Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAdjustment - 2007-05-15COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FOR THE CITY OF KITCHENER MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING HELD MAY 15, 2007 MEMBERS PRESENT: Messrs. M. Hiscott, A. Head & B. McColl OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ms. J. von Westerholt, Senior Planner, Mr. R. Parent, Traffic & Parking Analyst, Mr. B. Cronkite, Traffic Technologist, Ms. D. Gilchrist, Secretary-Treasurer, and Ms. R. Brent, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer. Mr. M. Hiscott, Vice-Chair, called this meeting to order at 10:00 a.m. MINUTES Moved by Mr. A. Head Seconded by Mr. B. McColl That the minutes of the regular meeting of the Committee of Adjustment, of April 17, 2007 as mailed to the members, be adopted. Carried NEW BUSINESS MINOR VARIANCE 1. Submission No.: A 2007-016 Applicant: Paul Leung Property Location: 19-21 Cameron Street South Legal Description: Part of Lot 63, Registered Plan 303 Appearances: In Support: P. Leung D. Short Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicant requests permission to construct a 1 storey addition to the existing restaurant to have a front yard set back from Cameron Street of Om rather than the required 3m (9.84'), and to provide 26 off-street parking spaces for the expanded restaurant rather than the required 31 off-street parking spaces. The Committee considered the report of the Development and Technical Services Department, dated May 7, 2007 advising that the purpose of this application is to facilitate a site plan application (SP06/105/C/AP) which proposes the development of two additions to an existing restaurant located at the northeast corner of Cameron Street and Charles Street. The building has been used as a restaurant since the mid-1970s. The site plan application proposes to construct a 93.8 m2 1-storey addition to an existing building along the Cameron Street frontage, and a 13.6 m2 1- storey glass enclosed entry addition to the opposite side of the building. In total, the additions would add 107.5 m2 of gross floor area to the restaurant. In addition, changes are proposed to the existing on-site parking lot, as outlined in the report below. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 82 MAY 15, 2007 1. Submission No.: A 2007-016 tCont'd) A related site plan application (SP06/106/K/AP) proposes to create a 13 space off- site parking lot for the exclusive use of the restaurant at the northwest corner of King Street East and Cameron Street, approximately 90 metres from the restaurant (500 King Street East). Both properties are designated Mixed Use Corridor with Special Policy #1 in the King Street East Secondary Plan of the Municipal Plan (MP) and are zoned Commercial- Residential Four Zone (CR-4) with Special Use Provision 1450 in the Zoning By-law. The owner has requested a minor variance to reduce the minimum front yard setback from 3.0 metres to 0.0 metres in order to allow an addition onto the Cameron Street frontage of the building. In addition, the owner has requested a minor variance to reduce the required parking for the restaurant. The existing restaurant parking lot is considered to be legal non-conforming, as the parking requirement formula changed with the current zoning by-law in such a way as to require more parking than is now provided. The fact that more restaurant gross floor area is proposed further exacerbates this situation. In addition, Transportation Planning Division has commented on the site plan application for the proposed restaurant expansion that under current City standards the site can now only accommodate a maximum of 13 of the 16 existing parking spaces, due to the need to secure two driveway visibility triangles. In order to address these parking issues, the owner has submitted a second site plan application which shows an additional 13 parking spaces on an off-site parking lot. Section 6.1.1.1 a) ii) and iii) of the zoning by-law allows for off-site parking provided an agreement is entered into between the owner and the City to secure the additional required parking. The owner of the off-site parking lot is prepared to enter such an agreement. It should be noted that the proposed 26 parking spaces (13 on-site and 13 off-site spaces) would still not allow the restaurant to comply with the current zoning by-law requirement. Under the present zoning by-law, 1 space is required for every 7.5 metres of gross floor area devoted to restaurant use. Using this formula, 14 spaces would be required for the proposed development. The current legal non- conforming parking situation requires 16 spaces. Staff originally advised the applicant that a minor variance would be necessary to address the parking situation. However, after further review staff are of the opinion that the parking issue should be addressed through Section 45(2)(a)(ii) of the Planning Act which deals with the Committee of Adjustment's power to permit the use of such land for a purpose that, in their opinion, is similar to the legal non- conforming use that may otherwise lawfully continue, or is more compatible with the permitted uses. Planning staff now advise the Committee that the parking situation should be addressed through a permission application to allow the portion of the property currently used as a legal non-conforming 16 space parking lot to be used as a legal non-conforming 13 space parking lot. Both site plan applications have been approved in principle subject to Committee of Adjustment approval of the two abovementioned items as well as a condition requiring the owner to enter into an off-site parking agreement with the City. With respect to the request for a reduced front yard setback, Section 45(1) of the Planning Act sets out the tests to be applied when considering minor variances. Planning staff offer the following comments in this regard. The variance meets the intent of the Municipal Plan for the following reasons. The Municipal Plan states that Mixed Use Corridors are intended to: "have strong pedestrian linkages with the surrounding residential neighbourhoods. To strengthen these linkages, new development may be required to orient a portion of the building mass to the street, provide for integration of cycling facilities, provide COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 83 MAY 15, 2007 1. Submission No.: A 2007-016 tCont'd) on-site pedestrian facilities, and provide pedestrian connections to abutting developments or off-site transit facilities. To achieve this objective, the City of Kitchener may also impose maximum front yard setbacks, limit vehicular parking between the building fagade and the street, and will require specific fagade treatments such as window or door openings and minimization of blank walls." In order to encourage pedestrian, transit, and cyclist supportive development, a reduced front yard setback is desirable. Maximum front yard setbacks will be implemented through upcoming revisions to the zoning by-law, which will have the effect of ensuring that buildings are placed closer to the street. In this particular case, Planning staff are of the opinion that the variance meets the intent of the Municipal Plan. The variance meets the intent of the zoning by-law for the following reasons. The current CR-4 zoning of the property is somewhat out-of-synch with the Municipal Plan. Planning staff are currently in the process of drafting proposed Mixed Use Corridor zoning regulations to implement the more recent Municipal Plan policies. The draft Mixed Use Corridor zoning regulations support reduced front yard setbacks. The intent of the current front yard setback requirement is to prevent undesirable encroachment of any buildings into the public right-of-way. In this case, the intent of the Municipal Plan is to allow the building to locate close to the right-of-way. Staff are of the opinion that the proposed reduction in the front yard setback meets the intent of the zoning by-law. The variance is minor for the following reasons. The main consideration in determining whether the variance is minor is whether the variance will have a greater than minor adverse impact on the adjacent properties. Planning staff are of the opinion that the variance will have a positive effect on the adjacent properties and will allow for human-scale development to occur. The variance is desirable for the appropriate development and use of the land for the following reasons. The variance would allow the building to be oriented toward the street and would bring human-scale development to the general Downtown area. In addition, the variance would allow the expansion of a use that serves the surrounding residential neighbourhoods and employment areas. With respect to the legal non-conforming parking situation, case law sets out the tests to be applied in considering permission applications under Section 45(2)(a)(ii). Planning staff offer the following comments in this regard. Planning staff are of the opinion that the proposal is in the public interest since it would allow the expansion of an existing business that serves the surrounding residential neighbourhoods and employment areas. This intensification would also allow the restaurant to become more transit supportive, which is a goal of the Mixed Use Corridor designation of the Municipal Plan. Although the restaurant would not meet the current zoning by-law parking requirements, the proposed development may strengthen the pedestrian linkages in this area through the site plan application which is another goal of the Municipal Plan. The proposal represents good planning since it will allow the on-site parking lot to be changed to conform to the City's standards. Specifically, the proposal would allow driveway visibility triangles to be accommodated at the driveway entrance to the site, thereby improving motorist visibility for access and egress to/from the restaurant. Transportation Planning Division has commented on the site plan application that they are in support of the proposed parking layout and number of spaces provided. The owner is willing to enter into an off-site parking agreement which would lessen the impact of the parking reduction. The application would not create unacceptable adverse impacts upon abutting properties. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 84 MAY 15, 2007 Submission No.: A 2007-016 tCont'd The on-site restaurant parking lot is proposed to be reduced by only 3 spaces. In addition, this reduction may be partially offset by the creation of a 13 space off-site parking lot. The current use of the land as a 16 space parking lot is similar to the proposed 13 space parking lot. Based on the foregoing, Planning staff recommends that the application be approved subject to the conditions outlined in the Recommendation Section of this report. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated May 7, 2007, advising they have no concerns with this application. The Committee agreed to consider the amendment to this application for the on-site parking lot, as recommended in the Development and Technical Services Department report. Mr. D. Short advised that he had read the staff report and agrees to their recommended conditions. Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Mr. A. Head That the application of Paul Leung requesting permission to construct a 1 storey addition to the existing restaurant to have a front yard set back from Cameron Street of Om rather than the required 3m (9.84'), and permission to use the legal non- conforming 16 space parking lot on the subject property as a legal non-conforming 13 space parking lot, on Part Lot 63, Registered Plan 303, 19-21 Cameron Street South, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner of 19-21 Cameron Street (subject property) and the owner of 500 King Street East (proposed off-site parking lot property) shall enter into an agreement with the City to be registered against the title of both properties. The agreement shall guarantee that the land required for parking by the Zoning By-law shall continue to be so used only for such purpose until the owner provides alternate parking space in conformity with the regulations of the Zoning By-law. 2. That the owner of the subject property shall obtain site plan approval in principle from the City's Supervisor of Site Plan Development for Site Plan Applications SP06/105/C/AP and SP06/106/K/AP. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variances requested in this application are minor in nature. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Municipal Plan is being maintained on the subject property. 4. The approval of this application is in the public interest. 5. The approval of this application represents good planning. 6. The approval of this application does not create unacceptable adverse impacts upon the abutting properties. 7. The proposed use of the 13 space off-site parking lot is similar to the existing 16 space off-site parking lot. Carried COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 85 MAY 15, 2007 2. Submission No.: A 2007-017 Applicant: John Guenzer Property Location: 8 Tagge Street Legal Description: Lot 34, Registered Plan 1696 Appearances: In Support: J. & E. Guenzer Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicant requests permission to construct a detached garage at the north side of the property to have a set back from Tagge Crescent of 4.2m (13.77') rather than the required 6m (19.68'). The Committee considered the report of the Development and Technical Services Department, dated May 8, 2007 the subject property is located on the north-east corner of the intersection of Tagge Street and Tagge Crescent. The zoning designation is Residential Four (R-4) under By-law 85-1 with a Municipal Plan designation of Low Rise Residential. This is a corner lot which contains a single family with an existing attached garage with access from Tagge Street. The applicant is requesting a minor variance to permit an accessory detached double-car garage with a setback from a side yard abutting Tagge Crescent of 4.2 metres rather than the required minimum of 6 metres. In regards to the variance staff has considered 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 does not meet the intent of the Zoning By-law which is to ensure that there is adequate depth in front of the garage and within the lot lines to park a vehicle. The by-law requires a 6 metres setback to accommodate the parking space and it is noted that a minimum parking space size is 5.49 metres. Therefore the proposed area in front of the garage would be deficient to accommodate a parking space within the lot lines of the property. This could result in vehicles encroaching onto city lands. The variance could be considered minor in nature for the following reason. The applicant has stated that he requires this additional garage space in order to park additional vehicles as well as storage space. He states that he does not intend to park vehicles in front of the garage. If used mainly for storage with no parking in front of the garage this use may be considered minor in nature. It is noted that there is no control to ensure that subsequent owners will commit to the same practise. The variance is not appropriate for the development and use of the land for the following reason. The detached garage is 7.315 metres in depth, whereas a minimum of 6 metres is required for a garage. The applicant could shorten the depth of the garage and still maintain a useable garage. If shortened, the garage could be setback enough to accommodate a parking space, 5.49 metres in depth, though it would still require variance approval. As well, it is noted that the oversized garage takes up a large percentage of the rear yard amenity area of this corner lot. This is not aesthetically pleasing to the streetscape or the functioning of the outdoor amenity area. Based on the above comments, Planning staff recommends that the application be refused. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated May 7, 2007, advising they have no concerns with this application. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 86 MAY 15, 2007 2. Submission No.: A 2007-017 tCont'd) Mr. Guenzer advised that he spoke with Ms. vonWesterholt about the staff report, and he is willing to amend this application to provide a 6m setback for the proposed garage; which will create a rear yard variance for the garage of 0.88m. Ms. vonWesterholt advised that Planning staff support this amendment. When questioned by the Committee, Mr. Guenzer advised that the garage can not be made smaller, as he needs it to house an older car, a snowmobile trailer and a car trailer. Mr. Parent advised that he supports the original application. He noted there is already a garage and parking space on this property. He also advised that the City's Engineering Services have advised that they have no intention of installing a sidewalk on Tagge Street, and there are no visibility issues. Moved by Mr. A. Head Seconded by Mr. B. McColl That the application of John Guenzer requesting permission to construct a detached garage at the northerly side of the property to have a rear yard of 6.622m (21.725') rather than the required 7.5 m (24.6'), on Lot 34, Registered Plan 1696, 8 Tagge Street, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variances requested in this application are minor in nature. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Municipal Plan is being maintained on the subject property. Carried 3. Submission No.: A 2007-018 Applicant: Laurel View Homes Property Location: Edgewater Crescent Legal Description: Block 289, Registered Plan 58M-393 and Part of Lot 117, German Comgany Tract Appearances: In Support: K. Barisdale Contra: None Written Submissions: None In light of the recommendation of staff that this application be deferred, and with the agreement of Ms. K. Barisdale, the Committee did agree to defer its consideration of this application. Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Mr. A. Head That consideration of Submission No. A 2007-018 -Edgewater Crescent, be deferred to allow the applicant an opportunity to submit a Detailed Vegetation Plan to address the impacts that the reduced setbacks may have on vegetation. Carried COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 87 MAY 15, 2007 4. Submission No.: A 2007-019 Applicant: Monarch Corporation Property Location: 618 Thomas Slee Drive Legal Description: Lot 29, Registered Plan 58M-421 Appearances: In Support: J. Chen Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicant requests permission to construct a single family dwelling with a rear yard of 7.15m (23.45') rather than the required 7.5m (24.6'). The Committee considered the report of the Development and Technical Services Department, dated April 18, 2007 advising that the subject property is located within the Topper Woods North subdivision which was registered on November 16, 2006 as Plan 58M-421. The lot is currently vacant and is positioned along the planned expansion of Thomas Slee Drive, which is north of New Dundee Road and west of Homer Watson Boulevard in the planning community of Doon South. The property is zoned R-4, designated "Low Rise Residential" in the Official Plan and is located in a neighbourhood that will primarily consist of single detached dwellings. The applicant is requesting a minor variance to allow a 7.15 metre rear yard setback whereas Zoning By-law 85-1 requires a 7.5 metre rear yard setback. 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 because its low rise residential designation is being maintained. The variance meets the intent of the zoning by-law for the following reasons. The purpose of the rear yard setback regulation is to maintain adequate distance between buildings and abutting rear yard properties. The subject property has slightly shorter lot depths than the other parcels in the subdivision which makes it difficult to position a standard house design without triggering a minor variance. The proposed position of the dwelling respects the intent of the regulation and deviates from it slightly. The variance is minor because it only diverges .35 metres from the regulation and there are no adverse affects attributed to it. The variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land because a single detached dwelling will occupy on the site, conforming to the rest of the neighbourhood. Based on the foregoing, Planning staff recommends that the application be approved. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated May 7, 2007, advising they have no concerns with this application. Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Mr. A. Head That the application of Monarch Corporation requesting permission to construct a single family dwelling with a rear yard of 7.15m (23.45') rather than the required 7.5 m (24.6'), on Lot 29, Registered Plan 58M-421, 618 Thomas Slee Drive, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 88 MAY 15, 2007 4. Submission No.: A 2007-019 tCont'd) It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variances requested in this application are minor in nature. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Municipal Plan is being maintained on the subject property. Carried 5. Submission No.: A 2007-020 Applicant: Monarch Corporation Property Location: 622 Thomas Slee Drive Legal Description: Lot 30. Registered Plan 58M-421 Appearances: In Support: J. Chen Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicant requests permission to construct a single family dwelling with a rear yard of 6.88m (22.57') rather than the required 7.5m (24.6'). The Committee considered the report of the Development and Technical Services Department, dated April 18, 2007 advising the subject property is located within the Topper Woods North subdivision which was registered on November 16, 2006 as Plan 58M-421. The lot is currently vacant and is positioned along the planned expansion of Thomas Slee Drive, which is north of New Dundee Road and west of Homer Watson Boulevard in the planning community of Doon South. The property is zoned R-4, designated "Low Rise Residential" in the Official Plan and is located in a neighbourhood that will primarily consist of single detached dwellings. The applicant is requesting a minor variance to allow a 6.88 metre rear yard setback whereas Zoning By-law 85-1 requires a 7.5 metre rear yard setback. 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 because its low rise residential designation is being maintained. The variance meets the intent of the zoning by-law for the following reasons. The purpose of the rear yard setback regulation is to maintain adequate distance between buildings and abutting rear yard properties. The subject property has slightly shorter lot depths than the other parcels in the subdivision which makes it difficult to position a standard house design without triggering a minor variance. The proposed position of the dwelling respects the intent of the regulation and deviates from it slightly. The variance is minor because it only diverges .62 metres from the regulation and there are no adverse affects attributed to it. The variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land because a single detached dwelling will occupy on the site, conforming to the rest of the neighbourhood. Based on the foregoing, Planning staff recommends that the application be approved. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 89 MAY 15, 2007 5. Submission No.: A 2007-020 tCont'd) The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated May 7, 2007, advising they have no concerns with this application. Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Mr. A. Head That the application of Monarch Corporation requesting permission to construct a single family dwelling with a rear yard of 6.88m (22.57') rather than the required 7.5 m (24.6'), on Lot 30, Registered Plan 58M-421, 622 Thomas Slee Drive, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variances requested in this application are minor in nature. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Municipal Plan is being maintained on the subject property. Carried 6. Submission No.: A 2007-021 Applicant: Monarch Corporation Property Location: 626 Thomas Slee Drive Legal Description: Lot 31, Registered Plan 58M-421 Appearances: In Support: J. Chen Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicant requests permission to construct a single family dwelling with a rear yard of 6.87m (22.53') rather than the required 7.5m (24.6'). The Committee considered the report of the Development and Technical Services Department, dated April 27, 2007, advising the subject property is located on Thomas Slee Drive. The subject property has a frontage of 13.1 metres on Thomas Slee Drive, an area of 406.10 square meters and currently contains no buildings. The applicant is requesting a minor variance to allow a 6.87 m rear yard setback whereas Zoning By-law 85-1 requires a minimum 7.5 metre rear yard setback. In addition, the proposed use of the site is supported by policies of the Places to Grow Act, and Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, which directs a significant proportion of new growth to existing built up areas through means such as infill development and intensification. 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 proposed variance meets the intent of the Municipal Plan for the following reasons. The subject property is designated Low Rise Residential in the Municipal Plan. The intent of this designation is to accommodate a full range of housing to achieve an overall low intensity. The reduced rear yard setback will permit a single- COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 90 MAY 15, 2007 6. Submission No.: A 2007-021 tCont'd) detached dwelling. This low rise residential use will maintain the intent of the Municipal Plan. The variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-Law for the following reasons. The property is zoned Residential Four Zone (R-4) which requires a 7.5 metre rear yard setback. The purpose of the rear yard setback in the Zoning By-Law is to provide private outdoor amenity space. The rear yard will still be large enough to provide adequate private outdoor amenity space. It is staff's opinion that the intent of the by- law will be maintained. The variance is minor for the following reasons. The reduced rear yard setback is only 0.63 metres shorter than the minimum rear yard setback requirement. Therefore, it will not have a significant visual impact on the neighbourhood, and as discussed above, adequate private amenity space will be maintained. The variance is appropriate development and use of the subject lands for the following reasons. First, the proposed 6.87 metre rear yard setback is considered appropriate because the rear yard will continue to function as a rear yard; second, there will be no negative impacts on the surrounding neighbourhood; and third, sufficient outdoor amenity space is maintained. Based on the foregoing, Planning staff recommends that the application be approved. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated May 7, 2007, advising they have no concerns with this application. Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Mr. A. Head That the application of Monarch Corporation requesting permission to construct a single family dwelling with a rear yard of 6.87m (22.53') rather than the required 7.5 m (24.6'), on Lot 31, Registered Plan 58M-421, 626 Thomas Slee Drive, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variances requested in this application are minor in nature. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Municipal Plan is being maintained on the subject property. Carried 7. Submission No.: A 2007-022 Applicant: Monarch Corporation Property Location: 630 Thomas Slee Drive Legal Description: Lot 32, Registered Plan 58M-421 Appearances: In Support: J. Chen Contra: None Written Submissions: None COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 91 MAY 15, 2007 7. Submission No.: A 2007-022 tCont'd The Committee was advised that the applicant requests permission to construct a single family dwelling with a rear yard of 6.87m (22.53') rather than the required 7.5m (24.6'). The Committee considered the report of the Development and Technical Services Department, dated April 27, 2007 the subject property is located at the corner of Thomas Slee Drive and Monarch Woods Drive. The subject property has a frontage of 11.7 metres on Thomas Slee Drive, 26.3 metres on Monarch Woods Drive, an area of 503.66 square meters and currently contains no buildings. The applicant is requesting a minor variance to allow a 6.87 metre rear yard setback whereas Zoning By-law 85-1 requires a minimum 7.5 metre rear yard setback. In addition, the proposed use of the site is supported by policies of the Places to Grow Act, and Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, which directs a significant proportion of new growth to existing built up areas through means such as infill development and intensification. 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 proposed variance meets the intent of the Municipal Plan for the following reasons. The subject property is designated Low Rise Residential in the Municipal Plan. The intent of this designation is to accommodate a full range of housing to achieve an overall low intensity. The reduced rear yard setback will permit asingle- detached dwelling. This low rise residential use will maintain the intent of the Municipal Plan. The variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-Law for the following reasons. The property is zoned Residential Four Zone (R-4) which requires a 7.5 metre rear yard setback. The purpose of the rear yard setback in the Zoning By-Law is to provide private outdoor amenity space. The rear yard will be large enough to provide adequate private outdoor amenity space. It is staff's opinion that the intent of the by- law will be maintained. The variance is minor for the following reasons. The reduced rear yard setback is only 0.63 metres shorter than the minimum rear yard setback requirement. Therefore, it will not have a significant visual impact on the neighbourhood, and as discussed above, adequate private amenity space will be maintained. The variance is appropriate development and use of the subject lands for the following reasons. First, the proposed 6.87 metre rear yard setback is considered appropriate because the rear yard will continue to function as a rear yard; second, there will be no negative impacts on the surrounding neighbourhood; and third, sufficient outdoor amenity space is maintained. Based on the foregoing, Planning staff recommends that the application be approved. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated May 7, 2007, advising they have no concerns with this application. Moved by Mr. B. McColl Seconded by Mr. A. Head That the application of Monarch Corporation requesting permission to construct a single family dwelling with a rear yard of 6.87m (22.53') rather than the required 7.5 m (24.6'), on Lot 32, Registered Plan 58M-421, 630 Thomas Slee Drive, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 92 MAY 15, 2007 7. Submission No.: A 2007-022 tCont'd) It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variances requested in this application are minor in nature. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Municipal Plan is being maintained on the subject property. Carried 8. Submission No.: A 2007-023 Applicant: Max Becker Enterprises Limited Property Location: 1191 Fischer-Hallman Road Legal Description: Block 2, Registered Plan 58M-288 Appearances: In Support: V. Bender Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicant requests permission to construct a McDonald's Restaurant with a set back from Fischer-Hallman Road of 7.14m (23.42') rather than the required 7.5 m (24.6'), an architectural feature (an awning) protruding 1.36m (4.46') into the required side yard rather than the permitted 0.6 m (1.96'), and permission for a portion of the landscape buffer, to be located between the drive-thru aisle and Fischer-Hallman Road, to have a width of 1.57 m (5.15') rather than the required 3m (9.84'). The Committee considered the report of the Development and Technical Services Department, dated May 7, 2007 advising the subject property is located on the southwest the corner of Fischer Hallman Road and Max Becker Drive. The land is currently designated Mixed Use Node and is zoned Neighbourhood Shopping Centre Zone (C-2) with Special Regulation Provisions 369R and 356R. The owner intends to develop the lands with adrive-thru McDonald's restaurant. The applicant is requesting minor variances to allow: 1. a 7.14 metre side yard setback from a street whereas Zoning By-law 85-1 requires a minimum 7.5 metre setback (8.2); 2. architectural features, to project 1.36 metres into a required yard whereas Zoning By-law 85-1 permits a projection of 0.6 metres (5.6.3); and 3. a 1.57 metre setback for a driveway aisle adjacent to a street (for a maximum distance of 16.95 metres along Fischer Hallman Road) whereas Zoning By- law 85-1 requires a minimum 3.0 metre setback (6.1.1.1.a.iv). 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 Mixed Use Node designation is to allow a full range of commercial uses, and to achieve a built form that is pedestrian oriented and compatible with surrounding low rise residential development. Mixed Use Nodes have strong pedestrian linkages, and to strengthen these linkages new development may be COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 93 MAY 15, 2007 8. Submission No.: A 2007-023 tCont'd) required to orient a portion of the building mass to the street and to provide strong pedestrian connections. Staff feel that overall the proposed layout and design of the drive-thru restaurant will help to facilitate pedestrian movement on the property. The building is oriented to the street, and because it is two-stories high (rather than a typical one-storey restaurant) it will have a strong visual presence at the intersection. The building oriented to the street, and the proposed reduction in the setback to the street allows the owner to accommodate the required parking on the land, and to provide for an outdoor patio area and strong pedestrian connections from the building to the street and to adjacent commercial developments. Similarly, allowing the architectural features to project up to 1.36 metres into the required setback will help support the upscale building design, as shown on the pictures submitted by the applicant, which help to make the building both visually appealing and more pedestrian in scale. Staff is also of the opinion that the reduced setback between the driveway aisle and the street allows the development to utilize a double drive-thru. The double drive-thru will help ensure that there is enough stacking space for those accessing the site in a vehicle, while also helping to ensure that the stacking spaces do not block site traffic and pedestrian circulation. The reduced setback is required only for a short section of the drive-thru lanes, and is necessary to accommodate vehicle turning radiuses. The variances meet the intent of the Zoning By-law for the following reasons. The intent of the 7.5 metre setback to the street is to ensure an adequate separation between the building and the street and to ensure that visibility is maintained at intersections. Staff believes that a 7.14 metre setback is appropriate in this location as the front of the building onto Max Becker is consistent with setback of the adjoining plaza, and there are no commercial buildings adjacent to the proposed restaurant along Fischer Hallman Road. In addition, staff note that a 7.5 metre visibility triangle has already been dedicated to the City at the intersection of Max Becker Drive and Fischer Hallman Road, and that there is a large landscape feature at the corner of the intersection between the building and the roadway. This landscape feature will be mirrored on each of the four corners which will ensure consistency and visibility at the intersection. The intent of limiting the projection of architectural features to 0.6 metres into the required yard is to ensure that they do not negatively impact any neighbouring properties. Staff note that this requirement is in the General Regulations of the Zoning By-law and applies to all setbacks in all zones. For example it applies equally to a 1.2 metre side yard setback between single detached dwellings, as it does in this instance. Staff feel that is it appropriate to allow the requested projection into the side yard abutting a street for this property. A projection of 1.36 metres would not impact any neighbouring properties, traffic or pedestrian movement and would likely create a more attractive building fagade. The intent of the 3.0 metre separation between driveway aisles and the street edge is to allow for a landscaping buffer. The owner has requested a reduced setback of 1.57 metres for a distance of 16.95 metres along Fischer Hallman Road. Staff recommend that the requested reduction should only apply to the setback to Fischer Hallman Road, extending from about 45 metres north of the most southern point of that property line, and extending to 25 metres from the most northern point of that property line (as shown on the proposed Site Plan). The owner has agreed to provide enhanced landscaping along the Fischer Hallman Road adjacent to the drive- thru aisles, and has agreed to install a low decorative wall to help screen the visual impact of the drive-thru at the narrowest point, as shown on the site sketch. In addition, the owner has agreed to provide a 3.48 metre landscape buffer in other areas adjacent to the drive-thru aisle. Staff feel that these measures will sufficiently mitigate the impacts of a reduced landscape buffer. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 94 MAY 15, 2007 8. Submission No.: A 2007-023 tCont'd) Staff felt that the proposed variances are minor in nature. They will not negatively impact any neighbouring property owners, will help to facilitate vehicular and pedestrian movement on the site, and will help to make the site more pedestrian friendly, while also providing flexibility for an enhanced building fagade. Therefore, staff feels that the variances are appropriate for the development and use of the land. Based on the foregoing, Planning staff recommends that the application be approved to allow: 1. a 7.14 metre side yard setback from a street whereas Zoning By-law 85-1 requires a minimum 7.5 metre setback; 2. architectural features, to project 1.36 metres into a required side yard abutting a street whereas Zoning By-law 85-1 permits a projection of 0.6 metres; and 3. a 1.57 metre setback for a driveway aisle adjacent to a street (for a maximum distance of 16.95 metres along Fischer Hallman Road extending from about 45 metres north of the most southern point of that property line, and extending to 25 metres from the most northern point of that property line whereas Zoning By-law 85-1 requires a minimum 3.0 metre setback (6.1.1.1.a.iv). The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Transportation Planner, dated May 7, 2007, advising they have no concerns with this application. Mr. Bender advised that they have imposed criteria on McDonald's Restaurants for this development, which results in these variances. Moved by Mr. A. Head Seconded by Mr. B. McColl That the application of Max Becker Enterprises Limited requesting permission to construct a McDonald's Restaurant with a set back from Fischer-Hallman Road of 7.14m (23.42') rather than the required 7.5m (24.6'), an architectural feature to protrude 1.36m (4.46') into the required side yard rather than the permitted 0.6m (1.96'); and, permission for a driveway aisle adjacent to Fischer-Hallman Road to have a setback of 1.57 m (5.15'), for a distance of 16.95 m (55.61'), rather than the required 3m (9.84') setback, on Block 2, Registered Plan 58M-288, 1191 Fischer- Hallman Road, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variances requested in this application are minor in nature. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Municipal Plan is being maintained on the subject property. Carried CONSENTS 1. Submission No.: B 2007-015 Applicant: CAW Local 1451 Building Corporation Property Location: 600 Wabanaki Drive Legal Description: Part of Lot 33, Registrar's Compiled Plan 1525 Appearances: In Support: G. Keller D. Senior COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 95 MAY 15, 2007 1. Submission No.: B 2007-015 tCont'd) Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicant requests permission to give aright-of- way to the abutting property, to have a width on Wabanaki Drive of 10m (32.8'), by a depth of 88.6m (290.6'), and to have an area of 886 sq. m. (9,537.13 sq. ft.). The right-of-way will be used for a shared driveway. The Committee considered the report of the Development and Technical Services Department, dated May 7, 2007, advising the subject property is located at 600 Wabanaki Drive and is designated Heavy Industrial in the Municipal Plan. The subject lands are currently vacant and have no direct access onto Wabanaki Drive as it is not financially feasible to extend services, and accesses onto Wabanki are limited due to the significant traffic in the area. The subject property is designated Heavy Industrial and is zoned M4-Heavy Industrial. Both the Heavy Industrial designation and the M4 zone permit a range of industrial uses including manufacturing, and storage and distribution of good and services. Although the Industrial policies of the Municipal Plan are silent with respect to the use of industrial land for a union hall, the M-4 Zoning permits the use of Union Halls, subject to certain criteria including a minimum frontage of 15 metres. In June of 2006, a minor variance and consent were granted for the subject lands which resulted in the creation of a "P" shaped lot with a frontage of 6 metres rather that the 15 metres typically required in the M-4 zone. The severed lot had an area of 1.9 ha and retained a lot with an area of 3.4 ha. These lots were considered in keeping with the existing variety of lot sizes in the area and would offer prospective industries a choice. At the time of the creation of the lot for the Union Hall, Engineering Staff advised that individual servicing was available for the "P" shaped lot containing the Union hall, however there was uncertainty as to where the water connection should come from and as condition of the consent the applicant had to provide an easement over the severed lands for the provision of servicing. Typical engineering items such as service connection cost and boulevard works could be addressed through the site plan approval stage should any development of the severed lands be contemplated. The current application before the Committee is fora 10 metre wide easement (with an area of 886 square metres) over the "P" shaped lands in order to provide a shared driveway access to the formerly severed property. The Teachers Federation is intending to construct a new building and the lands will be subject to Site Plan Approval. Staff supports the request for an easement in favour of Part 1 on Reference Plan 58R-15535 for the purposes of providing a common driveway access. 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, both the severed and retained lands will conform to the Municipal Plan as well as the Zoning By-law, the lands will have access to a municipal road and are consistent with development in the area. The application conforms to the PPS and with respect to the PTG legislation, no employment lands are being converted, so the integrity of the employment lands has not been compromised. Based on the foregoing, Planning staff recommends that the application be approved subject to the conditions listed below. 1. That satisfactory arrangements be made with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and/or local improvement charges. 2. That the owner provide a digital file of the deposited reference plan(s) prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor in .dwg (AutoCad) or .dgn (Microstation) format, as well as one full size paper copy of the plan(s). The COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 96 MAY 15, 2007 1. Submission No.: B 2007-015 tCont'd) digital file must be submitted according to the City of Kitchener's Digital Design Standards to the satisfaction of the City's Mapping Technologist. 3. That the owner pay to the City of Kitchener acash-in-lieu of parkland dedication equal to (5% residential) or 2% (commercial/industrial) of the value of the lands or (the value of one hectare of land for each 300 dwelling units proposed for the severed lands). The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Planning, Housing and Community Services, dated May 7, 2007 advising they have no objection to this application. The Committee considered the report of the Grand River Conservation Authority, Resource Planner, dated May 2, 2007 advising that a portion of the retained parcel (600 Wabanaki Drive) lies within the Schneider Creek Floodplain and contains steep slopes. Consequently, the site is regulated by the Grand River Conservation Authority under Ontario Regulation 150/06, Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses. Any future development within the Regulation limit will require the prior issuance of a permit from the GRCA. Mr. Keller explained that the property at 610 Wabanaki Drive was going to have its own separate driveway; however, there is a terrain issue that would require them to construct a costly retaining wall. Now, 600 Wabanaki Drive is requesting permission to allow 610 Wabanaki Drive to have an easement as identified in this application. In discussion with staff it was determined that as this land is zoned M-4 Heavy Industrial, the parkland dedication requirement is to be 2%. Moved by Mr. A. Head Seconded by Mr. B. McColl That the application of CAW Local 1451 Building Corporation requesting permission to give an easement for a shared driveway over a parcel of land having a width on Wabanaki Drive of 10 m (32.8') by a depth of 88.6m (290.6') and having an area of 886 sq.m. (9,537.13 sq. ft.), to the abutting property at 610 Wabanaki Drive, on Part Lot 33, Registrar's Compiled Plan 1525, 600 Wabanaki Drive, Kitchener, Ontario, BE GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: 1. 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. 2. That the owner shall provide the Secretary-Treasurer with a digital file of the deposited reference plan(s) prepared by an Ontario Land Surveyor in .dwg (AutoCad) or .dgn (Microstation) format, as well as 2 full size paper copies of the plan(s). The digital file must be submitted according to the City of Kitchener's Digital Design Standards to the satisfaction of the City's Mapping Technologist. 3. That the owner shall pay to the City of Kitchener acash-in-lieu of parkland dedication equal to 2% of the value of the land to be severed. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. 2. The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 97 MAY 15, 2007 1. Submission No.: B 2007-015 tCont'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 May 15, 2009. Carried ADJOURNMENT On motion, the meeting adjourned at 10:35 a.m. Dated at the City of Kitchener this 15th day of May 2007. Dianne H. Gilchrist Secretary-Treasurer Committee of Adjustment