Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-01-30PLANNING & STRATEGIC INITIATIVES COMMITTEE MINUTES JANUARY 30, 2012 CITY OF KITCHENER The Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee met this date, commencing at 6:50 p.m. Present: Councillor Z. Janecki - Vice-Chair Mayor C. Zehr and Councillors S. Davey, J. Gazzola, Y. Fernandes, P. Singh, B. Ioannidis, and D. Glenn-Graham. Staff: C. Ladd, Chief Administrative Officer D. Chapman, Deputy CAO, Finance & Corporate Services J. Willmer, Deputy CAO, Community Services P. Houston, Deputy CAO, Infrastructure Services A. Pinard, Director of Planning R. Regier, Executive Director, Economic Development L. Johnston, Director of Corporate Communications & Customer Service J. Witmer, Director of Operations T. O’Brien, Landscape Architect H. Holbrook, Planner G. Stevenson, Planner D. Ross, Manager of Development Review J. Billett, Committee Administrator CAO-12-003 - DOWNTOWN STRATEGIC PLAN VOL. 4 1. The Committee considered Chief Administrator’s Office report CAO-12-0003, dated January 23, 2012 concerning results of a Downtown survey and draft Downtown Kitchener Preliminary Action Plan. It was noted that Mr. Mark Garner, Downtown Kitchener Business Improvement Association (DKBIA), had registered to speak to this matter but had sent regrets that he was not able to attend due to another business commitment. Mr. R. Regier advised that one of the key areas of focus for the 2011 Kitchener Economic Development Strategy (KEDS.11) is development of a new Downtown Strategy and Action Plan. A consultation process was undertaken with community and downtown stakeholders, including feedback from Advisory Committees, downtown businesses / retailers, focus groups and an on-line survey. The consultation process exacted over 500 responses and provided insight into the likes, dislikes and suggested courses of action for the downtown. From this process a preliminary action plan was developed with 4 key themes, being: an amazing King Street experience; new urban neighbourhoods; an innovation district; and fostering a collaborative community. Mr. Regier advised that staff is asking that the Downtown Kitchener Preliminary Action Plan be accepted and direction be given to staff to continue public consultation on the draft, with a report on results to come forward for consideration at the February 27, 2012 Planning and Strategic Initiative Committee meeting. Councillor D. Glenn-Graham questioned if branding for the Downtown will be developed stemming from results of the Downtown Action Plan. Mr. Regier expressed the view that the Downtown Action Plan, in tandem with consultation among Regional partners, would act as the foundation for development of branding later on in the process. Councillor Glenn-Graham asked if the question of continuing Downtown incentives would be looked at as part of this process. Mr. Regier stated that review of Downtown incentives is a priority for 2012, with the most significant aspect related to Development Charges. He advised that an evaluation is to be completed leading up to the next review of the Development Charges By-law. The analysis will take into account changes occurring in the Downtown now and as forecasted around future projects impacting the Downtown, such as the Region’s Light Rail Transit and Multi-Modal Station. Councillor Y. Fernandes referred to the concept of turning the Civic Square into a true European-style square surrounded by restaurants and requested an update on the status of the vacant retail space adjacent to the Civic Square. Mr. Regier advised that staff have spent substantial time looking for potential occupants and, he pointed out that the space has unique challenges that would require significant investment if it were to be retrofit as a restaurant. Councillor Fernandes suggested that staff look at a variety of different uses for which the space could be rented on an interim basis, such as utilizing the space for the annual Christkindl Market event. Mr. Regier agreed that there may be opportunity to use the space on PLANNING & STRATEGIC INITIATIVES COMMITTEE MINUTES JANUARY 30, 2012 - 6 - CITY OF KITCHENER CAO-12-003 - DOWNTOWN STRATEGIC PLAN VOL. 4 (CONT’D) 1. an interim basis but noted that the retail market in the Downtown is strengthening, suggesting that over the coming months it is expected that opportunities will increase to attract a more permanent tenant of some significance. Councillor Fernandes questioned at what point the City should turn its focus outward beyond the core to other areas in the community. Mr. Regier advised that the KEDS.11 has interest in the City as a whole, noting there is a number of initiatives in the outer community that they are looking for a way to advance. Councillor F. Etherington requested an update on the City’s ability to attract a major retail grocer and/or cinema to the core. Mr. Regier advised that staff have been meeting with major retail grocers and are encouraged by the conversations to date. He pointed out, however, that this type of retail traditionally follows rather than leads the development process. He suggested that the Downtown is at a stage now where it is seeing significant population growth and with this tangible growth it is expected there will be an uptake in interest in the near term. In regard to a cinema, Mr. Regier advised that this is more challenging as the Region is seeing significant development in such venues around the outer edges. He stated that there may be opportunity in future to attract a cinema; however, it will require the population to screen ratios to come back in line. Councillor J. Gazzola stated that such venues were once present in the core and questioned how it is intended to bring them back. Mr. Regier stated that Downtown dynamics are changing and at a rapid pace in respect to City building. He noted that 2004 was a low point in terms of population, income and development in the core but since that time, over $600M has been invested with those investments now beginning to be occupied. He stated that pedestrian traffic in the core has more than doubled and the City is seeing an increase in Downtown trends related to retail sales, home values and condominium sales are going well. Mr. Regier added that accelerated growth is also expected as a result of implementation of the Region’s LRT and Multi-Modal Station. Councillor Gazzola questioned how success of the Action Plan is to be measured. Mr. Regier advised that factors which could be measured would relate to increases in the numbers of those living and working in the core; higher level assessment; and more retail / restaurant trades. Councillor Gazzola questioned the cost to taxpayers in development of the plan. Mr. Regier advised that the intent is to use existing staff and financial resources and did not foresee a need to increase resources in the Economic Development’s budget. Councillor Gazzola questioned the impact to those living outside the core other than the potential for higher taxes.Mr. Regier stated that the downtown is a destination place for all, noting that over 150,000 persons attended the summer Blues festival and as the historic heart of the City it is an important part of the revitalization and redevelopment process. Mayor C. Zehr agreed that the Downtown is a place for all citizens and suggested that the increased assessment resulting from new developments in the core will act as a moderator of property taxes across the City. Councillor Z. Janecki questioned if consideration had been given to locating an upscale grocer in a heritage building. Mr. Regier commented that they are seeing innovative trends in grocery models and suggested that there is substantial scope for creativity in the challenge to secure a grocer in the core area. Councillor Janecki noted that he has received concerns from constituents regarding the amount spent on King Street and questioned if the spending on the streetscape was finished. Mr. Regier responded that the King Street corridor work is complete with only normal maintenance costs expected but suggested that improvements to the Downtown are not finished, citing examples of the reconstruction project for Hall’s Lane and the Victoria Park improvements. Mr. Regier acknowledged that significant investment has been made in the Downtown but pointed out that resulting interest in private sector investment stands to far exceed that of the City’s investment over the next 4 years. He added that of the monies invested in the downtown since 2004, approximately 2/3 ($240 M) equates to private sector development, with projects of note being the new Provincial Courthouse and the University’s Health Sciences Campus. On motion by Mayor C. Zehr - it was resolved: PLANNING & STRATEGIC INITIATIVES COMMITTEE MINUTES JANUARY 30, 2012 - 7 - CITY OF KITCHENER CAO-12-003 - DOWNTOWN STRATEGIC PLAN VOL. 4 (CONT’D) 1. “That the Downtown survey results and the Downtown Kitchener Preliminary Action Plan be accepted as information; and further, That staff be directed to launch a public consultation on the Draft Downtown Action Plan and bring the results of this consultation back to Council for consideration.” Councillor Z. Janecki read aloud the following statement: “This is a formal public meeting to consider applications under the Planning Act. If a person or public body does not make oral or written submissions to the City of Kitchener before the proposed applications are considered, the person or public body may not be entitled to appeal the decision to the Ontario Municipal Board and may not be added as a party to a hearing of an appeal before the Ontario Municipal Board.” CSD-12-012 - ZONE CHANGE APPLICATION ZC09/10/COK/HH 2. - BELMONT AVENUE MIXED USE CORRIDOR The Committee considered Community Services Department report CSD-12-012, dated December 23, 2011 recommending approval of City-initiated Zone Change ZC09/10/COK/HH to effect proposed zoning for the Belmont Avenue West Mixed Corridor. The Corridor is proposed to be rezoned from various zone classifications to Mixed-Use Corridor MU-1 and MU-2 zones, with and without site specific special provisions applying to the subject lands. Ms. H. Holbrook advised that the proposed zoning complies with the City’s Official Plan and other relevant policies. It was noted that what is envisioned in the Corridor going forward is an Urban Village, with a diverse range of shops, offices, services, housing, and strong pedestrian linkages to surrounding neighbourhoods and open space systems. Low Intensity Mixed Use Corridor (MU-1) zoning is proposed in areas that abut low rise residential development and High Intensity Mixed Use Corridor (MU-2) zoning is proposed where development could adequately be separated from low rise residential development or to recognize existing conditions. Ms. Holbrook advised that in response to citizen concerns raised during the consultation period, Holding Provision 63H is being applied to two specific properties on Glasgow Street with the intent to maintain the low rise residential character of the surrounding neighbourhood. Councillor Y. Fernandes raised concerns that the proposed zoning is premature pending review of the City’s Official Plan. Ms. Holbrook advised that this zone change application is being advanced as the City is now several years behind in implementing Mixed Use Corridor land use policies approved in 2001 and the purpose of the zoning is to better align with the Official Plan objectives for Mixed Use Corridors. She stated that she did not forsee any adverse impact as the zoning is to be compatible with surrounding neighbourhoods and provides a broad range of uses in accordance with the Official Plan policies. Councillor Fernandes questioned if a change in height restrictions would apply. Ms. Holbrook advised that the maximum height in the MU-1 zone would be 4 stories and in the MU-2 zone it would be 8 stories; adding that there may be special regulations applied to further define height and/or other restrictions that could limit height to a lesser number of stories. Councillor Fernandes commented that she would not like to see high storey buildings in the area of Belmont Village because of increased density and traffic that may have an adverse impact on the vibrancy of that area. Councillor Fernandes questioned the possibility of certain types of business to have an adverse impact on residential neighbourhoods. Ms. Holbrook advised that auto oriented uses are not permitted, except for a drive-through; the latter of which is being strongly discouraged in this area and would be a matter to be dealt with at time of site plan review. Councillor Z. Janecki stated that he had no concerns with consideration of this application as it conforms to the Official Plan and follows through on approved land use policies; adding that he was satisfied with the recommendation and that the concerns of area residents had been addressed. PLANNING & STRATEGIC INITIATIVES COMMITTEE MINUTES JANUARY 30, 2012 - 8 - CITY OF KITCHENER CSD-12-012 - ZONE CHANGE APPLICATION ZC09/10/COK/HH 2. - BELMONT AVENUE MIXED USE CORRIDOR (CONT’D) On motion by Mayor C. Zehr - it was resolved: “That City-initiated Zone Change ZC 09/10/COK/HH being an amendment to Schedules 40, 41 and 73 of Appendix A, sections 17, 93 and 416 of Appendix C, sections 26, 80, 424, 504, 573, 574, 575, 576, 577, 578, 579, 580, 581, 582 and 583 of Appendix D and section 63 of Appendix F of By-Law Number 85-1 as they pertain to the Belmont Avenue West Mixed Use Corridor for the purpose of changing the zoning from various zone classifications to Mixed-Use Corridor MU-1 and MU-2 zones with and without site- specific special provisions applying to these lands, be approved, in the form shown in the attached “Proposed By-Law” dated December 23, 2011 attached as Appendix A to Community Services Department report CSD-12-012.” INS-12-019 - PARKLAND ACQUISITION - COUNTRYSTONE PARK 3. The Committee considered Infrastructure Services Department report INS-12-019, dated January 17, 2012 recommending approval to enter into an Agreement of Purchase and Sale with Sunvest Development Corp. for the purpose of acquiring a vacant parcel of land on Countrystone Drive, (Pt.Lt.34, GCT, Twp. Waterloo, Pt.2, Plan 58R-6887), to create frontage for Countrystone Park and improve park access for the community. Mr. T. O’Brien advised that the proposed purchase is in response to area resident concerns regarding appropriate access to the park from Countrystone Drive and Resurrection Drive; and if approved, the cost to purchase the parcel will be funded from the City’s Park Land Acquisition Fund. It was noted that the parcel of land presents good opportunity to improve access, as well as enhance visibility and enforcement capability for the park area. Mr. O’Brien advised that the agreement was negotiated through the City’s Real Estate Service provider and will expire on February 10, 2012, with the intent to receive final approval at the February 6, 2012 Council meeting. On motion by Councillor B. Ioannidis - it was resolved: “That the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to execute an Agreement of Purchase and Sale, satisfactory to the City Solicitor, with Sunvest Development Corp, for the purpose of acquiring the vacant municipal parcel on Countrystone Drive known as Part Lot 34, German Company Tract, Township of Waterloo, Part 2, Plan 58R-6887, for the purpose of creating suitable frontage for Countrystone Park and improved park access for the community, to an upset purchase price of $175,000 plus HST, associated real estate fees, land transfer tax, and transaction costs; and further, That the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to execute the necessary documentation to complete the conveyance.” CSD-12-015 - ZONE CHANGE APPLICATION ZC11/07/C/GS 4. - 1180 COUNTRYSTONE DRIVE - WILL-O HOMES (C.S.) INC - FOLLOW UP TO REPORT CSD-11-157 The Committee considered Community Services Department report CSD-12-015, dated January 13, 2012, addendum to report CSD-11-157 which recommended approval of Zone Change Application ZC11/07/C/GS to permit a 29 unit, stacked, multiple townhouse development at 1180 Countrystone Drive. Consideration of the zone change application was deferred from the November 28, 2011 Committee meeting to this date to allow the developer an opportunity to revise the proposed site plan and requested rezoning to address concerns raised by the Committee and area residents. Messrs. Hugh Handy, GSP Group and Kevin Smith, Will-O Homes (C.S.) Inc., attended in support of the zone change application. Mr. Handy advised that following the November 28th meeting, they gave careful consideration to Council’s resolution but still believe the zoning application as filed, and with the proposed site plan having been given support in principle by PLANNING & STRATEGIC INITIATIVES COMMITTEE MINUTES JANUARY 30, 2012 - 9 - CITY OF KITCHENER CSD-12-015 - ZONE CHANGE APPLICATION ZC11/07/C/GS 4. - 1180 COUNTRYSTONE DRIVE - WILL-O HOMES (C.S.) INC - FOLLOW UP TO REPORT CSD-11-157 (CONT’D) City staff, that it is appropriate and represents good land use planning. He asked that the Committee support approval of the zone change as originally submitted. Mayor C. Zehr questioned if the delegation believed that coming back with the original application in tact was in keeping with the spirit and tone of Council’s resolution and those present at the previous meeting. Mr. Handy reiterated that careful consideration had been given as to the intent of the resolution; however, it was his opinion it was made in the manner of a relief mechanism to provide a step back to make sure the right decision is made. He added that they are of the view that the right decision would be support of the original application. Mr. Handy further noted that they did consider the impact of reducing the original side yard variance but had concluded that given the proximity of the side yard to the neighbouring park the variance is appropriate in terms of how the development is to function. Mayor Zehr referred to a meeting with the developer, attended by Councillor B. Ioannidis, himself and City staff, at which time the developer had brought forward another proposal showing how the development could meet the R6 zoning regulations without need for variances by reducing the size of units and distance between unit blocks. He questioned if the delegation was of the opinion that the revised proposal was not appropriate. Mr. Handy stated that was correct, noting that after looking at the revised proposal and discussing it during the meeting they viewed it as a compromise and still believe the requested zoning with special provision / regulation is appropriate. Mayor Zehr suggested that the delegation had greatly misunderstood the spirit of Council’s resolution and expressed disappointment that a viable alternative has not come forward. Councillor Z. Janecki questioned that if the proposed number of units was reduced to 17 with no resulting change in massing of the buildings, how the developer would view the impact in comparison to the original proposal. Mr. Handy stated that he would anticipate that the development would still have the same number of people with the impact lessened only in respect to reduced parking requirements. Councillor Janecki questioned if the design of this development is to be similar to another development by the property owner on Howe Drive. Mr. K. Smith advised that in terms of size it would be identical but the townhouses in this instance would have enhanced façades. Councillor Y. Fernandes raised questions with regard to the limited back yard amenity space. Mr. Handy stated that in addition to lower unit decks, a common amenity area is being provided. He added that in discussions with their architect, they are considering providing an opening in the fence to the north of the development for access in and out of the adjacent park. Councillor Fernandes questioned how garbage removal is to be handled in context of manoeuvring around parked vehicles. Mr. Handy advised that the developer is willing to consider alternate options for garbage removal at time of site plan review, noting that they had considered installing Molok containers on site; however, there are issues in regard to backing up to service the units which Transportation staff does not support. Councillor Fernandes questioned how the proposed development fits in with municipal Urban Design Guidelines (UDG) which speak to the built form and goals of infill being compatible with the surrounding neighbourhood. Mr. G. Stevenson responded that the UDG is used as a guideline for development, outlining in general terms as to orientation of buildings in respect to the surrounding neighbourhood. He stated that the guidelines do not say development must be exactly the same but should be sympathetic to existing neighbourhoods. Councillor Fernandes commented that she did not see how the original proposal would fit in, suggesting that at minimum a reduction to 17 units should be considered out of respect for the neighbourhood. She questioned what course of action the developer would take if the original proposal is turned down. Mr. Handy stated that as they believe the proposal as submitted does work he would see their only option being to proceed to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB). Mr. Chuck Kruse, area resident, stated that there is no justification for approval of the zone change as submitted, commenting that even City staff has said the plan is constrained. He suggested that development with minimal parking, one entrance / exit, surrounded by a fence and on only 1 acre of land is not good planning.He stated that there is a common thread PLANNING & STRATEGIC INITIATIVES COMMITTEE MINUTES JANUARY 30, 2012 - 10 - CITY OF KITCHENER CSD-12-015 - ZONE CHANGE APPLICATION ZC11/07/C/GS 4. - 1180 COUNTRYSTONE DRIVE - WILL-O HOMES (C.S.) INC - FOLLOW UP TO REPORT CSD-11-157 (CONT’D) across the Province, referencing the goals of the City of Hamilton’s policies on intensification, which provide that development should only be permitted if compatible with the existing neighbourhood. Mr. Kruse further raised concerns with respect to emergency access to the site suggesting this issue has been downplayed and asked on behalf of the neighbourhood that the zone change application not be supported notwithstanding refusal may result in the matter proceeding to the OMB. Councillor B. Ioannidis questioned what the delegation would consider acceptable in terms of the number of units to be permitted on site. Mr. Kruse responded that it would be difficult to say, reiterating his concerns in respect to emergency access, as well as, increased traffic and potential overflow parking. Councillor Janecki questioned if the delegation would find a reduction to 17 units at the same massing acceptable. Mr. Kruse reiterated it would be difficult to say, suggesting that while he liked the proposed concept of reducing the number of units it was his opinion the development itself on the subject parcel is wrong. Ms. Gaetanne Kruse, area resident, raised concerns that the developer does not have respect for the community in which he is developing, pointing out that while the residents have attempted to voice their many concerns in a responsible and constructive way they appear to have fallen on deaf ears. She noted that not only does the proposal not meet the requirements of R6 zoning but also fails to meet the City’s UDG. She added that while the UDG policies support intensification it does not mean development should be taken entirely to the maximum but rather should be properly transitioned. She noted that there is another significant vacant parcel zoned R6 yet to be developed and raised concerns regarding the location of the entrance / exit to the proposed site relative to increased traffic and speeding in the area. She asked that R4 zoning be reaffirmed and any further proposal for the site be circulated to the community; adding that the adjacent park is for the community and should not be used to compensate for over-development. Ms. Kruse also asked that the City’s planning policies in respect to infill / intensification be further reviewed. Councillor Janecki questioned if the delegation would find a reduction to 17 units at the same massing acceptable. Ms. Kruse stated that she would consider it more acceptable on provision that there be no possibility of duplexing without a further rezoning application. She added that she would also ask that the site plan be changed to accommodate larger back yard amenity space and to reduce parking on site. Mr. Dale Morel, area resident, advised that his property on Iron Gate Street abuts the subject lands, raising concerns with regard to the impact to quality of life and property values. Mr. Morel suggested that the reason the original proposal has not changed is out of greed by the developer and the ineffectiveness of the City’s Planning staff.He acknowledged that the UDG is intended to be flexible but suggested the site plan is deficient in respect to emergency access and provision of back yard amenity space. He questioned how the 1m between the parking area and fence could be construed as enhanced landscaping and asked that Council take responsibility to right the wrong of an unreasonable proposal. Councillor B. Ioannidis questioned what the delegation would consider an acceptable amount of development for the subject property. Mr. Morel stated that just because the developer has purchased the property it does not mean it has to be developed. He added that he is not adverse to development and suggested that half the proposed number of units with reduction of parking and more landscaping would be more acceptable. Mr. Morel noted that he had paid a lot premium for his property and he did not want to see the neighbourhood destroyed. Councillor Janecki questioned if the delegation would find a reduction to 17 units at the same massing acceptable. Mr. Morel stated that this was a compromise most were willing to accept at the November 28th meeting and he could live with that number but reiterated that parking should be reduced and more landscaping provided. PLANNING & STRATEGIC INITIATIVES COMMITTEE MINUTES JANUARY 30, 2012 - 11 - CITY OF KITCHENER CSD-12-015 - ZONE CHANGE APPLICATION ZC11/07/C/GS 4. - 1180 COUNTRYSTONE DRIVE - WILL-O HOMES (C.S.) INC - FOLLOW UP TO REPORT CSD-11-157 (CONT’D) Mayor C. Zehr requested staff to comment on the issue of emergency access as it relates to fire services. Mr. G. Stevenson advised that the proposal complies with the Emergency Services Policy, adding that Building staff reviews all development plans for compliance with the policy and the City would not issue a building permit for any application that does not comply. Mr. Chris Stanley, area resident, raised similar concerns in regard to non-compliance of the proposed development with R6 zoning regulations and the City’s UDG, agreeing with comments made that it is out of greed that no change has been made to the proposal. He suggested that City staff have gone out of their way to accommodate this proposal and stated that it did not work on November 28th nor does it work now. He maintained that the proposed development is too big, too dense and offends the character of the existing neighbourhood. He questioned that in light of no change having been proposed by the developer, if the developer has sold units in advance of planning approvals. He asked that the developer be made to rework the proposal in a manner that measures the concerns of all stakeholders. Councillor Janecki questioned if the delegation would find a reduction to 17 units at the same massing acceptable. Mr. Stanley stated that he had surveyed area residents and on average they would prefer 8 units; however, he added that if 17 units is an option he would accept it as a step in the right direction. Councillor P. Singh referred to the issue raised by the delegation in respect to pre-selling of lots prior to Council approval and questioned if there is governing restrictions on pre-sales. Ms. D. Ross advised that there is no City governing restrictions nor are there any within the Planning Act but if a developer chooses to do so it would be at their own risk. She stated that the developer would be unable to construct any units that may have been pre-sold until approvals are in place. Ms. Ross added that while it is not an uncommon practice, it is not encouraged outside of the City’s planning process. Mayor C. Zehr commented that at the meeting held with the developer he had been disappointed that the only alternative presented was simply smaller units and elimination of the variances. He stated that the issue of pre-sold lots is not the City’s concern but expressed the view that if this is the case, he would consider it to have been done in bad faith. He reiterated that in his opinion the spirit of Council’s earlier resolution was ignored given no compromise of any reasonableness had been brought forward. Mayor Zehr also raised concerns with comments made by area residents of a derogatory nature toward City staff, pointing out that staff has an obligation to process applications and whether or not agreed with, to bring forward recommendations. Mayor Zehr agreed that while the proposal will fit on the parcel of land, he was still of the view that it is inappropriate infill for this site. He stated that a decision should not be about numbers but acknowledged it is difficult to consider development without and suggested that it is likely to come down to a decision that will not make either the developer or area residents completely happy. He pointed out that given staff’s recommendation of approval, if the proposal is refused and the developer proceeds to the OMB, the City will have to engage outside legal counsel and planning consultants to argue the case before the OMB, which will cost taxpayers a substantial sum. Mayor Zehr suggested that an alternative is needed in balance of the developer’s position and that of area residents that will reduce the potential for the matter to be taken to the OMB. He stated that an appropriate reduction in the number of units must be determined but suggested that 17 is not likely to be acceptable to the developer. Councillor P. Singh agreed that a compromise is needed, acknowledging the desire to address the concerns of area residents but still be acceptable to the developer to prevent the need for an OMB hearing. A motion by Councillor Singh was brought forward for consideration to approve the R6 zoning as amended to add a Special Regulation to provide that the maximum number of units shall be 24 rather than 29. PLANNING & STRATEGIC INITIATIVES COMMITTEE MINUTES JANUARY 30, 2012 - 12 - CITY OF KITCHENER CSD-12-015 - ZONE CHANGE APPLICATION ZC11/07/C/GS 4. - 1180 COUNTRYSTONE DRIVE - WILL-O HOMES (C.S.) INC - FOLLOW UP TO REPORT CSD-11-157 (CONT’D) Councillor Fernandes expressed disappointment that the developer chose not to consider the issues previously raised and she did not appreciate being held hostage on threat of an OMB hearing. She agreed that the developer has only his own interest in mind and would not support the proposed reduction, suggesting that a reduction to 17 was feasible. Councillor F. Etherington agreed that the proposal is not compatible with the neighbourhood but expressed the view that the City is not likely to be successful against an appeal by the developer to the OMB, resulting in wasted tax dollars. Accordingly, he advised that he was in agreement that a compromise is needed. Councillor S. Davey commented that in general, thinking is flawed if it is believed a private developer will go out of their way to appease the neighbourhood given it is their job to turn a profit. He suggested that given neither Council nor the neighbourhood is happy with the proposal that the planning process itself is not efficient and needs to be reviewed. He acknowledged comments made regarding the issue of an OMB hearing and while he did not think the neighbourhood would be happy with the proposed solution, he was prepared to support it but only as a compromise. Councillor B. Ioannidis expressed disappointment that the developer has been unwilling to compromise, and with having been put in the position of making a tough decision. He stated that while he understood the reasons for Councillor Singh’s proposed compromise he would continue to support area residents in opposing the development. He added that while he would vote against the motion, he would like to propose an amendment to ensure the community is provided a high level design and development. The amendment would direct staff to work with the developer at time of site plan review to achieve: enhanced landscaping to provide a naturalized buffer to neighbouring properties; building facades with high quality finishes exclusive of siding; and outdoor lighting designed and installed to minimize glare on to neighbouring properties. Councillor Ioannidis stated that the amendment is proposed to bring some comfort to the community that what is built regardless of the number of units is to high standards and will provide them with privacy. A discussion was entered into concerning the appropriateness of accepting the amendment in light that responsibility for site plan matters rests with staff. It was agreed that direction could be given to staff to consider certain conditions and therefore, the amendment could be accepted. Following further discussion, it was agreed that Councillor Ioannidis would bring forward his request in a separate motion. Councillor J. Gazzola questioned that if the proposed reduction in the number of units is approved if City staff would be able to defend Council’s decision in the event of an OMB hearing. Ms. Ross advised that staff having recommended approval of the original proposal would not be in position to argue the case on behalf of the City at an OMB hearing. Councillor Gazzola agreed that this is a no win situation for both parties but would support the proposed reduction in units as a compromise. He added that in his experience of similar developments concerns regarding adverse impact to property values did not materialize and hoped that in pressing issues to enhance site development it would go at least in part to appease the neighbourhood on that issue. Councillor Z. Janecki stated that he understood staff’s position regarding City policies related to intensification but also the concerns of area residents in respect to the impact to their neighbourhood. He stated that is why he had suggested a reduction to 17 units as a workable solution. He noted that he also had concerns with respect to the matter proceeding to the OMB; however, he advised that he could not support the proposed reduction to 24 units, preferring a further reduction to 17 units. Ms. D. Ross suggested that in considering the reduction to 24 units, the Committee may wish to also consider a restriction on duplexing. Mr. J. Willmer advised that to maintain the intent of permitted uses in an R6 zoning, any additional wording to the motion should provide for a maximum of 24 units, inclusive of duplexing. Councillor Singh accepted the wording as proposed by Mr. Willmer. PLANNING & STRATEGIC INITIATIVES COMMITTEE MINUTES JANUARY 30, 2012 - 13 - CITY OF KITCHENER CSD-12-015 - ZONE CHANGE APPLICATION ZC11/07/C/GS 4. - 1180 COUNTRYSTONE DRIVE - WILL-O HOMES (C.S.) INC - FOLLOW UP TO REPORT CSD-11-157 (CONT’D) Carried The following motion was voted on by a recorded vote and , with Mayor C. Zehr and Councillors J. Gazzola, D. Glenn-Graham, S. Davey, F. Etherington and P. Singh voting in favour; and Councillors B. Ioannidis, Y. Fernandes and Z. Janecki voting in opposition. Councillors K. Galloway and B. Vrbanovic were absent this date and accordingly did not vote. On motion by Councillor P. Singh - it was resolved: “That Zone Change Application ZC11/07/C/GS for Will-O Homes (C.S.) Inc. at 1180 Countrystone Drive, for the purpose of changing the zoning from Residential Four (R-4) to Residential Six (R-6) with Special Regulation Provision 598R and Special Regulation Provision 599R, and as amended to add a Special Regulation Provision to permit a maximum of 24 dwelling units, inclusive of duplexing, be approved; and further, That staff be directed to prepare a revised Proposed By-law, as recommended by the Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee, to be presented to Kitchener City Council at its meeting to be held on February 6, 2012.” Carried The following motion was voted on by a recorded vote and , with Mayor C. Zehr and Councillors J. Gazzola, D. Glenn-Graham, B. Ioannidis, Y. Fernandes, Z. Janecki, F. Etherington and P. Singh voting in favour; and Councillor S. Davey voting in opposition. Councillors K. Galloway and B. Vrbanovic were absent this date and accordingly did not vote. On motion by Councillor B. Ioannidis - it was resolved: “That staff be directed to work with the property owner through the site plan approval process for Zone Change Application ZC 11/07/C/GS for Will-O Homes (C.S) Inc. at 1180 Countrystone Drive to provide the following site design elements on the subject property: • enhanced landscaping throughout the site to provide a naturalized buffer to neighbouring properties; • building facades with high quality finishes such as brick or stone, and not including siding; and, • outdoor site lighting designed and installed to minimize glare on to neighbouring properties.” CSD-11-164 - DEMOLITION CONTROL APPLICATION DC11/18/C/MV 5. - 1180 COUNTRYSTONE DRIVE - WILL-O HOMES (C.S.) INC. The Committee considered Community Services Department report CSD-11-164, dated November 15, 2011 recommending approval of Demolition Control Application DC11/18/C/MV to permit demolition of one single detached dwelling located at 1180 Countrystone Drive to facilitate construction of a proposed new townhouse development by Will-O Homes (C.S.) Inc. On motion by Councillor B. Ioannidis - it was resolved: “That Demolition Control Application DC11/18/C/MV requesting permission to demolish one (1) single detached dwelling located at 1180 Countrystone Drive, owned by Will-O Homes (C.S.) Inc., be approved subject to the following condition: PLANNING & STRATEGIC INITIATIVES COMMITTEE MINUTES JANUARY 30, 2012 - 14 - CITY OF KITCHENER CSD-11-164 - DEMOLITION CONTROL APPLICATION DC11/18/C/MV 5. - 1180 COUNTRYSTONE DRIVE - WILL-O HOMES (C.S.) INC. (CONT’D) 1) That the Applicant obtains a building permit for the proposed residential dwelling unit; and, That upon satisfaction of condition 1, the Chief Building Official may authorize and issue a demolition permit under Section 33(6) of the Planning Act subject to the following condition: In the event that construction of the new dwelling units are not substantially complete within 2-years of the date of issuance of the demolition permit, the City Clerk may enter on the collector’s roll, to be collected in like manner as municipal taxes, $20,000 for each dwelling unit contained in the residential properties in respect of which the demolition permit is issued and such sum shall, until the payment thereof, be a lien or charge upon the land in respect of which the permit to demolish the residential property is issued.” ADJOURNMENT 6. On motion, this meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m. Janet Billettt, AMCT Committee Administrator