Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDTS-09-057 - Zone Change App ZC 08/23/G/KA - 921 Glasgow Street - 2117988 Ont Inc (Z Group)1 KITC~~R Devetopment& Technical Services REPORT Report To; Mayor and Members of Council Date ~f Meeting: April fi, X449 Submitted By: Alain Pinard, Interim Director of Planning X519-741-2319} Prepared By: Katie Anderl, Seniar Planner X519-741-298} Vllard~s}Involved. All Date of Report: April ~ ; 2949 Repo~k No: DTS o9-957 Subjects REgUEST FqR INFaRMAT14N RE. REFUSAL qF DTS 99-a36 921 GLASGgIIV STREET ZC08l231GIKA 2117988 gNTARIq INC. Z GRgUP RECOMMENDATION: For Information. BACKGROUND: 2117988 gntario Inc. ~Z Group} has submitted an application to change the zoning of 921 Glasgow Street from Residential Six Zone 4R-5} to Residential Seven Zone ~R-?"} with Special Regulation Provision 488R and Holding Provision 54H. In accordance with the Mixed Use Node designation, the owner has prepared a site specific Urban Design Brief to address compatibility between the subject site and neighbouring lands. Planning staff have recamrnended that the proposed zone change be approved and that the Urban Design Brief be adopted. At the Development and Technical Services meeting of March 30#~, 2999, the Committee voted unanimously to refuse the proposed zone change application, and directed staff to provide information v~rith respect to what a Residential Six `plus' zone, as a City Initiated Zone Change, might Look like in considering the concerns of neighbouring property owners. REPORT: Staff have considered whether a Residential Six Plus Zone would address the concerns expressed by neighbouring property owners. Specifically, these concerns revolve around height of buildings, density, traffic, location of the driveway entrance and preservation of the existing tree line. As a tool, zoning may be used to regulate use; massing, height, setbacks to buildings and driveways and density on a site -- to these ends special regulations may be added to a general zoning category. In order to achieve the development proposed by neighbouring property owners a new special regulation would be required. The R-5 zoning currently permits a range of low rise residential uses. including single detached dwellings, semi-detached dwellings, townhouses, and multiple dwellings up to three stories and residential care facilities having no more than nine residents. To achieve the R-6 `plus' proposal of the neighbouring property owners, which would not increase the existing densities, a Special Regulation would be needed to permit. a} residential care facilities with mare than 9 residents, and in accordance with the regulations for multiple dwellings; b} a maximum building height of 16.5 metres €approximately 5 storeys} on lands located on the western half o the property; and c} a minimum side yard setback from the eastern property line of about ~5 metres to buildings or driveways Ito encompass the entire stand of large trees}; These re ulations will generally limit the height of the buildings to 10.5 metres about 3 storeys}, 9 as is currently permitted, and will allow buildings located nearest the high_school to a height of 1 ~.5 metres about 5 storeys}, but would not allow more density than is currently permitted. Furthermore, the ~5 metre setback would not allow buildings or driveways to be Located within 25 metres of the eastern property line. This will ensure the driveway is located away from the residential units and increases the likelihood of tree preservation. However, a tree management lan would stilt be required in support of the Site Plan Applivatian, which may recommend that p trees in declining health be removed for safety reasons. Staff also recommend that a revised Design Brief, pursuant to the policies Mixed lase Node designation should be prepared in support of any future bylaw amendment. Staff note that it is an unusual step for Council tv initiate a rezoning that relates to a specific site in response to a development proposal. A site specific zone change is usually initiated by a property owner or another private interest and Council may wish to consider whether this is a precedent they wish to set. Typically, City initiated zone changes are used in instances including: applying or amending general regulations across the entire City, to rezone lands when it is in the interest of the City as a corporation, to rezone a number properties to a new zoning category when new designations are introduced, ar to bring lands into conformity with the t~ff'icial Plan and other policies. 1lVith respect to a preferred process to implement the neighbourhood's proposed zoning, staff note that zone change applications must proceed under the provisions of the Planning Act. First, staff suggest that the recommendation of DTS Committee to refuse the subject application be considered by Council. The decision to refuse the application may be appealed and referred to the Ontario Municipal Board. ~n such an appeal the Untario Municipal Board may allow the appeal and approve the proposed R-~ zoning, nay dismiss the appeal and confirm Council's refusal, or may amend the proposed by-law as the Board determines appropriate. Staff suggest that na action be taken on a City Initiated Zone Change until the appeal period has expired. Followin the a eal eriod and if no appeals are received, Council may then opt to direct staff g pp p to prepare a City Initiated zone change in accordance with the recommendations of the neighbouring property owners. The City initiated proposal will need to follow the required process pursuant to the regulations of the Planning Act, A report and proposed bylaw would be prepared by staff with respect to this matter and a public meeting would be scheduled far a Development and Technical Services Committee meeting where a recommendation may be made to Council. Any subsequent decision of Council is also subject to appeal. FINANCIAL ~~IPLICATIaNS: There are no direct financial implications associated with this report. However, should Council wish to proceed with a City Initiated site specific by-law there may be financial implications. These include costs associated with advertising and giving notice of the application, and the preparation of supporting documentation. ~a~ll~ululcATl~IVS: Staff have discussed the contemplated R-G `plus' zoning with the applicant. The applicant has indicated that while they have heard and considered the position of the residents, they do not agree with the recommended R-6 `plus' zoning on the lands. They feel that R-~ is the minimum required to meet the objectives of the Mixed Use Nade designation of the official Plan and other intensification policies including those contained in the l~itch~ner Growth Management Strategy. They feel that within the context of the designation and official Plan Policies, densities higher than .4 FSR would also be appropriate. The applicant reasons that while they have applied fvr strictly R-? zoning on the entirety of the lands, they have agreed to establish increased setbacks and reductions in height on a portion of the lands to address compatibility concerns. This will limit ,development, however will help to ensure compatibility. Further, they feel that the proposed Design Brief gives a high level of control to the City to ensure appropriate development through the Site Plan process. -~ K 'e Anderl, ,RPP Alan Pinard, MCIP, RPP enior Planner Interim Director of Planning