Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlng & Econ Dev - 1997-12-08PED\1997-12-08 PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES DECEMBER 8, 1997 CITY OF KITCHENER The Planning and Economic Development Committee met this date commencing at 4:00 p.m. under Councillor C. Weylie, Chair, with the following members present: Mayor C. Zehr and Councillors Jake Smola, M. Yantzi, J. Ziegler, G. Lorentz, K. Taylor-Harrison, B. Vrbanovic, T. Galloway, J. Haalboom and John Smola. Officials present: Ms. C. Ladd, V. Gibaut, J. Jantzi and Messrs. J. Gazzola, J. Shivas, T. McCabe, B. Stanley, P. Wetherup, J. Hancock, J. Witmer, D. Mansell, L. Bensason, Z. Janecki, T. Clancy and L.W. Neil. LANCASTER CORPORATE CENTRE, PHASE 2 RE LOT 10 REQUEST OF JAMESWAY CONSTRUCTION TO INSTALL POLE TRANSFORMER Ms. V. Gibaut advised the Committee that she was in receipt of a request to mount an electrical transformer on an existing pole in the Lancaster Corporate Centre rather than bury or enclose the transformer. Mr. Al Way appeared as a delegation on behalf of Jamesway Construction in regard to construction of a three storey office building to be built south of the existing Ernst & Young building. Mr. Way confirmed that his request was for permission to erect a transformer on an existing pole. In this regard, he noted that the service requirement for the building was a much smaller electrical requirement than that of other buildings in the park. Mr. Ron Charie appeared as a delegation on behalf of Kitchener-Wilmot Hydro and advised that the utility could accommodate either an underground or an overhead transformer. He noted that the issue was that the City as the developer has not permitted transformers to be placed on poles in the Lancaster Business Park to date. He pointed out that a utility pole can only accommodate a transformer up to a certain size and confirmed that underground installation was a much more expensive alternative. Councillor T. Galloway questioned if there was any opportunity to expand an existing vault to accommodate the current request and Mr. Way responded that each property has to be serviced on its own and in his view the issue was an aesthetic one. Ms. V. Gibaut commented on the cost of installation of such transformer and Mr. R. Charie identified situational costs for primary cable, secondary cable, road crossing, enclosure and transformer and noted that approximately $15,000 would be saved if a transformer was mounted on a utility pole. In response to Councillor C. Weylie, Ms. V. Gibaut noted that this portion of the park was the only area that had utility poles. Councillor J. Ziegler pointed out that the lands were owned by Grier Investments who had earlier negotiated a transaction price that was beneficial to them and commented that the firm was now trying to achieve further savings to the detriment of other businesses and he would not support the request. In response to Councillor T. Galloway, Ms. V. Gibaut noted that utility poles were only located in Phase 2 and she did not think there could be any other requests following consideration of the current one. Further, she indicated that a policy was never explicitly outlined with regard to the request now before the Committee. Mr. J. Gazzola confirmed that originally it was planned to place everything underground but that had changed for Phase 2 of the development and utility poles were allowed. He stated that in his view one transformer on a pole was preferable in place of two concrete units side by side each enclosing a transformer. Councillor J. Haalboom noted that in the Doon area utility boxes had been concealed and Councillor Jake Smola stated that he was opposed on the basis of protecting the other land owners in the corporate centre who had conformed to the City's policy. A motion by Councillor M. Yantzi to accede to the request of Jamesway Construction to mount a hydro transformer on an existing pole to service a building being developed on Lot 10 in Phase 2 of the Lancaster Corporate Centre was voted on and lost. On motion by Councillor Jake Smola - it was resolved: "That no action be taken on the request of Mr. Al Way, on behalf of Jamesway Construction, for permission to mount a hydro transformer on an existing pole to service a building being developed on Lot 10 in Phase 2 of the Lancaster Corporate Centre." PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES DECEMBER 8, 1997 - 170 - CITY OF KITCHENER PD 97/106 - RITTENHOUSE ROAD & ERINBROOK DRIVE - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION 30T-97009 - PROSPERITY HOMES LIMITED - SOUTH WARD The Committee was in receipt of Planning and Development Staff Report PD 97/106 dated October 30, 1997 dealing with a Subdivision Application submitted by Prosperity Homes Limited. It was noted in the report that the applicant is proposing to subdivide a parcel of land approximately 1.489 hectares (3.68 acres) in size located at the southeast corner of Rittenhouse Road and Erinbrook Drive. The subject lands were originally intended for development of a townhousing project; however, the current proposal would create 37 single family lots. It was pointed out that notice that the Committee would hold a public hearing this date to consider this matter had previously been given. Ms. C. Ladd advised that the current zoning for the subject lands which was multiple residential would allow the proposed subdivision. She also advised that a petition of support from five residents of the immediate area was received. Councillor T. Galloway stated that he supported the plan but had concerns with regard to the 25 foot lot widths fronting on Erinbrook Drive. He questioned if there were any options available for flexibility that would allow a reconfiguration of these lots at a later date. Ms. Ladd advised that the lots referred to, being lots 11 to 20, could be designated as a Iotless block for division at a later date. Secondly, she advised that if the subdivider wished to increase the width of lots 11 to 20 later in the development stage he could make a request to that effect. Councillor Galloway pointed out that 25 foot lot widths were very small and expressed concern over the streetscape appearance if two storey homes were erected. He questioned if some limitation could be placed on the size of the homes to be constructed on these lots through a lot coverage formula. Ms. C. Ladd advised that there was an existing lot coverage requirement within the zoning by-law that would apply. Mr. Greg Brophey appeared as a delegation on behalf of Prosperity Homes Limited, London, to support the recommendation in the staff report. He commented that the lots had been sized to obtain the maximum yield from the development parcel and in this regard noted that this maximum yield was tied to the value of the land with its multiple residential zoning category. He pointed out that the density of the proposed development was less than what would of otherwise occurred with a townhouse development. Councillor T. Galloway pointed out that his concerns were from an urban design standpoint and he suggested that an attempt be made to market bungalows for the site to lessen the building mass of the dwellings in the development. Mr. Brophey stated that ultimately the market place would dictate the kind of home buyers wish and he suggested that it was likely that two storey homes were desired. Again, he pointed out that the developer had to purchase the site based on an anticipated lot yield per acre. In response to Councillor J. Haalboom, Mr. Brophey detailed the forms of housing surrounding the proposed development and noted that the market value of homes to be sold on this site would be similar to that of the surrounding neighbourhood. In addition, he stated that every effort would be made to build dwellings that would blend with the existing ones in the area. In response to Councillor J. Haalboom, Mr. T. McCabe pointed out that the proposed development was actually a de-intensification of use that would have less impact on the surrounding community which already had various infrastructure amenities such as schools and parks. He noted that the landscaping requirement for these freehold lots would be boulevard sodding and tree installation. On motion by Councillor T. Galloway - it was resolved: "That Subdivision Application 30T-97009 (Prosperity Homes Limited) be recommended to Regional Municipality of Waterloo for draft approval, subject to the following conditions: That the Subdivider enter into a City Standard Form Residential Subdivision Agreement as approved by City Council embracing those lands shown outlined PD 97/106 - RITTENHOUSE ROAD & ERINBROOK DRIVE - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION 30T-97009 PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES DECEMBER 8, 1997 - 171 - CITY OF KITCHENER - PROSPERITY HOMES LIMITED - SOUTH WARD (CONT'D) on the attached Plan of Subdivision and that the following special conditions be written therein: The Subdivider covenants and agrees: 51. That the final plan for registration purposes shall be prepared in accordance with the attached Plan of Subdivision dated, October 14, 1997, providing that minor amendments to said plan, acceptable to the General Manager of Planning and Development and not affecting the numbering of lots or blocks may be permitted without an amendment to this agreement. Any changes affecting the numbering of lots or blocks shall require an amendment to this agreement to reflect such changes. 52. To submit a Lot Grading and Drainage Control Plan for approval by the City's General Manager of Public Works, in consultation with the City's General Manager of Parks and Recreation, and the Grand River Conservation Authority, prior to any grading or construction on site or registration of the subdivision plan. Said engineering design shall include erosion provision for any required erosion and siltation control features to be installed both during and after grading and construction stages. The Subdivider further agrees to implement all required measures as outlined in the approved final design. 53. That construction traffic accessing this subdivision shall be restricted to using Rittenhouse Road, Erinbrook Drive, Waterford Road to Westmount Road. The Subdivider agrees to advise all relevant contractors, builders and other persons of this requirement, with the Subdivider being responsible for any signage, where required by and to the satisfaction of the City's General Manager of Public Works. 54. That vehicular access to Lots 1, 11 and 37 shall only be permitted from Rittenhouse Road and shall be located on the side of the lot furthest away from the intersection. In addition, the Subdivider agrees that vehicular access to Lot 3 shall be provided along the flankage of the lot furthest away from the corner. 55. That the street name within the plan shall be White Sands Court. 56. That the transit stop on Rittenhouse Road shall be relocated to the east in front of Rittenhouse Park and a concrete pad be installed at the Subdivider's cost to the satisfaction of the General Manager of Public Works. That the Residential Subdivision Agreement registered on title as Instrument No. 1160676 be released from title of the subject lands immediately subsequent to the registration of the subdivision agreement required in A above. It is the opinion of this Committee that approval of this application is proper planning for the City." PD 97/122 -ADDENDUM TO PD 97/110 PD 97/110 - BLOOMINGDALE ROAD - REVISION TO BRIDGEPORT EAST SECONDARY PLAN - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION 30T-97007 - 346874 ONTARIO LIMITED - BRIDGEPORT-NORTH WARD The Committee was in receipt of Planning and Development Staff Report PD 97/110 dated November 5, 1997 dealing with a subdivision application submitted by 346874 Ontario Limited and a concurrent community plan revision to the Bridgeport East Secondary Plan. It was noted in the report that the applicant proposes a plan of subdivision that would subdivide approximately 0.874 hectares (2.16 acres) of land located on the northside of Bloomingdale Road beside Schaefer Park in the Bridgeport East Community. The property is currently zoned PD 97/122 -ADDENDUM TO PD 97/110 PD 97/110 - BLOOMINGDALE ROAD - REVISION TO BRIDGEPORT EAST SECONDARY PLAN PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES DECEMBER 8, 1997 - 172 - CITY OF KITCHENER - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION 30T-97007 - 346874 ONTARIO LIMITED - BRIDGEPORT-NORTH WARD (CONT'D) R-3 which permits single detached dwellings as the predominant use of the land. Further, the block of land has remained vacant since it was acquired by the City and abuts Schaefer Park to the west which was developed for park purposes in 1982. It is proposed to create a subdivision consisting of 13 lots for single family dwellings with 7 lots fronting on existing Bloomingdale Road and 6 lots fronting on a new cul-de-sac extending from Bloomingdale Road. To facilitate this subdivision a revision to the Bridgeport East Secondary Plan is required in order to permit 13.7 metre (45 foot) lot widths instead of 15 metre (50 foot) widths for all lots. The Committee was also in receipt of Planning and Development Staff Report PD 97/122 dated December 4, 1997 which was prepared as an addendum to Staff Report PD 97/110. The addendum report recommends an additional condition to be numbered #59 be added to the subdivision application. This issue was identified following preparation of the staff report and the new condition requires the provision of a direct-to-fire alarm monitoring system since the lands are outside the acceptable 4 minute response distance but below the 5 minute first response distance as set out in the approved Fire Station Location Study. This condition is requested in accordance with Municipal Plan Policy. It was pointed out that notice that the Committee would hold a public hearing this date to consider this matter had previously been given. Ms. C. Ladd provided a brief explanation of the reports before the Committee and in particular made reference to the additional condition requested in PD 97/122. She advised that she had nothing further to add to the staff reports under consideration. Mr. Paul Puopolo appeared as a delegation on behalf of the applicant and also pointed out for the record that he was a Director of Planning and Engineering Initiatives Limited and a Director of Vista Ridge. He advised that he was in support of the recommendations in both staff reports. He requested the Committee's approval of the application on the basis that it conforms to the zoning by-law and that the subdivision lot configuration conforms to lots in the general area. Also, he stated that it was his view the development would not increase the traffic counts as planned for the area. Further, he stated that in the subdivision layout every effort had been made to minimize the number of driveways that would access Bloomingdale Road. He referred to the land exchange that took place between the City and Vista Ridge regarding lands in the Pioneer Tower area and the major discussion that took place at the Ontario Municipal Board. He stated that he deemed the land exchange to be fair and reasonable to both parties. Mr. Puopolo pointed out that Mr. Brian Calder could not attend the meeting this date but did wish to make a comment that both he and Mr. Calder were of the view that personal comments made in the local newspaper in relation to this project were not appropriate. Councillor J. Ziegler referred to the subdivision plan and stated that it was his understanding that when the land exchange took place it was based on the creation of 11 lots rather than 13 lots. Ms. C. Ladd noted that the application originally received from the subdivider contained 13 proposed lots. Ms. Sarah Corfield appeared as a delegation and read a submission to the Committee that had been distributed with the agenda. In addition, she distributed a submission this date containing additional comments which she also read to the Committee. It was her view that implications of the Bridgeport East Secondary Plan have been ignored over the years as additional development has been allowed that has resulted in area road capacities being exceeded. In this regard she referred specifically to concern over delayed emergency response time due to congestion on the bridge over the Grand River. Further, her submission contained a number of questions and requested that staff provide answers in response. Ms. Corfield requested that until reasonable alternative road access was provided that there be a total moratorium on any new development that would further impact the Bridge Street/Lancaster Street intersection congestion. In her additional submission distributed this date she stated that it would appear that for many years input from members of the public expressing their concerns over new development in the Bridgeport Community has been disregarded. Her submission contained PD 97/122 -ADDENDUM TO PD 97/110 PD 97/110 - BLOOMINGDALE ROAD - REVISION TO BRIDGEPORT EAST SECONDARY PLAN - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION 30T-97007 PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES DECEMBER 8, 1997 - 173 - CITY OF KITCHENER - 346874 ONTARIO LIMITED - BRIDGEPORT-NORTH WARD (CONT'D) a number of quotes from municipal officials in regard to development issues pertaining to Bridgeport. Fire Chief J. Hancock noted that emergency response times in this area are the poorest within the local urban area. However, he did state that the times have been significantly improved and noted that a number of changes have occurred since 1989. In this regard he explained the departments two truck response and radio strategy to improve actual response times should there be congestion/blockage on the bridge. He also noted that the opticom device has been installed on traffic signals and allows traffic to clear the bridge. Also, moving the fire station from Guelph Street to Lancaster Street is an improvement as well as direct-to-fire alarm monitoring requirement. In summary, he noted that the City has not solved all the problems regarding this area of Bridgeport but it was his view that it has been duly diligent in attempting to improve the situation. Councillor Jake Smola referred to the fire that took place at the Logel Auto Parts property and questioned what the response time was. Mr. Hancock indicated that he would advise Council of the actual time. Councillor J. Ziegler suggested that a traffic signal be placed at the intersection of Tyson Drive and Bridge Street that could be activated red as required in order to relieve congestion by prohibiting additional traffic from entering the route of an emergency response vehicle. Councillor J. Haalboom questioned what attempts had been made to alleviate the concerns of the residents and Ms. C. Ladd advised that a number of traffic studies have been done for the area to improve flow. She noted that the major issue was the proposed Highway 7 realignment that was a provincial project which would have the effect of significantly alleviating problems in Bridgeport. At this point, Mr. P. Wetherup responded to the questions outlined in Ms. Corfield's submission. He noted that Schaefer Park was 6.5 acres in size and that its future use would continue as a neighbourhood style ball diamond but not a fully scheduled diamond. In regard to the issue of development of a City owned woodlot he pointed out that a small woodlot was being developed in Sylvia Park. Mr. T. Clancy referred to the configuration of Schaefer Park and the swale and bank that exists and noted that the original ball diamond will remain intact. Mr. Z. Janecki responded to Ms. Corfield's question regarding the possibility of an archaeological site and advised that this issue would form a condition on the part of the Region with regard to the subdivision and the consultant would have to satisfy the Region as to possible archaeological issues. Mr. Steve Vogel appeared as a delegation and commented on a number of points. Firstly, on the woodlot referred to in Sylvia Park he stated that it was only comprised of an area of approximately 20 feet by 50 feet in size. He also questioned the effectiveness of the opticom system to clear the access and bridge of traffic as the law requires that when vehicle operators hear a siren they stop their vehicle and such procedure would not clear the bridge. Further, he pointed out the view of the Region that the functioning of the Bridge/Lancaster intersection was at a "C" level. Finally as to the direct-to-fire alarm monitoring requirement, he suggested this had to be questioned as it was computer based and subject to failure. Mr. Bruce Allen appeared as a delegation and advised that he was not objecting to the subdivision but did wish to request that fencing be provided along the flankage of lots 10 and 11 which parallel the riverbank. Mr. P. Puopolo indicated that he had no problem with the request. Ms. Erma Rhodes appeared as a delegation regarding the proposed subdivision and questioned what name was intended for the development. Mr. P. Puopolo advised that he was aware of her concern and would choose a name other than Schaefer Park or anything containing reference to the Schaefer name. PD 97/122 -ADDENDUM TO PD 97/110 PD 97/110 - BLOOMINGDALE ROAD - REVISION TO BRIDGEPORT EAST SECONDARY PLAN - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION 30T-97007 - 346874 ONTARIO LIMITED - BRIDGEPORT-NORTH WARD (CONT'D) Ms. Delores Charbanneau was registered as a delegation but declined to make a presentation. PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES DECEMBER 8, 1997 - 174 - CITY OF KITCHENER Mr. Mark Schaefer appeared as a delegation with regard to the subdivision proposal and spoke on the difficulty that fire trucks encounter on Bridge and Lancaster Streets and suggested that it was difficult for them to access the bridge at the best of times. Further, he noted that if a large vehicle such as a snowplough was on the bridge there would not be enough room for a fire truck to pass. The Committee was also in receipt of written correspondence dated December 8, 1997 distributed this date from Mr. & Mrs. R. Boes who indicated they were opposed to the proposed development and any other development in the area. The letter itemized the amount of development that has taken place over the last 15 years with still no major improvement being made to rectify the access problems relating to the Bridge Street bridge. No other delegations were registered respecting this matter. Councillor John Smola indicated that he was prepared to make a motion to approve the staff recommendations. He commented on planning history since 1981 and the improvements that have been made as developments have been approved. He noted that based on the planning that has taken place to date and the comments from the Fire Chief he was satisfied that the project could proceed. Councillor T. Galloway in reference to the concerns expressed by residents questioned if there was any development cap in the Bridgeport area and Mr. T. McCabe advised that as part of the determination of land uses, lot sizes had been considered as part of the Iow rise density designation. Councillor John Smola noted that there was a cap on development in areas to the north of the bridge. Councillor J. Ziegler commented that the City must be concerned with the potential for blockage of the bridge and must continue to monitor this area until the new Highway 7 project was completed. Fire Chief J. Hancock indicated that he would investigate the suggestion for automatic control of signals through opticom that would stop traffic at Tyson Drive. Councillor John Smola also requested consideration of some similar device at the intersection of Bloomingdale Road and Bridge Street. The recommendations in the staff reports were then considered. It was agreed to include an additional condition to be numbered 59 regarding the direct-to-fire alarm monitoring system and to revise condition 56 to accommodate the request for fencing of flankage along the sideyard of lots 10 and 11. The recommendations, as revised, were then considered. On motion by Councillor John Smola - it was resolved: "A. That a revision to the Bridgeport East Secondary Plan be approved as follows: 5.2.6 Notwithstanding Policy 5.2.1 above, new single detached lots on lands adjacent to Schaefer Park may have a minimum lot width of 13.7 metres in consideration of their location facing existing semi-detached dwellings and the compatibility of lot sizes in this instance. It is the opinion of this Committee that approval of this revision to the Secondary Plan is proper planning for the City. That Subdivision Application 30T-97007 (346874 Ontario Limited) be recommended to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo for draft approval, subject to the following conditions: PD 97/122 -ADDENDUM TO PD 97/110 PD 97/110 - BLOOMINGDALE ROAD - REVISION TO BRIDGEPORT EAST SECONDARY PLAN - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION 30T-97007 - 346874 ONTARIO LIMITED - BRIDGEPORT-NORTH WARD (CONT'D) That the Subdivider enter into a City Standard Form Residential Subdivision Agreement as approved by City Council embracing those lands shown outlined on the attached Plan of PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES DECEMBER 8, 1997 - 175 - CITY OF KITCHENER Subdivision and that the following special conditions be written therein: The Subdivider covenants and agrees: 51. That the final plan for registration purposes shall be prepared in accordance with the attached Plan of Subdivision dated November 5, 1997, providing that minor amendments to said plan, acceptable to the General Manager of Planning and Development and not affecting the numbering of lots or blocks may be permitted without an amendment to this agreement. Any changes affecting the numbering of lots or blocks shall require an amendment to this agreement to reflect such changes. 52. To submit a Lot Grading and Drainage Control Plan for approval by the City's General Manager of Public Works, in consultation with the City's General Manager of Parks and Recreation, the Grand River Conservation Authority, and the Regional Municipality of Waterloo prior to any grading or construction on site or registration of the subdivision plan. 53. To submit a detailed engineering design for Storm Water Management for the approval of the City's General Manager of Public Works, in consultation with the City's General Manager of Parks and Recreation, Grand River Conservation Authority and the Regional Municipality of Waterloo, prior to any grading or construction on site or registration of the plan of subdivision. Said engineering design shall include erosion provision for any required erosion and siltation control features to be installed during and after grading and construction stages. The Subdivider further agrees to implement all required measures as outlined in the approved final design. 54. To obtain from the Grand River Conservation Authority, a Fill, Construction and Alterations to Waterways Permit under Ontario Regulation 149 of RRO 1990 as amended by Ontario Regulation 69/93 and 669/94 for any storm sewer outfalls or alterations within the flood plain or scheduled area of the Grand River. Such permits shall be obtained, prior to any on site grading, installation of services or prior to the City's release of the subdivision plan for registration purposes if required by the Grand River Conservation Authority. 55. That the street name in the plan shall be "Colyer Place". 56. To erect a 1.8 metre (5 foot) high chain link or wooden privacy fence along the flankage of Lots 1, 10 and 11 and the rear of Lots 11 to 13 at the subdivider's cost and to the satisfaction to the General Manager of Parks and Recreation. 57. To make a cash contribution to the City of Kitchener Park Trust Fund Account in lieu of land for park purposes and in fulfilment of the Planning Act's park dedication requirement. Said contribution shall be equivalent to 5% of the land being subdivided, being 0.044 hectares, with said value and contribution being determined as of the day before the day of draft approval and paid immediately prior to registration of the subdivision. 58. To dedicate, by plan registration, free and clear of encumbrance, Block 14 for a road widening. PD 97/122 -ADDENDUM TO PD 97/110 PD 97/110 - BLOOMINGDALE ROAD - REVISION TO BRIDGEPORT EAST SECONDARY PLAN - SUBDIVISION APPLICATION 30T-97007 - 346874 ONTARIO LIMITED - BRIDGEPORT-NORTH WARD (CONT'D) 59. The Subdivider agrees that no building permits shall be applied for on any lot within the Plan until satisfactory arrangements are made with the City's Chief Building Official regarding the installation and maintenance of a direct-to-fire alarm PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES DECEMBER 8, 1997 - 176 - CITY OF KITCHENER monitoring system for each and every dwelling to be constructed within this Plan. Satisfactory arrangements shall be the submission of drawings showing the hardwiring in each dwelling. Prior to occupancy of each dwelling, the Subdivider shall confirm with the Chief Building Official that such system is operational. Such system shall remain operational in perpetuity and this condition shall not be released from title unless and until the City's Solicitor is notified by the City's Fire Chief that adequate protection is otherwise provided and the maintenance of the system is no longer mandatory. It is the opinion of this Committee that approval of this application is proper planning for the City." For the record, it was noted that earlier Mr. P. Puopolo had given an undertaking not to utilize reference to the Schaefer name with regard to the name of this subdivision. LETTER - HURON BUSINESS PARK, PHASE III - OFFER TO PURCHASE - SITE 142 - ULMER CORPORATION - SOUTH WARD The Committee was in receipt of a letter dated December 2, 1997 from the Economic Development Division recommending acceptance of an offer to purchase lands submitted by the Ulmer Corporation. Mayor C. Zehr indicated that he was prepared to make a motion to accept the offer. Mr. J. Shivas advised the Committee that the offer was not complete and suggested that consideration be deferred and referred to the December 15, 1997 Council meeting. Ms. J. Jantzi confirmed that the offer was not complete but noted that the purchaser has given verbal agreement. On motion - it was resolved: "That consideration of the following staff recommendation be deferred and referred to the December 15, 1997 Council meeting: That the City accept, and the Mayor and Clerk execute an Offer to Purchase dated December 1, 1997, submitted by The Ulmer Corporation with respect to Part 10 of Reference Plan 58R-7426 of Site 142 in Phase III of the Huron Business Park for a total purchase price of $144,000.00 based on 1.92 acres at $75,000 per acre; and further, That the Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized to execute any other necessary documentation required by the City Solicitor." PD 97/121 - 890 KING STREET WEST - REQUEST TO EXTEND DEADLINE TO FULFIL CONDITIONS AND TO CHANGE CONDITIONS - ZONE CHANGE APPLICATION ZC 94/06/K/CL - DR. V.B. RAO - BRIDGEPORT-NORTH WARD The Committee was in receipt of Planning and Development Staff Report PD 97/121 dated December 1, 1997. The report deals with a request from Dr. V.B. Rao for a further extension PD 97/121 - 890 KING STREET WEST - REQUEST TO EXTEND DEADLINE TO FULFIL CONDITIONS AND TO CHANGE CONDITIONS - ZONE CHANGE APPLICATION ZC 94/06/K/CL - DR. V.B. RAO - BRIDGEPORT-NORTH WARD (CONT'D) to fulfil completion of conditions of his zone change application. The original conditions were described in the report and it was pointed out that some of the conditions have been satisfied. PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES DECEMBER 8, 1997 - 177 - CITY OF KITCHENER Ms. C. Ladd provided a brief explanation of the applicants request. On motion by Councillor J. Ziegler - it was resolved: "1) That City Council revise the conditions of approval for Zone Change Application 94/06/K/CL (Dr. V.B. Rao), 890 King Street West, as recommended for approval by Planning and Economic Development Committee on August 6, 1996, by adding the following one condition: As an alternative to completing conditions 1 to 4, the owner may submit a cost estimate for 100% of the total cost of all works required to be done in accordance with the approved grading and drainage control plan, storm water management plan and landscaping plan in a form satisfactory to the City's Director of Community Planning, Development and Design and to provide a letter of Credit to the City's Director of Community Planning, Development and Design for 100% of the said work to be completed in a form satisfactory to the City Solicitor. 2) The Kitchener Council support an extension to June 30, 1998 to allow the Owner to submit a letter of credit, and that Council advise the applicant that a further extension of time to fulfil the conditions of approval will not be granted." PD 97/119 -IMPLEMENTATION OF DELEGATED APPROVAL AUTHORITY RE: - PLANS OF SUBDIVISION AND PLANS OF CONDOMINIUM - PART LOT CONTROL EXEMPTION BY-LAWS The Committee was in receipt of Planning and Development Staff Report PD 97/119 dated November 27, 1997. The report deals with the issue of implementation of delegated approval authority from the Region of Waterloo for plans of subdivision, plans of condominium and part lot control exemption by-laws. On motion by Councillor M. Yantzi - it was resolved: "1) That City Council delegate to the General Manager of Planning and Development the authority to enter into an agreement with the Commissioner of Planning and Culture for the Regional Municipality of Waterloo respecting administrative matters related to the processing of plans of subdivision, plans of condominium, part lot control exemption by-laws and consents; and further, 2) That City Council approve the "Proposed By-law" dated December 4, 1997, attached as Appendix 'C' to Planning and Development Staff Report PD 97/119, to further delegate to Kitchener's General Manager of Planning and Development certain authority relative to plans of subdivision and plans of condominium under the Planning Act; and further, 3) That City Council approve the revisions to Council Policy "1-636: Approval Authority - Delegation - General Manager of Planning and Development" shown in bold on Appendix 'B' attached to Planning and Development Staff Report PD 97/119." PD 97/117 - ESTABLISHMENT OF A NEW AWARDS PROGRAM FOR HERITAGE AND ADAPTIVE RE-USE The Committee was in receipt of Planning and Development Staff Report PD 97/117 dated November 27, 1997. The report deals with recommendations relative to the establishment of a new awards program for heritage and adaptive re-use. Mr. B. Stanley referred the Committee to the three recommendations in the report noting that the staff report was the outcome of a request originating from Heritage Kitchener Committee earlier this year. He did draw the Committee's attention to the second recommendation which has an implication on the City's 1998 budget as it requests pre-budget approval. PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES DECEMBER 8, 1997 - 178 - CITY OF KITCHENER The Committee was also in receipt of correspondence dated December 5, 1997 from Ms. D. Gilchrist advising that Heritage Kitchener at its meeting held December 5, 1997 by resolution supported the recommendations in staff report PD 97/117. On motion by Councillor T. Galloway - it was resolved: "1) That City Council approve the establishment of an annual awards program to recognize the efforts of those who have contributed to the conservation of heritage properties or who have undertaken adaptive re-use projects in the City of Kitchener; and further, 2) That pre-budget approval in the amount of $2230 be approved in order to commence the program in time for the awards to be presented on Heritage Day, which will be celebrated on Monday, February 16th, 1998; and further, 3) That details regarding eligibility requirements, nomination and judging procedures, award categories and the presentation ceremony be referred to the Department of Planning and Development, in consultation with the Heritage Kitchener and Adaptive Re-Use Committees." PD 97/118 - COUNCIL POLICY ON DUPLEXlNG The Committee was in receipt of Planning and Development Staff Report PD 97/118 dated December 3, 1997. The report briefly addresses Council policy on duplexing from October 1994 to the present and discusses the approach currently authorized by Council. The report then describes the actions of the Ontario Municipal Board at its July 8, 1997 hearing in which it provided a verbal order and notes that in a further letter dated November 6, 1997 the OMB has advised that it is reopening the previous hearing. Mr. T. McCabe pointed out to the Committee that the most recent letter from the Ontario Municipal Board has caused confusion with regard to the duplexing issue and subdivision processing. He noted that staff propose to continue addressing duplexing in the manner already directed by Council and pointed out that if the OMB approves a 50 foot lot width requirement it would create inconsistency. Mr. McCabe advised that the Hearing date has now been established as February 24, 1998. Ms. C. Ladd commented on staff's current procedure and indicated that staff would continue as directed by Council pending the outcome of the Hearing. On motion - it was resolved: "That Planning and Development Staff Report PD 97/118 (Council Policy on Duplexing) be received for information." UNFINISHED BUSINESS - LIST OF ITEMS AND STATUS The Committee was in receipt of a list of unfinished business summarizing each item and its status. 10. ADJOURNMENT On motion, the meeting adjourned at 5:40 p.m. L.W. Neil, AMCT Assistant City Clerk