HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil - 2013-02-04 SSPECIAL COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 4, 2013 CITY OF KITCHENER
A special meeting of City Council was held at 1:00 p. m. this date, chaired by Mayor C. Zehr, with all
members present except Councillor J. Gazzola.
Notice of this meeting had been previously given to all members of Council by the City Clerk pursuant
to Chapter 25 (Council Procedure) of the Municipal Code.
It was noted that this meeting is being held as a Council Strategy Session (Workshop) on the
Strasburg Road Extension -Class Environmental Assessment (North of Stauffer Drive to New
Dundee Road), for the purpose of obtaining input from members of Council on the assessment
evaluation criteria. Council was in receipt of information, dated January 28, 2013 containing materials
for this Strategy Session (Workshop), including an Evaluation Criteria Scoping Information Brief for
the Strasburg Road Extension.
Mr. J. Willmer provided a recap of the process to date, indicating that the evaluation criteria has been
revised and expanded based on public input since the release of the Draft Environmental Study
Report (ESR) in May 2012.
Ms. Sue Cumming, Independent Facilitator, introduced Mr. Ian Upjohn, Consultant, SNC Lavalin. She
advised that he would provide a review of the 5 Proposed Alignment Alternatives Evaluation Criteria,
inclusive of the new or modified criteria to be used in the assessment of alignment alternatives for the
Strasburg Road Extension. Ms. Cumming advised that she would facilitate the discussion, indicating
that Members should focus on key questions to determine if the factors are appropriately described; if
there is additional information that needs to be considered; or, if there are any considerations
overlooked in the list of assessment evaluation criteria. Following today's workshop, she stated that
she would prepare a summary report containing the input received, which will be forwarded to
Council, senior staff and the Project Team.
Mr. Ian Upjohn then provided an overview of significant occurrences which have had an impact on the
evaluation criteria since the release of the Draft ESR including: public support for the owner of 500
Stauffer Drive; publication of a Notice of Intention to Designate 500 Stauffer Drive under the Ontario
Heritage Act; a conveyed land alternative alignment acceptable to the Developers Group; a mitigating
factor to the rigid position of the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) for the crossing of the Jefferson
Salamander regulated area; and, an indication by the Region of Waterloo that servicing constraints
would be evident if the western alignment option was considered, thereby requiring investigation of an
alternative route to the Doon South development.
Mayor C. Zehr requested that for consistency and clarity within the Information Brief, any reference to
the Technically Preferred Alignment (TPA) should be referred to as the "Draft TPA", as the TPA will
remain draft until endorsed by Council.
Mr. Upjohn reviewed the rationale for each of the Proposed Alignment Alternatives Evaluation Criteria
and the measurement indicators as detailed in the Information Brief, which is comprised of 5 Factor
Groups and 16 underlying factors. Members of Council then provided the following input regarding
each of the 5 Factor Groups:
Natural Environment
With regard to 1A Terrestrial Ecosystems, Councillor Y. Fernandes expressed concern for the impact
to the Provincially Significant Wetland (PSW) and linkage to the Areas of Scientific Interest (ANSI) by
the Study Area. Mr. Upjohn responded that the factors are standard evaluation criteria, as outlined by
the Environmental Assessment Act and the Municipal Engineers Association Class Environmental
Assessment document, which lists assessment requirements and have been tailored to the
sensitivities of this specific Study Area. He affirmed that there are no ANSI's within the Study Area
and that the Project Team is taking a systems perspective recognizing linkages and downstream
impacts of any alignment alternative. Councillor Fernandes requested that strong consideration be
given to the effect of any encroachment or impact to future areas of scientific interest during the
evaluation process.
Councillor Z. Janecki requested a detailed map for reference of "Figure 3.7: Existing Natural Heritage
Sensitivities", which was subsequently distributed this date by Mr. B. Korah, Manager of Development
Engineering.
SPECIAL COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 4, 2013 - 18- CITY OF KITCHENER
Mr. Upjohn reviewed 1C Groundwater Resources, stating that the EA acknowledges the Waterloo
Moraine and municipal wells as important groundwater resources. He stated that the Study Area is
not within the highest classification of vulnerability, albeit within the wellhead protection area. He
noted that roads can interfere with groundwater movement sub-surface, and confirmed that recharge
and discharge areas are being considered.
Councillor B. loannidis questioned the wellhead protection classification levels located within the
Study Area. Mr. Upjohn referred to the north portion of the Study Area and acknowledged the
presence of low level classifications (1 and 2); however, based on the general alignment, wellheads
are not located within the Study Area and will not be affected. Mr. Korah elaborated that the Region of
Waterloo has ownership of the wellheads and is working with the Project Team to ensure protection.
Councillor K. Galloway-Sealock questioned the impact to the private well at 500 Stauffer Drive. Mr.
Upjohn noted that individual domestic wells, such as 500 Stauffer Drive, are recognized as
groundwater resources and will receive investigation during the evaluation and assessment of this
criterion. With regard to the impact to the well system by the alignment, he stated that the well has
been identified as connected to the pond located at 500 Stauffer Drive. He commented that in general
terms, the surface water is flowing from northwest to southeast, and that an alignment to the
northwest would have greater impact to the well system. He confirmed that once the criteria is
applied, the impact can be assessed.
Councillor B. Vrbanovic requested that information be included in the summary report detailing
potential mitigation efforts for ground water resources both privately owned and those owned by the
Region of Waterloo.
Mayor C. Zehr requested assurance that the groundwater policies currently in place by the Region of
Waterloo will address the issues and concerns related to the groundwater resource protection in the
wellhead protection area and to individual domestic ponds. Mr. Upjohn confirmed that the ground
water is protected as defined in the policies which are included in the assessment of the evaluation
criteria.
With regard to 1D Surface Drainage, Mr. Upjohn stated that stormwater management is required
under the Upper Blair Creek Functional Drainage Study, and in accordance with the Ontario Ministry
of the Environment Design Guidelines and the City of Kitchener Design Guidelines. He confirmed that
runoff containing salt, oil and grit will be treated as required and that the evaluation process will
include identification of opportunities to coordinate or use adjacent development stormwater
management facilities for runoff. Councillor P. Singh requested that the terminology in the criteria
specify mitigation efforts related to flash floods due to groundwater recharging sensitivities. Mr.
Upjohn agreed to enhance the description of the methodology in the ESR related to how alternatives
for surface drainage was determined.
Mr. Upjohn reviewed 1 E Species at Risk (SAR) Permits, stating that an alignment with the potential to
impact the species and vegetation at risk would require a permit from the MNR. He indicated that the
described assessment would contain the efforts with respect to meeting the tests for a permit under
the requirements of the MNR. Mayor Zehr referred to the map, illustrating the regulated habitat,
questioning the size. Mr. Upjohn indicated that the area illustrated by an orange boundary on the map
is within one kilometer of known habitat based on historical data from the MNR.
Councillor P. Singh requested that the ESR information be expanded beyond identification of the
areas of concern related to the species at risk, by including technical and financial mitigating
measures that could be correlated to the MNR permit requirements.
Councillor Y. Fernandes requested that examples be provided of where afour-lane road has been
constructed through the habitat of a Species at Risk and the benefits of the road to that species. She
commented that this is one of the criteria required by the MNR and would like a response reflected in
the ESR.
Socio-Economic Environment
Mr. Upjohn reviewed the modified factors under Socio-Economic Environment, stating that 2A Land
Use Policy will identify the compatibility of the alignment with Regional and municipal policies and will
include assessment of the Countryside Line.
SPECIAL COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 4, 2013 - 19- CITY OF KITCHENER
Mayor C. Zehr questioned the wording in the Information Brief which describes an encroachment of
the alignment of Strasburg Road onto the developable lands for the draft approved Doon South
Community, Phase 2. Mr. Upjohn responded that the area southeast of Reidel Drive and New
Dundee Road would be evaluated, given a nominal area of potential encroachment. He stated that
the encroachment is not a determining factor of the alignment of the extension of Strasburg Road and
can be reconsidered should it not be required.
Councillor K. Galloway-Sealock requested that the Countryside Line have a separate bullet in the list
of factors under Land Use/Resource Designation and Policies. She further requested that the
rationale for the alignment of the Countryside Line be included in the ESR, and dependent on
approval of the Regional Official Plan by the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB), details on the ability to
change the alignment. She stated that the Countryside Line has held a great deal of importance and
would like it to maintain its emphasis during the assessment of the evaluation criteria.
Councillor Z. Janecki requested removal of the word "provincial" and insertion of the word "regional"
in the description of Land Use/Resource Designation and Policies factor.
Councillor B. loannidis requested that implications and alternatives to the Countryside Line be
included should the appeal of the Regional Official Plan not be approved by the OMB.
With regard to 2B Existing Land Use, Councillor Galloway-Sealock requested that 500 Stauffer Drive
be listed under the Other Business Operations factor to emphasize that the evaluation of the impact
to the business would be considered. She acknowledged that the specific location should not receive
any additional weight over other individual addresses, but would like the property listed to identify
specific consideration.
Councillor D. Glenn-Graham commented that the terminology for the Agricultural Operations factor is
not specific in terms of types of operations and requested that it be expanded to include consideration
to farm animals.
Councillor P. Singh raised concerns with the terminology in 2C Communities, under Community
Amenities, related to the noise impact of development, suggesting that mitigation efforts be
considered proactively and incorporated into the design as a cost saving measure.
Cultural Environment
In response to Councillor D. Glenn-Graham, Mr. B. Korah confirmed that the First Nations have been
consulted by the Ministry of Culture.
Transportation /Utilities
Councillor B. loannidis requested a proactive approach to consideration of the movement of the
Countryside Line should the Regional Official Plan not be approved. Mr. Upjohn reiterated the focus
to meet the primary objective, which is to identify how the Doon South Community is serviced by the
alternative alignments.
Councillor Y. Fernandes noted that there is an assumption that the owner of 500 Stauffer Drive will
support a connection to Robert Ferrie Drive, pointing out an additional EA is required. Mr. Upjohn
stated that from a network perspective, a connection has to be considered at Robert Ferrie Drive.
Councillor Fernandes requested that in the summary report the impact be clarified to the weighting of
the factor if the connection through 500 Stauffer Drive is not supported by the Owner.
Mayor C. Zehr pointed out that the Region of Waterloo Transportation Master Plan takes a
comprehensive view to transportation servicing requirements. He commented that movement of the
Countryside Line and the street network connection to Robert Ferrie Drive should be consistent with
the Master Plan. Ms. Cumming affirmed that although the terminology in the criterion may not have to
change, the ESR should reflect consideration of these items.
With regard to 4B Municipal Services and Utilities, Councillor Z. Janecki requested that it be specified
in the ESR, as to requirements for watermain connections and pumping stations for the developable
lands. He further requested that the information include how the servicing requirements are
considered during the evaluation process. Mr. Upjohn indicated that the servicing feasibility analysis
SPECIAL COUNCIL MINUTES
FEBRUARY 4, 2013 - 20- CITY OF KITCHENER
will detail the servicing requirements for the Doon South Community and confirmed that the alignment
alternatives will exhibit various alternatives for meeting the servicing requirements.
Technical /Financial
Councillor Fernandes questioned the inclusion of capital costs derived from requirements of the
Grand River Conservation Authority, such as bridges over wetlands. Mr. Upjohn indicated that
technical costs are quantified and included; however, as part of an EA process, permit costs are
identified as required, but not quantified within an EA. He confirmed that technical requirements, such
as watermains and pumping stations, will be identified and quantified as part of the assessment of
each alignment alternative.
Councillor D. Glenn-Graham emphasized the importance of considering new /emerging green
technologies in all aspects of the proposed road extension and asked that 5B Technical reflect this
consideration.
This meeting then recessed at 3:15 p. m. and reconvened at 3:30 p. m. with all members present,
except Councillor J. Gazzola.
Mr. Upjohn provided an overview of the Alignment Alternatives Assessment process, noting the
approach utilized by the Consultation Team to progress from a comparative assessment to
identification of the preferred alignment. He stated that the evaluation criteria will be quantified or
applied to qualitative assessments and subsequently compiled into a comprehensive information
package for the Project Team. He indicated that the specifics of the numerical based scoring system
to be used for ranking of the alternatives has yet to be finalized but would be applied to the evaluation
factors, which would then be totaled; and normalized alignment scores would be determined for each
factor group. He added that factor group scores would then be added to arrive at a total score for
each alignment with the highest being identified as the Draft Technically Preferred Alignment (TPA).
Ms. Cumming referred to the worksheet "Discussing Relative Importance of Factors", distributed this
date, indicating that the exercise would be utilized to demonstrate how members of Council are
leaning in terms of weighting each factor.
Councillor K. Galloway-Sealock referred to the project objectives as described in the Application of
Evaluation Criteria, requesting that the third bullet in the Secondary Project objective be separated
into three separate bullets, as follows: minimize impacts to natural heritage features; minimize
impacts to environmental resources; and minimize impacts to existing businesses and residents.
Ms. Cumming then led Members through an exercise demonstrating how the evaluation criteria is
applied in the assessment of alternatives. Members were asked to check-off which factors they
consider important on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being most important. Although unscientific and not
tabulated to form a result at this time, Members generally felt that the exercise was useful in
demonstrating to the Project Team trending of the alternatives.
Mr. Upjohn indicated that the next steps involved in the EA process include a Public Information
Center and consultation with Heritage Kitchener and the Environmental Committee in April, followed
by presentation of the draft TPA-V2 to the Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee in May 2013.
Moved by Councillor Y. Fernandes
Seconded by Councillor B. loannidis
"That an in-camera meeting of City Council be held this date to consider two litigation /potential
litigation matters one of which is also subject to solicitor-client privilege."
Carried.
On motion, the meeting adjourned at 4:41 p. m.
MAYOR CLERK