HomeMy WebLinkAboutPSI Agenda - 2021-08-09Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee
Agenda
I�ITCHENER Monday, August 9, 2021
6:00 p.m. — 8:30 p.m.
Office of the City Clerk Electronic Meeting
Kitchener City Hall
200 King St. W. - 2nd Floor
Kitchener ON N2G 4G7
Page 1 Chair - Councillor P. Singh Vice -Chair - Councillor S. Marsh
Due to COVID-19 restrictions City Hall is not open except for very limited services by appointment only.
Members of public are invited to participate in this meeting electronically by accessing the meeting live -
stream video at kitchener.ca/watchnow.
While in-person delegation requests are not feasible at this time, members of the public are invited to
submit written comments or participate electronically in the meeting by contacting
delegation@kitchener.ca. Delegates must register by 4:30 p.m. on August 9, 2021, in order to
participate electronically. Written comments will be circulated prior to the meeting and will form part of
the public record.
Consent Items
The following matters are considered not to require debate and should be approved by one motion in accordance
with the recommendation contained in each staff report. A majority vote is required to discuss any report listed
as under this section.
1. DSD -2021-125 - DC21/015/E/TZ — Demolition Control
- 138 Ebydale Drive
- Reid's Heritage Homes
Delegations
Pursuant to Council's Procedural By-law, delegations are permitted to address the Committee for a maximum of
five (5) minutes.
• None
Discussion Items
2. DSD -2021-144 - CD21/024/W/TS — Demolition Control (30 min)
- 175 Wellington Street North
- 1867528 Ontario Inc.
3. DSD -2021-127 - Regional Official Plan Review: Growth Scenarios (15 min)
(Staff will provide a 5 -minute presentation on this matter)
Public Hearing Matters under the Planning Act (7:00 p.m. advertised start time)
This is a formal public meeting to consider applications under the Planning Act. If a person or public body that
would otherwise have an ability to appeal a decision of the City of Kitchener to the Local Planning Appeal
Tribunal, but the person or public body does not make oral submissions at the public meeting or make written
submissions to the City of Kitchener before the by-law is passed, the person or public body is not entitled to
appeal the decision.
** Accessible formats and communication supports are available upon request. If you require assistance to
take part in a city meeting or event, please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 **
Planning & Strategic Initiatives
Committee Agenda Page 2 August 9, 2021
4. DSD -2021-123 - Official Plan Amendment OPA21/003/B/ES (25 min)
- Zoning By-law Amendment ZBA21/006/B/ES
- 120 Bullock Street
- PDCP Block 5 Industrial GP Inc.
(Staff will provide a 5 -minute presentation on this matter)
5. DSD -2021-122 - Sign Variance Application SVA2021-005 (20 min)
- 105 King Street East (Crowne Plaza Hotel)
- Vista Waterloo Limited Partnership
(Staff will provide a 5 -minute presentation on this matter)
Information Items
• None at this time.
Sarah Goldrup
Committee Administrator
** Accessible formats and communication supports are available upon request. If you require assistance to
take part in a city meeting or event, please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 ** 2
i
Staff Report �T R
Dbvelo n7entServicesDepartment www. kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Planning and Strategic Services Committee
DATE OF MEETING: August 9, 2021
SUBMITTED BY: Bustamante, Rosa — Director of Planning, 519-741-2200 ext. 7319
PREPARED BY: Seyler, Tim, Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7860
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 2
DATE OF REPORT: July 12, 2021
REPORT NO.: DSD -21-125
SUBJECT: Demolition Control Application DC21/015/E/TZ
138 Ebydale Drive
Reid's Heritage Homes
RECOMMENDATION:
That Demolition Control Application DC21/015/E/E/TZ requesting permission to demolish a
single detached dwelling located at 138 Ebydale Drive be approved.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
• The purpose of this report is the applicant is seeking Council approval to demolish a
single detached dwelling located at 138 Ebydale Drive.
• The key finding of this report is that staff support the demolition of the single detached
dwelling as the applicant intends to develop the property with 8 townhouse blocks
consisting of 36 units through ZBA20/011/E/KA approved by Council on June 28, 2021
• There are no financial implications as there is no impact to the capital or operating
budget.
• Community engagement included the information posted to the City's website with the
agenda in advance of the council/committee meeting. All property owners within 30
metres of the subject property will receive notice of the demolition control application for
information purposes immediately following Council approval.
• This report supports the delivery of core services.
BACKGROUND:
The Development Services Department has received an application requesting the
demolition of a single detached dwelling municipally addressed as 138 Ebydale Drive. The
subject property has an approved Zoning By-law Amendment to change the zoning to
Residential Six Zone (R-6) with Special Provisions 1 R and 771 R in Zoning By-law 85-1. The
property is designated Low Rise Residential in the Official Plan. The applicant is proposing
to demolish the single detached dwelling to allow for future construction of 8 townhouse
blocks, consisting of a total of 36 units.
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
3
Location Map —138 Ebydale Drive
REPORT:
Staff advise that the owner of the subject property is proposing to demolish the single
detached dwelling to allow for the future development of a 36 -unit townhouse multiple
dwelling on the subject property. The property owner has requested that the current dwelling
be demolished in order to ready the site for the future residential development.
The property is within the City's demolition control area as defined in the City's Demolition
Control By-law. The demolition control provisions contained within Section 33 of the
Planning Act are intended to:
(a) prevent the premature loss of viable housing stock and the creation of vacant
parcels of land;
(b) protect the appearance, character, and integrity of residential
neighbourhoods and streetscapes where no redevelopment is planned;
(c) prevent the premature loss of municipal assessment;
(d) retain existing dwelling units until redevelopment plans have been
considered and approved; and
(e) ensure that redevelopment occurs in a timely manner, where proposed.
Staff do not have concerns with the demolition of the residential unit as it is the intention of
the property owner to develop the lot with a residential development. The subject lands are
planned to be integrated into the adjacent multiple dwelling development at 1000 Lackner
Boulevard which is currently under construction. The home must be removed to allow the
site to be prepared for the future development. The property owner will be applying for site
plan approval and it is their intention to submit a site plan application by the fall. At that time
staff will ensure that all the appropriate approvals are in place before the development
commences. The lot has legal frontage onto a public road and has access to full services.
Since there will be a loss of a residential unit without immediate plans to replace it, via a
building permit or site plan approval, staff are bringing this report before Council as per the
21
City's Demolition Control Policy. However, as noted above, the applicant is progressing
toward site plan approval for a 23 -unit townhouse multiple dwelling this fall.
Figure 1: View of the existing single detached dwelling at 138 Ebydale Drive
STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT:
This report supports the delivery of core services.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Capital Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget.
Operating Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of
the council / committee meeting. All property owners within 30 metres of the subject
properties will receive notice of the demolition control application for information purposes
immediately following Council approval.
PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES:
• DSD -2021-69 Zoning By-law Amendment ZBA20/011/E/KA
• City of Kitchener's Demolition Control By-law
• Zoning By-law 2019-051
• Official Plan, 2014
APPROVED BY: Justin Readman — General Manager, Development Services
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A — Heritage Comments
5
From: Victoria Grohn <Victoria.Grohn@kitchener.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 20211:44 PM
To: Tim Seyler <Tim.Seyler@kitchener.ca>
Subject: RE: Demolition Control - DC21/015/E/TZ - 138 Ebydale Drive
Hi Tim,
The property municipally addressed as 138 Ebydale Drive is neither designated nor listed under
the Ontario Heritage Act.
As such, there are no heritage concerns with the demolition of the existing structure.
Please feel free to reach out with any further questions.
Victoria
Victoria Grohn, BES
(Pronouns: she/her)
Heritage Planner I Planning Division I City of Kitchener
519-741-2200 ext. 7041 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 victoria.grohn(a)-kitchener.ca
From: Tim Seyler <Tim.Seyler@kitchener.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, July 7, 20211:23 PM
To: Victoria Grohn <Victoria.Grohn@kitchener.ca>
Subject: Demolition Control - DC21/015/E/TZ- 138 Ebydale Drive
Hi Victoria,
We have received an application to demolish an existing single detached dwelling at 138 Ebydale Dr. The
applicant would like to demolish the structure before a building permit or site plan approval is given, as
they are moving forward with a 32 unit townhouse development on site. This property just went
through a Zoning By-law amendment to permit the new proposed use.
Are there any heritage concerns with the demolition of the structure?
Thanks,
Tim Seyler, BES, MCIP, RPP
Planner I Planning Division I City of Kitchener
519-741-2200 ext. 7860 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 Tim.Seyler@kitchener.ca
0
i
Staff Report �T R
Dbvelo n7entServicesDepartment www. kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Planning and Strategic Services Committee
DATE OF MEETING: August 9, 2021
SUBMITTED BY: Bustamante, Rosa — Director of Planning, 519-741-2200 ext. 7319
PREPARED BY: Seyler, Tim, Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7860
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 10
DATE OF REPORT: July 12, 2021
REPORT NO.: DSD -21-144
SUBJECT: Demolition Control Application DC21/024M//TS
175 Wellington Street North
1867528 Ontario Inc.
RECOMMENDATION:
That Demolition Control Application DC21/024/W/TS requesting permission to
demolish a single detached dwelling located at 175 Wellington Street North be
refused.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
• The purpose of this report is that the applicant is seeking Council approval to demolish
a single detached dwelling located at 175 Wellington Street North.
• The key finding of this report is that staff do not support the demolition of the single
detached dwelling as it is the intention of the applicant to use the property for parking
and access which is not permitted by the Zoning By-law which would result in a loss of
a residential unit.
• There are no financial implications as there is no impact to the capital or operating
budget.
• Community engagement included the information posted to the City's website with the
agenda in advance of the council/committee meeting. All property owners within 30
metres of the subject property will receive notice of the demolition control application for
information purposes immediately following Council, if approved.
• This report supports the delivery of core services.
BACKGROUND:
The Development Services Department has received an application requesting the
demolition of a single detached dwelling municipally addressed as 175 Wellington Street
North. The subject property is zoned Residential Five Zone (R-5) and is designated Low
Rise Residential in the Official Plan. The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing
single detached dwelling and use the property for parking and access for an adjacent
property, 130 Weber Street West, resulting in a loss of a residential unit.
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
7
Since there will be a loss of a residential unit without plans to replace it by the current
landowner, via a building permit or site plan approval, staff are bringing this report before
Council per the City's Demolition Control Policy.
Location Map — 175 Wellington Street North
The subject lands are located near the southeast (based on compass directions) corner of
the Weber Street West and Wellington Street North intersection, on the south side of
Wellington Street North. Surrounding the property to the north are single detached
dwellings, to the west is a residential multiple dwelling, to the south are lands used for
general industrial purposes, and to the east is a repair and sale of motor vehicles use which
is considered legal non conforming.
REPORT:
Staff advise that the owners/applicant of the subject property are proposing to demolish the
single detached dwelling to provide parking as well as access to the property located at 130
Weber St. W. which has lost its previous access from Weber St. W. due to grading changes
as a result of the underpass that was built under the railroads tracks. The property
addressed as 175 Wellington St. N. has vehicle access to Wellington Street and 130 Weber
St. W. has vehicle access to Breithaupt Street
Staff have concerns with the demolition of the residential unit as it is the intention of the
property owner to not redevelop the lot with a residential development, and have the
property left vacant. The property is within the City's demolition control area as defined in
the City's Demolition Control By-law. The demolition control provisions contained within
Section 33 of the Planning Act are intended to:
(a) prevent the premature loss of viable housing stock and the creation of vacant
parcels of land;
(b) protect the appearance, character, and integrity of residential neighbourhoods
and streetscapes where no redevelopment is planned;
(c) prevent the premature loss of municipal assessment;
(d) retain existing dwelling units until redevelopment plans have been considered
and approved; and
(e) ensure that redevelopment occurs in a timely manner, where proposed.
Staff is of the opinion that none of the demolition control provisions contained within this
Section of the Planning Act are met with this request to demolish the structure.
The property is designated Low Rise Residential in the City of Kitchener's Official Plan. The
Low Rise Residential land use designation accommodates a full range of low density
housing types which may include single detached dwellings, additional dwelling units,
attached and detached, semi-detached dwellings, street townhouse dwellings, townhouse
dwellings in a cluster development, low-rise multiple dwellings, special needs housing, and
other forms of low-rise housing.
Within the Low Rise Residential designation the City will support the integration of non-
residential land uses, which are complementary and serve the needs of residents, at
appropriate locations in the residential land use designations to support the development of
a walkable and complete community. A parking facility is not a permitted use for lands within
the Low Rise Residential land use designation.
The subject lands were previously designated Light Industrial in Zoning By-law 4830. In
1994, City Council approved a residential designation and implemented the Low Rise
Residential zoning for all the lands along the east side of Wellington Street in order to
preserve and strengthen the predominant low rise residential character of the
neighbourhood. The previous occupancy according to the City's zoning occupancy
certificate records was a spray paint shop housed in an accessory building at the rear of the
property and the main building was used as a dwelling unit. The commercial use was
considered legal non -conforming until the time it ceased operating. In 1995, the Committee
of Adjustment approved a change of use to permit a repair of electronic car parts within the
accessory building which occupied the property. The main building was used for office space
and a dwelling unit. In 2011, the repair of electronic car parts use ceased operating, and the
main dwelling was used as a residential dwelling only. All previous commercial/industrial
uses have since lost their legal non -conforming status and would no longer be permitted on
the property.
In 2015, the accessory building at the rear of the property was demolished through a
demolition permit issued by the Building Division. This building did not contain a dwelling
unit so Demolition Control did not apply to that building.
City staff are of the opinion that the loss of a residential unit on a residentially zoned property
with no plans for replacement does not align with a number of City objectives. First, it does
9
not meet Official Plan policies relative to demolition control and maintaining the character of
established neighbourhoods. Additionally, although the property has been unoccupied
since 2015, this request would remove a dwelling unit without replacement in an established
neighbour. The Housing Needs Assessment report (January 2020) found that existing rental
units in the primary housing market are not meeting demand and vacancy rental rates are
2.2%, below a healthy vacancy rate of 3%. Further supporting the retention of existing
housing stock.
Should Council approve the demolition of the residential dwelling the R-5 zoning currently
does not permit the parking use, an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law
Amendment would be required to permit the surface parking lot. Until those applications are
brought forward to Council, a decision finalized, and a site plan approved, the property would
not be permitted to be used as a parking lot and remain vacant.
Figure 1 & 2: View of the existing single detached dwelling at 175 Wellington Street North
(Front and Rear view)
10
STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT:
This report supports the delivery of core services.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Capital Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget.
Operating Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of
the council / committee meeting. All property owners within 30 metres of the subject
properties will receive notice of the demolition control application for information purposes
immediately following Council approval.
PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES:
• Zoning By-law 2019-051
• Official Plan, 2014
• Regional Official Plan, 2010
• City of Kitchener's Demolition Control Policy and By-law
• Planning Act, 1990
• City of Kitchener Affordable Housing Strategy, Housing for All, 2020
APPROVED BY: Justin Readman — General Manager, Development Services
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A — Heritage Comments
11
From: Victoria Grohn <Victoria.Grohn@kitchener.ca>
Sent: Monday, July 12, 20219:11 AM
To: Tim Seyler <Tim.Seyler@kitchener.ca>
Subject: RE: Demolition Control - DC21/024/W/TS - 175 Wellingtons St. N
Hi Tim,
The property municipally addressed as 175 Wellington Street North is neither designated nor
listed under the Ontario Heritage Act. Heritage Planning staff note for information that the
adjacent property municipally addressed as 130 Weber Street West is listed on the City's
Municipal Heritage Register, and that the subject property is adjacent to the Mt Hope/Breithaupt
Neighbourhood Cultural Heritage Landscape and the Warehouse District Cultural Heritage
Landscape.
However, there are no heritage planning concerns with the demolition of the building at 175
Wellington Street North.
Please let me know if you have any questions or require further information.
Thanks,
Victoria
Victoria Grohn, BES
(Pronouns: she/her)
Heritage Planner I Planning Division I City of Kitchener
519-741-2200 ext. 7041 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 victoria.grohn(ukitchener.ca
From: Tim Seyler <Tim.Seyler@kitchener.ca>
Sent: Monday, July 12, 20218:27 AM
To: Victoria Grohn <Victoria.Grohn@kitchener.ca>
Subject: Demolition Control - DC21/024/W/TS - 175 Wellingtons St. N
Hi Victoria,
We have received an application to demolish an existing single detached dwelling at 175 Wellington St.
N. The applicant would like to demolish the structure and use the property for parking and access to the
adjacent property.
Are there any heritage concerns with the demolition of the structure?
Thanks,
Tim Seyler, BES, MCIP, RPP
Planner I Planning Division I City of Kitchener
519-741-2200 ext. 7860 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 Tim.Seyler@kitchener.ca
12
StaffRepoit
Development Services Department
REPORT TO: Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee
DATE OF MEETING: August 9, 2021
J
K, R
www.kitchener. ca
SUBMITTED BY: Bustamante, Rosa, Director of Planning, 519-741-2200 ext.
7319
PREPARED BY: Donegani, Tim, Senior Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7067
WARD(S) INVOLVED: All Wards
DATE OF REPORT: July 28, 2021
REPORT NO.: DSD -2021-127
SUBJECT: Regional Official Plan Review: Growth Scenarios
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT the comments included in Staff Report DSD -2021-127 (Regional Official Plan
Review: Growth Scenarios) be endorsed; and further,
THAT staff be directed to forward this Staff Report DSD -2021-127 and Council's
comments to the Region of Waterloo for their consideration in the update to the
Region's Official Plan.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
The purpose of this report is to:
• Present Regional growth scenarios for greenfield development and intensification to
the year2051, and their implications on the need for new Designated Greenfield Area
(DGA) for suburban Community and Employment Area development;
• Present proposed regional criteria for evaluating new candidate Designated
Greenfield Areas (DGA);
• Seek Council endorsement of staff comments on the Regional Official Plan (ROP)
review growth scenarios and evaluation criteria;
• Outline next steps in the Regional Official Plan review process and subsequent
implications for the City's Official Plan;
• Community engagement has been led by the Region and is being conducted
primarily online at engagewr.ca/req ional-off icial-pIan ; and,
• This report supports the delivery of core services.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
• The Region is planning for 366,000 more residents and 194,000 more jobs by 2051,
as per provincial growth projections and this growth will be allocated to the City and
other area municipalities through the ROP review.
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
13
• The Region is evaluating four scenarios that vary the residential intensification rate
and greenfield density to accommodate growth. Depending on which scenario is
selected, urban boundary expansions ranging between 530-1,510 hectares would be
required across the Region.
• Staff are in preliminary support of Scenario 3 (65 residents and jobs per hectare for
the Designated Greenfield Area and a residential intensification target of 60%) that
would result in no urban boundary expansion for Community Areas, but more
information from the Region is required prior to providing final comments.
• All scenarios include a 680 ha urban boundary expansion for Employment Areas.
• Staff support Scenario 3 because it is reasonable given current and emerging trends;
supports higher order transit and active transportation needed to address climate
change; makes financially beneficial use of existing infrastructure; protects
agricultural land; and contributes to complete communities.
• Staff suggest that the Region further quantify criteria to evaluate growth scenarios
and potential locations for urban boundary expansion to allow for more transparent
decision making.
BACKGROUND:
The Waterloo Region Official Plan (ROP) is an important planning document that guides
decisions related to growth, development, and community investment across the Region. It
must be updated periodically in accordance with key Provincial planning documents such
as A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2019) and the
Provincial Policy Statement (2020). It outlines key planning ideas and policies including the
Countryside Line, the LRT central transit corridor, regional groundwater recharge area, and
intensification targets. Regional Council initiated a Review of the current ROP (2009) in
August 2018.
The Region is updating its Official Plan to accommodate 366,000 more residents and
194,000 more jobs by 2051. The ROP will continue to have a significant impact on planning
in Kitchener by establishing key policies which include defining the countryside line to limit
sprawl and identifying areas for growth and intensification.
The ROP review will:
• distribute forecasted growth by providing population and employment allocations to
the City and other area municipalities;
• set minimum density targets for the Downtown Kitchener Urban Growth Centre
(UGC), Major Transit Station Areas (MTSAs) along the LRT corridor, Employment
Areas and other Strategic Growth Areas; and
• set minimum residential intensification targets for area municipalities (the percentage
of residential development that is to occur annually within Built -Up Areas).
Depending on whether there is sufficient capacity within the built-up areas and existing
Designated Greenfield Areas (DGAs) to accommodate the growth forecast, the ROP may
identify new DGAs via urban boundary expansions along with minimum density targets for
their growth and development.
14
Following the approval of the Region's Official Plan, the City will be required to update its
Official Plan to provide more detailed policies to accommodate these population and
employment allocations and targets.
Figure 1 — Conceptual Illustration of the City's Urban Area and Countryside
CITY
URBAN
AREA
COUNTRYSIDE
Built -Up Area
Designate(# Greenfield Area
Protected Countryside
Built Batindary
Urban Area Boundary]
Countryside Line
The City's role in the Region's Official Plan Review project is to provide the Region with City
comments, concerns, and opportunities throughout their process, recognizing that the City's
Official Plan will need to be amended following approval of the ROP update. The ROP
update will be adopted by Regional Council and eventually approved by the Province in mid -
2022. Staff will keep City Council apprised of this project at key milestones.
In March 2021, through report DSD -2021-5, City Council provided comments to the Region
including:
• support for the proposed Major Transit Station Area boundaries based on the
consistent application of criteria in the new Growth Plan;
• support for the alternative density target for the Block Line Station Area;
• support for the proposed Regional Employment Areas and preliminary Regional
responses to employment conversion requests;
• the ROP can and should do more to support housing affordability, for example by
strengthening condominium conversion policies, encouraging rental replacement,
and enabling the Cities to implement Inclusionary Zoning;
• Newly proposed Major Intensification Corridors are supported in principle, but
additional analysis and consultation with a broad range of city -building stakeholders
is required;
• the Region should further consider the role of and opportunity for local intensification
and its implications on the need for additional Designated Greenfield Area (DGA);
• the ROP review should focus on tangible and implementable climate change policies
to make a meaningful impact; and
• the Region should analyse a 100% intensification scenario through the Land Needs
Assessment in the that would require no Urban Area Boundary expansion.
15
Comments in report DSD -2021-127 are in addition to those provided at a staff level since
2019 and by Council through report DSD -2021-5. These comments will influence the growth
scenario selected by the Region and ultimately the amount of new Designated Greenfield
Area land identified for urban development. The City will provide additional comments on
the draft ROP policies expected to be released this fall.
REPORT:
1. Growth Scenarios
The Region is undertaking a land needs assessment to understand the ability of the region
to accommodate population and employment growth to 2051. This must follow the provincial
land needs assessment methodology (LNA). A key step in the LNA is the development and
analysis of growth scenarios with varying assumptions regarding intensification and
greenfield growth. The land needs assessment process differs for Community Areas and
Employment Areas.
1.1 Community Areas
Community Areas accommodate all forms of housing and most population -related jobs and
office jobs. The Region has outlined a base case and three alternative scenarios. These
vary the rate of residential intensification and density of Community Areas in the DGA. The
higher the intensification rate and the higher the DGA density, the lower the quantity of new
DGA required to accommodate the growth forecast. The scenarios drive a need for an
expansion of the Urban Area Boundary and additional DGA for Community Areas ranging
from a need for an additional 828 hectares in the base case, down to a small surplus of
Community Area DGA in Scenario 3 as indicated in the last column of Figure 2.
In March 2021 (report number DSD -2021-5), City council requested that the Region
evaluate a 100% intensification scenario with no Urban Area Boundary expansion. Scenario
3 evaluates a 60% rate of intensification and a DGA density target of 65 people and jobs
per hectare across the entire DGA (both new and existing). This would mean that, going
forward, newly developed DGA would need to achieve a density of 71 residents and jobs
per hectare as shown in Figure 2. Even though the density target is 60% (not 100% as
requested by the City), this scenario meets the intent of the City's request with respect to
community areas in that there would be no Urban Area Boundary expansion.
Figure 2: Community Area DGA 2019-2051
16
City Comments:
The City appreciates the inclusion of scenario 3 that would result in no additional DGA for
Community Areas.
The City has not yet received the updated intensification strategy that addresses previous
city comments, DGA analysis nor the financial impact analysis required to provide detailed
comments. However, staff offer the following preliminary comments and observations in
support of scenario 3 for the Region's consideration.
• Assuming a 60% average residential intensification rate over the next 30 years is
likely reasonable considering historic trends in the rate of intensification. According
to the Region's Draft Intensification Strategy "Intensification has historically
accounted for approximately 50% of Region -wide growth from 2006 to 2019 with
the Region -wide share increasing from 44% over the 2006 to 2011 period to 52%
from 2011 to 2019." Increases in the rate of intensification are similar in Kitchener
increasing from 41 % in 2006-2011 up to 47% in 2011-2019.
• Market and policy shifts towards medium and high density housing forms lend
themselves to intensification. Furthermore, a shift to autonomous vehicles, active
transportation and increased transit ridership are likely to unlock substantial
opportunities for intensification of existing underutilized areas, including parking lots,
before 2051.
• Intensification helps make efficient use of land and leverage investment in existing
and planned infrastructure including dedicated rapid transit and pedestrian and
cycling infrastructure. A higher intensification rate will assist in the development of
complete communities that are compact and pedestrian, cycling and transit -oriented.
• The scenario 3 assumption of 71 residents and jobs per hectare in new DGA
Community Area seems reasonable considering that the current DGA is already
developed at 54 residents and jobs per hectare with 96% of housing being grade
related. Modest increases in the share of high and medium density housing in the
DGA should make the scenario 3 DGA density achievable considering policy and
market shifts towards higher density that are already underway.
• Frequent, and higher order transit will be required in many parts of the Region,
including within new community areas to achieve climate and transportation goals. A
density of 80 residents and jobs per hectare is required to achieve frequent (10-15
minute) bus service as shown in Figure 3. Densities in new DGA should be transit -
supportive. Ideally, achieving people and job densities of 100/hectare would allow for
5 minute bus service and set the stage for future LRT or BRT connections and would
help achieve the Region's goals of an 80 per cent greenhouse gas reduction by 2050.
Currently transportation accounts for 49% of the Waterloo Region communities
greenhouse gas emissions. While 100 people and jobs per hectare is an ambitious
goal for new greenfield development it would lead to a much more sustainable form
of urban development. The Region of Waterloo should also ensure that transit service
is provided to communities when residents begin moving in so that transit and active
transportation forms as a new habit on day one.
17
Figure 3 - Minimum Transit Supportive Densities
Basic Transit Service
(One bus every 20-30 minutes)
Frequent Transit Service
(One Bus every 10-15 minutes)
Very Frequent Bus Service
(One bus every 5 minutes with
potential for LRT or BRT)
Dedicated Rapid Transit
(LRT/BRT)
Subway
22 units per ha; 50 residents & jobs Combined
37 units per ha / 80 residents & jobs Combined
45 units per ha / 100 residents & jobs Combined
72 units per ha / 160 residents & jobs Combined
90 units per ha / 200 residents & jobs Combined
Source: Ministry of Transportation, Transit Supportive Guidelines (2012)
The required 30 -year planning horizon (as compared to the typical 20 -year horizon)
introduces additional uncertainty to the planning process. It is difficult to forecast
development trends so far in the future. The City currently has a designated and
available supply of land within the Built-up Area and existing Designated Greenfield
Area to accommodate significant growth beyond the 15 -year supply requirement of
the Provincial Policy Statement. This is detailed in section 6.3 of the 2020 Annual
Growth Monitoring Report (DSD -20-157). Selecting Scenario 3 and foregoing an
Urban Area Boundary expansion through this ROP review would allow additional time
to monitor the need for additional DGA. This decision will be reconsidered through
the next ROP review in 10 years. Once lands are included in the DGA it would be
extremely difficult to remove these permissions if we find the lands are not needed
based on contemporary trends.
The capital costs of growth are mostly recovered through development charges,
borne by developers and passed on to landowners. However, the maintenance and
replacement costs of this infrastructure are borne by taxpayers and ratepayers. While
intensification primarily makes use of existing infrastructure, greenfield development
requires the extension of new services including roads, water, sanitary sewers,
stormwater management, sanitary pumping stations, etc. — all City responsibilities.
Staff are currently analysing the relationship between the cost of development and
tax and rate revenues and how this varies across the City. Our preliminary findings
are that the City budgets $5,000 per linear metre to reconstruct this infrastructure at
the end of its lifecycle (approx. 60 years). Annual City maintenance costs for roads,
street lighting, sanitary sewers, water and stormwater are approximately $36 per
linear metre. Accordingly, the City prefers scenario 3 with its higher density and
intensification from a financial perspective. The financial implications for the City need
to be considered through the evaluation of growth scenarios and greenfield candidate
areas.
U:
1.2 Employment Areas
Employment Areas accommodate Employment in industrial -type buildings, and some office
and population -related jobs.
All growth scenarios use the same assumptions requiring 680 additional hectares of DGA
for Employment Lands region -wide. In this analysis the forecasted increase in jobs are
allocated between employment lands and community areas according to the industrial
forecasting done as part of the Region's Employment Strategy Technical Brief. This takes
into consideration existing vacant employment lands, intensification and employment
density forecasts. None of these scenarios address the intent of the City's request that a
scenario be evaluated that includes no Urban Area Boundary expansion.
It has yet to be determined if any additional DGA for Employment Lands would be located
in Kitchener. Notably, none of the requested Urban Area Boundary expansions for
Employment Areas are located in Kitchener (See Attachment B to the Regional Report).
City comments:
• All of the scenarios currently contemplate urban expansion for employment areas.
The City understands and appreciates the need to designate new DGA Employment
Areas to accommodate employment growth, especially to attract industrial uses that
require separation from sensitive uses or have low employment densities.
• While important for growth in manufacturing and planning for low employment density
uses like warehousing and logistics, new DGA Employment Areas planned at 35
employees per hectare will not be transit supportive and necessitate an auto- oriented
approach to transportation. The employment strategy and land needs assessment
should consider a variety of assumptions regarding employment densities, and what
share and what type of employment will be accommodated within Community Areas
vs. Employment Areas. Planning for a higher share of jobs within Community areas
would provide more opportunities for transit supportive employment development and
complete communities. Additionally, the Region should consider policy direction that
requires and supports net zero development and other sustainability initiatives when
DGA employment areas are contemplated.
2. Growth Scenario Evaluation Criteria
The Evaluation Criteria for Proposed Growth Scenarios included, as Attachment A, to the
Regional Report (included as Attachment A to report DSD -2021-127) are intended to inform
the selection of a preferred growth Scenario. These include nine objectives and multiple
evaluation criteria under three themes of:
• Growth Management;
• Transportation, Infrastructure and Financing; and
• Agricultural and Mineral Aggregate Resources.
3. Candidate Urban Areas
The Region received 55 requests for Urban Area Boundary expansions from landowners
and some area municipalities. Two of these areas are located in Kitchener as shown on
Attachment C of the Regional report (Attachment A). If the land needs assessment identifies
a need for new DGA to accommodate growth, Regional staff will assess the merits of new
19
DGA candidate areas included in Attachment D of the Regional report (Attachment A) and
will consult with the public, stakeholders, landowners and the area municipalities to
determine the most appropriate locations for any required Urban Area Boundary
expansions. As set out in the ROP, any future urban expansions must be considered on
lands within the Countryside Line. Where the Countryside Line coincides with the Protected
Countryside designation in the ROP, the Countryside Line is to be considered a permanent
boundary (see Figure 1 in this report and Attachment C to the Regional Report).
The Evaluation Criteria for Candidate Urban Expansion Areas are categorized in the
following themes:
• Growth Management
• Transportation, Infrastructure and Financing
• Agricultural and Mineral Aggregate Resources
• Natural Heritage and Sourcewater Protection
• Livability; and
• Economic Growth.
City comments:
The City generally supports the themes, objectives, and evaluation criteria for both the
growth scenarios and candidate urban boundary expansions. However, we suggest
quantifying and weighting these criteria to assist in more principled and transparent decision
making. Complete, pedestrian and transit -oriented communities; climate change; protecting
agricultural land; housing choice and affordability; and financial criteria should be weighted
heavily. Analysing climate and financial impacts would benefit substantially from
quantification.
4. Timing and Next Steps
Region consults on Growth Scenarios, Boundary Expansion and
Summer 2021
Evaluation Criteria
Draft Land Needs Assessment released including population and
September 2021
employment allocations to area municipalities
Draft ROP amendment presented to Regional council
Late 2021
Statutory public meeting to consider adopting growth related
Q1 2022
components of ROP review
Draft Amendment for non -growth related components of ROP
Fall 2021 -Winter
presented to council (natural heritage and water resources systems
2022
mapping, mineral aggregates, source water protection and
agricultural system)
Statuary Public Meeting to consider adopting non -Growth -Related
Q2 2022
components of ROP review
Province approvesgrowth-related ROP amendment
July 2022
Province approves nongrowth-related ROP amendment
Fall 2022
City OP update to conform with ROP amendment
2023+
STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT:
20
This report supports the delivery of core services.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Capital Budget — The recommendation has no immediate impact on the Capital Budget.
Operating Budget — The recommendation has no immediate impact on the Operating
Budget.
How and where the City of Kitchener grows has significant financial implications on the
capital, lifecycle and operational costs of providing infrastructure and community services
for future generations. Additional details regarding the financial implications for various
growth scenarios will be detailed in the Region's Fiscal Impact Assessment of the Growth
Scenarios. In addition, low density and sprawling communities can contribute to social and
environmental issues like climate change, loss of prime agricultural land, noise pollution and
public health impacts which are difficult to quantify but are important to consider.
Work to update the City's Official Plan to conform with the ROP must be completed within
one year of the ROP update's approval by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing.
There is currently a budget of $12,500 in 2022 to complete this work. The adequacy of this
budget will be reviewed once the extent of the conformity work has been scoped.
Any new Urban Expansion Area within the City would require resource -intensive
secondary planning. These areas would not be priority locations for growth within the next
10 years but would compete for limited planning resources in the short term.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
INFORM/CONSULT —
This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the
Council / Committee meeting.
The Region is leading the consultation on this project. Engagement is primarily virtual
and centred on www.engagewr.ca/regional-official-plan. In addition to asynchronous
engagement, live engagement events included:
o A Public Information Meeting of Regional Council
o Kick-off open houses, including one at the Kitchener Public Library, Fall 2019;
o Ask a Planner webinars held June 2020 and June 2021; and
o COVID-19 symposium held jointly with the University of Waterloo, August
2020.
PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES:
DSD -2021-5 Regional Official Plan Review
APPROVED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A Region of Waterloo Report PDL -CPL -21-29 Regional Official
Plan Review - Preliminary Growth Scenarios and Evaluation
Criteria
21
Report: PDL -CPL -21-29
Region of Waterloo
Planning, Development and Legislative Services
Community Planning
To: Planning and Works Committee
Meeting Date: June 10, 2021
Report Title: Regional Official Plan Review Update — Preliminary Growth
Scenarios and Evaluation Criteria
1. Recommendation:
For information.
2. Purpose/issue:
The purpose of this report is to identify preliminary growth scenarios, including a base
case scenario that will be considered as part of the Regional Official Plan (ROP)
Review. Each scenario tests progressively denser development assumptions to assess
the amount of land needed to accommodate the Region's population and employment
forecasts to 2051. This report also outlines the preliminary criteria for evaluating the
growth scenarios, and any required urban expansion areas
3. Strategic Plan:
The growth scenario analysis will establish the long-term framework for where and how
Waterloo Region will grow and aligns with the following strategic focus areas: Thriving
Economy; Sustainable Transportation; Environment and Climate Action; and Health,
Safe and Inclusive Communities. As well, it responds directly to Action 3.5.1, Promote
efficient urban land use through greenfield and intensification policies while conserving
natural heritage and agricultural areas.
4. Key Considerations:
Waterloo Region is anticipating significant population and employment growth by
2051.
The Provincial Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (Growth Plan) forecasts
a population of 923,000 and 470,000 jobs for Waterloo Region by 2051. This represents
growth of approximately 324,600 people and 177,000 jobs between 2021 and 2051.
Under the Growth Plan, the Region must amend the ROP to accommodate these
forecasts.
3586089 Pagel of 31
22
June 10, 2021
Report: PDL -CPL -21-29
The Region must use the Provincial Land Needs Assessment Methodology to
determine its land needs to 2051.
The Province's Land Needs Assessment Methodology sets out certain requirements
municipalities must follow to determine how much land is needed to accommodate their
forecasted growth to 2051, including the need for any urban expansions. Among the key
requirements is the need to achieve the Growth Plan's minimum intensification and
designated greenfield area (DGA) density targets. The overall objective is to provide a
balanced supply of land that reflects market demand, avoids shortages that could
increase land costs for both housing and employment uses, and addresses other
Regional policy objectives.
The land needs assessment is carried out in two parts. The first considers the
Community Area that will accommodate future residential growth. The second part
considers employment growth in the Employment Area.
Community Area
The Growth Plan specifies that a minimum of 50 percent of all residential development
occurring annually must occur through intensification (i.e., constructed within the built-
up area). The Region must also plan to achieve a minimum DGA density target of 50
residents and jobs per hectare, measured across both the existing and any new DGA
(i.e., any new area added to the DGA).
Employment Area
Employment growth is divided into four categories: population -based employment,
major office, employment land employment, and rural employment. Generally speaking,
population -based employment and major office will be accommodated within the
Community Area. Employment land employment is dealt with separately. Once the
existing employment land supply is determined, the amount of new employment land
area within the DGA is determined.
The base case and preliminary growth scenarios suggest Waterloo Region will
need additional land to accommodate its forecasted growth.
The Region retained Dillon Consulting and Watson and Associates Economists Ltd. to
assess the Region's land needs to 2051. Although this work is still ongoing, the
consulting team has run a base case and three preliminary growth scenarios to test the
impact of progressively higher intensification and DGA density targets on the Region's
total land needs.
Table 1 summarizes the results of the base case and the three preliminary growth
scenarios.
Table 1: Results of Base Case and Preliminary Growth Scenarios
3679209 Page 2 of 31
23
June 10, 2021 Report: PDL -CPL -21-29
To accommodate the Region's forecasted employment growth, the Region will need to
add approximately 680 hectares of new DGA for employment land. This estimate
considers the region's existing supply of employment land, and assumes a gross
density of 35 jobs per hectare. The 680 hectares employment land need remains
constant across each scenario.
The base case scenario generally reflects what the housing market has been delivering
on an average basis over the past few years. The base case aligns with the Growth
Plan's minimum intensification target of 50 percent. However, the minimum DGA
density target of 60 people and jobs per hectare is slightly above to better support
transit ridership. Given Council's significant investments in the ION light rail transit
system, and its commitment to extend the system to Cambridge, the base case
scenario underestimates Waterloo Region's potential and capacity to accommodate
higher levels of intensification over the next 30 years.
In general, the higher the intensification and DGA density targets, the lower the quantity
of new DGA needed to accommodate the Region's forecasted growth. To varying
degrees, these scenarios support the achievement of Council's strategic objectives,
such as protecting farmland, offering more travel choices, and reducing greenhouse gas
emissions. However, each of the growth scenarios still project a region -wide deficit of
DGA lands to 2051, ranging from approximately 530 hectares to 1,200 hectares. This
deficit is driven in part by the projected need for new employment lands (i.e., 680
hectares), which as noted earlier remains constant across each scenario.
The preferred growth scenario must balance several Provincial and Regional
planning objectives.
The growth scenarios will be evaluated against a series of criteria focusing on six
themes: Growth Management; Transportation, Infrastructure and Financing; Agricultural
and Mineral Aggregate Resources; Natural Environment and Source Water Protection;
Livability; and Economic Growth. Each theme includes a set of criteria or questions to
allow for a broad comparison among the growth scenarios. The evaluation criteria also
3679209 Page 3 of 31
24
June 10, 2021
Report: PDL -CPL -21-29
incorporate a "climate change lens" to identify growth scenarios that help reduce
greenhouse gas emissions, and support stronger and more resilient communities.
Attachment A contains a list of the evaluation criteria for the growth scenarios.
The preferred growth scenario will also be informed by five key background studies:
Long -Term Population and Housing Growth Analysis, 2051; Intensification Strategy;
Employment Strategy, Financial Impact Analysis; and Climate Change Policy Direction
Paper. The draft Employment Strategy and Financial Impact Analysis will be available
for pubic review and comment in the coming weeks. Early drafts of the other three
studies were posted on the Region's online engagement site last year and early 2021,
and will be finalized over the summer.
The Region has received 55 requests for an urban expansion/designation from
landowners and some area municipalities.
Forty of the requests (approximately 1,505 hectares) seek to expand an Urban Area, or
a Township Urban Area. Two requests (approximately 66 hectares) propose to
redesignate lands within the countryside for urban development. The remaining 13
requests (approximately 95 hectares) relate to a Rural Settlement Area, or a Rural
Employment Area in one of the four townships. The rural -related requests will not be
reviewed as part of the growth scenarios and land needs assessment work. Instead,
they will be reviewed as part of the refinement of the Province's agricultural land base,
which provides an opportunity to more accurately delineate the Rural Settlement Areas
and Rural Employment Areas in the ROP. Attachment B includes a list of the requests
for urban expansion/designation received to date. Attachment C contains a map
showing the approximate locations of the urban expansion requests for each
municipality.
Staff will review the expansion requests as part of the broader evaluation process of the
candidate urban expansion areas shown on Maps 3a to 3e of the ROP. These areas
are located between the existing Urban Area/Township Urban Area boundary and the
Countryside Line. As set out in the ROP, any future urban expansions must be
considered on lands within the Countryside Line. Where the Countryside Line coincides
with the Protected Countryside designation in the ROP, the Countryside Line is to be
considered a permanent boundary.
Depending on the results of the land needs assessment, staff will assess the feasibility
of any required urban expansions using an evaluation framework similar to one
described above for the growth scenarios (see Attachment D for criteria). Staff will
consult with the public, stakeholders, landowners and the area municipalities to
determine the most appropriate locations for any required urban expansions.
Background:
Since the approval of the ROP in 2015, several significant changes have occurred in the
3679209
Page 4 of 31
25
June 10, 2021
Report: PDL -CPL -21-29
Province's land use planning policies, including an updated Growth Plan. Among other
matters, the updated Growth Plan increased Waterloo Region's growth forecasts, and
also extended the time horizon of the ROP from 2041 to 2051. The current ROP review
will bring the ROP into conformity with the updated Growth Plan. It will also ensure the
Region has a sufficient land supply to accommodate its forecasted growth.
5. Area Municipality Communication and Public/Stakeholder Engagement:
Consultation and engagement with the various ROP Review Committees, including the
Steering Committee, Stakeholder Committee, Technical Team and Area Municipal
Working Group, as well as Indigenous engagement and public consultation is
continuous throughout the project. Staff are planning to host a public webinar in late
June to obtain additional feedback from the community on the preliminary growth
scenarios and evaluation criteria.
6. Financial Implications:
The ROP review will include a Financial Impact Analysis to provide Council with the
estimated financial impacts of servicing any proposed urban area expansions.
7. Conclusion / Next Steps:
Over the coming months, staff will continue consulting on the preliminary growth
scenarios to identify a recommend preferred scenario. This work will provide a key input
into the land needs assessment, which will be released later this summer. Depending
on the outcome of the land needs assessment, staff will evaluate the candidate urban
expansions areas identified in the ROP, and the site-specific expansion requests, to
determine the most appropriate locations for growth. The evaluation process will include
further engagement with the public and stakeholders over the summer and early fall,
and culminate in a recommended draft ROP amendment anticipated later this year.
Attachments / Links:
Attachment A — Evaluation Criteria for Growth Scenarios
Attachment B — List of Requests for Urban Expansion/Designation Received to Date
Attachment C — Location Maps of Urban Expansion Requests
Attachment D — Evaluation Criteria for Candidate Urban Expansion Areas
Prepared By: John Lubczynski, Principal Planner
Brenna MacKinnon, Manager, Development Planning
Reviewed By: Michelle Sergi, Director, Community Planning
Approved By: Rod Regier, Commissioner, Planning Development and Legislative
Services
3679209
Page 5 of 31
26
June 10, 2021 Report: PDL -CPL -21-29
Attachment A
Evaluation Criteria for Proposed Growth Scenarios
Theme
Objective
Evaluation Criteria
• Does the scenario allocate growth in a way that
supports the long-term viability of the Planned
Support Planned
Regional Structure?
Regional
Structure
. How well does the scenario support intensification
within existing or planned new Strategic Growth
Areas?
• How well does the scenario support complete
communities within the built-up area and in
designated greenfield areas?
Foster
development of
. How well does the scenario promote a more compact
complete and
built urban form?
compact
communities
. How well does the scenario help to reduce the growth
of greenhouse gas emissions through intensification,
and support for a wider variety of built forms and land
uses?
a�
• How well does the scenario support multi -modal
access to the GRT transit network, and facilitate
other sustainable and active modes of travel, such as
3
walking, cycling and travel with the use of mobility
o
aids, including motorized wheelchairs?
Build a
sustainable and
• How well does the scenario support minimizing
active
vehicle miles traveled and the growth of greenhouse
transportation
gas emissions?
system
• How well does the scenario support a low emissions
transportation system?
• How well does the scenario support the existing and
future expansion of the ION rapid transit network?
• How well can the scenario adapt to
unknowns/uncertainties such as shifts in
Provide flexibility
demographics, economic conditions, extreme
weather events and advances in technology (e.g.
transportation technology, work from home
technology)?
3679209
Page 6 of 31
27
June 10, 2021 Report: PDL -CPL -21-29
3679209
Page 7 of 31
Is there sufficient capacity in existing or planned
U
Optimize use of
municipal infrastructure (e.g., roads, transit, water,
C
existing or
wastewater, stormwater management) and public
=
U_
planned
service facilities (e.g., hospitals, long-term care
infrastructure and
facilities, libraries and schools) to support the growth
=
cc
public service
scenario?
facilities
• How well does the scenario optimize the use of
existing infrastructure and public service facilities?
N
How well does the scenario ensure that growth is
Ensure cost
financially viable over the long term through
c
effective/
optimization of existing regional and area municipal
c
financially
infrastructure and public service facilities, and
0
viability
minimization of long-term operations and
maintenance costs?
L
Facilitate green
How well does the scenario enable opportunities for
N
=
infrastructure and
energy, resource and water conservation, and
reduce risks
promotion of green infrastructure to support climate
change mitigation and adaptation?
• Does the scenario minimize the need for conversion
of prime agricultural land and provide for continued
investment in the agricultural food network?
L
• How well does the scenario help the agricultural
system become more resilient to outside shocks,
Protect prime
such as extreme weather events destroying crops
agricultural land
elsewhere in the world?
L
How well does the scenario support local food
a
production, processing and distribution to decrease
energy use and emissions by reducing the length of
trips between farms, processing facilities, and
grocery stores, or selling directly to homes and
businesses?
ca
Protect mineral
Does the proposed expansion area contain any
aggregate
deposits of mineral aggregate resources?
resources and
existing
• Would development within the proposed expansion
Q
aggregate
area preclude or hinder the expansion or continued
operations
use of any existing mineral aggregate operations?
3679209
Page 7 of 31
June 10, 2021
Attachment B
Report: PDL -CPL -21-29
Landowner and Area Municipal Requests for Urban Expansion/Designation
(submitted to date)
City of Cambridge
#
Address or
Location
Landowner or Applicant
Nature of Request
Size
(ha.)
1
0 Old Mill Rd.
Roger Roedding
Request to be added to
3.0
3
2118 New Dundee
Branthaven Homes
Urban Area for residential
60.6
Rd.
or employment land uses.
2
850, 1000, and 1010
Joseph Puopolo
Request to be added to
41.9
4
Riverbank Dr.
Schlegel Urban
the Urban Area for
57.7
Southwest Kitchener
Developments
residential land uses.
City of Kitchener
#
Address or
Owner/Applicant
Requested Land Use
Size
Location
(ha.)
3
2118 New Dundee
Branthaven Homes
Request to be added to
60.6
Rd.
the Urban Are for
residential land uses.
4
236 Gehl Place,
Schlegel Urban
Request to be added to
57.7
Southwest Kitchener
Developments
the Urban Area for
residential land uses.
5
271 Reidel Drive
Grambrian Investments
Request to be added to
23.0
the Urban Area for
residential land uses.
6
Southwest Kitchener
Activa
Request to be added to
54.7
the Urban Area for
residential land uses.
7
Southwest Kitchener
Schlegel Urban
Request to be added to
59.2
Developments
the Urban Area for
residential land uses.
8
SW of Bleams Rd.
Mattamy Homes
Request to be added to
12.6
and Fischer -Hallman
the Urban Area for
Rd.
residential land uses.
3679209
Page 8 of 31
29
June 10, 2021 Report: PDL -CPL -21-29
Township of North Dumfries
#
Address or
Owner/Applicant
Requested Land Use
Size
19
Location
Jim Flynn
Request to be added to
(ha.)
9
1410 Wrigley Rd.
Andy MacDonald
Request to add land to the
14.2
Wrigley Rural Settlement
20
East side of
Township of Wellesley
Area for residential land
8.2
Wellesley
uses.
10
2772 Greenfield
Hardy Bromberg
Request to be added to Ayr
52.1
Rd., Ayr
for residential land uses.
11
Brant -Waterloo Rd.
D. & K. Elliott
Request to be added to Ayr
40.4
and Nith Rd., Ayr
for residential land uses.
12
Brant -Waterloo Rd.
1054455 Ontario Ltd.
Request to be added to Ayr
41.4
and Swan Rd., Ayr
for residential land uses.
13
East side of Ayr
Township of North
Request to be added to Ayr
80.0
Dumfries
for residential land uses.
14
West side of
Silvestri Investments Ltd.
Request to be added to Ayr
23.3
Branchton Rd. North
for residential land uses.
of East Boundary
Rd.
15
Northumberland and
Terry Ballantyne
Request to be added to Ayr
20.7
Alps Rd.
for employment land uses.
16
1203
Rick Elliott
Request to be added to Ayr
9.2
Northumberland St.,
for employment land uses.
Ayr
17
1591
Seema Gupta
Request to redesignate the
41.6
Northumberland St.
property for employment
land uses.
18
Northumberland
Township of North
Request to be added to Ayr
90.8
Corridor
Dumfries
for employment land uses.
Township of Wellesley
#
Address or
Location
Owner/Applicant
Requested Land Use
Size
(ha.)
19
1309 Greenwood
Jim Flynn
Request to be added to
3.9
Hill Rd., Wellesley
Village of Wellesley for
residential land uses.
20
East side of
Township of Wellesley
Request to be added to
8.2
Wellesley
Village of Wellesley for
residential/commercial land
uses.
3679209
Page 9 of 31
30
June 10, 2021 Report: PDL -CPL -21-29
21
Part of 4200 Manser
Todd Cressman
Request to be added to the
0.1
29
Rd.
Snyder's Rd. (Baden) GP
Linwood Rural Settlement
116.1
Snyder's Rd. and
Inc.
Area for a new residential
1455 Nafziger Rd.,
Stremma Developments
lot.
22
South of
Township of Wellesley
Request to be added as a
0.4
Wallenstein
Stremma Developments
lot addition to an existing
(Baden Southeast) Inc.
residential property in the
Wallenstein Rural
Settlement Area.
23
West side of Village
Strohvest Ontario Inc.
Request to be added to the
6.3
of Wellesley
Village of Wellesley for
residential land uses.
24
Hawkesville
Township of Wellesley
Request to be added to the
2.5
Hawkesville Rural
Settlement Area for
employment land uses.
25
Geddes St.,
Chervin Custom
Request to be added to the
2.1
Hawkesville
Woodworks
Hawkesville Rural
Settlement Area for
employment land uses.
26
Linwood
Township of Wellesley
Request to be added to the
18.5
Linwood Rural Settlement
Area for employment land
uses.
27
Wellesley
Township of Wellesley
Request to be added to the
8.5
Wellesley Rural
Employment Area for
employment land uses.
28
Hawkesville
Township of Wellesley
Request to be added to the
23.8
Hawkesville Rural
Settlement Area for
employment land uses.
Township of Wilmot
#
Address or
Location
Owner/Applicant
Requested Land Use
Size
(ha.)
29
1056 & 1149
Snyder's Rd. (Baden) GP
Request to be added to
116.1
Snyder's Rd. and
Inc.
Baden for residential land
1455 Nafziger Rd.,
Stremma Developments
uses.
Baden
(Baden Southeast) Inc.
Stremma Developments
(Baden Southeast) Inc.
3679209
Page 10 of 31
31
June 10, 2021 Report: PDL -CPL -21-29
30
1145 Christner Rd.
Carey Homes
Request to be added to
16.2
New Hamburg
New Hamburg for
(ha.)
34
165 Bloomingdale
John Mesina
residential land uses.
0.9
31
1265 & 1299
Cachet Development
Request to be added to
59.9
Waterloo St., New
Partners Inc.
New Hamburg for
35
Hamburg
Lion's Mane Ministry
residential land uses.
13.7
32
Area between
Township of Wilmot
Request to be added to
109.6
Baden and New
Baden for employment land
36
Hamburg
Ken Leppard
uses.
0.9
33
2320 Snyder's Road
809721 Ontario Ltd
Employment Area
68.7
W
land uses.
Township of Woolwich
#
Address or
Owner/Applicant
Requested Land Use
Size
Location
(ha.)
34
165 Bloomingdale
John Mesina
Request to be added to the
0.9
Rd.
Urban Area for residential
land uses.
35
1700 Kramp Rd.
Lion's Mane Ministry
Request to be added to the
13.7
Kunle Oluwojure
Urban Area for residential
land uses.
36
208 Bloomingdale
Ken Leppard
Request to be added to the
0.9
Rd.
Urban Area for residential
land uses.
37
44 St. Charles St.
Karen Martin
Request to be added to the
7.8
E., Maryhill
Maryhill Rural Settlement
Area for residential land
uses.
38
52 Hawkesville
1604964 Ontario Ltd.
Request to be added to St.
28.1
Rd.
650207 Ontario Ltd.
Jacobs for residential land
uses.
39
55 Spring St., St.
Don Kenesky
Request to be added to St.
5.9
Jacobs
Jacobs for urban land uses.
40
6430 Line 86,
Westgate Farms. Ltd.
Request to be added to the
8.4
West Montrose
West Montrose Rural
Settlement Area for
residential land uses.
41
Highway 7 and
Thomasfield Homes
Request to be added to the
15.2
Greenfield Rd
Urban Area for residential
land uses.
3679209
Page 11 of 31
32
June 10, 2021 Report: PDL -CPL -21-29
42
Southeast corner
957859 Ontario Ltd/Forwell
Request to be added to the
88.3
of Ottawa St.
lands
Urban Area (Breslau) for
extension and the
urban land uses.
Grand River
43
Sunset Hills Cres.,
Sunset Hills Estates Corp.
Request to be added to the
1.2
Maryhill
Maryhill Rural Settlement
Area for residential land
uses.
44
2177 Lonsdale
House of Walker
Request the lands be
24.0
Rd., Breslau
redesignated for
employment uses as a
potential lot addition to
Conestoga Meat Packers.
45
East Elmira
Township of Woolwich
Request to be added to
89.9
Elmira for employment land
uses.
46
South Elmira
Township of Woolwich
Request to be added to
72.9
Elmira for employment land
uses.
47
St. Jacobs
Township of Woolwich
Request to be added to St.
2.1
Jacobs for employment
land uses.
48
Fountain St &
Township of Woolwich
Request to be added to the
31.5
Woolwich St
Urban Area for employment
Breslau
land uses.
49
285 Woolwich St.
Anchor Properties
Request to be added to the
7.8
S., Breslau
Urban Area for employment
land uses.
50
5185 Fountain St.
Breadner Trailers
Request to be added to the
3.3
N., Breslau
Urban Area for employment
land uses.
51
985-999 Bridge St.
Cooks Lands Group
Request to be added to the
43.3
W.
Urban Area for employment
land uses.
52
West of Fountain
Breslau Properties Limited
Request to be added to
27.4
St. at Dolman St.
Urban Area for residential
Extension, Breslau
land uses.
53
Southwest of
Breslau Properties Limited
Request to be added to the
14.3
Fountain St. and
Urban Area for residential
Township Rd. 80
land uses.
3679209
Page 12 of 31
33
June 10, 2021 Report: PDL -CPL -21-29
54
2000 Shantz
2716501 Ontario Inc.
Request to be redesignated
6.7
Station Road
for employment and
commercial land uses.
55
5009 Crowsfoot
Bill Southern
Request to be added to the
1.2
Road.
Crowsfoot Rural Settlement
Area for residential land
uses.
3679209
Page 13 of 31
34
June 10, 2021
Attachment C
Southwest Kitchener
3679209
Qa
Report- PDL -CPL -21-29
City of Kitchener
IMIMMINIRMI
Urban Area Boundary
Protected Countryside
Southwest Kitchener Policy Area
Urban Expansion Requests
Built Up Area
Y Rural Areas
N
Prime Agricultural Area
Designated Greenfield Area
Page 14 of 31
35
- ---
Legend
•
r -
d
Countryside Line
-.
o
N
Urban Area Boundary
Protected Countryside
Southwest Kitchener Policy Area
Urban Expansion Requests
Built Up Area
Y Rural Areas
N
Prime Agricultural Area
Designated Greenfield Area
Page 14 of 31
35
June 10, 2021
Breslau —Woolwich Township and North Cambridge
Breslau
01
Report- PDL -CPL -21-29
Township of Woolwich
Ftd
Legend N
e - Airport
Countryside Line
Urban Area Boundary
StE 7�0, PttendaleFtd
Urban Expansion Requests
Designated Greenfield Area
?� �banK b
s� N Built Up Area
° Prime Agricultural Area
Rural Areas
3679209
Page 15 of 31
36
June 10, 2021 Report: PDL -CPL -21-29
Elmira, St. Jacobs and Bridge Street West — Woolwich Township
3679209
Page 16 of 31
37
June 10, 2021 Report: PDL -CPL -21-29
Maryhill Rural Settlement Area — Woolwich Township
3679209
Maryhill
stiff
�����8e Ma,yhiYV Rd
n
Nr
o�
�a
Legend N
= Rural Settlement Area
Urban Expansion Requests
Prime Agricultural Area
Page 17 of 31
June 10, 2021
Report: PDL -CPL -21-29
West Montrose and Crowsfoot Corners Rural Settlement Areas — Woolwich
Township
3679209
West Montrose
line B6
Township of Woolwich
z
G
s
Y
m
Y
Legend N
owsfoot Corner Countryside Line
sa Rural Settlement Area
ha Urban Expansion Requests
Built Up Area
Prime Agricultural Area
Page 18 of 31
39
June 10, 2021
0 Old Mill Road— City of Cambridge
City of Kitchener
atsOn @l�tl
Conestoga College Blvd
N oUS,69a Rd
Nf:
3679209
F
Report- PDL -CPL -21-29
Blair Rd
0
x.
rn
T
m
Township of North Dumfries 7
4- ¢OSevilVe �d
Page 19 of 31
June 10, 2021
Ayr - North Dumfries Township
Report: PDL -CPL -21-29
40
Ayr
�sr
3679209
I ScottSt
St '
i
Legend N
Countryside Line A
Township Urban Area Boundary
Protected Countryside
Urban Expansion Requests
Built Up Area
- Rural Areas
Prime Agricultural Area
Designated Greenfield Area
Page 20 of 31
41
June 10, 2021 Report: PDL -CPL -21-29
McQueen Shaver Boulevard - North Dumfries Township
3679209
Page 21 of 31
42
June 10, 2021
1591 Northumberland St. - North Dumfries Township
3679209
Report: PDL -CPL -21-29
S
�7
a
Z
m
a
,Roseville R¢
Township of North Dumfries
Gedar� 0y�¢d
GBdar CseeK Rd
C
r Legend N
a
� N 0 Urban Expansion Requests
Designated Greenfield Area
Built Up Area
Prime Agricultural Area
Q Hwy 401/Reg Rd 97 Employment Area
Page 22 of 31
43
June 10, 2021
Report- PDL -CPL -21-29
Wrigley Rural Settlement Area - North Dumfries Township
3679209
-- Wrigley
Page 23 of 31
June 10, 2021 Report: PDL -CPL -21-29
Village of Wellesley — Wellesley Township
3679209
Page 24 of 31
45
June 10, 2021 Report: PDL -CPL -21-29
Linwood and Hawkesville Rural Settlement Areas - Wellesley Township
3679209
Page 25 of 31
June 10, 2021 Report: PDL -CPL -21-29
Baden and New Hamburg — Wilmot Township
3679209
Page 26 of 31
47
June 10, 2021 Report- PDL -CPL -21-29
East Wilmot Township
i}5Z
Z y
T.
d'
c
N R �
'a City of Waterloo P��Q
-- L7
r,¢
_ d7
3
�q o
- m
ria°da City of Kitchener
s Ra`
Snyder
�` =
Par��al01
or _
Core SSS/
Legend
N
Countryside Line
Urban Area Boundary
A ns 4P11ft
Protected Countryside
=--
Urban Expansion Requests
-
Built Up Area
JIL Rural Areas
Prime Agricultural Area
Designated Greenfield Area
3679209
Page 27 of 31
June 10, 2021 Report: PDL -CPL -21-29
Attachment D
Evaluation Criteria for Candidate Urban Expansion Areas
Theme
Objective
Evaluation Criteria
Consider local
development
Are there any known cross -jurisdictional issues that may
conditions
impact the viability of the land to be developed?
• Does the candidate expansion area represent logical
Wise use and
and orderly progression of growth?
management
of lands
Would the timing of the proposed expansion adversely
affect achievement of minimum density and
intensification targets?
E
Is the anticipated density for the proposed expansion
area transit -supportive? Would it support frequent transit
M
service and multi -modal access to the transit network?
M
�
Sustainable
Would the proposed expansion area support other
3
and active
sustainable and active modes of travel, such as walking,
L
transportation
cycling, and travel with the use of mobility aids, including
system
motorized wheelchairs?
• Would it support minimized vehicle kilometres travelled
and help reduce the growth of greenhouse gas
emissions?
• Can the expansion area function as a standalone
Complete
complete community or provide for the completion of an
communities
existing community including an appropriate mix of jobs,
stores, services, housing, transportation options, and
public service facilities for all ages and abilities?
• Is there sufficient capacity in existing or planned
o =
Optimize use of
municipal infrastructure (including road, transit, water
'U
existing or
and wastewater) and public service facilities to
a
planned
accommodate the expansion area?
N LL
infrastructure
,�
and public
• Is there opportunity to effectively expand on existing and
S
service facilities
planned infrastructure established through approved
master plans and related studies?
3679209
Page 28 of 31
June 10, 2021 Report: PDL -CPL -21-29
3679209
Page 29 of 31
0
• Would the water/ wastewater/ transportation
infrastructure needed be financially viable over the full
life cycle of the assets?
Cost effective/
financially
. What are the order of magnitude costs associated with
viable
servicing the settlement expansion area?
• Are the public service facilities needed financially viable
over the full life cycle of the assets?
Facilitate green
infrastructure
* Would expansion enable opportunities for energy,
and reduce
resource and water conservation and promotion of
risks
green infrastructure to support climate change mitigation
and adaptation?
• Where prime agricultural areas cannot be avoided, does
the proposed expansion area contain lower priority
Protect prime
agricultural lands?
agricultural
. Would the proposed expansion area impact the
areas
resiliency of the agricultural system to outside shocks,
such as extreme weather events destroying crops
elsewhere in the world?
Minimize
. Is fragmentation of prime agricultural lands avoided/
fragmentation
minimized; and, are contiguous agricultural lands
retained?
Compliance
o
with minimum
. Are there existing livestock operations in proximity to the
distance
candidate area? Does the proposed expansion area
a
separation
comply with the minimum distance separation formulae?
formulae
5
Minimize
• Does the candidate expansion area avoid/ minimize/
a�
L as
impact on the
mitigate any adverse impacts on the agri-food network,
Q Q
agri-food
including agricultural operations?
network
including
. Would the proposed expansion area negatively impact
agricultural
local food production, processing and distribution by
operations
increasing the length of trips (and greenhouse gas
emissions) between farms, processing facilities, and
grocery stores?
• Does the proposed expansion area contain any deposits
Protect mineral
of mineral aggregate resources?
aggregate
. Would development within the proposed expansion area
resources
preclude or hinder the expansion or continued use of
any existing mineral aggregate o erations?
3679209
Page 29 of 31
0
June 10, 2021 Report: PDL -CPL -21-29
3679209
Page 30 of 31
51
• Would the proposed expansion area minimize any
potential impacts on watershed conditions and the water
resource system?
m
• What is the potential for impacts on key hydrologic
0Enhance/
U) asupport
areas? Are key hydrologic areas protected?
m
Natural
Does the expansion area avoid and protect the Natural
4.0Heritage
Heritage System and/or maintain, restore or improve the
p
aSystem
functions of the area?
L L
= a
Does the proposed expansion area support nature -
based solutions to climate change mitigation and
adaptation (e.g., prevent flooding, provide shade, and
Z
sequester carbon)?
Source water
Would the proposed expansion area meet any
protection
applicable requirements of the Region's source
protection plan?
Improve
Will the proposed expansion area be served by and
linkages and
connected to/ integrated with an existing or planned
increase travel
transportation network (e.g. roads, rail, transit corridors
choices
and bike lanes and multi -use trails) to increase travel
choices?
• How well does the proposed expansion area provide
Support
opportunities to align with the target housing demand
housing choice
and market pressures for the Region?
and
affordability
How well does the potential expansion area support the
housing affordability objectives and targets of the
Region?
c�a
• Would the proposed expansion area affect any
significant built heritage resources or significant cultural
Support/
heritage landscapes?
protect culture
• What is the archaeological potential of the candidate
expansion area?
• Would the proposed expansion area provide residents
Access and
easy access and connectivity to food, shelter, education,
connectivity
health care, arts and recreation, and information
technology?
Provide open
• Would the proposed expansion area be integrated with
space and
existing, or planned open spaces, parks, trails, and other
parks
recreational facilities?
3679209
Page 30 of 31
51
June 10, 2021 Report: PDL -CPL -21-29
3679209
Page 31 of 31
52
• Can emergency services be efficiently delivered to the
settlement expansion area?
Support public
' Would the proposed expansion area contribute to a
health, active
pattern of development that supports healthy and active
living, and
living and mitigates public health risks?
personal safety
• Would the proposed expansion area help to minimize
the health effects of climate change, such as illnesses
related to extreme cold or heat events, or increased
exposure to air pollution?
• Is there potential for the candidate area to erode or
enhance protection of existing employment areas,
corridors, rail corridors and transit?
• Would the proposed expansion area protect or enhance
employment areas in proximity to major goods
Protect or
movement facilities and corridors for employment uses
3
o
enhance
that require those locations?
employment
areas, highway
Would the proposed expansion area help provide
corridors, rail
sufficient land, in appropriate locations, to accommodate
o
o
corridors and
the Region's Io growth?
gions em p yment
U
LU
transit
Would the proposed expansion area help strengthen the
economic diversity of the region?
• Would the proposed expansion area support a better
balance of jobs and housing in communities across the
region to reduce the need for long distance commuting
and greenhouse gas emissions?
3679209
Page 31 of 31
52
i
Staff Report �T R
Dbvelo n7entServicesDepartment www. kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee
DATE OF MEETING: August 9, 2021
SUBMITTED BY: Bustamante, Rosa, Director of Planning, 519-741-2200 ext. 7319
PREPARED BY: Schneider, Eric, Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7843
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 3
DATE OF REPORT: July 7, 2021
REPORT NO.: DSD -21-123
SUBJECT: Official Plan Amendment OPA21/003/B/ES
Zoning By-law Amendment ZBA21/006/B/ES
120 Bullock Street
PDCP Block 5 Industrial GP Inc.
RECOMMENDATION:
That Official Plan Amendment Application OPA21/003/B/ES for PDCP Block 5 Industrial GP
Inc. requesting a change in designation from Commercial to General Industrial
Employment, a change in urban structure from Arterial Commercial to Industrial
Employment Area, and the removal of Specific Policy Area 30 from the subject site be
adopted in the form shown in the Official Plan Amendment attached to Report DSD -21-123
as Attachment "A", for the lands specified and illustrated as the "Area of Amendment" on
Schedule "A", Schedule "B" and Schedule "C", and accordingly forwarded to the Region of
Waterloo for approval; and,
That Zoning By-law Amendment application ZBA21/006/B/ES for PDCP Block 5 Industrial
GP Inc. be approved in the form shown in the "Proposed By-law" and "Map No. 1" attached
to Report DSD -21-123 as Attachment "B"; and further,
That in accordance with Planning Act Section 45 (1.3 & 1.4) that applications for minor
variances shall be permitted for lands subject to Zoning By-law Amendment application
ZBA21 /006/B/ES.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
• The purpose of this report is to evaluate and provide a planning recommendation to approve the
proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment applications for the property
located at 120 Bullock Street.
• Community engagement included:
o Circulation of a notice letter to owners of property within 120 metres of the subject
property;
o Installation of 2 notice signs on the property;
o Staff received 1 neighbourhood response and corresponded directly with the member of
the public; and,
o Notice of the public meeting was advertised in The Record on July 16, 2021.
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
53
This report supports a Vibrant Economy by supporting job creation and supporting economic
prosperity.
This report supports the delivery of core services.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The owner of the property at 120 Bullock Street is proposing to:
• change the Official Plan designation from Commercial to General Industrial Employment
• change the Urban Structure in the Official Plan from Arterial Commercial to Industrial
Employment Area
• remove specific policy area 30 from the subject lands
• change the zoning from Arterial Commercial (COM -3) to General Industrial Employment
(EMP -2)
• remove Site Specific Provision 64 from the subject lands in Zoning By-law 19-051
• add a new Site Specific Provision (178) in Zoning by-law 19-051
Staff is supportive of the proposed changes that would enable manufacturing and other general
industrial on the subject site.
BACKGROUND:
PDCP Block 5 Industrial GP Inc. has made application to the City of Kitchener for an Official Plan
and Zoning By-law Amendment proposing to allow general industrial uses on the subject site.
The subject site lies on a portion of the former Budd Automotive/Kitchener Frame industrial site that
was a major industrial automobile manufacturing plant and large local employer beginning in the
1960s until its closure in 2008. After the plant closed, the lands were sold and an application to
amend the zoning by-law to convert a portion of the overall site to Commercial use from Industrial
was made to the City in applications ZC11/08/H/JVW & OP11/02/H/JVW. City Council refused the
application and it was settled at the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) in 2013. The settlement decision
resulted in the subject lands being zoned and designated Commercial. The subject site is a recently
created parcel that was registered as part of subdivision 30T-13202 on June 30, 2020 as registered
plan 58M-656.
The subject site is a through lot, with frontages on Homer Watson Boulevard, Bleams Road, and
Bullock Street. It is 10.11 hectares in area, 246 metres wide on the Bleams Road frontage, and 442
metres deep on the Homer Watson Boulevard frontage as shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1 — Location Map: 120 Bullock Street
54
REPORT:
PDCP Block 5 Industrial GP Inc. is proposing to construct a roughly 47,000 MZ industrial building
on the subject site. While the future building tenants are not known at this time, the owner intends
to lease the building for employment uses that will likely comprise of a mix of warehouse,
manufacturing, and light industrial uses. Some light industrial uses including warehousing are
currently permitted under the Arterial Commercial (COM -3) zoning, however, manufacturing is not.
The owner is thereby seeking to change the zoning to General Industrial (EMP -2) in order to permit
manufacturing and other similar general industrial uses on the subject site.
The application was received and circulated for comment in May 2021. Staff is supportive of the
proposed Zoning By-law Amendment and Official Plan Amendment to permit manufacturing on the
subject site.
Planning Analysis:
Provincial Policy Statement, 2020
The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) provides policy direction on matters of provincial interest
related to land use planning and development. The PPS sets out policies that support and sustain
healthy, liveable and safe communities. The PPS promotes economic development and
competitiveness in creating employment opportunities by providing an appropriate mix and range
of employment uses, identifying strategic sites, and providing opportunities for a diversified
economic base.
With respect to providing an appropriate mix and range of employment uses, the proposed
application represents an opportunity to increase the range of permitted employment uses on the
site. This will allow flexibility in attracting a broad range of employment uses to Kitchener.
Provincial policies also encourage approval authorities to identify strategic sites for employment
uses, with emphasis on separation from sensitive land uses as well as access to infrastructure
designed for goods movement. This site exemplifies these characteristics and is considered by
staff to be an ideal industrial site.
Based on the above, staff is of the opinion that this proposal is in conformity with the PPS.
A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 (Growth Plan):
The Growth Plan endeavors to provide flexibility to capitalize on new economic and employment
opportunities as they emerge. It also recommends that municipalities should designate areas
located near major goods movement facilities and corridors for manufacturing, warehousing and
logistics, and appropriate associated uses and ancillary facilities. A strong economy including
opportunities for traditional industries is an important aspect of a complete community.
The proposed application intends to provide flexibility by permitting a range of general industrial
uses that will enable the owner to attract a variety of employment uses to the subject site.
The subject site is located on a Regional Road (Homer Watson Boulevard) that acts as a major
goods movement route in the City of Kitchener because of its convenient access to the Conestoga
Parkway (Highway 7/8) and direct access to Highway 401. Staff is of the opinion that the
applications conform to the Growth Plan.
Regional Official Plan (ROP), 2010:
The subject site is located within the Urban Area in the Regional Official Plan. Regional policies
encourage municipalities to designate and preserve lands in the Urban Area that are in proximity to
55
major highway interchanges and rail yards as employment areas. Regional staff have provided
comments (Attachment `D') and identified that due to the Record of Site Condition (RSC) that was
completed for the overall subdivision lands, they are requesting that the City's by-law prohibits
geothermal energy systems and sensitive land uses such as daycare. With those additions to the
by-law, Regional Staff is in support of the proposed applications for Official Plan and Zoning By-
law amendment. Planning staff are of the opinion that the applications conform to the Regional
Official Plan.
City of Kitchener Comprehensive Review of Employment Lands (CREL), 2010
In 2010 the City conducted a study to complete a municipal comprehensive review of employment
lands. The purpose of this study was to ensure that the City has sufficient lands to meet long term
industrial employment needs, to protect prime industrial employment lands and to identify industrial
employment lands that are suitable for conversion to non -employment uses. The City reviewed over
1500 parcels of employment -industrial lands to determine which lands should be protected.
Preferred criteria for lands that should be protected employment included:
• Contiguous with other employment lands, forms a vibrant and viable cluster
• Convenient and superior access to highways, primary/secondary arterial/major collector
roads
• Rail service available or possible access
• Separated from sensitive uses (in accordance with the province's D6 guidelines for
compatibility with industrial uses)
• Removed from groundwater recharge area
• Relatively flat
• Parcel size (greater than 0.4 hectares (1 acre))
• Office use could provide a transition/buffer from sensitive land uses
Based on these criteria, the Comprehensive Review of Employment Lands (CREL) identified the
subject site as protected employment lands. The inclusion of this site as a protected employment
land contributed to Staff recommending refusal for the Zoning By-law Amendment ZC11/08/H/JVW
that requested to change the zoning to commercial. The subject site was ultimately changed to
Arterial Commercial zoning via an OMB decision in 2013 (PL121300).
As this application proposes to return the land to an Employment land use designation, staff is of the
opinion that it meets the intent of the Comprehensive Review of Employment Lands established by
the City in 2010. Map 1 of this study showing the protected employment lands is included in
Attachment "F" of this report.
City of Kitchener Official Plan and proposed Official Plan Amendment:
The subject lands are currently designated Commercial (Map 3) in the City's Official Plan. The
lands are currently identified as an Arterial Corridor in the urban structure of the Official Plan. The
subject lands are currently subject to Specific Policy Area # 30 in the Official Plan.
Amendment: Urban Structure
Planning staff recommend that the Urban Structure component change from Arterial Commercial
to Industrial Employment Area.
The Urban Structure components in the Official Plan provide guidance on growth management and
structure for the city's urban area. They are intended to provide an organizational structure to the
city on a macro level to help with directing growth to appropriate locations while protecting
established and stable areas.
56
Industrial Employment Areas within the urban structure are intended to facilitate employment
growth and contain general industrial employment uses. The requested change to the urban
structure would expand the surrounding Industrial Employment Area urban structure and would
complement the surrounding industrial lands. Planning staff are of the opinion that the requested
change to the urban structure to Industrial Employment Area is an appropriate location for
industrial lands and is necessary to facilitate this proposal for an employment growth opportunity.
Amendment: Land Use Designation
Planning staff recommend that the land use designation be changed from Commercial to General
Industrial Employment.
The City's Official Plan strives to provide an adequate supply of industrial lands to provide for a
diverse range of employment opportunities for the long term to support a vibrant economy. It also
encourages the retention and development of industrial employment areas which are accessible to
major existing or proposed transportation facilities such as Homer Watson Boulevard's access to
Highways 7/8 and 401. Planning staff recognize that the subject site has historically been used for
industrial purposes and that it meets the criteria for a prime industrial site. Since the change in land
use designation to Commercial in 2013, the site has been vacant and no commercial use has been
actualized on site. Changing the land use designation back to General Industrial Employment to
match the historical use of the property aligns with the City's policies on retention of industrial
employment areas and protection of prime industrial sites.
The proposal also aligns with Official Plan policies that encourage the development of industrial
employment areas that are transit -supportive, incorporate Transportation Demand Management
measures, have a compact built form and minimize surface parking areas. The proposed
development is located on existing transit routes and the new constructed multi -use pathway on
Homer Watson Boulevard and will include Class A bicycle storage and shower facilities.
From a land use compatibility perspective, the Official Plan also includes policies that discuss
physical separation between new industrial employment uses and sensitive land uses. The
subject lands are well suited to industrial employment uses with separation of over 150 m to the
closest residential uses, separated and buffered by Homer Watson Boulevard, Steckle Woods and
commercial uses. Staff also propose a site specific regulation that prohibits day care uses to
address compatibility and a comment received from a proximate industrial business.
Finally, from a sustainability perspective, the applicant has indicated in their Sustainability
Statement that they are targeting LEEDO Core and Shell certification for this development. This
aligns with Official Plan policies for that encourage conservation of energy and water to be
achieved within employment uses.
Amendment: Removal of Specific Policy Area #30 from Subject Site
Special Policy Area #30 was added to the Official Plan through OMB case PL121300 to change
the land use designation and zoning to Commercial in 2013. It contains specific policies that limit
the amount of commercial development on the site including maximum Gross Floor Area (GFA)
regulations based on commercial uses. These policies refer to the former block numbers of
subdivision 30T-13202 as they were implemented prior to the registration of the subdivision that
legally created the parcels and assigned civic addresses. The policies refer to Block 5 (120 Bullock
Street, subject site) and Block 6 (15 Pearson Street, not part of this application).
Planning Staff recommend that Specific Policy Area #30 is amended to remove the reference to
Block 5. Given the above recommendations to change the Urban Structure and land use
designation to General Industrial Employment, the policies in Specific Policy Area #30 that
references Block 5 are specific to commercial uses and would no longer be necessary.
57
Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment:
Zoning Amendment
The subject property is zoned Arterial Commercial (COM -3) with Site Specific Provision 64 in Zoning
By-law 19-051. The COM -3 zone is intended to accommodate the retailing of bulky, space intensive
goods and service commercial uses predominately serving the travelling public within Arterial
Corridors. The applicant has requested to change the zoning to General Industrial Employment
(EMP -2). The EMP -2 Zone is intended to accommodate a broad range of industrial uses that are not
noxious uses.
The applicant intends to construct an approximately 47,000 square metre one storey industrial
building on the subject site. The tenant mix is not known at this time but is expected to include a mix
of warehousing and manufacturing. While warehousing is currently permitted under the COM -3
zoning, manufacturing is not.
Staff is of the opinion that the historical industrial use on the subject site, as well as the criteria laid
out in the Comprehensive Review of Employment Lands study justifies the requested change in
zoning to General Industrial Employment.
Site Specific Provisions
Site Specific Provision 64 in the Zoning By-law 19-051 contains the same regulations as Special
Policy Area #30 in the Official Plan. This site specific provision was also added as a result of the
OMB decision in 2013. The regulations pertain to restrictions on GFA of uses that are commercial in
nature. Staff is of the opinion that these regulations are no longer necessary with an amendment to
General Industrial Employment zoning, and therefore is recommending that the site specific
provision 64 be removed from the subject site.
Planning Staff recommends that a new site specific provision (178) apply for the following
To establish parking rates for the development as follows:
o minimum parking rate for manufacturing uses of 1 space per 200 square metres of
GFA 2
o minimum electric vehicle parking of 1 space per 7500M2
o minimum future electric vehicle parking of 1 space per 1125M2
o minimum class A bicycle parking of 1 space per 1400M2
o that shower and change facility requirement is to be calculated based on the amount
of class A bicycle parking spaces for the total GFA of the building rather than based
on individual occupancies, and that all units have access to at least one shower and
change facility.
Prohibit daycare use
Prohibit geothermal energy systems
Site Specific Parking Rates
The minimum parking rate for manufacturing uses in By-law 19-051 is 1 space per 90 square metres.
However, Planning staff are aware that the amount of floor space per employee can vary greatly
among manufacturers. The size of the manufactured product, equipment needed, manufacturing
process, and floor space needed per employee can be drastically different and result in different
parking needs per square metre of floor space. The City's parking rates for manufacturing intend to
capture the needs of a typical manufacturing operation to ensure that adequate parking is provided
but does not always align with each manufacturing facility.
If the current by-law rate was applied, the development would require approximately 524 parking
spaces. At the proposed rate, this would be 235 parking spaces. The applicant is intending to build
approximately 387 parking spaces (including trailer spaces for transport trucks).
The minimum rates of electric vehicle and future electric vehicle parking are based on a percentage
of the total required parking spaces in by-law 19-051. 2.5% of required parking spaces are to be
electric vehicle spaces. 17.5% of required parking spaces are required to be future electric vehicle
spaces. As the tenant mix and therefore uses are unknown at this time, staff is proposing to establish
a rate for electric and future electric spaces based on the total GFA of the building rather than a
percentage of total required spaces.
The minimum parking rate for class A bicycle parking spaces is dependent on the use in by-law 19-
051. Both manufacturing and warehouse use requires 1 class A bicycle parking space per 1500M2
whereas office use requires 1 per 500M2. Staff is proposing rate based on the total GFA of 1 per
1400M2 to capture the class A bicycle needs for the total building but to be calculated on the total
building GFA rather than individual uses.
Shower and change facilities are required based on the amount of class A bicycle parking spaces in
by-law 19-051. The site specific provision is ensuring that the shower and change facilities required
will be based on the total amount of class A bicycle parking required for the GFA of the entire building,
rather than based on individual occupancies. All units will have access to at least one shower and
change facility.
The applicant is seeking to gain certainty in their parking layout and design so that further redesigns
will not be required in the future based changes in tenancy. Planning and Transportation staff is of
the opinion that the parking rates sought are appropriate and that there will be adequate parking on
site for bicycles and vehicles, including electric vehicles. Public transit is another mode of
transportation available as the site is serviced by a transit stop (GRT Route 12) located on the
Bleams Road frontage.
Based on the above, Planning staff is supportive of the proposed request to reduce the parking rate
for manufacturing uses on the site.
Prohibit daycare use
The Region of Waterloo has requested that sensitive land uses be prohibited on the subject site due
to the risk assessment that was approved as part of the Record of Site Condition for the overall
subdivision site. Staff have identified that Daycare use (accessory to permitted uses) is the only
sensitive land use that would be permitted under the base zone EMP -2 and is the only use that is
necessary to include in the prohibition.
Planning staff is in agreement with Regional Planning staff and recommends approval of this
regulation in the proposed site specific provision 178.
Prohibit geothermal energy systems
The Region of Waterloo has identified the subject site as being within Wellhead Protection Sensitive
Area 4 in Map 6a of the Regional Official Plan. In accordance with Section 8.A.14 of the Regional
Official Plan, Regional Planning staff have requested a prohibition of geothermal energy systems on
the subject site.
Planning staff is in agreement with Regional Planning staff and recommends approval of this
regulation in the proposed site specific provision 178.
Department and Agency Comments:
Preliminary circulation of the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment was
undertaken on May 17, 2021 to applicable City departments and other review authorities. No
concerns were identified by any commenting City department or agency. Copies of the comments
are found in Attachment "D" of this report.
59
The following reports and studies were considered as part of this proposed Official Plan Amendment
and Zoning By-law Amendment:
• Planning Justification Report
Prepared by GSP Group Inc., April 30, 2021
• Urban Design Report
Prepared by GSP Group Inc., April 2021
• Functional Servicing and Stormwater Management Report
Prepared by MTE Consultants, April 30, 2021
• Fire Flow Analysis Report
Prepared by MTE Consultants, April 30, 2021
• Tree Management Report
Prepared by GSP Group Inc., April 28, 2021
Community Input and Staff Response:
Staff mailed out a neighbourhood circulation letter to arrive the week of May 20, 2021 to properties
within 120 metres of the subject site. Staff received one response from an industrial company in the
Trillium Industrial Park across Homer Watson Boulevard. The request was to prohibit the daycare
use as it would represent a sensitive use in proximity to the industrial uses in the area. The request
for daycare prohibition is being sought in the site specific provision 178 as described in this report.
Planning Conclusions:
In considering the foregoing, staff are supportive of the proposed Official Plan Amendment and
Zoning By-law Amendment to for 120 Bullock Street. Staff is of the opinion that the subject
applications are consistent with policies of the Provincial Policy Statement (2020), conform to the
Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, the Regional Official Plan, and the City of Kitchener
Official Plan and represent good planning.
STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT:
The recommendation of this report supports the achievement of the City's strategic vision through
the delivery of core service.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
There are no financial implications associated with this recommendation.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the
committee meeting. Two notice signs are posted on the property and information regarding the
application posted to the City's website in May 2021. A notice of the public meeting was placed in
the newspaper on July 16, 2021 (Attachment "C").
CONSULT — The circulation letter for the proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law
Amendment were circulated to property owners within 120 metres of the subject site on May 17,
2021. In response to the circulation, one response was received by email. The respondent was
contacted by email in response to the comment received.
PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES:
• Zoning By-law 2019-051
• Official Plan, 2014
• Regional Official Plan, 2010
• Provincial Policy Statement, 2020
• Planning Act, 1990
• Growth Plan, 2020
• Comprehensive Review of Employment Lands, 2010
APPROVED BY: Justin Readman - General Manager, Development Services
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A
— Proposed Official Plan Amendment
Attachment B
— Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment
Attachment C
— Newspaper Notice
Attachment D
— Department and Agency Comments
Attachment E
— Neighbourhood Comments
Attachment F —
Map 1 of Comprehensive Review of Employment Lands
61
DSD -21-123 Attachment "A"
AMENDMENT NO. XX TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN
OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER
Cy��'�i]�:��r�la�►1�:7
120 Bullock Street
62
DSD -21-123 Attachment "A"
AMENDMENT NO. XX TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN
OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER
CITY OF KITCHENER
120 Bullock Street
1101§10-4
SECTION 1 TITLE AND COMPONENTS
SECTION 2 PURPOSE OF THE AMENDMENT
SECTION 3 BASIS OF THE AMENDMENT
SECTION 4 THE AMENDMENT
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 1 Notice of the Meeting of Planning and Strategic Initiatives
Committee of August 9, 2021
APPENDIX 2 Minutes of the Meeting of Planning and Strategic Initiatives
Committee — August 9, 2021
APPENDIX 3 Minutes of the Meeting of City Council xdatex
63
DSD -21-123 Attachment "A"
AMENDMENT NO. XX TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER
SECTION 1 — TITLE AND COMPONENTS
This amendment shall be referred to as Amendment No. ## to the Official Plan of the City of Kitchener.
This amendment is comprised of Sections 1 to 4 inclusive.
61X09C07►f0412111:01:71919*07a9:I;WALy, 1N11►191Ly, I;1►kI
The purpose of the Official Plan Amendment is to amend:
Map 3 (Land Use) by redesignating lands from Commercial to General Industrial Employment,
Map 2 (Urban Structure) by changing the urban structure on the subject lands from Arterial
Commercial to Industrial Employment Area,
Map 5 (Specific Policy Areas) by removing the subject lands from Specific Policy Area # 30
SECTION 3 — BASIS OF THE AMENDMENT
The subject lands are currently designated as Commercial. The lands are identified as Arterial
Commercial in the urban structure of the Official Plan.
Staff recommend that the application proposing to redesignate the lands to General Industrial
Employment, change the urban structure to Industrial Employment Area, and remove Special Policy
Area # 30 from the subject lands be approved.
The planned function of Industrial Employment Areas is to support and maintain economic activity in
the city by providing an adequate supply of land or a range of industrial -related employment uses
and appropriate accessory and ancillary uses.
The applications align with Provincial, Regional, and City policies and will contribute to the
community. Planning staff are of the opinion the use of the subject lands for general industrial uses
is appropriate for this location and will not have adverse impacts on the community.
Planning staff is of the opinion that the requested application is consistent with the policies and intent
of the Provincial Policy Statement. The proposed Official Plan Amendment will facilitate the use of
the lands for employment uses and is compatible with the surrounding community.
Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposed Official Plan Amendment conforms to the Regional
Official Plan (ROP). Regional policies encourage municipalities to designate and preserve lands
that are in the proximity to major highway interchanges and rail yards as employment areas. The
ROP also states that the focus of the Region's future growth will be within the Urban Area. This area
contains the physical infrastructure and community infrastructure to support major growth, including
transportation networks, municipal drinking -water supply systems and municipal wastewater
systems, and a broad range of social and public health services. It is also well -served by the existing
Regional transit system. For these reasons, lands within the Urban Area have the greatest capacity
to accommodate growth and serve as the primary focus for employment, housing, cultural and
recreational opportunities in the region.
MX011C67►[M11:1Evil Ly, IMIN I]Ly, 1W►NI
The City of Kitchener Official Plan is hereby amended as follows:
M
DSD -21-123 Attachment "A"
a) Amend Map No. 2 — Urban Structure by:
i) changing urban structure on the subject lands from Arterial Commercial to
Industrial Employment Areas as shown on the attached Schedule W.
b) Amend Map No. 3 — Land Use by:
i) redesignating the subject lands from Commercial to General Industrial
Employment as shown on the attached Schedule `B'.
c) Amend Map No. 5 — Specific Policy Areas by:
i) removing Specific Policy Area 30 from the subject lands as shown on the
attached Schedule `C'.
4
65
DSD -21-123 Attachment "A"
APPENDIX 1 Notice of the Meeting of Planning and Strategic Initiatives
Committee of August 9, 2021
Advertised in The Record July 16, 2021
PROPERTY OWNERS AND INTERESTED PARTIES ARE INVITED
TO ATTEND A PUBLIC MEETING TO DISCUSS
A PROPOSED OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT
UNDER SECTIONS 17,22 AND 34 OF THE PLANNING ACT
120 Bullock Street
PDCP Block 5 Industrial GP Inc. is proposing Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments to change the
zoning and land use designation on the subject site to General Industrial Employment.
In keeping with physical distancing measures recommended by Public Health due to COVID-19, an electronic
public meeting will be held by the Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee, a Committee of Council which
deals with planning matters on:
Monday, August 9, 2021 at 7:00 p.m.
(live -stream video available at kitchener.ca/watchnow)
If you wish to make written and/or verbal comments either in support of, or in opposition to, the
above noted proposal you may register as a delegation at kitchener.ca/delegations or by
contacting Legislated Services at 519-741-2200 ext. 2203 by no later than 4:00 p.m. on August
9, 2021. A confirmation email and instructions for participating in the meeting electronically with
be provided once your registration is received.
If a person or public body would otherwise have an ability to appeal the decision of the
City of Kitchener to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal, but the person or public body
does not make oral submissions at a public meeting or make written submissions to the
City of Kitchener prior to approval/refusal of this proposal, the person or public body is
not entitled to appeal the decision.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION is available by contacting the staff person noted below or by
viewing the report contained in the meeting agenda (posted 10 days before the meeting at
www.kitchener.ca - click on the date in the Calendar of Events and select the appropriate
committee).
Eric Schneider, Planner - 519-741-2200 x 7843 (TTY: 1-866-969-9994)
eric.schneider(a)kitchener.ca
DSD -21-123 Attachment "A"
APPENDIX 2 Minutes of the Meeting of Planning and Strategic Initiatives
Committee — August 9, 2021
67
DSD -21-123 Attachment "A"
APPENDIX 3 Minutes of the Meeting of City Council #date#
CITY OF KITCHENER
'
... :.i':
OFFICIAL PLAN
AMENDMENT TO MAP 2
URBAN STRUCTURE
,p
v
;;,
i, Major Transit Station Area
Intensification Areas N
...... ............. ......
�•••�� ••• ��> ••••••
.....
""'
Neighbourhood Node
•••••• ��� ••
••••
Arterial Corridor
`
Other Areas
.....
•
.......
Community Areas
••••••••••41&
Industrial Employment Areas
♦
..........................
.............
........ Green Areas
♦
Transit
♦
Existing Transit Corridor
♦
A .I Planned Transit Corridor
Area of Amendment
From Arterial Corridor
II m q To Industrial Employment Areas
SCHEDULE W0
250
REVISED:
OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT OPA21/003/B/ES
METRES
SCALE 1:10,000
APPLICANT:
ZONE CHANGE
APPLICATION ZBA21/006/B/ES
PDCP BLOCK 5 INDUSTRIAL GP INC.
Of Kitchener
FILE:
ICity OP18003FJVW_Map2
120 BULLOCK ST
DATE: MAY 9, 2021
DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES DEPARTMENT, PLANNING
mxd
...... f 1 r }T- [..
_F
A I
CITY OFKITCHENER
rf``F F;F.rF F
# $ '• � '
{ L- . L j:. ,
�- µ F�� - - � r-fi ,. F'r _-r-fi ,, �'r � �!r •
•._ -. _ ,.
{
� r. � ~ �-
OFFICIAL PLAN
AMENDMENT TO MAP 3
LAND USE
Low Rise Residential
r dr
-
0 Medium Rise Residential N
High Rise Residential
Mixed Use
Commercial
•
r
® Heavy Industrial Employment
-�
General Industrial Employment
p•, .4
�•.
Business Park Employment
Natural Heritage Conservation
Open Space
f.fr`r
— * -j �_� •j- ;-
Area of Amendment
_�' p p
n.
w -m From Commercial
r f
To General Industrial Employment
39
SCHEDULE W0
250
REVISED:
OFFICIAL
PLAN AMENDMENT OPA21/003/B/ES
APPLICANT:
METRES
ZONING BY-LAW
AMENDMENT ZBA21/006/B/ES
PDCP BLOCK 5 INDUSTRIAL GP INC.
SCALE 1:10,000
City of Kitchener
OPA200FILE.
07LES_SchA
120 BULLOCK ST
DATE: MAY 9, 2021
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, PLANNING
mxd
70
71
CITY OF KITCHENER
tion
F�
OFFICIAL PLAN
AMENDMENT TO MAP 5
�9>1>
SPECIFIC POLICY AREAS
R
s °
'L�l�o
g�Ep,M
N
Specific Policy Areas
NP'y °R
�NPeP
® 12. 535 Manitou Dr
® 25.689 Doon Village Rd
® 30. 1011 and 1111 Homer Watson Blvd
3U
Area of Amendment
To Remove a Portion of
z
i Specific Policy Area
o
... 30. 1011 and 1111 Homer Watson Blvd
C:
0
j
12
CD
co
ON R°
25
SCHEDULE 'C'
REVISED:
OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT OPA21/003/B/ES
o Soo
METRES
APPLICANT:
ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT ZBA21/006/B/ES
PDCP BLOCK 5 INDUSTRIAL GP INC.
SCALE 1:15,000
City of Kitchener
FILE
OPA20004 BJ V W_M
120 BULLOCK ST
DATE: MAY 9, 2021
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, PLANNING
ap5
mxd
71
follows:
DSD -21-123 Appendix "B"
PROPOSED BY — LAW
, 2021
BY-LAW NUMBER
OF THE
CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER
(Being a by-law to amend By-law 2019-051, as amended, known
as the Zoning By-law for the City of Kitchener
-PDCP Block 5 Industrial GP Inc. and PDCP Block 5 Industrial
Limited Partnership — 120 Bullock Street)
WHEREAS it is deemed expedient to amend By-law 2019-051 for the lands specified above;
NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Corporation of the City of Kitchener enacts as
Schedule Numbers 168 and 199 of Appendix "A" to By-law Number 2019-051 are hereby
amended by changing the zoning applicable to the parcel of land specified and illustrated as
Area 1 on Map No. 1, in the City of Kitchener, attached hereto, from Arterial Commercial Zone
(COM -3) to General Industrial Employment Zone (EMP -2) with Site Specific Provision (178).
2. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 178 thereto as follows:
"178. Within the lands zoned EMP -2 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning
Grid Schedule Numbers 168 and 199 of Appendix `A', the following regulations will
apply:
• Notwithstanding Table 5-5 in Section 5 of this By-law, the minimum parking
rate for manufacturing use shall be 1 space per 200 square metres of gross
floor area.
• Notwithstanding Section 5.8 of this By-law, minimum electric vehicle parking
rate shall be 1 space per 7500 square metres of gross floor area.
• Notwithstanding Section 5.8 of this By-law, minimum future electric vehicle
parking rate shall be 1 space per 1125 square metres of gross floor area.
• Notwithstanding Table 5-5 in Section 5 of this By-law, the minimum class A
bicycle parking rate shall be 1 space per 1400 square metres of gross floor
area.
72
DSD -21-123 Appendix "B"
• Notwithstanding Table 5-4 in Section 5 of this By-law, minimum shower and
change facility rate be calculated based on the amount of class A bicycle
parking spaces for the total gross floor area of the building rather than based
on individual occupancies, and that all units have access to at least one
shower and change facility.
• Notwithstanding Table 10-1 in Section 10 of this By-law, Day Care Facility use
shall be prohibited.
• Notwithstanding anything else in this by-law, geothermal wells and energy
systems shall not be permitted on lands affected by this subsection."
3. This By-law shall become effective only if Official Plan Amendment No. _ (120 Bullock)
comes into effect, pursuant to Section 24(2) of The Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as
amended.
PASSED at the Council Chambers in the City of Kitchener this day of
2021.
Mayor
Clerk
73
74
EM P-2
R_4-2
NHC-1 8R'3940
3 mm MIX-1 (85) °R.zo
EMP-2 (105)
fV
SUBJECTAREA(S) N
5
� MP-3
AMENDMENT TO BY-LAW 2019-051
AREA 1 -
���
FROM ARTERIAL COMMERCIAL ZONE (COM-3)
WITH SITE SPECIFIC PROVISION (64)
TO GENERAL INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT
WSW
ZONE (EMP-2)
=i=
WITH A SITE SPECIFIC PROVISION
y�y
1
EMP-2 (106)
BY-LAW 85-1
R-3 RESIDENTIAL THREE ZONE
R-4 RESIDENTIAL FOUR ZONE
AREA 1
i
BY-LAW 2019-051
COM-1 LOCAL COMMERCIAL ZONE
COM-3 ARTERIAL COMMERCIAL ZONE
EMP-2 GENERAL INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT
i
ZONE
i
EMP-3 HEAVY INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYMENT ZONE
EMP-5 GENERAL BUSINESS PARK EMPLOYMENT
ZONE
MIX-1 MIXED USE ONE ZONE
NHC-1 NATURAL HERITAGE CONSERVATION
ZONE
OSR-3 OPEN SPACE: STORMWATER
NHC-1
MANAGMENT ZONE
i
ZONE GRID REFERENCE
EMP-2 (105)
SCHEDULE NO. 168 AND 199
OFAPPENDIX'A'
KITCHENER ZONING BY-LAW 85-1 AND 2019-051
ZONE LIMITS
i
COM-3 (66)
g0A i
19
________________S_C_HEDU_LE168 _
SCHEDULE 167
_________:SCHE_DUL
:SCHEDUL
EM —5
OSR-3
MAP NO. 1
0 50
100
ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT
ZBA21/006/B/ES
OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT OPA21/003/B/ES
METRES
PDCP BLOCK 5 INDUSTRIAL GP INC.
SCALE 1:4,000
City of KitchenerF27!.A21006BES
DEVELOPME T SERVICES DEPARTMENT, PLANNING
FILE
_MAP1
mxd
120 BULLOCK ST
DATE: MAY 9, 2021
74
PROPERTY OWNERS AND INTERESTED PARTIES ARE INVITED
TO ATTEND A PUBLIC MEETING TO DISCUSS
A PROPOSED OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT
UNDER SECTIONS 17,22 AND 34 OF THE PLANNING ACT
120 Bullock Street
PDCP Block 5 Industrial GP Inc. is proposing Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments to change the zoning
and land use designation on the subject site to General Industrial Employment.
In keeping with physical distancing measures recommended by Public Health due to COVID-19, an electronic
public meeting will be held by the Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee, a Committee of Council which
deals with planning matters on:
Monday, August 9, 2021 at 7:00 p.m.
(live -stream video available at I<itchener.ca/watchnow)
If you wish to make written and/or verbal comments either in support of, or in opposition to, the
above noted proposal you may register as a delegation at kitchener.ca/delegations or by
contacting Legislated Services at 519-741-2200 ext. 2203 by no later than 4:00 p.m. on August
9, 2021. A confirmation email and instructions for participating in the meeting electronically with
be provided once your registration is received.
If a person or public body would otherwise have an ability to appeal the decision of the
City of Kitchener to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal, but the person or public body
does not make oral submissions at a public meeting or make written submissions to the
City of Kitchener prior to approval/refusal of this proposal, the person or public body is
not entitled to appeal the decision.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION is available by contacting the staff person noted below or by viewing
the report contained in the meeting agenda (posted 10 days before the meeting at www.kitchener.ca
- click on the date in the Calendar of Events and select the appropriate committee).
Eric Schneider, Planner - 519-741-2200 x 7843 (TTY: 1-866-969-9994)
eric.schneidera-kitchener.ca
75
City of Kitchener
COMMENT FORM
Project Address: 120 Bullock Street
Date of Meeting: No Meeting
Application Type: ZBA & OPA
Comments Of: Transportation Services
Commenter's Name: Steve Ryder
Email: steven.ryder@kitchener.ca
Phone: (519) 7412200 ext. 7152
Date of Comments: June 16, 2021
❑ I plan to attend the meeting (questions/concerns/comments for discussion)
❑ I do NOT plan to attend the meeting (no concerns)
1. Site Specific Comments & Issues:
• Proposed Parking for ZBA:
o The proposed parking rate for "Manufacturing" uses of 1 space per 200 sq.m is
supportable by Transportation Services;
o Given the proposed amount of GFA that could potentially be dedicated to manufacturing
uses as outlined in the Planning Justification Report, this requested special rate would
yield a total amount of 232 spaces (46,215 sq.m/200) not including spaces based on any
office uses, as opposed to the total of 514 spaces that the existing rate through the zoning
by-law would require;
o Given the typical types of employment models that could be utilized for manufacturing,
it is unlikely that this site would ever utilize more than the proposed 232 spaces at one
time, acknowledging that there would be additional parking capacity based on the
proposed office use;
o Additionally, it can be assumed that not all potential tenants (and thus not all proposed
GFA) would necessarily fall under the Manufacturing use, thus resulting in a lower overall
demand for parking than what the Manufacturing uses would require (ie. warehousing,
offices, sales);
o Other factors such as Class A bicycle parking and close proximity to transit would also help
mitigate some need for vehicle parking on-site.
76
• Proposed Class A Bicvcle Parking for ZBA:
o Transportation Services is not supportive of the proposed reduced amount of Class A
bicycle spaces for the site —15 spaces from the required 34 spaces;
o Given the proximity to transit and residential areas, the provision of these Class A
bicycle spaces encourages the use of active transportation and thus, could mitigate
some demand for vehicle parking on-site, of which a reduction is also sought as noted
above;
o However, Transportation Services can support the calculation of required Class A bicycle
spaces based on the entire GFA of the site (as noted on page 24 of the Planning
Justification Report), rather than a "per use" basis once the building shell has been
divided into separate units, acknowledging that it may be more onerous to retrofit units
as opposed to having a dedicated facility/area for all Class A bicycle spaces and the
required shower and change facilities;
o That said, based on the previous comment, the dedicated facility/area for Class A bicycle
spaces and the shower and change facilities should be located in a central area that is
accessible to all employees that will be accessing the site, and not located in one area
that would become part of a unit once the building has been divided;
o If the required amount of Class A bicycle spaces are to be calculated on the entire site
GFA, and not on a per unit basis, it would not be reasonable to limit who can access
these facilities by encapsulating all Class A bicycle spaces and shower and change
facilities within one (1) unit of the divided building that is being proposed.
• Proposed Class B Bicycle Parking for ZBA:
o Given the industrial employment uses intended for this site, it is not expected that extra
Class B bicycle spaces will offset the reduction in Class A bicycle spaces/storage
requested;
o Class B bicycle spaces are intended for short term usage and do not provide security for
long term use that employment shifts would demand.
2. Plans, Studies and Reports to submit as part of a complete Planning Act Application:
• None
3. Anticipated Requirements of full Site Plan Approval:
• None
4. Policies, Standards and Resources:
• None
5. Anticipated Fees:
• None
77
City of Kitchener
COMMENT FORM
Project Address: 120 Bullock Street
Application Type: Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment
Comments of: Environmental Planning — City of Kitchener
Commenter's Name: Carrie Musselman
Email: carrie.mussel man@kitchener.ca
Phone: 519-741-2200 X 7068
Date of Comments: June 14, 2021
1. Plans, Studies and Reports submitted as part of a complete Planning Act Application:
• Vegetation Management Plan, Homer Watson Business Park, 120 Bullock Street prepared by GSP
Group, dated April 28, 2021.
• Planning Justification Report, 120 Bullock Street Industrial Development prepared by GSP Group,
dated April 30, 2021
2. Site Specific Comments & Issues:
I have reviewed the studies as noted above to support an official plan and zoning bylaw amendment at
120 Bullock St, to change the urban structure of the site to permit Industrial Employment and note the
following:
• The vegetation management plan appears to be consistent with the 2015 Approved Detailed
Vegetation Plan prepared by Ron Koudys Landscape Architects for the Homer Watson Business
Park.
• Nine trees are in poor condition/dead and are recommended for removal.
• Twenty trees located within the site will need to be removed due to construction. Through the
Landscaping requirements of Site Plan Approval compensation for these trees will occur.
Based on my review of the supporting studies the Official Plan and Zoning By Law Amendments can be
supported.
3. Policies. Standards and Resources:
• As per Section 8.C.2 — Urban Forests of the Official Plan
o policy 8.C.2.16., the City requires the preparation and submission of a tree management plan
in accordance with the City's Tree Management Policy (available on the City's Website), as a
condition of a development application.
o policy 8.C.2.6., the City will incorporate existing and/or new trees into the streetscape or road
rights-of-way and encourage new development or redevelopment to incorporate, protect and
conserve existing healthy trees and woodlands in accordance with the Urban Design Policies
in Section 13 (Landscape and Natural Features) of the Urban Design Manual and the
Development Manual.
4. Anticipated Fees:
• N/A
City of Kitchener - Comment Form
Project Address: 120 Bullock Street
Application Type: Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment
Comments of: Environmental Planning (Sustainability) —City of Kitchener
Commenter's name: Carrie Musselman
Email: carrie.mussel man@kitchener.ca
Phone: 519-741-2200 x 7068
Written Comments Due: June 17, 2021
Date of comments: June 14, 2021
1. Plans, Studies and/or Reports submitted and reviewed as part of a complete application:
• Planning Justification Report, 120 Bullock Street Industrial Development prepared by GSP
Group, dated April 30, 2021
2. Comments & Issues:
I have reviewed the documentation (as listed above) to support an Official Plan and Zoning By-law
Amendment to change the urban structure of the site to permit Industrial Employment regarding
sustainability and energy conservation and provided the following:
Based on my review of the supporting study the Official Plan and Zoning By Law Amendments can be
supported. In part, as the owner is targeting a LEED® Core and Shell certification for the proposed
development and have planned to include, several sustainable development measures, such as:
• Optimized energy performance (greater than 20% of standard);
• Commissioned building systems;
• Provision of electric vehicle charging stations and conduit for additional electric vehicle charging
stations in the future;
• Irrigation water conservation measures;
• Potential for white roofs and renewable energy systems;
• Indoor bicycle storage with shower/change facilities and outdoor bicycle racks will be provided
to supporting active transportation opportunities;
• Material choice and detailing to address bird collision avoidance guidelines; and
• Internal dedicated areas for collection and storage of recyclable materials.
3. Policies, Standards and Resources:
• Kitchener Official Plan Policy 7.C.4.5. The City will encourage and support, where feasible and
appropriate, alternative energy systems, renewable energy systems and district energy in
accordance with Section 7.C.6 to accommodate current and projected needs of energy
consumption.
• Kitchener Official Plan Policy 7.C.6.4. In areas of new development, the City will encourage
orientation of streets and/or lot design/building design with optimum southerly exposures. Such
orientation will optimize opportunities for active or passive solar space heating and water heating.
79
• Kitchener Official Plan Policy 7.C.6.8. Development applications will be required to demonstrate,
to the satisfaction of the City, energy is being conserved or low energy generated.
• Kitchener Official Plan Policy 7.C.6.27. The City will encourage developments to incorporate the
necessary infrastructure for district energy in the detailed engineering designs where the
potential for implementing district energy exists.
4. Advice:
➢ As part of the Kitchener Great Places Award program every several years there is a Sustainable
Development category. Also, there are community-based programs to help with and celebrate
and recognize businesses and sustainable development stewards (Regional Sustainability
Initiative - http://www.sustainablewaterlooregion.ca/our-programs/regional-sustainability-
initiative and TravelWise - http://www.sustainablewaterlooregion.ca/our-programs/travelwise).
➢ The 'Sustainability Statement Terms of Reference' can be found on the City's website under
'Planning Resources' at ...
a. https://www.kitchener.ca/en/resourcesGeneral/Documents/DSD_PLAN_Sustainability_
State ment_Standard—Te rms_of Reference.pdf
0
Address: 120 Bullock Street
Owner:
Application #: ZBA/OPA
Comments Of: City of Kitchener— Urban Design- Planning
Commenter's Name: Pegah Fahimian
Email: Pegah.fahimian@kitchener.ca
Phone: 519-741-2200 Ext. 7342
Date of Comments: June 25, 2021
❑ 1 plan to attend the meeting (questions/concerns/comments for discussion)
❑X No meeting to be held
❑ I do NOT plan to attend the meeting (no concerns)
5. Documents Reviewed:
• Urban Design Brief, April 2021. GSP Group.
• Tree Management Plan, April 2021. GSP Group.
• Preliminary Elevations.
• Preliminary Site Plan
6. Site -Specific Comments & Issues:
I have reviewed the documentation (as listed above) to support amendments to the Official Plan and
Zoning By -Law from PDCP Block 5 industrial GP Inc. for the property located at 120 Bullock Street. There
are some design modifications that must be addressed for the site plan application process to ensure the
project fits in the context of the neighbourhood as detailed below:
• Where parking areas are located along Homer Watson boulevard, the landscape design shall employ
a layered approach that will screen the lower portion of cars, and the edge of the parking surface
with vegetation, while providing the planting of trees to assist in maintaining the street line and to
provide visual relief from views of open parking areas.
• More planting islands to be provided to break up the long rows of parking stalls proposed along
Homer Watson that can also offer walkway access points from the city sidewalk and multi -use trail.
• The intersection of Bleams Road and Homer Watson Boulevard should be designed as the central
all -turns access point to the site, and as such, should be provided with a larger and distinctive
landscape treatment to establish a central landscaped focal point.
• Provide outdoor amenity space for employees and customers. Spaces designed for frequent use
should include hardscaped areas, seating, and weather protection.
• Sidewalk connection to be provided from the transit stop on Bleams Rd to the building entrances.
01
• Provide the location of garbage storage and snow storage on the plan. The garbage storage should be
located at the side of the site such that they are not visible from the public realm. Enclosures should
be provided if the garbage storage is highly visible from the public realm.
The proposed loading area is highly visible from Bullock Street. Locate service, loading and storage
areas at the side such that they are not visible from the street, whenever possible. Avoid storing
dumpsters or industrial products outdoors. If necessary, fully screen loading area from Bolluck
street and Bleams Road utilizing high-quality landscaping. Where appropriate include trees, mid -
height plants such as shrubs or tall grasses and ground covers. Design these areas to be visually
appealing and easily maintainable.
• All utility locations including meter room and transformer room to be shown on the layout.
Building -mounted or ground-based AC units should be located away from public view and fully
screened, Otherwise, screen these elements visually with landscaping and architectural features
that are integrated into the building design as a whole.
• Coordinate streetscape and landscape design with utilities and infrastructure to minimize
visual clutter and points of conflict.
• Include bicycle parking, located near the main pedestrian entrance(s). Covered and enclosed
bicycle parking is recommended for employees.
• Provide details of proposed public art on the landscape plan
• Preliminary Floor plans and building unit breakdown should be provided.
2. Comments on Submitted Documents
The following comments should be addressed at this time.
Tree Management Plan:
Written permission for removal of or impact to trees in joint ownership along property lines is
required
The Tree Protection Fencing should be extended along the south property lines at dripline + 1m to
provide sufficient protection to all trees.
For safety reasons, additional information and confirmation should be provided for trees in poor
condition that have been proposed to be retained.
Preliminary Building Elevations:
All building elevations visible to the public street should be designed with care and demonstrate a
consistency of materials, quality, and details. The proposed building fagade along Bleams Road shall
be designed to provide visual interest through the use of changes in planes, overhangs, glazing, and
fenestrations. Additional architectural elements should be used to provide visual punctuations and
add definition to prevent long, unbroken building elevation.
• Please ensure all mechanical structures that are roof -mounted are screened from public views.
• All visible elements of a building, including utilities (meters, conduits), HVAC (a/c units, vents) and
loading/servicing areas are to be integrated into the design of the building and shown on elevation
drawings as part of the building elevation approval process.
Engineering and Kitchener Utilities Comments
From: Niall Melanson
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 20211:30 PM
To: Eric Schneider
Cc: Angela Mick; 'Jeff Lerch'
Subject:120 Bullock St, ZB21/006/B/ES & OP21/003/B/ES - Engineering Comments
Hello Eric
Engineering and Kitchener Utilities has no concerns with the Functional Servicing Report submitted by
MTE Consultants Inc. for the ZBA/OPA.
Jeff — Please note that the current DGSSMS flow rates for Industrial are 0.4L/s/ha (noted as 0.5 in the
report) and Commercial are 0.5L/s/ha (noted as 0.6 in the report). However, since Industrial flows are
less then Commercial, Engineering is okay and will not request a revised report. Also, please be advised
that the report was not reviewed for SWM.
Eric / Jeff — If either of you have any questions please let me know.
Thanks
Niall Melanson, C.E.T.
Engineering Technologist I Development Engineering I City of Kitchener
519-741-2200 Ext. 7133 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 niall.melanson@kitchener.ca
Building Division Comments
From: Mike Seiling
Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 20219:38 AM
To: Eric Schneider
Subject:FW: Circulation for Comment - OPA/ZBA (120 Bullock Street)
Attachments: Department -Agency Letter AODA.pdf; OPA21003BES_MAP2.pdf; OPA21003BES
_MAP3.pdf; OPA21003BES _MAPS.pdf; ZBA21006BES _MAP1.pdf
Building; no concerns.
Heritage Planning Comments
From: Michelle Drake
Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 20212:12 PM
To: Eric Schneider
Cc: Victoria Grohn
Subject:FW: Circulation for Comment - OPA/ZBA (120 Bullock Street)
No heritage planning concerns.
Michelle
Parks & Cemeteries Comments
From: Ashley DeWitt
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 202111:50 AM
To: Eric Schneider
Subject:Parks - No Comments - Circulation for Comment - OPA/ZBA (120 Bullock Street)
Hi Eric,
Parks does not have any concerns.
Regards,
Ashley DeWitt GALA, CSLA
Landscape Architect
Design & Development I Parks & Cemeteries I City of Kitchener
Work Cell: 226.749.1534 1 ash ley.dewitt@kitchener.ca
Discover nature in the city: www.kitchener.ca/parks
CN Rail Comments
From: Ashkan Matlabi <Ashkan.Matlabi@cn.ca>
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 202110:42 AM
To: Eric Schneider
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 2021-05-20_CN_RES_Circulation for Comment - OPA/ZBA (120 Bullock
Street)
Hello Eric,
Thank you for this information. In this case you can ignore my comments below. CN has no comments
concerning this application.
Regards
::
Ashkan Matlabi, Urb. OUQ.
Urbaniste senior /Senior Planner (CN Proximity)
Planning, Landscape Architecture and Urban Design
Urbanisme, architecture de paysage et design urbain
E : proximity@cn.ca
T: 1-438-459-9190
1600, Rene -Levesque Ouest, 11e etage
Montreal (Quebec)
H3H 1P9 CANADA
wsp.com
From: Eric Schneider <Eric.Schneider@kitchener.ca>
Sent: Thursday, May 20, 20219:37 AM
To: Ashkan Matlabi <Ashkan.Matlabi@cn.ca>
Subject: RE: 2021-05-19—CN—RES—Circulation for Comment - OPA/ZBA (120 Bullock Street)
Hello Ashkan,
The subject property is not adjacent to the rail line. The subdivision is now registered so there is a public
road and other blocks of private property between the subject site and the rail line. Please see the
attached map to highlight this.
Please revise comments accordingly.
Thank you,
Eric Schneider, MCIP, RPP
Planner I Planning Division I City of Kitchener
(519) 741-2200 ext 7843 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 eric.schneider@kitchener.ca
From: Ashkan Matlabi <Ashkan.Matlabi@cn.ca> On Behalf Of Proximity
Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 20219:39 PM
To: Eric Schneider <Eric.Schneider@kitchener.ca>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 2021-05-19—CN—RES—Circulation for Comment - OPA/ZBA (120 Bullock Street)
Hello Eric,
Thank you for circulating the attached notice of by-law amendment for the subject lands having
proposing a change from arterial commercial zone to general industrial employment zone. It is noted
that the subject site is adjacent to CN's Spur line. CN encourages the municipality to pursue the
implementation of the following criteria as conditions of an eventual project approval:
1. The Owner shall install and maintain a chain link fence of minimum 1.83 meter height along the
mutual property line.
2. Any proposed alterations to the existing drainage pattern affecting railway property must
receive prior concurrence from the Railway and be substantiated by a drainage report to the
satisfaction of the Railway.
Thank you and don't hesitate to contact me for any questions.
.E
Regards
Ashkan Matlabi, Urb. OUQ.
Urbaniste senior /Senior Planner (CN Proximity)
Planning, Landscape Architecture and Urban Design
Urbanisme, architecture de paysage et design urbain
E : proximity@cn.ca
T: 1-438-459-9190
1600, Rene -Levesque Ouest, 11e etage
Montreal (Quebec)
H3H 1P9 CANADA
wsp.com
WCDSB Comments
rom: Planning <planning@wcdsb.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 202110:21 AM
To: Eric Schneider
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Circulation for Comment - OPA/ZBA (120 Bullock Street)
91
Good Afternoon Eric,
The Waterloo Catholic District School Board has reviewed the above application and has no new
comments to add.
If you require any further information, please contact me by e-mail at Jordan. Neale@wcdsb.ca.
Thank you,
Jordan Neale
Planning Technician, WCDSB
480 Dutton Dr, Waterloo, ON N2L 4C6
519-578-3660 ext. 2355
92
N*
Region of Waterloo
Eric Schneider, MCIP, RPP
Planner
City of Kitchener
200 King Street West, 6t" Floor
P.O. Box 1118, Kitchener, ON
N2G 4G7
Dear Mr. Schneider,
PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT
AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES
Community Planning
150 Frederick Street 8th Floor
Kitchener Ontario N2G 4A Canada
Telephone: 519-575-4400
TTY: 519-575-4608
Fax: 519-575-4466
www.regionotwaterloo.ca
Melissa Mohr 1-226-752-8622
File: D17/2/21003
C14/2/21006
June 22, 2021
Re: Proposed Official Plan Amendment OPA 21-003 and
Zoning By-law Amendment ZBA 21-006
120 Bullock Street
GSP Group Inc. (C/O Heather Price) on behalf of PDCP
Block 5 Industrial GP Inc. /PDCP Block 5 Industrial
Limited Partnership
CITY OF KITCHENER
GSP Group Inc. has submitted an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law
Amendment for a development proposal at 120 Bullock Street in the City of Kitchener.
The purpose and effect of the proposed Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment is
to facilitate the construction of a 47,295 square metre (509,709 square foot) industrial
building with associated surface trailer and car parking areas located on site. The
applicant has proposed two (2) accesses from Bullock Street and has proposed 77
tractor -trailer spaces adjacent to the Bullock Street frontage with 391 surface parking
spaces along the Homer Watson Street frontage. Landscaping has also been proposed
throughout the site with the majority of the landscaping being located along the Homer
Watson Blvd. frontage.
To facilitate the development, the owner has requested an Official Plan Amendment to
amend the Urban Structure of the subject lands from the Arterial Corridor to Industrial
Employment and amend the land use designation from the Commercial Designation to
the General Industrial Employment Designation. In addition, the applicant is proposing
Document Number: 3706183 Version: 1
93
to remove Special Policy Area #30 from the subject lands. Special Policy Area #30
permitted additional commercial and retail uses on the lands.
In addition, the applicant has applied for a Zoning By-law Amendment to amend the
Zoning of the subject lands from the Arterial Commercial (COM -3) Zone to the General
Industrial Employment (EMP -2) Zone.
The Region has had the opportunity to review the recent proposal and offers the
following:
Regional Comments
Consistency with Provincial Legislation and Regional Official Plan Conformity
The subject lands are designated "Urban Area" and "Built -Up Area" on Schedule 3a of
the Regional Official Plan (ROP) and the site is designed Commercial in the City of
Kitchener Official Plan and zoned Arterial Commercial (COM -3) Zone in the Zoning By-
law. The applicant is proposing to amend the commercial land uses to permit an
industrial development on a vacant parcel of land in proximity to an industrial park in the
City of Kitchener.
Section 1.3 of the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 requires planning authorities to
promote economic development and competiveness by providing opportunities for a
diversified economic base including maintaining a range and choice of suitable sites for
employment uses and identifying strategic sites for investment, including market -ready
sites that have necessary infrastructure to support current and projected needs.
Furthermore, Section 2.2.5 of A Place to Grow Growth Plan establishes policies that
encourage economic development and competitiveness by ensuring there is sufficient
land in appropriate locations to accommodate the forecasted employment growth.
Regional staff recognize that the site is located in proximity to an existing employment
area within the Built -Up Area of the City of Kitchener and the amendment would
facilitate a market —ready site with the necessary infrastructure available to support the
projected employment needs within the Region.
In addition to the above, Chapter 4 of the Regional Official Plan establishes policies for
supporting Waterloo Region's Business Community. Section 4.A.3 encourages Area
Municipalities to designate and preserve lands in the Urban Area that are in proximity to
major highway interchanges, rail yards or the Region of Waterloo International Airport
as employment areas. Regional staff recognize that the subject lands are in proximity
to an existing industrial area of the Region and that the subject lands have frontage on
two Regional Roads (Bleams Road and Homer Watson Boulevard), with direct access
to Provincial Highway 401.
Regional staff are supportive of employment land uses in appropriate areas of the
Region and have no objection to the applications. Furthermore, Regional staff wish to
advise the applicant of the following technical comments related to the proposal:
Document Number: 3706183 Version: 1
01
Corridor Planning
Access Permit/TIS/Access Regulation.-
The
egulation:The subject lands (120 Bullock Street, Kitchener) appear to use two accesses from the
site to Bullock Street, with no direct vehicular access locations to Regional Road 28
(Homer Watson Boulevard) or Regional Road 56 (Bleams Road) as shown on the
concept plan described as Figure 6 within the Planning Justification Report (prepared by
GSP Group Inc. dated April 30, 2021). The Region of Waterloo has no concerns with
the proposed access design shown on Figure 6 (Planning Justification Report prepared
by GSP Group Inc. dated April 30, 2021), and a Regional Road Access Permit will not
be required as access is not proposed from the Regional Road network through the
concept plan provided.
Stormwater Management & Site Grading:
Region of Waterloo staff have received the "Functional Servicing and Stormwater
Management Report" dated April 30, 2021 and the associated Civil Engineering Plans.
Both completed by MTE. Regional corridor planning staff have reviewed the plans and
report and have no objection to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law. Detailed comments
related to the civil engineering plans will be provided under separate cover and can be
addressed under a future Site Plan application.
Environmental Threats/Record of Site Condition
Regional staff acknowledge the applicant has received a Record of Site Condition (RSC
No. 225537) which has an approved Risk Assessment and Certificate of Property Use.
The Risk Assessment and Certificate of Property Use must continue to be complied
with.
Please note that the Record of Site Condition does not list sensitive land uses as a
permitted use, however the EMP -2 Zone permits a day care facility as an accessory use
to the intended primary industrial land use. Regional staff request that a prohibition
on sensitive land uses (such as a day care facility) be written into the Zoning By-
law Amendment.
Risk Management
Please note that a Risk Management Plan has been negotiated for this property and the
Section 59 Notice is valid. There are no further comments or requirements from a Risk
Management perspective at this time.
Hydrogeology and Source Water Protection
The subject lands are located in Wellhead Protection Sensitive Area 4 with a 2 -year
time of travel. Please include a prohibition on geothermal energy systems in the
Zoning By-law Amendment in accordance with Section 8.A.14 of the Regional
Official Plan.
Document Number: 3706183 Version: 1
95
General Comments
As indicated above, the Region of Waterloo has no objection to the applications
subject to a prohibition on sensitive land uses (such as a day care facility) and
geothermal energy systems being written into the Zoning By-law.
Any future development on the lands subject to the above -noted application will be
subject to the provisions of Regional Development Charge By-law 19-037 or any
successor thereof. In addition, the Region of Waterloo acknowledges receipt of the
Official Plan, Zoning By-law Amendment review fees totaling $6,900.00.
Please accept this letter as our request for a copy of the decision pertaining to this
application. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Yours truly,
Melissa Mohr, MCIP, RPP
Principal Planner
C. PDCP Block 5 Industrial GP Inc. /PDCP Block 5 Industrial Limited Partnership C/O Adrianne
Bobechko (Owner)
GSP Group Inc. C/O Heather Price (Applicant)
Document Number: 3706183 Version: 1
From:
Sent: Tuesday, June 1, 20219:51 AM
To: Eric Schneider
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 120 Bullock Street Zoning By -Law Amendment
Hello,
Our facility is located at 50 Steckle Place, Kitchener, ON, N2E 20. This is directly across the street from
the subject property. We are a metal stamping facility that is currently exempt from environmental
noise guidelines due to our distance from sensitive receptors.
While we support the change in zoning, we have concerns that the zoning would allow for a daycare. Is
there a mechanism that would allow for the other types of uses in EMP -2 WITHOUT allowing a daycare
facility? A daycare would be impacted by the noise from our facility, and likely the other industrial
facilities surrounding the subject area.
Thank you for your assistance,
97
Comprehensive Employment Lands
R e v i e w
Corporate Services Department
Information Technology - GIS
KiT R March 22, 2010
Staff Report
Dbvelo n7ent Services Department
REPORT TO: Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee
DATE OF MEETING: August 9, 2021
SUBMITTED BY: Bustamante, Rosa, Director of Planning
www. kitchener ca
PREPARED BY: Pinnell, Andrew, Senior Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7668
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 9
DATE OF REPORT: July 28, 2021
REPORT NO.: DSD -2021-122
SUBJECT: Sign Variance Application SVA2021-005
Address: 105 King Street East (Crowne Plaza Hotel)
Owner: Vista Waterloo Limited Partnership
RECOMMENDATION:
That Sign Variance Application SVA2021-005 related to 105 King Street East for Vista
Waterloo Limited Partnership, for the purpose of allowing a digital sign on the Benton
Street fagade of the existing building, requesting the following relief from Section 680
of the Municipal Code ("Sign By-law"):
A. Relief from Section 680.10.18 only allowing fascia signs with external
downward illumination in D-1 through D-3 Zones, whereas the proposed
digital sign will be internally illuminated,
B. Relief from Sections 680.3.29 and 680.10.17 requiring automatic changing
copy on a sign to be no closer than 23 metres (75.45 feet) of a street
intersection or traffic light, whereas the proposed sign is approximately 1.2
metres (4 feet) from the intersection of Benton Street & King Street East, and
C. Relief from Section 680.3.32 prohibiting third party advertising, whereas the
proposed sign will include third party advertising,
ha rahicaH
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
• The purpose of this report is to recommend refusal of a Sign Variance Application
(SVA).
• There are no financial implications to the City associated with this matter.
• Community engagement included circulation of the application to all property owners
within 120 metres of the subject property, Downtown BIA directors, and DAAC
members.
• This report supports the delivery of core services.
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
BACKGROUND:
In late 2019, the applicant submitted a Sign Variance Application (SVA) to permit a large
digital sign on the Benton Street facade of the Crowne Plaza Hotel. The SVA was placed
on hold at Planning staff's request to undertake a study, since staff recognized potentially
significant and wide-ranging implications related to the proposed sign. Between February
2020 and June 2021, Planning staff undertook the Downtown Digital Sign Study (DDSS).
The DDSS identified that, in general, the downtown community does not want digital signs
to be permitted in the Retail Core of downtown. Accordingly, staff provided an information
report (DSD -2021-90) to Council in 2021 that suggested no changes to the Sign By-law,
which currently does not allow digital signs in the Retail Core. In June 2021, the applicant
submitted a revised SVA. This report responds to the revised SVA.
REPORT:
Original Sign Variance Application
In late 2019, the applicant submitted a Sign Variance Application (SVA) to permit a large
digital fascia sign on the Benton Street fagade of the Crowne Plaza Hotel. Planning staff
recognized the potential significant and wide-ranging implications of allowing such a sign,
which is not permitted in the City's sign by-law. At the request of staff, the applicant agreed
to place their application on hold to allow a study to be undertaken.
Downtown Digital Sign Study
Between February 2020 and June 2021, Planning staff undertook the Downtown Digital Sign
Study (DDSS). At the June 14, 2021 Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee meeting,
the Committee considered a `for information' staff report DSD -2021-90 regarding the DDSS.
The purpose of the DDSS was to evaluate whether the Sign By-law should be amended to
allow digital signs in the Retail Core. The study focused on engagement with the downtown
community and included consultation with directors of the Downtown Business Improvement
Association (BIA), members of the Downtown Action Advisory Committee (DAAC), the
downtown community (via an Engage Kitchener survey), four major downtown landlords /
developers, and the local sign industry.
The DDSS identified that, in general, the downtown community does not support digital signs
within the Retail Core. Since the results of engagement did not support changes to the
existing sign by-law, staff have not made a formal recommendation to make changes and
instead provided Council with information via an information report. This means that digital
signs continue to be prohibited in the Retail Core.
In addition, while DDSS did not specifically study the issue of third -party signage it was,
nonetheless, identified as a concern by individual directors of the Downtown Business
Improvement Association, members of the Downtown Action Advisory Committee, and one
of the major downtown property owner / developer respondents as this would open up the
downtown to permit digital billboards.
Revised Sign Variance Application
In May 2021, following the DDSS, the applicant submitted a revised SVA, to allow a 6.1
metre (20 feet) by 3.05 metre (10 feet) digital sign on the Benton Street fagade of the Crowne
Plaza Hotel, at the intersection of King Street East. The sign would encroach slightly into
100
the Region's Benton Street right-of-way. The digital sign is proposed to include third -party
advertising. Specifically, the applicant is requesting relief from the Sign By-law, as follows:
A. Relief from the requirement that fascia signs within the Retail Core be permitted
with external downward illumination, to allow the proposed digital sign with internal
illumination.
B. Relief from the requirement that automatic changing copy on a sign be no closer
than 23 metres (75.45 feet) of a street intersection or traffic light, to allow the
proposed sign to be located approximately 1.2 metres (4 feet) from the intersection
of Benton Street & King Street East.
C. Relief from the prohibition of third -party advertising, to allow the proposed sign to
include third -party advertising.
It should be noted that while approval authority for most SVAs has been delegated to staff,
the Sign By-law states that if an application is not considered minor by staff or if staff does
not support the requested variance, it must be decided by Council. This case is the first
time that such an SVA has been considered by Council since revisions to the SVA process
in 2019.
Applicable Regulations
External Illumination
In Kitchener, the City's Sign By-law permits digital signs in several areas of the city, subject
to regulations. However, digital signs are not permitted in the Retail Core —the central area
of downtown that generally extends between Duke Street and Charles Street, and between
Francis and Cedar Streets and includes key sections of King Street West and King Street
East (see Attachment A).
While the Sign By-law does not specifically define digital signs, they are, nonetheless,
prohibited within the Retail Core by Section 680.10.18, which requires that fascia signs are
permitted with external downward illumination only (digital signs inherently project light
outward in many directions). The only exception is individual channel letters, which may be
backlit.
Automatic Changing Copy
Digital signs are permitted in other areas outside the Retail Core and throughout the balance
of the city, generally, except for residential areas. In these areas, digital signs are regulated
because they include what the Sign By-law terms Automatic Changing Copy (ACC), which
is defined as "copy or images on a sign, shown by any electronic means, and which may or
may not change..." For example:
• A sign that includes ACC must be set back 23 metres from intersections, and 100
metres from residentially zoned properties,
• The ACC component of a ground supported sign is limited to a percentage of the sign
face,
• Text and images must be static for a minimum of 6 seconds and hours of operation
are specified, and
• Third -party signs or advertising are prohibited.
Prominent ACC examples in downtown, but outside the Retail Core, include the ground
supported digital signs at The Galleria building at Weber / Frederick and the Downtown
101
Community Centre at Weber / Ontario. The ground supported digital sign at St. Andrew's
Church at Weber / Queen is an example that is located near, but outside of the downtown
boundary.
Third -Party Signs
Non -accessory signs, also known as third -party signs (i.e., those in which the copy does not
relate to the lot upon which the sign is located), are not permitted anywhere within the Retail
Core, except in the form of Video Projection Signs (i.e., signs where images are projected
from an external source by electronic means onto a building or surface). Outside of
downtown, third -party signs are permitted only in specific areas (Industrial, Business Park,
Arterial Commercial, and Commercial Campus zones only), and only as billboards and
Video Projection Signs.
Planning Analysis
General Concern with Proliferation of Digital Signs
Planning staff has several concerns with the requested SVA. As aforementioned, the DDSS
identified that, in general, it is the preference of the downtown community to not allow digital
signs within the Retail Core. In this regard, it must be noted that if Council approves the
subject SVA it will be challenging to prevent the proliferation of digital signs within the Retail
Core, since a precedent would be established.
Apart from the downtown community's preference, Planning staff has several concerns
regarding the unmitigated proliferation of digital signs in the Retail Core. In general, digital
signs may have negative impacts, for example:
• Impacts on businesses. Other business owners may be compelled to acquire
expensive digital signs to `keep up' / compete with businesses that possess digital
signs.
• Impacts on downtown character and aesthetics. Digital signs may negatively impact
the quality and charm of downtown and the kind of vibrancy the City is seeking.
Unplanned placement and proliferation of digital signs may exacerbate this issue.
• Impacts on downtown residents. Residents may be negatively impacted as result of
the brightness and intensity of digital signs and more residents may be affected
because of the higher residential density in downtown (including future
development).
• Impacts on traffic. More study is required to determine potential for conflicts between
drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians resulting from distractions associated with digital
signs.
These impacts are potentially exacerbated by third -party advertising, which, in this case, the
SVA is requesting. The content of third party advertising, generally, is not regulated by the
City.
While Video Projection Signs are permitted within the Retail Core, digital signs are not
permitted. Unlike Video Projection Signs (VPS) which are visible only during evening hours,
digital signs are always visible (day and night) and brighter with light projected outward from
them. In addition, VPS are much less likely than digital signs to proliferate within the Retail
Core because of the highly specific circumstances needed for their viability (e.g., long-term
cooperation of the owner of a strategically located property for the placement of a
102
projector). Accordingly, digital signs have a greater reach and potential for negative impacts
than VPSs.
Specific Concerns with Subject Sign Variance Application:
Planning staff is primarily concerned with the potential for the proliferation of digital signs
throughout the Retail Core as a result of the precedent set by the subject application.
However, Planning staff also has specific concerns with the subject SVA, including negative
impacts on downtown character and aesthetics, and negative impacts on downtown
businesses, as well as the following.
Size and Location
The proposed digital sign is 200 square feet (18.6 sq.m) in area. For context, the proposed
sign would be the same area and dimensions as the digital signs on the south side of Victoria
Street North, opposite the intersection of Shirley Drive (near the bridge over the Grand
River). However, a difference is that the signs on Victoria Street are set back 23 metres (75
feet) from the road surface, whereas the proposed sign will have no setback to the public
realm.
Furthermore, the proposed sign would be located at the very heart of downtown, which many
consider to be King Street and its immediate side -streets. Visually, a digital sign of this size
at such a prominent intersection will be highly visible and dominate the view looking
southeast down King Street.
Light Pollution
The City has several Official Plan policies which speak to the issue of lighting practices,
including policy 6.C.3.6, that "The City will use and promote the use of responsible lighting
practices that eliminate or reduce light pollution and glare and restore unobscured views of
the night sky, while maintaining sufficient light levels for a safe built environment." It should
be noted that light pollution (such as light trespass or glare) is considered an "adverse
impact".
At present, the City's By-law Enforcement Division does not have the capability or resources
to monitor brightness levels of digital signs in the few areas of the city where they are
permitted. Planning staff is concerned that the proposed sign may generate light pollution
and may emit light levels that are uncomfortable to community members who live, work, and
play downtown.
Public Realm
The main viewing audience for the proposed digital sign would be pedestrians, cyclists, and
motorists in the public realm. The City has a responsibility to design streetscapes with the
public interest in mind. Invasive advertising is typically not compatible with the City's desire
to create a high-quality urban environment that supports public life.
Community Benefit
Planning staff is concerned that little or no public benefit is achieved through the proposed
sign and that for-profit, third -party advertising may become the primary purpose of the sign,
especially given the significant purchase and installation costs.
103
Sign content that has value to the public may include community information, art, wayfinding.
However, as mentioned above, the City does not have the authority to regulate third party
sign content, so there is no way to ensure the sign will benefit the community or the
streetscape.
While the location, size and orientation of this proposed sign may have minimal present-day
impacts on surrounding residential units because no residential units currently face the
proposed sign, residents of future developments may be affected by invasive artificial light
generated from the sign, which would negatively impact resident quality of life.
In summary, there are a number of factors that staff have concerns with:
• the large size of the proposed digital sign,
• the locational prominence at a major intersection in the heart of downtown,
• the lack of setback to the public realm,
• the request for third -party advertising, and the City's inability to regulate third -party
sign content, and
• establishing, essentially, a digital billboard sign — which the City does not permit as -
of -right anywhere within its limits. It should be noted that regular billboards (i.e., those
without a digital component) are only permitted in Industrial and Business Park
zones, with certain exceptions (i.e., Huron Business Park, Bridgeport Business Park,
and Lancaster Corporate Centre).
Considering the above comments, Planning staff recommends that the subject application
be refused.
STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT:
This report supports the delivery of core services.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Capital Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget.
Operating Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
INFORM — On June 8, 2021 the SVA was circulated for comment to internal departments,
external agencies, property owners within 120 metres of the subject lands, the directors of
the Downtown Business Improvement Association, and members of the Downtown Action
Advisory Committee. Written responses from the community are attached as Attachment
C.
Summarized comments are as follows:
Community Comments:
The SVA was circulated to all property owners within 120 metres of the subject property, the
directors of the Downtown Business Improvement Association, and members of the
Downtown Action Advisory Committee. Four comments were received, with three
comments expressing concerns (see Attachment C).
104
Department and Agency Comments:
Heritage Planning.-
The
lanning:The property municipally addressed as 105 King Street East is not designated or listed under
the Ontario Heritage Act. However, the property is adjacent to the following heritage
properties:
• 137-147 King Street East (Part IV designated property)
• 69 King Street East (listed)
The property is also located adjacent to the Downtown Cultural Heritage Landscape. Based
on the location of the proposed sign, and that the subject property is not listed or designated,
a heritage permit application and/or additional heritage studies are not required. Heritage
planning staff has no concerns.
Transportation Services.-
Transportation
ervices:Transportation Services offers the following comments for the variances:
A. Relief from Section 680.3.29 and 680.10.17 — no concerns with the location of the
sign. However, what are the hours of operation of the sign going to be, for example
8am to 11 pm? Also, what will the light intensity be during day/dark hours of
operation?
B. Relief from Section 680.3.32 — no concerns
C. Relief from Section 680.10.18 — no concerns
By -Law Enforcement.-
No
nforcement:No concerns from a by-law perspective provided the change and copy meets the bylaw
requirements and isn't distracting to drivers.
Building Division.-
Building
ivision:Building Division sees no issues with the proposed sign variance. As known, a sign permit
will be required for the new sign [Planning Division note: through the sign permit process, a
structural engineer would review how the sign will be secured to the wall face].
Region of Waterloo (Corridor Planning).-
The
lanning):The proposed sign will encroach into the Regional road right-of-way. Therefore, an
encroachment agreement will be required with the Region of Waterloo for the proposed sign
on the wall facing Benton Street (RR #06).
Kitchener -Wilmot Hydro:
KWHI has no objections to the Sign Variance for 105 King Street East in Kitchener.
This matter was advertised in The Record on July 23, 2021 in accordance with City policy
(see Attachment B). This report will be posted to the City's website with the agenda in
advance of the Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee meeting.
PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES:
• Chapter 680 (Sign By-law) of the Municipal Code
• DSD -2021-90 Downtown Digital Sign Study
APPROVED BY: Readman, Justin - General Manager, Development Services
105
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A — Retail Core Boundary Map
Attachment B — Public Notice Advertisement
Attachment C — Community Comments
106
107
Advertised in The Record on July 23, 2021
PROPERTY OWNERS AND INTERESTED PARTIES ARE INVITED
TO ATTEND A PUBLIC MEETING TO DISCUSS
A PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 680 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE (SIGN BY-LAW)
TAKE NOTICE THAT the Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee for the City of Kitchener
will meet electronically Monday August 9. 2021 for the purpose of hearing a sign variance
application to amend Chapter 680 (Signs) of the City of Kitchener Municipal Code. Due to COVID-19,
City Hall is currently open by appointment only, anyone interested in participating in the electronic
meeting can register at www.kitchener.ca/delegation. Please note this electronic meeting is a public
meeting and will be recorded. The live -stream is available at www. Kitchener. ca/watchnow
105 King Street East (Crowne Plaza Hotel)
If approved, the application would amend the Sign By-law to facilitate the placement of a fascia sign
with internal illumination and Automatic Changing Copy (i.e., a digital sign) on the upper levels of the
Crown Plaza Hotel, facing Benton Street, near the intersection with King Street East. The sign is
proposed to be 6.1 metres (20 feet) wide by 3.05 metres (10 feet) tall. In addition, the proposed sign
would be a non -accessory / third -party sign — one in which the content does not necessarily relate to
the property or business upon which the sign is located. The proposed sign would replace an existing
fascia sign (non -digital) that advertises the hotel / restaurant.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION is available at www.kitchener.ca by viewing the Planning and Strategic
Initiatives Committee meeting agenda, which will be published on the Calendar of events on July 30,
2021 or by calling the City Staff noted below.
Andrew Pinnell,
Senior Planner
519-741-2200 x 7668 (TTY: 1-866-969-9994);
and rew.pin nell(a)kitchener.ca
i 1:
Andrew Pinnell
From: Craig Beattie <cbeattie@perimeterdevelopment.com>
Sent: Sunday, June 27, 2021 1:15 PM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Cc: Berry Vrbanovic; Debbie Chapman; Sarah Marsh (sarah@sarahmarsh.ca); Scott Davey, Bil
loannidis; Dave Schnider, John Gazzola; Christine Michaud; Kelly Gal loway-Sea lock; Paul
Singh; margaret Johnson@kitchener.ca; Dan Chapman; Rosa Bustamante; Janine
Oosterveld
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Downtown Digital Sign Study
Importance: High
Hi Andrew. My apologies for delayed comments on the downtown digital sign study that you have been working on.
Between some important work related deadlines and some time off with family, I've been a bit compressed for time
lately. Have CC'd mayor and council for ease of circulation and important 'big picture' nature of this item.
I've reviewed your work on this matter and fully support staff recommendation that there be NO changes to the sign by-
law to permit digital signs in the retail area of downtown. Personally, digital signs really only have a place in select
locations that have been designed to accommodate same and play a role in the 'tourist' nature of the location, ie Times
Square in NYC and Yonge/Dundas Square in Toronto to a lesser extent. Both examples are in the heart of cities with
populations in the many millions and which draw millions of tourists a year. Downtown Kitchener is not comparable nor
should we desire to be compared to these examples.
As our city grows up and becomes more dense with a greater proportion of smaller condos and apartments, there needs
to be a doubling down and greater effort made on the public realm and urban design to authentically make downtown
Kitchener a real livable area. The more successful we are on these fronts, the more dwellers of these units will get out
and support their city. Leaders need to show pride and respect for their City and the addition of digital signs, most of
which subject to 3'd party advertising (how else are they paid for) does nothing to advance / improve the livability of
downtown Kitchener. These 'digital signs' are simply the modern day version of the old school Pattison billboards that
we've thankfully been removing from the landscape downtown. Improved sales for existing businesses and attracting
new businesses happens when the core is more livable and inviting for residents of the core and from the broader City
to come and explore and feels good to be in. That is the canvas for business success.
In addition, at a time when staff resources are stretched, do not see any value in more staff time being assigned to a
matter like this. There are so many more files that need attention that can actually yield greater benefit to the City. Stay
focused on items that really make a difference.
105 Kine Street East:
While reviewing the digital sign study work, I came across the variance application for a 20' x 10' digital sign proposed
for the Benton St side of the Crowne Plaza Hotel. If this is an indication of what may come should digital signs be
permitted, I'm concerned for the direction we'd be headed. This variance should be denied. What does a sign like this
really add to the City?? Make no mistake, this is simply a building owner looking to rent their wall and derive revenue
from 3`d party advertisers looking for exposure from the passing LRT vehicles all day camouflaged under policy -speak
justification.
At a time when most all of us have a super computer in our pocket, we don't need a sign like this to tell us the time or
weather.... and from my experience, community groups are doing a great job raising awareness for their organizations
events and activities.
Bottom line, there are many other ways to enliven this blank facade and it takes the desire, creativity and effort to
accomplish. Simply 'renting' it is the path of least resistance.
109
Be leaders and stay focused on making the City a truly livable place. Veering off to support something like this is
completely counter-productive.
Have passion and pride in your City.
Happy to discuss further should you have any questions.
All the best.
Craig
PERIMETER
CRAIG BEATTIE, Chief Executive Officer
DIRECT LINE: 519 514 1935
MOBILE: 647 982 9123
119 King Street West, Suite 220,
Kitchener, ON, N2G 1A7
perimeterdevelooment.com
110
Andrew Pinnell
From: Paul Ballantyne Ag
Sent: Monday, June 28, 2021 7:13 AM
To: Andrew Pinnell; Debbie Chapman
Subject: (EXTERNAL] Crown Plaza Digital Sign
Hi Andrew and Debbie,
My name is Paul Ballantyne and i am a partner in Vanguard Developments, who along with the Woodhouse
Group are owners of 132 Queen St S. and 27 Gaukel St. These are two prominent properties in the downtown
core which we have invested significantly in to repurpose into high quality office space; which is now occupied
with high quality tech companies.
It was just brought to our attention the matter of the digital sign application on the side for the Crown Plaza
Hotel building. We strongly feel that this inclusion into the rapidly transforming area of the downtown would
be a step in the wrong direction. We already feel that the substantial increase in marijuana shops could be
detrimental to this area and a digital sign would fit this same mould.
Thank you for considering my comments on behalf of Vanguard Developments,
Paul Ballantyne, Sales Rep
RE/MAX Twin City Realty Inc
cell: 519 729 5579
paulballantyne@)remax.net
7 Always Appreciate Your Referrals"
111
Andrew Pinnell
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Landlord of 206 King St E.
Hi Andrew,
Thu NguyenF
Tuesday, June 15, 2021 12:49 AM
Andrew Pinnell
[EXTERNAL] Variance Application - SVA2021-005
These are my comments in regards to the installation of a digital sign below.
I'm mostly concerned about the light pollution that this will cause. How will it affect surrounding residents and
occupants of the hotel to have the light from the sign glaring at them? Especially at night. How will they address this?
That's all the comments 1 have. Have a great dayl
Kind regards,
Thu
112
Andrew Pinnell
From:�.f„�
Sent:
ursday, June 10,20214:49 PM
To:
Chloe Howell
Cc:
Andrew Pinnell
Subject:
[EXTERNAL] Re: Downtown Digital Sign Study + Circulation for Comments - Sign
Variance
Thanks Chloe and Andrew.
No comment or concerns on the proposal.
From: Chloe Howell <Chloe.Howell@kitchener.ca>
Sent: June 10, 202112:17 PM
Cc: Andrew Pinnell <Andrew.Pin nell@kitchener.ca>
Subject: Downtown Digital Sign Study + Circulation for Comments - Sign Variance
Hello DAAC members,
I've been asked to share two items with you on behalf of Andrew Pinnell, a senior planner at the City of
Kitchener:
1. Downtown Digital Sign Study
a. Andrew gave a presentation to DAAC in 2020 regarding a Downtown Digital Sign Study and said
he received helpful feedback from the group. The study has been completed and a staff report
is now available, and will be considered at the Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee on
June 14. You can view the staff report HERE
2. Circulation for Comments —Sign Variance (105 King Street East)
a. Please see attached pdf'Agency Letter' regarding a variance application at a downtown
location. As the letter states, there is opportunity for comment:
"Before this application is heard by the Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee, a committee
of Council that will decide the subject application, we are providing an opportunity for
interested community members and department/agencies to make comments ... If you have any
comments regarding this application, please provide them by June 23, 2021. If you do not
submit written comments by the required date, we will assume you have no concerns and you
will not receive any further notice of this matter."
If you have any questions, please address them directly with Andrew, cc'd.
With thanks,
Chloe Howell I Program Assistant, Business Development I Economic Development I City of Kitchener
519-741-2200 ext. 7311 I chloe.howell@kitchener.ca
113