Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlng & Econ Dev - 1995-01-16PED\1995-01-16 PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES JAN UARY 16, 1995 CITY OF KITCHENER The Planning and Economic Development Committee met this date commencing at 3:05 p.m. under Councillor C. Weylie, Chair, with the following members present: Mayor R. Christy and Councillors K. Redman, B. Vrbanovic, T. Galloway, Jake Smola, M. Wagner, and J. Ziegler. Councillors M. Yantzi and G. Lorentz entered the meeting after its commencement. Officials present: Mr. T. McCabe, Mr. B. Stanley, Ms. C. Ladd, Mr. L. Masseo, Mr. R. Mattice, Mr. D. Mansell, Mr. D. Snow, Ms. S. Frenette, Mr. J. Witmer and Mr. L.W. Neil. PD 95/1 - 19 VANIER DRIVE - DEMOLITION CONTROL APPLICATION DC 94/07/V/RM - HALLMAN-BRIERDALE LTD. - FAIRVIEW WARD The Committee was advised that the Department of Planning and Development was in receipt of a Demolition Application from Hallman-Brierdale Ltd., pertaining to lands known municipally as 19 Vanier Drive. In this regard the Committee considered Staff Report PD 95/1 dated January 4, 1994 in which it was noted that the applicant proposed to demolish a single detached dwelling at 19 Vanier Drive to provide accessory parking for the high rise located at 37 Vanier Drive. It was pointed out in the report that the final design of the apartment building met the parking requirement of the old zoning; however, under the new comprehensive zoning it did not and the parking deficiency would become legal non-conforming. The applicant wishes to increase the number of parking spaces by 23 to bring the total number of 165 parking spaces closer to compliance with the required 180 spaces. Mr. R. Mattice provided the Committee with a brief overview of the demolition request. He pointed out that the owner must make an amendment to the registered site plan as a result of the change. Mr. P. Britton, MacNaughton Hermsen Britton Clarkson, appeared as a delegation on behalf of the applicant to indicate his clients support for the recommendation in the staff report. No other delegations were registered respecting this matter. On motion by Councillor J. Ziegler, it was resolved: "That Demolition Control Application DC 94/07N/RM (Hallman - Brierdale Ltd.) requesting approval for the demolition of a single detached dwelling located at 19 Vanier Drive legally described as Part Lot 10 & 11, R.P. 791 be approved. It is the opinion of this Committee that approval of this application is proper planning for the City." PD 94/127 - RENAMING OF A PORTION OF BLOCKLINE ROAD WEST OF WESTMOUNT ROAD AND APPROVAL OF STREET NAMES - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION 30T-92012/CL - 781081 ONTARIO LTD. - SOUTH WARD The Committee was in receipt of Planning and Development Staff Report PD 94/127 dated January 10, 1995 dealing with street names proposed for Draft Plan of Subdivision 30T-92012 (781081 Ontario Ltd.). Also under consideration was a proposal to rename a portion of Blockline Road that with this Draft Plan of Subdivision forms only a stub running westerly from Westmount Road. It was noted in the report that originally it was intended to extend Blockline Road into the Laurentian West community but that the new Community Plan has deleted the extension west of Westmount Road. Staff suggest in the report that the name change will serve to clarify the end of the existing Blockline Road as an arterial road and thus not invite traffic into the future residential neighbourhood on the west side of Westmount Road. PD 94/127 - RENAMING OF A PORTION OF BLOCKLINE ROAD WEST OF WESTMOUNT ROAD AND APPROVAL OF STREET NAMES PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES JANUARY 16, 1995 -2- CITY OF KITCHENER - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION 30T-92012/CL - 781081 ONTARIO LTD. - SOUTH WARD (CONT'D) Mr. T. McCabe advised that staff had nothing further to add to the report under consideration. Councillor T. Galloway questioned the purpose of the name change and if in fact the renamed street would cause people not to attempt to use it. Mr. D. Mansell advised that all of the City's transit maps have descriptions of streets on them and in the case of Blockline Road it would be defined as extending from Westmount Road to a certain easterly limit. Councillor Galloway suggested that the same name be given to both the renamed stub of Blockline Road and to street 1 in the subdivision and the Committee agreed. No delegations were registered respecting this matter. On motion by Councillor T. Galloway, it was resolved: (a) "That the following proposed street names be approved for Draft Plan of Subdivision 30T-92012 (781081 Ontario Ltd.): Street One - Street Three - Street Four - Street Five - Highbrook Street Highbrook Crescent Highbrook Crescent Highbrook Court (b) That the section of Block Line Road (Street Two) between Westmount Road and the easterly limit of Lot 2, Draft Plan of Subdivision 30T-92012 be renamed to "Highbrook Street" and staff be directed to prepare the necessary By-law and legal advertisements required to change the name. (c) That the section of Block Line Road (Street Two) west of the easterly limit of Lot 2, Draft Plan of Subdivision 30T-92012 be closed and retained by the City and the Legal Department be instructed to prepare the necessary By-law and legal advertisements to effect said closure." PD 95/5 - 79 FERGUS AVENUE - DEMOLITION CONTROL APPLICATION DC 94/01/RM - WATERLOO REGIONAL CREDIT UNION - CHICOPEE WARD The Committee was advised that the Department of Planning and Development was in receipt of a Demolition Application from the Waterloo Regional Credit Union pertaining to the property known municipally as 79 Fergus Avenue. It was noted in the report that the applicant proposes to demolish the single detached dwelling at 79 Fergus Avenue to provide for needed accessory parking for the financial institution (Credit Union) located at 1334-1336 Weber Street East. A Site Plan was attached to the report for information purposes only and it was noted that since the creation of accessory parking was not considered a development under the Planning Act, a site plan approval is not necessary. Mr. R. Mattice provided a brief overview of the application and made reference to the Site Plan in the report which he emphasized was how it was expected the parking lot would develop. Councillors T. Galloway and B. Vrbanovic disclosed a conflict of interest and abstained from all discussion as they are members of the Waterloo Regional Credit Union. PD 95/5 - 79 FERGUS AVENUE - DEMOLITION CONTROL APPLICATION DC 94/01/RM - WATERLOO REGIONAL CREDIT UNION - CHICOPEE WARD (CONT'D) PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES JANUARY 16, 1995 -3- CITY OF KITCHENER Councillor M. Yantzi entered the meeting at this point. No delegations were registered respecting this matter. On motion by Councillor J. Ziegler, it was resolved: "That Demolition Control Application DC 94/01/RM (Waterloo Regional Credit Union) requesting approval for the demolition of a single detached dwelling located at 79 Fergus Avenue legally described as Part of Lot 31, Registered Plan 687, more particularly described as Part 1, 58R-9130 be approved. It is the opinion of this Committee that approval of this application is proper planning for the City." Councillor T. Galloway and B. Vrbanovic previously disclosed a conflict of interest and abstained from all discussion and voting as they are members of the Waterloo Regional Credit Union. PD 95/4 - 1701 GLASGOW STREET - UPDATE ON OUTSTANDING CONDITIONS RE ZCA 931221GILM -AUTOCRAFT FOREIGN CARS INC. (H. MAGID) - WEST WARD The Committee was in receipt of Planning and Development Staff Report PD 95/4 dated January 11, 1995 prepared as an update on the status of fulfilment of conditions with respect to Zone Change Application 93/22/G/LM relative to lands known municipally as 1701 Glasgow Street. The resolution approved by City Council dated October 24, 1994 regarding this Zone Change was included in the Staff Report. Mr. L. Masseo displayed pictures outlining the progress of installation of the required fencing and pointed out that the report outlined what has been accomplished since Council gave approval subject to conditions. He commented that there was still a substantial part of the fencing to be completed but that all other conditions have been met. Councillor J. Ziegler asked staff to suggest what action Council should take given the fact that Mr. Magid has made a substantial effort to this point to satisfy all conditions. Councillor G. Lorentz entered the meeting at this point. Mr. T. McCabe advised that the previous Council approved the Zone Change and it was his view that all conditions must be met prior to any consideration of the zoning by-law. He noted that in order for staff to respond regarding Municipal Plan modifications, it was necessary that required work be complete by February 3. Councillor J. Ziegler indicated that he would support an extension to January 30, 1995. Mr. H. Magid appeared as a delegation and advised that he expected to complete the fencing well within the time extension suggested. A representative of Mr. Bruce Reinhart, 93 Stirling Avenue South, who owns property across the street from Mr. Magid appeared as a delegation and advised that Mr. Reinhart did not receive notice of this meeting and asked to be advised of future meetings. The Chair asked him to advise Mr. Reinhart that the matter would again be considered on January 30, 1995 at 3:00 p.m. if the Committee adopted Councillor Ziegler's proposed extension. On motion by Councillor J. Ziegler, it was resolved: PD 95/4 - 1701 GLASGOW STREET - UPDATE ON OUTSTANDING CONDITIONS RE ZCA 931221GILM -AUTOCRAFT FOREIGN CARS INC. (H. MAGID) - WEST WARD (CONT'D) "That an extension of time from January 1, 1995 to January 30, 1995 be granted so as to PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES JANUARY 16, 1995 -4- CITY OF KITCHENER allow Mr. Howard Magid additional time to complete the construction of a solid wood fence required by Condition #6 of Zone Change Application # 931221GILM (Autocraft Foreign Cars Inc) originally approved by City Council on October 24, 1994." Mr. T. McCabe advised that if the fencing was fully completed to the satisfaction of staff it may not be necessary for the matter to receive any consideration at the January 30th Planning and Economic Development Committee meeting. = MINISTRY OF MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS - PLANNING REFORM EDUCATION MUNICIPAL TRAINING SESSIONS FOR COUNCILLORS PLANNING AND MUNICIPAL STATUTE LAW AMENDMENT ACT (BILL 163) Mr. T. McCabe referred the Committee to the attachment in the agenda inviting Members of Council to a Ministry sponsored presentation of planning changes included in the recently passed Planning and Municipal Statute Law Amendment Act, 1994 (Bill 163). The meeting is being held on Tuesday, January 31st, and some members of Council have already responded to an invitation. Councillors J. Ziegler, M. Yantzi, B. Vrbanovic, K. Redman and Jake Smola indicated they would like to attend the meeting. Councillor C. Weylie advised those in attendance that as Chairman of the Regional Planning Committee she had cancelled the Regional Planning Committee meeting scheduled for January 31 st so as to afford everyone the opportunity to attend the ministry presentations. = = = FUNDING SOURCES RE - CEDARHILL PROJECT AREA Councillor M. Yantzi raised the issue of locating a firm funding source for project work in the Cedarhill area. Mr. T. McCabe advised that $25,000 has been allocated in the City's Capital Budget and Ms. S. Frenette advised that staff have been trying to find provincial funding to match Kitchener's contribution for community development projects. Councillor Yantzi indicated that originally it had been hoped to obtain such funding from Jobs Ontario; however, he indicated that there was now a possibility of some other funding source. It was indicated that the Ministry of the Solicitor General and Correctional Services could be that source which would provide programming support but not building support. Ms. S. Frenette indicated that the previous direction of City Council to staff was generally to search out and find matching dollars to support community development projects. The Committee directed the staff be authorized to submit an application to the Ministry of the Solicitor General/Correctional Services for matching dollars to Kitchener's contribution in support of a community development project for the Cedarhill area. PD 94/96 - 86 CEDAR STREET SOUTH - CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION APPLICATION CD 94/002 - P & E INVESTMENT INC. - VICTORIA PARK WARD The Committee was in receipt of Planning and Development Staff Report PD 94/96 dated November 10, 1994. The report deals with a Condominium Conversion Application under the Rental Housing Protection Act with respect to the lands known municipally as 86 Cedar Street South. The applicants seek approval under the RHPA as a precondition for the conversion of the property to condominium tenure. The property in question is presently a rental apartment building of 76 units consisting of 48 one bedroom units, 26 two bedroom units, and 2 three bedroom units. PD 94/96 - 86 CEDAR STREET SOUTH - CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION APPLICATION CD 94/002 - P & E INVESTMENT INC. - VICTORIA PARK WARD (CONT'D) It was pointed out that notice that the Committee would hold a public meeting this date had previously been given originally for the Committee's November 21, 1994 meeting which was cancelled and subsequently for the meeting this date. PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES JANUARY 16, 1995 -5- CITY OF KITCHENER Ms. S. Frenette provided the Committee with an overview of the Rental Housing Protection Act and the Committee/Council's role under the Act which she noted came into force in July 1986. She itemized the protection the Act provides to certain rental houses and noted that any municipal decisions may be appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board. She stated that in order for the municipality to favourably consider an application, such application must be approved under one of three criteria set out. Further she advised that Council may set conditions to protect existing tenants and in particular referred to the 5 year secure tenancy provided to tenants after registration of the building. Further she noted that tenants would be offered first right of refusal to purchase their unit. Mr. R. Mattice advised that approximately 95% of all RHPA applications receive their approval based on the third criteria and pointed out that Condominium Conversion was a two step process, firstly involving a recommendation to City Council to approve conversion, and secondly consideration of an application for registration of a Plan of Condominium. He reviewed the application and notification processes involved under the Act and pointed out that staff exceed the requirements of the Act by providing each tenant with a letter and copy of the staff report prior to the public meeting. Mr. Mattice advised that the objectives of the existing owners in this conversion proposal were to create financial flexibility for themselves and to increase neighbourhood stability through increased resident ownership. He noted that the vacancy rate was 4.7% which is extremely healthy from a tenant point of view and that there was an abundance supply of various types of dwellings in the area. He referred to the conditions of approval and specifically to the security of tenure as previously mentioned in which tenants are provided a minimum of 5 years secure tenancy in addition to the length of time it takes to achieve registration which could be anywhere from six months to two years. He pointed out that if after the five year period, the unit was not sold, the owner may then negotiate a lease with the existing tenant. In response to Councillor C. Weylie, Mr. Mattice advised that the owners throughout the process must follow the provincial rental legislation and were still obligated to the regulations of the Landlord and Tenant Act. In response to Councillor M. Wagner, Ms. Frenette advised that approximately eight applications have been processed in the last three years and that this was one of the larger buildings affected. Councillor Wagner questioned what the experience has been with the eight previous applications and Mr. R. Mattice advised that only one or two have proceeded with the second step of actually registering a Plan of Condominium to this point in time. He noted that there were significant costs involved in the step to create and register a Plan of Condominium. Mr. T. McCabe commented that once the owner has draft condominium approval he may then accept purchase offers for units. Ms. Frenette advised that given the housing market, converted units are not being sold very quickly. In response to Councillor Jake Smola, Mr. J. Witmer advised that any conversion would have to meet minimum property standards and updated fire regulations. Further he noted that there was no obligation to alter any unit for wheelchair accessibility in accordance with accepted barrier free guidelines. Mr. John Seymour a tenant of the building appeared as a delegation in support of his letter dated January 6, 1994 distributed to the Committee. Mr. Seymour read his letter which expresses concern with the proposed change and asked that it remain as a rental property. In his letter Mr. Seymour itemized the benefits of living in the building in this area and the commitment of existing tenants to remain. Mr. R. Mattice referred to Item (H) of Mr. Seymour's letter and suggested there may be a misunderstanding with respect to time limit or notification and clarified that it was the owner that PD 94/96 - 86 CEDAR STREET SOUTH - CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION APPLICATION CD 94/002 - P & E INVESTMENT INC. - VICTORIA PARK WARD (CONT'D) has 30 days to provide tenants simply with a copy of the agreement which lists the conditions outlined in the staff report and had nothing to do with any action required of the tenant within that time frame. Councillor G. Lorentz suggested to Mr. Seymour that given the range of selling prices being PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES JANUARY 16, 1995 -6- CITY OF KITCHENER suggested ($50,000 - $70,000) that tenants should give serious consideration to purchasing a unit rather than paying rents from $522 to $913 monthly. Mr. Bernd Wolf, Solicitor, and Mr. R. Williamson, Controller for P & E Investment Inc., appeared as a delegation to support the staff recommendation. Mr. Wolf noted that the application would make way for a condominium rather than a rental building and has no effect on the City's rental housing stock. Also, he commented that while tenants may remain up to approximately 7 years, sales of the units would actually be market driven and could take even longer. He stated that the owners consider the conversion to be a long range process and that a number of tenants have inquired about the possibility of purchasing units. As well he stated that the landlord has a good relationship with tenants and that none of the long term tenants have indicated an objection to the process. Councillor K. Redman questioned if there was a point in time that P & E Investments Inc., would decide that the condominium process was not worth the effort and cost and revert the building to a rental one. Mr. Wolf advised that P & E Investments could retain ownership of the individual units and simply continue to rent under existing legislation. Councillor Redman then questioned what notifications would be given if an empty unit subsequently was again rented and was advised that new tenants must be advised of the date of security of tenure. Mr. Charles Macerollo, a tenant of 86 Cedar Street South, also appeared as a delegation in support of his letter dated July 27, 1994 which was attached to the staff report. He advised that tenants support the work that Mr. Seymour has done to promote a spirit of community within the building and the neighbourhood. In reference to the suggestion that tenants consider purchasing their units, he advised that currently rents include utilities payments and that after purchase of individual units the unit owners would then be responsible for mortgage payments, condominium fees and utility fees and that the monthly cost in comparison to monthly rental may not be as attractive as suggested in earlier discussion. Further Mr. Macerollo stated that the building was central, safe, clean and affordable and it was his desire to see the building maintain the stability it has recently achieved. After further comments of Mr. Macerollo, Mayor R. Christy suggested that Mr. Williamson meet with the tenants and Ms. Frenette agreed to convene a meeting in that regard. Councillor T. Galloway commented that when ever a condominium conversion application is considered there always seems to be some misunderstanding on the part of the tenants and their rights. He questioned what notice is mailed and suggested that a simple brochure might explain the process more clearly. Ms. S. Frenette replied that staff exceed what they are required to do under the Act in terms of notification. She agreed that it would be desirable in future to hold a community information meeting in order than tenants concerns and questions may be informally addressed so as to avoid misunderstanding and clearly enunciate the rights that tenants have under the Act governing the process of condominium conversion applications. No other delegations were registered respecting this matter. On motion by Councillor J. Ziegler, it was resolved: PD 94/96 - 86 CEDAR STREET SOUTH - CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION APPLICATION CD 94/002 - P & E INVESTMENT INC. - VICTORIA PARK WARD (CONT'D) "That Council approve application CD/94/002 subject to the Owners entering into an Agreement under Section 12(1) of the Rental Housing Protection Act, which shall be executed and registered against the title to the lands at 86 Cedar Street South as part of any subsequent condominium agreement. The Agreement shall contain the following conditions: PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES JANUARY 16, 1995 -7- CITY OF KITCHENER a) b) c) d) The Owners agree to supply the City's Policy, Research and Housing Division with a list of the names and addresses of all the tenants who occupy the residential units which now exist upon the subject lands, hereinafter called the "Existing Units", as of the date Council's approval of this Agreement under the Rental Housing Protection Act. Further, the Owners shall supply the City's Policy, Research and Housing Division with the names and addresses of any new tenant who commences to occupy an Existing Unit between the date of Council's approval of the Agreement and the date of registration of the final plan of condominium. All tenants referred to above are hereinafter called "the Tenants". The Owners agree to give notice to the Tenants of their rights under the terms of the Agreement, within 30 days following the date of registration of the final plan of condominium, by providing them with a copy of this agreement and by filing proof of notification with the City's Policy, Research and Housing Division, either by a sworn affidavit of service or by a copy of this agreement signed by the Tenant as acknowledgement of receipt. This agreement shall confer no rights whatsoever upon any new tenant who enters into a lease agreement with the Owners and occupies an Existing Unit after the date of registration of the final plan of condominium (hereinafter called a "Post- Registration Tenant"). The Owners shall give notice of this agreement to all Post- Registration Tenants, at the time they enter into their leases, and provide proof of notification to the Policy, Research and Housing Division, either by a sworn affidavit of service or by a copy of this agreement signed by such tenants as acknowledgement of receipt, following which such tenants shall be deemed to have notice that they do not have any rights under this agreement. The Owners agree that, in the event a Tenant wishes to continue to rent and occupy his or her Existing Unit, or to rent it until such time as he or she might exercise his or her right to purchase, the following conditions apply: The Tenant shall be entitled to continue to rent the unit which he or she is currently renting and occupying for a period of up to five years following the date of registration of the final plan of condominium (herein after called the "Five Year Rental Period"). Throughout the Five Year Rental Period, the applicable rent for a given unit shall not exceed the lawful maximum rent which could be charged for that rental unit under the Residential Rent Regulation Act, R.S.S 1990, c. R.29, as amended (hereinafter called the "RRR Act") and any increases to that rent throughout the Five Year Rental Period shall be subject to the RRR Act. At the Tenant's discretion, the Owners and Tenant shall enter into a lease, leases, renewal or renewals for all or part of the Five Year Rental Period for such term or terms as is agreed to from time to time by the Tenant and the Owners, provided that the total term thereof does not exceed the Five Year Rental Period. PD 94/96 - 86 CEDAR STREET SOUTH - CONDOMINIUM CONVERSION APPLICATION CD 94/002 - P & E INVESTMENT INC. - VICTORIA PARK WARD (CONT'D) The Owners agree to supply the City's Policy, Research and Housing Division with an executed copy of the lease, and any subsequent renewals thereof during this five year period. e) The Owners shall provide the Tenant or Tenants occupying an Existing Unit with the right of first refusal to purchase it during the Five Year Rental Period. To establish that a Tenant has foregone or waived his or her right of first refusal to purchase, the PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES JANUARY 16, 1995 -8- CITY OF KITCHENER Owners shall provide the Policy, Research and Housing Division with a written waiver of such right executed by the Tenant, witnessed and dated subsequent to the date of registration of the final plan of condominium. If, at any time during the Five Year Rental Period, the Owners receive a bona fide, arms length offer to purchase an Existing Unit which the Owners are willing to accept and if the Tenant or Tenants of such unit have not waived their rights of first refusal to purchase, the Owners shall notify the Tenant or Tenants of such unit by providing them with a true copy of the offer to purchase and the Tenant or Tenants shall have the right, during the thirty days immediately following the receipt thereof, to purchase the unit by delivering to the Owners a signed offer to purchase for the price and upon the terms and conditions contained in the original offer, which the Owners shall accept immediately. The Owners shall provide proof of notification to the City's Policy, Research and Housing Division, either by a sworn affidavit or service or by a copy of the original offer to purchase signed by the Tenant as acknowledgement of receipt. If the Tenant or Tenants do not deliver an offer to purchase to the Owners within thirty days, the Tenant or Tenants shall be deemed not to have exercised the right of first refusal, and the Owners may accept the original offer to purchase. If for any reason the Tenant or Tenants do not exercise the right of first refusal and the Owners do not complete the offer to purchase which had been received, the right of first refusal of the Tenant or Tenants shall continue in effect. f) The Owners agree to engage the services of a consultant with qualifications acceptable to the City's Chief Building Official, to conduct a building audit to establish the physical condition of the structure, prior to draft approval of any plan of condominium on the lands, and to file the results of the building audit with the City of Kitchener Planning Department. The Owners shall correct, to the satisfaction of the Chief Building Official, any health and safety deficiencies uncovered in the audit which relate to the Building Code or the City's Property Standard By-law and, upon correction, the City's Chief Building Official will notify the Owners in writing that the deficiencies have been corrected to his satisfaction. g) Prior to the sale of any of the Existing Units, the Owners shall notify potential purchasers that the results of the building audit are available for their consideration. h) If a term of this Agreement is inconsistent with the rights conferred upon the Owners or a Tenant under the Rental Housing Protection Act, the Residential Rent Regulation Act or the Landlord and Tenant Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. L.7, as amended, the provisions of the aforesaid statues are deemed to apply. It is the opinion of this Committee that approval of this application is proper planning for the City." 8. ADJOURNMENT On motion, the meeting adjourned at 4:14 p.m. L.W. Neil, AMCT Assistant City Clerk