HomeMy WebLinkAboutCSD-14-113 - Zone Change Application-ZC14/04/L/AP - Grand River South Community Plan Amendment - Fairway Rd N at Lackner Blvd - Waterloo Region District School Board
REPORT TO: Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee
DATE OF MEETING: December 8, 2014
SUBMITTED BY: Alain Pinard, Director of Planning
PREPARED BY: Andrew Pinnell, Planner, 519-741-2200 x7668
Brandon Sloan, Manager, Long Range & Policy Planning
WARD INVOLVED: Ward 2
DATE OF REPORT: November 14, 2014
REPORT NO.: CSD-14-113
SUBJECT: STATUTORY PUBLIC MEETING FOR
ZONE CHANGE APPLICATION ZC14/04/L/AP AND
GRAND RIVER SOUTH COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT
FAIRWAY RD N @ LACKNER BLVD (N.E. CORNER)
WATERLOO REGION DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD
___________________________________________________________________
RECOMMENDATION:
That the oral and written submissions received before and at the Statutory Public
Meeting regarding the proposed Zone Change ZC14/04/L/AP (and related Grand
River South Community Plan Amendment) for lands at the northeast corner of
Fairway Road N/Lackner Boulevard, be considered in the preparation of the final
report and recommendation on the applications; and further
That following the December 8, 2014 Statutory Public Meeting on the proposed
Zone Change ZC14/04/L/AP (and related Community Plan Amendment), and
following the review of final technical and supporting information, staff bring
forward a final report and recommendation for consideration by Committee and
Council.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Waterloo Region District School Board (WRDSB) is proposing to change the land
use of the site at the northeast corner of Fairway Road N/Lackner Boulevard in order to
allow the construction of an elementary school. The submitted applications also propose
ng the current zoning
permissions to facilitate development. This would have the effect of
institutional uses including a school, and other complementary uses.
3 - 1
There are many opportunities and challenges with considering a potential school at the
subject location, including matters such as transportation/pedestrians and natural
environment implications. Staff is tabling this report in order to:
1. Satisfy the Planning Act requirement to hold a statutory public meeting;
2. Provide background and information regarding the subject applications in
advance of a final decision;
3. Provide asummary of the public and department/agency comments received;
4. Identify the actions taken on the comments/issues;
5. Advise the community and Committee of the current status and next steps;
6. Receive and consider further community input through the formal statutory public
meeting; and
7. Receive input from the Committee regarding their comments on the proposal.
BACKGROUND:
This is the first report to Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee (PSIC) on this matter
and represents the Statutory Public Meeting under The Planning Act. Further decision
making meetings at PSIC and Council will be required early in 2015. Additional site and
contextual background information
REPORT:
The subject area is located at the
northeast corner of Fairway Road North
and Lackner Boulevard in the Grand River
South Community, and is owned by the
Waterloo Region District School Board
(WRDSB).The site contains two
properties that for the purposes of the
land use applications have approximately
430 metres of frontage on Lackner
Boulevard, 250 metres of frontage on
Fairway Road and is approximately 7.2
hectares (18 acres) in area. The WRDSB
is seeking to rezone the majority of the
lands to a mixed use zone and the
natural heritage lands and storm water
Surrounding Context
Both Fairway Road and Lackner Boulevard are currently classified as Primary Arterial
Roads. Lands to the west of Lackner Boulevard in the Idlewood community contain
primarily single detached dwellings and open space in conventional subdivisions.There
is an existing convenience commercial plaza at the southwest corner of Fairway
Rd/Lackner Blvd/Fairway Cres. and lands fronting the south side of Fairway Road are
zoned for commercial development but currently vacant. Further to the south and to the
east are subdivisions built over the last 10 years with a variety of low-rise residential
3 - 2
dwelling types. The City of Kitchener owns a larger portion of the Lackner Woods
Environmentally Sensitive Policy Area and Provincially Significant Wetland which is to
the immediate northof the site.
Site Background
The original subdivision of this area dates back to the late 1980s. During the 1990s, the
current zoning was established which was re-enforced during the final approval of the
Grand River South Community Plan in 2000. The intended land use was for a
Neighbourhood Commercial site surrounded by High Rise Residential. These were/are
the only land uses of those types within Grand River South and the surrounding
community. Through the Community Plan, three elementary school sites were identified:
1) the site that became Lackner Woods Public School,2) the site that became St. John
Paul II Catholic School, and 3) asite that was within a residential neighbourhood east of
Old Zeller Drive (note: the subject lands were not identified as a school site at that time).
The previous planning decisions had the cumulative effect of creating the edge of the
natural heritage area to the north which, over the last 20 or so years, has continued to
grow into the subject site. The majority of the subject site is regulated by the Grand
River Conservation Authority due to the Idlewood Creek floodplain and spillway related
to Fairway Road.
Through the app
amendments in 2002, the subject area was designated in the Official Plan as aMixed
Use Node.The intent of this type of Node was to establisha range of commercial,
institutional and medium/high density residentialusesthat would serve the surrounding
community, support transit and ensurepedestrian-friendly design. A policy of the Official
Plan identifies the need for a site-specific urban design study.
Current Land Use Permissions
policy. The new Official Plan proposes that the site is within a Community Node with a
Mixed Use designation and a revised special policy. The Mixed Use and revised special
policy are intended to facilitate appropriate commercial uses to serve the surrounding
community andmedium/high density residential uses with a continued emphasis on
being designed to be transit and pedestrian oriented. The land use designations of
Neighbourhood Commercial and High Rise Multiple Residential in the Grand River
Community Plan remain in effect but are required to be changed to conform to the
Official Plan or repealed.
The current zoning of the site is also Neighbourhood Commercial (C-2) which allows a
wide range of stores and High Rise Residential (R-9) which primarily allows large scale
apartments.
3 - 3
Recent Events
Through the consideration of a draft plan of subdivision east of Old Zeller Drive, the
WRDSB identified that the final planned school site in the Grand River South
Community was no longer viable due to a variety of concerns related to the nearby
Waterloo Region International Airport. The Grand River South Community Plan was not
formally amended at that time. In 2010-11, the WRDSB conductedan Elementary
School Accommodation Review which considered several options for the broader area,
including a site on Morrison Road, the lands at Fairway/Lackner, and additions/changes
to existing facilities. City Planning staff comments on the Review suggested that the
Morrison Road site is appropriate for an elementary school and that there are a number
of challenges with considering a potential school on the Fairway/Lackner lands.
The WRDSB concluded the Accommodation Review, selected and subsequently
purchased the Fairway/Lackner site. Through preliminary meetings with the City and
Agencies in 2012, the WRDSB was informed of the technical studies, reports,
considerations and process options for submitting land use/development applications.
The existing zoning and Community Plan designation do not permit a school in the
location that theWRDSB is proposing.
In March 2014, the WRDSB hosted a public meeting at Lackner Woods P.S. in order to
provide information to the community and advise of their upcoming applications. The
formal applications were subsequently submitted in April of this year.
Submitted Application and Supporting Studies
Theations include changes to the Grand River South Community Plan,
and the zoning along with the preparation of a site-
consideration. The proposed amendment to the Community Plan would change the
existingNeighbourhood Commercialand High Rise Multiple Residential landuse
designations to Mixed Use and Open Spacein order to conform tothe existing and new
Official Plan. This would allow for the inte
The zone change as originally proposed would:
Change the two separate Neighbourhood Commercial and High Rise Residential
zones into one Mixed Use zone;
Within the mixed use area, an elementary school would be permitted (on a large
portion of the land currently zoned for residential);
Allow certain commercial uses, including gas bar and car wash, that will typically
not be permitted on mixed use sites;
Regulate certain physical characteristics of future development, including
minimum building massing,density, maximum floor area devoted to retail and
office uses, maximum building heights and other site design matters; and
Rezone a portion of the lands that currently permits high rise multiple residential
to a green zone (Open Space and Hazard Land) to conserve the significant
natural heritage features that have evolved on the site along with the proposed
creation of a stormwater management facility.
3 - 4
This site and proposal present several technical challenges. As part of the land use and
development process, the WRDSB submitted the followingtechnical studiesin order to
supporttheir applications:
1. Planning Justification Report: provides planning justification for the proposed
development and provides a summary of the existing and future policy and
regulatory framework that will influence the future development of the property.
2. Urban Design Brief and Master Plan: informs the site-specific zoning of a
propertyuide and ensure zoning
compliance of phases of development so that it is not done in an ad-hoc,
piecemeal way. The Brief is required as part of this public process.
3. Transportation Impact Study - determines the potential generation of vehicular,
cyclist and pedestrian volumes for the proposed development and the
implications to the surrounding street network.
4. Detailed Vegetation Plan- provides an identification and location of vegetation
types and groupings.
5. Wetland Hydrologic Assessment reviews and analyzes the potential
hydrological impacts on any existing wetlands and watercourses.
6. Environmental Impact Study considers the proposed development/zoning to
analyze potential implications to the environment (vegetation, habitat, floodplain,
wetlands, etc.) and provides any recommended directions/actions. The study
helps determine what parts of the property can be built upon and what parts
cannot (i.e., developable area)
7. Functional Servicing and Stormwater Management Report - outlines the
municipal and site servicing, area grading, stormwater management and utilities
strategies for the subject site.
8. Noise Impact Assessment provides an initial review of potential implications of
sources of noise in order to confirm proposed uses are appropriate and/or
mitigation measures could be utilized.
Key Challenges
The Official Plan (both the existing and new) has a policy which stipulates that
new elementary schools will be located to minimize potential conflicts between
vehicular traffic and children walking to and from school. This will include efforts
to discourage locating elementary sc (Part 2, Policy
8.3.7). In this instance there are two Arterial Roads and the future potential for a
different intersection type at Fairway/Lackner.
When planning/designing communities and neighbourhoods the preferred
approach is to locate a school where it is most accessible and conducive to
walking/cycling. The new catchment area for the proposed school would require
some students to cross Primary Arterial Roads, residences are not immediately
adjacent to the site and the subject area is currently auto-oriented. Options need
to be explored to see if a suitable, pedestrian-oriented built environment can be
developed.
There are no existing sidewalks along/to the site and limited intersection controls
in the surrounding area (except at Fairway/Lackner).
3 - 5
A typical school site would take up a significant portion of land that could be more
effectively/efficiently used for other purposes and would reduce the opportunity
for having a variety of businesses and residential dwelling types in the Grand
River South community (thus requiring further to travel to stores, etc.)
There are provincial, regional and local transit-supportive density targets
(persons and jobs per hectare) that should be achieved. This is one of the few
-zoned commercial and high rise residential which
would significant help the City achieve the overall required density objectives. A
conventional school site significantly reduces this possibility.
Over the last many years evolving natural environment considerations have
emerged
Transportation usage in this area will increase. Fairway Road is now a gateway
to the City and leads to several key regional destinations. The surrounding
community continues to grow and be developed. The proposed uses for the
subject site will need to consider these factors.
Changing uses at this site after 15 years of surrounding development requires
careful consideration.
Key Opportunities
Provides a new school to accommodate the growth in the area.
Allows for anintegration of different residential, commercial and institutional uses
through the creation of a small, mixed-use urban neighbourhood,urban village
or campus style development.
Protects more environmentally sensitive lands compared to the current zoning.
A multi-storey school would allow the land to be used more efficiently.
Locating the school on a private road set back from the Arterial Roads provides
more buffer, could integrate a school better with a new mixed-use
neighbourhood, allows more control for the WRDSB regarding internal traffic and
student drop off/pick up; and would not increase maintenance costs to the City.
A school/community space could provide a focal point within the Node and some
recreation space for the area.
The WRDSB would construct sidewalks along both Fairway Rd. and Lackner
Blvd. frontages and the Region would continue the sidewalk to the east along
Fairway Road.
City staff are discussing with the WRDSB the possibility of utilizing some of the
school facilities for public, recreation and neighbourhood-based uses during off
hours (satisfies the direction in the current Official Plan Part 2 Policy 3.3.3).
Summary of Comments Received to Date
Through the circulation of the applications and the neighbourhood information
meeting(s), a wide range of comments were raised by the community and department/
agency staff. Numerous members of the public (primarily those with children that go to
or would go to Lackner Woods PS) were advised that a new school would be built and
open by a certain time, recognize that this site was selected as the only option and have
concerns with the timing. Other members of the public have raised questions about the
feasibility/practicality of an elementary school on the site given the context and certain
3 - 6
challenges. Several issues were raised with transportation implications of the
zoning/proposal, height and density of development, environmental impacts, noise, and
concerns with allowing a car wash/gas station.
Many of these issues are consistent with comments provided by planning, departmental
and agency staff. An outline of the comments received to date along with the response
or status is attached to this report as Appendix A. The WRDSB and their consultants
have taken significant steps to consider and provide additional information to respond to
the issues.
Changes Since Original Submission
City staff and the applicant continue to review various land use concepts and built form
plans in order to determine the possibilities of creating an improved pedestrian
environment within a future mixed use development at this location. This will impact the
zoning, community plan amendment and would satisfy the requirement for a site
specific urban design study to be approved by Council. The applicant has provided
updated Master Plan Concepts (see Appendix B)that illustrate the proposed zoning
may
massing benchmark and residents/jobs per unit area benchmark. Neither of the options
should be construed as the absolute form of development and further options are being
explored for the final documents/recommendation. The concepts illustrate that the long-
term, planned function of this key site could still be achieved. The applicant and staff
have also created aconcept diagram (see Appendix C) for the internal, private road that
would appropriately accommodate pedestrians, cyclists, vehicles and school buses.
To help understand the density and massing considerations of the Official Plan and to
rea, staff has prepared several
renderings of a potential build-out scenario for the site. These concepts are based on a
3D model of the site designed by staff. This model shows a pedestrian-friendly, mixed
use development that is integrated with an elementary school. This model has been
helpful both to staff and the applicant in understanding the benefits and realistic
possibility of a campus style integration of uses on the site.
Sample Visualizations of Potential Streetscape To/From a School
View from School West to Lackner Blvd
View from Lackner Blvd East to School
3 - 7
City staff is working with the applicant to confirm the recommended results of a
Pedestrian Assessment for the site. Region of Waterloo transportation staff have
completed their review. This Assessment is intended to help understand the most
appropriate traffic control devices for pedestrians to cross the arterial roads and will help
staff to understand the suitability of the site for a school.
Through further meetings with the applicant, the Region has identified the potential for
the construction of a sidewalk between Pebble Creek Drive and the eastern extent of
the site as part of the school development (first) phase. City Engineering Services staff
has also identified that sidewalks along the entire Lackner and Fairway frontages should
be constructed as part of the school development phase and the WRDSB concurs as
these sidewalks would help to improve the walkability to/from the site.
After further discussions between staff and the applicant, as well as through input from
the community, the WRDSB has decided to remove the request to allow a carwash and
gas station on the site. It should be noted that these uses are currently permitted under
the current commercial zoning, but would require a special zoning provision to allow
them under the proposed zoning. This change would eliminate the concern about
conflicts between pedestrians and these particular automobile-oriented uses; address
the concern regarding potential for contamination of the water system; and eliminate
health/safety concerns pertaining to school children inhaling possible fumes associated
with these uses.
Next Steps
Before Planning staff can prepare an informed recommendation for consideration by
Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee, all portions of technical studies and
reports that are relevant to the rezoning/land use consideration should be signed off by
the appropriate department/agency. These studies and reports are presently in various
stages of the review process: In some cases, studies have been signed off. In other
cases, additional information is being submitted and analyzed.
Issues or matters still being considered include:
Confirming appropriate design features to ensure suitable access to an atypical
school site.
Resolving different opinions on the type and timing of a pedestrian crossing at
Lackner/Corfield intersection (pedestrian refuge island vs pedestrian signal).
Updating the master plan concepts and related site-specific Urban Design Study
to provide options that address the challenges/opportunities of the site; consider
the comments received; deal with height and built form issues; create a rational,
internal pedestrian and vehicular system that has route options; and illustrate
how in the long-term a new, mixed use urban neighbourhood could be created
that satisfies numerous objectives including the policies, proposed zoning, and
density targets.
Receiving final GRCA/department clearance on environmental and stormwater
3 - 8
Planning staff must consider the balance of issues, the input received at the Statutory
Public Meeting, and prepare a final report with a recommendation that may include a
proposed Zoning By-law and Community Plan Amendment.
ALIGNMENT WITH CITY OF KITCHENER STRATEGIC PLAN:
The propos
-
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
A minimum of 3 City crossing guards would be required to service the proposed school
(following a potential roundabout construction in 2022):1 guard at Lackner/Corfield and
between 2 and 4 guards at the proposed roundabout.Staff estimates that the future
financial implications to the City would be approximately: 3 to 5 guards x $7000 / guard
per year = $21,000 to $35,000 per year.
The WRDSB and the Region would install significant portions of sidewalks with the
initial stage of a school.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
INFORM and CONSULT There are several instances whereby the community has
been informed and consulted with beyond the typical Planning Act requirements. The
Waterloo Region District School Board hosted neighbourhood information meetings in
March and June 2014. The City posted information about the initial proposal and
development process on a planning news webpage. The application was circulated for
comment in April 2014 to all property owners within 120 metres of the subject area as
well as all those who signed into the March 2014 neighbourhood meeting.
The City held a Neighbourhood Information Meeting (NIM) on September 23, 2014 at
Lackner Woods School to inform the community on the background to the application,
provide a status update, advise of the next steps in the process and to answer the
All individuals who signed into the March neighbourhood
meeting,responded to the community circulation, or were property owners within 120
metres of the subject area were given notice of the NIM. In addition, the Stanley Park
Community Association and adjacent neighbourhood group were notified. Furthermore,
the City sent out social media updates about this event and signs were posted on the
property. At least 60 members of the community attended the NIM. The minutes of this
meeting are attached as Appendix D.
Also, twebsite continues to be updated after every significant milestone since
the circulation of the application to the community in April.
Notice of the statutory public meeting is advertised in the November 14, 2014 edition of
The Record (see Appendix E).
3 - 9
CONCLUSION:
Staff and the applicant will continue to address outstanding issues and, following input
from the community and Committee at the Statutory Public Meeting, a final report will be
provided for consideration by Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee early in
2015.
REVIEWED BY:
Brandon Sloan, Manager of Long Range and Policy Planning
ACKNOWLEDGED
Michael May, Deputy CAO
BY:
Community ServicesDepartment
Attachments
Appendix A Summary of Comments Received to Date
Appendix B Master Plans Prepared by GSP Group
Appendix C Cross-section Diagram of Internal Road
Appendix D Neighbourhood Information Meeting Minutes
Appendix E Newspaper Notice
3 - 10
Summary of Comments Received to Date
Submitted By:
CommentActions: How Staff / the Applicant is Responding to, Acknowledgi
CommunityStaff/Agency
The applicant submitted a Planning Justification Report (PJR) an
Pedestrian Assessment) to support the proposal of an elementary
Whether the proposed use of the lands for an elementary school i
1
Planning staff has requested updates to the PJR to provide addit
appropriate
Transportion Services staff is currently reviewing an update to
implications to achieving density targets.
The original planned school site for this area would have been a
Elementary school students in Grand River South need to be
2 working through the additional information / materials from the
accommodated as soon as possible
in order to make an informed recommendation about the school use
Transportion Services staff is currently reviewing an update to
Proposed school is isolated from the community it serves (i.e., address safe walking routes to the subject area. There is a pot
3 arterial roads to the west and south; envronmentally constrainedthe subject area and the community to the east is via a walkway
lands to north and east)environmentally constrained lands. Staff to consider this as pa
investigate creating a new neighbourhood that can help serve a s
The applicant submitted an Environmental Impact Study in support
4 EIS mapping updates requiredapplicant is currently responding to the final issues from the C
comments
The applicant submitted an Environmental Impact Study and Wetlan
Confirmation and justification for potential natural feature at
5
of their zone change application. The applicant is responding w
corner of site required
comments
Revisions to Preliminary Stormwater Management Report required The applicant submitted a Functional Servicing and Stormwater Ma
6
to show SWM and infiltration for site as a wholezone change application. The applicant is responding to the Cit
The applicant submitted an Environmental Impact Study and Stormw
7
Justification of stormwater management facility in floodplain
their application. The applicant is responding with documentati
8 Appropriate SWM facility outlet must be identifiedSame as response to #7
The applicant submitted a Transportation Impact Study in support
9 Transportation Impact Study (TIS) updates are required
Region requested an update to the TIS.
This is one of the primary concerns of City staff with the propo
Concern regarding appropriate walking and cycling routes / road Pedestrian Assessment to answer questions related to walkability
10
crossings for students of proposed schoolImpact Study. Cycling routes are discussed in the Transportatio
Services and Plannign Staff are reviewing a response submitted b
As expected, a developing area like Grand River South will conti
Concern that increased traffic will cause excessive congestion aprevious conditions. The applicant submitted a Transportation Im
11
noisetraffic/transportation implications. The Region requested an upd
required to study noise implications from roads for their site.
Transportation Demand Management report to be prepared and City Transportation Services staff advised the applicant of this
12
submitted to City staff for reviewThis will inform the proposed bike and vehicular parking require
In addition to the information contained within the Planning Jus
13
Confirmation that subject area can support City's density targetin support of their zone change application, City Planning staff
density information and options
The applicant submitted a Planning Justification Report and Urba
Determination of zoning regulations (e.g., height, density, buil
14 change application. The applicant is currently preparing update
orientation, podium requirements, parking reductions, etc.)
comments
Updates to Planning Justification Report required to reflect
The applicant has consented to the removal of the gas station an
15
permitted uses discussions (e.g., to eliminate gas station and
preparing updates to the Planning Justification Report and Urban
carwash, etc.)
The applicant submitted a Planning Justification Report and Urba
Updates to Urban Design Brief required (e.g., inclusion of shado
16 change application. The applicant is currently preparing update
impact, angular plane analysis, 3D massing model, etc.)
various site concept options
Site lighting will be considered through the future site plan ph
17
Concern regarding light pollution from proposed development
lighting guidelines to limit off-site glare
The applicant submitted an Environmental Impact Study in support
EIS speaks to the question of protection of natural features, fl
Concern that plant and animal species and other natural features
18 Environmental Advisory Committee has considered the EIS and reco
may be compromised
out through implementation. The applicant is finalizing the EIS
comments. Implementation of much of the EIS will take place thr
The applicant is currently updating the Urban Design Brief to in
Concern that the proposal will reduce surrounding property value
19
models, etc. This additional information will help inform staff
and privacy
evaluated by City staff through planning processes
The City and the applicant have been further considering the pot
compared to what could be ultimately built on the site. The appl
Design Brief to include further analysis of potential building i
Concern that the massing and density of the proposed development
20 etc. This additional information will help staff to understand
is too great
implications to surrounding properties. The current zoning of t
however, recent concepts explored by the applicant and City are
potential limit.
Utilizing the entire subject area for the school is more land th
land/infrastructure and would eliminate options to have stores,
21
The whole of the subject area should be kept for the school alonrelated uses and a range of housing options within close proximi
proposing a multi-storey school and adequate school site given t
been enlarged since the original proposal.
Concern that the school lands are too small and that larger sitSee response to #21. The WRDSB has advised the City that there a
22
may be available in the Grand River South communitylocations in the area for a new school site.
The entire Grand River South community of several thousand peopl
convenience commercial plaza. There is one other small vacant co
remaining opportunity in the area for significant mixed use and
This area is not underserviced for commercial use: mixed-use /
23
have a range of uses whereby people have options and do not nece
commercial is not necessary
creating additional car traffic, to get to stores. The applicant
plan and policies of achieving mixed use development at this loc
phases over a period of years as the Grand River South Community
Underground Parking - Concern that u/g parking would negatively Underground parking will be reviewed by City staff in greater de
24
affect groundwaterwith engineering and other appropriate agencies
There are other Kitchener examples of significant multiple resid
Concern that there are no other examples of multiple residential
25
schools. For example: Country Hills Public School (195 Country
and commercial surrounding a school in Kitchener
Drive) and several catholics schools including on Midland Dr.
3 - 11
Tree Protection
Area
Apartment
A
Sports Field
2-8 Storeys
Apartment
*
Play
Equip.
E
*
Two Storey Townhouses
Two Storey Townhouses
Chicopee Hills
Public School
Apartment
Apartment
(2-4 Storeys)
B
Play
Equip.
2-10 Storeys
ApartmentApartment
2 Storeys2 Storeys
SWM
Pond
Right In /
Right Out
C
D
1 Storey
2 Storeys
2 Storeys
2 Storeys
*
*
*
Right In /
Right Out
Right In /
Potential Right Out
Roundabout
Site StatisticsLegend
Ultimate
Site Area: Approx. 7.6 ha.
Medium - High Density Res.
Developable Area: 5.42ha.
Master Plan
Developable Area Within 30m Setback: 0.09ha.
Mixed Use
Proposed Zoning: Medium Intensity Mixed Use Corridor (MU-2) Zone
Commercial
Max. Residential Units: Approx. 416
Concept 1
FSR Provided: min.1.0 (based developable area + buffers)
School (2.06ha.)
FSR Range By BlockBlock Areas
Environmental Area
Chicopee Hills
A0.40ha.
A1.0 - 2.6
B0.82ha.
B1.0 - 3.5
Play Space / Amenity Area
C0.83ha.
C0.7
D0.47ha.
D0.5
Possible Building Edges
*
E2.14ha.
E0.3
Priority Buildings
0.61ha.
SWM
2.01ha.
ENVIRONMENTAL
RDS / SIDEWALKS0.38ha.
NOTE: Block letters (A, B, etc) do not reference staging of development.
NOTE: This concept has been prepared for general feasibility purposes only.
Scale 1:1250
November 20, 2014
Building code requirements and technical / architectural design have not
Project No.:11019
been addressed.
3 - 12
Tree Protection
Area
Apartment
A
Sports Field
2-8 Storeys
Apartment
*
Play
Equip.
E
*
Two Storey Townhouses
Two Storey Townhouses
Chicopee Hills
Public School
Apartment
Apartment
(2-4 Storeys)
Play
B
Equip.
2-12 Storeys
Apartment
Apartment
SWM
Pond
Right In /
Right Out
D
C
*
*
*
Right In /
Right Out
Right In /
Potential Right Out
Roundabout
Site StatisticsLegend
Ultimate
Site Area: Approx. 7.6 ha.
Medium - High Density Res.
Developable Area: 5.42ha.
Master Plan
Developable Area Within 30m Setback: 0.09ha.
Mixed Use
Proposed Zoning: Medium Intensity Mixed Use Corridor (MU-2) Zone
Commercial
Max. Residential Units: Approx. 592
Concept 2
FSR Provided: min.1.0 (based developable area + buffers)
School (2.06ha.)
FSR Range By BlockBlock Areas
Environmental Area
Chicopee Hills
A0.40ha.
A1.0 - 2.6
B0.82ha.
B1.6 - 4.0
Play Space / Amenity Area
C0.83ha.
C0.5
D0.47ha.
D0.5
Possible Building Edges
*
E2.14ha.
E0.3
Priority Buildings
0.61ha.
SWM
2.01ha.
ENVIRONMENTAL
RDS / SIDEWALKS0.38ha.
NOTE: Block letters (A, B, etc) do not reference staging of development.
NOTE: This concept has been prepared for general feasibility purposes only.
Scale 1:1250
November 20, 2014
Building code requirements and technical / architectural design have not
Project No.:11019
been addressed.
3 - 13
3 - 14
Neighbourhood Information Meeting (NIM) Minutes
Subject Property: Northeast corner of Fairway Road and Lackner Boulevard
Application: ZC14/04/L/AP and Community Plan Amendment
Date:September, 23rd, 2014 (6:30pm-8:30pm)
File Planner: Andrew Pinnell
Facilitator: Juliane vonWesterholt
Minutes:Sasha Oliveira
Presentation Overview
The Facilitator commenced the meeting by introducing various agencies and staff present
and overviewed the agenda, purpose of the meeting and ground rules for the event
The File Planner presented a presentation on the following topics:
Role of the City Planner
o
Project Background
o
Current Zoning of the project
o
Community Plan Designation
o
Current Official Plan Designation
o
Grand River South/Sunnyside Community Accommodation Review
o
Proposed Zone Change Application and Community Plan Amendment
o
Application Process to Date
o
Technical Studies and Review
o
Summary of Community Comments Received to Date
o
The Facilitator described the next steps and began facilitating Q&A
Question and Answers
Question(s):
1.Can the public access the technical studies?
Answers & Responses:
th
City
:Studies are available for viewing on the 6 floor.Anyone can make an
appointment to review them. Freedom of Information request can be made to receive
a copy.
Question(s):
2.Will the school be open in September 2016? If so, what needs to be done to
make it happen?
Comments:
Parents were advised that a school would be open soon. The date keeps changing.
Last meeting School Board said the date changed to 2016 if Council could approve it
by June 2015
Answers & Responses:
School Board Representative:
It takes 12-14 months to construct if servicing is
available. Depending on how early they could have the application go to Council,
they will have to see if it could still be completed within their timeframe.
City:
Any timing comments should have been dependent on the need to determine if
the school is an appropriate use for the proposed site through the zone change first.
3 - 15
Question(s):
3.What are the plans for the intersection [Fairway and Lackner]? How will it be
tackled for students crossing?
Comments:
Fairway and Lackner is a complicated and busy intersection
Answers & Responses:
Region: The intersection is signalized. Future i
ntersection control has only been
reviewed at a staff level. Future plans will go through a public process.
City:
Follow up question(s):
In the next 8 years, will it (the intersection) be in the current state?
Answers & Responses:
Region:
Some improvements may occur within the next 2-3 years, but overall
reconstruction tentatively scheduled for 2022 (subject to Capital Forecast).
Question(s):
4.Who gave the okay to pass the current zoning of the site and the area? What
is next- higher density zoning?Whose decision is it to destroy the bush off?
Comments:
want Rolling Acres Dr. to be ripped down for high density housing
Deer trail and bald eagles around
understand why there are plans to build high rises away from LRT
Answers & Responses:
City:
City Council is the approving authority for the zoning. The current site was
zoned approximately 20 years ago for high rise residential and commercial.
Follow up question(s):
Does the Ward Councillor know about the proposal?
Answers & Responses:
City:
The limit [of trees] was identified years ago when it when through the original
planning process. Trees have grown onto the land that is currently zoned for high
rise residential. The WRDSB proposal is aiming to save more trees than what the
original zoning would have saved. They have studied the trees/habitat/environment
and will conserve the significant vegetation and habitat in accordance with Regional
and City policies. There will be some tree removal primarily in the area that is
sports field. There are transit routes in the area
(instead of LRT). There are various reasons and objectives of providing a range of
3 - 16
housing options for people within the Grand River South Community and this Node is
intended to be a focal point for the community. The Ward Councillor is aware of the
development proposal.
Question(s):
5.High-density what does that mean? How high? How many people? How
many families? When are we going to stop it?
Comments:
Buying and spending tax money for elite area
12 storey buildings and children running around them
Answers & Responses:
City:
The proposed height is 12 storeys which could comply with the airport
regulations.
on the site, called the Floor Space Ratio. There are provincial, regional and
municipal objectives whereby certain lands in the city must have a minimum amount
of density measured in people and jobs per hectare. Further information is required
to illustrate this on site master plans and with other visualizations.
Question(s):
6.No question comments only
Comments:
Concern regarding deer and traffic
People will be killed (traffic)
Planes fly over the place
Answers & Responses:
Consultant:
A technical study was completed regarding traffic to illustrate suitability
of the proposal.
7. Question(s):
Last time 8 storey building was proposed why did it change? Does Andrew
rec?
Answers & Responses:
Consultant:
Along Lackner Blvd. a maximum of 8 storeys is proposed with a
maximum of 12 storeys internal site. Shadows and other compatibility implications
will be further studied.
Question(s):
8.When the airport is expanded, is the height considered? Zone change
proposes a car wash and gas station has this been looked at [health view]?
Comments:
supports the proposal
likes the school near 12 storey buildings
kids near gas station is bad because of the fumes
3 - 17
Answers & Responses:
City:
Gas station - still under review to see if that type of use is appropriate. (Staff
member directs audience to map of proposed zones and points to areas in which the
gas station could be permitted). Parking lot would provide a buffer separation
between gas station. Region in charge of the airport but there are Federal
regulations. Maximum building heights are reviewed to determine safe
building/zoning heights.
Consultant:
. 12 storeys is under the established, regulatory limit.
Follow-up Comment(s):
Member of the audience requested note taker to highlight in notes the following:
The conflict between children and gas stations
o
Airport regulations
o
Question(s):
9.chosen? When will the reports be finished?
When will the Council decision be?
Answers & Responses:
School Board:
WRDSB could make better use of the Lackner and Fairway site.
Morrison site would require busing students further away.
City:
Timing is somewhat dependent upon the WRDSB/Consultants revising reports
and departments/agencies providing acceptance. Expect that by/after the New Year
the proposal to go to Council for decision.
Question(s):
10.Does the school board plan or have they calculated the maximum number of
pupils? Is it 200, or 2000? How many people could live at this development?
Answers & Responses:
School Board:
Approximately 650 students.
City
:There are some estimates for how many residents (and jobs) could potentially
occur on a site given different development scenarios. The Consultant has provided
some information in their Planning Justification Report (the numbers were not readily
available at the presentation). Additional follow up and information is required.
Follow-up Comment(s):
more people will drive on roads
having two four-lane intersections near school not optimal
Question(s):
11.Nine reports submitted, you said some signed off, which ones have been
signed off and how many?
Answers & Responses:
City
:Only one study noise impact. All others require final information or sign off.
3 - 18
Question(s):
12.Are high-rise owned or rental units?
Answers & Responses:
City
:The City does not regulate if it is rental or owned units.
School Board:
No details yet.
Follow up Comment(s):
concern for property value
concern about gas station one already on Fairway Road and King, also Ottawa
Why do [they] need the gas station close to the school and intersection dangerous
situations and accidents
Follow up question(s):
Will input be considered in the decision?
Answers & Responses:
City:
Yes, questions and comments will be taken into consideration and may result
in a change of design. No decision being made tonight.
Question(s):
13.With the roundabout coming, is there an alternative access for pedestrians to
access? Pathways or others?
Answers & Responses:
City
:Transportation Impact Study will look at this. Pedestrian study under review
and will recommend traffic control type. There is potential for walkway at the rear of
the site to the neighbourhood to the northeast.
Question(s):
14.We do need a school, has this been addressed?
Answers & Responses:
City:
Yes, we are aware of the school needs for the area.
Question(s):
15.How can we be making high-density accommodations? Population coming to
the school. School has taken many years and there are ongoing issues lan B?
Is the Morrison site or another site in mind?
Comments:
Make sure the school is large enough if population increases
Answers & Responses:
School Board:
Undergone lengthy review. Until they receive the answer from
Council the current intent is to not pursue a Plan B. There are limited alternate
locations. An option is to consider additions to existing schools and busing out of
neighbourhoods.
3 - 19
Question(s):
16.If there were not so many parts [of the proposal] would the school happen
sooner? Could it be done in phases school first, then rest?
Comments:
Business portion of proposal is overtaking the need for the school benefit of school
is taken away from main concern of development
Answers & Responses:
City:
The site is proposed to be development in phases. The school is proposed as
the first phase. The proposed location of the school still needs a zone change.
Schooldensity
through a campus style development.
Comment(s):
17.There appears to be uncertainty with this proposal that it may not be rezoned
or passed. Is now the time for the WRDSB to work on Plan B or will they wait until 2016to
begin the process all over again?
Comment(s):
18.Safety is not being considered primary. There is traffic on Lackner mostly
from Guelph. Going from fast highway to a 4-lane road with kids crossing the road. Our
community needs safety.
Question(s):
19.Centralizing [concentrating on] high-rise so we can get school?
Comments:
Gas station near stormwater pond is a concern.
Answers & Responses:
City:
Acknowledgement of concern regarding gas station. Density is taken as a
whole for the site balance.
Question(s):
20.Is there an example to look to to see what the development might look like?
Answers & Responses:
City:
(Staff representative directs audience to slideshow for Kitchener and regional
examples of elementary schools located near high-density developments)
Question(s):
21.
Lackner)?
Comments:
traffic is horrible
bridge
noise with people going 80 km/hour
3 - 20
Answers & Responses:
City:
Not within the scope of this application.Noise implications on Regional Roads
are Region responsibilitrranted as part of a
separate process. This is a growing area within the city.
Follow-up Comment(s):
Noise survey was completed before heaver traffic came
The Region/City have to pay, they owe it to us
Will something be done?
Region/City representatives want to live there
Question(s):
22.When will the reports be complete? What are firm timelines? When will the
project go to Council for decision?
Comments:
This proposal is all dependent on City
Plan B is contingent on what City decides
Answers & Responses:
City:
Not uncommon for zone changes to run 6-8 months - even if it is a simple zone
change. City has to make informed decisions and thus the studies need to be
complete. The application was submitted in April.
Follow-up Question(s):
Is someone trying to stop this by requesting studies? Does it look like it is going to be
approved with the information [the City] has?
Answers & Responses:
City:
City Planning staff does not want to make a quick reaction on an important
matter. Planners make a professional recommendation and finalizing the technical
-designed site
whether going to be approved [based off information available at the
moment].
Question(s):
23.The Grand River Community Plan had pre-established sites for the school
does this mean those approved sites are no longer available?
Comments:
Resident proposed school location at Fairway/Lackner
Answers & Responses:
City:
The WRDSB did not purchase the pre-established site that is identified in the
community plan and does not own that land. Other land may/may not be available.
School Board:
other potential sites anymore.
3 - 21
Question(s):
24.The density should be lowered. Would the City be able to scale back the
population [of the proposal]? Is this a possibility?
Answers & Responses:
City:
The zoning has been in place for this area for over 20 years andcould have
brought about 350 jobs per hectare if it was fully built out at the full maximum. The
City previously identified a tentative target of 175 person and jobs per hectare for this
key site. Since other sites in the city have recently been approved for certain
densities, the City has reduced the target further in the new Official Plan special
policy to 150. A school does not technically contribute much in the way of density to
the target and thus puts more onus on the remainder of the lands to make up the
difference. Not an ideal condition; however, we are not fully planning by numbers
and are further investigating ways to appropriately design and zone the site so that
there could be a mixed-use neighbourhood with housing options that may also help
sustain a school in the long-term with children that could not have to cross an arterial
street.
Question(s):
25.How big is the school going to be, so we can accommodate?
Comments:
we need a school 700 more homes coming near the airport where very little is
there
Answers & Responses:
School Board:
About 650 students.
Closing remarks
Meeting Adjourned at 8:30pm
Staff remained to answer any other questions
3 - 22
PROPERTY OWNERS AND INTERESTED PARTIES ARE INVITED
TO ATTEND A PUBLIC MEETING TO DISCUSS
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE KITCHENER ZONING BY-LAW
UNDER SECTION 34 OF THE PLANNING ACT
Fairway Road North and Lackner Boulevard (Northeast Corner)
The Waterloo Region District School Board (WRDSB) is proposing to change the zoning and community plan designation
of the site at the northeast corner of Fairway Road N / Lackner Boulevard in order to allow the construction of an
elementary school. The applications also propose to allow a mix of commercial and high-density residential uses as well
proposal
with a range of residences, stores, institutional uses including a school, and other complementary uses. In general, the
zoning would be changed from Residential Nine (R-9) and Neighbourhood Shopping Centre (C-2) to a Mixed Use (MU-2)
with site-specific regulations. Green areas would be rezoned to Open Space (P-2) and Hazard Land (P-3).
The purpose of this public meeting is to:
1. Provide background and information regarding the subject applications in advance of a final
decision;
2. Provide asummary of the public and department/agency comments received to date;
3.Identify the actions taken on the comments/issues;
4. Advise the community and Committee of the current status and next steps;
5. Receive and consider further community input through the formal statutory public meeting; and
6. Receive input from the Committee regarding their comments on the proposal.
Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee
The public meeting will be held by the , a Committee of Council which deals
with planning matters, on:
MONDAY, DECEMBER 8, 2014 at 7:00 P.M.
nd
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2 FLOOR, CITY HALL
200 KING STREET WEST, KITCHENER.
Any person may attend the public meeting and make written and/or verbal representation either in support of, or in
If a person or public body does not make oral submissions at this public
opposition to, the above noted proposal.
meeting or make a written submission prior to approval/refusal of this proposal, the person or public body is not
entitled to appeal the decision to the Ontario Municipal Board, and may not be added as a party to the hearing of
an appeal unless there are reasonable grounds in the opinion of the Board.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
is available by contacting the staff person noted below, viewing the report contained in the
agenda(posted 10 days before the meeting at www.kitchener.ca - click on the date in the Calendar of Events and select the
th
appropriate committee), or in person at the Planning Division, 6 Floor, City Hall, 200 King Street West, Kitchener between
8:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. (Monday to Friday).
Andrew Pinnell
,Planner - 519-741-2200 ext. 7668 (TTY: 1-866-969-9994), andrew,pinnell@kitchener.ca
3 - 23