Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDSD-19-269 - A 2019-123 - 181-197 Frederick St & 143, 145 & 147 Lancaster St WStaff Report -x Development Services Department wwwkitchener.ca REPORT TO: Committee of Adjustment DATE OF MEETING: November 19, 2019 SUBMITTED BY: Juliane von Westerholt, Senior Planner - 519-741-2200 ext. 7157 PREPARED BY: Garett Stevenson, Senior Planner — 519-741-2200 ext. 7070 WARD: 10 DATE OF REPORT: November 7, 2019 REPORT NUMBER: DSD -19-269 SUBJECT: Application A2019-123 181-197 Frederick Street & 143-147 Lancaster Street West Owners — 1928393 Ontario Inc. Applicant — David Galbraith, IBI Group Approve with Conditions ' J r 128 p D i ,cn 130 22 O is 134 14 772 f r 181 13890 140 c� L \'i f. .145 9 11 15 ,r 151 Suddaby^ Pubic School 157 159 155 155 171 159 10 A 14 161 160 163 11 �� G Subject Properties Staff Report Development Services Department K"'""' NFR wwwki tchenr. ca Report: The property is proposed to be redeveloped with a ten storey mixed use building, with 134 residential dwelling units and five ground floor commercial units. The existing restaurant building, and the residential buildings at 143 and 145-147 Lancaster Street are proposed to be demolished. The building at 181 Frederick Street is proposed to be retained. The applicant has requested the following minor variances; • Relief from Section 45.3.6 of the Zoning By-law to permit a reduced side yard abutting a street of 1.9 metres, whereas 3.0 metres is required, for the corner "flat iron" edge of the building. • Relief from Section 6 of the Zoning By-law to permit a residential parking rate of 0.9 spaces/unit and 0.1 spaces/unit visitor parking, and to permit 11 shared visitor/commercial spaces. • Relief from Section 6 and Appendix D of the Zoning By-law to permit a non-residential parking rate of 1 spaces per 33 square metres, whereas the rate varies by use. • Relief from Appendix D to permit a maximum Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 2.72 (excluding the heritage building) whereas 2.33 is permitted. A site inspection as conducted on November 7, 2019. Existing Buildings: 143 & 145-147 Lancaster Street Staff Report Development Services Department Existing Building: 197 Frederick Street Existing Building: 181 Frederick Street K"'""' NFR wwwki tchenr. ca Planning Comments: The lands are currently zoned as Commercial Residential Two (CR -2) with Special Regulations 115R (FSR max. of 2.33), 370R (drive though prohibition and restaurant regulations), Special Use Provision 125U (permitting a restaurant) and Holding Provision 13H (requiring consolidation with lands fronting Frederick Street). Staff Deport Development Services Department 1 wR wwwki tchener. c a In considering the four tests for minor variances as outlined in Section 45(1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O., 1990 Chap. P. 13, as amended, Planning staff offers the following comments. 1. General Intent of the Official Plan The subject lands are located within a Major Transit Station Area (MTSA). The planned function of MTSAs is to support transit and rapid transit and it is intended that these areas achieve a mix of residential, office, institutional and commercial uses. They are also intended to have streetscapes and a built form that is pedestrian -friendly and transit -oriented. The planned function of Major Transit Station Areas is to provide a focus for accommodating growth through development to support existing and planned transit and rapid transit service levels, to provide connectivity of various modes of transportation to the transit system, to achieve a mix of residential, office, institutional, and commercial development, and to have streetscapes and a built form that is pedestrian -friendly and transit oriented. Major Transit Station Areas may include lands within stable residential neighbourhoods which are not the primary focus for intensification. In advance of the completion of Station Area Plans, it is recognized that not all lands within a possible influence area of a ten minute walking radius centered around the location of a proposed Rapid Transit Station Stop should be the focus for intensification and development. In the interim the City has completed Phase 1 of the Planning Around Rapid Transit Station Areas (PARTS) Project to identify Major Transit Station Study Areas including the preliminary identification of areas, based on a high level of technical analysis, in which to focus intensification in and which could support transit oriented and transit -supportive development and redevelopment. The subject lands were identified as a Recommended Focus Area in the PARTS Phase 1 work program, recognizing the balance of the Central Frederick Neighbourhood is stable and should not be the focus for redevelopment and significant intensification. Staff Report Development Services Department w �x wwwkitchener. ca PARTS Phase 2 provided direction for development applications that are received in advance of the completion of Station Area Plans. Development applications must have regard for Regional Official Plan and the Transit -Oriented Development Policies. Development applications should align with the PARTS Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Strategy and the PARTS Urban Design Guidelines. This direction has since been incorporated into the City's Official Plan and the Urban Design Manual. The PARTS Central Preferred Land Use Plan has identified the property as Medium Density Mixed Use. Urban Growth Centre 5.0 Preferred Plan City Centre District ED civic District ED Innovation District C3 Lanai Use Map Aearl et District rq Innovation Employment Institutional Mixed Use M�4)gh Dens edium Density Subject Properties tow Density Residential 1-iigh Rise rq Medium Rise Low Rise r t• . CIVIC 7 %DISTRICT Park ED Natural Heritage Two -Zone Policy Area (Floodplain) -�--� Iron Home Trail MA E7'Site-Specific Policy Area 1sTRI The subject lands are designed as Medium Density Commercial Residential with Special Policy Area 2 in the Central Frederick Neighbourhood Secondary Plan. Special Policy Area 2 only permits certain commercial on the lands municipally addressed as 143 and 145-147 Lancaster Street East if the lands consolidate with lands having frontage on Frederick Street. The intent of the Medium Density Commercial Residential designation is to allow for medium density residential, office and institutional redevelopment. Land uses may be segregated in separate buildings or integrated in mixed use developments. The maximum Floor Space Ratio (FSR) shall be 2.33, that is, the above grade gross floor area shall not exceed 2.33 times the lot area. Multiple dwellings may be permitted to exceed 200 units per hectare provided the FSR of 2.33 is not Staff Report Development Services Department K -x wwwkitchener. ca exceeded. A high level of quality in architectural and landscape design is required in all redevelopment projects. It is recognized that superior design can be achieved if sufficient flexibility is maintained in building height and form. CENTRAL FREDERICK NEIGHBOURHOOD PLAN FOR LAND USE MAP 20 SECONDARY PLAN J AV ubject Propertles- Jr. Public School Legend Low Rise Conseryatkrn A Low Rise Consarvation B - Low RISe Multiple R95id64ntial _ Low 6enSity Multiple R&I idontial _ Medium Lientity Multiple ReSid6nlia High ❑eerily MuRio e ReSidenlial ■ Office Residential Conversion Convenience Commercial _ Arterial Commercial Corridor Ali Low Density Commercial Residential _ High D9ri.ity Commertrdl ReSiCenlial Neighbourl od Ir' titulcmal Community Institutional Mixed. use Mode Neighbourhood Park t` i . 1 Boundary of Secnnolaryr Plan Special PoliCy Area Limit of RNional Saftl& lenl Patteri3 P81ity Area 'B' i Trunk Road Primary Arterial Road 9eonndanj Arterial Road Major CAI Ichor Rodd Minor CAI Ichor Road 51 100 $16 300 164 hlelres uTErx�lmu The Official Plan Urban Design policies require that new development have attractive forms, facades and roof designs which are compatible with surrounding buildings. Infill development must complement existing buildings and contribute to neighbourhood character, particularly if located within close proximity of a recognized cultural heritage resource. New developments must be designed to minimize adverse impacts on site, onto adjacent properties and into the public realm through building design. The highest standard of building design is required for buildings located at priority locations, with particular emphasis on architectural detailing for all facades addressing the public realm. The Housing polices in the Official Plan provide direction when a minor variance is requested to facilitate residential intensification or a redevelopment of lands. Any new buildings must be appropriate in massing and scale and are compatible with the built form and the community character of the established neighbourhood. Where front yard setback reductions are proposed for new buildings in established neighbourhoods, the requested front yard setback should be similar to Staff Report Development Services Department K"'""' NFR wwwki tchenr. ca adjacent properties and supports and maintain the character of the streetscape and the neighbourhood. The site must be able to function appropriately and not create unacceptable adverse impacts for adjacent properties by providing both an appropriate number of parking spaces and an appropriate landscaped/amenity area on the site. The impact of each variance cannot compromise the site in achieving objectives of compatible and appropriate site and neighbourhood design and should not create further zoning deficiencies. One of the City's Culture Heritage objectives is to conserve the city's cultural heritage resources through their identification, protection, use and/or management in such a way that their heritage values, attributes and integrity are retained. Through the processing of applications submitted under the Planning Act, resources of potential cultural heritage value or interest will be identified, evaluated and considered for listing as a non -designated property of cultural heritage value or interest on the Municipal Heritage Register and/or designation under the Ontario Heritage Act. All development, redevelopment, and site alteration permitted by the land use designations and other policies of this Plan will conserve Kitchener's significant cultural heritage resources. The conservation of significant cultural heritage resources will be a requirement and/or condition in the processing and approval of applications submitted under the Planning Act. The requested minor variances meet the general intent of the Official Plan. The lands are located within a MTSA which is an intensification area in the City. The lands are shown within the Recommended Focus Area in PARTS Phase 1, being a location where growth is expected and planned to occur. The lands are outside of the low rise conservation areas of the Central Frederick Neighbourhood where policies specifically require the preservation of the scale, use and intensity of existing development. The proposed uses are permitted under the existing land use designation, only the scale is proposed to change under the current minor variance applications. The impact of the minor variances do not cause any adverse impacts on adjacent properties, and the development retains an existing cultural heritage resource at 181 Frederick Street. Multiple dwellings and certain non-residential uses are permitted for lands designated as Medium Density Commercial Residential. The minor variance would permit an increase to the overall permitted scale, by allowing additional FSR. The land use designation recognizes that building height and form are not regulated in this land use district to allow flexibility to achieve superior design. The proposed FSR variance would further extend this flexibility, so it is relevant to consider the design of the building when evaluating the variance. Planning staff have worked with the developer through the site planning process to achieve a development concept that features unique architecture elements (flat iron design) that highlights the intersection and has an active pedestrian focused main floor (base), and underground and buffered surface parking areas. Planning staff is of the opinion that the design of the building is appropriate. Design elements of the building that have resulted in an increase FSR include extending the rear lower portion of the building along Lancaster Street to enclose the parking ramp within the building and to frame the outdoor patio. Indoor private amenity space is provided within internal access and addresses the proposed outdoor amenity space at the south limit of the property. Urban Design staff requested a flat iron design to highlight the angle of the intersection of Fredrick and Lancaster Streets in an effort to create a unique building at the entry to the Central Frederick Neighbourhood. A variance is required for the side yard abutting a street to accommodate the point of the flat iron building, whereas the balance of the building exceeds the minimum setbacks from Lancaster and Frederick Streets. The requested side yard abutting a street setback (which appears as a front yard) is for the corner edge of the building only and the required setbacks are exceeded along Lancaster and Frederick Staff Report Development Services Department K"'""' NFR wwwki tchenr. ca streets. The increased setback along Lancaster Street will provide further setback for portions of the building from Lancaster Street. The tallest part of building is positioned along Frederick Street, adjacent to the Urban Growth Centres (Downtown) and features a step down to address the intersection. The building is further stepped to six storeys along Lancaster, and is set back from Lancaster. The surface parking is located behind the building. The building will feature adequate indoor and outdoor amenity areas for the residents. The Urban Structure in the Official Plan reflects the existing and planned transportation options through the City. Recent and ongoing investments and improvements to active and public transportation modes in the City provide greater support to alternative modes of transportation, including public transportation. Intensification areas within close proximity to planned and existing public transportations have been identified as intensification areas. The proposed minor variance also conforms to Sustainable Development policies in the Official Plan, which encourage redevelopment to strive to be increasingly sustainable through compact and efficient built form that is transit -supportive development and provides for greater use of other active modes of transportation such as cycling and walking. The Parking policies in the Official Plan permit the City to consider adjustments to parking requirements for properties within an area or areas, where the City is satisfied that adequate alternative parking facilities are available, where developments adopt transportation demand management (TDM) measures or where sufficient transit exists or is to be provided. The City supports the Region's TDM Policies and initiatives to reduce automobile dependency, make alternative travel modes more attractive, and influence people to adopt sustainable trip behaviours and practices. The property municipally addressed as 181 Frederick Street is listed on the City's Municipal Heritage Register and the proposed development is adjacent to 171 Frederick Street which is a designated property under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. A Heritage Impact Assessment has been received and is under review as part of the Site Plan process. The proposed development retains the listed building at 181 Frederick Street in situ and does not have adverse impact on the adjacent designated heritage building at 171 Frederick Street. Heritage Planning staff have reviewed the minor variance application and has no concerns. For the reasons, Planning Staff is of the opinion that the general intent of the Official Plan is maintained. 2. General Intent of the Zoning By-law The requested side yard abutting a street of 1.9 metres, whereas 3.0 metres is required, is only for the "flat iron" corner edge of the building. A required road widening land dedication will increase the setback from Lancaster Street by approximately 8.0 metres, in addition to the proposed 4.4 metre building setback (from the new property line). The requested parking variances align with the new parking rates approved as part of recent amendments to the Zoning By-law. The City can require the incorporation of TDM measures as a condition of approval of a development application. Kitchener Zoning By-law 2019-051 contains new parking regulations for developments in the City, but those regulations have not yet been applied to this property. That work will be undertaken as part of a future Neighbourhood Planning review. The new parking regulations that apply to lands with the new M IX zones align with the requested variance. It is recommended that the Committee of Adjustment impose a condition to require minimum Class A and Class B bicycle parking to be shown on the site plan. This will ensure that the bicycle parking Staff Report Development Services Department K"'""' NFR wwwki tchenr. ca proposed as a TDM measure to support the requested parking rate will be enforced at the site planning stage. The intent of the FSR regulation is to regulate the overall mass of a building. The entire lower level is included in the FSR calculation, including the portions of the building used to house the driveway access ramp. There are site design elements that are being employed to ensure the compatibility of the overall building with the community, including active uses at grade and public outdoor patios and landscaped areas. The building is positioned so the taller portions are closest to Frederick Street with reduced steps in height towards the low rise residential portions of the community. There is an increased rear setback from the closest residential property which features a landscaped amenity area. The design of the building, with distinct sections, will help to reduce the overall appearance of the massing. Planning Staff is also of the opinion that the requested minor variance meets the general intent of the Zoning By-law. 3. Is the Variance Minor? The subject lands are planned to accommodate intensification. The lands are adjacent to the Urban Growth Centre (Downtown) and within a Major Transit Station Area (MTSA). Redevelopment sites within MTSAs must be developed to achieve transit -supportive densities in order to preserve adjacent low rise stable neighbourhoods. The requested side yard abutting a street variance only applies to the corner of the building and the requested parking variance aligns with rate approved in recent updates to the Zoning By-law. The increased FSR will not have adverse impacts and provides flexibility to achieve an improved building design. Therefore, Planning Staff is of the opinion that the requested minor variances are minor. 4. Is the Variance Appropriate? The proposed use is permitted since the approved of the Central Frederick Secondary Plan approval in 1994 Official Plan. The requested variances better align with recent changes to the planning regulations and standards, including the 2014 Official Plan, recent parking rate amendments to the Zoning By-law, Planning Around Rapid Transit Stations Phase 1 and 2 recommendations, the 2019 updates in the Urban Design Manual, and the Residential Intensification in Established Neighbourhood study. Planning Staff is of the opinion that the variances are appropriate. Building Comments: The Building Division has no objections to the proposed variance. Transportation Comments: Transportation Services can support the proposed variances to the parking rates as they all align with the intent of the future zoning by-law (CRoZBy). Heritage Comments: The property municipally addressed as 181 Frederick Street is listed on the City's Municipal Heritage Register and the proposed development is adjacent to 171 Frederick Street which is a designated property under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. A Heritage Impact Assessment has been received and is under review as part of the Site Plan process. The proposed Staff Report Development Services Department K"'""' NFR wwwki tchenr. ca development retains the listed building at 181 Frederick Street in situ and does not have adverse impact on the adjacent designated heritage building at 171 Frederick Street. Heritage Planning staff has reviewed the minor variance application and has no concerns. Engineering Comments: Engineering staff has no objections to the proposed variance. Engineering requirements will be satisfied through the site plan approval process. Operations Comments: Operations staff has no objections to the proposed variances. Parkland dedication will be satisfied through the site plan approval process. Environmental Planning Comments: Environmental Planning staff has no objections to the proposed variance. Tree management will be addressed at the site planning stage. RECOMMENDATION: That Application A2019-123, requesting relief from Section 45.3.6 of the Zoning By-law to permit a reduced side yard abutting a street of 1.9 metres, whereas 3.0 metres is required, for the corner "flat iron" edge of the building, and requesting relief from Section 6 of the Zoning By-law to permit a residential parking rate of 0.9 spaces/unit and 0.1 spaces/unit visitor parking, and to permit 11 shared visitor/commercial spaces, and requesting relief from Section 6 and Appendix D of the Zoning By-law to permit a non-residential parking rate of 1 spaces per 33 square metres, whereas the rate varies by use, and requesting relief from Appendix D to permit a maximum Floor Space Ratio of 2.72 (excluding the heritage building) whereas 2.33 is permitted, be approved subject to the following conditions: 1. That the Owner receive full site plan approval, including an underground parking plan and bicycle storage room, by November 19, 2021, for a mixed use building, which includes the following bicycle parking configuration: A minimum o1 Class A Bicycle Parking Stall for every two dwelling units. Each Class A Bicycle Parking Stall shall be a bicycle locker or an enclosed, secure area with controlled access in which a bicycle may be parked and secured for the long term in a stable position with at least one point of contact with the frame of the bicycle. ii. A minimum of 6 Class B Bicycle Parking Stalls. Class B Bicycle Parking Stalls shall be an area in which a bicycle may be parked and secured for the short term in a stable position with two points of contact with the frame of the bicycle. Garett Stevenson, B.E.S., MCIP, RPP Juliane von Westerholt, B.E.S., MCIP, RPP Senior Planner Senior Planner Region of Waterloo November 05, 2019 Holly Dyson City of Kitchener 200 King Street West P.O. Box 1118 Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 Dear Ms. Dyson: PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES 150 Frederick Street, Sth Floor Kitchener ON N2G 4A Canada Telephone: 519-575-4400 TTY: 519-575-4608 Fax: 519-575-4449 www. reg i o n ofwate r l o o. ca File No.: D20-20/ VAR KIT GEN (13) DEVIT AVENUE DEVELOPMENTS LTD. (15) 197 FREDERICK STREET TDL GROUP Re: Committee of Adjustment Meeting on November 19, 2019, City of Kitchener Regional staff has reviewed the following Committee of Adjustment applications and have following comments: 1) FN 2019-002 — 123 Mountain Mint Crescent— No Concerns. 2) SG 2019-016 — 500 Fairway Road South — No Concerns. 3) A 2019-111 — 37-39 Pandora Avenue North — No Concerns. 4) A 2019-112 — 45 Heiman Street — No Concerns. 5) A 2019-113 — 47 Heiman Street — No Concerns. 6) A 2019-114 — 45 Maywood Road — No Concerns. 7) A 2019-115 — 593 Charles Street East — No Concerns. 8) A 2019-116— 10 Shanley Street — No Concerns. 9) A 2019-117— 450 Rivertrail Avenue — No Concerns. 10) A 2019-118 — 8 Devon Street — No Concerns. 11) A 2019-119 — 51 David Street — No Concerns. 12) A 2019-120 — 14 Frontier Drive — No Concerns. 13) A 2019-121 — 80-96 Sydney Street North — No Concerns. 14) A 2019-122 — 1092 Queen's Boulevard — No Concerns. 15) A 2019-123 — 181-197 Frederick Street — No Concerns. 16) A 2019-124 thru 129 — 205, 209, 220, 212, 208 & 204 Field Sparrow Crescent — No Concerns. 17) A 2019-130 — Adjacent to 85 McIntyre Drive — No Concerns. Please be advised that any development on the subject lands is subject to the provisions of the Regional Development Charge By-law 14-046 or any successor thereof and may require the payment of Regional Development Charges for this development prior to the issuance of a building permit. The comments contained in this letter pertain to the Application number listed. If a site is subject to more than one application, additional comments may apply. Document Number: 3146724 Page 1 of 2 Please forward any decision on the above mentioned application to the undersigned. Yours Truly, Joginder Bhatia Transportation Planner (519) 575-4500 Ext 3867 Grand River Conservation Authority 400 Clyde Road, P.O. Box 729 Resource Management Division Cambridge, Ontario N 1 R 5W6 Andrew Herreman, Resource Planning Phone: (519) 621-2761 ext. 2228 Technician E-mail: aherreman@grand river. ca PLAN REVIEW REPORT: City of Kitchener Holly Dyson DATE: November 8, 2019 YOUR FILE: See below RE: Applications for Minor Variance: FN 2019-002 123 Mountain Mint Crescent SG 2019-016 500 Fairway Road South A 2019-111 37-39 Pandora Avenue North A 2019-112 45 Heiman Street A 2019-113 47 Heiman Street A 2019-114 45 Maywood Road A 2019-115 593 Charles Street East A 2019-116 10 Shanley Street A 2019-117 450 Rivertrail Avenue A 2019-118 8 Devon Street A 2019-119 51 David Street A 2019-120 14 Frontier Drive A 2019-121 80, 86, 92 & 96 Sydney Street North A 2019-122 1092 Queens Boulevard A 2019-123 181-197 Frederick Street & 143-147 Lancaster Street East A 2019-124 to A 2019-129 204, 205, 208, 212 & 220 Field Sparrow Crescent Applications for Consent: B 2019-066-071 253 Clark Avenue GRCA COMMENT: The above -noted applications are located outside the Grand River Conservation Authority areas of interest. As such, we will not undertake a review of the applications and plan review fees will not be required. If you have any questions, or require additional information, please contact me. Sincerely, Andrew Herreman, CPT Resource Planning Technician Grand River Conservation Authority xThese comments are respectfully submitted as advice and reflect resource concerns within the scope and mandate of the Page 1 of 1 Grand River Conservation Authority From: Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2019 3:26 PM To: Garett Stevenson <Garett.Stevenson@kitchener.ca> Subject: Proposed development at corner of Frederick and Lancaster Dear Mr. Stevenson; I am writing to you today regarding the proposed development of the 10 storey condo units at the corner of Frederick and Lancaster streets in the central frederick neighbourhood of Kitchener. We have lived in this neighbourhood for 11 ears and in the greater downtown area for an additional 4 Years. We reside on which is very close to this corner. While we can appreciate the urban growth our city and downtown core has seen over the last several years and are huge supporters of local business and development we are very concerned about this proposed development for several reasons; 1- this neighbourhood has worked hard for several years on traffic calming initiatives due to the constant speeding and unsafe driving that occurs on Lancaster street and at this intersection. There are countless accidents along with several incidents where children have been hit by cars. We have a crossing guard at this intersection and also further down at Chapel street and Lancaster street. There has been multiple other traffic calming initiatives inputted to help combat these issues. 2- no bike lanes/too narrow this is also a big safety concern for cyclists of the neighbourhood. There is very poor visibility and it is already a dangerous intersection this development would only make it worse. 3 -Parking. Parking is a huge issue in this area. While the LRT is a very welcome addition and we are huge supporters of the LRT, this city is still very much car dependant. And the parking in this area is few and far between. We already have a huge number of cars parking on our streets because of Rogers employees and other nearby business employees use due to lack of parking and/or costs. They use our streets for free parking. Add in events at the nearby Center in the square or art gallery or library and now there is NO parking spaces and our streets are already VERY narrow. Add in WINTER and snow events and you have a VERY unsafe situation for all! 4- Suddaby School. The current ROME business which occupies the heritage home cut down all the trees along the fence line between their parking lots and the school. Adding in this huge development would only do further damage to the remaining old beautiful and mature trees. We very much worry about this further damage to the environment when we are already in a climate crisis. Please consider these reasons to not allow this development or the developers variances to be considered. The safety of our children and neighbourhood children is very much at further risk. Thank ou for takin the time to read my concerns. Sincerely - Holly Dyson From: Sent: 12 November, 2019 5:18 PM To: Dianna Saunderson Cc: Holly Dyson Subject: Re: Proposed new development at Lancaster/Frederick Attachments: Courtesy Notice - 2019-11-19.pdf, A 2019-123 - Application - Frederick & Lancaster.pdf Dianna, I wish to have my written submission circulated to the Committee of Adjustment members for their consideration at the November 19, 2019 meeting re: application A 2019-123 - 181-197 Frederick Street & 143, 145 & 147 Lancaster Street East. For the last 50 years, Kitchener has allowed developers to ruin our'heritage' urban core. The first and most disturbing example was the destruction of our beautiful city hall. With hindsight, I think the consensus among Kitchener natives is that redevelopment was a mistake. Unlike the Tim Horton's at the Lancaster/Frederick site, the proposed building(s) developer is making no attempt to design the new structures to blend in with the neighborhood. It is one of Kitchener's best'heritage' areas and should be respected and redeveloped with care. Suddaby school is an architectural treasure and it's block should be protected against improper development. Please select a developer who will design with respect our'heritage' neighborhood and will adhere to the current floor space ratio (2.72). On Tuesday, November 12, 2019, 01:57:46 PM EST, Dianna. Saunderson@kitchener.ca <dianna.saunderson@kitchener.ca> wrote: Good Morning, Garrett Stevenson has forwarded your correspondence to me regarding Committee of Adjustment application A 2019-123 - 181-197 Frederick Street & 143, 145 & 147 Lancaster Street East. If you wish for your written submission (including specific points of concern) to be circulated to the Committee members for their consideration at the November 19, 2019 meeting, please email it to me with your full contact information (name, address etc.) by noon on Monday, November 18, 2019. Please note: I am unable to circulate comments without full contact information. Please be advised as this is a public planning matter, your personal information is not protected if someone requests the list of interested parties. If you no longer wish to be considered an interested party in this matter, please advise and you will be removed from the list. I have attached the Notice of Hearing and the application for your reference. Regards, Dianna Saunderson, AMP Committee Administrator I Corporate Services City of Kitchener 519-741-2200 ext. 7277 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 Dianna.Saundersona-kitchener.ca EK10ioZ�l From: Sent: IturMy,veWe 9WM To: Garett Stevenson <Garett.Stevenson kitchener.ca> Cc: Sub�ec: e:ropose new evelopment at Lancaster/Frederick I'd like to share with you my thoughts and concerns re: the proposed new development at Lancaster/Frederick. For the last 50 years, Kitchener has allowed developers to ruin our'heritage' urban core. The first and most disturbing example was the destruction of our beautiful city hall. With hindsight, I think the consensus among Kitchener natives is that redevelopment was a mistake. Unlike the Tim Horton's at the Lancaster/Frederick site, the proposed building(s) developer is making no attempt to design the new structures to blend in with the neighborhood. It is one of Kitchener's best'heritage' areas and should be respected and redeveloped with care. Suddaby school is an architectural treasure and it's block should be protected against improper development. Please select a developer who will design with respect our'heritage' neighborhood and will adhere to the current floor space ratio (2.72). While I have your attention, I'd like to share some ideas for Victoria park. The 'new' bridges should be replaced with ones that match the victorian style of the remaining original bridge. There was a well-heeled group that wanted to sponsor busts of all prime ministers and have them placed around the park. Could not another such group be found to sponsor nice bridges? Use the same (long lasting) building material as the old bridge and it becomes a cost effective upgrade too. The old bus terminal should be redeveloped as an extension of Victoria park. It would serve as a green corridor from the commercial core into the park. Skating on Victoria lake was a winter delight for residents who remember those day's. That, of course is no longer possible. However the city could create a substitute across the street by maintaining a (seasonal) large, round skating surface with lights, music and concession stand(s). The downtown residential population is growing and healthy family activity sites should be prioritized. By using modern cooling technology, the skating circle could be operational for 5 months. I moved from Toronto back in 1994 to get away from a large city with too much traffic. I chose Kitchener as a smaller place to live with less traffic . I chose the central Frederick neighbourhood because of its attractive residential homes.The City of Kitchener now seems determined to put up high rise buildings with insufficient parking according to existing zoning bylaws. The lack of parking will have motorists driving around the currently quiet neighbourhood looking for parking spots.. More people in an area creates traffic congestion and increased demand on city's infrastructures. How do we go from a low rise Tim Horton's building with very tasteful landscaping and no drive through allowed to the proposed very unattractive factory looking building?The 10 story building will loom over the Suddaby school and playground. The City of Kitchener should look at the City of Waterloo, especially King Street between University and Columbia, to avoid creating another ugly concrete jungle.