Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPSI Agenda - 2019-04-15 Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee Agenda Monday, April 15, 2019 3:30 p.m. 5:30 p.m. Office of the City Clerk 7:00 p.m. 9:00 p.m. Kitchener City Hall nd 200 King St. W. - 2 Floor Council Chamber Kitchener ON N2G 4G7 Page 1 Chair - Councillor S. Marsh Vice-Chair - Councillor D. Chapman Public Hearing Matters under the Planning Act (3:30 p.m. advertised start time) This is a formal public meeting to consider applications under the Planning Act. If a person or public body that would otherwise have an ability to appeal a decision of the City of Kitchener to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal, but the person or public body does not make oral submissions at the public meeting or make written submissions to the City of Kitchener before the by-law is passed, the person or public body is not entitled to appeal the decision. PART ONE 3:30 p.m. Delegations Procedural By-law, delegations are permitted to address the Committee for a maximum of 5 minutes. Item 1 Paul Britton, MHBC Planning Inc. Michelle DesRosiers, D.G.F. Group of Companies Chris Pidgeon, GSP Group Inc. Discussion Items 1. DSD-19-049 - New Zoning By-law (CRoZBy) - Stage 1 - Non Residential Zones (120 min) (Staff will provide a 10 minute presentation on this matter) Note: to view Appendix D New Zoning By-law please visit www.kitchener.ca/CRoZBy PART TWO - 7:00 p.m. Delegations -law, delegations are permitted to address the Committee for a maximum of 5 minutes. Item 2 Dale Woolner and Larry Kotseff Colin Chung, Glen Schnarr & Associates Inc. Discussion Items 2. DSD-19-049 - New Zoning By-law (CRoZBy) - Stage 1 - Non Residential Zones (120 min) Note: to view Appendix D New Zoning By-law please visit www.kitchener.ca/CRoZBy Information Items Unfinished Business List Jaclyn Rodrigues Committee Administrator ** Accessible formats and communication supports are available upon request. If you require assistance to take part in a city meeting or event, please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 ** REPORT TO:Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee DATE OF MEETING:April 15,2019 SUBMITTED BY:Alain Pinard, Director of Planning PREPARED BY:Brandon Sloan, Manager, Long Range & Policy Planning 519-741-2200 ext. 7648 Sarah Coutu, Planner (Policy) 519-741-2200 ext. 7069 Richard Kelly-Ruetz, Technical Assistant (Planning & Zoning) 519-741-2200 ext. 7110 WARD(S) INVOLVED:All DATE OF REPORT:March 22,2019 REPORT NO.:DSD-19-049 SUBJECT:New Zoning By-law (Stage 1) Comprehensive Review of the Zoning By-law (CRoZBy)Project RECOMMENDATION: That the City-initiated Official Plan Amendment attached to Report DSD-19-049as Appendix Cwhich is associated with the new Zoning By-law (Stage 1), be adopted and accordingly forwarded to the Region of Waterloo for approval; and That a new Zoning By-law(Stage 1) and associated mapping attached to report DSD-19- 049as Appendix Dbe approved; and further That Stage 1 of the new Zoning By-law does not represent a comprehensive, full replacement of the existing Zoning By- Section34of thePlanning Actdoesnot apply;thereby permitting amendmentsandminor variance applications. BACKGROUND: Kitcheneris cited as thefirst urban municipality in Canadato create a Zoning By-lawnearly 100 years ago. Following the lead of New York City, zoning was established here with the final Adams-Seymour Plan for Kitchener in1924 which identified industrial, businessand residential use districts.As the city grew, and in response to new legislation or policy direction, Zoning By- laws were updated and consolidated over the years. The primary one that is currently in place is By-law 85-1(as amended). It was created in successive stages over nine years. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. 1 - 1 AZoning By-lawis a legal document and development must adhere to it. It controls the use that are permitted on a property, the size and dimensions of alotand where buildings can be locatedand their size An example is that a restaurant use is permitted within aGeneral Commercial (COM-2) Zone provided that the building is setback from the front lot line bya minimum of 3.0 metres and the maximum building height is 15 metres. Since Zoning-By-laws apply toevery property within the City and deal with all sorts of circumstances for existing and future land uses, there is often quite a bit of complexity and many different nuances. Tew Zoning By-law was presented in 2014 which launched the Comprehensive Review of the Zoning By-law (CRoZBy) project. Over the next several years, first drafts were released witheach new zoning category (Commercial, Employment, Urban Growth Centre, etc.) as part of an extensive and formal engagement process. A Statutory Meeting was held in April/May 2018 on the final draft (not including Residential Zones). Further background is contained within the reports listed revious Consideration REPORT: Scope The first stage of the new Zoning By-law includes the framework of the document, the definitions, general regulations, parking requirements, and every zoning section with the exception of residential. It willapplyto over 50% of the cityand approximately 3,500properties, but willnot include residential properties or those areas that are undergoing specific neighbourhood planning reviews (i.e.Secondary Plan areas, Hidden Valley, station areas, etc.). Process 1 - 2 Highlightsof New Zoning By-law The new Zoning By- Competitive Downtown Less Cars, Respect the Focus on Made-in- Advantagefor AllMore EnvironmentEmployment Kitchener PeopleCommerce & Mixed Use -Downtown -Pedestrian -Conservation, -In-house -Reduced & Zoning built formopen space & -Uniqueness shared incentivesstormwater -Protect -Affordable -Broad parking management industrial (bonusing, housing Zones but -No parking)-Climate action -Broaden -Revised with focus minimums retail & office -Local uses-Health & -Bonusing downtown approachesSafety -Range of -Amenity -Community -Bike uses and -New economyarea Uses parking options Comparison to Existing Zoning By-law 85-1 The new Zoning By-law(attached as Appendix D)has a different, more consolidated format that utilizes tables for permitted uses and regulations for each of the zone types. Overall, the new approach is more efficient, defines all of the permitted uses and considers how it will be administered in a practical day-to-day basis. Some of the key comparisons include: Four Urban Growth Centre zones consolidated into one sectionwhichreplacesseven Downtown zones in seven sections. Updated Employment zones replace the Industrial and Business Park zones. Commercial zones are consolidated or reduced (in some cases replaced with mixed use). Mixed Use zones that could apply citywide replace the Mixed Use Corridor zones. Updated floodplain, environmental conservation and open space zones. The addition of a newzone for stormwater management facilities.Use of azoning overlay in some cases. Reduced Institutional zones (from three to two) with a focus on health, social and community-based uses. The new approach to on-site parking regulations, such as minimum bike parking, no minimum automobile parking requirements in the Urban Growth Centre, lowerminimum automobile parking requirements for most uses, updated shared parking, and EV-ready spaces. Expandedandimproved for the Urban Growth Centre that allows for greater density in an appropriate area in exchange for certain pre-defined community 1 - 3 benefits such as affordable housing, public amenity area, green infrastructure, environmental performance, transportation demand management and creative industries. Special use and special regulation provisions are streamlined into site specific provisions. Additional changes to the general regulations, regulations that are associated with permitted uses, transition provisions andother administrative improvements. For those properties that are included in the new Zoning By-law, all of the new provisions will apply. Remaining properties will continue to be under the existing Zoning By-law(s) provisions until they are brought intothe new By-law through a future process. Companion Official Plan Amendment Given that the process of creating a new Zoning By-law involves significant detail, often a purpose of the City-initiated Official Plan Amendment that accompanies the new Zoning By-law is primarily to: Provide further refinements to better reflect the intent of the Official Plan policies and provide clarity and alignment with the new Zoning By-law. Re-designatea number of properties to align with the new zone. Updatebonusing implementation policies. The proposed amendment, including the detailed policy and mapping updates, is attached to this report as Appendix C. 2018 Statutory Public Meeting (Comments and Responses) Over 110 oral and written submissions were received on the final draft. Staff reviewed the details of each and provided individual responses. These were all considered and resulted in improvements to the final by-law. A summary of the main topics are highlighted in the graphic below and the comment and response details are in Appendix B. Staff have also made a number of editorial, consistency and detailed wording updates since the 2018 Statutory Public Meeting version which are also listed in AppendixB. 1 - 4 Analysis The final newZoning By-law considers all submissions made on the first draftsand those from at (2009); the Provincial Policy Statement (2014); the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2017); the Planning Act, other relevant Provincial, Regional, and City policies; and zoning practices in local and other municipalities. The proposed Official Plan Amendment and new Zoning By-law aremore consistent with and conform to the above. Some examples include: Thefour Urban Growth Centre Zones conform to the four land use designations in the Official Plan (Section 15.D.2) whichallow for a range of transit-supportive land uses with regulations for an active ground floor environment. The densities conform to the Official Plan but do allow for greater density in many circumstances in exchange for pre-defined community benefits. The zoning related to the Urban Growth Centre helps implement the Official Plan, includingSections 2-5, 11, 13, 15 and 17. This aligns and is more consistent with provincial, regional and other local planning policies. The EmploymentZones implement and conform to the Official Plan (includingSections 2, 3, 5, 11, 15 and 17). They provide a basis for the conservation and focus on industrial and business park employment as directed through provincial, regional and local planning policiesand allows for general office use in proximity to transit. Some supportive service commercial uses are permitted at appropriate scales, zones and locations. The new Commercial, Mixed Use and InstitutionalZones implement and conform to the Official Plan (including Sections 2-5, 11, 15 and 17). All of the other zones, regulations and mapping of the new Zoning By-law conform to and areconsistent with provincial, regional and other local planning policies. The approach to Parking regulations conforms to the Official Plan policies; including those for active transportation, transportation demand management, intensification, urban design, the environment, and others (Sections 3, 7, 11, 13 and 17). This is consistent with the provincial and regional policies on transportation and intensification. The Comprehensive Review of Off-Street Parking & Loading Regulations (Paradigm Transportation Solutions Limited)was also utilized. The new By-law considers a range ofzoning-related issues that are appropriate for Kitchener including but not limited to reduced/sharedvehicular parking, distribution of retail and office uses, protection of industrial employment,affordable housing and environmental conservation. Next Steps Stage 2 of the new Zoning By-law (base residential zones and related regulations) is the next immediate priority with a Statutory Public Meeting intended for 2019.The first neighbourhoods to receive the residential zones will be severalof the neighbourhood planning review areas (Civic Centre, Cedar Hill & Schneider Creek, etc.) tentatively scheduled for Fall 2019. The residential zones will be applied to the remainder of the city through ward-by-wardconsultations in2020. In addition to working on the above, staff will also be preparing implementation onusing Implementation Guideline-line information and user training. Following future provincial or municipal policy changes, there may be a nt needed to the Zoning-By-law. 1 - 5 ALIGNMENT WITH CITY OF KITCHENER STRATEGIC PLAN: Strategic Priority 2 Strong and Resilient Economy Strategy 2.5 Facilitate the ongoing development of Downtown Kitchener as the heart of the City. Strategic Priority 3 Safe and Thriving Neighbourhoods Strategy 3.3 Manage growth, curb urban sprawl, and foster moremixed-use development, ensuring new development is integrated with the diversity and character of the surrounding community. 2019Business Plan NB11 Comprehensive Zoning By-law Review FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: The CRoZBy project is currently within its allocated budget. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: The CRoZBy project primarily utilized Community Engagement Policy and is going significantly above and beyond the typical requirements of the Planning Act. Descriptions of engagement method and results are documented in the previous CRoZBy reports and are highlighted below. Highlights 1 - 6 This report will be posted onCRoZBy project webpage,digitally sent to the project contact list (over 1200 individuals), and formally advertised in The Record in accordance with nd the requirements of the Planning Acton March 22. Given that there are additional lands and some changes from the 2018 Statutory Public Meeting version, this was advertised as a further Statutory Public Meeting. An information package is being sent to all Advisory Committees in advance of the Standing Committee date to updatethem. Also, the report is available on the the agenda in advance of the council / committee meeting. CRoZBy Comment Breakdown summarized in this report and are included with responses in Appendix B, along with further application of the new zoning circulation and additional comments received after the Statutory Public Meeting PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION OF THIS MATTER: Report CSD-13-067City of Kitchener Zoning By-law 85-1 Update& Work Program Report CSD-14-027Comprehensive Review of the Zoning By-law (CRoZBy) Work Program Report CSD-15-012CRoZBy Component A First Draft (Framework, Mixed Use, Employment, Natural Heritage, Floodplain, Recreation, Stormwater Management Zones) Report CSD-15-013 CRoZBy Comprehensive Review of Off-Street Parking and Loading Regulations Background Study Report CSD-16-022CRoZBy Component B First Draft (Urban Growth Centre Zones, other) Report CSD-16-070 CRoZByComponent C First Draft(Institutional Zones) Report CSD-17-024-CRoZBy Component D First Draft (Commercial and Agriculture Zones) Report CSD-17-045-CRoZBy Component E First Draft (Residential Zones) Report CSD-17-051 -CRoZBy Next Steps -Council Strategy Session Report CSD-18-002 -CRoZByFinal Draft and Companion Official Plan AmendmentStat.Mtg. 1 - 7 CONCLUSION: This comprehensive update is an important part of aligning three of the main planning documents (new Official Plan, new Zoning By-law, new Urban Design Manual).It is critical to complete this extensive body of work and have the new Zoning By-law in place as our Kitchener-- Staff continue to experience significantdevelopment so it is important to havemodernized zoning in place. Kitchener has always, and should continue to be, a leader in zoning. Our current Zoning By-law served us well and includes a number of long-lasting approaches that are being carried forward andevolved in the latest iteration. REVIEWED BY:Cory Bluhm,Executive Director, Economic Development Barry Cronkite, Director, Transportation Services Della Ross, Manager, Development Review Janine Oosterveld, Manager, Site Development & Customer Service Tina Malone-Wright, Senior Planner Lauren Nelson, Economic Development Analyst ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Justin Readman -General Manager, Development Services APPENDICES: Appendix AStatutory Public Meeting Notice Appendix BStatutory Public Meeting Comments and Responses Appendix COfficial Plan Amendment Appendix D New Zoning By-law (Appendices to the zoning by-law can be accessed at www.kitchener.ca/crozby) 1 - 8 Appendix A Statutory Public Meeting Notice Advertised in The Record March 22, 2019 PROPERTY OWNERS AND INTERESTED PARTIES ARE INVITED TO ATTEND A PUBLIC MEETING TO DISCUSS A PROPOSED NEW ZONING BY- OFFICIAL PLAN UNDER SECTIONS 22, 26 AND 34 OF THE PLANNING ACT The City of Kitchener is conductinga comprehensive review of its zoning by-law (CRoZBy) to ensure -laws are legal documents that divide the city into different land-use zones, specifying permitteduses (e.g. employment or commercial) and required standards (e.g. building size and location). Two STATUTORY PUBLIC OPEN HOUSES, as per the Planning Act, were held on June 10 and 11, - law. Because of the amount of information and zones being reviewed, a first draft of the new zoning by-law was tabled through a series of components beginning in March 2015. The first draft new zoning by-law was made available for public comment through eight (8) separate OPEN HOUSESfrom March 2015 to February 2019. A STATUTORY PUBLIC MEETING, as per the Planning Act, was held in two-parts on April 30 and May 8, 2018. The final draft new zoning by- tabled at this meeting and written and verbal submissions were made directly to Council. Staff reviewed in detail and responded to the submissions and in the majority of instances, the submissions have resulted in improvements to the final by-law. - www.kitchener.ca/crozby, by March 22, 2019. Proposed New Zoning By-law (Stage 1) The first stage of the new Zoning By-law includes the framework of the document, the definitions, general regulations, parking requirements, and every zoning section with the exception of residential. It will apply to approximately 3,500 properties, but will not include residential properties or those areas that are, or will be, undergoing specific neighbourhood planning reviews (e.g. Secondary Plan areas, Hidden Valley, station areas, etc.). Official Plan Amendment An Official Plan amendment is being proposed to align the detailed review and provisions of the proposed new zoning by-law with the Official Plan. Specifically, the Official Plan amendment proposes to adjust the land uses in certain areas of the City (e.g.properties adjacent to commercial campus (e.g. Sunrise Centre) lands to better align with new zoning; employment lands in the vicinity of Bleams Road and Manitou Drive) and permitted uses in land use designations to better reflect the intended use of these lands in the future. The Official Plan amendment also proposes to clarify the maximum permitted floor space ratio in the Market District of downtown and clarify Planning Act Bonusing community 1 - 9 benefits and process. Additionally, foursite specific policies (specific policy areas 9, 12, 30 and 48) are proposed to be amended/added to clarify the intent of the land uses and development parameters permitted on these lands. -law and associated amendment Official Plan will be held by the Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee, a Committee of Council which deals with planning matters, on: Session 1 Monday, April 15, 2019 at 3:30 -5:30 p.m. Session 2 Monday, April 15, 2019 at 7:00 p.m. nd Council Chambers, 2Floor, City Hall 200 King Street West, Kitchener If you would like to speak at the public meeting, please register in advance at www.kitchener.ca/delegationsor -2200, ext. 7275. Please indicate which public meeting session number you will be attending. Written submissions can be sent nd to the Office of the City Clerk, 2floor, 200 King Street West, Kitchener, ON, N2G 4G7. Any person may attend the public meeting and make written and/or verbal representation either in support of, or in opposition to, the above noted zoning by-law and/or Official Plan amendment. If a person or public body would otherwise havean ability to appeal the decision of the City of Kitchener to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal, but the person or public body does not make oral submissions at a public meeting or make written submissions to the City of Kitchener prior to approval/refusal of the zoning by-law and/or Official Plan amendment, the person or public body is not entitled to appeal the decision. ADDITIONAL INFORMATIONwww.kitchener.ca/crozby, emailing crozby@kitchener.caor by contacting the staff persons noted below, viewing the staff report contained in the agenda (available approximately 10 days before the meeting -https://calendar.kitchener.ca/council - th click on the date in the calendar, scroll down & select meeting), or in person at the Planning Division, 6 Floor, 200 King Street West, Kitchener between 8:30 a.m. -5:00 p.m. (Monday to Friday). Sarah Coutu, Planner (Policy) -519-741-2200 x7069 (TTY: 1-866-969-9994) Richard Kelly-Ruetz, Technical Assistant (Policy) -519-741-2200 x7110 (TTY: 1-866-969-9994) 1 - 10 law or - conforming - Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action No change:Use to become legal non - law and nt land - ment Area law to - ener Council 3 zoning - s to a conforming. This - s to be consistent 3 i - of Employment Lands law is to conform with the - . Please contact Regional Planning forms of intermittent events. Official Plan e are several uses on the site that have been conforming. Staff acknowledges that once a new 4 zone to the proposed EMP - - ecific use, such as conference/convention, would be opinion that including a "conference, convention, or law is adopted there will be cases of legal non - Plan. The Official Plan identifies this property, and surrounding law Amendment as well as consideration under the employme law as it is staff's opinion that as currently defined refer - - onsidered legal non Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) 1) The purpose of the proposed zoning byOfficial area, as a heavy industrial employment area that should be protected for heavy industrial employment uses. The reduced number of permitted uses from existing Mwith the Official Plan. Permitting the full range of current permitted uses is not something that staff can recommend as some current uses cannot be interpreted as permitted heavy industrial employment uses.2) As staff understands, therpermitted under "private club and lodge". As noted in your submission, these uses would not be permitted under the proposed zoning byas such these uses which are legally existing on the site would be czoning byis a necessary byproduct for moving towards a new zoning byimplement a new Official Plan.3) It is staff'sexhibition facility" as a permitted uses in the proposed EMPwould constitute a conversion of employment lands and that is not within the scope of CRoZBy nor permitted to be considered by Kitchoutside of a Regional Municipal Comprehensive Review. The Region of Waterloo is in the initial stages of undertaking a Regional Municipal Comprehensive Review and an employment strategy and assessment of lands will be completed as part of thisStaff for consideration of a conversion and to be involved in the review process. 4) Exhibition facility is proposed to be removed as a use from the zoning bytemporary use. It is staff's opinion that "exhibitions" are events that may take place at a conference centre which is why staff have proposed to redefine "conference, convention, or exhibition facility" to not only encompass exhibitions but other policies 15.D.6.25/26 do not contemplate conference/convention or exhibition facility as a permitted use. While Policy 15.D.6.21 does allow for 'exhibition display facilities' within the General Industrial Employprovided adequate parking is available, it is staffs opinion that in implementing 15.D.6.25 that an exhibition facility is not an industrial use typical found in the General Industrial Employment Areas. 5)Through the City's Comprehensive Review (CREL), this area was identified as a protected employment area and also as one of the few areas within the City that provide for, or have the potential to continue to provide for, heavy industrial employment uses. Compatibility of a spbetter addressed through an applicant initiated development application, which in this case would require an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning Byconversion policies of the Growth Plan 2017, the Regional Official Plan and the City's Official Plan. Statutory Public Meeting Comments and Responses resent a he existing d Exhibition Appendix B neighbourhood. permitted uses on the 4 zone to the proposed - linkages). people. Lot 42 will provide - ementary employment uses. The existing use of the 3 zone -typically are associated with the proposed use. The Official conforming or restrict the usage of their property - Comment Summary1) Concerned with the reduced number of property due to the change from the MEMP2) Concerned that the proposed zone would make them legal nonproposed Lot 42 Global Flex Campus (a private club). Question they which seeks to strengthen and maintain the existing industrial employment areas while providing some opportunities for new and complsupporting use providing opportunities for conference and conventions, exhibitions and assemblies of customers, employees and associated businessfar more employment opportunities than a singular, heavy industrial user. This property is in close proximity to the ION Mill Station (acknowledges that there is no direct access but that there are opportunities for pedestrian 4) As the new byexhibition facility use that is currently permitted. An exhibition facility is compatible from a land use perspectives as it has comparable traffic, noise and servicing. The addition of technical change.5) The area has transitioned from a heavy industrial area to a light industrial and commercial area. Given the composition of the neighbourhood, a conference/convention facility would be much more compatible with the surrounding 6) The existing use provides economic development opportunities for the Region by providing a flexible conference and event space for the growing technology sector Commenter Chris Pidgeon, GSP Group Inc. 41 Ardelt Place Written: April 17, 2018 and April 30, 2018 #1and9 1 - 11 2 - - law or 1 to - - (155) for Woodlands and ESPA ure phase of CRoZBy, Residential 2, with site specific provision - Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Change: Revised proposed zoning from COMCOMa reduced minimum interior side yard setback abutting a residential zone of 1.5m. Revised maximum building height in COMto 25m for a mixed use buildingNo change: Other legislation may exempt certain uses lawChange:The Natural Heritage Conservation land use designation in Official Plan is proposed to be amended to reflect the modifications to the layers. Accordingly, the Natural Heritage Conservation land use designation will be removed from 1016A and the property will be designated Low Rise Residential as part of the Companion Official Plan Amendment. Further Action:In a futzoning will be applied to the property to correspond with the Low Rise Residential land use. - . 1 - osed 2 zone - 1) Zone will - 2 zone does not - be exempt from 1016, 1082, 1094 Wilson ill not be recommending s containing dwelling units. 2. The COM - w of this property and the Commercial Policies 'public use' and 'utilities') aff is aware that the regional staff made and Companion Official Plan Amendment is not 2 zone allows dwelling units to a maximum floor - that we are in receipt of the updated Significant law, the Natural Heritage Conservation (NHC - h the Official Plan. law. Given these regulations, staff w 'As indicated in previous correspondence, proposed regulation - vation Authority (GRCA) has confirmed that portions of the subject on May 11, 2018, st ch use within Kitchener. Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) 6) Staff acknowledges the economic development opportunities that this type of use provides to Kitchener and further acknowledges the need for su1) and 2) Upon further reviein the Official Plan, staff will be recommending in the final draft zoning bylaw that the property be zoned COMrestrict the size of permitted uses to a max GFA of 300 sq. m per unit3, 4 and 5) The COMspace ratio of 2, but restricts them from locating on the ground floor. Further, staff will be revising maximum building height in the COMfrom 15 metres to 24 metres for buildingstanding residential on lands designated Commercial would not be consistent witStaff acknowledges that the Companion Official Plan Amendment has proposed to adjust land uses in certain areas to better reflect the intended zoning review processmeant to replace private development applications that would go through a public process and be considered on their own merits.1) and 2) 1.3 acknowledges that there may be other legislation that may be required zoning bythat electricity generation facilities and transmission and distribution systems (captured undercomplying with the regulations the applicable zone in which they are located.Following the site visit to the subject properties (Ave) modifications to their Significant Woodlands and Environmental Sensitive Policy Area (ESPA) layers around the Wilson Ave area. Consistent with what staff indicated in previous correspondence, the Grand River Conserproperties are within the GRCA regulated area and further, reiterate that no modifications to the delineation of slope erosion hazards and flooding hazard are supported. Staff can confirm Woodlands and ESPA layers and data from the Region of Waterloo on July 24th. Below, Figure 1, shows the modified Significant Woodlands and the ESPA layers on the subject properties. Accordingly, in the propfinal Zoning ByWoodlands and ESPA layers. Therefore, the delineation of the NHC e zone. the subject use - y of new ones 1 zone. - 1 Zone - be constrained by the setback 1 zoning for the site now places floor - he current Commercial Policies of the Official that regional staff erred in designation of the e that there may be individual tenants that require dential development permission be continued and Comment Summary1) Concerned that they will requirement set out in the COM1) States that new COMarea restrictions on most permitted uses, limiting them to 300 sq. m which differs from the current C2) They believmore than 300 sq. m of spaces and would like the cap to be removed.3) State that the configuration of the lot make it difficult to develop for commercial uses. As such, they believe that the current resithat multiple dwelling unit permission be maintained on the site to provide the option for a freestanding residential building. 4) If it is deemed that freestanding residential units is not consistent with tPlan, the applicant suggests a housekeeping amendment to the Official Plan. 5) Alternatively the applicant states that a mixeddesignation and zone could be added to the site.1) Concerned with the provision in s.4.16.1 (a) which requires electricity facilities and transmission and distribution systems to comply with performance standards of an applicabl2) Infrastructure Ontario (IO) and Hydro One Networks Inc. (HONI) are concerned with this provision since much of their HONI infrastructure cannot meet many zoning performance standards such as maximum heights, lot coverage or setbacks.1) State that the subject property does not have a slope or anature feature and that the special provision is not applicable.2) State that subject property has been zoned residential for 80 years and should remain zoned that use3) State that residential zones should never be considered as open space.4) Concernedsubject property as ESPA#3 Homer Watson Park since they used aerial mapping not direct site visits.5) Property owner reviewed the ROP 7C Core Environmental Features and states the criteria does not apply toproperty since there are no core environmental features at 1016A Wilson Ave.6) Property owner believes there are many inaccuracies for mapping and in their 44 years of ownership there has been no existing natural hazards and/or the possibilit Commenter Michael WeinbergGlenn Scheels, GSP Group Inc. Southwest Corner Glasgow Street and University Avenue West Written: April 17, 2018, May 3, 2018Jaime Posen, Fotenn Consultants Inc. Infrastructure Ontario and Hydro One Networks Inc. Written: April 18, 2018Neil Taylor 1016A Wilson Avenue Written: April 25, 2018 and April 30, 2018Oral: April 30, 2018 #2and1234and8 1 - 12 law or - - at dwelling units ) so not applicable 2 zones. residential use to be will be permitted - - non residential uses abut the façade for the - Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Change: Revised MIX zoning so that provision 8.2(1) is not applicable to MIXAccordingly, a cluster townhouse dwelling and a multiple dwelling without requiring alocated on the lot. Revised regulation 8.2 (2to multiple dwellings, thereby not requiring them to be located within a mixed use building and allowing them to be freestanding. Revised 8.2 (2) to clarify th(including amenity areas and access) may be located on the ground floor provided that nonentire length of the façade, except for access. Change: Site specific provision (12) proposed for property to reflect recently approved site plan - standing. - 1) will still be in - law 85 - law and consulting on the By - e façade for the entire length of law recommendation. - to the extent shown in green in law is applicable to all properties in - at facilitating and achieving a built form 2) zoning on the subject properties will law (Zoning - - law, staff will revise regulation 8.2 (2) so it - example. residential uses permitted in the proposed MIX - law, staff will recommend that the land use - tion of the final by Law. - residential uses abut th - ll apply to only permit multiple dwellings on a lot containing a law, there is an opportunity to consider the recent site plan 1 be changed- - law was prepared. Although there are transition provisions in the - ue to apply on the portions of the properties that are not included in residential use. 8.2 (2) will be revised to clarify that dwelling units - dential (RES) zones to the new Zoning By Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) zone will be revised, but will still apply Figure 1. Further, the slope erosion hazard (brown line) and flooding (blue line, hatched) hazard overlay will continue to apply as delineated in the final draft tabled in Spring 2018 any require permits from the GRCA prior to any development. As part of the Official Plan Amendment being done as a companion to the proposed final Zoning Bydesignation for the portions of the properties no longer proposed to be zoned NHCconsidered in a future component of CRoZBy that will consist of adding resiapplication of the RES zones to properties designated residential. Until such time as the new Zoning ByKitchener, the existing Zoning Byeffect and will be applicable to lands not included in the new Zoning Bylaw. Therefore, until such time as new residential zoning is considered, the existing Open Space Zone (Pcontinthe new Zoning ByAn important aspect of properties designated and zoned for mixed use is that they are in existing or planned transit areas with the intent of having increasing amounts of pedestrian activity. Currently, it is important to include regulations that are aimedthat is transit and pedestrian oriented. As indicated in previous correspondence, the purpose of restricting dwelling units on the ground floor is to ensure that active uses are located at the street to encourageactive, pedestrian friendly streets. Active uses are not limited to only retail, but include any of the nonzoning, including office, commercial school, fitness centre, veterinary services and restaurants forIn the proposed final zoning byis not applicable to multiple dwellings, thereby not requiring them to be located within a mixed use building and allowing them to be free8.2 (1) will stinon(including amenity areas and access) may be located on the ground floor provided that nonthe façade, except for access. The final site plan approval for this site was after the UGC component of the byproposed byapproval in the formula law lacks sound planning - law proposes to rezone the - store front or deter development the main floor to the uses described t viable main floor commercial along /016/G/JVW. Comment Summary7) City and Regional staff have yet to make site visits to the site and owner believes that proposed byprinciples. 1) Concerned that limiting will discourage the development everyone would like to see happen.2) Stated that the current density and development constraints in this area make it almost impossible to provide the population density needed to supporthe Lancaster strip.3) States that the Grand River limits the opportunity to intensify on the east side of Lancaster. The creek, wetlands and existing low density on the left side limits opportunity for intensificationand the Conestoga parkway effectively limits opportunity for intensification and limits significant interaction between areas south of it and the Lancaster node. 4) Concerned that forcing developers to provide main floor commercial will result in vacant in this node entirely.5) For the retail use to survive it will require higher nearby supporting populations than before.1) The applicant received AIP from the City of Kitchener for their proposed development on December 12, 2017. 2) Stated that the draft Zoning Bysite and it does not reflect the Site Plan Application SP17 Commenter Dietmar Sommerfeld, CBRE Limited Lancaster Street Mixed Use Corridor Written: April 26, 2018Heather Price, GSP Group Inc. 24 Gaukel Street #56 1 - 13 law or - 45 (1.4), to permit all law Amendment applications and - law prior to the second anniversary of the - Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Change:Site specific provision (125) proposed for property to reflect recent zoning amendment No change: Written acknowledgement received November 21, 2018 stating land owners acceptance of proposed zoning of property.Further Action:Staff recommending that Council declare by resolution, in accordance with Section 10.0.0.2 and SectionZoning Byminor variance applications submitted to amend/seek variance from the new zoning byday on which it was passed. s, wholesaling of the use of a ng parking spaces s for to implement a new 3. Therefore, the - law - law. - conforming as it continues to - 3: Regulations for Minimum Parking - tail as a permitted use. Retail is only complying. This is a necessary law was prepared. There is an - - law is in effect, all regulations, unless - law amendment for the subject site occurred - law is adopted by the City there will be cases of - storage warehouses, and facilitie - law includes the following definition of warehouse e in the proposed zoning by - recommendation. the Official Plan. law - law defines home improvement store as "means conforming and legal non - - 130 percent of those required in Table 5 otherwise stored or manufactured within the building, but shall not . Therefore, based on information obtained from the Zoning Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) after the UGC component of the byopportunity to consider the recent zoning approval in the formulation of the final by1) Confirmed.2) Confirmed.3) The zoning by"means the use of a building for the storage and/or distribution of goods and may include selfgoodsinclude a truck transport terminal". Through the definition of warehouse, wholesaling is also permitted. 4) The bypremises for the retailing of housewares and a wide range of materials, merchandise, and equipment for construction, home improvement, and home gardening". The Business Park Employment Official Plan land use designation does not contemplate repermitted as an accessory use to an employment area use (OP policy 15.D.6.30). As such, adding a home improvement store to the "building material and decorating supply establishment" use would not be consistent with 1 and 2) Once the new zoning byotherwise stipulated, will apply to any development (i.e. additionexpansions, redevelopment) on the property. Staff acknowledges that once a new zoning bylegal nonbyproduct for moving towards a new zoning byOfficial Plan. Staff confirm that an office use is proposed to be a permitted use on this property as per proposed Site Specific Provision (78). Therefore the use will not become legal nonbe a permitted usIn accordance with proposed Table 5Requirements, for an office use that is located in a zone other than UGC and MIX, 1 parking space is required for every 33 m2 of gross floor area (GFA)Occupancy Certificate for the subject property, 154 parking spaces would be required for a 5,069 square metre office. Proposed 5.7 a) stipulates that the number of parking spaces shall not exceed maximum number of parking spaces for a 5,069 square metre office would be 200 spaces. It is understood that there are 241 existing parking spaces. In accordance with proposed 5.7.d), if the existion a lot exceeds the maximum number of parking spaces permitted by 5.7 a), the number of existing parking spaces shall be the maximum number ty? law - g by conforming - law proposed to - specific zoning to reflect - 120 with respect to the king rates will require them - 034. - conforming status will impact their - law - ZBA 2018 law 2018 - residential uses, shall only be required for - rtions of buildings that were not existing on the sting buildings while seeking approval for a new ns of By law and that the parking standards would only apply - 1 and in the industrial employment policies of the Official ation. - Comment Summary1) City Council approved subject property however the new Zoning Byrezone that site and does not reflect the recently approved zoning for the site.2) Asks for city staff to incorporate sitethe permissio1) Confirmed that Site Specific Provision (29) has been revised in accordance with their request. 2) Confirmed that warehouse use has been reinstalled as a permitted use in accordance with their request3) Wholesale use is a current permitted use in Zonin85Plan. Ask that wholesale be added as a permitted use on their subject property.1) Would like clarification on how their property is impacted. What is the proposed maximum parking rate for their properAsks that staff confirm that existing parking complies with the Zoning Bywhen new buildings are proposed. Request that staff include a site specific provision that does not limit parking for this loc2) Concerned that legal nonproperty value. Wants city to provide a qualified Real Estate status on their property.3) States that new required bike parto provide 10 Class A and 5 Class B bike parking stalls along with shower and change facilities. States that this places undue burden on the landowner. 4) Concerned that they will be required to make unnecessary changes to exibuilding on the property. Request that requirements for Bicycle Parking Stalls (Class A and Class B) and related Indoor Shower regulations for nonbuildings or podate of passage of this By5) Ask that consideration be given to preparing a 120 Victoria - Commenter Written: April 30, 2018Heather Price, GSP Group Inc. 114Street South Written: April 30, 2018John S. Doherty, Gowling WLG (Canada) LLP 809 Wellington Street North Written: May 2, 2018Gord Mepham, Peter Benninger, Coldwell Banker Peter Benninger Realty, Brokerage 508 Riverbend Drive Written: May 2, 2018Oral: May 8, 2018Andrea Sinclair, MHBC Planning Written: May 8, 2018 #71011and78 1 - 14 law or - n land use ndment. 1) zoning will be applied to the - Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Change:The Natural Heritage Conservation land use designation in the Official Plan is proposed to be amended to reflect the modifications to ESPA layers. Accordingly, a portion of the property will be designated Natural Heritage Conservation and the remainder of the property will be designated Low Rise Residential as part of the Companion Official Plan AmeFurther Action:In a future phase of CRoZBy, residential zoning and Natural Heritage Conservation (NHCproperty to correspond with the Low Rise Residential land use designation and the Natural Heritage Conservatiodesignation land use designation 1 - to be lications 1) Zone will - law prior to the - nsist of adding mmendations law would be 241 - Grand River dingly, in the proposed 1016, 1082, 1094 Wilson law and consulting on the - om the first draft to the final draft Street Parking & Loading - from the GRCA prior to any proposed new zoning by law, staff will recommend that the land use - t will still apply to the extent shown in green in law, the Natural Heritage Conservation (NHC - - law Amendment applications and minor variance app - - on May 11, 2018, staff is aware that the regional staff made Staff will be recommending that Council declare by resolution, in ned NHC Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) of parking spaces. Therefore, the maximum number parking of spaces that would be required by the parking spaces. 3 and 4) As indicated in previous correspondence, direction for Class A Strategy and staff also considered conclusions and recofrom the Comprehensive Review of OffRegulations. Both documents provided direction to implement bicycle parking requirements and shower and change facility requirements in the zoning bylaw. Staff revised regulations frzoning byshower and change facilities) are only required for new buildings or new required for all buildings. Please refer to 5.4.a).5) accordance with Section 10.0.0.2 and Section 45 (1.4), to permit all Zoning Bysubmitted to amend/seek variance from the new zoning bysecond anniversary of the day on which it was passed.Following the site visit to the subject properties (Ave) modifications to their Significant Woodlands and Environmental Sensitive Policy Area (ESPA) layers around the Wilson Ave area. Consistent with what staff indicated in previous correspondence, theConservation Authority (GRCA) has confirmed that portions of the subject properties are within the GRCA regulated area and further, reiterate that no modifications to the delineation of slope erosion hazards and flooding hazard are supported. Staff can confirm that we are in receipt of the updated Significant Woodlands and ESPA layers and data from the Region of Waterloo on July 24th. Below, Figure 1, shows the modified Significant Woodlands and the ESPA layers on the subject properties. Accorfinal Zoning ByWoodlands and ESPA layers. Therefore, the delineation of the NHCzone will be revised, buFigure 1. Further, the slope erosion hazard (brown line) and flooding (blue line, hatched) hazard overlay will continue to apply as delineated in the final draft tabled in Spring 2018 any require permits development. As part of the Official Plan Amendment being done as a companion to the proposed final Zoning Bydesignation for the portions of the properties no longer proposed to be zoconsidered in a future component of CRoZBy that will coresidential (RES) zones to the new Zoning Byapplication of the RES zones to properties designated residential. nue to be xxx prior to the - law Amendment specific basis within - - at there may be the need submitted to amend Bylaw 20xx year time period. - Comment Summaryrecommendation to Council to the effect that Section 34 (10.0.0.1) does not apply to all Zoning Byapplicationssecond anniversary of the day on which it was passed; and that Section 45 (1.3) does not apply to all minor variance applications. Other municipalities have taken a similar approach. Our general concern is thfor variances or zoning changes on a sitethe two1) States that proposed NHC zoning is inconsistent with the long established use of the property and requests that the City change the zone back to residential.2) States that residential use has been and can conticonsistent with natural feature preservation. 3) States that real financial damage will be incurred if the proposed zoning were to be adopted. Commenter Oral: May 8, 2018John & Holly Caron, 1082 Wilson Avenue Written: May 4, 2018 #13 1 - 15 - law or - ons and law Number 85 - ng By law at this time and will - law Amendment applicati - ng height of 12 storeys or 36 metres on applied on the property. law prior to the second anniversary of the t - Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Change:No longer proposing a holding provision on the propertySite Specific provision (118) proposed for property to allow an increased maximum buildia lot containing a mixed use building.Further Action:Staff recommending that Council declare by resolution, in accordance with Section 10.0.0.2 and Section 45 (1.4), to permit all Zoning Byminor variance applications submitted to amend/seek variance from the new zoning byday on which it was passed.Change:Flooding hazard overlay updated to be consistent with current GRCA mappingThe property is not proposed to be included in the new zoning byremain subject to zoni1. An ecological restoration area overlay is no - ay serves operties will law Amendment - 1) will still be in pedestrian scale - ored feature or the law prior to the - law 85 - law is applicable to all properties in - that Council declare by resolution, in agreement to applying a site specific 2) zoning on the subject pr law (Zoning By - - ent application and the design brief can be to the satisfaction of the City, Region, Grand such guidance exists, the optimal ecological m permitted building height of up to 50 percent of oning By law. - the proposed 14H holding provision in the proposed Law. - law recognizing that necessary sanitary servicing - es. Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) Until such time as the new Zoning ByKitchener, the existing Zeffect and will be applicable to lands not included in the new Zoning Bylaw. Therefore, until such time as new residential zoning is considered, the existing Open Space Zone (Pcontinue to apply on the portions of the properties that are not included in the new Zoning By1) and 2) As indicated in previous correspondence, staff acknowledges that Official Plan policy 15.D.4.23 provides for the consideration of increases to the maximuthe permitted building height for mixed use buildings containing a residential use. There are certain aspects outlined in this policy that must be satisfied on a site specific context (e.g. compatibility, base, appropriate massing). Given that certain aspects must be addressed site specifically before an increase in building height can be considered, staff is still of the opinion that this would be appropriately addressed through a developmconsidered for justification. As such, staff will not be recommending permitting a greater maximum permitted building height for this property in the final draft zoning by3 and 4) Staff will be recommendingaccordance with Section 10.0.0.2, to permit all Zoning Byapplications submitted to amend the new zoning bysecond anniversary of the day on which it was passed. 5) Staff will remove final zoning byinfrastructure will be available to handle additional development. Further Consideration of RequestUpon further consideration, staff in provision to the property to allow for increased building height1) The delineation of the flooding hazard overlay is consistent with current GRCA mapping. 2) Ecological Restoration Heritage System as identified in the 2014 Official Plan (OP).The intent of ecological restoration areas overlay is to identify lands that have the potential to have their ecological functions restored. The overlas a notice that those lands identified will be subject to an Environmental Impact Study or other appropriate study prior to development (vacant sites), redevelopment (of all or part of existing developed sites), or site alteration (vacant or devPoliciThe study must demonstrateRiver Conservation Authority and/or Province, as appropriate, that there will be no adverse environmental impacts on the restecological functions of the feature in its optimal ecological state. The optimal ecological state of an ecosystem may be determined through watershed studies, environmental assessments, or other similar master plans or studies. Where no provision use building - tensify the upported on this year moratorium, which can - om the GRCA law. The property owner is concerned that the - Comment Summary1) Official Plan Policies make provision for increase to the permitted building height of up to 50% for a mixedcontaining residential uses. 2) The applicant submitted a design brief which demonstrates that additional building height can be sproperty. 3) The Planning Act provides a 2be put in place following the approval of a new comprehensive Zoning Bypotential moratorium may affect the ability to insubject lands. 4) Requests that staff considers exempting the subject lands from any moratorium that may be considered or alternatively, provide for a maximum building height of 12 storeys.5) Requests that staff consider removing the holding as it relates to the construction of a forcemain which will be completed this year1) The adopted Official Plan is under appeal as it relates to the subject lands2) Ask that flooding hazard overlay reflect permits that have been received fr3) Ask that the ecological restoration areas overlay be deleted given the lands are developed with an automobile dealership Commenter Paul Britton, MHBC Planning 2980 King Street East Oral: April 30, 2018Written: May 4, 2018Paul Britton, MHBC Planning Courtland Ave East, south of Block Line Road in proximity to Siebert Avenue Written: May 4, 2018 #1415 1 - 16 law or - eviewed. Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action No Change:Staff continues not to propose new zoning for the subject properties at this time given that they are have a residential land use designation.Further Action:Will consider the request in a future phase of CRoZBy when the zoning of residential lands are rChange:Proposed zoning on property consistent with the Official Plan e Kitchener Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) state of an ecosystem will be determined by the appropriate agencies having jurisdiction in consultation with the owner/applicant.This overlay will remain on the property in order to comply with the Regions / 1) and 2) Staff are aware of the interest in the lands for park/open space purposes. Similar input was previously received through thGrowth Management Plan process. These lands will be considered in a future component of CRoZBy. The City is working with the landowner, Grand River Conservation Authority.Addition al stakeholder meeting took place November 16, 2018No formal response provided as lands were subject to Official Plan Appeal. ts law not apply any - Natural Heritage System of ological Restoration Area, as it does not law however it does fall under the Flooding - Ecological Restoration Area Overlays. aw l - Comment Summary1) Requesting that the publicly owned lands outlined at 155 Woolner Trail and the publicly owned lands along the east side of Woolner trail to the south of the Woolner Heritage Farm be By2) Public passive parkland uses are needed and will enhance the valuable natural resource that the Grand River provides1) The subject lands are not proposed to be rezoned in the proposed Zoning ByHazard and 2) The client currently had Map 6 the Kitchener Official Plan under appeal as it relates to their lands3) Does not believe that section 34(1)3.2 of the Planning Act permits zoning of an Ecfall within the range of natural features and areas that are referenced in that section.4) Requests that the proposed Zoning Byoverlay designations to its land prior to the final resolution of iappeals of the Kitchener Official Plan. Commenter Larry Kotseff & Stephanie Massel, 155 Woolner Trail and property owned by the GRCA on the east side of Woolner Trail Written: May 4, 2018Oral: May 8, 2018Robert Howe, Goodmans LLP North West Corner of New Dundee Road and Reidel Drive Written: May 4, 2018 #1617 1 - 17 land n shall law or 3 to - - unit - chain link sion (54) to 2 and legalize the - unit parking rate. Minimum of - interior side yard setback e proposed maximum multi 2 with site specific provi - minimum Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Change: No longer proposing MIX zoning on the property. Revising Official Plan Amendment to change land use designation of subject lands from Mixed Use to Medium Rise Residential. Further Action:Zoning of the property will be reviewed ifuture phase of CRoZBy. Change: As per landowners request, proposed that Official Plan be amended to change the use designation on 525 Highland Road W., As per landowners request, changing the proposed zoning of 525 Highland Road W., and 563 Highland Road W. from MIXCOMexempt existing buildings and structure from regulations within Table 9existing drive through facility.As per landowners request, site specific provision (53) applied to 491 Highland Road W revised to permit the existing fence along the lot line abutting a residential zone as a visual barrier and to clarify that the be 1.5 metres.Added a 'multi1 sp / 35 GFA and maximum of 1 sp / 24 GFA. Thparking rate would allow 265 spaces on 563 2. - an unit parking - , 2019 3 for reasons - th the maximum building height in Dwelling units shall not be located aff response to your submission res uses) - law is pending. - ke the corresponding changes to recommend that 525 and 5 will now include a minimum and maximum multi usly discussed. 2 will be 25 m for mixed use buildings. note that in the written and oral submissions made on behalf of the - Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) No formal response provided as lands were subject to Official PlAppeal.Response to May 4, 2018 SubmissionStaff property owner it was requested that consideration of new zoning to be applied to the subject lands be deferred until such time as the Official Plan appeals are resolved. Accordingly, a stand confirmation of the zoning that staff will propose for the subject lands in the final Zoning ByAdditional stakeholder meeting took place Feb 14Response to Feb 19, 2019 SubmissionStaff will ma563 Highland Rd W be designated Commercial and zoned COMThe land use designation and zoning for 491 Highland Rd W will remain designated Mixed Use and proposed to be zoned MIXprevioStaff confirm that in the final zoning bylaw it is intended that:the maximum GFA of 10,000 sq m will be applicable to retail only rather than being applicable to all nonCOMRegulation 9.1 (3) will not be changed. on the ground floor. Space used for access to dwelling units is permitted on the ground floor. Sectionrate and a provision will be added to recognize existing parallel parking spots. 1 zone - plicant conforming and the - ht requirement of 24 3 and what it means - n every site .6 despite the policy direction 3 provisions are as follows: 1 with special use provision nd they ask that the proposed - - specific constraints of the subject - law is concerning to the property - 3 zone would frustrate changes in - ment. The proposed special provision (94) facing elevations at grade) - due to its unusual configuration instating the maximum building heig - e current proposed by Comment Summary1) Current property is zoned C363U and special regulation provision 466R.2) The in effect zoning allows for a maximum building height of 24 metres and does not provide an explicit maximum floor space ratio requirelimits the building height to 21 metres and the MIXimposes a maximum floor space ratio requirement of 1.3) Requests the Staff consider increasing maximum FSR to 2 and rem4) The development block extends into the hydro corridor, In consideration of the existing easement we anticipate this portion of the block will only be used for parking and landscape purposes only. Given the lot configuration the aprequests that the proposed site specific provision be revised by deleting the minimum interior side yard and rear yard setback abutting a hydro corridor.5) Existing zoning and policy framework make provision for free standing apartment buildings azoning add a similar provision6) Requests confirmation that an amenity area associated with residential is permitted on the ground floor of mixed use buildings.May 4, 20181) State that it is very important to the property owners that the subject properties maintain their legal status/existing use permissions and the zoning is sufficiently flexible to allow changes in tenancy, site improvements and future development. 2) Thowner because it makes their use legal nonregulations of the MIXtenancy and would not allow for site improvements or incremental intensification3) Concerned with the aspects of the MIXfor new development since it does not allow the subject properties to intensify incrementally over time.4) Their concerns with the MIXa. Requires a minimum FSR of 0in the Mixed use designation that states that the implementing zoning will consider and may contain transition requirements to facilitate an permit lands to ultimately meet the minimum FSRb. It requires the mixing of uses oc. Contains requirements that would be more appropriately contained in design guidelines (e.g. minimum 70% transparent openings of streetd. Does not consider the siteproperties Feb 19, 2019 May 4, Commenter Paul Britton, MHBC Planning 10 South Creek Drive Written: 2018Chris Pidgeon, Heather Price, GSP Group Inc. 491 Highland Road W., 525 Highland Road W., and 563 Highland Road W. Written: May 4, 2018Eric Davis/Michelle DesRosier Oral Submission: May 8, 2018Further correspondence received: Feb 19, 2019 #1819 1 - 18 2 - m law or m to 8 - - in COM - Parking, residential gross - generally do not apply to existing Action: a and minimum percent of 3. - Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Highland Road W when have a GFA of 6,423 sq m. Added provision in Section 5 Loading, and Stacking to stipulate that provisions parking space, existing loading spaces and existing stacking spaces and existing stacking lanes.Revised the maximum gross floor area requirement in COM and MIX zoning to apply to retail only rather than nonresidential.Revised maximum building height to 25m for a mixed use buildingRevised 8.3(1) so that all the regulations of all MIX zones contained in Table 8.2 are not applicable to existing buildings and structuresIncreased the maximum distance between façade openings in MIX zones from 4m.Reduced the minimum percent of ground floor façade openings from 70% to 50% for MIXAdded regulation to exempt individual buildings from achieving the minimum floor space ratio, minimum percent of nonresidential gross floor area and minimupercent of residential gross floor area where there is an approved Urban Design Brief that includes a Master Site Plan that demonstrates the overall development can achieve the minimum floor space ratio, minimum percent of nonfloor areresidential gross floor area.Change: No longer proposing INS zoning on the property. Further Zoning of the property will be reviewed in future phase of CRoZBy. e, confirm that with the unit parking rate and a Gross Floor Area - Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) In regards to the requests for an increased maximum number of parking spaces on 563 Highland Road W to 265 spacproposed revised maximum multiof 6,423 sq m, 265 spaces would be permitted by the zoning bylaw.No formal response provided. Necessary discussions occurred through review of relevant planning applications. - - 1 - and Zoning By 2 Zoning for 525 - in zoning to INS res uses) - the unique configuration of 2 from 15 m to 24 m for - residential use. - 10,000 sq m is applicable to retail only conforming and existing Committee of - that the City consider increasing the maximum # of law, includin - e.g. amenity rooms, lobby, mailroom, storage, etc.) is permitted Comment SummaryAccept a Commercial designation and COMand 563 Highland Road as suggested by staff. Maintain that 491 Highland Road should have the same designation/zoning as the other two properties. Given 491 Highland, it is unlikely to realize a mixed use development on its own. We will continue further investigation of what a MIX3 zone means for future development of 491 Highland. Request confirmation that:the maximum GFA of(rather than being applicable to all nonthe max building height in COMbuildings containing dwelling units. regulation 9.1 (3) is revised to clarify that dwelling related space (on the main floor and that the entire ground floor is not required to be occupied with nonchanges being made to the parking regulations in Section 5 of the Bythe recognition of existing parallel parking spots.Request site specific provisions to ensure properties do not become legal nonAdjustment decisions are recognized. Requestparking spaces on 563 Highland Road West to 265 spaces (38 more spaces more than existing conditions) in order to support occupancy of the vacant basement space. 1) Blaze Properties Inc. had made applications to the City of Kitchener for amendments to the Official Planlaw to permit single storey attached dwellings for seniors affordable housing2) Blaze has been preparing the required reports and is in a positon to file complete applications to The City of Kitchener3) Blaze properties opposes the change Commenter Mark L. Dorfman, Mark L. Dorfman, Planner Inc. 146 Trafalgar Road #20 1 - 19 law or - hange: Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action No change:No change requestedNo change:No change requestedNo change:No change requestedNo cNo change requestedNo change:No change requested evious concerns formal response provided. Comments indicated that previous concerns Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) Noaddressed. No formal response provided. Comments indicated that previous concerns addressed. No formal response provided. Comments indicated that previous concerns addressed. No formal response provided. Comments indicated that previous concerns addressed. No formal response provided. Comments indicated that praddressed. have law - Site Specific Provision law in part through Site - permissions have been low for the completion and law as it relates to these lands and - law as it relates to these lands and law as it relates to these lands and law as it relates to these lands and law as it relates to these lands and ---- law in part through - operty and related setbacks as well as clarifications on law. law. - - Comment Summarysince there is no intent to reuse the old school building for institutional purposes or demolish the building for other institutional uses4) Requests that the City of Kitchener defer consideration of this change in zoning in order to alsubmission of the relevant planning applications.1) Pleased to find that concerns related to site specific provisions and retail and office addressed in the final draft Zoning BySpecific Provision 48.2) Support the proposed byask to be notified of any further changes as it relates to the subject property1) Pleased to find that concerns related to Natural Heritage Features permitted uses have been addressed in the final draft Zoning By2) Support the proposed byask to be notified of any further changes as it relates to the subject pr1) Pleased to find that concerns related to permitted uses been addressed in the final draft zoning by2) Support the proposed byask to be notified of any further changes as it relates to the subject property1) Pleased to find that concerns related to site specific provisions and office permissions have been addressed in the final draft Zoning By48.2) Support the proposed byask to be notified of any further changes that relates to the subject lands1) Pleased to find that clarification related to permitted uses and office permissions have been addressed in the final draft zoning by2) Support the Final Draft Byrespectfully request ask that we be notified of any further 4289 King 4370 King -- 30100, -- Commenter Written: May 6, 2018Carol Wiebe, MHBC Planning 4271Street East Written: May 7, 2018Carol Wiebe, MHBC Planning 575 Riverbend Drive Written: May 7, 2018Carol Wiebe, MHBC Planning 50 Washburn Drive Written: May 7, 2018Carol Wiebe, MHBC Planning 4336 and 4318 King St E., 20 Heldman Rd, 10Sportsworld D,4336St E., 50 Sportsworld Crossing Rd 60Sportsworld Dr Written: May 7, 2018Carol Wiebe, MHBC Planning 1265 Strasburg Road #2122232425 1 - 20 - - law or - law and - d to be law at this - 1 zoning applied to the - 1. - 1 zoning and residential zoning - residential. the maximum gross floor area - d plied, the NHC Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Change: Reviserequirement to apply to retail only rather than nonChange:The subject lands are not proposeincluded in the new zoning bytime and will remain subject to zoning Bylaw Number 85Further Action:At the time the subject lands are proposed to be included in the new zoning byhave NHCapproperty will be consistent with the approved Detailed Vegetation Plan (DVP) for 30T97012.Change:Proposed zoning on property consistent with the Official Plan law, - ation Authority - n the proposed final zoning by ermined through watershed studies, tation with the owner/applicant. opment (of all or part of existing developed sites), or site egistration; and we have refined the zoning based on the original 97012. The DVP refines the General Vegetation Overview (GVO) - Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) 1, 2, 3, 4) Upon further consideration, istaff will revise the proposed COM zoning to apply the maximum gross floor area requirement to retail only. 5) As indicated in previous correspondence, the Ecological Restoration Areas (ERA) are a component of Kitcheneridentified in the 2014 Official Plan (OP). The ERA overlay serves as a notice that those lands identified will be subject to an Environmental Impact Study or other appropriate study prior to development (vacant sites), redevelalteration (vacant or developed sites) as per our Official Plan Policies (7.C.2.34. through to 7.C.2.43.). The study must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City, Region, Grand River Conservand/or Province, as appropriate, that there will be no adverse environmental impacts on the restored feature or the ecological functions of the feature in its optimal ecological state. The optimal ecological state of an ecosystem may be detenvironmental assessments, or other similar master plans or studies. Where no such guidance exists, the optimal ecological state of an ecosystem will be determined by the appropriate agencies having jurisdiction in consulThe proposed NHC zone illustrates a more refined limit of development and is consistent with the approved Detailed Vegetation Plan (DVP) for 30Tprior to rintent. The Detailed Vegetation Plan would not have necessarily been available when the Conservation Easement or previous 'P' zone were established.No formal response provided as lands were subject to Official Plan Appeal.Lands proposed to be added to zoning byprocess. 2 - - zone the subject - residential gross floor g in consideration of - law that could impact this not re - 2 Zone be clarified as relating to - residential GFA exceeds 10,000 law does residential floor area cap and the - - - difficult time intensifying, despite nal Draft, and as a result the non of the COM easement shown on the attached plan. Comment Summarychanges to the Final Draft Zoning Byproperty.1) Concerned with the nonecological restoration overlay2) The current zoning permits a maximum gross leasable commercial space of 13,500 sq. m on the subject lands and limits the gross leasable commercial space for a single commercial outlet to 4,550 sq. m. This provision is not being carried forward in the Firesidential gross floor area of the development will be limited to a maximum of 10,000 m2 as per the regulations of the COMzone category. 3) Suggests that the maximum total nonarea requirementretail only.centres where the total nonm2, a number of commercial sites (including 370 Highland Road West) may have ahaving retail floor areas well below 10,000 sq. m.5) Ask that the Ecological Restoration Overlay be deleted as it relates to the developed portions of 370 Highland Road West. The subdivision was subject to extensive analysis with respect to the limit of environmental features which were ultimately determined to coexistent with conservation easement. Please revise zoning limits such that they are coincident with the conservation1) The proposed Zoning bylands but applies overlay which restricts a number of uses.2) Question overlay restrictions in the event identified overlay considerations are otherwise resolved or removed from the property.3) Question the need for overlay mappinGRCA regulations which are now in effect4) Requests the overlay map as it relates to the subject lands be deleted. Commenter Written: May 7, 2018Carol Wiebe, MHBC Planning 370 Highland Road W. Written: May 7, 2018Oral: May 8, 2018Paul Britton, MHBC Planning Deer Creek Court Written: May 7, 2018Paul Britton, MHBC Planning Brigadoon South Community Lands Written: May 7, 2018 #262728 1 - 21 2 - law or - - cess) may law amendment - xisting buildings and residential. - residential uses abut the façade for the - e Official Plan. Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Change:Proposed zoning on property consistent with the Official PlanRevised regulation 8.2 (1) so not applicable to multiple dwellings, thereby not requiring them to be located within a mixed use building and allowing them to be freestanding. Revised 8.2 (2) to clarify that dwelling units (including amenity areas and acbe located on the ground floor provided that nonentire length of the façade, except for access. Revised 8.3(1) so that all the regulations of all MIX zones contained in Table 8.2 are not applicable to estructuresRevised maximum building height in COMto 25m for a mixed use buildingRevise the maximum gross floor area requirement to apply to retail only rather than nonRevised how ground floor façade openings calculatedRevised to allow mapping errors to be corrected as technical revisions and without a new for a zoning byChange:Proposed zoning on property consistent with th through this , 2019 th -- onse provided as lands were subject to Official Plan Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) No formal response provided as lands were subject to Official Plan Appeal.Lands proposed to be added to zoning byprocess. Additional stakeholder meeting took place Feb 8No formal respAppeal.Lands proposed to be added to zoning byprocess. 2 d - 2 zone be - dwelling units of zone the subject - 2 Zone and for a food store. - 2 Zone be deleted - law does not re - the proposed minimum ground floor mitted) g and loading spaces is problematic welling units without the requirement und floor of a building fronting a street. siderations are otherwise resolved or removed from the Suggest that maximum floor areas requirement of the COM Comment Summary1) Ask that Section 8.1 (Mixed Use Zones) make provision for free standing multiple dthat they be located within a mixed use building as provided for by the official plan.2) Ask that the Mixed Use Zone be clarified such that amenity space associated with multiple dwellings is also permitted on the gro3) Please consider deleting the total maximum gross floor area of 5,000 square metres in the MIX4) Anticipates the minimum ground floor façade width of 50% will be problematic as willopening requirement. Suggest these requirements be reduced and/or eliminated with consideration of these matters occurring in the context of a site plan approval process and/or design guidelines.5) The location of parkinand in the alternative, suggests a minimum setback from adjacent streets6) Suggest that the mixed use requirement for multiple dwellings outlined in the COM7) Wants confirmation that a maximum FSR fortwo is in addition to permitted commercial floor area8) Suggest that maximum building height in a COMincreased to 24 metres to ensure appropriate intensification of the sites and in recognition of the proposed maximum FSR9) zone be clarified as relating to retail only10) Definitions should cite listed uses as examples which are (e.g. the use shall be per11) The interpretation section should be clarified/expanded to provide for zone and classification interpretations based on approved permits issued from the GRCA or similar agencyto exclude any floor area located 50% or greater below grade.1) The proposed Zoning Bylands but applies overlays which restrict a number of uses. 2) Question overlay restrictions in the event identified overlay conproperty.3) Question the need for overlay mapping in consideration of GRCA regulations which are now in effect4) Requests the overlay map as it relates to the subject lands be deleted. Commenter Paul Britton, MHBC Planning Lands at the Southwesterly intersection of Ottawa Street and Lackner Boulevard and at the Northeasterly intersection of Ottawa Street and River Road Written: May 7, 2018Paul Britton, MHBC Planning Huron Road Land owned by Activa Holdings Ltd. Written: May 7, 2018 #2930 1 - 22 law or - to the .D.12.27 (29) Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Change:Added Site Specific Provision property in accordance with 15 ons law - law, staff - law to nt and/or - law regulati - law is adopted there will 2 zone implement the - complying. This is a - - ific Policy Area 34. specific consideration, where - law, staff will apply site specific site - g towards a new zoning by tions from the Comprehensive Review of l revise the COM zoning to clarify and will list conforming and legal non - nt to retail only. es of the new Official Plan are implemented. Street Parking & Loading Regulations. Shower and change facilities - Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) 1, 2a) The permitted uses proposed in the COMcontemplated as a permitted use in the Commercial land use designation. Staff acknowledges that once the new zoning bybe cases of legal nonnecessary byproduct for movinimplement the new Official Plan.2b) In the proposed final zoning byprovision (27) to implement Site Specific Policy Area 27 (15.D.12.27) in the same manner that it implements Site Specpermitted use. Staff wilEstablishment is defined as the use of a premises for research, investigation, testing, or experimentation including laboratories; pilot plants; prototype production facilities; software developmeengineering services; and scientific, technological, or communications establishments. 3) Upon further consideration, in the proposed final zoning bywill revise the proposed COM zoning to apply the maximum gross floor area requireme4. Direction to implement both Class A and Class B bicycle parking, as well as shower and change facility requirements into the zoning byconclusions and recommendaOffare part of the necessary function of a Class A bicycle parking space, so it can be used for its intended purpose. Further, Zoning byare enforceable and provide a legal way of consistently managing land use and future development. Design guidelines encourage development in line with the vision established through the Urban Design Manual, while maintaining a level of flexibility and appropriate. Part of this comprehensive review involved evaluating current design guidelines, and in certain instances, staff recommends zoning to ensure consistency of application and to ensure that objectives and polici 2 - 2 the -- that 2 zone - 2 zone and - 2 zone and the - fic, technological or 4 with special provision - 2 zone be revised to include - conforming. - residential gross floor area of 10,000 - tions for Shower and Change Facilities is d developments does not recognize the use is subject to maximum total gross floor area of elated to office uses set out by Site Specific Policy rally support the list however they have the following site ) For parking regulations, the applicant believes that table 5 Comment Summary1) Subject lands are currently zoned MPlan and are subject to Specific Policy Area 27. Specific Policy Arepercent of the gross floor area and to a maximum Floor Space 2) Reviewed the permitted uses for the COMgenespecific concerns:zone, as the lands are presently used as a warehouse they request that warehouse be included as a permitted use sothe current use is not legal nonb. The uses established from Special Policy Area 27 and Special Use Provision 196U have not been carried forward in the final draft. however the10,000 sq. m which is not consistent with Special Policy Area 27 regulations. By their calculations, the existing zoning would permit approximately 38,000 sq. m of office. Requests that the regulations rArea 27 and Special Use Provision 196 U be maintainedelectronic and data processing businesses; research and development establishments and scienticommunications establishments, to a maximum FSR of 0.5. These uses are not permitted in the COMapplicant requests that the COMthese uses or that a special regulation is created to maintaincurrent permissions of the subject lands3) A maximum total nonsq. m significantly limits the redevelopment potential for large sites. Further application of this gross floor area cap for multiunit buildings anregulations established in the Site Specific Policy Area of the Official Plan as it would limit office uses with multiple tenants.4which includes regulaoverly prescriptive and would be more appropriate within the Urban Design Guidelines. Commenter Carol Wiebe, MHBC Planning 6 Shirley Avenue Written: May 7, 2018Oral: May 8, 2018 #31 1 - 23 law or - to permit computer, Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Change:Site specific provision (156) proposed to apply to propertyelectronic, data processing, or serverestablishment; office; and, research and development establishment. specific - law. - comprehensive dustrial future expansions to such an. 2 to include uses not - bylaw reflect a public development - ty in the proposed final zoning by conforming use, but through the appropriate - Ontario Municipal Board. Zoning intended to rocess. The proposed Official Plan Amendment 2 zone implements the General In - the subject property is located along a planned transit corridor, staff Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) 1) Site specific policy area (15.D.12.3) in the Official Plan and siteprovision (105) in the proposed zoningapplication process and subsequent Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) hearing and settlement pas it relates to site specific policy area 15.D.12.3 is clarifying the intent of the policy and continues to implement what was agreed to on the subject zoning review process is not meant to replace private development applications. These applications go through a public process and are considered on their own merits. Therefore, staff will not apply site specific provision (105) to the properHowever, upon further review in consideration that an office use is an employment use (albeit not contemplated in the general industrial land use designation but in the business park employment designation) and that will recommend that a site specific provision be applied to the subject property to permit existing office and research and development establishments within the existing building. Anyexisting use would not be considered by means of the Committee of Adjustment as a legal nondevelopment review application process. 2) The proposed EMPthe range of uses in the proposed EMPcontemplated by the General Industrial Employment land use designation would not be in keeping with the Official Pl3) Staff acknowledge that the Official Plan is partially under appeal at the Ontario Municipal Board. It is understood that further modifications to the proposed zoning may be necessary pending resolution of matters related to the Official Plan at theimplement Official Plan policies under appeal will not come into effect until such time as corresponding Official Plan policies are in effect. - 2). In - 2), - law (April - law to - rive. includes an expanded list of permitted uses ts policies. al administrative office uses be applied to 277 Manitou proposed Business Industrial Employment Zone (EMP Comment Summary1) Site Specific Provision 105 in the draft Zoning By2018) has been proposed for the former Budd Automotive property, which within the General Industrial Employment Zone (EMPincluding scientific, technological or communications establishments. We request that Site Specific Provision 105 be applied to the property at 277 Manitou D2) Industrial administrative offices are only permitted in association with heavy repair operations, manufacturing, restoration, janitorial and/or security services, truck transport, the light of our request noted above with respect to the Official Plan Amendment and Site Specific Provision 105 of the Zoning Bylaw (April 2018), we request an expanded list of permissions for industriDrive.3) The City's new Official Plan is currently under appeal. Until such time as the new Official Plan is approved and in force, it may be premature to approve the new Zoning Byimplement i Second - Commenter Kristen Barisdale, GSP Group Inc. 277 Manitou Drive draft of CRoZBY Written: May 7, 2018 #32 1 - 24 law or - and, research and Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Change:Site specific provision (156) proposed to apply to property to permit computer, electronic, data processing, or serverestablishment; office; development establishment. - - rial land agreed to on sion Hazard 2 to includes uses not - bylaw reflect a public - 2 zone implements the General - ay identifies that the property is merits. Therefore, staff will not apply site conforming use, but through the appropriate office and research and development - ation process and subsequent Ontario Municipal nt review application process. vincial legislation regarding industrial areas, the City has updated e and minimize property damage and social disruption; and, the Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) 1, 2, 3, 4) Site specific policy area (15.D.12.3) in the Official Plan and sitespecific provision (105) in the proposed zoningdevelopment applicBoard (OMB) hearing and settlement process. The proposed Official Plan Amendment as it relates to site specific policy area 15.D.12.3 is clarifying the intent of the policy and continues to implement what was comprehensive zoning review process is not meant to replace private development applications. These applications go through a public process and are considered on their ownspecific provision (105) to the property in the proposed final zoning bylaw. However, upon further review in consideration that an office use is an employment use (albeit not contemplated in the general industuse designation but in the business park employment designation) and that the subject property is located along a planned transit corridor, staff will recommend that a site specific provision be applied to the subject property to permit existing establishments within the existing building. Any future expansions to such existing use would not be considered by means of the Committee of Adjustment as a legal nondevelopme5) As indicated in previous correspondence, staff acknowledge that the existing industrial (M) zones and business park (B) zones currently permit a wide range of industrial and commercial uses. However, to align with new Proits Official Plan to permit only industrial and industrial related/supportive uses in these areas. The proposed EMPIndustrial Employment land use designatioBroadening the range of uses in the proposed EMPcontemplated by the General Industrial Employment land use designation would not be in keeping with the Official Plan. 6) The Slope Erosion Hazard overlregulated by the Grand River Conservation Authority and provides more transparency. The purpose of this overlay is to identify lands that are susceptible to slope erosion hazards and prevent the: injury or the loss of lifaggravation of existing hazards and the creation of new ones. The overlays highlights that a permit would be needed from the GRCA prior to the development within the boundaries of the Slope Erooverlay. This requirement is consistent with the current GRCA Regulated Area that applies to this portion of the property, and thus does not change how the land can currently be used.The overlay will remain on the property in order to comply wnatural hazards. 1). - party tobacco testing - o align with the boundary of the c provision 105 be applied to the f the source material used to identify the Manitou Drive is currently occupied by ses as identified for the former Budd Automotive Comment Summary1) The Property at 262 Labstat International, an independent thirdcompany that provides regulatory testing and research of tobacco products.2) Requests consideration be given to including the same list of permitted uproperty for 262 Manitou Drive through the same Official Plan Amendment.3) In addition, requests that research and development be added to the list of used for 262Manitou drive.4) Request that site specifisubject lands as it permits scientific, technical or communications establishments5) request an expanded list of permissions for industrial administrative office uses be applied to 262 Manitou Drive6) We request a copy oSlope Erosion Hazard overlay on the southeast portion of the Property. We also request that the Slope Erosion Hazard overlay as identified on the southeast portion of the Property at 262 Manitou Drive be reduced tadjacent Natural Heritage Conservation Zone (NHC Second - Commenter Kristen Barisdale, GSP Group Inc. 262 Manitou Drive draft of CRoZBY Written: May 7, 2018 #33 1 - 25 law or - law. - Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action No Change:Request for clarification provided in response rather than change to proposed zoning byChange:Revised the minimum parking requirement 40 square metres to 1 space per 120 square metres.No change:No change requested.Change: The zoning has been revised to reflect the current GRCA floodplain mapping. as a l revised Street Parking & - separately osed Zones is defined law, they are consistent - law released in April 2018 as a - zoning by wing further review, staff will revise the proposed parking ing any changes. comments previously submitted by the WCDSB and in Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) 1 and 2) 'Major Equipment Supply and Service' is listed permitted use in Table 10.1 of the EMP Zone because a 'Large Merchandise Retail' (which includes Major Equipment Supply and Service) use is not permitted in the proposed EMP zoning. Every use in all the Tables pertaining to permitted uses in the propto provide clarity.3) Thank you for your supportive commentbe a permitted use in the proposed Urban Growth Centre, Mixed Use and Institutional zones. This use was added as a permitted use in these zones in the final draft of the proposed zoning byresult ofrecognition that the Official Plan contemplates educational establishments and institutional uses in the Urban Growth Centre, Mixed Use and Institutional land use designations. The Commercial the IndustriaEmployment land use designations in the Official Plan do not contemplate in the corresponding COM zones and EMP zones would not be consistent with the Official Plan. 4 and 5) Follorequirement for adult education school to be consistent with the proposed parking requirements of secondary schoolsLoadingpractice review that generally Kitchener is oversupplying parking and could benefit from the reduction of existing minimum parking requirements. Therefore, this study recommended that new and rates be developed based on policy and demand. In the review of the current supply of parking at a selection of existing schools, staff noted that while the proposed minimum parking rates may be higher than the minimum parking rates in the current with, or less than the current supply of parking at school sites. Therefore, staff is of the opinion that the minimum parking requirements proposed more closely match parking requirements with demand and are not recommendNo formal response provided. Comments indicated support of proposed land use designation and zoning. The zoning will be revised to reflect the current GRCA floodplain mapping. - law Amendment. - - Francis campus and - t zones. supply and service use is include applied to adult education as well. en carried over for this property. t Applications.Anticipates they will receive a permit from GRCA in the future Comment Summary1) Lands are currently developed with a use that would be described as a Construction Equipment Supplier2) While Major Equipmentwithin the Large Merchandise Retail use permitted in the COM3 zone, for clarification purposes they request that it be added as its own permitted use.3) Confirm support for the Special Regulation Provisions that have be1) The adult education use is currently proposed to only be permitted within the Urban Growth Centre, Mixed Use and Institutional zones.2) Looking for a larger location for the Stbelieve the proposed zoning will ability to relocate its programming due to the added financial and time constraints for requiring a Zoning By3) Ask that the Adult Education Use be permitted in commercial zones and potentially some employmen4) Concerned with the proposed parking requirement for adult education as 1 space per 40 sq. m as many of their clientele use transit and as such the required parking is too high. 5) Asks that parking requirements applied for secondary schools be6) Confused with current parking requirement since it was their understanding that city staff wanted to reduce parking requirements for elementary and secondary schools.1) Are in support of the proposed Official Plan designation of Ac1)and a site alteration permit from the City of Kitchener has now been issued2) Ensure that the approved permits are reflected in the zoning May 7, Commenter David Aston , MHBC Planning 170 Victoria Street North Written: May 7, 2018Virina Elgawly , Waterloo Catholic District School Board (WCDSB) Written: May 7, 2018Sarah Code, GSP Group Inc. 507 Frederick Street, 40, 44, and 48 Becker Street Written: 2018Paul Britton, MHBC Planning #34353637, 105 1 - 26 nits law or - - , subject to the not law. - residential uses abut the façade for the - Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Change: An ecological restoration area overlay is no longer applied on lands new zoning byRevised regulation 8.2 (1) so not applicable to multiple dwellings, thereby not requiring them to be located within a mixed use building and allowing them to be freestanding. Revised 8.2 (2) to clarify that dwelling u(including amenity areas and access) may be located on the ground floor provided that nonentire length of the façade, except for access. Change:Site specific provision (154) proposed to apply to property to permit computerelectronic, data processing, or serverestablishment; office; research and development establishment; and, health clinic - Plan bylaw reflect a public - in the general industrial land rocess is not meant to replace private policy area (15.D.12.3) in the Official Plan and site taff will recommend that a site specific provision be applied to Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) No formal response provided as lands were subject to Official Plan Appeal.1 and 2) Site specific specific provision (105) in the proposed zoningdevelopment application process and subsequent Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) hearing and settlement process. The proposed Official Amendment as it relates to site specific policy area 15.D.12.3 is clarifying the intent of the policy and continues to implement what was agreed to on comprehensive zoning review pdevelopment applications. These applications go through a public process and are considered on their own merits.3) Upon further review in consideration that an office use is an employment use (albeit not contemplateduse designation but in the business park employment designation) and that the subject property is located along a planned transit corridor and the vision of the Official Plan is to achieve a complete and healthy Kitchener, sthe subject property to permit existing office, research and development 1 - Natural - NHF and limits isions that have on 373U, which n overlay. The overlay toration Overlay. As the Map 6al features and areas that are law prohibits cluster townhouses and - osed zoning make a provision which allow s from fronting a street and require mixed use west Kitchener lands have been added to the Urban - endment. Comment Summarylimits3) Confirm support for the site specific provbeen recommended for this property1) Already undergone EIS which established the of development for these subdivisions. Given these completed studies they request that the overlay be removed for these two subdivisions.2) River Ridge Subdivision also underwent extensive studies and is subject to the ecological restoratioaffects the registered stage 5 and conveyable lots and they request that it be removed. 3) SouthArea Boundary, these lands are not proposed to be rezoned but have the Ecological ResHeritage System of the Official Plan is under appeal, applicant does not believe that s.34 (103.2 of the Planning Act permits the zoning of an Ecological Restoration Area as it does not fall within the range of naturreferenced in that section. Requests that the overlay does not apply to this property.4) Stauffer Woods Subdivision is proposed to be zoned MIXand the draft Zoning Bymultiple dwellingbuildings. However mixed use policies in the Official Plan do not require mixed use buildings. Since previous zoning allowed for cluster and street house dwellings and multiple dwellings, request that the propfor these uses and allow them to front the street. 1) Request the same list of permitted uses as identified for the former Budd Automotive property for 148 Manitou Drive (Manitou Professional Centre) by applied to 148 Manitou Drive (Manitou Professional Centre) through the same Official Plan Am2) Request that Site Specific Provision 105 be applied to the property at 148 Manitou Drive, with emphasis on permissions for health offices and scientific, technological or communications establishments;3) Request that Special Regulation Provisipermits 100% of the gross floor area of the building be used for office space, be maintained for 148 Manitou Drive. The permissions for 100% office space were fundamental to the purchase and related renovation plans of Orbit Holdings Limitedfor 148 Manitou Drive.4) Request that the Special Use Provision 34U, which permits a restaurant, be maintained for 148 Manitou Drive as part of May 7, west - 08204)08203)04210) --- Commenter 525 New Dundee Road Oral: April 30, 2018Written: May 7, 2018Pierre J. Chauvin, MHBC Planning Trussler Subdivision (30TStauffer Woods Subdivision (30TRiver Ridge Subdivision (30TSouthKitchener lands (North of New Dundee Road and west of Reidel Drive) Written: May 7, 2018Kristen Barisdale, GSP Group Inc. 148 Manitou Drive Written: 2018 #3839 1 - 27 law or ermit - Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action No change:No change requestedNo change:No change requestedChange:Proposed zoning on property consistent with the Official Plan.Consistent with existing provision 1R, the flood hazard overlay highlight that a pwould be needed from the GRCA prior to development within the boundaries of the Flooding Hazard overlay. 2 subject to 10.2 - conforming use, - , 2019 th stitute a conversion of Board. Zoning intended to f Special Use Provision 373U. employment use. Accordingly, it is - lands were subject to Official Plan egional Municipal Comprehensive Review and a permitted use in the proposed EMP wledge that the Official Plan is partially under appeal at the Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) establishment and health clinics within the existing building, effectively carrying forward the existing permissions oAny future expansions to the existing use would not be considered by means of the Committee of Adjustment as a legal nonbut through the appropriate development review application process. 4) A restaurant is(3).5) A pharmacy is considered to be a retail use and therefore, as per Official Plan Policy 15.D.6.6, is a nonstaff's opinion that adding a retail use would conemployment lands and that is not within the scope of CRoZBy nor permitted to be considered by Kitchener Council outside of a Regional Municipal Comprehensive Review. The Region of Waterloo is in the initial stages of undertaking a Ran employment strategy and assessment of lands will be completed as part of this. Please contact Regional Planning Staff for consideration of a conversion and to be involved in the review process. 6) Staff acknoOntario Municipal Board. It is understood that further modifications to the proposed zoning may be necessary pending resolution of matters related to the Official Plan at the Ontario Municipal implement Official Plan policies under appeal will not come into effect until such time as corresponding Official Plan policies are in effect. No formal response provided. Indicated support for proposed zoning. No formal response provided. Indicated support for proposed zoning. No formal response provided as Appeal.Additional stakeholder meeting took place Feb 8 - 1 Zone is - law given 01. law to - - - Employment law 2015 - ich is now shown on the of Zoning By 01. - part of the amending zoning by law number 878A wh - 4) identified for 56 Trillium Park Place.4) identified for 56 Trillium Park Place. -- law 2015 - Support the proposed Service Business Park Employment Comment SummaryZoning By5) Request that permissions for a pharmacy be considered for 148 Manitou Drive as part 6) The City's new Official Plan is currently under appeal. Until such time as the new Official Plan is approved and in force, it may be premature to approve the new Zoning Byimplement its policies.1) Support the proposed Service Business Park Zone (EMP1) Zone (EMP1) Asks for staff to amend the Zoning Grid Schedule to reflect the residential zone which has been approved, rather than the reference to Byzoning schedule2) Asks for staff to verify that the extent of the NHCconsistent with the zoning schedule of the attached zoning bylaw. 3) Asks staff to consider the necessity of including flooding and slope overlays asGRCA regulations which exist. - 299 Trillium - Hallman Commenter Kristen Barisdale, GSP Group Inc. 56 Trillium Park Place Written: May 7, 2018Kristen Barisdale, GSP Group Inc. 269Drive Written: May 7, 2018Paul Britton, MHBC Planning Multiple Residential Site -Construction Limited Strasburg Road #404142 1 - 28 law or - law amendment - sion (156) proposed to Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Revised to allow mapping errors to be corrected as technical revisions and without a new for a zoning byChange:Site specific proviapply to property to permit computer, electronic, data processing, or serverestablishment; office; and, research and development establishment. - finition provision 3 zone. - within the storage warehouses, - existing industrial (M) sment of lands will be not include a truck transport terminal. ough the appropriate development review ot contemplated in the general industrial land only industrial employment and industrial mmercial uses are proposed to no longer be permitted in the conforming use, but thr - f CRoZBy nor permitted to be considered by Kitchener Council outside of Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) 1) As indicated in previous correspondence, the zones and business park (B) zones currently permit a wide range of industrial and commercial uses. To align with updated Provincial legislation regarding industrial employment areas, the City has updated its Official Plan to permit employment related/supportive uses in these areas. Industrial Employment Areas are not intended for institutional uses or destinationoriented commercial and retail uses. Accordingly, many institutional and most coimplementing EMP zoning. For further clarity, please note that Wholesaling has been incorporated into that use. The proposed deand/or distribution of goods and may include selfand facilities for wholesaling of goods otherwise stored or manufactured within the building, but shall2) It is staff's opinion that broadening the range of permitted uses the proposed EMP zoning to include commercial uses would constitute a conversion of industrial employment lands and that is not within the scope oa Regional Municipal Comprehensive Review. The Region of Waterloo is in the initial stages of undertaking a Regional Municipal Comprehensive Review and an employment strategy and assescompleted as part of this. Please contact Regional Planning Staff for consideration of a conversion and to be involved in the review process. 3) Upon further review in consideration that an office use is an employment use (albeit nuse designation but in the business park employment designation) and that the subject properties are generally located within 450 metres of a planned transit corridor, staff will recommend that a site specificbe applied to the subject properties to permit existing officesexisting building. Any future expansions to the existing office use would not be considered by means of the Committee of Adjustment as a legal nonapplication process. 4) Staff is of the opinion that the subject lands do not meet the location criteria to be designated Business Park Employment as per Official Plan Policy 15.D.6.29. 2 - ese uses would render a number of conforming and impact the usability of the - parking facility 1 Zone can be interpreted consistent with any permit that - . Wholesaling Comment Summary4) Ask that the City considers clarifying that the extent of the NHCmay be issued by GRCA.1) Support a number of the proposed uses within the EMPzone, however note a number of uses are no longer permitted:a. Commercial b. Commercial recreationc. Computer, electronic and data processing businessd. Health clinice. Health officef. Officeg. Private club or lodge, union hallh. Surveying, planning, engineering or design businessi. Veterinary servicesj2) Gage Avenue has become an ideal service area as it is surrounded on all sides by residential development. As such they believe that a number of the proposed uses to be removed are appropriate in this location. 3) Additionally, removing ththe offices legal nonbuildings. 4) The Business Park Employment designation offers a more suitable range of uses for these lands Commenter Written: May 7, 2018Carol Wiebe/Andrea Sinclair, MHBC Planning 259, 275, 300 & 335 Gage Avenue Written: May 7, 2018Oral: May 8, 2018 #43 1 - 29 t law or - server Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action No change:Confirmed that change requesting was nonecessary as per proposed site specific provision (78)Change:Site specific provision (154) proposed to apply to property to permit computer, electronic, data processing, orestablishment; office; research and development establishment; and, health clinic. - be , upon property and was 4 would not be - cation process. conforming use, but - 5 does not permit office. Site - ect properties are generally rrently permit a wide range of Park Employment and EMP ed to be considered by Kitchener Council outside of /supportive uses in these areas. Industrial 2 (General Industrial Employment). The uses proposed within - d General Industrial Employment and as such is proposed to be 2 zone align with the permitted uses contemplated in the - thin the existing building. Any future expansions to the existing research Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) 1 and 2) You are correct that proposed EMPspecific provision (78) is proposed to be applied to thisincluded in the final draft tabled in April 2018. This provision allows office. This site specific provision is proposed to implement Site Specific Policy 15.D.12.9 in the Official Plan. 1) As indicated in previous correspondence, the existing industrial (M) zones and business park (B) zones cuindustrial and commercial uses. To align with updated Provincial legislation regarding industrial employment areas, the City has updated its Official Plan to permit only industrial employment and industrial employment relatedEmployment Areas are not intended for institutional uses or destinationoriented commercial and retail uses. Accordingly, many institutional and most commercial uses are proposed to no longer be permitted in the implementing EMP zoning. 2, 3 and 4) Staff is of the opinion that the subject lands do not meet the location criteria to be designated Business Park Employment as per Official Plan Policy 15.D.6.29. Therefore, changing the land use designation to Businessconsistent with the Official Plan. Each EMP zone has a range of appropriate industrial and related accessory uses which collectively provide a full range of industrial uses across the City. This property is designatezoned EMPthe EMPGeneral Industrial Employment land use designation. Howeverfurther review in consideration that an office/research and development establishment use is an employment use (albeit not contemplated in the general industrial land use designation but in the business park employment designation) and that the subjlocated within 450 metres of a planned transit corridor along Ottawa St S, staff will recommend that a site specific provision be applied to the subject properties to permit existing 'research and development establishments' wiand development establishment use would not be considered by means of the Committee of Adjustment as a legal nonthrough the appropriate development review appli5) It is staff's opinion that broadening the range of permitted uses in the proposed EMP zoning to include commercial uses would constitute a conversion of industrial employment lands and that is not within the scope of CRoZBy nor permitta Regional Municipal Comprehensive Review. The Region of Waterloo is in the initial stages of undertaking a Regional Municipal Comprehensive Review and an employment strategy and assessment of lands will 4 - nt employment e 2 allowable industries - 4 has 34 allowable uses and over - 4 zone. - - 2 zone limits the potential uses for future land - 2 has 21 allowable uses and less than 50% are realistic - conforming as it removes past uses that were allowed on - This change in use would make the current office use legal ficult to accommodate and would require a zone change and Comment Summary1) Proposed EMPpermitted use on these lands which is a major concern since plan process.2) Requests that the lands be put into a differe1) New EMPowners due to building design2) nonthe property3) Buildings on the subject lands do not have tall ceilings or garage door access making most EMPdifcould trigger site plan approval4) EMPfor the site. Whereas EMP70% of these uses are realistic for the sit5) Request that these lands be reconsidered and zoned EMPor given a special policy which includes many of the uses allowed in the EMP May 8, Commenter David Aston , MHBC Planning 526 Lancaster Street West Written: May 8, 2018Oral: 2018Andrew Head, Dryden, Smith & Head Planning Consultants Ltd. 10 Alpine Court Written: May 8, 2018 #4445 1 - 30 law or - 3 zoning from subject lands. - Change: Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Change:Amending land use designation in Official Plan fromRemoved MIXNoConfirmed that existing buildings are outside of the Ecological Restoration Area Overlay. - l be subject to an agreed to add a site by staff, we have for institutional uses or 3 was revised to add 'Major - 3 zone on the surface - ted use as it was deemed it 3 zoning would not be consistent with - law, the EMP - s. arge business machines; and commercial vehicles. oriented commercial and retail uses. Accordingly, many pment establishment) given that this is the current use of the - permitted use in the EMP pdated Provincial legislation regarding industrial employment areas, Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) completed as part of this. Please contact Regional Planning Staff for consideration of a conversion and to be involved in the review process. Additional stakeholder meeting took place Feb 6, 2019Following further consideration and discussion, staff specific provision on the property to allow a health clinic (given that is was a use recently on the property) and office (and related form of office computer, electronic, data processing, or server establishment; research and developroperty and that the property is located within 450 of transit corridor.Thank you for the comment. Upon further reviewconfirmed that continuing to include the MIXparking (eastern portion of the subject lands) was a mapping error. This will be corrected in the final draft.1 and 2) The existing industrial (M) zones and business park (B) zones currently permit a wide range of industrial and commercial uses. To align with uthe City has updated its Official Plan to permit only industrial employment and industrial employment related/supportive uses in these areas. Industrial Employment Areas are not intended destinationinstitutional and most commercial uses are proposed to no longer be detailing and repair operatioemployment use as per the Heavy Industrial Employment land use uses as athe Official Plan. However, staff note that from the first draft to the final draft of the proposed zoning byEquipment Supply and Service' as a permitwas an appropriate use in implementing the Heavy Industrial Employment land use designation. 'Major Equipment Supply and Service' is defined as the use of a premises for the service, repair, and sale of farm, construction, and l3) The intent of ecological restoration areas overlay is to identify lands that have the potential to have their ecological functions restored. The overlay serves as a notice that those lands identified wilEnvironmental Impact Study or other appropriate study prior to development (vacant sites), redevelopment (of all or part of existing developed sites), or site alteration (vacant or developed sites) as per the This overlay will remain on the property in order to comply with the ervice, 3 zone. 3 zone. - - law. vised to - 4 zone on the property law be revised to remove - - storage or repair of motor staff confirm that none of the existing buildings 3 zoning of the eastern portion of the subject lands - Comment Summary1) Concerned since draft OPA recommends designating the but the eastern portion of the lands developed as surface 2) Request that schedule d of the draft OPA be re3) Request that the final Zoning Bythe MIX1) Concerned since the previous Mallowed the sale, rental, service, vehicle, major recreational equipment and parts and accessories for motor vehicles or major recreational vehicles. These uses are not permitted in the proposed EMP2) Request that staff consider adding the sale, rental, sstorage or repair of motor vehicle, major recreational equipment and parts and accessories for motor vehicles or major recreational vehicles as a permitted use in the EMP3) Concerned since portions of the subject lands have mostly characterized by landscaped and parking area. Request that staff consider that this overlay would only be triggered where development would relate to works specifically within the overlay.4) Request that 7 Rittenhouse - Commenter David Aston , MHBC Planning 5Road Written: May 8, 2018David Aston , MHBC Planning 49 Overland Drive Written: May 8, 2018 #4647 1 - 31 1 - main law or - 1 zoning will re - law 85 - Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Change: Slope erosion hazard overlay and NHCzoning no longer applied to subject lands. The existing Byon the property. Future Action: In a future phase of CRoZBy, residential zoning will be applied to the subject lands. No change:No change requested 1 zoning and slope erosion - ng shown on the map is outside 1 zoning will remain. Residential zoning will be applied - law 85 - Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) 4) The extent of the Ecological Restoration Area is depicted on the map below (using 2017 air photo). The buildithe Ecological Restoration Area.Staff will no longer be proposing that NHChazard overlay be applied to the subject lands. Accordingly, the existing Zoning Byto the subject lands in a future phase of CRoZBy. No formal response provided. Comments indicate support for proposed zoning. these lands and 3 with Special Use - graded within Grading - law as it relates to - ting subdivision (e.g. R the City and the GRCA that support the overall 1 within a slope erosion hazard overlay identified. - Concerned that a small area of the subject lands remains Comment Summary1) zoned NHC2) These lands have been previously prePlans approved by the GRCA and studies have been completed and approved by grading of these lands.through a pending consent application.4) Request that City rezone lands to similar residential zoning category as the abutProvision 235U and Special Regulation Provision 1R, 230R and 260R).1) Support the proposed bysite specific provisions (78) and (79).2) Ask to be notified of any further changes as it relates to the subject property Commenter Pierre J. Chauvin, MHBC Planning Deer Ridge Estates Written: May 8, 2018Andrea Sinclair, MHBC Planning 675 Riverbend Drive Written: May 8, 2018 #4849 1 - 32 law or - health clinic rmit a in accordance with the building Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Change:Site specific provision (157) proposed to apply to property to pewithin the approved in principle site plan dated August 16, 2018. o thin the scope of rough the appropriate 1 zone. However, t - ial uses and has removed (2014) a health office has not . 1 zone implements policy - staff will recommend that a site trategy and assessment of lands will be l and related accessory uses which conforming use, but th - be applied to the subject property to permit the existing signation. Staff is of the opininon that the subject lands do not 1. This zone includes existing resident - lation regarding industrial areas, the City has updated its Official Plan ertain industrial areas within the City have developed over time with a Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) 1, 2, 3, 4 , 5) As indicated in previous correspondence, the existing industrial (M) zones and business park (B) zones currently permit a wide range of industrial and commercial uses. To align with new Provincial legisto permit only industrial and industrial related/supportive uses in these areas. Accordingly, new residential, institutional, and most commercial uses will no longer be permitted.Cmix of residential and industrial uses. The Lawrence Avenue area is one of these areas and as such staff recommended that this area be zoned EMPcertain industrial uses that may present conflicts by being in close proximity to residential uses. The EMP15.D.6.22 of the Official Plan (2014). Each proposed EMP zone has a range of appropriate industriacollectively provide a full range of industrial uses across the City.Service commercial uses, which a health office would be considered, are contemplated as permitted uses within the Business Park Employment land use demeet the location criteria to be designated Business Park Employment as per Official Plan Policy 15.D.6.29. As this property is designated General Industrial Employment in the Official Plan been included as a permitted use in the EMPrecognize the existing use and acknowledging the Official Plan's vision for a Complete and Healthy Kitchener,specific provisionhealth office in the existing building. Any future expansions to the existing health office use would not be considered by means of the Committee of Adjustment as a legal nondevelopment review application process6 and 7) Changing the land use designation of the subject lands and surrounding area to a Commercial Land use designation would constitute a conversion of employment lands and that is not wiCRoZBy nor permitted to be considered by Kitchener Council outside of a Regional Municipal Comprehensive Review. The Region of Waterloo is in the initial stages of undertaking a Regional Municipal Comprehensive Review and an employment scompleted as part of this. Please contact Regional Planning Staff for consideration of a conversion and to be involved in the review process. mall 1 but this - ntial (sensitive) 1 zoning. - th the surrounding residential uses. law. as recently submitted a site plan application to - e to the area. This should be considered for the full Comment Summary1) The subject lands are proposed to be zoned EMPzone does not permit a Health Office or Office use which was permitted in the previous M2) Concerned since there is an existing health office that exists on the property. 3) Client hexpand their dental office and they are concerned that they are making significant investments only to have the use not recognized going forward. 4) In their opinion, the Official Plan Policies related to soffices could be interpreted to recognize the existing use in the Zoning By5) Request that the City consider broadening the range of permitted uses for the subject lands, in recognition of their context and in particular, the proximity of resideuses to include the previously permitted uses listed above.6) There is an opportunity through the Companion Official Plan Amendment to explore a different employment land use designation that would allow some additional uses more suitablextent of Lawrence Avenue currently designated Industrial.7) Believe that the Business Park Employment or Commercial designation offers a more suitable range of uses that are less likely to conflict wi 324 - Commenter Andrea Sinclair, MHBC Planning 322Lawrence Avenue Written: May 8, 2018Oral: May 8, 2018 #50 1 - 33 law or - ing of the property will be reviewed in Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Further Action:Zonfuture phase of CRoZByChange:Revised COM zoning so that all the regulations of all COM zones contained in Table 9.2 are not applicable to existing buildings and structures.Site specific provision (137) applied to subject property. y w, in ions and Street Parking - law after the - law was adopted - law is similar to the ties in Kitchener, the - occupancy vehicle trips. The law is adopted and comes in - - graphy, and why the difference law. on; interpretation; definitions; law is in effect, all regulations, - - residential zones, that need to be in o the subject property to stipulate residential is adopted. Staff also note - -ajor influence on travel patterns and law. - 2 zone. Therefore the use will not become legal - inues to be a permitted use in the proposed law to apply t - law and not the general sections (Sections 1 - residential zones as well as Sections 1 through 5 that - law would still be in effect and would be applicable to 1 when the new zoning by -- - 5 residential zones were added. For clarification, until such - law 8 law. Further, lands that continue to retain existing zoning from law. Once the new zoning by - -- conforming as it cont - ncourage an efficient, dense and walkable built form. Consideration of hrough several amendments beginning in 1985, and the existing Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) 1,2,3) Staff acknowledge and understand that there are challenges with adding the new residential zoning to the new zoning byadoption of the nonpertain to general scope and administratigeneral regulations; and, parking, loading and stacking. Accordingly, the final draft tabled in April 2018 excluded general regulations in Section 4 and parking, loading and stacking provisions in Section 5 that relate onlto residential zones and intend to add these in with the amendment that adds in the Residential zoning. That said, there are many general regulations; definitions; and, parking, loading and stacking provisions that are applicable to all zones, including place at the time the zoning for nonthat the approach to adopting the new zoning byexisting zoning bytresidential zoning was added through an amendment several years later after the nontime as the new zoning is applicable to all properexisting zoning bylands not included in Appendix A (Zoning Grid Schedules) of the new zoning byZoning Byto effect, will be subject to the general sections (Section 1 through 6) of the existing zoning bythrough 5) of the new zoning by1, 2 and 3) Staff confirm that a fitness centre is proposed to be a permitted use in the COMnonzoning byunless otherwise stipulated, will apply to any development (i.e. additions, expansions, redevelopment) on the property. Upon further revierecognition that the property has undergone a development application and approval process in recent years that evaluated the site and determined the appropriate site layout, staff will propose a site specific provision in the final bythat no minimum front yard setback be required and that the total landscaped area shall be equal to or greater than the landscaped area existing on the date of passing of this By4. The provision of parking has a mbehaviour, including mode choice and singledecision to establish parking maximum rates to all geographies in the city is to encourage modal shift to other forms of transportation, and to eparking maximums in the Zoning ByPlanning Around Rapid Transit (PARTS) Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Strategy, and supported by the conclusrecommendations from the Comprehensive Review of Off& Loading Regulations. Staff recognizes there is a distinction between parking demand in suburban and urban contexts; this is why minimum parking rates are proposed to vary by geo the 5 of the law -- propose to law proposes to - specific Zoning to - law does not - that the City revisit the 2 which does not reflect the king any decisions on general - law would affect the Subject - zoned. However, aspects of the - law (particularly sections 1forming. - con - law) until a complete zoning by - law. - arking regulations. Comment Summary1) The April 2018 draft New Zoning Bychange the existing zoning of the Subject Lands, because the Site is currently residentiallyApril 2018 draft New Zoning ByLands, including general provisions such as definitions and p2) Submitted comments to express concerns with the introduction of new zoning definitions and general regulations (such as parking regulations) without releasing recommended zoning for the Subject Lands.3) Request that Council defer masections of the Zoning ByApril 2018 Zoning By(including Residential Zone categories) is available.1) The subject lands are currently used for Goodlife Fitness. The use and building were legally established throughapproved Site Plan Application SP10/023/M/LT.2) Concerned since the proposed Zoning Byrezone the subject lands to COMSite Plan Application SP/10/023/M/LT. This would render the existing use legal non3) Request that the City incorporate sitelegalize the existing use and building prior to the approval of the new Zoning By4) Additionally, the applicant is concerned with the introduction of parking maximums and request proposed new regulations as they pertain to the Subject Lands. Commenter Chris Pidgeon, GSP Group Inc. 195Commonwealth Street Written: May 8, 2018Chris Pidgeon, GSP Group Inc. 315 Max Becker Drive Written: May 8, 2018 #5152 1 - 34 law or - place). ) 2. - law and the minimum rate is structures. - 3 to COM - unit parking rate has been added to - and 4.5m rather than entire ground 3, there by requiring a minimum of 50% - Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Change: As per landowners request, proposed that Official Plan be amended to change the land use designation on 325 Max Becker Drive As per landowners request, changing the proposed zoning of 325 Max Becker Drive from MIXRevised COM zoning so that all the regulations of all COM zones contained in Table 9.2 are not applicable to existing buildings and Increased the maximum distance between façade openings from 4 m to 8 mReduced the minimum percent of ground floor façade openings from 70% to 50% for MIXfor all MIX zones. Revised 'strike zone' to 0.5mfloor façadeRevised the electric parking requirements so that 5 percent of the parking spaces are required to be electric vehicle spaces (i.e. charging station) and 15 percent must be EV ready (i.e. have the conduit inA multithe zoning by1/35 GFA and the maximum rate is 1/24 GFA. Increased the maximum parking for retail uses to 1 space per 24 square metres in all zones (Other than UGC and MIX law will be - , 2019 law to recommend a - th tween façade openings similar to the current zoning will propose for the subject lands law will include an aggregated parking - law is pending. - d by 5.7 a), the number of existing parking spaces shall increase the maximum parking for retail uses to 1 space per vehicle spaces (i.e. charging station) and 15 percent must be ed OPA as required to implement zoning. It is expected that rm that the staff will recommend that the lands that make up ty owner it was requested that consideration of new zoning to be 2. - initiat - square metres. The maximum parking rates in the final by - Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) between a parking minimum and parking maximum is proposed to vary by geography. Staff note that in accordance with proposed 5.7.d), if the existing parking spaces on a lot exceeds the maximum number of parking spaces permittebe the maximum number of parking spaces.Response to May 4, 2018 SubmissionStaff note that in the written and oral submissions made on behalf of the properapplied to the subject lands be deferred until such time as the Official Plan appeals are resolved. Accordingly, a staff response to your submission and confirmation of the zoning that staff in the final Zoning ByAdditional stakeholder meeting took place Feb 8Response to Feb 22, 2019 Submission1) Staff will revise so that 5 percent of the parking spaces are required to be electricEV ready (i.e. have the conduit in place). If 19 or fewer parking spaces requirement will be rounded down in zoning.2) ConfiWilliamsburg Town Centre all be designed Commercial and all be zoned COM3) Staff will be recommending that the façade opening requirement in all MIX zones be 50%. Furthermore, the distance bewill be increased from 4m to 8m in MIX zones to allow for flexibility on larger sites.4) Staff will 24 square metres (27 in MIX zones), with the minimum being 1 space per 33expressed as a fixed rate per GFA rather than as a percentage.It is further noted that the final byrate for properties with multiple units/uses (byper 35 square metres and a maximum of 1 space per 24 square metres. Citysimilar practice will be applied in Rosenberg. 3, - 2. - the Site MIX idential and conforming which - ffice building but the changes in tenancy and 40% of ground floor - specific Zoning to legalize - residential use relating to - c vehicle parking spaces. law being drafted to implement - il is too low. Request increase to law proposes to rezone - ovisions non requirement of 30% io Municipal Board appeal. residential uses on the Site; equest that the pr bility to achieve overall excellence in building design. The - Comment SummaryMay 8, 20181) Draft New Zoning Bywhich has been drafted to implement the Community Node and Mixed Use policies of the New Official Plan.2) Concerned with a zoning bypolicies of an Official Plan that are currently subject to an ongoing Ontar3) Request that Council defer further consideration of the MIX zones until such time as the OMB appeals pertaining to the Mixed Use designation and Community Node policies are resolved.4) Subject lands are currently used as an oproposed zone would make the use legal nondoes not reflect their previous site plan application approvals. 5) Request that City incorporate sitethe existing use / building and allow forbuilding expansion.6) Concerned with the following regulations as they are more restrictive than the current zoning:a. Min building height of 11 m and 3 storeys;b. Min FSR of 0.6;c. New regulations that require the mixing of resnond. New ground floor facade regulations, particularly the 70% minimum glazing requirement and maximum spacing of 4 m between openings; e. Introduction of parking maximums.Feb 22, 20191) RElectric Vehicle parking be the same as residential use to require 20% of parking spaces to be designed to permit the future installation of electric vehicle supply equipment rather than requiring them to be electri2) Request that lands that make up Williamsburg Town Centre all be designed Commercial and all be zoned COM3) Maintain that afaçade openings would provide more reasonable level of flexiproposed regulations to achieve 50 to 70% openings are too high, too restrictive and very difficult to achieve.4) The proposed maximum parking requirement of 130% of minimum requirement for reta140%. Commenter Chris Pidgeon, Sarah Code, GSP Group Inc. 325 Max Becker Drive Written: May 8, 2018Further correspondence received: Feb 22, 2019 #53 1 - 35 law or - ludes a residential - tance between 2. - ng of 325 Max Becker Drive 3 to COM - 3, there by requiring a minimum of 50% - oor façade Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Change: As per landowners request, proposed that Official Plan be amended to change the land use designation on 325 Max Becker Drive As per landowners request, changing the proposed zonifrom MIXRevised COM and MIX zoning so that all the regulations of all COM zones and MIX zones contained in Table 9.2 and Table 10.2 are not applicable to existing buildings and structures.Increased the maximum disfaçade openings from 4 m to 8 mReduced the minimum percent of ground floor façade openings from 70% to 50% for MIXfor all MIX zones. Revised 'strike zone' to 0.5m and 4.5m rather than entire ground flRegulation added to allow ability to incrementally achieve minimum Floor Space Ratio, minimum percent of nongross floor area and minimum percent of residential gross floor area where there is an approved Urban Design Brief that incMaster Site Plan n , 2019 th law is pending. - o Feb 22, 2019 Submission Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) Response to May 4, 2018 SubmissionStaff note that in the written and oral submissions made on behalf of the property owner it was requested that consideration of new zoning to be applied to the subject lands be deferred until such time as the Official Plaappeals are resolved. Accordingly, a staff response to your submission and confirmation of the zoning that staff will propose for the subject lands in the final Zoning ByAdditional stakeholder meeting took place Feb 8Response tSee #53 2 - law that - 3 and COM - conforming. - specific Zoning to legalize the law would render the existing - - law zones a portion of the subject lands - ldings and allow for changes in tenancy and residential uses on the Site; - The proposed Zoning By New regulations that require the mixing of residential and Comment Summary5) Assume may be Companion Official Plan Amendment at time consider zoning for Rosenberg to align.1) Proposed Zoning Bylocated along the interior private driveway as MIXon the remainder of the subject lands.2) buildings and their respective uses legal non3) Request that prior to approval of the new Zoning ByCity Council incorporate siteexisting uses / buifurther commercial intensification of the Site4) Concerned with the following regulations as they are more restrictive than the current zoning:a. Min building height of 11 m and 3 storeys;b. Min FSR of 0.6;c.nond. New ground floor facade regulations, particularly the 70% minimum glazing requirement and maximum spacing of 4 m between openings; Feb 22, 2019See #53 Commenter Chris Pidgeon, GSP Group Inc. 1187 Fischer Hallman Road Written: May 8, 2018 #54 1 - 36 law or - RoZBy Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Change: Changed the site specific on the property from (39) to (38)Further Action:Zoning of the property will be reviewed in future phase of C law and - er, the by Street Parking law. - - law after the - law was adopted s, that need to be in - retation; definitions; law is similar to the - ortation Demand occupancy vehicle trips. The law is adopted and comes in - - contexts; this is why minimum residential is adopted. Staff also note - - w zoning by residential zones as well as Sections 1 through 5 that - law would still be in effect and would be applicable to 1 when the ne -- - amendments beginning in 1985, and the existing g spaces on a lot exceeds the maximum number of parking residential zones were added. For clarification, until such - ff acknowledge and understand that there are challenges with zones and intend to add these in with the amendment that law 85 law. Further, lands that continue to retain existing zoning from - - law and not Sections 1 through 5 of the new zoning by - Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) 1, 2, and 3) Staff confirm that the incorrect site specific provision number was included on the subject property in the final draft zoning will revise accordingly.4) The provision of parking has a major influence on travel patterns and behaviour, including mode choice and singledecision to establish parking maximum rates to all geographies in the cityis to encourage modal shift to other forms of transportation, and to encourage an efficient, dense and walkable built form. Consideration of parking maximums in the Zoning ByPlanning Around Rapid Transit (PARTS) TranspManagement (TDM) Strategy, and supported by the conclusions and recommendations from the Comprehensive Review of Off& Loading Regulations. Staff recognizes there is a distinction between parking demand in suburban and urban parking rates are proposed to vary by geography, and why the difference between a parking minimum and parking maximum is proposed to vary by geography. Staff note that in accordance with proposed 5.7.d), if the existing parkinspaces permitted by 5.7 a), the number of existing parking spaces shall be the maximum number of parking spaces.1) At this time, it is anticipated that staff will begin a comprehensive review of the zoning of lands within the Rosenberg Secondary Plan once the Official Plan.2 and 3) Staadding the new residential zoning to the new zoning byadoption of the nonpertain to general scope and administration; interpgeneral regulations; and, parking, loading and stacking. Accordingly, the draft tabled in April 2018 excluded general regulations in Section 4 and parking, loading and stacking provisions in Section 5 that relate only to residentialadds in the Residential zoning. That said, there are many general regulations; definitions; and, parking, loading and stacking provisions that are applicable to all zones, including residential zoneplace at the time the zoning for nonthat the approach to adopting the new zoning by existing zoning bythrough several residential zoning was added through an amendment several years later after the nontime as the new zoning is applicable to all properties in Kitchenexisting zoning bylands not included in Appendix A (Zoning Grid Schedules) of the new zoning byZoning Byto effect, will be subject to the Section 1 through 6 of the existing zoning by law - is law - error in mapping and law until a complete Zoning by - law does not propose to change the existing - th some of the regulations contained in the law including the introduction of parking - regulations without releasing the recommended zoning for Comment Summary1) Concerned since contents of Special Provision 39 does not appear to be applicable to the subject lands. 2) Appears that there may have been an that special provision 38 should apply to the subject lands.3) Request that Schedules 92 and 93 of the New Zoning Bybe amended to refer to special provision 38 rather than special provision 39 on the subject lands4) Concerned wiDraft Zoning Bymaximums.1) Draft Zoning Byzoning of the property because of Rosenberg Secondary Plan.2) Concerned with the introduction of new zoning definitions andthe subject lands.3) Request that council defer making any decisions on general sections of the Zoning By(including zoning for the Rosenberg Secondary Plan area) available. Commenter Chris Pidgeon, GSP Group Inc. 1188 Fischer Hallman Road Written: May 8, 2018Chris Pidgeon,GSP Group Inc. 1193 Fischer Hallman Road Written: May 8, 2018 #5556 1 - 37 law or - viewed in Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Further Action:Zoning of the property will be refuture phase of CRoZBy as adopted law. relate only to - law after the - law w - law is similar to the - law is adopted and comes in - o all properties in Kitchener, the residential is adopted. Staff also note - including residential zones, that need to be in and administration; interpretation; definitions; residential zones as well as Sections 1 through 5 that - law would still be in effect and would be applicable to 1 when the new zoning by -- - residential zones were added. For clarification, until such - law 85 law. Further, lands that continue to retain existing zoning from - - ing By law and not Sections 1 through 5 of the new zoning by - Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) 1) At this time, it is anticipated that staff will begin a comprehensive review of the zoning of lands within the Rosenberg Secondary Plan once the Official Plan.2 and 3) Staff acknowledge and understand that there are challenges with adding the new residential zoning to the new zoning byadoption of the nonpertain to general scopegeneral regulations; and, parking, loading and stacking. Accordingly, the draft tabled in April 2018 excluded general regulations in Section 4 and parking, loading and stacking provisions in Section 5 thatresidential zones and intend to add these in with the amendment that adds in the Residential zoning. That said, there are many general regulations; definitions; and, parking, loading and stacking provisions that are applicable to all zones,place at the time the zoning for nonthat the approach to adopting the new zoning by existing zoning bythrough several amendments beginning in 1985, and the existing residential zoning was added through an amendment several years later after the nontime as the new zoning is applicable texisting zoning bylands not included in Appendix A (Zoning Grid Schedules) of the new zoning byZonto effect, will be subject to the Section 1 through 6 of the existing zoning by law - new zoning definitions enberg Secondary Plan area) is law until a complete Zoning by - law does not propose to change the existing - Comment Summary1) Draft Zoning Byzoning of the property because of Rosenberg Secondary Plan.2) Concerned with the introduction of and regulations without releasing the recommended zoning for the subject lands.3) Request that council defer making any decisions on general sections of the Zoning By(including zoning for the Rosavailable 1205 - Commenter Chris Pidgeon, GSP Group Inc. 1201Fischer Hallman Road Written: May 8, 2018 #57 1 - 38 law or - o highlight that a permit would be Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action No Change:Consistent with existing provision 1R, the flood hazard overlay remains on the subject properties tneeded from the GRCA prior to development within the boundaries of the Flooding Hazard overlay. Further Action:Zoning of the property will be reviewed in future phase of CRoZBy es in s change law. - lights that a law after the - the existing law was adopted - law is similar to the - law is adopted and com - with the amendment that there are challenges with s not change how the land can residential is adopted. Staff also note - ld still be in effect and would be applicable to residential zones as well as Sections 1 through 5 that - law wou hydraulic and hydrological modelling techniques all 1 when the new zoning by -- e overlay is to identify lands that are susceptible to - residential zones were added. For clarification, until such - time the zoning for non ulations; and, parking, loading and stacking. Accordingly, the law 85 law. Further, lands that continue to retain existing zoning from - - law and not Sections 1 through 5 of the new zoning by - Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) 1) Variables such as topography, infrastructure, land use, weather data, stream flows, and contribute in the determination of the resulting flood plain boundary. Unfortunately, over time any number of the variables can contribute to the floodplain boundaries changing. When flood plain boundariesome lands that were formally within a flood plain are removed and others are added.The Flooding Hazard overlay identifies that the property is regulated by the Grand River Conservation Authority and provides more transparency. The purpose of thflooding hazards and prevent the: injury or the loss of life and minimize property damage and social disruption; and, the aggravation of existing hazards and the creation of new ones. The overlays highpermit would be needed from the GRCA prior to the development within the boundaries of the Flooding Hazard overlay. This requirement is consistent with the current GRCA Regulated Area that applies to this portion of the property, and thus doecurrently be used.natural hazards.2) Staff acknowledge and understand thatadding the new residential zoning to the new zoning byadoption of the nonpertain to general scope and administration; interpretation; definitions; general regdraft tabled in April 2018 excluded general regulations in Section 4 and parking, loading and stacking provisions in Section 5 that relate only to residential zones and intend to add these in adds in the Residential zoning. That said, there are many general regulations; definitions; and, parking, loading and stacking provisions that are applicable to all zones, including residential zones, that need to be in place at thethat the approach to adopting the new zoning by existing zoning bythrough several amendments beginning in 1985, and residential zoning was added through an amendment several years later after the nontime as the new zoning is applicable to all properties in Kitchener, the existing zoning bylands not included in Appendix A (Zoning Grid Schedules) of the new zoning byZoning Byto effect, will be subject to the Section 1 through 6 of the existing zoning by zoning for the site. Comment Summary1) No proposed zone change but a flooding hazard overlay is proposed over the site which does not reflect the approved draft plan and 2) Concerned with the introduction of new zoning definitions and regulations without releasing the recommended zoning for the subject lands. 1291 - Commenter Chris Pidgeon, GSP Group Inc. 1255Fischer Hallman Road Written: May 8, 2018 #58 1 - 39 law or - ZBy operty will be reviewed in Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Further Action:Zoning of the property will be reviewed in future phase of CRoFurther Action:Zoning of the prfuture phase of CRoZBy , the law. - law after the law after the that need to be in -- law was adopted law was adopted -- tation; definitions; law is similar to the law is similar to the -- law is adopted and comes in - in Section 5 that relate only to g Zoning By residential is adopted. Staff also note residential is adopted. Staff also note -- zoning by g is applicable to all properties in Kitchener, the residential zones as well as Sections 1 through 5 that residential zones as well as Sections 1 through 5 that -endments beginning in 1985, and the existing - law would still be in effect and would be applicable to 1 when the new --- - acknowledge and understand that there are challenges with residential zones were added. For clarification, until such residential zones were added. For clarification, until such -- ones and intend to add these in with the amendment that ble to all zones, including residential zones, that need to be in law 85 law. Further, lands that continue to retain existing zoning from - - to general scope and administration; interpretation; definitions; law and not Sections 1 through 5 of the new zoning by - Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) 1) At this time, it is anticipated that staff will begin a comprehensive review of the zoning of lands within the Rosenberg Secondary Plan once the Official Plan.2 and 3) Staffadding the new residential zoning to the new zoning byadoption of the nonpertain to general scope and administration; interpregeneral regulations; and, parking, loading and stacking. Accordingly, the draft tabled in April 2018 excluded general regulations in Section 4 and parking, loading and stacking provisions in Section 5 that relate only to residential zadds in the Residential zoning. That said, there are many general regulations; definitions; and, parking, loading and stacking provisions that are applicable to all zones, including residential zones,place at the time the zoning for nonthat the approach to adopting the new zoning by existing zoning bythrough several amresidential zoning was added through an amendment several years later after the nontime as the new zoning is applicable to all properties in Kitchenerexisting zoning bylands not included in Appendix A (Zoning Grid Schedules) of the new zoning byZoning Byto effect, will be subject to the Section 1 through 6 of the existing zoning by1) At this time, it is anticipated that staff will begin a comprehensive review of the zoning of lands within the Rosenberg Secondary Plan once the Rosenberg Secondary Plan has been incorporated intOfficial Plan.2 and 3) Staff acknowledge and understand that there are challenges with adding the new residential zoning to the new zoning byadoption of the nonpertaingeneral regulations; and, parking, loading and stacking. Accordingly, the draft tabled in April 2018 excluded general regulations in Section 4 and parking, loading and stacking provisions residential zones and intend to add these in with the amendment that adds in the Residential zoning. That said, there are many general regulations; definitions; and, parking, loading and stacking provisions that are applicaplace at the time the zoning for nonthat the approach to adopting the new zoning by existing zoning bythrough several amendments beginning in 1985, and the existing residential zoning was added through an amendment several years later after the nontime as the new zonin 5) until a 5) until a -- definitions ning for the Rosenberg the recommended zoning for law (particularly sections 1law (particularly sections 1 -- available. law (including zoning for the Rosenberg law (including zo -- law does not propose to change the existing law does not propose to change the existing -- Comment Summary1) Draft Zoning Byzoning of the property because of Rosenberg Secondary Plan.2) Concerned with the introduction of new zoning definitions and regulations without releasing the subject lands.3) Request that council defer making any decisions on general sections of the Zoning Bycomplete Zoning bySecondary Plan area) is1) Draft Zoning Byzoning of the property because of Rosenberg Secondary Plan.2) Concerned with the introduction of new zoning and regulations without releasing the recommended zoning for the subject lands.3) Request that council defer making any decisions on general sections of the Zoning Bycomplete Zoning bySecondary Plan area) is available. Commenter Chris Pidgeon, GSP Group Inc. 1384 Huron Road Written: May 8, 2018Chris Pidgeon, GSP Group Inc. 1415 Huron Road Written: May 8, 2018 #5960 1 - 40 law or - ential Parking, law at this time - generally do not apply to existing are not applicable to existing residential lands proposed to be -te within 7.5 metres of an abutting Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action No Change:Nonincluded in new zoning byand zoned the appropriate non residzone.Further Action:Zoning of lands within a residential land use designation in the Official Plan will be applied to the subdivision in a future phase of CRoZBy. Change: Site specific provision (136) proposed to apply to property to permit loading spaces to locaresidential zone and stipulate that no rear yard setback or interior side yard setback shall be required for the existing building. Revised COM zoning so that all the regulations of all COM zones contained in Table 9.2buildings and structures.Added provision in Section 5 Loading, and Stacking to stipulate that provisions zoning g zoning from law. law. -- law after the - law was adopted - s in Kitchener, the law is similar to the - law to apply to the subject - law is adopted and comes in law is adopted and comes in the property has undergone -- dential zones, that need to be in tion; interpretation; definitions; residential is adopted. Staff also note - law recommendation. - residential zones as well as Sections 1 through 5 that when the new zoning by - law would still be in effect and would be applicable to law would still be in effect and would be applicable to 1 when the new zoning by1 --- -- residential zones were added. For clarification, until such - law 85law 85 law. Further, lands that continue to retain existinlaw. Further, lands that continue to retain existing zoning from -- -- to allow loading spaces to locate within 7.5 metres of an abutting ugh several amendments beginning in 1985, and the existing law and not Sections 1 through 5 of the new zoning bylaw and not Sections 1 through 5 of the new zoning by -- Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) existing zoning bylands not included in Appendix A (Zoning Grid Schedules) of the new zoning byZoning Byto effect, will be subject to the Section 1 through 6 of the existing zoning by1, 2, 3) Staff acknowledge and understand that there are challenges with adding the new residential zoning to the new zoning byadoption of the nonpertain to general scope and administrageneral regulations; and, parking, loading and stacking. Accordingly, the draft tabled in April 2018 excluded general regulations in Section 4 and parking, loading and stacking provisions in Section 5 that relate only toresidential zones and intend to add these in with the amendment that adds in the Residential zoning. That said, there are many general regulations; definitions; and, parking, loading and stacking provisions that are applicable to all zones, including resiplace at the time the zoning for nonthat the approach to adopting the new zoning by existing zoning bythroresidential zoning was added through an amendment several years later after the nontime as the new zoning is applicable to all propertieexisting zoning bylands not included in Appendix A (Zoning Grid Schedules) of the new zoning byZoning Byto effect, will be subject to the Section 1 through 6 of the existing zoning by4) Staff confirms that there will be an opportunity to consider approvals that occur after the final draft was tabled in April 2018 in the formulation of the final by1) 2) Upon further review, in recognition thata development application and approval process in recent years that evaluated the site and determined the appropriate site layout, staff will propose a site specific provision in the final bypropertyresidential zone and allow a rear yard setback of 0 metre for the existing building . - 1 - ng and 1, NHC - a 7.5 metre 1, INS - incorporated into the 1 which reflects the existing approved site plan - Concerned with the introduction of new zoning definitions Comment Summary1) Portions of the lot are being rezoned RECand SWM2) and regulations without releasing the recommended zoning for the subject lands.3) Submit that an appropriate review of the proposed zoning of the Site can only be done comprehensively when all zoniassociated zoning regulations, including definitions and general regulations, are fully known.4) Note that their Draft Plan of Subdivision Modification and Zone Change are almost complete and they would expect that the corresponding zoning would beCROZBY process. 1) Current automotive repair building would become legal nonconforming with respect to the 7.5 metre rear yard setback and proposed regulation Section 5.11b) which requires setback to the existing loading space from the adjacent property line.2) Request that City incorporate site specific zoning to legalize the existing uses/buildings and allow for changes in tenancy 1178 - Commenter Kevin Muir , GSP Group Inc. 1940 Fischer Hallman Road Written: May 8, 2018Chris Pidgeon, GSP Group Inc. 1170Fischer Hallman Road and 1111 Westmount Road East Written: May 8, 2018 #6162 1 - 41 law or - ng that y to existing Parking, existing 2. - generally do not appl are zoned COM Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action parking space, existing loading spaces and existing stacking spaces andstacking lanes.Change: As per landowners request, proposiOfficial Plan be amended so that the seven properties that make up Williamsburg Town As per landowners request, changing the proposed zoning so that the seven properties that make up Williamsburg Town CentreCOM Zoning revision so all the regulations contained in Table 9.2 are not applicable to existing buildings and structures.Added provision in Section 5 Loading, and Stacking to stipulate that provisions parking space, existing loading spaces and existing stacking spaces and existing stacking lanes.Further Action:Zoning of the property will be reviewed in future phase of CRoZBy law after the - , 2019 law was adopted - th law is similar to the - missions made on behalf of the will begin a comprehensive review esidential is adopted. Staff also note r ading and stacking. Accordingly, the - law is pending. - residential zones as well as Sections 1 through 5 that - - onfirmation of the zoning that staff will propose for the subject lands ds in the Residential zoning. That said, there are many general Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) Response to May 4, 2018 SubmissionStaff note that in the written and oral subproperty owner it was requested that consideration of new zoning to be applied to the subject lands be deferred until such time as the Official Plan appeals are resolved. Accordingly, a staff response to your submission and cin the final Zoning ByAdditional stakeholder meeting took place Feb 8Response to Feb 22, 2019 SubmissionSee #531) At this time, it is anticipated that staff of the zoning of lands within the Rosenberg Secondary Plan once the Official Plan.2 and 3) Staff acknowledge and understand that there are challenges withadding the new residential zoning to the new zoning byadoption of the nonpertain to general scope and administration; interpretation; definitions; general regulations; and, parking, lodraft tabled in April 2018 excluded general regulations in Section 4 and parking, loading and stacking provisions in Section 5 that relate only to residential zones and intend to add these in with the amendment that adregulations; definitions; and, parking, loading and stacking provisions that are applicable to all zones, including residential zones, that need to be in place at the time the zoning for nonthat the approach to adopting the new zoning by existing zoning bythrough several amendments beginning in 1985, and the existing - - he COM 5) until a - osed zoning 3 zones since they - conforming and that several - not all of the Williamsburg mmended zoning for the entire 2 and MIX - law (particularly sections 1 - does not propose to change the existing ty incorporate site specific zoning to law (including zoning for the Rosenberg - law - council defer making any decisions on general 3 Zones until reco3 Zones until the Ontario Municipal Board appeals -- law. State that a proper review would include the entirety of - Comment Summary1) Concerned because some but Town Centre was addressed within the April 2018 Draft Zoning Bythe noted.2) Request that Council defer further consideration of the COM2 and MIXnode is available for review.3) Concerned with the COMimplement Official Plan policies that are currently subject to an ongoing OMB appeal4) Request that council defer further consideration of t2 and MIXare resolved.5) Concerned that almost all buildings within the Williamsburg Town Centre will become legal noncurrent permitted uses will be removed in the propof the property. 6) Concerned that the new regulations are more restrictive than current requirements which may preclude the incremental intensification of their property. Request that council revisit these regulations. 7) Request that the Cilegalize the existing uses and buildings on the property and to permit expansions to the existing commercial centre.Feb 22, 2019See #531) Draft Zoning Byzoning of the property because of Rosenberg Secondary Plan.2) Concerned with the introduction of new zoning definitions and regulations without releasing the recommended zoning for the subject lands.3) Request thatsections of the Zoning Bycomplete Zoning bySecondary Plan area) is available. 27 PLAN - - Commenter Chris Pidgeon, Sarah Code, Glenn Scheels,GSP Group Inc. Vaughan Bender, SchlegelWilliamsburg Town Centre Written: May 8, 2018Oral: May 8, 2018Further correspondence received: Feb 22, 2019Chris Pidgeon, GSP Group Inc. Cotton Grass Street 1470 Pt Lot 6 RP58R13609 Pts 258Written: May 8, 2018 #6364 1 - 42 law or - d structures. e of CRoZBy Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Further Action:Zoning of the property will be reviewed in future phasChange: Revised COM zoning so that all the regulations of all COM zones contained in Table 9.2 are not applicable to existing buildings anRevised drive through facility regulations so not applicable to existing drive through facilities - ons are throughs are law. law. - -- itchener, the law after the - law was adopted law regulati - - law is similar to the would be applicable to - l zones, that need to be in law is adopted and comes in law is adopted and comes in application and to ensure interpretation; definitions; -- residential is adopted. Staff also note - the new zoning by residential zones as well as Sections 1 through 5 that - law would still be in effect and law would still be in effect and would be applicable to 1 when the new zoning by1 when --- -- e existing Urban Design Manual. Design guidelines ubject to the Section 1 through 6 of the existing zoning residential zones were added. For clarification, until such residential zones were added. For clarification, until such -- oning was added through an amendment several years later law 85law 85 veral amendments beginning in 1985, and the existing law. Further, lands that continue to retain existing zoning from law. Further, lands that continue to retain existing zoning from -- -- 3) Staff acknowledge and understand that there are challenges with ential zones and intend to add these in with the amendment that law and not Sections 1 through 5 of the new zoning bylaw and not Sections 1 through 5 of the new zoning by -- Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) residential zafter the nontime as the new zoning is applicable to all properties in Kitchener, the existing zoning bylands not included in Appendix A (Zoning Grid Schedules) of the new zoning byZoning Byto effect, will be sby1) At this time, it is anticipated that staff will begin a comprehensive review of the zoning of lands within the Rosenberg Secondary Plan once the Official Plan.2 and adding the new residential zoning to the new zoning byadoption of the nonpertain to general scope and administration; general regulations; and, parking, loading and stacking. Accordingly, the draft tabled in April 2018 excluded general regulations in Section 4 and parking, loading and stacking provisions in Section 5 that relate only to residadds in the Residential zoning. That said, there are many general regulations; definitions; and, parking, loading and stacking provisions that are applicable to all zones, including residentiaplace at the time the zoning for nonthat the approach to adopting the new zoning by existing zoning bythrough seresidential zoning was added through an amendment several years later after the nontime as the new zoning is applicable to all properties in Kexisting zoning bylands not included in Appendix A (Zoning Grid Schedules) of the new zoning byZoning Byto effect, will be subject to the Section 1 through 6 of the existing zoning by1) Staff note that the proposed regulations related to driveconsistent with thencourage development in line with the vision established through the Urban Design Manual, while maintaining a level of flexibility and sitespecific consideration, where appropriate. Zoning byenforceable and provide a legal way of consistently managing land use and future development. Part of this comprehensive review involved evaluating current design guidelines, and in certain instances, staff recommend zoning to ensure consistency ofthat objectives and policies of the new Official Plan are implemented. Through this process it was determined that requirements for drive through stacking lanes are more appropriate in zoning to ensure safety 5) until a - conforming. - Previous approvals with law. Their - law (particularly sections 1 leasing the recommended zoning for - t would become legal non law (including zoning for the Rosenberg - law does not propose to change the existing - area) is available. through stacking lanes contained in Section 5.12 of the - Comment Summary1) Draft Zoning Byzoning of the property because of Rosenberg Secondary Plan.2) Concerned with the introduction of new zoning definitions and regulations without rethe subject lands.3) Request that council defer making any decisions on general sections of the Zoning Bycomplete Zoning bySecondary Plan 1) Concerned with proposed new regulations applicable to driveApril 2018 Draft Zoning Byrespect to architectural projections and location of drive aisles in relation to the street line have not been considered and therefore general regulations contained Sections 4.15.2 and 5.2.2 are also of concern.2) Their developmenRequest that Council incorporate site specific zoning to legalize the existing use/building and allow for changes in tenancy. Commenter Chris Pidgeon, GSP Group Inc. 350 Cotton Grass Street Written: May 8, 2018Chris Pidgeon, GSP Group Inc. 1191 Fischer Hallman Road Written: May 8, 2018 #6566 1 - 43 law or - Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Change: Site Specific Provision (10) revised to reflect the variance decision with respect to parking on the property.No changeEcological Restoration Areas overlay applied to the property consistent with the Official Plan. No change:No change requestedNo change:Clarification provided regarding zoning provisions applicable. law be - law. 5.1 c - 004 law. It is the - - l law amendment - products of - 1. As such, staff will Parking, Loading, and for such purpose. - lands that have the e Drive, the parking se and be replaced by uses, law 85 - Application A2018 ial policies/requirements. conforming/complying - law. - conforming/complying. However, if an agreement is tion on site. - e lot containing the use requiring the parking spaces and pment (of all or part of existing developed sites), or site l zoning by conforming/complying are necessary by - law. - Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) and adequate circula2) Legal nonimplementing a new Official Plan through a new Zoning Byintention and expectation the legal nonuses/buildings/ structures will eventually ceabuildings and/or structures that conform to the new Official Plan and new Zoning ByThis property has previously been subject to a zoning byprocess. The decision of Minor Variance effectively makes for a minor change to an existing special regulation which applies to the property in Zoning Byrecognize this change in the contents of Site Specific Provision (10) in the proposed fina1) The Kitchener Natural Heritage System Background Report (available on the City's website) was undertaken to provide technicarecommendations for the policies in the New Official Plan. Ecological System as identified in the 2014 Official Plan (OP). The intent of ecological restoration areas overlay is to identifypotential to have their ecological functions restored. The overlay serves as a notice that those lands identified will be subject to an Environmental Impact Study or other appropriate study prior to development (vacant sites), redeveloPolicies. 2) This overlay will remain on the property in order to comply with the No formal response provided. No change requested.As indicated in previous correspondence, should the zoning byapproved as proposed, the parking provided at 120 McBrine would be considered legal nonregistered on the title of both 55 and 120 McBrinwould be considered in the context of Section 5 Stacking (specifically section 5.1) of the proposed Zoning Byand d) stipulate that parking spaces may be located on another lot within 400 metres of ththat the owner of both lots enter into an agreement with the City to be registered against the tile of both lots to guarantee that the land required for parking spaces shall continue to be used only law. - CROZBY 1). - roperty at 132 and the - law is released - June 12, 2015 004) for the property -law 2014 - law - the permission of By st consideration be given to including site specific Comment SummaryAn approved minor variance (A2018resulted in a parking rate expressed as a ratio rather than a number. Concerned since new zoning does not entirely reflect the recent planning approvals and the applicants request that Council reflectminor variance decision into the zoning of the property prior to approval of the new Zoning By1) We request a copy of the source material used to identify the Ecological Restoration Area overlay along the eastern boundary of the Property. 2) We also request that the Ecological Restoration Areas overlay as identified on the eastern portion of the P1060 Trillium Drive be reduced to align with the boundary of the adjacent Natural Heritage Conservation Zone (NHC1) Thank you for your response to our correspondence regarding the first draft of the zoning byWe reserve the right to provide further comments at the time the second final draft of the proposed zoning byand/or at the time that subsequent components of the initiative are completed.1) City confirmed that the business associated with BLM for the main business operation at 120 McBrine Drive would not 2) Requepermissions for parking associated with the truck transport terminal at 120 McBrine Drive for the Property at 55 McBrine Drive. Commenter Heather Price, GSP Group Inc. 100 Victoria Street South Written: May 8, 2018Kristen Barisdale, GSP Group Inc. 1060 Trillium Drive Written: May 8, 2018Kristen Barisdale, GSP Group Inc. 150 Shoemaker Street Written: May 8, 2018Kristen Barisdale, GSP Group Inc. 55 McBrine Drive Written: May 8, 2018 #67686970 1 - 44 law or - existing Parking, s. generally do not apply to existing : Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action No change:Clarification provided regarding zoning provisions applicable.ChangeRevised INS zoning so that all the regulations of all INS zones contained in Table 10.2 are not applicable to buildings and structures.Added provision in Section 5 Loading, and Stacking to stipulate that provisions parking space, existing loading spaces and existing stacking spaces and existing stacking lane 1 - ff will law be ling is not -3 zoning - law. 5.1 c - Street Parking 1. - - Parking, Loading, and ed and operated as a right in the current I - in the same building as the law. Multiple Dwellings and other agreement with the City to be of - - use building, or cluster townhouse - - 2 zoning on the property. Staff note - 2 zone be modified in the proposed final - tted as ing provided at 120 McBrine would be pply to existing buildings. conforming/complying. However, if an agreement is back townhouse dwelling. A multiple dwel - - to - care community and where personal services may be law as the Official Plan does not contemplate such residential law to not a -- 2 zones. 2 zone, subject to being located - - ng (specifically section 5.1) of the proposed Zoning By ng maximums in the Zoning By Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) As indicated in previous correspondence, should the zoning byapproved as proposed, the parkconsidered legal nonregistered on the title of both 55 and 120 McBrine Drive, the parking would be considered in the context of Section 5 Stackiand d) stipulate that parking spaces may be located on another lot within 400 metres of the lot containing the use requiring the parking spaces and that the owner of both lots enter into anregistered against the tile of both lots to guarantee that the land required for parking spaces shall continue to be used only for such purpose. 1) As indicated in previous correspondence, a 'Continuing Care Community' is a permitted use in the INS zones and is defined as 'the use of a premises that is planned, developed, managcontinuum of accommodations and care and is comprised of a large residential care facility and may contain an independent living facility'. An Independent Living Facility is defined as 'a multiple dwelling that is part of a continuing provided'. 'Multiple Dwelling' is defined as 'the use of a building containing three or more dwelling units, and may include a stacked townhouse dwelling and backa street townhouse dwelling, mixeddwelling'. A 'Continuing Care Community' is a proposed use on this property in the proposed final zoning byresidential uses which are permifor the subject property will not be carried forward in the proposed final zoning byuses as appropriate uses on institutional lands. Accordingly, stacontinue to recommend that residential uses not be permitted in the INSand INS2) While more details are required on the particulars of each use indicated in the comment, it is staff's initial interpretation that each of these uses are contemplated in the proposed INSthat uses including convenience retail, office, financial establishment, restaurant, and personal services are contemplated as accessory uses in the INSprincipal use. This is detailed in regulation (1) of Table 113) In response to this comment, staff will be recommending that the stepback requirement in the INSzoning by4) The decision to establish parking maximum rates to all geographies in the city is to encourage modal shift to other forms of transportation, and to encourage an efficient, dense and walkable built form. Consideration of parkiPlanning Around Rapid Transit (PARTS) Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Strategy, and supported by the conclusions and recommendations from the Comprehensive Review of Off& Loading Regulations. Staff recognizes there is a distinction between parking demand in suburban and urban contexts; this is why minimum parking rates are proposed to vary by geography, and why the difference - back - - law would to - - By o only g the location of specific special regulation - n to including site specific 2 zone intends to reduce the - Specific Zoning provision be added to state - that the existing site hich permits all forms of multiple dwellings.Concerned Comment Summary1) City confirmed that the business associated with BLM Transportation Group would for the main business operation at 120 McBrine Drive would not 2) We request consideration be givepermissions for parking associated with the truck transport terminal at 120 McBrine Drive for the Property at 55 McBrine Drive.1) Concerned that proposed INStypes of multiple dwellings that are permissible tapartment buildings, stacked townhouses and backtownhouses and requires such uses to be located on the same site as a large residential care facility.The proposed zoning does not carry forward site specific provisions on the subject lands wthat the proposed zoning reduces the number of permitted uses, including stacked townhouse which is of concern to the applicant. Request that all previously permitted uses continue to be permitted and applicable to the Site be carried forward in the new Zoning Bylaw.2) Request that Council consider broadening the range of permissible uses for the Site. Restaurants, classrooms, training facilities, medprograms, community spaces and personal service uses (e.g. spa services), are among the range of uses that support the community hub vision for the Site.3) Proposed regulations of the April 2018 Zoningresult in the existing development becoming legal nonconforming (e.g. a required stepback for buildings above 14 metre in height).4) Schlegel Villages Inc. also has concerns with the introduction of parking maximums and regulations governinparking (e.g. proposed regulation 5.2.3c which does not permit parking within a front yard or exterior side yard).Feb 22, 2019 SubmissionRequest that a Sitem2 shall apply to the entire Site. Commenter Kristen Barisdale, GSP Group Inc. 120 McBrine Drive Written: May 8, 2018Chris Pidgeon, GSP Group Inc. 695 Block Line Road & 1000 Westmount Road East Written: May 8, 2018Further correspondence received: Feb 22, 2019 #7172 1 - 45 - - law or - conforming. - 1241, 1251 Weber Street East - 2 zone to restrict permitted non 446, 460 Highland Road - - 1, 1221 Change: Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action 428, 438NoConfirmed that existing buildings are outside of the Ecological Restoration Area Overlay.340 Kingswood DriveNo change:Use to become legal non119No change:Clarified that no regulations are proposed in the COMresidential uses from locating in a freestanding building. - - - rmitted , 2019 fficial Plan and new th conforming/complying is proposed to vary by - conforming under the - r multiple dwellings and der to comply with the 1 also does not permit parking - law 85 isions 83R and 109U to allow a car - ther appropriate study prior to conforming/complying are necessary by - er of parking spaces. With regards to the location lementing a new Official Plan through a new Zoning By law. Legal non - to Feb 22, 2019 Submission law. law. - - 446, 460 Highland Road - a minimum parking rate of 1 space per 92 square metres of GFA, - Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) between a parking minimum and parking maximumgeography. Staff note that in accordance with proposed 5.7.d), if the existing parking spaces on a lot exceeds the maximum number of parking spaces permitted by 5.7 a), the number of existing parking spaces shall be the maximum numbof parking in the front yard or exterior side yard, staff notes that existing regulation 6.1.1.1 d) i) in zoning byin the front yard or side yard abutting a street foresidential care facilities, among other uses. This regulation will continue to be recommended by staff to be carried forward in the proposed final zoning byAdditional stakeholder meeting took place Feb 8Response applied and a maximum parking rate of 1 space per 70 square metres of GFA. 428, 4381) The extent of the Ecological Restoration Area is depicted on the map below (using 2017 air photo). The building shown on the map is outside the Ecological Restoration Area.2) The intent of ecological restoration areas overlay is to identify lands that have the potential to have their ecological functions restored. The overlay serves as a notice that those lands identified will be subject to an Environmental Impact Study or odevelopment (vacant sites), redevelopment (of all or part of existing developed sites), or site alteration (vacant or developed sites) as per the This overlay will remain on the property in or340 Kingswood Drive:1) As indicated in previous correspondence, this property is designated nonproposed zoning of this site does not include a car wash as a permitted use. Carrying forward Special Provwash would not be consistent with the Official Plan. The existing selfservice car wash would be considered legal nonnew zoning byproducts of implaw. It is the intention and expectation the legal nonuses/buildings/structures will eventually cease and be replaced by uses, buildings and/or structures that conform to the new OZoning By law. - ail use standing ret - 2 zone. - law - erlay. 1241, 1251 Weber Street East - 446, 460 Highland Road - ver in the final Zoning By Comment Summary428, 4381) Request that staff confirm that the Ecological Restoration Area overlay does not contain any existing buildings. 2) Request that staff consider that this overlay would only be triggered where development would relate to works specifically within the ov340 Kingswood Drive:1) Request that Special Regulation Provision 83R and Special Use Provision 109U be carried over in the Final Zoning By1191, 12211) Request that Special Use Provision 335 and 3U be carried o2) Requests clarification that a multiple dwelling is in a building with no other uses. Request that staff consider adding the multiple dwelling use to the COM3) Please confirm the regulations for a free - 446, - Commenter David Aston , MHBC Planning 428, 438460 Highland Road West340 Kingswood Drive1191, 12211241, 1251 Weber Street East Written: May 8, 2018 #73 1 - 46 law or - Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action 2 zone to standing - - ied forward in 2 zoning does not - . Manufacturing is not a permitted use proposed COM uses from locating in a free , staff will revise the COM zones to add residential - 6 zoning does. Permissions regarding maximum size of - 1241, 1251 Weber Street East - ining to maximum total retail gross floor area (staff will be revising residential). These regulations implement the policies of the Official - law as it permits manufacturinglaw because the exemptions relating to maximum lot coverage and -- Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) 1191, 12211) Existing Special Use Provision 3U has not been carried forward in drafts to date and will not be carried forward in the proposed final zoning byin lands designated Commercial located within Urban Corridors. Therefore, carrying forward this existing provision would not be consistent with the Official Plan.Existing Special Use Provision 335U has not been carrdrafts to date and will not be carried forward in the proposed final zoning bymaximum gross leaseable commercial space for a convenience retail outlet are redundant because theimpose maximum lot coverage or limit the size of convenience retail like the existing Csingle retail outlet are instead subject to proposed regulations in Table 9.2 pertathe maximum gross floor area requirement to pertain to retail only, not nonPlan. 2) Similar to the MIX zones'multiple dwelling' as a permitted use and the use will be subject to the same provisions as 'dwelling units'3) Staff confirm that no regulations are proposed in the COMrestrict permitted nonbuilding. Comment Summary Commenter # 1 - 47 law or - a gas law without the need - o permit existing law amendment. - - also subject to the flooding hazard d (91) to no longer permit Change: Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action NoContinue to propose Site Specific Provision (74) on property tdriveways, existing residential dwellings and any existing buildings or structures accessory thereto.Change:Revised EUF zone to remove permissions for existing storageRevised preamble in EUF zone to confirm zone isprovisionsZoning Bymapping errors as technical revisions that may be made to the Byfor a zoning byRevisestation, hospice and multiple dwelling. law - As . Further, 1.9 a gas station, hospice and hat document, both 1901 law amendment. - criteria provided in the provisions - ly. mental Features and Supporting System and zoned Natural Heritage laws respectively to regulate the use of land - Regulated by the Grand River Conservation law (CRoZBy). - 1). The purpose of this zone is to protect and/or - sidential dwellings and any existing buildings or structures law without the need for a zoning by - ) Thank you. Have revised according) Thank you. Have revised accordingly. ) Thank you. Have revised to no longer permit Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) 1) On Dec. 22, 2010, the Province of Ontario approved the new Regional Official Plan (ROP) with modifications. Within tand 1893 Ottawa St St were identified within the Greenlands Network as having a Core Environmental Features. The Greenlands Network is a layered approach to environmental protection comprised of Landscape Level Systems, Core EnvironEnvironmental Features. The most recent information provided to us from the Region has reconfirmed the presence of the Core Environmental Feature. In your case, it is due to the presence of Regionally Significant Woodlands.directed by the ROP, Area Municipalities will designate and zone Landscape Level Systems and Core Environmental Features in their official plans and zoning bywithin these areas.2) 1901 Ottawa St S is notAuthority. A very small portion of 1893 Ottawa St S is Regulated by the Grand River Conservation Authority.3) Applying the information provided, the property will be included within Conservation (NHCconserve natural heritage features and their ecological functions.4) Site Specific Provision (74) is proposed to permit existing driveways, existing reaccessory thereto.Review of the Zoning By1) Thank you. Have deleted permission to allow existing storage.2) Thank you. Have revised. 3) Thank you. HavExisting Use Floodplain zone are subject to the flooding hazard provisions 4) Development, redevelopment or site alteration would not be permitted within the slope erosion hazard where theis not satisfied. 5) Correct, changes to the boundaries of zoning without a zoning byamendment is not permitted by the Planning Act. Updates to the mapping can occur through city initiated annual zoning amendmentscorrections to mapping errors as technical revisions that may be made to the By678multiple dwelling. . law has - formation and 1 while allowing for - C 1 zoning from the - law amendment. The zoning - 1 zone since they state both - supersedes other zoning than they would ay requirements must be referenced. were in poor conditions due to limited sunlight, too much Comment Summary1) Concerned with the NHCproperties do not have any significant wildlife features. Additionally, a tree specialist visited the site and concluded the trees water and not enough space.2) States that GRCA does not hold any limitations on the property.3) Requests that staff remove the NHCproperty4) OR zone the back of the property NHresidential development in the front5) Or the City of Kitchener purchases the land to retain for parks or trails1) States that Section 18.2.1(a) (iii) contradicts Section 14.4 since if the overlay not be permitted to have any outdoor storage, whether existing or not.Section 18.2.1(a)(c)3) Recommend including a note in the EUF zone section that the overl4) State that it is not clear that the potential for no development within the slope erosion hazard is reflected in Section 18.2.25) Note that the technical revisions to the zoning Bychanged since the first drallows for technical revisions and refinements to boundaries without requiring a zoning byboundaries are based on current best available init is anticipated though the GRCA updates, survey work or technical studies undertaken by applicants that these boundaries are subject to changes (i.e wetlands, floodplain, 30, Commenter Rob Currie 1901 & 1893 Ottawa Street South Oral: April2018Mark Benjamins, Benjamins Realty Written: May 8, 2018Trisha Hughes, GRCAWritten: May 8, 2018 #7475 1 - 48 law or - Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) ction ty, in law, within - prevail he regulation number pplicable regulation approved Authority, where required by said Authority, nterference with wetlands or alterations to as affected by the Flooding Hazard Overlay, al for City Staff initiated zone changes on an annual 1 permits a gas station, hospice and multiple dwelling in - Note that Site Specific Provision (91) within the lands zoned ) Request the following text revisions in Section 18.2.1b and ) Request the following changes to the Text with the Map in ) Comment Summaryslope hazards, and watercourses). We understand that there is potentibasis to address minor refinements.6Section 18.2.2b(vi):the lands shown prior to the development of any land, interference with wetlands, or alterations to shorelines of watercourses in accordance with the underlying zone, a permit shall be obtained from the Grand River Conservation in accordance with the applicable regulation approved under the Conservation Authority, where required by said Authoriaccordance with the applicable regulation approved under the CNote that following the amendment to the Conservation Authorities Act, a new regulations is expected to be developed and in order to avoid having to replace t7Appendix C:a. Development, ishorelines or watercourses redevelopment or site alteration within the Grand River Conservation Authority regulated areas will require a permit from the Grand River Conservation Authority in accordance with the aunder the Conservation Authorities Act. The actual regulated area may differ from the area shown, which is shown for informational purposes and the regulated area, as determined by the Grand River Conservation Authority, shall8EUFthe existing building. These uses should not be permitted as new uses as per Section 6.C.2.6 of the Official Plan and Se18 which state that certain uses will not be permitted within hazardous lands due to issues with safe evacuation and hazardous chemicals. Commenter # 1 - 49 law or - Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Change:Revised minimum requirement for Class B Bicycle Parking to 1 space per 500 square metres of gross floor area for 'large merchandise retail'No change:No change requested. tail'. or site law, staff - rder to can include surface rimary building(s) environmental impacts on the cognition of the goods sold as part of ical functions restored. The overlay serves s currently used for parking could be utilized law. - master plans or studies. Where no such guidance exists, the Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) 1 and 2) As indicated in previous correspondence, given the proposed setbacks in the COM zones and that landscaped areawalk, pathways, and other similar materials as well as rooftops, there are opportunities to achieve the minimum landscape requirement. Further, given the proposed reduction in minimum parking requirements, as redevelopment occurs, landfor additional landscaping to meeting landscaping requirements. As such, staff will continue to recommend a minimum landscape area of 20% as part of the final zoning by3) 4) Upon further review and in re'large merchandise retail' uses, in the proposed final zoning bywill revise the requirement for Class B Bicycle Parking Staffs to 1 space per 500 square metres of gross floor area for 'large merchandise re5) Heritage System as identified in the 2014 Official Plan (OP).The intent of ecological restoration areas overlay is to identify lands that have the potential to have their ecologas a notice that those lands identified will be subject to an Environmental Impact Study or other appropriate study prior to development (vacant sites), redevelopment (of all or part of existing developed sites),Policies. The study must demonstrates to the satisfaction of the City, Region, Grand River Conservation Authority and/or Province, as appropriate, that there will be no adverserestored feature or the ecological functions of the feature in its optimal ecological state. The optimal ecological state of an ecosystem may be determined through watershed studies, environmental assessments, or other similaroptimal ecological state of an ecosystem will be determined by the appropriate agencies having jurisdiction in consultation with the owner/applicant. This overlay will remain on the property in opolicies/requirements.Thank you for your supportive comment. Staff confirm that any accessory use or building, which includes maintenance facilities, to a golf course are permitted by way of Regulation 4.2 Accessory Uses provided they are within the same is exclusively devoted to the principal use(s) or p accessory at these uses sting site and any law as it relates to these - creation uses would also t are predominantly bulky law) would now be permitted - ap 47 altogether as e Depot since they use the ed as follows: law and no longer includes reference to accessory - B bicycle stall requirements and that portions of site are conforming zone provision be allowed to continue as legal conforming. -- arking stall requirement be reduced from 1 space per 333 of Comment Summary1450 Ottawa Street,1) Concerned with the minimum 20% landscaped area and Class 2) Staff previously noted that Home Depot could provide additional landscaped area in the form of roof top gardens which is not feasible for Hommajority of their rooftop for solar panels and renewable energy. As a result, they request that the minimum 20% landscaped area provision only applies to portions of the site undergoing redevelopment and not be imposed on the exinonnon3) Based on the size of the site, the applicant would have to provide 50 bicycle B parking stalls. This number is impractical since the goods sold at home depoand require transport by automobile. 4) Request that bicycle B parking stalls requirements only be applied to portions of the building undergoing redevelopment. Alternatively if that is not feasible, they ask that the bicycle b pportion of the site that is already developed, they request that the overlay be removed from Mdevelopment, redevelopment or site alteration does not warrant the preparation of an EIS or other appropriate study.1) Writing in support the Final Draft Bylands provided subject to some clarification/confirmation of our understandings, summarizZoning Byuses such as clubhouse, restaurant, banquet facility, fitness centre, retail store, etc. It is our understanding th(and potentially other accessory uses not contemplated at the time of the writing of the zoning byunder the general accessory use provision. Please confirm this understanding.b. We understand that other indoor rebe permitted as accessory uses to the golf course.c. Kindly confirm that maintenance facilities are permitted as part of the primary golf course use (similar to washrooms and halfway houses), or alternatively, are permitted as an use. Commenter David McKay, MHBC Planning 1450 Ottawa Street South100 Gateway Park Drive Written: May 8, 2018David Aston/Andrea Sinclair, MHBC Planning Westmount Golf and Country Club Written: May 8, 2018 #7677 1 - 50 law or - residential. - Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Change:Revised the maximum gross floor area requirement in COM zoning to apply to retail only rather than non law, staff - ate study prior to gical functions restored. The 1440 &1450 Ottawa Street South) - , or site alteration (vacant or developed sites) as per the of ecological restoration areas overlay is to identify lands u for the supportive comment. Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) Sunrise Centre (14001) Upon further consideration, in the proposed final zoning bywill revise the proposed COM zoning to apply the maximum gross floor area requirement to retail only.2) The intentthat have the potential to have their ecological functions restored. The overlay serves as a notice that those lands identified will be subject to anEnvironmental Impact Study or other appropridevelopment (vacant sites), redevelopment (of all or part of existing developed sites), or site alteration (vacant or developed sites) as per the order to complypolicies/requirements.International Place (58 Ottawa Street South/5 Wake Robin)1) The intent of ecological restoration areas overlay is to identify lands that have the potential to have their ecolooverlay serves as a notice that those lands identified will be subject to anEnvironmental Impact Study or other appropriate study prior to development (vacant sites), redevelopment (of all or part of existing developed sites)policies/requirements.The Boardwalk1) Thank yo outlined above, and the 1440 &1450 Ottawa Street South) - law. - raft By 4 zone be clarified as relating to retail only - Comment SummarySunrise Centre (14001) Suggest that the maximum total GFA requirement of the Com2) Request that the ecological Restoration Area overlay beremoved since in interpretations for development, redevelopment or site alterations would only relate to works that would impact the storm water management systemInternational Place (58 Ottawa Street South/5 Wake Robin)1) The International Place lands recent Site Plan Approval in Principle, we request that the Ecological Restoration Area overlay be removed from the International Place landsThe Boardwalk1) Support the proposed zoning of the subject lands set out in the Final D Commenter David Aston, MHBC Planning Sunrise CentreInternational Place PropertiesThe Boardwalk Written: May 8, 2018 #79 1 - 51 units law or - - 3 zoning. - ty consistent with Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action No change:Current 'truck transport terminal' use proposed to be permitted by EMPNo change:No change requestedChange:Proposed zoning on properthe Official PlanRevised regulation 8.2 (1) so not applicable to multiple dwellings, thereby not requiring them to be located within a mixed use building and allowing them to be freestanding. Revised 8.2 (2) to clarify that dwelling(including amenity areas and access) may be located on the ground floor provided that . loyment Employment 3 in the final draft - , 2019 to Official Plan th commercial vehicles and sale of farm, - plated as a heavy industrial law as this would not be 3 zoning and/or subject property - - 3 was revised to add 'Major - 3 zoning and/or subject property through a -respondence, a restaurant is not service, repair, law, the EMP staff note that from the first draft to the final draft of - 3 zone. As indicated in previous correspondence, - to be a 'truck transport terminal' and is proposed to be ning provision would not be consistent with the Official e carried forward in the new zoning by Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) 1) Staff again confirm that the existing operations at the subject property are considered permitted in the EMPan automotive detailing and repair operation is not contemplated as a heavy industrial employment use as per the Heavy Industrialthis use as a permitted use in the EMPthrough a site specific zoning provision would not be consistent with the Official Plan. However,the proposed zoning byEquipment Supply and Service' as a permitted use as it was deemed it was an appropriate use in implementing the Heavy Industrial Empland use designation. 'Major Equipment Supply and Service' is defined as the use of a premises for theconstruction, and large business machines; and2) Retail of motor vehicles is not contememployment use as per the Heavy Industrial Employment land use as a permitted use in the EMPsite specific zoPlan. However, as indicated above, the proposed EMPpermits 'Major Equipment Supply and Service', which includes the sale of commercial vehicles. 3) As indicated in previous corcontemplated as a permitted use within the Heavy Industrial Employment existing zoning provision that permits a restaurant use is not proposed to bconsistent with the Official Plan.No formal response provided. Comments indicated that previous concerns addressed. No formal response provided as lands were subject Appeal.Lands proposed to be added to zoning byprocess. Additional stakeholder meeting took place Feb 8 - 1 - 2 - - law 85 - ve. 3) for 353 Manitou - law. - law as it relates to these lands and - n. detailing and repair operations have been notified of any further changes as it relates to the gross floor area of 5,000 square metres in the MIX 01 for 353 Manitou Drive. - is considered by City Council for approval. Comment Summary1) Automotive excluded as a permitted use and due to the current use of the lands, they request that automotive detailing and repair operations be included as a permitted use in the proposed Heavy Industrial Employment Zone (EMPDrive.2) Request that consideration be given to permitted limited retail of motor vehicle sales for 353 Manitou Drive3) Special Use Provision 35U in the existing Zoning Bypermits restaurants lots with frontage on Manitou DriRequest that consideration be given to maintaining the existing permissions of Special Use Provision 35U as part of Zoning Bylaw 20151) Pleased to find that our concerns related to permitted uses and clarification on retail and office permissions have been addressed in the final draft zoning by2) Support the proposed bysite.3) Ask to besubject property1) Note that subject lands are not proposed to be rezoned but ask that staff rezone the lands at such time as the zoning bylaw 2) Request that Section 8.1 (Mixed Use Zones) make provision for free standing multiple dwelling units without the requirement to be located within a mixed use building to ensure consistency with the official pla3) Request that the Mixed Use Zone be clarified such that amenity space associated with multiple dwellings is also permitted on the ground floor of a building fronting a street.4) Asks staff to consider deleting the total maximum retail and food store Zone. The policies which limit the size of retail gross floor area Commenter Kristen Barisdale, GSP Group Inc. 353 Manitou Drive Written: May 8, 2018Carol Wiebe, MHBC Planning 501 Krug Street Written: May 8,2018David Aston/Andrea Sinclair, MHBC Planning Southwesterly intersection of Huron Road and Strasburg RoadSoutheasterly Intersection of Huron Road #808182 1 - 52 2 - law or - 2 zones. - that provision 8.2(1) d in Table 8.2 are not law amendment - residential. - residential uses abut the façade for the - Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action nonentire length of the façade, except for access. Revised 8.3(1) so that all the regulations of all MIX zones containeapplicable to existing buildings and structuresRevised maximum building height in COMto 25m for a mixed use buildingRevise the maximum gross floor area requirement to apply to retail only rather than nonRevised Revised how ground floor façade openings calculatedRevised to allow mapping errors to be corrected as technical revisions and without a new for a zoning byChange: Site specific provision (49), (116) and (145) proposed to apply to property.MIX zoning revised so is not applicable to MIX on to consider transferring variances into law be carried forward. Any future development - Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) Response to May 8, 2018 Submission1, 2, 3) Generally staff is not recommending that variances granted under the existing zoning bythe site would be considered in the context of the new zoning of the site. Variances requested under the new zoning would be considered on their merits and evaluated against the zoning in effect at that time. Should you wish to provide us with rationale 1 - t to 2 Zone be law 85 - alone - - 2 zone as the - law. Please - residential gross floor - law is passed examples cited in - ted given stand 2 Zone be clarified as relating to - concerns with the MU proved permits issued from GRCA 2 Zone be dele - the location of parking and loading spaces olicies in the Official Plan change, the zoning 2 Zone) is in addition to permitted commercial floor area. - Comment Summaryare currently under appeal and may change as a result of the related pregulations will be updated accordingly.5) Concerned with the minimum ground floor façade width of 50% and minimum ground floor opening requirement. A minimum ground floor opening requirement can be difficulachieve for buildings with primary access located internal to the site. Suggest these requirements be reduced and/or eliminated with consideration taking place in the context of a site plan approval process and/or design guidelines.6) Concerned with (reg. 8.6) since it is difficult to achieve for larger sites. They suggest rather implementing a setback from a street.7) Ask that the mix use requirement for multiple dwellings outlined in the COMresidential uses are permitted in the Official Plan.8) Confirm a maximum floor space ratio for dwelling units of two (COM9) Ask that the maximum building height in the COMincreased to 24 metres to ensure appropriate intensification of the site10) Request that the maximum total nonarea requirement of the COMretail only11) Suggest that permitted uses and12) Suggest that the interpretation section should be clarified/expanded to provide for zone and classification interpretations based on apor other similar agency.exclude any floor area located 50% or greater below grade.14) The definition of Floor Space Ratio in Zoning Byincluded tmore than one zone having different floor space ratio regulations, floor space ratios shall be obtained using only that portion of the building floor area and only that portion of the lot area withinbeen carried forward in the final Draft Zoning Byconfirm how Floor Space Ratio will be calculated for sites with split zoning going forward.May 8, 20181) Previously submitted comments on behalf of our client on June 11, 2015 outlining our approved multiple residential dwellings proposed for the site would not comply with all regulations.2) Concerned that the variances granted on the subject lands may be lost when the new zoning by Commenter and Strasburg Road Written: May 8, 2018David Aston, MHBC Planning 460 Belmont Ave West #83 1 - 53 law or - Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Changes:Revised method of awarding bonusing to a hybrid approach which will equitably award bonus values by taking into account varying lot sizes. If the scale or cost of a given Community Benefit is fluid based on the size of the site, the corresponding Bonus Value will be Floor Space Ratio. If the scale or cost of a given Community Benefit is not fluid based on the size of the site, the - 1 (as of of the 2 zoning). - law. - residential use and floor space ratio - ground floor façade law which will equitably - - t is to specify the community staff cannot justify doing so only be: exempt from 8.2(1) which only he review and consultation process 1 which included Community Benefits - ission o account varying lot sizes. If the scale or of 4 (as per the existing MU property law 85 - law is in effect, the owner will have the ability to - floor space ratio ll not be given the ability to be recognized retroactively. Once the ARTS Station Study Area. However, the property was not included in the Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) special provisions on this property we will consider it as part of the draft new zoning for this site. No new zoning has been proposed on the property to date because the property was identified within the Midtown Pfinal Midtown Station Area Plan. As such, staff will be reviewing these lands and applying draft zoning to the property in the next couple months and will notify the property owner of tand the proposed zoning at this time.January 2019Lands proposed to be added to zoning byprocess. Response to Feb 15, 2019 SubmStaff included the subject property in the lands to be rezoned through the accordance with the Mixed Use land use designation in the Official Plan.Staff will recommend that the permits multiple dwellings on a lot containing a nondoes not permit multiple dwellings in a building fronting a street (as per recent development); exempt from the minimumper previous C of A decision) and have a minimumand maximum1) Thank you for the comment.2) While staff appreciate the suggestion to recognize Community Facilities, Services or Matters which existed on the day the 2014 Official Plan bonusing policies came into effect, for the bonusing provisions. Site plans or other development applications processed under Zoning Bywhich may be eligible for a Bonus Value in the proposed final zoning bylaw wiproposed final zoning byupdate a site plan approval to take advantage of bonusing provisions.3) Thank you for the comment. Our intenbenefits and bonus values in the proposed zoning by4) Thank you for the comment. Upon further review, staff will be recommending a hybrid approach in the final byaward bonus values by taking intcost of a given Community Benefit is fluid based on the size of the site, the corresponding Bonus Value will be Floor Space Ratio. If the scale or cost of a given Community Benefit is not fluid based on the size ould t of the law to state: - residential buildings ling are only permitted law. - alone multiple residential - d site commercial uses. - 2 zoning is Additional Regulation (1) - residential use. A cluster townhouse - 2 with Site Specific Regulation 576R(M). Site - under the new Official Plan policy framework to t that the City clarify the transition process for ters on a lot. For the purposes of this section, existing ic regulation that applies to the subject lands and we Section 4.3 (Bonusing) of the Final Draft continues to restrict uation that potentially applies to other large sites that will be Comment Summary3) Requesapproved minor variances as each component is passed separately by Council.Feb 15, 2019It was our understanding that a Mixed Use Zoning Category was no longer proposed for the lands and that the lands wbe considered through the future residential zoning process. Through FANZ we understand that the lands are now proposed to be zoned MIXSpecific Regulation 576R(M) carries forward the existing site specifsupport the inclusion of this regulation. Our concern with the MIXwhich applies to Multiple Dwellings and reads: A cluster townhouse dwelling and a multiple dwelon a lot containing a nondwelling and a multiple dwelling are not permitted in a building fronting a street. The above regulation is concerning given the recent development of the site for stanuses, including a multiple dwelling fronting a street. Request that the site be included in a residential zoning category as previously discussed, or alternatively that the site specific regulation be amended to allow multiple without the requirement for on1) No objection to the proposed modification of 104R in the Final Draft.2) subject lands is proceeding in phases, Section 4.3 d) of the proposed zoning bylaw would negate the ability to include the community facilities provided in the first phase in the bonus calculations when the second phase is developed. This is a sitdeveloped in phases, both now and in the future. Consider modifying Section 4.3 d) in the Zoning byor matshall mean legally existing on the day the bonusing provisions b. This modification would allow all developments that came into existence achieve density bonusing through the implementation mechanisms in the new Zoning By Commenter Written: May 8, 2018Addition written comments following further application of new zoning:Feb 15, 2019Dan Currie, MHBC Planning 85 Charles Street & 25 Water Street Written: May 8, 2018 #84 1 - 54 law or - - e regulations of to stipulate that 1 is residential uses abut the façade for the - evised 8.2 (2) to clarify that dwelling units Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Changes:Revised Class A parking requirement for cluster townhousesrequired per dwelling unit without a private garageRevised regulation 8.2 (1) so not applicable to multiple dwellings, thereby not requiring them to be located within a mixed use building and allowing them to be freestanding. R(including amenity areas and access) may be located on the ground floor provided that nonentire length of the façade, except for access. Revised 8.3(1) so that all thall MIX zones contained in Table 8.2 are not applicable to existing buildings and structuresDeleted provision 4.6. - ons law prior to the - law to require that - necessary to have buildings or new portions of d using only that portion of the building would never be rounded down to 0, but rounded to 1. law Amendment applications and minor variance applicati - Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) 1 and 2) Staff will be recommending that Council declare by resolution, in accordance with Section 10.0.0.2 and Section 45 (1.4), to permit all Zoning Bysubmitted to amend/seek variance from the new zoning bysecond anniversary of the day on which it was passed. 3) There is no requirement in the proposed zoning bycluster townhouses provide garages, as such, it isClass A parking stall requirements to ensure the provision of parking for bicycles.4) As per proposed 5.5 b), where the calculation results in a fraction, the requirement shall be the next higher whole number. As such, the requirement 5) Staff revised regulations from the first draft to the final draft zoning bychange facilities) are only required for newbuildings. Please refer to 5.4.a).6) 2.3 b) i) stipulates how FSR will be calculated where two zones apply to a lot. 'Where two or more zones apply to a lot, the following shall apply: i) floor space ratio shall be calculatefloor area and only that portion of the lot area within each zone;'7) Floor Space Ratio (FSR) is a measurement of the massing of a building on a lot. It is important to include all areas of a building above grade r vices or for their xxx prior to the - law Amendment law law -- - y specific basis within the - residential uses, consideration be portions of buildings that were not - 1 provides clarification on how FSR will be - law 85 - 3, no Class A Bicycle Parking is required at cluster townhouses should not have Class A - residential property year time period. - - Comment Summary3) Recommend that the city continue specifying the bonus value of community benefits and corresponding facilities, sermatters4) Recommend that City return to a system of bonus values based on floor area ratio since they believe FAR introduces and inequity between large and small parcels. Through FAR for a small lot than it is for a large lot.1) Ask that consideration be given to preparing a recommendation to Council to the effect that Section 34 (10.0.0.1) does not apply to all Zoning Bapplications submitted to amend Bylaw 20xxsecond anniversary of the day on which it was passed; and that Section 45 (1.3) does not apply to all minor variance applications. General concern is that there may be the need forvariances or zoning changes on a sitetwo2) State that further parking reductions may be warranted on a site specific basis and are concerned on how Section. 34 of the Planning Act will prevent this3) State thparking stalls since they typically have private garages where the bicycles could be stored. 4) Ask for confirmation that if the GFA is under the amount set in Table 5non5) Ask that for Class A Bicycle Parking Stalls and related Indoor Shower regulations for nongiven to adding a provision that these requirements shall only be required for buildings or existing on the date of passage of this By6) Zoning bycalculated on properties with split zoning, ask that staff provide confirmation on this matter in the new by7) Request that consideration be given to excluding parking Commenter Andrea Sinclair, MHBC Planning Drewlo Holdings Inc. Voisin Development Ltd. & Incc Corp. Hallman Construction Ltd. Activa Holdings Inc. Lexington Park Real Estate HIP Developments Killam Properties Realstar Property Management #85, 86, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 99 1 - 55 law or - anniversary of the floor façade openings that Council declare by law Amendment applications and - residential. - e site, the corresponding Bonus Value law prior to the second - Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Revise the maximum gross floor area requirement to apply to retail only rather than nonRevised how groundcalculatedRevised method of awarding bonusing to a hybrid approach which will equitably award bonus values by taking into account varying lot sizes. If the scale or cost of a given Community Benefit is fluid based on the size of thwill be Floor Space Ratio. If the scale or cost of a given Community Benefit is not fluid based on the size of the site, the Further Action:Staff recommending resolution, in accordance with Section 10.0.0.2 and Section 45 (1.4), to permit all Zoning Byminor variance applications submitted to amend/seek variance from the new zoning byday on which it was passed. ds se. - law, staff - vided in residential u - e ratio. If a parking use buildings on lan - ntended to set a minimum proposed MIX zones, for the 2) so it is not applicable to multiple standing. 8.2 (1) will still apply to - law are i - law. - larification that only the portion of buildings located g amounts of pedestrian activity. Currently, it is important r consideration, staff intend to remove this regulation in e proposed COM zoning to apply the maximum gross floor and the street, having buildings or primary facades that are more law, staff will revise regulation 8.2 (law. These include regulations about having a portion of the buildings -- Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) (regardless of whether it is used for parking) on a lot to ensure that the entire mass of a building is captured. Staff is of the opinion that revisions to the definitions relevant to floor space ratio from the first draft to the final draft provide the cabove grade are included when calculating building floor area and therefore floor space ratio. If a parking structure is located below grade, it is excluded from the building floor area and floor spacstructure is located above grade, it is included in building floor area and floor space ratio.8) In order to maintain direct vehicular access to and from parking spaces, staff will not be recommending that parking spaces can be protandem for privately owned buildings. Development applications can be submitted to consider such parking scenarios for private properties and be considered on their own merits.9 and 10) There is a strong desire to have mixedproposed to be zoned MIX to provide for uses that encourage an active streetscape and pedestrian activity. However, multiple dwellings are a permitted use in the proposed MIX Zones. In the proposed final zoning bydwellings, thereby not requiring them to be located within a mixed use building and allowing them to be freeonly permit multiple dwellings on a lot containing a non8.2 (1) will be revised to clarify that dwelling units (including amenity areas and access) may be located on the ground floor provided that nonresidential uses abut the façade for the entire length of the façade, except for access. 11) Upon furthethe proposed final zoning by12) An important aspect of properties designated and zoned for mixed use is that they are in existing or planned transit areas with the intent of having increasinto include regulations that are aimed at facilitating and achieving a built form that is transit and pedestrian oriented. The built form/design related regulations that are to be included in the most part, are currently contained in the MU zones in the existing zoning bytowards the front lot line, not having large parking areas between the building than one storey in height and ensuring that there are primary entrances, openings and windows along a building frontage. Regulations of this type included in the proposed zoning bydirection and options for how to go beyond these minimum standards.13) Upon further consideration, in the proposed final zoning bywill revise th s 2) - and -- alone - residential use - residential uses (Table 9 - residential caps applied to the er permitting tandem parking spaces - alone culture townhouses and stand - ies in the Official Plan. to applying to retail uses. Do not object to a and/or eliminated with consideration taking place in Comment Summarystructures from the FSR, or at a minimum suggest the definition located 50% or greater below grade.8) Request that staff considin privately owned buildings9) In MIX zone, in relation to multiple dwellings, they ask staff to confirm that standmultiple dwellings are permitted, provided nonare also contained on the same lot. We ask that consideration be given to deleting the second part of regulation (1).10) Request that staff delete regulation (2) such that standalone residential can be implemented as contemplated by the Mixed Use polic11) Concerned with section 4.6 which states that Cluster townhouse dwellings, multiple dwellings, and mixed use buildings shall have an entrance on the ground floor for all façades abutting a street. They believe it would be more appropriately be dealt with through design guidelines.12) Concerned with minimum ground floor façade width of 50% since they can be difficult to achieve for buildings with primary access located internal to the site. Suggest these requirements be reduced the context of a site plan approval process and/or design guidelines.13) Concerned that the nonCommercial Zones apply to all nonas opposed maximum retail gross floor area for sites where Retail Commercial Centers are not permitted, however other nonresidential uses such as office, personal service, restaurant, should not be included in this cap.14) Recommend that the city continue specifying the bonus value of community benefits and corresponding facilities, services or matters15) Recommend that City return to a system of bonus values based on floor area ratio since they believe FAR introduces inequity between large and small parcels. Commenter 20 Crestview Place VIVE Development Written: May 8, 2018 # 1 - 56 to be law or - Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Change:Corrected referencing error.Change:Revised site specific provision (31) to confirm that all lands affected by the provision (sunrise centre) are deemedone lot for the purpose of calculating gross floor area and landscaped area.Revised minimum requirement for Class B Bicycle Parking to 1 space per 500 square metres of gross floor area for 'large merchandise retail'. law to - law, - will be ning by urs, lands currently ect to an Environmental law which will equitably - Value will be Floor Space Ratio. If ferencing error in the final draft. law. - law and this will apply to any development (i.e. - s identified in the 2014 Official Plan (OP).The intent of verlay will remain on the property in order to comply with continue to recommend a minimum landscape area of 20% as Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) area requirement to retail only.14) Thank you. It is the intent to specify the community benefits and bonus values in the new Zoning By15) Thank you for the comment. Upon further review, staffrecommending a hybrid approach in the final byaward bonus values by taking into account varying lot sizes. If the scale or cost of a given Community Benefit is fluid based on the size of the site, the corresponding Bonusthe scale or cost of a given Community Benefit is not fluid based on the 1. Thank you. Staff will correct the re2. Thank you for your supportive comment.1) Staff confirm that the landscaped area does not include areas for parking of the access of motor vehicles. 2) The minimum 20% landscape area requirement is intended to apply to the entire commercial development known as the Sunrise Centre. Staff will revise Site Specific Provision 31 in the proposed final zoning bymake this clarification. 3) Staff willpart of the final zoning byadditions, expansions, redevelopment). Given the proposed reduction in minimum parking requirements, as redevelopment occused for parking could be utilized for additional landscaping to meeting landscaping requirements. 4 and 5) Upon further review and in recognition of the goods sold as part of 'large merchandise retail' uses, in the proposed final zostaff will revise the requirement for Class B Bicycle Parking Staffs to 1 space per 500 square metres of gross floor area for 'large merchandise retail'. Heritage System aecological restoration areas overlay is to identify lands that have the potential to have their ecological functions restored. The overlay serves as a notice that those lands identified will be subjImpact Study or other appropriate study prior to development (vacant sites), redevelopment (of all or part of existing developed sites), or site Policies. This o 1. - law (Final - law 85 - developed with parking ude areas for parking or the access of parcel or only to future development. edge that the Special Use Provision 454U on the nd the Walmart site would require 49 Class B parking k that Bicycle B parking stalls requirement only be applied Comment Summary1) Special Provision 453U c) should be modified to reference the appropriate section of the proposed Zoning ByDraft), being Section 11.3 (Regulations for Institutional (INS) Zones). Currently references 32.3.5 of Zoning By2) Acknowlsouthern portion of the property has been carried forward to the Final Draft as Site Specific Provision (74) and we would like to confirm support for this consistency. 1) Concerned about minimum 20% landscaped area requirement since in the definition it appears landscaping may include natural vegetation, surface walkways, rooftop gardens, patios, decks, playgrounds, pathways and other similar materials but shall not inclmotor vehicles. 2) Would like clarification on how the 20% landscape requirement will be calculated. Does it apply to the entire commercial development known as the Sunrise Centre or does it apply to each individual 3) Request that minimum requirement only be applied to portions of the subject lands undergoing redeveloped and not be imposed on the existing. 4) Concerned that class B parking stalls are required for all buildings astalls. Believe it's impractical to anticipate that this many bicycle parking would be required due to many of the purchases are made in large quantities and would require transport by automobile. 5) Asto portions of the site undergoing redevelopment and not be imposes on the existing site. 6) Request that city remove the Ecological Restoration Overlay from their property as the plaza is fully areas and buildings already located in the overlay, Commenter Dan Currie, MHBC Planning 547 New Dundee Road Written: May 8, 2018Oz Kemal, MHBC Planning 1400 Ottawa Street South Written: May 8, 2018 #8795 1 - 57 law or - ing to a 1 zoning. the scale or cost - law allow for a - to 0.5m and 4.5m rather 3 zoning. - ded by the Grand River Conservation Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action No Change:Proposed zoning consistent with information proviand with current PChanges:No longer proposed minimum parking requirements within the UGC zone, except for a minimum parking requirement of rate of 1/50 GFA for office with a GFA in excess of 4,000m2.Revised method of awarding bonushybrid approach which will equitably award bonus values by taking into account varying lot sizes. If the scale or cost of a given Community Benefit is fluid based on the size of the site, the corresponding Bonus Value will be Floor Space Ratio. Ifof a given Community Benefit is not fluid based on the size of the site, the Changed Minimum percent of the ground floor façade openings from 70% to 65%, and revised 'strike zone'than entire ground floor façade.Modified 4m distance between façade openings so that it only applies to King Street.Change:Revise Site Specific Provision (56) in the proposed final zoning bymaximum of 12 storeys rather than 4 storeys required by the MIX - - 1 and - law 85 - sought from the law so that it iver Conservation - law. Staff are aware of the - 1 zoning. - law amendment processes, as - 2763 Ext. 2319. this matter complies with these - 621 law allow for a maximum of 12 storeys - - law on law have been selectively chosen for their - - der meeting took place February 6, 2018 ibilities to represent provincial interests with respect to UGC. Staff acknowledge the implications of including law. In those cases, relief could be - designed projects may not be able to meet all regulations - ent). The primary purpose of the comprehensive zoning by you for the comment. 6) Staff are comfortable with the design regulations in the UGC zones. - Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) 1) Your property falls within the GRCA watershed. The GRCA has delegated responsnatural hazards (flooding hazards, erosion hazards) in this area. These were based on information provided by the Grand RAuthority (GRCA). The proposed zoning of your property aligns with this GRCA information. Should you have any specific questions about the GRCA natural feature(s) on your property, please contact the GRCA at planning@grandriver.ca or 5192) The proposed zoning will remain on the property in order to comply with regarding natural hazards.1) As indicated in previous correspondence, the maximum FSR in the vision documconforms with the Official Plan. As such, staff will continue to recommend that the maximum FSR for the UGC zones be 3.0.2) Thank3Several of these exist in some form in the current Zoning Bythose in the new Zoning Byimportance to thespecific design regulations in the Zoning Byreality that wellof the Zoning ByCommittee of Adjustment or zoning byneeded. The Official Plan policies for the Urban Growth Centre expect all buildings to be of high quality urban design and including some regulations in the Zoning Bypolicies. It is the opinion of staff that the design regulations included in the UGC Zones are of highest priority, and engraining them in the Zoning Bylaw ensures stronger adherence than guidelines do.Additional stakehol1 and 2) Upon further review, staff will revise Site Specific Provision (56) in the proposed final zoning byrather than 4 storeys required by the MIX - ply ing and 1. - specific solutions - ade width as a percent of ould not meet many of the in favour of site assumption has to change since a maximum 4 storeys permitted in the MIX pportive of the parking regulations proposed for at the UGC Zones prescribe minimum and maximum Comment Summaryelevated with fill long before they took possession of the property. States the GRCAsignificant portion of the property does not have the risk of flooding due to the elevation. 2) Opposed to the new proposed zoning of NHC1) Maximum FSR of 3 for the downtown is too low given the role the Downtown plays in our community and in the new regional transportation system and is an underutilization of Downtown property. Many recent developments in the Downtown achieve FSR far greater than what the zoning framework provides for.2) Generally suthe Downtown and the exemption for smaller buildings. 3) Note that the UGC Zones propose minimum step backs for midrise buildings and tall buildings. Request that the prescribed 3 metre stepback be removed implemented at the Site Plan review stage as directed by new urban design guidelines. Note that mid rise buildings, depending on their design, may not require stepbacks given their minimal height and scales. 4) Note thheights for podiums. Request that height should be project specific, having regard to site, neighbourhood and building characteristics rather than stipulated in the zoning. 5) Request removing the minimum facthe street line (70% to 90%), the percent of ground floor facade openings of 70% and maximum spacing of 4 metres and replaced with urban design guidelines which illustrate the principle and allow for the appropriate amount of glazfagade openings to be created based on the context and building purpose. The standards proposed are arbitrary and onerous, but the principle it is trying to implement is desirable and can be captured in guidelines. 6) Recently approved buildings wnew elements of the proposed zoning, yet they are very well designed projects.1) Concerned with the 1 zone which is inconsistent with the maximum height of 36 metres permitted in Site Specific Provision No.56.2) Request that a provision be added which exempts the development from a maximum number of storeys and simrely on building height. - Commenter Fred Wagner25 Shirk Place Written: May 8, 2018Oral: May 8, 2018Glen Scheels, GSP Group Inc. General Comments Downtown zoning and bonusing Oral: May 8, 2018Written: May 18, 2018Pieter and Catherine Vos, 628 New Dundee Road 628 New Dundee Road #969798 1 - 58 law or - . shall be automotive provision) and operations part of the Companion amended to reflect the modifications to subject to their review of the zoning Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Change:Site specific provision (134) is proposed to be applied to the subject lands to permit retail of motor vehicles and majorrecreational equipment detailing and repair permitted.Written acknowledgement received March 11, 2019 stating land owners acceptance of proposed zoning of subject properties (schedules to confirm the application of zoning and site specific Change:The Natural Heritage Conservation land use designation in the Official Plan is proposed to be ESPA layers. Accordingly, a portion of the property will be designated Natural Heritage Conservation and the remainder of the property will be designated Low Rise Residential asOfficial Plan Amendment. Further Action: cial Plan law a site specific onsideration of a - zards and flooding oriented commercial - 1016, 1082, 1094 Wilson in the proposed EMP zoning ing by way of permitting 'retail 4 zon properties ( - al equipment' and 'automotive detailing and zones currently permit a wide range of 3 and COM - 2, COM - omprehensive Review. The Region of Waterloo is in the initial t related/supportive uses in these areas. Industrial indicated in previous correspondence, the Grand River A layers on the subject properties. Accordingly, in the proposed on May 11, 2018, staff is aware that the regional staff made Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) 1) As indicated in previous correspondence, the existing industrial (M) zones and business park (B)industrial and commercial uses. To align with updated Provincial legislation regarding industrial employment areas, the City has updated its Official Plan to permit only industrial employment and industrial employmenEmployment Areas are not intended for destinationand retail uses. Accordingly, the Business Park Employment and General permitted use in the Commercial land use designation and in the proposed COMof motor vehicles and major recreational equipment' and 'automotive detailing and repair operation'.2) It is staff's opinion that including a "sale, rental, service, storage or repair of motor vehicles" as a permitted useor amending the Official Plan to do so would constitute a conversion of industrial employment lands and that is not within the scope of CRoZBy nor permitted to be considered by Kitchener Council outside of a Regional Municipal Cstages of undertaking a Regional Municipal Comprehensive Review and an employment strategy and assessment of lands will be completed as part of this. Please contact Regional Planning Staff for cconversion and to be involved in the review process.Staff will be recommending that in the proposed final byprovision be applied to the subject lands to permit existing 'retail of motor vehicles and major recreationrepair operations'. Following the site visit to the subject Ave) modifications to their Significant Woodlands and Environmental Sensitive Policy Area (ESPA) layers around the Wilson Ave area. Consistent with what staff Conservation Authority (GRCA) has confirmed that portions of the subject properties are within the GRCA regulated area and further, reiterate that no modifications to the delineation of slope erosion hahazard are supported. Staff can confirm that we are in receipt of the updated Significant Woodlands and ESPA layers and data from the Region of Waterloo on July 24th. Below, Figure 1, shows the modified Significant Woodlands and the ESP financial impact adding automotive established residential use, the - Comment Summary1) Concerned that proposed zoning does not allow for automotive sales function to continue on these properties2) Proposed that Committee either include sales in business parks or adopt an OPA to create special policies for Victoria Street and Shirley Drive to permit automotive dealerships.1) Opposed to NHC zoning and are concerned with how the zoning will impact: the longintended use to maintain residential use; the with the resale value, the lack of permitted uses, the insignificance of the woodlot and the appropriateness of the boundaries between zones.2) Request that planning staff complete site inspections 2380 - Commenter Written: May 8,Glenn Scheels, GSP Group Inc. 2340Shirley Drive, 2385 Shirley Drive, 125 Centennial, 1800 Victoria St. NOral: April 30, 2018Larry & Monica Himmelmann 1094 Wilson Avenue Oral: April 30, 2018 #99100 1 - 59 law or - ion and the icial Plan Amendment. ct the modifications to the 1) zoning will be applied to the - Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action In a future phase of CRoZBy, residential zoning and Natural Heritage Conservation (NHCproperty to correspond with the Low Rise Residential land use designatNatural Heritage Conservation land use designation land use designation Change:Revised definition of Commercial Entertainment to include accessory retailWhere appropriate, changed wording in definitions from 'may include' to 'can include'Change:The Natural Heritage Conservation land use designation in Official Plan is proposed to be amended to reflelayers. Accordingly, the Natural Heritage Conservation land use designation will be removed from 1016A and the property will be designated Low Rise Residential as part of the Companion OffFurther Action:In a future phase of CRoZBy, Residential zoning will be applied to the property to correspond with the Low Rise Residential land use. - 11 -- ooding HC 1) Zone will 1) Zone will -- properties in 1) will still be in - ion of the NHC law 85 - 1016, 1082, 1094 Wilson law and consulting on the - law is applicable to all - 2) zoning on the subject properties will law (Zoning By - - e properties no longer proposed to be law, staff will recommend that the land use - previous correspondence, the Grand River the subject properties. Accordingly, in the proposed pace Zone (P Law. - future component of CRoZBy that will consist of adding law, the Natural Heritage Conservation (NHClaw, the Natural Heritage Conservation (NHC -- bled in Spring 2018 any require permits from the GRCA prior -stakeholder meeting took place November 21, 2018 on May 11, 2018, staff is aware that the regional staff made Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) final Zoning ByWoodlands and ESPA layers. Therefore, the delineatzone will be revised, but will still apply to the extent shown in green in Figure 1. Further, the slope erosion hazard (brown line) and flooding (blue line, hatched) hazard overlay will continue to apply as delineated in the final draft tato any development. As part of the Official Plan Amendment being done as a companion to the proposed final Zoning Bydesignation for the portions of thzoned NHCconsidered in aresidential (RES) zones to the new Zoning Byapplication of the RES zones to properties designated residential. Until such time as the new Zoning ByKitchener, the existing Zoning Byeffect and will be applicable to lands not included in the new Zoning Bylaw. Therefore, until such time as new residential zoning is considered, the existing Open Scontinue to apply on the portions of the properties that are not included in the new Zoning ByAdditional Staff will revise the definition of commercial entertainment to include accessory retail.Confirm that site specific provision (76) proposed to apply to the property definition of amusement park includes a water park.Following the site visit to the subject properties (Ave) modifications to their Significant Woodlands and Environmental Sensitive Policy Area (ESPA) layers around the Wilson Ave area. Consistent with what staff indicated inConservation Authority (GRCA) has confirmed that portions of the subject properties are within the GRCA regulated area and further, reiterate that no modifications to the delineation of slope erosion hazards and flhazard are supported. Staff can confirm that we are in receipt of the updated Significant Woodlands and ESPA layers and data from the Region of Waterloo on July 24th. Below, Figure 1, shows the modified Significant Woodlands and the ESPA layers on final Zoning ByWoodlands and ESPA layers. Therefore, the delineation of the Nzone will be revised, but will still apply to the extent shown in green in Figure 1. Further, the slope erosion hazard (brown line) and flooding (blue line, hatched) hazard overlay will continue to apply as delineated in the established residential use, the - ale value, the lack of permitted uses, the 1) Opposed to NHC zoning and are concerned with how the zoning will impact: the longintended use to maintain residential use; the financial impact with the resinsignificance of the woodlot and the appropriateness of the boundaries between zones.2) Request that planning staff complete site inspections Comment Summary1) Desire to continue to ensure current permitted uses on the property are carried forward Commenter Paul Britton, MHBC Planning Bingemans Oral: April 30, 2018Scott Mackenzie 1016B Wilson Avenue Oral: April 30, 2018 #101102 1 - 60 law or - land use dment. 1) zoning will be applied to the - Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Change:The Natural Heritage Conservation land use designation in the Official Plan is proposed to be amended to reflect the modifications to tESPA layers. Accordingly, a portion of the property will be designated Natural Heritage Conservation and the remainder of the property will be designated Low Rise Residential as part of the Companion Official Plan AmenFurther Action:In a future phase of CRoZBy, residential zoning and Natural Heritage Conservation (NHCproperty to correspond with the Low Rise Residential land use designation and the Natural Heritage Conservationdesignation land use designation in - 1 - 1) Zone will - sist of adding 1) will still be in 1) will still be in -- Grand River rom the GRCA prior law 85law 85 dingly, in the proposed -- 1016, 1082, 1094 Wilson law and consulting on the law and consulting on the -- no longer proposed to be law is applicable to all properties law is applicable to all properties in -- 2) zoning on the subject properties will law (Zoning Bylaw (Zoning By - -- onent of CRoZBy that will consist of adding law, staff will recommend that the land use law, staff will recommend that the land use ning By -- t will still apply to the extent shown in green in ng 2018 any require permits from the GRCA prior Law. - law, the Natural Heritage Conservation (NHC - -- on May 11, 2018, staff is aware that the regional staff made ed NHC Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) final draft tabled in Sprito any development. As part of the Official Plan Amendment being done as a companion to the proposed final Zoning Bydesignation for the portions of the propertieszoned NHCconsidered in a future compresidential (RES) zones to the new Zoning Byapplication of the RES zones to properties designated residential. Until such time as the new Zoning ByKitchener, the existing Zoning Byeffect and will be applicable to lands not included in the new Zoning Bylaw. Therefore, until such time as new residential zoning is considered, the existing Open Space Zone (Pcontinue to apply on the portions of the properties that are not included in the new Zoning ByFollowing the site visit to the subject properties (Ave) modifications to their Significant Woodlands and Environmental Sensitive Policy Area (ESPA) layers around the Wilson Ave area. Consistent with what staff indicated in previous correspondence, theConservation Authority (GRCA) has confirmed that portions of the subject properties are within the GRCA regulated area and further, reiterate that no modifications to the delineation of slope erosion hazards and flooding hazard are supported. Staff can confirm that we are in receipt of the updated Significant Woodlands and ESPA layers and data from the Region of Waterloo on July 24th. Below, Figure 1, shows the modified Significant Woodlands and the ESPA layers on the subject properties. Accorfinal Zoning ByWoodlands and ESPA layers. Therefore, the delineation of the NHCzone will be revised, buFigure 1. Further, the slope erosion hazard (brown line) and flooding (blue line, hatched) hazard overlay will continue to apply as delineated in the final draft tabled in Spring 2018 any require permits fto any development. As part of the Official Plan Amendment being done as a companion to the proposed final Zoning Bydesignation for the portions of the properties no longer proposed to be zonconsidered in a future component of CRoZBy that will conresidential (RES) zones to the new Zoning Byapplication of the RES zones to properties designated residential. Until such time as the new Zoning ByKitchener, the existing Zo the appropriateness of the established residential use, the - zoning and are concerned with how the Comment Summary1) Opposed to NHC zoning will impact: the longintended use to maintain rge residential use; the financial impact with the resale value, the lack of permitted uses, the insignificance of the woodlot and boundaries between zones.2) Request that planning staff complete site inspections Commenter Dave Thompson 1016D Wilson Avenue Oral: April 30, 2018 #103 1 - 61 law or - a hotel. to allow for a commercial 3 zoning to permit3 zoning to convenience -- hotel the site, the corresponding Bonus Value Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Change:Site Specific Provision (135) proposed to apply to property school to include the existing elementary schoolChange:Revised method of awarding bonusing to a hybrid approach which will equitably award bonus values by taking into account varying lot sizes. If the scale or cost of a given Community Benefit is fluid based on the size of will be Floor Space Ratio. If the scale or cost of a given Community Benefit is not fluid based on the size of the site, the Change:Revised COMAmend lands designated Commercial and located within Arterial Commercial Corridors to permit Change:Amend lands designated Commercial and located within Arterial Commercial Corridors to permit convenience retailRevised COMretail - law, - law to - - vate perties will 3 zones. - 6 which - However, staff will cial and located within law which will equitably e Floor Space Ratio. If - 3 zoning. - - 3 zoning. - law that a site specific - ty to allow for a commercial 2) zoning on the subject pro - Law. - law will come into effect on the day that it is passed and - law in error. Staff will revise the proposed final by - - mmending a hybrid approach in the final by not be retroactively dated. Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) effect and will be applicable to lands not included in the new Zoning Bylaw. Therefore, until such time as new residential zoning is considered, the existing Open Space Zone (Pcontinue to apply on the portions of the properties that are not included in the new Zoning ByStaff confirm that the subject property is currently zoned Cpermits an educational establishment. In the proposed new zoning bySection 3. In implementing the Commercial land use designation of the new Official Plan (2014), the proposed COM zoning does not permit an include an adult education school, elementary school, secondary school or posttherefore not permitted in the proposed COMrecommend in the proposed final zoning byprovision be added to the subject properschool to include the existing elementary school.1) Thank you for the comment. Upon further review, staff will be recoaward bonus values by taking into account varying lot sizes. If the scale or cost of a given Community Benefit is fluid based on the size of the site, the corresponding Bonus Value will bthe scale or cost of a given Community Benefit is not fluid based on the 2) The Zoning Bywillof the zoning byStaff will recommend that the Official Plan be amended to permit convenience retail on lands designated CommerArterial Commercial Corridors and therefore permit in COM lower law is - 2 which would law used FSR to - - conforming which could - ity depending on the size of the site. - - Comment Summary1) Opposed to property being rezoned COMprohibit educational establishments.2) Currently there is a private school operating on thelevel of the building and the proposed zoning would render the private school use as legal nonjeopardize their licensing3) Asks that a site specific provision be considered to permit the educational use1) States that the first draft of the Zoning Bycalculate bonusing and they believe this mechanism is more equitable than what is currently proposed. Believes current proposal creates an inequ2) Asks that staff consider that when the Zoning Bypassed, it is retroactive to the date which the Official Plan received final approval. 1) Concerned since COMuse for the property which would have adverse impacts for the property owner.1) Stated that COMto permit that use. - 4233 King - Commenter Brandon Peister 3328 King Street East Oral: May 8, 2018Dan Currie, MHBC Planning General Comments Bonusing Oral: May 8, 2018K. Patel 4521 King Street East Oral: May 8, 2018Scott Patterson, Labreche Patterson 4195Street East Oral: May 8, 2018 #104105106107 1 - 62 law or - 1 zoning. - 1 zoning consistent with - Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Change:Slope Erosion Hazard Overlay updated to reflect the GRCA revised mapping.No Change: Proposed EUFinformation provided by the Grand River Conservation and with current E eir ion 150/06. 1 are subject to - ply to lands that are 1) no person shall - 1 ap Law since January 24, - - 1/EUFlterations to Shorelines - mapping. The limits of the - 1 Zone for outdoor storage, - 1/EUF - ts. Under Regulation 150/06, t aggravate existing flooding law is 30 years old and requires an - 1. The E - er to prevent the creation of new hazards r the current By law (85 imit the extent of all of the areas regulated by the Regulation. law will be updated to reflect the GRCA revised mapping. - trailer. - The - 1 zone and the Slope Erosion Hazard Overlay in the final proposed - 1 zone is being renamed EUF - Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) Staff confirm that the GRCA has updated their EUFZoning ByThe E1994.update as a result of the new Official Plan. As part of this update, some existing zones and uses are being renamed or reclassified. The existing Elocated within the floodway as determined by the Grand River Conservation Authority (GRCA) where there is existing development subject to flooding hazards. The purpose of this Zone is to recognize existing uses and development, and nohazards or create new ones, and to reduce the risk to life and property in the event of flooding.In addition to the Zoning By law, lands zoned EGRCA Policies for the Administration of Ontario RegulatRegulation 150/06 allows the GRCA to prevent or restrict development in areas where the control of flooding, erosion (slope erosion and slope valley), dynamic beaches, pollution or the conservation of land may be affected by development, in ordor the aggravation of existing ones.Areas regulated under Ontario Regulation 150/06 have been mapped according to the criteria and standards outlined in the GRCA Reference Manual Determination of Regulation Limisome properties in the watershed that were previously regulated are no longer regulated while some other properties that were not regulated before may now be regulated. It is important to note that existing mapping does not delPolicies for the administration of the Regulation are provided in the Grand River Conservation Authority Policies for the Administration of the Development, Interference with Wetlands and Aand Watercourses Regulation available at www.grandriver.caPermitted Uses under the current By law (85proposed By law. Also, undeuse any land in whole or in part within an Edisplay for sale or to the parking of the trailer component of a tractor trailer or semi law - Comment Summary1) Requests that Council delay approval of the Zoning Byuntil GRCA has completed their updates to the mapping of the area for hazard lands. 1) Advised that they own a vacant parcel of land that is proposed to be zoned EUF which would make the parcel undevelopable. w Commenter Ken Murphy 153Bloomingdale Road Oral: May 8, 2018AndreGastmeier 20 Bridge Street Oral: May 8, 2018 #108109 1 - 63 law or - Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action property, therefore the uses are not currently permitted nor will Staff Response (provided in individual response letters) subject they be permitted in the proposed By law.The proposed zoning will remain on the property in order to comply with regarding natural hazards. Comment Summary Commenter # 1 - 64 3 2 - - law or - 1 zoning delineation. - Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action No Change:Confirmed that the current use of the property is permitted in the proposed EMPzone. Change:Revised maximum building height in COMto 25m for a mixed use buildingChange:Official plan amended to correspond with the NHC dors are also Heavy Industrial 3 was revised to add - in previous correspondence, law to implement the new - commercial uses will no longer be law, the EMP - law, staff will be revising the maximum - nt use of the property is permitted in the 2 zone from 15 metres to 24 metres for - 3 zone. - Supply and Service'. Staff note that from the first draft to the he City has updated its Official Plan to permit only industrial and perty and not the entire property. Staff Response(provided in individual response letters) 1 and 2) As indicated in previous correspondence, based on the description of your business provided, staff consider the use 'Major Equipment final draft of the proposed zoning by'Major Equipment Supply and Service' as a permitted use as it was deemed it was an appropriate use in implementing the Employment land use designation. 'Major Equipment Supply and Service' is defined as the use of a premises for the service, repair, and sale of farm, construction, and large business machines; and commercial vehicles. Accordingly, the curreproposed EMPAs the City proceeds with a new zoning byOfficial Plan (2014), the current zoning cannot remain as is where it is not consistent with the Official Plan. As indicatedstaff recognize that the existing industrial (M) zones and business park (B) zones currently permit a wide range of industrial and commercial uses. However, to align with new Provincial legislation regarding industrial areas, tindustrial related/supportive uses in these areas. This will ensure that these areas are utilized for primarily industrial uses and, to achieve this, residential and institutional and mostpermitted. These uses are not proposed to be removed only to the subject property; they are being removed from all industrial areas.1 and 2) As per policy 3.C.2.39, lands within Urban Corriintended to be designated Commercial. As such, staff will not be recommending that the land use designation or the proposed zoning of the subject proposed be revised. 3) In the proposed final zoning bybuilding height in the COMbuildings containing dwelling units. 4) Staff confirm that the regulations pertaining to the ecological restoration areas are only applicable to lands in which the overlay apply on the proStaff confirm that as part of the companion Official Plan Amendment for CRoZBY, the Natural Heritage Designation in the Official plan mapping will be updated. he 2 zones since - 2 would help to better - 2 zone remains, that a site specific - 1 zone aligns with the recently - 2 zone is an underutilization of the - M that current zoning remains site plan and ask that the Natural Heritage vision be added to permit a maximum building height of 8 Comment Summary1) Want to ensure 2) That if they wish to sell the property, they can sell it zoned as it currently is.1) Request that the properties be zoned as MIXthey believe the COproperty. 2) Believe that zoning the lands MIXOfficial Plan.3) Request that if the COMprostoreys.4) A small portion of the rear of the property has been identified within the Ecological Restoration Area Overlay. Request that Staff consider the interpretation that the implementation of tredevelopment and/or site alteration would relate to works specifically in the area within the overlay and not on other portions of the land. 1) Satisfied that the NHCapproved Designation in the Official Plan be updated to correspond with the zoning map.2) Alternatively, they request that confirmation be given that the Official Plan designation is interpreted to coincide with the moredetailed zoning map and the approved site plan. Commenter DetailsJohn and Jeff Kirby, THE KIRBY INTERNATIONAL TRUCKS LTD GROUP OFCOMPANIES 44 &48 Ardelt Avenue, 21 Ardelt Place Written: May 9, David Aston, MHBC Planning 3171&3163 King Street East Written: May 9, 2018 Dave Aston, MHBC Planning 1000 Lackner Written: May 9, 2018 #111112113 Received After Statutory Public Meeting 1 - 65 law or - - residential - f non the property is residential gross - Site specific provision residential. Accordingly, - a of 14,000 m2. um percent of non nge: Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action ChaRevised 8.3(1) so that all the regulations of all MIX zones contained in Table 8.2 are not applicable to existing buildings and structuresAdded regulation to exempt individual buildings from achieving the minimum floor space ratio, minimum percent oresidential gross floor area and minimum percent of residential gross floor area where there is an approved Urban Design Brief that includes a Master Site Plan that demonstrates the overall development can achieve the minimum floor space ratio, minimfloor area and minimum percent of residential gross floor area.Site specific provision (63) revised to clarify that the existing 11,890.8 m2 woodlot be conserved and maintained and to stipulate that the minimum FSR for0.53.Revised the maximum gross floor area requirement in MIX zoning to apply to retail only rather than nonremoved provision in (63) stipulating a maximum nongross floor are 1, - - law. - law staff will - law, staff will - 3, the entire lot area, - 1) not only applies to MIXty is 0.53 in recognition that , the existing and proposed law, unless otherwise - spondence, the existing special 3. Therefore, the regulations within Table 8.2 will - 2 and MIX - the woodlot, would be used in determining the FSR of the site. rder to avoid confusion, staff will recommend that the proposed Site 4) As indicated in previous corre Staff Response(provided in individual response letters) 1) Thank you for the supportive comment. 2) Thank you for the supportive comment. 3) All regulations in the final draft zoning bystipulated, apply to any development (i.e. additions, expansions, redevelopment) on the property. In the proposed final byrevise the MIX zoning so that Regulation 8.3 (but also MIXnot apply to existing buildings on the subject property. New buildings will be required to meet the regulations. regulation requires the consolidated landscaped treed area to be provided and maintained at the corner of Strasburg and Block Line. It is staff's position that the zoning requires the entire wooded area to be preserved. In oSpecific Provision (63) be revised to clarify that the existing 11,890.8 m2 woodlot be conserved and maintained in the proposed final by5) As indicated in previous correspondencedefinitions of FSR require that the entire lot within each zone be used as the lot area for the purposes of calculating FSR. As this property, including the woodlot, is proposed to be zoned MIXincluding However, upon further consideration, in the proposed final byrecommend that the proposed Site Specific Provision (63) be revised to stipulate that the minimum FSR for the properthe woodlot will not be included in lands to be developed. This essentially would require a minimum FSR of 0.6 on the portion of the lot that does not have the existing woodlot. 6) Thank you for the supportive comment. law - ng law proposes the - s and the implications at a set area. This is ved. If it is determined that the ents challenges to achieving the ance with all zoning by law. Understand that the specified - development of the woodlot should not be ision to protect the woodlot and the history residential gross floor area of 14,000 m2. The - d that property may not be able to achieve Comment Summary2) Concerneminimum density requirements of the zone should alterations be made to the property. Supportive of transitional policies to allow for interim forms of development that demonstrate a progression towards full compliin progress development applications (Section 19 of the Final Draft). Clarification requested regarding whether certain regulations will apply to only new buildingto building height for the property. 3) Acknowledge that existing Special Regulation Provision 9R (proposed 63) has been modified to change the percent of the woodlot to be maintained to a defined square metre amount. Understand decbehind the existing special provision. Note that the woodlot is not identified as a natural heritage system, open space or natural heritage conservation area in the Official Plan; therefore, of the opinion that precluded by the zoning byarea of 11,890.8 m2 corresponds with the size of the existing woodlot and that the Final Draft zoning byentire wooded area to be conserexisting woodlot is to be protected, request a modification to Site Specific Provision (63) b) to clarify that the existing 11,890.8 m2 woodlot be conserved rather that stipulating the provision of one consolidated woodlotrequested to avoid confusion should future development option be explored. 4) Request that the woodlot be exempt from the minimum FSR calculation, noting that it reduces the developable proportion of land from the property and presminimum FSR stipulated by the MIX zoning. 5) Supportive of Site Specific Provision (63) which proposes a maximum nonOfficial Plan provides for the ability to recognize existicommercial developments that exceed 10,000 m2 that are located outside of Urban Growth Centres, Major Transit Station Areas or City Nodes. Commenter DetailsDave Aston, MHBC Planning 700 Strasburg Road Written: May 23, 2018 #114 1 - 66 law or - Commercial 2 - residential - 4 zone within existing buildings and - Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Change:Revised the maximum gross floor area requirement in COM zoning to apply to retail only rather than nonRevised so that Table 9Zoning Regulations and the provisions contained in Section 5 will not apply to existing buildings or structures.Added warehouse as a permitted use in COMstructuresChange:As per the request, site specific provision (94) be applied to the subject lands rict 2 in the - storage - Table 9 law will allow a total law will allow -- storage. Accordingly, self - 4 zoning. - Plan policy 15.D.5.9, these lands were not nsive zoning review process is not meant to replace subject lands to permit the existing single detached 4 zoning is appropriate for the subject property. 4 zoning. -- 4 zoning in the proposed final zoning by4 zoning in the proposed final zoning by -- 2 Commercial Zoning Regulations in the proposed final zoning retail gross floor area of 42,000 square metres. - 4 for the subject property.4 zoning can locate within existing buildings on the subject property -- Amendment redesignate these lands and will continue to propose law and the provisions contained in Section 5 will not apply to existing Staff maintains that the Commercial Campus designation and the - Staff Response(provided in individual response letters) 1) proposed COMAccordingly, staff will not be recommending that the companion Official Plan COMThe primary purpose for proposing redesignating lands in the vicinity from Commercial Campus to Commercial is a) in recognition that in accordance with Official smaller properties to Official Plan policy 15.D.5.14 which would restindividual retail outlets to a minimal size of 1,500 square metres. A site specific provision is proposed to apply to these lands in the vicinity of the units.private development applications. These applications go through a public process and are considered on their own merits.2) The COMmaximum 3) Table 9bybuildings or structures. Accordingly, any permitted uses inCOMand comply with the COM4) The COMis proposed to be permitted on the subject property by way of the proposed COMAs per the request, staff will be proposing that site specific provision (94) be applied to the dwelling. - 2 Zone - 4 Zone - permitted use within the existing buildings Request a Site Specific Provision to allow total retail gross Comment Summary1) Request redesignate subject property from Commercial Campus to Commercial and accordingly, apply COMrather than COM2) floor area shall be 42,000 square metres3) Request a Site Specific Provision to legalize the approved existing conditions4) Request a Site Specific Provision/Zoning to allow selfstorage as a Request that site specific provision be applied to the subject lands to legalize the existing single detached dwelling. arch M Margaret ten: Commenter DetailsEric Saulesleja, Heather Price GSP Group Inc. 245 Strasburg RoadWritten: Feb 19, 2019Heather Price GSP Group Inc. 140AveWrit15, 2019 #115116 1 - 67 law law -- law or by - 2 zones. - 1.1. -- te Specific Provision (49) proposed to apply Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Change:Existing zoning to remain as is within 85Further Action:Zoning of the property will be reviewed at the time of the PARTS (Planning Around Rapid Transit Stations) exercise is undertake for the Block Line Station Area. Change:Sito the property to have a minimum floor space ratio of 1 and maximum floor space ratio of 4.Revised MIX zoning so that provision 8.2(1) is not applicable to MIXChange:Existing zoning to remain as is within by85Further Action:Staff will recommend that new zoning for the subject lands be applied in a future phase of application of the new zoning in order to comprehensively apply new zoning to all lands within the PARTS Central Plan at the same time. 19. zoning bylaw ing) would not initiated 3 as this zoning is for lands designated - tion for this land use is provided in the law for approval on April 15th, 20 - uch as small repair operations and contractor or e Official Plan. However, upon further review and 1 be applied to your property at the time they - with the production of goods and materials dertaken. Further consideration of appropriate new 1. - law 85 - Staff Response(provided in individual response letters) Staff will defer applying new zoning to the subject properties and properties within the vicinity until such time as the Block Line Station Area Planning (PARTS) exercise is unzoning for the subject lands will be given as part of this exercise. Accordingly, the zoning of the lands will remain as is under current zoning byStaff will be proposing that a site specific provision be applied to the property to have a minimum FSR of 1 and a maximum FSR of 4. Our current Official Plan framework (which guides the implementing zonallow us to grant an FSR of 5. As such, consideration for an FSR of 5 would have to continue to be evaluated through an owneramendment and official plan amendment that would have a separate public process.The property will not be zoned UGCUrban Growth Centre in thin consideration of your comments, staff will no longer be proceeding with recommending that EMPrecommend the new zoning byInstead, staff intend to recommend that new zoning be applied to the property at the time that new zoning for a new category of land use, not currently found in the Official Plan, is brought forward. This land use is PARTS Central Plan. This new land use and implementing zoning will accommodate the following type of uses:Creative productive industriesRetail sales associatedOffice uses, including scientific, technological and/or communications establishments such as computer, electronic, data processing, research and development, research and developmentSome light industrial uses sservice trade usesComplementary service commercial uses such as restaurants, print shops, personal services, fitness centres, recreational facilities, daycare facilities, health clinics, veterinary servicesResidential uses where compatible Staff will continue to keep you informed of the new zoning process and will advise when staff plan to proceed with recommending approval of new zoning on your property. ehind both 2 but the FSR is - FSR 4:1 or better and all 2) - 2 to MIX - zoning. I would like to have 2 - 1 does not allow health clinic or - 3 as the lot surrounding me with the - is moving from MU Computer, Data ProcessingDay Care, Health ClinicOffice Comment Summary2) These 2 properties should be zoned the same. They are side by side and present and past uses are very similar. Manufacturing is not appropriate. 3) Our plan was to link the 2 properties for development. We have light rail up the street and apartments bproperties. We feel zoning should be residential and retail general.1) We like it not staying the same at lease.2) We would like it to have FSR 4:1 as it is now possibly higher to MIX4 with FSR 5:13) Kindly advise if the zone change can be incorporated with new changes, at least to stay withother things stay as MU1) Permitted Uses of Existing (M---2) The proposed EMPoffices which are present existing uses of the lot surrounding my lot and my present existing my lot zoned UGCclose proximity to Google this would provide a wider selection of uses. 8, Commenter Details808 Courtland Ave E & 836 Courtland Ave E Written: Feb 5, 2019525 Belmont Ave W Written: Feb 5, 2019136 Weber Street WestWritten: Feb 2019 123 Comment Submission on Further Application of New Zoning (FANZ) 1 - 68 law or - ion. 1 zoning consistent with the 1 zone. - - Provided clarification that many of 1. - Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action No ChangeProposed EMPOfficial Plan General Industrial Employment land Use designatNo Change:Continue to propose that property be zoned AGRthe requested uses are permitted in the proposed AGR ive d use 1 zone, - (including 2 zoning and - table following this ced by what is permitted 1 zone align with the - mit a wide range of ch property in the new law (CRoZBy) project is - Farm Diversified Use. Refer to - 1 (Neighbourhood Industrial - Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) ost commercial uses are not being removed from Farm Diversified. General regulations for Home Occupation - 1 zoning. ly (Section 4.8). - lated based on the market value but rather the assessed value Staff Response(provided in individual response letters) 1) The existing industrial (M) zones currently perindustrial and commercial uses. To align with new Provincial legislation regarding industrial areas, the City has updated its Official Plan to permit only industrial and industrial related/supportive uses in these areas. This will ensurindustrial areas will offer unique land uses as there will be very few other areas in the City that will permit industrial uses. Please note that residential and institutional and myour property alone. These uses are being removed from all industrial areas. Many industrial uses have been renamed, or several similar uses have been consolidated into a single broad use. Please refer to the response for a comparison of using permitted in existing Mproposed EMP2) The comprehensive review of the zoning bydifferent EMP zones proposed for properties within the industrial areas. There are several factors that determine which EMP zone is most appropriate for each property. This determination is made in close consideration for the land use designation of eaOfficial Plan. Each EMP zone has a range of appropriate industrial and related accessory uses which collectively provide a full range of industrial uses across the City. This property is designated General Industrial Employment land such is proposed to be zoned EMPEmployment). The uses proposed within the EMPpermitted uses contemplated in the General Industrial Employment landesignation. Some of the uses that may present conflicts by being in close proximity to residential uses has been removed as permitted uses.3) The zoning of properties has little to no impact on the assessed value of properties. The Municipal assesses the value of properties based on as many as 200 different factors. location, lot size/dimensions, building area, age of the property any major renovations and additions) and, quality of construction. More obtained by visiting https://www.mpac.ca/PropertyTypes/ResidentialProperties. Property taxes are not calcuof the property. The market value of a property depends on a host of factors preferences. An individual purchaser may be influenon a property. The CRoZBy project is aligning uses across the City which will provide greater clarity and consistency1) While not proposed to be listed as a separate use in the AGRHome Occupation is permitted as an Ondefinition for Onwould also appPrivate home daycare is permitted as a form of home occupation in a single detached dwelling, please see general regulations on the page above. law for Agriculture - ve reduced my land/building Health Clinic, Security and Janitorial Services, - 1: - Comment Summary1) Nothing! Under the M2 zoning there were 38 allowable uses and you have now reduced it to 16. I liken it to the City telling a variety store owner that he can only open Monday, Wednesday and Friday. You havalue. 2) Allow for Vehicle Detailing3) Shall i expect a reduction in my property taxes now that the value has been reduced?1) To add permitted uses for Agriculture Zone (AGR) to include listed on the current zoning byzone Afarm equipment Commenter Details262 Breithaupt Street Written: Feb 11, 2019PT11 Plains Road (opposite 675 Plains Rd)Written: Feb 15, 2019 45 1 - 69 law or - terloo regarding the Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action No Change:Staff maintains that the proposed zoning of the property aligns with information provided by the Region of Walocation of Regional Core Environmental features on the property. 1) - ly, staff related - ted uses. Official Plan. An taken in support of rela - added agricultural - site accommodation - ivate wells and wastewater egion has been notified to add you to d as examples in the OMAFRA Guidelines farm diversified use and/or agriculture - means the use of a premises that includes home as on tourism uses, uses that produce value - farm diversified may include the processing or packaging of - tourism are liste -matter was heard at the OMB. The OMB determined in the law. - for farm related residential units (15.D.8.15) but would require a Farm Diversified -1 zone. - egional Official Plan (ROP) shortly. It is not known at this time how the Staff Response(provided in individual response letters) Retail sales, home occupation warehouse/assembly facilities: These uses are all contemplated uses. Please refer to the OMAFRA Guidelines. Multiple unit house, secondary house & housing for farm labour / family members: The second dwelling units are permitted and that the Official Plan providesplanning application to confirm that specified criteria is met that is farm operation warrants additional employment and that onis necessary, site can be serviced by prtreatment.2) Onoccupation, agriproducts, and retail of goods produced or manufactured primarily on the premises. Onagricultural products, food store, pet boarding, pet services establishment, restaurant, and/or veterinary services. Hotel: is not permitted, but other forms of agrisuch as farm vacation suite, petting zoo, horse trail rides, retreats. Portable house, trailer storage, camping site, RV parking: OMAFRA Guidelines are explicit that these are not agricultural uses or agricultureAccordingly, staff will not be recommending that these uses be added to the AGR1) Noted. Staff maintains that the proposed zoning of your property aligns with information provided by the Region of Waterloo regarding the location of Regional Core Environmental features on your property. Accordingwill continue to recommend that the Natural Heritage Conservation (NHCzone, with site specific provision (74) be applied to your property in the new Zoning By2) The Region has identified that they will be undertaking a review of their Rreview of the environmental component of the ROP will occur. It is anticipated that a more detailed work program that outlines the ROP Review will be available later this year. The Rtheir list of contacts to keep apprised of any ROP Review updates.3) Historic Development Proposal (Severance) In 1999 an application to sever the subject property was made to the Committee of Adjustment (B3/99 and Minor Variance A12/99). The Region requested the decision of the Committee of Adjustment be appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB). In 2000, thehearing that it would hear the land use planning merits of the case first and then make a determination as to whether to proceed to hear specific evidence on the Environmental Impact Study (EIS) underthe consent and minor variance. It was clearly established that the property was designated Open Space in Sensitive Policy Area (ESPA) as determined by the RegionOfficial Plan Amendment would be required to affect development. n which ombined with the camping site, RV parking is a lack of labor and it is difficult to find w us to construct a separate dwelling. Farm Diversified, please add: Hotel, retail, sales - Comment SummaryMultiple units house and secondary housing should be allowed. Farmers require multiple families of workers to help but currently, there workers. If multiple units and secondary houses are allowed, workers will be attracted to the living accommodations and the improved conditions. Secondly, they reduce the expenses for farmers. The land price clabor and operation fees is too high which causes a lack of profit. Many farms cannot continue to operate. The farmers can rent out the units to lessen the expenses. Lastly, with many aging farmers in Kitchener, housing should be provided farming. The second generation farmers will have their own families and they would want their own housing units. Allowing multiple units and secondary houses with multiple units will provide space for the farmbusiness in Kitchener.2) In Onoffice, warehouse, assembly facilities, on site storage, portable house and trailer storage, 1) Concerned, negatively impacted, and respectfully request that the zoning not change as proposed.2) Request that the City of Kitchener, in cooperation with then Region of Waterloo, revisit the ESPA designatiowas assigned inconsistently and irregularly. 3) A previous application to sever the property made over 20 years ago was approved and subsequently rescinded by the Region. It is our intention to revisit the option of severing the property to allo Commenter Details390 Pinnacle DriveWritten: Feb 14, 2019 6 1 - 70 law or - cific Provision (156) proposed to Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Change:Site Spepermit computer, electronic, data processing, or server establishment; office; and, research and development establishment.Change: - on rial land use o the subject lands to 2 zone. Wholesaling has - l Plan. in the EMP nds. ding industrial employment areas, the dment, the request for consent to sever storage warehouses, and facilities for - al Plan (Policy 7.C.2.20) identifies that development, rough severance or plan of subdivision (or condominium) that has per Policy 7.C.2.18, all proposals for development, redevelopment or site holesaling of goods otherwise stored or manufactured within the building, Staff Response(provided in individual response letters) The Board decision (Decision/Order No. 1138) concluded that as the absence of an Official Plan Amenconsent application was refused. The OMB made no determination on the merits of the Environmental Impact Study or of the development of the laCurrent Development Potential (Severance) Official Plan and within an Environmentally Sensitive Policy Area (ESPA) as determined by the Region Official Plan. redevelopment or site alteration will not be permitted on lands designated as Natural Heritage Conservation. division ththe effect of fragmenting lands within the Natural Heritage System will not be permitted in Core Natural Heritage Features and will be discouraged in all other natural heritage features. As alteration within, or adjacent to, any features included as part of the Landscape Level System or Core Environmental Features will be reviewed in accordance with the Regional Officia1) The existing industrial (M) zones and business park (B) zones currently permit a wide range of industrial and commercial uses. To align with updated Provincial legislation regarCity has updated its Official Plan to permit only industrial employment and industrial employment related/supportive uses in these areas. Industrial Employment Areas are not intended for institutional uses or destinatioriented commercial and retail uses. Accordingly, many institutional and most commercial uses are proposed to no longer be permitted in the is proposed to be a permitted use withfollows: means the use of a building for the storage and/or distribution of goods and may include selfwbut shall not include a truck transport terminal.2 and 3) Upon further review in consideration that an office use is an employment use (albeit not contemplated in the general industdesignation but in the business park employment designation), staff will recommend that a site specific provision be applied to the subject properties to permit office use given that this use currently exists on the property.Upon further review and in consideration of your comments, staff will be proposing that site specific provision (49) be applied t 2 - 710 - differently than 2 zone excludes office space - ldings. will be expanding the self storage space on the Comment Summary1) Support a number of the proposed uses within the EMPzone, however note a number of uses are no longer permitted. Currently occupy the space as follows a self storage warehousea tenant with warehouse and office space, and; a pure office space area.2) It appears that the EMPfrom the uses. This is not acceptable and there is no other option for a portion of the existing building to be anything but office space. Removing the office use will impact the usability of the bui3) It is our intention to continue to rent the pure office space out as office space and the rest of the building will continue to be used as warehouse or self storage space with associated offices for the foreseeable future. It is expected that weproperty into a space currently occupied by a warehouse/office tenant in the next year or so. The proposed zoning changes need to take this into account and not limit our ability to operate the building any we already do. (same comments mentioned via voice message)We are planning consultants to Blaze Properties Inc. with respect to the properties municipally addressed as 696 Commenter Details409 Weber Street West Written: Feb 19, 2019Heather Price GSP Group Inc. 78 1 - 71 1 - law or - Parking, 2 zones.2 zones. 2 rather than MIX -- - ng buildings and generally do not apply to existing Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Site Specific Provision (49) proposed to apply to the property to have a minimum floor space ratio of 1 and maximum floor space ratio of 4.Revised MIX zoning so that provision 8.2(1) is not applicable to MIXChange:Proposing to zone MIXRevised MIX zoning so that provision 8.2(1) is not applicable to MIXRevised so all the regulations of all MIX zones contained in Table 8.2 are not applicable to exististructures.Added provision in Section 5 Loading, and Stacking to stipulate that provisions parking space, existing loading spaces and existing stacking spaces and existing stacking lanes.No change:No change requested law and law and -- 2 with site specific provisions 2. This zone requires a minimum 2 with site specific provision -- - l new zoning bylaw staff is that the subject lands be included in the new zoning by holding provision (14H). Staff Response(provided in individual response letters) require a minimum FSR of 1 and maximum FSR of 4 (consistent with current MU Zoning FSR permissions). Accordingly, in the final new zoning bylaw staff is recommending for approval on April 15th, 2019, staff will continue to recommend that the zoning of the subject lands be MIX(49), (128), (142).Upon further review and in consideration of your comments, staff will be proposing that subject lands be zoned MIXFSR of 0.6 and maximum FSR of 2 (consistent with current MU Zoning FSR permissions). Accordingly, in the finarecommending for approval on April 15th, 2019, staff will continue to recommend that the subject lands be included in the new zoning bythat the zoning of the subject lands be MIX(148) andNo formal response provided. Comments in support of proposed zoning. 1. - law to - - law are law 85 - - law). - 2) with Site - law Further cluding the - ulations relating to (MU The Subject Property is erein about the proposed law (including the law (in -- 2 with special provisions. - or review and consultation. at this time. We may provide law. We may provide further comments - We request that the Zoning of the Subject law to a maximum FSR of 2.0 in the draft FANZ - - g By law). - Comment Summaryand 712Medium Intensity Mixed Use Corridorspecific provisions 424R and 573R in Zoning ByThe owner received correspondence from the City of Kitchener on January 21, 2019 regarding the Comprehensive Review of the Zoning Byproposed to be rezoned MIXThe proposed rezoning is of concern to the property owner because of the proposed decrease in the permitted scale of development (from a maximum FSR of 4.0 in the current ZoninByOther implications of the FANZ Bychanges to the parking requirements, definitions and other detailed regulations affecting the Subject Properties) have not been fully reviewedadditional comments once a detailed review has been completed. Property be deferred to provide additional time for proper review and consultation.I trust that the concern expressed hdecrease in FSR will be considered when preparing the final draft of Zoning Bywhen revised draft(s) of the proposed Zoning Bymade available. We request notification of any future circthis initiative. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions about the comments hereinThe proposed rezoning is of concern because of the proposed decrease in the permitted scale of development (from a maximum FSR of 2.0 in the current Zoning Bya maximum FSR of 1.0 in the draft FANZ ByOther implications of the FANZ Bychanges to the parking requirements, definitions, and other detailed regulations affecting the Subject Property) have not been fully reviewed at this time.Request that the Zoning of the Subject Property be deferred to provide additional time fIn support of proposed zoning in regards to the permissions for lot coverage and that it will allow dwellings 710 and 732 -- Commenter Details696712Belmont Avenue West Written: Feb 19, 2019Heather Price GSP Group Inc. 207 Glasgow StreetWritten: Feb 19, 20192399 Kingsway Dr 910 1 - 72 law - law or - ound Rapid ly new zoning to all 1. - Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action Change:Existing zoning to remain as is within by85Further Action:Staff will recommend that new zoning for the subject lands in a future phase of application of the new zoning in order to comprehensively applands within the PARTS Central Plan at the same time.Change:Existing zoning to remain as is.Further Action:Zoning of the property will be reviewed at the time of the PARTS (Planning ArTransit Stations) exercise is undertake for the Block Line Station Area. Change: in a 1. - part of the on which ll MIX zoning now captured law 85 - r outdoor street or and/o building permitted as home roposed zoning bylaw dated its Official Plan to permit landscaping similar uses have been consolidated oning is applied and approved, but will now combined with commercial entertainment posed setbacks in the proposed MIX zones and that for the purpose of (PARTS) exercise is undertaken. Accordingly, the now captured under health clinic , that is accessible from a law. - used building now captured under community facility now captured under artisans establishment is located, lot Staff Response(provided in individual response letters) Staff intend to recommend that new zoning be applied to the property future phase of application of the new zoning in order to comprehensively apply new zoning to all lands within the PARTS Central Plan at the same time. Staff will continue to recommend that the property receive Mixed Use (MIX) Zoning at the time new zensure that the proposed floor space ratio (FSR) permissions are consistent with current MU Zoning FSR permissions (minimum FSR of 1 and maximum FSR of 4).Staff will be revising the MIX zones and recommending that apermit:Many of the other uses that appear to no longer be permitted in the MIX zones have been renamed, or severalinto a single broad use. For example:occupation in accordance with Section 4.8 of punder research and development establishmentwhich has no the rooftop gardens, patios, decks, playgrounds, pathways, and other similar materials. Given the prolandscaped area can include rooftops garden, there are opportunities to achieve the minimum landscape requirement. As such, staff will continue to recommend a minimum landscape area of 15% in these zones asfinal new zoning byAs per the request, staff will defer applying new zoning to the subject property and properties within the vicinity until such time as the Block Line Station Area Planning zoning of the lands will remain as is under current zoning by1) The existing industrial (M) zones currently permit a wide range of industrial and commercial uses. To align with new Provincial legislation regarding industrial areas, the City has up - be deferred pending the outcome of the Blockline 2 has lower FSR that current zoning in place; less 2 has lower FSR that current zoning in place; less -- Comment SummaryMIXnumber of uses and landscape are 15% is too high for potential development.MIXnumber of uses and landscape are 15% is too high for potential development.We respectfully request that the zoning of lands within the Blockline Station Study Area, particularly the Subject Property, Station Area Planning exercise. 1) Concerned with loss of residential and commercial parking option. Very few business options listed under EMP1 are already in a few block radius of our block. 194 & 198 - Commenter DetailsWritten: Feb 21, 2019103, 107, and 111 Water St. NWritten: Feb 24, 201994 Weber St. West & 95 Water St. NorthWritten: Feb 24, 2019Heather Price GSP Group Inc. 859 Courtland Ave E Written: Feb 26, 2019192Breithaupt St 11121314 1 - 73 2 to law or - - 1 zones. - property be zoned INS rm to the Institutional land use Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action setback abuttlonger apply to EMPRevised so all the regulations of all EMP zones contained in Table 10.2 are not applicable to existing buildings and structures.Change:Applied a site specific provision to 108 Ahrens St W permitting up to 65% office within the existing building. No change:Proposing that confodesignation law - 1 zone align - 2 zoning and - very few other 2014, staff reviewed in detail - ithin the EMP permitted in existing M use designations and policies of the 1 zones. Further, the EMP zoning is also being - 1 zoning. - pportive of adding a site specific provision to the property as mpt existing buildings and structures from the regulations of y, the land use designation of the subject lands is not proposed to 2. - ximity to residential uses. Staff Response(provided in individual response letters) only industrial and industrial related/supportive uses in these areas. This will industrial areas will offer unique land uses as there will beareas in the City that will permit industrial uses.Many industrial uses have been renamed, or several similar uses have been consolidated into a single broad use. Please refer to the table following this response for a comparison of using proposed EMPPlease note that residential and institutional and most commercial uses are not being removed from your property alone. These uses are being removed from all industrial areas. The uses proposed wwith the permitted uses contemplated in the General Industrial Employment land use designation. This zone includes existing residential uses and has removed certain industrial uses that may present conflicts by being in close pro2) Upon further review and in consideration of your comments, the no longer apply to EMPrevised to exeTable 103) Please refer to the map excerpt from the Planning Around Rapid Transit Station (PARTS) Central Plan following this response to see where the The subject properties are just outside of the boundaries of the PARTS 1) Staff are suvariance approved indicated alignment with 2014 Official Plan and corresponding general industrial employment land use designation. (CRoZBy) is to implement the landPlanning Around Rapid Transit Stations (PARTS) Rockway Stations study area, the lands were not included in the final PARTS Rockway Plan. Accordinglbe changed through the implementation of the PARTS Rockway Plan. As such, staff is proceeding with recommending new zoning for this subject property to implement the land use designations New Official Plan at this time. Through the Official Plan review process 2010an Institutional designation based on a number of factors, including the in the 2) Zone - S Property at 333 Carwood Drive that would permit Concern with reduced setbacks. Comment Summary2) 3) Nothing in the current documentation states this is'Innovation District' contrary to what was verbally stated.1) A minor variance has been approved for the property that permits 65% office use (rather than the maximum permitted 25%). Would the City consider applying a site specific for this site, stating that 65% office use is permitted? Request the City consider a Site Specific Use Provision for the multiple dwelling units in addition to the uses permitted in the proposed Major Institutional (IN 25, Commenter DetailsWritten: Feb 26, 2019Sarah CodeGSP Group Inc.108 Ahrens St WWritten: Feb 2019Kristen BarisdaleGSP Group Inc.333 Carwood AveWritten: March 15, 2019 1516 1 - 74 law or - Corresponding Change in Final ByFurther Action land use permissions for lude residential uses. According, staff cannot or all of the site: r, if lands that are intended for institutional uses to meet housing targets, particularly for special 014 Official Plan than were designated in the 1994 Official Plan and the use of the site for a suitable alternative institutional purpose;acquisition of the site or a portion of it by the City for institutional or open space use, based on the park needs of the surrounding area; andthe use of the site needs or affordable housing. y 15.D.7.4 states that where a use on a site with an Institutional land a)b)c) d immediate area. City Council also identified the need to protect these Staff Response(provided in individual response letters) current use of lands, its appropriateness as an institutional site, and the presence or absence of institutional designated lands in the neighbourhood anOfficial Plan. This is a different approach than what was previously taken in the 1994 Official Plan. Ratheare designated with permissions for a residential uses, when the institutional use ceases and the property is redeveloped for residential, the institutional use in the established neighbourhood is lost athe need to have institutional sites within neighbourhoods and our in the 2permissions for residential uses in lands designated for institution were removed. proposed INS zones do not incsupport the request to add permissions for residential uses by way of a site specific zoning provision as this would not be in conformity with the Official Plan. Any change to the Official Plan institutional the subject lands should be considered through a private development comprehensive zoning review process is not meant to replace private development applications.Policuse designation ceases, the City may consider the redesignation of the site to an appropriate alternative land use designation only after examination of the following options for part Comment Summary Commenter Details 1 - 75 in lands, ves readability. property detail schedules. prototype production facilities and ange if lot line changes. ; balcony. pilot plants law. yard setbacks. ; - ries separate parking rates for each CRoZBy use is not needed on a lot or within a building containing multiple uses. constructed in accordance with and regulated by Chapter 630 unit parking rate') - would not be able have each use in Stage 1 of by provides for vertical storage of a bicycle, the minimum length may be (now called 'multi provision. consistent with building code. Provides more clarity that zone line doesn't ch law'.to be - bicycle parking stall law. Figures are being used within site specific provisions in place of - or experimentation including laborato , more clarity line stepback for more clarification within provisions where a law enabled by Official Plan Amendments come into effect - law applies to prevent the issuance of a Zoning Occupancy Certificate for a permitted use with - unit parking rate') in CRoZBy @ 1 sp / 35 GFA. Deleted Shared Parking Space Reductions. Added parking - 1 to confirm provision does not apply to fences Byapproach for different zones. - law. Defining for more clarity. - 1 - law 85 - consistent with the fact that have allowed covered decks in rear 10 square metres Following analysis of multiple plaza's in Kitchener, calculating measurement for MIX and UGG. Clarified. Otherwise, if building is built to the minimum setback, Fire Protection and Prevention Act and the Building Code A Zoning Occupancy Certificate shall be required for façade and street line façade for more clarification within provisionsstepback and street introduction of former plaza parking rate - research, investigation, testing as the term used in by . Used in re corner visibility consistent with applicable legislation. Statutory Public Meeting version less than 10 metres definition for clarity in interpretation Description of ChangeAdded provision to clarify when provisions of byAdded wording to clarify that Added wording to confirm that Nothing inbuilding, or structures established in accordance with the Transition Provisions of Section 18.Added wording to confirm that figures form part of the byAdded wording to clarify that use of n/a shall mean not applicableAdded following lot lines 'on the date of passage of this ByDeleted. Property details now contained within applicable Site Specific ProvisionsMoved provisions related to two of more zones to Section 4.17 Two or More ZonesRemove crematorium as permitted use.New definition for revised corner visibilityRevised to be Split façade into two terms Added definition for termRevised for clarity in interpretationRemove crematorium as permitted use.Added definitionAdded definitionRevised to be consistent with New term added and defined. Term used through revised stepback definitions/provisions. Added definitionAdded Added definition back in. It is needed as there are regulations pertaining to poolsSplit façade into two terms Change Added wording consistent with by(Fences) of The City of Kitchener Municipal Code.Have different Include MIX from CVT/DVT exemption.Change to 'which also' to 'or' to improve readability. Exempt from UGC and MIX Remove 'uncovered' decks to be more clarity.Added provisions consistent with 85Change so organize for requirements for ramps and stairs less than 0.6m above ground level and then above ground level. ImproChange from 'residential zone' to 'residential use'. Clarifies intent of Revised provision and illustration to confirm that reduced to 1.2 metres rather than 1.8.Add a plaza parking rate (now called 'multireductions for mixed use sites.as the parking is similar in all cases. Food Cart d) Unit Parking Rate Rise Residential - .4 Decks.4 .10 - a) 3 8 Regulation1.61.1.8Use of Tables2.3 ii)2.2.3 Property Details2.3 Limit of ZonesCemeteryCorner Visibility AreaDay Care, Private HomeFaçade/Street Line FaçadeFood CartFront Line LineFuneral HomeResidential UseLight Rail TransitLodging HouseLowManufacturingMultiNewSecond Dwelling Unit Secondary Dwelling Unit PoolStreet Line Stepback/Stepback4.14.54.5 b) c)4.5 e)4.14.14.2 4.144.144.144.16.8 d)Bicycle Parking Stall ProvisionsPlaza Parking DefinitionsDefinitionsDefinitionsDefinitionsDefinitionsDefinitionsDefinitionsDefinitionsDefinitionsDefinitionsDefinitionsDefinitionsDefinitionsDefinitionsDefinitionsDefinitionsDefinitionsDefinitionsG en RegulationsGen RegulationsGen RegulationsGen RegulationsGen RegulationsGen RegulationsGen RegulationsGen RegulationsGen RegulationsGen Regulations ---------------------------- SectionSection 1Section 1Section 1Section 2.1.4Section 2Section 2Section 2Section 3 Section 3 Section 3 Section 3 Section 3 Section 3 Section 3 Section 3 Section 3 Section 3 Section 3 Section 3 Section 3 Section 3 Section 3 Section 3 Section 3 Section 3 Section 4 Section 4 Section 4 Section 4 Section 4 Section 4 Section 4 Section 4 Section 4 Section 4 Section 5Section 5 Editorial, consistency and detailed wording updates since the 2018 1 - 76 rise buildings and tall - Recent parking study provided to City law easier. 1 and PPS. Could still be limited to less if GRCA - - stepback of 3m for mid Implements OP policies for Business Park Employment 5. 2 from 2m to 0m - - er developments.inimum m scale community uses. - 4 and EMP - ore consistent with existing E Zone than EMP This is m 2 - 3. - Amend minimum interior site yard setback in MIX 3. And added clause not to permit within 250 m of any residential or school. - 3. Amend in OP - rise residential zone - 2 to 25m. - 2 and Com - height in MIX revised so that zone will not be applied within UGC or MTSA. as permitted use for EMP - No longer required given changes to OSR/REC zoningRedundant with (74). Will apply to property instead.Redundant with (49). Will apply to property instead. 2 preamble - Description of ChangeAdd as per GFA cap rather than fixed 130% parking space maximum. Makes interpretation of Zoning ByIn suburban areas, increased visitor parking requirement from 10% to 15% for any development with 80 units or less. Transportation staff shows that demand for visitor parking is closer to 15% than 10% for smallRevised stepback provisions to pertain to street line stepbacks, added provisions to require buildings where the base abuts a lowMIXAdd Community Facility to zone to service immediate building and allow flexibility for smallAmend max buildingAdd 'Place of Worship' in ComCreate a different provision for permitted accessory uses in EMPand General Industrial Employment.Amend maximum building height adjacent to residential zones from 10.5 m to 11 m.Add crematoriumModified so speaks less to urban structureLimit additions to 25% of existing ground floor building floor area. permit doesn't allow that much.Delete, Merge with Section 15, becomes OSRDelete.Delete.Delete. Parking RegulationParking MaximumsVisitor Stepback8.18.28.39.210.310.310.3PreambleEUFEntire(81)(116)(118) EMPEMPEMP COM --- - SectionSection 5Section 5Section 6, 8 and 11Section 8Section 8Section 8Section 9 Section 10 Section 10 Section 10 Section 11Section 14Section 17Section 19Section 19Section 19 1 - 77 DSD-19-049 Appendix C AMENDMENT NO. ____TO THE OFFICIALPLAN OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER CITY OF KITCHENER 1 - 78 AMENDMENT NO. ___TO THE OFFICIALPLAN OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER CITY OF KITCHENER INDEX SECTION 1TITLE AND COMPONENTS SECTION 2PURPOSE OF THE AMENDMENT SECTION 3BASIS OF THE AMENDMENT SECTION 4THE AMENDMENT APPENDICES APPENDIX 1Notice of the Meeting of Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee of April 15, 2019 APPENDIX 2Minutes of the Meeting of Planning and Strategic Initiatives CommitteeApril 15, 2019 APPENDIX 3Minutes of the Meeting of City Council TBD 1 - 79 AMENDMENT NO. #TO THE OFFICIALPLANOF THE CITY OF KITCHENER SECTION 1 TITLE AND COMPONENTS This amendment shall be referred to as Amendment No. ___to the OfficialPlan of the City of Kitchener. This amendment is comprised of Sections 1 to 4 inclusive. SECTION 2 PURPOSE OF THE AMENDMENT The purpose of the OfficialPlan Amendment is to incorporate certain modifications to the text and schedules to support the a-law. The effect of the changes are to clarify the intent of certain policies; redesignate a number of properties to reflect the intended future use of these lands, update Bonusing implementation policies,and;modify site specific policies and policy areas. SECTION 3 BASIS OF THE AMENDMENT The effect of the amendment is to incorporate certain modifications to the text and schedules to -law. It is necessary to align the detailed review and provisions of the new comprehensive zoning by-law with the policies and mapping of the Official Plan. This Official Plan amendment is consistent with and conforms to the Provincial Policy Statement (2014),the provincial Places to Grow Act (2005) and Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2017) and the Regional Official Plan (2015). SECTION 4 THE AMENDMENT 1.The City of Kitchener OfficialPlan is hereby amended as follows: a)Part D, Section b)Part D, Section 15.D.2.37 is amended by deleting c) automobile-related commercial uses; and,andby renumbering d) to c); c)Part D, Section 15.D.2.41 is deleted in its entirety; d)Part D, Section 15.D.2.59c) is amended bydeleting the words automobile-related commercial as well as thoseand replacing with the words ; e)Part D, Sections15.D.2.60and 15.D.2.61areamended by deleting themin their entirety and replacing themwith the following: Floor Space Ratiofor all new development or redevelopmentwill be 3.0. Notwithstanding the foregoing, for landsbounded by Duke Street, Eby Street, Market Lane and Scott Street andfor lands with frontage on Duke Street, the maximum Floor Space Ratiowill be 1.0 f)Part D, Section 15.D.2 is amended by renumbering Sections 15.D.2.42 to 15.D.2.68 as 15.D.2.41to 15.D.2.66; 3 1 - 80 g) h)Part D, Section 15.D.5.12 is amended by adding the following after g): i)Part D, Section 15.D.5.12 is amended by renumbering h) to l) as i)to m); j)Part D, Section 15.D.5.16 is amended by adding the following after k): k)Part D, Section 15.D.5.16 is amended by renumbering l) to n) as m)to o); l)Part D, Section 15.D.5.20 a) is amended by adding the following after iv): m)Part D, Section 15.D.12.4 c) is amended by deleting i) in its entirety and replacing it with the following: Floor Space Ratioof 2.0; n)Part D, Section 15.D.8.5 d) is amended by deleting it in its entirety and renumbering 15.D.8.5 e) to 15.D.8.5 d); o)Part D, Section 15.D.12.4 c) is further amended by adding the following after ii) . p)Part D, Section 15.D.12.30 is amended by deleting the text in the name of the q)Part D, Section 15.D.12.30is amendedby adding the following after d): e) Notwithstanding the General Industrial Employment land use designation and policies on the lands legally described as Part of Lot 31, Registered Plan 1489, more particularly described as Blocks 1-3, 7-14 and, 23 of Draft Approved Plan of Subdivision 30T-13202 (last revised July 27, 2016), municipally known as 1011and 1111 Homer Watson Boulevard, the following additional uses will also be permitted: i)canine or feline grooming and associated boarding and training; ii)commercial recreation, for Block 2 only; iii)computer, electronic or dataserver or processing establishment; iv)financial establishment; v)health office; vi)private club or lodge; vii)scientific, technological or communications establishment; viii)surveying, engineering, planning or design establishment only as an accessory use to a permitted use or located in a building used for other permitted uses, and shall not exceed 25 per cent of the gross floor area to a maximum gross floor area of 10,000 square metres;and, ix)veterinary services.; r)Part D, Section 15.D.12is amended byaddingnew Policy 15.D.12.48as follows: 4 1 - 81 110, 130 & 136 Fergus Avenue Notwithstanding the Low Rise Residential land use designation,on lands municipally known as 110, 130 & 136 Fergus Avenue,the maximum Floor Space Ratio shall be 0.85 and the maximum building height shall be 12.5mand 4 storeys. s)Part E, Section 17.E.10.5 is amended by adding the words,a Bonusing Justification Reporta where required,; t)Part E, Section 17.E.17.2 a) is amended by deleting it in its entirety and replacing it with the following: enhanced stormw u)Part E, Section 17.E.17.2 g) is amended by deleting it in its entirety and replacing it with the following: v)Part E, Section 17.E.17.2 j) is amended by deleting it in its entirety and replacing it with the following: ; w)Part E, Section 17.E.17.2 k) is amended by deleting it in its entirety and replacing it with the following: at, or equivalent to LEED standards or similarsite or building rating system; x)Part E, Section 17.E.17.2 m) is amended by deleting it in its entirety and replacing it with the following: provision of privately-owned indoor or outdoor amenity areas which are accessible to and equipped for the use by the general public for passive or active ; y)Part E, Section 17.E.17.2 n) is amended by deleting it in itsentirety and replacing it with the following: the provision of public art; z)Part E, Section 17.E.17.2 o) is amended by deleting it in its entirety and replacing it with the following: , in a variety of dwelling unitsizes,in the Urban Growth Centre (Downtown) in mixed use buildings.; aa)Part E, Section 17.E.17.2 is amended by adding the following after o): the provision of enhanced streetscape elements; q) the provision of architectural excellence; r)the provision of a food storein a multi-unit buildingor mixed use building; or s) the provision of business incubator space for a social, environmental, heath, ; 5 1 - 82 bb)Part E, Section 17.E.17.6 is a development City will require the owner to enter into one ormore legal agreements to be reg cc)Part E, Section 17.E.17 is amended by adding the following after section 17.E.17.6: complete application."; 17.E.17.8 The City may provide further guidance for the implementation of Bonusing such as dd)Part F, Schedule B: Other Information and Materials is amended by insertingthe Affordable Housing Report ee)Amend Map No. 2 Urban Structure by: i)Identifying956-962 Glasgow Street as a ff)Amend Map No. 3 Land Use by: i)Designating 956- ii)Designating 95 Fairway Road North, 99 Fairway Road North, 86 Morgan asshown on the attached Schedule ; iii)Designating 5-7 iv) shown on the attached E; v)Designating 707 Ottawa Street South, 715 Ottawa Street South, 721 Ottawa Street South, 725 Ottawa Street South, 795 Ottawa Street South, 800 Ottawa Street South, 44 Alpine Road and, 300 Homer Watson attached ; vi)Designating 35-37 Bleams Road, 45-45 Bleams Road, 81 Bleams Road, 115 Bleams Road, 44, Otonabee Drive, 45 Otonabee Drive, 60 Otonabee Drive, 63 Otonabee Drive, 70 Otonabee Drive, 120 Otonabee Drive, 130 Otonabee Drive, 146 Otonabee Drive, 154 Otonabee Drive, 160 Otonabee Drive/36 Sasaga Drive, 45 Sasaga Drive, 65 Sasaga Drive, 107 Manitou Drive, 133 Manitou Drive, 149 Manitou Drive, 209 Manitou Drive, 227 Manitou Drive, 241 Manitou Drive, 257 Manitou Drive, 277 Mannitou Drive, 299 Manitou Drive, 50 Manitou Drive, 110 Manitou Drive, 148 Manitou Drive, 262 Manitou Drive, 270-280 Manitou Drive, 300 Manitou Drive, 326- hown on the att vii)Designating 685 Fisher Hallman Road, 715 Fischer Hallman Road, PT Towerview Av PL 820 Kitchener, PT 1, 58R6858, and; PT LOT 1-3, PL820 Kitchener, PT LT 47 German Company Tract Kitchener, as in B46046 and 6 1 - 83 360874 (thirdly and fourthly), Lying W of PT9 58R10182, Kitchener ; viii)Designating 155 Westwood as shown on the attached K; ix)Designating 525 Highland Road West and,563 Highland Road West CommercialMixed Useas shown on the attached Schedule L; x)Designating 1187 Fischer HallmanRoad,Part Lot 6 Registrar's Compiled Plan 1470 Part 47 58R-13609. S/T Ease, LT127508 In Favour Of The Corporation Of The City Of Kitchener Over Pt. Of Said Lot, Being Pt. 30 On 58r-13609. City Of Kitchener. T/W Ease Over Common Elements Of Condo 423 As InWr397292and, 325 Max BeckerDrive M; xi)Designating 4 Dodge Driveand, 321Blair Creek Drive Low Rise Residential, as shown on the attached Schedule N xii)Designating 389 Pinnacle DriveInstitutionalNatural Heritage , as shown on the O; xiii)Designating 10 South Creek Drive Medium Rise Residential Mixed UseP; xiv)Designating 110 Fergus AvenueLowRise Residential Institutional, as shown on the attached Q; xv)Designating 1016A Wilson Avenue, 1016B Wilson Avenue, 1016D Wilson Avenue, 1082 Wilsonand 1094 WilsonAvenue Open Space, as shown on S; xvi)Designating aPark Employment ,as shown on the attached T gg)Amend Map No. 4 Urban Growth Centre (Downtown) by: i)Renaming Specific Policy Area 1 in the legend as shown on the attached Sched ii) hown on iii) hown on the attached Sc iv)Remaining 100 and 104 Garment StJ hh)Amend Map No. 5Specific Policy Areas by: i)Adding the lands legally described as Part of Lot 31, Registered Plan 1489, more particularly described as Blocks 1-3, 7-17and, 22-23 of Draft Approved Plan of Subdivision 30T-13202 (last revised July 27, 2016), municipally known as 1011 and 1111 Homer Watson Boulevard to Specific Policy Area 30 as shown on the attached ; 7 1 - 84 ii)Renaming Specific Pol30. 1011 Homer , as shown on the attached ; iii)Adding a new Specific Policy Area 48. 110, 130 & 136 Fergus Avenue, as s; iv)Adding additional portions of 508 Riverbend Driveto Specific Policy Area U 8 1 - 85 APPENDIX 1Notice of the Meeting of Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee of April 15, 2019 Advertised in The Record March 22, 2019 PROPERTY OWNERS AND INTERESTED PARTIES ARE INVITED TO ATTEND A PUBLIC MEETING TO DISCUSS A PROPOSED NEW ZONING BY-LAW AND A UNDER SECTIONS 22, 26 AND 34 OF THE PLANNING ACT The City of Kitchener is conducting a comprehensive review of its zoning by- Official Plan. Zoning by-laws are legal documents that divide the city into different land-use zones, specifying permitted uses (e.g. employment or commercial) and required standards (e.g. building size and location). Two STATUTORY PUBLIC OPEN HOUSES, as per the Planning Act, were held on June 10 and 11, 2014 to obtain -law. Because of the amount of information and zones being reviewed, a first draft of the new zoning by-law was tabled through a series of components beginning in March 2015. The first draft new zoning by-law was made available for public comment through eight (8) separate open houses from March 2015 to February 2019. A STATUTORY PUBLIC MEETING, as per the Planning Act, was held in two-parts on April 30 and May 8, 2018. The final draft new zoning by- verbal submissions were made directly to Council. Staff reviewed in detail and responded to the submissions and in the majority of instances, the submissions have resulted in improvements to the final by-law. -law, including mapping, and associa www.kitchener.ca/crozby, by March 22, 2019. Proposed New Zoning By-law (Stage 1) The first stage of the new Zoning By-law includes the framework of the document, the definitions, general regulations, parking requirements, and every zoning section with the exception of residential. It will apply to approximately 3,500 properties, but will not include residential properties or those areas that are, or will be, undergoing specific neighbourhood planning reviews (e.g. Secondary Plan areas, Hidden Valley, station areas, etc.). Official Plan Amendment An Official Plan amendment is being proposed to align the detailed review and provisions of the proposed new zoning by- law with the Official Plan. Specifically, the Official Plan amendment proposes to adjust the land uses in certain areas of the City (e.g.properties adjacent to commercial campus (e.g. Sunrise Centre) lands to better align with new zoning; employment lands in the vicinity of Bleams Road and Manitou Drive) and permitted uses in land use designations to better reflect the intended use of these lands in the future. The Official Plan amendment also proposes to clarify the maximum permitted floor space ratio in the Market District of downtown and clarify Planning Act Bonusing community benefits and process. Additionally, foursite specific policies (specific policy areas 9,12, 30 and 48) are proposed to be amended/added to clarify the intent of the land uses and development parameters permitted on these lands. -law and associated amendment held by the Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee, a Committee of Council which deals with planning matters, on: Session 1 Monday, April 15, 2019 at 3:30 -5:30 p.m. Session 2 Monday, April 15, 2019 at 7:00 p.m. nd Council Chambers, 2Floor, City Hall 200 King Street West, Kitchener If you would like to speak at the public meeting, please register in advance at www.kitchener.ca/delegationsorby calling -2200, ext. 7275. Please indicate which public meeting session number you will be attending. nd Written submissions can be sent to the Office of the City Clerk, 2floor, 200 King Street West, Kitchener, ON, N2G 4G7. 9 1 - 86 Any person may attend the public meeting and make written and/or verbal representation either in support of, or in opposition to, the above noted zoning by-law and/or Official Plan amendment. If a person or public body would otherwise have an ability to appeal the decision of the City of Kitchener to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal, but the person or public body does not make oral submissions at a public meeting or make written submissions to the City of Kitchener prior to approval/refusal of the zoning by-law and/or Official Plan amendment, the person or public body is not entitled to appeal the decision. ADDITIONAL INFORMATIONwww.kitchener.ca/crozby, emailing crozby@kitchener.caor by contacting the staff persons noted below, viewing the staff report contained in the agenda (available approximately 10 days before the meeting -https://calendar.kitchener.ca/council -click on the date in the calendar, scroll down & select meeting), or in th person at the Planning Division, 6Floor, 200 King Street West, Kitchener between 8:30 a.m. -5:00 p.m. (Monday to Friday). Sarah Coutu, Planner (Policy) -519-741-2200 x7069 (TTY: 1-866-969-9994) Richard Kelly-Ruetz, Technical Assistant (Policy)-519-741-2200 x7110 (TTY: 1-866-969-9994) 10 1 - 87 APPENDIX 2Minutes of the Meeting of Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee April 15, 2019 11 1 - 88 APPENDIX 3Minutes of the Meeting of City Council TBD 12 1 - 89 1 - 90 1 - 91 1 - 92 R E 1 - 93 1 - 94 1 - 95 W 1 - 96 U R 1 - 97 1 - 98 ! 1 - 99 1 - 100 1 - 101 N 1 - 102 O S 1 - 103 B R 1 - 104 1 - 105 T S N I 1 - 106 1 - 107 1 - 108 1 - 109 AL N C A S ET R S T W 1 - 110 Appendix D New Zoning By-law available at: https://www.kitchener.ca/en/resourcesGeneral/Documents/DSD_PLAN_CROZBY_Final_Cons olidated-Zoning-By-law.pdf 1 - 111 PLANNING & STRATEGIC INITIATIVES COMMITTEE Page 1UNFINISHED BUSINESS2019-04-15 SUBJECT (INITIATOR)DATE TARGETSTAFF INITIALLYDATE/STATUSASSIGNED CONSIDERED Financial implications analysis of enhanced 2012-06-18Future PSI B.Sloan streetscape options for Fischer Hallman Rd design (PSI)Meeting improvements (over and above baseline capital and operating budgets) IF1 - 1