Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAdjustment - 2001-02-06COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FOR THE CITY OF KITCHENER MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING HELD FEBRUARY 6, 2001 MEMBERS PRESENT: Messrs. S. Kay, D. Cybalski and B. Isaac. OFFICIALS PRESENT: Mr. L. Masseo, Manager of Development & Design and Ms. J. Billett, Secretary-Treasurer. Mr. S. Kay, Chair, called this meeting to order at 9:35 a.m. Moved by Mr. D. Cybalski Seconded by Mr. B. Isaac That the minutes of the regular meeting of the Committee of Adjustment of January 9, 2001, as mailed to the members, be accepted. Carried UNFINISHED BUSINESS MINOR VARIANCE 1.Submission Nos.: A 2001-004, A 2001-005, A 2001-006 & A 2001-007 Applicants: Scott & Anne Frieburger; France Bertrand & Cindy Mercier; Margaret J. Goldsmith; and Jeff Charette & Michelle Ranger Property Locations: 12, 14, 18 & 24 Copper Leaf Street Legal Description: Part Block 18, Registered Plan 58M-132, designated as Parts 31, 32, 34 and 37 on Reference Plan 58R-12160 Mr. S. Kay declared a pecuniary interest in Minor Variance Application, Submission No. A 2001- 004, as he acts on behalf of the applicant and did not participate in any discussion or voting with respect to these applications. Mr. S. Kay left the meeting and Mr. D. Cybalski Chaired the meeting during consideration of these applications and in accordance with the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act these applications were considered by the remaining two members. Appearances: In Support:Mr. S. Frieburger 12 Copper Leaf Street Kitchener ON N2E 3T3 Mr. J. Charette 24 Copper Leaf Street Kitchener ON N2E 3T3 Contra:None Written Submissions: In Support:None Contra:None COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT21FEBRUARY 6, 2001 1.Submission Nos.: A 2001-004, A 2001-005, A 2001-006 & A 2001-007 (Cont'd) These applications were previously considered by the Committee at its meeting held on January 9, 2001, at which time the Committee agreed to defer consideration of these applications as no one had appeared in support the applications. The Chair pointed out that neither the owner or agent for Minor Variance Applications, Submission Nos. A 2001-005 & A 2001-006, were in attendance this date. The Chair stated that the these applications are consistent with the other two Minor Variance Applications for which the owners are present and suggested that, given the Committee's authority to proceed in the absence of the applicant, the Committee consider all 4 applications this date. Mr. Isaac concurred with this suggestion. The Committee was advised that the lands involved in these applications comprise existing residential townhouse dwellings. Each have an attached garage with interior landings and staircases which encroach into the required clearance space inside the garage. Accordingly, the applicants are requesting permission to legalize the existing attached garages having an unobstructed interior clearance of 5.44 m (17.8 ft.) for Units 12, 14 and 18; and 5.06 m (16.6 ft.) for Unit 24; rather than the required 5.49 m (18 ft.). The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Business & Planning Services in which they advised that the subject properties are located on the north side of Copper Leaf Street between Activa Avenue and Wisteria Court. These dwelling units are two-storey townhouses with single car attached garages. The applicants are requesting permission to legalize the garage dimensions currently in contravention of Zoning By-law 85-1, Regulation 6.1.2. More specifically, the applicants are looking for relief to allow for a reduction in the minimum length of the garage of 5.49 m (18 ft.). Until the time of grading, garage lengths at all four properties originally appeared to be in compliance with the Zoning By-law until it was determined that there was a grade difference between the garage and the dwellings. The required lengths could not be achieved due to the necessity to build stairs between these areas. In an effort to facilitate compliance, the standard stair-width requirement of 36 inches was reduced to 24 inches. However, despite this reduction, stairs in three of the properties, 12, 14 and 18 Copper Leaf Street, still encroached into the required garage area by eight inches. This reduced the total length of the garage to 5.43 m (17.8 ft.). In the garage at 24 Copper Leaf Street, stairs installed by the owners, encroached by a total of 24 inches. This has produced an 18 inch reduction in the unobstructed clearance of this garage, reducing the length to 5.05 m (16.6 ft.). After a building inspection was completed it was determined that all of the garages, including the garage with the greatest amount of reduced clearance at 24 Copper Leaf Street, while short of the standard outset in the Zoning By-law, were still adequate to meet basic functional internal parking requirements. Even in this latter case, the 18 inch portion that encroached into the garage removed a relatively minor portion of the utility of the total garage area. This, while changes in all four garages vary somewhat from the optimum standard of 5.49 m (18 ft.) in length, the basic standard for the appropriateness of these land uses can still be considered desirable as functional requirements appear to have been met. Based on the above comments, it is the opinion of staff that the subject variances are acceptable and the impact of the variance would be minor as the request maintains the general intent of the Municipal Plan and Zoning By-law. The Department of Business and Planning Services recommends approval of Submissions A 2001-004, A 2001-005, A 2001-006, and A 2001-007. The Committee noted the comments of the Director of Building in which he advised that the Building Division has no concerns with respect to these applications. The Committee noted the comments of the Planning & Culture Department, Region of Waterloo, in which they advised that Regional staff have reviewed these applications and have no concerns; however, any development on the subject lands is subject to the provisions of the COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT22FEBRUARY 6, 2001 1.Submission Nos.: A 2001-004, A 2001-005, A 2001-006 & A 2001-007 (Cont'd) Regional Development Charge By-law 99-038 or any successor thereof and may require the payment of Regional Development Charges for this development prior to the issuance of a building permit. The Committee noted the comments of the Grand River Conservation Authority in which they advised that they have no objections with respect to these applications. The Chair reviewed the staff comments, noting that staff are recommending approval of all 4 applications and enquired if the owners present had anything further to add. Mr. Frieburger and Mr. Charette advised that they had reviewed the staff reports and had nothing further to add. As there were no further questions or comments forthcoming, the Chair called for a motion. Minor Variance A 2001-004 Moved by Mr. B. Isaac Seconded by Mr. D. Cybalski That the application of Scott & Anne Frieburger requesting permission to legalize an existing attached garage having an unobstructed interior clearance of 5.44 m (17.8 ft.), rather than the required 5.49 m (18 ft.), on Part Block 18, Registered Plan 58M-132, designated as Part 31 on BE APPROVED Reference Plan 58R-12160, 12 Copper Leaf Street, Kitchener, Ontario, . It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1.That the variance requested in this application is minor in nature. 2.This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3.The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Municipal Plan are being maintained on the subject property. Carried Minor Variance A 2001-005 Moved by Mr. B. Isaac Seconded by Mr. D. Cybalski That the application of France Bertrand & Cindy Mercier requesting permission to legalize an existing attached garage having an unobstructed interior clearance of 5.44 m (17.8 ft.), rather than the required 5.49 m (18 ft.), on Part Block 18, Registered Plan 58M-132, designated as Part BE APPROVED 32 on Reference Plan 58R-12160, 14 Copper Leaf Street, Kitchener, Ontario, . It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1.That the variance requested in this application is minor in nature. 2.This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3.The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Municipal Plan are being maintained on the subject property. Carried COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT23FEBRUARY 6, 2001 1.Submission Nos.: A 2001-004, A 2001-005, A 2001-006 & A 2001-007 (Cont'd) Minor Variance A 2001-006 Moved by Mr. B. Isaac Seconded by Mr. D. Cybalski That the application of Margaret J. Goldsmith requesting permission to legalize an existing attached garage having an unobstructed interior clearance of 5.44 m (17.8 ft.), rather than the required 5.49 m (18 ft.), on Part Block 18, Registered Plan 58M-132, designated as Part 34 on BE APPROVED Reference Plan 58R-12160, 18 Copper Leaf Street, Kitchener, Ontario, . It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1.That the variance requested in this application is minor in nature. 2.This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3.The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Municipal Plan are being maintained on the subject property. Carried Minor Variance A 2001-007 Moved by Mr. B. Isaac Seconded by Mr. D. Cybalski That the application of Jeff Charette & Michelle Ranger requesting permission to legalize an existing attached garage having an unobstructed interior clearance of 5.06 m (16.6 ft.), rather than the required 5.49 m (18 ft.), on Part Block 18, Registered Plan 58M-132, designated as Part BE APPROVED 37 on Reference Plan 58R-12160, 24 Copper Leaf Street, Kitchener, Ontario, . It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1.That the variance requested in this application is minor in nature. 2.This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3.The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Municipal Plan are being maintained on the subject property. Carried The Committee then recessed the meeting temporarily, at 9:40 a.m., to allow an opportunity for those parties having an interest in matters scheduled for 10:00 a.m. to arrive. This meeting reconvened at 10:00 a.m. NEW BUSINESS MINOR VARIANCE 1.Submission No.: A 2001-008 Applicant: Cho Moua Property Location: 175 Wellington Street North Legal Description: Part of Lot 84, Registered Plan 376 Appearances: In Support:Mr. C. Moua 161 Hickson Drive Kitchener ON N2B 2H8 COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT24FEBRUARY 6, 2001 1.Submission No.: A 2001-008 (Cont'd) Contra:None Written Submissions: In Support:None Contra:None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting a change of legal non-conforming use, previously approved by the Committee of Adjustment, from repair of electronic car parts to an auto detailing business which would include interior car shampoo, vacuuming and detailing, as well as exterior car wash and polishing. The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Business & Planning Services in which they advised that the subject property is located on the south side of Wellington Street between Weber Street and Ahrens Street and is currently developed with a duplex dwelling and a one-storey industrial concrete block building at the rear. The subject lands were previously zoned Light Industrial (LI) according to Zoning By-law 4830. In 1994, the subject lands and the lands along the east side of Wellington Street were designated and zoned residential in order to preserve and strengthen the predominant low rise residential character of the area. At the time the lands were rezoned, a contractor specializing in paint and woodworking occupied the concrete block building in the rear of the subject property. In 1995, the contractors use ceased in operation and the Committee of Adjustment approved an application for permission to change the legal non-conforming paint and woodworking use to a repair of electronic automotive parts use. The application also had the effect of legalizing the location of the existing concrete building on the subject property. The owner of the subject lands would now like to use the concrete building for an auto detailing business which will include interior car shampoo, vacuuming and detailing, as well as exterior car wash and polishing. As the use of the concrete building is presently restricted to the repair of electronic auto parts, the owner has filed an application for permission to request that the legal non-conforming use permitted on the subject property be changed to an auto detailing business. Although the subject property and the lands to the east and west along Wellington Street are designated and zoned residential, these properties are currently developed with a mix of uses including a hair salon use and auto service use. The lands abutting the subject property at the rear are designated and zoned heavy industrial and are currently developed with industrial uses. As the concrete building is located to the rear of the duplex dwelling on the subject property, the residential character of the street will not be adversely impacted with the continued use of the building for light industrial purposes. The auto detailing use will likely be less intrusive than the repair of electronic auto parts on the surrounding properties that are currently developed with residential uses. Accordingly, as the proposed auto detailing business will be more compatible with the existing residential development in the area, it would be appropriate to recommend approval of this application. The Department of Business and Planning Services recommends that Minor Variance Application A 2001-008, requesting permission to allow an auto detailing business to occupy the existing one- storey concrete block building at the rear of the subject property, be approved. The Committee noted the comments of the Director of Building in which he advised that the Building Division has no concerns with respect to this application. The Committee noted the comments of the Traffic & Parking Analyst in which he advised that the Traffic & Parking Division has reviewed this application and has no concerns with the change of the legal non-conforming use. However, with no approved site plan, we would like to review the proposed parking layout to ensure the functionality of the required parking. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT25FEBRUARY 6, 2001 1.Submission No.: A 2001-008 (Cont'd) The Committee noted the comments of the Planning & Culture Department, Region of Waterloo, in which they advised that Regional staff have reviewed the application and have no concerns; however, any development on the subject lands is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 99-038 or any successor thereof and may require the payment of Regional Development Charges for this development prior to the issuance of a building permit. The Committee noted the comments of the Grand River Conservation Authority in which they advised that they have no objections with respect to this application. The Chair reviewed the staff comments, noting that staff are recommending approval of the application and enquired if Mr. Moua had anything further to add. Mr. C. Moua advised that he had reviewed the staff reports and had nothing further to add. The Chair referred to the comments of the Traffic & Parking Division and enquired if these had been taken into consideration. Mr. L. Masseo advised that the Planning staff comments had not incorporated the comments of the Traffic & Parking Division; however, advised that Planning staff would have no difficulty if the Committee wished to impose a condition requiring a parking layout plan to be submitted and approved by the City's Principal Planner. He further suggested that the applicant be given a 4 month timeframe in which to submit the plan. In response to questioning, Mr. Masseo advised that his understanding of the Planning Act relative to this application allows the Committee to consider changing a legal non-conforming use to that which will bring the use closer to the intent of the current Zoning By-law. He further stated that while ultimately it is the City's mandate to bring legal non-conforming uses into compliance, the Committee should consider what is reasonable to allow in the interim. Traffic concerns relative to the proposed use were raised and it was pointed out that this type of business does not normally generate a lot of traffic. Auto detailing differs from a drive through carwash, in that only a small number of vehicles are on-site at any one time and are there for longer periods of time (1 - 2 hours). Mr. Masseo also pointed out that this is not a repair business, which by its very nature has a tendency toward exterior unsightliness. In this regard, he felt that this proposal is a more appropriate use. The Chair enquired if the subject land was currently used for residential purposes. Mr. Moua advised that the front building is used for residential purpose and he conducts the auto detailing business from the building at the rear. Mr. Moua further advised that he had been informed by the vendor of the property at the time of purchase that he would require approval to operate his business and, accordingly, had filed this application. The Chair enquired as to the uses on adjacent properties and Mr. Moua advised that an auto retail business was located on one side, a light industrial use on the other and a duplex to the rear of his property. As there were no further questions or comments forthcoming, the Chair called for a motion. Moved by Mr. D. Cybalski Seconded by Mr. B. Isaac That the application of Cho Moua requesting permission to change a legal non-conforming use from repair of electronic car parts to an auto detailing business within the existing one storey concrete block building at the rear of the subject property, on Part of Lot 84, Registered Plan BE APPROVED 376, 175 Wellington Street North, Kitchener, Ontario, , subject to the following condition: 1.That a parking layout plan shall be submitted, to the satisfaction of the City's Principal Planner, by June 6, 2001. No extension to this deadline shall be granted unless approved in writing by the City's Principal Planner prior to the deadline date set out in this decision. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT26FEBRUARY 6, 2001 1.Submission No.: A 2001-008 (Cont'd) It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1.The variance requested in this application is minor in nature. 2.This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3.The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Municipal Plan is being maintained on the subject property. Carried 2.Submission No.: A 2001-009 Applicant: John Tellier Property Location: 318 Duke Street West Legal Description: PartLots 149 and 150, Registered Plan 376 Appearances: In Support:Ms. E. Wilson 97 Benton Street Kitchener ON N2G 3H5 Contra:None Written Submissions: In Support:None Contra:None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to legalize an existing vacant commercial building having a frontyard setback of 4.42 m (14.21 ft.), rather than the required 6.1 m (20 ft.), a northerly sideyard setback of 1.08 m (3.56 ft.), rather than the required 3 m (9.84 ft.) and a rearyard setback of 2.13 m (7 ft.), rather than the required 7.62 m (25 ft.). The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Business & Planning Services in which they advised that the subject land is located on the easterly side of Duke Street between Wellington Street and Breithaupt Street. This property is occupied by an old fire hall, which has been listed on the City’s Inventory of Heritage Buildings. The subject land has 17.37 m (57 ft.) of frontage on Duke Street and a depth of 30.48 m (100 ft.). The subject land does not comply with Zoning By-law 85-1 relative to the structure’s rearyard, frontyard and left sideyard setbacks. The fire hall occupied the site from 1913 to 1972. Since then, the use has changed causing non-conformity relative to the building location. The applicant proposes to operate a business for the sale and service of motor vehicles on the first floor of the building, and to live in the dwelling unit on the second floor. Minor variance is required to recognize the location of the existing structure on the subject lands due to the change in use of the building. In addition to the required yard setbacks, a parking requirement of 10 spaces is also required for the proposed uses. Eight spaces are required for the two bays to be used for the service of vehicles, one space is required for the sales office, and one space is required for the dwelling unit. Since the property is unable to accommodate 10 spaces, the required off-street parking may be provided on another lot within 300 m of the subject lands, as per Zoning By-law requirements. The applicant also owns the vacant, southerly adjacent property created through a severance in 1992. The applicant is required to enter into an Off-site Parking Agreement with the City to be registered against the title of both the lot upon which parking is to be provided and the lot, which COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT27FEBRUARY 6, 2001 2.Submission No.: A 2001-009 (Cont'd) the parking is required. Without this agreement full compliance for the intended use could not be achieved and an occupancy permit would not be obtainable. Approval of the noted minor variances is desirable and it meets the intent of the City’s Municipal Plan by pursuing the conservation of the City’s heritage resources through adaptive reuse of the historic fire hall building. Additionally, the proposed use of the sale and service of motor vehicles and a second floor dwelling unit for the owner is permitted in the M-2 Zone according to By-law 85-1. Given that the variances recognize an existing building location, which does not result in adverse impacts on adjacent properties, the intent of the Zoning By-law is maintained. To facilitate future changes of use of the existing building, staff recommend legalizing the building location for any permitted M-2 use. The request to recognize the existing structure in relation to its location on the subject land is considered to be minor in nature and also maintains the general intent of both the Zoning By-law and the Municipal Plan. Accordingly, the Department of Business and Planning Services recommends that Minor Variance Application A 2001-009 be approved to recognize the location of the existing structure on the subject lands for any permitted M-2 use. The Committee noted the comments of the Director of Building in which he advised that the Building Division has no concerns with respect to this application. The Committee noted the comments of the Planning & Culture Department, Region of Waterloo, in which they advised that Regional staff have reviewed the application and have no concerns; however, any development on the subject lands is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 99-038 or any successor thereof and may require the payment of Regional Development Charges for this development prior to the issuance of a building permit. The Committee noted the comments of the Grand River Conservation Authority in which they advised that they have no objections with respect to this application. The Chair reviewed the staff comments, noting that staff are recommending approval of the application and enquired if Ms. Wilson had anything further to add. Ms. E. Wilson advised that she was the owner of the car sales business that would be moving into the existing building and would be employing the owner of the property as a mechanic. The Chair enquired with respect to the off-site parking agreement referred to in the Planning staff comments and Ms. Wilson advised that the owner of the subject property was in the process of taking title to the adjacent lands. She was of the understanding that once this occurred the two properties would merge and questioned if an off-site parking agreement would still be required. Mr. L. Masseo advised that the subject property and the property on which the off-site parking is proposed were created through severance and, accordingly, would always be two separate lots. Mr. Masseo stated that the parking agreement is a critical issue for staff in approving this application. Ms. E. Wilson advised that she had spoken to the owner of the subject property with regard to the issue of parking and the owner had indicated to her that there would be no concern with entering into an off-site parking agreement. The Chair enquired if it would be appropriate to impose a condition with regard to the off-site parking agreement. Mr. Masseo responded that it was not the intent of staff to impose the parking agreement as a condition as this would have to happen regardless in order for the business to obtain an occupancy permit. The Chair stated that he was still of the opinion that it would be appropriate to impose the condition so the applicant is fully aware that the issue of parking must be dealt with. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT28FEBRUARY 6, 2001 2.Submission No.: A 2001-009 (Cont'd) Moved by Mr. B. Isaac Seconded by Mr. D. Cybalski That the application of John Tellier requesting permission to legalize an existing vacant commercial building for any permitted M-2 use, having a frontyard setback of 4.42 m (14.21 ft.), rather than the required 6.1 m (20 ft.), a northerly sideyard setback of 1.08 m (3.56 ft.), rather than the required 3 m (9.84 ft.) and a rearyard setback of 2.13 m (7 ft.), rather than the required 7.62 m (25 ft.), on Part Lots 149 and 150, Registered Plan 376, 318 Duke Street BE APPROVED West, Kitchener, Ontario, , subject to the following condition: 1.That the owner shall enter into an Off-site Parking Agreement, to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor, by June 6, 2001. No extension to this deadline shall be granted unless approved in writing by the City's Principal Planner prior to the deadline date set out in this decision. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1.The variances requested in this application are minor in nature. 2.This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3.The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Municipal Plan is being maintained on the subject property. Carried 3.Submission No.: A 2001-011 Applicant: D. Gary Windsor Property Location: 231 Grand River Boulevard Legal Description: Lot 19, Registered Plan 1447 Appearances: In Support:None Contra:None Written Submissions: In Support:None Contra:None As no one was in attendance at this time to support the application, the Committee agreed to set this application aside until the end of the meeting. CONSENT 1.Submission Nos: B 2001-006 to B 2001-010, inclusive Applicant: Activa Holdings Inc. Property Location: Woolwich Street Legal Description: Part Lot 66 and 125, German Company Tract Appearances: In Support:Mr. P. Chauvin MHBC Planning Limited 171 Victoria Street South Kitchener ON N2H 5C5 COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT29FEBRUARY 6, 2001 1.Submission Nos: B 2001-006 to B 2001-010, inclusive (Cont'd) Contra:None Written Submissions: In Support:None Contra:None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to create 5 new lots by severing 5 parcels of land and retaining a parcel of land having an average area of 7.25 ha (17.9 ac). The severed parcels are proposed to be developed as single residential dwellings each having frontage on Woolwich Street of 30.48 m (100 ft.), by a depth of 30 m (98.43 ft.) and areas ranging from 812.827 m² (8,749.48 sq. ft.) to 919.047 m² (9,892.86 sq. ft.). The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Business & Planning Services in which they advised that the lands were zoned Residential Three Zone (R-3) as part of the approval of a Draft Plan of Subdivision (30T-98205) and accompanying Zone Change application by the Ontario Municipal Board on October 28, 1995 (ZC97/07/W/JW). The subject lands are designated Low Rise Residential which would permit the proposed five residential lots. The subject lands are located immediately north of a wooded block (zoned Open Space (P-2)) also owned by Activa Holdings. To the west across Woolwich Street are existing single family dwellings. To the north is a draft approved Plan of Subdivision also owned by Activa Holdings (30T-98205). Finally, further development is proposed immediately east of the subject lands on lands also owned by Activa Holdings, but not currently the subject of an application for a Plan of Subdivision. Other single family dwellings exist along both sides of Woolwich Street further south of the subject lands. The lands are the subject of two special regulation provisions which require a minimum lot width of 15 m (304R) and which impose a restriction on the location, size and width of a garage and driveway (307R). The proposed lots will have a minimum frontage of 30.48 m with the exception of the most northerly lot at the corner of Woolwich Street and Falconridge Drive which will have a frontage on Woolwich Street of 25.3 m, so all proposed lots comply with the Zoning By-law. The depth of each lot is approximately 30 m, and the area of the lots will range from 812 m² to 919 m². The lands are currently vacant. The subject lands are located in the area known as Bridgeport North. In 1996, the Region approved a restriction of a maximum of 300 new residential units in Bridgeport North until improvements are made to the local transportation network. In the OMB decision of 1999, both plans of subdivision for Activa Holdings and Southstaton Holdings were restricted to a total 300 units (200 units in Southstaton’s plan and 100 Units in Activa’s plan). The unit count is proposed to be further broken down as follows: Proponent No. of units Activa (30T-98205)97 Activa (current consent applications)5 Southstaton (30T-97005)192 Southstaton (adjacent lands to 30T-98205)2 Others (private land owners)4 TOTAL300 The Region has commented that they have no concerns with the proposed five lots as they form part of the overall 300 unit cap in Bridgeport North. The Region has requested, however, that the owner prepare an archaeological assessment for the review and approval of the Ministry of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation. Staff understand that an archaeological assessment was completed for the subject lands as part of an assessment completed for the adjacent plans of subdivision and that the assessment was reviewed and approved by the Ministry previously. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT30FEBRUARY 6, 2001 1.Submission Nos: B 2001-006 to B 2001-010, inclusive (Cont'd) The Department of Public Works has commented that arrangement for servicing will be provided as part of the agreement for the adjacent Plan of Subdivision (30T-98205) also owned by Activa Holdings. The Public Works Department also seeks to ensure that there is compatible grading for the proposed lots and the adjacent draft approved subdivision. A condition is included in the approval of these applications which require that servicing and grading requirements be satisfied. In conclusion, the proposed consent applications conform with the Municipal Plan and Zoning By- law. The severance of these lands provides appropriate infill development along this portion of Woolwich Street. The Department of Business and Planning Services recommends approval of Submissions B 2001-006 to B 2001-010 inclusive, each subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner pay to the City of Kitchener a cash-in-lieu contribution for park dedication equal to 5% of the value of the lands to be severed. 2. That the owner make arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's General Manager of Public Works, for the installation of all new service connections to the severed lands. 3. That satisfactory arrangements be made with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and/or local improvement charges. 4. That an agreement be entered into to prepare a Tree Preservation Plan in accordance with the City’s Tree Management Policy, to include, among other matters, the identification of a proposed building envelope/work zone, landscaped area, and vegetation to be preserved/transplanted (significant plant species locations and recommendations for same), with such Plan to be approved by the City’s Principal Planner prior to area grading. The Committee noted the comments of the Director of Building in which he advised that the Building Division has no concerns with respect to these applications. The Committee noted the comments of the Planning & Culture Department, Region of Waterloo, in which they advised that Regional staff have reviewed the application and have the following comments. The subject lands fall within a restricted development area, identified in the Bridge Street Area Transportation Study. On February 22, 1996, Regional Council endorsed recommendations relating to the Bridge Street Transportation Study. The study recommended an approval limit of 300 new residential units in the Study Area. The proposed five lots are part of 11 lots, which have previously been subtracted from the 300 limit, and therefore the Region has no concerns regarding this issue. A preliminary archaeological assessment indicates a moderate to high potential for the recovery of archaeological remains. In accordance with Policy 6.2.10 in the Regional Official Policies Plan, an archaeological assessment will be required on the severed parcels. Regional staff have no objection to the approval of the creation of five new residential lots subject to the following condition: 1)That prior to final approval of the application, the owner submit an archaeological assessment for the severed parcel to the Ministry of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation for approval. A copy of the completed assessment must be forwarded to the Regional Commissioner of Planning, Housing & Community Services. The Region further advised that any future development on the lands subject to this consent application will be subject to the provisions of Regional Development Charge By-law 99-038, or any successor thereof and there may be a Regional fee assessed for development agreements, if required. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT31FEBRUARY 6, 2001 1.Submission Nos: B 2001-006 to B 2001-010, inclusive (Cont'd) The Committee noted the comments of the Grand River Conservation Authority in which they advised that they have no objection to the approval of these applications as they had provided comments on the parcels in a previous zone change application. The Chair reviewed the staff comments, noting that staff are recommending approval of the application subject to certain conditions and enquired if Mr. Chauvin had anything further to add. Mr. P. Chauvin advised that he had reviewed the staff comments and was in agreement with the recommendations contained therein. The Chair reviewed the Planning staff comments with regard to the Region's request for an archaeological assessment and enquired if it was not necessary to impose the Region's condition. Mr. Masseo advised that staff believe an archaeological assessment was completed on an adjacent Plan of Subdivision which included the subject land. Mr. Masseo pointed out that the Committee could still impose the condition and if, in fact, the assessment has been completed it would not create any hardship for the applicant as the condition would in effect already be satisfied. Mr. P. Chauvin assured the Committee that an archaeological assessment on all lands owned by Activa, including the subject lands, had undergone an archaeological assessment in 1999 which was reviewed and approved by the Ministry of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation. Accordingly, the Committee agreed that it would not be necessary to impose a condition with respect to an archaeological assessment. Mr. L. Masseo requested that Condition No. 4 as written in the Planning staff report relative to preparation of a Tree Preservation Plan be amended to delete the phrase "transplanted (significant plant species locations and recommendations for same)". Mr. Chauvin advised that he had no concerns with the requested amendment. Accordingly, the Committee concurred with this request. Consent B 2001-006 Moved by Mr. D. Cybalski Seconded by Mr. B. Isaac That the application of Activa Holdings Inc. requesting permission to convey a parcel of land to be developed as a single residential dwelling having frontage on Woolwich Street of 25.316 m (83.05 ft.), by a depth of 30 m (98.43 ft.) and an area of 812.827 m² (8,749.48 sq. ft.), on Part Lots 66 & BE GRANTED 125, German Company Tract, Woolwich Street, Kitchener, Ontario, , subject to the following conditions: 1.That the owner shall pay to the City of Kitchener a cash-in-lieu contribution for park dedication equal to 5% of the value of the lands to be severed. 2.That the owner shall make arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's General Manager of Public Works, for the installation of all new service connections to the severed lands. 3.That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and/or local improvement charges. 4.That an agreement shall be entered into, to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor, to prepare a Tree Preservation Plan in accordance with the City’s Tree Management Policy, to include, among other matters, the identification of a proposed building envelope/work zone, landscaped area, and vegetation to be preserved, with such Plan to be approved by the City’s Principal Planner prior to area grading. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT32FEBRUARY 6, 2001 1.Submission Nos: B 2001-006 to B 2001-010, inclusive (Cont'd) Consent B 2001-006 (Cont'd) Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfil the above- noted conditions within one year of the date of giving notice of this decision. Pursuant to Subsection 43 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the decision of this Committee shall lapse two years from the date of approval, being February 6, 2003. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1.A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. 2.The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. 3.The use of the land in the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Carried Consent B 2001-007 Moved by Mr. D. Cybalski Seconded by Mr. B. Isaac That the application of Activa Holdings Inc. requesting permission to convey a parcel of land to be developed as a single residential dwelling having frontage on Woolwich Street of 30.48 m (100 ft.), by a depth of 30 m (98.43 ft.) and an area of 919.047 m² (9,892.86 sq. ft.), on Part Lots 66 & BE GRANTED 125, German Company Tract, Woolwich Street, Kitchener, Ontario, , subject to the following conditions: 1.That the owner shall pay to the City of Kitchener a cash-in-lieu contribution for park dedication equal to 5% of the value of the lands to be severed. 2.That the owner shall make arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's General Manager of Public Works, for the installation of all new service connections to the severed lands. 3.That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and/or local improvement charges. 4.That an agreement shall be entered into, to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor, to prepare a Tree Preservation Plan in accordance with the City’s Tree Management Policy, to include, among other matters, the identification of a proposed building envelope/work zone, landscaped area, and vegetation to be preserved, with such Plan to be approved by the City’s Principal Planner prior to area grading. Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfil the above- noted conditions within one year of the date of giving notice of this decision. Pursuant to Subsection 43 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the decision of this Committee shall lapse two years from the date of approval, being February 6, 2003. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1.A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT33FEBRUARY 6, 2001 1.Submission Nos: B 2001-006 to B 2001-010, inclusive (Cont'd) Consent B 2001-007 (Cont'd) 2.The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. 3.The use of the land in the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Carried Consent B 2001-008 Moved by Mr. D. Cybalski Seconded by Mr. B. Isaac That the application of Activa Holdings Inc. requesting permission to convey a parcel of land to be developed as a single residential dwelling having frontage on Woolwich Street of 30.48 m (100 ft.), by a depth of 30 m (98.43 ft.) and an area of 914.4 m² (9,842.84 sq. ft.), on Part Lots 66 & BE GRANTED 125, German Company Tract, Woolwich Street, Kitchener, Ontario, , subject to the following conditions: 1.That the owner shall pay to the City of Kitchener a cash-in-lieu contribution for park dedication equal to 5% of the value of the lands to be severed. 2.That the owner shall make arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's General Manager of Public Works, for the installation of all new service connections to the severed lands. 3.That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and/or local improvement charges. 4.That an agreement shall be entered into, to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor, to prepare a Tree Preservation Plan in accordance with the City’s Tree Management Policy, to include, among other matters, the identification of a proposed building envelope/work zone, landscaped area, and vegetation to be preserved, with such Plan to be approved by the City’s Principal Planner prior to area grading. Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfil the above- noted conditions within one year of the date of giving notice of this decision. Pursuant to Subsection 43 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the decision of this Committee shall lapse two years from the date of approval, being February 6, 2003. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1.A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. 2.The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. 3.The use of the land in the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Carried COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT34FEBRUARY 6, 2001 1.Submission Nos: B 2001-006 to B 2001-010, inclusive (Cont'd) Consent B 2001-009 Moved by Mr. D. Cybalski Seconded by Mr. B. Isaac That the application of Activa Holdings Inc. requesting permission to convey a parcel of land to be developed as a single residential dwelling having frontage on Woolwich Street of 30.48 m (100 ft.), by a depth of 30 m (98.43 ft.) and an area of 914 m² (9,842.84 sq. ft.), on Part Lots 66 & 125, BE GRANTED German Company Tract, Woolwich Street, Kitchener, Ontario, , subject to the following conditions: 1.That the owner shall pay to the City of Kitchener a cash-in-lieu contribution for park dedication equal to 5% of the value of the lands to be severed. 2.That the owner shall make arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's General Manager of Public Works, for the installation of all new service connections to the severed lands. 3.That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and/or local improvement charges. 4.That an agreement shall be entered into, to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor, to prepare a Tree Preservation Plan in accordance with the City’s Tree Management Policy, to include, among other matters, the identification of a proposed building envelope/work zone, landscaped area, and vegetation to be preserved, with such Plan to be approved by the City’s Principal Planner prior to area grading. Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfil the above- noted conditions within one year of the date of giving notice of this decision. Pursuant to Subsection 43 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the decision of this Committee shall lapse two years from the date of approval, being February 6, 2003. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1.A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. 2.The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. 3.The use of the land in the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Carried Consent B 2001-010 Moved by Mr. D. Cybalski Seconded by Mr. B. Isaac That the application of Activa Holdings Inc. requesting permission to convey a parcel of land to be developed as a single residential dwelling having frontage on Woolwich Street of 30.48 m (100 ft.), by a depth of 30 m (98.43 ft.) and an area of 914.4 m² (9,842.84 sq. ft.), on Part Lots 66 & BE GRANTED 125, German Company Tract, Woolwich Street, Kitchener, Ontario, , subject to the following conditions: 1.That the owner shall pay to the City of Kitchener a cash-in-lieu contribution for park dedication equal to 5% of the value of the lands to be severed. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT35FEBRUARY 6, 2001 1.Submission Nos: B 2001-006 to B 2001-010, inclusive (Cont'd) Consent B 2001-010 (Cont'd) 2.That the owner shall make arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's General Manager of Public Works, for the installation of all new service connections to the severed lands. 3.That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and/or local improvement charges. 4.That an agreement be entered into, to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor, to prepare a Tree Preservation Plan in accordance with the City’s Tree Management Policy, to include, among other matters, the identification of a proposed building envelope/work zone, landscaped area, and vegetation to be preserved, with such Plan to be approved by the City’s Principal Planner prior to area grading. Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfil the above- noted conditions within one year of the date of giving notice of this decision. Pursuant to Subsection 43 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the decision of this Committee shall lapse two years from the date of approval, being February 6, 2003. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1.A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. 2.The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. 3.The use of the land in the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Carried 2.Submission No.: B 2001-011 Applicant: Mill-Gate Holdings Inc. Property Location: 271 and 275 Shoemaker Street Legal Description: Part Lot 2, Registrar's Compiled Plan 1478, designated as Parts 1 and 2 on Reference Plan 58R-5862 Appearances: In Support:Mr. C. Runstedler Sims Clement Eastman 700-22 Frederick Street Kitchener ON N2G 4A2 Contra:None Written Submissions: In Support:None Contra:None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to create one new lot by severing a parcel of land and retaining a parcel of land having an area of 6,184.5 m² (66,571.58 sq. ft.). The severed parcel is proposed for landscaping contractor use and will have frontage on Shoemaker Street of 61.06 m (200.33 ft.), by a depth of 100 m (328.08 ft.) and an area of 6,184.5 m² (66,571.58 sq. ft.). COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT36FEBRUARY 6, 2001 2.Submission No.: B 2001-011(Cont'd) The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Business & Planning Services in which they advised that the subject property is located south of Bleams Road and east of Strasburg Road in the Huron Business Park. The property consists of Part 1 (271 Shoemaker St.) and Part 2 (275 Shoemaker St.) on Reference Plan 58R-5862. The owner proposes to sever 271 Shoemaker Street (Part 1) to create two separate lots. There is an existing building on the retained land that was constructed in 1989 and is used as a commercial plumbing supply and warehouse. The severed land is presently vacant and is proposed to be used for a contractor’s establishment, equipment repairs and warehousing. The surrounding lands and the subject property are designated Business Park in the Municipal Plan. This designation permits a range of industrial/commercial uses including the existing uses on the retained land and the proposed uses on the severed land. The subject property is zoned Business Park (B-1). The proposed lot sizes for the severed and retained lands comply with the minimum requirements of the B-1 zone. In addition, all other regulations pertaining to the severed and retained lands as required by the B-1 zone would be satisfied. Also, a Site Plan Application (SP00/36/S/BS) has recently been approved for the proposed use of the severed land. There are no site servicing items that would be required as part of this consent application. The Department of Business and Planning Services recommends approval of Application B 2001- 011 subject to the following condition: 1.That satisfactory arrangements be made with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding Municipal property taxes and/or local improvement charges. The Committee noted the comments of the Director of Building in which he advised that the Building Division has no concerns with respect to this application. The Committee noted the comments of the Planning & Culture Department, Region of Waterloo, in which they advised that Regional staff have reviewed the application and the subject lands have been identified as potentially contaminated. The subject lands have a history of manufacturing steel and aluminum doors, windows and frames. Currently the property is used as a commercial plumbing supply, distributor and warehouse. The subject lands are located within a Regional well field. As such, this application is subject to: 1)The completion of a Record of Site Condition acknowledged by the Ministry of the Environment. A copy of the Ministry acknowledged RSC is to be forwarded to the Regional Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services. In summary, Regional staff have no objection to these applications subject to the above noted requirement; however, any development on the lands subject to this consent application will be subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 99-038 or any successor thereof and there may be a Regional fee assessed for development agreements, if required. The Committee noted the comments of the Grand River Conservation Authority in which they advised that they have no objections with respect to this application. The Chair reviewed the staff comments, noting that staff are recommending approval of the application subject to certain conditions. The Chair enquired if Mr. Runstedler had reviewed the staff comments and had anything further to add. Mr. C. Runstedler stated that he had reviewed the comments and with regard to the Regional comments, advised that his Associate had discussed the issue of a Record of Site Condition and the Region was now satisfied that this matter had been addressed. Mr. Runstedler pointed out that it was his understanding a prior test had been conducted and a report had been submitted to the Ministry of Environment and approved. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT37FEBRUARY 6, 2001 2.Submission No.: B 2001-011(Cont'd) The Chair enquired if Mr. Runstedler had written acknowledgement from the Region and Mr. Runstedler advised that he did not; however, his Associate, Mr. Fedy, had advised him that the matter had been addressed. The Chair requested staff to comment and Mr. Masseo pointed out that if the condition has in fact been satisfied, then imposing the condition would not create any hardship for the applicant. The Chair stated that he was prepared to accept Mr. Runstedler's assurances that the matter had been satisfied and the Committee concurred. Accordingly, it was agreed not to impose the condition outlined in the Regional comments. Moved by Mr. B. Isaac Seconded by Mr. D. Cybalski That the application of Mill-Gate Holdings Inc. requesting permission to convey a parcel of land proposed for landscaping contractor use, having frontage on Shoemaker Street of 61.06 m (200.33 ft.), by a depth of 100 m (328.08 ft.) and an area of 6,184.5 m² (66,571.58 sq. ft.), on Part Lot 2, Registrar's Compiled Plan 1478, designated as Parts 1 & 2 on Reference Plan 58R-5862, BE GRANTED 271 and 275 Shoemaker Street, Kitchener, Ontario, , subject to the following condition: 1.That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and/or local improvement charges. Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfil the above- noted conditions within one year of the date of giving notice of this decision. Pursuant to Subsection 43 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the decision of this Committee shall lapse two years from the date of approval, being February 6, 2003. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1.A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. 2.The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. 3.The use of the land in the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Carried At the conclusion of the meeting this date, Mr. Runstedler approached the Committee again with respect to this consent application and advised that since leaving the meeting he had been in contact with his Associate. As a result of his conversation, it was determined that he had misinterpreted what his Associate had relayed in a telephone message with respect to discussions with the Region regarding the Record of Site Condition. Mr. Rundstedler stated that he had unintentionally misled the Committee to conclude that the Regional condition was not required. Accordingly, Mr. Runstedler requested that the decision of the Committee be amended to include the Regional condition and apologized for inconveniencing the Committee. Moved by Mr. B. Isaac Seconded by Mr. D. Cybalski That the decision relative to Consent Application, Submission No. B 2001-011, as applied for by Mill-Gate Holdings Inc. for the property known municipally as 271 and 275 Shoemaker Street, BE AMENDED Kitchener, Ontario, , to include the following condition: COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT38FEBRUARY 6, 2001 2.Submission No.: B 2001-011(Cont'd) "2.That the owner shall complete a Record of Site Condition to be submitted to, and acknowledged by, the Ministry of Environment. A copy of the Ministry's acknowledgement of the Record of Site Condition shall be forwarded to the Regional Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services." Carried 3.Submission No.: B 2001-012 Applicant: Centennial Manor Apts. Property Location: 55 & 63 Ross Avenue and 60 & 72 Wilfred Avenue Legal Description: Lots 97, 98, 99 & Part Lots 96, 114, 116 & 117, Registered Plan 765, desiganted as Part 1 on Reference Plan 58R-986 Appearances: In Support:Mr. A. Radovic 50 Wilfred Avenue Kitchener ON N2A 1W8 Contra:None Written Submissions: In Support:None Contra:None The Committee was advised that the lands involved in this application have merged under common ownership and it is intended to re-create one parcel as an independent lot. The applicant is therefore requesting permission to create one new lot by severing a parcel of land (63 Ross Avenue) and retaining parcels of land (55 Ross Avenue; 60 & 72 Wilfred Avenue) having an average area of 4,068.28 m² (43,792 sq. ft.). The severed parcel contains an existing duplex dwelling and will have frontage on Ross Avenue of 24.5 m (80.36 ft.), by a depth of 41.17 m (135.08 ft.) and an area of 1,003.32 m² (10,800 sq. ft.). The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Business & Planning Services in which they advised that the owner proposes to sever an existing single detached dwelling at 63 Ross Avenue from other assembled properties which include 55 Ross Avenue next door and 60 and 72 Wilfred Avenue which abut small sections of the rear lot line. All lots are developed and no variances are created by the consent. The severed lot exceeds the lot size requirements of R-3, having a lot width of 80.36 feet. Staff have no concerns with the consent as it recognizes existing development patterns and facilitates a change in title to the severed lot. The Department of Business and Planning Services recommends approval of Submission B 2001-012 subject to the following condition: 1.That satisfactory arrangements be made with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding Municipal property taxes and/or local improvement charges. The Committee noted the comments of the Director of Building in which he advised that the Building Division has no concerns with respect to this application. The Committee noted the comments of the Planning & Culture Department, Region of Waterloo, in which they advised that the purpose of this application is to re-create one residential lot, where there is an existing residential dwelling. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT39FEBRUARY 6, 2001 3.Submission No.: B 2001-012 (Cont'd) At this location, Weber Street has an existing road allowance width of 66 feet and a designated width in the Regional Official Policies Plan of 86 feet. Therefore, a 10 foot road allowance widening is required. Furthermore, a 25 foot daylighting triangle is required at the intersection of Weber Street and Ross Avenue. The property at 55 Ross Avenue is adjacent to Weber Street, were projected noise levels may cause concern to individuals living at that location. This concern is based on Noise Level Objectives approved by the Regional Municipality of Waterloo. As such the noise warning clause, stated below in condition three, must be included in all offers of purchase and deeds or rental agreements. Regional staff have no objection to this application subject to the following conditions: 1)That prior to final approval, the owner agrees to convey the 10 foot road widening allowance along the entire frontage of Regional Road #1 (Huron Road). 2)That prior to final approval, the owner agrees to convey a 25 foot daylighting triangle at the intersection of Huron Road and Stone Street. 3)That the following noise warning clause is included in all offers of purchase and deeds or rental agreements, for 55 Ross Avenue: Due to its proximity to Regional Road #8 (Weber Street), projected noise levels on this property exceed the Noise Level Objectives approved by the Regional Municipality of Waterloo and may cause concern to some individuals. The Region further advised that any future development on the lands subject to this consent application will be subject to the provisions of Regional Development Charge By-law 99-038, or any successor thereof and there may be a Regional fee assessed for development agreements, if required. The Committee noted the comments of the Grand River Conservation Authority in which they advised that they have no objections with respect to this application. The Chair reviewed the staff comments, noting that staff are recommending approval of the application and enquired if Mr. Radovic had anything further to add. Mr. A. Radovic referred to conditions 1 and 2 in the Regional comments and questioned how they applied to this application as the roadways mentioned therein are not within the vicinity of the subject property. Mr. L. Masseo advised that he had contacted the Region to clarify these conditions and it was determined that a clerical error had been made. In this regard, Mr. Masseo advised that Condition No. 1 should refer to Regional Road No. 8 (Weber Street) and Condition No. 2 should refer to the intersection of Weber Street and Ross Avenue. Mr. Masseo further advised that he had questioned the need for the road widening conveyance given that the Region had already taken a road widening conveyance along Weber Street this past summer. Mr. Masseo advised that the Region had agreed to modify the recommendation to include the words "if necessary". Mr. Radovic stated that he felt the Region had acquired adequate space and noted that Weber Street has already been widened to four lanes. The Chair referred to the Regional comments respecting 55 Ross Avenue and enquired if a further severance was pending. Mr. Radovic advised that it is only intended to sever 63 Ross Avenue which is to be sold to his parents for use as a retirement home. All other lands, including 55 Ross Avenue will be retained under current ownership. In addition, it is noted that the Regional Condition No. 3, as written, could not be enforced within the required 1 year period to fullfil conditions of a consent application. Members of the Committee agreed that the Regional conditions would not be imposed. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT40FEBRUARY 6, 2001 3.Submission No.: B 2001-012 (Cont'd) Moved by Mr. S. Kay Seconded by Mr. B. Isaac That the application of Centennial Manor Apts. requesting permission to convey a parcel of land containing an existing duplex dwelling, having frontage on Ross Avenue of 24.5 m (80.36 ft.), by a depth of 41.17 m (135.08 ft.) and an area of 1,003.32 m² (10,800 sq. ft.), on Lots 97, 98 & 99 and Part Lots 96, 114, 116 & 117, Registered Plan 765, designated as Part 1 on Reference Plan BE GRANTED 58R-986, 55 & 63 Ross Avenue and 60 & 72 Wilfred Avenue, Kitchener, Ontario, , subject to the following condition: 1.That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and/or local improvement charges. Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfil the above- noted conditions within one year of the date of giving notice of this decision. Pursuant to Subsection 43 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the decision of this Committee shall lapse two years from the date of approval, being February 6, 2003. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1.A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. 2.The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. 3.The use of the land in the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Carried CONSENT & MINOR VARIANCE 1.Submission Nos.: B 2001-013 &A 2001-010 Applicant: Pan Am Capital Corp. Property Location: 52 Mansion Street and 175 Queen Street North Legal Description: Part Lots 23, 24 & 25 and Part Lots 27, 28 & 29, Registered Plan 379, designated as Part 3 on Reference Plan 58R-3888 Appearances: In Support:Mr. R. Johnson 145 Casselholme Crescent New Dundee ON N0B 2E0 Contra:Ms. E. Forsyth-Russell 48 Mansion Street Kitchener ON N2H 2J6 Written Submissions: In Support:None Contra:Ms. E. Forsyth-Russell 48 Mansion Street Kitchener ON N2H 2J6 The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to create one new lot by severing a parcel of land (52 Mansion Street) and retaining a parcel of land (175 Queen COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT41FEBRUARY 6, 2001 1.Submission Nos.: B 2001-013 &A 2001-010 (Cont'd) Street North) having an average area of 582.11 m² (6,266 sq. ft.). The lands to be severed are proposed to be developed with semi-detached dwellings and will have frontage on Mansion Street of 12.04 m (39.5 ft.), by a depth of 24.079 m (79 ft.) and an area of 289.1 m² (3,111.95 sq. ft.). In addition, the applicant is requesting permission for the severed parcel to have a maximum lot width of 12.04 m (39.5 ft.), rather than the required 15 m (49.21 ft.) and a maximum lot area of 289 m² (3,111.95 sq. ft.), rather than the required 470 m² (5,059.2 sq. ft.) The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Business & Planning Services in which they advised that the retained lands, at 175 Queen Street are zoned “Residential Nine Zone (R-9)” and are designated High Density Multiple Residential in the Municipal Plan. The retained lands comply with all by-law requirements including minimum lot size, frontage, setbacks, off-street parking provisions, and lot coverage. Municipal services are available for the proposed severed lot. According to the application, the subject lands proposed for severance was a separate lot prior to its merging with the retained lands when the apartment building was being constructed. Staff find that the consent is appropriate as the severed lot is not required for the use of these lands. The proposed severance at 52 Mansion Street is consistent with Municipal Plan infill policy and conforms to the Zoning By-law. Of the two requested variances, the variance on lot width from the required 15m (49.21 ft.) to a lot width of 12.04 m (39.5 ft.) can be considered minor and meets the intent of the Municipal Plan and the Zoning By-law. Further, the reduction in lot width is appropriate for the intended development because the 1.2 m (3.93 ft.) side yard setbacks will be complied with in the proposal. This proposal also complies with the Zoning By-law in many other respects, such as the proposed setbacks, rear yards, and parking availability, which are all within acceptable limits notwithstanding the proposed variances. There is some question as to the second proposed variance, relief from a required total lot area of 470 sq. m. (5,059.2 sq. ft.), to a lot area of 289 sq. m. (3,111.95 sq. ft.). This proposal appears to be a significant deviation from the required total lot area standard. However, consideration of this should be given within the context of other tests. Staff feels that the subject property is considered desirable for redevelopment. This is particularly relevant given that the neighbourhood is considered to be an area of transition and that the proposal offers the potential for additional housing stock within physical proximity to the downtown core. The test of minor is often measured by the impact on the neighbourhood. The development on this property as a raised two storey building would produce a negligible visual impact since it is adjacent to the driveway of the retained lands at 175 Queen Street. The new development would also incorporate garages, thus limiting the need for on-street parking. When considering the proposed variances, the intent of the Municipal Plan was a major consideration in the recommendations of this report. The Municipal Plan’s Low Density Multiple Residential designation seeks to maintain the character of the neighbourhood while introducing integrated redevelopment. The redevelopment of this property remains consistent with this policy. While the extent of the total lot area reduction is an important factor, the strength of the other tests, which can be answered in support of the application, mediate the significance of total lot area reduction. Thus, in considering all relevant factors and the proposal in its totality, staff supports the application for minor variance for lot width and lot area. The Department of Business and Planning Services recommends: A. That Minor Variance Application A 2001-010 be approved without conditions. B. That Consent Application B 2001-013 be approved subject to the following conditions: COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT42FEBRUARY 6, 2001 1.Submission Nos.: B 2001-013 &A 2001-010 (Cont'd) 1.That the owner pay to the City of Kitchener a cash-in-lieu contribution for park dedication equal to 5% of the value of the lands to be severed. 2.That the owner make financial arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's General Manager of Public Works, for the installation of all new service connections to the severed lands. 3.That the owner make financial arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's General Manager of Public Works for the installation, to City standards, of boulevard landscaping including street trees, and a paved driveway ramp, on the severed lands. 4.That satisfactory arrangements be made with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding Municipal property taxes and/or local improvement charges. The Committee noted the comments of the Director of Building in which he advised that the Building Division has no concerns or comments with respect to these applications. The Committee noted the comments of the Planning & Culture Department, Region of Waterloo, in which they advised Regional staff have reviewed the applications and have no concerns; however, any development on the subject lands is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 99-038, or any successor thereof and there may be a Regional fee assessed for development agreements, if required. The Committee noted the comments of the Grand River Conservation Authority in which they advised that they have no objections or concerns with respect to these applications. The Committee noted the written submission of Ms. E. Forsyth-Russell in which she advised that she was opposed to the request to have the required lot size adjusted to allow for building development. In particular, the objection is to the parcel of land that is facing onto Mansion Street. The overwhelming reasons for this objection are: a)Major Safety Issues The lot is located immediately adjacent to a 20+ storey apartment building roadway and less than 20 feet from two intersections onto busy Lancaster Street. Traffic, both vehicle and pedestrian, in this small corner are heavy. Mansion Street itself is a very busy walking and driving area because of its location to the Centre in the Square and to the downtown. A building of any size would create severe blind spots. A building of any sort would most definitely lead to potentially fatal accidents. b)Reduction in Size is Substantial The request for reduction in size requirement is substantial - nearly 40%. The lot size is definitely not suitable for a dwelling. The lot size is only suitable for the existence of a small park area. The street area contains mostly large old houses. The area appearance is that of heritage. Profit for one would be at the expense of all homeowners in the immediate area. Ms. E. Forsyth-Russell also provided a hand drawn sketch showing the layout of residential properties and streets in the area of the subject property. The Chair reviewed the staff comments, noting that staff are recommending approval of the application subject to certain conditions and enquired if Mr. Johnson had anything further to add. Mr. R. Johnson advised that the lands to be severed had been merged with the retained lands which contained an existing highrise apartment and were no longer needed for any use in conjunction with the highrise. Accordingly, the owner is proposing to sever these lands and develop a semi-detached dwelling. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT43FEBRUARY 6, 2001 1.Submission Nos.: B 2001-013 &A 2001-010 (Cont'd) Ms. E. Forsyth-Russell stated that she wished to clarify that the lands to be severed had initially been required by the developer of the highrise apartment to facilitate construction of a secondary access for emergency purposes. She further advised that this access is heavily used by the tenants of the highrise. The Chair enquired as to the physical layout of the proposed building lot and Mr. Johnson advised that an existing house had been demolished and the area grassed over. He further advised that the access road to the highrise is still there and will remain. Mr. Johnson further stated that the proposed semi would be constructed in keeping with heritage aspects of the area and is in keeping with the City's policy with regard to infilling. Ms. E. Forsyth-Russell advised that her main objection had to do with safety issues, noting that Mansion Street is a very busy street utilized by patrons of the Centre in The Square, Suddaby School and local residents. Ms. Forsyth-Russell stated that she did not feel that the lot size was suitable for development other than possibly a small park area. She also did not agree that the proposed building would have no visual impact on the neighbourhood. She pointed out that the intersection of Mansion Street and Lancaster Street, together with a short connecting roadway, is in close proximity to the proposed lot. Ms. Forsyth-Russell expressed concern with movement of traffic from the proposed new lot as well as the highrise and stated that she had witnessed several accidents at the intersection. In her opinion, she stated that there were severe safety issues and pointed out that there are many children in the neighbourhood. She further stated that she objected to the request for a reduction in lot size noting that it amounts to 40% less. The Chair enquired if Traffic staff had commented on the proposal and it was pointed out that Traffic staff only provide comment on those applications they have concern with. Accordingly, it is assumed that there are no traffic related concerns. In response to questioning, Mr. Johnson advised that the main entrance to the highrise is from Queen Street North and that the two-way road to the rear of the highrise is for emergency access purposes. He acknowledged that the residents do use the emergency access to enter and exit the property. Mr. D. Cybalski enquired if any consideration had been given to relocating the emergency access to the opposite side of the proposed severance, in effect, flipping the plan. Ms. Forsyth-Russell commented that while this may help it still would not resolve the concerns that she had with regard to safety. The Chair stated that he was having difficulty with Ms. Forsyth-Russell's objection as the property previously contained a residential dwelling for a number of years which also would have generated traffic. He pointed out that the owner is trying to redevelop what had previously existed and that infilling is appropriate. The Chair further noted that the proposal in its totality is considered and not limited to the percentage factor relative to lot width. Mr. L. Masseo also stated that a complete zoning analysis had been conducted on the subject property and while it does not comply with lot width, it does comply with all setback requirements. The Chair again stated that he had difficulty with the objection given that there were no concerns raised by Traffic staff; however, enquired if the applicant would entertain deferral of the application to allow Traffic staff to comment. Mr. Johnson stated that it would be problematic to delay the application and pointed out that the applicant had in good faith subjected the application to a complete planning analysis. Mr. Johnson reiterated that he was of the opinion the proposal would enhance the quality of the street while fulfilling a City mandate for infilling and did not agree that safety is a major problem. Ms. Forsyth-Russell commented that this was not reinstituting what was previous as this was no longer a full sized lot and felt that the lot was only suitable for park area. She stated that she would have no concerns with the proposal provided that the emergency access and the connecting street could be eliminated. She stated that she would like to know the reasons why Traffic staff have no concerns with this proposal. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT44FEBRUARY 6, 2001 1.Submission Nos.: B 2001-013 &A 2001-010 (Cont'd) In response to Mr. Cybalski, Mr. Johnson stated that he believed the emergency access lane was to be one-way going into the highrise; however, acknowledged that tenants exit through the access. Mr. Johnson suggested that he could approach the owner of the highrise to install signage indicating that the road is one-way and identify the road as an emergency access only. In response to the Chair, Mr. Masseo advised that staff support the application as it is looked upon as desirable infill and while the property was initially purchased to facilitate the emergency access, it has always been envisioned that the remaining portion would be developed, perhaps independently. He further pointed out that the owner could potentially develop the subject lands without severing the parcel which may have a greater impact. Mr. Cybalski questioned if development took place without severance if a site plan would be required and Mr. Masseo advised that was correct. Mr. Cybalski further questioned if the access lane would then be revisited and Mr. Masseo advised that the function of the laneway and setbacks would all be taken into consideration. Ms. Forsyth-Russell suggested that imposing a condition to require the posting of signs at the access would help alleviate some of her concerns and she would be willing to approach the City with regard to closing the connecting street. Mr. Johnson stated that he was willing to work on these issues with Ms. Forsyth-Russell. Discussion was entered into regarding the posting of signs and it was concluded that it would not be appropriate to make this a condition of approval as it would be very difficult to enforce one-way traffic given that this is private property. The Chair expressed the opinion that the connecting street was more of a safety issue and encouraged Ms. Forsyth-Russell to pursue closing the connecting street with the City. He stated that as the highrise has a high percentage of senior residents he did not feel that safety relative to use of the access lane was as major an issue. In this regard, he advised that he was prepared to move approval of the applications. Minor Variance A 2001-010 Moved by Mr. S. Kay Seconded by Mr. D. Cybalski That the application of Pan Am Capital Corp. requesting permission to construct a semi-detached dwelling on a lot having a maximum lot width of 12.04 m (39.5 ft.), rather than the required 15 m (49.21 ft.) and a maximum lot area of 289 m² (3,111.95 sq. ft.), rather than the required 470 m² (5,059.2 sq. ft.), on Part Lots 23, 24 & 25 and Part Lots 27, 28 & 29, Registered Plan 379, designated as Part 3 on Reference Plan 58R-3888, 52 Mansion Street and 175 Queen Street BE APPROVED North, Kitchener, Ontario, . It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1.The variances requested in this application are minor in nature. 2.This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3.The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Municipal Plan are being maintained on the subject property. Carried COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT45FEBRUARY 6, 2001 1.Submission Nos.: B 2001-013 &A 2001-010 (Cont'd) Consent B 2001-013 Moved by Mr. S. Kay Seconded by Mr. D. Cybalski That the application of Pan Am Capital Corp. requesting permission to convey a parcel of land to be developed with a semi-detached dwelling, having frontage on Mansion Street of 12.04 m (39.5 BE GRANTED ft.), by a depth of 24.079 m (79 ft.) and an area of 289.1 m² (3,111.95 sq. ft.), , subject to the following conditions: 1.That the owner shall pay to the City of Kitchener a cash-in-lieu contribution for park dedication equal to 5% of the value of the lands to be severed. 2.That the owner shall make financial arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's General Manager of Public Works, for the installation of all new service connections to the severed lands. 3.That the owner shall make financial arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's General Manager of Public Works for the installation, to City standards, of boulevard landscaping including street trees, and a paved driveway ramp, on the severed lands. 4.That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding Municipal property taxes and/or local improvement charges. Pursuant to Subsection 41 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the applicant shall fulfil the above- noted conditions within one year of the date of giving notice of this decision. Pursuant to Subsection 43 of Section 53 of the Planning Act, the decision of this Committee shall lapse two years from the date of approval, being February 6, 2003. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1.A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. 2.The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. 3.The use of the land in the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. Carried MINOR VARIANCE 1.Submission No.: A 2001-011 Applicant: D. Gary Windsor Property Location: 231 Grand River Boulevard Legal Description: Lot 19, Registered Plan 1447 Appearances: In Support:Mr. G. Windsor 302-600 Greenfield Avenue Kitchener ON N2C 2J9 Contra:None Written Submissions: COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT46FEBRUARY 6, 2001 1.Submission No.: A 2001-011 (Cont'd) In Support:None Contra:Ms. E. Troutman 235 Grand River Blvd. Kitchener ON N2A 3G7 The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to locate a pre- manufactured modular home on the subject lands having a northerly sideyard setback of 0.37 m (1.2 ft.) and a southerly sideyard setback of 0.82 m (2.7 ft.), rather than the required 1.2 m (4 ft.). The Committee noted the comments of the Department of Business & Planning Services in which they advised that the property has been vacant since the dwelling was finally removed following damage by fire. The owner proposes to reconstruct a larger dwelling on site which does not comply with the sideyard requirements. On the northerly side, this also necessitates the approval by Council of an encroachment agreement onto the adjacent City parkland for construction and ongoing maintenance of the dwelling. Council consideration of the encroachment matter is pending the Committee of Adjustment’s consideration of this application. Staff are not supportive of this application as the request does not maintain the intent of the by- law nor is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. The R-3 zone does not provide for lesser sideyards in combination with maintenance easements, as do other smaller lot zones. The lot is sufficiently wide, with more than 50 feet at the building line, to accommodate an appropriately sized dwelling without using public lands. No hardship or valid reason why compliance with the by-law cannot be achieved has been demonstrated. On the desirability test, it is noted that this owner has historically encroached onto the public lands and approval of this application will further exacerbate this encroachment, potentially causing concern by the City, other neighbours and users of the public lands. Accordingly, it is the opinion of staff that this application fails to meet all of the Planning Act tests and cannot be recommended for approval. The Department of Business and Planning Services recommends refusal of Submission A 2001- 011. The Committee noted the comments of the Director of Building in which he advised that the Building Division will support a three party agreement being registered on title to allow easement for window openings on the side elevation proposed to be 1.2' from the property line. Actual width of the allowance is to be to the satisfaction of the Chief Building Official. The Committee noted the comments of the Legal Department in which they advised that subject to obtaining consent from the Committee of Adjustment for all variances required to permit the installation of an already constructed prefabricated house on the subject property, staff is willing to recommend to Council that permission be given to permit the eavestroughs of the house to encroach 4", more or less, over the adjacent City parkland and that a 5' maintenance easement and a temporary construction easement be granted. Final approval for the encroachment and easements is required from Council. If Council grants approval the applicant would be required to enter into an agreement with the City. If the required approvals are received from the Committee of Adjustment and Council, Building staff will make a decision respecting the openings on the side of the house facing the parkland. The applicant will be required to either alter the openings so that there is compliance with the Building Code or seek authorization from Council for an agreement to permit the openings. The Committee noted the comments of the Planning & Culture Department, Region of Waterloo, in which they advised that Regional staff have reviewed the application and have no concerns; however, any development on the subject lands is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 99-038 or any successor thereof and may require the payment of Regional Development Charges for this development prior to the issuance of a building permit. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT47FEBRUARY 6, 2001 1.Submission No.: A 2001-011 (Cont'd) The Committee noted the comments of the Grand River Conservation Authority in which they advised that they have no objections with respect to this application. The Committee noted the written submission of Ms. E. Troutman in which she advised that as the property owner of 235 Grand River Boulevard, she wishes to appeal the request of the applicant to locate a pre-manufactured modular home at 231 Grand River Boulevard. I feel the lot is of adequate size to accommodate a dwelling that would come within the guidelines of the City requirements. I am concerned about curb appeal and maintenance of the property, as there have been problems in previous years, even before the fire destroyed the dwelling. I strongly disagree with this minor variance application and as a taxpayer I request the City to decline the application concerning the above property. The Chair reviewed the staff comments, noting that staff are recommending refusal of the application. The Chair requested clarification relative to the need for an encroachment and Mr. Windsor responded that an encroachment is necessary on one side for maintenance purposes. He further pointed out that an easement already exists on the other side relative to the previous house which was destroyed by fire. Mr. Windsor stated that the modular home selected was the only one available and is of good quality. The Chair referred to staff comments which indicate that the building lot is sufficient to allow a dwelling to be constructed in compliance with the Zoning By-law. Mr. Windsor responded that he was currently dealing with legal issues as a result of the fire and pointed out that he was given a timeline by the insurance company in which to build a new house. He stated that the builders he had approached advised that the timeframe was not sufficient to build a new home. In order to meet legal obligations, Mr. Windsor stated he felt he had no other choice but to purchase a modular home. The Chair stated that he was not certain the legal issues had relevance as these are issues the Committee has no control over. The Committee is to consider issues that are relevant to the Planning Act and he noted that no planning hardships have been demonstrated. Mr. Windsor commented that the modular home is a bungalow and smaller than the previous 3 storey home. He pointed out that the adjacent green space owned by the City upon which the encroachment is proposed is not developable and already has easements in favour of Bell Canada. The Chair enquired as to height restrictions and Mr. Masseo advised that the by-law requirement for height is not more than 10.5 m or 3 storeys; however, pointed out that this was not an issue. Mr. Masseo stated that staff maintain there is no valid reason why compliance with the by-law cannot be achieved. In response to Mr. Windsor, the Chair reiterated that the building lot is sufficient to accommodate compliance and the only hardship described relates to extraneous issues over which the Committee has no control. Mr. Windsor stated that efforts were made to minimize non-compliance; however, being a bungalow the house is long. He advised that he has been dealing with the legal issues for approximately 3 1/2 years and this is the closest he has come to a settlement without going to court. In response to Mr. Isaac, Mr. Windsor clarified that while the legal issues have been ongoing for 3 1/2 years an Umpire was only brought in last fall and it was at that time the deadline to build was established. The Chair enquired if the purpose of the deadline was to establish a limit on the time the Insurance Company would pay Mr. Windsor's expenses relative to his current accommodation. Mr. Windsor responded that he had been given a dollar value and a timeframe in which to build a new home, otherwise the Insurance Company would base the settlement on the cash value COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT48FEBRUARY 6, 2001 1.Submission No.: A 2001-011 (Cont'd) of the previous home which would be approximately 40% less. Mr. Windsor stated that if he had to accept the cash value, it would present an economic hardship for him. The Chair maintained that the legal issues are outside the bounds of the Committee's consideration whose mandate is to have concern with matters relative to the Planning Act. Given that the building lot is sufficient to allow compliance and no hardship other than extraneous issues has been demonstrated, he was not prepared to support the application. The remaining members concurred with the Chair's comments. Moved by Mr. B. Isaac Seconded by Mr. D. Cybalski That the application of D. Gary Windsor requesting permission to locate a pre-manufactured modular home on the subject lands having a northerly sideyard setback of 0.37 m (1.2 ft.) and a southerly sideyard setback of 0.82 m (2.7 ft.), rather than the required 1.2 m (4 ft.), on Lot 19, BE REFUSED Registered Plan 1447, 231 Grand River Boulevard, Kitchener, Ontario, . It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1.The variances requested in this application are not minor in nature. 2.This application is not desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3.The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Municipal Plan is not being maintained on the subject property. Carried ADJOURNMENT On motion, the meeting adjourned at 11:45 a.m. Dated at the City of Kitchener this 6th day of February, 2001. J. Billett Secretary-Treasurer Committee of Adjustment