HomeMy WebLinkAboutPSI Agenda - 2019-05-13
Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee
Agenda
Monday, May 13, 2019
4:30 p.m. 5:30 p.m.
Office of the City Clerk
7:00 p.m. 9:00 p.m.
Kitchener City Hall
nd
200 King St. W. - 2 Floor
Council Chamber
Kitchener ON N2G 4G7
This is an approximate start time, as this meeting will commence immediately following
the Finance & Corporate Services Committee meeting.
Page 1
Chair - Councillor S. Marsh Vice-Chair - Councillor D. Chapman
PART ONE 4:30 p.m.
Delegations
-law, delegations are permitted to address the Committee for a maximum of
5 minutes.
Item 1 None at this time.
Discussion Items
1. DSD-19-106 - CRoZBy - New Zoning By-law (Stage 1) (60 min)
- Deferred Items: Urban Growth Centre Bonusing/Zoning
(Staff will provide a 10 minute presentation on this matter)
PART TWO 7:00 p.m.
Delegations
-law, delegations are permitted to address the Committee for a maximum of
5 minutes.
Item 4 None at this time.
Item 5 None at this time.
Public Hearing Matters under the Planning Act (7:00 p.m. advertised start time)
This is a formal public meeting to consider applications under the Planning Act. If a person or public body that
would otherwise have an ability to appeal a decision of the City of Kitchener to the Local Planning Appeal
Tribunal, but the person or public body does not make oral submissions at the public meeting or make written
submissions to the City of Kitchener before the by-law is passed, the person or public body is not entitled to
appeal the decision.
Discussion Items
2. DSD-19-079 - OPA18/003/F/JVW (10 min)
- & ZBA18/003/F/JVW
- 100 Seabrook Drive
- Activa Holdings Inc.
(Staff will provide a 5 minute presentation on this matter)
3. DSD-19-064 - Zone Change Application - ZC17/015/B/AP (45 min)
- 450 Bridgeport Road
- Will-O-Homes (C.S.) Inc.
(Staff will provide a 5 minute presentation on this matter)
** Accessible formats and communication supports are available upon request. If you require assistance to
take part in a city meeting or event, please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 **
Planning & Strategic Initiatives
Committee AgendaPage 2May13, 2019
Discussion Items
4. DSD-19-095 - Zone Change Application - ZC18/008/N/CD (30 min)
- 730 New Dundee Road
- Principia Development Ltd.
(Staff will provide a 5 minute presentation on this matter)
5. DSD-19-096 - Final Vision + Scope/Plan for Development Services Review (30 min)
(Staff will provide a 5 minute presentation on this matter)
Information Items
Unfinished Business List
Jaclyn Rodrigues
Committee Administrator
REPORT TO:Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee
DATE OF MEETING:May 13, 2019
SUBMITTED BY:Alain Pinard, Director of Planning, 519-741-2200 ext. 7319
PREPARED BY:Brandon Sloan,Manager, Long Range & Policy Planning
519-741-2200 x7648
Richard Kelly-Ruetz,Technical Assistant (Planning & Zoning)
519-741-2200 x7110
WARD(S) INVOLVED:Wards 9 & 10
DATE OF REPORT:May 3, 2019
REPORT NO.:DSD-19-106
SUBJECT:New Zoning By-law (Stage 1)
Deferred Items: Urban Growth Centre Bonusing/Zoning
RECOMMENDATION:
ThatSections 6(Urban Growth Centre) and 4.3 (Bonusing) of the new Zoning By-law
(Stage 1) and associated mapping attached as Appendix D to report DSD-19-049be
approved asAmendment No.1 to By-law 2019-051subject to the following minor updates:
to include Net-Zero Development with updated Bonus Values of:
o Equivalent to LEED Gold or above (or comparable): 1.0 FSR
o Net Zero Energy: 1.25 FSR
o Net Zero Carbon: 1.5 FSR
o Net Positive Energy or Carbon: 1.75 FSR
age metric onlyto be:
o Greater than 10%: 1.0 FSR
o Greater than 25%: 2.0 FSR
o Greater than 50%: 1.5 FSR; and further
Thatstaff prepare the Bonusing Implementation Guide, with additional stakeholder
consultation, within one year of the approval of the bonusing provisions of the new
Zoning By-law.
BACKGROUND:
Council deferred consideration of the bonusing provisions for the Urban Growth Centre(i.e.
-law from
April 29, 2019 to May.The base Urban Growth Centre zones and properties were also deferred.
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
1 - 1
REPORT:
The exchange of community benefits for additional building height and/or density ofa
development, referred to as bonusing, is a tool currently allowedunder section 37 of The
Planning Act (as amended). This tool is often used as an incentive. It does not guarantee that
the provisions will happen, but in combination with other approaches as part of an overall city-
Kitchener Official Plan).
The Kitchener approach to bonusing could be one of the most innovative and would set us apart
from other municipalities in our region and most others intheprovince.
balances community and development interests by providing a mechanismto secure community
benefits that exceed standard and allowable requirements in a way that is transparent,
predictable and streamlined. If used to its maximum potential, development of up to 8.0floor
space ratio (FSR) would be allowed as-of-right in appropriate areasof the downtown without the
need of a zoning by-law amendment. If none of the bonusing provisions are used, a maximum
of 3.0 FSR wouldgenerallybe permitted in the downtown.
Currently, bonusing provisions are already encoded within many ofthe downtown zones of By-
law 85-1.However, there are only three community benefits (residential dwelling units, amenity
area and heritage conservation).Although the tool was rarely used until recently, the existing
provisions have now led to positive downtown benefits.
Through a consultative process, the approach to downtown
development and bonusing was updated in the approved and in
effect Official Plan(Sections 15.D.2 and 17.E.17). A range of
objectives and community benefits were identified including
affordable housing, public amenity area, green infrastructure,
environmental performance,and transportation demand
management. Through the 4-year process of preparing the new
zoning by-law, which must conform to the Official Plan, additional
benefits such as food store, architectural excellence, 2or 3-
bedroom dwelling units, creative industriesand business incubator
space were also identified.
Garment St. Condos - Momentum
The eegulations for the Urban Growth Centre allows for
greater density in an appropriate area in exchange for certain pre-defined community benefits.
The working team of Planning and Economic Development staff reviewed the approach of 14
other municipalities, investigated potential implications using 3D visualizations, undertook
numerous internal discussions,andreviewed recent developments in the City of Waterloo,
Toronto, Ottawa and Kitchener. A first draft was released for public review in May2016 and an
updated version was released for further public review at the April/May 2018 Statutory Public
Meeting. Comments were reviewed and responded to. Staff presented and discussedwith the
Downtown Action and Advisory Committee twice, attended a Downtown Business Improvement
Area (BIA)meeting and worked further with local consultants to further refine the approach.
1 - 2
The new zoning by-law provisions translate the policy direction and list of community benefits of
the Official Plan into the Zoning By-law but since the by-law is a regulatory, legal tool it should
be more specific (and as definitive and clear as possible). Not only should the bonusing
provisions be considered in combination with the Official Plan policies, but the next step will be
to prepare a Bonusing Implementation Guideline document to further detail the process and
more in depth logistics of how each benefit is provided through the development process and
agreement (to be registered on title under s.37 of The Planning Act).
{ƷĻƦ Ќʹ
{ƷĻƦ Њʹ {ƷĻƦ Ћʹ
LƒƦƌĻƒĻƓƷğƷźƚƓ
hŅŅźĭźğƌ tƌğƓƚƓźƓŭ .ǤΏƌğǞ
DǒźķĻ
Important Considerations
Before bonusing isconsidered, a development proposal would needto be pre-qualified. A
landowner would be required to prepare, and receive approval of, a Bonusing Justification Study
to confirm it is compatible with surrounding areas, achieves Official Plan and urban design
objectives, has the necessary infrastructure and is good planning. Oncepre-qualified, the Study
wouldidentifyand justify the facility, services or matters to be provided in exchange for the
additional density.These would be considered and secured through the site development and
bonusing agreements.
Proposed community benefits must be over and above the standard requirements and exceed
the level of improvements that a municipality otherwise has the authority to require.All of the
benefitslisted in the bonusing provisions of the new zoning by-law are over and abovestandard
requirements and through a bonusing by-lawthere isa legal mechanismto secure the benefit
for the short and long-term.
Advantages
There are a number of advantages to the recommended approach, including:
Pre-defined,transparentand predictable.
Different fromthe approach of most other municipalities, which can be lengthy and
1
undetermined negotiation of benefits.
Balanced approach.
Economic developmentand planning incentive (along with the approach to new
downtown parking provisions) in a time immediately following the sun-setting of the
downtown DC exemption incentive.
Certaintymakes up front development costs easier to predict. It provides a clear
understanding to landowners, public and Council of what is permitted and what to expect.
1
In Ontario, the Town of Grimsby includes some community benefits in exchange for added density within its zoning by-
law. The City of London has a hybrid approach. Most others utilize a site-specific zoning by-law amendment application
approach. Nanaimo, BC (different provincial legislation and policies) uses a tiered approach within their zoning.
1 - 3
Cutsprocess while still maintaining certainty.Reduces time, expenseand risk.
Intensificationin the Urban Growth Centre (UGC)benefitsthebroadercommunity.
Is one of the only tools available to municipalities to ensure that many of the matters are
provided and maintained with a development.
Focuses growth and amenities in the UGC.
Does not rely on valuation; instead uses provision of items, sizes, costs, percentages.
Integrates into the site plan process. Involves an agreement to secure the benefits and
how they are maintained for the long term.
Amore detailed description of the process, and examples of the benefits will be provided in the
th
staff presentation and discussion at the May 13Committee meeting. It is very important to
distinguish the recent developmentprojectsin the City of Kitchener that have used the existing
By-law 85-1provisions or are located outside of downtownand were considered through site-
specific applications. Thebenefits secured thought these developments were not pre-defined.
Potential Risks
Potential risksinclude a lack of interest in pursuing the bonusing provisions or an uneven use of
bonusing provisions, where only a selected few community improvements are being provided.
Because this is aninnovativeapproach and there are limitedcomparable precedents, staff will
monitor the effectiveness and the impactsof the bonusing provisions and the Cityof Kitchener
can make adjustments as needed through the annual by-law update process.
Another potential risk is that at the time of writing, the Provincial government announced another
series of proposed planning reforms, includinglegislative changes related to bonusing
reduced or even eliminated. However, based on initial announcements it would appear that
roposed approach aligns the provincial objective of ensuring that
development costs and community benefits arepredictable.
Next Steps
Staff will also preparing the . This will outline the details of how
bonusing is integrated into the development and agreement process. The Implementation Guide
will have more description for each community benefit (including examples)and will provide a
course of action for how the bonusing provisions
are to be deployed (e.g. how and where the added
Њ͵ ƚƓźƓŭ .ǤΏƌğǞ
park space or public realm funds provided will be
utilized and the definition of affordable).
Approval of the zoningprovisions would provide
Ѝ͵ wĻǝźƭĻͲ ƩĻķǒĭĻͲ Ћ͵ .ƚƓǒƭźƓŭ
more certainty for the preparation of the
ƩĻķźƩĻĭƷͲ ğķƆǒƭƷLƒƦƌĻƒĻƓƷğƷźƚƓ
implementationdetails.
ĬĻƓĻŅźƷƭ ğƓķ ǝğƌǒĻƭDǒźķĻ
The mid-to long-range objective is to reduce,
remove, and adjust the bonusing provisions as
more of the community benefits are provided, to
Ќ͵wĻǝźĻǞ
incorporate further refinements in the approach, or
to re-prioritize objectives (potentially within different
1 - 4
downtown districts).Theregion has begun the process of updating their official plan polices to
implement the updated provincial growth plan and growth for the next planning horizon.
Subsequently, the city will have to update our plan to conform, including revisiting downtown
growth, density and bonusing. As such, the new UGC and bonusing regulations will be revisited
again in the coming years.
Potential Bonusing in Other Areas
A future step is to review the potential approachtocommunity benefits within 450 meters of an
ION stop as per the Official Plan and approved PARTS Plans.
Planning Analysis
to bonusing balances community and development interests by providing
a mechanism to secure community benefits that exceed standard and allowable requirements
in a way that is transparent, predictable and streamlined. The recommended zoning by-law is
consistent with and conforms to provincial policy, the Regional Official Plan and the Kitchener
Official Plan. Theproposed community benefits implementsnumerouspolicy objectives related
to transportation demand management, affordable housing and sustainable development. Minor
updates are recommended to respond to comments at the April 2019 Statutory Public Meeting,
including incorporating Net-Zero Development and refining the affordable housing value.
ALIGNMENT WITH CITY OF KITCHENER STRATEGIC PLAN:
Strategic Priority 2Strong and Resilient Economy
Strategy 2.5 Facilitate the ongoing development of Downtown Kitchener as the heart of the
City.
Strategic Priority 3 Safe and Thriving Neighbourhoods
Strategy 3.3 Manage growth, curb urban sprawl, and foster more mixed-use development,
ensuring new development is integrated with the diversity and character of the surrounding
community.
2019 Business Plan NB11 Comprehensive Zoning By-law Review
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
The CRoZBy project is currently within its allocated budget.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
th
See previous report and description in the report above. In addition, between the April 29
Council decision and the preparation of this report, planning staff had further conversations and
correspondence with each ofthe delegations on the topic along with some members of Council.
PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION OF THIS MATTER:
Report CSD-16-022 CRoZBy Component B First Draft (Urban Growth Centre Zones, other)
Report CSD-18-002 -CRoZBy Final Draft and Companion Official Plan Amendment Stat. Mtg.
Report CSD 19-049New Zoning By-law (CRoZBy) Stage 1 Non-Residential Zones
1 - 5
CONCLUSION:
Utilizing a zoning by-law to secure community benefits in exchange for added density is a tool
currently allowed under ThePlanning Act(as amended)and is further authorizedand directed
in the Kitchener Official Plan. Staff developed an updated and balanced Kitchener approach
through a lengthy public process over the last 8 years (new Official Plan and new Zoning By-
law). The downtown is the primary area where the Province, Region and Citywant intensification.
This is one tool that will continue to give Kitchener the edge while at the same time helping
ensure that with added density, new development will positively contribute to our community.
REVIEWED BY: Cory Bluhm, Executive Director, Economic Development
ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Justin Readman -General Manager, Development Services
1 - 6
REPORT TO:Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee
th
DATE OF MEETING:May 13, 2019
SUBMITTED BY:Alain Pinard, Director of Planning, 519-741-2200 ext. 7319
PREPARED BY:Juliane vonWesterholt,Senior Planner,519-741-2200 ext. 7157
WARD(S) INVOLVED:Ward 5
th
DATE OF REPORT:April 10, 2019
REPORT NO.:DSD-19-079
SUBJECT:OPA 18/003/F/JVW and ZBA18/003/F/JVW
100Seabrook Drive
Activa Holdings
RECOMMENDATION:
A.That Official Plan Amendment Application OP18/003/F/JVW for Activa Holdings
requesting a change in designation from to
permit a mixed use development on the parcel of land specified and illustrated on
to Report DSD 19-079
Waterloo for approval; and
B.That Maps 3 and 5 of the Official Plan and Maps 22 a, b, c, d, e, f of the Rosenberg
attached to Report DSD 19-079; and
C.That the Huron Community Plan be amended to remove theArea 2 portion of thesubject
lands from the HuronCommunity Plan;and
D.ThatZoning By-law Amendment Application ZC18/003/F/JVWfor Activa Holdings
requesting a change fromBusiness Park Service Centre Zone (B-3), with Special Use
Regulation 300 U to LowIntensity Mixed UseCorridor(MU-1) with Special Regulation
Provision750Rand from Residential Three (R-3) to Low Intensity Mixed UseCorridor
(MU-1) with Special Regulation Provision750R and Special Use Provision 476Uon the
parcel of land specified and illustrated on Map No. 1, be approved in the form shown in
th
-May 13, 2019, attached to Report DSD 19-079as
; and further
*** This information is availablein accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
2 - 1
E.Thatin accordance with Planning Act Section 45 (1.3 & 1.4) applications for minor
variances shall be permitted for lands subject to Zoning By-law Amendment Application
ZC18/003/F/JVW.
BACKGROUND:
The subject lands, known as 100 Seabrook Drive, are locatedon the northeast corner of
Fischer Hallman Road and Seabrook Drive intersection and also have additional frontage
along Valencia Avenue. The lands straddle both the Huron Village and Rosenberg planning
communities and have a total area of 2.59 hectares (6.38 acres). The intent of the application
is to re-designate the portion of the subject lands fronting onto Valencia Avenue from Low Rise
Residential to Mixed Use Corridor One and to rezone the lands to Mixed Use One(MU-1),so
that the entiresite will have one land use category and zone. Additionally, the Official Plan
Amendment would bring the entire lands into the Rosenberg Secondary Plan,so that the
property would no longer straddle two community/ secondary plans. A site specific Special
Regulation will be applied to the portion of the property fronting along Valencia Avenue in order
to ensure a transition to more compatible uses and densities opposite the residential
subdivision from the Mixed Uses along the Fischer Hallman corridor to the west.
2 - 2
REPORT:
The applicants have submitted applications for Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law
Amendment in order to facilitate the development of the subject lands for a Mixed Use
Development with a total Floor Space Ratio (FSR) up to 1.0. Threeto fourstorey buildings will
frame the intersection of Fischer Hallman Road and Seabrook Drive. The back-to-back building
design together with live work units will serve to intensify the development within the mixed
use corridor along Fischer Hallman Road.The combination of slightly higher density residential
uses coupled with live work and commercial uses,will create active uses at grade and will help
support transit usage along the corridor. Along the Valencia Avenue frontage, back to back
townhouses will provide for a transition from the more intensive development along Fischer
Hallman to the single detached residential uses along the opposite side of Valencia Avenue in
the Huron Village subdivision. A Special Regulation will be applied to the block facing Valencia
Avenue that prohibits non-residential uses, so as to provide for more compatible uses opposite
the residential subdivision.An additional site specific Special Regulation will also be applied to
the Area 1 portion of the site along Fischer Hallman Road and are described in more detail
below in the Zoning section.
As part of this development,the applicant will be seeking an amendment to the Official Plan to
bring the portion of the subject lands (Area 2)into the Rosenberg Secondary Planthus having
the entire lands within one planning community. In addition, the Official Plan Amendment will
also change the land use designatiOne. This
will allow the subject lands to be developed comprehensively and in their entirety with one land
use designation, as opposed to two. Furthermore, the zoning by-lawwill limitthe height, as
well asthe usesalong Valencia Avenueto residential uses that would compliment a Medium
Densityscale such as the back to backtownhouses that are intended for the second phaseof
this development.
In addition to the amendment to the Official Plan, the applicantshave requested an amendment
to the Zoning By-law to bring the zoning into conformity with the Mixed Use Oneland use
designation,as set out by the Rosenberg Secondary Plan. In turn,the proposed zoning for the
first phase(Area 1) of the development is Low Intensity Mixed Use One (MU-1). For the
second phase ( Area 2) portion of the subject lands, the zoning by-law amendment will rezone
the lands from its current Residential Three (R-3) zone to Low Intensity Mixed Use One (MU-
1). Both phases will also havesite specificSpecial Regulations applied. These include
regulations that will reduce front yard setback maximums from 8.6 metres to 7.5 metres
necessitated byroad widenings taken along Fischer Hallman Roadby the Region of Waterloo,
as well as heightrestrictions along Valencia Avenue. A further site specific Special Use
regulation will restrict land uses along Valencia Avenue to residential uses.
PROVINCIAL POLICY CONSIDERATIONS:
Provincial Policy Statement, 2014
The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) provides policy direction on matters of provincial
interest related to land use planning and development. The PPS sets out policies to consider
in buildingstrong healthy communities. The PPS is supportive of efficient development and
land use patterns which sustain the financial well-being of the Province and municipalities over
2 - 3
the long term, communities that accommodate an appropriate range and mix of land uses,
while promoting compact and efficient development patterns that minimize land consumption
and makes better use of infrastructure.
The PPS requires municipalities to promote healthy, livable and safe communities by
accommodating an appropriate range and mix of residential, commercialand other uses to
meet the long term needs of the community and to encourage compact, mixed-use
development that incorporates compatible live work and commercial employment uses to
support liveable communities.
Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposed applications are consistent with the PPS as
they will facilitate the development of the subject property with a compact mixed-use
development that is located withinthe plannedurbanintensification corridor along Fischer
Hallman Road. The proposed development will providea modest amountadditional
employment through its live work and retail uses, as well as a variety of residential uses which
may consist of a multiplebuilt form optionsincluding stacked town houses, back-to-back town
houses and live/ work units. The proposed developmentwill make better use of lands that are
currentlyzoned for business park and low density residential threeuses.No new public roads
would be required for the proposed development and Engineering staff has confirmed there is
capacity in existing infrastructure to support the proposed development.
While the existing policies are consistent with the PPS,Planning staff is of the opinion that the
requested applications are more consistent with the policies and intent of the PPS.
Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2017 (Growth Plan)
The Growth Planidentified and designated greenfield areasasareas that support the
achievement of complete communities, together with active transportationthat sustains
viability of transit services through their design, land use designation, and zoning.
Complete communities feature a diverse mix of land uses, including residential and
employment uses, and convenient access to local stores, services, and public service facilities.
They also have convenient access to a range of transportation options, including options for
the safe, comfortable and convenient use of active transportation. Within complete
communities, developments must be of a high quality compact built form and an attractive and
vibrant public realm which includes public open spaces.
Landsadjacent to or near existing and planned higher frequencytransitsuch as the Fischer
Hallman Corridorwith the (I Express), should be planned to be transit-supportive and
supportive of active transportation and should be comprised of a range of uses and activities
and should encourage land uses and built form that would support the achievement of transit-
supportive densities.
While the existing uses conform to the Growth Plan, the proposed applications will bring the
subject lands into better conformity with the Growth Plan.
2 - 4
REGIONAL POLICY CONSIDERATIONS:
Regional Official Plan (ROP)
The subject lands are located in the designated Greenfield Area of the Regional Official Plan.
Lands within the Designated Greenfield Area are intended to be well planned, are well
connected with multi-modal street patterns that encourage walking, cycling, support transit and
mixed use development. Greenfield areas are also intended to support a more compact urban
form, with an appropriate mix of land uses that allows people to walk or use transit to travel to
work through the promotion of medium to higher density development closer to transit routes.
Density targets of 55 persons and jobs per hectare are expected to be achieved in the
greenfield areas.
While the lands currently conform to the ROP, Planning staff is of the opinion that the
applications result in better conformity with the Regional Official Plan.
CITY POLICY CONSIDERATIONS:
Official Plan
Current Designations
The portion of the subject lands within (Area 1)of the development is designated Mixed Use
Onein the Rosenberg Secondary Plan. Lands within this designation are generally intended
to provide a minimum amount of small scale commercial uses at neighbourhood gateway
locations supplemented with multiple residential and other non-residential uses.
The(Area 2)portion of the subject lands is currently designated Low Rise Residentialin the
Huron Community Plan, which are intendedto permit a range of residential uses including
singles, semis, duplexes,street townhouses and multiples to a maximum of25 units per
hectare.
Proposed Official Plan Amendments
The (Area 2)portion of the subject lands are designated Low Rise Residential in the Official
Plan, while the balance of the lands is designated Mixed Use One in the Rosenberg Secondary
Plan.
Given that the site has two land use designations within two separate Community/Secondary
Plans,the proposed Official Plan Amendment will remove the (Area 2)portion of the subject
lands from the Huron Community Plan and in turn, bring these lands into the Rosenberg
Secondary Plan and will designate these lands as Mixed Use One. This will ensure that the
entire site is situated within one Secondary Plan and has one land use designation. The
proposed designation in the Rosenberg Secondary Plan for the (Area 2)portion of the land is
(Area 1)portion
of the subject lands.
Restrictions will be placed in the zoning of the (Area 2)portion through a site specific Special
Use Provision to limit the uses to only residential uses and prohibit non-residential uses for this
portion only. In addition, a further Site Specific Regulation will also limit the height of the built
form along the (Area 2) portion of the subject lands. Both site specific regulations are intended
to allow for a more compatible interface with the residential subdivision to the east and will
2 - 5
align more closely with the original intended residential uses of the current Low Rise
Residential designation.
Atechnical amendment to the Rosenberg Secondary Planis required in order to bring the
(Area 2) lands into the Rosenberg Secondary Plan. The implementation of this Official Plan
Amendment will result in map changes to Maps2, 3and 5 of the Official Plan, as well as the
Rosenberg Secondary Plan Maps 22 a) to f). These are attached as Schedules a) through h)
in the Official Plan Amendment. A recommendation has been added to the Planning Report
DSD-19-079 to remove the subject lands fromthe Huron Community Planas they will be added
to the Rosenberg Secondary Plan.In turn, the Huron community Plan Map will also be
The amendment as proposed herein is more consistent with the objectives of the Provincial
Policy Statement and the Policies of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, than
the existing Low Rise Residential land use designation as described in this report. The Official
Plan Amendment conforms to the Regional Official Plan. The proposed land uses conform to
the Official Plan, Staff is of the opinion that the proposed Official Plan Amendment would result
Amendment forthese lands represents good planning, and recommends that the proposed
Official Plan Amendment be approved.
2014 Official Plan Policy Direction(Policies 3.C.2.37-3.C.2.28)
Fischer Hallman Road is designated as an Urban Corridor, and as such is intended to have
strong pedestrian linkages and be integrated with neighbouring residential or employment
uses. Its planned function is to provide a range of retail and commercial uses and intensification
opportunities that are transit supportive. Urban Corridors function as a spine of the community
as well as a destination for the surrounding neighbourhoods. Strengthening linkages and
establishing compatible interfacesbetween the urban corridorsand the surrounding
community areas are priorities for development inthese areas.
Rosenberg Secondary Plan Policy Direction(Part 2-2.2.1 and Part 3-2.2)
Lands with a Mixed Use designationwithin the Rosenberg Secondary Planare intended to
permit a wide range of non-residential and medium to high density residential uses in a compact
urban formalong the Fischer Hallman transit corridor. In order to achieve a true mix of uses,
the zoning of individual sites may not permit the full range of uses at the maximum development
intensity at every site location. To clarify, this means that in order to achieve a mix of uses in a
site such as the subject lands, the site zoning may regulate the minimums of certain uses. For
instance, the zoning may stipulate that a certain minimum amount of commercial uses have to
,so that the site does not become too homogeneous with only
onepredominantuse. The intent of this policy is to ensure the combinationor mixof uses
required toachieve the planned function of the mixed use corridor along Fischer Hallman Road
at the desired intensity and scale are realized.To achieve thisobjective, a minimum of 400
square metresof commercial space will be required on the subject site,which will be regulated
through a site specific Special Regulation in the amending zoning by-law.
2 - 6
Additionally, and equally important,is to achieve the densities along Fischer Hallman Road that
will support transit usage.These greater densities are encouraged in the Mixed Use areas
rather than in the residential neighbourhoods. To this end,a minimum Floor Space Ratio (FSR)
of 0.6 is required.This may be increased up to a maximum of 2.0 for the entire site. The subject
lands are proposed to be achieving a maximum FSR of 1.0. In order to provide flexibility and to
recognize that market trends may influence the pace at which development occurs, the policy
allows the desired FSR to be phased in over time,provided a site plan is approved that
demonstrates that the densities will be achieved in the fullness of timeupon full build out of the
site.
Built Form Objectives
The Rosenberg Secondary Plan encourages a variety of built form typologies in order to frame
intersections and define entrances to a neighbourhood or community gateway. Built form
typologies are intended to address the street in a manner that supports an attractive
streetscape for the pedestrians by orienting primary entrances towards the public realm
(street) as opposed to internal to the site. In addition, the ground floor of multiple floor uses
are encouraged to contain active uses in Commercial or Mixed Use areas. Along Fischer
Hallman Road,multiple storey buildings are intended to address the street with regard for the
overall impact that a development has on the overall streetscape. Building articulation and
subtle variations in height will contribute to maintaining a pedestrian friendly scale,thus
promoting walkability.
Large Multiple blocks,such as the subject lands,are required to achieve human scale
buildings through their design, siting and orientation on the site in a manner that distributes
heights and massing. The building heights and massing shall transition between the higher
intensity areas along Fischer Hallman Road to the surrounding lower intensity uses in the
residential areas to the east and west.
Streetscape Objectives
The primary function of the Fischer Hallman Road corridor within the Rosenberg Community
for streetscape is as a central spine and focal point for commercial activity, higher densities
and transit supportive mixed use development. Its secondary function is as an Arterial Road
designed to provide efficient pedestrian, bicycle, transit and vehicular movement through out
the transportation network.
Transportation Policies and Objectives
The Rosenberg Community is intended to be a transit supportive community that provides for
a land use pattern and transportation system that over time can achieve a modal travel split
that is 25% of trips via transit. The Region of Waterloo has set this asa target for this compact
urban street form despite its suburban context in order to provide a future I-Xpress level of
transit service in the Rosenberg community. The densities and land uses shall be facing the
street with active uses at the street levelthus encouraging pedestrian use and walkability. To
further encourage transit usage, Transportation Demand Measures (TDM) will form part of the
consideration of development applications in this area.
2 - 7
The strategy outlines where new development will take place within our city to ensure it is
complementary to our community priorities, and aligned with our future infrastructure
B,which
means the City will actively work on applications.
Zoning By-law
Current Zoning
The (Area 1)portion of the subject lands is currently zoned Business Park Service Centre
Zone-3), while (Area2)-3). Currently the zoning
of the lands for the (Area 1) portion does not align with
Proposed Zoning
The requested zoning by-law amendment will bring the zoning in conformity with the Official
Plan designation so that the two documents align. The proposed zoning for the entire lands
-1). In addition, onesiand one site
specific Special Use Provision will be added to the subject lands.
The first site specific Special Regulation 750Rwill establish new site specific regulations for
maximum front yard setbacks,as well as maximum side yard abutting the streetand rear yard
setbacksto recognize the site specific front and side yard abutting a street conditions post
road widening taken along the Fischer Hallman Road frontage. This regulation will also
establish the minimum rear yard setback and determination that the frontage along Valencia
Street will be the rear lot line on this through lot (lot with multiple frontages). In addition, this
site specific Special Regulation will permit the phasing in of the Floor Space Ratio (FSR) for
the entire site over time,thereby not requiring the minimum FSR in the initial phases provided
the overall approved site plan demonstrates that the minimum FSR will be achieved in the
fullness of time as the site becomes fully developed.
The regulation also establishes a minimum requirement for the provision of commercial uses
on the subject lands.Lastly, a height restriction of 11.5metres, which although slightly higher,
wouldcontinue to onlypermit a 3 storey structureand would provide for better design options
for the buildings. This would alsobe regulated by the site specific Special Regulation in order
to provide a better transition to the residential subdivision to the eastwhich also is permitted
to have a height of 3 storeys albeit to a height of 10.5 metres.
Further, a site specific Special Use Provision 476Uwill be applied to the Phase 2 portion of
the lands facing Valencia Avenuewhich would prohibit commercial uses at this location only,
so as to provide for a more compatible residential interfaceas a transition toward the existing
Huron Village subdivision to the east.
Neighbourhood Comments
During the circulation of this application to the residents in the area, staff received only one
letter from a resident.Although the resident raised a few concerns, the resident made some
2 - 8
suggestions for staff to consider should the applications be supported.The resident had the
followingquestions or concerns:
Traffic noise and volumesat the intersection of Seabrook and Fischer Hallman Road;
On street/ on siteparking and siteentrance(proposed that entrance beoff of Seabrook
andpropose internal on-site parking location)
Height of buildings (propose to 2 storeys along Valencia)
Proposed a setback of homes along Valencia to 12.5 m (41 feet) including the curb ,
boulevard andwalkway
Traffic Volumes
Fischer Hallman Road is a Regional Arterial Road and isclassified as a Neighbourhood
Collector in the Regional Official Plan. As such,the road is designed to move large volumes
of traffic and will have controlled access. There is a centremedian along this portion of the
road to discourage full access movements. Regional arterial roads, such as Fischer Hallman
Road are connected to the broader regional arterial road and highway network.
A traffic study was completed as part of acomplete submission of this application and was
reviewed by City Transportation Services staff and no concerns with the applications for
Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment proceeding were identified. The
traffic for this area is at acceptable levels and there are no infrastructure improvements
required to accommodate the proposed development.
Traffic Noise
With respect to the noise levels, noise levels were also assessedby Stantec Consulting in a
Noise Assessment Report dated December 2017. Noise warning clauseswill be required to
be registered on title for the live work units, as well as the townhomes fronting along Fischer
Hallman Road.In addition, all of the units noted above will also be required to have central
air conditioning, and the six live work units will also be required to provide acoustical noise
abatement through the glazing of windows and the insulation of the outside walls of the
structure in order to mitigate the noise levels. This will be implemented through a future plan
of condominium process.
Parking
The required parking for lands within a Mixed Use One(MU-1) zonefor the residential uses
is one space per unit, which for this site,would result in 182 required spaces for the residential
uses and 17 spaces for the commercial component for a total of 199 required spaces. The
site has 268 spaces that are provided,including 215 site specific spaces for the units, as well
as 17 commercial and 36 visitor parking spaces. This is a surplus of 69 parking spaces for
the site, all of which are located internal to the site.In addition, the entrance to the site is off
of Seabrook Drive and not off of Valencia Avenue.This addr
Height of Buildings along Valencia
The maximum building height in an MU-1 zone is 13.5 metres, which would permit a 4 storey
structure. The resident inquired about the possibility of limiting the height along Valencia
2 - 9
Avenueto two storeys in order to provide a better interface with the residential uses on the
opposite side of the street. The applicants have agreed to a height restriction of 11.5 metres
which wouldcontinue topermit a 3 storey structure.This height is slightly higher thanthe 10.5
metres height maximums on the lands on the opposite side of Valencia Avenuein the R-3
zones. Staff feels that this is a reasonable height,as it will allow built formdesignoptions at
an appropriate scale and density to helpmeet the site FSR minimums,while allowing for a
more compatible street edge,as one transitions from the Mixed Use site to the residential
subdivisionto the east.
Proposed Setback from curb
The draft site plan submitted to the City with the application shows a setback of approximately
12.5 metres(approximately 41 feet)from the back of the curb to the buildings proposed along
Valencia. This is consistent with the proposed setback that the resident made in their letter
and should therefore resolve their concern.
Property Values
The last comment raised by the resident was regarding the impact of this proposed
development on property values. It is difficult for planning staff to comment accurately on the
impact that a proposed development may have on the value of nearby homes.Planning staff
understands that MPAC assesses homes based on as many as 200 different factors ranging
from the size of the house and lot, tothe number of bathrooms and quality of the
construction.Market values also depend on ahost of different factors including the state of
Planning staff does not consider
market value to be a land use planning matter.Planning staff focuseson whether the
development is good planning with respect to the community as a whole.The proposed
development, as discussed in previous sections, helps to achieve a number of development
goals set out in the Official Plan and the Kitchener Growth Management Strategy.
Planning Analysis
As stated earlier in the report,the purpose of the Official Plan Amendment 4 isintended to
consolidate 2 previous designations from two different policy documents into one document.
The smaller (Area 2) portion of the subject lands is somewhat of an orphaned piece from the
Huron Community Plan and once the OPA is approved,the lands will be integrated into the
Rosenberg Secondary Plan,so that the site can be developed comprehensively.
This would implement the vision of the Rosenberg Secondary Plan and would simplify
implementation of regulations at the site plan approval stage.A site specific Special
Regulation will be placed on the (Area2)lands exempting these lands only from the provision
of non-residential usesas part of the Mixed Use One (MU-1) Zone.This would provide a
transition in uses, density and heightfrom Fischer Hallman to the Huron Village subdivision.
The proposed development for the subject lands is at a scale and density that will help support
transit usage, will be oriented to the street and willbe of a mix of commercial and live work
units,as well as multiple residential uses.Thissatisfiesthe visionof the secondary plan with
respect to provision of a mix of uses that achieves the planned function of the Fischer Hallman
2 - 10
corridor,which is to serve as a central spine to the community that supports transit usage.The
scale and intensity of development will also be more intense along Fischer Hallman Road and
will transition into lower scale and density toward the eastern property boundary along Valencia
Avenue,which borders a low rise residential development.
Additional site specific Special Regulations will be applied as noted above in the Proposed
Zoning Section of the report to address site specific needs such as setbacks,minimum
provision of commercial uses,and the FSR.The site contains sufficient parking for the subject
lands and should therefore not have any negative impacts on the surrounding community.The
site has been designed to respect the adjacent neighbourhood. Specific regulations in the by-
law will require the built form to transition in scale and massing from denser mixed use
development including live work units to back to back towns with a lower height and no
commercial uses along Valencia Street,thus presenting amore compatible interface with
residential areas locatedon the opposite side of Valencia Avenue.
ALIGNMENT WITH CITY OF KITCHENER STRATEGIC PLAN:
through the delivery of core service.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:No new or additional capital budget requests are associated
with these recommendations.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: Property owners within 120 metres of the subject lands were
circulated notice of the application and a sign was placed on the subject lands. There was 1
comment receivedfrom the publicas a result of the circulationwhich is attached as Appendix
E. As a result no NIM was held. Instead the residents concerns were addressed in the report
under the heading Neighbourhood Comments. The following concerns were raised in the one
piece of correspondence: traffic noise and volumes,sufficient parking, height of buildings along
ValenciaAvenueand setbacks of the development from the curb.Departmental and Agency
F.This report will be
website with the agenda in advance of the council / committee meeting.Also, a notice was
th
advertised in the Record on April 18, 2019.
CONCLUSION:
City of Kitchener staff supports the proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law
Amendment applications. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed lowintensity mixed use
development containing live work andcommercial uses, together with medium density
residentialuses,is desirable for the future redevelopment and intensification of the subject
lands. The proposed regulations will guide the development to ensure that the site is developed
appropriately and within the context of the Mixed Use Corridor as identified in the Rosenberg
Secondary Plan.
The requested Official Plan and Zoning Bylaw Amendments are more consistent with the
objectives of the Provincial Policy Statement andthe Policies of theGrowth Plan for the
Greater Golden Horseshoe and conforms to both the Regional Official Plan and the City of
Kitchener Official Plan. The applications represent good planning. Planning staff recommends
2 - 11
thatOfficial Plan Amendment together with the Zoning By-law Amendment applications be
REVIEWED BY:Della Ross-Manager, Development Review
ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Justin Readman -General Manager, Development Services
Attachments:
Appendix A-Official Plan Amendment
-Draft Zoning By-law and Map 1
-Amended Huron Community Plan Map
-Notice
E-Public Comments
F-Agency Comments
2 - 12
DSD-19-079 - Appendix A
AMENDMENT NO. TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN
OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER
CITY OF KITCHENER
100 Seabrook Drive
2 - 13
DSD-19-079 - Appendix A
AMENDMENT NO. TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN
OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER
CITY OF KITCHENER
100 Seabrook Drive
INDEX
SECTION 1TITLE AND COMPONENTS
SECTION 2PURPOSE OF THE AMENDMENT
SECTION 3BASIS OF THE AMENDMENT
SECTION 4THE AMENDMENT
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 1Notice of the Meeting of Planning &Strategic Initiatives
Committee of May 13, 2019
APPENDIX 2Minutes of the Meeting of Planning &Strategic Initiatives
CommitteeMay 13, 2019
th
APPENDIX 3Minutes of the Meeting of City Council May 27, 2019
2 - 14
DSD-19-079 - Appendix A
AMENDMENT NO. TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER
SECTION 1 TITLE AND COMPONENTS
This amendment shall be referred to as Amendment No. to the Official Plan of the City of Kitchener.
This amendment is comprised of Sections 1 to 4 inclusive.
SECTION 2 PURPOSE OF THE AMENDMENT
The purpose of the Official Plan Amendment is amend:
Amend Map No. 2Land Use by
Urban CorridorCommunity Areasas shown on the
attached;
Amend Map No. 3 Land Use by
For Detail
as shown on the attachedB;
Amend Map No. 5 Specific Policy Areas
C
Amend Map No.22 a Rosenberg Secondary Plan Community Structure Plan to
identify the lands shown
D
Amend Map No. 22b -Rosenberg Secondary Plan Cultural Heritage Resources to
E
Amend Map No. 22c -Rosenberg Secondary Plan Transportation Network Plan to
AmendmeF
Amend Map No. 22d -Rosenberg Secondary Plan Priority Streets Planto amend
G:
Amend Map No. 22e Rosenberg Secondary Plan Land Use Plan to amend the
boundary of the Secondary Plan and to designate the
H
Amend Map No. 22f Rosenberg Secondary Plan Natural Heritage System and
Water Management to amend the Secondary Plan boundary to include the lands
shown as I
2 - 15
DSD-19-079 - Appendix A
SECTION 3 BASIS OF THE AMENDMENT
The Phase 2 portion of the subject lands are designated Low Rise Residentialin the Official
Plan, while the balance of the lands aredesignated Mixed Use Onein the Rosenberg Secondary
Plan.
Given that the site has two land use designations within two separate Plans, namely the
Rosenberg Secondary Plan and the Official Plan (Huron Community planning area) the proposed
Official Plan Amendment will remove the Phase 2 portion of the subject lands from theHuron
Community Planarea within the Official Planand in turn, bring these lands into the Rosenberg
Secondary Planand will designate these lands as Mixed Use One. This will ensure that the entire
site is situated within one Secondary Plan and has one land use designation. The proposed
designationin the Rosenberg Secondary Plan
n of the subject
landsalready situated within the Rosenberg Secondary Plan community.
Restrictions will be placed in the zoning of the Phase Two portion through a site specific Special
Use Provision to limit the uses to only residential uses and prohibit commercial uses for this
portion only. In addition, a further Site Specific Regulation will also limit the height of the built form
along the Phase to 2 Portion of the subject lands. Both site specific regulations are intended to
allow for a more compatible interface with the residential subdivision to the east and will align
more closely with the original intended residential uses of the current Low Rise Residential
designationin the Official Plan,asfurther delineated in the Huron Community Plan.
This is a very technical amendment to the Rosenberg Secondary Plan. The implementation of
this Official Plan Amendment will result in map changes toMaps 2,3and 5of the Official Plan,
the Rosenberg Secondary Plan Maps 22 a)to f), as well as the Huron Community Plan.
The amendment as proposed herein is more consistent with the objectives of the Provincial Policy
Statement and the Policies of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, than the
existing Institutional land use designation as described in Report DSD19-079.The Official Plan
Amendment conforms to the Regional Official Plan. Staff isof the opinion that the proposed
Official Plan Amendment represents good planning, and recommendsthat the proposed Official
Plan Amendment be approved.
SECTION 4 THE AMENDMENT
The City of Kitchener Official Plan is hereby amended as follows:
a)Amend Map No. 2Land Use by
Urban CorridorCommunity Areasas shown on the attached;
b)Amend Map No. 3 Land Use by
For Detailas shown on the
attached;
c)Amend Map No. 5 Specific Policy Areas to
d)Amend Map No.22 a Rosenberg Secondary Plan Community Structure Plan to identify the
lands shown a
2 - 16
DSD-19-079 - Appendix A
e)Amend Map No. 22b -Rosenberg Secondary Plan Cultural Heritage Resources to amend
attached Sche
f)Amend Map No. 22c -Rosenberg Secondary Plan Transportation Network Plan to amend
g)Amend Map No. 22d -Rosenberg Secondary Plan Priority Streets Planto amend the
h)Amend Map No. 22e Rosenberg Secondary Plan Land Use Plan to amend the boundary
of the Secondary Plan and to designate the la
i)Amend Map No. 22f Rosenberg Secondary Plan Natural Heritage System and Water
I
2 - 17
DSD-19-079 - Appendix A
APPENDIX D: Notice of the Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee Meeting (May 13, 2019)
PROPERTY OWNERS AND INTERESTED PARTIES ARE INVITED
TO ATTEND A PUBLIC MEETING TO DISCUSS
A PROPOSED OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT & AMENDMENT TO THE KITCHENER ZONING BY-LAW
UNDER THE SECTIONS 17, 22 & 34 OF THE PLANNING ACT
100 Seabrook Road
Activa Holding Inc. is proposing Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments forthe lands at 100 Seabrook
Drive to bring the lands into the Rosenberg Secondary Planning Communityfor low intensity mixed uses
including multiple residential, commercial and live work units.Site specific zoning regulations will also apply
to the subjectlands.
The public meeting will be held by the Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee, a Committee of
Council which deals with planning matters, on:
Monday, May13th , 2019 at 7:00 P.M.
nd
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2FLOOR, 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 opposition to, the above noted proposal. If a person or public body would otherwise have an
ability to appeal the decision of theCity of Kitchener to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal, but the
person or public body does not make oral submissions at a public meeting or make written
submissions to the City of Kitchener prior to approval/refusal of the proposal, the person or public
body is not entitled to appeal the decision.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATIONis available by contacting the staff person noted below, viewing the staff report
contained in the agenda (available approximately 10 days before the meeting -
https://calendar.kitchener.ca/council -click on the date in the calendar, scroll down & selectmeeting), or in
th
person at the Planning Division, 6Floor, City Hall, 200 King Street West, Kitchener between 8:30 a.m. -5:00
p.m. (Monday to Friday).
Juliane vonWesterholt, Senior Planner -519-741-2200 ext. 7157 (TTY: 1-866-969-9994);
juliane.vonwesterholt@kitchener.ca
2 - 18
DSD-19-079 - Appendix A
APPENDIX 2: Minutes of the Planning &Strategic Initiatives Committee Meeting (May13th, 2019)
2 - 19
DSD-19-079 - Appendix A
APPENDIX 3-Minutes of the Meeting of City Council
2 - 20
DSD-19-079 - Appendix A
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
2 - 21
DSD-19-079 - Appendix A
E
V
A
E
N
I
B
D
O
O
W
2 - 22
DSD-19-079 - Appendix A
2 - 23
DSD-19-079 - Appendix A
2 - 24
DSD-19-079 - Appendix A
2 - 25
DSD-19-079 - Appendix A
S
Y
L
I
L
Y
A
D
2 - 26
DSD-19-079 - Appendix A
2 - 27
DSD-19-079 - Appendix A
2 - 28
DSD-19-079 - Appendix A
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
2 - 29
DSD-19-079 - Appendix A
2 - 30
DSD-19-079 - Appendix B
BY-LAW NUMBER
OF THE
CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER
(Being a by-law to amend By-law No. 85-1, as amended,
known as the Zoning By-law for the City of Kitchener
-Activa Holdings Inc.-100 Seabrook Drive)
WHEREAS it is deemed expedient to amend Zoning By-law 85-1;
NOW THEREFORE the Council of The Corporation of the City of Kitchener
enacts as follows:
1.Schedule Numbers 96 and109-law Number 85-1arehereby
amended by changing the zoning applicable to the parcel of land specified and
illustrated as Area 1 on Map No. 1,in the City of Kitchener,attached hereto, from
Business Park Service Centre Zone(B-3) with Special Use Provision 330U to Low
Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU-1) with Special Regulation Provision 750R.
2.Schedule Number 109-law Number 85-1 is hereby
amended by changing the zoning applicable to the parcel of land specified and
illustrated as Area 2 on Map No. 1, in the City of Kitchener,attached hereto,from
Residential Six (R-6) to Low Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU-1) with
Special Regulation Provision 750R and Special Use Provision 476U.
3.-law Number 85-1 are hereby
further amended by incorporating additional zone boundaries as shown on Map
No. 1 attached hereto.
4.-law 85-1 is hereby amended by adding Section 476U thereto
as follows:
Notwithstanding Section 53.1 of this By-law, within the lands zoned
MU-1 as shown on Sch
shown as beingaffected by this subsection, non-residential uses
2 - 31
DSD-19-079 - Appendix B
5.-law 85-1 is hereby amended by adding Section 750R thereto
as follows:
.Notwithstanding Section 53.2 ofthis By-law, within the lands zoned
MU-
the following special regulations shall apply:
i)the front yard shall be the lot line abutting Fischer Hallman
Road;
ii)the rear yard shall bethe lot line abutting Valencia Avenue;
iii)the maximum front yard setback shall be 8.7metres;
iv)the minimum rear yard setback shall be 5.2 metres;
v)the maximum building height along Valencia Avenue shall be
11.5 metres;
vi)dwelling units may be permitted on the ground floor of the
mixed use building;
vii)that a minimum of 400 squaremetres of commercial uses be
provided on the subject lands;
viii)each individual phase of development is not required to satisfy
the minimum floor space ratio requirement of 0.6, provided an
overall site plan has been prepared and approved
demonstrating that the minimum floor space ratio will be
6.This By-law shall become effective only if Official Plan Amendment No. ____, (100
2 - 32
DSD-19-079 - Appendix B
Seabrook Drive) comes into effect, pursuant to Section 24 (2) of the Planning Act,
R.S.O.1990, c.P.13, as amended.
PASSED at the Council Chambers in the City of Kitchenerthis
day of , 2019
__________________________
Mayor
__________________________
Clerk
2 - 33
DSD-19-079 - Appendix B
1
6
P
A
PTR
A2
51 TR
1
P
A
TR
3
P
A
TR
4
P
A
TR
5
P
A
TR
6
P
A
TR
7
P
A
TR
8
P
A
TR
9
P
RA
T
0 1
P
RA
T
1 1
P
RA
T
2 1
P
RA
T
3 1
P
RA
T
4 1
P
RA
T
5 1
P
A
R
T
3
5
8 R
R
1-E
5
P0
A9 G
R3
T
2 P
L
A
P N
A
R
T 5
1
8
P M
RA
T
6 1-
3
3
9
P
RA
T
7 1
B
P L
RA K
T 1
8 1 8
5
P
RA
T
9 1
P
RA
T
02
P
RA
T
12
P
RA
T
2 2
P
RA
T
2 5
P
RA
T
15
P
RA
T
0 5
4
2
5
2T
R
T
RA
P
A
P
P
RA
T
9 2
P
RA
T
94
5
8
R
1-
5
2
9 P
7 RAP
TRA
0 3T
84
P
RA
T
1 3
P
RA
T
7 4
P
RA
T
6 4
P
RAP
TRA
2 3T
54
PP
RARA
TT
3 344
P
RA
T
4 3
P
RA
T
5 3
P
RA
T
34
P
RAP
TRA
6 3T
2 4
P
RA
T
7 3
P
RA
T
14
P
RA
T
8 3
P
RA
T
9 3
0
4
T
R
A
P
P
A
R
T
P 7
A
R
T
1
1
P
A
R
T
1
0
P
A
R
T
9
P
A
R
SCHEDULE 110SCHEDULE 109 T
8
P
A
R
T
P7
A
R
T
6
P
A
R
T
2
0 5
P
A
R
T
4
1
9
P
A
R
T
SCHEDULE 95SCHEDULE 96
3
P
A
R
T
2
P
A
R
T
851
-R
81
27
4
AP
TR
2
RAP
5 T
P
A
R
T
4
P
A
R
T
1
7
P
A
R
T
1
6P
A
R
T
4
2
P
A
R
TP
1 A
5
R
T
4
1
P
A
R
T
1
4
P
A
R
T
2
P4
A
R
T
1
3
P
A
R
T
3
6P
PA
AR
T
PR2
AT5
R
T3
1 9
1
P
AP
RA
R
TT
3 2
6
P
A
R
T
3
5
P
A
R
T
P2
A7
R
T
P
4A
0
R
T
3
4
P
A
R
T
2
8
P
A
R
PT
A
3
R3
TP
A
1R
0T
P2
A9
R
T
3
7
P
A
R
T
3
0
AP
R
T
P1
A
R
T
9
P
A
R
T
2
0
P
A
R
T
1
8
P
A
R
T
5
AP
R
T
6
AP
R
T
7
2 - 34
2 - 35
DSD-19-079 - Appendix D
APPENDIX D: Notice of the Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee Meeting (May 13, 2019)
PROPERTY OWNERS AND INTERESTED PARTIES ARE INVITED
TO ATTEND A PUBLIC MEETING TO DISCUSS
A PROPOSED OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT & AMENDMENT TO THE KITCHENER ZONING BY-LAW
UNDER THE SECTIONS 17, 22 & 34 OF THE PLANNING ACT
100 Seabrook Drive
Activa HoldingsInc. is proposing Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments forthe lands at 100
Seabrook Drive to bring the lands into the Rosenberg Secondary Planning Communityforlow intensity
mixed uses including multiple residential, commercial and live work units.Site specific zoning regulations
will also apply to the subjectlands.
The public meeting will be held by the Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee, a Committee of
Council which deals with planning matters, on:
MONDAY, MAY13, 2019 at 7:00 P.M.
nd
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2FLOOR, 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 opposition to, the above noted proposal. If a person or public body would otherwise have an
ability to appeal the decision of theCity of Kitchener to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal, but the
person or public body does not make oral submissions at a public meeting or make written
submissions to the City of Kitchener prior to approval/refusal of the proposal, the person or public
body is not entitled to appeal the decision.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATIONis available by contacting the staff person noted below, viewing the staff report
contained in the agenda (available approximately 10 days before the meeting -
https://calendar.kitchener.ca/council -click on the date in the calendar, scroll down & selectmeeting), or in
th
person at the Planning Division, 6Floor, City Hall, 200 King Street West, Kitchener between 8:30 a.m. -5:00
p.m. (Monday to Friday).
Juliane vonWesterholt,Senior Planner -519-741-2200 x7157 (TTY: 1-866-969-9994);
juliane.vonwesterholt@kitchener.ca
2 - 36
2 - 37
2 - 38
2 - 39
2 - 40
2 - 41
2 - 42
2 - 43
2 - 44
2 - 45
2 - 46
2 - 47
2 - 48
2 - 49
2 - 50
2 - 51
2 - 52
2 - 53
2 - 54
2 - 55
REPORT TO:Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee
DATE OF MEETING:May 13, 2019
SUBMITTED BY:Alain Pinard, Director of Planning, 519-741-2200 ext. 7319
PREPARED BY:Andrew Pinnell, Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7668
WARD(S) INVOLVED:Ward 1
DATE OF REPORT:March25, 2019
REPORT NO.:DSD-19-064
SUBJECT:ZONING BY-LAWAMENDMENT APPLICATION ZC17/015/B/AP
450 BRIDGEPORT ROAD
WILL-O-HOMES (C.S.) INC.
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
3 - 1
RECOMMENDATION:
A.That Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZC17/015/B/AP for WILL-O-
HOMES (C.S.) INC.be approvedin the -
DSD-19-064as Appendix A; AND
B.Thatin accordance with Planning Act Section 45 (1.3 & 1.4) that applications
for minor variances shall be permitted for lands subject to Zoning By-law
Amendment Application ZC17/015/B/AP, AND FURTHER
C.That the Urban Design Brief for 450 Bridgeport Road, attached to Report
DSD-19-064asAppendix B,be endorsedand provide the basis for future
development.
REPORT:
Background and SiteContext:
The subject property is located in the Bridgeport West Planning Community,on the north
side of Bridgeport Road, between the onramp to Highway 85 and Lancaster Street West.
The surrounding neighbourhood is composed oflow density residential development,
mainly single and semi detached dwellings, with 3 churches interspersed.The properties
to the west (side) and north (rear) of the subject property front onto Lang Crescent,and
contain single detached dwellings constructed in the early to mid-1960s.The properties
to the east are relatively large (width and area) compared with the properties to the west
and north, and contain single detached dwellings constructed over a wide timeframe
(1910-1996).
The subject property is a large lot that possesses a lot width of approximately 51.5 metres
(169feet),a depth of 124 metres(407feet), and an area of 0.7 hectares (1.6 acres).The
property contains a single detached dwelling that was constructed in approximately 1949,
as well as numerous trees.
The subject property is currentlyzoned Residential Two (R--law.
The R-2 Zone is a low density residential zoning classification that is often applied to
estate residential areas. The main land uses permitted withinthis zone are single
detached dwellingsand duplexes.
Initial Development Concept:
Prior to submission of the subject Zoning By-law Amendment Application (ZBA), the
applicant met withPlanning staff to discuss the proposal. At that time,the applicant had
proposed to change the zoning from R-2(described above) to R-6 (a residential zoning
classification that allows multiple dwellings, townhouses, and semi-detached dwellings).
The purpose of the application had beento allow redevelopment of the property with 17
townhousesplus one single detached dwelling,for a total of 18 units. At that time,
Planning staff suggested that theapplicant reduce thedensityand retain the R-2 Zone,
because the proposed redevelopment was considered too dense in the context of the
surrounding neighbourhood.
3 - 2
Application Submission along with Revised Development Concept:
Subsequently, the applicant submitted the subject ZBA, along with an Urban Design Brief
(UDB), which represented a modified proposal. It was intended that the UDB would
inform the zoning and provide the basis for development through the future Site Plan
process. Themodified proposal changed the dwelling type from townhouses to single
detached dwellings, reduced the unit density from 18 to 8, and retained the R-2 Zone. A
site-specific regulation was requested in order to allow8 single detached dwellings on
one lot with frontage on and access to a private, shared driveway that would lead to
Bridgeport Road. A condominium application would be submitted in the future in order to
divide ownership of the dwellings and create common ownership of the driveway, etc.
This proposal was circulated for comment to the public as well as toCity departments
and agencies.
Neighbourhood Information Meetingand Further Proposal Revisions:
Following the commenting period, the proposal was further fleshed out by the applicant.
It was clarified that the single detached dwellings would be two storeys in height
consistent with the surrounding residential neighbourhood. Additionally, it was
determined that on-site stormwater infiltration would be a key component of the
development; stormwater wouldbehandledviafive infiltration galleries and an infiltrating
storage tankwith an oil/grit separator.
OnJanuary 23, 2018, Planningstaff hosted a Neighbourhood Information Meeting (NIM)
at . The
purpose of the NIM wasto discuss the subject application with the communityand gather
additional feedback. Approximately 18 community membersattended the NIM. The
minutes of this meeting are attached as Appendix E.
After the NIM, Planning staff continued working with theapplicantto furtherrevise the
requested zoning andUDB. As a result of discussions with the community, departments
/ agencies, and Planning staff, the following changes were made to the development
conceptthat is now included in the UDB(the development concept can be found in
Section 3 of the UDB, attached as Appendix B):
Side yard setbacks increased from standard 1.2 metres to 3.0 metres,to provide
agreater buffer to homes that back onto the development(fronting on Lang Cres);
Private, shared driveway realigned away from easterly side lot line to preserve
some perimeter trees;
1.8 metre (6 foot) high fence proposed to be built around the perimeter of the
property;
Perimeter fence heightincreasedto 2.4 metres (8 feet) at westerly end of private,
shareddriveway to address neighbour concern regarding headlight glare;
Armour stone placed at westerly end of the private, shareddriveway to address
neighbour concern aboutvehiclesapproachingproperties frontingonLang Cres;
Front yard setbacksincreased from 4.5 metres to 5.9 metres,to better align with
neighbouring homes on Bridgeport Road and Lang Cres. and create pleasing
streetscape on Bridgeport Road;
Special design attention given to thedwellings closest to Bridgeport Road.
3 - 3
Requested Zoning By-law Amendment:
As previously mentioned, the existing R-2zoning is not requestedto be changed. With
n order to implement theabovementioned development
concept, the ZBAwas modifiedby simply refining theproposed site-specific zoning
provision.The revised site-specific provision would have theeffect of:
Allowinga maximum of 8 single detached dwellings on the subject property(note
that zoning normally allows only 1 single detached dwellingper property);
Limitingthe minimum lot area to the current size of the lot (note this would prevent
severance of the lot and construction of multiple single detached dwellings on
subdivided lots);
Ensuringappropriate building setbacks to the front, side, and rear lot lines,as
described, above;
Ensuringadequate distance separation between the single detached dwellings;
Establishingappropriate setbacks from the private, shareddriveway to the single
detached dwellings.
In summary, the subject application would retain the R-2 Zone and adda site-specific
zoning provision toallow 8 single detached dwellings on the property,and ensure
appropriate minimum lot area and setbacks.
Policy Conformity
Provincial Policy Statement, 2014
The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) provides policy direction on matters of provincial
interest related to land use planning and development. The PPS sets out principles to
development patterns which optimize the use of land, resources, and public investment
in infrastructure and public service facilities.
The PPS states that healthy, liveable and safe communities are sustained by a number
of factors such as accommodating an appropriate range and mix of land uses to meet
long-term needs.
The PPS includes policies to ensure that land use patterns within settlement areas are
based on, for example,densities and a mix of land uses which efficiently use land and
resources,and are appropriate for, and efficiently use, the infrastructure and public
service facilities which are planned or available.
The PPS also states that land use patterns within settlement areas shall be based on a
range of uses and opportunities for intensification and redevelopment. Intensification
means the development of a property at a higher density than currently exists through,
for example, redevelopment, which includes the creation of new dwelling units on
previously developed land in existing communities.
In this case, therequested ZBAwould permit redevelopment of the property since the
existing single detached dwelling would be demolished in favour of 8 new single detached
3 - 4
dwellings, representing a net increase of 7 units. Additionally, no additional municipal
infrastructure is necessary to support the proposed redevelopment and increased density.
Also, the requested ZBA would allow the density of the subject property to be increased
from approximately 1.5 units per hectare (UPH) to 12 units per hectare, which is slightly
greater than the density of the single detached dwelling properties on Lang Crescent,
immediately to the west, which are approximately 10.5 UPH.
While the existing zoning is consistent with the PPS, the requested ZBA ismore
consistent with the PPS.
Growth Plan forthe Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2017
The Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2017 (Growth Plan) supports the
achievement ofcompletecommunitiesthat are designed to support healthy and active
living and meet people's needs for daily livingthroughout an entire lifetime. The Growth
Plan seeks to support the achievement of complete communities.
The proposed ZBA wouldfacilitateredevelopment andintensification,within the
Delineated Built-up Area,and less than 500 metres from a Mixed Use Corridor.
While the existing zoning conforms to the Growth Plan, the requested ZBAconforms to
the Growth Plan better than the current zoning.
Regional Official Plan (ROP)
The Regional Official Plan designates the subject property Built-upArea. Regional
Planning staff hasno objections to the ZBA (see Region comments, included with the
Department and Agency comments,as Appendix D).
While the existing zoning conforms to the ROP, the requested ZBA also conforms to the
Regional Official Plan.
City of KitchenerOfficial Plan, 2014
The subject lands are
The Urban Structure identifies the lands as being within a Community Area and identifies
both Bridgeport Road and nearby Lancaster Street as Planned Transit Corridors (and
both streets haveGrand River Transitlocal busservice Routes 5 and 6, respectively).
The Low Rise Residential (LRR)
low density housing types including single detached dwellings, duplex dwellings, semi-
detached dwellings, street townhouse dwellings, townhouse dwellings in a cluster
development, low-rise multiple dwellinAdditionally, the
y will encourage and support the mixing and integrating
of innovative and different forms of housing to achieve and maintain a low-
Although, technically,the land use proposed is single detached dwelling, which is thealso
predominant land use in the surrounding area, the form of the dwellings is innovative and
3 - 5
unique, in that the dwellings wouldultimatelyhave condominium tenure, and would front
onto an internal private driveway, rather than a public street.
TherequestedZBA would allowthe subject property to be intensified to a greater degree
than under the current zoning. Under the current zoning, due to the narrow lot width,the
property could only be redeveloped with a maximum of 2 dwellings,viaa severance that
would result in 2 lots (each lot would be oriented perpendicular to Bridgeport Road).
However, this scenario would leave the majority of the lands undeveloped since the lots
would be extremely deep and redevelopment would only occur nearthe street. Under
this scenario the rear yards would be left undeveloped and underutilized and would yield
a net increase of only one dwelling.
In contrast, the requested ZBAwould allowunique, innovativeredevelopment of the
property with single detached dwellings,at a slightly greater density than the immediately
adjacent properties to the west which front onto LangCres (i.e., approximate15% density
increase).The ZBAwould allow the lands to be appropriately intensified and would allow
redevelopment to occuralongthe full depth of the property, not just at the front.
The currentzoning conformsto the 2014 Official Plan and the requested ZBA also
conforms to the 2014 Official Plan.
Department and Agency Comments:
Preliminary circulation of theZBA was undertaken on November 2, 2017to applicable
City departments and agencies.The following departments and agencies do not have
any concernswith the requested ZBA (notethat some site designmatters will be
addressedas part of the future Site Planprocess):Urban Design (Planning),
Environmental Planning (Planning), Heritage Planning (Planning), Transportation
Services, Engineering Services, Operations Division (Design and Development), Building
Division, Kitchener Utilities, Grand River Conservation Authority, Waterloo Region District
School Board, Ministry of Transportation, and The City of Waterloo(see Appendix Dfor
Department and Agency comments).
Community Comments:
Preliminary circulation of the ZBA was undertaken on November 2, 2017 to all property
owners within 120 metres ofthe subject lands. In total,14written responses were
received(see Appendix Ffor Community Comments).In addition, Planning staff hosted
a Neighbourhood Information Meeting(NIM)at Church on January
23, 2018in which staff gathered further community feedback. The minutes of the NIM
are attached as Appendix E.Asummary of concerns, along withstaff responses, are
providedbelow:
1.Community Comment:Privacy concern about lights, overlook, loss of rear yard
privacy (especially residents on LangCres).
Staff Response:Since these comments were provided,Planning staff worked with
the applicant to modify the requested ZBA and related UDB.
3 - 6
Theproposedminimum side yard setback adjacent to the properties fronting onto
Lang Cres hasmore than doubled,from 1.2 metres (3.9feet) to 3.0 metres (9.8
feet). This will have the effect of increasing the buffer from Dwellings 1 and 7 to
the rear yards of the adjacent properties fronting onto Lang Cres.
In addition, the applicant has agreed to a 1.8 metre (6 feet) high perimeter fence.
The fence would be increased to 2.4 metres (8 feet) in height where the internal
private driveway curves toward and terminates near the rear yard of 101 Lang
Cres. This fence will help to provide privacy, including preventing headlight glare
into rear yards, and is beyond what the zoning and other City standards would
otherwise require.
2.Community Comment:Densitythe number of houses proposed should be
reduced.
Staff Response:The density of the proposed developmenthas been reduced
drastically since theoriginal development concept,which showed 17 townhouse
units plus one single detached dwelling (18 units total). Planning staff worked with
the applicant and ultimately the density was reducedto 8 single detached
dwellings. It should be noted that the proposed development is only 15% more
dense than the properties fronting Lang Cres \[i.e., 12 units per hectare vs. 10.5
units per hectare\].Planning staff is satisfied that the proposed density is
appropriate and compatible with the surrounding neighbourhood.
3.Community Comment:Landscapingconcern about loss of mature trees on the
site.
Staff Response:
The subject propertycontainsmany plantedtrees. However, takentogether,the
existing trees should not be construed to be a forest. As part of the subject
application, the applicant provided a preliminary tree management planthat shows
the removal of many trees. Through the review of the subject application, the
developmentconcept was revised in order to preserve some trees(e.g., the
shared, private driveway is now offset from the eastern side lot line to preserve
trees).
TheUDBindicates that thedeveloper will provide appropriate compensation
plantingsfor trees thatare removed. Through the compensation received, the City
would seek to ensurethe community goals of tree cover and shadingare achieved.
The UDB statesfurther,additional coniferous planting will be provided along the
northern edge of the site for increased privacy.Plantings where applied will
emphasize the use of native trees and shrubs and low maintenance perennial
.
3 - 7
e planted at a rate of 1 tree
for every 6 metres along residential property lines, and 1 tree for every 7.5 metres
along the street frontage.
4.Community Comment: Streetscapeconcern that the dwellings closest to
Bridgeport Road will not facethe roadand will be located too close to Bridgeport
Road.
Staff Response:Through the review of the subject application, the requested
zoning and development concept was revised in order to increase the front yard
setbacks from the standard 4.5 metres to 5.9 metres to better align with
neighbouring homes on Bridgeport Road and Lang Cres. andtocreateapleasing
streetscape on Bridgeport Road, including greater landscaped area.
With respect to the design of the single detached dwellings, the Urban Design Brief
states that,attention will be given to lots 7 and 8 as street frontage priority units
to emphasize their street presence at the corner of Bridgeport Road and the
proposed internal private street. These units will be designed to provide an
attractive pres
particular attention will be given to the units facing
Bridgeport Road through the use of subtle design elements that add variation and
visual interest to each of the elevations. Some of these elements include a high
level of glazing to increase visibility to and from the public street, decorative
fenestration, and increased landscaping and lighting that accentuates the built
form and gives p
5.Community Comment: Drainage-concern about stormwater runoff onto adjacent
properties.
Staff Response:Through the site plan process, the site will be designed to ensure
that stormwater runoff will not encroach onto neighbouring properties. Through
the development of the site, it is proposed that stormwater runoff from the majority
of rooftops and grassed areas will be directed to on-site infiltration galleries that
will be sized to capture the 100 year storm event.Stormwater runoff from the
internal site road will be directed to a private storm sewer system and directed into
on-site infiltration gallerieswith a piped overflow into Bridgeport Road.Post-
development stormwater flows will be designed to be attenuated to pre-
development ratesthrough the use of on-site infiltration galleries.
6.Community Comment: Trafficconcern that the proposed development will add
traffic to an already busystreet.
Staff Response:
Master Plan as a Regional Arterial Streetand is currently operating below its
typical annual average daily traffic volume of 20,000 vehicles per day. The traffic
3 - 8
volume generated by the 8 proposed single detached dwellings is negligible and
is not expected to negatively impact the operation of the roadway.
7.Community Comment: Property valuesconcern that surrounding property values
will decrease as a result of the proposed development.
Staff Response:It is difficult for Planning staff to comment accurately on the impact
that a proposed development may have on the value of nearby homes. Staff
understands that MPAC assesses homes based on as many as 200 different
factors ranging from thesize of the dwellingand lot and the location, to the number
of bathrooms and quality of the construction. Market values depend on a host of
preferences. While, Planningstaff recognize that property value may be an
important consideration for residents, it is not a land use planning matter. Planning
staff focuses on whether the development representsgood planning with respect
to the community as a whole.
Planning Analysis:
The requestedZBAand associated development conceptoutlined in the Urban Design Brief
represent theevolutionof theproposal from17 townhousesplus one single detached
dwelling proposal to8 single detached dwellings.Through thepublic consultation process
and with Planning staff direction, the proposal was further refined,resulting in redevelopment
that represents balanced intensification that is appropriateand sensitiveto the
neighbourhood.
The revised development concept proposesdevelopment along the full depth of the property
while providing a unit density that is only 15 percent greater than the properties immediately
to the west, on Lang Cres. The proposal puts an innovative anduniquespin onacommon
housing type, by orienting single detached dwellings towardan internal, private driveway,
rather than a public street,and by proposing condominium tenure.
Planning staff is satisfied that the proposed ZBA andassociatedUrban Design Brief
represent good planning andarein the public interest of the city as a whole.
ALIGNMENT WITH CITY OF KITCHENER STRATEGIC PLAN:
through the delivery of core service.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
No new or additional capital budget requests are associated with these
recommendations.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
INFORM The ZBA was circulated for comment to internal departments, external
agencies, and all property owners within 120 metres of the subject lands on November 2,
2017. Written responses from the communityare attached as Appendix Fand are
3 - 9
addressed in this report. This report will bewebsite with the agenda
in advance of the Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee meeting. A standard notice
sign isposted on the property.
CONSULT A Neighbourhood Information Meeting (NIM) was held at
Church on January 23, 2018. The NIM was attended by approximately18community
members. Minutes of this meeting are attached as Appendix E. Reponses and
comments identified were considered as part of this staff report. All community members
who provided commentor attended the Neighbourhood Information Meeting will be
mailed notice of the Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee meeting, and notice of
the committee meeting will appear in The Record on April18, 2019. Acopy of the Notice
is attached as Appendix C.
CONCLUSION:
Planning staff is of theopinion that the requested Zoning By-law Amendmentand Urban
Design Briefrepresent good planning and arein the public interest. Accordingly, staff
recommends that the application be approved andthe Urban Design Briefbe endorsed.
REVIEWED BY:Della Ross, Manager, Development Review
ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager (Development Services)
ATTACHMENTS:
Appendix A Proposed Zoning By-law including Map No. 1
Appendix B Urban Design Brief
Appendix C Newspaper Notice
Appendix DDepartment and Agency Comments
Appendix E Minutes of Neighbourhood Information Meeting
Appendix F Community Comments
3 - 10
DSD-19-064 - Appendix A
PROPOSED BY LAW
March 12, 2019
BY-LAW NUMBER ___
OF THE
CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER
(Being a by-law to amend By-law 85-1, as amended,
known as the Zoning By-law for the City of Kitchener
WILL-O-HOMES (C.S.) INC.450 Bridgeport Road)
WHEREAS it is deemed expedient to amend By-law 85-1 for the lands specified
above;
NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Corporation of the City of Kitchener
enacts as follows:
1.Schedule Number 80-law Number 85-1 is hereby amended
by changing the zoning applicable to the parcel of land specified and illustrated as
Area 1 on Map No. 1, in the City of Kitchener, attached hereto, fromResidential
Two Zone (R-2)to Residential TwoZone (R-2)with Special Regulation Provision
749R.
2.Schedule Number80of Append-law Number 85-1 ishereby further
amended by incorporating additional zone boundaries as shown on Map No. 1
attached hereto.
3.Appendix -law 85-1 is hereby amended by adding Section749thereto as
follows:
749.Notwithstanding Sections5.12.1 and36.2.1of this By-law, within the lands
zoned Residential TwoZone (R-2), as shown on Schedule 80 of Appendix
being affected by this subsection,a maximum of 8 eight
single detached dwellings shall be permitted on one lot and the following
special regulations shall apply:
a)the Minimum Lot Area shall be 6,600squaremetres;
b)the Minimum Front Yard shall be 5.9 metres;
c)theMaximum FrontYard shall be 9.0 metres;
d)theMinimum Side Yard shall be 3.0 metres;
3 - 11
DSD-19-064 - Appendix A
e)the minimum distance between dwellings shall be 2.4 metres;
f)the minimum setback from a dwelling to an internal, private roadway
granting access to individual dwellings shallbe 6.0 metres.
PASSED at the Council Chambers in the City of Kitchener this ______day of
___________, 2019
_____________________________
Mayor
_____________________________
Clerk
3 - 12
DSD-19-064 - Appendix A
5
8
R
-
4
5
5
9
5
3
82
72
8979
99
99
001
101
92
01
11
2
4
5
3
8
R
6
-
-
8
7
3
R
2
8
T
5
R
A
P
5
R85
751-8
46
5R
8541-R8
5
-
01
9
0
9
4
4
9
1
T
R
A
P
4
8
R
ALP GE
007 N
ER
ALP G
066 N
GER
NALP
066
7
8
7
O
OFX
6 DR
R S
T
E
-
G
P
L
RA
N
86
58R-1247
7
4
5
5
8
R
M
PICINU
LP LA
-987 NA
7
5
0
1
GER
6 NALP
06
GER
NALP
066
6
9
5767-R8585
984-R
1
R
E
G
P
L
A
N
6
7
4
5
8
03
5
7
9
6
-
R
P
1 TRA
8
5
85
4261-R
5
4
7
4
6
4
54
9
OLB
KC
48
6
3
8
3
7
K
1
C
85
876-R
5
ON
L
A
3
BL
9
P
G
4
3
E
2
R
1
85
302-R
0
2
0
3
G1
N
A
L
N
P
I
G
E
T
3R
N
8
R
E
C
K
D
I
C
N
W7
O3
O
2
L
Z
R0
I
B6
4
3
9
6
O
R
1
6
3
F
O
N
6
2
2
P H
I
A
9
R
E
G
L
RP
L
A
3N
P8
T26
6
0
0
S
3
7
G
'3
SCHEDULE 125
SCHEDULE 126
3E1
3
6
1
R
N
A
R
E
LG
P
L
A
P
N
SCHEDULE 79 6 SCHEDULE 80
7
4
5G
8
R
E
E
G
7
P
RL
A
6N
7
9
-
0
58R-1247
R
8
5
7
8
9R
E
G
0
P
L
A
1N
4
6 7
7
4
8
3
1
"
1
A
"
N
R
KE
A
G
P
L
CLA
N
6
7
P4
O
L
G
B
E
R
01
9
4
1
6
7
1
-
R
8
5
1
1
5
1
4
1
3
1
2
1
1
5
8
R
-
1
1
6
1
1
5
8
R
-
9
1
1
6
R
E
G
P
L
A
N
1
1
2
9
R
E
G
P
L
A
N
1
1
2
9
3 - 13
DSD-19-064 - Appendix B
Urban DesignBrief
450 BridgeportRoadEast
Will-O Homes
Kitchener
Zoning By-law Amendment
December2018
3 - 14
DSD-19-064 - Appendix B
Urban DesignBrief
450 Bridgeport RoadEast
Zoning By-law Amendment
Kitchener
December2018
Prepared for:
Will-O Homes
55 Reinhardt Place
PO Box 187, Petersburg, ON
N0B 2H0
Prepared by:
GSP Group Inc.
72 Victoria Street South, Suite 201
Kitchener, ON
N2G 4Y9
3 - 15
DSD-19-064 - Appendix B
Contents
1. Introduction.........................................................................................................................1
1.1 Background...............................................................................................................1
1.2 Purpose and Scope...................................................................................................1
2. Spatial and Contextual Assessment...................................................................................2
2.1 Neighbourhood Context.............................................................................................2
2.2 Block.........................................................................................................................3
2.3 Subject Site...............................................................................................................4
2.4 Circulation.................................................................................................................5
2.5 Built Form..................................................................................................................5
2.6 Streetscape...............................................................................................................7
3. Proposed Development......................................................................................................9
3.1 Development Vision...................................................................................................9
3.2 Project Overview.....................................................................................................10
3.3 Massing and Height.................................................................................................11
3.4 Architectural Expression..........................................................................................13
3.5 Landscape, Stormwater Management and Public Realm........................................13
3.6 Site Servicing and Parking.......................................................................................16
3.7 Sustainability...........................................................................................................16
4. Policy and Design Framework..........................................................................................17
4.1 Kitchener Official Plan.............................................................................................17
4.2 Kitchener Urban Design Manual..............................................................................20
5. Design Guidelines............................................................................................................22
5.1 Site Design..............................................................................................................22
5.2 Built Form................................................................................................................22
5.3 Landscape Design...................................................................................................22
6. Conclusion........................................................................................................................23
Urban Design Brief| 450 Bridgeport Street Easti
GSP Group | October2018
3 - 16
DSD-19-064 - Appendix B
1.Introduction
1.1Background
GSP Groupareconsultants to Will-O Homes Inc.with respect to 450
Bridgeport Road Eastin the City of Kitchener (the proposing the
development of eight single detached dwellings fronting onto a private condominium road
Proposed DevelopmentTo accommodate the Proposed Development, a Zoning
By-law Amendment).
The Record of Pre-submission Consultation,signedApril 11, 2017,identifies anUrban
Design Reportas a complete application requirement. This report should be read in
conjunction with the submitted Planning Justification Reportand other information and
materials submitted as part of the complete application.
The Post-Circulation Letter dated February 23, 2018 identifies that an update to the Urban
Design Brief is required to reflect changes in the Proposed Development that incorporate
comments by the City. This update includes the latest versions of the concept plan,
elevations,renders and addresses updates to the tree management plan and other
details.
1.2Purpose and Scope
Thisreport has been prepared in support of the Proposed Development. A Terms of
Reference for the scope of this Urban Design Brief was prepared and approved by City of
Kitchener Urban Design Staff. This report has been updated accordinglyto reflect
changes to the Proposed Developmentand itcontains:
Aspatial assessmentof thephysical context of the Site;
A description of the design elements of the Proposed Development;
An overview of the relevant urban design policy and regulations, includingOfficial Plan
and Urban Design Manual;and
A set of urban design guidelinesfor the Proposed Development
Urban Design Brief | 450 Bridgeport Street East1
GSP Group | December2018
3 - 17
DSD-19-064 - Appendix B
2.Spatial and Contextual Assessment
2.1NeighbourhoodContext
The Site is locatedwithin the Bridgeport Westneighbourhoodin the northeast portion of
the City of Kitchener, east to the Conestoga Parkway and west of the intersection of
Bridgeport Road and Lancaster Street(see Figure 1).Bridgeport Westis a predominantly
low density neighbourhood with residential, retail, and office uses ranging from one to five
storeys in height. The Grand River is located to the east of the neighbourhood.
In recent years, this section of Kitchenerhas seen significant development,particularly
new office buildings along Riverbend Drive.The urban fabric of Bridgeport West is
irregular,a common characteristicof low density neighbourhoods.There are three
churchespresentin the vicinity of the Site.
Figure 1Site location and context
Urban Design Brief | 450 Bridgeport Street East2
GSP Group | December2018
3 - 18
DSD-19-064 - Appendix B
2.2Block
The Site is located within an irregularly shaped,low density residential blockbounded by
Bridgeport Road East to the south, Lancaster Street West to the east, and Lang Crescent
to the north and west. It is mostly comprised of single detached homes within different lot
sizes(see Figure 2).
Figure 2The city block (orange)bounded by Bridgeport Road, Lancaster Street and Lang Crescent and the Site (red)
Urban Design Brief | 450 Bridgeport Street East3
GSP Group | December2018
3 - 19
DSD-19-064 - Appendix B
2.3 Subject Site
The Siteis municipally known as 450 Bridgeport Road East, and is located north east of
the Conestoga Parkway, west of the intersection of Bridgeport RoadEast and Lancaster
Street West.The Site has approximately 50 metresof frontage along Bridgeport Road
East and itis surrounded by single detached residential lots. It is0.66 hectaresin sizeand
is currently occupied by a single detachedresidencethat connects to the road via a long
driveway(see Figure 3).
The Vegetation Management Plan prepared by GSP Group (August 30 2017, re-issued
August 2 2018) identifies 158 trees within the Site or along its edges. Many of these trees
are coniferous and were planted in close proximity to each other as buffersalong the
north, east and west property boundaries. Additionalconiferous and deciduoustrees are
clustered to the interior of the Site.The Vegetation Management Plan notes that68trees
arein faircondition,usually meaning that trees are alive and do not present noticeable
diseases butthey are starting toshow signs of stress and/or early decline.There are 5
dead trees on the Site, and a total of 10 trees are determined to be in
-
Topographically, there is a slight slope that increases towards the rear of the Site.
Figure 3The Subject Property and immediate context
Urban Design Brief | 450 Bridgeport Street East4
GSP Group | December2018
3 - 20
DSD-19-064 - Appendix B
2.4Circulation
Bridgeport Road East, at the location of the Site, is a Regional Roadand is approximately
15metres wide, with twolanesof vehicular traffic in either direction. There are sidewalks
on the north side of the street.Given the importance of Bridgeport Road Eastas an
arterial road and the proximity to the Conestoga Parkwayexit, the circulation to and from
the Site is expected to continue to beheavily automobilefocused, however, there is an
existing local bus route(#5)that servesthe Siteand will connectwith ION Rapid Transit in
the near future.
2.5Built Form
The surrounding urban fabric is generally comprised oflow density residential uses that
range from 1 to 3 storeys. Immediately adjacent to the Site (west, north and east) are
single detached homes. South of the Site across Bridgeport Road there is a 3-storey
walkup apartment building, 2-storey semi-detached dwellings in addition to 1 and 2 storey
single detached homes.
PhotoNearby semi-detached dwellings reflect the evolving urban form of the neighbourhood
Urban Design Brief | 450 Bridgeport Street East5
GSP Group | December2018
3 - 21
DSD-19-064 - Appendix B
PhotoA three-storey walk up building across the street from the Site
PhotoSingle detached homes with varying lot sizes are predominant in the neighbourhood
Urban Design Brief | 450 Bridgeport Street East6
GSP Group | December2018
3 - 22
DSD-19-064 - Appendix B
2.6Streetscape
The streetscapealong Bridgeport Road East is automobile oriented. There is a sidewalk
only on the north side of the road(interfacing with the Site). There is a significant amount
of vegetation, most of which lies interior to the property lines along the street. Hydro lines
are above ground, and there are no marked pedestrian crossings at any of the
intersections with other nearby streets.
PhotoView of the Bridgeport Road streetscape at the Site
Urban Design Brief | 450 Bridgeport Street East7
GSP Group | December2018
3 - 23
DSD-19-064 - Appendix B
PhotoUrban cross section of Bridgeport Road looking east
PhotoUrban cross section of Bridgeport Road looking west
Urban Design Brief | 450 Bridgeport Street East8
GSP Group | December2018
3 - 24
DSD-19-064 - Appendix B
3.Proposed Development
3.1Development Vision
450 Bridgeport Road East will be a residential cluster of single-detached homes that
respects and complements its surroundings, providing new high quality homes in the
Bridgeport West Neighbourhood.
IllustrationArchitectural precedent for the two-storey homes in the Proposed Development
Urban Design Brief | 450 Bridgeport Street East9
GSP Group | December2018
3 - 25
DSD-19-064 - Appendix B
3.2Project Overview
The Proposed Development consists of 8 single-detached, two-storey dwellingsalong a
private (condominium) streetwitha singleaccess to Bridgeport Road (see Figure 4).
Figure 4Overall concept plan of the Proposed Development
Urban Design Brief | 450 Bridgeport Street East10
GSP Group | December2018
3 - 26
DSD-19-064 - Appendix B
The main characteristics of the Proposed Development are as follows:
Circulation
The Proposed Development accesses Bridgeport Road Eastby a private (condominium)
road, with a sidewalk provided along the west side of the private road.
Lot Pattern
The Proposed Development consists of 8 single detached dwellingswhich will be
registered as a condominium. The condominium approvals will ultimately determine the
individual unit boundaries.
Building Heights
The proposed dwellings willbe up to two storeys in height, similar to that of the
surrounding urban form.
Landscaping
Outdooramenityspace would be provided in the rear yards of the individual lots and
appropriate landscaping will edge property lines and focal points.The updatedConcept
Plan has an increasedfront yardsetback of 5.9 metres, up from 4.5 metres, providing
space for an expandedlandscaped areaand consistentstreet wall to neighbouring
properties along Lang Crescent.A detailed landscaping plan will be prepared at the Site
Plan Stage.
3.3Massing and Height
The Proposed Development is compatible with its surroundings in terms of scale and
massing.At two storeys,the proposed single detached dwellings are similar in height to
those on surrounding properties, and the cluster form of the development provides an
appropriate human scaleandpedestrian realmwithin the Site.
The low rise urban form makes the Proposed Development an appropriate form of
intensification within an existing residential neighbourhood by respecting and blending into
its context (see Figure 5and 6).
Urban Design Brief | 450 Bridgeport Street East11
GSP Group | December2018
3 - 27
DSD-19-064 - Appendix B
Figures 5 & 6Volumetric 3D model showing how the Proposed Development fits with the scale of its surroundings
Urban Design Brief | 450 Bridgeport Street East12
GSP Group | December2018
3 - 28
DSD-19-064 - Appendix B
3.4Architectural Expression
The design of the Proposed Development will be clean and attractive, while taking cues
from the surrounding vernacular that is characteristic of recent low density
neighbourhoods. Each of the elevationswill incorporateneutral façade materialsand
accents, including glass, brick, stone andother high quality and durable materials.The
architectural vision for the Proposed Developmentis intended to beattractivewithout
being visually overpowering.The principal façadeswill featuredefined entrances with the
possibility of including porches or rooftop canopies above.Particular attention will be given
to the units facing Bridgeport Road throughthe use ofsubtle design elements that add
variation and visual interest to each of the elevations.Some of these elements include a
high level of glazing to increase visibility to and from the public street, decorative
fenestration, and increased landscaping and lighting that accentuates the built formand
gives prominence to the street facing façade.
3.5Landscape, Stormwater Management and Public Realm
A detailed landscape plan will be prepared aspart of theSite Plan approval stage.Most of
the landscaping for the Proposed Development will be contained within the private realm
of the individual condominium units (lots), however, the Preliminary Landscape Concept
prepared by GSP Group (Updated November2018) shows that landscaping will be
provided along the eastern edge of the Site and along the Bridgeport RoadEastfrontage.
Due to the removal of existing trees on the Site, compensation plantings will be provided
with appropriate species. Trees will be interspersed along the internal private road, in front
of each of the proposed homes, and along the Bridgeport Road frontage.An armourstone
and retaining wall barrier is proposed at the end of the private street and includes
coniferous trees for screening purposes. Additional coniferous planting will be provided
along the northern edge of the Site for increased privacy. Plantings where applied will
emphasize the use of native trees and shrubs and low maintenance perennial species
(see Figure7).
Urban Design Brief | 450 Bridgeport Street East13
GSP Group | December2018
3 - 29
DSD-19-064 - Appendix B
According to the Stormwater Management Reportprepared by Meritech (June2018),
stormwater managementwill be provided bya total of five infiltration galleries, an
infiltrating storage tank, and inflows into the storage tank will be treated by an oil/grit
separator.In terms of public realm, the Proposed Development will integrate with the
Bridgeport Road East streetscape by providing a sidewalk along the west side of the
internal private street, as well as landscaping along the Bridgeport frontage. Attention will
be given to lots 7 and 8 as street frontage priority unitsto emphasize their street presence
at the corner of Bridgeport Road and the proposed internal private street.These units will
be designed to provide an attractive presence along the public street.An increased
setback of 5.9 metres will be provided to accommodate an expanded landscaped area
along the Bridgeport Road frontageand toprovide a consistent street wall as established
by the immediate property to the west fronting onto Land Crescent.
Urban Design Brief | 450 Bridgeport Street East14
GSP Group | December2018
3 - 30
DSD-19-064 - Appendix B
Figure 7Preliminary Landscape Concept Plan and barrier detail
Urban Design Brief | 450 Bridgeport Street East15
GSP Group | December2018
3 - 31
DSD-19-064 - Appendix B
3.6Site Servicing and Parking
The Proposed Development will be designed to conform to all applicable standards and
guidelines, with a final design to be provided at the Site Plan approval stage. Parking will
be accommodated internally to the Site in the provided garages and driveways to each of
the units. The internalprivate road can accommodate emergency and other service
vehiclesand provides appropriate turning and backing areas.
3.7Sustainability
The Proposed Development is a sustainable form of development by intensifying a lower
density site within the urban area of the City of Kitchener. Providing a sensitive form of
infill development that respects its contextis key to increase the number of people living in
existing built-up areas. This form of intensification promotes a more efficient use of
infrastructure. The proximity of the Proposed Development to the Conestoga Parkway and
a variety of services and amenities, as well as the presence of a bus stop that will connect
to ION Rapid Transit are examples of better utilization of existing and future infrastructure.
The Proposed Development requires almost total removal of existing trees due to
stormwater management, grading and site servicing, however, as per the Vegetation
Management Plan many of these trees are showing signs of decline and were planted in
close proximity to each other. The Landscape Concept shows preliminary locations of new
trees. Replacement trees and other plantings will prioritize native, perennial, drought and
salt tolerant species that require minimum maintenance and water use.
Waterconservation and management will be achieved through appropriate water
infiltration techniques and the use of permeable surfaces, drought tolerant landscaping,
and other features such as water efficient fixtures in each of the dwellings. Other
sustainability related features will be defined at the detailed design stage;these may
include but are not limited to: energy efficient lighting standardsand the selection of
appropriate materials for each of the dwellings.
Urban Design Brief | 450 Bridgeport Street East16
GSP Group | December2018
3 - 32
DSD-19-064 - Appendix B
4.Policy and Design Framework
Much of the planning framework is addressed in detail in the Planning Justification Report
prepared by GSP Group (August2017) and submitted in support of the Proposed
Development. The following subsections of this Report focus on the urban-design related
policies of the planning framework. Each subsection contains a summaryof applicable
design policies and commentary of how the Proposed Development conforms to these
policies.
4.1Kitchener Official Plan
The 2014City of KitchenerOfficial Plan()reflects the policy direction of the
Growth Plan and the Region of Waterloo Official Planwith respect to growth management
to the 2031 planning horizon and contains further policy direction for land use and
development at the localized scale. The following subsections summarize these relevant
planning policies.
Land Use Designation
The Site is designated Low Rise
Residentialin theOP. There are several
urban design related objectives that are
relevant to the Proposed Development.
These include: maintaining liveliness
and livability; promoting high quality
design and architectural excellence;
contributing to vibrancy and safety;
fostering community and neighbourhood
identity; and maintaining a cycling and
pedestrian-friendly environment.
The OP indicates that a high quality of
urban design will be expected. To
support vibrant people spaces it
requires consideration of the quality of the public realm and potential to contribute to
special events, public art and cultural programming. It recognizes sidewalks as a place for
people activity. It encourages place-making initiatives, streetscape improvements,
architectural expression and art.
Urban Design Brief | 450 Bridgeport Street East17
GSP Group | December2018
3 - 33
DSD-19-064 - Appendix B
designation in the 2014 Kitchener Official Plan. Lands designated Low Rise Residential
are tocontributetoBridgeport West
neighbourhoodin an overall low intensity of use, contributing to a mixing and dispersion of
Specifically, the proposed development has a residential density less than25 units per
hectare, has zoning regulations that limit the floor space ratios to a maximum of 0.6, and,
is in keeping with the maximum building height of 3 storeys.
Urban Design Policies
Section 11of theOP contains policies pertaining to Urban Design. It states that Kitchener
will be a city designed for people. The policies are intended to be used to evaluate:
patterns of movement, the relationship between built form and open spaces, integration of
natural and cultural resources and impacts of development.
The policies pertain to aesthetic characteristics, functionality and compatibility of
development. They arecontainedin General policies, Site Design policies and Building
Design, Massing and Scale policies.
Relevant General policies of this section require development applications to: apply Crime
Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles; consider emergency
response including accommodating fire prevention; be designed to be barrier-free
accessible; and provide shade.
Relevant Site Design policies require consideration of relationship of buildings to the
streetscape as well as landscaping to improve the streetscape. The policies require
developments to improve aesthetic quality, be safe, comfortable, functional and provide
circulation for all modes of transportation. Thepoliciesrequire site servicing/utilities to be
screened from view from the public realm,clarity of night time visibility and incorporation of
design mitigation measures to minimize adverse impacts on site, adjacent properties and
the public realm.
Relevant Building Design, Massing and Scale design policies require buildings to relate to
human scale proportions to support a comfortable and attractive public realm. A high
standard of urban design is expected for buildings at priority locations. Policy 11.C.1.33
Urban Design Brief | 450 Bridgeport Street East18
GSP Group | December2018
3 - 34
DSD-19-064 - Appendix B
encourages: attractive building forms, façades and roof designs; complementary design of
new buildings relative to existing buildings and architectural innovation and expression.
More specifically, the Proposed Development is consistent with the policies of Section
11.C.1.33 of the 2014 Kitchener Official Plan related to building design, massing and scale
as per the below.
a) Provision of attractive building forms, façades and roof designs which are compatible
with surrounding buildings;
The Proposed Development takes cues from the surrounding built form pattern. The
detailed design of individual units willconsider the use of material palettes with a large
proportion of brick, visual depth to facadesand variation in roofline heights and details.
b)Infill development to complement existing buildings and contribute to neighbourhood
character, particularly if located within close proximity of a recognized cultural heritage
resource or Heritage Conservation District;
Compatibility with the surrounding Bridgeport Westcommunity will be achieved through a
combination of similar height and masses to the prevailing built form, complementary
architecture and palette of materials consistent with surrounding houses, and fencing and
plantings thatprovide attractive edges to the site abutting residential properties.
c) Minimization of adverse impacts on site, onto adjacent properties (particularly where
sites are adjacent to sensitive land uses) and into the publicrealm through building
design;
Adverse impacts from the Proposed Development are not expected, given the scale and
heightsthat arecontemplated. Thedesign recommendations in this Brief address
considerations for the immediately abutting residential interface in terms of fencing and
planting details for privacy and screening purposes.
d) Individual architectural innovation and expression that reinforces and positively
n design goals and objectives;
The above design recommendations seek an architectural expression that is geared
towards a compatible fit with the surrounding community, as per the considerations in a)
and b) above.
e) The highest standard of building design for buildings located at priority locations, with
particular emphasis on architectural detailing for all façades addressing the public realm.
The Proposed Development will put forward a high standard of building design and
architectural detailing for all buildings on the site. Specifically, the design
recommendations in this Brief identifya particular emphasis onarticulation,fenestration
Urban Design Brief | 450 Bridgeport Street East19
GSP Group | December2018
3 - 35
DSD-19-064 - Appendix B
and other architectural detailsto the front and flanking side elevations of those units facing
BridgeportRoadEastand the internal public street, as well as the incorporation of
entrance doors. This architectural detailing would be complemented by fencing and
planting details that contribute to an attractive street edge.
4.2Kitchener Urban Design Manual
cument that
provides direction onurban design mattersthrough the approval process. The overall
purpose of the UDM is to implement the OPvisioncreate a safe, attractive, stimulating,
accessible, and barrier-free environment in which to live and work. The UDM is
comprised of three components: design guidelines that provide more generaldesign
guidance;design briefs that provide more specific design guidance to particular topics or
areas; and design standards that provide specific guidance on technical details. The
guidance provided by the UDM is intended to be flexible in nature andto account for
particular site conditions or contexts.
The Proposed Development is consistent with the applicable and relevant goals of the
Urban Design Manual as per the below:
Goal: Diverse, attractive, walkable neighbourhoods thatcontribute to complete
communities.
The proposed development would add to the diversity ofthe housing stock in the
Bridgeport Westcommunity withadditional detached dwellings that provide housing
choices an community.
Goal: Site circulation that is safe and functional for all personsand vehicles.
The proposed development provides direct access toBridgeport Road Eastwith a single
access through a private street and sidewalks on the west side of the proposedstreet.
Thereare no functional opportunities for additionalconnections given the existing uses
adjacent onall otheredgesof the Site.
Goal: Site servicing components are functional, attractive andappropriately screened
from public view.
All servicing elements will be contained withinthe individuallots andmeters and
infrastructure will be directed to the sides of the proposed units and screened where
possible.
Urban Design Brief | 450 Bridgeport Street East20
GSP Group | December2018
3 - 36
DSD-19-064 - Appendix B
Goal: Landscaping which enhances each building or projectas well as the streetscape.
Landscaping and planting plans for the proposeddevelopment will be explored at the
detaileddesign stage. Thedesign recommendationsof this Briefidentify key locations for
emphasis, which includesurrounding buildings, along site perimeter boundaries,and
along the Bridgeport RoadEastfrontage.
Goal: Clarity ofnight-time visibility for pedestrians andmotorists and to minimize the
intrusion of light ontoadjacent properties.
Lighting will be provided along the new internal private street per City lighting standards.
Goal: Buildings arranged to create safe, secure and usableinternal spaces.
Buildings are arranged in a standard mannerfordetached dwellings, fronting the internal
street with rearand frontyard amenity areas for individual lots.
Goal: Attractive building forms, facades and roof designswhich are compatible with
surrounding buildings.
Thedesign recommendationsinthe following section ofthis Briefidentify a
complementary architecture and palette of materialsconsistent with surrounding houses
(a varied pattern ofprojections, recessions, fenestration, roofline shapes,and garage
placement; using high proportion ofmasonry materials) as well as fencing and plantings
thatprovide attsabutting residentialproperties.
Goal: Infill development that complements existing buildingsand neighbourhood
character; impacts through buildingdesign.
The Proposed Development will complement thesurrounding neighbourhood character
withsimilar one to two-storey building form; visuallyinteresting articulationwillinclude a
varied pattern of projections, recessions,fenestration, roofline shapes, and garage
placement;and, a palette of materials that follows the prevailingpattern of higher
proportion of glazing and masonry materials.
Urban Design Brief | 450 Bridgeport Street East21
GSP Group | December2018
3 - 37
DSD-19-064 - Appendix B
5.Design Guidelines
The Design Guidelines contained inthis section are intended to be applied at the detailed
design stage and as a guiding document for the Site Planapproval process. The overall
purpose of these guidelines is to ensure development of 450 Bridgeport Road East
demonstrates a high standard ofurban designand makes a direct contribution to the
liveliness and livability ofthe existing neighbourhood. Theseguidelines are not intended to
be prescriptive in nature, rather to express general intent. They are to provide some
flexibility forinterpretation and to allow for innovative ideas and creative solutions at the
detailed design stage.
5.1SiteDesign
Intensify the use of a Site in the built-up area by providing sensitive infill opportunities.
Orient lots as a residential clusteraround an internal private street.
Place 2 lots/dwellings in direct relationship with Bridgeport RoadEastto provide a
focal point and sense of entrance.
5.2Built Form
Ensure that the massing and scale of new homes in the Proposed Development is
compatible with its surroundings in terms of urban form.
Provide architectural design elements that are simple, elegant and contemporary while
taking cues from the surrounding vernacular.
Prioritize dwellings onlots 7 and 8 as street frontage priority units.Ensure that facades
facing Bridgeport Road East -
Ensure a consistent pattern of architectural detailing along all of the new dwellings.
5.3Landscape Design
Ensure that the Bridgeport RoadEastfrontage is attractive by applying decorative
landscapingand a 5.9 metre setback.
Prioritize the use of native tree species and shrubs and other plantings that are
perennial, non-invasive and require minimal maintenance and watering.
Urban Design Brief | 450 Bridgeport Street East22
GSP Group | December2018
3 - 38
DSD-19-064 - Appendix B
6.Conclusion
The Proposed Development offers an opportunity to provide new homes in the Bridgeport
West neighbourhood in a sensitive infillform that respects and complements its
surroundings. The application is seeking a Zoning By-law Amendment so as to allow for
the development which will further contribute to the growth and intensification of the City of
Kitchener. Due to its location, the Site is accessible to a variety of community amenities,
transit infrastructure and residential opportunities. In terms of urban design, the Proposed
Development fits with the general intent of the OfficialPlan and Urban Design Manual by
providing an infill development that enhances the public realm and is compatible with the
scale of the neighbourhood.
Urban Design Brief | 450 Bridgeport Street East23
GSP Group | December2018
3 - 39
DSD-19-064 - Appendix C
Advertised in The Record on April 18, 2019
PROPERTY OWNERS AND INTERESTED PARTIES ARE INVITED
TO ATTEND A PUBLIC MEETING TO DISCUSS
A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE KITCHENER ZONING BY-LAW
UNDER SECTION34OF THE PLANNING ACT
450 Bridgeport Road
The City of Kitchener has received an applicationfor aZoning By-law Amendment toallow the redevelopment of the
property with 8 single detached dwellings. The amendment would change the zoning from Residential Two (R-2) to
Residential Two (R-2) with a site-specificzoning provision that deals withminimum lot area and building setbacks.
Thepublic meeting will be held by the Planning & Strategic InitiativesCommittee, a Committee of Council which deals
with planning matters,on:
MONDAY, MAY 13, 2019at 7:00 P.M.
nd
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 2FLOOR, 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
opposition to, the above noted proposal. If a person or public body would otherwise have an ability to appeal the
decision of the City of Kitchener to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal, but the person or public body does not
make oral submissions at a public meeting or make written submissions to the City of Kitchener prior to
approval/refusal of this proposal, the person or public body is not entitled to appeal the decision.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATIONis available by contacting the staff person noted below, viewing the staff report contained in the
agenda(available approximately 10 days before the meeting -https://calendar.kitchener.ca/council-click on the date in the
th
calendar,scroll down & select meeting), or in person at the Planning Division, 6Floor, 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 - 40
DSD-19-064 - Appendix D
3 - 41
DSD-19-064 - Appendix D
3 - 42
DSD-19-064 - Appendix D
3 - 43
DSD-19-064 - Appendix D
3 - 44
DSD-19-064 - Appendix D
3 - 45
DSD-19-064 - Appendix D
3 - 46
DSD-19-064 - Appendix D
3 - 47
DSD-19-064 - Appendix D
3 - 48
DSD-19-064 - Appendix E
Neighbourhood Information Meeting January 23, 2018
Minutes
450 Bridgeport Road544 Bridgeport Road
ZoneChange Application ZC17/015/B/AP6:30 p.m. -8:00 p.m.
Staff:Andrew Pinnell File Planner
Garett StevensonPlanner/Facilitator
Lenore RossUrban Designer
Siobhan KellyStudent Planner/Minutes
Councilor:Scott Davey (Ward1)
Applicant:Kevin Smith Owner/Applicant
Brandon Flewwelling Consultant
Norm Litchfield Meritech Engineering
Kevin Smith Will O Homes
Garett Made opening remarks and welcomed community members.
Stevenson(City):Introduced Andrew Pinnellas the CityPlannermanagingthe file,
himselfas the Facilitator of the meeting, Siobhan Kellyas the
Planning Student.Advised community members that Siobhanwould
be taking minutes and that information collected is pursuant to the
Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.
Discussed the purpose of the meeting. Introduced CouncilorScott
Davey.Turned discussion over to Andrewto provide background
information on the application.
Andrew PinnellIntroduced himself and provided an overview of the role of the City
(City):planner, the application process,and provided an explanation ofthe
zoning,including permitted uses and regulations for the R-2 zone.
Andrew proceeded by providing background information regarding
the application (including a broad overview of comments received to-
dateand a display of the conceptual site drawing and site
renderings).
Garett Advised of the discussion protocol for the Question and Answer
Stevenson(City):period of the meeting and welcomed community members to provide
comments or ask questions.
1
3 - 49
DSD-19-064 - Appendix E
NeighbourAsked Citywhat the depth is of the proposed backyards for dwellings
(97 Lang 1, 2, and 3. Questioned whether the proposed clearance of trees was
Crescent):appropriate based on the bird species living within the trees (doves
and crows) and voiced concern regarding six vehicles which would
be shinning headlights into the neighbouring properties if the trees
wereremoved.
Andrew Pinnell (City):Depth of the proposed backyards is 25 ft.
Lenore Ross (City): Advised that although most trees are proposed to be
cleared there is a requirement for a preliminary tree
management plan and that the status of trees on the
property will be determined throughout the site plan control
process.
NeighbourAsked if the side of the house for dwellings 7and 8 would be fronting
(97 Lang BridgeportRd.
Crescent):
Andrew Pinnell(City):Advised that the side which would faceonto Bridgeport Rd
would be designed to appear as a front. For example, the
front door would be facingtowardsthe road.
Neighbour(101 Asked the City if theyfelt that they haddone their due diligence in
Lang Crescent): regards to the proposed development. Clarified that new owners who
hadrecently moved into the neighbourhood were not informed of the
development priorto purchasing their properties.
Andrew Pinnell(City):Outlined that the City responds to the request from the
developer and does not monitor real estate. When a
developer has a proposal,the City distributes notifications
and information based on a circulation dimeter. Andrew
apologized to the new home ownerhowever, explained that
perhaps the previous property owners had been notified.
Neighbour(89Identified himself as the new property owner. Asked how storm water
Roberts and debris from construction would be controlled from flowing
Crescent)towards the neighbouring properties.
Andrew Pinnell (City):Clarified that he would be included on the circulation list
andkept informed throughout the application process.
2
3 - 50
DSD-19-064 - Appendix E
Norm Litchfield Interms of the rainwater, the consultants have a number
(Engineer):of criteria that must be met for the City. He clarified that if
eight dwellings are built on the site more storm water would
be generated however; the consultants and developer
must manage the discharge to ensure that the same
amount of water is beingdischarged after construction. He
added that from the work which they had completed across
the street, he knows thatin addition to regular curbs and
the City storm water system,the soils are conducive and
the overflow of rain water would be managed.
Neighbour (101 Lang Asked if storm water management can be guaranteed. If
Crescent)not, is the City willing to compensate?
Norm Litchfield After the completion of construction,the engineers andthe
(Engineer):City review the site to ensure that what was built is
functioning as planned. Through the engineering process,
thereareset of plans which will be prepared, reviewed, and
certified.
Lenore Ross (City):Reiterated the site plan approval process and explained
that there arecriteria which are reviewed by the consultants
and again by the City. The engineers and landscape
architects will verify that the plans are as approved or as
amended. For every plan prepared by the consultants,City
staff will review to ensure that City standards are met. In
addition, Lenore clarified that the City holds securities for
all the projects on that property.
Neighbour(475 Asked if the proposed number of single detached dwellings (8) could
Bridgeport be reduced to 6.Added that the setback for the front two dwellings
Road):is too close in comparison with the setback for the other properties
in the neighbourhood.
Andrew Pinnell (City):Explained that concerns around the setbacks and site
configuration have been noted by City staff and the
applicants.
Neighbour(435 Expressed concerns with the traffic with regardto the existing
Bridgeport Road)congestion on BridgeportRdduring peak hours and the impact an
increase of 16 vehicles will have on pedestrian safety.
Andrew Pinnell(City):Clarified that the road is a regional road. Proposed that he
could have a conversation with the Region about
investigating potential safety measures to assist with safe
pedestrian crossing such as a pedestrian refuge island.
3
3 - 51
DSD-19-064 - Appendix E
NeighbourExpressed concerns with safety. In particular with regard to the
(101 Lang safety of her backyard (located behind the proposed driveway) and
Crescent)the impact of headlights shinning into their home.
Garett Stevenson (City):Requested elaboration regarding the concern for safety
what safety measures are in place?
Neighbour (101 Lang Expressed that her daughter would not be able to play in
Crescent):that area because of its proximity to the driveway.
Neighbour (101 Lang Interjected that a driver could easily mistake the accelerator
Crescent):for the break and that an accident would result.
Andrew Pinnell (City):Explained that where there is a parking area there is a
requirement for a fence. Added that this area would be
considered an aisle and that a fence would be required
however, not along the full length.
NeighbourAsked what will transpire if the owners change their yard landscaping
(73 Lang and it affects storm water runoff. Expressed concerns about the
Crescent):removal of trees considering the pollution generated fromautomotive
congestion in the area.
Andrew Pinnell (City):In respect to the grading question,during the site plan
process grading plans are approved and registered on the
property. If there was an issue with a private owner making
a significate grading change which impacted the
neighbours, the neighbors can come to the cityand look at
the plans and the City could communicate with the property
owner and become a civil manner.
Neighbour (73 Lang Asked for a clarification whether a property owner would
Crescent):require a building permit if they were to make achange to
the approved landscaping of their property.
Andrew Pinnell (City):Explainedthat if the grading changes were significant and
altered the flow of water that the alterationswould have to
comply with theapprovedgrading plans. He added that the
property owners would be subject to the same review
process by the City.
Garett Stevenson (City):Explained the compliance of the approved plan. Provided
a previous example which involved a vacant land condo
where the condominium owner put pressure on the owners
before the City was involved in regards to landscaping
compliance.
4
3 - 52
DSD-19-064 - Appendix E
NeighbourAsked what is allowed with the zone change?
(73 Lang
Crescent):
Andrew Pinnell(City):Outlined that the zoning would be kept the same however,
would permit additional dwellings on the property. Currently
the R-2 designation only allows for single detached
dwellings. The applicant is requesting to have 8 single
detached dwellings. The zone change is a customized
regulation which would allow the applicant to have
additional dwellings on the site however; the zone change
would not add any new permitted uses.
Neighbour (73 Lang Asked if 8 duplexes would be permitted rather than single
Crescent):detached.
Andrew Pinnell (City):If approved, it would be clearly articulated that 8 single
detached dwellings would be permitted in the zoning by-
law.
Neighbour (73 Lang Asked what would happen if the applicant changed their
Crescent):minds in regardto the type of dwellings permitted.
Andrew Pinnell (City):Explained that if the applicant would require going through
the zoning change process again.
NeighbourIn regard to the information which was circulated about the initial
(67 Lang applicant request, were the 22 townhouses considered excessive by
Crescent): theCity.
Andrew Pinnell (City):Outlined that the City had to gain permission from the
applicant to present the information from the pre-
submission consultation to the neighbourhood. The initial
proposed application consisted of three blocks of 17
townhouses. He added, that the details of meeting,
meeting was confidential and that proposal is no longer on
the table.
NeighbourAsked what percentage of the property would be covered by the
(99 Lang proposed developments.
Crescent):
Andrew Pinnell(City):23% building coverage.
5
3 - 53
DSD-19-064 - Appendix E
NeighbourAsked how the applicant intends to preserve the existing
(99 Lang Crescent):trees on the site in addition to the neighbouring trees
considering the span of their roots and the amount of
excavation that will be required on this site.
Lenore Ross(City):Explained how tree management plans are prepared
including the documentation of all trees on the property and
nearby and the conditions for considering the span of the
tree roots.Added that tree protection fencing are required
for all neighbouring trees and that when determining which
trees will be preserved the City places priority on good
quality trees. Clarified that the initial proposal consists of
removing manyof theexisting trees however, this will be
reviewed by the City during the site plan application
process.
Neighbour (99 Asked whether the excavation holes dug for construction will
Lang Crescent):trespass in his backyard.
Garett Stevenson(City):Explained that the applicant cannot encroach on private
property without the permission of the property owners.
Neighbour (59 Asked what the timeline was for the proposed development and in
Lang Crescent):particular, for how long the neighbours would be impacted during
construction.
Kevin Smith (Applicant):Explained that because the proposed development is a
condo, they must finish the exteriors and the site must be
registered in less than a year. However, this does not mean
that each unit will be internally complete within this timeline.
Added that the construction timeline is dependent on the
site plan approval process and weather.
Andrew Pinnell (City):Clarified with the applicant that the site plan process would
begin following the approval ofthe zoning change. Outlined
that the site plan approval process is approximately 9
months and the process for condo approval is
approximately 6 months.
Neighbour (59 Asked if the ownership of the proposed dwellings would be rental.
Lang Crescent):
Kevin Smith (Applicant):The dwellings will be $750,000 homes. Stated that he does
not see them as rental developments.
Neighbour (59 Lang Asked for the square footage of the proposed dwellings.
Crescent):
Kevin Smith (Applicant):25,000 sqft
Neighbour (101 Asked how this development benefits the neighbours and whether
Lang Crescent):the applicant would want this development in his backyard.
Garett Stevenson (City):Clarifies the purpose of the meeting and emphasized the
importance of a productive meeting.
Kevin Smith (Applicant):Responded stating that he does see value in the property.
6
3 - 54
DSD-19-064 - Appendix E
Neighbour (101 Lang Asked the applicant if this development could happen in his
Crescent):backyard.
Kevin Smith (Applicant):Stated that yes, a development of this nature could occur
inhis neighbourhood.
NeighbourAsked the applicant if this development were to happen in
(101 Lang Crescent):his backyard would he want it.
Garett Stevenson (City):Interjected and redirected the question.
Brendon Explained that the zoning standards allow a development
Fiewwellingto be there and that the applicant has heard from the city to
(Consultant):increase the set back during the pre-consultation however,
at the current moment all the zoning requirements are met.
Added that the applicant will be exploring the concerns that
have been raised tonight including increased setbacks and
tee protection. Added that that this is the first design based
on the zoning parameters. He then emphasized that no
decisions are made tonight.
Kevin Smith In regards to the concerns surrounding safety and lighting,
(Applicant):a solution would be toconstruct a 4 foot retaining wall
which wouldbe landscaped to scale the size of the wall.
Neighbour (101 Lang Asked where the retaining wall would be located.
Crescent):
Kevin Smith (Applicant):Explained that the retaining wall would be constructed
where it is appropriate and feasible to do so.
Neighbour (101 Lang Expressed concern surrounding the landscaping of the
Crescent):retaining wall and that it would be an eyesore.
Kevin Smith (Applicant):Explained that there would be landscaping on both sides of
the retaining wall to screen its appearance.
Garett Stevenson (City):Clarified that decisions are not being made tonight and that
the applicant is not required to present solutions to the
concerns presented. Added that the meeting is an
opportunity to voice concerns so that the City can take the
comments and includethem in the application review.
Neighbour (101 Lang Stated that she did not attend the meeting for a discussion
Crescent):and that the neighbours would like to have an idea of what
is being planned. She added that it is fair to have some of
their questions answered in the meeting.
Garett Stevenson (City):Explains that the concerns and questions raised tonight
would beincorporatedwith their respective answers in
staff report.
Neighbour (99 Expressed his appreciation for themeeting however, emphasized
Lang Crescent):the devastation felt by the neighbours.
Neighbour (101 Expressed that the City is a corporation and suggested that City
Lang Crescent):Council will look at this development as an investment and an
opportunity to make money.
7
3 - 55
DSD-19-064 - Appendix E
Andrew Pinnell (City):Stated that his experience with the City Council was that
they take the concerns of the nighbourhood seriously and
are working inthe interest of the neighbourhood.
(Councilor):Explainedthat the City councilors are the representatives
for the residents and that they are intending to find a
solution for what the residents want and what the
developers want. He added, that if the application is not
approved the developer has an independent body the
OMB.
Neighbour (101 Lang Added that the appeal process works both ways and that if
Crescent):City Council approves the application, the neighbours can
also go to the OMB and file a claim.
Garette Asked if there were any additional questions that have not been
Stevenson (City):addressed yet.
Neighbour (103 Asked whether site elevations have been looked at in relation to their
Lang Crescent):impact on flooding.
Andrew Pinnell (City):Explained that site elevations in addition to the site plan
details and application requirements will be prepared and
reviewed at a later stage.
Neighbour (103 Lang Clarified his initial question and asked whether the
Crescent):applicant has a preliminary site plan withthe intention of
changing the elevation of that property.
Kevin Smith (Applicant):Explained that there is a conceptual plan and provided
further description of the process of determining where and
how much earth grading will be required.He added that
these specifications would determine the location and type
of the dwellings on the grade.
Neighbour (103 Asked how the residents can view these preliminary plans.
Lang Crescent):
Garett Stevenson (City):Explains that at the pre-submission consultation the City
outlines the studies that the applicantis required to
undertakeand that City staff will review those studiesand
the plans prepared.
Norm Litchfield Explained that the applicant has to match how much water
(Engineering):go into the municipal sewer system and that none of that
water is permitted to go onto neighbouringproperties. He
added that the City certifies that the grading is correct and
that thedeveloper receivessecurities untilthe work is
completed as planned.
Garett Stevenson (City):Explained that storm water management criteria and
standards have evolved and that new developments have
to meet the 2018 standards. Considering this, any new
storm water mitigation measures which would be added to
the site would be an improvement.
8
3 - 56
DSD-19-064 - Appendix E
Garett Thanked the community members for participating in the process
Stevenson (City):and briefly outlined the next steps. Asked that any additional
comments or concerned to be directed to Andrew.
9
3 - 57
DSD-19-064 - Appendix F
3 - 58
DSD-19-064 - Appendix F
3 - 59
DSD-19-064 - Appendix F
3 - 60
DSD-19-064 - Appendix F
3 - 61
DSD-19-064 - Appendix F
3 - 62
DSD-19-064 - Appendix F
3 - 63
DSD-19-064 - Appendix F
3 - 64
DSD-19-064 - Appendix F
3 - 65
DSD-19-064 - Appendix F
3 - 66
REPORT TO:Planning and Strategic InitiativesCommittee
DATE OF MEETING:May 13, 2019
SUBMITTED BY:Alain Pinard,Director of Planning,519-741-2200 ext. 7319
PREPARED BY:Craig Dumart,Junior Planner,519-741-2200 ext. 7073
WARDINVOLVED:Ward 4
DATE OF REPORT:April 9, 2019
REPORT NO.:DSD-19-095
SUBJECT:ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATION
ZC18/008/N/CD
730 New Dundee Road
Principia Development Ltd.
______________________________________________________________________
Location Map: 730 New Dundee Road
RECOMMENDATION:
A.That Zoning By-law Amendmentapplication ZC18/008/N/CDfor Principia Development
Ltd.requesting tochangethe zoningfrom Agriculture Zone (A-1) to Convenience
CommercialZone(C-1)with Special Use Provision 477U, Special Regulation
Provision 751Rand Holding Provisions87H and 25HSRon the parcel of land
specified and illustrated on Map No. 1, be approved in the form shown in the
-April 9,2019, attached to Report DSD-19-095as Appendix
A;And
B.That in accordance with Planning Act Regulation 45 (1.3 & 1.4) that applications for
minor variances shall be permitted for lands subject to Zoning By-law Amendment
Application ZC18/008/N/CD.
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
4 - 1
REPORT:
Summary of Proposal
The subject lands are located at 730 New Dundee Road near the intersection of Dodge Drive
and New Dundee Road.The surrounding neighbourhoodconsistsof single detached dwellings
located behind the subject lands on Blair Creek Drivenorth of the property and a single
detached dwelling to the west of the property,astorm water management facility is located
directly beside the subject propertyto the eastand alarge residential care facility islocated to
the south east of the subject property. 730 New Dundee Roadis currentlydeveloped with atwo
storeysingle detached dwelling. The owner is proposing to rezone the lands from Agriculture
Zone (A-1) to Convenience Commercial Zone (C-1) with Special Use Provision 477U, Special
Regulation Provision 751R to allow the neighbourhoodscale commercial uses as permitted
uses. Holding provisions for the clearance ofanarcheological assessment study(87H)and full
water services (25HSR) will apply.
Proposed Zoning Summary:
Convenience Commercial Zone (C-1)
Rezone the subject lands from Agriculture Zone (A-1) to Convenience Commercial
Zone (C-1). This new zoning would permit neighbourhood scale commercial uses.
Specifically;Convenience Retail, Dwelling Unit, Financial Establishment, Health Office,
andPersonal Services.
Special Use Provision 477U
Site specific uses tobe added to the subject lands topermit Health Clinic, Veterinary
Services and Office as permitted uses.Further, the site specific regulation prohibits a
restaurant and gas par as permitted uses.
Special Regulation Provision 751R
Site specific regulationsto permit : Maximum gross leasable space for an Office shall
not exceed 170 square metres (approximate size of the largest unit)
Maximum gross leasable commercial space for a Convenience Retail Outlet shall not
exceed 300 square metres for a single convenience retail outlet; and
Location and Maximum Floor Area criteria for Health Office Use shall not apply.
Holding Provision 87H
No development shall be permitted on the subject lands until an archeological
assessment study is fully completed and clearance of the study is provided by the
Region of Waterloo.
Holding Provision 25HSR
No development shall be permitted on the subject lands until full water services are
available for the subject property.
Policy Conformity
Provincial Policy Statement
The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) provides the policy foundation for regulating the
development and use of land in the Province. The PPS promotes healthy, liveable and safe
4 - 2
communities by accommodating an appropriate range and mix of residential, employment
(including commercial uses), recreational and open spaceuses to meet long-term need of its
residents. Specifically, the followingpolicies provide directionto support the Zoning By-law
Amendment.
Policy 1.1.1: Healthy, livable and safe communities are sustained by:
a) promoting efficient development and land use patterns which sustain the financial well-being
of the Province and municipalities over the long term;
b) accommodatingan appropriate range and mix of residential (including second units,
affordable housing and housing for older persons), employment (including industrial and
commercial), institutional (including places of worship, cemeteries and long-term care homes),
recreation, park and open space, and other uses to meet long term needs;
Policy 1.7.1: -term economic prosperity should be supported by:
Planning staff is of the opinion that the existing zoning on the property isnotconsistent with the
Provincial Policy Statement.
Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposedusesrequested by the Zoning By-law
Amendmentareconsistent with the Provincial Policy Statement.
2017 Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe
Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. The Growth Plan promotes development that
contributes to complete communities and supports active transportation. The proposal complies
with the policies of the Growth Plan.
Regional Official Plan
Regional Official Plan. The proposal conforms to the policies of this plan. Through the review of
the application, the Region of Waterloo has identified the need to finalizean archeological
assessment. Regional staff supports the adoption of the zoning bylaw subject to use of a
holding provision to secure the completion of such study,to the satisfaction of the Regional
Municipality of Waterloo, prior to lifting of tThe existing zoning does not conformtothe
Regional Official Plan. The proposed zoning conforms to the Regional Official Plan.
City of Kitchener Official Plan
Urban Structure
planned function of Community Areas is to provide for residential uses as well as non-residential
supporting uses intended to serve the immediate residential areas.
Official Plan
Low Rise ResidentialOfficial Plan.
The predominant land use in the Low Rise Residential District is residential, but it is intended to
4 - 3
accommodate, encourage and mix non-residential uses in residential areas at a scale and in
locations appropriate to an area of low rise housing.
The Low Rise Residential designationpermits small scale commercial uses such as
clinics, educational establishments (excluding secondary schools), religious institutions, small
and large residential care facilities, restaurants in plazas, social service establishments, studios,
veterinary services, service stations and car washes may be permitted where they are
considered to be compatible with Low Rise Residential development and subject to any specific
locational criteria.
The subject lands havealways been intended for development as the lands are designated Low
The current zoning of the subject lands (Agriculture
Zone, A-1) does not comply with the Official Plan. Theproposed Zoning By-law Amendmentwill
comply with the Official Plan.
Planning Analysis
The subject property is designated Low Rise Residential in the OfficialPlan.The applicant is
proposing to rezone the subject lands from Agriculture Zone (A-1) to Convenience Commercial
Zone (C-1) with Special Use Provision 477U, Special Regulation Provision 751R to allow
nieghourood scale commercial uses as permitted uses.Holding provisions for the completionof
an archeological assessment study (87H) and full water services (25HSR) will apply.
The proposed zoning will allow the owner to develop a neighbourhood scale commercial
building that would serve the surrounding neighbourhoodand community.The owner intends to
develop a one storey,578 square metre(approximately 6221 square feet) commercial building.
The building proposes to include four commercialunits in total,ranging from 129.5 square
metres (1400 square feet) to 170 square metres (1800 square feet).
The proposed uses, location and scaleof the proposed commercial development are
appropriate and will contribute towards a complete community.The neighbourhood scale
commercial uses, Office, Health Office, Personal Services, Convenience Retail (such as a
pharmacy), and Financial Establishment, typicallyoperate 9am -5pm week day primarily. The
proposed zoning will prohibit arestaurant use which will minimize the hours the commercial
building will be open.
The building is proposed to be located 8.5 metres (28 ft) setback from the rear property line and
10.5 metre (34 feet) from the westerly residential property which will allow for adequate tree
plantings additional to a required 1.8 metre visual barrier to furtherscreen the commercial
building from adjacent residential properties. Parking will be located at the side and mainly in
front of the building to have less impact on adjacent residential lands.The site plan process will
address site function including lighting, landscaping, safety, servicingand the potential for a trail
connection between the commercial buildingand theadjacent residential subdivision to allow
residents to walk to the neighbourhood commercial building.
The proposed zoning will allow for an appropriate rangeof commercial uses alongNewDundee
Road(a Regional,Arterial Road). The proposed use is at a scale that is compatible with the
existing neighbourhood. Furthermore, the proposed zoning will allow the property to align with
its Official Plan designation.
4 - 4
In considering the foregoing, Staff is supportive of the proposed Zoning By-law amendment.
Rezoning the subject lands will reflect the general character of the neighbourhood and provides
a transitional use for the residential uses located behind the subject property.
The proposed Zoning By-law Amendment is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement,
Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, and the Regional Official Plan. The proposed
Staff is of the opinionthat the
proposed Zoning Bylaw Amendment represents good planning.
In considering the foregoing, Staff is recommending the approval of the Zoning By-law
Amendmentapplication.See Appendix A.
ALIGNMENT WITH CITY OF KITCHENER STRATEGIC PLAN:
The
through the delivery of core service.
AGENCY COMMENTS:
Commenting agencies and City departments have noconcerns with the proposed Zoning By-
law amendment.The City of Kitchener Engineering Department supports this zone change with
the inclusion of a holding provision.A holding provision for municipal water servicing to the
satisfaction of the City of Kitchener along with a holding provision for the completion of an
archeological assessment, to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo has been
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
INFORM and CONSULT The Application was circulated to City departments, commenting
agencies and property owners within 120 metres of the subject landson October 16,2018as
per Planning Act requirements. A copy of all department/agency comments are attached as
Csadvising of the Zoning
By-law Amendmentapplication.
in advance of the committee meeting.
Written responses from property owners and interested parties are attached as
Following the submission of written responses from residents/property owners,Planning staff
held a NeighbourhoodInformation Meeting on February 28, 2019 to discuss the proposaland
address concerns raised byresidents/property owners.
Through written comments and discussion at the Neighbourhood Information Meeting common
themes were identified. Staff responseto the following identified issues are as follows:
(1)Traffic Concerns:
Residents identified traffic and access a concern. As New Dundee Road is a Regional Road,
the Region of Waterloo provided a written response to address concerns:
Safe Access:As a condition of approval for a future site plan application, the applicant
will be required to ensure that the proposed access complies with the Regional Access
Policy i.e. width and radii.
4 - 5
New Dundee Road Reconstruction:New Dundee Road (Regional Road12) has been
identified for widening and road reconstruction including cycling facility and sidewalk in
2025 (with EA to commence in 2021).
Traffic Study:
In/Out in AM /PM peak hour. The trip generation from the proposed development at the
above location would generate approximately 12 trips In/Out in AM /PM peak hour.The
size of the development is too small to require any traffic study.
The Current two lane road can handle approximately 900 vehicles per hour, per
direction.
(2) Noise/ Visual Impacts:
Residents raisedconcerns with noise, visual and social impacts withtheproposed
development, specifically a restaurant being a permitted use in the proposed C-1 zone.
The property owner agreed that a restaurant use may be a nuisance tothesurrounding
residents/property owners and the proposed zoning will prohibit restaurant as a
permitted use.
Safety, specifically concernabout activity at the rear of the building will be addressed
through the site plan review.
A Visual Barrier is also required and will be reviewed during the site plan process.
Where in any zone a visual barrier is required to be provided and maintained, such
barrier shall act as a screen between uses and be constructed to a minimum height of
1.8metres and shall consist of the following: a) a wall, fence; or b) trees or shrubs
(provided however that there is a reserved width of planting that is appropriate for
healthy plant growth so that the vegetation achieves a minimum height of 1.8 metres and
is continuously unpierced within 3 years of planting); or c) earth berms; or d) any
combination of the above.
(3) Tree Retention:
Residents identified tree retention as a concern. In response staff provided the following
comments:
Tree retention willbe reviewed during the site plan process.Staff will make every effort
to ensure the ownerretains as many trees as possible on site.
The proposed building will be setback 8.5 metres (28 feet) from the rear property line
which will allow for adequate tree plantings additional to the required visual barrier to
further screen the commercial building from adjacent residential properties.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
No new or additional capital budget requests are expected withthis recommendation.
COMMUNICATIONS:
Notice of the May 13, 2019public meeting of the Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee will
be advertised in The Record onApril 18, 2019. The newspaper notice is attached as Appendix
4 - 6
Community Engagement Strategy. The notice will also be posted on the City of Kitchener
website at www.kitchener.ca.
CONCLUSION:
Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposed Zoning By-law amendmentdemonstrates good
planning principles, and is consistent and actually resultsin compliance with the Official Plan
designation on the subject lands and is appropriate for the surrounding neighbourhood.Staff
therefore recommends approval of the Zoning By-law amendmentas outlined in the
Recommendation section of this report.
REVIEWED BY:Della Ross, Manager, Development Review
ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager (Development Services)
Attachments
Appendix A -Proposed Zoning By-law
Appendix B-Newspaper Notice
Appendix C-Department/Agency Comments
Appendix DResident/Property OwnerComments
4 - 7
DSD-19-095 - Appendix A
PROPOSED BY LAW
April 9, 2019
BY-LAW NUMBER ___
OF THE
CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER
(Being a by-law to amend By-law 85-1, as amended,
known as the Zoning By-law for the City of Kitchener
-Vladimir Sestan -730 New Dundee Road)
WHEREAS it is deemed expedient to amend Zoning By-law 85-1;
NOW THEREFORE the Council of The Corporation of the City of Kitchener
enacts as follows:
1.Schedule Number 250-law 85-1 is hereby amended by
changingthe zoning applicable to the parcel of land specified and illustrated as
Area1 on Map No. 1,in the City of Kitchener,attached hereto, from Agricultural
Zone (A-1)toConvenience Commercial Zone (C-1) with Special Use Provision
477U, Special Regulation Provision 751R,and Holding Provisions 87H and
25HSR.
2.Schedule Number-law Number 85-1 is hereby further
amended by incorporating additional zone boundaries as shown on Map No. 1
attached hereto.
3.-law 85-1 is hereby amended by adding Section 477Uthereto
as follows:
477.Notwithstanding Section 7.1of this By-law, within the lands shown
on Schedule Number 250usesshall
also be permitted:
i)Health Clinic, Veterinary Services and Officein accordance
with the regulations in Section 7.2.
4 - 8
DSD-19-095 - Appendix A
Further, the following uses shall not be permitted:
i)Restaurant, Gas Bar.
4.-law 85-1 is hereby amended by adding Section 751R thereto
as follows:
751. Notwithstanding Section 7.2of this By-law, within the lands shown on
Schedule Number 250
regulations shall apply:
i)Themaximum gross leasable space for an Office shall not
exceed 170 square metres.
ii)The maximum gross leasable commercial space for a
Convenience Retail Outlet shall not exceed 300 square
metres for a single convenience retail outlet; and
iii)Thelocation and maximum floor area criteria for Health Office
Use shall not apply.
5.-law 85-1 is hereby amended by adding Section 87H thereto
as follows:
87.Notwithstanding Section 7of thisBy-law, within the lands zoned
C-1asshown as affected by this subsection on ScheduleNumber
250, nodevelopmentshall be permitted until such
time as the City of Kitchener is in receipt of a letter from the Regional
have been satisfied with respect to the submission and clearance of
an Archeological Assessment, and this Holding Provision has been
removed by By-law
6.-law 85-1 is hereby amended by adding Section 25HSR thereto
as follows:
25.Notwithstanding Section 7of this By-law, within the lands zoned
C-1,shown as affected by this subsection on Schedule Number 250
4 - 9
DSD-19-095 - Appendix A
,theholding provision represented by the letter
symbols K (W) as established in Section 3.5.7 shall apply so that
no building permits will be issued until such time as there is adequate
water services available to the lands
PASSED at the Council Chambers in the City of Kitchener this day of
, 2019.
_____________________________
Mayor
_____________________________
Clerk
4 - 10
DSD-19-095 - Appendix A
Schedule252
Schedule250
2
T
R
A
P
4
1
T
R
AP
KCOLB
501
4 - 11
DSD-19-095 - Appendix B
PROPERTY OWNERS AND INTERESTED PARTIES ARE INVITED
TO ATTEND A PUBLIC MEETING TO DISCUSS
A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE KITCHENER ZONING BY-LAW
UNDER THE SECTION 34 OF THE PLANNING ACT
730 New Dundee Road
The owner is proposing a Zoning By-law amendment to rezone the lands from Agriculture One Zone (A-1) to Convenience
CommercialZone (C-1)withsite specificregulations.The site specific regulationswill permitOffice,HealthClinic,and
veterinary services, and will prohibit a gas bar and restaurant as uses.
Thepublicmeetingwill be heldbythePlanning&StrategicInitiatives Committee,aCommitteeofCouncilwhich deals
with planningmatters on:
MONDAY, May 13,2019at 7:00 P.M.
nd
COUNCIL CHAMBERS,2FLOOR,CITYHALL
200 KING STREETWEST, KITCHENER.
Any personmayattend thepublic meeting and make written and/or verbalrepresentation eitherin supportof, or in opposition
to, the above noted proposal. If a person or public body would otherwise have an ability to appeal the decision of the
Cityof Kitchener to the Local PlanningAppealTribunal,butthe personor publicbodydoes not make oral
submissions at a public meeting or make written submissions to the City of Kitchener prior to approval/refusal of
this proposal,the person or public body is not entitled to appeal the decision.
ADDITIONALINFORMATIONisavailablebycontactingthestaffpersonnotedbelow,viewingthereportcontainedinthe
meeting agenda (posted 10 days beforethemeeting atwww.kitchener.ca-click onthe dateinthe CalendarofEvents and
th
select the 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).
Craig Dumart,JuniorPlanner - 519-741-2200 x7073(TTY:1-866-969-9994);craig.dumart@kitchener.ca
4 - 12
DSD-19-095 - Appendix C
4 - 13
DSD-19-095 - Appendix C
4 - 14
DSD-19-095 - Appendix C
4 - 15
DSD-19-095 - Appendix C
4 - 16
DSD-19-095 - Appendix C
4 - 17
DSD-19-095 - Appendix C
4 - 18
DSD-19-095 - Appendix C
4 - 19
DSD-19-095 - Appendix C
4 - 20
4 - 21
4 - 22
4 - 23
4 - 24
4 - 25
4 - 26
4 - 27
4 - 28
4 - 29
4 - 30
4 - 31
4 - 32
4 - 33
4 - 34
4 - 35
4 - 36
4 - 37
4 - 38
4 - 39
4 - 40
4 - 41
4 - 42
4 - 43
4 - 44
4 - 45
REPORT TO:Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee
DATE OF MEETING:May 13, 2019
SUBMITTED BY:Justin Readman, General Manager,519-741-2200 ext. 7646
PREPARED BY:Margaret Love, Manager of Service Coordination & Improvement,519-
741-2200 ext. 7042
WARD (S) INVOLVED:All
DATE OF REPORT:April 25, 2019
REPORT NO.:DSD-19-096
SUBJECT:Development Services Review Update
___________________________________________________________________________
RECOMMENDATION: That the proposed shared vision for the development services
review be approved; and further,
That the site plan and public engagement processes be prioritized for review, as outlined
in Report DSD-19-096.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Detailed Planning phase for the Development Services review began in October 2018 and
will conclude at the end ofMay 2019 at which point, the Collaborative Delivery phase will
commence.
The Collaborative Deliveryphase(June 2019 May 2020)will include a detailed review of (i)
the full site planprocessand (ii) public engagement processes, the development of a process
improvement strategy,and a recommendation report to Council.
The purpose of this report is to present Council with the results from the Detailed Planning phase:
Establishment of a Shared Vision for Economic Growth, City Building, Sustainability and
Development Interests
The scope for the first-year detailed review period(June 2019 May 2020)
Environmental Scanresults
A summary of engagement activitiesto-date
BACKGROUND:
In September 2017, Dan Chapman shared five priorities that he would be pursuing in his first
hief Administrative Officer (CAO). One of those priorities involved
undertaking an organizational review toensure that organizational structure supports
strategies and vision. As a result of this review, like-functions were aligned strategically
and the Development Services Department was created and includes five divisions: Building,
Economic Development, Engineering, Planning,andTransportation Services.
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
5 - 1
In parallelto the organizational review,preliminary workbeganon developing a high-level scope
for thedevelopment servicesreview. The purpose of the development services reviewis to look
at how development functionsinteract and are coordinated, and to identify if that coordination
can be improvedin a way that results in clearer accountability, stronger collaboration, and
ultimately an even better customer experience.Five objectives were identified for thereview:
1.Establish a Shared Vision for Economic Growth, City Building, Sustainability, and
Development Interests
2.Align Work Processes to Support the Development Services Vision
3.Enhance Team Building, Collaboration and Creative Problem Solving
4.Take a Coordinated Approach to Development
5.Communicate Clearly and Effectively
The development services review is currently nearing the end of the Detailed Planningphase,
as identified in the project timeline that is depicted in Figure 1, and will be entering the
Collaborative Deliveryphase in June 2019.
Figure 1.Project Life Cycle for the Development Services Review
REPORT:
outcomes of the development services review and/or those with the ability to influence
the outcomes
5 - 2
Using this definition, key stakeholdergroupsinclude: staff, the development community, the
broader Kitchener community and Council. An overview of all stakeholder engagement activities
completed to-date for the development services reviewisprovidedin the Community
Engagement section of this report.
Establishing a Shared Vision
In November 2018, stakeholderswere engagedthrough the process ofcreating a shared vision.
This staff report summarizes details from this process, while the full summary report is included
as Attachment A.
One of thefirst priorities for the new Development Services Department was to undertake a
more detailed review of selected development functions to bring a greater focus, coordination
and accountability to the delivery of development-related services.
It is essential that stakeholders are working towards common goals and understand how their
contributions support the delivery of development services, as there are a number of
disciplines involvedwho may represent functions with competing interests at times.
This report delivers on one of the first objectives of the development services review by
proposing a shared vision between all stakeholder groups --Council, staff, the broader
Kitchener community,and development community --for economic growth, city building,
sustainability, and development interests.
The goal in establishing a shared vision is to achieve broad alignment across all stakeholder
groups. Once established, all future process improvement recommendations in development
services will be aligned to, and reviewed against, the shared vision. The shared visioning
framework proposed in this report has six components: a vision statement, a mission, values,
commitments, goals, and stakeholder actions.
The vision statementis intended to provide a description of where we want the community
to be as a result of our contributions in development services. The goal of a vision
statement is to be inspiring, purpose-driven, future-focused, and memorable.
The missionis intended to be a short statement that describes our goals and philosophies.
The valuesrepresent our core, shared values that are foundational to delivering on our
vision.
The shared commitmentsare aligned to each value and are intended to describe how we
as stakeholders in development services processes commit to working together.
The goalsrepresent key areas within each commitment that each stakeholder group will
work to implement.
5 - 3
Finally, the stakeholder actionsrepresent specific steps that will be taken by each
stakeholder group to implement their goals. These actions will be identified through a
detailed review of selected development services processes, beginning in June 2019.
Figure 2 depicts the stakeholders who were involved in establishing the shared vision, while the
attached report detailsthe key themes that emerged from each stakeholder group, as well as
the final recommendations for the vision.
It is important to note that the Project Steering Committee identifiedearly in the Detailed Planning
phasethat the objective of establishing a shared vision was not about rewriting/redefining
existing policies or plansfor how the City will grow/develop. Rather, the purposeof establishing
a sharedvision is to articulate how stakeholders will collectively work togetherto build a great
citywithinthe existing policy framework.
/ƚƩƦƚƩğƷĻ
\[ĻğķĻƩƭŷźƦ
Ļğƒ
{ƷĻĻƩźƓŭ
{ƷğŅŅ
/ƚƒƒźƷƷĻĻ
Shared
Vision
5ĻǝĻƌƚƦƒĻƓƷ
/ƚǒƓĭźƌ
/ƚƒƒǒƓźƷǤ
.ƩƚğķĻƩ
YźƷĭŷĻƓĻƩ
/ƚƒƒǒƓźƷǤ
Figure 2: Stakeholder groups who participated indeveloping a shared vision
With existing strategies, plans and policiesin mind, staff drafted a shared vision as the first step
in this process.Both a Corporate Leadership Team(CLT)half-day Strategy Session (January
2019) and aCouncil Strategy Session (March 2019) were used to fine-tunethis body of work
prior tosharing with the community and development community for their feedback.
A total of three community focus groups and two developer drop-in sessions(March/April 2019)
were hosted by staff and Councillors across the City of Kitchener to collect feedback on
development services, present and obtain feedback on the
5 - 4
draft vision as well as discuss priorities for the first year of the review.The final vision is
presented in Figure 3, below, while the evolution of the shared visionisdescribedindetail in
Attachment A.
Figure 3: Final Shared Vision
Moving forward, all future process improvement recommendations willbe aligned to, and
reviewed against, the shared vision.
Scope of Development Services Reviewfirst-year review period
In October and November 2018, various stakeholders including the Mayor, Councillors, staff,
community members, local businesses, architects, builders, consultants, developers, agencies,
utilities, neighbourhood associations, and advisory committee members were engaged through
surveys and interviews to:
5 - 5
Understand their expectations of the review;
Identify what they needed from the review; and
Identify how the City may bring the greatest impact and improvements to development
services processes.
We heard from stakeholders that processes are too long, complicated, duplicative, difficult to
navigate, and paper-intensive, with too much energy being spent on trying to navigate the
process/parties involved.We also heard that confused and frustrated customers can be atime
drain on staff resources,as they need to triagecalls, emails and in-person visitsto assist them.
In additionto these concerns, this engagement was instrumental in identifying the two priority
areas for the first-year review period: the site plan process and broader, public engagement
processes within development services.These two focus areaswere confirmed with Council
through a strategy session in March 2019. Subsequent to the strategy session, stakeholders
were invited to share their ideas for how to improve site plan and public engagement through
Engage Kitchener, focus-groups and drop-in sessions(March/April 2019). Ideas will continue to
besolicited on Engage Kitchener until May 31, 2019 and will be carried forward for consideration
as part of the detailed review, as appropriate.
The opportunities for improvement within site plan and public engagementwere also reinforced
through the results of theCustomer Service Review (2019) and the CommunityEngagement
Review (2017), respectively.This will be discussed further in the following report sections.
SITE PLAN PROCESS
Review methodology: Lean
Lean methodologies focus oncreating more value for customerswhile
existing processes. Aleanorganization understands customervalue and focuses its key
processes to continuously increase it. The ultimate goal is to provide perfect value to the
customerthrough a perfect value creationprocessthat has zero waste.
Leanmethodologies are rooted in creating effective and efficient processes. Methodologies use
-up approach (stakeholders identify
challenges and solutions) so that time/effort can be focused on value-added tasks.
There are 3 types of site plan applications:
Full Site Plan:Projects such as a new building or structure, major additions or building
renovations or a commercial parking facility.
Stamp Plan A:Projects such as minor additions to an existing building, street fronting
townhouses and temporary sales centres fall under this category.
Stamp Plan B:Projects that either already have an approved site plan, or include lands
covered by a development/site plan agreement that's already registered against title.
At a minimum, the FullSite Plan Processwill be reviewed using Lean methodologies.
5 - 6
Strongalignment exists between theengagement feedback received for the development
services reviewandthe themes/focus areas resulting from theCustomer ServiceReview(e.g.
service-first culture, easy processes, convenient tools, clear standards, empathetic staff). In
priorityfor delivering on process improvements.Theproject team willendeavor to address the
following within the full site plan process review:
Table 2. Opportunities to Streamline the Customer Experience in the Site Plan Process
Shared ValuesPotential OpportunitiesDesiredOutcomes
Leadershipand
Review overall file management (e.g.Seamless processes
Accountability
queueing, liaison, hand-offs, issues
resolution, etc.)perspective
Explore opportunities to encourageNumber of
accurate/complete submissionsresubmissions
reduced
Review the appropriateness / justification
forrequirements at various stagesReduction in
throughout the application processunnecessary
paperwork,
Review the appropriateness of
documents
requirements based on the scale and
complexity of a projectReduction in number
of trips to City Hall, or
-
locations within City
Review checklists and templates to ensure
Hall
/
identify those that should be created
Review opportunities to expand remote
access to services (e.g. online application
submissions, drawing reviews, payments,
etc.)
Evaluate the merit of developing a different
process model for different types of
applicants (e.g. less experienced vs.
experienced)
Evaluate the merit of developing a different
process based on the scale and complexity
of an application
Evaluate the merit of a file concierge
service model
Communication
Create and share process mapsInformed customers
Establish and sharetimelines for keyProcess clarity
process milestones (macro-level)
Predictability:
Provide regular status updatesCustomers better
able to properly
Well-communicated standards
5 - 7
Shared ValuesPotential OpportunitiesDesiredOutcomes
schedule their
Coordinate departmental / agency
projects
comments(resolving inconsistencies, as
needed, and prior to meeting with theFewer submissions;
applicant)quicker approvals
Consistent acknowledgement of receipt of
submissions
applicant
Communication received from one staff
member (e.g. file liaison), with consistent
messaging (i.e. avoid introducing new
nd
requirements on 2and subsequent
resubmissionsdue to multiple staff
reviewing a file)
Commitmenton review timeframes
Returnemail/phone calls in alignment with
Corporate standards
Collaboration
Ensure processes are solutions-orientedOpen, thoughtful,
and collaborativesolutions-oriented
approach to problem
Review alignment of priorities/policies
solving
across development servicesfunctions
Ensuring meetings
Be forthcoming with alternative solutions
are appropriately
that the City is willing to consider
timed and meaningful
Review/clarify roles and responsibilities
for participants
Review the purpose/objectives of existing
Clarity with respect to
meeting formats/requirements to ensure
how individual
they are meeting their intended need/
stakeholders can
identify those that should be created
contribute to the
Respect
Review the waywe deliver services to theProcesses developed
customer:
o Attitudeexperiencein mind
o Judgement/Flexibility
Customer may not
o Professionalism
always be right, but
o Convenience
they are always
o Empathy / Understanding
important
Help the customer
navigate processes
and compliance with
standards
5 - 8
Out of scope for the site plan review:
Zoning by-law, Minor Variance and Official Plan amendment processes:establishing the
land use is a precursor for site plan application approval. These amendments will be
identified as a possibility in the site plan value stream mapping, however, the process will
not be mapped in detail.
Appeal process by applicant:site plans have not historically been appealed by the
applicant; therefore, the value of mapping this process is not justified at this time. The
opportunity for an applicant to file an appeal as part of the site plan process will be
identified in the site plan value stream mapping, however, the process will not be mapped
in detail.
Building Permit process:this process wasidentified as an area of strength within the
-related services and, as such, isnot identified as a priority area for
the first year review period.While some building-related processeswill be identified in the
site plan value stream mapping, the process will not be mapped in its entirety.
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT
Review methodology: A combination of Lean methodologies, customer satisfaction,and end-
user analysis
Public engagement processeswill be reviewedbroadly across Development Services to
encourage innovative approaches to engagement while ensuring consistency and
alignment in theapproach.
As discussed earlier in this report, the process improvement opportunities identified through
consultation with stakeholders as part of the development services review Detailed Planning
phase were confirmed and reinforced through the results of two recent City-led reviews: the
Customer Service Review (2019) and the Community Engagement Review (2017).This
consistency is reassuring and solidifies the importance of the identified focus areas for the
development services review (site plan and public engagement).In January 2017, Council
resolved thatthe recommendations contained in the Community Engagement Review be
approved by Council(refer to Report # CAO-17-001). Potential opportunities to align to, and
deliver on, the Community Engagement Review recommendations are identified below.
Through alignment of theengagement resultsto the Community Engagement Review(2017),
the project team willendeavor to address the following within the review of public engagement
processesin development services:
Table 3. Opportunities to Streamline the CustomerExperience in Public Engagement Processes
Shared ValuesPotential OpportunitiesDesired Outcomes
Leadership and
Identifyopportunities to engage in moreMeaningful,
Accountability
meaningful waysand begin to develop ainclusive
1
toolkitfor stakeholders to successfullyengagement
5 - 9
Shared ValuesPotential OpportunitiesDesired Outcomes
implement community engagement
Outcomes of
initiatives.
engagement are
Look for opportunities to engageshared
using new models
Identifythe objectives of
engagement in consistent and
understandable ways
Explore new ways to follow-upafter
engagement (e.g. what was heard,
how it is being used, next steps)
Review the timing of engagement
Communication
Create a guide for communityCreate a
2
engagementspecific to developmentdevelopment
servicesservices approach
to public
Articulateand shareinformation about
engagement
active development applicationsin
consistentand visual waysUnderstandroles /
responsibilities in
Improve access to information on the
engagement
(e.g. navigation content)
Enhanced access
Review the merits of expanding the
to information
legislated buffer distance for public
noticesEliminatetechnical
jargon
Develop new formats and styles of
sharing informationin presentations,Develop a brand for
reportsand public notices, for example:development
o Remove technical jargon, increaseservices signage/
visuals, ensure the informationnotices
being shared is easy to understand
Use story-telling
o Develop a City of Kitchener
methods to help
development services brand in
stakeholders
collaboration with the Ci
understand
3
Corporate Communications Team
Look for new opportunities for sharing
information and story-telling
Collaboration
Identify opportunities forgreaterBuild bridges
connectivity and information sharingbetween
between neighbourhood/communitystakeholders and
4
groups, council, staff,and developersincrease
opportunities for
Identify opportunities to leverage
information-sharing
community engagement expertisecross-
5
departmentally(e.g. explore cross-Capitalize on
departmental engagement teams)existing expertise /
strengths
5 - 10
Shared ValuesPotential OpportunitiesDesired Outcomes
Respect
Identify staff training needs, asEquip staff
6
appropriate
1
existing Community Engagement Toolkit, to provide a resource for staff and other stakeholders
who lead community engagement activities.
2
Developing a guide forcommunity engagement is recommendation #14 from the Community
Engagement Review.
3
Engage Kitchener brand. The work proposed as part of the development services review would
align toand build on this current body of work.
4
Recommendations #4 and #6from the Community Engagement Review propose developing
a strategy to create partnershipswith the community and Councilto broaden community
engagement.
5
Recommendation #2 from the Community Engagement Review supports the creation of an
internal community engagement working group to build expertise, foster collaboration, assist in
the development of tools, templates and training and share lessons to fostercontinuous
improvement.
6
Recommendation #5 from the Community Engagement Review proposes the development of
a staff training program to support community engagement.
Schedule for Development Services Review first-year review period:
Two priority areashave been identified for the first-year review period of the development
services review: (i) site planprocessand (ii) public engagementprocesses across development
services. The anticipated macro-level schedule is shown below:
Site Plan Review:June 2019 December 2019(Lean methodologies)
Public Engagement Review:June 2019 December 2019 (Lean methodologies) and January
2020 May 2020 (Customer satisfaction and end-user analysis)
The public engagement review start-date is subject to change and may partially overlap with the
Site Plan review.
Environmental Scan
An environmental scan is a review of current and anticipated internal and external factors that
o
minimize threats.
5 - 11
As part of the Detailed Planning phase, the project team completedseveral environmental
scanning exercises.In a March 2019 report to Council (Report # DSD-19-048),staff committed
to providing an overview of a variety of Environmental Scanning exercises.A summary is
providedbelow.
Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats (SWOT)
Project team members
strengths-weaknesses-opportunities-threats(S-W-O-T) analysis. Key outcomes from the
analysis are highlighted in Figure 4, below. Overall, CLT identified that the development services
department isentering the review from a position of strength in terms of people. While there
was recognition that staff have developed good processes(e.g. two-stage site plan approval
process), opportunities to improve were also identified. A desirefor staffto be creative, innovate,
and leadwas evident to CLT, and the development services review is an opportunity to engage
in positive change.
{ƷƩĻƓŭƷŷƭĻğƉƓĻƭƭĻƭhƦƦƚƩƷǒƓźƷźĻƭŷƩĻğƷƭ
Our peopleProactiveNew organizationalOn-going Provincial
communicationstructurechanges to legislation
Staff expertise
(quick roll-out;
Story-telling / bigAccountability from
Strong policy
workflow
picture branding / PRCLT
acumen
disruptions)
Citizen-focusedEstablishing a shared
Positive
Increasing
engagementvision
development
construction costs v.
interactionsClarity around theCollaborative /
affordable housing
purpose of, and rolessolutions-oriented
Quality design
Gentrification of the
in, engagementapproach to
Desire to innovate
downtown
problem-solving
Access to online
(break-down silos)Greenfield land
information / tools
supply
Engaged industry
Moving goal posts
and public
File management
Embedding
Lack of agile work
sustainability
environment
principles
throughout workflow
Applying Lean
methodoogies /
process
improvement
Figure 4. Summary of Strengths-Weaknesses-Opportunities-Threats(SWOT)Analysis
Previous review of the site plan process (2010)
Several meetingswere coordinated withproject leaders from a previous site plan review (2010)
to discuss what should/couldbe leveraged from the previous project and key lessons learned.
The following points represent several highlights from these discussions.
5 - 12
Leverage:process maps;revisit the recommendations from the previous project
Barriers to implementing the recommendations: cost of implementation, ownership of
processes, resource and training supports; and,
Lessons learned from the project: ensure staff are engaged early and that they lead the
change, including final recommendations andimplementation; ensure there are sufficient
implementation supports (training, resources, etc.); ensure the project team shadows
existing processes; share key messages more than once; create a communication
network for sharing information; look at processesthrough multiple stakeholder lenses;
communicate what will defines project success.
The knowledge gained from these meetings will help to orient and position the development
services review project team to achieve successful outcomesfrom the current review. The
development services review will differ from the previous review in several key ways:
The 2017 Organizational review led to the creationof the development services
department, grouping like development functionsunder the leadership of one general
manager;
Leadership Team (CLT);
There is support and accountability for the success of this project in the development
services senior management team(SMT);
A continuous improvement culture has been developed across all City departments;
The development services review is internally-led and supported by subject matter
experts where necessary, resulting in accountability and follow-through;
Clear roles/accountabilities will be established throughout the term of the project; and
A change management plan will be developed and implemented.
Continuous Improvement initiatives currently underway that will improve the site plan process
In additionto the development services review, there are a number of continuous improvement
initiatives that are currently underway to improve city processes, which will result in improvement
to the site plan process:
Staff are working with industry representativesto streamline financial processes (e.g.
letter of credit and plan review fees);
Staff are working to increase the usage and functionality of AMANDA (e.g. integrate
Region and GRCA; launch a public portal);
Staff have started to scope a project for digitalplan review;
Staff are evaluating online payment options at a corporate level;and,
Staff are undertaking a comprehensive update to the Urban Design Manual which will
clarify expectations for site development.
Interviews with General Managers of development-related servicesin othermunicipalities
Beginning in December 2018, project team members began contactingthe General Managers
(or equivalent position) of 17 municipalities across Ontario to ask about their vision for building
a future-ready city, what they are doing well, and what their top priorities are for improving their
development-related services.While only fourmunicipalities have responded to the request for
5 - 13
an interview (Burlington, Oakville, Cambridge,and Milton),and information was obtainedonline
for another (Brampton),the project team gleaned valuable insight from this exercise.Highlights
are identified below:
Afuture-ready cityincludes:a mix of housing choices;atransit strategy;access to jobs;
aplan to address climate change; digital transformation; and,and enhanced services.
Recent service improvement success storiesinclude:escalating files to a manager
after 2+ reviews;consolidating securities (used to have to go to different departments);
one point of contact;implementing
joint-agency working meetings to resolve issues prior to providing comments to
developers;creating an urban design review panel; and,introducing a multi-stream
approach to site plansbased on complexity.
Actions that applicants can taketo make processes as smooth as possible, include:
pre-consultingearly in the process; following-through on requirements resulting from the
pre-consultation process to ensure complete, quality submissions; keeping an open line
s point-person; providingwritten responses for how
comments have been addressed;andidentifying revisions in resubmissions.
In terms of top priorities for streamlining development processes,municipalities
identified: creating service delivery teams for projects; providing more services online;
creating strong terms of reference for studies/reports; ensuring there is good break-out
spaces for agile, collaborative problem-solving;and, implementing new processes better
tailored to the complexity of an application (e.g. site plan).
Recent changes to community engagement include: assigning a dedicated planner to
evening walks with citizens
where they identify what they like and value in a neighbourhood/city; shifting engagement
to where people are (e.g. malls, hockey games, streets, parks); creating user-friendly,
clickable maps with all project-related info from pre-approval to approval; requiring
developers to hold neighbourhood meetings as part of the pre-consultation process
(applicant runs the meeting, staff attend); developing a 3-stage meeting approach (a
neighbourhood meeting before application is submitted, a staff-led statutory meeting, then
a recommendation meeting);hosting periodic meetings with neighbourhood associations
platforms for real-time comments and engagement; mailing notices to all property owners
within 240 metres of a subject property; and, developing more visual, user-friendly written
notices, property signs and report formats.
The project team will continue to explore how other municipalities are adapting and changingto
resolve commondevelopment serviceschallenges, while recognizing thatsomeprocess
improvements inother municipalities may not be appropriate for the City of Kitchener (i.e. it is
rarelyanapples-to-applescomparison).
ALIGNMENT WITH CITY OF KITCHENER STRATEGIC PLAN:
Strategic Theme:Effective and Efficient Government
5 - 14
Strategy: 5.2 Improve the design and delivery of city services so that they provide what
citizens want in the most reliable, convenient and cost efficient way.
StrategicProject:CS74 Development Services Review
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Capital budget has been allocated to this project in both 2018 and 2019 for the purpose of
undertaking the review.Any unused budget in 2019 will carry over into 2020.There is no
additional funding requested at this time.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
During the detailed planning process for the development services review, over 250
stakeholders were engaged through a variety of methods, including:
Mayor and Council through group or individual interviews, a Council strategy session, and
community workshops
Over 100 staff through one-on-one interviews, an online survey and staff workshops
30 citizens through one-on-one interviews and an online survey
26citizens through three community workshops
34 members of the development community through one-on-one interviews and an online
survey
15 members of the development community through two drop-in sessions
Eightorganizations (e.g. Region of Waterloo, utilities, government organizations)through
interviews and an online survey
Sevencommittees(Economic Development Advisory Committee, Committee of
Adjustment, Cycling and Trails Advisory Committee, Downtown Action and Advisory
Committee, Environmental Committee, Heritage Kitchener, Arts & Culture Advisory
Committee)
25people engaged on Engage Kitchener through surveys, general comments and ideas
boards
A timeline of key engagement activities is shown in Figure 5, below.The primary goal in
engaging stakeholders was to ensure quality of data, not quantity.
5 - 15
Figure 5: Snapshot of key engagement activities
Additional internal and external stakeholder engagement will take place when reviewing the site
plan process and public engagement processes (part of the Collaborative Delivery phase).
The Engage Kitchener platform has been used to engage internal and external stakeholders in
the following ways:
o Share project updates
o Provide information on upcoming workshops
o Providestakeholders with an opportunity to provide general comments on the
development services review
o Provide stakeholders with an opportunity to post ideason the priority areas for the
development services review
o Obtain feedback from stakeholders on engagement initiatives
The platform will be used throughout the life cycle of the project to engage stakeholders and
share project information.
INFORM
This staff
council / committee meeting.
5 - 16
Internal and external stakeholders were informed of opportunities to engage in the
website, Engage Kitchener, print form (cards at the front counters of engineering,
planning, building, transportation, economic development), Council-supported outreach,
targeted invitations, emails to neighbourhood associations, and advisory committee
meetings.
A stakeholder Engagement Reportwasshared with internal and external stakeholders
(February/March 2019)
Project informationwasshared through the launch of a public-facing Engage Kitchener
project page (March 2019)
An engagement report waspreparedand distributed, summarizing the outcomes of the
March/April 2019 Community and Development Community engagement sessions (April
2019)
CONSULT
Consulted withthe City of Kitchener Corporate Management, Corporate Leadership
Team and Senior Management Team
Internal and external stakeholders were consulted through one-on-one interviews and an
online survey.
COLLABORATE
Three staff workshops were held to draft a shared vision for all development services
stakeholders
Sixpublic engagement sessions were plannedin both the community (based on ward
groupings) and development community.The purpose of these sessions was to obtain
feedback on the draft,shared vision for all development services stakeholders and to
receive input on the priority areas for the development services review (site plan and
public engagement). In total, five sessionswere delivered, as there was no attendance at
one of the community sessions.
PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION OF THIS MATTER:
th
DSD-19-048March 4Council Strategy Session
Description: Council input on the Development Services Review was obtained during astrategy
sessionon March 4, 2019. Specifically, Council was asked to provide input ona draftshared
visioning framework for all development services stakeholders as well asthe priority areas for
the first year review period(site plan and public engagement).
CONCLUSION:
Processes that do not form part of the first-year review period will be considered as part of an
on-going body of continuous improvement work.
It is important to note that, where appropriate, process improvements identified as a result of
these reviews could potentially be transferred to other similar processes (as an example there
5 - 17
are hand-off procedures in subdivision planning that are the sameas site plan, so an
improvement in one area would translate to the other).
A foundation for a continuous improvement culture in development services will be built
throughout this project. The development services review will create a framework, knowledge
base (i.e. through trained, Lean Green Belt-designated staff), and build momentum for an on-
going body of continuous improvement workin development services.
NEXT STEPS:
Initiate first-year detailed review (June 2019 May 2020)
Implementation/Sustainment (Aug 2019 onward)
Project Closure (Aug 2020); Implementation may be on-going
ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A Consultant Report on Final Recommendations for Shared Vision
5 - 18
Attachment A
Consultant Report on Final Recommendations for Shared Vision
5 - 19
City of Kitchener
Development Services
Review
Establishing a Shared Vision:
Summary and Recommendations
Prepared jointly by LURA Consulting and the
City of Kitchener
April 2019
5 - 20
Our Shared Vision
Vision Statement: A city for everyone
Mission: Working together • Growing thoughtfully • Building Community
Values: Leadership, Collaboration, Communication, Accountability, and Respect
Commitments:
Leadership - We will commit to shaping a great community that is
caring, vibrant and innovative
Collaboration - We will foster a helpful, flexible, solutions-oriented
approach to working together
Communication - We will communicate clearly, thoughtfully, and
transparently with each other
Accountability - We will follow-up, follow-through and make
decisions with the best interests of the broader community in mind
Respect - We will respect each other’s knowledge, experience and
perspectives
-Council, Staff, Community, Development Community
2
5 - 21
ESTABLISHING A SHARED VISION
Vision / Values / Final vision
BackgroundGoalsNext Steps
MissionCommitment s Framework
Introduction
Following a comprehensive organizational review in 2017, the Development Services
Department was created in April 2018, bringing together Planning, Engineering,
Building, Transportation and Economic Development in order to facilitate better
coordination in the delivery of development services to the community.
One of the first priorities for the new Development Services Department was to
undertake a more detailed review of selected development functions to bring a greater
focus, coordination and accountability to the delivery of development-related services.
It is essential that stakeholders are working towards common goals and understand
how their contributions support what we are trying to achieve within the city – especially
since there are a number of disciplines involved in the delivery of development services
who may represent functions with competing interests at times.
This report delivers on one of the first objectives of the development services review by
proposing a shared vision between all stakeholder groups -- Council, staff, the
community and development community -- for economic growth, city building,
sustainability, and development interests.
The goal in establishing a shared vision is to achieve broad alignment across all
stakeholder groups. Once established, all future process improvement
recommendations in development services will be aligned to, and reviewed against, the
shared vision. The shared visioning framework proposed in this report has six
components: a vision statement, a mission, values, commitments, goals, and
stakeholder actions.
The vision statement is intended to provide a description of where we want the
community to be as a result of our contributions in development services. The goal
of avision statement is to be inspiring, purpose-driven, future-focused,and
memorable.
“Establishing a shared vision is
The mission is intended to be a short
important because, in the end, we
statement that describes our goals and
allwant a community that we are
philosophies.
proud to say we helped shape and
The values represent our core, shared
develop.”
values that are foundational to delivering
-Development Community Member
on our vision.
The shared commitments are aligned to
each value and are intended to describe how we as stakeholders in development
services processes commit to working together.
The goals represent key areas within each commitment that each stakeholder group
will work to implement.
3
5 - 22
ESTABLISHING A SHARED VISION
Vision / Values / Final vision
BackgroundGoalsNext Steps
MissionCommitment s Framework
Finally, the stakeholder actions represent specific steps that will be taken by each
stakeholder group to implement their goals. These actions will be identified through
a detailed review of selected development services processes, beginning in June
2019. Actions will serve as a “living list” and may be amended as needed to deliver
on the vision.
This report will detail who was involved throughout the visioning process; how they
contributed to the shared vision; as well as present the final recommendations based on
feedback from all stakeholders involved.
Our Process
Between October 2018 andApril 2019, the City undertook a variety of engagement
activities with staff, City Council, and external stakeholders through interviews, surveys,
workshops, strategic sessions, focus groups and drop-in sessions to hear what people
had to say about what is working well in development services, what needs to be
improved and how to work together to achieve positive change.
Stakeholder Surveys and Interviews
In October and November 2018, over 180
stakeholders including the Mayor,
Councillors, staff, community members,
local businesses, architects, builders,
consultants, developers, agencies, utilities,
neighbourhood associations,and advisory
committee members were engaged
through surveys and interviews to:
Understand their expectations of the
review;
Identify what they needed from the
review; and
Identify how the City may bring the greatest impact and improvements to
development services processes.
Staff Workshops
As a new department coming together, over 70 Development Services staff were
engaged early in the review in order to reflect and define their new identity as a team. A
4
5 - 23
ESTABLISHING A SHARED VISION
Vision / Values / Final vision
BackgroundGoalsNext Steps
MissionCommitment s Framework
total of three workshops engaged staff from Planning, Engineering, Building,
Transportation, Economic Development, and Parks Design and Development teamsto:
Reflect on each division’s purpose and value to the City;
Identify the City’s current reality;
Identify shared values and principles; and
Develop draft shared vision statements and commitments.
Council Strategy Session
Following the staff workshops, consultation expanded outwards. At a strategy session,
City Council and the Mayor were presented with the draft shared vision, values, and
commitments for feedback in advance of external stakeholder consultation.
External StakeholderEngagement
Both community members and the development community were engaged in the project
planning phase for the Development Services Review.
Community Focus Groups
A total of three community focus groups were hosted by staff and Councillors across
the City of Kitchener to collect feedback on participants’ past experience with
Development Services, present the draftshared vision statements, values and
commitments for feedback, identify actions in support of the commitments, as well
as discuss priorities for the first year of the review. Feedback was collected through
facilitator note-taking and optional participant workbooks.
Development Community Drop-In Sessions
Two drop-in sessions were hosted to give members of the development community
an opportunity to provide feedback on the draft shared vision statements, valuesand
commitments, identify actions in support of the commitments, as well as discuss
priorities for the first year of the review.Feedback was collected throughpublic
engagement boards and optional participant workbooks.
5
5 - 24
ESTABLISHING A SHARED VISION
Vision / Values / Final vision
BackgroundGoalsNext Steps
MissionCommitment s Framework
What We Heard
The vision statements and commitmentshave undergone consultation with City staff,
Councillors, the Mayor,members of the community, and members of the development
community. Thesections below outlinethe key themes emerging from the feedback
from each stakeholder group. This feedback hasinformed the final recommendations
for the shared vision.
Vision Statement
Staff Contributions
At the January 2019 workshop, staff were asked to draft vision statements by
answering the question “What will we promise to contribute so that our community
benefits?” They reflected on quality and consistency of services, stakeholder
engagement, timelines, and the benefits of sustainability, innovation, integration and
providing great quality of life.
The activity resulted in 10 draft vision statements. Keyingredients from the draft
vision statements included:
High-quality service“Articulating a shared vision will help
us keep our eye on the big picture and
Community
hold us accountable to one another.”
Leadership
Innovation
-City Staff Member
Communication/engagement
The 10 vision statements were narrowed down to three by staff, and refined to
produce the following working draft vision statements:
1.Working together to build a community we share
2.Growing today to benefit tomorrow
3.Together we will bring our best to make Kitchener the best
Mayorand Councillor Contributions
At the Council Strategy Session in March 2019, Councillors and the Mayor were
asked to reflect on the draft vision statements developed through the staff workshop.
Their initial responses to the draft vision statements are summarized in Figure 1
below. Over half of the participants indicated that Vision Statement 2 did not
resonate with them (63%). A total of half of the participants indicated that they like
Vision Statement 3, but Vision Statement 1 was also a favorite, with over 50% of
participants ranking it as good or better (51%).
6
5 - 25
ESTABLISHING A SHARED VISION
Vision / Values / Final vision
BackgroundGoalsNext Steps
MissionCommitment s Framework
Mayor and Councillor Rating of Draft Vision Statements
100%
I like it!
13%13%
90%
13%
80%
Good, but missing
50%
70%
something.
38%13%
60%
On the right track.
50%
13%
40%
25%
Has potential, but
63%
30%
needs a lot of work.
Percentage of Participants
20%
38%
25%
Does not resonate
10%
with me.
0%
Vision Statement 1Vision Statement 2Vision Statement 3
Figure 1: Mayor and Councillor Rating of Draft Vision Statements
Feedback on the first and third draft statements was positive, and the second
statement was revised based on Council’s recommendations. Table 1 below
summarizes key points from the discussion.
Comment Vision Statement 1: Vision Statement 3:
Category Working together Vision Statement 2:Together we will
to build a Growing today to bring our best to
community we benefit tomorrow make Kitchener the
share best
Likes
“Community”
“Together”
“Tomorrow” is Aspirational
“Community”
future-focused
Proposed
Remove “Benefit” –
Changes
unclear who benefitsRemove repetition
Change “working
of “best”
Propose: “through a
together” to
thoughtful,Clarify “the best” of
“collaborative”
collaborativewhat?
process”
Table 1: Mayor and Councillor Comments on the Draft Vision Statements
7
5 - 26
ESTABLISHING A SHARED VISION
Vision / Values / Final vision
BackgroundGoalsNext Steps
MissionCommitment s Framework
After consulting Council, the draft vision statements that were thenpresented for public
feedback were as follows:
1.Working together to build a community we share
2.Building community through a thoughtful, collaborative process
3.Together we will bring our best to make Kitchener the best
Community Contributions
At the community focus groups in March and April 2019, participants were asked to
rate the draft vision statements on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 representing “it does not
resonate with me”, and 5 representing “I like it!”. The graph below summarizes the
response from community members on their reaction to the vision statements. Most
participants liked the second vision statement (39%), but both vision statements 1
and 2 had 61% of participants rating the statement as good or better. Vision
statement 3 was the least popular, with 39% of participants indicating it did not
resonate with them.
Community Rating of Draft Vision Statements
100%
6%
I like it!
17%6%
90%
39%
80%
22%
Good, but missing
70%
something.
44%
60%
On the right track.
28%
50%
22%
40%
Has potential, but
30%
needs a lot of work.
22%
28%
20%
39%
Percentage of Participants
Does not resonate
11%
10%
with me.
11%
6%
0%
Vision Statement 1Vision Statement 2Vision Statement 3
Figure 2: Community Rating of the Draft Vision Statements
8
5 - 27
ESTABLISHING A SHARED VISION
Vision / Values / Final vision
BackgroundGoalsNext Steps
MissionCommitment s Framework
Participants were also asked what they liked, and what they would change about each
vision statement. Their feedback is summarized in Table 2.
Comment Vision Statement 3:
Vision Statement 1: Vision Statement 2:
Category Together we will
Working together to Building community
bring our best to
build a community through a thoughtful,
make Kitchener the
we share collaborative process
best
Process-based
Descriptive and
“Share” implies
process-based
Likes*
sharing
“Thoughtful” implies
responsibility
Includes name of
involving
the City
“Working
community
together”
Strong elements
Good use of key
Resonates
words
Missing “together”
Proposed
Best is subjective –
Explore otherCombination of
Changes
unclear what it
words for “build”statements 1 & 2?
means
Describe theAdd growing
Outcome-based -
community wethoughtfully
does not resonate
are building
Balance needs
with community
Table 2: Community feedback on the Draft Vision Statements
Community members expressed strong opinions that, while there were elements about
the proposed statements that they like,a vision statement needs to be less about city
processes and more about “creating a city for everyone by everyone”. As author Jane
Jacobs famously stated “Cities have the capability of providing something for
everybody, only because, and only when, they are created by everybody.”
9
5 - 28
ESTABLISHING A SHARED VISION
Vision / Values / Final vision
BackgroundGoalsNext Steps
MissionCommitment s Framework
Development Community Contributions
At thedrop-in sessionsin March 2019, attendeeswere also asked to rate the draft
vision statements. Figure 3 summarizes the response from developers on their
reaction to the vision statements. Most participants liked the third vision statement
(36%), but vision statement 1 was the most popular, with 92% of participants rating
the statement as good or better. Vision statement 2 was the least popular of the
three.
Development Community Rating of Draft Vision Statements
100%
I like it!
17%
90%
33%
36%
80%
Good, but missing
70%
something.
60%
18%
50%
On the right
75%
track.
40%
58%
30%
Has potential, but
45%
20%
needs a lot of
Percentage of Participants
work.
10%
8%8%
0%
Vision Statement 1Vision Statement 2Vision Statement 3
Figure 3: Development Community rating of the Draft Vision Statements
Participants were also asked what they liked, and what they would change about
each vision statement. Their feedback is summarized in Table 3.
Comment Vision Statement 3:
Vision Statement 1: Vision Statement 2:
Category Together we will
Working together to Building community
bring our best to
build a community through a thoughtful,
make Kitchener the
we sharecollaborative process
best
Likes
ToneTone
Tone
Working together“Together”
Proposed
Changes
What kind of
Building what kind of
community?
community?
No feedback
Share for what
Be descriptive
purposes?
Table 3: Development Community comments on the Draft Vision Statements
10
5 - 29
ESTABLISHING A SHARED VISION
Vision / Values / Final vision
BackgroundGoalsNext Steps
MissionCommitment s Framework
The Final Vision Statement
After reviewing the contributions of all stakeholders, it was determined that it would
be more appropriate to develop both a vision and mission statement.
Vision statements should be unique, memorable, future-focused, specific and clear,
and relevant to all stakeholders. With this in mind, and taking into account the
feedback that we heard from our diverse stakeholder groups, we saw one common,
overarching theme emerge: to build a city that is for everyone. This is in alignment
with feedback obtained through the development of the City’s new strategic plan. As
the City continues to grow and develop, it’s important that it does so for all of our
residents. As such, the final vision statement for development services is:
Vision Statement: A city for everyone
The Final Mission Statement
The missionis intended to be a memorable statement that describes our goals and
philosophies – what we aspire to become.
We started by reviewing elements from“Working together to build a community
we share”, which was viewed most positively by all stakeholder groups.
This statement was used as a foundation for the mission, and was adapted in
response to comments provided by stakeholders throughout the consultation
process. Three elements were included in the mission statement:
Maintained “working together” because it implies a shared responsibility,
collaboration, and inclusion.
Added “growing thoughtfully" as stakeholders acknowledged that the City
is growing and changing. It brought to mind the physical, structural elements
of what makes a community, and while that is a core aspect of development,
it is also much more than that – growing a great city requires a thoughtful
process (e.g. good design, regard for sustainability and climate change,
consideration of neighbourhoods, affordable housing, a vibrant and diverse
economy, etc.)
Changed “build a community we share” to “building community”as a
pillar of our mission. Building community is about people. Stakeholders
identified that they would be proud to live in a communitywhere our focus
was on our citizens. This may be reflected through inclusive engagement,
great urban design, fostering strong relationshipsthrough formal/informal
opportunities to engage with one another, and working together to care for the
environment and our neighbours, to name a few.
As such, the final mission statement for development services is:
Mission: Working together • Growing thoughtfully • Building Community
11
5 - 30
ESTABLISHING A SHARED VISION
Vision / Values / Final vision
BackgroundGoalsNext Steps
MissionCommitment s Framework
Shared Values and Commitments
StaffContributions
At the December 2018 workshop, staff were asked to draft shared commitments by
reflecting on what makes a great city; what they value; what they love about working,
living and playing in the City of Kitchener; what outcomes they want to achieve
through their work; and their work environment. Some of the key themes emerging
from staff discussions included:
Diversity
Collaboration
Transparency Culture of innovation
Sustainability Providing great services
An engaged community Economic opportunities
Trust
The results of their discussions led to the development of five shared values –
Leadership, Collaboration, Communication, Accountability, and Trust/Respect
– and corresponding commitments:
Leadership – Together we commit to building a great community
Collaboration – Foster a flexible, solutions-oriented approach
Communication – Be clear, open and transparent with each other
Accountability – We will act with the best interest of the community in mind
Trust/Respect – Build a foundation of trust by respecting each other’s expertise,
experience and perspectives.
12
5 - 31
ESTABLISHING A SHARED VISION
Vision / Values / Final vision
BackgroundGoalsNext Steps
MissionCommitment s Framework
Mayorand Councillor Contributions
At the Council Strategy Session in March 2019, Councillors werepresented with the
draft shared values and commitment statementsand asked to provide feedback.
Their comments are summarized in Table 4.
Mayor and Councillor Rating of Draft Shared Commitments
100%
90%
I like it!
38%38%38%
80%
50%
70%
Good, but missing
something.
60%
13%88%13%
On the right track.
50%
25%
40%
25%
Has potential, but
38%
30%
needs a lot of work.
50%
Percentage of Participants
20%
38%
Does not resonate
25%
with me.
10%
13%13%
0%
Commitment 1 -Commitment 2 -Commitment 3 -Commitment 4 -Commitment 5 -
LeadershipCollaborationCommunicationAccountabilityRespect
Figure 4: Mayor and Councillor rating of the draft Shared Commitments
Proposed Changes
Likes
Draft Shared Commitments
Leadership:
Leaders of what?
Together we commit to building a
Leadership is good
Explain.
great community
Collaboration:
Foster a flexible, solutions-
Flexibility is good Add “helpful”
oriented approach
Communication:
No proposed
Be clear, open and transparent
Liked it
changes
with each other
Accountability:
Missing action
We will act with the best interest
Liked it
language
of the community in mind
13
5 - 32
ESTABLISHING A SHARED VISION
Vision / Values / Final vision
BackgroundGoalsNext Steps
MissionCommitment s Framework
Proposed Changes
Likes
Draft Shared Commitments
Liked the
Trust/Respect:
acknowledgement of Remove the word
Build a foundation of trust by
what various trust and focus on
respecting each other’s expertise,
stakeholders bring respect
experience and perspectives.
to the conversation
Table 4: Mayor and Councillor comments on the draft Shared Commitments
Council’s feedback was incorporated and the following draft values and commitment
statements were focus-grouped externally for public feedback:
Together, we will…Together, we will…
LeadershipLeadership – – CCommit to building a great community that is caring, vibrant and ommit to building a great community that is caring, vibrant and
innovative.innovative.
CollaborationCollaboration – – FFoster a flexible, helpful, solutionsoster a flexible, helpful, solutions--oriented approach.oriented approach.
CommunicationCommunication – – CCommunicate clearly, openly and transparently with each ommunicate clearly, openly and transparently with each
other.other.
AccountabilityAccountabilityAccountability – – AAct with the best interest of the community in mind.ct with the best interest of the community in mind.
RespectRespect – – RRespect eachespect each other’s expertise, experience and perspectives.other’s expertise, experience and perspectives.
14
5 - 33
ESTABLISHING A SHARED VISION
Vision / Values / Final vision
BackgroundGoalsNext Steps
MissionCommitment s Framework
Community Contributions
Community members were asked to rate each of the five shared values and
commitment statements. The graph below summarizes the responses from
community members. All commitments resonated with community members to
varying degrees, with Respectbeingthe most well-likedvalue/commitmentamongst
the community.
Community Rating of Draft Shared Commitments
100%
90%
I like it!
33%
80%
44%
Good, but missing
56%
70%
61%
67%
something.
60%
On the right track.
28%
50%
28%
40%
Has potential, but
needs a lot of
25%
30%
22%
work.
28%17%
Percentage of Participants
Does not resonate
20%
17%
with me.
11%
10%
19%
17%
11%11%
6%
0%
Commitment 1 -Commitment 2 -Commitment 3 -Commitment 4 -Commitment 5 -
LeadershipCollaborationCommunicationAccountabilityRespect
Figure 5: Community rating of the draft Shared Commitments
Participants were also asked to provide more detail about what they liked or would
change about each statement. Table 5 below provides a summary of the key themes
from their feedback.
Proposed Changes
Likes
Draft Shared
Commitments
Currently very city-focused
Leadership:
Commit to building a Consider “creative” instead
Happy to see this
great community that is of “innovative”
commitment to
caring, vibrant and
leadership
Replace the word “build”
innovative.
Add inclusion piece
Collaboration:
Add “working together”
Important principle
Foster a flexible, helpful,
to help break silosAdd inclusion piece
solutions-oriented
at the City
Change “flexible”
approach
15
5 - 34
ESTABLISHING A SHARED VISION
Vision / Values / Final vision
BackgroundGoalsNext Steps
MissionCommitment s Framework
Proposed Changes
Likes
Draft Shared
Commitments
Mention multi-channel
communication
Communication:
Add “thoughtful” – want to
Communicate clearly,
Important and
feel heard by City and
openly and transparently
critical principle
developers
with each other.
Choose one of “open” or
“transparent”
Accountability:
“Community in Focus on perspectives
Act with the best interest
mind”
Statement does not currently
of the community in
Important principle reflect being accountable
mind
Respect:
Well written
Respect each other’s
Consider changing
Experience is
expertise, experience
“expertise” to “knowledge”
acknowledged
and perspectives
Table 5: Community comments on the draft Shared Commitments
“We want to be informed and involved early on in development processes, have
time to thoughtfully reflect and re-engage to provide meaningful feedback.”
-Community Member
16
5 - 35
ESTABLISHING A SHARED VISION
Vision / Values / Final vision
BackgroundGoalsNext Steps
MissionCommitment s Framework
Development Community Contributions
Participantswere asked to rate each commitment. The graph below summarizes the
response from the development community. Collaboration was the most well-liked
commitment, followed by communication.
Development Community Rating of Draft Shared Commitments
100%
9%
17%
90%
I like it!
31%
80%
43%
70%
Good, but missing
8%
55%
something.
60%
85%
On the right track.
50%
75%
40%
46%
Has potential, but
50%
30%
18%needs a lot of work.
Percentage of Participants
20%
Does not resonate
8%
10%
with me.
18%
15%
8%
8%
7%
0%
Commitment 1 -Commitment 2 -Commitment 3 -Commitment 4 -Commitment 5 -
LeadershipCollaborationCommunicationAccountabilityRespect
Figure 6: Development Community rating of the draft Shared Commitments
17
5 - 36
ESTABLISHING A SHARED VISION
Vision / Values / Final vision
BackgroundGoalsNext Steps
MissionCommitment s Framework
Participants were also asked what they liked about each statement and what they
would change, and their responses are summarized below.
Proposed Changes
Likes
Draft Shared
Commitments
Leadership Consider changing
Commit to building a Kitchener is already a“vibrant” to
great community that is leader“prosperous”
caring, vibrant and
Vibrant is a good goalMeet the needs of the
innovative
city
Collaboration
Foster a flexible, helpful,
Add “open” to connect
This is important
solutions-oriented
to communication
approach
Communication
Should incorporate
Communicate clearly,
timing, specifically
Liked it
openly and transparently
quick or prompt
with each other
responses
Accountability
Act with the best interest
No feedback receivedDoesn’t speak to
of the community in
beyond overall ratingactions
mind
Respect
Respect each other’s Values mutual-respect
No feedback received
expertise, experience
Everyone brings value
and perspectives
Table 6: Development Community comments on the draft Shared Commitments
18
5 - 37
ESTABLISHING A SHARED VISION
Vision / Values / Final vision
BackgroundGoalsNext Steps
MissionCommitment s Framework
The Final Shared Values and Commitments
Each draft statement was adapted in response to comments provided by
stakeholders throughout the consultation process. Thefinal statements are
presented below, with the rationale for changes based on stakeholder feedback.
Leadership: We will commit to shaping a great community that is
caring, vibrant and innovative
Build was changed to shape to be consistent with stakeholder feedback. Other
language remained unchanged in aneffort to maintainalignmentwith the City’s
existing community vision: “Together we will build an innovative, caring and
vibrant Kitchener.”
Collaboration: We will foster a helpful, flexible, solutions-oriented
approach to working together
“Working together” was added in response to feedback. The term “flexible” was
kept in response to be able to work “in the grey” and be flexible in our approach
to solving problems. Finally, the word order was changed to emphasize the
importance of being, first and foremost, helpful.
Communication: We will communicate clearly, thoughtfully, and
transparently with each other
Stakeholders felt that “open” and “transparent” were synonymous, and so “open”
was replaced by “thoughtfully”, as suggested.
Accountability: We will follow-up, follow-through and make decisions
with the best interests of the broader community in mind
Language was enhanced to be more action-oriented, as identified by
stakeholders, while maintaining elements that stakeholders felt were important.
The ultimate accountability in all that we do is to the broader community.
Respect: We will respect each other’s knowledge, experience and
perspectives
The word “expertise” was replaced with “knowledge” so that all stakeholders can
see their place in the commitment in order to respect where we are all coming
from.
The request to add inclusive language has been addressed through the vision
statement, as this was a critical aspect for stakeholders to see in the vision. Other
feedback as applicable has been incorporated into the proposed stakeholder goals,
which are described in the following section.
19
5 - 38
ESTABLISHING A SHARED VISION
Vision / Values / Final vision
BackgroundGoalsNext Steps
MissionCommitment s Framework
Goals
All stakeholders were asked to identify potential
“One of the key goals for
goals that they could set for themselves to support
Council isto build bridges
each shared commitment statement and the overall
between stakeholders.”
implementation of the shared vision.
-City Councillor
Community
Be informed about what is happening in the community
Be engaged in the community and share your ideas
Get to know your neighbours and work together to share information
Hold each other accountable
Staff
Foster solutions-oriented and decisive leadership
Focus on the “big picture”
Foster a positive customer experience
Seek out opportunities to streamline the customer experience
Look for opportunities to be flexible in processes
Engage stakeholders in meaningful ways
Explore ways to engage broadly and inclusively
Provide efficient, timely responses when communicating with stakeholders
Take a proactive approach to working with stakeholders
Be purposeful in interactions with stakeholders
Enhance access to information
Develop user-friendly guidelines and policies
Development Community
Consult with staff and residents early in the process
Maintain open lines of communication with staff
mmit to submitting complete and accurate plans and documents
Co
Explore new ways to engage and connect with the community
Council
Be informed/engaged
Build connections between stakeholders
Engage in Council-supported outreach
Explore new ways of sharing information with the public
20
5 - 39
ESTABLISHING A SHARED VISION
Vision / Values / Final vision
BackgroundGoalsNext Steps
MissionCommitment s Framework
Final Vision Framework
The shared visioning frameworkfor development services stakeholdersis comprised of
sixcomponents: the vision statement,mission, values,commitments, goals and
stakeholder actions. What we heard from staff, Council, community members and the
developmentcommunityhaveallbeen taken into consideration to help inform the final
vision framework.
The vision statement is intended to provide a description of where we want the
community to be as a result of our contributions in development services. The goal
of avision statement is to be inspiring, purpose-driven, future-focused, and
memorable.
The mission is intended to be a short statement that describes our goals and
philosophies.
The values represent our core, shared values that are foundational to delivering on
our vision.
The shared commitments are aligned to each value and are intended to describe
how we as stakeholders in development services processes commit to working
together.
The goals represent key areas within each commitment that each stakeholder group
will work to implement.
Finally, the stakeholder actions represent specific steps that will be taken by each
stakeholder group to implement their goals. These actions will be identified through
a detailed review of selected processes, beginning in June 2019. Actions will serve
as a “living list” and may be amended as needed to deliver on the vision.
The final vision framework is illustrated on the following page for reference. Each goal
has been assigned to a commitment; however, goals may overlap with other
commitments as well.
21
5 - 40
22
Next Steps
Final vision Framework
Goals
s
Values / Commitment
ESTABLISHING A SHARED VISION
Vision / Mission
Background
5 - 41
ESTABLISHING A SHARED VISION
Vision / Values / Final vision
BackgroundGoalsNext Steps
MissionCommitment s Framework
Next Steps
City staff will present a report to Standing Committeeon May 13, 2019on the results
presentedin this report.
All stakeholders were asked to identify ways in which to improve the site plan process
and public engagement processes, which have been identified as the priority areas for
the first year of the Development Services Review. Engagement is currently on-going
on the City’s Engage Kitchener project page until May 31, 2019, at which point all ideas
will be reviewed for further consideration as part of the detailed review project phase.
The next phase of the Development Services Review includes a detailed review of the
site plan process and public engagement processes (June 2019 – May 2020).
For more information:
Visit our Engage Kitchener project page:
https://www.engagewr.ca/development-services-review
Margaret Love
Manager of Service Coordination & Improvement
Development Services Department
City of Kitchener
Phone 519-741-2200 ext. 7042
Email margaret.love@kitchener.ca
23
5 - 42
PLANNING & STRATEGIC INITIATIVES COMMITTEE
Page 1UNFINISHED BUSINESS2019-05-13
SUBJECT (INITIATOR)DATE TARGETSTAFF
INITIALLYDATE/STATUSASSIGNED
CONSIDERED
Financial implications analysis of enhanced 2012-06-18Future PSI B.Sloan
streetscape options for Fischer Hallman Rd design (PSI)Meeting
improvements (over and above baseline capital and
operating budgets)
IF1 - 1