Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAdjustment - 2002-05-07 COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FOR THE CITY OF KITCHENER MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING HELD MAY ?, 2002 MEMBERS PRESENT: Messrs. P. Kruse, D. Cybalski and B. Isaac. OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ms. J. Billett, Secretary-Treasurer and Mr. L. Masseo, Manager of Development & Design and Mr. B. Sloan, Planner. Mr. P. Kruse, Vice-Chair, called this meeting to order at 9:30 a.m. Moved by Mr. D. Cybalski Seconded by Mr. B. Isaac That the minutes of the regular meeting of the Committee of Adjustment of April 16, 2002, as mailed to the members, be accepted. Carried UNFINISHED BUSINESS CONSENT Submission Nos.: Applicant: Property Location: Legal Description: B 2001-048 to B 2001-050 Inclusive Ivan Biuk Construction Ltd. Pinnacle Drive Block 10, Registered Plan 1480 and Part Lot 6, Lot 7, Registered Plan 578, designated as Part 1 on Reference Plan 58R-6207 Appearances: In Support: Contra: Public Submissions: In Support: Contra: Mr. B. Kowalchuk 154 Mooregate Crescent Kitchener ON N2M 2G1 Mr. I. Biuk Ivan Biuk Construction Ltd. 1989 Old Mill Road Kitchener ON N2P 1E4 Ms. G. Luciantonio 20 Pinnacle Drive Kitchener ON N2P 1B7 Mr. R. Szydlowski c/o Ms. J. Oleskevich 1824 Old Mill Road Kitchener ON N2P 1E2 None Mr. P. Martin Ms. G. Luciantonio 20 Pinnacle Drive Kitchener ON N2P 1B7 COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 72 MAY 7, 2002 1. Submission Nos.: B 2001-048 to B 2001-050 Inclusive, (Cont'd) This application was originally considered by the Committee at its meeting held on September 11, 2001 at which time the application was deferred to allow discussions with staff relative to engineering requirements and discussions with concerned residents to take place. This application was subsequently deferred on four other occasions resulting in the application being deferred for consideration this date. The Committee was previously advised that the applicant is requesting permission to create three new lots fronting onto Pinnacle Drive to be developed for residential use (semi-detached); Parcels 1 and 3 will have a lot width of 16.76 m (55 ft.) and Parcel 2, 16.15 m (53 ft.); Parcel 1 will have a lot area of 753.65 m2 (8,112.5 sq. ft.); Parcel 2, 615.46 m2 (6,625 sq. ft.); and Parcel 3, 523.7 m2 (5,637.5 sq. ft.). The Committee was in receipt of the following City staff / agency comments and public submissions (if any): Business & Planning Services - September 6, 2001 - request to defer the application; and May 1, 2002 - in support as amended, shown on revised drawing dated November 5, 2001, and subject to certain conditions; Region of Waterloo - September 6, 2001 - in support subject to an archaeological assessment being submitted to the Ministry of Citizenship, Culture & Recreation for approval; and April 10 and May 2, 2002 - advising that previous comments dated September 6, 2001 are still in effect; The following had no concerns or comments with respect to this application: · Director of Building - August 24, 2001 · Traffic & Parking Analyst - September 7, 2001 · Grand River Conservation Authority - August 27, 2001; Mr. Randy Martin & Ms. Gina Luciantonio, 20 Pinnacle Drive - October 29, 2001 - opposed; concerns raised include prematurity of the severances regarding an incompleted study relating to provision of student housing to be conducted under Interim Control By-law No. 2001-162; the lots under consideration are to be single detached according to Block Plan 58 and the Plan states that semi-detached dwellings are not allowed; the heritage impact that infilling in the area of "Doon" will have as the lands are located within the area of interest for a Heritage Conservation District; smaller lots than the 66 ft. frontages shown on Registered Plan 578 would take away from the historical character of the area; and, incompatibility with the rural and spacious lots in the area. Mr. Bill Kowalchuk, agent for the applicant, advised that he had reviewed the staff comments and was in agreement with the conditions contained therein. In addition, Mr. Kowalchuk advised that he had reviewed the comments of the Region of Waterloo and was also in agreement with their condition respecting an archaeological assessment. Ms. Gina Luciantonio was in attendance in opposition to the proposed severances and reviewed the contents of her letter of objection dated October 29, 2001. Ms. Luciantonio pointed out that an Interim Control By-law is in effect in the area which provides for a study to be undertaken in respect of land use planning policies relating to provision of student housing in Lower Doon. She suggested that the severance applications are premature as the study has not been completed. In reference to Block Plan 58, she commented that the approved lot patterns for the lots under consideration are indicated as single family detached and specifically states that semi-detached housing is not allowed. She pointed out that while the intended lotting is consistent with current zoning, the use has changed and the land divisions are no longer appropriate. Ms. Luciantonio further pointed out that the lands are located within the area of interest for a Heritage Conservation District within the former Village of Doon and while the City has no concerns, infill development is a matter of heritage concern to residents. She referred to Registered Plan 578 which shows lots having frontages of 66 ft. and expressed the opinion that anything smaller would 1. Submission Nos.: B 2001-048 to B 2001-050 Inclusive, (Cont'd) COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 73 MAY 7, 2002 take away from the historical character of the area. She also raised concern with incompatibility of the proposed lots within the rural setting of the area and pointed out that two neighbouring properties have frontages of 136 ft. and 70 ft. respectively, while the proposed lots have only 50 ft. She expressed the opinion that the appearance of the proposed lots will resemble row housing, with very little green space and they would not fit within the historical character of Lower Doon. In response to Mr. P. Kruse, Mr. B. Sloan addressed the issues raised by Ms. Luciantonio as follows: · the study to be undertaken under the Interim Control By-law is in progress; however, the by- law does not prohibit semi-detached dwellings but rather is concerned with the number of persons living in one dwelling; the by-law does prohibit duplex dwellings and allows for only one additional lodger within a dwelling; · Block Plan 58 was created approximately 25 years ago in consultation with the community and acts as a guide for infill development; in recent years new development has taken place within the rural setting and the lots proposed would not compromise the Block Plan; the lots comply with the general lotting of the plan and the plan shows both singles and semis; current zoning permits semis; zoning is relied upon rather than the Block Plan as the Plan is not a legal document; semis have been constructed in the area and in particular, on Amherst Drive; · many lots in the area do have larger frontages as they are older and are beginning to be subdivided; the 50 ft. frontages proposed are not inconsistent and are not radically different from lots in the area having 66 ft. frontages; two single detached lots across from the proposed lots have 40 ft. frontages and the semis on Amherst Drive have 60 ft. frontages. Mr. Kowalchuk commented that the Block Plan was widely circulated to the community and developed with a conscious decision toward urban development rather than rural and services were installed to accommodate smaller lots. He acknowledged that certain members of the community today disagree with this decision; however, he stated that the lots proposed are consistent with the Block Plan and current zoning, and requested the Committee's consideration of approval. Mr. Roman Szydlowski pointed out that Amherst Drive is a separate street and comparison should be limited to Pinnacle Drive on which the severed parcels face. He further pointed out that three heritage dwellings are located on Pinnacle Drive. Mr. D. Cybalski advised that he was in agreement that the lots as proposed are within the context of the Block Plan and consistent with current zoning and accordingly, was prepared to approve the applications as amended to reflect the lot configurations shown on the revised plan dated November 5, 2001. The remaining members of the Committee were in agreement with Mr. Cybalski's comments. Consent B 2001-048 Moved by Mr. B. Cybalski Seconded by Mr. B. Isaac That the application of Ivan Biuk Construction Ltd. requesting permission to convey a parcel of land, shown as Lot 1 on revised drawing dated November 5, 2001, having frontage on Pinnacle Drive of 15.24 m (50 ft.), a depth of 45.72 m (150 ft.) and an area of 697 m2 (7,502.69 sq. ft.), on Block 10, Registered Plan 1480 and Part Lot 6 and Lot 7, Registered Plan 578, designated as Part 1 on Reference Plan 58R-6207, Pinnacle Drive, 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 owner shall pay to the City of Kitchener a cash-in-lieu contribution for park dedication equal to 5% of the value of the lands to be severed. 1. Submission Nos.: B 2001-048 to B 2001-050 Inclusive, (Cont'd) COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 74 MAY 7, 2002 That the owner shall prepare a comprehensive stormwater management plan for lands included in Block Plan 58 to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering Services. That the owner shall prepare a grading control plan for the severed lands to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering Services. That the owner shall make financial arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering Services, for the installation of all new service connections to the severed lands. That the owner shall make financial arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering Services for the installation, to City standards, of a sidewalk along the frontage of the severed lands, boulevard landscaping including street trees, and paved driveway ramps, on the severed lands. That the owner shall receive Council approval to lift a portion of the one foot reserve on Pinnacle Drive (Block 11, R.P. 1480) only as it abuts the severed lands; and the said one foot reserve shall be lifted and all costs associated with the process, including the preparation of a reference plan, shall be borne by the owner. That the owner shall receive Council approval for a revision to Clause 56 of the Agreement registered on title as Instrument #674413 to permit the development of Part of Block 10 without the adjacent lands. That the owner shall submit an archaeological assessment for the severed parcel to the Ministry of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation for approval; a copy of the completed assessment and clearance letter from the Ministry must be forwarded to the Regional Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services. 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 May 7, 2004. Carried Consent B 2001-049 Moved by Mr. B. Cybalski Seconded by Mr. B. Isaac That the application of Ivan Biuk Construction Ltd. requesting permission to convey a parcel of land, shown as Lot 2 on revised drawing dated November 5, 2001, having frontage on Pinnacle Drive of 16.15 m (52.98 ft.), a depth of 39.47 m (129.49 ft.) and an area of 589.49 m2 (6,345.42 sq. ft.), on Block 10, Registered Plan 1480 and Part Lot 6 and Lot 7, Registered Plan 578, designated as Part 1 on Reference Plan 58R-6207, Pinnacle Drive, Kitchener, Ontario, BE GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: 1. Submission Nos.: B 2001-048 to B 2001-050 Inclusive, (Cont'd) COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 75 MAY 7, 2002 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 owner shall pay to the City of Kitchener a cash-in-lieu contribution for park dedication equal to 5% of the value of the lands to be severed. That the owner shall prepare a comprehensive stormwater management plan for lands included in Block Plan 58 to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering Services. That the owner shall prepare a grading control plan for the severed lands to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering Services. That the owner shall make financial arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering Services, for the installation of all new service connections to the severed lands. That the owner shall make financial arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering Services for the installation, to City standards, of a sidewalk along the frontage of the severed lands, boulevard landscaping including street trees, and paved driveway ramps, on the severed lands. That the owner shall receive Council approval to lift a portion of the one foot reserve on Pinnacle Drive (Block 11, R.P. 1480) only as it abuts the severed lands; and the said one foot reserve shall be lifted and all costs associated with the process, including the preparation of a reference plan, shall be borne by the owner. That the owner shall receive Council approval for a revision to Clause 56 of the Agreement registered on title as Instrument #674413 to permit the development of Part of Block 10 without the adjacent lands. That the owner shall submit an archaeological assessment for the severed parcel to the Ministry of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation for approval; a copy of the completed assessment and clearance letter from the Ministry must be forwarded to the Regional Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services. 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 May 7, 2004. Carried 1. Submission Nos.: B 2001-048 to B 2001-050 Inclusive, (Cont'd) COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 76 MAY 7, 2002 Consent B 2001-050 Moved by Mr. D. Cybalski Seconded by Mr. B. Isaac That the application of Ivan Biuk Construction Ltd. requesting permission to convey a parcel of land, shown as Lot 3 on revised drawing dated November 5, 2001, having frontage on Pinnacle Drive of 16.15 m (52.98 ft.), a depth of 32.76 m (107.48 ft.) and an area of 504.33 m2 (5,428.74 sq. ft.), on Block 10, Registered Plan 1480 and Part Lot 6 and Lot 7, Registered Plan 578, designated as Part 1 on Reference Plan 58R-6207, Pinnacle Drive, 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 owner shall pay to the City of Kitchener a cash-in-lieu contribution for park dedication equal to 5% of the value of the lands to be severed. That the owner shall prepare a comprehensive stormwater management plan for lands included in Block Plan 58 to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering Services. That the owner shall prepare a grading control plan for the severed lands to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering Services. That the owner shall make financial arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering Services, for the installation of all new service connections to the severed lands. That the owner shall make financial arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering Services for the installation, to City standards, of a sidewalk along the frontage of the severed lands, boulevard landscaping including street trees, and paved driveway ramps, on the severed lands. That the owner shall receive Council approval to lift a portion of the one foot reserve on Pinnacle Drive (Block 11, R.P. 1480) only as it abuts the severed lands; and the said one foot reserve shall be lifted and all costs associated with the process, including the preparation of a reference plan, shall be borne by the owner. That the owner shall receive Council approval for a revision to Clause 56 of the Agreement registered on title as Instrument #674413 to permit the development of Part of Block 10 without the adjacent lands. That the owner shall submit an archaeological assessment for the severed parcel to the Ministry of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation for approval; a copy of the completed assessment and clearance letter from the Ministry must be forwarded to the Regional Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services. 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. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 77 MAY 7, 2002 1. Submission Nos.: B 2001-048 to B 2001-050 Inclusive, (Cont'd) 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 May 7, 2004. Carried The Committee then recessed the meeting temporarily, at 9:50 a.m., to allow an opportunity for all interested parties to applications listed for consideration on the Committee's 10:00 a.m. agenda to arrive. This meeting reconvened at 10:00 a.m. NEW BUSINESS MINOR VARIANCE Submission No.: Applicant: Property Location: Le.qal Description: A 2002-024 Kurt Ditner 104 Glasgow Street Lot 54, Re.qistered Plan 217 Appearances: In Support: Mr. K. Ditner 71 Ethel Street Kitchener ON N2B 1Z8 Contra: None Other: Mr. N. Ebner 100 Glasgow Street Kitchener ON N2G 2G7 Public Submissions: In Support: None Contra: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to convert an existing duplex to a triplex on a lot having a minimum lot width of 12 m (39.37 ft.), rather than the required 15 m (49.21 ft.) and a minimum lot area of 445.92 m2 (4,800 sq. ft.), rather than the required 495 m2 (5,328.31 sq. ft.). The Committee was in receipt of the following City staff / agency comments and public submissions (if any): · Business & Planning Services - April 25, 2002 - in support, as amended to permit a lot area of 439.2 m2 and subject to certain conditions; · Director of Building - April 19, 2002 - in support, subject to a site inspection to confirm the 3rd unit conforms to the Ontario Fire Code; The following had no concerns or comments with respect to this application: · Traffic & Parking Analyst - April 17, 2002; · Region of Waterloo -April 23, 2002; · Grand River Conservation Authority- April 29, 2002. 1. Submission No.: A2002-024 (Cont'd) COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 78 MAY 7, 2002 Mr. K. Ditner advised that he had reviewed the comments and had concern with the required asphalt paving of the driveway. He noted the he had recently gravelled this area which, in his opinion, holds better than asphalt and was concerned that trees on the property would be lost if asphalt was required. Mr. Ditner provided several photographs of the driveway/parking area and requested consideration be given to allowing this area to remain gravelled. Mr. N. Ebner advised that he was the owner of the adjacent property at 100 Glasgow Street and while he was not necessarily opposed, advised that he would prefer the driveway/parking area to be asphalted. He also questioned how close to the lot line the driveway/parking area would be permitted to be asphalted. In response to Mr. P. Kruse, Mr. Ebner acknowledged an existing chain link fence between the two properties. Mr. L. Masseo advised that the driveway could be asphalted up to the lot line; however, it is normal practice to leave sufficient space for drainage. Mr. Masseo further advised that asphalt is recommended to properly design and restrict parking to the required number of spaces and to clearly distinguish between the amenity space and the parking area. Mr. Masseo pointed out that asphalt would allow ease of demarcation for the parking spaces and would also control dust. Mr. Ditner stated that he would be prepared to install an appropriate barrier between the two properties, suggesting some type of wooden fence. He also referred to the drawing in the staff report and advised that he did not want to enlarge the parking area but rather retain the existing entrance and widen out from there to accommodate the two spaces. Mr. Masseo reiterated that the main concern of staff is to restrict the number of parking spaces to that required so that parking takes place in an orderly manner, with paving being secondary to allow proper demarcation and to control dust. Mr. P. Kruse also pointed out that as a condition of approval the applicant would be required to receive approval of a site plan showing the parking/amenity area and advised the applicant that he should not rely on the conceptual drawing in the staff report. In response to a question from Mr. Ebner, Mr. Kruse advised that it would be inappropriate for the owner of the subject property to permit snow to be blown into Mr. Ebner's backyard. In response to Mr. D. Cybalski, Mr. Ebner advised that most properties in the area have paved driveways. Mr. Ditner agreed with Mr. Ebner; however, suggested that a fence would resolve any concerns related to the gravel driveway. In response to a further question from Mr. D. Cybalski, Mr. Masseo advised that should the Committee agree to permit gravel, staff would have an opportunity to work with the applicant to address concerns related to the parking area through approval of the site plan. Mr. P. Kruse pointed out that the Building Division requires that a site inspection of the third unit be undertaken to ensure that the unit conforms to the Ontario Fire Code. Mr. Ditner acknowledged this requirement and advised that he had already made arrangements for the inspection. Moved by Mr. D. Cybalski Seconded by Mr. B. Isaac That the application of Kurt Ditner requesting permission to convert an existing duplex to a triplex on a lot having a minimum lot width of 12 m (39.37 ft.), rather than the required 15 m (49.21 ft.) and a minimum lot area of 439.2 m2 (4,727.66 sq. ft.), rather than the required 495 m2 (5,328.31 sq. ft.), on Lot 54, Registered Plan 217, 104 Glasgow Street, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: That the owner shall prepare a site plan showing the area intended for parking and amenity space and shall obtain approval of the plan from the City's Principal Planner prior to July 7, 2002. 2. That the owner shall construct the rear parking area as identified on the approved site plan and shall demarcate the parking spaces to the satisfaction of the City's Principal Planner prior to September 7, 2002. Submission No.: A2002-024 (Cont'd) COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 79 MAY 7, 2002 That the owner shall contact the City's Fire Prevention to make necessary arrangements for a site inspection of the existing third unit to ensure the unit conforms to the Ontario Fire Code. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variances requested in this application are minor in nature. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 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: Legal Description: A 2002-025 Klingbaum Holdings Inc. 2979 King Street East Part Lot 16, Municipal Compiled Plan 958 and Part Lots Registered Plan 883 1&2, Appearances: In Support: Mr. D. Gianopoulos 2979 King Street East Kitchener ON N2A 1A8 Contra: None Public Submissions: In Support: None Contra: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to legalize an existing restaurant use having a total of 89 parking spaces rather than the required 96 spaces. The Committee was in receipt of the following City staff / agency comments and public submissions (if any): · Business & Planning Services - April 24, 2002 - in support, as amended to permit a total of 88 parking spaces and subject to certain conditions; · Director of Building - April 19, 2002 - in support, subject to a building permit being obtained for the new outdoor patio; The following had no concerns or comments with respect to this application: · Traffic & Parking Analyst - April 17, 2002; · Region of Waterloo -April 25, 2002; · Grand River Conservation Authority- April 29, 2002. Mr. P. Kruse noted that staff are recommending the application be amended to permit a total of 88 parking spaces rather than 89 as suggested in the application and enquired if Mr. Gianopoulos was in agreement with this recommendation. Mr. D. Gianopoulos, owner of the restaurant business, advised that he was in agreement with the proposed amendment. Mr. Gianopoulos advised that he had concern with the deadline proposed for paving of the parking area and requested that additional time be considered. 2. Submission No.: A2002-025 (Cont'd) COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 80 MAY 7, 2002 The Secretary-Treasurer pointed out that the condition allows the applicant to make written request for extension of the completion date and Mr. Masseo further advised that staff would have no difficulty with extending the timeframe given a reasonable request for extension. Moved by Mr. D. Cybalski Seconded by Mr. B. Isaac That the application of Klingbaum Holdings Inc. requesting permission to legalize an existing restaurant use having a total of 88 parking spaces, rather than the required 96 spaces, on Part Lot 16, Municipal Compiled Plan 958 and Part Lots 1 & 2, Registered Plan 883, 2979 King Street East, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall obtain a building permit prior to construction of a new outdoor patio. That the expanded parking shall be developed in accordance with the approved revised site plan, to the satisfaction of the City's Principal Planner, prior to August 1, 2002; no extension to this completion date shall be granted unless approved in writing by the Principal Planner prior to the completion date set out in this decision. 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 2002-026 Dave and Cindy Gregory 70 Vintage Crescent Lot 391, Re.qistered Plan 1404 Appearances: In Support: Mr. R. Sajkunovic 7 Dunlop Place Kitchener ON N2P 1J3 Mr. & Mrs. D. Gregory 70 Vintage Crescent Kitchener ON N2P 1L2 Contra: None Public Submissions: In Support: None Contra: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to construct a family room addition having a westerly side yard setback of 0.3 m (1 ft.) to the wall of the addition and 0.15 m (6 in.) to the roof line, rather than the required 1.2 m (3.94 ft.) and a rear yard setback of 4.89 m (16 ft.), rather than the required 7.5 m (24.6 ft.). The Committee was in receipt of the following submissions (if any): Submission No.: A2002-026 (Cont'd) City staff / agency comments and public COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 81 MAY 7, 2002 · Business & Planning Services - April 23, 2002 - in support; Director of Building - April 19, 2002 - in support, subject to the right side elevation being constructed with non-combustible materials, including the wall studs, and installation of an eavestrough to address issues of drainage; The following had no concerns or comments with respect to this application: · Traffic & Parking Analyst - April 17, 2002; · Region of Waterloo -April 23, 2002; · Grand River Conservation Authority- April 29, 2002. Mr. R. Sajkunovic, agent for the applicant, referred to the comments of the Director of Building relative to the right side elevation and questioned if it would be necessary to use steel studs. Mr. L. Masseo advised that there were a number of non-combustible materials that would qualify and the structure would have to comply with the requirements of the Building Code. Mr. Sajkunovic pointed out that the applicant had requested a sideyard of 6 in. and noted that Business & Planning Services comments indicate a 1 ft. setback. He advised that the eavestrough would be attached on the right side and would be directed to the rear of the property behind the property line. In this regard, he questioned if this would be sufficient to allow the 6 in. sideyard as requested in the application. Mr. L. Masseo clarified that the 6 in. setback refers to the roof line and the 1 ft. setback refers to the wall of the addition. He noted that Building staff are concerned with run-off from the roof and accordingly, have requested an eavestrough to be added. He advised that provided the eavestrough does not encroach onto the neighbouring property and is installed in a manner that alleviates any drainage concerns, the requested setback would be acceptable. Moved by Mr. B. Isaac Seconded by Mr. D. Cybalski That the application of Dave and Cindy Gregory requesting permission to construct a family room addition having a westerly sideyard setback of 0.3 m (1 ft.) to the wall of the addition and 0.15 m (6 in.) to the roof line, rather than the required 1.2 m (3.94 ft.), and a rear yard setback of 4.89 m (16 ft.), rather than the required 7.5 m (24.6 ft.), on Lot 391, Registered Plan 1404, 70 Vintage Crescent, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the right side elevation of the new addition shall be constructed using non- combustible materials, including the wall studs. That an eavestrough shall be installed to eliminate rainwater run-off from the roof of the new addition and the eavestrough shall be entirely within the limits of the subject property line. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variances requested in this application are minor in nature. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 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 82 MAY 7, 2002 CONSENT Submission No.: Applicant: Property Location: Le.qal Description: B 2002-010 George Robert Tilt 1047 Doon Village Road Part of Lot 3, Biehn's Tract Appearances: In Support: Mr. George Tilt Ms. Karen Tilt 1047 Doon Village Road Kitchener ON N2P 1A6 Contra: None Public Submissions: In Support: None Contra: None The Committee was advised that the lands involved in this application were the subject of a previously approved Consent (B 2002-008). The applicant is now proposing to relocate the severance line. The parcel of land to be severed and developed for single residential use will now have frontage on Doon Village Road of 37.67 m (123.58 ft.), by an average depth of 133.22 m (473.09 ft.) and an area of 3,850 m2 (41,442.41 sq. ft.). The Committee was in receipt of the following City staff / agency comments and public submissions (if any): · Business & Planning Services - April 19, 2002 - in support, subject to certain conditions; Director of Building - April 19, 2002 - in support, subject to a geotechnical investigation completed by a professional engineer confirming the suitability of the severed lot for a private in-ground sewage disposal system; Region of Waterloo - May 2, 2002 - in support, subject to completion of a detailed archaeological assessment to the satisfaction of the Ministry of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation; in addition, the subject site has been identified as lands with suspected contamination; Regional staff are uncertain of potential health or safety risks; the lands are not located within a wellfield and as the Region does not have a direct corporate interest is not requesting a Record of Site Condition; if the Committee decides to impose such a condition or other similar requirement the Committee, and not the Region, should be responsible for its release; The following had no concerns or comments with respect to this application: · Traffic & Parking Analyst - April 17, 2002; · Grand River Conservation Authority- May 1,2002. In response to Mr. P. Kruse, Ms. K. Tilt advised that she was in agreement with the conditions contained in the Business & Planning Services comments, as well as the Regional condition regarding an archaeological assessment. Mr. P. Kruse referred to the Region's comments respecting possible contamination with respect to the lands adjacent to the subject property. In this regard, he advised that in consideration of the previous Consent application (B 2002-008) the Committee had received identical comments from the Region and concluded that the information provided was insufficient for the purpose of determining the necessity of imposing a Record of Site Condition as a condition of approval. Members of the Committee agreed that such a condition would not be imposed with respect to 1. Submission No.: B 2002-010 (Cont'd) COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 83 MAY 7, 2002 the current application given the Region's comments are identical and no additional information has been provided to substantiate the necessity of imposing such a condition. Moved by Mr. D. Cybalski Seconded by Mr. B. Isaac That the application of George Robert Tilt requesting permission to convey a parcel of land for single residential development having frontage on Doon Village Road of 37.67 m (123.58 ft.), by an average depth of 133.22 m (473.09 ft.) and an area of 3,850 m2 (41,442.41 sq. ft.), on Part Lot 3, Biehn's Tract, 1047 Doon Village Road, Kitchener, Ontario, BE GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: That the owner shall pay to the City of Kitchener a cash-in-lieu contribution for park dedication equal to 5% of the value of the lands to be severed. That the owner shall make financial arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering Services for the installation, to City standards, of boulevard landscaping including street trees, and a paved driveway ramp, on the severed lands. That the owner shall make financial arrangements to the satisfaction of the City's Engineering Services, for the installation of all new service connections to the severed lands. That the owner shall submit, for the review of the City's Chief Building Official, a geotechnical investigation completed by a professional engineer confirming the suitability of the severed lot for a private in-ground sewage disposal system. 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 lands, which shall include the following: a) That the owner shall prepare a Tree Preservation Plan for the severed lands in accordance with the City's Tree Management Policy, to be approved by the City's Principal Planner and where necessary, implemented prior to any grading, tree removal or the issuance of building permits; such plans shall include, among other matters, the identification of a proposed building envelope/work zone, landscaped area and vegetation to be preserved. b) The owner further agrees to implement the approved plan; no changes to the said plan shall be granted except with the prior approval of the City's Principal Planner. 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 owner shall submit a detailed archaeological assessment for the severed parcel to the Ministry of Citizenship, Culture and Recreation for approval; a copy of the completed assessment and clearance letter from the Ministry must be forwarded to the Regional Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services. 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. 1. Submission No.: B 2002-010 (Cont'd) COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 84 MAY 7, 2002 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 May 7, 2004. ADJOURNMENT On motion, the meeting adjourned at 10:25 a.m. Dated at the City of Kitchener this 7th day of May, 2002. Carried J. Billett Secretary-Treasurer Committee of Adjustment