Proposed 659 Stirling Avenue South | 19 m | 6 fl

[UrbanWaterloo]

Kitchener Committee of Adjustment Meeting August 21, 2012
Date of Report: August 8, 2012 | Report: A 2012-054
Prepared By: Brian Bateman, Senior Planner | Submitted By: Juliane von Westerholt, Senior Planner
Address: 659 Stirling Avenue South | Property Owners: Azam Ezazi, Ahmad Mohammadi
Summarized Recommendation: Approve with condition

REPORT

Planning Comments:

The subject property is located on the corner of Stirling Avenue South and Homer Watson Boulevard, at 659 Stirling Avenue South. The lands are currently vacant and are designated Low Rise Residential in the Official Plan. The northern portion of the property is zoned Convenience Commercial (C-1) in Zoning By-Law 85-1, subject to Special Use Provision 56U. The remainder of the property is zoned Hazard Land (P-3).

The property is proposed to be developed with a 6-storey mixed use building consisting of a ground floor convenience commercial unit and 29 residential units. The property is the subject of a site plan application (SP12/033/S/BB), which was approved in principle by the Site Plan Review Committee on June 27, 2012.

To facilitate development, the applicant is requesting the following variances:

1. To permit a front yard setback of 0 metres on Stirling Avenue South, rather than the minimum 3 metre front yard setback required by Section 7.2 of Zoning By-Law 85-1
2. To permit a setback abutting a street of 1 metre at the intersection of Stirling Avenue and Homer Watson, rather than the minimum 3 metre setback required by Section 7.2 in the by-law
3. To permit a 2.36 metre obstruction to visibility within the driveway visibility triangle (DVT), whereas Section 5.3 in the by-law does not permit any obstruction to visibility within the DVT
4. To permit a loading space that is 3.0 metre x 7.2 metre in size, rather than 3.0 metre x 10.7 metre as required by Section 6.2.1 in the by-law
5. To permit a setback of 0 metre from the street line for a loading space, rather than the 3.0 metre required by Section 6.1.1.1 (a)(iv) in the by-law
6. To permit a setback of 1.4 metre for one parking space, rather than the 3.0 metre required by Section 6.1.1.1(a)(iv) and Section 6.1.1.1 (d)(i) in the by-law

City Planning staff conducted a site inspection of the property on July 31, 2012.

Figure 2 – View of subject property from Homer Watson, looking towards Stirling Avenue South

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.

A) Regarding variances 1 & 2, to permit reductions in front yard and side yard abutting a street setbacks:

i. The variances meet the intent of the Official Plan for the following reasons. The intent of the Low-Rise Residential designation is to accommodate a range of housing types while allowing compatible non-residential uses at appropriate locations. Convenience commercial (as proposed) is a permitted use within the Low Rise Residential designation.

As per Policy 3.1.2.4 in Part 3 of the Official Plan, housing above street level convenience uses (such as that proposed) is permitted and encouraged, provided that the net residential density does not exceed 16 units per hectare. The net density of the proposed development will be approximately 84 units per hectare. However, Policy Planning staff notes that the intent is to guide the preparation of Secondary and Community Plans, and not to be applied to site specific applications, such as this one. For this reason, Planning staff is satisfied that the proposed variances meet the intent of Policy 3.1.2.4.

ii. With respect to the front yard variance, the variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law for the following reasons. The intent of the minimum 3.0 metre front yard setback requirement is to create a consistent setback along the street. It is the opinion of Planning staff that visually, the requested 0 metre setback would maintain a more consistent street edge than a 3.0 metre setback because the front lot line of the subject property is located farther away from the sidewalk and roadway relative to the existing residential lots on Stirling Avenue. Urban Design staff has also commented that the location and orientation of the building addresses the street edge and creates a more prominent and interesting street edge.

Regarding the variance for a reduced side yard setback abutting a street, the variance meets the intent of the Zoning By-law. The intent of the minimum required 3.0 metre setback abutting a street is to ensure that there is adequate separation between the building and the road right of way. Planning staff is of the opinion that sufficient separation will be provided despite the reduced setback because the property line is located more than 3 metres from the roadway.

iii. The variances are minor. The variances will allow the building to be oriented in a manner that enhances the street edge and streetscape. The variances will allow the building to conceal the parking area from the primary view of the intersection.

iv. The variances are appropriate for the development and use of the land. Planning staff notes that the site is severely constrained. It is partially located on a floodplain and is irregularly shaped. The requested variances will allow the constrained site to be developed in a manner that is encouraged by the Official Plan, permitted by zoning, and compatible with the surrounding uses.

B) Regarding variances 3 & 4, to permit an obstruction to visibility within the DVT and a reduced setback of one parking space:

i. The variances meet the intent of the Official Plan for the reasons stated in A) i. above.

ii. The variances meet the intent of the Zoning By-law. The intent of the driveway visibility triangle and the setback requirement for parking spaces is to provide clear and unobstructed sight lines to pedestrian and vehicular traffic passing by when vehicles exit the driveway in order to minimize potential conflicts. Transportation staff has commented that the alignment of the driveway leading into/out of the site allows for an unobstructed view to the sidewalk and oncoming traffic, despite the obstruction in the DVT and the reduced parking space setback. For this reason, Planning staff believes that the intent of the zoning by-law is met.

iii. The variance is minor. As mentioned above, the variance will not have an adverse impact on traffic or pedestrian safety. The impacts of the reduced parking setback can be mitigated by landscape screening on site and landscaping within the right of way.

iv. The variances are appropriate for the reasons stated in A) iv. above.

C) Regarding variances 5 & 6, to permit reductions to the size and setback of a loading space:

i. The variances meet the intent of the Official Plan for the reasons stated in A) i. above.

ii. The variance for a reduction to the loading space size meets the intent of the Zoning By-law for the following reasons. The intent of the loading space dimensions specified in the by-law is to provide adequate space for a standard sized truck to load and unload within the site. The applicant has informed staff that the garbage truck used to service the site will be smaller than the standard size. Also, because the commercial space provided on site is smaller than average, a smaller supply truck would be appropriate. Transportation staff has no concerns with the reduced size. Thus, Planning staff is of the opinion that the requested reduced loading space size would provide adequate loading space on the site and would therefore meet the intent of the by-law.

The variance for a reduced setback of the loading space meets the intent of the Zoning Bylaw for the following reasons. The intent of the 3.0 metre setback requirement is to provide space for a landscape buffer between the loading space and the roadway. The requested setback of 0 metres does not allow for a landscaped buffer to be provided on site. However, Urban Design staff has commented that as part of the site plan process, the owner will be required to provide landscaping within the City’s right of way.

iii. The variances are minor. A reduction of 3.5 m in loading space length will not have adverse impacts on the functionality of the site. The reduced setback of the loading space will not have an unacceptably adverse impact on neighbouring properties or on the streetscape. Any potential impacts of the loading space on the streetscape and neighbouring properties can be mitigated through landscaping.

iv. The variances are appropriate for the reasons stated in A) iv. above.

Based on the foregoing, Planning staff recommends that the application be approved, subject to the condition outlined in the Recommendation section of this report.

Urban Design Comments:

Urban design staff have reviewed the setback relief along Stirling Ave S and Homer Watson Blvd in the context of building massing and orientation and are able to support the variance for the following reasons.

It is staff’s opinion that by moving the building mass to the corner of the site and orienting the building parallel to the visibility triangle the building addresses the street edge and creates a more prominent and interesting street edge. The movement of the building also brings the main parking area to the rear of the site and conceals it from the primary view of the intersection. This also creates a larger separation between the proposed building and existing residential rear yards. The approximate 20m +/- separation from the street edge to the proposed building face was also taken into consideration in supporting this reduction as this existing setback (which will be preserved) provides a significant landscape buffer to the building face.

The proposed building articulation coupled with the existing landscaped setback and proposed landscaping will mitigate impacts related to the setback reductions requested. Staff support the building mass being moved closer to the street edge in this location as there is a significant existing landscape buffer of 4.5m+/- from back of sidewalk to building face which will be preserved. The proposed articulation of the building addresses concerns related to building massing. This articulation breaks up the building mass, while adding visual interest to the street edge. The proposed building articulation also creates the opportunity for a partial landscape buffer to screen the parking area from the street edge.

The impacts related to the setback reductions for parking and loading can be mitigated by landscape screening. Urban design staff have recommended planting in the right of way which would be addressed through an encroachment agreement and maintained through the site plan agreement at the owners cost. It is staff’s intent to further pursue this option as part of the site plan process and the applicant has been made aware of this and is receptive to this solution.

Environmental Comments:

Environmental Planning staff does not have any additional comments beyond those provided for the site plan.

Building Comments:

The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance provided a permit is obtained for the proposed 6 storey convenience retail/apartment building. Please contact the Building Division @ 519-741-2433 with any questions.

Traffic Comments:

Transportation Services has no concerns.

Engineering Comments:

Engineering staff has no concerns with the requested variances.

RECOMMENDATION

That application A2012-054 for permission to construct a six storey mixed use development having a front yard setback of 0m rather than the required 3m; a side yard setback abutting a street of 1m rather than the required 3m; an obstruction to visibility within the driveway visibility triangle of 2.36m whereas no obstruction is permitted within a driveway visibility triangle; a 3m x 7.2m loading space rather than the required 3m x 10.7m; a loading space having a setback of 0m from the front lot line rather than the required 3m; and one required parking space having a setback abutting a street of 1.4m rather than the required 3m, be approved subject to the following condition:

1. That site plan application SP12/033/S/BB obtains final site plan approval to the satisfaction of the Manager of Site Development and Customer Service.

2. If condition 1 is not satisfied, this minor variance approval becomes null and void.

[panamaniac]

Interesting location for something like this - the building will be practically surrounded by parks and trees.

[KevinL]

Wow, this takes me back - this is my old neighbourhood. I recall some work happening on this lot in the late 80s, I think when it was still on the books to extend Homer Watson to connect to Belmont Ave (long-since quashed for environmental reasons). Good to see things moving ahead.