Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAdjustment - 2009-10-20COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FOR THE CITY OF KITCHENER MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING HELD OCTOBER 20, 2009 MEMBERS PRESENT: Messrs D. Cybalski, M. Hiscott and A. Head OFFICIALS PRESENT: Ms. J. von Westerholt, Senior Planner, Mr. J. Lewis, Traffic Technologist, Ms. D. Gilchrist, Secretary-Treasurer, Ms. L. Garovat, Administrative Clerk and Ms. D. Saunderson, Administrative Clerk Mr. D. Cybalski, Chair, called this meeting to order at 9:34 a.m. MINUTES Moved by Mr. A. Head Seconded by Mr. M. Hiscott That the minutes of the regular meeting of the Committee of Adjustment, of September 15, 2009, as mailed to the members, be accepted. Carried UNFINISHED BUSINESS CONSENT 1. Submission Nos.: B 2009-031 Applicant: Nicholas & Patricia Boyko Property Location: 433 Stirling Avenue South Legal Description: Part Lot 15 & 16, Plan 25 - and - Submission Nos.: B 2009-032 Applicant: Nicholas & Patricia Boyko Property Location: 437 Stirling Avenue South Leaal Description: Part Lot 16, Plan 25 Appearances: In Support: C. McNabb Contra: W. & R. Schork A. Primoscia Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicants are requesting permission to sever a parcel of land from the rear of 433 Stirling Avenue South and one from the rear of 437 Stirling Avenue South, both parcels are to be conveyed as lot additions to 274 Highland Road East. The parcel to be severed from 433 Stirling Avenue South will have a width of 11.965m (39.25'), a depth of 62.484m (205') and an area of 754.7 sq. m. (8,123.78 sq. ft.). The retained land will have a width of 11.965 m (39.25'), a depth of 45.696 m (149.92') and an area of 542 sq. m. (5,834.23 sq. ft.) and will continue to be used as residential. The parcel to be severed from 437 Stirling Avenue South will have a width of approximately 13.7m (44.94') by a depth of 62.484 m (205') and an area of 856 sq. m. (9,214.2 sq. ft.). The retained land will have a width of approximately 13.7 m (44.94') by COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 208 OCTOBER 20, 2009 1. Submission No. B 2009-031 & B 2009-032 (Cont'dl a depth of 45.696m (149.92') and will have an area of 626 sq. m. (6,738.42 sq. ft.) and will continue as a residential use. The Committee considered the report of the Development and Technical Services Department, dated September 9, 2009, advising that the subject properties are located at 433 and 437 Stirling Avenue South, near Highland Road East. 433 Stirling Avenue South contains a single detached dwelling and 437 Stirling Avenue South contains a duplex dwelling. The subject lands are currently designated Low Rise Residential in the City's Official Plan and are zoned Residential Six Zone (R-6). The subject consent applications propose to sever the rear of each property and convey the lands as lot additions to the abutting lands at 274 Highland Road East, which is currently developed with two low rise multiple residential buildings. The lands to be severed from 433 Stirling Avenue South have a width that ranges between 11.965 m and 12.201 m, a depth of 62.484 m and an area of 754.7 m2. The lands to be severed from 437 Stirling Avenue South have a width that ranges between 13.685 m and 13.716 m, a depth of 62.484 m and an area of 856.0 m2. The proposed consent was previously considered by the Committee of Adjustment in 2003. The consent was approved at that time; however, the timeline for fulfilling conditions lapsed before the conditions were fulfilled. Staff notes that in 2003 the properties appeared to have merged on title and the previous consent was processed with the assumption that the two houses were on one lot. However, today staff can confirm that the two parcels have not actually merged in title at the Registry Office, and while the City's records show identical ownership, this is not actually the case. The properties have not merged, and therefore, two consents applications are provided and should be considered together. With respect to the criteria for the subdivision of land listed in Section 51 (24) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, staff offer the following comments. The lands are zoned R-6 which permits a range of low rise residential uses. The uses of both parcels to be retained, as well as the lands to which the lot additions will be conveyed, conform to the existing designation and zoning regulations. The lands to be severed and conveyed to 247 Highland Road East could facilitate additional infill with the current R-6 zoning. A development proposal for these lands has not been received, and staff notes that any future development will require site plan approval. The dimensions and shapes of the resulting lots (both retained lands and the lands to which the severed portions will be conveyed) are appropriate and will be compatible in size with the lots in the surrounding area. Staff have been informed by the applicant that the proposed lot line between the severed and retained lands has been located so that large trees in the rear yards of both retained parcels can be maintained. As the proposed consent does not directly facilitate any development, a tree management plan is not required at this time. Staff notes that should the future owner of the lands to be conveyed wish to pursue development, a tree management plan will likely be a requirement of the site plan approval. The dimensions of 247 Highland Road East, to which the severed lands will be conveyed, are currently irregular and will continue to be irregular; however, are considered suitable for future residential uses. With respect to access and availability of services, each of the retained parcels front onto established public streets and have adequate means of access, and the lands are currently serviced with independent and adequate service connections to municipal services. The lands to be severed will be added to 247 Highland Road East and access and services will be available. Staff are of the opinion that the proposed consent is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement issued under subsection 3(1) of the Planning Act, and conforms to or does not conflict with the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, and conforms to the City's Official Plan and Zoning By-law regulations. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 209 OCTOBER 20, 2009 1. Submission No. B 2009-031 & B 2009-032 (Cont'dl The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo, Planning, Housing & Community Services, dated September 8, 2009, in which they advise that they have no objections to this application. Mr. Schork advised the Committee that his only concern with this application is the property line between 433 Stirling Ave South and 429 Stirling Ave South. A surveyor has been out marking property lines and some of the marking stakes are in the rear yard of his mothers' property. He noted that he has a survey of his mothers' property and wants clarification of the property line because the one that was submitted with the application does not match the one that he has. Mr. McNabb indicated that his company has been interested in purchasing this land for four years now. An application was brought forward to the Committee in 2003 and approved, funding fell through and the conditions lapsed. He now has funding approval for the project and is prepared to work with the neighbours to remedy any possible concerns. He is aware that surveyors have gone out and placed stakes to define the property lines and an extensive survey has been prepared. Further discussions were had regarding the clarification of property lines and the accuracy of the neighbour's survey compared to the survey provided with the application. The Chair advised Mr. Schork that his best option would be to speak with ACI Surveying to clarify the surveying process and the indentified property lines to clear up any confusions. Mr. Primoscia advised that he has no objections to this application. The only request that he has is that the applicant install a fence between his property at 296 Highland Road East and the property to be developed at 274 Highland Road East. There is presently a gate between the two properties; however, it is not sufficient in denying people access between the properties. In response to questions both Mr. McNabb and staff advised that a fence would be a condition of approval in the site plan process, as the proposed development is residential and the neighbouring property is zoned commercial. Submission No. B. 2009-031 Moved by Mr. A. Head Seconded by Mr. M. Hiscott That the application of Nicholas & Patricia Boyko requesting permission to convey a parcel of land having a width of 11.965m (39.25'), a depth of 62.484m (205') and an area of 754.7 sq. m. (8,123.78 sq. ft.), on Part Lots 15 & 16, Plan 25, 433 Stirling Avenue South, Kitchener, Ontario, BE GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That should either the conditions of approval for the consent granted for application B2009-032 (for 437 Stirling Avenue South) fail to be fulfilled or should the consent lapse, both in accordance with the timeframes specified under section 53 of the Planning Act, application B2009-031 for 433 Stirling Avenue South may not proceed to registration and this consent shall also be considered lapsed as provided for under subsection 53 (43) of the Planning Act. 2. 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. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 210 OCTOBER 20, 2009 1. Submission No. B 2009-031 & B 2009-032 (Cont'dl 3. 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 shall be submitted according to the City of Kitchener's Digital Submission Standards to the satisfaction of the City's Mapping Technologist. 4. That the Severance Deed associated with application B2009-031 may only be registered following the registration of the Severance Deed associated with application B2009-032 (437 Stirling Avenue South) and that the lands to be severed from 433 Stirling Avenue South shall be added to the abutting lands at 274 Highland Road East (together with the severed lands from 437 Stirling Avenue South) and that title shall be taken into identical ownership as the abutting lands. The deed for endorsement shall include that any subsequent conveyance of the parcel to be severed shall comply with Sections 50(3) and/or (5) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended. 5. That the owner's Solicitor shall provide the City Solicitor with a Solicitor's Undertaking to register an Application to Consolidate Parcels immediately following the registration of the Severance Deeds and prior to any new applicable mortgages, and to provide a copy of the registered Application Consolidation Parcels to the City Solicitor within a reasonable time following registration. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. 2. The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. 3. The use of the land in the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. 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 October 20, 2011. Carried Submission No. B. 2009-032 Moved by Mr. A. Head Seconded by Mr. M. Hiscott That the application of Nicholas & Patricia Boyko requesting permission to convey a parcel of land having a width of approximately 13.7m (44.94') by a depth of 62.484 m (205') and an area of 856 sq. m. (9,214.2 sq. ft.), on Part Lot 16, Plan 25, 437 Stirling Avenue South, Kitchener, Ontario, BE GRANTED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owner shall make satisfactory arrangements with the City of Kitchener for the payment of any outstanding municipal property taxes and or local improvement charges. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 211 OCTOBER 20, 2009 1. Submission No. B 2009-031 & B 2009-032 (Cont'dl 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 shall be submitted according to the City of Kitchener's Digital Submission Standards to the satisfaction of the City's Mapping Technologist. 3. That the lands to be severed from 437 Stirling Avenue South shall be added to the abutting lands at 274 Highland Road East and that title shall be taken in identical ownership as the abutting lands. The deed for endorsement shall include that any subsequent conveyance of the parcel to be severed shall comply with Sections 50(3) and/or (5) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended. 4. That the owner's Solicitor shall provide the City Solicitor with a Solicitor's Undertaking to register an Application to Consolidate Parcels immediately following the registration of the Severance Deeds and prior to any new applicable mortgages, and to provide a copy of the registered Application Consolidation Parcels to the City Solicitor within a reasonable time following registration. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. A plan of subdivision is not necessary for the proper and orderly development of the municipality. 2. The requirements of the Zoning By-law are being maintained on the severed lands and the retained lands. 3. The use of the land in the application conforms to the City of Kitchener Municipal Plan and the Regional Official Policies Plan. 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 October 20, 2011. Carried The meeting recessed at 9:40 a.m. and reconvened at 10:06 a.m. with the following members present: Messrs. D. Cybalski, M. Hiscott and A. Head NEW BUSINESS MINOR VARIANCE 1. Submission Nos.: A 2009-061 Applicant: Jane Hossfeld & Connie Wolfe Property Location: 114 Lancaster Street West Legal Description: Part Lot 12, Plan 66 Appearances: In Support: J. Hossfeld D. Wolfe Contra: None Written Submissions: None COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 212 OCTOBER 20, 2009 1. Submission No. A 2009-061 (Cont'dl The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to construct a second storey addition, above the existing one storey rear addition, to have a 1 m (3.82') left side yard rather than the required 1.2 m (3.93') side yard. The Committee considered the report of the Development and Technical Services Department, dated October 9, 2009, advising that the subject property is located at 114 Lancaster Street West, north of Wellington Street North. It is developed with a duplex dwelling unit and has a shared driveway with the adjacent property at 118 Lancaster Street West with a mutual access agreement registered on title for both properties as shown on an existing survey plan in the City's files. The property is zoned Residential Seven (R-7) in the Zoning By-law and is designated Low Density Multiple Residential in the Official Plan. Relief is being sought from Section 41.2.2 of the Zoning By-law to allow a side yard set back of 1.0 metres where a minimum of 1.2 metres is required for a duplex dwelling unit within an R-7 zone to allow a second storey addition above an existing single storey portion of the existing building. 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 Official Plan. The intent of this designation is to maintain the overall low density, low rise residential character of the neighbourhood while allowing for some redevelopment of the area. The proposed variance will legalize the proposed addition while maintaining the intent of the Official Plan. The variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law as the intent of the 1.2 metres minimum side yard set back is to allow for privacy and separation of the subject and abutting property. The encroachment of the duplex dwelling into the required side yard setback is minimal and provides adequate separation between the buildings on abutting properties. The variance is considered minor as there is adequate separation from the subject property and the abutting residential property and as such will likely have minimal impact to adjacent lands. The variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land as the addition would be consistent with the established development within the neighbourhood and no adverse impacts are anticipated as a result of the variance. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo Transportation Planner, dated October 13, 2009, advising that they have no concerns with this application. The Chair referred to the comments provided by the City Transportation Division. Mr. Wolfe advised that there was already a mutual agreement registered on title and he can provide a copy to the City. He noted that he was not opposed to making it a condition for approval. Moved by Mr. M. Hiscott Seconded by Mr. A. Head That the application of Jane Hossfeld & Connie Wolfe requesting permission to construct a second storey addition, above the existing one storey rear addition, to have a 1 m (3.82') left side yard rather than the required 1.2 m (3.93') side yard, Part Lot 12, Plan 66, 114 Lancaster Street West, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 213 OCTOBER 20, 2009 1. Submission No. A 2009-061 (Cont'dl 1. That the owners shall provide Transportation Planning staff with a copy of the mutual access agreement with the abutting property that has been registered on title. 2. That the owners shall obtain a building permit from the City's Building Division prior to constructing the addition. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance requested in this application is minor in nature. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Official Plan is being maintained on the subject property. Carried 2. Submission Nos.: A 2009-062 Applicant: Mirko & Brankica Sarcevic Property Location: 31 Sophia Crescent Legal Description: Lot 144, Registered Plan 58M-374 Appearances: In Support: M. & B. Sarcevic Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting legalization of a covered patio (outdoor kitchen) having a rear yard of 5.85 m (19.19') rather than the required 7.5m (24.6'). The Committee considered the report of the Development and Technical Services Department, dated October 13, 2009, advising that the subject property is located at 31 Sophia Crescent, which is located in a newer subdivision in the southwest area of Kitchener, near the intersection of Fischer Hallman Road and Huron Road. The property has approximately 9.144 metres of frontage, an area of approximately 292 square metres, and is developed with a single detached dwelling. It is zoned Residential Six (R-6) and has an Official Plan designation of Low Rise Residential. Relief is being sought from Section 40.2 of the Zoning Bylaw where the applicant is requesting a minor variance to reduce the required minimum rear yard setback from 7.5 metres to 5.85 metres to allow for the construction of a covered outdoor kitchen in the required rear yard. 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 Official Plan. The Low Rise Residential designation recognizes the existing scale of residential development and allows for a variety of low density residential uses. The proposed development at 31 Sophia Crescent is consistent with the Low Rise Residential designation. The variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law as the purpose of a 7.5 metres rear yard setback is to provide an outdoor amenity space as well as adequate separation COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 214 OCTOBER 20, 2009 2. Submission No. A 2009-062 (Cont'dl from neighbouring properties. The applicant has provided a sworn statement from the immediately adjacent neighbours which states that they are in agreement with the proposed variance. It is staff's opinion that a setback of 5.85 metres would continue to allow outdoor amenity space. The outdoor kitchen will also provide outdoor living amenity space as well. The variance is considered minor as there is adequate separation from the proposed addition to abutting residential properties and as such will likely have minimal impact to adjacent lands. The variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land as the proposed covered patio in the rear yard will allow for an outdoor kitchen which will continue to serve as amenity space for the property owners. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo Transportation Planner, dated October 13, 2009, advising that they have no concerns with this application. Moved by Mr. M. Hiscott Seconded by Mr. A. Head That the application of Mirko & Brankica Sarcevic requesting legalization of a covered patio (outdoor kitchen) having a rear yard of 5.85 m (19.19') rather than the required 7.5m (24.6'), on Lot 144, Registered Plan 58M-374, 31 Sophia Crescent, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance requested in this application is minor in nature. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Official Plan is being maintained on the subject property. Carried 3. Submission Nos.: Applicant: Property Location: Legal Description: Appearances: In Support: A 2009-063 Access Self Storage Inc. 50 Ottawa Street South, Unit C1 Lots 1-11, Plan 262, Part Lot 486, Streets & Lanes and Part Park Lot 25, Plan 404, being Parts 2-5 & 7, Reference Plan 58R-2633 B. Martin Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to use 30% of the floor area of the building [178.67 sq. m. (584 sq. ft.)] for accessory retail sales rather than the permitted 25% [148.89 sq. m. (488.5 sq. ft.)]. The Committee considered the report of the Development and Technical Services Department, dated October 9, 2009, advising that the subject property is located at 50 Ottawa Street South at the southeast corner of Charles Street East and Ottawa Street South. The land is currently designated General Industrial in the Mill Courtland COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 215 OCTOBER 20, 2009 3. Submission No. A 2009-063 (Cont'dl Woodside Park Secondary Plan. The property is zoned General Industrial Zone (M-2), with Special Use Provision 159U. Special Use Provision 159 stipulates that the sale and rental of motor vehicles and major recreational equipment as an accessory use to a service and repair shop is prohibited on site. A site inspection was conducted on September 28, 2009. The subject building is currently under renovation. The subject unit is currently vacant; however, the owners propose to establish a manufacturing use (bakery) with an accessory retail area where customers may purchase goods. The subject unit has a total area of about 181.5 m2. The accessory retail component of the use will be located in the front corner of the building. The applicant is requesting a minor variance to allow for 30% (54.46 mz) of the subject unit to be used as accessory retail (as shown on the sketch attached to the application) instead of 25% (45.38 mz) as currently permitted. 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 property is designated "General Industrial" in the Official Plan in the Mill Courtland- Woodside Park Secondary Plan. Official Plan policy 13.4.3(1) indicates that the designation's primary objective is intended to provide for the continued function of industrial operations located within the General Industrial designation and recognizes their importance in terms of employment opportunities. In view of the secondary plan, the policy in section 13.4.3(1) states, "Unless specifically prohibited in the Plan, complementary uses which do not interfere with nor are detrimental to the development of industrial operation are permitted in all General Industrial areas". Staff are of the opinion that introducing a slightly larger accessory retail component to the subject unit will not interfere with other general industrial uses which may locate on the subject lands or nearby. Therefore the requested variance meets the intent of the Official Plan. The intent of the General Industrial Zone in the Zoning By-law is to permit retail uses where they are accessory to other permitted industrial uses. The applicant's intent is to allow for a small increase in the permitted size of the accessory retail use within the subject unit. The requested increase to 30% of the gross floor area of the subject unit represents 54.46 m2, whereas the permitted 25% represents 45.38 mz. This is an increase of only 9.1 mz. The entire building in total is approximately 20,000 m2. This is a very small increase considering the overall scope and size of the building. Staff note that parking will need to be provided for the retail use in accordance with the retail parking regulations. These spaces can be accommodated in the existing parking lot, and staff will rely on the issuance of an Occupancy Permit in this regard. The proposed variance can be considered minor in nature and appropriate for the development and use of the lands. Staff note that the majority of the building will continue to be used for industrial manufacturing and warehousing uses. Given the nature of the retail operation it will not overwhelm the site. Furthermore, the proposed bakery will be an amenity to other employees working at the site and to the neighbourhood in general. Staff are of the opinion that this variance is minor in nature and appropriate for the redevelopment of subject lands. Transportation Planning staff have noted that they have no concerns subject to Site Plan Review. Planning Staff have determined that the building does not require Site Plan Approval at this time; however, should the owner wish to reorient the parking area, or make a zone change application to allow additional uses on the lands, site plan approval would be required. It should be noted that the increase in accessory retail space to 30% should only be considered for the subject unit. Therefore, the variance should be limited to 30% of the gross floor area of the unit as shown on the sketch submitted by the applicant (being COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 216 OCTOBER 20, 2009 3. Submission No. A 2009-063 (Cont'd 54.26 mz) and only for the bakery use. Furthermore, staff note that a `restaurant' use is not permitted under the existing designation and zoning by-law regulations. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo Transportation Planner, dated October 13, 2009, advising that a road allowance widening is required from Charles Street and a 10 foot widening is required from Ottawa Street to comply with the Region's Official Plan. In addition, a 50 foot daylight triangle is required at the intersection of Charles Street and Ottawa Street. The site is next to a preferred Rapid Transit (RT) route on both Ottawa Street and Charles Street in addition to a station location. Additional road allowance widening may be required above the Official Plan requirements to accommodate the RT route and station. The acquisition of these road allowances, widenings and daylight triangle may not be appropriate under this application; however, the applicant must be made aware that these widenings would be required under any future applications on this property. These road widenings have significant impact on the parking layout on the site and will result in the elimination of parking spaces along Ottawa Street flanking in vicinity of the proposed bakery. Any future application on this property will also require modifications/consolidation to the existing access configurations on both Ottawa Street and Charles Street. He also advised that any development on the subject lands is subject to provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-Law 99-038 or any successor thereof and may require the payment of Regional Development Charges for this development (s) prior to the issuance of a building permit. The Chair advised the applicant of the comments submitted by the Region Transportation Division regarding any future development applications being subject to Regional Development charges and road widening allowances. The Chair then questioned staff regarding their recommended approval and whether the unit number should be included in the Committees decision. Ms. von Westerholt advised that staff's recommendation indicated approval of an accessory retail use to occupy a maximum of 30% of the gross floor area of the subject unit, (i.e. 54.26 m2) which does take into account the actual unit on site. Mr. Head questioned staff about the limitation of the approval, in many cases bakeries of this nature expand to create small sandwich shops. In response Ms. von Westerholt advised that they are limited by the zoning on the property. The zoning is industrial, not commercial, so they are permitted to have a bakery but they are not permitted to have a restaurant type use. Moved by Mr. A. Head Seconded by Mr. M. Hiscott That the application of Access Self Storage Inc. requesting permission to use 30% of the floor area of Unit C1 in the building [178.67 sq. m. (584 sq. ft.)] for accessory retail sales rather than the permitted 25% [148.89 sq. m. (488.5 sq. ft.)], on Lots 1-11, Plan 262, Part Lot 486, Streets & Lanes and Part Park Lot 25, Plan 404, being Parts 2-5 & 7, Reference Plan 58R-2633 , 50 Ottawa Street South, Unit C1, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following condition: 1. That the variance approved in this application shall apply to accessory retail for a bakery only, and only for the unit shown in the plan submitted with this application. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance requested in this application is minor in nature. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 217 OCTOBER 20, 2009 3. Submission No. A 2009-063 (Cont'dl 3. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Official Plan is being maintained on the subject property. Carried 4. Submission Nos.: A 2009-065 Applicant: Jeffery & Sonya Knipfel Property Location: 272 Woolwich Street Legal Description: Part Lot 66, German Company Tract, being Part 1, Reference Plan 58R-451 Appearances: In Support: G. Auer J. Knipfel Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting legalization of an existing single family dwelling (under construction) with a northerly side yard of 3.88m (12.72`) rather than the required 10 m (32.8`). The Committee considered the report of the Development and Technical Services Department, dated October 9, 2009, advising that the subject property is located on the east side of Woolwich Street, south of Hawkswood Drive and has approximately 30.8 metres of frontage and an area of approximately 0.19 hectares. The subject property is one of a stretch of five properties on Woolwich Street between Hawkswood Drive and Falconridge Drive that contain single detached dwellings. The property is designated as Low Rise Residential in the Official Plan and is zoned Agricultural (A-1 ). The previous dwelling that occupied the lot and the lot itself were considered to be legal non-conforming since they do not comply with Zoning By-law regulations for minimum lot area, minimum lot width, and minimum side yard setbacks. The applicant sought and received permission for minor variances for these deficiencies in January 2009; however, during construction of the new dwelling on the property it was discovered that the north side yard setback was built with a setback of 3.88 metres. The minor variance received permitted this sideyard to be a minimum of 4.0 metres, and as such, a new variance was deemed to be required to recognize the actual setback of the building. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a minimum side yard setback of 3.88 metres, whereas a minimum side yard setback of 7.5 metres is required. It should be noted that the Woolwich Street right-of-way is owned by the City of Waterloo and that Waterloo provides water service to the subject property. The City of Waterloo was circulated on this application and comments received by Clerk's Department, if any, should be considered prior to making a decision. With regards to the variance requested, Planning staff offer the following comments 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. The intent of the Low Rise Residential designation is to accommodate a full range of housing types at a low overall intensity of use. The subject variance would allow development that conforms to this designation. In addition, the Official Plan states that the City shall support and attempt to accommodate residents who wish to adapt their housing needs that change over time. Part of the reason for the proposed redevelopment is to construct a dwelling that meets the needs of the owners' son who has cerebral palsy and requires attendant care and has special vehicle transportation COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 218 OCTOBER 20, 2009 4. Submission No. A 2009-065 (Cont'dl needs. As such, staff considers this proposal to meet the intent of the Official Plan designation. The intent of the minimum setback is to ensure adequate separation between property lines and buildings to allow enough space for access and maintenance. As discussed in the previous report, the agricultural zoning on this property is remnant from a time before the area transitioned to primarily residential uses. The agricultural zoning requirements require greater setbacks and parcel sizes typical with rural residential. Development; whereas, the variances required would allow development with setbacks more in keeping with what is typically seen in a residential area. Furthermore, the variance being requested is only 0.12 metres greater than the variance sought and received by the applicant in January 2009. Staff are of the opinion that the remaining setback of 3.88 metres should be sufficient to allow adequate access to that facade of the building, as well as to the rear of the property, to allow for the maintenance of the dwelling and the property. Therefore, staff feels that the intent of the Zoning By-law would be maintained. Given the arguments made when this property was initially considered and approved in January, and the fact that an additional decrease only 0.12 metres (4 inches) in the proposed setback from what was considered in January is now being brought forward, staff considers the variance to be minor in nature. The variance can be considered desirable for the appropriate development and use of the subject lands because it allows for the development of a home that meets the specific requirements of a family accommodating the special needs of an individual, allowing that family to remain in their community. The Committee had previously approved a reduction in the minimum side yard setback, and the variance before the Committee today makes what is, in staff's opinion, a minor modification to further reduce that setback to accommodate the foundation being constructed 0.12 metres (4 inches) closer to the property line than previously permitted. As noted in the previous staff report, the plan submitted with the initial application shows an existing gravel driveway "to be abandoned". In the revised plans submitted with this application, a proposed driveway location has been drawn in on the north side of the front yard. To be consistent with the previous staff recommendation and in accordance with the Zoning By-law regulation permitting only one driveway for such a lot, staff recommends that as a condition of approval, the old driveway on the south end of the lot be formally closed with the gravel being removed and the land being resodded. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo Transportation Planner, dated October 13, 2009, advising that they have no concerns with this application. Moved by Mr. M. Hiscott Seconded by Mr. A. Head That the application of Jeffery & Sonya Knipfel requesting legalization of an existing single family dwelling (under construction) with a northerly side yard of 3.88m (12.72`) rather than the required 10 m (32.8`), on Part Lot 66, German Company Tract, being Part 1, Reference Plan 58R-451, 272 Woolwich Street, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following condition: 1. That the existing driveway toward the south side lot line of the property shall be closed, and that the gravel shall be removed; and further, that this land be re- sodded, within six months of occupancy of the proposed new dwelling, or by July 30j" of the same year, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance requested in this application is minor in nature. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 219 OCTOBER 20, 2009 4. Submission No. A 2009-065 (Cont'dl 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 Official Plan is being maintained on the subject property. Carried 5. Submission Nos.: A 2009-066 Applicant: Arnalo & Helenda Candieiro Property Location: 2 Peach Blossom Crescent Legal Description: Lot 13, Registered Plan 58M-132 Appearances: In Support: A. & H. Candieiro Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting legalization of an existing covered deck having a rear yard of 4.6 m (15.1 `) rather than the required 7.5 m (24.6'). The Committee considered the report of the Development and Technical Services Department, dated October 14, 2009, advising that the subject property is a corner lot located on 2 Peach Blossom Crescent at David Bergey Drive and is developed with a single detached dwelling. The property is zoned Residential Six (R-6) in the Zoning By- law and has an Official Plan designation of Low Rise Residential. Relief is being sought from Section 37.2.1 of the Zoning By-law 85-1 where the applicant is requesting a minor variance to reduce the minimum rear yard setback from 7.5 metres to 4.6 metres to legalize an existing deck with roof structure. Transportation Planning staff have reviewed the application and advise that the fence is within the 4.57m Driveway Visibility Triangle (DVT) at the north-east corner of the property. Therefore the applicant will be required to realign the fence in the north east corner of the property so that it no longer lies within the 4.57m DVT. 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 regarding the existing deck with roof structure: 1. The variance meets the intent of the Official Plan. The intent of this designation is to accommodate a full range of housing to achieve an overall low density. The proposed variance will legalize the existing deck, while maintaining the low density character of the property. 2. The variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law as the purpose of a 7.5 metres rear yard setback is to provide an outdoor amenity space as well adequate separation from neighbouring properties. It is staff's opinion that a setback of the existing deck at 4.6 metres would continue to allow outdoor amenity space to be provided and the impact on neighbouring properties is minimal. 3. The variance is considered minor as there is adequate separation from the existing deck to abutting residential properties and as such will likely have minimal impact to adjacent lands. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 220 OCTOBER 20, 2009 5. Submission No. A 2009-066 (Cont'dl 4. The variance is appropriate for the development and use of the land as the deck with roof structure located in the rear of the lot already exists and would not have any adverse impacts as a result of this variance. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo Transportation Planner, dated October 13, 2009, advising that they have no concerns with this application. Ms. Von Westerholt noted that staff's only concern is the portion of the fence that is located within the drive way visibility triangle. Mr. Candieiro indicated that the fence has already been removed from the DVT and he can provide photos if required. Moved by Mr. A. Head Seconded by Mr. M. Hiscott That the application of Arnalo & Helenda Candieiro requesting legalization of an existing covered deck having a rear yard of 4.6 m (15.1 `) rather than the required 7.5 m (24.6'), on Lot 13, Registered Plan 58M-132, 2 Peach Blossom Crescent, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the owners shall obtain building permit application #09 114621 from the City of Kitchener Building Division for the new roof structure. 2. That the owners shall re-align the fence in the north east corner of the property so that it no longer lies within the 4.56m Driveway Visibility Triangle, by June 2010. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance requested in this application is minor in nature. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Official Plan is being maintained on the subject property. Carried 6. Submission Nos.: Applicant: Property Location: Legal Description: Appearances: In Support: A 2009-067 Karoly & Ilonna Deak 108 Weber Street West Part Lots 1 to 5, Plan 389, being Parts 1 to 5, Reference Plan 58R-6324 E. Deak Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to locate a personal service use in a building that does not contain 20 units or more, or have a minimum floor area of 4,700 sq. m. (50,592 sq. ft.); permission for the personal service use to occupy 28% [28.6 sq. m. (307.85 sq. ft.)] of the gross floor area of the building rather than the permitted maximum of 20% [20.418 sq. m. (219.78 sq. ft.)]; and, legalization of the existing building having a setback from Weber Street of Om rather than the required 3m (9.84'). COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 221 OCTOBER 20, 2009 6. Submission No. A 2009-067 (Cont'dl The Committee considered the report of the Development and Technical Services Department, dated October 9, 2009, advising that the subject property is located on the north side of Weber Street West between Victoria and Water Streets. The property contains two buildings: 110 Weber Street West which is a legal non-conforming single family dwelling and 108 Weber Street West which is proposed to be used as a personal service use (hair salon) and one dwelling unit. The property has an Official Plan designation of Mixed Use Corridor and is zoned Commercial Residential Three (CR-3) in the Zoning By-law. The adjacent neighbourhood consists primarily of commercial uses and some residential uses. The applicant is requesting permission to locate a personal service use in a building that does not contain 20 units or more, or have a minimum floor area of 4,700 sq.m.; permission for the personal service use to occupy 28% (28.6 sq.m.) of the gross floor area of the building rather than the permitted maximum of 20% (20.4 sq.m); and, legalization of the existing building having a setback from Weber Street of 0 m rather than the required 3 m. 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. In regards to the variances for the personal service use: The variance meets the intent of the Official Plan. The Mixed Use Corridor designation permits a broad range of commercial uses and is primarily intended to serve the adjacent residential neighbourhoods and employment areas and to allow for intensive, transit supported development. The hair salon is a commercial use that serves the neighbourhood and is easily accessible to transit which helps support intensive development. The variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. A personal service use is permitted provided it is located in a large building which would serve the needs of the residents or workers of the building and surrounding areas. The subject building has existed for some time and has been used as a legal non-conforming duplex in the past. Converting one of the units from a residential dwelling to a commercial use is in keeping with the intent of the Commercial Residential zones to have mixed uses on a property. Staff notes that the area is subject to aCity-initiated zone change application to rezone the property to a Mixed Use Zone which would permit personal service use without the regulations currently found in the present CR zone. The variance can be considered minor. The personal service use serves the needs of the mixed commercial residential uses surrounding the property. In regards to the variance to legalize the existing building setback: The variance meets the intent of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law. The setback requirements encourage pedestrian oriented and low rise development along transit supported areas. In addition the proposed Mixed Use zoning categories encourage orienting the building mass towards the street with parking towards the rear yard. The subject building has existed for over 50 years and its location has not been a concern to the surrounding streetscape to date. The variance is appropriate for the development of the subject land as well as the surrounding streetscape. As noted earlier, the use of the building for a business and a dwelling unit is both compatible with the surrounding low rise streetscape and the reduced setback encourages pedestrian and transit oriented movement. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo Transportation Planner, dated October 13, 2009, advising that they have no concerns with this application. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 222 OCTOBER 20, 2009 6. Submission No. A 2009-067 (Cont'dl Moved by Mr. A. Head Seconded by Mr. M. Hiscott That the application of Karoly & Ilonna Deak requesting permission to locate a personal service use in a building that does not contain 20 units or more, or have a minimum floor area of 4,700 sq. m. (50,592 sq. ft.); permission for the personal service use to occupy 28% [28.6 sq. m. (307.85 sq. ft.)] of the gross floor area of the building rather than the permitted maximum of 20% [20.418 sq. m. (219.78 sq. ft.)]; and, legalization of the existing building having a setback from Weber Street of Om rather than the required 3m (9.84'), on Part Lots 1 to 5, Plan 389, being Parts 1 to 5, Reference Plan 58R-6324, 108 Weber Street West, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following condition: 1. That the owner shall obtain and Occupancy Permit from the City's Planning Division for the personal service use. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance requested in this application is minor in nature. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Official Plan is being maintained on the subject property. Carried 7. Submission Nos.: A 2009-069 Applicant: Family and Children Services Property Location: 300 Frederick Street Legal Description: Part Lot 10, Plan 111 Appearances: In Support: V. Pharoah Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission for stairs at an emergency exit to be located 0.08 m (0.26`) from the interior side lot line rather than the required 0.75 m (2.46`). The Committee considered the report of the Development and Technical Services Department, dated October 7, 2009, advising that the subject property is located at the north-west corner of Frederick and Locust Streets. The property contains a single family dwelling used by Family and Children Services as a residential care facility (group home). The property has an Official Plan designation of Low Density Commercial Residential in the Central Frederick Neighbourhood Secondary Plan and is zoned Commercial Residential One (CR-1) with special regulations 114R and 128U. The adjacent neighourhood consists primarily of local commercial and residential uses along Frederick Street, with primarily residential uses along Locust Street and Merner Avenue. The applicant is requesting a minor variance to permit stairs, beside an interior side lot line, to have a 0.08 metre side yard setback rather than the required minimum 0.75 metre. It is noted that the existing steps do not comply and have never been legalized. The applicant has confirmed that he is proposing to remove the existing emergency COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 223 OCTOBER 20, 2009 7. Submission No. A 2009-069 (Cont'dl stairs and rebuild them and notes that there is no other location to provide the inhabitants on the second and third floor access to emergency exits. 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 Official Plan for the following reasons. The variance does not propose to alter the usability of the existing use of the single detached dwelling, and the stairs will support the residential care facility operating on the site. Staff notes that the proposed variance meets the intent of the Official Plan as it does not affect the subject property's compliance to its designation as Low Density Commercial Residential. The variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The intent of the 0.75 metre setback is to allow for maintenance of the building and the steps without the owner having to encroach onto the neighbouring property. It is noted that the open construction of the stairs permits for maintenance within the subject property lines and the applicant must ensure that steps can be maintained on their own property. As well, the existing emergency stairs have existed for some time without concerns from the neighbouring property. The variance can be considered minor. The new stairs will be built in the same location as the existing stairs which have functioned for some time and provided emergency access for the inhabitants of the dwelling. As noted above, the open construction of the stairs will still provide for access to maintain both the stairs and the building. The application is appropriate for the development of the subject land as well as the surrounding streetscape. Given that the effects on the streetscape will be minor, the recognition the existing emergency exit steps have not been a concern to date, and the fact that maintenance can still be maintained on the property, the application can be considered appropriate. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo Transportation Planner, dated October 13, 2009, advising that they have no concerns with this application. Moved by Mr. M. Hiscott Seconded by Mr. A. Head That the application of Family and Children Services requesting permission for stairs at an emergency exit to be located 0.08 m (0.26`) from the interior side lot line rather than the required 0.75 m (2.46`), on Part Lot 10, Plan 111, 300 Frederick Street, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following condition: 1. That the owner shall obtain a building permit for the new emergency stairs from the City's Building Divison. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance requested in this application is minor in nature. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Official Plan is being maintained on the subject property. Carried COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTI 8. Submission Nos.: Applicant: Property Location: Legal Description: Appearances: In Support: Contra: VIENT 224 OCTOBER 20, 2009 A 2009-070 Davood Khosrowshahian 588 Queen Street South Part Lot 71, Subdivision Lot 17, German Company Tract D. Khosrowshahian None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to construct a building containing 25 residential units with retail on the ground floor, to have a front yard set back of 1.5 m (4.92`) rather than the required 3 m (9.84'), after the required road widening has been given to the Region of Waterloo. The Committee considered the report of the Development and Technical Services Department, dated October 9, 2009, advising that the subject property is located on the southeast corner of Queen Street South and the Iron Horse trail, between Schneider Avenue and Homewood Avenue. The land is currently designated as Mixed Use Corridor in the Official Plan and is in the Victoria Park Neighbourhood Plan. The subject lands are zoned Commercial Residential Zone Two (CR-2) with Special Regulation Provision 450R and 53H. The property currently contains a gas station and auto repair garage. The owner is planning to redevelop the lands with a multiple residential building. Site Plan Application was made in 2007 for the multiple residential building and staff are in general support of the application; however, it was put on hold for a variety of reasons and during this time the Region has completed the road widening. Had the site plan been approved prior to the widening being taken, the setback would continue to be legal under the zoning by- law; however, because Site Plan approval has not yet been granted, a variance is required so that the site plan is in accordance with the zoning. Therefore, this proposal is exactly the same as that generally supported in 2007; however, the location of the road has been changed, resulting in a deficient front yard setback. The applicant is requesting the following minor variance to permit a 1.5 metre front yard setback. Zoning By-law 85-1 requires a minimum 3.0 metre setback (Section 45.6). 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 Official Plan for the following reasons. The intent of the Mixed Use Corridor designation is to encourage a mix of uses and to establish an urban streetscape along corridors in the central city. Overtime, it is intended that Mixed Use Corridors shall intensify and provide a balanced distribution of commercial, multiple residential and institutional uses. The future multiple residential use is permitted and the proposed variance is in keeping with an urban streetscape. Therefore the intent of the Official Plan is maintained. The variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law for the following reasons. The City is in the process of implementing the Official Plan Designation of Mixed-Use Corridor by implementing new zoning. These zones have already been created as Low Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU1), Medium Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU2) and High Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU-3) and will be applied to all lands that have a Mixed Use Corridor designation. Each of these zones allows a minimum front yard setback of 1.5 metre which is consistent with the proposed variance. The proposed variance will allow the owner to proceed in advance of the City initiated zone change. The current zoning requires a 3.0 metre setback; however, staff is of the opinion that a COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 225 OCTOBER 20, 2009 8. Submission No. A 2009-070 (Cont'dl 1.5 metre front yard setback is appropriate for the proposed multiple residential building; as the Queen Street Mixed Use Corridor is intended to become a more urban corridor. The proposed 6-storey structure will provide a transition from lower rise uses south of the subject property to higher-rise apartment building use immediately north of the subject lands. The requested variance is minor for the following reasons. Staff notes that the proposed development will have a positive impact on the streetscape and will add to the public realm. The proposal is in keeping with the anticipate Mixed Use Corridor zones and once these zones are in place the variance will become redundant. Staff feels that the variance is desirable for the appropriate use of the land and will not negatively impact neighbouring residential or commercial property owners. Staff notes that the proposal represents a positive redevelopment in the Mixed Use Corridor. Therefore, staff feel that the requested variances is appropriate for the development and use of the land. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo Transportation Planner, dated October 13, 2009, advising that they have no concerns with this application. The Committee considered correspondence from Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc., dated October 6, 2009, advising that any approval of this application should include conditions that require the applicants to make satisfactory arrangements with Hydro for the provision of electrical servicing to this land, including granting any easements that they may require. The Chair noted the comments provided by Kitchener Wimot Hydro, advising the applicant that their request would be added as conditions of approval. Moved by Mr. A. Head Seconded by Mr. M. Hiscott That the application of Davood Khosrowshahian requesting permission to construct a building containing 25 residential units with retail on the ground floor, to have a front yard set back of 1.5 m (4.92`) rather than the required 3 m (9.84'), after the required road widening has been given to the Region of Waterloo, Part Lot 71, Subdivision Lot 17, German Company Tract, 588 Queen Street South, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following condition: 1. That the owner shall make arrangements satisfactory to Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc. for provision of electrical servicing to this land, including any easements they may require. It is the opinion of this Committee that 1. The variance requested in this application is minor in nature. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Official Plan is being maintained on the subject property. Carried 9. Submission Nos.: A 2009-071 Applicant: Steve Nagy & Naomi Stansfield Property Location: 116 Bingeman Street Legal Description: Part Lot 167 & Part Lot 168, Plan 86 COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 226 OCTOBER 20, 2009 9. Submission No. A 2009-071 (Cont'dl Appearances: In Support: S. Nagy Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to construct an attached garage and second storey addition to have a left side yard of 0.6 m (1.96`) rather than the required 1.2m (3.93`), and a right side yard of 0.7 m (2.29`) rather than the required 1.2 m (3.93`) and legalization of a front porch having a front yard setback of 4.2 m (12.06`) rather than the required 4.5m (14.76`). The Committee considered the report of the Development and Technical Services Department, dated October 12, 2009, advising that the subject property is located at 116 Bingeman Street and currently there is a single detached dwelling on the property. The owner is proposing to build an attached single car garage. The subject property is designated Low Rise Conservation `A' in the Central Frederick Neighbourhood Secondary Plan in the City's Official Plan and is zoned Residential 5- (R-5) with Special Use Provision 129U. Special Use Provision 129U stipulates that multiple dwelling units shall not be permitted on site. The applicant is requesting a minor variance to permit a left side yard setback of 0.6m and a right side yard set back of 0.7m rather than the required 1.2 metres and to legalize the front yard setback of 4.2m rather than the required 4.5m. The applicant is requesting a minor variance to allow a left side yard setback of 0.6m and a right side yard setback of 0.7metre, whereas Zoning By-law 85-1 requires a minimum 1.2 metre side yard setback. The purpose of the request is to allow for the construction of an attached garage on the left side of the property and an addition to the house that allows for the continuation of the right side yard setback. The applicant is also requesting legalization of the existing front yard setback of 4.2m instead of the required 4.5m. 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 Low Rise Conservation `A' designation recognizes the majority of the land use is single detached dwelling and allows for the preservation of scale, use and intensity of existing development. The proposed garage and rear dwelling addition at 116 Bingeman Street are consistent with the aforementioned designation. Therefore, the proposed variances meet the intent of the Official Plan. The intent of sideyard setbacks is three-fold: 1. to provide for sufficient width for access to the rear yard; 2. to provide for side yard drainage and maintenance and 3. to provide separation from adjacent properties. The variance meets the intent of the Kitchener Zoning By-law for the following reasons: the property owner has ensured staff and upon site visit staff note there is adequate space for a lawnmower through the side yard access. Additionally, staff note that the single attached garage will have throughway access to the rear yard. Furthermore, side yard setbacks of 0.6m and 0.7m are wide enough for maintenance and drainage considerations. The variance is considered to be appropriate development of the land as it is the opinion of staff that the attached garage and dwelling addition will not negatively impact the adjacent properties. City staff is of the opinion that the left and right side yard setback deficiencies to permit the construction of the garage and dwelling addition are considered minor. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 227 OCTOBER 20, 2009 9. Submission No. A 2009-071 (Cont'dl Staff wishes to point that that ownership of an existing hedge along the west property line is unclear. As such, staff recommends that, as condition of approval, a letter of authorization be obtained and signed by the abutting property owners at 44 Lydia Street as the root system of the existing hedge may be impacted by the construction of the garage. The authorization will permit any removal, replacement, interference or modification to the hedge during construction or after construction. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo Transportation Planner, dated October 13, 2009, advising that they have no concerns with this application. The Chair referred to the comments from staff regarding a letter of authorization from the neighbour for the shared hedge. Mr. Nagy advised that he already has the letter and has no concern with it being added as a condition. Moved by Mr. A. Head Seconded by Mr. M. Hiscott That the application of Steve Nagy & Naomi Stansfield requesting permission to construct an attached garage and second storey addition to have a left side yard of 0.6 m (1.96`) rather than the required 1.2m (3.93`), and a right side yard of 0.7 m (2.29`) rather than the required 1.2 m (3.93`) and legalization of a front porch having a front yard setback of 4.2 m (12.06`) rather than the required 4.5m (14.76`), on Part Lot 167 & Part Lot 168, Plan 86, 116 Bingeman Street, Kitchener, Ontario, BE APPROVED, subject to the following condition: 1. The owner shall provide an authorization letter from the neighbouring property owner regarding the construction and the shared hedge, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning. It is the opinion of this Committee that: 1. The variance requested in this application is minor in nature. 2. This application is desirable for the appropriate development of the property. 3. The general intent and purpose of the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law and Official Plan is being maintained on the subject property. Carried 10. Submission Nos.: A 2009-072 Applicant: Ken Murphy Property Location: Right-of-way off Bloomingdale Road Leaal Description: Part Lot 71 German Company Tract Township of Waterloo Appearances In Support: Contra: None Written Submissions: None The Committee was advised that the applicant is requesting permission to develop a legal non-conforming residential lot, having no frontage on a public street, with a single family dwelling; whereas, development of properties with no frontage on a public street is not permitted in the zoning by-law. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 228 OCTOBER 20, 2009 10. Submission No. A 2009-072 (Cont'dl The Committee considered the report of the Development and Technical Services Department, dated October 13, 2009, advising that the subject property is not municipally addressed and is legally described as Part Lot 71 German Company Tract Township of Waterloo. The property does not have legal frontage onto a City street but has legal access to Bloomingdale Road over an adjacent property by an established right of way. The property has an area of approximately 0.57 hectares is zoned Residential Three Zone (R-3). A majority of the property is within the Regulation Limit of the Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) limit and is therefore subject to a special zoning regulation (Regulation 1 R) which requires that prior to the erection of any permitted building or any placement of fill, a Fill, Construction and Alteration to Waterways Permit shall be obtained from the Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA). The property is designated as Low Rise Residential in the Official Plan. A site visit of the subject property was completed on August 21, 2009. Relief is being sought from Section 5.2 of the Zoning Bylaw where the applicant is requesting to construct a single detached dwelling on a property which does not abut a street. Section 5.2 of the Zoning Bylaw prohibits constructing any building for any purpose on a lot which does not abut a street. As the site is adjacent to the Grand River and within the GRCA regulated limit, the Owner has been previously advised to contact the GRCA and the Regional Municipality of Waterloo (Region) to determine if any special report or studies will have to be completed to determine if the property is can be appropriately developed. A Preliminary Slope Stability Assessment report prepared by Chung & Vander Doelen Engineering Ltd was submitted on October 6, 2009 to the City of Kitchener for review. Planning staff are of the opinion that this application be deferred until such time that the Region and the GRCA have the opportunity to review this document and provide comments. Planning staff cannot form an opinion on the requested variance until it is determined if the property is appropriate for development. The Committee considered the report of the Region of Waterloo Transportation Planner, dated October 13, 2009, advising that they have no concerns with this application. The Committee considered correspondence from Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro Inc., dated October 6, 2009, advising that any approval of this application should include conditions that require the applicants to make satisfactory arrangements with Hydro for the provision of electrical servicing to this land, including granting any easements that they may require. The Committee considered the report of the Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA), dated October 15, 2009, advising that a portion of the subject property is regulated by the GRCA and due to the presence of wetland, floodplan and slope erosion associated with the Grand River. We have reviewed the Preliminary Slope Stability Assessment (prepared by Chung and Vander Doelen Engineering Limited, dated September 24, 2009) submitted to us in support of the proposed construction of a residential dwelling on the property and are satisfied with the findings and have no objections with this application. Based on the recommendation of the City staff, the Committee of Adjustment agreed to defer its consideration of this application to its meeting to be held on January 19, 2010. COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT 229 OCTOBER 20, 2009 ADJOURNMENT On motion, the meeting adjourned at 10:25 a.m. Dated at the City of Kitchener this 20th day of October, 2009. Dianne H. Gilchrist Secretary-Treasurer Committee of Adjustment