HomeMy WebLinkAboutAdjustment - 2004-12-07 COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT
FOR THE
CITY OF KITCHENER
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING HELD DECEMBER 77 2004
MEMBERS PRESENT: Messrs. P. Britton, D. Cybalski and B. Isaac.
OFFICIALS PRESENT: Mr. B. Sloan, Planner, Ms. R. Brent, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer and Ms.
D. Gilchrist, Secretary-Treasurer
Mr. P. Britton, Chair, called this meeting to order at 9:00 a.m.
MINUTES
Moved by Mr. D. Cybalski
Seconded by Mr. B. Isaac
That the minutes of the regular meeting of the Committee of Adjustment of November 16, 2004, as
mailed to the members, be accepted.
Carried
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
CONSENT
Submission No.:
Applicant:
Property Location:
Legal Description:
B 2004-048
Gravity Custom Homes Ltd.
875 Thomas Slee Drive
Part Lot 35, Registered Plan 58M-109, being Part 1, Reference Plan
58R-14100
Submission No.:
Applicant:
Property Location:
Legal Description:
Appearances:
In Support:
Contra:
- and -
A 2004-082
Gravity Custom Homes Ltd.
875 Thomas Slee Drive
Part Lot 35, Registered Plan 58M-109, being Part 1, Reference Plan
58R-14100,
Mr. K. Marinovic
Ms. G. Zaja
Mr. D. Morlock
Mr. M. Taylor
Mr. G. Marinovic
Mr. & Mrs. M. Mundi
Ms. J. Belsky
Mr. & Mrs. B. Noe
Mr. & Mrs. J. Kadlec
Mr. M. Guerriero
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 212 DECEMBER 7, 2004
Submission No.:
B 2004-048 & A 2004-082 (Cont'd)
Written Submissions:
Neighbourhood Petition
Mr. & Mrs. Mundi
Ms. J. Belsky
Mr. & Mrs. B. Noe
Mr. & Mrs. Kadlec
The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to create a new lot
with a width of 57.4 metres on Thomas Slee Drive and an area of approximately 0.13 hectares
that would contain a single detached dwelling. The retained lands would have a lot width of
38.4 metres on Thomas Slee Drive and an area of approximately 0.1 hectares and is proposed
to contain a new dwelling. The creation of the new lot requires a minor variance to permit the
two new lots with areas of 0.13 hectares and 0.1 hectares instead of the required 0.4 hectares
in the Residential One (R-l) zoning of the subject lands.
The Committee considered the report of the Development & Technical Services Department,
dated October 8, 2004, in which they advised the subject land is located at 875 Thomas Slee
Drive, new New Dundee Road and the southern terminus of Pinnacle Drive. The land is
currently designated Low Rise Residential in the Municipal Plan and is zoned Residential One
Zone (R-l). This zoning permits single detached dwellings on lots having an area greater than
0.4 hectares. Typically, this zoning is applied to lands where limited services are available and
the required 0.4 ha ensures adequate space is provided for a septic system. The subject lands
currently contain one single detached dwelling under construction located on the lot proposed to
be severed (see plan). The proposed lot to be retained is currently vacant. Lands to the east of
the subject lands have been developed with large-lot single detached dwellings, and lands to the
west of the subject lands have been developed with singles on smaller sized lots.
The subject lands were severed from lands addressed as 879 Thomas Slee Drive in 2003. At the
time of the previous consent application, the owner also applied for a minor variance requesting a
reduction in lot area from 0.4 hectares to 0.27 hectares for the lot to be retained and 0.23 ha for
the lot to be severed. Through the circulation of the application the Engineering Department
commented that municipal sanitary sewers were municipally serviced. Due to steep slopes along
Thomas Slee Drive the sanitary sewer could not be extended further along Thomas Slee Drive to
the lot to be severed. A geo-technical investigation was carried out in support of the applications
and found that a lot of 0.23 ha was large enough for a private septic system. As such, the
consent application and minor variances were approved. Today, the applicant is proposing to
sever the retained 0.27 ha parcel of land into two lots. The severed lot is proposed to have a
frontage 38.4 m and a depth of 54.2 m. The lot to be retained is proposed to have a frontage of
57.4 m and a depth of 58 m. A Minor Variance application has been submitted to permit the lots
to be severed and retained to have areas of 0.14 ha and 0.13 ha respectively, rather than 0.4 ha.
The most significant issue effecting the subject applications is the availability of services. Full
municipal services are available for the lot to be severed, but are not available for the portion of
the lot to be retained and an onsite septic system is proposed.
In considering the four tests for minor variances as outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act,
R.S.O., 1990 Chap, P. 13, as amended, Planning staff offer the following comments:
The variances meet the intent of the Municipal Plan for the following reasons. The intent of the
Municpal Plan is to ensure efficient and adequate services are available to all residential lots.
The lot to be severed can be serviced by municipal water, storm and sanitary sewers and
therefore meets the intent of the Municipal Plan. The lot to be retained can be serviced by
municipal water and storm sewers, but cannot be serviced by municipal sanitary sewers. The
intent of the Municipal Plan is to permit development on, "individual septic systems when
associated with...infilling situations in existing unserviced developed areas where other forms of
servicing are not feasible..." This is outlined in Section 4.1.6 i) of the Municipal Plan. The
proposed severance resulting in the retained lot having an area of 0.13 ha rather than 0.4 ha can
be considered infill in an existing unserviced developed area. Servicing is not feasible in this
situation because of the extremely steep slope and the shallow depth of the existing sanitary
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 213 DECEMBER 7, 2004
1. Submission No.: B 2004-048 & A 2004-082 (Cont'd)
sewer. The proposed variance and severance will meet the requirements of this policy and
therefore, the intent of the Municipal Plan is maintained.
The variances meet the intent of the Zoning By-law for the following reasons. The zoning by-law
requires that lots zoned Residential One Zone (R-l) have a minimum area of 0.4 ha. The
purpose of the requirement for a 0.4 ha lot is to ensure there is adequate room on site for a septic
system. Currently, the portion of the lot closest the sewer connection can be serviced by
municipal sanitary sewers. Hence, the proposed lot to be severed can be municipally serviced
and a septic system is not necessary and therefore, a lot area of 0.14 ha meets the intent of the
Zoning By-law. The portion of the lot to be retained cannot be serviced by municipal sanitary
sewers and well require a septic system. The geo-technical investigation submitted indicates that
a specific type of septic system could operate and be installed on a lot having an area of only
0.13 ha. The Building Division has reviewed the proposed septic system, and although it is not
the preferred type of septic system (given the required maintenance) it will comply with the
Building Code. Therefore, the intent of the by-law is maintained.
The Variances are minor for the following reasons. Despite the requested reduction in lot size,
the lot width and frontage exceed by-law requirements and there will be little impact on the visual
streetscape. The proposed lots would help to provide an appropriate transition between the
smaller sized lots to the west and the larger sized lots to the east. The proposed lot areas at 0.13
and 0.14 ha provided lot areas sufficient to build single detached dwellings with adequate room
on the lot to be retained for an onsite septic system. The lots created will fit into the existing
neighbourhood and therefore the variances are considered minor and appropriate for the
development and use of the lands.
With respect to the criteria for the subdivision of land listed in Section 51 (24) of the Planning Act,
R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13, and although variances are required for the lot areas of both the retained
and severed lot, the lot areas of both parcels are sufficient to accommodate the future
development of single detached dwellings. Therefore, the proposed configuration of the resultant
lots is appropriate and suitable for the use of the lands. Also, the severed and retained parcels
will be compatible in size with lots in the surrounding areas and will provide a transition between
the small lots to the west and the large lots to the east. Both the lots will front an established
public street, Thomas Slee Drive, and the consent will comply with the servicing policies of the
Municipal Plan.
Based on the foregoing, Planning staff recommend that the applications be approved subject to
certain conditions.
Engineering Services has identified that storm sewer and water services are available for the lot
to be retained and the lot to be severed and arrangements should be made for the appropriate
connections. Due to the grades along Thomas Slee Drive, sanitary sewer service is available for
the lot to be severed, but not for the lot to be retained. Engineering staff caution that while a
private septic tank may meet the requirements of the Building Code, the site is significantly
smaller than average for a septic system. Furthermore, a paved driveway ramp, sidewalk
contribution and boulevard landscaping will also be required.
The proposed onsite sewage system as recommended by the draft Geo-technical Investigation,
prepared by Naylor Engineering Associates Ltd. And dated August 19, 2004, meets the
regulations of the Building Code. Staff caution that the type of system being proposed is more
compact than most systems and as such will probably require annual maintenance.
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 214 DECEMBER 7, 2004
Submission No.: B 2004-048 & A 2004-082 (Cont'd)
The Committee was also in receipt of a report from the Development & Technical Services
Department, dated November 9, 2004, in which they advised the subject land is located at 875
Thomas Slee Drive, new New Dundee Road and the southern terminus of Pinnacle Drive. The
land is currently designated Low Rise Residential in the Municipal Plan and is zoned Residential
One Zone (R-l). This zoning permits single detached dwellings on lots having an area greater
than 0.4 ha. Typically, this zoning is applied to lands where limited services area available and
the required 0.4 ha ensures adequate space is provided for aseptic system. The subject lands
currently contain one single detached dwelling under construction located on the lot proposed to
be severed. The proposed lot to be retained is currently vacant. Lands to the east of the subject
land shave been developed with large-lot single detached dwellings, and lands to the west of the
subject lands have been developed with singles on smaller sized lots.
The applicant is proposing to sever the subject 0.27 ha parcel of land into two lots. The lot to be
severed is proposed to have a frontage 38.4 m and a depth of 54.2 m. The lot to be retained is
proposed to have a frontage of 57.4 m and a depth of 58 m. A minor variance application has
been submitted to permit the lots to be severed and retained to have areas of 0.14 ha and 0.13
ha respectively, rather than 0.4 ha. The most significant issue effecting the subject applications is
the availability of services. Full municipal services are available for the lot to be severed, but are
not available for the portion of the lot to be retained and an onsite septic system is proposed.
The Committee first heard this application on October 19, 2004 and recommended that the
application be deferred to allow the applicant to submit additional supporting information including
a Geo-Technical Report signed by a Licensed Professional Engineer, a Hydro-Geological
Investigation, and a Grading Plan. In addition, and to help address the concerns of neighbouring
property owners, the applicants were requested to provide proposed building drawings, home
layouts, examples of past projects, and a written discussion on the appropriateness of the
proposed severance and minor variance. Staff were also asked to consider whether the
applications should be considered for zone change.
The information requested by the Committee has been submitted by the applicant and includes a
report from Naylor Engineering providing an evaluation of the feasibility of the severance with
respect to on-site sewage disposal, detail on the inspection/maintenance regimes for the
proposed sewage system, and an assessment of any potential risk created by the proposed
sewage system on existing private wells. City staff do not have the expertise to review impact of
the sewage system on the wells and have forwarded the report to the Region of Waterloo for
review. The report has also been forwarded to the Building Department for review to ensure the
proposed septic system is in compliance with Ontario Building Code requirements. An example
Service/Maintenance Agreement, prepared by Sanitech Communal Systems Inc., has also been
submitted. The purpose of the Service/Maintenance Agreement is to ensure that any potential
homebuyer complies with the regular service and maintenance requirements of their septic
system. Grading Plans, prepared by Metz and Lorentz Ltd., have also been provided.
The requested documents and additional information were not received until a couple of days
prior to the preparation of this report and neither City no Regional staff have had the opportunity
to review the information submitted. As such, staff are recommending that the application be
deferred to allow time for formal comments to be submitted to the Committee for consideration.
Planning staff have considered whether the requested minor variance should be a zone change.
Whether considered as a zone change or a variance to the lot area. The same analysis applies.
Consideration still must be given to whether it is appropriate to create the subject lots with the
proposed lot areas. The intent of the lot area requirement in the R-1 zone is to ensure there is
adequate space on the lot for the septic system, if one is necessary. It may be appropriate to
reduce the required lot area where large sized lots can be serviced municipally, or where the
appropriate studies indicate that a septic system can be accommodated on the lot. In this
situation, the lot to be severed complies with the required lot width and can be municipally
services. The lot to be retained also complies with the required lot width and can be municipally
serviced. The lot to be retained also complies with the required lot width and several studies
have been carried out to support the septic system. These studies are currently under review,
and the results will help determine if the lot area of the retained lands is appropriate and therefore
if the application meets the four tests of a minor variance.
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 215 DECEMBER 7, 2004
1. Submission No.: B 2004-048 & A 2004-082 (Cont'd)
The Committee considered the comments of the Region of Waterloo Planning, Housing &
Community Services, dated October 13, 2004, with respect to Submission No. B 2004-048,
advising it appears that both the severed and retained lands will be affected by traffic noise from
Thomas Slee Drive; consequently, a noise study should be undertaken to analyze future traffic
noise from Thomas Slee Drive, and outline any noise mitigation measure which may be required
for both the severed and retained land.
The Committee considered the comments of the Region of Waterloo Transportation Planner,
dated October 12, 2004, in which they advised they have no objection to Submission No. A 2004-
082.
The Committee considered correspondence from Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc., dated October 12,
2004, requesting the owner be required to make arrangements with them for the provision of
electrical servicing to the lands to be retained, including any easements they may require.
The Committee considered the written submissions and petitions from neighbourhood residents,
in opposition to these applications.
The Committee considered two reports from Naylor Engineering Associates Ltd., Consulting
Engineers, dated August 19, 2004, and November 3, 2004, with respect to the proposed private
sewage disposal system to be installed on the new lot. A copy of a standard
Service/Maintenance Agreement for a Class 4 sewage system, as required under the Ontario
Building Code, was also considered by the Committee.
The Chair provided background on the previous two hearings for these applications, noting at the
last meeting in November, staff requested this matter be deferred in order to allow time for the
Region of Waterloo to review the engineering reports from Naylor Engineering.
The Secretary-Treasurer stated she had been advised by the Region of Waterloo that to review
and comment on such reports is not within their jurisdiction; consequently, comments would not
be forthcoming.
The Chair then advised a full hearing on these applications will be held at this time, and all parties
will be given an opportunity to address the Committee. He then explained the four tests for a
minor variance: whether the variance is minor in nature; whether is appropriate development for
the property; and whether it needs the intention of the City's Zoning By-law and the City's Official
Plan. With respect to the Application for Consent, he advised the Committee will be considering
the appropriateness of the lot in terms of this Estate Residential area, and in terms of the lot
accommodating a private sewage disposal system. With respect to the proceedings at this
hearing, the Chair advised that it will proceed in the following order:
The applicant will present the applications, including what is proposed, what the
development will look like, and why they think the application is minor and appropriate
development.
2. Each objector will be given an opportunity to make their submissions.
3. The applicant will be given an opportunity to respond to the objectors submissions.
4. Staff will then be given an opportunity to make comments.
5. The Committee will ask questions of anyone, to clarify issues.
6. The Committee will then deliberate and formulate its decisions.
He requested that questions from all parties be directed to the Chair.
When questioned by the Committee, Mr. Guerriero advised that he has a historic interest in this
property, and some of the neighbours asked him to represent them. He advised that he has been
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 216 DECEMBER 7, 2004
Submission No.: B 2004-048 & A 2004-082 (Cont'd)
a realtor in this area for 15 years, and was the listing agent for the property abutting the subject
property, which was also severed from this lot.
Ms. G. Zaja addressed the Committee on behalf of Gravity Custom Homes advising the
November report for Naylor Engineering states there is no increased risk to the wells on
surrounding properties if a Class 4 sewage disposal system is installed on the new lot. She noted
a service/maintenance agreement, in the form as submitted, must be signed by the purchaser, as
required by the Ontario Building Code. Further, they will be required to submit a grading plan for
approval. It was Ms. Zaja's opinion the application is minor in nature and appropriate
development. The lot width exceeds the by-law requirement and the lot is a sufficient size to
accommodate a private sewage disposal system. She advised the Committee they propose to
construct a two storey single family dwelling with a 3 car garage, which will be in keeping with the
existing development in the area, and the lot will be professionally landscaped. In this regard,
Ms. Zaja displayed building plans and photographs showing the distances between existing
housing and the location for the proposed dwelling. She advised that leaving this lot vacant has
caused vandalism and the dumping of garbage. With respect to the petitions and written
submissions from the neighbours, Ms. Zaja advised they had visited the signatories on the
petition and some are under 18 years of age. Others no longer objected once they received a
proper explanation.
The Chair questioned whether the placement of the existing house on this property was chosen
because the owner had always intended to sever this new lot. It was noted the existing house on
this property was sited where it is to allow it to be connected to the municipal sewer. The Chair
questioned lot coverage for the proposed new lot in comparison to surrounding properties, and
was advised from the street there would be more space than exists for other lots in the area. The
Chair commented that Estate Residential areas have a very open feel as compared to lots on
municipal services. Mr. Morlock, Naylor Engineering, advised the new lot will have a width of a
180 ft., to contain a home with a width of 70 ft., and that size of home will fit in with others in the
neighbourhood.
Mr. Morlock, P Eng., Naylor Engineering Ltd., advised his principal duty is designing onsite
sewage disposal systems, and he has enough knowledge of hydrogeology to prepare the reports
before the Committee this date. He stated a subsurface investigation was conducted and the soil
was a high silt soil. He noted his proposal, is outlined in the reports, is to install a Class 4 onsite
system with a tertiary treatment unit. With respect to any potential risk to the groundwater from
such a system, he referred the Committee to his second report, dated November 3, 2004, and the
criteria listed for the construction of a new single family dwelling. He advised that as part of the
preparation of the report, he conducted a site investigation of neighbouring wells, and checked
the MOEE records for those wells. Mr. Morlock advised that the proposed sewage system is
positioned well beyond the Ontario Building Code setback requirements from the wells.
The ground service elevations at the subject wells are at or above the finished grade of the
proposed sewage system; consequently, surface runoff at the proposed sewage system will not
reach the subject wells. Given the Iow infiltration rate of the silt till combined with the thickness of
the deposit at the subject wells, the native silt provides for ample nitrate abatement above the
gravel aquifer. Further he advised the approved tertiary treatment unit produces a high quality of
effluent.
With respect to the tertiary treatment unit, Mr. Morlock advised the Ontario Building Code requires
a maintenance agreement for such a system, and if there are problems with the system the Chief
Building Official must be notified. Mr. Morlock stated there does not seem to be a risk to the
existing wells from the proposed sewage system.
The Chair commented that the percolation rate is such that the nitrates will be cleansed before
they can reach the wells; which Mr. Morlock confirmed. The Chair questioned whether there will
be lateral movement of the effluent which Mr. Morlock also confirmed, but advised that by using a
shallow buried trench system there will be a controlled even dose. The Chair questioned whether
Mr. Morlock will guarantee there will be no movement of effluent beyond the limits of the
proposed lot. Mr. Morlock stated that he could not make such a guarantee; however, any effluent
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 217 DECEMBER 7, 2004
1. Submission No.: B 2004-048 & A 2004-082 (Cont'd)
would be cleaner than that from the usual type of septic system. With respect for the potential of
an owner not to maintain such a system, Mr. Morlock advised that the ultimate responsibility for
maintaining and servicing the system lies with the property owner. Upon further questioning Mr.
Morlock advised anyone liable for the operation of this proposed septic system will have done
due diligence if they have followed the standards set out in the Ontario Building Code. The Chair
questioned both the owner and the engineer as to whether they would be willing to accept liability
for continued maintenance and operation of this proposed septic system. Mr. Morlock stated that
every sewage system requires maintenance, and if you do not take care of it you will have a
problem. Mr. Taylor, Solicitor for the owner, advised the applicant is not able to accept indefinite
liability for the proposed septic system beyond that required under the Ontario New Home
Warranty Program. However, they could have a powerful agreement registered on title and the
applicant could go so far as to lodge financial securities to be drawn on by the City under certain
circumstances. Mr. Sloan responded that it would be difficult to ensure this system by the City.
Mr. Kadlec addressed the Committee questioning how long the proposed septic system has been
on the market for residential use. He stated it seems to be a complex, high maintenance system
which is quite expensive. He suggested the small pump could break down at any time and no
one would be aware of it. Mr. Morlock responded that there is an alarm system which would
notify the owner if the pump failed. The Chair questioned Mr. Morlock as to how the system
would behave in the case of heavy rain, and he responded such a situation has been considered
in the design of the system.
Mr. Guerriero addressed the Committee advising of the various occasions since 1996, that
previous owners have enquired of the City whether this lot could be severed, and at each
occasion the City advised it could not. He stated that he himself had made such an enquiry of
May 2002 and was told by the City that the lot could not be severed. He stated that for more than
10 years this property has been considered Estate Residential, and it has never been considered
a transition zone. Further, he advised that the house currently under construction on this property
is at least 2 times the size of the house proposed for the new lot.
The Chair questioned the position of the house currently under construction. Mr. Sloan advised
the house has been placed to be as close as possible to the municipal sewer; and, although the
City's Engineering Services state that pumping is possible for this lot, to do so would be
expensive, and would require maintenance and upkeep. Further, Engineering staff are not
supportive of a forcemain which would cost approximately $50,000. He stated the existing house
could, by gravity, feed to the existing sewer, if placed in its current location.
Mr. Guerriero stated that variance is not minor, he is concerned with the private septic system,
and the proposed development is not an appropriate transition.
Ms. Kadlec addressed the Committee advising she is disappointed this situation has risen at all.
Out of the entire area 3 lots were fine, but the owner is now trying to create 4 lots. The design
looks terrible, there is a threat to the watertable, and no one wants to take full responsibility for the
proposed septic system. Mr. Kadlec questioned what would happen if the maintenance company
fails.
Mrs. Belsky stated she agrees with her neighbours, and does not believe anyone will accept
responsibility if the septic system fails. She stated she believes the house will not fit in the
property, and she is concerned about her well.
Mr. Guerriero addressed the Committee advising that people make decisions based on policies
and rules. He advised that the people who back onto this property paid a premium price for their
properties to back onto an Estate Residential lot.
Mr. Noe noted the disclaimers in the Naylor report with respect to using chemicals. There is the
potential the system will become less efficient with the use of chlorine. He stated he does not
believe all potential failure modes have been addressed. The Chair stated this system has been
endorsed under the Ontario Building Code. Mr. Morlock commented the disclaimers with respect
to the use of chemical is not unique to a tertiary treatment system.
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 218 DECEMBER 7, 2004
Submission No.: B 2004-048 & A 2004-082 (Cont'd)
Mrs. Noe stated that she has been lied to since she and her husband bought their home. They
only found out about the developers intention to sever this lot after they signed all the papers to
purchase their home. She stated she is concerned with the configuration of the new lot and with
the proposed septic system, and what may happen if it breaks down, as it will ultimately be close
to her property.
Mrs. Mundi advised the Committee that she is concerned about drainage. She stated when she
bought her property she was advised this was an Estate Residential area. Further, before she
bought her property she was told by the City the subject property could not be severed.
Ms. Zaja advised this property is considered a transition because of the lot size and street
appearance.
With respect to the neighbours concerns about drainage, Mr. Morlock stated the septic will be at
the Iow side of the lot, and referred to the grading plan noting there is an outlet for surface water,
so the water will not pond. Further, Ontario Building Code setbacks have been met.
Mr. Sloan addressed the Committee advising staff have considered the four tests for a minor
variance when analyzing these applications, and the rational came down to servicing. At the time
of the initial report, staff confirmed the proposed septic system does comply with the Ontario
Building Code. In terms of the second report submitted by Naylor Engineering, the City does not
have staff that can comment on the report, and the Region is not willing to do so. The Chair
questioned the configuration and compatibility of the lot, and Mr. Sloan responded that staff do
not dispute the validity of the neighbours' comments. However, in terms of the broader
subdivision, staff believe the lot is compatible with respect to streetscape and frontage. The
backyard is primarily in the private realm. Staff view this property as a transition lot.
Submission No. B 2004-048
Moved by Mr. D. Cybalski
Seconded by Mr. B. Isaac
That the application of Gravity Custom Homes requesting permission to convey a parcel of land
having a width of 57.4 m (188.32 ft.) and an area of approximately 1452.2 m2 (15,631.86 sq. ft.),
on Part Lot 35, Registered Plan 58M-109, being Part of Part 1, Reference Plan 58R-14100, 875
Thomas Slee Drive, Kitchener, Ontario BE GRANTED, subject to the following conditions:
1. That the owner shall receive final approval of Submission No. A 2004-082.
That the owner shall make arrangements satisfactory to the City of Kitchener for the
payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and/or local improvement changes.
That the owner shall make arrangements satisfactory to the City's Engineering Services
for the following:
(a) installation of all new service connections to the retained land; and,
(b)
installation, to the City standards, of sidewalks and boulevard landscaping including
street trees, and a paved driveway ramp on the retained land.
That the owner shall receive approval from the City's Chief Building Official, of a geo-
technical investigation, completed by a professional engineer, confirming the suitability of
the retained land for a private in-ground sewage disposal system.
That the owner shall receive approval, from the City's Chief Building Official, of the house
design chosen for the retained land, certifying that it meets the criteria set-out in the geo-
technical investigation required in Condition 4, above.
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 219 DECEMBER 7, 2004
1. Submission No.: B 2004-048 & A 2004-082 (Cont'd)
That the owner shall enter into an agreement, satisfactory to the City's Chief Building
Official, which agreement shall require the servicing and maintenance of the private in-
ground sewage disposal system.
That the owner shall make arrangements satisfactory to Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc. for
the provision of permanent electrical servicing to the retained land, including granting any
necessary easements.
It is the opinion of this Committee that:
A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the
municipality.
The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed land and
retained lands with final approval of Application for Minor Variance A 2004-082.
The use of the land in the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and
the Regional Official Policies Plan.
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 December 7, 2006.
Carried
Submission No. A 2004-082
Moved by Mr. D. Cybalski
Seconded by Mr. B. Isaac
That the application of Gravity Custom Homes requesting permission for the severed land to
have an area of 0.13 ha, and the retained land to have an area of 0.1 ha, rather than the required
0.4 ha, on Parts of Lot 35, Registered Plan 58M-109, being Parts of Part 1, Reference Plan 58R-
14100, 875 Thomas Slee Drive, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED.
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.
The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Municipal Plan
is being maintained on the subject property.
Carried
This meeting recessed at 11:00 a.m., and reconvened at 11:10 a.m. with the following members present:
Ms. D. Angel and Messrs. P. Britton, D. Cybalski, Z. Janecki and B. Isaac.
APPOINTMENT OF CHAIR AND VICE-CHAIR
It was resolved:
That Mr. P. Britton be appointed Chair and Mr. D. Cybalski be appointed Vice-chair, of the Committee of
Adjustment, with these appointments to expire November 30, 2006.
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 220 DECEMBER 7, 2004
UNFINISHED BUSINESS (CONT'D)
Submission No.:
Applicant:
Property Location:
Legal Description:
B 2004-046
2001024 Ontario Limited
Vacant parcel next to 30 Sunbridge Crescent
Part Lot 124, German Company Tract, being Part 3, Reference Plan
58R-12341
Submission No.:
Applicant:
Property Location:
Legal Description:
- and -
B 2004-047
Justin Edward & Kimberley Ann Fabian
196 Woolwich Street
Part Lots 59 & 124, German Company Tract, being Parts 1 - 12,
Reference Plan 58R-4721
Appearances:
In Support:
Mr. J. Fabian
Mr. J. Buisman
Contra: None
Written Submissions: None
The Committee was advised that the owners of two adjacent properties at the end of Sunbridge
Crescent are proposing to convey parcels of land to each other. A portion of land
approximately 324 m2 (3,487.62 sq. ft.) with no frontage would be conveyed from the
unaddressed property to 196 Woolwich Street. A portion of land approximately 67.6 m2
(727.66 sq. ft.) with 12 m (39.37 ft.) of lot width on Sunbridge Crescent would be conveyed
from 196 Woolwich Street to the unaddressed property. Both lots are proposed for the future
construction of one single detached dwelling each.
The Committee noted the report of the Development & Technical Services Department, dated,
December 2, 2004, recommending approval of these applications, provided satisfactory
arrangements are made for payment of any outstanding property taxes and/or local improvement
charges, and the lands to be severed are added to the abutting lands.
The Committee considered the comments of the Region of Waterloo Planning, Housing &
Community Services, dated October 13, 2004, in which they advise they have no objections to
Submission No. B 2004-046. In their comments, they also advise that a portion of the property in
Submission No. B 2004-047 lies in an area of archaeological potential, and, in accordance with
the Regional Official Policies Plan an archaeological assessment is required prior to any grading
or construction and final approval.
The Committee noted the correspondence from Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro, dated November 2,
2004, in which they advise they have no objections provided satisfactory arrangements are made
for electrical servicing to the lands to be retained and severed, and that no easements other than
what is shown on Draft Reference Plan are required.
Mr. Buisman addressed the Committee advising that since the Committee of Adjustment meeting
of October 19, 2004, they have met on site with Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro, to determine the
appropriate location for an easement, in an effort to protect trees on these properties. In this
regard, the Committee was in receipt of correspondence from Van Harten Surveying Inc., dated
November 19, 2004, attached to which is a revised severance plan for both applications, showing
the required Hydro easement. Mr. Buisman requested permission to amend these applications
in accordance with this revised sketch.
With respect to the Region's request for an archaeological assessment, Mr. Buisman advised he
has spoken with the Region in this regard and they no longer require this assessment.
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 221 DECEMBER 7, 2004
2. Submission No.: B 2004-046 & B 2004-047 (Cont'd)
Submission No. B 2004-046
Moved by Mr. B. Isaac
Seconded by Ms. D. Angel
That the application of 2001924 Ontario Limited requesting permission to convey a parcel of land
having an area of 331 m2 (3,562.97 sq. ft.) as a lot addition, subject to an easement in favour of
Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc., on Part Lot 124, German Company Tract, Sunbridge Crescent,
Kitchener, Ontario, BE GRANTED, subject to the following conditions:
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.
That the lands to be severed be added to the abutting lands and title shall be taken
identical ownership as the abutting lands. Any subsequent conveyance of the parcel to be
severed shall comply with Sections 50(3) and/or (5) of the Planning Act.
That the owner shall convey to Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc. an easement, over the
severed land, substantially as shown on the severance sketch prepared by Van Harten
Surveying Inc., dated November 17, 2004.
It is the opinion of this Committee that:
A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the
municipality.
The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the
retained lands.
The use of the land in the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and
the Regional Official Policies Plan.
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 December 7, 2006.
Carried
Submission No. B 2004-047
Moved by Mr. B. Isaac
Seconded by Ms. D. Angel
That the application of Justin Edward and Kimberly Ann Fabian requesting permission to convey
a parcel of land as a lot addition, having an area of 45m2 (484.39 sq. ft.), and permission to
convey an easement to Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc. over the retained land, on Part Lot 124,
German Company Tract, 196 Woolwich Street, Kitchener, Ontario, BE GRANTED, subject to the
following conditions:
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.
That the lands to be severed shall be added to the abutting lands and title shall be taken
identical ownership as the abutting lands. Any subsequent conveyance of the parcel to be
severed shall comply with Sections 50(3) and/or (5) of the Planning Act, 1995.
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 222 DECEMBER 7, 2004
Submission No.: B 2004-046 & B 2004-047 (Cont'd)
That the owner shall convey an easement to Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc., over the
retained land, substantially as shown on the severance sketch prepared by VanHarten
Surveying Inc., dated November 17, 2004.
It is the opinion of this Committee that:
A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the
municipality.
The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the
retained lands.
The use of the land in the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and
the Regional Official Policies Plan.
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 December 7, 2006.
Carried
Submission No.:
Applicant:
Property Location:
Legal Description:
B 2004-049
Richard Targosz, Janice Moser & Francine Verutis
77 Brunswick Avenue
Lot 23, Registered Plan 146
Appearances:
In Support:
Mr. J. Ward
Contra: None
Written Submissions: None
The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to create a new lot with a
width of 12.19 m (39.99 ft.), a depth of 36 m (118.11 ft.) and an area of 438 m2 (4,714.7 sq. ft.) for
a proposed new residential dwelling. The retained lands would contain an existing single
detached dwellin~l and would have a lot width of 15.24 m (50 ft.), a depth of 36 m (118.11 ft.) and
an area of 548 mt (5,898.8 sq. ft.).
The Committee considered the report of the Development and Technical Services Department,
dated November 30, 2004, in which they advise the subject property is located on the west side
of Brunswick Avenue between Hartwood Avenue and Guelph Street. The property is zoned
Residential Four Zone (R-4) and is designated as Low Rise Residential in the Municipal Plan.
The applicant proposes to sever a portion of the property municipally known as 77 Brunswick
Avenue to create a new lot for a proposed single detached or duplex residential dwelling with
frontage on Brunswick Avenue. The lands proposed to be severed would have a width of 12.5
m, a depth of 35.9 m, and an area of 438.6 square m. The retained lands will have a width of
14.9 m, a depth of 35.9 m, and an area of 520.8 sq. m., which will contain the existing single
detached dwelling.
The proposed severance would result in a side yard setback of 0.19 metres to the existing
building on the retained parcel which would not meet the minimum zoning requirement. It is
possible to meet the zoning requirements if the lot line was shifted 1.01 metres. This would give
the severed parcel a lot width of 11.485 metre, lot area of approximately 402 square metres, and
a retained parcel lot width of 15.88 metres and lot area of approximately 568 square metres.
Therefore, staff recommend that the application be amended accordingly.
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 223 DECEMBER 7, 2004
2. Submission No.: B 2004-049 (Cont'd)
With respect to the criteria for the subdivision of land listed in Section 51 (24) of the Planning Act,
R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, the uses of both the severed and retained parcels are in conformity with
the City's Municipal Plan, the lands front on an established public street and are compatible in
size with the lots in the surrounding area, the lands are within an existing serviced area and the
severance would be considered proper and orderly development.
The Committee noted the comments of the Region of Waterloo Planning, Housing and
Community Services, dated November 10, 2004, in which they advise they have no objections
to this application.
At the request of Mr. Ward, the Committee agreed to consider an amendment to this application
as recommended in the Development & Technical Services Department report.
Moved by Mr. Z. Janecki
Seconded by Ms. D. Angel
That the application of Richard Targosz, Janice Moser and Francine Verutis requesting
permission to convey a parcel of land having a width on Brunswick Avenue of 11.485 m (37.68 ft.)
by a depth of 35.96 m (118 ft.), and an area of approximately 413 m2 (4,445.64 sq. ft.), on Part
Lot 23, Registered Plan 146, 77 Brunswick Avenue, Kitchener, Ontario, BE GRANTED, subject
to the following conditions:
That the owner shall pay to the City of Kitchener a cash-in-lieu of parkland dedication
equal to 5% of the value of the land to be severed.
That the owner shall make arrangements satisfactory to the City of Kitchener for the
payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and/or local improvement changes.
That the owner shall make arrangements satisfactory to the City's Engineering Services,
for the following:
(a) installation of all new service connections to the severed land; and,
(b) installation, to City standards, of boulevard landscaping including street trees, and a
paved driveway ramp, on the severed land.
It is the opinion of this Committee that:
A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the
municipality.
The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the
retained lands.
The use of the land in the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and
the Regional Official Policies Plan.
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 December 7, 2006.
Carried
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 224 DECEMBER 7, 2004
Submission No.:
Applicant:
Property Location:
Legal Description:
B 2004-050
Pioneer Sportsworld Inc.
100 Sportsworld Drive
Lots 8 & 9, Beasley's Broken Front Concession
Appearances:
In Support:
Mr. J. Wood
Contra: None
Written Submissions: None
The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to convey a parcel of land
having a width of 66 m (216.53 ft.), a depth of 107 m (351.04 ft.), and an area of 0.73 ha (1.8 ac);
together with a right-of-way over the retained land for access to Sportsworld Drive, and an
easement over the retained land for services.
The Committee considered the report of the Development and Technical Services Department,
dated December 1, 2004, in which they advise the subject property is located along Sportsworld
Drive, between Highway 8 and King Street East, commonly referred to as Pioneer Sportsworld.
The Municipal Plan designation is Planned Commercial Campus and the Zoning is C6, with
special use provision 6U. The proposed lands to be severed are located at the rear of the
property - adjacent to Highway 8. The applicant is looking to sever a parcel of land that would
have a lot width of 66m and an area of 0.72 hectares, with the intent of constructing a future
commercial use such as a hotel. The severance of the parcel was deferred on November 16,
2004, for discussions with the applicant regarding the size of the parcel being severed. Upon
meeting with the applicant, planning staff consider the size (1.5 acres) of B2004-050 (Part 2) to
be suitable for the proposed commercial development (proposed Hotel). The applicant has
indicated examples that demonstrate a hotel can be developed with adequate parking on a site of
this size. Additional lands may also be available for future use but are dependent upon MTO's
future plans which are currently unknown.
The application also includes rights-of-way needed for access purposes for the severed lands
over the retained lands to Sportsworld Drive, and a proposed easement for underground services
over the retained lands within the driveway adjacent to the Outback Steakhouse.
With respect to the criteria for the subdivision of land listed in Section 51 (24) of the Planning Act,
R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13, staff are satisfied that the creation of the severed lot is desirable and
appropriate. The configuration of the severed lands (B2004-050) can be considered suitable for
the purpose for which it is to be subdivided and the lands can be accessed and separately
serviced. Therefore the consent for B2004-050 is considered appropriate.
Although the proposed lands have frontage on a public roadway (being Highway 8), there is
currently no access to any public roadway. Staff are satisfied that appropriate locations for
vehicular access and underground services will be provided via easements and rights-of-way.
The Region of Waterloo previously submitted comments noting that the subject lands "have been
identified as potentially contaminated". Although they have no corporate interest in the suspected
contamination, they have suggested that the Committee of Adjustment may want to impose a
condition requesting a Record of Site Condition. As a result of the concern raised, staff feel it
may be appropriate to request such a condition on the severed lands (B2004-050) especially
considering the proposed hotel use. This condition was included in the previous approval.
Based on the foregoing, Planning staff recommend that application B2004-050 be approved,
subject to various conditions listed in the recommendation.
The Committee noted the comments of the Ministry of Transportation, dated November 12, 2004,
in which they advised that the owner must submit a stormwater management report along with
grading/drainage plans for the proposed development; they may require a Traffic Impact Study
indicating the anticipated traffic volumes and their impact on the interchange of Highway 8 and
Sportsworld Drive; all new structures be setback a minimum of 8.0 m from our proposed highway
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 225 DECEMBER 7, 2004
3. Submission No.: B 2004-050 (Cont'd)
property line and that building/land use and sign permits are required before any
grading/construction commence within a 395 m radius of Highway 8 and Sportsworld Drive.
The Committee considered the comments of the Region of Waterloo, Planning, Housing &
Community Services, dated November 10, 2004, advising they have no objections to this
application.
The Committee considered the comments of Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc., dated November 10,
2004, requesting the owner be required to provide them with any easements they may require.
In response to questions from the Committee, both Mr. Wood and Mr. Sloan advised the
requirements of the Ministry of Transportation will be accommodated through the Site Plan
approval process. With respect to the Record of Site Condition, Mr. Sloan advised this same
severance was approved by the Committee last year, and a Record of Site Condition was
required. Further, the proposed use of the property as a hotel is similar to a residential use, and
staff believe, for that reason, a Record of Site Condition should be required.
Moved by Ms. D. Angel
Seconded by Mr. Z. Janecki
That the application of Pioneer Sportsworld Inc. requesting permission to convey a parcel of land
having a width of 66 m (216.53 ft.), a depth of 107 m (351.04 ft.), and an area of 0.73 ha (1.8
acres); together with a right-of-way over the retained land for access to Sportsworld Drive, and an
easement over the retained land for services, on Part Lots 8 & 9, Beasley's Broken Front
Concession, 100 Sportsworld Drive, Kitchener, Ontario, BE GRANTED, subject to the following
conditions:
That the owner shall make arrangements satisfactory to Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc. for
any easements required by them.
That the owner shall make financial arrangements satisfactory to the City's Engineering
Services for the installation of all new service connections to the severed land.
That the owner shall enter into an agreement, to be approved by the City Solicitor, which
will ensure that rights-of-way for access and easements for servicing are maintained in
perpetuity, and provide confirmation that this agreement has been registered against the
title of the severed and retained lands.
That the owner shall make arrangements satisfactory to the City of Kitchener for the
payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and/or local improvement charges.
That the owner shall receive approval from the City's Manager of Design and
Development of a draft reference plan showing proposed rights-of-way, easements and
property lines.
That the owner shall enter into an agreement with the City of Kitchener, to be prepared by
the City Solicitor and registered on title of the severed land, which shall require that prior to
the commencement of any grading on the site, and prior to the issuance of any building
permits, the owner shall undertake a site assessment for the severed and retained lands,
in accordance with the Guidelines for Use at Contaminated Sites in Ontario. A copy of the
Record of Site Condition, acknowledged by the Ministry of Environment and Energy shall
be provided to the City's Manager of Design & Development.
It is the opinion of this Committee that:
A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the
municipality.
The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the
retained lands.
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 226 DECEMBER 7, 2004
Submission No.: B 2004-050 (Cont'd)
3. The use of the land in the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and
the Regional Official Policies Plan.
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 December 7, 2006.
Carried
NEW BUSINESS
MINOR VARIANCE
Submission No.:
Applicant:
Property Location:
Legal Description:
A 2004-092
Monarch Construction Ltd.
Ridgemere Court
Lot 24, Registered Plan 58M-337
Appearances:
In Support:
Ms. K. Dietrich
Contra: None
Written Submissions: None
The Committee was advised that the applicant requests permission to reduce the minimum side
yard abutting a street (Ridgemere Street) to 3.5 m (11.48 ft.) instead of the required 4.5 m (14.76
ft.) for the construction of a new single detached dwelling.
The Committee considered the report of the Development & Technical Services Department,
dated November 29, 2004, advising they have no objections to this application.
The Committee considered the comments of the Region of Waterloo Transportation Planner,
dated November 30, 2004, advising they have no concerns with this application.
Ms. Dietrich advised the applicant has chosen the smallest house model they could possibly put
on the property.
Moved by Mr. B. Isaac
Seconded by Mr. D. Cybalski
That the application of Monarch Construction Ltd. requesting permission to construct a single
family dwelling with a setback of 3.5 m (11.48 ft.) from Ridgemere Street (side yard abutting a
street) rather than the required 4.5 m (14.76 ft.), on Lot 24, Registered Plan 58M-337, Ridgemere
Court, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following condition:
That the variance as approved in this application shall apply generally as shown on the
plan submitted with this application.
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.
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 227 DECEMBER 7, 2004
Submission No.:
A 2004-092 (Cont'd)
The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Municipal Plan
is being maintained on the subject property.
Submission No.:
Applicant:
Property Location:
Le.qal Description:
Appearances:
In Support:
Contra:
Written Submissions:
A 2004-093
Monarch Construction Ltd.
313 Pine Valley Drive
Lot 74, Registered Plan 58M-316
Carried
Ms. K. Dietrich
None
None
The Committee was advised that the applicant requests permission for a rear yard setback of
6.85 m (22.47 ft.) instead of the required 7.5 m (24.6 ft.) for the construction of a new single
detached dwelling.
The Committee considered the report of the Development & Technical Services Department,
dated November 29, 2004, advising they have no objections to this application.
The Committee considered the comments of the Region of Waterloo Transportation Planner,
dated November 30, 2004, advising they have no concerns with this application.
Ms. Dietrich advise the applicant has chosen the smallest house model they could possibly put on
the property.
Moved by Mr. D. Cybalski
Seconded by Mr. B. Isaac
That the application of Monarch Construction Ltd. requesting permission to construct a single
family dwelling with a rearyard of 6.85 m (22.47 ft.) rather than the required 7.5 m (24.6 ft.), on Lot
74, Registered Plan 58M-316, 313 Pine Valley Drive, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED,
subject to the following condition:
That the variance as approved in this application shall apply generally as shown on the
plan submitted with this application.
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.
The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Municipal Plan
is being maintained on the subject property.
Carried
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 228 DECEMBER 7, 2004
Submission No.:
Applicant:
Property Location:
Legal Description:
A 2004-094
PenRetail II Ltd.
655 Fairway Road South
Part Lot 2, Plan 1525
Appearances:
In Support:
Mr. B. Chorny
Contra: None
Written Submissions: None
The Committee was advised that the applicant requests permission to add 24.8 m2 (266.95 sq. ft.)
of mezzanine space to a commercial retail plaza with an existing gross floor area of 16,291 m2
(175,360.6 sq. ft.), with a total of 600 parking spaces instead of the required 709 parking spaces.
The Committee considered the report of the Development & Technical Services Department,
dated November 29, 2004, in which they advise the subject property is located along the south
side of Fairway Road South, and is currently being developed with large format retail outlets. The
site is designated Fairway Road Commercial Corridor, and is zoned Commercial Campus Zone
C-8 with Special Use Provision 112U, Special Regulation 297R and Special Regulation 413R.
The zoning on the site permits the development of large format retail uses. There is no space on
the site to locate any additional parking. A minor variance requesting permission to construct a
92.2 m2 mezzanine in Block 'D', without providing the required parking, was approved in April
2004.
The applicant is requesting a minor variance to permit a 24.8 m2 mezzanine to be added to Block
'El', in the location indicated on the submitted plans, increasing the Gross Floor Area (GFA) of
the plaza from 16,291.2 m2 to 16,316.0 m2, without providing the required parking. The applicant
is requesting a reduction in parking from 709 spaces to 600 spaces. The mezzanine is intended
to be used for office space and a staff room and will not accommodate any additional retail floor
area.
The parking requirement for a plaza development with a gross floor area greater than 600m2 but
less than 16,200 m2 is 1 parking space for every 27 m2 of gross floor area. The original site plan
for the existing development approved a gross floor area of 16,199 m2, thus requiring 600 parking
2 2
spaces (16,199m/27m ). There are 612 spaces provided on the site, but 12 are occasionally
used for seasonal outdoor sales, and only the 600 required spaces are always available. When a
plaza's GFA is above 16,200 m2 the required parking is based on 1 space/23m2 of Gross
Leaseable Commercial Space (GLCS). The proposed GFA for this site is 16,316 m2; therefore,
, 2
the parking should be calculated based on the plaza s GLCS of 14,876.5 m. Hence, the required
2 2
parking is 647 parking spaces (14876.5 m / 23 m ). Therefore, the application should be
amended to request a variance of 47 parking spaces rather than 109. The applicant is in
agreement with this change.
In considering the four tests for minor variances as outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act,
R.S.O., 1990 Chap. P. 13, as amended, Planning staff offer the following comments:
The variance meets the intent of the Municipal Plan for the following reasons. The site is
designated Fairway Road Commercial Corridor in the Municipal Plan, which permits a broad
range of retail uses which can locate in plazas or in freestanding buildings. Therefore, the intent
of the Municipal Plan is maintained.
The variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law for the following reasons. The purpose of the
parking requirement in the Zoning By-law is to ensure that there is adequate on-site parking
provided for customers and staff. The minor variance was approved in April 2004 requesting a
minor variance to allow a 92.2 m2 storage mezzanine in Block 'D' without providing additional
parking. The variance was approved as the commercial floor space was not being increased and
it was deemed that there should not be an increased demand on available parking. Similarly, the
proposed 24.8 m2 mezzanine will not significantly increase the commercial floor space, and will
be used for a staff room and office space. There should not be an increase in the number of
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 229 DECEMBER 7, 2004
3. Submission No.: A 2004-094 (Cont'd)
sales associates or the number of customers frequenting the site, and demands on the on-site
parking should not change. Therefore, the intent of the Zoning By-law is maintained.
The variance is minor for the following reasons. The mezzanine constitutes a very small portion
of the overall GFA of the site (about 0.15% of the total gross floor area), and since the mezzanine
will be used as a staff room and office space it should not increase the retail floor space.
Therefore, there should be no impact to traffic levels, or parking demands on the site. However, it
should be noted that further minor variances for increases in floor space will add up, but the
incremental effect to date still has a fairly minor impact.
The variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land for the following reasons.
Staff feel that due to the large size of the development an additional 24.8 m2 of floor area, to be
used for office and a staff room will not impact levels of traffic or demand additional parking on the
site.
Based on the foregoing, Planning staff recommend that application A2004-094 to reduce the
required number of parking spaces from 647 to 600 be approved as amended, subject to the site
being developed with a maximum gross floor area of 16,361.0 m2 and that the 24.8 m2
mezzanine proposed to be added to Block "El" be used only for a staff room and office space. In
addition, the applicant should be aware that Site Plan Approval will be necessary to permit
construction of the proposed mezzanine.
The Committee considered the comments of the Region of Waterloo Transportation Planner,
dated November 30, 2004, advising they have no concerns with this application.
Mr. Chorny requested permission to amend this application as recommended in the Development
& Technical Services Department report.
Upon questioning Mr. Sloan advised there are no concerns with the existing parking, and no
problems are anticipated with the mezzanine.
Moved by Ms. D. Angel
Seconded by Mr. B. Isaac
That the application of PenRetail II Ltd. requesting permission to provide 600 parking spaces for a
plaza having a maximum gross floor area of 16,361.0 m2 and a Gross Leaseable Commercial
Space of 14,876.5 m2, rather than the required 647 parking spaces, on Part Lot 2, Plan 1525, 655
Fairway Road South, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following condition:
That the 24.8 m2 mezzanine proposed to be added to Block "El" shall be generally as
shown on the plans submitted with this application, and shall be used only for a staff room
and office.
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.
The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Municipal Plan
is being maintained on the subject property.
Carried
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 230 DECEMBER 7, 2004
Submission No.:
Applicant:
Property Location:
Legal Description:
A 2004-095
Earle D. Hunsley
22 Theresa Street
Part Lot 16, Plan 49
Appearances:
In Support:
Ms. M. McMahon
Contra: None
Written Submissions: None
The Committee was advised that the applicant requests permission to construct an uncovered
deck 1 m (3.28 ft.) above grade set back a minimum of 1 m (3.28 ft.) from the front lot line rather
than the required 4.5 m (14.76 ft.).
The Committee considered the report of the Development & Technical Services Department,
dated November 9, 2004, stating they have no objections to this application provided it applies to
the existing dwelling only. They also advise a building permit for the ramp is required if the porch
is greater than 24" off the ground.
The Committee considered the comments of the Region of Waterloo Transportation Planner,
dated November 30, 2004, advising they have no concerns with this application.
It was noted that a survey had not been provided, and the applicant should verify exactly where
the front property line is located.
Moved by Mr. D. Angel
Seconded by Mr. D. Cybalski
That the application of Earle D. Hunsley requesting permission to construct an uncovered deck 1
m (3.28 ft.) above grade with a setback of 1 m (3.28 ft.) from the front lot line along Theresa
Street rather than the required 4.5 m (14.76 ft.), on Part Lot 16, Plan 49, 22 Theresa Street,
Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following condition:
That the variance as approved in this application shall be generally as shown on the plan
submitted with this application
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.
The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Municipal Plan
is being maintained on the subject property.
Carried
Submission No.:
Applicant:
Property Location:
Le.qal Description:
A 2004-096
Leanne & Gerald Leeman
109 North Hill Place
Part Lot 54, German Company Tract
Appearances:
In Support:
Mr. & Mrs. Leeman
Mr. D. Snow
Mr. D. Grzella
Contra: None
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 231 DECEMBER 7, 2004
4. Submission No.: A 2004-096 (Cont'd)
Written Submissions:
Chicopee Ski Club
The Committee was advised that the applicant requests permission to expand a building on a
legal non-conforming lot (the subject property has no frontage on a public street) by
approximately 111 m2 (1,194.83 sq. ft.), including the addition of a second dwelling unit.
The Committee considered an addendum to this application from Mr. & Mrs. Leeman, dated
November 2004, in which they advise they wish to construct a coach house addition, permitted in
the zoning by-law, to provide independent accommodation for aging parents. They also advise
the addition has been designed in such a way as to be easily converted back to a singe family
residence at the appropriate time. Further, Mr.& Mrs. Leeman advise they have reviewed the
Region of Waterloo's draft titled "Waterloo Region in the 21st Century: A Community Action Plan
for Housing", stating the recommendations in this report support their application.
The Committee considered the comments of the Development & Technical Services Department,
dated November 9, 2004, advising the subject property is located at the end of North Hill Place,
south of Fairway Road and west of the Chicopee Ski Hill. The property is zoned Residential
Three (R-3) and contains a single detached dwelling that was constructed in approximately 1962
when the lands were within the Township of Waterloo. The property has a driveway access over
the adjacent property (99 North Hill Place) to North Hill Place.
The owners of the property have submitted a 'permission' application under Section 45(2) of the
Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13, to allow the expansion of the legal non-conforming use of a lot
(no frontage on a public street) including the establishment of a second dwelling unit. The area of
the existing single detached dwelling is approximately 146 m2 and there is an existing detached
accessory building is about 41 mt. The owners are proposing to demolish the detached
accessory building and construct an addition to the dwelling that would include a three-car garage
and a second dwelling unit intended for a~ling family members. The application identifies a
proposed expansion of approximately 111 mt, however, upon further review it appears as though
the addition may be two storeys (not one storey) and therefore the total addition would be
approximately 222 m2. The applicants should clarify the area of the proposed expansion.
The Committee will recall that a previous application in the area to sever for creation of new lot(s)
and resultant unit(s) at 90 North Hill Place was refused by the Committee and the re-application
to sever one new lot was "stood down" as the applicant did not proceed. After much debate, the
application to expand the existing dwelling on the property for the same use on a lot without
frontage on a public street was approved to allow renovation of the existing dwelling and a new
garage addition. The staff concerns and recommendations to refuse those applications are
similar to the issues staff have with the subject application at 109 North Hill Place.
The applicants have indicated that the intent is to establish a secondary apartment unit for aging
relatives instead of having additional family members living within the existing single detached
dwelling. In the future, there is no guarantee as to the number and relation of the residents of
either the existing dwelling or the proposed new unit. City staff do support the vision and
objectives of providing a range of housing types (such as duplex dwellings) for the changing
population along with infill and intensification goals, where appropriate. However, it is
questionable if North Hill Place is currently an appropriate location. The main issues with new
development on North Hill Place are generally as follows:
· Properties do not have frontage on a public street. The Zoning By-law does not permit
development on lots without appropriate frontage on a street and the majority of North Hill
Place is not wide enough to be considered a public street;
· Difficulties in upgrading North Hill Place to municipal standards/public street;
· Potential sizing issues with the existing sanitary services;
· Compliance with Council's Emergency Access Policy is questionable. The majority of the
residential properties are beyond the maximum 150-metre length for a cul-de-sac. It is
recognized that there are existing properties and units, however the establishment of new lots
or units is questionable for emergency services access;
· Noise and light issues from the adjacent Chicopee Ski Hill;
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 232 DECEMBER 7, 2004
4. Submission No.: A 2004-096 (Cont'd)
Consideration of all of the three existing properties on North Hill Place as it relates to the
above noted issues and with respect to considering the future development potential and
planning for the area.
There are a number of outstanding issues that need to be considered in order to ensure the
proper and orderly development of this and the surrounding properties.
The owners are requesting to construct a large addition to the existing building (including adding
the second dwelling unit). A building permit for new development can not be issued, as it would
not comply with the Zoning By-law which states that no lot shall have built upon it a building
without frontage on a public street. Generally, staff do not support proposals that have the effect
of perpetuating the use of a lot that does not comply with the Zoning By-law. Approval of the
application to allow the proposed addition would most likely help perpetuate the use.
Notwithstanding, the impact of the expansion must be further considered. It is acknowledged that
the lot has historically existed without frontage on a public street and the dwelling has existed
adjacent to the ski hill and on existing services. The expansion or addition for a replacement
garage would increase the floor area, but the impact may be minimal as there has been an
existing garage for some time, no additional services should be required, there should be no
additional impact from adjacent ski hill, and the need for emergency access is not as
questionable. Staff may consider the appropriateness of replacing of the existing accessory
building with a similar size and for a similar purpose should the owner choose to do so. However,
the establishment of new residential dwelling unit may have an impact on existing services and
may require new additional services, there may be noise, lighting or other impacts from the ski hill
that would have to be considered (determine if construction type or warning clauses warranted,
etc) and emergency services for the additional unit would be needed. The enlargement or
expansion of the building is for a different use than the legal non-conforming use of the property.
The new use (duplex with three car garage) is not necessarily more compatible with the uses
permitted in the by-law than what the property is currently used for but in some respects the new
use may be similar to the current use. However, based on the foregoing, there may be adverse
impacts for the subject and surrounding properties and there may also be impacts on the
potential future development of this area.
Another important factor in considering how appropriate an expansion to the legal non-
conforming use of a lot is the size of the expansion and the resultant size of the building. Previous
examples for expanding dwellings on lots without frontage in Kitchener (ie. 254 Woolwich Street),
were for up to a 45% increase, but in certain cases the entire dwelling ended up being replaced.
If it were confirmed that the proposal is a two-storey expansion totaling approximately 222m2 of
new floor space, this would increase the building area by 166%. Considering that staff have a
difficult time arriving at supporting any expansion at all, staff would be unable to support an
expansion that is more than the size of the existing building (in this case it would be more than
2.5 times the size of the existing building).
Construction of a new building addition and dwelling unit is restricted under the current zoning. In
this case, the applicant is requesting 'permission' from the Committee of Adjustment to expand
the legal non-conforming use of the lot. Staff are of the opinion that given the magnitude of the
size of the addition along with the proposed additional dwelling unit and the issues with North Hill
Place that the expansion is a different use of the lands, is not appropriate, may have adverse
impacts and makes proper and orderly development more difficult. Therefore, staff have
difficulties supporting the application and recommend that it be refused.
The subject proposal may be more appropriately considered as a zone change application and
this was identified and discussed with the owner prior to submitting the 'permission' application.
However, even if it was a zone change, the City usually has difficulty supporting any
consideration of a zone change to permit development on a lot with no frontage on a public street
(there has been consideration of some unique situations for replacement dwellings, but not
necessarily addition of dwelling units). Ultimately, a resolution of the issues for proper and orderly
development would have to be considered. The City is acquiring land from 90 North Hill Place as
part of a recent application for potential widening. Issues with grading and/or land acquisition from
GRCA would still need to be overcome. Any future consideration of the road width/widening
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 233 DECEMBER 7, 2004
4. Submission No.: A 2004-096 (Cont'd)
issue, servicing, emergency access, ski hill issues and land use/dwelling type is contingent upon
the area property owner's interest in [comprehensive] development of the lands on North Hill
Place.
Engineering staff previously confirmed that the existing sanitary sewer pipe is not sufficient and
will need to be upgraded. They also have indicated that the North Hill Place road allowance
should be upgraded to municipal standards with any development.
Transportation Planning has reviewed this application and note that the subject property does not
front on a public street and exceeds the 150 metre emergency access limit.
The Committee considered the comments of the Region of Waterloo Transportation Planner,
dated November 30, 2004, advising they have no concerns with this application.
The Committee considered the written submission of Mr. G. Stremlaw, Executive Director,
Chicopee, speaking on behalf of the entire membership, Board of Directors, and the Grand River
Conservation Authority who owns the land on which the ski club operates at 396 Morrison Road,
Kitchener. In the written submission, Mr. Stremlaw states they would like to officially go on record
to remind the owner and applicant of their immediate proximity to one of the largest recreational
areas in the community. He states the potential tenants and land owners of 109 North Hill Place
should be aware that the functions that have occurred on Chicopee lands will only be increasing
in the coming years.
The Chair advised that Mr. Snow was in attendance; however had to leave, but did advise the
Chair he is in support of this application.
The Chair questioned Mr. & Mrs. Leeman about applications previously before this Committee for
90 North Hill Place, and whether they had appeared in opposition to those applications. Mr.
Leeman advised they had opposed Mr. Freure's applications; however, there have been
circumstantial changes. At the time, Mr. Freure wanted 2 additional lots, which they felt could not
be accommodated given the size of the street and existing services. With respect to the current
application, Mr. Leeman advised they have been living on this property with 3 adult children, who
have now left home. Now they want to provide a home for Mrs. Leeman's aging parents. They
propose to construct a 30 ft. by 40 ft. 2 storey addition which will be a garage on the lower floor
with an apartment above. He stated that the garage will not be used for residential.
The Chair noted that at the time of Mr. Freure's applications, the preparation of a block plan was
recommended, and Mr. & Mrs. Leeman advised they were not interested in participating in such a
process. He stated the Committee understands their current situation, but questioned what
would happen when the property is sold. Although your proposed situation shows less demand
on services, this lesser demand may not apply once the property is sold.
Mr. Leeman advised he has spoken with the property owners at 94 and 99 North Hill Place, who
also are not interested in a block plan process. Mrs. Leeman stated the City recently acquired
20 ft. of land from 94 North Hill Place, so they now have lots of room to widen the road.
The Chair then discussed with Mr. Sloan as to under which part of the Planning Act this
application should the considered. The Chair advised the application will not be considered as a
request to expand a legal non-conforming use, but as a request for a variance to a regulation
which requires a lot to have a certain length of frontage on a public street. Mr. Leeman
questioned the requirement for frontage on a public street, and the Chair responded that given
the application is actually to change the use of the property rather than expand the existing use
as a single family dwelling, the Committee will look upon this application as a variance to a
regulation. Mr. Leeman advised their property has 20 ft. of frontage on North Hill Place, to which
Mr. Sloan advised that because North Hill Place is not a public street, by definition, their lot has
no frontage a public street. Mr. & Mrs. Leeman then requested permission to amend their
application so as to consider an amendment to the by-law regulation for a specific width of
frontage on a public street.
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 234 DECEMBER 7, 2004
Submission No.: A 2004-096 (Cont'd)
Mr. Sloan noted that in certain circumstances such as this, property owners have come forward
with a zone change application. The Chair noted the City's Engineering Services previously
advised there is no servicing potential for any additional units, and stated his inclination that this
situation should be handled through the zone change process.
Mr. Leeman stated a block plan encourages future development. He and his wife purchased a
one acre lot in this location for privacy and they do not want to subdivide or develop their
property.
The Chair advised Mr. Leeman that he may look differently on this application if the lot had 20 ft.
of frontage on a public street as defined in the zoning by-law. Mr. Leeman stated that if a solution
can not be reached at this hearing, he won't pursue his proposal any further. Mr. Leeman noted
the road narrows at the rear of 94 North Hill Place. Further, the Grand River Conservation
Authority is involved, and they are reticent to give any land for a road widening.
The Chair stated it is not proper to allow increased development while ignoring the problems.
Further, staff has submitted a report strongly recommending refusal of the application. Further,
Mr. & Mrs. Leeman made strong representations against previous applications for another
property on North Hill Place.
Moved by Mr. B. Isaac
Seconded by Mr. D. Cybalski
That the application of Leanne & Gerald Leeman requesting permission to expand a building on a
lot having 0 m frontage on a public street rather than the required frontage of 13.7 m (44.94 ft.) on
a public street, on Part Lot 54, German Company Tract, 109 North Hill Place, Kitchener, Ontario,
BE REFUSED.
It is the opinion of this Committee that:
1. The variance requested in this application is not minor in nature.
2. This application is not desirable for the appropriate development of the property.
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
CONSENT
Submission No.:
Applicant:
Property Location:
Le.qal Description:
Appearances:
In Support:
Contra:
B 2004-053 - B 2004-056
Habitat for Humanity Waterloo Region Inc.
145A, 145B, 147A, 147B & 149 Weber Street East
Part of Lot 4, Re.qistered Plan 370, Eby's Survey
Ms. P. McLean
Mr. S. Head
Mr. A. Head
None
Written Submissions: None
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 235 DECEMBER 7, 2004
6. Submission No.: B 2004-053- B 2004-056 (Cont'd)
The Committee was advised the applicant is requesting permission to create 4 new lots, with one
retained lot, each with a street townhouse unit front Weber Street East. Each lot is proposed to
have a 0.9 m (2.95 ft.) wide rear yard access easement. Three of the new lots would have a lot
width of 6.1 m (20 ft.) and an area of approximately 293 m2 (3,153.92 sq. ft.). The fourth new lot
would have a lot width of about 9.4 m (30.8 ft.) and an area of approximately 468 m2 (5,037.67
sq. ft.). The retained lands will have frontage of 9.7 m (31.82 ft.) and an area of 454 m2 (4,886.97
sq. ft.). The townhouses have recently been constructed.
The Committee considered the report of the Development & Technical Services Department,
dated November 03, 2004, in which they advised that the subject property is located on the west
side of Weber Street East, between Madison Avenue North and Cameron Street North. The
lands are zoned Commercial Residential One (CR-1) and designated as Low Density
Commercial Residential in the Official Plan. Five recently constructed street fronting townhouse
units occupy the property. Surrounding land use is primarily residential.
The applicant, through applications B2004-053 to B2004-056, is requesting to create four lots and
retain one lot in order to establish five freehold townhouses fronting onto Weber Street East.
Each lot is proposed to have a 0.9 m wide rear yard access easement. Three of the four severed
lots would have a lot width of 6.1 m and a lot area of approximately 293 square m. The remaining
severed lot would have a lot width of 9.4 m with a lot area of approximately 468 square m. The
retained lands would have 9.7 m in frontage and 454 square m in lot area.
With respect to the criteria for the subdivision of land listed in Section 51 (24) of the Planning Act,
R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13, the uses of both the severed and retained parcels conform with the City's
Municipal Plan, the dimensions and shapes of the proposed lots are appropriate and suitable for
the existing use as the lands front on an established public street. Also, the resultant lots exceed
the zoning requirements for street townhouses and conform to Official Plan policies pertaining to
infilling, providing a range and mixture of lot sizes, providing affordable housing and re-
development only having access to Weber Street only. All site servicing requirements have been
addressed through the Site Plan Approval stage.
Based on the foregoing, planning staff recommends that the application be approved, subject to
conditions.
The Committee considered the comments of the Region of Waterloo, Planning, Housing &
Community Services, dated December 1,2004, in which they advised they have no objections to
these applications.
The Committee considered the correspondence from Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc., dated
November 30, 2004, requesting that the owner provide the status of ownership for each of the 5
lots, and grant any easements required by Hydro.
Mr. Head appeared in support of these applications advising he is willing to accept the conditions
requested by Hydro and the City.
Mr. Janecki questioned the City's request of 5% parkland dedication for each of the 5 lots, and
whether the parkland dedication would not have already been paid. Mr. Sloan advised parkland
dedication should have been collected through the site plan approval process, but was not. Mr.
Janecki noting there were previously 3 houses on this property, stated the owner should only
have to pay parkland dedication for 2 of the new lots.
Submission No. B 2004-053
Moved by Ms. D. Angel
Seconded by Mr. Z. Janecki
That the application of Habitat for Humanity requesting permission to convey a parcel of land
having a width of 9.4 m (30.8 ft.), a depth of approximately 48 m (157.48 ft.) and an area of 468
m2 (5,037.67 sq. ft.), subject to and together with a 0.9 m (2.95 ft.) wide access easement, on
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 236 DECEMBER 7, 2004
6. Submission No.: B 2004-053- B 2004-056 (Cont'd)
Part Lot 4, Registered Plan 370, 145A Weber Street East, Kitchener, Ontario BE GRANTED,
subject to the following conditions:
That the owner shall provide Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc. with the status of ownership for
the land to be severed.
That the owner shall make arrangements satisfactory to Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc. for
any easements they may require.
That the owner shall make arrangements satisfactory to the City of Kitchener for the
payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and/or local improvement changes.
That the owner shall pay to the City of Kitchener a cash-in-lieu of parkland dedication for 2
of the new lots to be created through Submission No.'s B 2004-053 to B 2004-056,
inclusive.
It is the opinion of this Committee that:
A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the
municipality.
The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the
retained lands.
The use of the land in the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and
the Regional Official Policies Plan.
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 December 7, 2006.
Carried
Submission No. B 2004-054
Moved by Ms. D. Angel
Seconded by Mr. Z. Janecki
That the application of Habitat for Humanity requesting permission to convey a parcel of land
having a width on Weber Street of 6.1 m (20 ft.), a depth of approximately 48 m (157.48 ft.), and
an area of 293 m2 (3,153.92 sq. ft.), subject to and together with a 0.9 m (2.95 ft.) wide access
easement, on Part Lot 4, Registered Plan 370, 145B Weber Street East, Kitchener, Ontario, BE
GRANTED, subject to the following conditions:
That the owner shall provide Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc. with the status of ownership for
the land to be severed.
That the owner shall make arrangements satisfactory to Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc. for
any easements they may require.
That the owner shall make arrangements satisfactory to the City of Kitchener for the
payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and/or local improvement changes.
That the owner shall pay to the City of Kitchener a cash-in-lieu of parkland dedication for 2
of the new lots to be created through Submission No.'s B 2004-053 to B 2004-056,
inclusive.
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 237 DECEMBER 7, 2004
6. Submission No.: B 2004-053- B 2004-056 (Cont'd)
It is the opinion of this Committee that:
A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the
municipality.
The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the
retained lands.
The use of the land in the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and
the Regional Official Policies Plan.
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 December 7, 2006.
Carried
Submission No. B 2004-055
Moved by Ms. D. Angel
Seconded by Mr. Z. Janecki
That the application of Habitat for Humanity requesting permission to convey a parcel of land
having a width on Weber Street of 6.1 m (20 ft.), a depth of approximately 48 m (157.48 ft.), and
an area of 293 m2 (3,153.92 sq. ft.), subject to an together with a 0.9 m (2.95 ft.) wide access
easement, on Part Lot 4, Registered Plan 370, 147A Weber Street East, Kitchener, Ontario, BE
GRANTED, subject to the following conditions:
That the owner shall provide Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc. with the status of ownership for
the land to be severed.
That the owner shall make arrangements satisfactory to Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc. for
any easements they may require.
That the owner shall make arrangements satisfactory to the City of Kitchener for the
payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and/or local improvement changes.
That the owner shall pay to the City of Kitchener a cash-in-lieu of parkland dedication for 2
of the new lots to be created through Submission No.'s B 2004-053 to B 2004-056,
inclusive.
It is the opinion of this Committee that:
A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the
municipality.
The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the
retained lands.
The use of the land in the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and
the Regional Official Policies Plan.
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 December 7, 2006.
Carried
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 238 DECEMBER 7, 2004
Submission No.: B 2004-053- B 2004-056 (Cont'd)
Submission No. B 2004-056
Moved by Ms. D. Angel
Seconded by Mr. Z. Janecki
That the application of Habitat for Humanity requesting permission to convey a parcel of land
having a width on Weber Street of 6.1 m (20 ft.), a depth of approximately 48 m (157.48 ft.), and
an area of 293 m2 (3,153.92 sq. ft.), subject to an together with a 0.9 m (2.95 ft.) wide access
easement, on Part Lot 4, Registered Plan 370, 147B Weber Street East, Kitchener, Ontario, BE
GRANTED, subject to the following conditions:
That the owner shall provide Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc. with the status of ownership for
the land to be severed.
That the owner shall make arrangements satisfactory to Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc. for
any easements they may require.
That the owner shall make arrangements satisfactory to the City of Kitchener for the
payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and/or local improvement changes.
That the owner shall pay to the City of Kitchener a cash-in-lieu of parkland dedication for 2
of the new lots to be created through Submission No.'s B 2004-053 to B 2004-056,
inclusive.
It is the opinion of this Committee that:
A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the
municipality.
The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the
retained lands.
The use of the land in the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and
the Regional Official Policies Plan.
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 December 7, 2006.
Submission No.:
Applicant:
Property Location:
Le.qal Description:
B 2004-057
Voisin Developments Limited
1400 Ottawa Street South
Part Lot 47, German Company Tract
Appearances:
In Support:
Mr. G. Voisin
Contra: None
Written Submissions: None
The Committee was advised that the applicant requests permission to have a consent for lease
greater than 21 years for a newly constructed retail building in the Sunrise Shopping Centre
COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 239 DECEMBER 7, 2004
Submission No.: B 2004-57 (Cont'd)
The Committee noted the report of the Development & Technical Services Department, dated,
December 2, 2004, recommending approval of these applications, provided satisfactory
arrangements be made for payment of any outstanding property taxes and/or local improvement
charges.
The Committee considered the comments of the Region of Waterloo Planning, Housing &
Community Services, dated December 1, 2004, noting that the subject lands are located within
Wellhead Protection Sensitivity Area 2, and the large amount of salt used on parking lots in this
area is concern. They advised that if the severed land exceeds the building footprint, they
request a condition be imposed that the owner be required to submit a salt management and
reduction plan satisfactory to the Region.
The Committee noted the comments of the Ministry of Transportation, Transportation Technician,
dated December 1, 2004, advising building/land use permits will be required for any new
structures within 800 m of the Highway 7/8 and Fischer Hallman Drive interchanges, and sign
permits may also be required.
In response to the comments of the Region of Waterloo, Mr. Voisin confirmed the lease is for the
building only and not any part of the parking lot.
Moved by Mr. B. Isaac
Seconded by Mr. D. Cybalski
That the application of Voisin Developments Limited requesting permission for a lease in excess
of 21 years for a newly constructed retail building having an area of 12.310 m2 (132,500 sq. ft.),
on Part Lot 47, German Company Tract, 1400 Ottawa Street South, Kitchener, Ontario, BE
APPROVED, subject to the following condition:
That the owner shall make arrangements satisfactory to the City of Kitchener for the
payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and/or local improvement changes.
It is the opinion of this Committee that:
A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the
municipality.
The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the
retained lands.
The use of the land in the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and
the Regional Official Policies Plan.
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 December 7, 2006.
ADJOURNMENT
On motion, the meeting adjourned at 12:50 p.m.
Dated at the City of Kitchener this 7th day of December, 2004.
Dianne H. Gilchrist
Secretary-Treasu rer
Committee of Adjustment