Concerns
3) A 2025 —
045
— 191 Morgan Avenue — No Concerns
4) A 2025 —
046
— 241 Huck Cresent — No Concerns
5) A 2025 —
047
— 14 Jansen Avenue — No Concerns
6) A 2025 —
048
— 24 Amherst Drive — No Concerns
7) A 2025 —
049
— 42 Orchard Mill Cresent — No Concerns
8) A 2025 —
050
— 244 Samuel Street — No Concerns
9) A 2025 —
051
— 503 Victoria Street North — No Concerns
10)A 2025 —
052
— 573 Guelph Street — No Concerns
11)A 2025 —
053
— 575 Guelph Street — No Concerns
12)A 2025 —
054
— 864 King Street West — 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.
Document Number: 4976854
Page 70 of 246
Please forward any decisions on the above-mentioned Application numbers to the
undersigned.
Yours Truly,
Joshua Beech Falshaw
Transportation Planner
jbeechfalshaw@regionofwaterloo.ca
Document Number: 4976854
Page 71 of 246
May 5, 2025
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 — May 20, 2025
Applications for Minor Variance
A 2025-021
2880 King Street East
A 2025-043
82 Brunswick Avenue
A 2025-044
84 Brunswick Avenue
A 2025-045
191 Morgan Avenue
A 2025-046
241 Huck Crescent
A 2025-047
14 Jansen Avenue
A 2025-048
24 Amherst Drive
Applications for Consent
B 2025-016 1950 Fischer Hallman Road
B 2025-017 864 King Street West
via email
A 2025-049
42 Orchard Mill Crescent
A 2025-050
244 Samuel Street
A 2025-051
503 Victoria Street North
A 2025-052
573 Guelph Street
A 2025-053
575 Guelph Street
A 2025-054
864 King Street West
Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff have 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 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 72 of 246
Staff Report
r
JR
Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment
DATE OF MEETING: May 20, 2025
SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Manager, Development Approvals
519-783-8913
PREPARED BY: Maitland Graham, Student Planner, 519-783-7879
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 7
DATE OF REPORT: May 7, 2025
REPORT NO.: DSD -2025-209
SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2025-046 — 241 Huck Crescent
RECOMMENDATION:
That Minor Variance Application A2025-046 for 241 Huck Crescent requesting relief
from the following sections of Zoning By-law 2019-051:
i) Section 4.14.4 b) ii) to permit a deck to have a rear yard setback of 3.9 metres
instead of the minimum required 4.0 metres; and
ii) Section 7.3, Table 7-2, to permit an addition of a sunroom to have a rear yard
setback of 4.8 metres instead of the minimum required 7.5 metres;
to facilitate the construction of a sunroom and deck in accordance with drawings
prepared by Four Seasons Sunrooms GTA, dated January 26, 2025, BE APPROVED,
subject to the following condition:
1. That the Owner shall provide and show Erosion and Sedimentation Control
Measures on the plot plan for the Application for Building Permit to protect the
`Locally Significant Valleyland' to the rear and side of 241 Huck Crescent.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
• The purpose of this report is to review a Minor Variance Application requesting a
reduced rear yard setback of 3.9 metres rather than the required 4 metres to construct
a deck and a reduced rear yard setback of 4.8 metres rather than the required 7.5
metres to construct an addition of a sunroom attached to the dwelling.
• The key finding of this report is that the requested 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
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Page 73 of 246
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 northwest side of Huck Crescent in the Highland
West neighbourhood, which is predominantly comprised of low rise detached dwellings.
y�� F
Figure 1 — Aerial Photo of the Subject Property
•
T4
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 Three Zone (RES -3)' in Zoning By-law 2019-
051.
The purpose of the application is to request relief from Section 4.14.4 b) ii) to permit a rear
yard setback of 3.9 metres instead of the minimum required 4 metres and from Section
7.3, Table 7-2 to permit a rear yard setback of 4.8 metres instead of the minimum required
7.5 metres. Approval of the variances will allow for the development of a deck and addition
of a sunroom.
Page 74 of 246
F N24'61'10"W
31-997
ff
f PROPOSED
DECK
EYISTING
DWELLING n
LOT
PROPOSED
HEATED
SUNROOM
i
N24'61"10 -W
31.542
Figure 2 — Proposed Site Plan
Figure 3 — Site Photo of 241 Huck Crescent
Page 75 of 246
Figure 4 — Existing rear yard where the deck and addition are proposed.
Figure 5 — Existing rear yard where the deck and addition are proposed.
Page 76 of 246
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 accommodate a diverse range of low-
rise housing types while maintaining the low-density character of the neighbourhood. The
use of the property for a detached dwelling is permitted and a rear yard deck and sunroom
are natural extensions of the living space. Planning Staff is of the opinion that the
proposed minor variances to facilitate a rear yard deck and sunroom meet the general
intent of the Official Plan
General Intent of the Zonina By-law
The purpose of the minimum rear yard setback is to ensure that an adequate distance is
maintained between buildings or additions and the rear property line to accommodate for
fire separation, to provide privacy to abutting neighbours, and to accommodate an
appropriate amount of amenity space for the residents of the dwelling.
Planning Staff is of the opinion that the proposed 3.9 metre setback of the deck meets the
intent of the rear yard setback regulation as there is still an adequate amount of rear yard
space provided and as the deck will provides another type of passive outdoor recreational
space, the general intent of the Zoning B -law will be maintained.
The 4.8 metre setback for the addition is not anticipated to cause privacy concerns as the
proposed addition is situated in the portion of the rear yard that abuts Huck Park Natural
Area along the left side interior side yard and the rear yard. Fire separation and privacy
would be maintained for the neighbour abutting the right side interior side yard.
Accordingly, the reduced setback for the sunroom will maintain the general intent of the
Zoning By-law.
Is/Are the Effects of the Variance(s) Minor?
Planning Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance of 3.9 metres to permit the
addition of a deck and 4.8 metres to permit the addition of a sunroom are minor as the
abutting neighbour at 245 Huck Cres received approval for a variance for a reduced rear
yard setback of 4.4 metres rather than the required 7.5 metres to permit the addition of a
sunroom, and the requested variance of 3.9 metres to permit the addition of a deck will be
very close to the required 4 metre setback and not discernible.
Is/Are the Variance(s) Desirable For The Appropriate Development or Use of the Land,
Building and/or Structure?
The variances are desirable and appropriate for the use of the land as they will facilitate
the construction of useable amenity space for the residents of the dwelling. In addition,
due to the grade of the rear yard, the green amenity space is difficult to fully utilize, so the
Page 77 of 246
variances will facilitate the construction of the proposed addition and deck which will allow
a greater use of the amenity space of the property.
Environmental Planning Comments:
The subject property is adjacent to a Locally Significant Valleyland (LSV). Environmental
Planning Staff are not in favour of reduced setbacks to the lands zoned `Natural
Conservation Zone (NHC-1)'. Erosion and Sedimentation Control (ESC) measures should
be provided in accordance with the building permit to protect the LSV to the rear.
Heritage Planning Comments:
No concerns.
Building Division Comments:
The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variances provided a building permit
for the proposed sunroom and deck is obtained prior to construction. Please contact the
Building Division at building(a-)kitchener.ca with any questions.
Engineering Division Comments:
Engineering has no concerns.
Parks and Cemeteries/Forestry Division Comments:
No concerns, no requirements.
Transportation Planning Comments:
Transportation Services have no concerns with this application.
Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) Comments:
GRCA has no objections to the approval of the application. The subject property does not
contain any natural hazards such as watercourses, floodplains, shorelines, wetlands, or
valley slopes. The property is not subject to Ontario Regulation 41/24 and, therefore, a
permission from GRCA is not required.
Region of Waterloo Comments:
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.
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
Page 78 of 246
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 Planning Statement (PPS 2024)
• Regional Official Plan
• Official Plan (2014)
• Zoning By-law 2019-051
Page 79 of 246
May 6, 2025
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 May 20, City of Kitchener
Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and
have the following comments:
1) A 2025 —
043
— 82 Brunswick Avenue — No Concerns
2) A 2025 —
044
— 84 Brunswick Avenue — No Concerns
3) A 2025 —
045
— 191 Morgan Avenue — No Concerns
4) A 2025 —
046
— 241 Huck Cresent — No Concerns
5) A 2025 —
047
— 14 Jansen Avenue — No Concerns
6) A 2025 —
048
— 24 Amherst Drive — No Concerns
7) A 2025 —
049
— 42 Orchard Mill Cresent — No Concerns
8) A 2025 —
050
— 244 Samuel Street — No Concerns
9) A 2025 —
051
— 503 Victoria Street North — No Concerns
10)A 2025 —
052
— 573 Guelph Street — No Concerns
11)A 2025 —
053
— 575 Guelph Street — No Concerns
12)A 2025 —
054
— 864 King Street West — 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.
Document Number: 4976854
Page 80 of 246
Please forward any decisions on the above-mentioned Application numbers to the
undersigned.
Yours Truly,
Joshua Beech Falshaw
Transportation Planner
jbeechfalshaw@regionofwaterloo.ca
Document Number: 4976854
Page 81 of 246
May 5, 2025
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 — May 20, 2025
Applications for Minor Variance
A 2025-021
2880 King Street East
A 2025-043
82 Brunswick Avenue
A 2025-044
84 Brunswick Avenue
A 2025-045
191 Morgan Avenue
A 2025-046
241 Huck Crescent
A 2025-047
14 Jansen Avenue
A 2025-048
24 Amherst Drive
Applications for Consent
B 2025-016 1950 Fischer Hallman Road
B 2025-017 864 King Street West
via email
A 2025-049
42 Orchard Mill Crescent
A 2025-050
244 Samuel Street
A 2025-051
503 Victoria Street North
A 2025-052
573 Guelph Street
A 2025-053
575 Guelph Street
A 2025-054
864 King Street West
Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff have 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 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 82 of 246
Staff Report
r
JR
Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment
DATE OF MEETING: May 20, 2025
SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Manager, Development Approvals
519-783-8913
PREPARED BY: Eric Schneider, Senior Planner, 519-783-8918
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 2
DATE OF REPORT: May 8, 2025
REPORT NO.: DSD -2025-235
SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2025-047 —14 Jansen Avenue
RECOMMENDATION:
That Minor Variance Application A2025-047 for 14 Jansen Avenue requesting relief
from the following Sections of Zoning By-law 2019-051:
i) Section 11.3, Table 11-2, to permit an interior side yard setback of 3.2 metres
instead of the minimum required 7.5 metres; and
ii) Section 5.6 a), Table 5-5, to permit a parking requirement of 8 parking spaces
instead of the minimum required 16 parking spaces;
to facilitate a 2 -storey addition at the rear of the existing building to be able to
expand an existing daycare use, in accordance with Site Plan Application
SPF25/003/J, BE APPROVED.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
• The purpose of this report is to review a Minor Variance Application to facilitate the
construction of a 2 -storey addition to expand an existing daycare use.
• The key finding of this report is that the requested 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.
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Page 83 of 246
BACKGROUND:
The subject property is located on the west side of Jansen Avenue and is a "through lot",
with the rear yard having a street line on Florence Avenue.
Figure 1: Location Map
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)' with Site Specific
Provision (214) in Zoning By-law 2019-051. Site Specific Provision (214) permits the
daycare facility use in accordance with the `INS -1' regulations in Table 11-2 of Zoning By-
law 2019-051.
The purpose of the application is to facilitate the construction of a 2 -storey addition to
expand an existing daycare use. Site Plan Application SPF25/003/J has received
Conditional Approval.
Page 84 of 246
no
Y
CNILOB o
g
- i�
/ '4I le■
ENb r g V5Ti0C IME
HGCIfV TLwn hiw
311A9:N'MI _
417 in e 7n RWUGHI'RVNGRE
4, 4FmAin 04T,RC9 TNAKLE L AIHIG RKV Y
L]1 IINGYY�t'174ENL!'r
IE PFPLdLE13 ;11 [i A$$ABI[rCIF f%GTiNG �STf //F1
�NEG9]+.C•W ttif ai:f c,,.- IA G'{4'.. PR�FRTr LIRE '7dF SGi: Rlli Y1 SRC
:rf -f TP,FF1L. II 'CN[ NAY RiPFTI °r
iu M1i 1 —_;Z N0. iVv
o' sGFHALT ! - - f'' iGFHALT
k IX AGRHSLT CPoSE
:ANN: t t t t ' r PR',,6C — —
w y—aT _3j Is�uacgdx....
.. Ew - .K�IY -..7b LI➢N 'k1r.1�� � ����� 1a+a ARORGbIGA640ARN LItb1N5RiRd�Y W� i—'T/ —
1----- r: rr—
�1 l nnr EHIFL CARE MA k
lL �� }11 !!!!ii{ Sf3U8951 1{�R.9.14E :SNL 'Ivi
1 '� P 1 1 1 1 1{ 91=R]]mP Idn,1 i:11 illi PI1 Psi y w
♦111111 11111;♦ aiernNS hA'nlN3nIG 9Mx
t t t t t .ArUouNO rPIN OTC PWPERT`LVE
yr.:{-tom+ +R+�'+r -- NC.3
y ! rttt}t} }ti tii'+ i�}RI{M TiN 1 fi' 6.1
r { LLFC `� NT. FILE FOUTE l3
uSus.Ale �: uy tiK a �.. dLAT&UNIANPF,h
n ,
FMKMG'srdllTG EG 1 i • . $ l '
VTR4FP IJ.Wifr! GT1 ET PN4iING CRi
iTORACE AS PAST NS51717°I 957' N 1:1'11' =F0• Rh' UhE 6I551 W f{pRENCE CGEGNG
AGREEC TO WFIE ` — NE. 31' SAGE. GATE RRLAn VPRRa;:PLA
PEGGNid WA�P.C.P 1SN1 Nu'H FfxCf DOW{wJlpM6 MSkS5 TC 9r.
E417IIG'NC00FENCL
NORORGAIEAOF NOTI i[U A IKSCGP AAU`
6lNUERFM pIEL4151MUE
>GTEM ON EGACPFTF PRCNCEC IN THE APSEk1ENi
PIAIDAG aIGN MIri LOU. AAP�MG PAfiUNG STARES
FAL 11AFU ❑RRi pFCHAH [lu;lALN0A4 MOM
FLAWiPOLNO dAFA
"AFUNCIDWOPEG Fi 11111
FI'IH 1 ':PAID
Figure 4: Site Plan Drawing
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'.
Yard Setback to a Lot with a Low -Rise Residential Zone
General Intent of the Official Plan
The subject lands are designated "Low Rise Residential" in the City's Official Plan. There
is an existing daycare facility on the lands. The Official Plan contains policy 15.D.3.27
which speaks to non-residential supporting land uses within residential land use
designations. Day care facilities are included in this policy, which supports the
development of a walkable and complete community by locating complementary non-
residential uses within residential neighbourhoods. Staff are of the opinion that the
requested variances for the reduction in yard setback meets the general intent of the
Official Plan.
General Intent of the Zoning By-law
The intent of the regulation that requires institutional uses to be set back 7.5 metres from a
lot with a low-rise residential zone is to provide for adequate building separation between
institutional and residential uses. In this situation, the subject lands themselves are zoned
low-rise residential, and contain an existing building within the required 7.5 metre setback
area (3.7 metres). The request to align the addition generally with the existing building and
provide a yard setback of 3.2 metres will continue to provide for an adequate building
separation on the subject lands in the opinion of Planning Staff and will provide for an
opportunity for expansion within reason on the subject lands. Therefore, Staff is of the
opinion that the requested variance meets the general intent of the Zoning By-law.
Page 86 of 246
Is/Are the Effects of the Variance(s) Minor?
The location of the proposed building addition is expected generally align with the existing
building and is not expected to cause adverse impacts or effects to the adjacent lands.
Therefore, Staff are of the opinion that the effects of the requested variance are minor.
Is/Are the Variance(s) Desirable For The Appropriate Development or Use of the Land,
Building and/or Structure?
The lands are currently developed with an existing daycare facility. The proposed addition
has demonstrated functionality and appropriateness through the site plan application, and
Planning Staff is of the opinion that the requested variance for reduction in yard setback is
appropriate for the use of the lands.
Parking Reduction
General Intent of the Official Plan
The subject lands are designated `Low Rise Residential' in the City's Official Plan. The
intent of the Low Rise Residential land use designation is to accommodate a full range of
low density housing types, as well as complimentary non-residential uses. Section 13 of
the City's Official Plan contains policies for an Integrated Transportation System, including
encouraging both active transportation and public transit. The requested variance
identifies an opportunity to achieve the objectives and policies of the official plan by
promoting a healthy, walkable, community that makes a wide range of transportation
choices viable in Kitchener. Planning Staff are of the opinion that the requested variance
for a reduction in parking spaces meets the general intent of the Official Plan.
General Intent of the Zonina By-law
The intent of the regulation that requires a minimum of 16 parking spaces is to ensure that
there is adequate storage for motor vehicles on site. The majority of the parking need for
the use (day care facility) is for employees, as parents dropping off and picking up their
children are only stopping for 5-10 minutes at a time and can use the on -street parking
available on Jansen Avenue and Centreville Street.
To support and encourage active transportation, secure bicycle parking is provided (3
Class A spaces) in excess of the minimum required by the Zoning By-law (1 Class A
space), and outdoor visitor bike parking is provided (5 Class B Spaces) whereas none are
required by the Zoning By-law. Additionally, the applicant will provide one Shower and
Change Facility for employees biking to work, whereas none are required for this scale of
development in the Zoning By-law.
In regards to public transit, the subject lands are well served by GRT route 8 and Npress
206 which contains stops 100-300 metres away on Weber Street East/King Street East
and Fairway Road. Finally, the applicant will assign an employee as a "TDM Coordinator"
(Transportation Demand Management) who will be assigned to promote alternative modes
of transportation to employees, providing information packages to new employees about
transit options, and providing employees with subsidized transit passes. In the opinion of
Planning Staff, the 8 parking spaces that are proposed to be provided are adequate for the
use of the subject lands and therefore meets the general intent of the Zoning By-law.
Page 87 of 246
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 site would
provide a balance of options for parking, alternative transportation modes and would not
cause adverse impacts. On -street parking is limited to a duration of 3 hours and would not be
a viable option for employees. The applicant is providing Transportation Demand
Management measures to encourage alternative transportation modes and manage parking
demand on site.
Is/Are the Variance(s) Desirable For The Appropriate Development or Use of the Land,
Building and/or Structure?
The lands are well connected to bus transit and active transportation routes. On site TDM
measures are incorporated into the development proposal. Accordingly, the requested
variance for reduction in vehicle parking is desirable and appropriate for the development
of the lands to facilitate the construction of an addition to the existing building.
Environmental Planning Comments:
Tree Management will be addressed through Site Plan Application SPF25/003/J.
Heritage Planning Comments:
No Heritage comments or concerns.
Building Division Comments:
The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variances provided a building permit
for the addition to the day care is obtained prior to construction. Please contact the Building
Division at building(a-)kitchener.ca with any questions.
Engineering Division Comments:
Engineering has no concerns.
Parks and Cemeteries/Forestry Division Comments:
No concerns, no requirements.
Transportation Planning Comments:
As part of the Site Plan Approval process in March 2025, parking justification was
submitted by the applicant development consultant. Based on their justification, it appears
that the parking supply should be adequate for this use.
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 88 of 246
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 Planning Statement (PPS 2024)
• Regional Official Plan
• Official Plan (2014)
• Zoning By-law 2019-051
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A — Site Plan Drawing
Page 89 of 246
- �LOR�NC�
N -
�
NEW DRIVEWAY
w 0 i0 s�oE aLK s, Z a+�ae " �oti��E soEw
D 0 �oR �0
4
1 -165 "ES PROPERTI LINE ,5.24p M (/� All 11 PREP RTI ,TIN 15.240 M
O 0 — m
z p w.
� D
Z IT1 m m 5 M BUILDING - - x Z 7,5 M BUIL LIG ACK LINE
�- _ SETBACK LINE
3.0 - -
_V Z 7.5 0_
5.9 11, 7,3 _
m
tQ
_- -
I II Pi - I I c
<ti mmr.� 2tEm
ro of =
OIIm
Z° z
z�
■
m
S' o Y II>
3 _
- t
GET
=F
i2 FnEE _ ,.5 u a 3.2
10
m �� yp
BE
' S. I I
n�
�{ wo
a°
°�
m{ I
aN
�. 'Y I I
n� Hca 6J75 tg7
e ^ S 3.62 3.7
3.7
o
cn
� w Q
aw — m
m Y
—o m5w
'ae m�
a
—
w i w
5. 2 y m 5 2
2. 6L 2. 6� _
z� 6 M BU ING
r SETBHC LINE 5.38
6 M BU LDING c�5-36
C
B, p� SETBAp u E -
61
o
> 15.240 M
N34'S2'10"c�PROPERTY INEz N34 52 PROPERTv INE 15.240 M
1 =I
- O
m A
JA 4SEN jANSEN
om
m� c
a
Dz m z�
z
- N
n�
U nZ
1.
c
-
o��
MO. WON
e
Ni s1 �31,N�0
m
za
°Fnrz
�m
Yva�~��
oq
�
DAYCARE EXPANSION
n �
—
14 JANSEN AVENUE KITCHENER, UNTARIU
v
3
2
O
m
r m
� o
—
m o
T
T
—
3
3
O
1.
-
o��
MO. WON
e
Ni s1 �31,N�0
m
za
°Fnrz
wsr
oq
�
DAYCARE EXPANSION
n �
—
14 JANSEN AVENUE KITCHENER, UNTARIU
May 6, 2025
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 May 20, City of Kitchener
Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and
have the following comments:
1) A 2025 —
043
— 82 Brunswick Avenue — No Concerns
2) A 2025 —
044
— 84 Brunswick Avenue — No Concerns
3) A 2025 —
045
— 191 Morgan Avenue — No Concerns
4) A 2025 —
046
— 241 Huck Cresent — No Concerns
5) A 2025 —
047
— 14 Jansen Avenue — No Concerns
6) A 2025 —
048
— 24 Amherst Drive — No Concerns
7) A 2025 —
049
— 42 Orchard Mill Cresent — No Concerns
8) A 2025 —
050
— 244 Samuel Street — No Concerns
9) A 2025 —
051
— 503 Victoria Street North — No Concerns
10)A 2025 —
052
— 573 Guelph Street — No Concerns
11)A 2025 —
053
— 575 Guelph Street — No Concerns
12)A 2025 —
054
— 864 King Street West — 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.
Document Number: 4976854
Page 91 of 246
Please forward any decisions on the above-mentioned Application numbers to the
undersigned.
Yours Truly,
Joshua Beech Falshaw
Transportation Planner
jbeechfalshaw@regionofwaterloo.ca
Document Number: 4976854
Page 92 of 246
May 5, 2025
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 — May 20, 2025
Applications for Minor Variance
A 2025-021
2880 King Street East
A 2025-043
82 Brunswick Avenue
A 2025-044
84 Brunswick Avenue
A 2025-045
191 Morgan Avenue
A 2025-046
241 Huck Crescent
A 2025-047
14 Jansen Avenue
A 2025-048
24 Amherst Drive
Applications for Consent
B 2025-016 1950 Fischer Hallman Road
B 2025-017 864 King Street West
via email
A 2025-049
42 Orchard Mill Crescent
A 2025-050
244 Samuel Street
A 2025-051
503 Victoria Street North
A 2025-052
573 Guelph Street
A 2025-053
575 Guelph Street
A 2025-054
864 King Street West
Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff have 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 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 93 of 246
Staff Report
r
JR
Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment
DATE OF MEETING: May 20, 2025
SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Manager, Development Approvals
519-783-8913
PREPARED BY: Tim Seyler, Senior Planner, 519-783-8920
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 4
DATE OF REPORT: May 7, 2025
REPORT NO.: DSD -2025-226
SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2025-048 - 24 Amherst Drive
RECOMMENDATION:
That Minor Variance Application A2025-048 for 24 Amherst Drive requesting relief
from the following Sections of Zoning By-law 2019-051:
i) Section 5.4 f) and Table 5-2 to permit a driveway width of 8.3 metres instead of
the maximum permitted driveway width of 8 metres; and
ii) Section 7.3, Table 7-2, to permit an interior side yard setback of 0 metres
instead of the minimum required 1.2 metres;
to recognize an existing driveway and facilitate the conversion of the existing
garage into an entry area for an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Attached), generally
in accordance with drawings submitted as part of Minor Variance Application
A2025-048, BE APPROVED.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
• The purpose of this report is to review a minor variance application to permit a
driveway to be 8.3 metres in width and 0 metres from the side lot line.
• 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 corner of Amherst Drive and Drummond Drive in the
Doon South neighbourhood.
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Page 94 of 246
5
Figure 1 — Location of subject property – 24 Amherst 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 Four Zone (RES -4)' in Zoning By-law 2019-
051.
The purpose of the application is to legalize an existing driveway to be 8.3 metres in width
rather than the maximum permitted 8.0 metres, and to permit a driveway to be setback 0
metres from the side lot line instead of the required 1.2 metres. The owner is proposing to
add an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU)(Attached) to the existing Single Detached Dwelling
and is in the process of obtaining a Building Permit.
It should be noted that the Committee of Adjustment previously approved both of the
required driveway variances in 2013, in order to convert the existing Single Detached
Dwelling to a Duplex Dwelling. The driveway was constructed at the time of the Minor
Variance Approval-, however, the owner/applicant did not clear the required conditions of
the Minor Variance Approval, a Building Permit was never issued and the Single Detached
Dwelling was never converted to a Duplex Dwelling. The minor variance then lapsed and
was never fully in force and effect. The applicant is now applying to add an Additional
Dwelling Unit (ADU)(Attached) within the Single Detached Dwelling and this now requires
the minor variances for the existing driveway conditions.
The existing garage will be converted to an entrance for the Additional Dwelling Unit
(ADU) and will have a principal entrance off of the front portion of the building. A 1.1 metre
unobstructed walkway is not required where the principal entrance to the dwelling unit is
located on the street line fagade. Figure 2 does indicate a proposed walkway-, however, it
Page 95 of 246
is not a requirement for the development should the owner/applicant choose not to move
forward with the walkway.
• �i.er'�'w IM; e�i1
r a
n - 7
a
w � �
n p
24 Amherst Drive
Lot 104, Plan 578
t
— b x
9.4m
roura+*[or a Cr
ee wpyeel I Bnn �.
CC
O
�^+ tort /OVMW nv.
a
O
} �I
L
Gm
IrIOM'C Y foe f
Q w0 a p 4
I `tpz N
DRIVE
fA'ORMERL1p S Y
MO
Drlve.. MW 6
—
Figure 2 — Site Plan showing existing driveway location with parking
Figure 3 — Floor Plan showing proposed new entrance and garage conversion.
Page 96 of 246
Figure 4 — View of 24 Amherst Drive from the street.
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 encourage a range of different housing to achieve a low rise
built form in the neighbourhood.
Specifically, Section 13.C.8.4 of the Official Plan states:
"All parking area or facilities will be designed, constructed and maintained:
f) to result in aesthetically acceptable parking areas which blend into the general
environment of the area."
Planning staff are of the opinion that the existing widened driveway currently blends into
the streetscape and surrounding environment. The appearance of the driveway does not
have any adverse impacts. Therefore, the requested variances meet the general intent of
the Official Plan.
General Intent of the Zoning By-law
Section 7.3, Table 7-2 of Zoning By-law 2019-051, states that a driveway shall be no
closer to the side lot line than the required side yard setback. This ensures that vehicles
and their access do not encroach upon adjacent properties. Staff note that the exiting
Page 97 of 246
driveway does not encroach onto the neighbouring property, and is separated with a small
retaining wall, this section of the driveway does not present any encroachment issues.
Section 5.4, Table 5-2, further states that the maximum width of a driveway with an
attached private garage is the width of the garage or 50% of the lot width. As well, Section
5.4 f) states that no driveway shall exceed 8 metres in width. The existing widened
driveway was approved by the Committee of Adjustment in 2013 and is in line with what
was approved at that time. No further widening has been requested to the existing
d riveway.
Therefore, the proposed variances maintain the general intent of the Zoning By -Law.
Is/Are the Effects of the Variance(s) Minor?
The proposed variances will allow an existing driveway, that was established in 2013, to
remain. The proposed variance will legalize an existing situation that has received no
complaints while in existence for over the past 10 years. Staff do not anticipate any
changes to the appearance and function of the existing driveway. Staff do not anticipate
any significant or adverse impacts as a result of the minor variance. Therefore, the effects
of the proposed variances are minor in nature.
Is/Are the Variance(s) Desirable For The Appropriate Development or Use of the Land,
Building and/or Structure?
The proposed variances are desirable and appropriate for the use of the land because
they will recognize an existing driveway that was approved previously in 2013 and
facilitate a gentle intensification with the development of an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU)
(Attached).
Environmental Planning Comments:
No environmental concerns, as no new development/construction is proposed.
Heritage Planning Comments:
No heritage planning concerns.
Building Division Comments:
The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance provided a building permit
for the new attached ADU is obtained prior to construction. Please contact the Building
Division at buildinq(a-)kitchener.ca with any questions.
Engineering Division Comments:
Engineering has no concerns.
Parks and Cemeteries/Forestry Division Comments:
No concerns, no requirements.
Transportation Planning Comments:
Transportation Services have no concerns with this application. For future reference, the
parking space dimensioning should be noted in the plan.
Page 98 of 246
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 Planning Statement (PPS 2024)
• Regional Official Plan
• Official Plan (2014)
• Zoning By-law 2019-051
• Minor Variance Application A2013-020
Page 99 of 246
May 6, 2025
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 May 20, City of Kitchener
Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and
have the following comments:
1) A 2025 —
043
— 82 Brunswick Avenue — No Concerns
2) A 2025 —
044
— 84 Brunswick Avenue — No Concerns
3) A 2025 —
045
— 191 Morgan Avenue — No Concerns
4) A 2025 —
046
— 241 Huck Cresent — No Concerns
5) A 2025 —
047
— 14 Jansen Avenue — No Concerns
6) A 2025 —
048
— 24 Amherst Drive — No Concerns
7) A 2025 —
049
— 42 Orchard Mill Cresent — No Concerns
8) A 2025 —
050
— 244 Samuel Street — No Concerns
9) A 2025 —
051
— 503 Victoria Street North — No Concerns
10)A 2025 —
052
— 573 Guelph Street — No Concerns
11)A 2025 —
053
— 575 Guelph Street — No Concerns
12)A 2025 —
054
— 864 King Street West — 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.
Document Number: 4976854
Page 100 of 246
Please forward any decisions on the above-mentioned Application numbers to the
undersigned.
Yours Truly,
Joshua Beech Falshaw
Transportation Planner
jbeechfalshaw@regionofwaterloo.ca
Document Number: 4976854
Page 101 of 246
May 5, 2025
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 — May 20, 2025
Applications for Minor Variance
A 2025-021
2880 King Street East
A 2025-043
82 Brunswick Avenue
A 2025-044
84 Brunswick Avenue
A 2025-045
191 Morgan Avenue
A 2025-046
241 Huck Crescent
A 2025-047
14 Jansen Avenue
A 2025-048
24 Amherst Drive
Applications for Consent
B 2025-016 1950 Fischer Hallman Road
B 2025-017 864 King Street West
via email
A 2025-049
42 Orchard Mill Crescent
A 2025-050
244 Samuel Street
A 2025-051
503 Victoria Street North
A 2025-052
573 Guelph Street
A 2025-053
575 Guelph Street
A 2025-054
864 King Street West
Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff have 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 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 102 of 246
Frons:
To: Committee of Adiustment (SM)
Subject: Application A 2025-048 conceminq 24 Amherst Drive
Date: Tuesday, May 13, 2025 5:30:02 PM
You don't often get email from . Learn why this isim op rtant
Dear Committee Members,
I am writing to express my opposition to Minor Variance Application A 2025-048 concerning 24 Amherst
Drive. The application proposes:
• An increased driveway width of 8.3 meters (exceeding the 8 -meter bylaw limit); and
• A 0 -meter southerly side yard setback (where 1.2 meters is required), to legalize an existing driveway
and convert the garage into an entryway for an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU).
I believe these variances will negatively affect the neighborhood for the following reasons.-
The
easons:The requested changes would not only increase the property's capacity but also eliminate important
setbacks that contribute to character, privacy and neighborhood safety.
Ongoing Disruptive Behavior:
This is a rental property with no on-site owner. Due to this fact, its current use has resulted in repeated
disturbances and crime.
(Individuals/guests/residents —urinating, defecating, and vomiting on the neighboring property - and
exposing themselves beside parked vehicles in front of the neighboring property, and dangerous driving,
stunt driving, drinking and driving, walking on the Drive with opened alcohol from this home to the
neighboring property, their guests of this property drink open alcohol and walk to the neighboring
property), unattended fire -pit, littering which includes glass alcohol bottles and cans and noise.}
These behaviors have been reported to police and are ongoing.
The Bylaw Enforcement is praised for their efforts: however., their patrols are infrequent.
This is unacceptable and deeply disrespectful to the neighboring property and nearby homeowners.
Over -intensification:
Approving these changes would increase occupancy and traffic, leading to further disruption, noise, litter,
and safety issues. An increased driveway invites more vehicles, which in tum increases potential
problematic behavior and crime.
Allowing increased driveway width and eliminating the side yard setback may contribute to
overdevelopment of the lot, potentially changing the character of the neighborhood and setting a
precedent for future applications.
Emergency and Road Access Risks:
There is a fire hydrant directly beside the driveway. Increasing public vehicle access near it may impede
emergency services. Additionally, illegal street parking in front of this home already blocks road access.
especially in winter. affecting snow removal and local traffic.
Pedestrian and 5treetscaM Impact:
There are no sidewalks on Amherst Drive. More vehicles increase risk to pedestrians, dogwalkers and
familes with strollers and children. Amherst drive is a pedestrian route to the Grand River through
adjacent Drives pathway. Permitting more vehicles to access an area generally increases the
Widening or increasing driveways also reduces green space and alters the residential character of the
Page 103 of 246
street.
Drainage and Property Maintenance:
A 0 -meter setback eliminates buffer space needed for proper drainage and property maintenance access,
garbage collection access, potentially affecting neighboring properties.
Allowing an oversized driveway and a zero lot line would set a troubling precedent, eroding community
standards and diminishing quality of life for surrounding residents.
For these reasons, I respectfully urge the Committee to deny this application. Thank you for your time and
consideration.
Sincerely,
Silvana DiMaria
Please confirm this email was received.
Please see attached pictures directly related to the dangers of increasing vehicles and parking safety
concerns along Amherst Drive and the adjacent Drive
Page 104 of 246
Shoring You THIS PICTURE OFAMERST
,gyp: DRIVE SKID MARKINGS FROM DRAG RACING
-,;77TH eL Yi T ii ■T
i,F•e ,— 7—W,
. 'rF
e 106 of 246.
• 5
STUNT DRIVING
AND DANGEROUS
DRIVING ON
MHER TDRI1
Rhese incidents
were reported, to
the Police) HOW IS
THIS SAFE FOR.,,...
STUNT DRIVING SKIDDING ON
±IHER STAH0THEVEHICLE WENT
IOVE9-TRE--CURB AN B SMAShEB THE
5
e
STOP SIGN BNVRUMMIONBDRIVE
t
t1%
L
11
41
EA
5
Staff Report
r
JR
Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment
DATE OF MEETING: May 20, 2025
SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Manager, Development Approvals
519-783-8913
PREPARED BY: Tim Seyler, Senior Planner, 519-783-8920
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 4
DATE OF REPORT: May 7, 2025
REPORT NO.: DSD -2025-227
SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2025-049 - 42 Orchard Mill Cres.
RECOMMENDATION:
That Minor Variance Application A2025-049 for 42 Orchard Mill Crescent requesting
relief from Section 7.3, Table 7-2, of Zoning By-law 2019-05 to permit an interior side
yard setback for a driveway of 0 metres instead of the minimum required 1.2 metres
to recognize an existing driveway and facilitate the conversion of the existing
garage into an entry area for an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Attached), generally
in accordance with drawings submitted as part of Minor Variance Application
A2025-049, BE APPROVED.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
• The purpose of this report is to review a minor variance to permit a driveway to be 0
metres from the side lot line.
• 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 Orchard Mill Cres, near the intersection of Orchard Mill
Cres and Doon Valley Drive.
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Page 111 of 246
"A
ORCAIM M11M_ _ CRSS .
l�
Figure 1 — Location of subject property – 42 Orchard Mill Crescent
i
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 the application is to legalize an existing driveway and permit a driveway
setback of 0 metres from the side lot line instead of the required 1.2 metres. The driveway
has been in existence since before 2009 with no concerns or complaints from the
neighbours.
The owner is proposing to add an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Attached) to the existing
Single Detached Dwelling and is in the process of obtaining a Building Permit. The existing
attached garage will be converted to an entrance for the Additional Dwelling Unit and will
have a principal entrance off of the front portion of the building. A 1.1 metre unobstructed
walkway is not required where the principal entrance to the dwelling unit is located on the
street line fagade. Figure 2 does indicate a proposed walkway; however, it is not a
requirement for the development should the owner/applicant choose not to move forward
with the walkway.
Page 112 of 246
ee ^ se '
ra • od --
i uo u
d
Lor 23,►��
Z2
7 3rrt
i
4/ 7fi ' d 42 gild Mill Cms
ne
+ ., Lot 23, Plan 1472
,y F-- -• h iMHld. prrknp+n paa+vay
y im a-GLW/YwaPr ina cia aifNrrrl(ifa
^ rax tow F °"' AM
Z
17.Y5rn
r.a r+r f
■f7' a
m* Yom =amok 01 orm
'a4iw9W for dMewtf
'pelh W kway �
yA , 4
n
iei!
MMMLIW(adati
ORCHARD MIL L CRE -S.
Figure 2 — Site Plan showing existing driveway location with parking
Figure 3 — Floor Plan showing proposed new entrance and garage conversion.
Page 113 of 246
Figure 4 — View of 42 Orchard Mill Cres from the street.
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 encourage a range of different housing to achieve a low rise
built form in the neighbourhood.
Specifically, Section 13.C.8.4 of the Official Plan states:
"All parking area or facilities will be designed, constructed and maintained:
f) to result in aesthetically acceptable parking areas which blend into the general
environment of the area."
Planning staff are of the opinion that the existing driveway currently blends into the
streetscape and surrounding environment. The appearance of the driveway does not have
any adverse impacts. Therefore, the requested variance meets the general intent of the
Official Plan.
Page 114 of 246
General Intent of the Zoning By-law
Section 7.3, Table 7-2 of Zoning By-law 2019-051 states that a driveway shall be no closer
to the side lot line than the required side yard setback. This ensures that vehicles and their
access do not encroach upon adjacent properties. Staff note that the exiting driveway
does not encroach onto the neighbouring property, this section of the driveway does not
present any encroachment issues.
Therefore, the proposed variance maintains the general intent of the Zoning By -Law.
Is/Are the Effects of the Variance(s) Minor?
The proposed variance will allow an existing driveway, that was established in 2009, to
remain. The proposed variance will legalize an existing situation that has received no
complaints while in existence for over the past 15 years. Staff do not anticipate any
changes to the appearance and function of the existing driveway. Staff do not anticipate
any significant or adverse impacts as a result of the minor variance. Therefore, the effects
of the proposed variance is minor in nature.
Is/Are the Variance(s) Desirable For The Appropriate Development or Use of the Land,
Building and/or Structure?
The proposed variance is desirable and appropriate for the use of the land because it will
recognize a driveway that has existed since 2009 without a history of complaint and
facilitate a gentle intensification with the development of an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU)
(Attached).
Environmental Planning Comments:
No environmental concerns, as no new development/construction is proposed.
Heritage Planning Comments:
No heritage planning concerns.
Building Division Comments:
The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance. A Building Permit
Application has been made for the change of use to a Duplex.
Engineering Division Comments:
Engineering has no concerns.
Parks and Cemeteries/Forestry Division Comments:
No concerns, no requirements.
Transportation Planning Comments:
Transportation Services have no concerns with this application. For future reference, the
parking space dimensioning should be noted in the plan.
STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT:
This report supports the delivery of core services.
Page 115 of 246
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 Planning Statement (PPS 2024)
• Regional Official Plan
• Official Plan (2014)
• Zoning By-law 2019-051
Page 116 of 246
May 6, 2025
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 May 20, City of Kitchener
Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and
have the following comments:
1) A 2025 —
043
— 82 Brunswick Avenue — No Concerns
2) A 2025 —
044
— 84 Brunswick Avenue — No Concerns
3) A 2025 —
045
— 191 Morgan Avenue — No Concerns
4) A 2025 —
046
— 241 Huck Cresent — No Concerns
5) A 2025 —
047
— 14 Jansen Avenue — No Concerns
6) A 2025 —
048
— 24 Amherst Drive — No Concerns
7) A 2025 —
049
— 42 Orchard Mill Cresent — No Concerns
8) A 2025 —
050
— 244 Samuel Street — No Concerns
9) A 2025 —
051
— 503 Victoria Street North — No Concerns
10)A 2025 —
052
— 573 Guelph Street — No Concerns
11)A 2025 —
053
— 575 Guelph Street — No Concerns
12)A 2025 —
054
— 864 King Street West — 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.
Document Number: 4976854
Page 117 of 246
Please forward any decisions on the above-mentioned Application numbers to the
undersigned.
Yours Truly,
Joshua Beech Falshaw
Transportation Planner
jbeechfalshaw@regionofwaterloo.ca
Document Number: 4976854
Page 118 of 246
May 5, 2025
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 — May 20, 2025
Applications for Minor Variance
A 2025-021
2880 King Street East
A 2025-043
82 Brunswick Avenue
A 2025-044
84 Brunswick Avenue
A 2025-045
191 Morgan Avenue
A 2025-046
241 Huck Crescent
A 2025-047
14 Jansen Avenue
A 2025-048
24 Amherst Drive
Applications for Consent
B 2025-016 1950 Fischer Hallman Road
B 2025-017 864 King Street West
via email
A 2025-049
42 Orchard Mill Crescent
A 2025-050
244 Samuel Street
A 2025-051
503 Victoria Street North
A 2025-052
573 Guelph Street
A 2025-053
575 Guelph Street
A 2025-054
864 King Street West
Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff have 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 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 119 of 246
Staff Report
r
JR
Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment
DATE OF MEETING: May 20, 2025
SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Manager, Development Approvals
519-783-8913
PREPARED BY: Andrew Pinnell, Senior Planner, 519-783-8915
WARD INVOLVED: Ward 10
DATE OF REPORT: May 7, 2025
REPORT NO.: DSD -2025-223
SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2025-050 - 244 Samuel Street
RECOMMENDATION:
That Minor Variance Application A2025-050 for 244 Samuel Street requesting relief
from Section 5.4, Table 5-3 of Zoning By-law 2019-051, related to a Single Detached
Dwelling, within lands identified on Appendix C — Central Neighbourhoods, to
permit:
i) a driveway with a width of 8 metres (68% of the lot width), whereas only a
driveway with a maximum width of 4.7 metres (40% of the lot width) is
permitted; and
ii) a driveway to be located 0.5 metres from the rear lot line, whereas the driveway
shall not be located closer to this lot line than the required side yard setback of
the dwelling which is 1.2 metres;
for the purposes of facilitating an enlargement of the existing driveway, while
maintaining a minimum 1.8 metre high wood fence along that portion of the rear lot
line (shared with 100 Stirling Avenue North) from which the proposed driveway is
set back 0.5 metres, generally in accordance with drawing attached to Report DSD -
2025 -223, BE APPROVED.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
The purpose of this report is to recommend approval of variances for relief from
driveway width and setback regulations related to a Single Detached Dwelling within
lands identified on Appendix C — Central Neighbourhoods.
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
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Page 120 of 246
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.
Figure 1 — Subject Property (outlined in —1r) in context of surrounding
neighbourhood
BACKGROUND:
The subject property is located at the southeast corner of Samuel Street and Stirling
Avenue North, in the Auditorium Planning Community. The property contains a single
detached dwelling, constructed in approximately 1925, with an attached garage that was
added sometime later. An existing single car driveway leads directly from the garage to
Stirling Avenue North. A wood board fence with an approximate maximum height of 1.8
metres and stepping down towards Stirling Avenue North, is located along the rear lot line
(shared with 100 Stirling Avenue North).
The lands immediately surrounding the subject property are comprised almost entirely of
low rise residential uses (mainly detached dwellings). Sheppard Public School is located to
the southeast, and Knollwood Park and the Kitchener Memorial Auditorium Complex are
located to the west.
The subject property is identified as `Community Areas' on Map 2 — Urban Structure of the
2014 Official Plan and is designated as `Low Rise Residential' on Map 3 — Land Use.
The property is zoned `Low Rise Residential Four Zone' (RES -4) under By-law 2019-051.
The property is not located within a Protected Major Transit Station Area but is located
only 760 metres from the Kitchener Market ION Station Stop.
Development and Housing Approvals staff visited the site on May 6, 2025.
Page 121 of 246
Figure 2 — Photo of Subject Property, taken from Stirling Avenue North. The existing
driveway is shown at centre. The existing wood board fence is also shown along the
rear lot line (shared with 100 Stirling Ave N).
The purpose of the subject application is to request relief from Section 5.4, Table 5-3 of
Zoning By-law 2019-051, related to a Single Detached Dwelling, within lands identified on
Appendix C — Central Neighbourhoods, to permit:
i) a driveway with a width of 8.0 metres (68% of the lot width), whereas a maximum
width of 4.7 metres (40% of the lot width) is required; and
ii) a driveway to be located 0.5 metres from the rear lot line, whereas the driveway
shall not be located closer to this lot line than the required side yard setback of the
dwelling (1.2 metres);
for the purposes of facilitating an enlargement of the existing driveway.
It should be noted that for the purposes of the Variances:
The subject property is a corner lot, and lot width is based on the front lot line,
which, in this case, is the shorter lot line abutting a street (i.e., Samuel Street), even
though the driveway does not technically cross this lot line. Instead, the driveway
crosses the longer lot line abutting Stirling Avenue North (i.e., exterior side lot line).
The zoning definition of Front Lot Line states, "... in the case of a corner lot, the
shorter lot line abutting a street, not including the lot line forming part of a corner
Page 122 of 246
visibility triangle, shall be the front lot line..." In this regard, the maximum driveway
width is based on the front lot line (abutting Samuel Street), despite the fact that the
driveway can only be accessed across the exterior side lot line (abutting Stirling
Avene North).
Also, the driveway is not a full 8 metres wide for the entire length. Rather, it is 8
metres wide only at the front fagade of the garage, tapering to 5.2 metres wide at
the property line (and only 3.5 metres wide at the travelled portion of Stirling
Avenue North), and reduced to 4.8 metres wide beside the attached garage.
2. It should also be noted that the regulation requires a driveway setback to the rear
lot line (i.e., that lot line farthest from and opposite to the front lot line abutting
Samuel Street), not the side lot line, even though the regulation states that the
driveway, "...shall be located no closer than the required side yard setback of the
dwelling..." In this case, technically, it is the required side yard setback of 1.2
metres that must be applied to the driveway setback from the rear lot line. This is
because the regulation is primarily intended to be applied to interior lots where the
driveway crosses the front lot line, rather than be applied to a corner lot (such as
this case) where the driveway crosses the exterior side lot line.
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 2014 Official Plan contains a few policies that are relevant to the subject application,
for example:
11.C.1.28. Neighbourhoods in the City can be characterized as either suburban
or central neighbourhoods. The Urban Design Manual provides
design direction with respect to character, built form and amenities in
both typologies of neighbourhoods. a) In the Central Neighbourhoods
the City's primary focus will be to ensure that new infill development is
compatible with the existing neighbourhood.
13.C.8.4. All parking areas or facilities will be designed, constructed and
maintained:... f) to result in aesthetically acceptable parking areas
which blend into the general environment of the area.
The subject property is within the Central Neighbourhoods. Although infill development is
not proposed, Development and Housing Approvals (DHA) staff is of the opinion that the
proposed driveway width and setback are, nonetheless, compatible with the existing
neighbourhood, noting that the driveway width is proportionally acceptable, since the
driveway is accessed across the (longer) exterior side lot line (Stirling Avenue North),
rather than from the shorter front lot line (Samuel Street).
Page 123 of 246
Also, the driveway would be tapered (narrowed) from 8 metres wide at the front fagade of
the garage to only 5.2 metres wide at the property line. This would allow for a portion of
the boulevard landscaping to be retained and would separate the subject driveway from
the driveway of the abutting property (100 Stirling Avenue North). Staff is satisfied that the
resultant driveway would be aesthetically acceptable and would blend into the general
area, noting that driveway widths within the surrounding neighbourhood are quite varied in
terms of width and other characteristics.
The Official Plan also provides several policies that state the City encourages and
supports the adaption of the existing housing stock through renovation and seeks to
support and attempt to accommodate residents who wish to adapt their housing to better
suite their circumstances and needs that may change over time. The variances would
facilitate a driveway expansion that would accommodate a second, larger vehicle,
whereas the applicant states the current driveway in front of the garage can only
accommodate one small vehicle. The proposal would facilitate the implementation of these
policies:
4.C.1.10. Where appropriate, and without limiting opportunities for
intensification, the City will encourage and support the ongoing
maintenance and stability of existing housing stock in the city by: a)
supporting the reuse and adaption of the housing stock through
renovation, conversion and rehabilitation;
4.C.1.20. The City will support and attempt to accommodate residents who may
wish to adapt their housing to better suit their circumstances and
needs that may change over time, provided these changes to the
housing do not significantly impact the nature or community character
of the surrounding residential area.
Staff is satisfied that the requested variances meet the general intent of the Official Plan.
General Intent of the Zoning By-law
The intent of the driveway width and setback regulations is to ensure that compatibility of
character is achieved, within the Central Neighbourhoods.
The driveway width variance is required because the subject property is a corner lot. If the
lot width could be based on the Stirling Avenue North frontage, a driveway width variance
would not be required. It should be noted that the proposal complies with Section 5.4 f),
which states, "f) Despite any provision in Table 5-2 and Table 5-3 a driveway associated
with a single detached dwelling... may not exceed 8.0 metres in width..."
The driveway setback variance for a minimum 0.5 metre driveway setback is proposed at
the parking space and the setback would increase as the driveway approaches Stirling
Avenue North (as the driveway tapers, away from the abutting rear property line (shared
with 100 Stirling Avenue North).
In this regard, DHA staff is satisfied that the requested variances meet the general intent
of the Zoning By-law.
Page 124 of 246
Are the Effects of the Variance Minor?
DHA staff is of the opinion that the requested variances are minor, since they are not
anticipated to cause unacceptably adverse impacts on adjacent properties. The majority of
the driveway on the subject property will be 4.8 metres in width, only 0.1 metres greater
than the permitted width, the 8 metre width will only occur at the fagade of the attached
garage and the driveway will be located on the longer lot line which is 22 metres in length.
The proposed driveway expansion is not anticipated to significantly impact the nature or
community character of the surrounding residential area. It should be noted that
Transportation Services has "no concerns with this application."
Are the Variances Desirable For The Appropriate Development or Use of the Land, Building
and/or Structure?
DHA staff is of the opinion that the requested variances are desirable and appropriate for
the subject property. The requested variances would facilitate a driveway expansion that
would accommodate a second, larger vehicle, whereas the applicant states the current
driveway in front of the garage can only accommodate one small vehicle.
Environmental Planning Comments:
No comments received.
Heritage Planning Comments:
The property is located within the Pandora Neighborhood Cultural Heritage Landscape
(CHL). 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 proposed driveway widening is not
anticipated to have any adverse impacts on the character -defining elements of the CHL.
As such, staff have no concerns.
Building Division Comments:
The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variances.
Engineering Division Comments:
Engineering has no concerns.
Parks and Cemeteries/Forestry Division Comments:
No concerns, no requirements.
Transportation Planning Comments:
Transportation Services have no concerns with this application.
Regional Municipality of Waterloo:
No concerns.
Grand River Conservation Authority:
No objections.
Page 125 of 246
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 Planning Statement (PPS 2024)
• Regional Official Plan
• Official Plan (2014)
• Zoning By-law 2019-051
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A — Plan Submitted with Application
Page 126 of 246
Attachment A - Plan Submitted with Application
— 11 . 6 PA
Page 127 of 246
YA
40
A
lki- L -LI
off
3
vu
>
4.8
3.3
2
5.9
QNB CAR
3.2-
pplvpwfiy
EZC
Page 127 of 246
YA
lki- L -LI
off
<k OD
>
3.3
2
5.9
Page 127 of 246
May 6, 2025
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 May 20, City of Kitchener
Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and
have the following comments:
1) A 2025 —
043
— 82 Brunswick Avenue — No Concerns
2) A 2025 —
044
— 84 Brunswick Avenue — No Concerns
3) A 2025 —
045
— 191 Morgan Avenue — No Concerns
4) A 2025 —
046
— 241 Huck Cresent — No Concerns
5) A 2025 —
047
— 14 Jansen Avenue — No Concerns
6) A 2025 —
048
— 24 Amherst Drive — No Concerns
7) A 2025 —
049
— 42 Orchard Mill Cresent — No Concerns
8) A 2025 —
050
— 244 Samuel Street — No Concerns
9) A 2025 —
051
— 503 Victoria Street North — No Concerns
10)A 2025 —
052
— 573 Guelph Street — No Concerns
11)A 2025 —
053
— 575 Guelph Street — No Concerns
12)A 2025 —
054
— 864 King Street West — 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.
Document Number: 4976854
Page 128 of 246
Please forward any decisions on the above-mentioned Application numbers to the
undersigned.
Yours Truly,
Joshua Beech Falshaw
Transportation Planner
jbeechfalshaw@regionofwaterloo.ca
Document Number: 4976854
Page 129 of 246
May 5, 2025
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 — May 20, 2025
Applications for Minor Variance
A 2025-021
2880 King Street East
A 2025-043
82 Brunswick Avenue
A 2025-044
84 Brunswick Avenue
A 2025-045
191 Morgan Avenue
A 2025-046
241 Huck Crescent
A 2025-047
14 Jansen Avenue
A 2025-048
24 Amherst Drive
Applications for Consent
B 2025-016 1950 Fischer Hallman Road
B 2025-017 864 King Street West
via email
A 2025-049
42 Orchard Mill Crescent
A 2025-050
244 Samuel Street
A 2025-051
503 Victoria Street North
A 2025-052
573 Guelph Street
A 2025-053
575 Guelph Street
A 2025-054
864 King Street West
Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff have 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 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 130 of 246
Staff Report
r
JR
Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment
DATE OF MEETING: May 20, 2025
SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Manager, Development Approvals
519-783-8913
PREPARED BY: Sean Harrigan, Senior Planning Technician, 519-783-8934
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 10
DATE OF REPORT: May 8, 2025
REPORT NO.: DSD -2025-230
SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2025-051- 503 Victoria St. N.
RECOMMENDATION:
That Minor Variance Application A2025-051 for 503 Victoria Street North requesting
relief from the following Sections of Zoning By-law 85-1:
i) Section 6.1.1.1.b) ii) b) to permit a minimum driveway width of 2.2 metres
instead of minimum required 2.6 metres; and
ii) Section 5.24 to permit a residential building with noise mitigation to be located
3.8 metres from an Arterial Road instead of the minimum required 12 metres;
to facilitate the development of an Additional Dwelling Unit (Attached) in an existing
Duplex Dwelling, generally in accordance with drawings prepared by Fiori Design,
dated November 14, 2024, BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions:
1. That 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.
2. That the Owner 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 -
This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Page 131 of 246
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."
AND
That Minor Variance Application A2025-051 for 503 Victoria Street North requesting
relief from the following Sections of Zoning By-law 85-1:
i) Section 5.22. f) to permit an Unobstructed Walkway to overlap with the
driveway whereas the By-law prohibits any part of the Unobstructed Walkway
from overlapping with the driveway; and
ii) Section 6.1.1.1. b) vi) to permit a driveway to have the same material as the
Unobstructed Walkway whereas the By-law requires the driveway material to
be different and distinguishable from all other ground cover or surfacing on
the lot, including landscaping and walkways;
to facilitate the development of an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Attached) in an
existing Duplex Dwelling, generally in accordance with drawings prepared by Fiori
Design, dated November 14, 2024, BE REFUSED.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
• The purpose of this report is to review the requested minor variances to facilitate the
development of an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU)(Attached) in an existing Duplex
Dwelling.
• The key finding of this report is that staff are satisfied the requested variances for
reduced driveway width and noise mitigation fulfills the Four Tests, but the variances
for the Unobstructed Walkway and driveway material do not satisfy any of the Four
Tests.
• 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:
503 Victoria Street North is located within the Central Frederick neighbourhood and is
situated on the south side of Victoria Street between Filbert Street and Locust Street. The
property has approximately 11.2 metres of frontage on Victoria Street North, which is a
Regional Arterial Road, and currently contains an existing Single Detached Dwelling with
one Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Attached) (Duplex Dwelling). The property is within
300 metres of a railway corridor and as such, Metrolinx has requested two conditions of
Page 132 of 246
approval to help ensure minimal conflicts between the proposed Additional Dwelling Unit
(ADU) (Attached) and the railway corridor.
1P
10
11 � Z+G 17
N� 20
1 15 � SS
I '
Figure 1: Location Map (503 Victoria St N shown in RED)
The subject property is identified as `Community Areas' on Map 2 — Urban Structure and is
designated `Low Rise Conservation B' on Map 20 — Central Frederick Neighbourhood Plan
for Land Use in the City's 1994 Official Plan.
The property is zoned `Residential Five Zone (R-5)' in Zoning By-law 85-1. The property
also falls within Appendix H — Residential Intensification in Established Neighborhoods
Study (RIENS) Area in Zoning By-law 85-1
The purpose of the application is to review the requested minor variances to facilitate the
conversion of an existing duplex to a triplex. The proposed variances seek to permit an
existing reduced minimum driveway width, an existing absence of noise mitigation, and for
the existing driveway to overlap with and to be comprised of the same material as the
required new 1.1 metre Unobstructed Walkway.
Staff note that it may be possible to avoid the variances to the Unobstructed Walkway and
driveway material by modifying the existing shared entrance to include an entrance to the
basement unit, as shown in Figure 9 below. This would facilitate the conversion of the
existing `Duplex' to a `Triplex' while avoiding complications with the driveway overlapping
with the Unobstructed Walkway.
Page 133 of 246
po"
—
+�'' QIC+169 M6A
22.
I
i
� � 4
r-.. .-.._.-
OOWM 4 '
OW G1ClE AS I
--------
K Ila a 0 rvwvwlcu '
AND Alli a i
COM1110L�Ap -T e�!(
j
yaw ,. .
{ /DMC1alM�RN � 1 i
i � � i3dSTMiG �.DM6
FJafiTM3DfN�3
LA---
R 17 [1,tn] +
ti+r �
1
COK
"MW
Figure 2: Site Plan
Page 134 of 246
Figure 3: Existing House - Right Side
Figure 5: Existing Driveway Facing
Victoria Street North
Figure 7: Existing Parking to be
Converted to Landscaping
Figure 4: Existing House - Left Side
Figure 6: Existing Parking
Figure 8: Existing Outdoor Amenity
Space
Page 135 of 246
EXISTING MAIN FLOOR PLAN
Figure 9: Possible Shared Ground
Floor Entrance
REPORT:
503 VICTORIA ROAD
UNIT 2
5BI SOFT,
Figure 10: Proposed Ground Floor
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 general intent of the `Low Rise Conservation B' in the Central Frederick Secondary
Plan is to retain the existing low rise, low density residential character of the
Neighbourhood. Retention of the existing low-rise, low-density neighbourhood scale shall
be encouraged through the long-term maintenance and improvement of the existing house
stock, and the creation of additional residential units through conversion of existing
residential structures. To this regard, staff are satisfied that adding an additional dwelling
unit to an existing residential building with an existing reduced driveway width and
absence of noise mitigation maintains this general intent. Furthermore, staff are satisfied
that the reduced driveway width and absence of noise mitigation do not interfere with the
appropriate functions of the lands and do not create adverse impacts for adjacent
properties, as required by Official Plan policy 4.C.1.8.e).
However, staff have significant concerns that the proposed variances to allow the
Unobstructed Walkway to overlap entirely with the driveway will impede the appropriate
functions of the land and potentially create adverse impacts on abutting properties, which
conflicts with Official Plan policy 4.C.1.8.e). The applicant has stated that there is sufficient
parking located within the rear yard and as such, the Unobstructed Walkway will only be
temporarily obstructed when cars are entering and leaving the site. While it is true there
are three (3) parking spaces located within the rear yard, Transportation Services has
concerns with the functionality. As shown on Figure 11 below, the parking spaces are
situated perpendicular to the house with about 8.5 metres of driveway width. After
Page 136 of 246
accounting for the minimum 5.5 metre parking spot there, there is only about 3 metres of
space available to make the necessary 90 degree turn to enter and leave the parking
space. This is significantly lower than the standard 6.7 metres drive aisle usually provided
for turning movements for single loading parking. As such, Transportation Staff anticipate
significant challenges with daily parking that may encourage or even force tenants to park
on the driveway directly within the path of the Unobstructed Walkway.
j� 11.0 m
11 ares um)
REAR PROPE7PROPOSOLANDSCAPFJ
E
GRASS AREA
on;r�+�
wo A -T [4Im1
Figure 11: Proposed Rear Yard Parking (Drive Aisle Measured using Plan Scale)
In addition to Transportation Service's comments above, planning staff identified
challenges with the existing parking layout during the site visit that further supports
Transportation's concerns. As shown in Figures 6 and 7, the existing parking layout
extends the entire length of the rear yard, which is proposed to be reduced to
accommodate required rear yard landscaping. Despite this extra existing parking length,
staff found it difficult to make the necessary turning movements to leave the site in either a
forward motion or by reversing out of the parking space and driveway, leading staff to
question whether the existing parking length could support three parking spots. This
means that when the parking layout is reduced by 0.9 metres in length to meet the
minimum rear yard landscaping requirements, the parking difficulties experienced by staff
will only get worse and increase the chances of someone parking on the driveway beside
the house directly within the path of the Unobstructed Walkway.
Staff also note that Victoria Street North is an Arterial Road which prohibits on street
parking at all times and prohibits stopping during peak hours. These on street restrictions
places addition pressure on the driveway and rear yard parking to accommodate things
like visitors, contractors, and deliveries. Given the challenges with rear yard parking
discussed above, it is anticipated that any visitors, contractors, and deliveries would have
to park on the driveway beside the house thereby interfering with the Unobstructed
Walkway and appropriate function of the lands.
In addition to parking concerns, Official Plan policy 4.C.1.8.a) states that where minor
variances are requested to facilitate residential intensification, the overall impact of the
Page 137 of 246
variances will be reviewed to ensure that any modifications to existing buildings have
regard to Official Plan Section 11, amongst other provisions. Official Plan Section 11 policy
11.C.1.15 states that development applications will be reviewed to ensure they are
designed to accommodate fire prevention and timely emergency response. To this regard,
Emergency Services through discussions with Transportation Services have stated that
proposed parking layout, driveway, and Unobstructed Walkway are not designed for
adequate fire prevention and have potential to significantly impact timely emergency
responses. As discussed above, there is a high probability that parking will occur on the
driveway directly beside the house and within the Unobstructed Walkway. This parking
situation combined with a reduced driveway width means there would be minimal space to
get a stretcher or other emergency equipment to the Additional Dwelling Unit, thereby
negatively impacting adequate fire prevention and timely emergency responses.
General Intent of the Zoning By-law
The general intent of the minimum 2.6 metre driveway width is to ensure there is sufficient
space to park and access a vehicle. Staff note that it might be difficult to park and access
a vehicle directly beside the front porch stairs where the driveway is only 2.2 metres wide,
but the rest of the driveway beside the house is 2.48 metres in width which should be
sufficient to park and access a vehicle. As such, staff are satisfied the variance for
reduced minimum driveway width maintains the general intent of the Zoning By-law.
The general intent of the noise mitigation measures required by Zoning Section 5.24 is to
ensure that any new residential buildings within 12 metres of an Arterial Road are
designed to handle the increased noise associated with an Arterial Road. To this regard,
the building on 503 Victoria Street North is an existing building with two units. Staff are
satisfied that adding a third unit to an existing building with an existing absence of noise
mitigation does not conflict with the general intent of this zoning regulation.
The general intent of the 1.1 metre wide Unobstructed Walkway comes from the
Emergency Services Policy which requires a suitable emergency access route from a
street or sidewalk to the principal entrance of an Additional Dwelling Unit (ADU) (Attached)
where the door does not face a street. The Unobstructed Walkway must remain
completely unobstructed at all times with at least 2.1 metres of overhead clearance to
ensure timely emergency responses by guaranteeing that nothing will impede or block
emergency equipment like stretchers or fire fighting equipment. As discussed above, staff
anticipate that parking will occur on the driveway directly beside the house and within the
Unobstructed Walkway due to the challenging rear yard parking layout and lack of on
street parking. As such, Emergency Services are not satisfied that there is a suitable
emergency access route.
The general intent of the zoning regulation requiring the driveway material to be different
and distinguishable from all other ground cover, including landscaping and Unobstructed
Walkways, is the ensure parking only occurs within approved and designated areas and
that parking will not conflict with other outdoor areas, such as landscaping and
Unobstructed Walkways. As discussed above, staff believe the rear yard cannot function
as the sole parking area which means parking will most likely occur directly beside the
house and within the Unobstructed Walkway. This does not satisfy the general intent of
the zoning regulation.
Page 138 of 246
Is/Are the Effects of the Variance(s) Minor?
Staff are satisfied that the effects of the proposed variances to allow an existing reduced
driveway width and absence of noise mitigation to facilitate the conversion of a `Duplex' to
a `Triplex' are minor in nature. As mentioned above, the driveway width is 2.2 metres
directly beside the front porch steps and 2.48 metres beside the rest of the house, which
does not impede proper function of the driveway and lands. The lack of noise mitigation
already exists for the Duplex and should not create unacceptable impacts for the third unit.
Staff are not satisfied that the effects of the proposed variances to allow the Unobstructed
Walkway to overlap and be comprised of the same material of the driveway is minor in
nature. As discussed above, staff anticipate parking will occur within the Unobstructed
Walkway which can have significant negative effects in an emergency.
Is/Are the Variance(s) Desirable For The Appropriate Development or Use of the Land,
Building and/or Structure?
Staff are satisfied that the proposed variances for an existing driveway width and absence
of noise mitigation are desirable for the appropriate development and use of the land and
building. These variances will facilitate a gentle intensification by allowing a third unit to be
added within an existing building with no anticipated negative impacts.
Staff are not satisfied that the proposed variances for the Unobstructed Walkway and
driveway material are desirable for the appropriate development and use of the land and
building. As discussed above, staff anticipate these variances will create an undesirable
conflict between emergency access and parking which has the potential for significant
negative impacts. Staff also note that there are other design options which avoid these
variances entirely, meaning that refusal of these variances does not prohibit an Additional
Dwelling Unit (Attached) from being added to this building.
Environmental Planning Comments:
No concerns.
Heritage Planning Comments:
The property is located within the Central Frederick Neighborhood Cultural Heritage
Landscape (CHL). 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 proposed driveway
relief is not anticipated to have any adverse impacts on the character -defining elements of
the CHL. As such, staff have no concerns.
Building Division Comments:
The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance. A Building Permit
Application has been made for the interior renovations to facilitate a Triplex use.
Engineering Division Comments:
Engineering has no concerns.
Parks and Cemeteries/Forestry Division Comments:
No concerns.
Page 139 of 246
Transportation Planning Comments:
Transportation Services has reviewed this application and offer the following comments.
NOT SUPPORTABLE - Zoning By-law 85-1 Section 5.22.f) to permit an
Unobstructed Walkway to overlap with the driveway whereas the bylaw does not
permit any part of the Unobstructed Walkway to overlap with the driveway.
SUPPORTABLE (existing driveway) - Zoning By-law 85-1 Section 6.1.1.1.b) ii) b)
to permit a minimum driveway width of 2.2 metres whereas the by-law requires a
minimum driveway width of 2.6 metres.
NOT SUPPORTABLE - Zoning By-law 85-1 Section 6.1.1.1. b) vi) to permit a
driveway with the same material as the Unobstructed Walkway whereas the by-
law requires the driveway material to be different and distinguishable from all other
ground cover or surfacing on the lot, including landscaping and unobstructed
walkways.
Based on the plan that was submitted with this application, Transportation
Services cautions the applicant with the functionality of the existing parking.
Accessing these parking spaces at the rear of the property will be difficult at times
due to the narrow drive aisle. The plan notes in red an 8.5 metre parking length.
This equates to a 3.0 metre drive aisle with a typical 5.5 metre parking space.
Typically, a 6.7 metre drive aisle is provided for single loaded parking.
11.30 m
37-4r[11.3M]
Region of Waterloo Comments:
No concerns.
Page 140 of 246
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 Planning Statement (PPS 2024)
• Regional Official Plan
• Official Plan (2014)
• Zoning By-law 85-1
• Emergency Services Policy
Page 141 of 246
May 6, 2025
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 May 20, City of Kitchener
Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and
have the following comments:
1) A 2025 —
043
— 82 Brunswick Avenue — No Concerns
2) A 2025 —
044
— 84 Brunswick Avenue — No Concerns
3) A 2025 —
045
— 191 Morgan Avenue — No Concerns
4) A 2025 —
046
— 241 Huck Cresent — No Concerns
5) A 2025 —
047
— 14 Jansen Avenue — No Concerns
6) A 2025 —
048
— 24 Amherst Drive — No Concerns
7) A 2025 —
049
— 42 Orchard Mill Cresent — No Concerns
8) A 2025 —
050
— 244 Samuel Street — No Concerns
9) A 2025 —
051
— 503 Victoria Street North — No Concerns
10)A 2025 —
052
— 573 Guelph Street — No Concerns
11)A 2025 —
053
— 575 Guelph Street — No Concerns
12)A 2025 —
054
— 864 King Street West — 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.
Document Number: 4976854
Page 142 of 246
Please forward any decisions on the above-mentioned Application numbers to the
undersigned.
Yours Truly,
Joshua Beech Falshaw
Transportation Planner
jbeechfalshaw@regionofwaterloo.ca
Document Number: 4976854
Page 143 of 246
May 5, 2025
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 — May 20, 2025
Applications for Minor Variance
A 2025-021
2880 King Street East
A 2025-043
82 Brunswick Avenue
A 2025-044
84 Brunswick Avenue
A 2025-045
191 Morgan Avenue
A 2025-046
241 Huck Crescent
A 2025-047
14 Jansen Avenue
A 2025-048
24 Amherst Drive
Applications for Consent
B 2025-016 1950 Fischer Hallman Road
B 2025-017 864 King Street West
via email
A 2025-049
42 Orchard Mill Crescent
A 2025-050
244 Samuel Street
A 2025-051
503 Victoria Street North
A 2025-052
573 Guelph Street
A 2025-053
575 Guelph Street
A 2025-054
864 King Street West
Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff have 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 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 144 of 246
:N�: METROLINX BY EMAIL ONLY
TO: Kitchener - Committee of Adjustments
200 King Street West, 6th Floor, P.O. Box 1118, Kitchener ON N2G 4G7
CC: cofa@kitchener.ca
DATE: May 51h, 2025
RE: Adjacent Development Review: A2025-051
503 Victoria St N, Toronto, ON
Minor Variance
Metrolinx is in receipt of the Minor Variance application for 503 Victoria St N, to allow a triplex on the subject site as
circulated April 25th, 2025, and to be heard at Public Hearing on May 20th, 2025. Metrolinx's comments on the subject
application are noted below:
• The subject property is located within 300m of the Metrolinx Guelph Subdivision which carries Kitchener GO
Train service.
GO/HEAVY-RAIL - CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
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 forthe 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).
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 thatthe 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 contact Farah.Faroque@metrolinx.com.
Best Regards,
Farah Faroque
Project Analyst, Third Party Project Review
Metrolinx 110 Bay Street I Toronto I Ontario I M5J 2S3
T: (437) 900-2291
Page 145 of 246
Adjacent Development Review: A2025-051
503 Victoria St N, Toronto, ON
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 (provided that doing so is not contrary to law applicable to Metrolinx)
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.
THIS Easement and all rights and obligations arising from the above easement
shall extend to, be binding upon and enure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their
respective officers, directors, shareholders, agents, employees, 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 a party hereto, if such party comprises more than one person,
shall be joint and several.
Easement in gross.
:X: METROLINX 2
Page 146 of 246
Staff Report
r
JR
Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment
DATE OF MEETING: May 20, 2025
SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Manager, Development Approvals
519-783-8913
PREPARED BY: Arwa Alzoor, Planner, 519-783-8903
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 10
DATE OF REPORT: April 25, 2025
REPORT NO.: DSD -2025-205
SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2025-052 - 573 Guelph Street
Minor Variance Application A2025-053 - 575 Guelph Street
RECOMMENDATION:
A. Minor Variance Application A2025-052 — 573 Guelph Street
That Minor Variance Application A2025-052 573 Guelph Street requesting relief from
Section 7.3, table 7-3, of Zoning By-law 2019-51:
i) to permit a lot width of 7.4 metres instead of the minimum required 7.5
metres, and;
ii) to permit an interior side yard setback of 0.9 metres instead of the minimum
required 1.2 metres;
to recognize the existing semi-detached dwelling; generally, in accordance with
drawings prepared by Ontario Land Surveyor David J. Raithby, dated June 8, 2023.
BE APPROVED.
B. Minor Variance Application A2025-053 — 575 Guelph Street
That Minor Variance Application A2025-053 for 575 Guelph Street requesting relief
from Section 7.3, table 7-3, of Zoning By-law 2019-51:
i) to permit a lot width of 7.4 metres instead of the minimum required 7.5
metres; and
ii) to permit an interior side yard setback of 0.9 metres instead of the minimum
required 1.2 metres
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Page 147 of 246
to recognize the existing semi-detached dwelling; generally, in accordance with
drawings prepared by Ontario Land Surveyor David J. Raithby, dated June 8, 2023.
BE APPROVED.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
• The purpose of this report is to review Minor Variance Applications to recognize an
existing semi-detached dwelling and facilitate the severance of the lot so that each
half of the semi-detached dwelling may be dealt with independently.
• The key finding of this report is that 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 located in the Mt. Hope Huron Park area between Margaret
Avenue and St Leger Street. The property is surrounded by low-rise residential uses.
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.
In April 2021, the Committee of Adjustment approved Minor Variance Application A2021-
027 to Zoning By-law 85-1 to permit the construction of a semi-detached dwelling on a lot
with the following variances:
A lot width of 14.96 metres, whereas a minimum width of 15 metres is required; and
An easterly side yard setback of 0.94 metres and a westerly side yard setback of 0.91
metres, whereas a minimum setback of 1.2 metres is required.
A building permit for the semi-detached dwelling was issued on April 20, 2022.
Subsequently, in July 2024, the Committee of Adjustment conditionally approved Consent
Application B2024-020 to sever the parcel of land fronting onto Guelph Street, allowing
each half of the semi-detached dwelling to be dealt with separately.
The severed parcel proposed to have a lot width of 7.5 metres, a depth of 40.3
metres, and an area of 302.25 square metres.
The retained parcel proposed to have a lot width of 7.46 metres, a depth of 40.3
metres, and an area of 300.6 square metres.
As of the date of this report, most conditions related to the consent application have been
satisfied, and the building permit is in the inspection process.
Page 148 of 246
ELMWDOD -AVE H :I ■�
I W — l+.lr �� •t.
�°.'': F} 1 f i iiw6V AFf211.1 f
q Z• J/ u.•r y•r;• :r;
e -
�V
� � I
2
NDO�l�� O
�P � Lips P
b
l�, !•rl:5atl� dark
x g�F ct
ip� t3��GN�
Figure 1: Location Map
Following the approval of the above -noted Minor Variance and Consent Applications, it
was determined, as per Figure -3, that both sides of the semi-detached dwelling have:
• A lot width of 7.4 metres, whereas one of the lots was to be 7.5 metres in lot width as
approved by A2021-027 and B2024-020; and
• An easterly side yard setback of 0.92 metres instead of 0.94 metres as approved by
A2021-027 and a westerly side yard setback of 0.93 metres instead of 0.91 metres as
approved by A2021-027.
The purpose of the Application is to recognize a lot width of 7.4 metres for each proposed
lot and a side yard setback of 0.9 meres.
The City's Development and Housing Approvals Division has paid the Minor Variance
Application fees to account for this additional minor variances.
Page 149 of 246
Figure 2: Zoning Map
Page 150 of 246
GUELPH STREET
(WDTH VARIES) (SUMMSM OF LOT 4 GERMAN 01WAHY TRACIj
PIN 22374 — 9002 (Li)
i—xzsaga n --
z+5• 'c w """KD r nw +«
9a,i:R1 mr r vra 30.6M
BMOuj
7AW —tee 1—
S9
g ` LOT 17
MTM EAST CORNEX
0021 (LT) 6,6+.
rr
LOT 17 REGISTERED
UQ
V
4'J5
y
�LLn f'
0.O�E
I� 1
a
—J
rri'
aae
h`
2
H
Z
4 ]P
g
lY
�x
A
7.4" T^ 7.497
.B
Figure 3: Survey drawing of the subject property
Development and Housing Approvals (DHA) staff visited the site on May 02, 2025
Page 151 of 246
Figure 3: An image of the Front View of The Semi-detached Reflecting the proposed
lot width
Figure 4: A Side Image to reflect the side yard setback
Page 152 of 246
Figure 5: A Side Image to reflect the side yard setback
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. It
also places emphasis on the relationship of housing to adjacent buildings, streets and
exterior areas. It is the opinion of staff that the requested variances are appropriate and
continue to meet the general intent of the Official Plan.
General Intent of the Zoning By-law
The 7.5 metres lot width intends to ensure adequate space for a semi-detached dwelling
to be constructed and provide adequate street -facing built form presence along the
streetscape. The reduction in lot width to 7.4 metres will be negligible and will not
negatively affect the appearance of the lots.
Page 153 of 246
The 1.2 metre minimum interior side yard setback requirement is intended to provide
sufficient access to the rear yards, ensure adequate separation between buildings for
privacy and maintenance, and to promote proper light, air circulation, and drainage. The
existing interior side yard setback of 0.9 metres will continue to provide reasonable access
to the rear yards and sufficient separation between the dwellings. Staff have no concerns
regarding maintenance access or privacy impacts due to the reduced setback.
Based on the above, staff is of the opinion that the requested variances meet the general
intent of the Zoning By-law.
Is/Are the Effects of the Variance(s) Minor?
The variances can be considered minor as it is the opinion of staff that the reduction in lot
width from 7.5 metres to 7.4 metres is almost negligible in the context of the development. The
side yard setbacks continue to accommodate the appropriate rear yard access.
The setbacks of 0.9 metres for the side yards will not present any significant impacts to
adjacent properties and the overall neighbourhood.
Is/Are the Variance(s) Desirable For The Appropriate Development or Use of the Land,
Building and/or Structure?
The requested variances are desirable and appropriate as they will recognize the semi-
detached dwelling on the whole of the lot and facilitate the severance of the dwelling so that
each half of the semi-detached dwelling can be dealt with independently.
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 has
been issued for the new semi-detached dwelling.
Engineering Division Comments:
No concerns.
Parks and Cemeteries/Forestry Division Comments:
No concerns.
Transportation Planning Comments:
No concerns.
Enova Power comments:
The meter base for each unit must be installed at the front of the house. Installation on the
side wall is not permitted due to insufficient clearance.
Page 154 of 246
City staff communicated with Enova Power that the wall is already constructed, and this is
to recognize an existing situation. Enova will follow up and may recommend/request that
the meter be relocated.
The Region of Waterloo Comments:
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.
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 Planning Statement (PPS 2024)
• Regional Official Plan
• Official Plan (2014)
• Zoning By-law 2019-051
• DSD -2021-19
• DSD -2024-351
Page 155 of 246
May 6, 2025
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 May 20, City of Kitchener
Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and
have the following comments:
1) A 2025 —
043
— 82 Brunswick Avenue — No Concerns
2) A 2025 —
044
— 84 Brunswick Avenue — No Concerns
3) A 2025 —
045
— 191 Morgan Avenue — No Concerns
4) A 2025 —
046
— 241 Huck Cresent — No Concerns
5) A 2025 —
047
— 14 Jansen Avenue — No Concerns
6) A 2025 —
048
— 24 Amherst Drive — No Concerns
7) A 2025 —
049
— 42 Orchard Mill Cresent — No Concerns
8) A 2025 —
050
— 244 Samuel Street — No Concerns
9) A 2025 —
051
— 503 Victoria Street North — No Concerns
10)A 2025 —
052
— 573 Guelph Street — No Concerns
11)A 2025 —
053
— 575 Guelph Street — No Concerns
12)A 2025 —
054
— 864 King Street West — 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.
Document Number: 4976854
Page 156 of 246
Please forward any decisions on the above-mentioned Application numbers to the
undersigned.
Yours Truly,
Joshua Beech Falshaw
Transportation Planner
jbeechfalshaw@regionofwaterloo.ca
Document Number: 4976854
Page 157 of 246
May 5, 2025
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 — May 20, 2025
Applications for Minor Variance
A 2025-021
2880 King Street East
A 2025-043
82 Brunswick Avenue
A 2025-044
84 Brunswick Avenue
A 2025-045
191 Morgan Avenue
A 2025-046
241 Huck Crescent
A 2025-047
14 Jansen Avenue
A 2025-048
24 Amherst Drive
Applications for Consent
B 2025-016 1950 Fischer Hallman Road
B 2025-017 864 King Street West
via email
A 2025-049
42 Orchard Mill Crescent
A 2025-050
244 Samuel Street
A 2025-051
503 Victoria Street North
A 2025-052
573 Guelph Street
A 2025-053
575 Guelph Street
A 2025-054
864 King Street West
Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff have 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 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 158 of 246
From:
Pui Ming Leung
To:
Committee of Adiustment (SM)
Subject:
Comments, Enova Power, April 2025
Date:
Monday, May 5, 2025 9:51:20 AM
Attachments:
11111j)d
in
The following are the comments for Committee of Adjustment applications -April 2025.
82 / 84 Brunswick Ave:
Following the property severance, each municipal address must have an individual hydro
service. The meter base for the accessory dwelling unit (ADU) must be located in the same
area as the front units.
573/575 Guelph St:
The meter base for each unit must be installed at the front of the house. Installation on the
side wall is not permitted due to insufficient clearance.
864 King St W:
The building must maintain a minimum clearance of 5.5 meters plus required working space
from the primary hydro pole line. Refer to Standard D11111 for guidance. Additional
requirements can be found in the document:
Tech nical-Guidelines-for-properties-in-Kitchener-and-Wilmot-over-400-Amperes-rev-3-feb-
13-2024. pdf
Reminder for all applications:
Customers must submit a Service Request for any new hydro service connection or upgrade
using the following link:
Service Request Form - Engineering (Victoria Street Office) - Enova Power
Thanks,
Pui Ming Leung (she/her) I Design Technologist
Direct Number: 226-896-2200 (EXT 6205)
Mobile Number: 519-589-2659
puimin_.la eunq(a enovapower.com
301 Victoria Street South, Kitchener, Ontario, N2G 41_2
enovapower.com
UJ
This correspondence is directed in confidence solely to the addressees listed above. It may
Page 159 of 246
contain personal or confidential information and may not otherwise be distributed, copied or
used by the intended recipient. Ifyou 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 160 of 246
N
U
LU
J J O Z
a O m
F20o WW U 0° zwp� ~ w d
W LL O w U 2 f Z z W O `J z
25, o=o =w ww 3a 3wzr o
a 0 2 z¢ Z F> x> O H 2 K U Z
Q W H ❑ Z❑ w O H m J y O
_ ~ ~ ~l 3 O
Z W J
O 7 a O O N W 0 0 p W ' K a O r�r^^ J Q
~ 1p y w m W 0 m 0 w U U Q O Y 2 2> v/ U
3ovz ow
o
w O= F 2 Q O W O N y ¢ Q H z O W i W N Z (� N
J LU
O a. 0 N W J W y a Z W 0 0 ❑J F a a 0 N N
w W W O V W J OJ Z OF x O W W W 0 W Q N N w w
ma �� W, m0 vJ40 =O° Oxz FD Z O & O ``'
Q° O w v Q Q LL ? Z m W z z to U Q 0 O Z 8 /
zu yrs w ' wo z Y
y> j m�� fxg2 Ola-~ U U r H0 a W z LU04
CK�W 7yLLJ
CF aQw fU-y Ow �zpf i O O M
g z-< o U w¢ O= LL w w 00
�FEEo _ov� �a ua a n� ozm°n ¢ ¢
0aa(7 ~» mfwn .: �x< h m� Um000 y fail W w
N Z~ z 0 0 N J~ W N a = W Q j° F F Z W Z U (7
O 2ND w°z (°_�o oZm 3<w z yz ,i0os o°O o Z m 3
zo fnOy H (70 r W wo W w fgNUf/)F 7 7 Q 3
Z LLU W ¢w¢O ZNa 00O w 2N W KKOZ �� LNL m N VJ (7
O W S z N ❑ O LL' 0 O U ❑ w F fn w W
LU
m¢�O N F U U m W O tnjf ¢ Q~= N~000 OUz OU w Z Z Y O
r❑wz OOyU zaz wm0 >� UNO ZU(9>Z (J 9 (") Z
'^ Z0LL0 x W W> w W O aN W =W ❑0� O W z0Z N v Q U) W a J_
vJ ¢ W W F 0 j H W ¢ U J W Z ' 0 i- 2¢ ] O 0 a a K (❑ ❑ L) Q LL
Do a.U U U ¢
w 0 7 7 W X 0 0 N 0 z 0 > 0 0 Q a J� f H 2 O°
a 6¢ O 0 J a a 2 ° m W Z= J f9 w ZF- 0 w z O a - N
O o W W J 2 F Z W O H 0 W o J 0 0 a 0¢ O J 0 0 x
z U a w _ z 3 a N U U U> U a N U U N m F 4 O 2 z
Z � N of a �n fo r � ;ry � � 3
T'yQ6/ �i� Wfn W�
S x
a £
s°
Cys l >O n N z rc
�aa
K 6 w O K O a
T pp N
w
3 0 orb'
ISL
cC U
LD f — Q w a z A
m
U w r N N
a U W \ W
a r ¢
a\
N z \
o \
U
Z -
Z W
O - 0
F O
_ a e
e
0
\ NZ \.
\ T
~ / W
U W
N O
z Z
� LL
r
H
O
J
a
Staff Report
r
JR
Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment
DATE OF MEETING: May 20, 2025
SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Manager, Development Approvals
519-783-8913
PREPARED BY: Brian Bateman, Senior Planner, 519-783-8905
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 3
DATE OF REPORT: May 7, 2025
REPORT NO.: DSD -2025-231
SUBJECT: Consent Application B2025-014 — 508 Fall Harvest Place
RECOMMENDATION:
That Consent Application B2025-014 requesting consent to sever a triangular-
shaped parcel of land from Part 3 on Reference Plan 58R-7207 owned by the Grand
River Conservation Authority and measuring 35.8 metres by 14.3 metres by 27.6
metres having an area of 180.2 square metres, and convey it as a lot addition to Lot
27, 58M-527, addressed as 508 Fall Harvest Place, as shown on survey sketch
prepared by Guenther Rueb Surveying Limited, dated March 19, 2025, 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 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
Director, Development and Housing Approvals, and registered on title to the
"Severed Parcel" (as shown in the Proposed Severance Sketch Plan, prepared
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Page 162 of 246
by Guenther Rueb Surveying Limited, dated March 19, 2025 (Figure 4, DSD -2025-
231) and Lot 27, 58M-527 (legal description of "receiving parcel"), to provide the
following:
"That title to the Severed Lands and Lot 27, 58M-527 shall at all times be
maintained in identical ownership and said lands shall be treated as one lot or
parcel with respect to the Planning Act and neither of the Severed Lands nor
Lot 27, 58M-527 shall be separately conveyed, or otherwise dealt with, without
the prior consent of the City of Kitchener, with the criteria for granting or
withholding such consent to be the applicable considerations to be applied if
a consent for severance was applied for under the Planning Act, as if section
50 (3) and /or section 50 (5) of that statute applied to such conveyance or
dealing."
5. That the Owner's Solicitor shall provide a Solicitor's Undertaking to register an
Application Consolidation Parcels for the Severed Lands and Lot 27, 58M-527
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.
Alternatively, if in the opinion of the City Solicitor, an Application Consolidation
Parcels cannot be registered on title, the Owner shall take such alternative
measures and provide such alternative documents to ensure that the severed
parcel and receiving parcel are not separately encumbered, conveyed, or
otherwise transferred from one another and shall remain in common ownership,
at the discretion of and to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
• The purpose of this report is to assess a Consent Application requesting to convey a
piece of land owned by the GRCA and add it as a lot addition to 508 Fall Harvest
Place.
• The key finding of this report is it represents `good planning' by creating a lot that is
now consistent in size and shape as other lots within the plan of subdivision.
• 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 508 Fall Harvest Place within the Pioneer Tower
neighbourhood (see Figure 1). It is an irregular-shaped lot with a single detached dwelling
and accessory structures located on it. The lot backs onto lands owned by the Grand River
Conversation Authority.
Page 163 of 246
! fgoad un -,_w —' a 1y 1
9
Figure 1 — Aerial photo of 508 and 512 Fall Harvest 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.
508 Fall Harvest Place and the lands to be added are zoned `RES -2: Low Rise Residential
Two Zone' in Zoning By-law 2019-051.
City of Kitchener Appendix A (Consolidated ) - Zoning Grid Schedule 280
--_C
233R
3t1
R _ _ W sI
x�lt
E&z I -M O O _
f�zflal � –
t�R A �SFNC
�0^}1
lNGl - osRa -- REO-t S,
lszaal RTp,.
1114) ._
r m [50001
aEs)
lszoal
911001
R€S 1
lsloul /v ---
=
(001
_
____ __ __ __ _ _ _
_
-----------------
�__c_:_�__c
Purchasing
.'this tri angular--- - - - --- ----- --==-E9_ ___ ------
-Piece from____ -
_______'-_-____ _-_
-�_-_'-_------
•: ':GRCA and r __ _ _ _ _ r _u ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _c_.r __-
_ -- _ _ ____-�
508 Fall
Harvest -
512 Fall -
Harvest
Figure 3 — Photo of 508 and 512 Fall Harvest Place
A site visit occurred on May 4, 2025 (see Figure 3).
SKETCH FOR SEVERANCE APPLICATION
CITY OF KITCMENER
SCAtE - �o I�
METRIC
nsau cmrnivriw� wur Os i0i li-BFMLLl'e Bgnrvn nwr mx[Rsla�
I? LOT 2a
27`
t.
LOT
`e: �EYER®CE2
PROPG6ED
s3 LOT 23 SEVE(bgNCE 1 wn
LARDS
e
J'
Kiq gi64£ •EiEii54 irvc.
Figure 4 — Surveyor's Plan
THIS Is WT
AKMCWWJRM
—.1—
Page 165 of 246
The purpose of the application is to convey a triangular-shaped piece of land owned by the
GRCA and convey it as a lot addition shown in Figure 4.
REPORT:
Planning Comments:
In considering all the relevant Provincial legislation, Regional and City policies and
regulations, Planning staff offer the following comments:
Provincial Planning Statement (PPS 2024)
Staff are satisfied that the proposed severance application is consistent with the Provincial
Planning Statement in general and as it related to housing policies in Chapter 2 regarding
intensification and facilitating housing options. Section 2.2 1 (b) states that Planning
authorities shall provide for an appropriate range and mix of housing options and densities
to meet projected needs of current and future residents of the regional market area by
permitting and facilitating all housing options required to meet the social, health, economic
and well-being requirements of current and future residents.
Regional Official Plan (ROP):
ROP Urban Area policies state that the focus of the Region's future growth shall be within
the Urban Area. The subject lands fall within the `Urban Area' and 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 and community infrastructure required for the
proposed residential development, including transportation networks, municipal water and
wastewater systems, and a broad range of social and public health services. Regional
polices require 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. Staff are satisfied that the proposed
severance applications adhere to these policies and conforms to the ROP.
City's Official Plan (2014)
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;
Page 166 of 246
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;
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."
Zoning By-law 2019-051
The subject properties are zoned as `Low Rise Residential Two Zone (RES -2)'. The
purpose of this zone is to accommodate a limited range of low-density dwelling types on
larger lots than the RES -3 Zone in low rise. Lots in the general vicinity are considered
larger lots and therefore the lot addition square off the lot making it consistent with the
prevailing pattern.
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 lot addition 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 lot is suitable for the use of the lands
and compatible with the surrounding community because of the lot addition. The lands front
onto an established public street and are serviced with municipal services. Staff are further
of the opinion that the proposal is consistent with the Region of Waterloo Official Plan, the
Provincial Planning Statement, and is good planning and in the public interest.
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 lots are
desirable and appropriate.
Environmental Planning Comments:
Be advised that the land (owned by the GRCA) to be conveyed to the Fall Harvest
properties is regulated by the GRCA as being adjacent to slope erosion hazard, and in
proximity to floodplain and wetlands. As no development is proposed within the land to be
severed there is no concern.
Heritage Planning Comments:
No concerns.
Building Division Comments:
The Building Division has no objections to the proposed consent.
Page 167 of 246
Engineering Division Comments:
No concerns.
Parks and Cemeteries/Forestry Division Comments:
Lot addition- no parkland dedication is required.
Transportation Planning Comments:
No concerns.
Region of Waterloo Comments:
Regional staff have reviewed the application and have the following comments to provide:
Environmental Threats: For City staff's awareness, the Threat Inventory Database (TID)
identifies no threats on or adjacent to 508 Fall Harvest Place.
Regional Fees: Regional staff acknowledge receipt of the required $350 fees for review of
a Consent Application (received May 1, 2025). No additional fees are required.
Regional staff have no objection to this application.
GRCA Comments:
GRCA has reviewed these applications under the Mandatory Programs and Services
Regulation (Ontario Regulation 686/21), including acting on behalf of the Province
regarding natural hazards identified in Section 5.2 of the Provincial Planning Statement
(PPS, 2024), as a regulatory authority under Ontario Regulation 41/24, and as a public
body under the Planning Act as per our CA Board approved policies.
The information currently available at this office indicates that the lands to be severed and
merged with 508 and 512 Fall Harvest Place are adjacent to valley slopes and contain the
regulated allowance adjacent to the valley slopes. The retained lands owned by the GRCA
contain the Grand River, floodplain, valley slopes, wetlands, and the regulated allowance
adjacent to these features. A copy of GRCA's resource mapping is attached.
Due to the presence of the above -noted features, portions of the subject lands are
regulated by the GRCA under Ontario Regulation 41/24 — Prohibited Activities, Exemptions
and Permits 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 41/24.
The Consent Applications propose lot line adjustments to convey two parcels of land to 508
and 512 Fall Harvest Place. GRCA Planning and Regulation Services staff have reviewed
the proposed applications, and we do not have any concerns with the lot line adjustments.
STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT:
This report supports the delivery of core services.
Page 168 of 246
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 Planning Statement (PPS 2024)
• Regional Official Plan (ROP)
• Official Plan (2014)
• Zoning By- 2019-051
Page 169 of 246
N*
Region of Waterloo
Connie Owen
Administrative Clerk, Legislative Services
City of Kitchener
200 King Street West
Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7
CofA(a-)kitchener.ca
PLANNING, DEVELOPMENTAND
LEGISLATIVE SERVICES
150 Frederick Street, 8t" floor
Kitchener Ontario N2G 4J3 Canada
Telephone: 519-575-4400
Fax: 519-575-4449
www.regionofwaterloo.ca
Will Towns, MCIP, RPP
519-616-1868
File: D20-20/25 KIT
May 5, 2025
Re: Comments on Consent Applications: B2025-014 to B2025-017
Committee of Adjustment Hearing, May 20, 2025
City of Kitchener
Please accept the following comments for the above -noted consent applications to be
considered at the upcoming Committee of Adjustment Hearing.
Document Number: 4971747 Version: 2 Page 1 of 8
Page 170 of 246
File No:
B2025-014
Address:
508 Fall Harvest Place
Description:
Lot 27, Plan 58M-527
Owner:
Mark Fackoury
Applicant:
Tony Bocchino
The owner/applicant is seeking consent to add lands currently owned by the Grand
River Conservation Authority to a residential lot located at 508 Fall Harvest Place. The
application proposes to sever 180.2 square metres from Part 3, 58R-7207 and add
these lands to 508 Fall Harvest Place.
Regional staff have reviewed the application and have the following comments to
provide:
Environmental Threats: For City staff's awareness, the Threat Inventory Database
(TID) identifies no threats on or adjacent to 508 Fall Harvest Place.
Regional Fees: Regional staff acknowledge receipt of the required $350 fees for review
of a consent application (received May 1, 2025). No additional fees are required.
Regional staff have no objection to this application.
Document Number: 4971747 Version: 2 Page 2 of 8
Page 171 of 246
File No: B2025-015
Address: 512 Fall Harvest Place
Description: Lot 26, Plan 58M-527
Owner: Deer Ridge Heights Inc.
Applicant: Tony Bocchino
The owner/applicant is seeking consent to add lands currently owned by the Grand
River Conservation Authority to a residential lot at 512 Fall Harvest Place. The
application seeks to sever 342.5 square metres Part 3, 58R-7207 and add these lands
to 512 Fall Harvest Place.
Regional staff have reviewed the application and have the following comments to
provide:
Environmental Threats: For City staff's awareness, the Threat Inventory Database
(TID) identifies no threats on or adjacent to 512 Fall Harvest Place.
Regional Fees: Regional staff acknowledge receipt of the required $350 fees for review
of a consent application (received May 1, 2025). No additional fees are required.
Regional staff have no objection to this application.
Document Number: 4971747 Version: 2 Page 3 of 8
Page 172 of 246
File No: B2025-016
Address: 1950 Fischer Hallman Road
Description: Part Lots 158 and 159 German Company Tract
Owner: Schlegel Urban Developments Corp.
Applicant: GSP Group (c/o Richard Kelly-Ruetz)
The owner/applicant has applied for a consent to facilitate a long-term lease in excess
of 21 years in favour of a McDonald's on the subject lands (as previously reviewed by
Regional staff through site plan application SP23/024/F/CD). The proposed lease area
is approximately 1,457.1 square metres and consists of the restaurant building, stacked
drive-through lanes, seven parking spaces, and associated landscaping and walkway
areas.
Regional staff have reviewed the application and have the following comments to
provide:
Threats Inventory Database: For City staff's awareness, the Threat Inventory
Database (TID) identifies no threats on or adjacent to 1950 Fischer Hallman Road.
Regional Consent Review Fee: Regional staff have not received the fee for consent
review of $350 per application. The fee payment is requested as a condition of
approval.
Regional staff have no objection to B2025-016 subject to the following condition:
1. That the Owner/Developer submit the consent review fee of $350 to the Regional
Municipality of Waterloo.
Document Number: 4971747 Version: 2 Page 4 of 8
Page 173 of 246
File No: B2025-017
Address: 864 King Street West
Description: XLT 306, 319-320 PL 385 KITCHENER; PT LT 304-305, 312 PL 385
KITCHENER AS IN 1309823, SAVE & EXCEPT PTS 1 & 2 ON EX PL
WR838553 & PTS 1, 6 & 7, 58R18537;TM & S/T 725378; T/W 694748
Owners: Vive Development Corp.
Applicant: Craig Dumart
The owner/applicant is seeking consent to sever lands at 864 King Street West to
create a new parcel totalling 3,045.1 square metres to facilitate the development of the
lands in two phases with a 45 -storey residential development inclusive of 304 residential
units. The retained parcel is proposed to be 3,259.6 square metres. A blanket easement
is also proposed that would apply to both properties for access and servicing. Regional
staff provided pre -submission consultation comments on this proposal on March 4,
2025.
Source Water Protection: The property is located within an area subject to Part IV of
the Clean Water Act. Regional staff note that the applicant negotiated a provisional Risk
Management Plan with the Risk Management Official(rmo(a�regionofwaterloo.ca) in fall
2024 applicable to previous zoning by-law amendment application ZBA24/022/K/ES;
staff also understand that a final Risk Management Plan is currently being negotiated
with the applicant in association with an in -progress site plan application. A valid
Section 59 Notice for site plan has not yet been issued.
Notwithstanding the above and consistent with pre -consultation comments, issuance of
a valid Notice of Source Protection Plan Compliance (Section 59 Notice) is required for
this consent application (to be required as a condition) separate from the Risk
Management Plan process for site plan. The applicant is asked to contact the Risk
Management Official to obtain the Notice for this consent application.
Environmental Noise: The Region is in receipt of a noise study related to the proposed
development on these lands entitled "Noise Feasibility Study, Proposed Residential
Development, 864-872 King Street West, Kitchener, Regional Municipality of Waterloo,
ON" (prepared by HGC Engineering, dated July 24, 2024). Regional staff have reviewed
the study in relation to the Regional road noise source (King Street West) and have no
concerns with the study or its recommendations (which pertain only to the retained
lands). Regional staff request that the owner/developer enter into a registered
agreement with the Region to implement the study's recommendations. Specifically, the
following will be required for inclusion in the agreement:
- The provision of central air conditioning for all units.
- Noise warning clauses included in any agreements of Offers of Purchase and
Sale, lease/rental agreements and condominium declarations:
East, west, and south facades:
Type B.-
Document
:Document Number: 4971747 Version: 2 Page 5 of 8
Page 174 of 246
Purchasers/tenants are advised that despite the inclusion of noise control
features in the development and within the building units, sound levels due to
increasing road traffic (King Street West) may on occasions interfere with some
activities of the dwelling occupants as the sound levels exceed the sound level
limits of the Municipality and the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and
Parks.
Type C.-
This
:This dwelling unit has been designed with the provision for 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 Municipality and the Ministry of the
Environment, Conservation and Parks.
Regional staff also note that an update to the noise study will be required in association
with a future Planning Act application pertaining to the proposed Phase 2 of the
development (to be located on the severed lands).
Environmental Threats: For the City's awareness, the Regional Threats Inventory
Database identifies "high" threats identified in the Regional Threats Inventory Database
for the subject lands (associated with past operations of Electrohome Ltd. and CTV
Television Inc.), as well as records of an historical landfill on and adjacent to the subject
lands. This information was also provided to the applicant in Regional comments
associated with ZBA24/022/K/ES on September 13, 2024.
Document Number: 4971747 Version: 2 Page 6 of 8
Page 175 of 246
Regional Consent Review Fee: Regional staff have not received the fee for consent
application review of $350 as per Regional By-law 24-052. The fee payment is
requested as a condition of consent approval.
Regional staff have no objection to Consent File B2025-016 subject to the
following conditions:
That the Owner/Developer provide a valid Notice of Source Protection
Plan Compliance (Section 59 Notice) to the satisfaction of the Regional
Municipality of Waterloo.
2. That for the retained lands, the Owner/Developer enter into a registered
development agreement with the Regional Municipality of Waterloo to
implement the environmental noise recommendations specific to noise
impacts from King Street West (Regional Road No. 8) identified in the
noise study report entitled "Noise Feasibility Study, Proposed Residential
Development, 864-872 King Street West, Kitchener, Regional Municipality
of Waterloo, ON" (prepared by HGC Engineering, dated July 24, 2024).
For the severed lands, the agreement shall also specify that an update to
the noise study assessing noise impacts associated with King Street West
shall be completed prior to site plan approval of any future development
on these lands.
3. That the Owner/Developer submit the consent review fee of $350 per
application to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo.
Document Number: 4971747 Version: 2 Page 7 of 8
Page 176 of 246
General Comments:
If any other applications are required to facilitate the application additional fees and/or
requirements may apply. Any submission requirements may be subject to peer review,
at the owner/applicant's expense as per By-law 24-052.
Any future development on the lands subject to the above -noted consent applications
will be subject to the provisions of Regional Development Charge By-law 19-037 or any
successor thereof.
Prior to final approval, City staff must be in receipt of the above -noted Regional
condition clearances.
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.
Thank you,
Will Towns, MCIP RPP
Senior Planner
Regional Growth, Development and Sustainability Services
Regional Municipality of Waterloo
Document Number: 4971747 Version: 2 Page 8 of 8
Page 177 of 246
May 5, 2025
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: B2025-014 & B2025-015 — 508 & 512 Fall Harvest Place
Marilyn Mills
City of Kitchener
200 King Street West
Kitchener, ON N2G 407
Dear Marilyn Mills,
Re: Applications for Consent B 2025-014 & B 2025-015
508 & 512 Fall Harvest Place, City of Kitchener
Applicant: Tony Bocchino
via email
Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff have reviewed the above -noted
consent applications for two lot line adjustments.
Recommendation
GRCA Planning and Regulation Services has no objection to the proposed consent
applications.
GRCA Comments
GRCA has reviewed these applications under the Mandatory Programs and Services
Regulation (Ontario Regulation 686/21), including acting on behalf of the Province
regarding natural hazards identified in Section 5.2 of the Provincial Planning Statement
(PPS, 2024), as a regulatory authority under Ontario Regulation 41/24, 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 lands to be severed and
merged with 508 and 512 Fall Harvest Place are adjacent to valley slopes and contain
the regulated allowance adjacent to the valley slopes. The retained lands owned by the
GRCA contain the Grand River, floodplain, valley slopes, wetlands, and the regulated
allowance adjacent to these features. A copy of GRCA's resource mapping is attached.
Due to the presence of the above -noted features, portions of the subject lands are
regulated by the GRCA under Ontario Regulation 41/24 — Prohibited Activities,
Exemptions and Permits 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 41/24.
The consent applications propose lot line adjustments to convey two parcels of land to
508 and 512 Fall Harvest Place. GRCA Planning and Regulation Services staff have
reviewed the proposed applications and we do not have any concerns with the lot line
adjustments.
Member of Conservation Ontario, representing Ontario's 36 Conservation Authorities I The Grand — A Canadian Heritage River
Page 178 of 246
GRCA Property Department staff are working with the applicant to coordinate the
consent applications and any related interests as the current owner of the lands to be
conveyed.
Plan Review Fees
Consistent with GRCA's approved fee schedule, these applications are considered
minor consent applications. Since these applications were reviewed together, the
applicant will be invoiced one fee in the amount of $465.00 for GRCA's review of the
applications.
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: Tony Bocchino (via email)
Chris Meilleur & Joel Doherty, GRCA (via email)
Page 179 of 246
LO _r_
N v
mQ C7 LL U mho"" E
N 1 _ ¢ Ct � Ea�o O
O N r.) �? �'� ow
� V LJ
m p L to iT
U N i7 C� U L d "vow
o w a n. F
r
p_ Q a U e� eo V 4 `o. c n ut _ v - M
� M `X as u7 CC L
cu N C L 1 4? C L.L Sf] o w ��2 U N V L o<-0 o
Q O CD F=G .� a s n ar m: ? m .2 .m ¢� = 3��va- z
N �° a s dpi tla m m W W W W as E v
m F —2 n a p p — > > d4 gty,} ur .- 'LE
-
'm w w o w` u� O H m qJj Y Y Y Y a �"��
C1 d
p0 00
T d q v 'von
22
LL in G7 I ET—! U o r in B° E 0 �7
°
L
ZJ 5
4_ v ;
L
CO
a
La
C: - rss
Y U
tY (D
�} a -
W �
c
cn
LL
c
m CD
cc _
(D
T3 C) O
{ll
j 1 a
W —
n] Vtl)]
L `u
LL
O = CNt
L
u7
7:7 LL
N-0'co
m OW
N
x
U
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Hello,
LANDUSEPLANNING
Committee of Adiustment (SM)
KITCHENER - 512 FALLSHARVEST PLACE - B2025-014
Monday, May 12, 2025 2:52:44 PM
We are in receipt of your Application for Consent, B2025-014 dated 2025-04-11. We have reviewed the documents
concerning the noted Plan and have no comments or concerns at this time_ Our preliminary review considers issues
affecting Hydro One's 'High Voltage Facilities and Corridor Lands' only.
For proposals affecting'Low Voltage Distribution Facilities' the Owner/Applicant should consult their local area
Distribution Supplier. Where Hydro One is the local supplier the Owner/Applicant must contact the Hydro subdivision
group at subdivision@Hydroone.com or 1-866-272-3330.
To confirm if Hydro One is your local distributor please follow the following link: Stonncentre (hydroone.com)
Please select "Search" and locate the address in question by entering the address or by zooming in and out of the snap
? a
MENU HELP SEARCH
I
hyd tune
Customers Affected:0 15000 501-5000 0 51-500 0 21-50 V e=20 0 Multiple ® Crew —Service Area
u sir
Q0ttaw Montreal
��
V. ® r
Hunt:5veli2 417 417
40Q 17 � o
5 C,
rd� � O 4ifi A
0Orlin Kawartha
aoa � Lakes vis
° & P2t2rh ,Ugi
0 Kin
9ell�ville �
s 115
nflCeo dWaf Watertown
'4° ' a
5 Lzranlpltono Toronto
o o
Kitchei r � ar,o
o o Mississauga
a , Hamilton
Rochester
4031 Mao data 92019 Google 50 km 6____J Terms of Use
If you have any further questions or inquiries, please contact Customer Service at 1-888-664-9376 or e-mail
CustomerCommunicationsgHydroOne.com to be connected to your Local Operations Centre
If you have any questions please feel free to contact myself.
Thank you,
Land Use Planning Department
Hydro One Networks Inc.
Email: LandUsePlanninggHydroOne_com
Burlir
Page 181 of 246
Staff Report
r
JR
Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment
DATE OF MEETING: May 20, 2025
SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Manager, Development Approvals
519-783-8913
PREPARED BY: Brian Bateman, Senior Planner, 519-783-8905
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 3
DATE OF REPORT: May 7, 2025
REPORT NO.: DSD -2025-232
SUBJECT: Consent Application B2025-015 — 512 Fall Harvest Place
RECOMMENDATION:
That Consent Application B2025-014 requesting consent to sever a triangular-
shaped parcel of land from Part 3 on Reference Plan 58R-7207 owned by the Grand
River Conservation Authority and measuring 35.8 metres by 14.3 metres by 27.6
metres having an area of 180.2 square metres, and convey it as a lot addition to Lot
26, 58M-527, addressed as 512 Fall Harvest Place, as shown on survey sketch
prepared by Guenther Rueb Surveying Limited, dated March 19, 2025., BE
APPROVED subject to the following conditions:
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 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
Director, Development and Housing Approvals, and registered on title to the
*** 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 246
"Severed Parcel" (as shown in the Proposed Severance Sketch Plan, prepared
by Guenther Rueb Surveying Limited, dated March 19, 2025 (Figure 4, DSD -
2025 -231) and Lot 26, 58M-527 (legal description of "receiving parcel"), to
provide the following:
"That title to the Severed Lands and Lot 26, 58M-527 shall at all times be
maintained in identical ownership and said lands shall be treated as one lot or
parcel with respect to the Planning Act and neither of the Severed Lands nor
Lot 26 58M-527 shall be separately conveyed, or otherwise dealt with, without
the prior consent of the City of Kitchener, with the criteria for granting or
withholding such consent to be the applicable considerations to be applied if
a consent for severance was applied for under the Planning Act, as if section
50 (3) and /or section 50 (5) of that statute applied to such conveyance or
dealing." and
5. That the Owner's Solicitor shall provide a Solicitor's Undertaking to register an
Application Consolidation Parcels for the Severed Lands and Lot 26, 58M-527
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.
Alternatively, if in the opinion of the City Solicitor, an Application Consolidation
Parcels cannot be registered on title, the Owner shall take such alternative
measures and provide such alternative documents to ensure that the severed
parcel and receiving parcel are not separately encumbered, conveyed, or
otherwise transferred from one another and shall remain in common
ownership, at the discretion of and to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
• The purpose of this report is to assess a consent application requesting to convey a
piece of land owned by the GRCA and add it as a lot addition to 512 Fall Harvest
Place.
• The key finding of this report is it represents `good planning' by creating a lot that is
now consistent in size and shape as other lots within the plan of subdivision.
• 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 512 Fall Harvest Place within the Pioneer Tower
neighbourhood (see Figure 1). It is an irregular-shaped lot that is currently vacant. The lot
backs onto lands owned by the Grand River Conversation Authority
Page 183 of 246
s9
,i
� lyoad undo' w�ranrN
Figure 1 — Aerial photo of 508 and 512 Fall Harvest 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.
508 Fall Harvest Place and the lands to be added are zoned `RES -2: Low Rise Residential
Two Zone' in 2019-051.
City of Kitchener Appendix A (Consolidated ) - Zoning Grid Schedule 280
Figure 2 — Schedule 280 of By-law 2019-051
Page 184 of 246
E-
SN�RJ
s
Iszool
Is000l _ a
PAG P �_ Isonol lR�l
15aoo2
-------------
__ _________= =
---------------
----------------------
Purchasing
____ _______ �. ___________ __
�4 _ _ ---------------
is triangular -__ ________mat_=,=______
�iGRCk and
�z�l
ddin9 as lot —__
a .—"___.....___—_._.._ __--__
dditios to _
__
zr --
--L08 & 512 Fall ----------
-- =-Harvest PL __'-----
_---
z_=_ -_ __-_-_ _____ _z=_zz___zz__ z_.=_ __ ___
_____
----------- r_=r_-....__c = -rr- __=rrrrr=rrrr==._c-_-_c= =r_ _sgds__...._-_
==
____ ____
_____
x�m 1_________________
f—...a,w. mae: xeaee� B� a �sApplic bleto Byiaw20A9-0.5
(eel s�sv�rm.�a�g},-Law 2013051 riooa�ay rfa:ara ®Ecological Restoration Meas
oM Sa� -be,
arrF ]t ] r�R�..l c�.e� AL1 �xna lMhurl-'�A'� — E-.,—Hnc�rrf ��Sinnifircnf lNilrllifa -i--d l vrMfmmc � �
Figure 2 — Schedule 280 of By-law 2019-051
Page 184 of 246
Figure 3 — Photo of 508 and 512 Fall Harvest Place
A site visit occurred on May 4, 2025 (see Figure 3).
SkETCm "sEWE mcc APPLIGR m
.-rf OF KITCHENER
g2LL e I; -&-- LTJ . T . T. i
WETR IC
rvex� cacaimRM wurT OT u3T Ii.6GNLLY3 fi9di�n � GAMLRVGn
``. LOT as
LST 2®vff"�'�
wnY�uu�� �i267 \1 Tf'
qq� ash`
a
k SEYER�E 2
PROPOSED
LCY4 23 SCV1EFMNCE i 4
o
was RE[ApA,.
It7E
uwos
Yom"
� RIOBE HEI9FiPJ InIC.
Figure 4 — Surveyor's Plan
THIS Is ROT
A PLAN OF SURVEY
tsu. m, 2—
WGRnik nLca au�aa-rny . a Tin
Page 185 of 246
The purpose of the application is to convey a triangular-shaped piece of land owned by the
GRCA and convey it as a lot addition shown in Figure 4.
REPORT:
Planning Comments:
In considering all the relevant Provincial legislation, Regional and City policies and
regulations, Planning staff offer the following comments:
Provincial Planning Statement (PPS 2024)
Staff are satisfied that the proposed severance application is consistent with the Provincial
Planning Statement in general and as it related to housing policies in Chapter 2 regarding
intensification and facilitating housing options. Section 2.2 1 (b) states that Planning
authorities shall provide for an appropriate range and mix of housing options and densities
to meet projected needs of current and future residents of the regional market area by
permitting and facilitating all housing options required to meet the social, health, economic
and well-being requirements of current and future residents.
Regional Official Plan (ROP):
ROP Urban Area policies state that the focus of the Region's future growth shall be within
the Urban Area. The subject lands fall within the `Urban Area' and 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 and community infrastructure required for the
proposed residential development, including transportation networks, municipal water and
wastewater systems, and a broad range of social and public health services. Regional
polices require 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. Staff are satisfied that the proposed
severance applications adhere to these policies and conforms to the ROP.
City's Official Plan (2014)
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;
Page 186 of 246
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;
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."
Zoning By-law 2019-051
The subject properties are zoned as `Low Rise Residential Two Zone (RES -2)'. The
purpose of this zone is to accommodate a limited range of low-density dwelling types on
larger lots. Lots in the general vicinity are considered larger lots and therefore the lot
addition square off the lot making it consistent with the prevailing pattern.
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 lot addition 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 lot is suitable for the use of the lands
and compatible with the surrounding community because of the lot addition. The lands
front onto an established public street and are serviced with municipal services. Staff are
further of the opinion that the proposal is consistent with the Region of Waterloo Official
Plan, the Provincial Planning Statement, and is good planning and in the public interest.
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 lots are
desirable and appropriate.
Environmental Planning Comments:
Be advised that the land (owned by the GRCA) to be conveyed to the Fall Harvest
properties is regulated by the GRCA as being adjacent to slope erosion hazard, and in
proximity to floodplain and wetlands. As no development is proposed within the land to be
severed there is no concern.
Heritage Planning Comments:
No concerns.
Building Division Comments:
The Building Division has no objections to the proposed consent.
Page 187 of 246
Engineering Division Comments:
No concerns.
Parks and Cemeteries/Forestry Division Comments:
This is a lot addition and no parkland dedication is required.
Transportation Planning Comments:
No concerns.
Region of Waterloo Comments:
Regional staff have reviewed the application and have the following comments to provide:
Environmental Threats: For City staff's awareness, the Threat Inventory Database (TID)
identifies no threats on or adjacent to 512 Fall Harvest Place.
Regional Fees: Regional staff acknowledge receipt of the required $350 fees for review of
a consent application (received May 1, 2025). No additional fees are required.
Regional staff have no objection to this application.
GRCA Comments:
GRCA has reviewed these applications under the Mandatory Programs and Services
Regulation (Ontario Regulation 686/21), including acting on behalf of the Province
regarding natural hazards identified in Section 5.2 of the Provincial Planning Statement
(PPS, 2024), as a regulatory authority under Ontario Regulation 41/24, and as a public
body under the Planning Act as per our CA Board approved policies.
The information currently available at this office indicates that the lands to be severed and
merged with 508 and 512 Fall Harvest Place are adjacent to valley slopes and contain the
regulated allowance adjacent to the valley slopes. The retained lands owned by the GRCA
contain the Grand River, floodplain, valley slopes, wetlands, and the regulated allowance
adjacent to these features. A copy of GRCA's resource mapping is attached.
Due to the presence of the above -noted features, portions of the subject lands are
regulated by the GRCA under Ontario Regulation 41/24 — Prohibited Activities,
Exemptions and Permits 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 41/24.
The Consent applications propose lot line adjustments to convey two parcels of land to
508 and 512 Fall Harvest Place. GRCA Planning and Regulation Services staff have
reviewed the proposed applications, and we do not have any concerns with the lot line
adjustments.
STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT:
This report supports the delivery of core services.
Page 188 of 246
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 Planning Statement (PPS 2024)
• Regional Official Plan (ROP)
• Official Plan (2014)
• Zoning By- 2019-051
Page 189 of 246
N*
Region of Waterloo
Connie Owen
Administrative Clerk, Legislative Services
City of Kitchener
200 King Street West
Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7
CofA(a-)kitchener.ca
PLANNING, DEVELOPMENTAND
LEGISLATIVE SERVICES
150 Frederick Street, 8t" floor
Kitchener Ontario N2G 4J3 Canada
Telephone: 519-575-4400
Fax: 519-575-4449
www.regionofwaterloo.ca
Will Towns, MCIP, RPP
519-616-1868
File: D20-20/25 KIT
May 5, 2025
Re: Comments on Consent Applications: B2025-014 to B2025-017
Committee of Adjustment Hearing, May 20, 2025
City of Kitchener
Please accept the following comments for the above -noted consent applications to be
considered at the upcoming Committee of Adjustment Hearing.
Document Number: 4971747 Version: 2 Page 1 of 8
Page 190 of 246
File No:
B2025-014
Address:
508 Fall Harvest Place
Description:
Lot 27, Plan 58M-527
Owner:
Mark Fackoury
Applicant:
Tony Bocchino
The owner/applicant is seeking consent to add lands currently owned by the Grand
River Conservation Authority to a residential lot located at 508 Fall Harvest Place. The
application proposes to sever 180.2 square metres from Part 3, 58R-7207 and add
these lands to 508 Fall Harvest Place.
Regional staff have reviewed the application and have the following comments to
provide:
Environmental Threats: For City staff's awareness, the Threat Inventory Database
(TID) identifies no threats on or adjacent to 508 Fall Harvest Place.
Regional Fees: Regional staff acknowledge receipt of the required $350 fees for review
of a consent application (received May 1, 2025). No additional fees are required.
Regional staff have no objection to this application.
Document Number: 4971747 Version: 2 Page 2 of 8
Page 191 of 246
File No: B2025-015
Address: 512 Fall Harvest Place
Description: Lot 26, Plan 58M-527
Owner: Deer Ridge Heights Inc.
Applicant: Tony Bocchino
The owner/applicant is seeking consent to add lands currently owned by the Grand
River Conservation Authority to a residential lot at 512 Fall Harvest Place. The
application seeks to sever 342.5 square metres Part 3, 58R-7207 and add these lands
to 512 Fall Harvest Place.
Regional staff have reviewed the application and have the following comments to
provide:
Environmental Threats: For City staff's awareness, the Threat Inventory Database
(TID) identifies no threats on or adjacent to 512 Fall Harvest Place.
Regional Fees: Regional staff acknowledge receipt of the required $350 fees for review
of a consent application (received May 1, 2025). No additional fees are required.
Regional staff have no objection to this application.
Document Number: 4971747 Version: 2 Page 3 of 8
Page 192 of 246
File No: B2025-016
Address: 1950 Fischer Hallman Road
Description: Part Lots 158 and 159 German Company Tract
Owner: Schlegel Urban Developments Corp.
Applicant: GSP Group (c/o Richard Kelly-Ruetz)
The owner/applicant has applied for a consent to facilitate a long-term lease in excess
of 21 years in favour of a McDonald's on the subject lands (as previously reviewed by
Regional staff through site plan application SP23/024/F/CD). The proposed lease area
is approximately 1,457.1 square metres and consists of the restaurant building, stacked
drive-through lanes, seven parking spaces, and associated landscaping and walkway
areas.
Regional staff have reviewed the application and have the following comments to
provide:
Threats Inventory Database: For City staff's awareness, the Threat Inventory
Database (TID) identifies no threats on or adjacent to 1950 Fischer Hallman Road.
Regional Consent Review Fee: Regional staff have not received the fee for consent
review of $350 per application. The fee payment is requested as a condition of
approval.
Regional staff have no objection to B2025-016 subject to the following condition:
1. That the Owner/Developer submit the consent review fee of $350 to the Regional
Municipality of Waterloo.
Document Number: 4971747 Version: 2 Page 4 of 8
Page 193 of 246
File No: B2025-017
Address: 864 King Street West
Description: XLT 306, 319-320 PL 385 KITCHENER; PT LT 304-305, 312 PL 385
KITCHENER AS IN 1309823, SAVE & EXCEPT PTS 1 & 2 ON EX PL
WR838553 & PTS 1, 6 & 7, 58R18537;TM & S/T 725378; T/W 694748
Owners: Vive Development Corp.
Applicant: Craig Dumart
The owner/applicant is seeking consent to sever lands at 864 King Street West to
create a new parcel totalling 3,045.1 square metres to facilitate the development of the
lands in two phases with a 45 -storey residential development inclusive of 304 residential
units. The retained parcel is proposed to be 3,259.6 square metres. A blanket easement
is also proposed that would apply to both properties for access and servicing. Regional
staff provided pre -submission consultation comments on this proposal on March 4,
2025.
Source Water Protection: The property is located within an area subject to Part IV of
the Clean Water Act. Regional staff note that the applicant negotiated a provisional Risk
Management Plan with the Risk Management Official(rmo(a�regionofwaterloo.ca) in fall
2024 applicable to previous zoning by-law amendment application ZBA24/022/K/ES;
staff also understand that a final Risk Management Plan is currently being negotiated
with the applicant in association with an in -progress site plan application. A valid
Section 59 Notice for site plan has not yet been issued.
Notwithstanding the above and consistent with pre -consultation comments, issuance of
a valid Notice of Source Protection Plan Compliance (Section 59 Notice) is required for
this consent application (to be required as a condition) separate from the Risk
Management Plan process for site plan. The applicant is asked to contact the Risk
Management Official to obtain the Notice for this consent application.
Environmental Noise: The Region is in receipt of a noise study related to the proposed
development on these lands entitled "Noise Feasibility Study, Proposed Residential
Development, 864-872 King Street West, Kitchener, Regional Municipality of Waterloo,
ON" (prepared by HGC Engineering, dated July 24, 2024). Regional staff have reviewed
the study in relation to the Regional road noise source (King Street West) and have no
concerns with the study or its recommendations (which pertain only to the retained
lands). Regional staff request that the owner/developer enter into a registered
agreement with the Region to implement the study's recommendations. Specifically, the
following will be required for inclusion in the agreement:
- The provision of central air conditioning for all units.
- Noise warning clauses included in any agreements of Offers of Purchase and
Sale, lease/rental agreements and condominium declarations:
East, west, and south facades:
Type B.-
Document
:Document Number: 4971747 Version: 2 Page 5 of 8
Page 194 of 246
Purchasers/tenants are advised that despite the inclusion of noise control
features in the development and within the building units, sound levels due to
increasing road traffic (King Street West) may on occasions interfere with some
activities of the dwelling occupants as the sound levels exceed the sound level
limits of the Municipality and the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and
Parks.
Type C.-
This
:This dwelling unit has been designed with the provision for 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 Municipality and the Ministry of the
Environment, Conservation and Parks.
Regional staff also note that an update to the noise study will be required in association
with a future Planning Act application pertaining to the proposed Phase 2 of the
development (to be located on the severed lands).
Environmental Threats: For the City's awareness, the Regional Threats Inventory
Database identifies "high" threats identified in the Regional Threats Inventory Database
for the subject lands (associated with past operations of Electrohome Ltd. and CTV
Television Inc.), as well as records of an historical landfill on and adjacent to the subject
lands. This information was also provided to the applicant in Regional comments
associated with ZBA24/022/K/ES on September 13, 2024.
Document Number: 4971747 Version: 2 Page 6 of 8
Page 195 of 246
Regional Consent Review Fee: Regional staff have not received the fee for consent
application review of $350 as per Regional By-law 24-052. The fee payment is
requested as a condition of consent approval.
Regional staff have no objection to Consent File B2025-016 subject to the
following conditions:
That the Owner/Developer provide a valid Notice of Source Protection
Plan Compliance (Section 59 Notice) to the satisfaction of the Regional
Municipality of Waterloo.
2. That for the retained lands, the Owner/Developer enter into a registered
development agreement with the Regional Municipality of Waterloo to
implement the environmental noise recommendations specific to noise
impacts from King Street West (Regional Road No. 8) identified in the
noise study report entitled "Noise Feasibility Study, Proposed Residential
Development, 864-872 King Street West, Kitchener, Regional Municipality
of Waterloo, ON" (prepared by HGC Engineering, dated July 24, 2024).
For the severed lands, the agreement shall also specify that an update to
the noise study assessing noise impacts associated with King Street West
shall be completed prior to site plan approval of any future development
on these lands.
3. That the Owner/Developer submit the consent review fee of $350 per
application to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo.
Document Number: 4971747 Version: 2 Page 7 of 8
Page 196 of 246
General Comments:
If any other applications are required to facilitate the application additional fees and/or
requirements may apply. Any submission requirements may be subject to peer review,
at the owner/applicant's expense as per By-law 24-052.
Any future development on the lands subject to the above -noted consent applications
will be subject to the provisions of Regional Development Charge By-law 19-037 or any
successor thereof.
Prior to final approval, City staff must be in receipt of the above -noted Regional
condition clearances.
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.
Thank you,
Will Towns, MCIP RPP
Senior Planner
Regional Growth, Development and Sustainability Services
Regional Municipality of Waterloo
Document Number: 4971747 Version: 2 Page 8 of 8
Page 197 of 246
May 5, 2025
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: B2025-014 & B2025-015 — 508 & 512 Fall Harvest Place
Marilyn Mills
City of Kitchener
200 King Street West
Kitchener, ON N2G 407
Dear Marilyn Mills,
Re: Applications for Consent B 2025-014 & B 2025-015
508 & 512 Fall Harvest Place, City of Kitchener
Applicant: Tony Bocchino
via email
Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff have reviewed the above -noted
consent applications for two lot line adjustments.
Recommendation
GRCA Planning and Regulation Services has no objection to the proposed consent
applications.
GRCA Comments
GRCA has reviewed these applications under the Mandatory Programs and Services
Regulation (Ontario Regulation 686/21), including acting on behalf of the Province
regarding natural hazards identified in Section 5.2 of the Provincial Planning Statement
(PPS, 2024), as a regulatory authority under Ontario Regulation 41/24, 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 lands to be severed and
merged with 508 and 512 Fall Harvest Place are adjacent to valley slopes and contain
the regulated allowance adjacent to the valley slopes. The retained lands owned by the
GRCA contain the Grand River, floodplain, valley slopes, wetlands, and the regulated
allowance adjacent to these features. A copy of GRCA's resource mapping is attached.
Due to the presence of the above -noted features, portions of the subject lands are
regulated by the GRCA under Ontario Regulation 41/24 — Prohibited Activities,
Exemptions and Permits 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 41/24.
The consent applications propose lot line adjustments to convey two parcels of land to
508 and 512 Fall Harvest Place. GRCA Planning and Regulation Services staff have
reviewed the proposed applications and we do not have any concerns with the lot line
adjustments.
Member of Conservation Ontario, representing Ontario's 36 Conservation Authorities I The Grand — A Canadian Heritage River
Page 198 of 246
GRCA Property Department staff are working with the applicant to coordinate the
consent applications and any related interests as the current owner of the lands to be
conveyed.
Plan Review Fees
Consistent with GRCA's approved fee schedule, these applications are considered
minor consent applications. Since these applications were reviewed together, the
applicant will be invoiced one fee in the amount of $465.00 for GRCA's review of the
applications.
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: Tony Bocchino (via email)
Chris Meilleur & Joel Doherty, GRCA (via email)
Page 199 of 246
LO _r_
N v
mQ C7 LL U
N 1 _ Ct �
U) 2 O d N
�" C] C7 -
o ow
L m .¢ as C� < � ova n. F
r
p E_ Q a U e� eo V 4 `o. c n ut � _cu
f as u7 CC a C" a L o
N C 4} C tl�] �y �j LL 0 d w ��2 � U N v L o< 0 o
Q G .� a s n ar m a m a ar ¢ = 3 a U z
CN �° a s dpi tla m m W W W W as E v
m F —2 n a p p — > > d4 gty,} ur .- 'LE
-
'm w w o w` u� O H m qJj Y Y Y Y a �"-
�
C1 d - T
p d q u 'v n
LL in G7 I 22
ET—! U o r o 2 ° E 0 �7
JuMN
L
v;
L
CO
a
La
C: - rss
a) J —�
�} a -
W �
c
cn
cp _
T3 C) O
j 1 a
7 (D _
W( —
n] tl�]
L VJ L.L`u
O = CNt
L
u7OW
7:7 LL
co
J ig
x
U
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Hello,
LANDUSEPLANNING
Committee of Adiustment (SM)
KITCHENER - 512 FALLSHARVEST PLACE - B2025-014
Monday, May 12, 2025 2:52:44 PM
We are in receipt of your Application for Consent, B2025-014 dated 2025-04-11. We have reviewed the documents
concerning the noted Plan and have no comments or concerns at this time_ Our preliminary review considers issues
affecting Hydro One's 'High Voltage Facilities and Corridor Lands' only.
For proposals affecting'Low Voltage Distribution Facilities' the Owner/Applicant should consult their local area
Distribution Supplier. Where Hydro One is the local supplier the Owner/Applicant must contact the Hydro subdivision
group at subdivision@Hydroone.com or 1-866-272-3330.
To confirm if Hydro One is your local distributor please follow the following link: Stonncentre (hydroone.com)
Please select "Search" and locate the address in question by entering the address or by zooming in and out of the snap
? a
MENU HELP SEARCH
I
hyd tune
Customers Affected:0 15000 501-5000 0 51-500 0 21-50 V e=20 0 Multiple ® Crew —Service Area
u sir
Q0ttaw Montreal
��
V. ® r
Hunt:5veli2 417 417
40Q 17 � o
5 C,
rd� � O 4ifi A
0Orlin Kawartha
aoa � Lakes vis
° & P2t2rh ,Ugi
0 Kin
9ell�ville �
s 115
nflCeo dWaf Watertown
'4° ' a
5 Lzranlpltono Toronto
o o
Kitchei r � ar,o
o o Mississauga
a , Hamilton
Rochester
4031 Mao data 92019 Google 50 km 6____J Terms of Use
If you have any further questions or inquiries, please contact Customer Service at 1-888-664-9376 or e-mail
CustomerCommunicationsgHydroOne.com to be connected to your Local Operations Centre
If you have any questions please feel free to contact myself.
Thank you,
Land Use Planning Department
Hydro One Networks Inc.
Email: LandUsePlanninggHydroOne_com
Burlir
Page 201 of 246
Staff Report
r
JR
Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment
DATE OF MEETING: May 20, 2025
SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Manager, Development Approvals
519-783-8913
PREPARED BY: Evan Wittmann, Senior Planner, 519-783-8523
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 5
DATE OF REPORT: May 7, 2025
REPORT NO.: DSD -2025-210
SUBJECT: Consent Application B2025-016 — 1950 Fischer Hallman Road
RECOMMENDATION:
That Consent Application B2025-016 for 1950 Fischer Hallman Road to facilitate a
Lease Agreement for an area of 1,457 square metres in excess of 21 years in favour
of a McDonald's Restaurant, in accordance with the Site Plan Drawing, Attachment
'A', submitted with Consent Application B2025-016, 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 verify, in writing, whether the Lease Agreement, is affected by any
required or existing easements and/or restricted covenants, to confirm the
necessary arrangements for servicing, shared parking and access are in place.
5. That the Owner verify, in writing, that the subject property has been developed in
accordance with the Approved Site Plan Agreement, and if necessary, the Site
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Page 202 of 246
Plan Agreement is to be amended to include any required revisions and/or
updates.
6. That the Owner verify, in writing, that the Lease Agreement complies with and
fulfils all pertinent provisions of the Ontario Planning Act.
7. That the Owner/Developer submit the consent review fee of $350 to the Regional
Municipality of Waterloo.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
• The purpose of this report is to review and make recommendations with respect to the
Consent Application for a long-term lease agreement for 1950 Fischer Hallman Road.
• The key finding of this report is that staff recommends that the application be
approved with conditions.
• 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 in the southwestern area of the City at the southeastern
corner of the intersection of Fischer Hallman Road and Huron Road. The subject property
features several commercial buildings and the full build out of the property is currently
underway. The long-term lease application applies to the McDonald's restaurant on the
property.
The subject property is identified as `Community Node' on Map 2 — Urban Structure and is
designated `Mixed -Use Two' on Map 22e — Rosenberg Secondary Plan Land Use Plan in
the City's 2014 Official Plan.
The property is zoned `Medium Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU -2, 637R, 424U)' in
Zoning By-law 85-1.
The purpose of the application is to facilitate a Lease Agreement in excess of 21 years in
favour of a McDonald's Restaurant. The leased area totals approximately 1,457 square
metres and consists of the restaurant building, drive-through stacking lanes, 7 parking
spaces, and some associated landscaped/walkway areas surrounding these lands.
The owner of the McDonald's Restaurant located at 1950 Fischer Hallman Road is
requesting consent, as per Section 50 (3) of the Ontario Planning Act, to permit the
execution of a long-term lease (agreement) with Schlegel Urban Developments Corp for a
period exceeding 21 years in duration.
The building is existing and no new Gross Floor Area (GFA) is proposed.
Page 203 of 246
MOM
Figure 1: View Of McDonald's From Interior Of Subject Property (Taken May 2, 2025)
10
Mcpona
T'"; DRIVE TLul
Figure 2: View Of McDonald's From Fischer Hallman Road (Taken May 2, 2025)
Page 204 of 246
REPORT:
Planning Comments:
In considering all the relevant Provincial legislation, Regional and City policies and
regulations, Planning staff offer the following comments:
Provincial Planning Statement (PPS 2024)
Regional Official Plan (ROP):
As the proposal is to facilitate a long-term lease of existing restaurant for a period greater
than 21 years, no lots are being created or lot lines being adjusted, and no physical changes
to the existing development are proposed, it is Planning staff's opinion that no sections of the
PPS, Growth Plan or Regional Official Plan are specifically relevant, and that the application
would conform to these plans and policies.
City's Official Plan (2014)
With respect to the Official Plan, no new parcels will be created through this application. The
consent will not frustrate the planned function or ability of the site to operate (with shared
access and parking) or appear to impede the outcome of any future planning processes.
The use of property is in conformity with the City's Urban Structure and land use designation.
In considering that the intent of the proposal is to facilitate an administrative consent required
by the Planning Act and that no changes are proposed to the existing, permitted commercial
development on the lands, it is Planning staff's opinion that the proposed consent does not
adversely impact any policies of the Official Plan.
Zonina By-law 85-1
With respect to the City's Zoning By-law the use of the subject lands for a restaurant is a
permitted use in the'MU-2' Zone and the site as developed comprehensively complies
with the Zoning By-law with respect to setbacks and parking. The long-term lease would not
negatively impact the remainder of the property and no minor variances are required as a
result of the long-term lease.
Environmental Planning Comments:
No Environmental comments or concerns.
Heritage Planning Comments:
No concerns. The property is located adjacent to the Huron Road Cultural Heritage
Landscape (CHL), and to 1944 Fischer Hallman Road, which is listed as a non -designated
property of cultural heritage value or interest on the City's Municipal Heritage Register.
Building Division Comments:
The Building Division has no objections to the proposed consent.
Engineering Division Comments:
As there is no lot being created Engineering has no concerns.
Parks/Operations Division Comments:
Long term lease. No new lot is created, and no parkland dedication is required.
Page 205 of 246
Transportation Planning Comments:
Transportation Services have no concerns with this application.
Region of Waterloo Comments:
That the Owner/Developer submit the consent review fee of $350 to the Regional
Municipality of Waterloo.
GRCA Comments:
GRCA has no objection to the approval of the above application. The subject property
does not contain any natural hazards such as watercourses, floodplains, shorelines,
wetlands, or valley slopes. The property is not subject to Ontario Regulation 41/24 and,
therefore, a 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.
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 Planning Statement (PPS 2024)
• Regional Official Plan (ROP)
• Official Plan (2014)
• Zoning By-law 85-1
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A — Site Plan
Page 206 of 246
ATTACHMENT A:
rnKD/0
r V O ~
°.;12
w �
LLJ .4
mi
m' A
lue:mddVAgp-mOspuelleuaR!Ppt� ,.:-.;� - (/7 i� Lu
1�
l
peoN uomH
O
V
[V
N
4
O _
W
LL
U ¢
m o
U)
F-
7" Z
W
IDL
J fL'
J w
w
J
w m _
W
J =
0 `4
w., J LL-
c)
Lc) or
Page 207 of 246
it 1,
-
LL
LT!
u�
yyrW
G E
V l
LL
peoN uomH
O
V
[V
N
4
O _
W
LL
U ¢
m o
U)
F-
7" Z
W
IDL
J fL'
J w
w
J
w m _
W
J =
0 `4
w., J LL-
c)
Lc) or
Page 207 of 246
N*
Region of Waterloo
Connie Owen
Administrative Clerk, Legislative Services
City of Kitchener
200 King Street West
Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7
CofA(a-)kitchener.ca
PLANNING, DEVELOPMENTAND
LEGISLATIVE SERVICES
150 Frederick Street, 8t" floor
Kitchener Ontario N2G 4J3 Canada
Telephone: 519-575-4400
Fax: 519-575-4449
www.regionofwaterloo.ca
Will Towns, MCIP, RPP
519-616-1868
File: D20-20/25 KIT
May 5, 2025
Re: Comments on Consent Applications: B2025-014 to B2025-017
Committee of Adjustment Hearing, May 20, 2025
City of Kitchener
Please accept the following comments for the above -noted consent applications to be
considered at the upcoming Committee of Adjustment Hearing.
Document Number: 4971747 Version: 2 Page 1 of 8
Page 208 of 246
File No: B2025-014
Address: 508 Fall Harvest Place
Description: Lot 27, Plan 58M-527
Owner: Mark Fackoury
Applicant: Tony Bocchino
The owner/applicant is seeking consent to add lands currently owned by the Grand
River Conservation Authority to a residential lot located at 508 Fall Harvest Place. The
application proposes to sever 180.2 square metres from Part 3, 58R-7207 and add
these lands to 508 Fall Harvest Place.
Regional staff have reviewed the application and have the following comments to
provide:
Environmental Threats: For City staff's awareness, the Threat Inventory Database
(TID) identifies no threats on or adjacent to 508 Fall Harvest Place.
Regional Fees: Regional staff acknowledge receipt of the required $350 fees for review
of a consent application (received May 1, 2025). No additional fees are required.
Regional staff have no objection to this application.
Document Number: 4971747 Version: 2 Page 2 of 8
Page 209 of 246
File No: B2025-015
Address: 512 Fall Harvest Place
Description: Lot 26, Plan 58M-527
Owner: Deer Ridge Heights Inc.
Applicant: Tony Bocchino
The owner/applicant is seeking consent to add lands currently owned by the Grand
River Conservation Authority to a residential lot at 512 Fall Harvest Place. The
application seeks to sever 342.5 square metres Part 3, 58R-7207 and add these lands
to 512 Fall Harvest Place.
Regional staff have reviewed the application and have the following comments to
provide:
Environmental Threats: For City staff's awareness, the Threat Inventory Database
(TID) identifies no threats on or adjacent to 512 Fall Harvest Place.
Regional Fees: Regional staff acknowledge receipt of the required $350 fees for review
of a consent application (received May 1, 2025). No additional fees are required.
Regional staff have no objection to this application.
Document Number: 4971747 Version: 2 Page 3 of 8
Page 210 of 246
File No: B2025-016
Address: 1950 Fischer Hallman Road
Description: Part Lots 158 and 159 German Company Tract
Owner: Schlegel Urban Developments Corp.
Applicant: GSP Group (c/o Richard Kelly-Ruetz)
The owner/applicant has applied for a consent to facilitate a long-term lease in excess
of 21 years in favour of a McDonald's on the subject lands (as previously reviewed by
Regional staff through site plan application SP23/024/F/CD). The proposed lease area
is approximately 1,457.1 square metres and consists of the restaurant building, stacked
drive-through lanes, seven parking spaces, and associated landscaping and walkway
areas.
Regional staff have reviewed the application and have the following comments to
provide:
Threats Inventory Database: For City staff's awareness, the Threat Inventory
Database (TID) identifies no threats on or adjacent to 1950 Fischer Hallman Road.
Regional Consent Review Fee: Regional staff have not received the fee for consent
review of $350 per application. The fee payment is requested as a condition of
approval.
Regional staff have no objection to B2025-016 subject to the following condition:
1. That the Owner/Developer submit the consent review fee of $350 to the Regional
Municipality of Waterloo.
Document Number: 4971747 Version: 2 Page 4 of 8
Page 211 of 246
File No: B2025-017
Address: 864 King Street West
Description: XLT 306, 319-320 PL 385 KITCHENER; PT LT 304-305, 312 PL 385
KITCHENER AS IN 1309823, SAVE & EXCEPT PTS 1 & 2 ON EX PL
WR838553 & PTS 1, 6 & 7, 58R18537;TM & S/T 725378; T/W 694748
Owners: Vive Development Corp.
Applicant: Craig Dumart
The owner/applicant is seeking consent to sever lands at 864 King Street West to
create a new parcel totalling 3,045.1 square metres to facilitate the development of the
lands in two phases with a 45 -storey residential development inclusive of 304 residential
units. The retained parcel is proposed to be 3,259.6 square metres. A blanket easement
is also proposed that would apply to both properties for access and servicing. Regional
staff provided pre -submission consultation comments on this proposal on March 4,
2025.
Source Water Protection: The property is located within an area subject to Part IV of
the Clean Water Act. Regional staff note that the applicant negotiated a provisional Risk
Management Plan with the Risk Management Official(rmo(a�regionofwaterloo.ca) in fall
2024 applicable to previous zoning by-law amendment application ZBA24/022/K/ES;
staff also understand that a final Risk Management Plan is currently being negotiated
with the applicant in association with an in -progress site plan application. A valid
Section 59 Notice for site plan has not yet been issued.
Notwithstanding the above and consistent with pre -consultation comments, issuance of
a valid Notice of Source Protection Plan Compliance (Section 59 Notice) is required for
this consent application (to be required as a condition) separate from the Risk
Management Plan process for site plan. The applicant is asked to contact the Risk
Management Official to obtain the Notice for this consent application.
Environmental Noise: The Region is in receipt of a noise study related to the proposed
development on these lands entitled "Noise Feasibility Study, Proposed Residential
Development, 864-872 King Street West, Kitchener, Regional Municipality of Waterloo,
ON" (prepared by HGC Engineering, dated July 24, 2024). Regional staff have reviewed
the study in relation to the Regional road noise source (King Street West) and have no
concerns with the study or its recommendations (which pertain only to the retained
lands). Regional staff request that the owner/developer enter into a registered
agreement with the Region to implement the study's recommendations. Specifically, the
following will be required for inclusion in the agreement:
- The provision of central air conditioning for all units.
- Noise warning clauses included in any agreements of Offers of Purchase and
Sale, lease/rental agreements and condominium declarations:
East, west, and south facades:
Type B.-
Document
:Document Number: 4971747 Version: 2 Page 5 of 8
Page 212 of 246
Purchasers/tenants are advised that despite the inclusion of noise control
features in the development and within the building units, sound levels due to
increasing road traffic (King Street West) may on occasions interfere with some
activities of the dwelling occupants as the sound levels exceed the sound level
limits of the Municipality and the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and
Parks.
Type C.-
This
:This dwelling unit has been designed with the provision for 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 Municipality and the Ministry of the
Environment, Conservation and Parks.
Regional staff also note that an update to the noise study will be required in association
with a future Planning Act application pertaining to the proposed Phase 2 of the
development (to be located on the severed lands).
Environmental Threats: For the City's awareness, the Regional Threats Inventory
Database identifies "high" threats identified in the Regional Threats Inventory Database
for the subject lands (associated with past operations of Electrohome Ltd. and CTV
Television Inc.), as well as records of an historical landfill on and adjacent to the subject
lands. This information was also provided to the applicant in Regional comments
associated with ZBA24/022/K/ES on September 13, 2024.
Document Number: 4971747 Version: 2 Page 6 of 8
Page 213 of 246
Regional Consent Review Fee: Regional staff have not received the fee for consent
application review of $350 as per Regional By-law 24-052. The fee payment is
requested as a condition of consent approval.
Regional staff have no objection to Consent File B2025-016 subject to the
following conditions:
That the Owner/Developer provide a valid Notice of Source Protection
Plan Compliance (Section 59 Notice) to the satisfaction of the Regional
Municipality of Waterloo.
2. That for the retained lands, the Owner/Developer enter into a registered
development agreement with the Regional Municipality of Waterloo to
implement the environmental noise recommendations specific to noise
impacts from King Street West (Regional Road No. 8) identified in the
noise study report entitled "Noise Feasibility Study, Proposed Residential
Development, 864-872 King Street West, Kitchener, Regional Municipality
of Waterloo, ON" (prepared by HGC Engineering, dated July 24, 2024).
For the severed lands, the agreement shall also specify that an update to
the noise study assessing noise impacts associated with King Street West
shall be completed prior to site plan approval of any future development
on these lands.
3. That the Owner/Developer submit the consent review fee of $350 per
application to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo.
Document Number: 4971747 Version: 2 Page 7 of 8
Page 214 of 246
General Comments:
If any other applications are required to facilitate the application additional fees and/or
requirements may apply. Any submission requirements may be subject to peer review,
at the owner/applicant's expense as per By-law 24-052.
Any future development on the lands subject to the above -noted consent applications
will be subject to the provisions of Regional Development Charge By-law 19-037 or any
successor thereof.
Prior to final approval, City staff must be in receipt of the above -noted Regional
condition clearances.
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.
Thank you,
Will Towns, MCIP RPP
Senior Planner
Regional Growth, Development and Sustainability Services
Regional Municipality of Waterloo
Document Number: 4971747 Version: 2 Page 8 of 8
Page 215 of 246
May 5, 2025
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 — May 20, 2025
Applications for Minor Variance
A 2025-021
2880 King Street East
A 2025-043
82 Brunswick Avenue
A 2025-044
84 Brunswick Avenue
A 2025-045
191 Morgan Avenue
A 2025-046
241 Huck Crescent
A 2025-047
14 Jansen Avenue
A 2025-048
24 Amherst Drive
Applications for Consent
B 2025-016 1950 Fischer Hallman Road
B 2025-017 864 King Street West
via email
A 2025-049
42 Orchard Mill Crescent
A 2025-050
244 Samuel Street
A 2025-051
503 Victoria Street North
A 2025-052
573 Guelph Street
A 2025-053
575 Guelph Street
A 2025-054
864 King Street West
Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff have 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 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 216 of 246
From: LANDUSEPLANNING <LandUsePlanning@HydroOne.com>
Sent: Monday, May 12, 2025 2:57 PM
To: Committee of Adjustment (SM) <CommitteeofAdjustment@kitchener.ca>
Subject: KITCHENER - 1950 Fischer Hallman Rd - B2025-016
Hello,
We are in receipt of your Application for Consent, B2025-016 dated 2025-04-11. We have
reviewed the documents concerning the noted Plan and have no comments or concerns at
this time. Our preliminary review considers issues affecting Hydro One's'High Voltage
Facilities and Corridor Lands' only.
For proposals affecting 'Low Voltage Distribution Facilities' the Owner/Applicant should
consult their local area Distribution Supplier. Where Hydro One is the local supplier the
Owner/Applicant must contact the Hydro subdivision group at
subdivision(a)Hydroone.com or 1-866-272-3330.
To confirm if Hydro One is your local distributor please follow the following link:
Stormcentre (hydroone.com)
If you have any further questions or inquiries, please contact Customer Service at 1-888-
664-9376 or e-mail CustomerCommunicationsC-OHydroOne.com to be connected to your
Local Operations Centre
If you have any questions please feel free to contact myself.
Thankyou,
Land Use Planning Department
Hydro One Networks Inc.
Email: LandUsePlanning(a-)HydroOne.com
Page 217 of 246
Staff Report
r
JR
Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment
DATE OF MEETING: May 20, 2025
SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Manager, Development Approvals
519-783-8913
PREPARED BY: Eric Schneider, Senior Planner, 519-783-8918
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 10
DATE OF REPORT: May 7, 2025
REPORT NO.: DSD -2025-229
SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2025-054 - 864 King Street West
Consent Application B2025-017 - 864 King Street West
RECOMMENDATION:
A. Minor Variance Application A2025-054 - 864 King Street West
That Minor Variance Application A2025-054 for 864 King Street West requesting
relief from the following Sections of Zoning By-law 2019-051
i) Section 6.5.2, Table 6-5 to allow for a Front Yard Lot Width (King Street
West) of 2.2 metres instead of the minimum required 48 metres;
ii) Site Specific Provision (415) a) for a minimum Yard Setback (South
Property Line, Middle) of 0 metres instead of the minimum required 3
metres;
iii) Site Specific Provision (415) a) for a minimum Yard Setback (West
Property Line, Interior) of 0 metres instead of the minimum required 3
metres;
iv) Site Specific Provision (415) e) for a minimum Physical Separation for
Storeys 7-12 (South Property Line, Middle) of 0 metres instead of the
minimum requires 6 metres;
v) Site Specific Provision (415) e) for a minimum Physical Separation for
Storeys 7-12 (West Property Line, Interior) of 0 metres instead of the
minimum required 6 metres;
vi) Site Specific Provision (415) f) for a minimum Physical Separation for
Storeys 13-18 (West Property, Interior) of 6.1 metres instead of the
minimum required 9 metres;
vii) Site Specific Provision (415) g) for a Minimum Physical Separation for
Storeys 19-36 (West Property Line, Interior) of 6.1 metres instead of the
minimum required 12 metres; and
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Page 218 of 246
viii) Site Specific Provision (415) h) for a Minimum Physical Separation for
Storeys 37 and above (West Property Line, Interior) of 6.1 metres instead
of the minimum required 15 metres;
to facilitate the severance of the lands for construction phasing/financing
purposes in accordance with accordance with drawings prepared by Reinders
and Associates, dated March 3, 2025, BE APPROVED.
B. Consent Application B2025-017 — 864 King Street West
That Consent Application B2025-027 requesting consent to sever an irregular-
shaped parcel of land measuring 2.2 metres by 90.4 metres and having an area
of 3,045.1 square metres, BE APPROVED subject to the following conditions:
1. That Minor Variance Application A2025-054 receive final approval.
2. 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.
3. 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.
4. 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.
5. That 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 Manager, Site Plans, and registered on title to the severed lands, which
shall include the following:
i) That prior to the initiation of any site development works, grading or
issuance of a Demolition and/or Building Permit the Owner agrees to
submit and receive approval of a Site Plan to the satisfaction of the City's
Manager, Site Plans, which reflects, at minimum, the proposed changes to
the lot size and any associated changes to the operation and/or
functioning of the site.
Should a Site Plan Application be approved, to the satisfaction of the City's
Manager, Site Plans, in accordance with the condition above prior to
endorsement of the deed, the above noted condition shall not be required to be
registered on title.
6. That the Transfer Easement document(s) required to create the Easement(s)
being approved herein shall include the following, and shall be approved by the
Page 219 of 246
City Solicitor in consultation with the City's Manager, Development Approvals:
a) a clear and specific description of the purpose of the Easement(s) and of the
rights and privileges being granted therein (including detailed terms and/or
conditions of any required maintenance, liability and/or cost sharing
provisions related thereto); and
b) a clause/statement/wording confirming that the Easement(s) being granted
shall be maintained and registered on title in perpetuity and shall not be
amended, released or otherwise dealt with without the express written
consent of the City.
7. That a satisfactory Solicitor's Undertaking to register the approved Transfer
Easement(s) and to immediately thereafter provide copies thereof to the City
Solicitor be provided to the City Solicitor.
8. That the Owner provides a servicing plan showing outlets to the municipal
servicing system to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services.
9. 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.
10. That the Owner makes financial arrangements for the installation of any new
service connections to the severed and/or retained lands and disconnection /
abandonment of existing services that are no longer required to the satisfaction
of the City's Director of Engineering Services.
11. That any new driveways are to be built to City of Kitchener standards at the
Owner's expense prior to occupancy of the building to the satisfaction of the
City's Director of Engineering Services.
12. 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.
13. That prior to final approval the Owner submits a valid Section 59 Notice.
14. That for the severed lands, the Owner/Developer enter into a registered
development agreement with the Regional Municipality of Waterloo to
implement the environmental noise recommendations specific to noise
impacts from King Street West (Regional Road No. 8) identified in the noise
study report entitled "Noise Feasibility Study, Proposed Residential
Development, 864-872 King Street West, Kitchener, Regional Municipality of
Waterloo, ON" (prepared by HGC Engineering, dated July 24, 2024). For the
Page 220 of 246
retained lands, the agreement shall also specify that an update to the noise
study assessing noise impacts associated with King Street West shall be
completed prior to site plan approval of any future development on these
lands.
15. That prior to final approval the Owner submits the Consent Application Review
Fee of $350.00 to the Region of Waterloo.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
• The purpose of this report is to review a Minor Variance Application and Consent
Application to facilitate the construction phasing/financing for the development of the
subject lands with a 45 storey multiple residential building on the Severed lands, and a
future high rise multiple residential building on the Retained lands.
• The key finding of this report is that the requested variances meet the 4 tests of the
Planning Act, and that the requested severance meets the criteria of the Planning Act
and Provincial, Regional and City policies.
• 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 northeast corner of King Street West and Pine
Street.
The subject property is identified as a `Protected Major Transit Station Area' on Map 2 —
Urban Structure and is designated `Strategic Growth Area C' on Map 3 — Land Use in the
City's 2014 Official Plan.
The property is zoned "High Rise Growth Zone (SGA -4) (415) (95H)" in Zoning By-law
2019-051.
Page 221 of 246
Aw
• ' r !*
i
y.
w.
4,.
r
fi ... �y
Figure 1 — Location Map: 864 King Street West
The purpose of the application is to facilitate the construction phasing/financing for the
redevelopment of the severed lands with a 45 -storey tower. On October 2811, 2024, the
Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee approved Zoning By-law Amendment
Application ZBA24/022/K/ES. The proposed development represents `Phase 1' of a multi-
phase build -out of the lands. The Retained lands, located on the corner of King and Pine,
are for future high-rise redevelopment. Site Plan Application (SP24/069/K/ES) for the 45 -
storey tower has received `Conditional Approval'.
The applicant is proposing to establish reciprocal "blanket" easements over the entirety of
the Severed and Retained lands in order to allow for shared services and access.
Municipal consent is not required to establish blanket easements, rather it is for specific
easements that apply to part of a lot. However, City Legal staff will review the draft
easement documents to ensure that adequate provisions have been made for shared
services and access.
On February 18, 2025, the Committee of Adjustment approved Minor Variance Application
A2025-007 in report DSD -2025-073 to allow for a reduced physical separation of the 711
storey podium to the east property line. No changes to this property line/physical
separation regulation are proposed through this application.
Page 222 of 246
Figure 2 — Location Map: View of Site from King Street West (May 6, 2025)
Page 223 of 246
I
M
WIWI
-4K
will
N
mi
I-V
smrEm
LOT 304 LOT 305
— - — - — - — - — - — - —
KING S--R.HT 6ST
Figure 4 — Site Plan Drawing with Phasing Lines
Page 225 of 246
R@siE1fR4L FhE 711'E m31
... ..
.............................................................................................
....-----------
....
.4
dS 51pIPY
I
Ij
311
,_.En
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - -
- - - - - - -
--
i mi
LOT 320
I
i
smrEm
LOT 304 LOT 305
— - — - — - — - — - — - —
KING S--R.HT 6ST
Figure 4 — Site Plan Drawing with Phasing Lines
Page 225 of 246
L'_,,
LOT 318 p'N
_ A
SU91E=:
fT 4
22327 0240
5027
40.18
S '
PHASE A j
rr�rr�rr�ri�ra i
�PHASE B 31.66
LOT 319 r.�vnsta ss
saysnan
Figure 5 — Severance Sketch
REPORT:
Planning Comments Minor Variance Application A2025-054:
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 `Strategic Growth Area C' in the City's 2014 Official
Plan. The Strategic Growth Area C land use designation is intended to accommodate
significant intensification at high density. The requested variances represent no changes
to the physical location of the approved building, rather they enable the construction
phasing and financing of the development on the Severed lands and separate the balance
of the vacant lands for future development as the Retained lands for future development.
Planning Staff is of the opinion that the requested variances meet the general intent of the
Official Plan.
Page 226 of 246
€nRe.rwu.�ry r
I v
-------------------
-i LOT 4
I
I
LOT
320
�wnsmea
Rernrvm
I
I
I
L 25.75 >k
ro I
3�
2 1
I
I
PHASE A.
23.114 PHASEe
L—T
_1L,
j
LOT 304
i
LOT
!
305 LOT 306
P
`
I
I
WJDENEDsr I
LST. No. WR92M05j
_ ass I
2.28
33.45
rrr 7232 .021
-{r
35.73
F _ D1
,.22327-02s3
WIOENE�M
LSf Nb_WR92U1BJ
PHV 52327-0243
L NINGG�
--
r�N'21327024�
Wi DENEDV
I
PUV 22327-0241
NST. Na- W R4mimj
KING STREET WEST
(ALSO KNOWN AS REGIONAL ROAD No. 15 BY BY-LAW No. 01-059)
(ESTABLISHED BY GORE DISTRICT QUARTER SESSIONS BY-LAW No -2, JULY 15, 1819)
F'^1 1231, - i.C,°_..
Figure 5 — Severance Sketch
REPORT:
Planning Comments Minor Variance Application A2025-054:
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 `Strategic Growth Area C' in the City's 2014 Official
Plan. The Strategic Growth Area C land use designation is intended to accommodate
significant intensification at high density. The requested variances represent no changes
to the physical location of the approved building, rather they enable the construction
phasing and financing of the development on the Severed lands and separate the balance
of the vacant lands for future development as the Retained lands for future development.
Planning Staff is of the opinion that the requested variances meet the general intent of the
Official Plan.
Page 226 of 246
General Intent of the Zoning By-law
The subject property is zoned "High Rise Growth Zone (SGA -4) (415) (95H)" in Zoning By-
law 2019-051. The purpose of this zone is to create opportunities for high-density growth
in both mid and high-rise forms. The general intent of the regulations for minimum lot
width, yard setbacks and physical separation is to ensure the lands are functional and that
there is adequate separation of buildings to avoid adverse impacts. The requested
variances represent no changes to the physical location of the approved building, rather
they enable the construction phasing and financing of the development on the Severed
lands and separate the balance of the vacant lands for future development as the
Retained lands for future development. The requested variances for yard setbacks and
physical separation represent relief to the new property line being established in the
request for severance. These variances are considered technical as the balance of the
lands (retained lands) will be developed as one functional site with the severed lands, and
the severance line will exist only for phasing/financing purposes. Planning Staff is of the
opinion that the requested variances meet the general intent of the Zoning By-law.
Is/Are the Effects of the Variance(s) Minor?
No changes to the physical location of the building are proposed. Staff do not anticipate
any effects or adverse impacts as a result of the requested variances. In the opinion of
Planning Staff, the effects of the variances are considered minor.
Is/Are the Variance(s) Desirable For The Appropriate Development or Use of the Land,
Building and/or Structure?
The entirety of the subject lands are proposed to be redeveloped with high-rise multiple
dwellings, as is permitted in the land use designation and zone. The requested variances
will not change the proposed building form or location in any way, and the site will continue
to achieve it's planned function. Therefore, Planning Staff are of the opinion that the
requested variances are desirable for the appropriate development and use of the lands.
Planning Comments Consent Application 820225-017:
In considering all the relevant Provincial legislation, Regional and City policies and
regulations, Planning staff offer the following comments:
Provincial Planning Statement (PPS 2024)
Staff are satisfied that the proposed severance application is consistent with the Provincial
Planning Statement in general and as it related to housing policies in Chapter 2 regarding
intensification and facilitating housing options. Section 2.2 1 (b) states that Planning
authorities shall provide for an appropriate range and mix of housing options and densities
to meet projected needs of current and future residents of the regional market area by
permitting and facilitating all housing options required to meet the social, health, economic
and well-being requirements of current and future residents.
Regional Official Plan (ROP):
ROP Urban Area policies state that the focus of the Region's future growth shall be within
the Urban Area. The subject lands fall within the `Urban Area' and 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 and community infrastructure required for the
proposed residential development, including transportation networks, municipal water and
Page 227 of 246
wastewater systems, and a broad range of social and public health services. Regional
polices require 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. Staff are satisfied that the proposed
severance applications adhere to these policies and conforms to the ROP.
City's Official Plan (2014)
The subject property is identified as a `Protected Major Transit Station Area' on Map 2 —
Urban Structure and is designated `Strategic Growth Area C' on Map 3 — Land Use in the
City's 2014 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;
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 severance requires a Minor Variance Application to correct deficiencies.
That analysis is included in the previous section of this report. The lot fabric for the lands
fronting King Street West between Pine Street and Andrew Street is irregular and does
follow a typical residential pattern with similar sized lots. Lot sizes and shapes vary and
there are discrepancies in use and scale of lands as lands are redeveloped for high-rise
development within the Protected Major Transit Station Area, Grand River Hospital Station
area. Finally, the lots have suitable frontage on a public street, access to full municipal
services, do not restrict development of adjacent properties, and do not require a plan of
Page 228 of 246
subdivision. As such, staff are satisfied that he proposed severances conform to the City
of Kitchener Official Plan.
Zoning By-law 2019-051
The property is zoned "High Rise Growth Zone (SGA -4) (415) (95H)" in Zoning By-law
2019-051. Requested variances for deficiencies have been addressed previously within
this report.
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
permitted in the City's Official Plan and Zoning By-law. The severed lands front onto both
a local road (Pine Street) and a regional road (King Street West) which are established
public streets and are serviced with municipal services. Staff is further of the opinion that
the proposal is consistent with the Region of Waterloo Official Plan, the Provincial
Planning Statement, and is good planning and in the public interest.
Environmental Planning Comments:
No Environmental Planning concerns.
Heritage Planning Comments:
No heritage comments or concerns.
Building Division Comments:
The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance. A Building Permit
Application has been made for the apartment building. The Building Division has no
objections to the proposed Minor Variance and Consent Applications.
Engineering Division Comments:
Minor Variance
• Engineering has no concerns
Consent
• Kitchener Utilities and Engineering strongly recommends that a Non -Municipal
Drinking Water System is not implemented. Further, confirmation that the existing
150 mm watermain on Pine Street is sufficient to provide water demand for all
phases of development or if upsizing of the watermain is required.
• The site is eligible for the City's Central Neighborhood Intensification Funding
should servicing upgrades be required along Pine Street.
• Engineering understands that sanitary and storm servicing for the severed parcel
will run through the retained parcel. As part of Site Plan Application
SP24/069/K/ES. Engineering requires confirmation that private servicing easements
for sanitary, storm and stormwater management be provided.
• Engineering requires confirmation that there will be no future cross connection of
water servicing between the retained and severed parcels.
• Severance within the subject lands will require separate, individual water service
connections in accordance with City policies.
Page 229 of 246
• 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 the properties and disconnection / abandonment of existing
services that are no longer required.
• 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 will be required to the satisfaction of the Engineering Division.
• A Development Asset Drawing (digital AutoCAD) is required for the new municipal
infrastructure with corresponding layer names and asset information to the
satisfaction of the Engineering Division.
• The owner must ensure that the basement elevation of the buildings 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 for the severed lands will be required through Site
Plan Application SP24/069/K/ES. Cash -in -lieu of park land dedication for the Retained
lands will be required at time of future Site Plan application.
Transportation Planning Comments:
Transportation Services have no concerns with this application.
Region of Waterloo Comments:
The owner/applicant is seeking consent to sever lands at 864 King Street West to create a
new parcel totalling 3,045.1 square metres to facilitate the development of the lands in two
phases with a 45 -storey residential development inclusive of 304 residential units. The
retained parcel is proposed to be 3,259.6 square metres. A blanket easement is also
proposed that would apply to both properties for access and servicing. Regional staff
provided pre -submission consultation comments on this proposal on March 4, 2025.
Source Water Protection: The property is located within an area subject to Part IV of the
Clean Water Act. Regional staff note that the applicant negotiated a provisional Risk
Management Plan with the Risk Management Official (rmo(a-)-regionofwaterloo.ca) in Fall
2024 applicable to previous Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA24/022/K/ES; staff
also understand that a final Risk Management Plan is currently being negotiated with the
applicant in association with an in -progress site plan application. A valid Section 59 Notice
for site plan has not yet been issued.
Notwithstanding the above and consistent with pre -consultation comments, issuance of a
valid Notice of Source Protection Plan Compliance (Section 59 Notice) is required for this
Consent Application (to be required as a condition) separate from the Risk Management
Plan process for site plan. The applicant is asked to contact the Risk Management Official
to obtain the Notice for this consent application.
Environmental Noise: The Region is in receipt of a Noise Study related to the proposed
development on these lands entitled "Noise Feasibility Study, Proposed Residential
Page 230 of 246
Development, 864-872 King Street West, Kitchener, Regional Municipality of Waterloo,
ON" (prepared by HGC Engineering, dated July 24, 2024). Regional staff have reviewed
the study in relation to the Regional road noise source (King Street West) and have no
concerns with the study or its recommendations (which pertain only to the Retained lands).
Regional staff request that the Owner/Developer enter into a registered agreement with
the Region to implement the study's recommendations. Specifically, the following will be
required for inclusion in the agreement:
- The provision of central air conditioning for all units.
- Noise warning clauses included in any agreements of Offers of Purchase and Sale,
lease/rental agreements and condominium declarations:
East, west, and south facades:
Type 8:
Purchasers/tenants are advised that despite the inclusion of noise control features in
the development and within the building units, sound levels due to increasing road
traffic (King Street West) may on occasions interfere with some activities of the dwelling
occupants as the sound levels exceed the sound level limits of the Municipality and the
Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks.
Type C.-
This
:This dwelling unit has been designed with the provision for 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 Municipality and the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation
and Parks.
Regional staff also note that an update to the Noise Study will be required in association
with a future Planning Act Application pertaining to the proposed Phase 2 of the
development (to be located on the Severed lands).
Environmental Threats: For the City's awareness, the Regional Threats Inventory
Database identifies "high" threats identified in the Regional Threats Inventory Database for
the subject lands (associated with past operations of Electrohome Ltd. and CTV Television
Inc.), as well as records of an historical landfill on and adjacent to the subject lands. This
information was also provided to the applicant in Regional comments associated with
ZBA24/022/K/ES on September 13, 2024.
Regional Consent Review Fee: Regional staff have not received the fee for consent
application review of $350 as per Regional By-law 24-052. The fee payment is requested
as a condition of consent approval.
Regional staff have no objection to Consent File B2025-016 subject to the following
conditions:
Page 231 of 246
1. That the Owner/Developer provide a valid Notice of Source Protection Plan
Compliance (Section 59 Notice) to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of
Waterloo.
2. That for the retained lands, the Owner/Developer enter into a registered development
agreement with the Regional Municipality of Waterloo to implement the environmental
noise recommendations specific to noise impacts from King Street West (Regional
Road No. 8) identified in the noise study report entitled "Noise Feasibility Study,
Proposed Residential Development, 864-872 King Street West, Kitchener, Regional
Municipality of Waterloo, ON" (prepared by HGC Engineering, dated July 24, 2024).
For the severed lands, the agreement shall also specify that an update to the noise
study assessing noise impacts associated with King Street West shall be completed
prior to site plan approval of any future development on these lands.
3. That the Owner/Developer submit the Consent Review Fee of $350 to the Regional
Municipality of Waterloo.
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 Planning Statement (PPS 2024)
• Regional Official Plan (ROP)
• Official Plan (2014)
• Zoning By-law 2019-051
• DSD -2025-073
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A — Severance Sketch
Attachment B — Site Plan Drawing showing Phasing Lines
Page 232 of 246
<
�
°:
I |
I
I ri
� I
I �
`
� |
\%\)
I |
I |
=
I
--------3---------
)
�—�—�—�—�----�--.�
\
� \�
\�
elsg
>
,
- :
6
o
W -M
.:\,
:
- _
■ , ; ;:;�
\
�
{
W,(
!\\
\
--------------
.>GmJc
--
:
--
-_/
-
���\( �/{� °°° ..■ee*•\|Z&
`dam— \_
\ _- \\ \ \
\ /
—:--------
_a--.—...----
a,a +!
:
I I
I |
I |
I |
°:
I |
I
I ri
� I
I �
`
� |
I |
I |
=
I
--------3---------
)
�—�—�—�—�----�--.�
H
F-
LU ul
W
coa
m0
W
E
m
ma
m �o
Mo < o W
Eo
ry
f o D
r
1S 3N/y
-00 Z z w
¢ - W
o o.
zo
m
n� w w F
¢
U
Bp �
2
U
F-
LU LL
Y
U O
LU LO
O
U
Z
a
U
LU N
LU
U)
zLn
��
o w
<_ o
wa w
�sz Q o N o
0
wQ
�< Z o
wua
az
lV � 2 0
S� m x;
C_)
LO•£b
o >
o --- ¢¢
o m Lamm
H w m Z
N ri N O
m o w o
ao NW
N
O �N a J OH m
<
% u
o w w Ob'L£
m ¢r¢ lD
N a�a O ool p z w
N
J m L �J m � 0
rM �O'mN n N Ym
�N
--------- a
a a
1ir�ri�rJirrJirrrr O ��
row SL'6£ m N �-
-- v-- N to m�l
2 ~ N I^
? O N00
---------89L Naz
m ? m
z
'om V O J
N -
O ------- -- - r^
z o� o ooc r-----�- N>�I
~ Q a�m IZT CD
~ Q L --CD O ------ 89-ZI INA
O w
J wl fwn cwn
a~a �� l
00'bL NNt £6•£9ryb
£6'LL z
lozl
-000-BZEZZ Nld tool
(S8£ NV�d Cl2 ]ISIDI3 A8 03HSI�OV1S3) LTJ
il]HiS 3NId
E
W
E
m
o
m �o
Mo < o W
Eo
ry
f o D
= o
F o
D
w
-00 Z z w
¢ - W
o o.
zo
m
n� w w F
¢
U
o¢w w� m
w
Z
E w
=
w g o o
�w0 Zn
L7
o Z
Nz¢
NU
v
m.ow F
O a
a w
w>> ¢ O
¢ o¢
o z w
w
>a >
aC7a a LL
mw-
aw
>C7 o
U �o a
f�F
�¢ W
zoZ a- ¢
w
xwlo
fnF U
�"2E ¢> F (7
m
Q
a
O z
� w
00 0
a
o Z w O O
=
w W
a� a
wino =LL O a
'^
w,
a0 to
Z
o0w ZO to -
~
O
a 0
U K O o w U
0
0=
yy O F
�r Z¢ w
a O w w w >
0 K Q
W Z_
fn
K� W w
4> Z w
z
Z
E -i `� a '�
VJ
LL]
C7 a=
O o U z rn J
F� F
FO -I
(9< DOU O Fw
z
z
w
U ry
Z
N n v
zLn
��
o w
<_ o
wa w
�sz Q o N o
0
wQ
�< Z o
wua
az
lV � 2 0
S� m x;
C_)
LO•£b
o >
o --- ¢¢
o m Lamm
H w m Z
N ri N O
m o w o
ao NW
N
O �N a J OH m
<
% u
o w w Ob'L£
m ¢r¢ lD
N a�a O ool p z w
N
J m L �J m � 0
rM �O'mN n N Ym
�N
--------- a
a a
1ir�ri�rJirrJirrrr O ��
row SL'6£ m N �-
-- v-- N to m�l
2 ~ N I^
? O N00
---------89L Naz
m ? m
z
'om V O J
N -
O ------- -- - r^
z o� o ooc r-----�- N>�I
~ Q a�m IZT CD
~ Q L --CD O ------ 89-ZI INA
O w
J wl fwn cwn
a~a �� l
00'bL NNt £6•£9ryb
£6'LL z
lozl
-000-BZEZZ Nld tool
(S8£ NV�d Cl2 ]ISIDI3 A8 03HSI�OV1S3) LTJ
il]HiS 3NId
N*
Region of Waterloo
Connie Owen
Administrative Clerk, Legislative Services
City of Kitchener
200 King Street West
Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7
CofA(a-)kitchener.ca
PLANNING, DEVELOPMENTAND
LEGISLATIVE SERVICES
150 Frederick Street, 8t" floor
Kitchener Ontario N2G 4J3 Canada
Telephone: 519-575-4400
Fax: 519-575-4449
www.regionofwaterloo.ca
Will Towns, MCIP, RPP
519-616-1868
File: D20-20/25 KIT
May 5, 2025
Re: Comments on Consent Applications: B2025-014 to B2025-017
Committee of Adjustment Hearing, May 20, 2025
City of Kitchener
Please accept the following comments for the above -noted consent applications to be
considered at the upcoming Committee of Adjustment Hearing.
Document Number: 4971747 Version: 2 Page 1 of 8
Page 235 of 246
File No: B2025-014
Address: 508 Fall Harvest Place
Description: Lot 27, Plan 58M-527
Owner: Mark Fackoury
Applicant: Tony Bocchino
The owner/applicant is seeking consent to add lands currently owned by the Grand
River Conservation Authority to a residential lot located at 508 Fall Harvest Place. The
application proposes to sever 180.2 square metres from Part 3, 58R-7207 and add
these lands to 508 Fall Harvest Place.
Regional staff have reviewed the application and have the following comments to
provide:
Environmental Threats: For City staff's awareness, the Threat Inventory Database
(TID) identifies no threats on or adjacent to 508 Fall Harvest Place.
Regional Fees: Regional staff acknowledge receipt of the required $350 fees for review
of a consent application (received May 1, 2025). No additional fees are required.
Regional staff have no objection to this application.
Document Number: 4971747 Version: 2 Page 2 of 8
Page 236 of 246
File No: B2025-015
Address: 512 Fall Harvest Place
Description: Lot 26, Plan 58M-527
Owner: Deer Ridge Heights Inc.
Applicant: Tony Bocchino
The owner/applicant is seeking consent to add lands currently owned by the Grand
River Conservation Authority to a residential lot at 512 Fall Harvest Place. The
application seeks to sever 342.5 square metres Part 3, 58R-7207 and add these lands
to 512 Fall Harvest Place.
Regional staff have reviewed the application and have the following comments to
provide:
Environmental Threats: For City staff's awareness, the Threat Inventory Database
(TID) identifies no threats on or adjacent to 512 Fall Harvest Place.
Regional Fees: Regional staff acknowledge receipt of the required $350 fees for review
of a consent application (received May 1, 2025). No additional fees are required.
Regional staff have no objection to this application.
Document Number: 4971747 Version: 2 Page 3 of 8
Page 237 of 246
File No: B2025-016
Address: 1950 Fischer Hallman Road
Description: Part Lots 158 and 159 German Company Tract
Owner: Schlegel Urban Developments Corp.
Applicant: GSP Group (c/o Richard Kelly-Ruetz)
The owner/applicant has applied for a consent to facilitate a long-term lease in excess
of 21 years in favour of a McDonald's on the subject lands (as previously reviewed by
Regional staff through site plan application SP23/024/F/CD). The proposed lease area
is approximately 1,457.1 square metres and consists of the restaurant building, stacked
drive-through lanes, seven parking spaces, and associated landscaping and walkway
areas.
Regional staff have reviewed the application and have the following comments to
provide:
Threats Inventory Database: For City staff's awareness, the Threat Inventory
Database (TID) identifies no threats on or adjacent to 1950 Fischer Hallman Road.
Regional Consent Review Fee: Regional staff have not received the fee for consent
review of $350 per application. The fee payment is requested as a condition of
approval.
Regional staff have no objection to B2025-016 subject to the following condition:
1. That the Owner/Developer submit the consent review fee of $350 to the Regional
Municipality of Waterloo.
Document Number: 4971747 Version: 2 Page 4 of 8
Page 238 of 246
File No: B2025-017
Address: 864 King Street West
Description: XLT 306, 319-320 PL 385 KITCHENER; PT LT 304-305, 312 PL 385
KITCHENER AS IN 1309823, SAVE & EXCEPT PTS 1 & 2 ON EX PL
WR838553 & PTS 1, 6 & 7, 58R18537;TM & S/T 725378; T/W 694748
Owners: Vive Development Corp.
Applicant: Craig Dumart
The owner/applicant is seeking consent to sever lands at 864 King Street West to
create a new parcel totalling 3,045.1 square metres to facilitate the development of the
lands in two phases with a 45 -storey residential development inclusive of 304 residential
units. The retained parcel is proposed to be 3,259.6 square metres. A blanket easement
is also proposed that would apply to both properties for access and servicing. Regional
staff provided pre -submission consultation comments on this proposal on March 4,
2025.
Source Water Protection: The property is located within an area subject to Part IV of
the Clean Water Act. Regional staff note that the applicant negotiated a provisional Risk
Management Plan with the Risk Management Official(rmo(a�regionofwaterloo.ca) in fall
2024 applicable to previous zoning by-law amendment application ZBA24/022/K/ES;
staff also understand that a final Risk Management Plan is currently being negotiated
with the applicant in association with an in -progress site plan application. A valid
Section 59 Notice for site plan has not yet been issued.
Notwithstanding the above and consistent with pre -consultation comments, issuance of
a valid Notice of Source Protection Plan Compliance (Section 59 Notice) is required for
this consent application (to be required as a condition) separate from the Risk
Management Plan process for site plan. The applicant is asked to contact the Risk
Management Official to obtain the Notice for this consent application.
Environmental Noise: The Region is in receipt of a noise study related to the proposed
development on these lands entitled "Noise Feasibility Study, Proposed Residential
Development, 864-872 King Street West, Kitchener, Regional Municipality of Waterloo,
ON" (prepared by HGC Engineering, dated July 24, 2024). Regional staff have reviewed
the study in relation to the Regional road noise source (King Street West) and have no
concerns with the study or its recommendations (which pertain only to the retained
lands). Regional staff request that the owner/developer enter into a registered
agreement with the Region to implement the study's recommendations. Specifically, the
following will be required for inclusion in the agreement:
- The provision of central air conditioning for all units.
- Noise warning clauses included in any agreements of Offers of Purchase and
Sale, lease/rental agreements and condominium declarations:
East, west, and south facades:
Type B.-
Document
:Document Number: 4971747 Version: 2 Page 5 of 8
Page 239 of 246
Purchasers/tenants are advised that despite the inclusion of noise control
features in the development and within the building units, sound levels due to
increasing road traffic (King Street West) may on occasions interfere with some
activities of the dwelling occupants as the sound levels exceed the sound level
limits of the Municipality and the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and
Parks.
Type C.-
This
:This dwelling unit has been designed with the provision for 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 Municipality and the Ministry of the
Environment, Conservation and Parks.
Regional staff also note that an update to the noise study will be required in association
with a future Planning Act application pertaining to the proposed Phase 2 of the
development (to be located on the severed lands).
Environmental Threats: For the City's awareness, the Regional Threats Inventory
Database identifies "high" threats identified in the Regional Threats Inventory Database
for the subject lands (associated with past operations of Electrohome Ltd. and CTV
Television Inc.), as well as records of an historical landfill on and adjacent to the subject
lands. This information was also provided to the applicant in Regional comments
associated with ZBA24/022/K/ES on September 13, 2024.
Document Number: 4971747 Version: 2 Page 6 of 8
Page 240 of 246
Regional Consent Review Fee: Regional staff have not received the fee for consent
application review of $350 as per Regional By-law 24-052. The fee payment is
requested as a condition of consent approval.
Regional staff have no objection to Consent File B2025-016 subject to the
following conditions:
That the Owner/Developer provide a valid Notice of Source Protection
Plan Compliance (Section 59 Notice) to the satisfaction of the Regional
Municipality of Waterloo.
2. That for the retained lands, the Owner/Developer enter into a registered
development agreement with the Regional Municipality of Waterloo to
implement the environmental noise recommendations specific to noise
impacts from King Street West (Regional Road No. 8) identified in the
noise study report entitled "Noise Feasibility Study, Proposed Residential
Development, 864-872 King Street West, Kitchener, Regional Municipality
of Waterloo, ON" (prepared by HGC Engineering, dated July 24, 2024).
For the severed lands, the agreement shall also specify that an update to
the noise study assessing noise impacts associated with King Street West
shall be completed prior to site plan approval of any future development
on these lands.
3. That the Owner/Developer submit the consent review fee of $350 per
application to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo.
Document Number: 4971747 Version: 2 Page 7 of 8
Page 241 of 246
General Comments:
If any other applications are required to facilitate the application additional fees and/or
requirements may apply. Any submission requirements may be subject to peer review,
at the owner/applicant's expense as per By-law 24-052.
Any future development on the lands subject to the above -noted consent applications
will be subject to the provisions of Regional Development Charge By-law 19-037 or any
successor thereof.
Prior to final approval, City staff must be in receipt of the above -noted Regional
condition clearances.
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.
Thank you,
Will Towns, MCIP RPP
Senior Planner
Regional Growth, Development and Sustainability Services
Regional Municipality of Waterloo
Document Number: 4971747 Version: 2 Page 8 of 8
Page 242 of 246
May 5, 2025
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 — May 20, 2025
Applications for Minor Variance
A 2025-021
2880 King Street East
A 2025-043
82 Brunswick Avenue
A 2025-044
84 Brunswick Avenue
A 2025-045
191 Morgan Avenue
A 2025-046
241 Huck Crescent
A 2025-047
14 Jansen Avenue
A 2025-048
24 Amherst Drive
Applications for Consent
B 2025-016 1950 Fischer Hallman Road
B 2025-017 864 King Street West
via email
A 2025-049
42 Orchard Mill Crescent
A 2025-050
244 Samuel Street
A 2025-051
503 Victoria Street North
A 2025-052
573 Guelph Street
A 2025-053
575 Guelph Street
A 2025-054
864 King Street West
Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) staff have 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 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 243 of 246
From:
Pui Ming Leung
To:
Committee of Adiustment (SM)
Subject:
Comments, Enova Power, April 2025
Date:
Monday, May 5, 2025 9:51:20 AM
Attachments:
11111j)d
in
The following are the comments for Committee of Adjustment applications -April 2025.
82 / 84 Brunswick Ave:
Following the property severance, each municipal address must have an individual hydro
service. The meter base for the accessory dwelling unit (ADU) must be located in the same
area as the front units.
573/575 Guelph St:
The meter base for each unit must be installed at the front of the house. Installation on the
side wall is not permitted due to insufficient clearance.
864 King St W:
The building must maintain a minimum clearance of 5.5 meters plus required working space
from the primary hydro pole line. Refer to Standard D11111 for guidance. Additional
requirements can be found in the document:
Tech nical-Guidelines-for-properties-in-Kitchener-and-Wilmot-over-400-Amperes-rev-3-feb-
13-2024. pdf
Reminder for all applications:
Customers must submit a Service Request for any new hydro service connection or upgrade
using the following link:
Service Request Form - Engineering (Victoria Street Office) - Enova Power
Thanks,
Pui Ming Leung (she/her) I Design Technologist
Direct Number: 226-896-2200 (EXT 6205)
Mobile Number: 519-589-2659
puimin_.la eunq(a enovapower.com
301 Victoria Street South, Kitchener, Ontario, N2G 41_2
enovapower.com
UJ
This correspondence is directed in confidence solely to the addressees listed above. It may
Page 244 of 246
contain personal or confidential information and may not otherwise be distributed, copied or
used by the intended recipient. Ifyou 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 245 of 246
N
� � O
r (p
N
ifri �fri LU � N
f>)
a p m
F2mo wW U 0° zwp� ~ w d
W a O w U 2 f Z 2 W O `J z
25, o=p =w w3a 3wzr o
a 0 2 Z Q Z F> x>w OH 2 K U z
O H m
Q W H ❑ Z❑ w J y O
_ ~ ~ ~l 3 O
Z W J
O
1.21.
a O p N w m m
�
p1y W 'Yzv^
p2U U Q O N2> U
oovz w H �w¢� p WyOZ J
Q
(� N
J Om MO Z. W J W yaz W mp ❑JFQa m N N
w W W O V W> J OJ z OF x O W W W m W Q N N W W
ma �� W, m0 F =O° Uxz FD Z p & O ``'
Q° O w v Q Q LL ? z m W z z to U Q m O Z /
z, yrs w ' wo z Y
y> O j mow fxgZ Ola-~ U U r �m a W z y°1 �
CK�� 7yLLJ
04
w0 aa¢ -w LL pw ouz O M
m z o v w¢ O=W w w 00
j FE R 0 _o V O a W Q h a y H 0 Z m° N 6 Q
maa(7 ~» my,y �xQ h m� Um COO y fail W w
N Z~ z m 0 N J~ W N a = W ¢ j° F F Z W Z U (7
mO 2ND wzcpio .0 Z, 3<w z yz 0i0os op o Z m 3
w O0m 0, Y H f70> r W wo w w fq NU f/)F 7 7 Q 3
Z LLU W Q W QO ZNa m OO w 2N W KKa'2 �� LNL m N VJ (7
O W S H N ❑ O a' K O U ❑ w F fn w W
LU
- OUz OU w OJQ(N
Z
❑ O O y o >� O Zmm NOQ(9> U) W a
xWW= O 6ZW GzV
ZUOmUQ J
U) ¢ W O ] ❑ L) l_L¢ W W F jH aa v,
mLLO O W W UW
wm w mz > Va O
° F- 0
6 Q 0 Ja
W Z= CO Zw Z O a
O 0 W2Z6
0
WO00QOOJOm
zf2nz3a14 Ll UUaU Nm z
Z of 2
R O
S x
3
T'yQ6/ �i� Wfn W�
a
w £
a V s°
Cys l >On N z rc
�aa o�
K 6 K O K O a
T pp N
w
3 0 0 b
cC k-11 S
U
LD f — c~i w a Z G
m
Uw r N 14
7 U W \ W
mar m
a\
N z \
o \
U
Z W
O - ~
At O
e
e
F
\ A \.
\ T
~ / W
U W
N O
z Z
� LL
r
H
O
J
a