Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDSD-2025-489 - A 2025-122 - 117 Samuel StreetStaff Report r JR Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: December 9, 2025 SUBMITTED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Manager, Development Approvals 519-783-8913 PREPARED BY: Sheryl Rice Menezes, Senior Planning Technician 519-783-8944 WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 10 DATE OF REPORT: November 27, 2025 REPORT NO.: DSD -2025-489 SUBJECT: Minor Variance Application A2025-122 —117 Samuel Street RECOMMENDATION: That Minor Variance Application A2025-122 for 117 Samuel Street requesting Permission under Section 45(2)(a)(ii) of the Planning Act to expand a `Legal Non - Conforming Use, a 5 -unit multiple dwelling having a parking area of 3 parking spaces, to recognize a multiple dwelling having 6 dwelling units and to recognize a parking area having 4 parking spaces with the following: i) to permit a motor vehicle on a parking space to encroach 4.1 metres into the 7 metre x 7 metre Corner Visibility Triangle (CVT) whereas the By-law does not permit encroachments into the CVT; ii) to permit a parking lot to have parking spaces that do not ingress and egress in a forward motion; iii) to permit a parking lot to be setback 0 metres from the westerly interior side lot line instead of the minimum required 1.5 metres; iv) to permit a parking space to have a length of 5.1 metres instead of the minimum required 5.5 metres; v) to permit a parking lot to be located in the front yard whereas the Zoning By-law does not permit parking lots in the front yard; and, vi) to permit a parking lot to be setback 0 metres from the front lot line (Krug Street) and 2.9 metres from the exterior side lot line (Samuel Street) instead of the minimum required 3 metres; in accordance with the drawings prepared by JR Design and Consultants, dated September 2025, Revision #2, BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the Owner demarcates the four (4) approved off-street parking spaces; as well as to clearly identify the asphalt area that is not used for parking, which is *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 59 of 251 located along the Samuel Street flankage, to the satisfaction of the Manager, Development Approvals, and, 2. That the Owner shall complete the work, identified in Condition No. 1 above, by April 30, 2026. Any request for a time extension must be approved in writing by the Manager, Development Approvals prior to completion date set out in this decision. Failure to complete the condition will result in this approval becoming null and void. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: • The purpose of this report is to review a Minor Variance Application for Permission in order to legalize the use of the subject property as a 6 -unit multiple dwelling with a parking area having four off-street spaces. • The key finding of this report is that the requested Permission under Section 45 (2) (a) (ii) meets the two criteria as outlined in the report below. • 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. Figure 1: Aerial Photo ITOMLou Page 60 of 251 BACKGROUND: The subject property is located at the south-west corner of Samuel and Krug Streets. It 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 Minor Variance Application is to see Permission to legalize the expansion of a `Legal Non -Conforming Use', 5 unit multiple dwelling with three (3) off- street parking space to a 6 -unit multiple dwelling with four (4) off-street parking spaces with consideration to the size and location of the parking spaces. Figure 2: View from Krug Street (Area marked with yellow hatching not to be used for parking). REPORT: History: The subject building was constructed in 1951 as a 5 -unit multiple dwelling under Zoning By-law 1823. At that time, there was no minimum number of parking spaces required for the use. From review of the file history, there appears to have been no parking spaces developed at that time. A survey, dated February 10, 1961, shows a gravelled drive for the apartment building that accommodated three parking spaces, and which has been accepted as `legal non- conforming' regarding size (depth) of the parking spaces and their location on the property. This `legal non -conforming status' was determined by previous Planning Staff as the three (3) parking spaces existed prior to Zoning By-law 4830 (dated October 9, 1962). Page 61 of 251 In 1989, under Zoning By-law 4830, a Minor Variance Application was submitted by a previous owner and considered by the Committee of Adjustment to add a 6t" dwelling unit within the existing building. At that time, the application was refused because of insufficient parking for 6 units. However, it is noted that the Zoning By-law requirement in 1989 for multiple dwellings was at a higher rate (1.25 parking spaces per dwelling unit). Under the existing Zoning By-law, 2019-051, the current owner wishes to legalize the sixth dwelling unit and the parking area which contains 4 deficient parking spaces. Planning Comments: Case law sets out the tests to be applied by the Committee of Adjustment in considering applications under Section 45(2)(a)(ii). It should be noted that the test to be applied is not the four-part test for minor variances under Section 45(1) but rather whether the approval of the application: 1. Is in the public interest; and 2. Creates unacceptable or adverse impact upon abutting properties. Figure 3: View from Krug St of the interior side yard Page 62 of 251 Figure 4: View from corner intersection of Krug and Samuel Streets. (Area marked with yellow hatching is not to be used for parking) Is Approval in the Public Interest? Historically, the sixth dwelling unit has existed for some time without permission. This application is to legalize the use and ensure Building and Fire Code regulations are met for the tenants. Regarding the expansion of the parking area to have four (4) parking spaces, staff note the following. To have four (4) parking spaces instead of the required 6 spaces is supportable in this area as it is near public transit. There is a bus stop at the corner of Krug and Samuel Streets and there is a light rail transit station approximately 750 metres from the property (at Charles and Cedar Streets). As well, the location is within walking distance of the downtown a shopping plaza and other amenities; Permitting parking spaces to encroach into the Corner Visibility Triangle is supportable. It is noted that the CVT is taken at the intersection of the property lines. When the CVT is viewed at the intersection of the curbs, there is clear visibility to traffic at the intersection. Page 63 of 251 Permitting the parking spaces to have a length of 5.1 metres rather than the required 5.5 metres is supportable. Staff note that there exists city -owned land between the property line along Krug Street and the sidewalk. This is sufficient for the parking depth of a motor vehicle (5.5 metres). Therefore, there is no impact on the streetscape in the consideration of legalizing this parking area by reducing this measurement within the property line. Lastly, permitting a parking lot to have motor vehicles that do not ingress and egress in a forward motion is supportable, to be setback 0 metres from the westerly interior side lot line rather than the required 1.5 metres; to be located in the front yard whereas the Zoning By-law does not permit parking lots in the front yard; and permitting a parking lot to be setback 0 metre from the front lot line (Krug Street) and 2.9 metres from the exterior side lot line (Samuel Street) rather than the required 3 metre setback is supportable. The parking layout has existing sometime without concerns. Transportation Planning staff advise that after reviewing the existing site conditions and the rationale provided, they can support a parking area having four (4) parking spaces of this size and in their configuration and location on the property. Planning staff note that legalizing the existing 6t" unit is in the public interest as it will support a gentle intensification and the City's Housing Pledge in a built form conducive to dwelling units. Any Adverse or Unacceptable Impacts? Though the use of the building as a 6 -unit multiple dwelling appears to have existed since at least 1989, without permission, it has not received any complaints regarding the number of dwelling units. The applicant has attached to the application four letters from neighbours in support of the Minor Variance Application. Regarding the existing paved area along Krug Street, the applicant has agreed not to have any parking spaces extend beyond the Samuel Street fagade line. Therefore, Staff are recommending a condition to demarcate the parking spaces and ensure that the no - parking area is differentiated from the parking area, such as painted lines as shown in Figures 2 and 4. Staff are of the opinion that there are no adverse or unacceptable impacts in approving this requested Minor Variance Application for Permission. Environmental Planning Comments: No concerns. Heritage Planning Comments: The property municipally addressed as 117 Samuel Street is located within the Central Frederick 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 Page 64 of 251 proposed application is not anticipated to have any adverse impacts to the CHL's attributes. Thus, staff have no comments or concerns. Building Division Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance provided a building permit to legalize the 6t" dwelling unit is obtained. Please contact the Building Division at building(a)kitchener.ca with any questions. Engineering Division Comments: No concerns. Figure 5: View from Samuel Street from rear yard towards Krug Street Parks and Cemeteries/Forestry Division Comments: No concerns or requirements. Transportation Planning Comments: Transportation Services and Planning staff have engaged with the applicant regarding the proposed variances. After reviewing the existing site conditions and the rationale provided, Transportation Services supports the requested variances. Given that some residential units will not include an associated parking space, Transportation Services recommends unbundling parking and offering spaces separately Page 65 of 251 from the lease or purchase of residential units. This approach promotes the efficient use of parking resources by allowing residents who do not require parking to avoid incurring additional costs. 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 Page 66 of 251 November 18th, 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 December 9, City of Kitchener Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have the following comments: 1) A 2025 — 117 — 2922 King Street East — No Concerns 2) A 2025 — 118 — 630 Benninger Drive — No Concerns 3) A 2025 — 119 — 455 Old Chicopee Trail — No Concerns 4) A 2025 — 120 — 532 Courtland Avenue East — No Concerns 5) A 2025 — 121 — 546 Courtland Avenue East — No Concerns 6) A 2025 — 122 — 117 Samuel Street — No Concerns 7) A 2025 — 123 — 20 Gildner Street — No Concerns 8) A 2025 — 124 — 131 Gage Avenue — No Concerns 9) A 2025 — 125 — 50-56 Weber Street West & 107 Young Street — No Concerns 10) A 2025 — 126 — 1720 Glasgow Street — No Concerns 11) A 2025 — 127 — 71 Blucher Street — 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: 5129065 085291 Page 67 of 251 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: 5129065 Page 68 of 251 November 21, 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 - December 9, 2025 Applications for Minor Variance A 2025-117 2922 King Street East A 2025-118 630 Benninger Drive A 2025-119 455 Old Chicopee Trail A 2025-122 117 Samuel Street A 2025-123 20 Gildner Street A 2025-125 50-56 Weber Street West & 107 Young Street A 2025-127 71 Blucher Street Applications for Consent B 2025-032 776 Rockway Drive B 2025-033 104 Brentwood Avenue B 2025-034 71 Blucher Street B 2025-035 67 Blucher Street via email 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-grandriver. 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 69 of 251 Frons: To: Committee of Adiustment (SM) Subject: Re: Committee of Adjustment A2025-122 @ 117 Samuel St.,Krtchener Date: Thursday, December 4, 2D25 8:15:35 PM You don't often get email from . Learn why this is mportant o To: Committee of Adjustment, City of Kitchener Dec 04, 2025 From: Henry Eitzen Re: Committee of Adjustment A2025-122 @ 117 Samuel St.,Kitchener History of apartment building at 117 Samuel St. My brother and I in our inherited family home at Krug St. Our parents purchased our home in 1955, before the apartment building at 117 Samuel St was built. The owner of the 117 Samuel St property at the time was a was a dishonest man. He told our parents he was just planning to renovate the existing century home. After the work began, it soon became obvious This plan was to construct the building in question. City records should indicate whether initially applied for a building permit or applied for a renovation permit and later was granted a zoning bylaw exception and building permit after the construction had begun (without the required permit). Unfortunately, for our family, the City of Kitchener allowed to complete the construction. The result of this unjustified decision by the City of Kitchener was that profited while our family suffered a loss to our property's value. This loss of value to our property is permanent. Requested Committee of Adjustment actions Given that the original building permit issued by the City of Kitchener in the 1950's was financially injurious to the surrounding area's property values and the building continues to be a depreciating factor for adjacent properties, the application for a 6th unit as well as any request for expansion of the parking lot should be rejected. As the heirs to Krug St., we can be considered as the original party who's adjacent property has been permanently depreciated. We have never received any form of compensation from the City of Kitchener after it permitted the apartment building to be constructed next our property. We assume the city will also not offer to compensate local homeowners for an additional realty valuation downgrade of their properties if the Committee of Adjustment approves a 6th unit. Given the controversial history of 117 Samuel St., it may be questionable whether approval of any application to increase the number of permitted units could withstand a legal suit. The City of Page 70 of 251 Kitchener should never have issued the initial zoning exception due to the fact that permitting the apartment to be built caused a financial loss for several homeowners. We also request the City of Kitchener complete an inspection of 117 Samuel St. for possible current bylaw infractions. This brief provides the Committee of Adjustment with strong evidence that a 6th unit may have been installed and the property owner(s) may be illegally collecting rent payments from a 6th unit since June. An inspection of the rear fencing is required to address the issue of unlawful encroachment. Current bylaw issues at 117 Samuel St This past June, we witnessed new tenants moving into the building. The new tenants have been parking overnight on the street. The new tenants vehicle license plate number can be provided upon request. Since all other tenants vehicles are still parked in their designated spots, there is a strong possibility the 6th apartment has been installed and the property owner(s) are illegally collecting rent from the occupants of an apartment that does not have the required bylaw adjustment. I'm unsure as to how many tenant vehicles are permitted on this property. Currently, their are 6 vehicles as 1 parking spot has been lengthened for the unit that has 2 vehicles. There is no room to park another vehicle on this property as there is a bus stop on the corner. One of the parking spots is already a proximity hazard to this bus stop. The property rear fencing that backs onto 77 Krug St. does not conform to Kitchener's required fencing bylaw standards. The wooden fence is in disrepair and leans onto our adjacent property. The fence is wholly owned by 117 Samuel st. A few years ago, someone associated with the apartment building trespassed onto our property at Krug St. and without permission, drove a few metal stakes into the ground in an effort to straighten the leaning fence. The City of Kitchener cannot allow this act of encroachment to stand. Henry Eitzen Page 71 of 251