HomeMy WebLinkAboutDSD-19-189 - New Urban Design ManualREPORT TO:Community & Infrastructure ServicesCommittee
DATE OF MEETING:September 9, 2019
SUBMITTED BY:Alain Pinard, Director of Planning, 519-741-2200 ext. 7319
PREPARED BY:Adam Clark, Senior Planner (Urban Design)
519-741-2200 ext. 7027
Dayna Edwards, Senior Planner (Urban Design)
519-741-2200 ext. 7324
WARD(S) INVOLVED:All Wards
DATE OF REPORT:August 12, 2019
REPORT NO.:DSD-19-189
SUBJECT:New Urban Design Manual
Part A – Urban Structure& Built Form
Urban Design Guidelines
RECOMMENDATION:
That Part A of the Urban Design Manual, attached as Appendix ‘A’ to Report DSD-19-
189, be approved and adopted into the City’s Urban Design Manual to replace the
existing Part Aand portions of Part Bof the City’s 2010 Urban Design Manual; and
further,
That following the approval of Part A of the Urban Design Manual, an implementation
plan and monitoring strategy be preparedby staff, with a Monitoring Report submitted
biennially to Council beginning in 2021.
BACKGROUND:
In March 2015, staff presented a work program to Council for the update to the Urban Design
Manual. In June 2018, Council received an interim status update which included a copy of
the first draft of the Manual.Since that time, staff have worked with stakeholders toward a
final draft that represents a balanced, progressive approach to city-building.
REPORT:
Context & History
Kitchener has a history of leadership in urban design and has beenrecognized for its
successes. The Urban Design Manual plays a key role in communicating the City’s
expectations for community, site and building design to land developers, city staff and the
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
4 - 1
community. Well defined guidelines create a benchmark for good design, provide certainty
tostakeholders, and help to ensure equitable standards are applied on all projects.
The City of Kitchener first approved an Urban Design Manual in 1999. It contained
expectations and standards, primarily aimed at site development, to ensure a minimum level
of urban design for all new and redeveloped multi-residential, commercial, industrial and
institutional properties across the City. Over the years, Council has approved the
Neighbourhood Design Initiative, which included theSuburban Design & Neighbourhood
Mixed Use Centres section(2007), as well asnumerous area-specific design reports.
In 2010, Council approved further changes to the general guidelines and specific standards
sections of the Urban Design Manual (DTS-10-114). This update also included new
guidelines related to Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) and Drive
Through Facilities.
Overview - Part A of the Urban Design Manual
Over the past few years the planning framework in Kitchener has changed.Council has
recently adopted:
A new Official Plan;
Three station area plans (PARTS Central, Midtown and Rockway);
Stage 1 of the new Zoning By-law (CRoZBy);and,
The Residential Intensification in Established Neighbourhoods Study (RIENS).
The Urban Design Manual is an important implementation tool for these approvedpolicy
documents. It has been nearly 10years since the previousmajorupdate to the Urban Design
Manual and 20 years since the manual’soriginalapproval.
The new Urban Design Manual Part A reflects contemporary city buildingpracticesand
provides increased compatibilitywith the City’s current growth and development patterns
while carefully preparing for the future. It represents a Made In Kitchener approach, providing
progressive, achievable expectations, including a specific focus on the Development
Services Department’snew mandate of “a city for everyone.” The new Manual
introduces/provides increased focus on critical topics such as:
Safety
Inclusivity and Diversity
Age & Family Friendly Design
Sustainability, including Climate Change Adaptation & Mitigation
Complete Streets; and,
Smart City Design
Many of these align directly with other corporate priorities and projects. The vision statement
and primary objective of the Urban Design Manual is “to deploy a spirit of collaboration and
creativity through thoughtful and innovative design that makes Kitchener the best designed
mid-sized city in Canada.”
4 - 2
The updated Urban Design Manual also provides greater certainty for the development
industry, which supportsa more efficient review and approval process. It carefully creates
flexibility for the industry without sacrificing quality. The manual will help achieve a level of
urban design that is appropriate for Kitchener’surban structuresand built forms.
How Were the Draft Urban Design Guidelines Created?
The draft guidelines were developed through a best practice review and a study of
Kitchener’s context. The guidelines were developed by Planning staff, in consultation with
other internal divisions including Engineering & Stormwater Management, Operations –
Design & Development, Building, Transportation, Economic Development andtheDigital
Kitchener Innovation Lab.
In addition, the draft guidelines were developed utilizing the feedback, comments and
collaborative efforts of communityand local stakeholders throughout the process. This included;
26 stakeholder and committee meetings;
6 coffee shop chats;
An open house at Doors Open Waterloo Region;
Six design charrettes with central neighbourhoods and;
A survey on Engage Kitchener.
Draft guidelineswere presented to stakeholderstwice--once in April 2018 and again in
February of 2019. The commenting period was followed by one-on-one stakeholder
interviews with interested parties, and more than 300 written comments were received.
CommunityEngagement was held at local coffee shops across the city.
4 - 3
Where Will the Guidelines Apply?
The Urban Design Manual will apply City-Wide. All communities and sites within the City of
Kitchener deserve quality, compatibleurban designthat focuses on sustainability, inclusivity
and affordability. The document is structured to improveclarity, effectiveness and usability
for all users, particularly with regard to Planning Act applications and City-led projects.
How is the Document Structured?
The new Part A document has been crafted to act as a tool for the development industry and
city staff to use when preparing and reviewing preliminary ordetailed Planning Act
applications andsite plans. The City-Wide Design section sets the base design expectations
for all development. The remaining 12 sections address a specific land-use or built-form
typology. For example, a 6-storey apartment buildingin Midtown would need to meet the
City-Wide guidelines while also addressing the sections for Mid-Rise Buildings and Major
Transit Station Areas.
The new Part A is divided into coloured-coded sub-sections to increase the usability of the
document and provide greater clarity as to what sections need to be addressed.
The updated manual will continue to reflect the current three-part framework of the existing
2010 Urban Design Manual:
Part Awill provide a comprehensive set of urban design guidelines, organized by urban
structureand built. This is the section being brought before Council for approval
through this report.
Part Bcontains supplemental design reports and studies. This section contains or will contain
more detailed area specific plans such as Streetscape Plans, Master Plans, and
Neighbourhood-Specific Plans.
Part Cwill provide detailed standards and technical direction fordevelopment and site
functionality. Existing sections that provide detailed design guidance have been carried over
in the interim in Part C. Part C is scheduled to be updated as part of a future work plan.
4 - 4
The following graphic outlines the framework for Parts A, B,and C of the Urban Design
Manual. The new Part A:Urban Structure and Built Form is attached to this report as
Appendix A.
4 - 5
Next Steps
Once approved, Appendix A will form Part A of the City’s Urban Design Manual. By clarifying
expectations, identifying key considerations and providing design guidance, the design
guidelines aim to shorten review times for planning applications, reduce the risk ofappeals,
and ensure that urban design policies within the Official Plan and the Urban Design Manual
are implemented. The following steps are planned to occur following the approval of thenew
Urban Design Manual:
1. Implementation - Staff & Community Training
Urbandesign staff will provide staff training and workshops to staff and others. Staff will also
continue to engage with the communityand industryto educate, share knowledge and
increase the profile of Kitchener as a City committed to urbandesign.Implementation
strategies may also include a development review scorecard to grade implementation,
periodic industry and communitysurveys, audits of a range of projects that go through the
development review process and connecting with the Development Services Review and
other internal processes on the consistent and equitable application of the design guidelines.
2. Monitoring Report: ‘The State of Urban Design in Kitchener’
Staff recommend that an implementation monitoringreport be provided to Council biennially,
which could be timed to align withthe Kitchener Great Places Awards (beginning in 2021).
This “State of Urban Design in Kitchener” could report on the progress of implementing the
new design guidelines, identify successes and identify any challenges or possible minor
updates needed. The report could also highlight urban design placemaking initiatives or
opportunities along with formally documenting the award winners.
ALIGNMENT WITH CITY OF KITCHENER STRATEGIC PLAN:
City of Kitchener Strategic Plan 2019 - 2022
Strategic Priority – Vibrant Economy
Action: Complete a new Urban Design Manual by 2019 that expresses city building and
design expectations to ensure vibrant new development throughout Kitchener.
Accountability: 2019
FINANCIALIMPLICATIONS:
The Urban Design Manual Part A was prepared within the original budget allocation.The
remaining budget amount will be required for the Part C update, which may require technical
consultants for some subsections.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
The preliminary engagement for the Urban Design Manual update utilized the primary
themes of “INFORM” “CONSULT” and “COLLABORATE” from the City’s Community
Engagement Strategy.
INFORM – This report has been posted to the City’s website with the agenda in advance of
the Council meeting. Notice of this meeting was posted online and communicated to
4 - 6
stakeholders and the public. Notice of the communityconsultation was provided via email
and social media to the project contact list, local Neighbourhood Associationsand Council.
CONSULT/COLLABORATE – The draft urban design guidelines were prepared utilizing
feedback received from communityand industry stakeholders.
Stakeholder Engagement (Information Session + Stakeholder Interviews)
In April 2018, staff held a stakeholder information session to present an early draft of the
proposed guidelines. The session was followed by one-on-one stakeholder interviews with
interested stakeholder groups, including the Waterloo Region Home Builders’ Association.
In February 2019, a final draft was presented to internal staff and stakeholders for review
and comment. Again one-on-one stakeholder interviews were held with interested
stakeholder groups.
The draft was posted online in February to accommodate the review and comment by those
unable to attend the sessions.
Engagement with Citizen Boards & Committees of Council
In the fallof 2018, staff engaged with the following citizen boards and committees of Council:
Arts & Culture Advisory Committee
Cycling & Trails Advisory Committee
Downtown Action & Advisory Committee
Economic Development Advisory Committee(EDAC)
Environmental Committee
Safe & Healthy Communities Advisory Committee
Mayor’s Advisory Committee for Kitchener Seniors(MACKS)
Input from all committees and boards wasconsidered in the preparation of the final draft.
CommunityEngagement
In April 2018, urban design staff held public consultations in local community coffee shops,
spread out across the city. The drop-in coffee shop sessions were designed to inform the
communityof urban design initiatives taking place at the City, but also to collect feedback on
the current and proposed urban design direction for Kitchener.Staff held 6 coffee shop
events, which engaged more than 30 participants in over 12 hours of total conversation.
In September 2018, urban design staff participated at Doors Open Waterloo Region at 44
Gaukel St. to highlight work happening in Kitchener Planning and to gain feedback from local
residents on how they use their neighbourhoods and communities.
As part of the Neighbourhood Planning work currently underway, urban design staff held
design charrettes for Central Neighbourhoods to assist in the creation of guidelines that
reflect a collective community vision for future change in the local neighbourhood. These
neighbourhood specific guidelines will be brought before Council as part of the
Neighbourhood Planning reviews.
4 - 7
Additionally,Urban Design in Kitchenerwas featured on ‘Engage Kitchener’ for
approximately 2 months(beginning in April 2018)to receive additional public feedback.An
overview of the community and stakeholder engagement, along with a summary of the
comments received is included in Appendix B.
Summary of Community/Stakeholder Comments
The majority of the comments received on the draft urban design guidelineswere
format/organizationrelatedor specific feedback on individual guidelines. Staff reviewed all
comments received, provided written responses to each stakeholderand responded to
questions and concerns in individual stakeholder meetings. Staff made changes to the
draft based on stakeholder and communityfeedback. An overview of all comments received
and staff responses to those comments have been provided in the Community &
Stakeholder Engagement Summary in Appendix B.
PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION OF THIS MATTER:
Memo to Council \[June 2018\] - Project Status Update and Draft Urban Design Manual
CSD-15-018 \[March 19, 2015\] - Comprehensive Review of the Urban Design Manual
The project framework and work program was presented to Council in the above noted
report.
CONCLUSION:
The Urban Design Manual Part A sets the framework for high-quality, compatible
development that responds to its context, maintains and enhances the character of an area
and promotes a morehuman approach to city-building. It will help to create a safe,
inclusive, sustainable, vibrant, and liveable Kitchener for all.
After extensive study and communityand stakeholder engagement, the Urban Design
Manual Part A proudly positions Kitchener as a City for everyone and acts asa
comprehensive blueprint for how Kitchener should evolve through design, both now and
into the future.
It is recommended that the Part A of the Urban Design Manual be approved and
immediately implemented in new development.
REVIEWED BY: Janine Oosterveld, Manager of Site Development & Customer Service
Brandon Sloan, Manager of Long Range & Policy Planning
Della Ross, Manager of Development Review
ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services
Appendix A –Part A Urban Design Manual
Appendix B –Community & Stakeholder Engagement Summary
4 - 8
4 - 9
2
4 - 10
3
4 - 11
4
4 - 12
5
4 - 13
6
4 - 14
7
4 - 15
8
4 - 16
9
4 - 17
10
4 - 18
11
4 - 19
12
4 - 20
13
4 - 21
14
4 - 22
15
4 - 23
16
4 - 24
17
4 - 25
18
4 - 26
19
4 - 27
20
4 - 28
21
4 - 29
22
4 - 30
4 - 31
24
4 - 32
25
4 - 33
26
4 - 34
4 - 35
4 - 36
4 - 37
4 - 38
4 - 39
4 - 40
4 - 41
4 - 42
4 - 43
4 - 44
4 - 45
4 - 46
39
4 - 47
40
4 - 48
41
4 - 49
42
4 - 50
43
4 - 51
44
4 - 52
4 - 53
4 - 54
4 - 55
48
4 - 56
4 - 57
50
4 - 58
51
4 - 59
52
4 - 60
53
4 - 61
54
4 - 62
55
4 - 63
56
4 - 64
57
4 - 65
58
4 - 66
59
4 - 67
60
4 - 68
4 - 69
4 - 70
4 - 71
4 - 72
4 - 73
66
4 - 74
67
4 - 75
68
4 - 76
69
4 - 77
70
4 - 78
71
4 - 79
72
4 - 80
73
4 - 81
74
4 - 82
4 - 83
4 - 84
777777
4 - 85
78787878
4 - 86
797979
4 - 87
80808080
4 - 88
818181
4 - 89
82828282
4 - 90
838383
4 - 91
84848484
4 - 92
858585
4 - 93
86868686
4 - 94
87
4 - 95
8888
4 - 96
89
4 - 97
9090
4 - 98
4 - 99
92
4 - 100
93
4 - 101
94
4 - 102
95
4 - 103
96
4 - 104
97
4 - 105
98
4 - 106
99
4 - 107
100
4 - 108
101
4 - 109
102
4 - 110
103
4 - 111
104
4 - 112
105
4 - 113
106
4 - 114
107
4 - 115
108
4 - 116
109
4 - 117
110
4 - 118
4 - 119
112
4 - 120
113
4 - 121
114
4 - 122
115
4 - 123
116
4 - 124
117
4 - 125
118
4 - 126
119
4 - 127
120
4 - 128
121
4 - 129
4 - 130
4 - 131
4 - 132
4 - 133
126
4 - 134
127
4 - 135
128
4 - 136
129
4 - 137
130
4 - 138
131
4 - 139
132
4 - 140
4 - 141
4 - 142
4 - 143
4 - 144
4 - 145
4 - 146
4 - 147
140
4 - 148
141
4 - 149
142
4 - 150
4 - 151
144
4 - 152
145
4 - 153
146
4 - 154
147
4 - 155
148
4 - 156
149
4 - 157
150
4 - 158
151
4 - 159
152
4 - 160
4 - 161
154
4 - 162
155
4 - 163
156
4 - 164
157
4 - 165
158
4 - 166
159
4 - 167
160
4 - 168
161
4 - 169
162
4 - 170
4 - 171
4 - 172
4 - 173
4 - 174
4 - 175
4 - 176
4 - 177
4 - 178
4 - 179
4 - 180
4 - 181
4 - 182
4 - 183
4 - 184
4 - 185
4 - 186
4 - 187
4 - 188
4 - 189
4 - 190
4 - 191
184
4 - 192
185
4 - 193
186
4 - 194
187
4 - 195
188
4 - 196
189
4 - 197
190
4 - 198
4 - 199
192
4 - 200
193
4 - 201
194
4 - 202
195
4 - 203
196
4 - 204
197
4 - 205
198
4 - 206
4 - 207
200
4 - 208
201
4 - 209
202
4 - 210
203
4 - 211
204
4 - 212
4 - 213
2
4 - 214
3
4 - 215
4
4 - 216
5
4 - 217
6
4 - 218
7
4 - 219
8
4 - 220
9
4 - 221
10
4 - 222
11
4 - 223
12
4 - 224
13
4 - 225
14
4 - 226
YYYYY
N...
(Y/N)
Made
Change
Y
YYYYY
N
(Y/N)
Req'd
Change
Staff Response (Description of Change or Follow-up or Consideration)
Adjustments to the language and the formatting have been made to address these concerns.1 & 2) updated3) Adjusted for larger blocks1) Wording has been updated to reflect the Stormwater
Master Plan. 1) Wording has been revised as per the provided suggestion.These are high-level comments about the direction of the manual, and will be considered throughout the process.Staff
have made updates to the draft to reflect the some of the comments heard at the stakeholder sessions.Thank you for the feedback. Staff are working on a "How to Use the Guidelines" section
which will be included at the beginning of the document. It is our intent that this section will provide more clarity, especially to the industry, as to how the Manual should be considered
in used. An Urban Design Manual, as it is understood, is not a regulatory document and is inherently intended to provide some flexibility. That being said the guidelines, principles
and vision stated within each section provide an expectation for design quality in Kitchener. Providing more specific design direction
Summary of Comment
1) p. 7 First point under 'infill' - does "established" mean "existing" or "zoned"? Specifically, there are often large areas of 2-3 storey buildings in an area with new MU-2 zoning,
or so. 2) p.11 Does the GRCA and the RMOW's EEAC support unconstrained access?3) p. 15 Requests clarification for last line - considered for what?4) p. 17 Missing a dividing line near
the bottom5) p. 24 The eighth point seems to repeat the end of the third point1) p. 3 Typo in the last point2) p. 7 Typo in the first point under "lotting pattern" 3) p. 7 Fourth point
under "lotting pattern" - what about longer blocks? For example 7 and 8 units long is quite common. 1) p. 3 What is meant by "mechanisms to partially divert stormwater runoff from the
street.." There is nothing in the CoK Master SWM plan that recommends this, to my knowledge (quite possible just because I haven't come across this idea, yet!)2) p. 4 Typo in the photo
caption on the bottom of the page.1) p.4 Under "Water use" - technically, green roofs do not infiltrate water... Possibly reword to "Green roofs to reduce the annual runoff volume from
the site and help reduce urban heat island effects"? 1. We ask that the homeowners’ perspective be considered in all policies. Mainly, we ask that the UDM balance good design and practices
with cost-effective and practical solutions. 2. We suggest some structural changes to the document by further clarifying the high level vision and goals. The document should list items
that are encouraged, items that are desired, items that are discouraged, etc. We think this will aide in making the document easier to read. 3. We also believe the document should be
shortened as much as possible. We like the various sections of the UDM to help direct users of the document to context-specific areas, however, the policies should be written in a direct
and concise manner. At first glance, the document appears to be very large once all sections are fully completed.4. We would appreciate some sort of tracked changes document which illustrates
new policies, modified policies, and deleted ones to help better navigate the document.5. The policies should be written such that there is flexibility. That is what helps to drive
creativity and good design. We see the document being more subscriptive than prescriptive. The document should speak to any given project achieving the overall intent of the UDM and
that not all policies need to be necessarily met.6. We see the need to strongly link the forthcoming CROZBY regulations with this updated UDM as we believe they need to be in sync.
The drafting of each document should be done cohesively to ensure they meet a common vision and do not create conflict. One initiative should not overreach or preclude the outcome of
the other. Can you provide any commentary on how that will be accomplished given the large volume of work being undertaken? Also, how do they align with the Official Plan, especially
since it is still under appeal?7. Given the subjective nature of architecture and design, is there an opportunity for mediation or third party review which could assist when there is
an impasse in points of view and approach?8. While we are completely supportive of advancing building science and energy efficiency, where new technologies or building practices are
discussed (e.g. solar panels, EV charging), we suggest the use of soft language to allow flexibility. It is common that new technologies are often flawed and cost-prohibitive and take
time for the industry to learn how best to implement them. Forcing a certain technology on a builder/developer can have negative implications for the overall project. We are happy to
provide our expertise in technical areas that are being drafted in the UDM to ensure they are practical and achievable.9. We encourage the notion of early collaboration between the
City and builder/developer on the vision for a project and good communication regarding expectations at the outset. This would assist in laying the groundwork for a collaborative process,
using the UDM as the “playbook”.10. Is there any plan or policy that will speak to how often the UDM will be reviewed/updated? We want to ensure that best practices and innovation are
always being considered. Staff met with industry stakeholders to discuss the document and how urban design objectives are implemented through the development review process. We appreciate
the opportunity to speak with you both, get clarification on many items and share our comments and concerns. Overall, we all agree that the UDM has great principles and will lead development
in the right direction from a design perspective. Our biggest concern has always been to ensure flexibility in interpretation and implementation for the industry, recognizing that the
UDM is an ideal and that not all guidelines can be achieved for every development, nor would they necessarily be appropriate. While we support many of the principles and guidelines,
our comments focus on areas of concern and where clarification or elaboration is needed. As mentioned, we applaud your efforts and hope that we can help to make the document even better.
Section
City WideDesign for NeighbourhoodsIndustrial Employment AreasStructured ParkingAll SectionsAll Sections
Type of Comments Received
WrittenWrittenWrittenWrittenWrittenInterview
Stakeholder / Internal Staff / Public CommentsSpring 2018 Engagement on the First DraftSpring 2019 Engagement on Final Draft
Stakeholder Stakeholder Stakeholder Stakeholder Stakeholder Stakeholder
4 - 227
YYYY
NNNNNNN
...............
YYYYYYYY
NNNNNNNN
p g qy g p g
and guidance, ultimately provides more options for industry and where a guideline cannot be achieved, an Urban Design Report is expected to provide rationale or suggested alternative
actions. It is not the intent of the design guidelines to increase the cost to the developer. Good design does not have to contribute additional cost to a project. New buildings have
a longstanding presence in a City and therefore good design is expected in the interest of the public. Staff are working on numbering the sections to provide greater organization.This
language has been removed to avoid confusion and interpretation issues.Improvements to urban design implementation will be completed as part of improvements to the Site Plan process
through the Development Services Review. It is staff's opinion that providing a manual that is better organized, with more design direction-- will result in an improved implementation
process, as a result of a greater understanding around the City's expectation for good design and fewer disagreements over design details.An Urban Design Manual, as it is understood,
is not a regulatory document and is inherently inteded to provide some flexibility. That being said the guidelines, principles and vision stated within each section provide an expectation
for design quality in Kitchener. Providing more specific design direction and guidance, ultimately provides more options for industry and where a guideline cannot be achieved, an Urban
Design Report is expected to provide rationale or suggested alternative actions. Staff recognize that there is currently duplication in the final draft of the guidelines. This is intentional
at this stage in the review process to ensure that all parties have the opportunity to review each topic of each subsection and provide staff with comments prior to removing the duplication.
As staff move toward the final version, the duplication within the sub-sections will be removed and guidelines that are applicable across the city will be moved to the City-Wide section.
The Urban Design Manual in its entirety is an implementation tool of the Official Plan, while reflecting current urban design practices and principles. The Official Plan provides direction
for the creation of an urban design manual and does not provide comprehensive instruction on what that manual is to contain.Some technical standards have been provided in the guideline
document to provide for some flexibility which is not offered through CROZBY regulations. Additional, more specific technical standards will be reserved for the update to the Part C,
Standards section of the Urban Design Manual.Great suggestion. In the final version, staff will be sure to provide a notion that maps from other policy documents are for reference only.It
is important that the Urban Design Manual provide design guidance on topics such as sustainability and smart cities, as this is a document that will reflect Kitchener's vision for urban
design for the years to come. Staff have consulted widely with experts in both the sustainability and smart city design fields. No building material is restricted altogether, however
the guidelines do state that some building materials (that appear very uniform) should not be used as a primary building material. Staff will look in more detail at the building material
requirements. As materials evolve over time to better meet the objectives of the building design guidelines, this information can be provided as part of an application and elevations
will be reviewed accordingly.Additional clarity will be added to this set of guidelines.Staff have considered these changes and make adjustments to language, guidelines and figures
where appropriate. It is not the intent of the design guidelines to increase the cost to the developer. Good design does not have to contribute additional cost to a project. New buildings
have a longstanding presence in a City and therefore good design is expected in the interest of the public. Clarity will be added to this.Wind + shadow studies. The criteria for these
studies will come as part of the PART C: Standards update to the manual
We recommend that a general statement suggesting that not all guidelines are mandatory and that the UDM is meant to read as an ideal should be included. The use of words like “where
appropriate/ applicable/ possible/ feasible”, “encourage”, etc. should be added throughout. There are numerous examples of this in every section of the UDM. Our general opinion is that
every principle should be considered in relation to its context – there is no “one size fits all” approach to this, which is why we reiterate a theme of flexibility.There is no recognition
of the cost implications of the UDM guidelines. It would be appreciated if that is somehow factored into evaluating top priorities as cost is important in making any project a reality.An
organized numbering system should be included to help reference specific guidelines.Many of the proposed guidelines include the statement that such guidelines should meet or exceed
the standards established in the ‘City-Wide Design’ section of the manual which can create confusion and interpretation issues.The manner in which the guidelines will be interpreted
on a go forward basis is lacking.Clarification should be provided as to who is responsible for the implementation of the proposed guidelines. Consider organizing sections in this manner.Avoid
excessive detail in certain sections to permit flexibility.There is a lot of duplication of principles throughout the document which makes it much longer than it needs to be (i.e. sustainability,
architectural excellence, materials and articulation, public art, etc.). Consider adding these to the City Wide Design section and only referencing them briefly elsewhere, if necessary.Any
technical standards should be removed from this section of the UDM and deferred to the Design Standards section and CROZBY where they can be evaluated further. As a general rule, we
suggest the limited use of numbers in the policies.Maps from other policy documents that are regularly amended, while visually helpful, should be carefully considered. Consider simply
referencing them, providing hyperlinks or noting that they are for general reference only.Caution is advised on technology-related best practices (i.e. energy efficiency, sustainability,
building materials, “smart cities”). It is difficult to understand the requirements and objectives. Further, this should be incorporated in the Design Standards section with consultation
from the industry and professionals in that field.There is specification and restrictions on the types of building materials and finishes to use throughout the document. No material
should be restricted as technologies are always advancing to better products. Further, design styles are always changing and this is a highly subjective topic.There is a request for
“contemporary” design throughout the document. Please elaborate as to what this means or provide an example. Also, please elaborate as to why this is the preferred design style. In
our opinion, all architectural design styles have benefits and can be appropriate in certain contexts.Additional editorial comments were provided for each section of the Urban Design
Manual.If every project must design for “high standards”, how will this affect the affordability and the resultant economic impacts?‘New development should be contemporary in nature...’
What does this mean specifically and who will make the determinations? Under “Kitchener Enjoys” the second paragraph specifically references “shadow and wind impacts from developments”
and how they must be “very carefully considered”. How must they be carefully considered and by whom?
All Sections
4 - 228
YYYYYYY
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
...
YYYYYYYY
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
The UDM is needed to preserve a mix of building styles across the city so we don't end up with one type, but instead grow to achieve a diversity of building styles, typologies + forms.Urban
design + CPTED reports should provide rationale + speak specifically to these two items.Not required in all developments, however the intent of the guideline is to over time achieve
a diversity of unit types + tenures on a neighbourhood scale.Disagree. Interior storage and entrance ways are related to how people use a building and it is important to speak to building
design that accommodates all users.Public housing was changed to affordable housing. Inclusivity means available for use by all regardless of ability.Smart City guideline will be treated
as principles for now - it is expected that their implementation will evolve as technologies evolve.The manual is to be used by developers, stakeholders, the City and public alike.
These are principles of good design (designed to future proof the manual). Specific initiatives may be addressed in Part C or in the future.Climate change is a real issues that we need
to address in the coming years. These guidelines are for the City, developers and the public to consider when proposing change in Kitchener. They are designed to compliment the changes
that may come in the future to the OBC.Staff have added "good design elements". The use of avoid implies 'where feasible'. These are minor compared to complete sets of bird friendly
and dark sky guidelines in effect and used by other by other municipalities.This criteria is being prepared as part of an implementation measure of the manual and will captured in the
future update to Part C: Standards.Design with regard for, not eliminate potential impact. This section will align with the complete streets guideline currently being prepared by Transportation
Services. All of these criteria are not mandatory but each new street will be evaluated using a checklist and a minimum score will be required. Where this is not possible or the best
design solution, this should be noted and rationalized in an urban design report.Staff will review this as this is not the intent.Studies will determine the buffer and pathways will
not be permitted in vegetation protection zone. Zoning provides no flexibility on this on a site by site basis. Therefore staff feel that it should remain as an urban design guideline.
This detail is designed to provide options and certainty for developers, the City and the public as part of the development review process. Not all guidelines need to be met to on each
site however design decisions and choices should be rationalized in an urban design report. This is also intended to single detached if front yard parking can be avoided in favour of
parking in the side yard - that is preferred.Change made: added where appropriate + feasible Agreed - added where possibleStaff plan to add a "How to Use the Manual" section upfront
in the document which should provide additional clarity around the use of the document.Staff have removed the language surrounding LEED Silver and have replaced this will other sustainable
design practices understanding that LEED certification is costly and that there are other measures for assessing sustainability.Stepbacks are important to provide for a transition in
height and to mitigate adverse impacts such as overlook, shadow, privacy and wind. If on a case by case basis, an applicant is unable to step a building back, this justification should
be provided in an urban design report. Added "Incorporate visible mechanical elements into the design of the building to minimize their visual impact." to provide more flexibility for
alternative design solutions. If this is not possible on a site by site basis, an urban design report should provide the relevant rationale for staff review.If this is not possible
on a site by site basis, an urban design report should provide the relevant rationale for staff review.
Under “Kitchener Blends Together”, in the first paragraph, it states: “Particularly within its Downtown, Central Neighbourhoods and Major Transit Station Areas, Kitchener is an eclectic
mix of styles, eras, typologies and forms. At larger scales, there is no single defining or prevailing ‘Kitchener Style’.” Doesn’t that single statement somewhat undermine the entire
City Wide Design Manual?‘No building, street or shared space is to be designed in isolation from its surroundings’ or ‘…do not create any potential entrapment areas, dead-ends, or hidden/obscured
spaces’. Again, this not specifically defined nor how it will be interpreted.“Provide a mix of housing types, sizes and tenures in each neighbourhood, including seniors housing options
for both independent and assisted living to create options for aging-in-place.” That may not be realistic in all developments, especially if particular constraints exist.Unit storage
and entryways should not be discussed in the UDM.The term ‘Public Housing’ should be replaced with ‘Affordable Housing’. Also, in the last sentence where ‘Public art installations and
community arts and culture spaces are to be accessible and inclusive’ what does inclusive mean?Smart City Design in general is a good principle, but how are all of these statements
to be implemented? And whose responsibility is this? Until this field is better understood, these statements should be general and visionary only.What does ‘Ensure safe and convenient
access to health care, social services and healthy food options’ mean and whose responsibility is it to provide same? Also, the introduction states ‘We now find ourselves in a critical
moment to limit the worst impacts of climate change’. What are the worst impacts and, in whose opinion, will they be defined?The guidelines for ‘Design for Climate Change’ are strenuous,
costly and unnecessarily prescriptive. The OBC is already making many of these standards requirements already or in the near future (i.e. net-zero).“Avoid demolition of buildings which
may be adaptively reused, have good design elements, particularly larger buildings for which demolition and removal is expensive and wasteful where feasible.”The guidelines under ‘Design
for Wildlife’ are too detailed and prescriptive.Under “Microclimates”, in the third paragraph, it states: “Staff may ask for a Wind Study and/or a Shadow Study wherever potential impacts
may exist. The recommendations from these studies are to be implemented through the site and building design.” Should there not be some objective criteria imposed which would help
determine whether those studies are truly necessary?‘Design all buildings, streets and open spaces with regard for Kitchener’s year-round weather conditions including….’ and related
guidelines is unrealistic.Designing streets in the last two points on the page is questionable in the first instance and represents what is presently being accomplished in the second
instance. Some of the mandatory provisions here are onerous and not practical from a design perspective.‘Fronting buildings onto parks and open spaces’ may not be practical or the best
solution in certain instances. This shouldn't be mandatory.Many of the policies in “New Development in Existing Neighbourhoods” seems to want to avoid a mix of housing types, though
that same policy is promoted elsewhere in the UDM.‘Locate multi-use trails and pathways outside of buffers and vegetation protection zones’. Why? This restriction is not required as
appropriate studies will determine this through the Planning process.‘Provide a minimum 3.0m wide landscape area in addition to any walls or fences at the edges of site…’ is an onerous
and costly provision that should be dealt with through zoning.The provisions regarding public art, signs and lighting are too detailed and onerous.“Avoid placing parking between a building
and the street” and “Provide vehicle parking at the side and rear of buildings. Avoid front yard parking”, which is presumably a policy not meant for single family dwellings? If so,
that should be clarified.“Locate utilities underground to improve the appearance of a site where appropriate and feasible.” Collaboration with utilities and their design standards is
necessary and should help inform the UDM as their ideals usually conflict with UDM policies.Snow storage cannot always be located in direct mid-day sunlight.Please make it clear as
to what is “Community Design” as the main heading. As a general rule, make sure these general headings are clear in their intent/ownership (e.g. private sector vs. public/municipal)Assuming
this refers to public projects, requiring a minimum of “LEED Silver” status for new development has many costs associated with it and may not be feasible for projects at all scales.
Further, it is not the only measure of a sustainable building.Similar comment in “Mid-Rise Buildings” section. Requiring stepbacks is not always feasible nor attractive, especially
on smaller footprints.Depending on the mechanical system and building layout, suites facing a front façade may have to have air vents along them. Air vents should be blended with the
façade material as much as possible or “side vented” to balconies where possible.“No above grade structured parking is to front onto King St. W. Active uses, office space and/or residential
units are to wrap any structured parking along King St. W, for the full extent of both the length and height of the garage where possible.” This is not practical for all properties
along King St. W., depending on size, configuration, location.Same comment as above for King St. & Charles St.
ajor Transit Station Areas
City-Wide DesignM
4 - 229
YYYYY
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
....
YYYYYY
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
This is an initiative outlined in the PARTS Rockway Plan. We will investigate extending this to other sections. If this is not possible on a site by site basis, an urban design report
should provide the relevant rationale for staff review.Amended to read "Avoid site design that creates potential entrapment areas, conflicts between pedestrians and motorists, and where
there are hidden areas, narrow or confined spaces, and/or dead-ends. Where this cannot be achieved, a CPTED report will be required." Climate change is a real issues that we need to
address in the coming years. These guidelines are for the City, developers and the public to consider when proposing change in Kitchener. They are designed to compliment the changes
that may come in the future to the OBC.Agreed. Staff have reviewed this guideline to have new development respect the scale of the existing and planned context. Therefore if the development
is along an arterial road with proposed higher density commercial and mixed uses proposed, that this should be taken into account.New lots in established neighbourhoods should have
consistent lot widths, depths and areas as other lots in the greater area.These guidelines are specific to townhouse forms exclusively and may not apply to singles, semis or duplex
typologies.Driveways could be shared, accessed via a rear lane or located off-site. Providing this regulation in the UDM provides for flexibility, however 50% is the target to maintain
a pedestrian friendly street.If there are instance where this shouldn't apply on site by site basis - applicant should rationalize in UDM Report.Driveways could be shared, accessed
via a rear lane or located off-site. Providing this regulation in the UDM provides for flexibility, however 50% is the target to maintain a pedestrian friendly street.There are many
design solutions to avoid the internal hall condition short of allowing projecting garages--which detract from a streetscape and neighbourhood character, specifically in Central Neighbourhoods
where this condition is rare. This is an objective we should strive for. This guideline only applies to heritage properties that would require an HIA.Through noise and vibration studies
where required and rail setbacks as requested by relevant authorities. A modified grid system also provides for better walking ability between uses and transit.The language has changed
in the Urban Design Manual to provide more certainty and clarity around the City's expectations. If any of these guidelines cannot be achieved, the applicant should rationalize this
in an urban design report. Yes, staff will clarify this graphic.This is currently not required however this topic will be explored through the update to Part C: Standards of the Urban
Design Manual.Staff will remove the reference to 'vibrant' and just specify a variety of colours.Thank you this typo has been corrected. This guideline is important to maintain and
active frontage along a street and a safe public realm. Garage projections do not contribute positively to the public realm and streetscape and will be permitted in the urban design
manual.
Under “Design for Rockway”, the second paragraph states: “Affordable housing units are to be integrated fully into their buildings. Separate entrances or building forms for affordable
housing occupants is not acceptable.” Why is affordable housing specific to the Rockway MTSA only?Same comment as above for not allowing any structured parking to front onto the subject
streets.A CPTED report should only be required where the ‘cantilevered’ element is not visible from the public realm. For example, consider a building with only a few feet of cantilevering.Details
related to sustainable building materials and energy efficient technologies should not be a UDM concern. Consider that the OBC deals with this at length and both are a majority priority
in it as we move towards Net Zero homes.Larger buildings are appropriate in certain contexts including corner lots, arterial roads, areas with a mix of housing forms and areas in transition.
Consider Ottawa St. N. & Weber St. E - both have portions designated Low Rise Residential in the OP and within REINS. Should redevelopment consist of bungalows and 1-1/2 storey homes
on streets of this nature?“Maintain the neighbourhood’s prevailing pattern of lot widths, lot depth and lot area.” Please elaborate further.Why are townhouses the only form of housing
being detailed in this section? Consider removing these guidelines.A 50% landscaped area is not practical for smaller lots (e.g. 16-18’ townhouses) when driveways and walkways are considered.
This should be excluded from the UDM and dealt with through zoning.A 7.5m rear yard is not necessary in all contexts. This should be excluded from the UDM and dealt with through zoning.A
driveway should not be limited to 1/3 of the lot width. Zoning requires a 2.6m (8.5’) wide parking space, which means the minimum lot would have to be 25.5’ wide. This is not practical
for many semis and townhouse lots (as small as 16’).Recessing garages creates long internal hallways and inefficient front entrances which are unattractive. Garages should be able to
project beyond the main building façade where porches are also well designed and extend beyond the main building façade as well to help draw the focal to it.“Provide individual garage
doors on houses with double car garages if possible.” This is not always achievable and there are many new garage doors which are much more visually appealing.All Design Objectives
should be provided “where appropriate”. “Identify existing cultural heritage resources through a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) and determine appropriate conservation techniques.
Preferably, these resources should be conserved on their original sites”. This policy should be clarified. If there are no heritage resources around, why would you have to do an HIA?‘Locate
land uses in a way that is compatible with noise and vibration from roads and rail’. How will this be interpreted?Please clarify what a “modified grid system” is. Agreed that "row on
row" orthogonal grid support efficiency in density, but in turn creates a lack of dynamism at the streetscape level.Under “Lot Design”, several of the policies seem rather conclusive
(i.e. this must happen for all developments), yet they are unlikely to apply or be implemented in all circumstances. For example:“Establish a mix of lot frontages along all streets
to promote variety and to maximize on-street parking opportunities.”“Provide a mixture of lots for different dwelling types within a neighbourhood and on a street block. This could
include providing semi-detached lots along streets with townhouse blocks or single detached lots with small lot frontages.”Townhouse block lengths should allow for any unit range as
long as they are well designed. Ranges are restrictive especially for irregular shaped condominium blocks.‘Ensure cluster townhouse development includes units which address public streets,
with emphasis on priority and arterial streets where appropriate.’Eliminate all technical standards/dimensions and incorporate in the Design Standards section with proper consultation.
These can have major implications.The reference to Urban Green in the photo (#4) appears to, in fact, be the Greenway?At what scale of development should a waste reduction plan be required?Vibrant
colours are not always a good design idea.Under “Intersection Design”, in the first paragraph, there appears to be a typo – “design” should be “designed”.“Street-facing building facades
should be highly transparent” is extremely restrictive on material options and ultimate design.The garage projection suggestion should be altered to allow it to project in front of
the front door, where good design is provided.
esidential Infill in Central
RNeighbourhoodsNew Neighbourhoods
ritten &
WInterview
Stakeholder
4 - 230
YYYY
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
.........
YYYYYYY
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
Amenity spaces can be both private and public, privately owned public spaces. They are important components of residential buildings to provide for indoor and The intent is to minimize
the impervious surfaces on-site. Agreed. Charles Street was added as a gateway to the downtown.Agreed. This will be added to the City-Wide section. Disagree. This is being asked for
to continue to achieve high quality design in the future. It is important to highlight the need to provide barrier-free design in our city. None of the standards outlined in the UDM
exceed what is required by the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act.This refers to materials used, light colours, impervious surfaces and lighting used to achieve these
goals. Further direction will be provide in the update to Part C: This has been changed to 1.8 to be consistent with what is being proposed in the Complete Streets guidelines. Some
interpretation is positive to provide for a variety of options and to allow for design creativity. This can happen naturally or through variations in building design. This is important
to achieve a vibrant streetscape.The intent of providing a detailed list is to provide direction as to what is acceptable. Staff will review this list and will make references to evolving
materials that achieve good design objectives. Zoning provides no flexibility on this on a site by site basis. Therefore staff feel that it should remain as an urban design guideline.
Some interpretation is positive to provide for a variety of options and to allow for design creativity. Where this cannot be achieved, alternative actions should be suggested in the
urban design report.On phased plans, staff are opened to landscape plans which accommodate future growth.Zoning provides no flexibility on this on a site by site basis. Therefore staff
feel that it should remain as an urban design guideline. Some interpretation is positive to provide for a variety of options and to allow for design creativity. Where this cannot be
achieved, alternative actions should be suggested in the urban design report.This has been updated and more direction has been provided based on comments received from Utility providers.
There is ample flexibility in all of these design interventions. These guidelines are apply not just to new developments but to master parks and trails networks that are planned for
the future. Staff will review this in more detail and provide greater clarity. Replicating an existing building from a certain historical period is considered faux-heritage and is not
a good design practice. Modern materials do not perfectly match historical materials, therefore differences are observed.This guideline provides for flexibility in design and use.Staff
will review this in more detail and provide greater clarity. Massing, materials and facade design, are important components of the public interest and should be addressed in the Urban
Design Manual.
Who should pay to maintain outdoor amenity spaces? Consider the costs of this.Since a proportion of homeowners have two vehicles and often the whole garage or a portion of it is used
for storage, the driveway width should be allowed to extend wider than the garage to accommodate both vehicles within a certain percentage of the garage door width.Suggest adding Charles
St. as an important gateway into the downtown.“Variety in architectural style is encouraged, so long at that variety represents a contextually appropriate response to existing and planned
conditions.” This principle should apply the entire City and all applicable sections of the UDM.References to ‘High Quality’ buildings and future intensification are unnecessary guidelines
as they infer that what is being presently constructed is not of high quality.‘Carefully incorporate barrier free infrastructure into the landscape design and architecture of all projects
…..’. Requirements for these and other initiatives are guided by other means such as the OBC and need not be repeated in the design guidelines especially if such guidelines go beyond
what is required by law.‘Mitigate urban heat island effects by providing…..’,’Design to conserve, protect and enhance existing wildlife habitats and bird migration patterns’, are worrisome
in terms of meaning and how such measures will be determined and interpreted.2.0m sidewalk requirements are mandatory guidelines that have significant cost implications. These should
be included in the UDM Design Standards section only after further consultation with the industry.‘Provide weather protection at building entrances.…’, ‘Provide sheltered bicycle parking
….’, ‘Provide a range of short and long term bicycle parking at appropriate locations….’, and ‘Provide site furnishings ….at building entrances, along core pedestrian routes and in
amenity areas’ are all mandatory guidelines yet open to considerable interpretation. These should be encouraged.‘Reinforce the street edge with subtle variations in setback for open
space opportunities’ have considerable cost implications.Use of Materials & Articulation section at the bottom of the page is too detailed and restrictive in terms of implementation.
There are many appropriate options not listed and design and building materials are constantly evolving.‘Provide a minimum 3.0m wide landscaped area along the edge of a site’ is very
onerous. Remove from UDM and include in zoning in appropriate locations.‘Plant trees in landscaped islands in parking areas, with at least two trees together and provide adequate soil
volumes for the trees to thrive’ is again too onerous and open to significant interpretation.Planting trees, shrubs, ground cover etc. on any unbuilt portions of the site is extremely
costly and wasteful. Only where a site is master planned and locations are permanent should this be considered.‘Provide a minimum 3.0m wide landscape area along the site’s side and
rear yards in order to provide tree screening and enhance site environmental benefits’ is very onerous and should be amended. Again, remove from UDM and include in zoning in appropriate
locations.‘Screen rooftop mechanical equipment from public view’ may not be necessary, appropriate or feasible in all situations yet this is a mandatory guideline.‘All servicing and
utility elements should be invisible from the public realm’. What does this mean exactly? This likely conflicts with Utility Cos objectives and further consultation is needed.Provide
excessive detail related to ‘glazing on street facing elevations’, ‘landscaping complementary to the pedestrian experience’, need for a ‘pedestrian circulation plan’, ‘providing parking
primarily underground and in structured parking’, and the like. These proposed guidelines provide for very minimal flexibility on a go forward basis.Under “Connectivity”, several of
the policies seem rather conclusive (i.e. this must happen for all developments), yet they are unlikely to apply or be implemented in all circumstances. For example:- “Create an interconnected
open space system with a variety of park spaces located within walking distance (5 minute walk) to most homes.”- “Provide for a continuous off-road, open space community trail network
with frequent connections to the on-road active transportation network and key transportation nodes, as well as connecting to key community facilities and destinations (shopping and
work centres, community facilities e.g. parks and open spaces, hospitals, libraries, schools and community centres”Stepback on upper-level storeys is not always feasible and may not
look appropriate on buildings with 4-6 storeys. Should be encouraged where appropriate.“Mid-rise buildings are to be contemporary and not replicate existing or historical architectural
styles.” Why?“Where retail or office at grade is not required and residential uses are permitted, the design of the ground floor is to provide adequate public/private transition and
allow for future conversion to retail uses where in the appropriate planning context.”Requiring stepbacks is not always feasible, especially on smaller footprints. Changing floor plates
from lower levels often creates inefficient floor plates or unusable spaces, since stairwells, elevators and hallways usually stack through all floors. Should be encouraged where feasible.“Provide
consistent, clean, contemporary massing and materials. Mid-rise buildings do not necessarily benefit from extensive decorative elements or frequent changes in colour, material or forms.
Smaller mid-rise buildings in particular can quickly become too ‘busy’ visually.” We do not think the City should be commenting on architectural styles as they are extremely subjective
and always evolving.
DowntownsNodes & CorridorsGreen AreasMid-Rise Buildings
4 - 231
YYY
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
YYY
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
Building orientation plays a part in minimizing microclimatic impacts. If the other guidelines are followed in addition to building orientation, a development will likely have few recommended
changes that would come out of a wind study.The current manual requires at-grade outdoor amenity space. In almost all mid-rise developments private amenity is provide in one form or
another (balconies are included). Amenity space is very important to the wellbeing of residents in multi-residential buildings. Parking in the front yard is very much discouraged. If
this can not be achieve on a site by site basis staff will review this in the urban design report. Utility companies have been circulated on the Manual and have provided staff comments.
These section have been updated with increased clarity to address the concerns of utility providers. They are consistent with the typologies as defined in the Zoning By-law.This has
been provided as a design guideline to provide some flexibility for creativity in the design process. Adding this to the Zoning By-law as a regulation does not provide for site or design
variations on a case by case basis. If narrower units are provided, perhaps greater than 8 linear units could be considered. If wider units are provided, perhaps 8 unit blocks are too
long. Design flexibility is important to consider situations like this and therefore this is best achieved as a guideline at the given time. Intensification is important but so is
ensuring there is proper separation between units for mechanicals, seating areas, walkways, amenity areas, trees and garbage and recycling containers. Good design principles on these
items will be further studied by the zoning team and considered through the Zoning By-law update. It is also important in the UDM to speak to building siting on and off-site which includes
building setbacks.No materials are completely restricted outright. Some materials are to be limited to accents as they don't provide high quality facade treatments or articulation on
their own.This guideline can be implemented at a developers discretion and as a resident amenity.Designing for wildlife also includes bird friendly. This should be explored on significant
new developments in built-up areas. This will be determined as an implementation measure of the manual + will be detailed in Part C.This is a target that developers should strive to
achieve. If this cannot be implemented rationale should be provided in an urban design report. As mentioned above, staff do not feel that there are any conditions where a projecting
garage represents good urban design and contributes positively to the streetscape.This has been modified to say 'maximize' with a minimum of 50% of the frontage. This provides some
flexibility on larger sites, however smaller sites should achieve a greater than 50% building along street frontage ratio.In these cases, the exceptions should be detailed as part of
an urban design report. This section provides creative design direction for back of house and blank wall conditions. Staff would disagree with this based on studies that have been prepared
recently through the Zoning By-law review process. Agreed.Sites and building locations should not be designed around parking or access plans. Good design puts pedestrians first and
cars second. Agreed - added.
All guidelines related to the “Microclimates” section should be read as suggestions. The intended outcomes are a function of building orientation and where a building is positioned on
a site which could be in direct conflict with zoning setbacks.“Mid-rise buildings are encouraged to provide a mixture of both private and public shared spaces.” There can be a cost
to landlords/condo boards and security concerns with this. Further, not all sites provide for an appropriate location for this.Providing parking to the side or behind a building and
hiding it from the street is a good principle, but it is not always practical depending on the building orientation, interior layout and site conditions. A level of screening should
be provided where parking is located in the front yard.Utility metering requires a greater conversation with the Utility Cos as they usually want the meters easily accessible and not
enclosed. This comment is mirrored in most sections of the UDM.Concern about the definitions in the typologies section. Are there any missing? Are they accurate? Are they consistent
with definitions in the zoning bylaw, etc.?Require 75% of a building to occupy a street frontage is rarely achievable with driveways, building separations and side yard setbacks. This
should be removed from the UDM and further studied through zoning implementation.Townhouse blocks should not be limited to 8 units – it depends on each unit’s width. Overall block sizes
could be regulated, but again, this should be left to zoning.Building separations of 12 & 15m between blocks is excessive and is in direct conflict with the comment above and general
intensification principles.Functional backyards that are interior side yards should vary in setbacks. This is completely site specific and depends on the typology proposed. Any dimension
should be removed from the UDM and further studied through zoning implementation.Restricting certain materials is not appropriate but requiring quality products is.Specify that the
facility itself should not be required, but that an area designated for future implementation of a garden/composting is desired. These can be a maintenance nightmare and should be implemented
on a site-specific basis where the condo board or landlord wishes to do so at their own discretion.Designing for wildlife is difficult in general where higher intensity developments
are built. This is a good principle, but extremely difficult to evaluate and implement on site level basis. Reserve this section for new planned communities and area studies in general.When
are the “Wind and Sun/Shadow Studies” required? What is the trigger (i.e., # of storeys) to complete these studies?Limiting garages to less than 50% of the façade eliminates 16’ townhouses
from having single car garages. This contradicts affordability initiatives as garages are highly desired for small families.Garages can project ahead of the front facade of the building
with appropriate architectural features including strong front porches.“At least 50% of street frontages should be occupied by building façade” can be difficult to achieve on large
sites, especially when anchor buildings are to be located at the back. This is a good principle but should be more flexible (no % indicated).Blank walls need to sometimes be recognized
as a reality of commercial buildings. Commercial users are always in need of back office/storage space as well as facilities like washrooms and kitchens. Glazing, especially towards
the rear of a building, is not always feasible or desired and there are often OBC requirements which complicate this.“Provide a high percentage of transparency for building frontages.”
Good design can be achieved with only 30% glazing in some cases.“Include awnings, canopies and other overhangs to shelter pedestrian routes and add depth to the building façade where
appropriate.”“Locate surface and structured parking away from public street frontage, preferably at the rear of the buildings and internal to sites where possible.” Site constraints
will often dictate building placement and in turn parking. Nose-in parking that is visible from the street can benefit businesses that have high turnover in their parking lots.Large-format
sites like grocery store sites often do not have nose-in parking (parking directly in front of the building) and will usually have a large drive aisle between their parking trees and
the store. In these cases, accessible parking should be located adjacent to a demarcated walkway, safe crosswalk, or some other traffic calming measure.
MidRise BuildingsLow Rise Multiple Residential BuildingsLow Rise Commercial & Mixed Use
4 - 232
YYYYY
NNNNNN
YYYYY
NNNNNN
Planning Act, Planning Act,
can't require specific internal programming of spaces. We can however promote the can't require specific internal programming of spaces. We can however promote the
These guidelines are general design principles that pertain to drive-thru design. There are some exceptions to these rules. Drive-thrus will continued to be reviewed by the Zoning By-law
and the more detailed drive-thru standard section in Part C.If there is only a single frontage, expectations will be made for areas where vehicular access is required. This guidelines
has been changed to read as follows in attempt to provide further clarity: "when designing a standalone parking structure, provide appropriately located, programmed and sized shared
spaces tailored to both users and the public." The intent of the guideline is to provide an easy of access for cyclist to enter a parking garage but also to access bike storage. Often
time bicycle storage is an afterthought in parking garage design and therefore is difficult to access. The final draft was revised based on the comments provided to include older adults,
children and people of different abilities in the definition of diversity.The final draft was revised based on the comments provided to further include language around accessibility..The
final draft was revised based on the comments provided to provide age friendly and family friendly design guidelines that balance the needs of older adults as well as young families.Active
uses, in the urban design sense was further defined in the Manual.Through the Urban Design Manual update, under Section 41 of the staff addition of community spaces as part of the bonusing
framework for new developments, or in lieu of retail, when a developer is looking to provide an active use at grade.Zoning will address a distance separation between food trucks and
other uses. Through the Urban Design Manual update, under Section 41 of the staff addition of community spaces as part of the bonusing framework for new developments, or in lieu of
retail, when a developer is looking to provide an active use at grade.
“Avoid the implementation of drive-through facilities except when internal to a large site”. Remove from UDM and regulated through zoning.“Ensure that no part of a drive-through facility
is located between the building and street” is too rigid and should allow flexibility if well-designed. 1191 Fischer-Hallman Road is an example of a drive-through between a building
and the street that is executed well (and is used in the current set of design standards).“Avoid multiple drive-through facilities on the same lot” should be a zoning regulation reserved
for small lots of certain sizes only.We agree there should be some active uses along the primary street frontage to hide parking but requiring the entire street frontage to have an
alternate use in front of the parking is often not practical – consider a property with only one frontage.“Include appropriately programmed and sized amenity areas as part of the design
of parking structures.” This would be difficult to implement and requires some elaboration or an example.“Where possible… Design parking structures such that cyclists do not have to
dismount to enter or use the garage, and ensure that they are not otherwise inconvenienced in favour of motorists.” How is that achieved when there are doors/gates for parking security
and climate control? This requires some elaboration or an example.Diversity- “This includes a commitment to establishing downtown as a regional centre for multiculturalism as well as
a commitment to the safety and comfort of all people, including women, the LGBTQIA+ community, and persons with different physical and mental health needs.” (pg. 2)Consider expanding
this list to include the concept of age as a form of diversity. In particular, older adults or members of the aging community experience unique age-related changes that can make them
more vulnerable to discrimination and potentially less likely to access or frequent a community space that is not felt to be inclusive or accessible.And- “Create buildings and public
spaces that are inclusive and sensitively designed for a range of activities which speak to the needs of people from many different backgrounds and identities.” (pg. 2)Consider altering
this statement to include people of different abilities, in addition to backgrounds and identities. In creating inclusive and accessible spaces for people of varying ages and abilities,
we can in turn create spaces that are inclusive and accessible for all.Accessibility- “This includes site and building design that is sustainable, expressive, and appealing to pedestrians.”
(pg. 3) and “Design public open and plaza areas to further promote seamless connectivity between a project and its surroundings, maximizing pedestrian comfort, ease of movement and
visual appeal.” (pg. 4)v strengthen the concepts of inclusive and barrier-free spaces that have been highlighted elsewhere throughout the Guidelines. In ensuring that community spaces
are accessible to people of varying ages and abilities, we thereby increase the access and active use of the space, facilitating opportunities that promote good health for all residents
of the community, across the lifespan.Demographic trends- “Sustainability for Downtown Kitchener means creating a design culture that embraces change without erasing the past or doing
harm to the future. It means creating a forward thinking environment that attempts to anticipate future challenges and opportunities to best position Downtown in both the short and
long term.” (pg. 5) With an ongoing shift in the demographic composition of Waterloo Region, it is important now more than ever to anticipate future challenges and opportunities relating
to the unique needs of young children and older adults living in and accessing the community. As previously noted, population projections for 2021 suggest that almost one-third of both
Ontario’s population (29 per cent) and Waterloo Region’s population (27 per cent) will represent young children (under ten years of age) and older adults (over 64 years of age).14 Consider
opportunities to strengthen and clarify language pertaining to age-friendly environments and community design throughout the Guidelines.Pedestrian activity and recreation- “As part
of new development/renovation/adaptive reuse, concentrate active uses along the north side of Otto St., including restaurants, cafes, gallery spaces and other uses that leverage and
enhance the district’s character as a hub of arts and culture.” (pg. 10)Consider clarifying the use of the term ‘active uses’. From a Public Health perspective, active uses may be interpreted
as environments that facilitate opportunities to engage in physical and recreational activity, thereby promoting good health. Instead, in the statement above, the term ‘active uses’
may be referring to more frequently accessed spaces.Sustainability – “It includes civic Sustainability; preserving and creating new public institutions and open spaces that meet evolving
needs and exceed expectations.”To prepare for evolving community needs, consider requiring new public facilities to include kitchens that meet the food safety guidelines outlined in
the Ontario Food Premises Regulation (O. Reg. 493/17).21 This will open up the possibility for use by community members when providing food to the public during community events, and
allow for community groups to hold cooking classes to teach food skills.Healthy Communities – “The urban environment can affect a person's physical, social and mental well-being in
many ways - the quality of the air, soil and water, opportunities for exercise, recreation and social interactions, access to healthy food and the availability, proximity and nature
of jobs, shops, services and public spaces.”Sustainability – “It includes social/economic sustainability to preserve a range of housing, office and retail options to protect and enhance
Downtown as a place for people of all income levels, backgrounds and stages of life.”“It includes civic sustainability, to preserve and create additional public institutions and open
spaces that service local neighbourhoods, the city and the region.”To support the above sustainability objectives, consider promoting the creation of community kitchens or public institutions
with kitchens designed for use by community members as well as cooking and food skills programs. To prepare for evolving community needs, consider requiring new public facilities to
include kitchens that meet the food safety guidelines outlined in the Ontario Food Premises Regulation (O. Reg. 493/17).21 This will open up the possibility for use by community members
when providing food to the public during community events, and allow for community groups to hold cooking classes to teach food skills.
Structured ParkingCity-Wide DesignCity-Wide DesignCity-Wide DesignDowntown
Written & Interview
Region of Waterloo Public Health and Emergency Services (Fall Prevention)Region of Waterloo
4 - 233
YYYYYY
NNN
YYYYYY
NNN
Thank you for the comment. Pop-up markets have been added to the Downtown City Centre guideline.Our New Neighbourhood section seeks to create walkable communities. The Zoning By-law
permits uses but cannot discriminate between food retail outlets that provide healthy vs. unhealthy food. It is important that we create walkable communities so that students have healthy
active transportation options to and from school and throughout their communities. Additional guidelines around cycling and creating a minimum grid have been added, as well as guidelines
detailing safe, well lit pedestrian and cyclist crossings.Additional guidelines pertaining to wayfinding signage, signalized crossings with extended times, and improved lighting have
been added. In addition, guidelines around creating stronger pedestrian and cycling crossings in the Civic District have been added. A page on complete streets has been added to the
City-Wide Design section to provide clarity. A reference to cyclists was added were pedestrians were mentioned. Thank you for the comment. The suggested wording was added into the Urban
Design Manual. This level of review should be considered as part of the tender processes for new streets, park and other public projects. These standards would be far too detailed
for the Urban Design Manual. This comment will be passed along to Parks & Operations.
City Centre District – “Preserve the established retail fabrics along King St., Ontario St., and Queen St., respectively. King St. should continue to provide continuous ground-floor
retail in the form of cafes, restaurants, events spaces, shops and convenience stores. Queen St. is to be positioned as the second highest order retail street in the downtown, with
a range of smaller-scale shops, restaurants and service retail options. Ontario St., is to continue developing into an eclectic mix of shops, services, restaurants and event spaces
at an especially fine-grain including narrower and visually unique storefronts. These objectives should be met even as large scale redevelopment of sites takes place.”To increase access
to healthy food retail, consider promoting pop-up fresh vegetable and fruit markets, in addition to the formal market.Creating Walkable Neighbourhoods – “Design neighbourhoods based
on a 5-minute walking distance (400 M radius) between major pedestrian destinations such as transit stops, schools, neighbourhood parks and commercial spaces. Longer walking distances
may be considered for additional larger scale park spaces and commercial areas.”While not specifically addressing food retail, commercial spaces may include food outlets. Consider removing
“commercial spaces” when outlining components to be included within a 5-minute walking distance from schools. Suggesting that retail outlets should be further from schools will help
support a healthy family environment by reducing the amount of food retail children and adolescents have access to on a daily basis.Integrating Neighbourhood Commercial Centres – “Place
neighbourhood commercial centres within walking distance of surrounding neighbourhoods.”“Promote higher density housing, such as townhouse units, stacked townhouses or multiple dwellings
within or adjacent to neighbourhood commercial centres.”Consider expanding the distance between commercial centres and schools to reduce the amount of food retail in and adjacent to
areas that children frequent. A distance of 800m13–15 to 1000m14–18 is recommended between retail and schools. Limiting commercial zones near schools helps support a healthy family
environment by reducing the amount of unhealthy food retail children and adolescents have access to on a daily basis.Streetscape design:“…all streetscapes are to be crafted and enhanced
to create the best possible pedestrian experience for all users.”Consider including language that supports both pedestrians and cyclists. There is emphasis on the pedestrian experience,
but the creation of spaces and positive experience for cyclists is limited. Design should consider all road users to ensure people have safe and accessible choices for their desired
mode of travel.“Create mid-block connections as part of the development wherever possible, especially where it would extend or connect existing pedestrian routes or improve overall
network connectivity.”Consider defining what the mid-block connections are; indicating the use of cross-walks, signalized crossings, or use of signage improves safety for pedestrians
and cyclists.Civic District:“Prioritize the pedestrian experience…to include particular attention to the needs of the young, elderly, and other frequent user groups of the public library,
creating a safe, vibrant, welcome and barrier free public realm.”“Provide ample Queen St. pedestrian crossings and implement enhanced safety and accessibility measures to ensure that
the many civic institutions in the Civic District are available to all users.”Consider explicitly stating what features will address the needs of the pedestrians listed above (e.g.
wayfinding signage, signalized crossings with extended crossing times, improved lighting, installation of crosswalks).Consider expanding language to include cyclists and incorporate
the need for separated bike lanes, connectivity to trails and options to decrease points of conflict between pedestrians and cyclists.Innovation District:“Design Charles St. as a complete
street…”Consider explicitly stating what facilities will exist as a “complete street” and what this means including examples such as: sidewalk facilities that include clear, direct
and unobstructed and continuous paths of context-sensitive width for all road users -regardless of physical age or ability.Market District:Where “pedestrian” is mentioned, consider
expanding the design principles to include cyclists. Consider adding language that addresses how cyclists may navigate district and amenities that encourage residents to cycle (e.g.
bike racks).Climate change adaptation – Addressing microclimates, sun/heat protection is not consistent across the various guidelines. As UVR levels and high temperatures will continue
to increase, we feel it is important to ensure it is incorporated.Consider applying a combination of wording from the Mid-Rise and Downtown Guidelines.“Design a built form that provides
sunlight access to the public realm during the winter months, shaded areas for the summer months, and comfortable, safe wind conditions year round.” (pg. 10 – Mid-Rise)“Projects in
the downtown should demonstrate high standards in sustainability. This includes environmental sustainability to mitigate against climate change, preserve for pedestrian comfort (access
to sunlight and reduction of cumulative wind effects) and adapt to changing energy costs, depleting natural resources and the evolving needs of building occupants into the future.”
(pg. 05 – Downtown)Suggested wording to be applied to all guidelines:To adapt to climate change, design of the streetscape/public amenities/parking/etc. (could be customized by guideline)
for pedestrian and cyclist comfort (access to sunlight and shade, respite from heat, and reduction of cumulative wind effects) will include using natural or built form to provide sunlight
access to the public realm during the winter months, shaded areas for spring and summer months*, and comfortable, safe wind conditions year round.Shade provision standards – Consider
developing standards that determine the type of shade to be used for various settings. The standards would indicate where and when to use fabric shade, permanent solid structures, permanent
slatted structures, adjustable shade structures, and natural shade (e.g. trees and vegetation), fritted or PPG Solexia glass, etc.Factors to be considered could include: material appropriateness,
vandal resistant, initial cost, maintenance and/or replacement cost, aesthetics, seasonal and storage requirements, etc. This would then be provided to consultants, project staff, tender,
etc. for new and refurbishment projects.
DowntownNew NeighbourhoodsNew NeighbourhoodsDowntown
Written & InterviewWritten & Interview
Public Health and Emergency Services (Food Services)Region of Waterloo Public Health and Emergency Services (Road Safety)
4 - 234
NNNNNNNNNN
NNNNNNNNNN
Planning Act.
This would be an initiative undertaken by Parks & Operations. This comment was provided to Parks & Operation Services for their review and consideration. This would be an initiative
undertaken by Parks & Operations. This comment was provided to Parks & Operation Services for their review and consideration. This would be an initiative undertaken by Parks & Operations.
This comment was provided to Parks & Operation Services for their review and consideration. The site plan process is currently being reviewed as part of the Development Services Review.
This comments will be passed along as part of the review. Staff will consider if shade in public amenity which can be bonused for under Section 37 of the This would be an initiative
undertaken by Parks & Operations. This comment was provided to Parks & Operation Services for their review and consideration. This tool will be explored through 'Part C: Standards'
update to the Urban Design Manual.This is a great suggestion for further stakeholder engagement in both Parks and Planning (Urban Design). This tool will be explored through 'Part C:
Standards' update to the Urban Design Manual.Staff agree with this comment. This will be passed along to the project team (Economic Development).
Criteria for prioritization for shade - We would recommend that Kitchener develops a criteria for prioritization of shade to be based on:Suggested prioritized settings for shade - Shade
trees may be used to directly provide protection over settings (e.g. playground or, seating area), or where it may provide sun and/or heat respite areas in a setting (e.g. skate park,
splash pad). Engaging the community to determine where they think shade is needed can help identify prioritized settings. From a Public Health perspective the following list would be
settings we would prioritize for shade:Conducting shade audits – We recommend City of Kitchener conducts shade audits on spaces that fall within their criteria for prioritization. A
shade audit is a tool for individuals or organizations to identify how your outdoor space is used and whether the existing shade (natural or built) is sufficient. A shade audit can:To
develop a larger plan for prioritization of sites, we would suggest working with the Urban Forest Strategy staff to determine how to jointly assess this (as they require a tree baseline
and plan for implementation) and how this can be accomplished. Utilizing summer students or possibly partnering with a post-secondary institution may be a viable option to complete
this task.Conducting shade audits will also help support implementation of a Health Impact Assessment for sun safety and climate change as identified in the City of Kitchener’s Official
Plan Item 6.C.1.2.Site plan applications and consultations – For sites/settings that fall under prioritization criteria for shade, consider including a requirement for a shade audit
and plan within site plan applications and consultations plans.Incentive programs - Consider including shade in incentive programs for developers.Requests for proposals - Consider including
a shade audit requirement in RFP’s for: new sites, landscape design plans, and landscape services.Health Impact Assessment – Consider including a Health Impact Assessment as a requirement
for all new or refurbishment projects to assess for sun safety and climate change adaptation. Currently it appears to be optional.Community engagement/input – City of Kitchener has
been very engaged in obtaining stakeholder and public input on policies/strategies (e.g. Urban Forest Strategy), as well on new or refurbishment projects. Consider engaging the community
in determining where they feel shade is needed for the purpose of sun protection and heat respite/mitigation.Incorporating shade principles - To ensure shade is considered and applied
correctly (e.g. planting trees south and southwest of a space or installing built structures over top of the design element) to provide maximum health benefit to the public, consider
incorporating the shade principles (i.e. shade density, shadow casting, etc.) into relevant implementation policies and guidelines along with requirements for consultants when working
on new or refurbishment projects. See the Shade Design Fact Sheet for more details.Impermeable surfaces – Within the manual there is mention of installing trees in permeable surface
areas and not impermeable surfaces. We would encourage you to consider expanding this to include planting trees in impermeable surfaces of prioritized strategic locations where there
is a high volume of people using it. Such examples of sites could include downtown streets, city square, public amenity spaces where there is a large amount of hardscape surfacing such
as concrete. These spaces in particular could benefit from heat mitigation techniques and protection from direct and reflected UVR. Planting can be achieved through innovative installation
techniques such as installing silva cellsalong with a grate surrounding the tree, and permeable surface treatments/materials can help ensure that the tree not only survives, but thrives
in these conditions. This applied best practice will also benefit other goals of the City such as improving stormwater management, creating comfortable and enjoyable spaces for the
public.The Carl Zehr City Square is included in the Downtown Design Guidelines. One proposed plan for the refurbishment of this space was to use portable potted trees. We would caution
the City in using portable trees as these trees are likely to be stunted by the size of the pot’s root space, can struggle to thrive, and therefore will not provide adequate benefits
(i.e. sun protection, heat mitigation).
ll Sections
A
Written & Interview
Region of Waterloo Public Health and Emergency Services (Shade)
4 - 235
YYYYYYY
NNNNNN
YYYYYYY
NNNNNN
Through Part C of the Urban Design Manual update staff will work with the Urban Forestry Strategy group to determine priority areas for shade trees. This shade tree and native species
list will be explored through 'Part C: Standards' update to the Urban Design Manual.The suggested wording was added into the Urban Design Manual. The suggested wording was added into
the Urban Design Manual. Tree replacement guidelines, including a tree size list will be explored through 'Part C: Standards' update to the Urban Design Manual.We have added a few guidelines
to the manual that look at the use of light surfaces and trees to mitigate heat absorption.The suggested wording was added into the Urban Design Manual. Agreed this is important and
is addressed through the built form guidelines. Additional guidelines pertaining to cycling infrastructure and promoting cycling supportive environment have been added to the final
draft. Added to the final draft.Added to the final draft.
Increasing the tree canopy/urban forest strategy - In action #13 of the City of Kitchener’s Urban Forest Strategy, it identifies setting a tree canopy target. And in the UDM, a number
of guidelines identify increasing the tree canopy. We would encourage the City of Kitchener to not only set a canopy target, but to also ensure strategic placement of trees where it
will benefit the user (i.e. providing protection from the sun and respite from the heat) when addressing key areas or elements within a space. This will require collaboration with the
Urban Forest Strategy staff to determine priority areas for shade trees. Developing a list of criteria for prioritization can assist with this.Shade tree list – For the City’s master
tree list, consider including a section that identifies preferred shade trees. A list of these trees can help identify trees that work in certain site conditions, level of shade density,
and other considerations such as canopy spread, height, wind resistance, etc.The Shade Work Group of Waterloo Region’s shade tree list contains trees that have been selected for the
shade they can provide, their large stature, their suitable use in urban settings, their ability to adapt to climate change, and their resistance to disease and pests.This list would
be provided to City staff or those who are involved in projects such as landscape architects, contractors, developers, etc. to be used on prioritized sites for shade.Work with Urban
Forest Strategy staff to help identify preferred deciduous trees list.Expand beyond native species – A number of guidelines indicate using native plant and tree species. Consider including
non-native tree species due to changing climate. What may survive well now, may not do so in future climate conditions. Trees will need to be able to survive difficult situations such
as poor soil, drought and extreme weather conditions including wind/ice storms and flooding. Work with the Urban Forest Strategy staff to help identify preferred deciduous trees list.
See Shade Tree List for example of list of shade trees that includes both native and non-native species.Tree diversity – When planting trees, consider a requirement to plant for species
diversity and age diversity. Alternately, if there is a plan to install trees in an area, or along a route, consider staggering the installation along the path/route. This is to ensure
that not all trees are lost due to disease, insect, wind/ice storms, or that they reach their end of life expectancy at the same time. This could be a requirement for City staff and/or
anyone involved in the project would be required to follow.Tree protection – Consider expanding wording related to tree protection beyond environmental and aesthetic benefits to include
health and social benefits such as providing protection from the sun’s rays, keeping people cool in the heat, increasing physical activity, improving mental health, improving a sense
of community, and strengthening of social ties.Tree replacement - The Urban Forest Strategy mentions that when significant damage occurs it may require new planting of trees. We recommend
that when tree replacement is needed, not to necessarily plant a tree in the same location, but check if there is a strategic opportunity to move the location for the replacement tree
for the benefit of users of the space. For example, closer to an unprotected bus stop, over street furniture, over a playground, etc.Large caliper trees – Consider planting larger caliper
sized trees on prioritized sites (based on your selected criteria) for the purpose of more immediate health benefit (sun protection/heat respite) to the user of the space.Surface materials
– Many of the guidelines mentioned using enhanced surface treatments and planting of trees, plants, and other soft landscaping features. Materials chosen to mitigate heat are often
in conflict with those that decrease reflected UVR. In other words, light-coloured and reflective surfaces are more preferable to reduce heat absorption vs. dark asphalt, dark painted
surfaces, etc. Whereas to mitigate reflected UVR, the preference is to have darker non-reflective surfaces. We recognize that priority will likely be given to surface treatments/choice
of materials to mitigate heat absorption. In consideration of this, trees and plant materials (e.g. shrubs, flowers, and grasses) can help address direct and reflected UVR and help
mitigate heat through evapotranspiration.Seating/refuge areas – Throughout the manual there is mention of seating and refuge areas. The New Neighbourhood Guidelines identifies providing
“green spaces designed to provide rest and shade along trails and within the urban environment, including parkettes, commons and lookouts.” (pg. 08)Consider ensuring this same consideration
is included in other relevant guidelines particularly along major pedestrian routes, transit stations/stops, and at the beginning and end of trails/multi-use pathways. This supports
individuals who need intermittent seating breaks for those with limited walking abilities.Building placement/orientation – Within a number of guidelines, building orientation and placement
and possible microclimatic impacts are mentioned. The Mid-Rise Design Guidelines identifies the need to include a “sun/shadow analysis and a wind study to demonstrate how a proposed
development is designed to mitigate unwanted microclimatic impacts.” We would caution that building shadow casting (within intensification areas) does not equate to the benefits that
come from natural shade (i.e. trees). As part of the analysis and study process – we would encourage you to include assessing the impacted space for green infrastructure/equitable access
to trees. Trees have the added benefit (over building shadow casting) to provide evapotranspiration (additional cooling effect to offset UHI), aesthetics, and other health, social,
and environmental benefits trees provide.Cyclists – Majority of the guidelines currently focus on pedestrian-friendly/supportive environments with some intermittent mention of cyclists.
Consider expanding use of trees/streetscape design elements to provide benefits to cyclists and multi-use pathway users.Traffic calming – There was mention in a number of guidelines
about utilizing traffic calming measures along streets. Consider including trees as a traffic calming strategy not only for safety but also for the other benefits trees provide.Public
art – There is a lot of mention throughout the manual of incorporating public art. Consider integrating multipurpose art to provide shade in a strategic location (e.g. over seating).
This could be achieved through a natural or built art form.
4 - 236
YYYYYYYYYY
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
YYYYYYYYYY
NNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
CPTED guidelines will be updated through the 'Part C: Standards' update to the Urban Design Manual.The site plan process is currently being reviewed as part of the Development Services
Review. This comments will be passed along as part of the review. Utilities coordination to preserve locations for mature streets as part of the streetscape is a new process/step that
is currently being integrated into the site plan review process. Compared to the previous UDM that is currently in effect today, the language in the new document is much more directive
and specific. In order to stike a balance, some flexibility (on limited, more ambitious guidelines) is needed to provide for alternative design responses to address the City's expectations.
Agreed. As a next step following approval of the document, urban design staff will be working with planning staff and the DSD review process to improve urban design guideline implementation.
Staff will revised the language to better suit MACKS suggested language.Staff will ensure that the WHO and the Age Friendly Kitchener principles are contained within the guidelines
however it is not our practice with this document to reference third party publications. This section is designed to focus on marginalized groups. Staff will address income levels elsewhere
in this section.The audience of this document is the planner, the developer the stakeholder and the public. The vision is simple and clear and speaks to promoting good design which
is designed to benefit the public and make Kitchener the best designed mid-sized city in Canada.Yes, visitable spaces is in direct reference to living units. We have included serveral
guidelines that speak to visitability throughout the document.Staff will be working to ensure that new developments have services and amenities for people at all stages of life through
the use of these guidelines.Agree this would apply to anyone and everyone who is challenged with mobility. By requiring a greater range of housing types, sizes and tenures we are opening
the door for a variety of units targeting a broader range of price points. Agreed. This has been addressed.Added reference to water fountains explicitly.Agreed this was incorporated
into guidelines pertaining to age friendly units.Social infrastructure refers to community assets, community services and facilities and public housing.Visitability is probably better
referenced in the 'Age and Family Friendly' section than the Sustainability section.Agreed. Added. Added reference to washrooms and water fountains explicitly.The language was revised
to provide increased clarity.Added in street design.Staff have added extensive guidelines around Stormwater Management. Together these guidelines will work with the City's Stormwater
Management Plan to address flooding caused by reduced impervious surfaces. Staff have added reference to naturalized boulevards as an alternative to grass throughout the document.Noted.
Safety – Throughout the manual there is mention of creating projects and environments to promote safety of the user of the space through applying CPTED principles. Trees/green space
have been found to increase safety and therefore should be included.To ensure the inclusion of trees/shade and avoid conflict with CPTED principles, the right type of shade/tree for
the space needs to be selected. This includes selecting the right tree for the right space (e.g. factoring lower branch height to not impede with sightlines, selecting a tree with dense
or dappled shade); maintaining care of the tree (e.g. pruning of lower branches), etc. The Shade Work Group of Waterloo Region’s shade tree list can help in selecting the right tree.Alternately
to trees, built or removable shade may be an option that may work more effectively within the space – looking at slatted wood or metal panel system, using fritted glass, etc.A solution
can always be found to meet both CPTED principles and shade design considerations.Long-term site planning – Consider long-term site plans when planting new trees (e.g. newly planted
trees have been damaged after concrete/paving work was completed). This will require coordination with staff working on the Urban Forest Strategy. It may mean deferring tree planting
until a future project is completed. This falls under the larger picture Urban Forest Strategy plan for planting.Utilities coordination - Consider subsurface or trenchless technology
installation rather than tree removal to address conflicts with underground utilities.Sounds great but still is weak on keeping the developers to the plan due to wording such as: Wherever
possible and Should be.The guidelines (generally referred to as expectations) are only good if implemented & enforced. Understand that the City may trade off in many cases (with developers)
but that will call into question commitment to a vision for our City.Avoid the terms elderly & senior where possible. Prefer phrasing toward the end "...members of all ages, identities,
cultural traditions and abilities".Would have liked a statement of commitment to an age-friendly city with reference perhaps to the WHO principles. It may be implied and it should
be explicit.Under Inclusivity: should this speak to inclusion of those of all income levels?Vision: guessing that intended audience for this document is the planner & developer. This
vision leaves me as a citizen though very cold. Want a city designed to enable me to live & age well; to thrive & participate actively in my community. Would like to be explicit in
our vision of what a well-designed city is.Kitchener...belongs to all of us: Liked the reference to affordability. Does the reference to accessible & visitable spaces include living
units? Would like to see this concept addressed at some point.Age-Friendly Design: I liked the section. I would return to my concern above, when I see reference to "benefiting all
people", that this often gets compromised as developments are brought on stream.Mobility independence is not just an issue for kids and seniors.Our mix of housing types does not appear
to include cost.I would wish the opportunity for older adult services to be also in central locations & let's allow for creative service delivery.When we talk about benches & washrooms,
do we wish to consider fountains?Unit Scale: Visitability not only for those residing in a unit but also the ability to visit another in their accommodation.Social Infrastructure: Is
it public or social housing? Design for Sustainability: Health & Wellbeing: Noticed the reference to affordability. Perhaps a nod to visitability? among housing options.Street Design:
Ensure we also minimize points of conflict between pedestrians and cyclists.Can we think about washrooms and fountains? They benefit not only the older adult and also the homeless.Park
& Open Space Design: The language around consultation seemed a little off. Editing?When speaking to a comfortable environment, I am looking for seating, washrooms & even fountains.Question
regarding long-term environmental sustainability. Weather patterns are changing creating more storms and flooding. As older homes are renovated with additions and as house sizes increase,
there is less permeable ground for water to be absorbed leading to more flooding. The insurance industry is tracking this and changing coverage for flooding. Suggestion to replace
grass with native species ground cover plants on boulevards to help manage rainwater.Zero form gardening recommended.
All Sections
Written & Interview
Mayor's Advisory Committee Kitchener Seniors (MACKS)
4 - 237
YYYYYYYYYYY
NNNNNN
YYYYYYYYYYY
NNNNNN
This has been referenced in the City Wide Design and the Downtown section of this document. This is not currently being considered by the zoning team at this time.This is currently
what is required by the building code. As the code changes the Manual will evolve to require greater than 15% be barrier-free. Of course at this time we would encourage all units to
be barrier-free accessible.Guidelines for Downtown have reflected the desire to have a mix of units, types and tenures. Changes made to document to address suggested revision.Changes
made to document to address suggested revision.Changes made to document to address suggested revisions.Changes made to document to address suggested revisions.Changes made to document
to address suggested revisions.Changes made to document to address suggested revisions.Changes made to document to address suggested revisions.Changes made to document to address suggested
revisions.Staff will be adding a 'How to use the Guidelines' as an introduction section the the Manual. The intent of this section will be to provide more clarity as to how staff intend
to implement the guidelines and how stakeholders should read and respond to the various section of the Urban Design Manual in urban design reports that they will prepare in support
of an application.This wording has be revised to provide more clarity and to remove the reference to 'exceeding' guidelines in the City Wide Section.Designing the first 12m of a building
to minimize bird strikes does not necessarily mean eliminate glazing. The use of bird stickers, fritted glass, avoiding reflective glass and minimizing glass tunnels are all ways in
which glazing can be preserved and bird strikes can be minimized.A direct reference to the Tall Building Design Guidelines has been provided. This guideline is currently existing in
the Suburban Neighbourhood Brief in Part B of the Urban Design Manual. This guideline is consistent with Transportation Services minimum requirement for on-street parking in new developments.
Staff will review this requirement through the residential zoning review and if appropriate, it may be added into the zoning.This guideline is currently existing in the Suburban Neighbourhood
Brief in Part B of the Urban Design Manual. The Urban Design Manual is an implementation measures of the City's Official Plan. It is important to have this guideline in the manual
as site plans do not need to comply directly with the Official Plan, but instead the Zoning By-law and the Urban Design Manual (which implement the OP).
Need a greater variety and mix of unit options in large developments, particularly in downtown, not just 1 bedroom units. Could this be incorporated into a zoning bylaw? 15% barrier
free units not enough. All units should be visitable by anyone.Downtown is not going to be affordable for many, and isn't doing to draw a mixed demographic is mostly 1 bedroom units.Revise
to add 'Where feasible', locate utilities underground to improve the appearance of a site.Revise to add: Group or consolidate utility boxes, meters, and ventilation elements to minimize
their visual impact 'while ensuring suitable accessibility for maintenance.' Consider innovative ways to integrate services into streetscape features or architectural elements.Revise
to add: Consolidate utility boxes, meters, and HVAC to minimize their visual impact 'while ensuring suitable accessibility for maintenance'. Consider innovative ways to integrate services
into streetscape features or architectural elements.Revise to add: Incorporate any required above-grade utility and servicing structures into the residential streetscape through compatible
building design, screening elements and landscaping, 'while ensuring appropriate maintenance access'.Revise to add: 'All private, on-site' servicing and utility elements, 'such as loading
areas', should be invisible from the public realm.Revise to add: Coordinate and consolidate servicing and utility functions to limit their 'visual' impacts, 'while considering access
for maintenance'.Revise to add: Fully screen 'private, on-site' servicing and loading areas wherever visible from the street.Revise to add: Incorporate all servicing and utility elements
into the design of the building and screen equipment, meters, service areas and other related elements fully from public view 'where feasible'.Revise to add: Incorporate all servicing
and utility elements into the design of the building and screen equipment, meters, service areas and other related elements fully from public view 'where feasible'.Revise to add: Locate
transformers, HVAC equipment and utility meters away from public views 'where feasible'.We would recommend including a guide on how to use the Urban Design Manual at the front, as well
a as a Definitions Glossary to ensure all users understand the terms being used in the context in which they are intended.We see that the City-Wide Design section is formatted to be
the most comprehensive and recommend that the remaining 11 sections refer back to it more diligently throughout the Manual.• Nodes and Corridors Section Page 02: Inclusive Designo “All
design … should meet or exceed the standards established in the City-Wide Design section of the manual” – This is frequently mentioned beneath each subheading.o Similar headings are
used repeatedly in the document, particularly in New Neighbourhoods and Industrial Employment Areas.o Also, as a general note, we believe that exceeding the standards will be difficult
to quantify. We recommend wording that indicates that meeting standards is a minimum requirement.Reference specific policies wherever possible to avoid contradictory statements and
ensure points of view can be enforced. For example:• City-Wide Design Section Page 14: Design for Sustainability>Design for Wildlifeo “Design the first 12m of a building to prevent
bird strikes by limiting the potential for reflection of trees and sky through material choice and detailing” – We find this contradicts CROZBY with 65% required glazing.Reference specific
policies wherever possible to avoid contradictory statements and ensure points of view can be enforced. For example:• Major Transit Station Areas Section Page 06: Scale & Transitiono
“For large sites or consolidated blocks with multiple tall buildings, provide the greatest building height either at the most prominent intersection or internally within a site where
it will create the fewest negative impacts” – We feel that the document should reference The Tall Building Guidelines for this kind of information.Reference specific policies wherever
possible to avoid contradictory statements and ensure points of view can be enforced. For example:New Neighbourhoods Section Page 15: Vehicular Access & Parkingo “Provide 1 on-street
parking space for every 2-single detached dwelling units.” We feel this should be in the ZBL, not the UDM. Is there a suggestion on how to design this? Will criteria be provided?Reference
specific policies wherever possible to avoid contradictory statements and ensure points of view can be enforced. For example:New Neighbourhoods Section Page 01: Design Objectiveso Stated
under the OP in section 11.C.1.26 (Urban Design, Neighbourhood Design)o We would recommend against duplication of content. Instead “recommend referring to OP…” to avoid contradiction.
City-Wide DesignResidential Infill in Central NeighbourhoodsNew NeighbourhoodsNodes & CorridorsIndustrial Employment AreasMid-Rise BuildingsLow-Rise Multiple ResidentialLow Rise Commercial
& Mixed UseAll SectionsCity-Wide DesignCity-Wide DesignMTSANew NeighbourhoodsNew Neighbourhoods
Written
Stakeholder
4 - 238
YYYY
NNNNNNNN
YYYY
NNNNNNNN
This guideline has been modified to provide more clarity. The new guideline now reads "Provide a mix of townhouse block lengths ranging from 4-8 linear units." It is not intended that
stacked town typologies would count towards the total number of units. Staff will review this requirement through the residential zoning review and if appropriate, this may be added
into the zoning.Staff have revised the 2.0m to reference the 1.8m proposed ask part of the upcoming Complete Streets policy.Longer term bike storage could exist in the form of covered
outdoor bike parking. Providing a requirement that buildings on a CROZBY requirement is not intended to conflict with CROZBY but to provide a greater deal of options for sites that
might benefit from longer term bicycle parking outdoors.This landscape setback is designed to provide a buffer between different uses on different sites. If site connectivity is desired
by design this number can be changed. If the number is provided as a zoning regulation, a variance would be required to provide connectivity between sites. Providing the setback in
the urban design manual provides for more design flexibility.Part A of the Manual has guidelines around safety. Standards specifically related to CPTED will be addressed as part of
the update to Part C of the Urban Design Manual.Noted. Will consider this link as we do final graphics and layout. Further reference material is provided in the Bird & Wildlife section
of the City-Wide Design GuidelinesThe stormwater objectives are provided in the City's Stormwater Masterplan. The canopy objectives have not yet been defined through the foresty strategy.
This will be completed as a future initiative. These measures are outlined in more detail in the City's Stormwater Masterplan. In addition, LID technology specs and standards will be
further outlined in Part C of the Urban Design Manual update.As a final task in the final draft, staff will be preparing more images, graphic and pictures to enhance communication.
Staff will provide a reference back to the PARTS plans that provide detailed maps and legends.Noted. Staff will work on enhancing visualisations/diagrams in this section.
Reference specific policies wherever possible to avoid contradictory statements and ensure points of view can be enforced. For example: New Neighbourhoods Section Page 05: Lot Designo
“Provide a mix of townhouse block lengths ranging from 4-8 units.” Why limit to 4-8 units? What if they are stacked towns? It would be more beneficial to identify ideal range in length
as opposed to number of units. Specify in CROZBY Zoning for each type of townhome and should not be noted in the UDM.o Similar commentary is also used in Low-Rise Multi-Residential
Street Townhouses.Reference specific policies wherever possible to avoid contradictory statements and ensure points of view can be enforced. For example:Nodes and Corridors Section
Page 04: Street Design> Pedestrians and Cyclistso “2.0m public sidewalk” requirement. Reference the City of Kitchener Sidewalk Policy which dictates the sidewalk width depending on
the site. If the site does not fall under the categories in the Sidewalk Policy the City of Kitchener’s Development Manual states that all sidewalks should be 1.5m in width combined
with a 0.5m boulevard to the face of curb.Reference specific policies wherever possible to avoid contradictory statements and ensure points of view can be enforced. For example:Nodes
and Corridors Section Page 04: Pedestrian & Cyclistso Providing a range of short- and long-term bike parking outside – We feel this contradicts CROZBY zoning as it dictates only Type
B Parking Outside. Refer to definitions Bicycle Parking Stall, Class A and B.Reference specific policies wherever possible to avoid contradictory statements and ensure points of view
can be enforced. For example:Nodes and Corridors Section Page 07: Landscapingo We find that the request to provide “a 3.0m wide landscape area along the edge of a site” is vague and
restrictive, as some zones permit you to be closer via the required setbacks. Also, the requirement of a 3.0m landscape buffer to parking along interior and rear lot lines should be
specified in the ZBL, rather than in the UDM.More specific direction as to where reference material and policies can be accessed. For example:New Neighbourhoods Section Page 06: Safetyo
OP 17.E.22.6. Says to go to the UDM for CPTED principles. There should be some direction for the reader on where to go for these principals. We feel the CPTED should be included in
the City-Wide Design section.More specific direction as to where reference material and policies can be accessed. For example:Industrial Employment Areas Section Page 08: Site Function
>Stormwater Managemento “New development shall comply with the City of Kitchener’s Integrated Stormwater Management Master Plan criteria for stormwater pond construction” - We recommend
a link to the plan. The plan should also be included in the City-Wide Design section.More specific direction as to where reference material and policies can be accessed. For example:Nodes
and Corridors Section Page 03: Design for Sustainability>Design for Wildlifeo “Design to conserve, protect and enhance existing wildlife habitats and bird migration patterns” – Is there
material to reference with recommendations?More specific direction as to where reference material and policies can be accessed. For example:Nodes and Corridors Section Page 13: Urban
Corridors>What is an Urban Corridoro Where do we find “Kitchener’s stormwater and tree canopy objectives”?More specific direction as to where reference material and policies can be
accessed. For example:Green Areas Section Page 3: Design for Sustainability>Design for Climate Changeo “Design parks and open spaces for water efficiency including Low Impact Development
(LID) measures” - Where would one find these measures?Communicate information more consistently. The Industrial Employment Areas is effective in its use of reference imagery and diagrams
and the other sections would benefit from additional visuals.Major Transit Station Areas Section Page 12: Design for Downtono This kind of description would be better communicated with
a map and legend.New Neighbourhoods Section Page 05: Categoriesof Visual examples (photos or diagrams) should be provided for each. For example, City of Brampton provides photos, street
section and plan for window streets.
New NeighbourhoodsNodes & CorridorsNodes & CorridorsNodes & CorridorsNew NeighbourhoodsIndustrial Employment AreasNodes & CorridorsNodes & CorridorsGreen AreasAll SectionsMTSAsNew Neighbourhoods
4 - 239
YYY
NNNN
...
YYYY
NNNN
Staff will be revising the graphics and photos in this section to better align with the remainder of the UDM.Noted.Noted. Staff will consider as we make final adjustments to figures/graphics/photos
in the final phase of the project. When riding on roads cyclists do not have to dismount to cross the street. This guideline encourages developers to make entering and navigating parking
garages easier for cyclists (which includes the location of bicycle storage) so that people living in multi-residential buildings are encouraged to pursue active transportation options.
The Urban Design Manual intentionally has more direct and prescriptive language than the existing 20 year old version of the document. Staff feel that providing more direction and design
guidance assists the industry, the public and Council with an understanding of Kitchener's expectations for good urban design. Vague wording with wording such as 'encourage' or 'where
possible' does little for elevating urban design in Kitchener. The Urban Design Manual in its entirety allows for flexibility depending on the context. Where a specific guideline cannot
be met, the urban design report should address why and provide alternatives. The language also provides a balance between what industry is requesting and what is being requested by
the public. Not all design guidelines should or can be encoded into policy or zoning, as this can result in inflexible, rigid and similar design solutions that are produced city-wide.
In effort to provide more clarification, staff will be preparing an up-front section that will explain to all users, how to use the manual. The guidelines was revised to read "Where
direct street access to parking, loading or servicing is permitted, place it on the portion of the site that provides the least interruption the streetscape and related pedestrian activity."
This provides more flexibility on a site by site basis and steers away from dicticating a location. Staff do feel that prioritizing pedestrian safety is more important than parking
efficiency and where this guideline cannot be met, the onus is on the applicant to provide demonstrated alternatives in an urban design report. In the Downtown context, it is important
to place buildings at the street with parking behind the buildings. It is likely these would fall into the category of private amenity spaces. Public parks and open spaces should be
visible to the street/public realm.
Industrial Employment Areas - Revisit graphics and diagramso Section Page 06: Built Form> Natural Areas Interfaceo Section Page 06: Built Form> Cornero Section Page 07: Shared Space>
Landscapingo Section Page 07: Shared Space> Forestryo Section Page 09: Introduction> Public Realmproportion of uses compared to today’s industrial typologies.o Section Page 13: Lancaster
Corporate Centre>Sectionso Section Page 14: Shirley>Sections• Downtown Section Page 12o We recommend providing reference maps with highlighted streets to apply specific urban design
directives.• Nodes and Corridors Section Page 09: Key Mapo It’s difficult to contextualize the nodes and orient oneself to and corridors in question. Could the map illustrate the extent
of downtown and major street names?o With 7 City Nodes (Page 10), 6 Urban Corridors (Page 13), 5 Arterial Corridors (Page 14), identify specific intersections/streets for context.Nodes
and Corridors Section Page 14: Arterial Corridors>What is an Arterial Corridoro We find the sample perspectives in each section to be helpful.Green Areas Section Page 01: Kitchener’s
Green Areas>Green Areas Classificationso Include an example (local and inspirational international) for each category?Structured Parking Section Page 06: Site Function>Cyclingo “…cyclists
do not have to dismount to enter or use the garage” – We recommend an explanation on why (cyclists dismount to cross the street, why not the parking structure?). Also, reference images/
diagrams of a similar scenario would be useful to show how to design the space.Use of more flexible wording (rather than prescriptive language like “use”, “avoid”, etc.), such as can
be found in:• City-Wide Design Section Page 24: Shared Spaces>Outdoor Amenityo “Orient balconies to maximize access to sunlight and views and to minimize overlook into surrounding buildings.”
– Should add in “where possible”.City-Wide Design Section Page 28: Site Function> Servicing & Utilitieso “Locate utilities underground to improve the appearance of a site.” – Add “where
possible”.New Neighbourhoods Section Page 12: Building Design Detailso “Provide porches of at least 1.5m in depth, particularly on priority lots and along priority streets.” – “where
possible” or “consider”.New Neighbourhoods Section Page 10: Access and Location,o “Front parks and open spaces on public streets, with a minimum of two street frontages.” This would
make it difficult to have a park back onto a green space. Two streets is ideal, but a minimum is too restrictive.o Mentioned in several other sections, including Design for Residential
Infill in Central Neighbourhoods Section Page 06Major Transit Station Areas Section Page 09: Drivewayso “Where direct street access to parking, loading or servicing is permitted, place
it at the edge of the site to avoid interrupting the streetscape and related pedestrian activity” – We find this restrictive to design, may result in less efficient parking/more parking
structure than is really needed on a site; provide design recommendations to avoid major conflicts with pedestrian pathways as alternative.o This is mentioned in several other sections
including Downtown, Section Page 09Downtown Section Page 09: Site Functions>Vehicular Access & Parkingo “Place parking, loading and servicing areas to the rear of buildings…” – Add
“where possible”Nodes and Corridors Section Page 07: Shared Spaces>Public Arto “Pursue opportunities” - This is good wording• Nodes and Corridors Section Page 05: Parks & Opens Spaces>
Access & Locationo “Locate parks and open spaces as focal points for new development and as central features in nodes and corridors” What about courtyards and gardens? (more quiet and
contemplative spaces not intended to be obvious, but rather discovered).
Industrial Employment AreasNodes & CorridorsGreen AreasStructured ParkingCity-Wide DesignNew NeighbourhoodsMTSA & DowntownDowntownNodes & Corridors
4 - 240
YYYYYYY
NNNNNN
.........
N
YYYYYYYYYY
NNNNNNN
Thanks for the feedback. Staff will push for the implementation of this guideline through site plan review.Long uninterrupted parking decks can become permanent barriers to future pedestrian
connections, create entrapment areas and threaten pedestrian safety. This is of particular concern for large developments in which multiple buildings sit atop a shared parking garage.This
guideline was further explained in the guideline document.Staff will review these guidelines.Staff feel that specifying marginalized groups will provide greater opportunities to address
needs than saying "opportunities for all" which is not as clear or specific. Revised to provide a definition. Changed to say "social spaces".Revised to provide a definition. Some flexibility
is required as is the design response. What is acceptable and where depends on the context and the scale of the building. It is staff's opinion that providing an acceptable area might
be too limiting.Revised to provide more clarity.Very detailed lighting standards are currently in Part C of the Urban Design Manual. This standard represents an updated requirement
for LED lighting.Staff have removed the language surrounding LEED Silver and have replaced this will other sustainable design practices understanding that LEED certification is costly
and not the only method for achieving a sustainable site.These are principles of good urban design, which are designed to provide a streetscape that is not dominated by the automobile.
Good point. Added to the guideline to to also address private roads. This has been removed and changed to "Plant trees, shrubs, ground cover etc. on any unbuilt portions of the site.
Where future phases are contemplated, temporary landscaping may be permissible, provided it is compatible with the permanent landscape site design."Staff have added a reference for
5 hours of day of sunlight on park space from existing and proposed buildings.This details do not need to be shown on the pre-consultation drawings, however at the time of elevation
approval, completed as part of full site plan approval or at the building permit stage, this information should be known and shown on the drawings. Staff have added further clarification
around "as part of the building elevation approval process."This number is total. This is not a requirement, perse but a suggestion for enhance the sustainable components of a site
Industrial Employment Areas Section Page 02: Design for Outdoor Comfort>Four Seasons & Winter City Designo “When designing buildings, consider the use of vibrant colours, human-scaled
lighting, art, four season landscaping and other techniques to bring warmth and visual interest to industrial employment areas.” – We suggest adding in the bold words.Structured Parking
Section Page 04: Inclusivity>Safetyto “Avoid long uninterrupted above-grade parking decks” – We don't believe this to be the most efficient way to lay out a parking garage. Needs further
explanation.Promote inclusive design without listing specific titles.• Downtown Section Page 02: Inclusive Design> Diversityo The language in this section seems very political. We recommend
focusing on aspirational aspects of the goals, rather than using language with political implications.Green Areas Section Page 2: Inclusive Design> Diversityo “Provide parks, open spaces,
and recreational opportunities for persons of all identities, ages, abilities, and cultural and economic backgrounds” – We recommend “opportunities for all”.Avoid abstract terms without
providing definitions, or provide definition in the Manual. Some examples of these terms include:• City-Wide Design, Section Page 03: Kitchener Enjoys o “viewshed”Major Transit Station
Areas Section Page 05: Parks & Open Spaces>Parks & Open Space Designo “social collision spaces”New Neighbourhoods Section Page 05: Street Typologies>Priority Lotso “window street lots”Design
for Residential Infill in Central Neighbourhoods Section Page 06: Built Form>Materials & Articulationso “blank walls” - Contextual nuance up to interpretation; perhaps provide a definition
or a maximum acceptable area.o Mentioned in several other sections including Low-Rise Commercial & Mixed-Use Buildings Scale and TransitionLow-Rise Multi-Residential Section Page 02:
Compatibility>Massing & Placementof "traditional townhouse form"Criteria too specific for a guideline/question scope of Urban Design• City-Wide Design Section Page 26: Shared Spaces>Lightingo
“Site lighting is to have a colour temperature maximum of 3000k, or demonstrated equivalent.”Criteria too specific for a guideline/question scope of Urban DesignMajor Transit Station
Areas Section Page 03: Design for Sustainability>Health & Wellbeingo “Establish high indoor air quality…provide operable windows” – This would be covered by OBC and other regulatory
bodies.Major Transit Station Areas Section Page 03: Design for Sustainability>Design for Climate Changeo “New development is to achieve a minimum equivalent to LEED Silver status” –
There is no such thing as LEED equivalent. It is or it is not.Criteria too specific for a guideline/question scope of Urban DesignNew Neighbourhoods Section Page 12: Building Design
Detailso “Provide individual garage doors on houses with double car garages.” – We find this approach to be inefficient from a utilization and economic standpoint and we are unclear
on the purpose of the criteria.o Similar point on Page 13 “Garages should be recessed behind the front porch or in-line with the habitable portion of the dwelling.”Criteria too specific
for a guideline/question scope of Urban DesignDesign for Residential Infill in Central Neighbourhoods Section Page 06: Built Form>Townhouseso “Townhouses should be oriented to have
their front entrances on a public street in all cases (or alternatively they may front a public park)” – What about a townhouse development with an internal private road, such as Common
Element Condo?o Also mentioned in Low-Rise Multi-Residential Street TownhousesCriteria too specific for a guideline/question scope of Urban DesignNodes and Corridors Section Page 07:
Shared Spaces>Landscapingo Required 100% Planting of an unfinished portion of a phased site is costly and should be considered only when the phasing is longer than a defined timeline
TBD. Temporary planting measures should be permissible.Criteria too specific for a guideline/question scope of Urban DesignGreen Areas Section Page 04: Park Design>Access/Locationo
“Surrounding built form should not negatively impact sun access onto green areas.” Include “for x consecutive hours a day”? Clarify if this is in reference to new or existing forms.Criteria
too specific for a guideline/question scope of Urban DesignLow-Rise Multi-Residential Section Page 02> Massing and Placementof “All visible elements of a building, including utilities
(meters, conduits), HVAC (a/c units, vents) and loading/servicing areas are to be integrated into the design and shown on elevation drawings as part of the building elevation approval
process.” Certain M&E requirements are not typically available at time of the design pre-con.Criteria too specific for a guideline/question scope of Urban DesignLow-Rise Multi-Residential
Section Page 05> Design for Climate Changeo “Provide a 6m2 area on-site for a common garden and composting area.” – Is this per unit?o Who manages this area? How does this work in a
private development with owned lots, for instance?
Industrial Employment AreasStructured ParkingDowntownGreen AreasCity-Wide DesignMTSAsNew NeighbourhoodsResidential Infill in Central Neighbourhoods + All SectionsLow Rise Multiple ResidentialCity-Wid
e DesignMTSAsNew NeighbourhoodsResidential Infill in Central NeighbourhoodsNodes & CorridorsGreen AreasLow Rise Multiple ResidentialLow Rise Multiple Residential
Written
takeholder
S
4 - 241
YY
NNNNNN
YY
NNNNNN
Zoning regulations and the sign by-law would take priority over the design manual. Any setbacks that are provided in the manual are either not on the zoning or may request a greater
setback under certain circumstances. Putting these numbers in the zoning provides for no flexibility to respond to a unique design. Staff feel that the majority of setback should remain
in the zoning, with a few reserved for the UDM. Growing Up is Toronto's document for children and age friendly towers. This document is used through OP/ZC + Site Plan. Our UD manual
will apply to OP/ZC + Site Plan + Capital projects. Therefore it is necessary to speak to a board range of design initiatives, city expectations and best practices.It is staff's intent
to remove repetition from all sections following the stakeholder and internal review. Staff understand that further internal and inter-municipal coordination is needed. Further efforts
with respect to improving this will be addressed though the implementation of the UDM and the development services review. Staff will consider policies for public art initiatives as
part of the UDM implementation process. The Arts & Culture section is being brought forward to the City-Wide section and removed from smaller sections to limit overlap of guidelines
and a general lack of direction as to what is expected.This is intended to apply only to public spaces or privately owned public spaces. Noted. Noted. The City will be updating the
lighting standards as part of Part C of the UDM update. It is possible that through this review a policy will be contemplated.
In general:o Setback restrictions are outlined by Zoning.o Signage is determined in City of Kitchener Sign bylaw.o “New buildings should incorporate green roofs” How will this be enforced?
What about reflective roofs or pitched roofs?o Unit types and tenures are not or should not be part of an Urban Design Manual as they are not subject to Site Plan Approval. Consider
referencing documents like “Growing Up”- “This includes accommodating larger families within multi-residential buildings, conserving the greatest possible mix of unit types, and providing
a full range of price points for both rental and ownership by pursuing affordable housing options at every opportunity”- “Provide a mix of building types and sizes” - How could this
be accomplished by a single developer?- “Provide an appropriate mix of units that includes options for growing families and downsizing seniors.”Avoid repetition throughout the document
and within the same sections. For example:• New Neighbourhoods Section Page 10: Parks & Open Spaces >Parks & Open Spaces Designo “Provide enhanced perimeter street tree planting along
street frontages. Consider a double of row street trees to reinforce the street edge.” – This comment is repeated here and is first noted under Street Trees.• Downtown Section Page
12o All indicated in the Tall Buildings Guidelines – this is repetitive.• Nodes and Corridors Section Page 12: Neighbourhood Nodeso Highlight the differentiating qualities between nodes
rather than repeating the same qualities for each. It’s difficult to distinguish the varying qualities between City, Community, and Neighbourhood nodes in the present layout.• Structured
Parkingo The Health & Wellbeing and Driveways sections are repetitive.Coordinate internally to ensure specific asks are feasible. For example:Attempts in the past have been made by
this Firm and its clients to make connections to existing trail and public space networks and although endorsed by Planning staff, other City departments have not always shared the
same enthusiasm (due to liability, maintenance, etc.)• Major Transit Station Areas Section Page 05: Parks & Open Spaces> Connectivityo “Link MTSA’s with parks, open spaces and natural
areas via trails, complete streets and other pedestrian and cycling connections to create a continuous network of public space along the transit corridor” – Will the city assist in
the maintenance/liability of such connections?• Downtown Section Page 16: Innovation District>UGC3o Provide “future trail connections” – The City (Parks) will need to be on board with
working with developers to maintain/take liability for new trail connections.• Industrial Employment Areas Section Page 03: Parks and Open Spaces> Access & Locations and Connectivityo
We believe this section falls under Municipality oversight.• Green Areas Section Page 04: Park Design>Access/Locationo “Design streetscapes along urban greens to a high standard, with
high quality materials. Integrate the streetscape seamlessly into the park space.” – Is there flexibility to expand into the Public ROW with pavers, etc.? (coordinate with Region).
This conflicts with Region of Waterloo policy.Public Art - We encourage the concept and feel there should be a policy. Consider public art guidelines such as the "Percent for Public
Art" program in Toronto. As it is currently, there is no benefit the applicant, and it depends heavily on developers’ “generosity” or “horse trading” during Site Plan Approval. Additional
ideas on the topic are as follows:• Design for Residential Infill in Central Neighbourhoods Section Page 02: Inclusive Design>Arts & Cultureo There is not always an opportunity to integrate
arts and culture spaces in residential projects.• Industrial Employment Areas Section Page 03: Street Design>Arts & Cultureo “Consider ways to incorporate public art into industrial
employment areas” – recommendations/examples on how to do this?• Green Areas Section Page 07: Shared Spaces>Seatingo “Public art should reward curiosity and exploration…” - This is
great. The description of public art is open-ended and sure to stimulate creativity.• Mid-Rise Buildings Section Page 09: Public Arto “Pursue opportunities to integrate public art into
mid-rise building design…” – If it is not necessary, there is little incentive for a developer to do it.Downtown Section Page 02: Inclusive Design>Safetyo “Hostile design elements are
unacceptable…” – The aspiration is a great thought but need a more balanced approach, wherein there is a defined line between private and public property. This does not account for
security of private property or persons.Nodes and Corridors Section Page 03: Design for Sustainability>Design for Climate Changeo The examples of sustainable technologies provided are
helpful.• Nodes and Corridors Section Page 06: Built Forms>Massingo “Where a blank wall is unavoidable…” – List of suggested strategies is helpful acknowledging blank walls are not
always avoidable.• Nodes and Corridors Section Page 03: Design for Outdoor Comfort>Four Season & Winter City Designo Four Season and Winter City Design section is a good addition.Industrial
Employment Areas Section Page 08: Site Function >Stormwater Managemento “Consider providing rain gardens and bioswales wherever possible. Consider providing permeable pavements wherever
possible. New buildings should incorporate green roofs, and they should be considered where possible during the retrofit process.” – Interesting concept.Green Areas Section Page 07:
Shared Spaces>Lightingo “Design lighting that is specific to the intended function of each space, minimizes light pollution, spill-over and trespass, is bird friendly and dark sky compliant,
and is high efficiency and supports sustainability objectives.”o Mentioned in several other sections including Mid-Rise Buildings and Low-Rise Multi-Residential Design for Wildlife.
City should consider a policy. Make reference to Bird-Friendly design guidelines and policies in all cases.
All SectionsAll SectionsAll SectionsAll SectionsDowntownNodes & CorridorsIndustrial Employment AreasGreen Areas
4 - 242
Y
NNN
......
YYY
NNN
The new Urban Design Manual will be a document that will also be used by the City for capital projects. New park design guidelines are important for both the City as they conduct park
design and development and the private sector as new parks are developed as part of new neighbourhoods.To provide more clarity this guideline has been revised to read: "Build mid-rise
buildings with high-quality, resilient and sustainable materials. A building’s material palette is to contain a variety of complementary materials, carefully detailed and articulated
for proportional and visual harmony while being consistent in their architectural intent. Avoid materials which appear monolithic, flat, or unresolved. Where a palette contains such
materials, it is expected that options for colour, texture, patterns, finish and details (including reveals, how the material frames openings, etc) will be explored through a collaborative
design process." At this time, there are no specific guidelines for POPs (Privately owned public spaces). This will be considered through the update to Part C: Standards.The first
guidelines speaks to minimizing conflicts between pedestrian traffic and egress to a parking garage. The second guideline speaks to how parking garages can be gateway elements at intersections
or to neighbourhoods/commercial main streets and therefore the architecture could be dynamic, provide public art or interest in a way that would contribute to a sense of arrival. Staff
will be adding a 'How to use the Guidelines' as an introduction section the the Manual. The intent of this section will be to provide more clarity as to how staff intend to implement
the guidelines and how stakeholders should read and respond to the various section of the Urban Design Manual in urban design reports that they will prepare in support of an application.The
design guidelines provided as part of Part A are much more specific and provide a more detailed design direction than our current Urban Design Manual. The level of specificity provided
in the document is on par (or exceeds) that of other design manuals across the province. As staff move forward to creating the final document, further examples, images and graphics
will be prepared to illustrate examples and concepts. Specific standards will be applied through a future update to Part C of the urban design manual. Part A is focuses on objectives
and we have intentionally preserved flexibility with regard to how those objectives are achieved to respond to the broad industry consensus that flexibility is key to urban design guidelines
and to encourage creative and thoughtful design solutions to site-specific constraints and opportunities. A
Park locations and designs – why have these been included in the UDM? Wouldn't these be City designed initiatives?Clarify if precast finish is interpreted as a “quality material” rather
than “a material that resembles stucco” (mentioned in several sections including Low-Rise Commercial & Mixed-Use Buildings and Low-Rise Multi-Residential Façade Design).o “Build multi-residential
buildings with high-quality, resilient and sustainable materials such as stone, brick, metal and glass. Material such as vinyl, stucco-style finishes, painted concrete and highly reflective
glass do not age well and are discouraged.” – We believe painted concrete to be quality product that is sustainable and durable.Are there POPs guidelines?o Referenced in various sections,
including Mid-Rise Buildings Section Page 08> Outdoor Amenity mention “both private and public shared spaces”.Structured Parking Section Page 03: Building Componentso There are conflicting
statements in this section. Entry & Access “Locate garage driveway entrances where they interfere least with pedestrian traffic…” vs. Focal Points & Gateways, “parking structures often
function as gateway elements… enhance this experience.The Part A Guidelines need an introductory section. This should provide a clear introductory piece to the broader Part A Urban
Design Guidelines that outlines how the document is intended to be read and used. We feel it will eliminate the need for the numerous cross references between chapters of the Guidelines
and would assist with setting the tone for the application and interpretation of the Guidelines.We suggest that such a section should:may be other design solutions that can be proposed
and considered on their merits;circumstances, certain guidelines and standards may not be physically achievable; andThe language and content does not necessarily offer the specific
guidance expected of design guidelines. The wording in numerous sections and guidelines is akin to broader policy-based direction, rather than more specific guidance on the design details.
While we recognize the Guidelines are generally applied moving from city-wide to area-specific or typology-specific, in many instances they do not offer much more guidance than what
is already provided in existing policies. In this regard we are concerned that the Guidelines do not provide a meaningful expression of the City’s expectations that can form the basis
of the design dialogue moving forward with planning and development applications.We would suggest a further review by Staff to determine whether further guidance may be warranted to
provide a greater level of specificity in some guidelines, in the interests of clarifying to users what is intended. Introducing examples, including representative images/diagrams as
necessary, will be helpful in expressing expectations. The use of “for instance” with examples may be helpful to more clearly express expectations, while still providing flexibility
for other suitable considerations. Also, revisions should clarify how specific guidelines are intended to implement the Urban Design policy statement, vision statement, and/or overarching
design principle.
All SectionsAll SectionsMid-Rise BuildingsStructured ParkingAll Sections
Written
Stakeholder
4 - 243
YY
......
YYYY
Staff recognize that there is currently duplication in the final draft of the guidelines. This is intentional at this stage in the review process to ensure that all parties have the
opportunity to review each topic of each subsection and provide staff with comments prior to removing the duplication. As staff move toward the final version, the duplication within
the sub-sections will be removed and guidelines that are applicable across the city will be moved to the City-Wide section. The Urban Design Manual in its entirety is an implementation
tool of the Official Plan, while reflecting current urban design practices and principles. The Official Plan provides direction for the creation of an urban design manual and does not
provide comprehensive instruction on what that manual is to contain.An introductory 'How to Use the Guidelines' section that staff will be adding to the manual should provide some clarification.
Over the summer months staff will be working on the working to ensure language is as consistent and clear as possible. The Urban Design Manual intentionally has more direct and prescriptive
language than the existing 20 year old version of the document. Staff feel that providing more direction and design guidance assists the industry, the public and Council with an understanding
of Kitchener's expectations for good urban design. Vague wording with wording such as 'encourage' or 'where possible' does little for elevating urban design in Kitchener. The Urban
Design Manual in its entirety allows for flexibility depending on the context. Where a specific guideline cannot be met, the urban design report should address why and provide alternatives.
The language also provides a balance between what industry is requesting and what is being requested by the public. Not all design guidelines should or can be encoded into policy or
zoning, as this can result in inflexible, rigid and similar design solutions that are produced city-wide. In effort to provide more clarification, staff will be preparing an up-front
section that will explain to all users, how to use the manual. Staff have worked closely with the zoning team to ensure that definitions and wording is similar in order to facilitate
easy of use between the two documents. Where more complex words or phrases have been used, staff have added a "DYK" - did you know - sidebar in the margin that seeks to explain the
concept. This is to ensure the document is accessible to the public, stakeholders, industry and staff. Over the course of finalizing the draft, staff will ensure that bolded and italicized
terms are consistent throughout the document. Upon review of the final draft if you feel there are definitions that remain inconsistent among documents, please provide direction to
staff at to which specific guidelines you are referring to and we will review prior to bringing the document to Council for approval.
There is significant duplication within the Guidelines. At the outset of our review, we expected the City-Wide Guidelines would provide general guidelines applicable throughout all typologies
and urban structure areas, with the latter two guideline sets providing additional, more specific design guidance above that of the general guidance.This is not the case; there are
two challenges we see. First, there is duplication of existing policy statements contained in the Official Plan and other policy documents. This is further to our #2 point above, which
has the effect of confusing the purpose of guidelines of providing additional implementation guidance. Second, there is duplication of design guidelines within chapters as well as duplication/restat
ing or rephrasing the same guidelines between chapters of the Guidelines. On this second point, as currently written, it is challenging to maneuver between the City-Wide Guidelines and
the typology of urban structure where they share similar or the same guidelines. Further, there are subtle differences between the general and specific areas which raise questions reading
into the differences.We appreciate Staff’s approach of preparing each set of the Guidelines with “full coverage” of design themes and guidelines to show applicability for discussion
purposes. We understand Staff’s intent is to re-work the drafts to remove these overlaps and duplication. We support this scaling back of the content. Together with our suggestions
for points #2 and #4, this should avoid repeating or restating policies contained in the Official Plan and other planning implementation instruments and eliminate redundancies within
chapters to the extent possible.The format would benefit from a more coherent structure within each theme in the chapters. Currently, the draft Guidelines read in isolation from higher-order
policy directions on matters of urban design, particularly concerning linkages to the Official Plan. As an implementing tool of the Official Plan, we would expect that these are important
linkages to stress, particularly considering the application of guidelines. The introductory sentences of most sections currently provide a commentary that highlights an intent of the
respective theme, and which could serve as the basis for an overarching principle for the theme or topic.We suggest re-working the framework for each chapter or design theme to provide
a clearer progression from design vision/policy to over-arching design principles (related to achieving that vision/policy), to a series of design guidelines that could achieve the
associated principle. This would assist in establishing the higher-level design principle that is to be met and a set of design guidelines that can achieve this principle, recognizing
the intended flexibility in the latter for alternative solutions. Additionally, this would assist in providing clarity as to the Guidelines’ application as a flexible tool rather than
a checklist.The Guidelines interchangeably use design terms. The draft Guidelines regularly mix the use of vision statements, objectives, design principles, guidelines and standards
throughout the different chapters. The interchangeable use of these terms throughout the draft Guidelines adds to the confusion of the reader. We suggest that the introductory section
per point #1 above should include a set understanding of what a “vision”, “objective”, “principle” and “guideline” is for the purposes of the Part A Guidelines, as well as a “standard”
as it affects the Part C Standards. Our suggestions for point #4 would also assist in clarifying the role and purpose of the different terms within the context of the broader Urban
Design Manual.The language of some guidelines is too prescriptive. We would expect that design guidelines are to be discretionary guidance tools that provide expectations for design,
but which include alternative solutions for achievement in different contexts. In this sense, “should” is implied throughout design guidelines. In some cases in the draft Guidelines,
however, the language used is directive, indicating that proponents must implement the specified design intervention. This type of language does not provide the level of flexibility
necessary to explore creative design solutions or to recognize circumstances where design interventions may not be possible or appropriate. It may set unrealistic expectations for Council
or the public, where it is not warranted or appropriate. We would suggest removing such prescriptive language to ensure the intent of design guidance is maintained. Where such prescriptiveness
is needed by Staff, it is better addressed either as a higher-level principle or incorporated into a policy, rather than as a guideline.Some terminology and definitions are not clear.
In some cases throughout the Guidelines, phrases or words are bolded, capitalized or italicized indicating they are referring to a defined term; however there are not always corresponding
definitions. We see three challenges:o Several terms used in the draft Part A Guidelines do not align with how the terms are defined in the Official Plan, the Zoning By-law, or other
associated implementation tools. While the definitions in these tools would take precedence over guidelines, the distinction is concerning in terms of application and use of the guidelines.o
There are some terms used throughout the Guidelines that we believe may have different meanings to different audiences that would benefit from having a definition.o There are some terms
used in different sections of the Guidelines that seem to have different meanings depending on the context.We suggest that Staff’s intended re-working of the draft Guidelines should
address this need for clarity, particularly reconciling sections where the Part A Guidelines are inconsistent with other planning instruments. The revised Guidelines should be consistent
in italicizing or bolding terms that have definitions. A glossary of definitions at the end of the Part A Guidelines will be helpful, distinguishing where different meanings are prescribed
for different contexts, as necessary.
ll Sections
A
Written & Interview
Stakeholder
4 - 244
N
...
Y
YY
N
The new Urban Design Manual is intended to be used by City staff, the industry, stakeholders and the public. Design for everyone goes beyond just built form, therefore these sections
are important to describing the overall design direction for the future of the City of Kitchener. The guidelines to which you refer are all addressed in the City-Wide section. The
built form guidelines which would mainly be used by industry contain fewer of these guidelines. Staff intent to provide a section at the front of the manual which seeks to provide further
clarity around 'how to use the guidelines'.Staff are bringing forward Part A of the Manual this Fall. Part B will not contain additional guidelines but instead, streetscape and geographically
specific design reports or plans prepared in the future. Some sections contained in the existing Parts B & C will be carried over in the interim prior to their future update. Other
sections are being deleted as they have been folded into the new Part A. Part C, that will provide the terms of reference for studies as mentioned in Part A will be initiated as a phase
2 of this project. It is important that Council supports Part A prior to us conducting the full overhaul of Part C.Staff have made updates to the draft to reflect the some of the comments
heard at the stakeholder sessions.These guidelines were removed from individual sections and replace with the following two guidelines in the City-Wide section of the Urban Design Manual:
Some subjects covered in the Part A Guidelines cannot be appropriately addressed through Planning Act approvals processes. Several design themes or individual guidelines promote design
measures that go beyond the scope of what can be reviewed and approved through the Planning Act (e.g. interior design considerations, or marketability/price points of housing units).
In addition, there are some topics contained in the document that are bigger picture considerations that we submit are better addressed/resolved at a policy planning level (e.g. the
Official Plan or Corporate Strategic Planning level) than through the UDM. While we generally do not have concerns with these topics, we struggle with how we would demonstrate that
these topics are addressed through a development approvals process. For example, the Smart Cities chapter in the City-Wide section contains many innovative concepts, though many of
the specific guidelines are not subject to a planning application per the Planning Act. We would suggest that such sections or guidelines be repositioned to incorporate these ideas
and concepts as part of other appropriate policy planning undertakings such as the OP Review and Corporate Strategic Planning processes. We appreciate that Staff feel such topics are
an important part of the design dialogue; however, their inclusion likely confuses expectations. Alternatively, if they are to remain in the UDM for other purposes (e.g. commitments
for City of Kitchener facilities or City of Kitchener road reconstruction projects) their intended application should be specified in the introductory section or the specific chapter.It
is difficult to review Part A without a parallel update to Parts B and C (Design Briefs and Design Standards). We have concerns with updating Part A of the UDM without a similar update
to Parts B and C which contains design briefs and design standards of the UDM respectively. As discussed in our meeting, it is our understanding that some of the guidelines currently
in Part A of the UDM (such as CPTED design guidelines) are proposed to be moved to Part C of the UDM as part of this process, though that has not yet been presented. We would benefit
from reviewing how the CPTED guidelines currently in Part A are translated to new standards before we are able to comment on their elimination from Part A as proposed. Similarly, Part
A contains reference to studies that may be required (such as Viewshed, Wind and Shadow Studies); however, the standards for what those studies are required to address have yet to be
developed.We would suggest that the UDM be considered as a sum of its parts, with the Part A Guidelines being considered together with the design briefs contained in Part B and design
standards contained in Part C. This should be clearly expressed in the introductory section identified in our point #1 above. Standards for studies that form complete application requirements
(including Viewshed, Wind and Shadow Studies) or conditions of development approval (including CPTED reports) should be developed to address Part A guidelines and those standards should
be embedded in Part C of the UDM.Additional editorial comments were provided for each section of the Urban Design Manual.Under Materials & Articulation“Use materials that are complementary
to the neighbourhood context. The replication of older building styles using new materials is discouraged.Materials which resemble stucco in their finish are not considered as consistent
with existing neighbourhood context as stucco was not a part of the historical Kitchener vernacular.”The above language asserts that stucco or materials that resemble stucco is outside
a neighbourhood context without knowing the location of the new project or renovation making applicable to the entire city. Premise is incorrect, as stucco is not absent from Kitchener’s
historical vernacular. Examples of stucco use on residential properties can be found on historic properties. Indeed, the heritage landmark Victoria Park includes examples of stucco
use in dominant roles, not simply limit accents. As such, stucco use should not be precluded from available options, in particular where its use would echo similarly styled properties
in the region, or where its use is consistent with appearances on streetscapes of the particular era. Stucco was not a predominate exterior in 1850 for example, but its use in that
era did not translate to an architectural oddity. Depending on the balance of the project’s design it may well be the most suitable option. The suggestion that replication provides
for lesser buildings than those made from the material being honoured is unfair and likely to be unevenly applied. Would Kitchener also apply that masonry veneer is a poor substitute
for multi-wythe masonry, typical of 50+ years ago? Real quarry stone preferable over manufactured stone products, despite environmental advantages of the later? Unlikely. The planning
department cannot know, or be expected to know all advantages that newer technologies deliver or are meant to provide to the client, nor what durability characteristics are inherent.
This is the place of codes and standards. Contemporary materials may well be able to both replicate a historic material to the degree that they undisguisable from one another, but
also bring numerous ecological and performance advantages. ALTERNATIVE“Use material, colour and variation that is complementary to the neighbourhood context. The replication of older
building styles by selection of a coordinate material without also echoing architectural style, scale and form is discouraged.
Residential Infill in Central Neighbourhoods
4 - 245
...
Y
Guideline has been modified to read as follows in an attempt to address the comment: "Build mid-rise buildings with high-quality, resilient and sustainable materials. A building’s material
palette is to contain a variety of complementary materials, carefully detailed and articulated for proportional and visual harmony while being consistent in their architectural intent.
Avoid materials which appear monolithic, flat, or unresolved. Where a palette contains such materials, it is expected that options for colour, texture, patterns, finish and details
(including reveals, how the material frames openings, etc) will be explored through a collaborative design process." Look for guidelines in the materials section of Low Rise Residential
are updated to reflect his comments
Under Materials & Articulation“Utilize quality materials including masonry, glazing, and metal. Incorporate a greater amount of brick near residential areas.Materials that resemble stucco
in their finish are appropriate for accent areas only and should not be a primary building material. Materials resembling stucco in their finish are not appropriate for achieving a
'traditional' or historical architectural style as stucco is not a part of the Kitchener historical vernacular.”The above language implies that materials such as masonry, glazing and
metal are quality materials, while those not on the list are not. If the user questions if the absence of “stucco” from the list of quality material means it is not desirable, they
need look no further than the next paragraph. An urban design manual should avoid pronouncements on a material quality, without caveats of any sort. 1) Not all masonry, glazing and
metal are of equal quality. 2) Pronouncement gives advantage to the noted materials over those unnoted. The implication that materials that resemble stucco in their finish are suitable
for limited accent areas cannot be viewed in isolation from other sections of the manual where replication by other materials is discouraged and represents an undue impediment to EIFS
use. With regard to a stucco look being outside of Kitchener’s architectural pallet, this again is incorrect. As noted previously, stucco use is within Kitchener’s historical vernacular.
The ability of EIFS modern technologies to replicate traditional materials to a quality and/or with greater benefit than the material it is replacing has been successfully demonstrated
over a wide range of architectural styles. Stucco and EIFS are used interchangeably in the Ontario design and construction communities. Discouragement of stucco will translate to
an impediment to EIFS use and/or confidence. Please note that this comment of replicate technologies is also applicable to language in Low-Rise Multi-Residential section of the manual
under scale & transition where it notes that replication of traditional building elements cannot be replicated to the same impact or level of quality with contemporary materials and
construction practices. While there may be some merit to this for institutional buildings, it is not appropriate in the context of low-rise multi-residential. ALTERNATIVEUtilize
quality materials with validated conformity to the applicable material standard. Where appropriate, incorporate greater amount of masonry style and character near residential areas.Facings
that project monolithic texture, colour and shape should be avoided. Materials should be coordinate with area’s 'traditional' or historical architecture and context. Under Materials
& Articulation“Build mid-rise buildings with high-quality, resilient and sustainable materials such as stone, brick, metal and glass. Material such as vinyl, stucco-style finishes,
painted concrete and highly reflective glass do not age well and are discouraged. Materials resembling stucco in their finish are not appropriate for achieving a 'traditional' or historical
architectural style as stucco is not a part of the Kitchener historical vernacular. Mid-rise buildings should employ a compatible palette of materials providing a variety of colours,
textures, and details. A good mid-rise building is one that finds a balance between being too monotonous (one material or detail repeated over and over) and being too busy (too many
conflicting materials and design elements).”As with previous observations for nodes and corridors, the language in this section of the manual advantages materials noted as “high-quality,
resilient and sustainable” over those not included. However, it goes further than other sections by contrasting “high-quality” options, to materials including stucco-style finishes
by noting they do not age well. The comparison is higher subjective and ignores findings by multiple agencies with regard to EIFS sustainability, resilience and ecological advantages,
relative to most all other building materials (see Annex A). It also repeats the error that stucco is outside Kitchener’s historic flavour. AlternativeMid-rise buildings should
employ a compatible palette of materials providing a variety of colours, textures, and details. A good mid-rise building is one that finds a balance between being too monotonous (one
material or detail repeated over and over) and being too busy (too many conflicting materials and design elements). Build mid-rise buildings with high-quality, resilient and sustainable
materials with demonstrated conformity to material durability assessment standards. Under Materials & Articulation“Utilize quality materials including masonry, glazing, and metal.
Incorporate a greater amount of brick near residential areas.Materials that resemble stucco in their finish are appropriate for accent areas only and should not be a primary building
material. Employ colours, creative architectural details, and enhanced articulation to create unique, engaging and visually interesting environments for users.Concerns with the section
of the manual are the same as those noted under Nodes and Corridors, where the same language pasted above is included. AlternativeUtilize quality materials with validated conformity
to the applicable material standard. Where appropriate, incorporate greater amount of masonry style and character near residential areas.Facings that project monolithic texture, colour
and shape should be avoided. Employ colours, creative architectural details, and enhanced articulation to create unique, engaging and visually interesting environments for users.
Nodes & CorridorsMid-Rise BuildingsLow-Rise Commercial Mixed Use
Written
Stakeholder
4 - 246
YYY
YYY
Page 5: Changes made to address transit users and cyclists and not just pedestrians. Page 7: Change made to both guidelines as proposed.Page 12: Change made to both guidelines as proposed.Page
15: Staff are hesitant to call out transit waiting areas in particular because it is important that unwanted wind impacts be mitigated everywhere. This guideline would indeed apply
to transit user waiting areas, transit stations and on-street shelters.Page 16: Changes made to both guidelines as proposed.Page 17: Changes made to the guideline as proposed.Page 18:
Changes made to the guideline as proposed.Page 19: Changes made to the guideline as proposed.Page 21: Noted.Page 24: Changes made to this section as proposed.Page 27: Changes made to
the guidelines as proposed.Page 1: Changes made to the guideline.Page 2: This is a principle of good design that should be considered in areas close to transit. The guidelines don't
specify where, however it is understood that some of this infrastructure exists at our higher order transit (LRT) stations.Page 4: The intent is not for new transit stops to have wind
studies performed, but that development around transit stops that would be subject to a wind study would consider the impact it would have on the transit stop (ie: by placing a sensor
at this location and striving for sitting wind speeds). A guideline pertaining to snow removal at transit stops was added.Page 5: Changes made to the guidelines as proposed.Page 9:
Transit stops are in the public realm and are therefore captured by the reference to public realm.Page 1: Changes made to the guideline.Page 2: User implies all site users.Page 4: These
guidelines apply to low rise residential areas located on local roads were transit is not generally servicing. Page 9: Guideline added.
Pg. 5, para. 8 – There is emphasis in the second paragraph of this section on the prioritization of modes of transportation, but there is no mention of inclusive design for transit users
elsewhere in this section. Explicit mention of transit users (and cyclists) could be added to the eighth paragraph (“Prioritize transit user, cyclist, and pedestrian safety…” or this
section could be rearranged to reflect the hierarchy introduced above). CPTED principles for site design should also be considered when locating transit waiting areas and other amenities.-
Pg. 7, para. 3 – Retirement, long-term care, and institutional uses should also be located near transit routes. This is mentioned for child care facilities but also applies to the facilities
described in the third paragraph.- Pg. 7, para. 10 – Crosswalks should also be designed for intuitive integration with transit stops, and vice versa. Distances should be as short as
possible, generally, to discourage unsafe road crossing to catch a bus.- Pg. 12, para. 2 – Clarify what “active” public transit use means here. Consider whether it should read “Promote
safe active transportation and public transit…”, unless active has a different meaning in this context.- Pg. 12, para. 3 – In the final sentence of this paragraph, another link to transit
could be made as follows: “…designing compact, walkable, and transit-supportive communities.”- Pg. 15, para. 2 – In the final sentence of this paragraph, it could be specified that
this is important in transit user waiting areas in particular (i.e. transit stations, on-street shelters)- Pg. 16, para. 1 – The hierarchy in modes is not consistent here – motorists
are listed before transit riders.- Pg. 16, para 6 (“Pedestrian & Cyclist Use & Comfort”) – Transit users could also be explicitly provided for here – comfortable spaces and appropriate
access to transit are key components of the pedestrian environment and ought to be highlighted in tandem with walking and cycling.- Pg. 17, para 5 – While staff support the paragraph
regarding locating transit stops, we recommend that equal consideration be given for designing and orienting gateways, planned commercial areas, employment areas, higher density housing
blocks, live-work areas and parks in such a way that transit integration is convenient and seamless (i.e. avoiding long setbacks from the street).- Pg. 18, Wayfinding (para. 2) – We
recommend that wayfinding also consider connections to the transit system in addition to pedestrians and cyclists.- Pg. 19, Parks and Open Space (Access/Location) – Greenspaces and
parks should also be accessible to transit users whenever possible.- Pg. 21, New Development in Existing Neighbourhoods – This type of development should be sensitive not only to existing/desired
parking conditions but also existing and desired transit use. Particularly when integrating higher-density development into existing neighbourhoods, these two items go hand-in-hand,
for example, to reduce the prominence of parking, encourage development that’s transit-supportive.- Pg. 24, Landscaping – Integrating landscaping with on-street transit stops and waiting
areas (and vice versa) in an attractive and intuitive fashion should be another goal of this section.- Pg. 27, Site Function – Vehicular Access and Parking (para. 1): Use consistent
terminology – e.g. “mass transit” should be public transit, and “active transit” is more commonly referred to as active transportation. Alternatively it could be referred to as walking
and cycling as is done elsewhere in the document. Providing intuitive and comfortable access for transit users should also be made explicit in this section, particularly if a transit
stop is adjacent to or located on the site.Pg. 1 – The second section says there are five (5) major station areas, then lists six (6).- Pg. 2 – Clarify if the following is intended
for ION/GRT stops, public spaces, or private development area: “Implement safety infrastructure such as designated waiting areas for transit users, emergency panic buttons, and other
such resources and technologies, where appropriate”- Pg. 4 – Clarify if the intent is that transit stop design should incorporate Wind/Shadow studies and who is responsible for undertaking
these studies. If the intent is that these would be required for a GRT stop on a City road, we recommend that City staff have further discussions with GRT.- Pg. 4 – The largest barrier
to winter transit usage is operational, not design-related. Consider changing the 4 season city section to speak to snow removal service levels.- Pg. 5 – Staff recommend expanding the
wayfinding section to refer to comprehensive, coordinated planning, and who does what. In addition, the focus should work in reverse as well (connecting destinations to transit, not
just transit to destinations).- Pg. 5, Parks and Open Spaces – Consider adding a reference to the transit furnishings and amenities as well so that these can be incorporated into park
design.- Pg. 9, Driveways – We recommend adding a reference to coordinating driveway locations with transit stop locations.- Pg. 9, Servicing & Utilities – Staff recommend explicitly
including transit stops as part of the public realm/share space.- Pg. 9, Garbage & Recycling – Staff recommend explicitly include transit stops as part of the public realm/share space.Pg.
1, Working with the Guidelines: Consider whether the word “or” should be changed to “and” between “MTSAs” and “the ‘Community Area’”.- Pg. 2, para. 3: Along with prioritizing pedestrian
safety, consider adding transit users and the importance of promoting safety through design for transit stops / waiting areas.- Pg. 4, Street Design: We recommend including consideration
of connectivity of residential infill to the Regional transit network whenever possible as well as minimizing conflict between vehicular access points and transit vehicles in driveway
design.- P.9, Driveways: We recommend adding that driveway design should avoid creating conflict points between cars and transit vehicles to the extent possible.
City-Wide DesignMTSAsResidential Infill in Central Neighbourhoods
4 - 247
YYYYYY
NNNNN
YYYYY
NNNNN
Y
Page 1: Change made to the guideline.Page 4: This section does not provide guidelines but mainly an explanation of the different street typologies. This guideline will be added elsewhere
in the section.Page 5: Change made to the guideline. Page 7: Transit user is implied under the category of 'user' safety.Page 8: Change made to the guideline.Page 8: Agreed. Our climate
change guidelines are mainly based around improvements that can be made to buildings to address environmental climate impact.Page 9: Guidelines pertaining to speed bumps or other forms
of vertical traffic calming efforts were removed. In reference to intersection design around avoiding jaywaying - this is implied in prioritize safe crossings and enhanced crossings
at transit stops.Page 10: Added a guideline pertaining to connecting transit network to open spaces.Page 11: Added a guideline to address suggestion.Page 15: Guideline added.Page 1:
Change made. Page 9: Changes made to the guidelines as per the suggestions.Page 4:Guideline added. Noted.Page 5:Guideline added.Page 8:These sections were removed from the Nodes & Corridors
section and therefore guidance for driveway placement will defer to the land ue or City-Wide Section.Added reference to transit stops. Page 4: Changes made to the guidelines as per
the suggestion. This section was removed from the Mid-Rise section and therefore guidance for driveway placement will defer to the land ue or City-Wide Section.This section was removed
from the Low-Rise Multi-Residential section and therefore guidance for driveway placement will defer to the land ue or City-Wide Section.These sections were removed from the Low-Rise
Commercial Mixed Use section and therefore guidance for driveway placement will defer to the land ue or City-Wide Section.These sections were removed from the Structured Parking section
and therefore guidance for driveway placement will defer to the land ue or City-Wide Section.Making King Street a pedestrian only street or changing the direction of car flow are not
within the scope of the Urban Design Manual update. Thanks for the remaining comments. Comments received from these boards and committees have been reviewed and reflected in the final
version of the Urban Design Manual.
Pg. 1, para. 1 – Suggestion to amend text as follows: “…the creation of attractive, walkable, and transit-supportive neighbourhoods…”- Pg. 4, Street Typologies: We recommend that this
section include consideration of the location and placement of transit facilities for arterial and collector streets. Also, consider explicit consideration of locations of landing pads,
shelters, etc.- Pg. 5, para. 3 – Staff suggest adding the word “and stops” after the words “transit routes”.- Pg. 7, Safety – Staff recommend adding consideration of safety of transit
users.- Pg. 8, Health & Well Being – We recommend that this section highlight the importance of designing new neighbourhoods to be transit-supportive. This is achieved by promoting
walkability but also by orienting higher-density uses to higher-order streets, and by considering transit stop locations and amenities early in the design process.- Pg. 8, Design for
Climate Change – Transit use is a climate change mitigation strategy and connectivity of new areas (and particularly mixed-use and residential buildings) to transit could be mentioned
as an important design consideration.- Pg. 9, Traffic Calming – Staff are supportive of the proposed traffic calming efforts but GRT generally discourages vertical forms of traffic
calming (e.g. traffic humps) in favour of horizontal (i.e. chicanes, throat narrowing, etc.) as these have less of an impact on buses, the transit user experience, and transit schedule
adherence.- Pg. 9, Intersection Design – Prioritizing safe crossings for transit users are captured in safe crossings for pedestrians, but this could be made explicit by, for example,
avoiding design and stop placement which encourages pedestrians to jaywalk in order to access a transit stop on the opposite side of the street.- Pg. 10, Connectivity and Community
Trails & Walkways – Staff recommend explicitly noting the importance of connecting open spaces to transit (and vice versa), and integrating trail and walkway systems with transit wayfinding
signage to facilitate connections to and from other parts of the Region.- Pg. 11, Integrating Neighbourhood Commercial Centres – Staff are pleased to see transit-supportive design guidance
in this section. Consider also mentioning the need to connect these nodes to the transit network so as to be accessible to everyone in the community.- Pg. 15, Vehicular Access & Parking
and Driveways – See comments on Chapter 3 (Residential Infill in Central Neighbourhoods), Pg. 9 regarding the location of driveways.Pg. 1, DTK – Staff suggest the last sentence be revised
to say “Grand River Transit bus service, ION Light Rail Transit, GO Train and Bus service and VIA Rail” (in order from local to inter-regional, removes mention of the “Regional Bus
Terminal”).- Pg. 9, Driveways – See comments on Chapter 3 (Residential Infill in Central Neighbourhoods), Pg. 9 regarding the location of driveways.- Pg. 9, Snow Storage – See comment
in Chapter 5 (Downtown), Pg. 9 regarding snow storage.Pg. 4, Pedestrians & Cyclists – The bigger barrier to winter transit usage is operational, not design related. This section could
address design for snow storage around bus stop locations to ensure effective snow clearing for transit passengers.- Pg. 4, Pedestrians & Cyclists – It is recommended that the design
and maintenance of any bicycle parking at transit stops (on the shelter/landing pad) be developed in coordination with transit staff.- Pg. 5, Wayfinding – See comment on wayfinding
on Chapter 2 (Major Transit Station Areas), - Pg. 8, Driveways – See comment in Chapter 2 (Major Transit Station Areas), Pg. 9 regarding coordination of driveways and transit stops.-
Pg. 8, Services/Utilities – Staff recommend explicitly including transit stops as part of the public realm.- Pg. 8, Snow Storage – See comment in Chapter 5 (Downtown), Pg. 9 regarding
snow storage.Pg. 3, Street Design – Staff recommend that the pedestrian network explicitly indicate any bus stop locations, and include direct connections to bus stops and provisions
for landing pads where no public sidewalk is available.Pg. 4, Access/Location – Provision for bus stops (and space for landing pads) should be considered near points of public access.Pg.
10, Driveways – See Comment in Chapter 2 (Major Transit Station Areas), Pg. 9 regarding coordination of driveways and transit stops.Pg. 8, Driveways – See Comment in Chapter 2 (Major
Transit Station Areas), Pg. 9 regarding coordination of driveways and transit stops.Pg. 7 – Lighting – Staff recommend including transit stop locations as places to provide pedestrian
scale lighting.- Pg. 8 – Driveway – See Comment in Chapter 2 (Major Transit Station Areas), Pg. 9 regarding coordination of driveways and transit stops.- Pg. 8 – Services/Utilities:
Staff recommend explicitly including transit stops as part of the public realm.- Pg. 8 – Snow Storage: See comment in Chapter 5 (Downtown), Pg. 9 regarding snow storage.Pg. 3 and 6,
Entry & Access, Driveways – See Comment in Chapter 2 (Major Transit Station Areas), Pg. 9 regarding coordination of driveways and transit stops.Shame that they won't consider King Street
as pedestrian-only but in light of that - what about making it one-way, with Duke Street being the other way. Speed limits should be strictly enforced and put speed bumps throughout
the main part of the UGC1 to discourage people from using it as a way through. Also if "most new projects in the downtown will be either tall or mid-rise buildings," then the lighting
becomes far more important. Rather than non-descript street lights that currently exist. String lighting draped across the streets would provide a more intimate and human scale. Also
festive bunting is a wonderful addition. I think perhaps Goudies Lane occasionally does this. Hurrah to more trees! The project team met with the following Boards & Committees of Council:
Arts & Culture Advisory Committee, Cycling & Trails Advisory Committee, Downtown Advisory Committee, Economic Development Advisory Committee, Environmental Committee and Mayor's Advisory
Committee for Kitchener Seniors.
New NeighbourhoodsDowntownNodes & CorridorsIndustrial Employment AreasGreen AreasMid-Rise BuildingsLow-Rise Multi-ResidentialLow-Rise Commercial Mixed UseStructured ParkingDowntownAll
Sections
WrittenWritten & In PersonWritten & In Person
egion of Waterloo /
RGRTDowntown Kitchener Neighbourhood AssociationCommittees & Boards of Council
4 - 248
Y
NNNN
***
YY
NNNN
Thank you, noted. Staff will consider this recommendation when developing the final draft. Thank you for the letter. As staff proceed with the final version of the document that we will
be taking to Council - we will be looking at how to use graphics, figures and photographs to better explain ideas. We will consider your suggestion for a graphic that shows the interrelationship
between design principles. Staff will revised the guideline "Avoid the use of dark surface materials to limit urban heat island effects" to more clearly articulate the objectives. The
'infill' reference in the document looks at the addition of new development in the form of single detached, duplex, triplex and townhouse development in low-rise neighbourhoods. Areas
planned for intensification are specified as part of the PARTS plans and proposed secondary plans. This section of the Urban Design Manual does not provide permissions for high rise
development in low-rise neighbourhoods. The cover photo of 'Design for Structured Parking' was removed and replaced. Urban design staff met with the author of this comment on site to
review the accessibility concern to ensure that it won't be repeated in future designs. Updates to the lighting section will be completed as Part C of the Urban Design Manual update,
which will be programmed and scheduled at a future date.The neighbourhood specific urban design guidelines in the Urban Design Manual correspond with the name of the Secondary Plan.
This comment will be forwarded to the Secondary Planning Policy team for consideration.
It's been awhile but I am still mulling over the Urban Design Manual and have been able to look back at the drafts again. It really is a great document that contains a lot of visionary
perspectives on what we are and could become.The only thing I would encourage is a bit more bravery and to really push for big changes to the city. From hearing from both of you at
the Cafe session and elsewhere it's clear you understand how to make great urban spaces and I really feel that the Urban Design Manual could be an aspirational document.The City of
Kitchener's last urban design manual was from 1999 and feels very dated. When planning the new design document it is critical to imagine this document being used for the next 20 years
and maybe, like our current, finally coming to fruition at it's end of life. We have to imagine it what kind of city we want to live in in 2039. That's hard to do but it does mean we
need to push the envelope of what we believe a city will be.Furthermore, from my perspective I am confident that we will have greater connectivity to Toronto by that time and that means
we also need to think about the identity of Kitchener even more. What is going to set our community and our neighbourhoods apart? We have seen many communities that with enhanced connectivity
to Toronto lose their identity and uniqueness. Let's design our city around an assumption that the same could happen here and how do we want to define the way we move and live in this
city. So think and dream big! Imagine us having proper separated bicycling facilities, big parks and building the hierarchy of road users into the manual. Let's talk about sheltering
our neighbourhoods from through traffic so that they can increasingly have their own unique identities too. The city of Ghent was once a car based capital but new pedestrian zones and
now a new circulation plan for traffic has seen massive changes making driving easier and safer while also encouraging cyclists and transit use. We can do the same here! I think that
is all of my comments! Be brave and inspire our city to be something unique!Urban design needs to accommodate many different perspectives and uses, as well as the larger context. This
manual goes a long way to identifying many of them, and suggests (although does not explicitly state) how those many perspectives relate to each other, overlap, and are rarely, if ever,
in conflict. For instance there is strong evidence that human health and well-being is enhanced by having walkable neighbourhoods and green spaces. In the long run, this will reduce
health care costs as well as result in a more thriving and happy community. So that citizens, developers, contactors and just plain folks in the community don’t simply see this as an
overwhelming shopping list to check off, it would be useful to have a section showing the systemic interactions and positive reinforcement loops in the document (perhaps near the beginning
or end).Specific comment.One of the big challenges for the next 20-50 years is how to deal with the extremes of weather instability associated with climate change. The manual is strong
on storm-water management, perhaps because that has direct impact on the functioning of city infrastructure.What is less clearly addressed is how designers can mitigate temperature
extremes in the context of larger urban issues. Under “Design for Climate Change” the manual says that building designers should “Design building layouts to maximize natural lighting
and passive solar gain in the winter to reduce energy consumption.” This is good, and clearly directed at the impacts of those who live in the buildings. However, the statement that
one should “Avoid the use of dark surface materials to limit urban heat island effect” appears to be somewhat “orphaned.” The use of dark roofing materials for instance, not only impacts
the internal comfort of the residence, but, through the noted heat island effect, can result in significantly higher use of air conditioners in the neighbourhood around the building.
This is an externalizing of costs by the builder to the neighbourhood and to the next generation; the energy costs are then absorbed by the surrounding neighbourhood and the city. While
each individual building may only contribute a small amount to this effect, the cumulative impact can be very large; it is precisely the cumulative impacts of many small actions that
have led to the climate crisis in the first place. The use of light coloured roofs, rooftop gardens and the like can mitigate this to the benefit of the residents of the individual
buildings, the neighbourhood, and the region. It would be worth making the recommendation to use “green roofing” within this document.Thanks. The documents look so different. So,
are all the elements in the previous document in the Infill document? I still have a problem with the title that suggests that we actually need to infill. While the area can't be "frozen
in time", the title suggests that the direction is in the way of a thaw. As nearly every participant at the charette suggested, there is a fear that nearby high rise buildings will
overwhelm the Victoria Park area. So, we need buffers that really will protect the low-rise historic district rather than infill it. Given that we have seen recent incursions into
the VPHCD, with two houses destroyed and two others put at risk, the design needs to be very strong in the face of density pressures. So, rather than promoting infill, why not reinforce
the statement that built heritage shall be preserved in the VPHCD?If the parking garage you are using for a model of good design is the one in the draft sketch, it is disappointment.
This garage is not accessible friendly and the appearance from the street is deadly...materials do little for enhancing the streetscape! I need to meet with you to explain what happens
for those who require accessible parking and who have to reach their vehicles from Queen Street from the rear of the building.Is the lighting section (specifically) going to be updated
still? As part of the overall UDM updates? I'm just wondering because there doesn't seem to be any activity on it in recent months.Can we officially refer to the neighbourhood as “Olde
Berlin” or “Olde Berlin Town” as opposed to Civic Centre in all land-use documents? To avoid confusion.
All SectionsAll SectionsResidential Infill in Central NeighbourhoodsStructured ParkingPART C - lighting
Written - Received in Spring 2018Written - Received in Spring 2019Written - Received in Spring 2019Written - Received in Spring 2019Written - Received in Spring 2019
Public Engagement on First and Final Draft 2018 & 2019
PublicPublicPublicPublicPublic
4 - 249
Y
NNNNNNNNNNNNNN
Y Y
*********
YYYYYY
NNNNNNNNNNNNNN
New and proposed extensions of existing bike lanes will be planned and implemented through the Cycling and Trails Master Plan. This comment has been forwarded to our Transportation team
for consideration. An urban design guideline was added to encourage extending green boulevards and to enhance the tree canopy. For the purposes of the planning exercise, the Civic Centre
neighbourhood will include both sides of Margaret street, regardless of the proposed intensification. Pedestrian scale lighting, particularly on lanes has been explicitly noted as a
community design objective in the design guidelines. The MTSA section contains guidelines that look at transition in massing and scale between intensification areas and low-rise neighbourhoods
to preserve sunlight. The guidelines are general to all areas within MTSAs, which include intensification areas adjacent to Civic Centre.Staff will review the feasibility of these
and will incorporate the recommended crossings where appropriate, as recommendations in the neighbourhood specific design guidelines.The Parkland Dedication policy would determine where
cash in lieu collected as part of a development can be applied. This comment will be forwarded to Parks & Operations for their review when undergoing an update to this policy.Will incorporate
this recommendation in the neighbourhood specific design guidelines.Yes this will be undertaken through the site plan control process on all new developments.Snow clearing will be reviewed
by the City and Council as part of a separate initiative. Storeys provides more clarity to industry, stakeholder and the public as to what is planned on a site. Most lay-people reading
a by-law or guidelines have great difficulty translating a building height in metres to a number in storeys.Terms of reference for wind and shadow studies will be completed as part
of Part C of the Urban Design Manual update in the future.This is a very specific request that should be looked at from a heritage perspective. The comment will be forwarded to heritage
planning to be addressed as part of any updates to the heritage district plan.This is a very specific request that should be looked at from a heritage perspective. The comment will
be forwarded to heritage planning to be addressed as part of any updates to the heritage district plan.Asking for brick as an predominant exterior is probably too specific as there
are other materials that are complementary to the neighborhood context that would meet the intent of the Heritage District Plan.Porches are important from an urban design perspective
to ensure that there are 'eyes on a street'. Whether a porch is enclosed or unenclosed, it still meets the objectives of increased safety and presence on a street. Transition will be
required between intensification areas and low-rise residential areas. This will be achieved through the design guidelines provided in the MTSA section and zoning regulations such as
stepbacks and setbacks.The changes were considered when preparing the final document. The majority of comments/suggestions/ideas received were incorporated into the draft. Staff will
be working with other divisions to address outstanding comments, as we move towards the creation of a final draft. All internal issues have been The majority of comments/suggestions/ideas
received were incorporated into the draft. Staff will be working with other divisions to address outstanding comments, as we move towards the creation of a final draft. All internal
issues have been addressed.
Queen at Ahrens and Queen Lancaster at Lancaster and Mansion
Victoria at Ahrens and Victoria
ofof
of
Can we continue the bike lanes along Margaret from Victoria to Queen?Can we encourage more green canopy on both private and public land?How do we ensure that the neighbourhood does not
get split into two communities on either side of a more intensified Margaret?Can we bring street lighting down, below the tree canopy for safety, intimacy and reduction of light pollution?Can
we add a sentence to the MTSA such as “Transition gradually in both height and massing from the Civic Centre low-rise residential areas into the Urban Growth Centre and across Water
St, to ensure sunlight and views?” Perhaps on p.14 after the 6th paragraph?Can we improved pedestrian crossings as follows:a)b)c)Can we allocate required additional green space within
a 10-minute walk of the development which generates the requirement?Can we increase sidewalk width on Victoria?Can we ensure that properties have sufficient capacity to store accumulated
snowfall?Can we solve the routine plowing of snow from Victoria St N onto the sidewalk, particularly at corners?Can we talk about buildings heights in terms of meters as opposed to
storeys?Can we lay out the current guidelines for wind and shadow studies? I am told that there is no intention of addressing shadowing within the zoning bylaw. Can we address it
more clearly in the UDM? The city of Mississauga has very clear legislation of shadowing (www6.mississauga.ca/onlinemaps/planbldg/UrbanDesign/FinalStandards_ShadowStudies_July2014.pdf).
How are we expecting to address this issue?In terms of recognizing the unique architectural style of the neighbourhood, can we encourage pitched, shingled roofs?Can we encourage future
builds within the heritage district take as their point of departure an architectural style from the area from any period between 1850 and 1930?Do we want to call for brick as the predominant
exterior? Do we want a call for unenclosed front porches?Most generally, do we need a buffer space between Residential Infill areas and MTSA areas? Their objectives are as diametrically
opposite as can be in our planning. How can we avoid conflict between neighbouring owners and communities? A local resident provided staff marked up drafts of both sections, outlining
suggested changes. Internal comments were received from Planning, Engineering, Operations-Parks, Transportation Services, Economic Development and the Building Division. Internal comments
were received from Planning, Engineering, Operations-Parks, Transportation Services, Economic Development, Digital Kitchener Innovation Lab and the Building Division.
idential Infill in Central
ResNeighbourhoods - Civic DistrictResidential Infill in Central Neighbourhoods & MTSAsAll SectionsAll Sections
Written - Received in Spring 2019Written - Received in Spring 2019
Internal Staff Engagement on First and Final Draft 2018 & 2019
PublicPublic Internal Comments Spring 2018Internal Comments Spring 2019
4 - 250