Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlng & Econ Dev - 1995-10-02PED\1995-10-02 PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES OCTOBER 2, 1995 CITY OF KITCHENER The Planning and Economic Development Committee met this date commencing at 3:15 p.m. with the following members present: Mayor R. Christy and Councillors John Smola, G. Lorentz, B. Vrbanovic, T. Galloway, J. Ziegler, M. Wagner and Jake Smola. Councillors C. Weylie and K. Redman entered the meeting after its commencement. Officials present: Ms. C. Ladd, Ms. J. Jantzi, Ms. S. Frenette and Messrs. T. McKay, T. McCabe, B. Stanley, D. Mansell, R. Mattice, J. Shivas, D. Snow and L.W. Neil. The Committee was requested to appoint a Councillor to act as Chair until the expected arrival of Councillor C. Weylie. On motion by Councillor B. Vrbanovic - it was resolved: "That Councillor T. Galloway chair this meeting in the absence of Councillor C. Weylie, Chair and Councillor M. Yantzi, Vice-Chair." 1. DOWNTOWN UPDATE Ms. S. Frenette provided the Committee with a brief report on the following activities relative to developments in the downtown: - four new leases signed for businesses in the downtown - staff are pursuing numerous development leads - a strong interest has been expressed by a business involved in the telecommunications and high technology field - office vacancy rates are beginning to fall in the downtown PD 95~94 - REPEAL OF DOWNTOWN ACTION COMMITTEE TERMS OF REFERENCE - ADOPTION OF DOWNTOWN ADVISORY COMMITTEE TERMS OF REFERENCE The Committee was in receipt of Planning and Development Staff Report PD 95/94 dated September 25, 1995 discussing a refocussing of the role of the Downtown Action Committee into a more inclusive community committee to be known as the Kitchener Downtown Advisory Committee. In this regard, proposed Terms of Reference for the Kitchener Downtown Advisory Committee were attached to the staff report. Mr. B. Stanley advised that staff had nothing further to add to the report under consideration. He briefly reviewed the basis of the recommendation in the report. Councillor M. Wagner referred to the membership structure of the new committee and questioned what the basis was for appointing 5 members of Council. He stressed that it was his view any inner city Ward Councillors should have the first right to sit as members of the Advisory Committee. Mr. B. Stanley advised that the 5 Councillor appointees were taken from the existing Downtown Action Committee Terms of Reference. He noted that the Committee discussed the extent of Council representation and would be in favour of inner city Ward Councillors being appointed. Councillor M. Wagner suggested that a representative from the City of Kitchener Arts & Culture Advisory Committee should be appointed in place of the representative from the Waterloo Regional Arts Council. Councillor Jake Smola suggested a representative of the Kitchener Public Library might be valuable and requested Mr. B. Stanley to contact Ms. M. Walshe to see if there was interest in such an appointee sitting on the Committee. Mr. Stanley did comment that in his experience with the Downtown Action Committee there were very few items that would be of interest to the Kitchener Public Library. The recommendation and the Terms of Reference were then considered and it was agreed to revise the Terms of Reference so as to provide for the appointment of 1 representative from the City of Kitchener Arts & Culture Advisory Committee rather than a representative from the Waterloo Regional Arts Council. The recommendation as revised was then considered. PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES OCTOBER 2, 1995 - 152 - CITY OF KITCHENER PD 95~94 - REPEAL OF DOWNTOWN ACTION COMMITTEE TERMS OF REFERENCE - ADOPTION OF DOWNTOWN ADVISORY COMMITTEE TERMS OF REFERENCE (CONT'D) On motion by Councillor M. Wagner - it was resolved: "That Kitchener City Council adopt the revised Terms of Reference of the Kitchener Downtown Action Committee adopted by the Committee at their meeting of September 14, 1995, and further, That the existing Kitchener Downtown Action Committee Terms of Reference, City of Kitchener Council Policy Manual No. 1-90, be repealed and replaced with the new Terms of Reference of the Kitchener Downtown Advisory Committee as outlined hereunder: KITCHENER DOWNTOWN ADVISORY COMMITTEE TERMS OF REFERENCE 1.0 2.0 3.0 PURPOSE AND SCOPE 1.1 The Kitchener Downtown Advisory Committee is an Advisory Committee reporting directly to Council or to the appropriate Standing Committee. 1.2 The Kitchener Downtown Advisory Committee will consider the downtown in its broadest context to include a downtown community made up of three concentric areas: a commercial core defined by Charles Street, Cedar Street, Weber Street and Victoria Street, a ring of adjacent inner city neighbourhoods comprised of the Civic Centre, Central Frederick, King East, Cedar Hill, Victoria Park and Mill Courtland neighbourhoods; and an inner city area bounded by the Conestoga Expressway, The City of Waterloo and Westmount Road. As such the Committee mandate will cover all matters that impact on the Downtown including: environment and physical image; arts, culture, heritage and entertainment; marketing and business development; media and community relations; safety; housing; neighbourhood and community development; and transportation and parking. RESPONSIBILITIES 2.1 To hear delegations, review reports on any subject falling within the Committee's mandate and, where appropriate, to advise Council directly or through the appropriate Standing Committee. 2.2 To oversee and administer the Downtown Kitchener Community Strategic Plan including its implementation and long term maintenance and review. 2.3 To provide liaison between the City and the Community concerning all matters relating to the Downtown Community. 2.4 To promote and initiate short-term, intermediate and long-term proposals, programs and projects for the strengthening and enhancement of the Downtown. MEMBERSHIP AND ORGANIZATION 3.1 Membership on the Committee shall be as follows: Mayor Ex Officio 5 Members of Council PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES OCTOBER 2, 1995 - 153 - CITY OF KITCHENER PD 95~94 - REPEAL OF DOWNTOWN ACTION COMMITTEE TERMS OF REFERENCE - ADOPTION OF DOWNTOWN ADVISORY COMMITTEE TERMS OF REFERENCE (CONT'D) 5 Reps - Chairman and 4 Members of Kitchener Downtown Business Association 1 Rep - Senior Citizens 1 Rep - Kitchener Downtown Churches 1 Rep - Social Planning Council of Kitchener-Waterloo 1 Rep - Affordable Housing 1 Rep - Physically Challenged 1 Rep - From each of: a) Cedar Hill Neighbourhood Association b) Central Frederick Neighbourhood Association c) King Street East Neighbourhood Association d) Civic Centre Neighbourhood Association e) Mill Courtland Neighbourhood Association f) Victoria Park Neighbourhood Association 1 Rep - City of Kitchener Arts & Culture Advisory Committee 1 Rep - Kitchener-Waterloo Multicultural Centre 1 Rep -Waterloo Regional Police 3.2 The Committee shall, from amongst their members, annually choose a Committee Chairman who must be a member of Council and a Vice- Chairman. 3.3 Minutes will be kept of each meeting with secretarial services provided by the staff of the Department of Planning and Development. 3.4 Meetings will be held monthly or as called by due notice." INFORMATION REPORT - CEDAR HILL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT The Committee was in receipt of a report dated October 2, 1995 prepared by Ms. Karen Taylor Harrison, Community Development Coordinator for the Cedar Hill Community Project. The report provides an update on community activities that have taken place subsequent to receipt of community development grant monies in May of 1995. Various events have been organized including: seniors/youth tea, a summer folk festival and police supported basketball/floor hockey. Other outcomes arising from these community development initiatives were itemized along with conclusions and results from this community development process. Ms. Karen Taylor Harrison appeared to present additional comments with respect to her report. She recounted some incident respecting certain happenings and activities that have recently taken place in the community. She stated that it was her view that there was solid support within the community to build upon and acknowledged the strong support that has been received from City staff and the Police Department. In conclusion, Ms. Taylor Harrison stated that the development grant was worthwhile and had assisted in fostering positive spirit within the community. She thanked City Council for its initiative in this regard. Councillor T. Galloway requested the delegation pass along congratulations from City Council to her co-workers for the results achieved thus far. PD 95~97 - NEW COMMUNITY TRAILS The Committee was in receipt of Planning and Development Staff Report PD 95/97 dated September 27, 1995 dealing with New Community Trails in new plans of subdivision. The report discusses consideration, decisions and notification processes regarding planning and installation of community trails. Mr. T. McCabe commented that the issue dates back to direction given by Council on December 13, 1993 following consideration of a report brought in by the Department of Parks and Recreation. He commented on the recommendation in PD 95/97 that would require subdividers to front-end finance and construct community trails supported by a credit for PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES OCTOBER 2, 1995 - 154 - CITY OF KITCHENER PD 95/97 - NEW COMMUNITY TRAILS (CONT"D) development charges to be paid. In summary, Mr. McCabe stated that with the revisions to processes that were now proposed; it was his hope that in future homeowners would not be suddenly taken by surprise when community trails were developed adjacent to their properties. Councillor M. Wagner was strongly supportive of the recommendations and commented that the issue was also a very decisive and positive step forward in the area of transportation since by means of these community trails, cyclists were being recognized as a legitimate form of transportation and development costs of the trails were appropriate to be paid for by the developer. Councillor T. Galloway questioned what the City's policy would be in respect to transition situations. Mr. T. McCabe commented that if a subdivision was previously approved the cost component for the trail was not included; however, if a subdivision was still at draft plan stage but not registered, the City could request the developer to install the community trail and offer a credit toward development charges. On motion by Councillor B. Vrbanovic - it was resolved: 1) "That the Department of Planning and Development be directed to consider the issue of new community trails as part of the comprehensive review of public notification and participation procedures and as an interim measure be directed to include community trails on plans of subdivision where the location of such trails are known at this stage of the planning process. 2) That the cost of construction of community trails within new plans of subdivision be reviewed as a component of the Development Charge Bylaw for inclusion in the 1996 By-law and further, that when there are insufficient funds available to the City to construct community trails at the time new plans of subdivision are under development, the Subdivider be required to front end finance and construct said trails with credits to be granted through the provisions contained within the Development Charge By-law." REPORT - MARLBOROUGH AVENUE - PROPOSED SIDEWALK INSTALLATION - ROCKWAY-ST. MARY'S WARD The Committee was in receipt of a report from the Department of Public Works dated September 28, 1995 prepared by Mr. S. Gyorffy discussing concerns relating to student pedestrian traffic on Marlborough Avenue and alternative solutions in that regard. Councillor M. Wagner commented that due to the fast response by staff with respect to this matter he had been unable to gather delegations that have an interest in this safety problem. Accordingly, he requested the matter be deferred. On motion by Councillor M. Wagner - it was resolved: "That the Department of Public Works report dated September 28, 1995 prepared by Mr. S. Gyorffy respecting pedestrian safety/sidewalk installation/financing on Marlborough Avenue be referred to the Finance and Administration Committee for consideration at its October 16, 1995 meeting." Councillors C. Weylie and K. Redman entered the meeting at this point. Councillor T. Galloway vacated the Chair which was assumed by Councillor C. Weylie who conducted the remainder of the meeting. PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES OCTOBER 2, 1995 - 155 - CITY OF KITCHENER PD 95~86 - 23 & 27 OTTAWA STREET NORTH - DEMOLITION CONTROL APPLICATION DC 9513101RM - KITCHENER MENNONITE BRETHREN CHURCH - CENTRE WARD The Committee was in receipt of Planning & Development Staff Report PD 95/86 dated September 19, 1995 respecting a Demolition Control Application for two single detached dwellings at 23 & 27 Ottawa Street North submitted by the Kitchener Mennonite Brethren Church. The purpose of the application is to remove two single detached dwellings and outbuildings in order to provide additional parking for the church to bring its parking capacity more into conformity with the zoning requirement. The subject houses are not affected by the Rental Housing Protection Act or the Ontario Heritage Act. The lands are designated Low Density Commercial Residential according to the King East Secondary Plan. The staff report contains an examination of the issues both for and against the demolition application and recommends refusal of the application. Mr. B. Stanley advised that he had nothing further to add to the report under consideration other than to note that letters of concern were received from the property owners at 31 & 35 Ottawa Street North. Mr. R. Mattice advised the Committee that as a result of revision of the Demolition Control By-law, the criteria for consideration of requests was altered. Under the old by-law the question of prematurity of the demolition was considered and resulted in too many boarded up dwellings. Accordingly, the criteria was expanded and now considers the property zoning, state of building repair or disrepair and time frame for development. Mr. Mattice then reviewed "the issues for demolition" as listed on page 3 of the report and then the "issues against demolition" as listed on pages 4 & 5 of the report. In response to Councillor G. Lorentz, Mr. Mattice advised that the intent of the designation in the secondary plan was to provide for a form of future development along Ottawa Street North that would buffer the adjacent residential area from commercial development. Councillor Lorentz questioned the view of planning staff that the neighbourhood was regarded as within walking distance to the downtown and its commercial core. Mr. Gary Melanson, Madorin Snyder, appeared as a delegation on behalf of the owners of 31 & 35 Ottawa Street North to support the staff recommendation to refuse the application. He commented that the content of the staff report on this issue was quite fair and stated that actual street landscape must be considered. In this regard he noted that only 23 parking spaces would be obtained as a result of the demolitions but would significantly change the streetscape. Mr. Melanson referred to the Iow level utilization of nearby parking lots and stated that the demolitions would be negative to the neighbourhood and contrary to good planning as the two remaining homes at 31 & 35 Ottawa Street North would be reduced in value. In response to Councillor M. Wagner, Mr. Melanson commented that the subject properties hide the physical bulk of the church and could in future be utilized to consolidate with the properties at 31 & 35 Ottawa Street North for a commercial development. Mrs. Lori Heller, 31 Ottawa Street North, advised if the two subject properties were removed she would be immediately adjacent to the new parking lot. She stated that she was opposed to the applications for the following reasons: that her property would be devalued, that future commercial redevelopment of the two remaining homes would be jeopardized and that noise and a traffic bottleneck would be created adjacent to her driveway. She pointed out that there was ample parking across the street at Eastwood Square and requested the Committee refuse the application. In response to Councillor K. Redman, Mrs. Heller stated that since the subject homes were in such good shape it would take a long time for them to deteriorate to the point that residents would be requesting removal. She stated that it was her expectation that commercial redevelopment would occur before such deterioration could happen. Councillor G. Lorentz commented that he did not think the church would sell their lands for any future joint commercial development with the owners of 31 & 35 Ottawa Street North. Mr. Larry Hackbart appeared as a delegation representing the owners of 35 Ottawa Street North. He commented on how well the properties were cared for and how the physical balance of the block would be destroyed if the two single family homes were demolished. He noted that he had received advice from realtors indicating the property values would be hurt by the PD 95~86 - 23 & 27 OTTAWA STREET NORTH - DEMOLITION CONTROL APPLICATION DC 9513101RM - KITCHENER MENNONITE BRETHREN CHURCH - CENTRE WARD (CONT'D) PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES OCTOBER 2, 1995 - 156 - CITY OF KITCHENER demolitions. Further, he pointed out that there was excess parking located behind the Tim Horton's as well as on the neighbouring automobile dealer and bank properties. Councillor T. Galloway questioned the suggestion of diminished property values and Mr. Hackbart replied that his reference was to a general depreciation taking place whether the properties were considered residential or commercial. On the commercial aspect it was noted that Eastwood Square has had difficulty filling vacant space and other commercial redevelopment was not forseen in the near future. Mr. Richard Wagner appeared as a delegation on behalf of the church and pointed out that many of the church members care for the church property and the two residential properties owned by the church. He distributed a submission outlining the proposal and indicated that the church had approached neighbouring residents regarding their proposal. He requested staff comment on the valuation issue. Mr. R. Mattice advised that the Regional Assessment Office generally considers a vacant commercial lot to be worth more than a derelict residential lot. He noted that consideration should be on a site specific basis but generally commercial was worth more than residential. Mr. Wagner continuing his presentation, advised that the pastor had met with neighbouring residents. As a result of the church's understanding that valuation was a concern to the property owners, the church had arranged for extensive landscaping in excess of the usual requirements to address this concern. He pointed out that the two houses over look the Tim Horton's business operation and are impacted by the heavy traffic conditions of Ottawa Street. He contended that the church was faced with a dangerous situation relating to parking and access and has made every reasonable effort to share parking mutually with adjacent land owners. He advised that given the good condition of the dwellings, the church has worked toward bringing about preservation by making inquiries as to groups that would be interested in relocating them. On another issue, he referred the Committee to an agenda application to be considered this date from the K-W Hospital in which staff recommend approval of demolitions and suggested the issues between the applications were similar. In response to a question, he advised that the first home was purchased six years ago and the second home was purchased this year. In responding to questions he advised that in the past the owner of the Eastwood Plaza was supportive of the use of the plaza parking lot by the church but that the new owner has been less supportive particularly in light of Sunday shopping. Finally, he noted that the church has an immediate parking problem that must be resolved. Councillor M. Wagner questioned what specifically precipitated the demolition applications and Mr. Wagner advised that it was a strong desire on the part of the church to achieve needed parking and that it was never their intent to be property landlords in the long term. Also, he noted that the congregation was made up of some 450 members. The senior pastor for the church advised that two services were held on Sunday but with Sunday School in between there was an overlapping requirement as to parking needs. He confirmed that generally from Monday to Saturday the church parking lot was not filled except in instances where special community events were being held such as blood donor clinics and individual gatherings. Councillor B. Vrbanovic commented that he considered the majority of property along this section of Ottawa to be non-residential in character. He questioned how change could be anticipated if the Council was not prepared to support the commercial aspect called for in the Secondary Plan. Mr. R. Mattice responded that residential use dominates the centre section of the east side of Ottawa Street between Weber and King Streets; however, he acknowledged that the street is dominated by commercial use when both sides are considered. Councillor B. Vrbanovic then pointed out that the Committee previously considered and approved a demolition application of the Waterloo Credit Union on Weber Street and questioned why the difference in staff view of the application. Mr. R. Mattice explained the individual physical site conditions and the building condition with regard to the application submitted by the Waterloo Credit Union. Councillor K. Redman questioned if the applicant was willing to meet with the neighbouring property owners to discuss any of their concerns with regard to landscaping and the church delegation acknowledged that they would be pleased to involve the neighbours in this process. Councillor M. Wagner commented that the issue was neither future property PD 95~86 - 23 & 27 OTTAWA STREET NORTH - DEMOLITION CONTROL APPLICATION DC 9513101RM - KITCHENER MENNONITE BRETHREN CHURCH - CENTRE WARD (CONT'D) values nor planning related but the issue was whether or not the City would allow good housing PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES OCTOBER 2, 1995 - 157 - CITY OF KITCHENER stock to be removed to be replaced by a parking lot. Councillor G. Lorentz stated that he favoured removal of the two subject properties and there re-use somewhere else. Mayor R. Christy stated that he had great sympathy for the two remaining home owners at 31 & 35 Ottawa Street North. However, he referred to the experience of the residents in the K-W Hospital neighbourhood who have pleaded for run down properties to be removed and the site cleaned up. On motion by Councillor B. Vrbanovic - it was resolved: "That Demolition Control Application DC 95/3/O/RM (Kitchener Mennonite Brethren Church) requesting approval for the removal of two single detached dwellings located at 23 and 27 Ottawa Street North legally described as Lot 39 & Part Lot 40, Registered Plan 316 and Part Lot 40 and Lot 41, Registered Plan 316 be approved. It is the opinion of this Committee that the approval of this application is proper planning for the City." The Chair advised that this recommendation would be considered by City Council at its meeting to be held at 6:00 pm on Tuesday, October 10, 1995. PD 95~87 - 44 & 54 GLASGOW STREET, 385, 389, 391,393 & 397 PARK STREET - RENTAL HOUSING PROTECTION ACT APPLICATION DE/95/002 - DEMOLITION CONTROL APPLICATION DC 95141GIRM - K-W HOSPITAL - VICTORIA PARK WARD The Committee was in receipt of Planning and Development Staff Report PD 95/87 dated September 5, 1995. The staff report deals with two applications. Firstly, an application for demolition under the Rental Housing Protection Act and secondly, an application under the Demolition Control By-law for the demolition of a nine unit apartment building and five single detached dwellings in order to facilitate the development of a residential care facility. The subject properties are located at the corner of Park and Glasgow Streets and are known municipally as 44 & 54 Glasgow Street and 385, 389, 391,393 & 397 Park Street. It was pointed out that notice that the Committee would hold a public meeting this date to consider this matter had previously been given. Mr. R. Mattice advised that staff had nothing further to add to the staff report and the recommendation to demolish the subject properties. Mr. Craig Robson, McCarter Grespan Robson, appeared as a delegation on behalf of K-W Hospital in support of the application. He noted that the lands were approved for a residential care facility which in this case will be a detox centre to replace the existing facilities which are totally inadequate. Also, he commented that while the application was submitted as a package, actually four of the houses would not be part of an RHPA application. Mr. Robson advised that the neighbourhood supports the application and indicated that some land would be taken from the subject properties for road widening and that the site plan was in the process of being finalized. In response to Mayor R. Christy, Mr. Robson advised that funding from the province for this facility was assured. It was noted that at one time these properties were purchased in anticipation of being required to meet hospital parking needs. Mr. Paul Britton, MacNaughton Hermsen Britton Clarkson, appeared as a delegation on behalf of K-W Hospital and advised that a meeting had been held two weeks ago with area neighbours. He advised the Committee that the neighbours had been informed that there was a risk funding from the province could be withdrawn which could result in a delay in development. He commented that there was every intent to ensure planning and legal staff PD 95~87 - 44 & 54 GLASGOW STREET, 385, 389, 391,393 & 397 PARK STREET - RENTAL HOUSING PROTECTION ACT APPLICATION DE/95/002 - DEMOLITION CONTROL APPLICATION DC 95141GIRM - K-W HOSPITAL - VICTORIA PARK WARD (CONT'D) monitor the situation carefully in order to avoid development of a parking lot as a result of a delay in development. PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES OCTOBER 2, 1995 - 158 - CITY OF KITCHENER In response to Councillor M. Wagner, Mr. Robson advised that it was the intention of the hospital to remove all the properties at once. Further, he advised that the neighbours were aware of the proposed use of the property as a new detox centre. Also in response to Councillor Wagner, he advised that he was aware of only one other home owned by the K-W Hospital in addition to the subject properties. Councillor C. Weylie confirmed that area neighbours have been requesting for a number of years that the subject properties be demolished. No other delegations responded to an invitation from the Chair to address the Committee on this matter. Councillor T. Galloway advised that he was a member on the Grand River Hospital Board and stated that while funding is not assured, there was confidence that the project would go ahead. He did indicate that if funding was not forthcoming for the project, the hospital should demolish only the buildings that were in actual need of demolition and that he would advance this point of view at the hospital board if it becomes necessary. On motion by Councillor J. Ziegler - it was resolved: 1) "That Council approve Rental Housing Protection Act application DE/95/002 (K-W Hospital) for the demolition of a nine unit apartment building and five single detached dwellings located at 44 & 54 Glasgow St, 385, 389, 391, 393, and 397 Park Street subject to the Owner complying with Section 105 of the Landlord and Tenant Act, R.S.O. 1990. c. L.7, as amended. The issuance of the 120 Day Notice of Termination of the Tenancy Agreement shall not be sooner than the date of Council's approval of the Owner's application under the Rental Housing Protection Act. 2) That Demolition Control Application DC 95/4/G/RM (K-W Hospital) requesting approval for the removal of a 9 unit apartment building and five single detached dwellings located at 44 & 54 Glasgow Street and 385, 389, 391,393, and 397 Park Street legally described as Part Lot 285, Registered Plan 385 and Part Lots 1, 3, 5, 6 & 8, Reference Plan 58R-4956 be approved. It is the opinion of this Committee that the approval of these applications is proper planning for the City." The Chair advised that this recommendation would be considered by City Council at its meeting to be held at 6:00 pm on Tuesday, October 10, 1995. PD 95/81 - PINNACLE DRIVE - ZONE CHANGE APPLICATION ZC 941231PIZJ - HUROX HOLDINGS LIMITED & CITY OF KITCHENER - SOUTH WARD The Committee was advised that the Department of Planning and Development was in receipt of an application from Hurox Holdings Limited and the City of Kitchener to change the zoning of lands on Pinnacle Drive. The proposed zoning change is from Open Space (P-2) and Hazard Land Zone (P-3) to Residential Four Zone (R-4) according to By-law 85-1. In this regard the Committee considered Planning and Development Staff Report PD 95/81 dated September 6, 1995 and the proposed by-law dated July 19, 1995 attached to the report. PD 95/81 - PINNACLE DRIVE - ZONE CHANGE APPLICATION ZC 941231PIZJ - HUROX HOLDINGS LIMITED & CITY OF KITCHENER - SOUTH WARD (CONT'D) It was noted in the report that Hurox Holdings has applied to re-zone land along Pinnacle Drive to create two single detached lots, which are to be exchanged with the City for approximately 3 acres of land to be used for parkland purposes. PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES OCTOBER 2, 1995 - 159 - CITY OF KITCHENER It was pointed out that notice that the Committee would hold a public meeting this date to consider this matter had previously been given. The staff report pointed out that in 1994 Hurox Holdings Limited approached the City requesting consideration of an exchange of land they own to the rear of the land fronting Pinnacle Drive, for City owned land fronting Pinnacle Drive. Further background regarding this proposal is described in the report. Mr. T. McCabe advised that staff had nothing further to add to the report under consideration. He did note that a representative of the applicant was in attendance and that as a result of discussions held with Mr. David Parrish it would appear that Mr. Parrish no longer intends to pursue his earlier objection. Mr. Bruce Hurlburt appeared as a delegation on behalf of the applicant in support of the application. No other delegations responded to an invitation from the Chair to address the Committee on this matter. On motion by Councillor T. Galloway - it was resolved: "That Zone Change Application 94/23/P/ZJ (Hurox Holdings Limited and the City of Kitchener) requesting a change in zoning from Open Space Zone (P-2) and Hazard Land Zone (P-3) to Residential Four Zone (R-4) according to By-law 85-1 on part of Biehn's Unnumbered Tract, more particularly described as part of Part 1, on Plan WDR-226, be approved, in the form shown in the "proposed By-law" attached, dated July 19, 1995, without conditions. It is the opinion of this Committee that the approval of this application is proper planning for the City and is in conformity with the City's Municipal Plan." The Chair advised that this recommendation would be considered by City Council at its meeting to be held at 6:00 pm on Tuesday, October 10, 1995. 9. ADJOURNMENT On motion, the meeting adjourned at 5:10 p.m. L.W. Neil, AMCT Assistant City Clerk