Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlng & Econ Dev - 1999-08-16PED\1999-08-16 PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES AUGUST 16, 1999CITY OF KITCHENER The Planning and Economic Development Committee met this date commencing at 4:0.4 p.m. under Councillor C. Weylie, Chair with the following members present: Mayor C. Zehr and Councillors M. Yantzi, J. Ziegler, K. Taylor-Harrison, B. Vrbanovic, T. Galloway, J. Haalboom and John Smola. Officials present: Ms. C. Ladd, J. Given, L. MacDonald and Messrs. J. Gazzola, J. Shivas, G. Richardson, J. Witmer, J. Willmer, P. Wetherup, D. Mansell, and L. W. Neil. 1.BPS 99/107-507 FREDERICK STREET AND 18 BECKER STREET -MUNICIPAL PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION MP 99/5/F/GR -ZONE CHANGE APPLICATION ZC 99/6/F/GR - HENRY WALSER - CENTRE WARD Councillor C. Weylie, Chair, read the following statement: “This is a Public Meeting under 'The Planning Act, 1996' to consider Municipal Plan Amendment Application MP 99/5/F/GR (507 Frederick Street and 18 Becker Street ) Section 17 (45) of the Planning Act allows the Ontario Municipal Board to dismiss all or part of an appeal without holding a hearing if the appellant did not make oral submissions at a public meeting or did not make written submissions to the council before the plan was adopted and, in the opinion of the Board, the appellant does not provide a reasonable explanation for having failed to make a submission. In order to ensure the record includes all the names of those individuals who are making verbal submissions today for this Municipal Plan Amendment, please ensure that you clearly identify yourself before you begin your submissions and the Clerk will record your name for the record. If your name does not appear on the record, you may jeopardize any further involvement you wish to have in these matters. Any recommendation made by Planning Committee on these matters today will be considered by City Council on If City Council adopts the amendments, August 30, 1999. they will proceed to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo who has the final approval authority for Municipal Plan Amendments. They are also the body to whom appeals are sent. Further information on these procedures is available from the City's Department of Planning and Development or the Region's Department of Planning and Culture. “ The Committee was in receipt of Business and Planning Services Staff Report BPS 99/107 dated July 2, 1999 dealing with a Municipal Plan Amendment and Zone Change Application submitted by Henry Walser respecting the properties known municipally as 507 Frederick Street and 18 Becker Street. Also attached to staff report BPS 99/107 was the Municipal Plan Amendment Report (Henry Walser – 507 Frederick Street and 18 Becker Street) respecting the affected lands fronting on Frederick, Ann and Becker Streets. The proposed Municipal Plan Amendment would add a special policy to the existing Medium Rise Residential designation to permit a limited range of commercial uses on a parcel of land comprising approximately 0.57 hectares in size fronting Frederick Street, Ann Street and Becker Street. The proposed zoning is Commercial Residential Two Zone (CR-2) from Residential Eight Zone (R-8) with a special use provision restricting the range and size of commercial uses. Specific commercial uses which will be permitted include: day care facility, educational establishment, financial establishment, funeral home, office, religious institution, sale, rental, or service of business machines and office supplies, security or janitorial services, studio and tourist home. It is also proposed that the minimum floor space ratio of 0.6 in the CR-2 zone apply only to future residential development. In this regard, the Committee considered Business and Planning Services staff report BPS 99/107 dated July 2, 1999 and a proposed by-law dated June 25, 1999 attached to the report. PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES AUGUST 16, 1999- 114 -CITY OF KITCHENER 1.BPS 99/107-507 FREDERICK STREET AND 18 BECKER STREET -MUNICIPAL PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION MP 99/5/F/GR -ZONE CHANGE APPLICATION ZC 99/6/F/GR - HENRY WALSER - CENTRE WARD(CONT’D) Ms. Diana Biuk, Green Scheels Pidgeon Planning Consultants Limited appeared as a delegation on behalf of the applicant and advised that Mr. Henry Walser intends to purchase the property to develop a funeral home. She also advised that it was the applicant's intent to demolish part of the existing building and renovate the remainder and that Mr. Walser would be utilizing 18 Becker Street as a home for his family. She remarked on the minimum floor space ratio proposed and that staff support the applications. Ms. Biuk also mentioned the former use of this site and commented on environmental issues in that regard. She pointed out that Acknowledgement of the Record of Site Condition from the Ministry of the Environment has been received and accordingly the condition outlined in the staff recommendation pertaining to the zone change has been met. Ms. Biuk also pointed out that the parking configuration on the site would normally be finalized at the site plan stage but at this point the applicants concept was to provide 59 parking spaces which was in excess of the 40 spaces required. Ms. Biuk asked that the Committee approve the applications based on the proposed use being a good one for the property having regard to its location on an arterial road and adjacent to the Conestoga Expressway. As well, she stated that the use was a better one than the former industrial use and that the area already contained mixed uses. Further, she noted that Mr. Walser has gone door-to-door in the neighbourhood to explain the proposal and that the new use would beautify two properties located on a prominent City road. Finally, Ms. Biuk noted that Mr. Walser was in attendance to answer any questions of the Committee. Councillor C. Weylie referred to letters from area residents objecting to the entrance / exit of the property on to Ann Street. Ms. Biuk advised that the Ann Street access was proposed because of the position of the Region of Waterloo which opposed an access on to Frederick Street. However, she noted that following further discussions, it would appear the Region might now support a right- in, right-out access / egress arrangement on Frederick Street but that an access was still required to Ann Street. Councillor B. Vrbanovic also referred to the question of access questioning why the Region would not allow access directly on Frederick Street. Ms. J. Given advised that as a result of the latest discussions with the Region, City Traffic Staff feel the Region will allow limited if not full access to Frederick Street but that the Region had concern as to traffic from this property conflicting with traffic and intersection movements in the immediate area. Ms. Biuk commented that in all of her conversations with Regional staff only a limited right-in, right-out arrangement has been indicated. Ms. J. Given commented that full consideration of access issues would take place at the site plan application stage. Ms. J. Given confirmed that the conditions outlined in the staff recommendation could be deleted since Acknowledgement of the Record of Site Condition has been received. The Committee was also in receipt of a submission from Ms. Biuk distributed this date which contains an attached letter from Mr. John Shortreed whose home is located beside a funeral home in the City of Guelph and which outlines his experiences living adjacent to a funeral home operation. Mr. Marko Sandal appeared as a delegation and circulated copies of a letter from himself as the owner of 537 Frederick Street and also a letter from George Vukadinovic who owns the property at 547 Frederick Street situated on the corner of Ann and Frederick Streets. Mr. Sandal advised that both letters indicate support for the zone change if the access to Ann Street was eliminated and the access created off Frederick Street. Councillor K. Taylor-Harrison commented that staff have indicated that they were willing to work with the residents on the access issue and asked that Ms. th Given meet with the residents before the August 30 Council meeting. No other delegations were registered respecting this matter. The staff recommendation was then considered and it was agreed to revise the recommendation PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES AUGUST 16, 1999- 115 -CITY OF KITCHENER 1.BPS 99/107-507 FREDERICK STREET AND 18 BECKER STREET -MUNICIPAL PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION MP 99/5/F/GR -ZONE CHANGE APPLICATION ZC 99/6/F/GR - HENRY WALSER - CENTRE WARD(CONT’D) in accordance with the request of Ms. Given to delete the conditions as a result of compliance. On motion by Councillor K. Taylor-Harrison - It was resolved: “1)That Council approve the attached Municipal Plan Amendment Application MP 99/5/F/GR (Henry Walser - 507 Frederick Street and 18 Becker Street), being an amendment to: a) add Special Policy 30 to Part 3, Section 12 as follows: 30.Notwithstanding the Medium Rise Residential designation, on lands municipally known as 507 Frederick Street and 18 Becker Street, legally described as Part of Lots 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12, and Lot 31, Registered Plan 42, a limited amount of commercial uses as set out in the zoning by-law shall also be permitted. b)Amend Map 8 to include Special Policy 30 as shown on Schedule A attached. It is the opinion of this Committee that approval of this application is proper planning for the City. 2)That Zone Change Application ZC 99/6/F/GR (507 Frederick Street and 18 Becker Street - Henry Walser) requesting a change in zoning from Residential Eight Zone (R-8) to Commercial Residential Two Zone (CR-2) with special use provision 268U, on lands legally described as Part of Lot 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12, and Lot 31, Registered Plan 42, be approved in the form shown in the "Proposed By-law" attached, dated June 25, 1999, without conditions: It is the opinion of this Committee that approval of this application is proper planning for the City and is in conformity with a recommended Amendment (Henry Walser - 507 Frederick Street and 18 Becker Street) to the City’s Municipal Plan.” 2.BPS 99/117-CLOSURE AND CONVEYANCE OF PORTION OF GLASGOW STREET -WEST WARD The Committee was in receipt of Business and Planning Services staff report BPS 99/117 dated August 12, 1999 providing background information relative to the proposed closure and sale of portions of old Glasgow Street between new Glasgow Street and University Avenue. It was noted in the staff report that at the time of the draft approval of Plan of Subdivision 30T- 88042, Council passed a resolution directing that the closure of existing Glasgow Street between the portion previously closed in 1998 and University Avenue occur following the construction of the new Glasgow Street through the subdivision to University Avenue. The resolution indicated that the redundant road was to be conveyed, together with easements, to abutting land owners at market value. Attached to the report were maps shown as Appendices A and B respectively being a copy of the original section of the road to be closed, and a copy of the Draft Plan of Subdivision. The report provides further detail in respect to the right-of-way to be closed and conveyed and maps marked as Appendices C and D in that regard. Recent chronological history regarding the proposal to close and sell the right-of-way to abutting owners was outlined in the report and it was noted that the by-law to close and sell the portions of Glasgow Street discussed in the report has been advertised for a third reading at the August 30, 1999 Council meeting. 2.BPS 99/117-CLOSURE AND CONVEYANCE OF PORTION OF GLASGOW STREET PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES AUGUST 16, 1999- 116 -CITY OF KITCHENER -WEST WARD (CONT’D) th Ms. J. Given confirmed that advertising for the August 30 Council meeting has taken place and outlined the parts of old Glasgow Street intended to be conveyed to property owners. She noted that notwithstanding the response of registered owners, the Scheifele Family in Trust was currently in foreclosure procedure and has indicated an interest in that portion of the road abutting lands of 1021366 Ontario Limited / Scheifele Family in Trust (under foreclosure). Mr. Grant Scheifele appeared as a delegation on behalf of the Scheifele Family Trust and confirmed that the Trust does wish to acquire the property in question. He pointed out that the numbered company that owns the property was in default and that under a Notice of Power of Sale, the Scheifele Family Trust intends to re-acquire ownership and use the lands for farming purposes. Mr. Scheifele advised that old Glasgow Street from this point to Westmount Road was donated to the City by his father and that more recently when new Glasgow Street extension was constructed they had been required to donate more lands to the City for the roadway. Mr. Scheifele commented that as a result of planning and development that has taken place, an awkward plan as to size and configuration remained but nevertheless the Trust wishes to acquire half the Glasgow Street lands that abut their remaining lands. Mr. Michael Weinberg appeared as a delegation on behalf of Michael Weinberg and Associates Limited and Alium Investments Limited which own the property at the southwest corner of University Avenue and new Glasgow Street. Mr. Weinberg commented that in law it was not unusual for a mortgagee (Scheifele Family Trust) to require a mortgagor (the numbered company) to advise the mortgagee of any proceedings respecting their property. However, no representation was made. Mr. Weinberg pointed out that in the re-zoning of the property the purpose stated was for development in conjunction with property to the north. He commented that the City had acted in good faith respecting the information it had and as a result of this, further planning procedures were undertaken to develop the remaining lands. Additional comments were put forward in reference to the interest of the School Board and the size of the land parcel. Mr. Weinberg asked that the City award the conveyance in their favour in view of all of what has transpired in respect to the mortgagee prior to this meeting and in view of the practical development aspect. Mr. Weinberg made reference to Alium Investments participation and provided additional explanation with regard to historical issues respecting the lands to be closed. In response to Councillor J. Ziegler, Mr. Weinberg indicated that approximately $1500 was spent for a new reference plan. Councillor J. Ziegler questioned how much land the Scheifele Family Trust had left and Mr. Scheifele advised that it was approximately 8 acres and that the subject lands were contiguous to their lands. Councillor J. Ziegler questioned where the City stood from a legal point of view and Mr. J. Shivas suggested that his response should more properly be dealt with in-camera. He did comment that the numbered company was the registered owner and that it had signed a waiver. He also referred to the issue of timing and the length of time that it had taken for new Glasgow Street to be built and the changing circumstances as a result of the time lag experience. Mr. D. Mansell confirmed that new Glasgow Street had all the underground services installed, had its first coat of paving and was considered to be about 80% complete. On motion by Councillor J. Ziegler - It was resolved: “ That an in-camera meeting be held immediately to consider a matter subject to solicitor- client priviledge.” The Committee meeting recessed at 4:51 p.m. and reconvened following an in-camera meeting. In response to Councillor J. Ziegler, Mr. J. Shivas advised that Council has set out a price for the land in the proposed by-law. In reference to Part 9 he noted that the selling price was $3000 but that further costs would be assessed in respect to share of advertising, surveying and legal fees 2.BPS 99/117-CLOSURE AND CONVEYANCE OF PORTION OF GLASGOW STREET PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES AUGUST 16, 1999- 117 -CITY OF KITCHENER -WEST WARD (CONT’D) approximating $1,300. As well, he stated that the cost to add one half of Part 9 to a block would amount to $1,000. Councillor J. Ziegler addressed Mr. Scheifele as to if it was found the Trust was entitled to the lands, whether or not it was prepared to pay the costs referred to. Mr. Scheifele indicated concurrence subject to a determination of the exact cost but that he was not clear on the reason for the $1,000 fee. Councillor J. Ziegler commented that it would be desirable if Messrs. Scheifele and Weinberg th could discuss this matter prior to the August 30 Council meeting. On motion by Councillor J. Ziegler - It was resolved: “That Business and Planning Services staff report BPS 99/117 dated August 12, 1999 be received as background information to the closure and sale of portions of old Glasgow Street between new Glasgow Street and University Avenue; and, That third reading of the proposed by-law to close and sell portions of Glasgow Street be considered by Council at its August 30, 1999 meeting in accordance with advertised notice in this regard.” 3.BPS 99/104-APPEALS OF OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT, ZONE CHANGE AND SUBDIVISION APPLICATIONS -GRAND RIVER SOUTH COMMUNITY PLAN (CITY OF KITCHENER RESPONSE) - GRAND RIVER WARD The Committee was in receipt of Business and Planning Services staff report BPS 99/104 dated June 25, 1999. The report deals with Appeals of Municipal Plan Amendment, Zone Change and Subdivision Applications within the Grand River South Community. The appeals were filed by Hallman Brierdale, Northlake Homes and Teakwell Developments based on the City’s failure to make a decision on their applications within the community. Staff are requesting Council direction relative to the extent of staff involvement in the continued processing of the community plan, the applications under appeal, and other planning considerations within the area. Background relative to planning issues was discussed in the report. In the report staff point out that because the lands are designated residential in the Municipal Plan and since no residential development is proposed above the currently approved 30NEF ( Noise Exposure Forecast), there are no solid grounds for refusing the development applications. However, staff suggest that the present conflict between aircraft noise and residential land use and the growth of the area suggest that it is appropriate to consider alternative land uses in the Grand River South Area, while the developable lands are still vacant. Upon consideration of the options, staff recommend Council authorize the initiation of a land use review. Mr. J. Willmer made a presentation summarizing the issues contained within the report. Councillor J. Ziegler stated his preference was that processing of applications continue based on the fact that warning clauses relative to the airport operations were in place to notify future landowners and a committee had been established to deal with issues relative to airport operations. Councillor Ziegler indicated he would introduce a motion to instruct staff to continue processing development applications subject to resolving issues in the Community Plan. Mr. Paul Britton, MacNaughton Hermsen Britton Clarkson, appeared as a delegation on behalf of Teakwell Developments, Northlake Homes and Hallman Brierdale. Mr. Britton commented that the development plans were in conformity with the Regional and Municipal Plans and that nothing had changed within the area except the airport master planning process. He noted that the developers had front-ended various costs which he listed and that it was inappropriate to suggest the development plans were premature. Accordingly, he requested that the plans be processed in the normal routine. PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES AUGUST 16, 1999- 118 -CITY OF KITCHENER 3.BPS 99/104-APPEALS OF OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT, ZONE CHANGE AND SUBDIVISION APPLICATIONS -GRAND RIVER SOUTH COMMUNITY PLAN (CITY OF KITCHENER RESPONSE) - GRAND RIVER WARD (CONT’D) In response to Councillor M. Yantzi, Mr. Britton stated that the development was compatible with the airport and commented on his reasoning in that regard. Councillor T. Galloway pointed out that the development plans were in the City’s Year 2000 Staging of Development Report and questioned why the developers had chosen to appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board. Mr. Britton advised that mixed signals had been picked up by the developers as to whether the City would proceed with the current plans. Councillor T. Galloway noted that if every development application was going to proceed by means of the appeal route, it would bring the integrity of the City’s Staging of Development process into question. Mr. Britton commented that the recommendation in BPS 99/104 verifies the concern the developers had with respect to a change in direction to planning of development for their lands. In response to a question from Councillor B. Vrbanovic as to the validity of the 30NEF contour line, Mr. Britton advised that the contour had been established in several different ways. Mayor C. Zehr stated that the issue was the question of co-existence with the airport and what its basis would be. Mr. Britton commented that important aspects were managment of airport small issues plus what they had done in terms of avoidance issues. Mayor Zehr stated it was his view there was a problem with noise warning clauses in purchase offers as they have had little impact and suggested that there must be a mechanism to protect future owners in the long term. Mr. Britton recommended that a similar clause could be included in the subdivision agreements. Mr. Paul Grespan appeared as a delegation representing Northlake Homes, Teakwell Developments and Hallman Brierdale Limited along with Messrs. Pat Rooney and Lyle Hallman. Mr. Grespan pointed out that Mr. P. Britton in his presentation had touched on technical issues and that the purpose of his presentation was to provide an explanation in regard to the appeals. He advised that he had been involved in the planning process for 7 years and that his clients had millions of dollars tied up in the proposals. Their concern now was over a possible delay notwithstanding the fact that they have complied with all issues relative to processing. He stated that because the planning process had bogged down, the developers appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board on a protective basis only. In regards to the appeals Councillor T. Galloway questioned what information Mr. Grespan had that precipitated their lodging of the appeals. Mr. Grespan advised that it was their understanding that there would be a request forthcoming to undertake another study with regard to development of his clients lands. Accordingly, it was their view that the planning process had bogged down after spending a very large amount of time and money to meet all municipal processing requirements. He said that it was their hope to work the matter through with staff to resolution. Also in response to Councillor Galloway, Mr. Grespan emphasized that the action had been to protect his clients interests in the event of the City taking another approach in respect to development planning for these lands. Mr. Lyle Hallman commented on the significant amount of monies invested in the development of these lands and pointed out that this was the first time in history of development in the City that they as developers felt that they would be blocked even though they had done everything requested with regard to the planning process. He stated that it was his hope to carry on with the subdivision as conceived. Mr. Paul Puopolo, Planning and Engineering Initiatives Limited, appeared as a delegation on behalf of Rockway Holdings and the Grand River Conservation Authority. Mr. Puopolo distributed a submission dated August 16, 1999 with attached maps outlining his clients lands. He asked that the Committee take no action on the recommendation in the staff report and that it direct that the processing of the development applications continue. Mr. Puopolo advised that his clients lands had been designated in the Municipal Plan since 1994 and that none of the lots lie within the Noise Contour Lines involving airport operations. He commented that his clients have complied with all development requirements and noted that they had not appealed their plans to the Ontario Municipal Board. Further, he noted that they had expected by last June to see a completed plan. PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES AUGUST 16, 1999- 119 -CITY OF KITCHENER 3.BPS 99/104-APPEALS OF OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT, ZONE CHANGE AND SUBDIVISION APPLICATIONS -GRAND RIVER SOUTH COMMUNITY PLAN (CITY OF KITCHENER RESPONSE) - GRAND RIVER WARD (CONT’D) Mr. Pat Rooney, President and co-owner of Northlake Homes appeared as a delegation to express concern with respect to the extremely long process involved to do business and develop lands in the Region of Waterloo. He expressed the opinion that the City had been cavalier with the planning process in regards to his application which cost $12,000 per month for delay. He asked that the Committee move forward on the planning process noting that his involvement has been over 11 years. Mr. Rick Hardie appeared as a delegation and pointed out that his clients lands were in the southern part of the Community Plan in the area of Fairway Crescent and were not affected by issues involving the airport noise contour lines. He urged that staff be allowed to process development applications in the area south of Idlewood Creek. Moved by Councillor J. Ziegler - That the recommendation in Business and Planning Services staff report BPS 99/104 “ dated June 25, 1999 regarding initiation of a land use review within the Grand River South Community not be accepted; and, That staff be instructed to continue processing the Grand River South Community Plan as a residential community plan, and to continue processing all residential development applications within the Grand River South Community Plan.” A recorded vote on Councillor Ziegler’s motion was requested following discussion. Councillor C. Weylie commented in regard to the business community with respect to the benefits of the airport operations and noted that stormy meetings have been held pertaining to airport operation and issues. Councillor J. Haalboom concurred there was a need for the airport but that every effort must be made to protect future generations from noise and it was her view the land use situation should be reviewed. Councillor T. Galloway commented that future owners must be forewarned in regards to the airport and suggested that when the Community Plan was undertaken, policies be considered that put some responsibilities on the City respecting issues of awareness and education relative to future landowners. He did comment that he was disappointed in the precipitousness in which the developers had undertaken appeals without approaching Council to discuss their concerns. In response to Councillor B. Vrbanovic, Mr. J. Willmer advised that staff agree with all the points that the developers have put forward; however, he stated there was a need to promote compatible land use as at this time staff foresee incompatibility. Accordingly staff feel it is necessary for Council to consider the issue of whether or not is too late to change direction relative to planning in the area. Councillor Vrbanovic questioned if the residents or the business community had been informed of the meeting this date and Mr. Willmer advised that they were not as it was Council’s decision. Further, he noted that the Region was accountable to its constituents respecting the airport operations. Councillor Vrbanovic responded that he would have preferred the fullest possible discussion with all parties particularly in view of uncertainty with respect to the 30NEF contour line. He indicated that upon comments of all Committee members, he would introduce a motion to defer consideration of this matter for 2 weeks. Councillor M. Yantzi commented that the issue was a complex one but that he supported Councillor Ziegler’s motion as it was necessary that a responsible decision be made based on where the development proposals were at this point. He did comment that it was correct of staff to bring their concerns forward respecting this matter. Mayor C. Zehr commented that the attention on airport issues that has been generated has been a good exercise; however, he felt the process had gone too far down the road to change direction. Further, he pointed out that any action taken in the matter under discussion would not change anything for those who had been complaining with respect to airport operations. He did comment that mitigation issues respecting airport operations are under discussion and that it was fortunate the Region was the owner of the airport and had some control over how it was operated. PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES AUGUST 16, 1999- 120 -CITY OF KITCHENER 3.BPS 99/104-APPEALS OF OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT, ZONE CHANGE AND SUBDIVISION APPLICATIONS -GRAND RIVER SOUTH COMMUNITY PLAN (CITY OF KITCHENER RESPONSE) - GRAND RIVER WARD (CONT’D) Councillor K. Taylor-Harrison questioned what the time frame would be to initiate a Land Use Review. Ms. C. Ladd advised that staff had not considered that matter but suggest the hiring of a local consultant as soon as possible if a review was to be undertaken. Councillor K. Taylor- Harrison questioned what circumstances had changed since 1994 and Mr. J. Willmer advised that it was determined that unserviced residential development could not take place and therefore plans were altered to a serviced residential community. As well, since 1994 he pointed out that Transport Canada and Ontario have changed NEF limits as well as there being a significant increase in night time flights at the airport. A motion of Councillor B. Vrbanovic to defer consideration of staff report BPS 99/104 for 2 weeks to allow for further clarification with regard to the 30NEF contour line was put to vote and lost. The original motion of Councillor J. Ziegler was then put to a recorded vote. In favour: Mayor C. Zehr and Councillors J. Ziegler, T. Galloway, M. Yantzi, John Smola and C. Weylie. Contra: Councillors J. Haalboom, K. Taylor-Harrison and B. Vrbanovic. Motion Carried Councillor B. Vrbanovic abstained from the vote and prior to the vote had acknowledged that with his abstention, it would be recorded as a negative vote. Councillor J. Haalboom then referred the Committee to the notice distributed this date advising of a resolution adopted by Heritage Kitchener at its August 13, 1999 meeting. Councillor B. Vrbanovic questioned if the motion shouldn’t first be referred to staff but Mr. J. Willmer indicated that if approved, staff would deal with it. Councillor Vrbanovic commented that it was his view that the wording should be made much stronger so as to ensure what happened to Old Chicopee Drive was avoided. On motion by Councillor J. Haalboom - It was resolved: “That we endorse the August 16, 1999 resolution of Heritage Kitchener expressing its opinion that Zeller Drive and Woolner Road are of scenic significance and support Heritage Kitchener’s request that the scenic qualities of Zeller Drive and Woolner Road be addressed in the planning and development of lands located in the vicinity of Zeller Drive in the Grand River South Community.” 4.BPS 99/96-ANNUAL REVIEW OF RESIDENTIAL VACANCY RATES IN KITCHENER The Committee was in receipt of Business and Planning Services staff report BPS 99/96 dated June 22, 1999. The report deals with the Annual Review of Residential Vacancy Rate Statistics in the City of Kitchener. On motion by Councillor J. Ziegler - It was resolved: “That Council accept Business and Planning Services staff report BPS 99/96 on Kitchener’s residential vacancy rates for information and direct staff to make the document available to Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC), the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing and those persons requesting information about the 4.BPS 99/96-ANNUAL REVIEW OF RESIDENTIAL VACANCY RATES IN KITCHENER PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE MINUTES AUGUST 16, 1999- 121 -CITY OF KITCHENER local housing market.” 5.BPS 99/115 - DOWNTOWN LIGHTING DESIGN EVALUATION - ESTABLISHMENT OF DATE FOR PRESENTATION AND WALKING TOUR It was noted in the report at its meeting on June 1, 1998 Council endorsed the Downtown Lighting Design Study. An evaluation of the new lighting standard was to be undertaken after the construction of the pilot projects and it is now proposed that the lighting consultants attend a meeting to present the findings of the evaluation and undertake a walking tour. On motion by Councillor K. Taylor-Harrison - It was resolved: “That a presentation at . in the Council Chambers related to the evaluation of the 7:00 p.m Downtown Lighting Design followed by a guided tour of the pilot lighting projects be given to the Planning and Economic Development Committee by the study consultants on .” Tuesday September 21 6.BPS 99/118-KITCHENER RESPONSE TO REGION OF WATERLOO -DRAFT BY-LAW REGULATING ELECTION SIGNS ON REGIONAL ROADS The Committee was in receipt of Business and Planning Services staff report BPS 99/118 dated July 30, 1999. The report provides staff comments on the draft Region of Waterloo Election By- law. Councillor B. Vrbanovic questioned the one square metre size outlined in the by-law and if the matter of size in relation to inches could also be addressed. Further, he suggested that staff look at any necessary change to the City’s sign by-law in this regard. On the issue of enforcement, Councillor J. Haalboom suggested that she would appreciate more clarity being included in the by- law on how enforcement would be undertaken. On motion by Councillor B. Vrbanovic - It was resolved: “That Council advise the Regional Municipality that the City of Kitchener has no concerns with the intent of the draft by-law regulating election signs on Regional Roads subject to the following concerns being addressed in the draft by-law: a)Section 3 (d) – modification of the 1.0 square metre area maximum size of the sign to accommodate practical measurement in imperial measurement. b)Section 4 – inclusion of additional clarity on how enforcement would be undertaken.” 7.ADJOURNMENT On motion, the meeting adjourned at 6:45 p.m. L.W. Neil, AMCT Assistant City Clerk