HomeMy WebLinkAboutPSI Agenda - 2022-01-10Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee
Agenda
Monday, January 10, 2022, 6:00 p.m. - 8:00 p.m.
Electronic Meeting
Due to COVID-19 and recommendations by Waterloo Region Public Health to exercise physical
distancing, City Hall is open for select services. Members of the 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. Please refer to the delegations section on the agenda below for registration
deadlines. Written comments will be circulated prior to the meeting and will form part of the public
record.
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.
Chair: Councillor D. Chapman
Vice -Chair: Councillor P. Singh
Pages
1. Commencement
2. 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.
2.1. Demolition Control Application DC21/038/W/TS - 82 Wilson AvenueThe 3
Regional Municipality of Waterloo
3. Delegations
Pursuant to Council's Procedural By-law, delegations are permitted to address
the Committee for a maximum of five (5) minutes. Delegates must register by
4:00 p.m. on January 10, 2022, in order to participate electronically.
3.1. Public Hearing Matter report DSD -2022-004 listed as Item 5.2
3.1.a. Valerie Schmidt, GSP Group
3.1.b. Jason Babchuck and Chad Davidson, Traine Construction and
Development
4. Discussion Items
4.1. Tree Canopy Target for Kitchener - INS -2022- 45 m
002
(Staff will provide a 5 -minute presentation on this matter.)
4.2. Downtown Kitchener Vision Project Plan - DSD- 15 m
2022-014
5. Public Hearing Matters under the Planning Act (7:00 p.m.)
This is a formal public meeting to consider applications under the Planning Act.
If a person or public body does not make oral or written submissions to the City
of Kitchener before the proposed applications are considered, the person or
public body may not be entitled to appeal the decision to the Ontario Land
Tribunal and may not be added as a party to a hearing of an appeal before the
Ontario Land Tribunal.
5.1. Zoning By-law Amendment ZBA/21/016/F/CD 15 m
1940 Fischer Hallman Road, Draft Plan of
Subdivision 30T-07205, Blocks 183-
191 Schlegel Urban Developments Corp. -
DSD -2022-003
(Staff will provide a 5 -minute presentation on this matter.)
5.2. Zoning By-law Amendment ZBA21 /011 /H/ES- 30 m
1673 Huron RoadHuron Road Apartments
Kitchener 2021 Ltd - DSD -2022-004
(Staff will provide a 5 -minute presentation on this matter.)
6. Information Items
6.1. None.
7. Adjournment
Daniela Mange
Committee Administrator
7
15
33
Page 2 of 114
StaliBeport
J
IKgc.;i' r� R
Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee
DATE OF MEETING: January 10, 2022
SUBMITTED BY: Rosa Bustamante, Director of Planning, 519-741-2200 ext. 7319
PREPARED BY: Tim Seyler, Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7860
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 3
DATE OF REPORT: December 17, 2021
REPORT NO.: DSD -2022-020
SUBJECT: Demolition Control Application DC21/038/W/TS - 82 Wilson Avenue
The Regional Municipality of Waterloo
RECOMMENDATION:
That Demolition Control Application DC21/038/W/TS requesting permission to
demolish a multiple dwelling with 16 dwelling units located at 82 Wilson Avenue be
approved.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
• The purpose of this report is to outline the request of Council to approve the demolition
of an existing two storey multiple dwelling with 16 units located at 82 Wilson Avenue.
• The key finding of this report is that staff support the demolition of the existing multiple
dwelling as the Region of Waterloo (Owner) intends to redevelop the property with a 6
storey, 48 -unit affordable housing development. The City has just received an
application to amend the Zoning By-law to facilitate the proposed redevelopment.
• 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 an existing 16 -unit multiple dwelling addressed as 82 Wilson Avenue. The
subject property is zoned Residential Six (R-6) in Zoning By-law 85-1. The property is
designated Medium Rise Residential in the Official Plan. The applicant is proposing to
demolish the existing multiple dwelling to allow for future construction of a 48 -unit affordable
housing multiple dwelling.
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Page 3 of 114
Location Map — 82 Wilson Avenue
REPORT:
Staff advise that the owner of the subject property is proposing to demolish the unoccupied
two storey 16 -unit multiple dwelling to allow for the future development of a six story 48 -unit
affordable housing multiple dwelling on the subject property. The Region of Waterloo has
requested that the current unoccupied building be demolished in order to ready the site for
the future residential development, which will provide an overall increase of 32 senior -
oriented residential units, as well as space for additional services provided to the community.
This expansion forms part of the Waterloo Region Housing Master Plan (2020-2040), which
was approved by Regional Council in 2019.
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 units as it is the intention of
the Region of Waterloo to redevelop the lot with a new affordable housing residential
development.
An application for Zoning By-law Amendment is required to facilitate the proposed
development which has been submitted to the City and is currently under review. The
purpose of the proposed application for Zoning By-law Amendment is to rezone the site from
Page 4 of 114
Residential Six (R-6) in Zoning By-law 85-1 to RES -6 in accordance with By-law 2019-051
with site specific provisions to address vehicular and bicycle parking and front yard setbacks.
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 16 residential dwelling units without approved plans to replace
the dwelling units, via a building permit or site plan approval, staff are bringing this report
before Council as per the City's Demolition Control Policy. However, as noted above, the
applicant is progressing toward redeveloping the site with a 48 -unit affordable housing
multiple dwelling in 2022.
The property does not have a heritage designation nor is it within a heritage district. Heritage
Planning has no concerns with the application.
Figure 1: View of the existing multiple dwelling at 82 Wilson Avenue
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:
City of Kitchener's Demolition Control By-law
Zoning By-law 2019-051
Official Plan, 2014
Page 5 of 114
APPROVED BY: Justin Readman — General Manager, Development Services
Page 6 of 114
StaliBeport
J
IKgc.;i' r� R
Infrastructure Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee
DATE OF MEETING: January 10, 2022
SUBMITTED BY: Niall Lobley, Director, Parks & Cemeteries 519-741-2600 ext. 4518
PREPARED BY: Josh Shea, Manager, Natural Areas Management, 519-741-2600 ext.
WARD(S) INVOLVED: ALL
DATE OF REPORT: December 15, 2021
REPORT NO.: INS -2022-002
SUBJECT: Tree Canopy Target for Kitchener
RECOMMENDATION:
That a tree canopy target of 30 per cent by 2050 be established for each of the 10 Wards
in the City of Kitchener together with an overall City-wide canopy target of 33 per cent%
by 2070, and,
That staff be directed to develop ward (and where appropriate, neighbourhood), specific
action plans that focus on planting, maintaining and protecting trees in consideration of
local pressures on canopy and,
That these action plans inform future budget requests beginning in 2022 for the 2023
financial year and,
That staff be directed to initiate a review of existing tree protective processes in the City,
including a review of existing protection bylaws and policies, and requirements for tree
planting contained within the Development Manual, and report back to Council with
preliminary findings by the end of 2022, and,
That staff report back in 2025 and on five -yearly intervals thereafter, with an update on
Kitchener's Urban Forest Canopy
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
The report provides a policy framework for implementing ward and city-wide urban
canopy targets that focus on planting and maintenance and continued support of
Kitchener's forestry programs and outlines action items across the City of Kitchener
The development of the Tree Canopy Cover Target supports the theme of Environmental
Leadership within the City of Kitchener Strategic Plan 2019 — 2022. Specifically, it delivers
on a commitment to "Implement the Sustainable Urban Forest Strategy with a focus on
establishing a tree canopy target"
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Page 7 of 114
Financial impacts will be defined through implementation plans and identified through
future reporting and budget processes.
Development of a Sustainable Urban Forest Strategy and the Tree Canopy Target has
been informed by more than 2,500 community members. More than 2,000 community
members participated in in person and online engagements leading to the development
of the SUFS and more than 600 people have shared thoughts on how a tree canopy target
can be achieved
BACKGROUND:
The City of Kitchener adopted the Sustainable Urban Forest Strategy (SUFS), in 2019 which
articulated and affirmed the City's commitment to supporting the multiple benefits of a diverse,
well maintained and sustainably managed urban forest to community and residents in the City.
The SUFS responded to Council priorities under the strategic theme of Environmental
Leadership and helped to provide direction to investments into the urban forest in 2019, 2020
and 2021. Notable among these:
• Council supported establishing a pilot partnership with REEP Green Solutions that has
enabled the appropriate planting of many 100's of trees across the City on private property
with support provided for species selection, site location and maintenance.
• 1000's of residents have been supported in education and stewardship activities since
2019 that have provided advice, information and education on stewardship for trees on
private property
• Investments into operating budget have supported the development and implementation
of a street tree raising program that, by the end of 2021 will have seen proactive
maintenance undertaken on almost 60 streets where street raising work was of highest
need
• In 2021, street tree structural pruning was undertaken on several streets to promote
healthy and vigorous growth of younger trees
• The backlog of trees left unreplaced on City streets and boulevards by the impacts of
Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) at the end of the EAB program in 2018 has been eliminated,
and we have a sustained replacement for trees removed on City streets of between two
and three years
• Staff have submitted a Request for Information in response to a call from the Federal
Government in respect to the Billion Tree Program which could further build and enhance
City tree planting program
In addition Council has invested in 2022 in implementing the SUFS by:
• Responding to the pilot private tree planting and stewardship program by implementing
this for ten years and doubling funding toward the enhancement, growth and maintenance
of the private tree canopy
• Providing initial funding to support the replacement of lost trees in public parks and open
spaces
• Providing sustained funding for future canopy assessments to track canopy changes over
time
Page 8 of 114
The SUFS articulated the importance of the need to Plan first and Engage widely in its Five
Branches of activity'. Developing a clear direction urban forest management activities through
developing a tree canopy goal is driven by the need to ensure that action is informed by planning
and engagement. These early activities have provided significant benefit to the urban canopy;
through adopting a target, staff will be able to bring forward a comprehensive strategy to address
that target.
REPORT:
The development of Kitchener's tree canopy target is driven by seeking to provide greater
equity in canopy, and targeting improvements to canopy ensuring actions that address local
pressures are implemented.
It is considered likely that over the next 50 years, the City will experience fluctuations, including
reductions, in overall canopy cover as the effects of aging trees, climate change and the need
to accommodate more of the City's growth in already developed areas to meet provincially
mandated growth targets, impact the existing canopy. It is unlikely that a sustained, straight line
growth in canopy can be achieved and that there will be fluctuations in canopy over coming
decades; however, staff hope that with targeted approach specific to the needs of each
community across the City, local enhancements can be made as well as an overall growth on
canopy over the 50 year horizon.
The development of, and implementation of actions towards meeting a tree canopy target
contributes toward equity by seeking to address environmental inequities across communities in
Kitchener, and climate and sustainability objectives, such as helping to mitigate and manage the
impacts of climate change. Likewise, the development of the target helps affirm Kitchener's
commitment to action under the declaration of a Climate Emergency.
Canopy cover varies dramatically across the City with the least well served communities seeing
less than 12% canopy, and the best served neighbourhoods seeing more than 40% canopy. It
is clear from studies across the globe, and by looking at least and best served neighbourhoods,
that areas with lowest canopy often correlate strongly with rental and apartment style buildings,
less access to greenspace and higher populations of equity deserving communities;
communities that often see the greatest societal value of enhanced canopy.
Action on tree canopy is proposed across all areas of the City; aligned with feedback from
community engagement and an increasing recognition of the potential that canopy has to help
toward addressing equity issues, this will be targeted by seeking to ensure all wards have 30%
canopy by 2050. In some neighbourhoods, this work will be extensive and will see a trebling of
canopy over the next 30 years; in other wards, work will be just as challenging as the pressure
of growing or maintaining existing canopy against a backdrop of aging trees and development
will be equally challenging.
Cities across southern Ontario have over the past decade, established long term goals for tree
canopy in urban areas. Oakville, Toronto and London have established targets between 30%
and 40% over 50 year timelines, whereas cities like Cambridge have established lower targets
' Pages 13-15 Kitchener's Sustainable Urban Forest Strategy
Page 9 of 114
over shorter, 20 year timeframes. Other cities such as Guelph and Hamilton have established
targets, but without timeframes associated to theme. 50 years may seem like a significant
timeline for improvements; trees planted today will only start to have a significant bearing on
canopy in 50 years and so actions today will really become reflected in the canopy present in 50
years time.
Kitchener fairs well for existing urban canopy, having seen this increase in recent years to 27%.
However, staff recognize that this canopy is heavily reliant on existing, mature trees. In many
areas of the City, these trees are in less -than -optimal
condition and health and in other areas planned
growth over coming decades, may result in some tree °
loss. The City is rapidly changing and, alongside other
communities, is facing the pressure of a changing
climate, which, while perhaps favouring some species,
is negatively impacting existing species across the
City.
More than 50% of the existing tree canopy is on private
property and community partnership in delivering on
both ward and neighbourhood level objectives will be
essential in achieving both local community increases
in canopy and in sustaining and growing canopy
across the City as a whole.
Given the extensive differences across the City, any
one action alone will not be sufficient to address a
canopy target and staff plan to implement actions to meet a canopy target that include:
lJ���D%II/llll�f1111111111111/111111������r
• Planting correctly and deliberately — selecting the right trees for the right locations with a
focus on native species that will add value to future canopy
• Protecting prudently — seek to building on existing policies and protection for trees where
appropriate
• Maintaining proactively — ensure that trees are maintained from planting throughout their
lives to offer maximum opportunity to support mature trees that provide highest benefit.
A balanced approach of actions that address both short-term demand and pressures on canopy,
and actions that support long term, sustainable change are required. Actions are required that
are implemented to, and impact on, both publicly owned property and privately owned property.
Across the City, some neighbourhoods may see a focus on tree planting, others will see greatest
value from protection, and in many, deliberative maintenance programs to sustain growing trees
to maturity will be required.
Reflecting on the needs above and the dramatic differences in existing canopy will require a
considered approach to management. Based on the direction received by Council through this
report, staff will develop a comprehensive implementation strategy that will include a future
capital and operating budget requests.
'- Page 15 - Kitchener Urban Forest Canopy Technical Report
Page 10 of 114
Private property tree management tools
Staff are aware that there is high public interest in tree protection driven by development
applications where trees have been or are proposed to be removed. This has led to a heightened
call for `a tree bylaw'. Despite a high public awareness of this issue, feedback from the recently
concluded engagement on tree canopy does not see bylaws as the highest priority, with a focus
on tree planting (public and private) and tree care and maintenance being higher priorities. This
reflects feedback received during engagement on the Sustainable Urban Forest Strategy as well.
Kitchener currently has the following tools which are used to manage trees on private property:
- Tree Conservation Bylaw — requires a permit to be issued for tree removal on properties
that are greater than 1 acre in size for trees that are greater than 10 centimeters in depth
at breast height (DBH)
- Tree Management Policy — applies where a development is proposed that requires a
Planning Act application (e.g. subdivision, Official Plan and Zoning Bylaw amendments,
site plans, and committee of adjustment applications). As part of these applications,
studies will be used to evaluate trees great than 10 centimeters DBH to identify which are
appropriate for removal and which are required to be retained and protected through
construction and beyond
- Kitchener's natural heritage system — Kitchener's Official Plan includes policies, land use
and mapping that identify its natural heritage system. Kitchener's natural heritage system
includes, among other things, regionally significant and locally significant woodlands.
These woodlands are identified in the Official Plan as areas where development is not
appropriate. The Official Plan natural heritage system land use is currently being
implemented in its new Zoning Bylaw through the application of a natural heritage
conservation zone. The purpose of this zone is to protect and conserve these identified
woodlands on private and public property in the future.
Staff are recommending a review of the existing bylaw protection and other protective measures
through the balance of 2022. While the scope of this work has yet to be determined, it is important
to understand at the outset that should the scope of protective/management tools on private
properties be increased this may have a permitting, review, approval and enforcement impact to
it which may be unreflective of the overall impact to tree canopy (i.e. a disproportionate
effort/staff time may be required to protect a relatively small percentage of the overall canopy).
Staff will seek to understand better the amount of currently `unprotected' canopy as part of this
review.
STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT:
The development of the Tree Canopy Cover Target supports the theme of Environmental
Leadership within the City of Kitchener Strategic Plan 2019 — 2022.
Specifically, it delivers on a commitment to:
Implement the Sustainable Urban Forest Strategy with a focus on establishing a tree canopy
target
Page 11 of 114
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
There are no financial implications at this time. Short term priorities of the SUFS which will help
support a tree canopy target have been implemented in budgets in 2020, 2021 and 2022.
On the basis of the target adopted, staff will develop a comprehensive implementation plan that
will inform future budget cycles beginning in 2023.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
Development of a Sustainable Urban Forest Strategy and the Tree Canopy Target has been
informed by more than 2,500 community members. More than 2,000 community members
participated in in person and online engagements leading to the development of the SUFS and
more than 600 people have shared thoughts on how a tree canopy target can be achieved.
Through community engagement, staff have adopted a broad approach to the management of
the urban forest through: Planning First, Engaging Widely and then implementing actions that
include Planting Deliberately, Protecting Prudently and Maintaining trees through establishment,
adolescent and into maturity. These actions were informed by, and confirmed through, public
engagement and consultation.
Over the course of October and November, 2021, staff sought to better understand feedback
from the community on actions that they would like to see the City undertake in respect to trees
to inform the development of a target. This engagement included seeking feedback from
members of Council, which is included in the summary below.
Key highlights of this engagement are:
Almost 80% of respondents favour a balanced approach to urban tree management that
incorporates both short term measures and long term sustained approaches
Two thirds of respondents support activities in all areas of the City with a third of
respondents seeking to target activity only to lower cover wards
More than 85% of respondents favour an approach that includes support for stewardship
and planting on private property, with 61% preferring that this be resident led with City
support
On the basis of engagement, community has indicated that the top three things that can be done
to support private tree planting and maintenance are:
1. Technical support,
2. Financial support and,
3. Education,
with information on the right type of tree and how to maintain being cited as the number one
incentive to help plant a tree on private property.
245 comments were received as part of the survey response that provided further insight into
community feelings.
Page 12 of 114
• 72 comments related specifically to the need to plant trees within existing public
properties
39 comments related specifically to the need to maintain trees on public property
0 39 comments related to the need to protect trees either through protective bylaws for
private trees or public trees, or to protect through development work, retaining healthy
trees alongside development, or through compelling developers to plant trees
• 36 comments related to private tree planting, education, stewardship and awareness,
subsidizing trees planting and including schools in tree planting
• 57 comments fell into a number of other areas including:
o Planting native species, managing invasive species
o Planting fruit trees
o Proposing that less trees are planted and advocating for tree removals along
streets
o Asking that trees not be planted where there are overhead wires or lights
o Avoid planting tree to avoid leaves in fall
o Advocating against any municipal lead work on private property for example tree
planting subsidy or private tree protection
o Financial support for residents in managing and removing large trees on private
property
Many comments in this category were supportive of the SUFS and ongoing dedication toward
maintaining urban tree canopy
In addition to the feedback on Engage Kitchener, Building Parks Together, an equity focussed
volunteer group, that seeks to share feedback on Parks and Open Space matters, were asked
in a forum setting to share ideas.
Through this forum, the following themes emerged as priorities:
Overall concern for maintaining canopy cover in the City, particularly in areas of
established canopy which may be subject to future intensification
The need to increase tree stewardship and care led by the City on existing publicly owned
trees to care for what we have first and foremost, and to provide access to resources and
education to encourage community to do likewise on privately owned trees. The City
should show leadership in maintaining existing trees.
Capitalize on enthusiasm of young people to be active in climate and forestry programs
— the City could facilitate youth led programs to support urban forestry and climate change
programs in the City;
o Partnerships between school board and City to encourage tree education and
stewardship by students
o Explore establishing youth led urban forest programs
o Explore potential for a tree ambassador program to support neighbourhood trees
Appreciate that not everyone loves trees
Engage community through outreach and engagement activities; support National Tree
Week, provide information at community events and festivals on trees and tree
management, work with schools
Page 13 of 114
Protect trees — ensure trees are protected as development and construction occurs,
implement bylaws to manage tree removal especially of larger healthy trees, but
recognize that protecting trees through bylaw will result in neighbour disputes and that
bylaws are limited by the ability to monitor and enforce compliance.
Staff shared draft recommendations and details of the proposed Tree Canopy Target with the
Environment Committee at their meeting on November 18 2021. Environment Committee was
supportive of both the approach taken in developing a target and the nature of the
recommendations that have been suggested. Environment Committee endorsed the
recommendations included within this report.
Staff believe that the proposed Tree Canopy Target and Recommendations of this report reflect
the sentiments expressed by community through engagement. Staff will consider comments
received as they move toward developing approaches to deliver on a tree canopy target over
coming months.
INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the
council / committee meeting.
PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES:
INS -10-008 —Sustainable Urban Forest Strategy
INS -20-018 — Setting an Urban Forest Canopy Cover Target
APPROVED BY: Denise McGoldrick, General Manager, Infrastructure Services
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A - Kitchener's Sustainable Urban Forest Strategy
Attachment B - Tree Canopy Background Information
Attachment C - Tree Canopy Technical Report
Page 14 of 114
StaliBeport
J
IKgc.;i' r� R
Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee
DATE OF MEETING: January 10, 2022
SUBMITTED BY: Cory Bluhm, Executive Director Economic Development, 519-741-
2200 ext. 7065
Rosa Bustamante, Director of Planning, 519-741-2200 ext. 7319
PREPARED BY: Darren Becks, Manager of Downtown Development and Innovation,
519-741-2200 ext. 7064
Natalie Goss, Manager of Policy and Research, 519-741-2200 ext.
7648
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Wards 9 and 10
DATE OF REPORT: December 23, 2021
REPORT NO.: DSD -2022-014
SUBJECT: Downtown Kitchener Vision Project Plan
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Downtown Kitchener Vision project plan outlined in this report be endorsed.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
This report provides an overview and seeks Council's endorsement of the project plan
for the development of a comprehensive vision for Downtown Kitchener
The Downtown Kitchener vision process will be community -led, and staff supported.
Central to this community -led process is a Downtown Community Working Group
(DCWG) comprised of approximately 25-30 members of the downtown and broader
Kitchener community each bringing unique and diversified perspectives to the process
To ensure robust conversations on the development of a vision, theme areas are
included as conversation points to guide the DCWG and broader downtown
community/stakeholder engagements in the areas of growth/housing, business,
movement of people/goods, public spaces, events/street life, climate
change/environmental leadership, equity, and safety/security. Additional themes may be
identified and added through the process
This project is funded through approved capital budget for costs associated with
consultant services and community engagement.
This report supports the Strategic Plan theme A Vibrant Economy.
BACKGROUND:
Downtown Kitchener (DTK) is at a key point in its evolution. Unprecedented growth is
happening at a time where housing affordability, climate, equity, and social factors are
intersecting. The pandemic has caused significant impacts to our business community,
including the many businesses and organizations reliant on in-person engagement. The
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Page 15 of 114
office community has largely been forced to work remotely, with uncertainty on what a post -
pandemic work environment will look like. As a result of all these converging factors, it is
an opportune time for the community to shape a new vision for DTK; a new vision that
includes a set of equity -based guiding principles for the next generation of community -led
transformation.
In 2003, City Council endorsed a vision for DTK with key guiding principles (Downtown
Strategy Plan Vol. 1). This vision focused on creating "a place for people" which guided
key decisions over the following decades such as:
• Investments in post -secondary institutions
• Pedestrian -first redesign of King Street
• Growth of festivals and events
Creation of the Downtown Community Centre
Expansion of KPL Central Library, and
Policy changes to support residential intensification.
The 2003 vision still resonates today in many of our recent policy and investment
decisions. Today DTK is guided by more recent strategies such as Kitchener's Strategic
Plan (2019-2022), Make It Kitchener 2.0 (2020), Shaping DTK — A Vision for 2020 and
updated Official Plan policies and guidelines for the downtown in Kitchener's Urban
Design Manual.
The Downtown Kitchener BIA is a key stakeholder and partner in the evolution and
success of DTK. Over the past 4 years, the City and BIA have shared a common strategy
(Shaping DTK — A Vision for 2020) which has enabled both organizations to align and
leverage each others' efforts. This vision process provides an opportunity to advance
similar collaboration with the BIA but also to engage with other downtown stakeholders
and the broader downtown community.
Over the next several decades, there are numerous and sizable bodies of work that will be
undertaken by the City that will continue to shape and transform DTK. There is an
opportunity to have the community working together with the City to craft a collective DTK
vision to inform and align these bodies of work. At this time, identified in -progress and
future city initiatives that a collective DTK vision would help inform include:
• A new land use and zoning framework for DTK
• A Civic District master plan
• A Bramm Yards master plan
• An Arts and Culture Strategy
• A District Energy plan for DTK
• Inclusionary zoning for DTK
• Places and Spaces Master Plan
• City -owned lands strategy (Make it Kitchener 2.0), and
• A new Official Plan
REPORT:
The goal of the DTK vision process is to develop a comprehensive vision and set of
guiding principles for DTK founded on the values, principles, and needs that are unique to
DTK. The DTK vision process will be community -led, and staff supported. The project
plan, which includes the scope of work, timeline, and community engagement approach, is
Page 16 of 114
attached to this report as Attachment 1. Central to this community -led process is a
Downtown Community Working Group (DCWG). The DCWG will be comprised of
approximately 25-30 members of the downtown and broader Kitchener community each
bringing unique and diversified perspectives to the process.
The DCWG will:
Shape a comprehensive community engagement process
Craft a vision that encapsulates DTK in 10 years, one that is premised on a "downtown
for all", and
Identify and define a set of principles that shape, direct and contextualize future
decision-making for DTK.
The DCWG will work together with and be supported by community engagement
consultants and staff. A space for input and collaboration with the broader DTK community
will be part of the community engagement process. The graphic below shows the
functional relationships of the project.
Project Sponsor
GM Development Services
Project Directors
Director Economi,.
Development
Director of Planning
Project Leads
Manager of Downtown
Development ant! Innovation
M' fP ii. 8
Project Steering
Committee
Project Sponsor
Project Directors
Project Leads
anager o o cy an
Research I L
Internal Leadership Group
Director of Trampottation Services
Director of Parks R Cemeteries
Mrector of Sport
Director, Strategy and Corporate Perfornm ince
Manager of Community Centers
Corporate Cornrnunicat.ions &. Marketing
Manager of Special Events
.....................................................
Community Engagement
Consultant
\, : Broad Community--
Engagement
Downtown Community Working Group �i�
'15-.30 community members 1 (Including Kitchener
* * i Advisory Committees) i
Staff Working Team
Economic Develop mment staff'
Communications staff
Figure 1: DTK Vision functional relationships diagram
Subject Matter Experts
Planning
Equity, Anti -Racism and Indigenous Initiatives
Neighbourhood Development office
Iram4mrtation Planning
Econornic Development
Parks and Cemeteries
Bylaw Enforcement
Downtown Kitchener Business Improvement Association
Corporate sustainability officer
Region of Waterloo
Communitech
Waterloo Region Policy: Services
To ensure robust conversations on the development of a DTK vision and principles, theme
areas are included as conversation points with the DCWG and broader downtown
community/stakeholders. The following are already identified themes. Additional themes
may be identified and added through the process:
• Growth
• Housing
• Neighbourhoods
• Supporting existing business and recovery (1 to 4 years out)
• Business - imagine forward (5 to 10 years out)
Page 17 of 114
• Movement of people and goods
• Public spaces
• Events, animation, and street life
• Climate and environmental leadership
• Equity
• Safety and security
The table below outlines what is in scope and out of scope for the DTK vision project.
In scope
Out of scope
Together with the Downtown Community
Updates to any city or community
Working Group and community
documents (e.g., Official Plan, Places and
engagement consultants, develop and
Spaces, Make it Kitchener 2.0)
execute a communications and community
engagement plan for this project.
Review of existing city and community
An action plan to implement the DTK
documents and plans that currently provide
vision/principles including the identification
guidance/direction for DTK. Review
of costs, priority of future works
provincial and federal policies for
relevance. Research other downtown
plans from across the province, country,
and globe.
Develop a new vision and key principles
Funding or resources allocation for
for DTK to guide future decisions
implementation
The DTK vision project will take place during 2022 and 2023 through four phases:
• Phase 1 — project planning (Q4 2021-Q1 2022).
This phase includes the preparation of a project plan, recruitment, and establishment of
the DCWG, and preparation of a communications and community engagement plan.
The DCWG will meet for the first time during this phase to confirm the goals of the
project and share/explore background material.
• Phase 2 — community -led visioning through theme -based discussions (Q2 -Q3 2022).
• A series of 10 to 12 workshops based on themes will occur with the DCWG. Broad
community workshops will also occur as part of this phase. Conversations on certain
themes may be prioritized in timing to align with impending related project deliverables,
such as various Council strategic plan actions. For example, to allow work to progress
in 2022/23 on a new land use and zoning framework for DTK and Major Transit Station
Areas (MTSAs) conversations on the growth, housing, and neighbourhoods themes
are planned to occur first.
• Phase 3 — development of a DTK vision and principles (Q4 2022-Q1 2023)
This phase includes the development of a vision and principles for DTK led by the
DCWG with guidance by the community engagement consultants and staff. Broad
community engagement on the draft and final DTK vision and principles will happen
during this phase.
• Phase 4 — approval of a DTK vision and principles (Q1 2023).
Page 18 of 114
This phase includes a wrap-up session with the DCWG to confirm the final DTK vision
and principles prior to Council's consideration.
STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT:
This report supports A Vibrant Economy. The DTK vision project plan delivers a wholistic
vision for the future of DTK enabling the continuation of strategic investments supporting job
creation, economic prosperity, thriving arts and culture, and great places to live.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Capital Budget — This project is funded through approved capital budget for costs associated
with consultant services and community engagement.
Operating Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
The DTK vision engagement process is community -led and, staff supported. Central to the
engagement process is a DCWG, comprised of 25 to 30 individuals representing different
aspects of downtown life. The DCWG will inform, guide, and participate in themed
conversations which will be used as the starting point for conversations with the broader
community. A series of approximately 10 to 12 theme -based workshops will be held with the
DCWG. The DCWG will also collaboratively develop a DTK vision with guidance from
subject matter experts, and engagement consultants.
In addition to the theme -based workshops outlined above, there will be a series of broad
community engagement points at key milestones. It is anticipated that there will be a
minimum of 5 community engagement events throughout the DTK vision process. The
project plan (Attachment A) describes the composition of the DCWG and how opportunities
for broader community conversations are woven throughout the process. Council will also
be engaged at key points in the process via strategic sessions of council.
INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of
the council / committee meeting.
PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES:
There are no previous reports/authorities related to this matter.
APPROVED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A — Downtown Kitchener Vision Project Plan
Page 19 of 114
Attachment 1 — Downtown Kitchener Vision Project Plan
PROJECT PLAN
Downtown Kitchener Vision and Principles
Page 20 of 114
1.0 PROJECT OVERVIEW
1.1 Problem/Opportunity Statement
Downtown Kitchener (DTK) has realized tremendous change in the form of growth, investment,
and revitalization over the last 20 years. DTK's growth over this time was guided by a strong
initial vision and core principles established in 2003, centered around creating "A Place for
People", intensification, high quality design and the growth of a knowledge economy. As
Downtown has evolved, advancements such as the ION, new post -secondary institutions, an
increase in housing supply, unprecedented development, and continued growth within the tech
sector have anchored this transformation. The global pandemic has slowed some of this
investment, but all indications are that the next 10 years will see DTK grow through investments
and revitalization.
While DTK's revitalization was kickstarted by the City of Kitchener's EDIF investment, what has
transpired was the result of a true community effort, including a large community of passionate
stakeholders (Kitchener residents, business leaders, academic partners, cultural organizations,
creative professionals, entrepreneurs, social service providers, developers, event organizers,
the Downtown BIA, etc.). Each have contributed to DTK's evolution.
As we look forward, DTK is at a key point in its evolution. Unprecedented growth is happening
at a time where housing affordability, climate, equity, and social factors are intersecting,
requiring a new vision for DTK with a set of equity -based guiding principles for the next
generation of community -led transformation. To achieve such success requires a community
driven, pan -corporation effort through a full community and stakeholder engagement process.
Over the next several decades, there are numerous, and sizable bodies of work that will be
undertaken by the City that will continue to shape and transform DTK. The opportunity to craft a
collective DTK Vision to inform and align these bodies of work, led by community is before us.
This project will deliver a broad, comprehensive, people -centered vision and set of principles for
DTK providing direction for ongoing and future city initiatives in the areas of equity, experience,
growth, and sustainability. At this time, identified in -progress and future city initiatives include:
- A new land use and zoning framework for the Major Transit Station Areas (MTSAs) that are
west of the Conestoga Parkway which includes the Urban Growth Centre (DTK)
- A Civic District master plan
- A Bramm Yards master plan
- An Arts and Culture Strategy
- A District Energy plan a capital project
- Inclusionary zoning for DTK and MTSAs
- Places and Spaces Master Plan
- City -owned lands strategy (Make it Kitchener 2.0), and
- A new or updated Official Plan
Page 21 of 114
This project, with the assistance of external supports, will be guided by the community through a
community working group, will include extensive community engagement, inter -departmental
co-operation, and will draw upon our collective wisdom to build a DTK Vision for the next 10
years.
1.2 Project Goals and Objectives
The goal of the project is to develop a comprehensive vision and set of guiding principles for
DTK founded on the values, principles, and needs that are unique to Kitchener's downtown,
identified by the community.
Through this community driven process, the Downtown Community Working Group (DCWG)
will:
Shape a comprehensive public engagement process,
Craft a vison that encapsulates DTK in 10 years, one that is premised on a "downtown for
all" and,
- Identify and define a set of principles that shape, direct, and contextualize future decision-
making for DTK.
This process is intended to, and perhaps most importantly, this process needs to:
- Build continued consensus
- Motivate and inspire action, and
- Ensure inclusive community building.
1.3 Project Scope
The considerable work over the past 20 years (strategic plans, policies, investments, etc.) to
support DTK will be the foundation from which the community will develop a new vision and key
principles to shape future decisions. The following table outlines what is in and out of scope for
this project.
In scope
Out of scope
Together with the Downtown Community
Updates to any city or community documents
Working Group and community engagement
(e.g., Official Plan, Places and Spaces, Make
consultants, develop and execute a
it Kitchener 2.0)
communications and community engagement
plan for this project.
Review of existing city and community
An action plan to implement the DTK
documents and plans that currently provide
vision/principles including the identification of
guidance/direction for DTK. Review provincial
costs, priority of future works
and federal policies for relevance. Research
other downtown plans from across the
province, country, and globe.
Develop a new vision and key principles for
Funding or resources allocation for
DTK to guide future decisions
implementation
As outlined above, the process for developing a DTK vision and principles is community -led,
and staff supported. Central to this process is a Downtown Community Working Group (DCWG)
Page 22 of 114
who will, together with and supported by engagement consultants and staff resources, guide the
development of a DTK vision and principles. Members of the DCWG will report back to their
various advisory bodies or member organizations, where applicable, to engage their groups in
conversations. A space for input and collaboration with the broader DTK community is also
included in the community engagement process.
The process to develop a vision and principles for DTK and the vision itself will be used to
inform, provide direction to, and support initiatives, strategic priorities and practical tools needed
for implementation.
To ensure robust conversations on the development of a DTK vision and principles the following
theme areas are included as minimum conversation points with the DCWG and with the broader
downtown community and stakeholders throughout community engagement. Through
conversations with the DCWG additional themes may be identified. Already identified themes
include:
1. Growth — where and how should more people and jobs be added in DTK?
2. Housing - How can DTK be a home for all (e.g., housing supply, housing affordability)?
3. Neighbourhood - How do we imagine DTK as a distinct neighborhood?
4. Supporting Existing Businesses and Recovery (1-4 years out) — How do we support
businesses in recovering from the impacts of the pandemic?
5. Business - Imagine Forward (5-10 years out) - What does the retail, hospitality, service, and
office sectors look like in the DTK?
6. Movement of People and Goods — How do we plan and maintain a transportation system
that supports and prioritizes safety for all users and reduces automobile dependence while
providing safe and efficient movement of people and goods in and through the downtown?
7. Public spaces - How do we plan and support engaging public spaces and places (e.g., parks
and amenity spaces) that support a vibrant DTK neighbourhood and quality of life?
8. Events, Animation, and Street life — How do we support a vibrant street life through festivals,
programs, patios etc.?
9. Climate change/Environmental Leadership — How should Kitchener's commitments on
climate change and sustainable development be considered and balanced with all other
considerations in DTK's future?
10. Equity - How do we create a downtown that meets the needs of all, is welcoming to all and
provides opportunities for all? How do we support those most in need?
11. Safety and Security - How can we construct and foster an empathetic, supportive
community?
In addition to conversations on the above themes, conversations with the DCWG will include an
initial meeting that will confirm the goals of the project and share/explore background material. A
final meeting with the DCWG will see the DCWG confirm the final DTK vision and principles
prior to Council's consideration.
1.4 Key Milestones and Baseline Project Schedule
The project is organized into 4 phases as follows:
Phase 1 — Project planning — Q4 2021 to Q1 2022
Phase 1 establishes the project framework. It includes the development of a project charter and
request for proposals for a community engagement consultant. Phase 1 will also include the
Page 23 of 114
retention of the consultant and, recruitment and establishment of the DCWG. An initial meeting
with the DCWG will occur in this phase to confirm the goals of the project and share/explore
background material.
Phase 2 — Community -led visioning — Q2 to Q3 2022
Phase 2 includes the development of a draft community engagement plan by the consultant with
input from the DCWG and Project Steering Committee (PSC) to gather input on proposed
theme areas for a series of workshops. Once the CEP is finalized, the consultant will facilitate,
with support from the PSC and technical experts, a series of approximately 10-12 theme -based
workshops with the DCWG. In addition to the theme -based workshops with the DCWG there will
be a series of broad community engagement points at key milestones. It is anticipated that there
will be a minimum of 5 broad community engagement events. Certain themes may be prioritized
to align with impending project deliverables, such as various Council strategic plan actions. For
example, to allow work to progress in 2022/23 on a new land use and zoning framework for
DTK and Major Transit Station Areas (MTSAs), at a minimum, conversations on themes 1-3
outlined above would be held in Q2 2022.
Phase 3 — Development of a DTK vision and principles — Q4 2022 — Q1 2023
Informed by conversations in Phase 2 and a draft DTK vision and principles will be created
collaboratively with the DCWG, project leads, PSC. These conversations will be facilitated by
the consultant. Input on the draft DTK vision and principles will be sought from the broader
community.
Phase 4 — Approval of DTK vision and principles — Q1 2023
A final vision and principles for DTK, once endorsed by the DCWG using an agreed to
consensus model, will be presented to Council for approval and will be used to inform the in -
progress and future projects outlined above and any others identified along the way.
Page 24 of 114
1.5 Risks and Threats to Project Viability
Risk
Assumption
Mitigation
Adequate time scheduled for
That the project schedule
The project leads will monitor
specific tasks, both generally
provides for adequate time
the project schedule and if a
and considering the ongoing
for each task to be
deadline or milestone is
global pandemic.
completed.
missed, or anticipated to be
missed, by more than 2
weeks there may be a need
to adjust the project timeline
in consultation with the
Project Steering Committee.
At each milestone, the
project leads will detail out
the next phase of the project
and will consider any impacts
that the previous phase had
on the overall project
timeline. This will be done in
consultation with the Project
Steering Committee.
Changes to the timeline will
require approval by the
Project Directors and Project
Sponsor.
Page 25 of 114
Risk
Assumption
Mitigation
Internal and external
Key resources such financial
A resourcing commitment
resource availability
and staffing will be available
from leadership at the
during all phases for the
commencement of the
project
project is necessary as this
body of work is dependent on
cross departmental
collaboration. Project leads
will work collaboratively with
all departments to resource
this project.
Should key resources not be
available in the timeframe
required to meet project
milestones, the project leads,
in consultation with the
project steering committee,
will consider options to
adjusting the project
timelines and/or workload
priorities
Should consultants not be
retained within the required
timeframe or consultants be
retained with not the full
ability to complete all
intended tasks, the project
leads in consultation with the
Project Steering Committee,
will consider options to
adjusting the project
timelines or assignment of
additional tasks city
resources (if available and
appropriate).
Alignment with the ongoing
Messaging about and
The project steering
corporate strategic plan
information gathered
committee will work with the
through the DTK vision and
strategic plan team
corporate strategic plan
throughout both respective
processes will be shared
processes to ensure that
and aligned.
information is shared
regularly, specifically
information gathered through
community engagement.
Page 26 of 114
Risk
Assumption
Mitigation
Additional community
That community
The Project Leads, together
engagement requested
engagement will be
with the consultant will
executed as outlined in the
consider options and revise
community engagement
the community engagement
plan
plan accordingly. The
community engagement plan
will only be revised once the
Project Steering Committee
has considered implications
on timelines, resourcing, and
budget. Should additional
community engagement be
identified that is beyond the
consultant's scope/budget,
Project Directors may identify
internal resources to support
identified engagement.
Agreement on approach for
The Community
The Project Leads and
community engagement.
Engagement Plan that is
Directors will actively maintain
Certain interest groups (e.g.,
developed will ensure that
relations with key
BIA, DAAC etc.) may desire
input is obtained from as
stakeholders to ensure there
a greater level of
many stakeholders and the
is broad support for the
engagement than others
broader community as
process, DCWG, draft vision,
and may identify concerns
possible.
and project.
with a Downtown
Community Working Group
Should such challenges arise,
led approach to
Project Leads will work with
engagement.
Project Directors to assess
and identify any strategies to
ensure broad support.
Agreement on project
That the scope outlined in
The Project Leads will work
approach, scope, goals, and
the project charter will be
with the Project Steering
objectives
adhered to.
Committee and consultant to
manage and articulate the
scope of the project to the
DCWG and broader
community.
A communications plan will
be developed to assist with
key messaging on the scope
of the project.
Should changes in scope be
proposed, the project leads in
collaboration with the Project
Steering Committee, will
consider them in the context
of the project timeline and
budget.
Page 27 of 114
Risk
Assumption
Mitigation
Adequate budget
That City staff will work
The budget earmarked for
collaboratively to determine
this project is shared with a
funding sources for any
related Planning Division
recommended strategies
project on updating land use
and zoning for DTK. Should
Change control process and
the scope of engagement or
procedures will be in place
timeline of the project expand
to ensure project
beyond that which is
deliverables are realized
established in this project
charter there may be
implications.
The Project Leads will update
the Project Steering
Committee at key millstones
throughout the project on
budget aspects. All change
orders from the community
engagement consultant that
will have an impact on the
project budget, scope, or
timeline will be reviewed and
discussed the Project
Steering Committee.
1.6 Funding Authority
This project is funded through approved capital budget for costs associated with consultant
services and community engagement.
Page 28 of 114
2.0 PROJECT ORGANIZATION
2.1 Project Roles and Responsibilities
Project Champion — General Manager Development Services
The project champion will be the visible champion of the project from CLT and will address
issues of scope, deliverables, and resources. The Project Champion will sign off on all project
deliverables including the charter, terms of reference, and project vision.
Project Director(s) - Executive Director of Economic Development
Director of Planning
The project directors(s) will be the project leadership and will work with the Project Steering
Committee to ensure obstacles or barriers to success are removed. The project directors will:
- Secure support of corporate leadership
- Validate direction, and field resource allocation requests
- Coach, mentor to support project outcomes
Project Lead(s) - Manager of Downtown Development and Innovation
Manager of Policy Planning
Project Lead(s) will work with the Project Steering Committee, and the selected consultant to
execute on the project deliverables. The Project Charter, the Project Terms of Reference, and
the RFP documentation will all serve as guiding documents. Project lead(s) will guide the
project, make sure the project aligns with agreed to milestones, outcomes, and ensure that the
project proceeds within the given timeframe. The project leads will also be responsible for
working with the DCWG and engagement consultants on drafting the downtown vision and
principles.
Engagement Consultant
The engagement consulting team will work with the project leads and DCWG to:
- Provide project management and facilitation supports for the DCWG,
- Support the development of a Community Engagement Process, including identification of
techniques (ex: survey and potential questions, workshops, charettes, etc.) by preparing a
Draft Community Engagement Plan to be reviewed by the DCWG and Project Steering
Committee
- Facilitate all community engagement
- Support the DCWG in the development of a DTK vision and principles
Internal Leadership Group
The Internal Leadership Group will be assembled with manger or director level leaders from
internal departments that have a connection to key themes that are intended to shape the vision
and will have responsibility for bodies of work that will impact DTK or support its vision.
Representatives will include, but not limited to:
- Director of Transportation Services
Page 29 of 114
Director of Parks & Cemeteries
Director of Sport
Director, Strategy and Corporate Performance
Manager of Community Centers
Corporate Communications & Marketing
Manager of Special Events
At key milestones, the work of the DCWG will be reviewed by the Internal Leadership Team and
to provide feedback and advice from their area of expertise. The Project Leads will establish
defined touch points once the Community Engagement Plan has been established.
Project Steering Committee
The project steering committee will be responsible for outlining priorities, identifying project
deliverables and provide overall vision and direction of the Downtown Vision. In addition, the
project steering committee will review and evaluate each submitted consultant proposal, be a
member of the evaluation team and if required, participate in interviews for short-listed
proposals. The project steering committee with be comprised of the project sponsor, project
directors, project leaders and staff working team members
Staff Working Team
The staff working team will function as business analysts or resource supports. These
individuals are key in supporting the Project Steering Committee to ensure the required tools
are in place to support project deliverables, document or analyze project execution, and liaise
with the external consultant of progress and schedule. The staff working team will be
responsible for supporting the work plan and providing the necessary logistics for adherence to
establish schedules. The staff working team members include staff resources from Economic
Development.
The DCWG will also be supported by the staff working team who will provide process,
administrative and analytical support. This will include such tasks as scheduling meetings,
minute taking, supporting the execution of community engagement exercises, providing
statistical information, etc.
Subject Matter Experts
The complexity and range of issues to be discussed as inputs into the development of a DTK
vision and principles requires the use of subject matter experts to support the engagement
processes, provide educational aspects of engagement, clarity of technical requirements, and to
participate in community engagement activities. Subject Matter Experts will be drawn into the
process as required. Subject Matter Experts either lead existing business units which touch DTK
or are leading bodies of work that will impact the future of DTK. Divisions or external
governments/agencies that will provide subject matter support include:
- Planning — policy, urban design, environmental planning
- Equity, Anti -Racism, and Indigenous Initiatives - social planning and affordable housing
- Neigbourhood Development Office
- Transportation planning — parking
- Economic Development — All
- Parks and Cemeteries — Places and Spaces
- Bylaw enforcement
Page 30 of 114
DTK BIA
Corporate sustainability officer
Region of Waterloo — housing; transit; social services; emergency services
Communitech
Waterloo Region Police Services
Downtown Community Working Group
Given the nature of the DTK vision work, it will be essential to lean on a diverse and broad set of
external participants. The Downtown Community Working Group (DCWG) will be comprised of
approximately 30 team members. By design, this team will encompass the necessary skills,
expertise, investment, and passion for the Downtown including interests such as, but not limited
to:
- Academic (1)
- Arts and Culture Representative (artist/institution) (1)
- Business Owner — Hospitality and Night Life (1)
- Business Owner — Office, Services (1)
- Business Owner — Restaurant (1)
- Business Owner — Retail (1)
- Climate/Sustainability professional (1)
- Developer/Land or building owner — Commercial (1)
- Developer/Landowner — Residential (1)
- Executive Director, Downtown Kitchener BIA (1)
- Planner/Architect (1)
- Post -Secondary — Downtown Campus (1)
- Post -Secondary - Student (1)
- Representative — Street Involved/Lived Experience (1)
- Representative - Underrepresented Populations (2)
- Resident -at -Large — Downtown and adjacent neighbourhoods — 1 representative from each
of the following neighbourhoods; Downtown, Mount Hope Briethaupt Park, KW Hospital,
Cherry Hill, Victoria Park, Cedar Hill, King Street East, Central Frederick, and Civic Centre —
(9)
- Resident -at -Large — Outside Downtown/adjacent neighbourhoods (2)
- Social Services — Downtown Agency (1)
- Social Services — Housing (1)
In addition to the specific expertise that each representative provides, the selection team will
look to recruit representatives that make up the demographic composition of the downtown
community.
Figure 1 illustrates the functional relationships of the groups involved in the project.
Page 31 of 114
Figure 1 — Functional relationships of the DTK Vision project
Project Sponsor
GM Development Services
Project Directors
Director Economic
Developorent
Director of Planning
Project Steering
Committee
Project Leads Project Sponsor
i
Managerof Downtown Project Directors Development -LI Project Leads
Developmentandonovalion 14
Manager of Policyand
Research
Internal Leadership Group
Dikector of Transportation Services
Director of Parks & Cemeteries
Director of Sport
Director, Strategy and Corporate performance
Manager of Cori Centers
Corporate Communications & Marketing
Manager of Special Events
2.2 Project Structure
Organization and Mandate
----------------------------
Community Engagement
Consultant
: Broad Community
Downtown Community Working =Group 11 Engagement
25 �30 community rnerr)[Eerc (including Kitchener I
I
iAdvisory Committees) I
t ---------------- I
Staff Working Team
Economic Development staff
Communications staff I
Subject Matter Experts
Planning
Equity, Anti Racism and Indigenous Irnbatives
Neighbourhood Development Office
Transportation Planning
Economic Development
Parks and Cemeteries
Bylaw Enforcement
Downtown Kitchener Business rnprovernent Association
Corporate sustarnabdity of
Region of Waterloo
Cornmunitech
Waterloo Region PrAce Services
• Charter sign -off
• Notification/confirmation of steering committee and project team
• Develop work plan (Gantt chart)
• Define approval process
• Establish standards and benchmarks
• Identify issues, concerns, risk gaps
Analysis
• Review existing plans, provincial and federal policies, and research other downtown plans
from across the Province, country, globe
0 Gather stakeholder/Council feedback
Deliverables
• Community engagement plan
• Communications plan
• Community engagement summaries
• Vision and principles — draft and final
• Reports to Council
Page 32 of 114
StaliBeport
l
IKgc.;i' r� R
Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee
DATE OF MEETING: January 10, 2022
SUBMITTED BY: Bustamante, Rosa - Director of Planning, 519-741-2200 ext. 7319
PREPARED BY: Dumart, Craig — Senior Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7073
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 5
DATE OF REPORT: December 8, 2021
REPORT NO.: DSD -2022-003
SUBJECT: Zoning By-law Amendment ZBA/21/016/F/CD
1940 Fischer Hallman Road, Draft Plan of Subdivision 30T-07205,
Blocks 183-191
Schlegel Urban Developments Corp.
RECOMMENDATION:
That Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA21/016/H/CD for Schlegel Urban
Developments Corp. be approved in the form shown in the "Proposed By-law", and "Map No.
1", attached to Report DSD -2022-003 as Appendix "A"; and
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
ZBA/21 /016/F/CD.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
The purpose of this report is to provide a planning recommendation to approve the Zoning By-law
Amendment application for the subject lands located at 1940 Fischer Hallman Road, within Draft
Plan of Subdivision 30T-07205, Blocks 183-191.
• Community engagement included:
o Circulation of a preliminary notice of application postcard to occupants and property
owners within 240m of the subject lands;
o Installation of a large billboard notice signage on the property; and
o Notice of the Statutory Public Meeting was published in the Waterloo Region Record
on December 17, 2021.
• This report supports the delivery of core services.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The owner of the subject properties is requesting a Zoning By-law Amendment to add a Special
Regulation Provision to allow the building height of street townhouse dwellings to be up to 135% of
the maximum permitted building height rather than the permitted 110%. The building height of street
townhouses is regulated both from the highest and lowest finished grades on a property. The
purpose of adding the Special Regulation Provision is to have a regulation that will accommodate
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Page 33 of 114
for the significant grade changes within the subject lands and to allow for 2 storey street townhouse
dwellings.
BACKGROUND:
Schlegel Urban Developments Corp. has made an application to the City of Kitchener for a Zoning
By-law Amendment proposing to change the zoning of Blocks 183-191 on Plan of Subdivision 30T-
07205 (also known as 1940 Fischer Hallman Road) to allow the building height of street townhouse
dwellings to be 135% of the maximum permitted building height from the lowest finished grade rather
than the permitted 110%. The subject lands are designated Low Rise Residential in the City of
Kitchener Official Plan and zoned Residential Six Zone (R-6) with Special Regulation Provisions
732R and 734R in Zoning By-law 85-1. No Official Plan amendment is required or requested.
Existing zoning permissions include:
• Residential Six Zone (R-6) Special Regulation Provisions 732R and 734R permits:
o Low rise residential forms of housing including street townhouse dwellings, multiple
dwellings, single detached and duplex dwellings and detached additional dwelling
units; and
o Maximum building height of 11.5 metres, lowest point of grade to the peak of the
building permitted to exceed 110% of the maximum building height.
The subject lands are located in the Wallaceton Subdivision, within stage 5 of Draft Plan of
Subdivision 30T-07205, specifically within Blocks 183-191.
'Ny� ry
A
j" fl
sw A
Figure 1 - Location Map: 1940 Fischer Hallman Road,
Draft Plan of Subdivision 30T-07205, Blocks 183-191
REPORT:
Page 34 of 114
The owner is requesting a Zoning By-law Amendment to add a Special Regulation Provision to allow
the building height of street townhouse dwellings to be 135% of the maximum permitted building
height from the lowest finished grade rather than the permitted 110°/x. The subject lands, Blocks 183
to 192 within Draft Plan of Subdivision 30T-07205, have a significant grade change from one end of
the street townhouse block to the other. To permit the development of 2 storey street townhouse
dwellings, the site-specific provision requested by the owner is required. The requested Special
Regulation Provision will allow for 2 storey street townhouse dwellings that are compatible for the
planned community as illustrated in Figure 1. below. The Site Specific Provision will also permit
walkout street townhouse units where the grade is significantly lower at the rear than the front.
Figure 1. Concept elevation of 2 storey street townhouse dwelling.
Plannina Analvsis:
Provincial Policy Statement, 2020:
The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) provides policy direction on matters of provincial interest
related to land use planning and development. Section 1.4.3(b) of the PPS promotes all types of
residential intensification, and sets out a policy framework for sustainable healthy, liveable and safe
communities. The PPS promotes efficient development and land use patterns, as well as
accommodating an appropriate mix of affordable and market-based residential dwelling types with
other land uses, while supporting the environment, public health and safety. Provincial policies
promote the integration of land use planning, growth management, transit -supportive development,
intensification, and infrastructure planning to achieve cost-effective development patterns,
optimization of transit investments, and standards to minimize land consumption and servicing costs.
Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposed application will facilitate the development of the
subject properties with street townhouse developments that are compatible with the existing and
planned built form of the surrounding community and will make use of the newly developed
infrastructure. The Site Specific Regulation does not result in changes that would require new public
roads and Engineering staff have confirmed there is capacity in the sanitary sewer to permit the
development of the subject lands.
Based on the foregoing, staff is of the opinion that this proposal is consistent with the PPS.
A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 (Growth Plan):
The Growth Plan supports the development of complete and compact communities that are designed
to support healthy and active living, make efficient use of land and infrastructure, provide for a range
and mix of housing types, jobs, and services, at densities and in locations which support transit
Page 35 of 114
viability and active transportation. The subject lands are in close proximity to transit and the subject
lands directly abut trails and a park.
Policy 2.2.7.1 of the Growth Plan requires municipalities to support housing choice through the
achievement of the minimum intensification and targets by identifying a diverse range and mix of
housing options and densities, including additional residential units and affordable housing to meet
projected needs of current and future residents.
The subject lands are located within the City's delineated Greenfield Area. The proposed
development represents new development that will contribute towards achieving the City's minimum
density targets for the greenfield area. The proposed zoning will support the achievement of a
complete community by permitting a compatible low density housing type. Planning staff is of the
opinion that the development proposal conforms to the Growth Plan.
Regional Official Plan (ROP):
Urban Area policies of the ROP identify that the focus of the Region's future growth will be within the
Urban Area. The subject lands are identified at part of the Urban Designated Greenfield Area in the
ROP. The proposed development conforms to Policy 2.D.1 of the ROP as this neighbourhood
provides for the physical infrastructure and community infrastructure to support the proposed
residential development, including transportation networks, municipal drinking -water supply and
wastewater systems, and a broad range of social and public health services. Regional policies
require Area Municipalities to plan for a range of housing in terms of form, tenure, density and
affordability to satisfy the various physical, social, economic and personal support needs of current
and future residents. Regional staff have indicated that they have no objections to the proposed
application (Appendix `C'). Planning staff are of the opinion that the application conforms to the
Regional Official Plan.
City of Kitchener Official Plan:
Urban Structure
The subject lands are located within the `Community Areas' in the City's Urban Structure (Map 2).
The planned function of Community Areas is to provide for residential uses as well as non-residential
supporting uses intended to serve the immediate residential areas.
Land Use Designation
The subject lands are designated Low Rise Residential and Open Space (Map 3) in the 2014 Official
Plan. The Low Rise Residential land use designation permits a full range of low density housing
types which may include single detached dwellings, semi-detached dwellings, street townhouse
dwellings, and low-rise multiple dwellings. The Low Rise Residential land use designation considers
a Floor Space Ratio up to 0.75 and allows a maximum building height of 3 storeys.
Planning staff is of the opinion that the requested zoning conforms with Low Rise Residential land
use designation and an Official Plan Amendment is not required. Street townhouses dwellings are a
permitted use in the Low Rise Residential land use designation.
Urban Design
The City is committed to achieving a high standard of urban design, architecture and place -making
to positively contribute to quality of life, environmental viability and economic vitality. Urban design
is a vital component of city planning and goes beyond the visual and aesthetic character of individual
buildings and also considers the functionality and compatibility of development as a means of
strengthening complete communities.
Urban Design policies in the 2014 Official Plan support creating visually distinctive and identifiable
places, structures and spaces that contribute to a strong sense of place and community pride, a
Page 36 of 114
distinct character and community focal points that promote and recognize excellence and innovation
in architecture, urban design, sustainable building design and landscape design. The City will
require high quality urban design in the review of all development applications through the
implementation of the policies of the Official Plan and the City's Urban Design Manual.
Housing
The City's primary objective with respect to housing in the Official Plan is to provide for an
appropriate range, variety and mix of housing types and styles, densities, tenure and affordability to
satisfy the varying housing needs of our community through all stages of life. The proposed Zoning
By-law amendment continues to allow for the range of dwelling units available in the city and the
proposed development offers modern street townhouse units that reflect a high standard of urban
design. The proposed development is a compatible low rise residential use that is appropriate for
the neighbourhood.
Policy Conclusion
Planning staff are of the opinion that the proposed Zoning By-law amendment is consistent with
policies of the Provincial Policy Statement, conforms to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden
Horseshoe, the Regional Official Plan and the City of Kitchener Official Plan, and represents good
planning.
Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment:
The subject lands are currently zoned Residential Six Zone (R-6) with Special Regulation Provisions
732R and 734R in Zoning By-law 85-1.
The applicant has requested the following special regulation be added as an amendment to Zoning
By-law 85-1:
773R: Notwithstanding Section 4.2 of this By-law, within the lands shown on Schedule Numbers 107
and 108 of Appendix "A", the following special regulations shall apply:
i) At no point shall the vertical distance between the lowest finished grade and the
uppermost point of the building exceed 135% of the maximum building height for street
townhouse dwellings."
Staff offer the following comments with respect to the requested special regulation 773R:
773R allows street townhouse dwellings to exceed the maximum building height by 135% from the
lowest finished grade to the uppermost point of the building. There are significant grade changes
from one end of the street townhouse blocks to the other. The purpose of the regulation is to allow
for 2 storey street townhouse dwellings and permit walkout street townhouse units where the grade
is significantly lower at the rear than the front.
Department and Agency Comments:
Preliminary circulation of the Zoning By-law amendment was undertaken on October 19, 2021 to
applicable City departments and other review authorities. No concerns were identified by any
commenting City department or agency. A consolidation of comments is attached as Appendix `C'
of this report.
Community Input & Staff Responses
Staff circulated the preliminary notice of application postcard to occupants and property owners
within 240m of the subject lands. No responses were received.
Page 37 of 114
Planning Conclusions
Planning staff are supportive of the Zoning By-law amendment. Staff is of the opinion that the subject
applications are consistent with policies of the Provincial Policy Statement (2020), conform to Growth
Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, the Regional Official Plan, and the City of Kitchener Official
Plan and represent good planning. Staff recommends that the application be approved.
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. Large billboard notice signs were posted on the property and
information regarding the application was posted to the City's website in the fall of 2021. Notice of
the Public Meeting was posted in The Record on December 17, 2021 (a copy of the notice may be
found in Appendix `B').
CONSULT — The proposed Zoning By-law Amendment was originally circulated to occupants ND
property owners within 240 metres of the subject lands on October 19, 2021. Staff did not receive
any responses. All information received was posted on the City's StoryMap application tool.
PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES:
• Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13
• Growth Plan, 2020
• Provincial Policy Statement, 2020
• Regional Official Plan
• City of Kitchener Zoning By-law 85-1
REVIEWED BY: Stevenson, Garett — Manager of Development Review, Planning Division
APPROVED BY: Readman, Justin - General Manager, Development Services
APPENDIX&
Appendix A — Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment
Appendix B — Newspaper Notice
Appendix C — Department and Agency Comments
Page 38 of 114
NOTICE O PUBLIC
for a development in your neighbourhood
1940 Fischer Hallman
concept drawing
If t,i iil 1( Wa I1�° . 0III.,11.
l 't S, t i eet
I...ow Illi IIL.i s &
� �k14.. ✓����fl AN�rY TQ k�a' ii.
Date:
Time:
Location: Virtuaog
To view the staN report,agenda,
meetingfind
appear as a delegation, visit:
kitchener.cr
To learn more about this project,
including information on your
appeal g
r,,
plan r rio
Craig Dumart, Senior Planner
519.741.2200 x 7073
craig.dumart@ kitchener.ca
StreetThe applicant is proposing a Zoning By-law Amendment to add a Special
Regulation Provision to allow the building height of Street Townhoust
Dwellings to be 135% of the maximum permitted building height rather than
the permitted 110%. The purpose of the application is to allow for 2 storey
Page 39 of 114
Craig Dumart, MCIP, RPP
Senior Planner
Planning Division, Community Services Dept.
City of Kitchener
200 King Street West
Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7
Dear Mr. Dumart:
PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT
AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES
Community Planning
150 Frederick Street 8th Floor
Kitchener Ontario N2G 4A Canada
Te f eph on e: 519-575-4400
TTY: 519-575-4608
Fax: 519-575-4466
www. regionofwaterl oo.ca
Shilling Yip (226) 753-1064
File: C14-60/4/21016 &
D18-30/07205
November 24, 2021
Re: Post Circulation Comments
ZBA 21/016/F/CD
1940 Fischer -Hallman Road
Schlegel Urban Developments Corp.
CITY OF KITCHENER
Region staff has . reviewed the above -noted application and provide the following
comments for your consideration at this time. The applicant is proposing a Zoning By-
law Amendment to add a Special Regulation Provision to allow the building height of
Street Townhouse Dwellings to be 135% of the maximum permitted building height rather
than the permitted 110%. The purpose of the application is to allow for 2 storey walkout
Street Townhouse Dwellings. The existing Zoning permits the highest point of finished
grade (the front yard) to be 11.5 metres in height which is not proposed to change.
Staff has no concerns with the subject application. The lands subject to the application
are part of Stage 5 of plan of subdivision 30T-07205, and any issues and concerns have
been or will be, addressed through the subdivision process and conditions of draft
approval.
Planning Review Fee
Pursuant to Region Fee By-law 21-01 staff acknowledges receipt of the required ZBA
planning review fee received November 24, 2021.
Document Number: 3881080 Version: 1
Page 40 of 114
Regional Development Charges
Any future development on the subject lands will be subject to provisions of Regional
Development Charges By-law 19-037 or any successor thereof.
Region staff has no objection to proceeding with a recommendation to the City's
Committee and Council with a recommendation on the ZBA application at this time.
Please provide a copy of the draft zoning by-law amendment for review and clearance by
the Region prior to adoption.
Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned.
Yours truly,
Shilling Yip, MCIP, RPP
Principal Planner
cc. Chris Pidgeon, GSP Group
Document Number: 3881080 Version: 1
Page 41 of 114
From: K4ikeSei|ing
Sent: Tuesday October 19\2021 5:53 PM
To: [migDumart
Subject: FW: Circulation for Comment Development Application (1940 Fischer Hallman Road)
Attachments: department & agency letter - Wallaceton.pdf
Building; Noconcerns.
Mike
From: Christine Konopter<Chris1ine.Komp1er@khchenecca>
Sent: Tuesday, October 19,2O2l4:23PK1
To:_DL_#_DSD_P|anning <DSD-Mannin8Division@khzhenerza>;Aaron K4cChmmonJones<Aaron. McCrimmon-
]ones@kitchener.cu»;Bell c/o VVSP<drcu|adons@xop.com>;Dave Seller xDave.SeUer@kitchenerza>;David Paetz
<David.Pae1z@kitchener.ca>;Feds<vped@feds.ca>; GRCA(North Kitchener) - Trevor Heywood
<theywomd@8randriverza>;GRCA(South Kitchener) Chris Foster -Pengelly <cfosierpenQe||y@Qrandriver.ca>;Greg
Reitze|<GreO.Reitze|@kitchener.oa>;Hydro One - Dennis DeRango<|andusep|onning@hydroone.com>;Jim Edmondson
<]im.Edmondson@kitchener.co>;Katherine Hughes xKatherine.HuQhes@kitchenerza>;K-VVHydro - Greig Cameron
<Qcanneron@kwhydro.onza>;Linda Cooper <LindaIooper@kitchenerza>; Mike5ei|ing <Mike.Sei|in8@kitchenerza>;
Ontario Power Generation <Executivevp.lawanddevelopment@opg.com>; Park Planning (SM)
<Park.Planning@kitchener.ca>; Region - Planning <PlanningApplications@regionofwaterloo.ca>; Property Data
Administrator (SM)<PropDataAdmin@kitchenerza>;Robert MorQan<RoberL. Mor8an@kitchener.ca>;Steven Ryder
<Steven.Ryder@kitchener.ca>;Sy|vie Eastman <Sy|vie.Eastman@kitchenerza>;VVCDSB- Planning
<p|annin8@vvcdsb.ca>; VVRDS8- Board Secretary(e|aine_burns@vvrdsbza) <e|aine_burns@wrdsb.ca>; VVRDS8
Planning <p|annin8@wrdsbza>
Cc: Craig Oumar1<Craig.Duma rt@kitchener.ca>
Subject: Circulation for Comment - Development Application (1940 Fischer Hallman Road)
Please see attached. Additional documentation isavailable in ShareFile. Comments orquestions should be
directed iOCraig OWrnart Senior Planner (copied 0nthis ennai}).
Administrative Assistant | Planning Division | City ofKitchener
200 King Street West, 6m Floor | P.O. Box 1118 | Kitchener ON N2{S4G7
5l9-741-22OOext. 7425|TTY 1-8G6-959-9994|
Page 42 of 114
Craig Dumart
From: Victoria Grohn
Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2021 5:10 PM
To: Craig Dumart
Subject: RE: Circulation for Comment - Development Application (1940 Fischer Hallman Road)
Hi Craig,
No heritage planning concerns.
Victoria
Victoria Grohn (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: Christine Kompter<Christine.Kompter@kitchener.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 20214:23 PM
To: _DL_#_DSD_Planning <DSD-PlanningDivision@kitchener.ca>; Aaron McCrimmon-Jones <Aaron.McCrimmon-
Jones@kitchener.ca>; Bell - c/o WSP <circulations@wsp.com>; Dave Seller <Dave.Seller@kitchener.ca>; David Paetz
<David.Paetz@kitchener.ca>; Feds <vped@feds.ca>; GRCA (North Kitchener) - Trevor Heywood
<theywood@grandriver.ca>; GRCA (South Kitchener) - Chris Foster-Pengelly<cfosterpengelly@grandrive r.ca>; Greg
Reitzel <Greg.Reitzel@kitchener.ca>; Hydro One - Dennis DeRango <landuseplanning@hydroone.com>; Jim Edmondson
<Jim.Edmondson@kitchener.ca>; Katherine Hughes<Katherine.Hughes@kitchener.ca>; K -W Hydro - Greig Cameron
<gcameron@kwhydro.on.ca>; Linda Cooper <Linda.Cooper@kitchener.ca>; Mike Seiling <Mike.Seiling@kitchener.ca>;
Ontario Power Generation<Executivevp.lawanddevelopment@opg.com>; Park Planning (SM)
<Park.Planning@kitchener.ca>; Region - Planning<PlanningApplications@regionofwaterloo.ca>; Property Data
Administrator (SM) <PropDataAdmin@kitchener.ca>; Robert Morgan <Robert.Morgan@kitchener.ca>; Steven Ryder
<Steven.Ryder@kitchener.ca>; Sylvie Eastman <Sylvie.Eastman@kitchener.ca>; WCDSB - Planning
<planning@wcdsb.ca>; WRDSB - Board Secretary (elaine_burns@wrdsb.ca) <elaine_burns@wrdsb.ca>; WRDSB -
Planning <planning@wrdsb.ca>
Cc: Craig Dumart <Craig.Dumart@kitchener.ca>
Subject: Circulation for Comment - Development Application (1940 Fischer Hallman Road)
Please see attached. Additional documentation is available in ShareFile. Comments or questions should be
directed to Craig Dumart, Senior Planner (copied on this email).
Christine Kompter
Administrative Assistant I Planning Division I City of Kitchener
200 King Street West, 6th Floor I P.O. Box 1118 Kitchener ON N2G 4G7
519-741-2200 ext. 7425 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 christine.kompter@kitchener.ca
Page 43 of 114
Craig Dumart
From: Jason Brule
Sent: Monday, November 15, 2021 8:46 AM
To: Craig Dumart
Subject: FW: Circulation for Comment - Development Application (1940 Fischer Hallman Road)
Attachments: department & agency letter - Wallaceton.pdf
Hi Craig,
Sorry I am a little late on this one. Engineering has no concerns for this proposal
Regards,
Jason Brule, C.E.T.
519-741-2200 ext.7419
From: Linda Cooper <Linda.Cooper@kitchener.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 20219:00 AM
To: Jason Brule <Jason.Brule@kitchener.ca>
Subject: FW: Circulation for Comment - Development Application (1940 Fischer Hallman Road)
Hi,
For your review and comments please and thank you.
Linda
Linda Cooper, L.E.T, C.E.T
Manager I Development Engineering I City of Kitchener
519-741-2200 ext. 7974 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 ( Iinda.cooper0kitchener.ca
From: Christine Kompter<Christine.Kompter@kitchener.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 20214:23 PM
To: _DL_#_DSD_Planning <DSD-PlanningDivision@kitchener.ca>; Aaron McCrimmon-Jones <Aaron.McCrimmon-
Jones@kitchener.ca>; Bell - c/o WSP <circulations@wsp.com>; Dave Seller <Dave.Seller@kitchener.ca>; David Paetz
<David.Paetz@kitchener.ca>; Feds <vped@feds.ca>; GRCA (North Kitchener) - Trevor Heywood
<theywood@grandriver.ca>; GRCA (South Kitchener) - Chris Foster -Pengelly <cfosterpengelly@grandriver.ca>; Greg
Reitzel <Greg.Reitzel@kitchener.ca>; Hydro One - Dennis DeRango <landuseplanning@hvdroone.com>; Jim Edmondson
<Jim.Edmondson@kitchener.ca>; Katherine Hughes <Katherine.Hughes@kitchener.ca>; K -W Hydro - Greig Cameron
<gcameron@kwhydro.on.ca>; Linda Cooper <Linda.Cooper@kitchener.ca>; Mike Seiling <Mike.Seiling@kitchener.ca>;
Ontario Power Generation<Executivevp.lawanddevelopment@opg.com>; Park Planning (SM)
<Park.Planning@kitchener.ca>; Region - Planning<PlanningApplications@regionofwaterloo.ca>; Property Data
Administrator (SM) <PropDataAdmin@kitchener.ca>; Robert Morgan <Robert.Morgan@kitchener.ca>; Steven Ryder
<Steven.Ryder@kitchener.ca>; Sylvie Eastman <Sylvie.Eastman@kitchener.ca>; WCDSB - Planning
<planning@wcdsb.ca>; WRDSB - Board Secretary (elaine burns@wrdsb.ca) <elaine burns@wrdsb.ca>; WRDSB -
Page 44 of 114
OPA/ZBA Circulation Response Form
Application M Zoning By-law Amendment ZBA21/016/F/CD
Address: 1940 Fischer Hallman Road (Draft Plan of Subdivision 30T-07205, Blocks 183-191,
Wallaceton)
Owner: Schlegel Urban Developments Corp.
Ward: Ward 5
Parks and Cemeteries have no concerns with this application or requirements.
Parks & Cemeteries/ Design and Development LPivi&rel Ro-w
Department/Agency Signature of Representative
November 012021
Date
Page 45 of 114
Craig Dumart
From: Chris Foster -Pengelly <cfosterpengelly@g rand river.ca >
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2021 11:48 AM
To: Craig Dumart
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Circulation for Comment - Development Application (1940 Fischer
Hallman Road)
Hi Craig,
The subject lands are not regulated by the GRCA under Ontario Regulation 150/06. As such, we will not be providing
comments. We trust that the City will ensure appropriate stormwater management for the site.
Thank you,
Chris
Chris Foster -Pengelly, M.Sc.
P: (519) 621-2763 x2319
F: (519) 621-4844
www.grandriver.ca
From: Christine Kompter<Christine.Kompter@kitchener.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 20214:23 PM
To: _DL_#_DSD_Planning <DSD-PlanningDivision@kitchener.ca>; Aaron McCrimmon-Jones <Aaron.McCrimmon-
Jones@kitchener.ca>; Bell - c/o WSP <circulations@wsp.com>; Dave Seller <Dave.Seller@kitchener.ca>; David Paetz
<David.Paetz@kitchener.ca>; Feds <vped@feds.ca>; Trevor Heywood <theywood@grandriver.ca>; Chris Foster -Pengelly
<cfosterpengelly@grandrive r.ca>; Greg Reitzel <Greg.Reitzel@kitchener.ca>; Hydro One - Dennis DeRango
<landuseplanning@hydroone.com>; Jim Edmondson <Jim.Edmondson@kitchener.ca>; Katherine Hughes
<Katherine.Hughes@kitchener.ca>; K -W Hydro - Greig Cameron <gcameron@kwhydro.on.ca>; Linda Cooper
<Linda.Cooper@kitchener.ca>; Mike Seiling <Mike.Seiling@kitchener.ca>; Ontario Power Generation
<Executivevp.lawanddevelopment@opg.com>; Park Planning (SM) <Park.Planning@kitchener.ca>; Region - Planning
<PlanningApplications@regionofwaterloo.ca>; Property Data Administrator (SM) <PropDataAdmin@kitchener.ca>;
Robert Morgan <Robert.Morgan@kitchener.ca>; Steven Ryder <Steven.Ryder@kitchener.ca>; Sylvie Eastman
<Sylvie.Eastman@kitchener.ca>; WCDSB - Planning <planning@wcdsb.ca>; WRDSB - Board Secretary
(elaine_burns@wrdsb.ca) <elaine_burns@wrdsb.ca>; WRDSB - Planning <planning@wrdsb.ca>
Cc: Craig Dumart <Craig.Dumart@kitchener.ca>
Subject: Circulation for Comment - Development Application (1940 Fischer Hallman Road)
Please see attached. Additional documentation is available in ShareFile. Comments or questions should be
directed to Craig Dumart, Senior Planner (copied on this email).
Christine Kompter
Administrative Assistant I Planning Division I City of Kitchener
200 King Street West, 6th Floor I P.O. Box 1118 Kitchener ON N2G 4G7
519-741-2200 ext. 7425 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 christine.kompter@kitchener.ca
Page 46 of 114
PROPOSED BY — LAW
2021
BY-LAW NUMBER
OF THE
CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER
(Being a by-law to amend By-law 85-1, as amended, known as
the Zoning By-law for the City of Kitchener
— Schlegel Urban Developments Corp.
— 1940 Fischer Hallman Road, Draft Plan of Subdivision 30T-07205,
— Blocks 183-191)
above;
WHEREAS it is deemed expedient to amend By-law 85-1 for the lands specified
NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Corporation of the City of Kitchener
enacts as follows:
1. Schedule Number 107 of Appendix "A" to By-law Number 85-1 is 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 Residential Six Zone
(R-6) with Special Regulation Provisions 732R and 734R to Residential Six Zone
(R-6) with Special Regulation Provisions 732R, 734R and 773R.
2. Schedule Number 107 of Appendix "A" to By-law Number 85-1 is hereby further
amended by incorporating additional zone boundaries as shown on Map No. 1
attached hereto.
3. Appendix "D" to By-law 85-1 is hereby amended by adding Section 773R thereto
as follows:
"773. Notwithstanding Section 4.2 of this By-law, within the lands zoned R-6 as
shown on Schedule Number 107 of Appendix "A" and shown as being
affected by this subsection, the following special regulations shall apply:
i) At no point shall the vertical distance between the lowest finished grade
Page 47 of 114
and the uppermost point of the building exceed 135% of the maximum
building height for street townhouse dwellings."
PASSED at the Council Chambers in the City of Kitchener this
day of
,2021
Mayor
Clerk
Page 48 of 114
CL
L NVI syr
C
w
O
p
O
U
LU Cl)O
D W
0 0
W W W N
Z Z w
m
VVIIIIIIIIiIV �,
LO
o
r-
F-
oM
rn
C
04
C14
(�
\
r-
I-
N � 1
N 1
U)
U)
>
�
o
m
0
O
w W Z 2
Ow 00N0-
U
LU
(n
0
0
C�
Of
0
wa
z
�a
Ln z
co 00
-Z
W 0
z
N H
z H
w
Q
O Q
JX
Q
L J
m Q�
U�
LLI
LU
♦— of
LU
J of
a
=
is
O W J
Q J Q
a
�>> ( W W W c�
w2p
zUn
H
U
w oU
wa
W
pap
N
Z�g�
wU)Q
CD
c7oaw
2
W LU
2
�' W'
�I......I
cr
M
U
�QNzdO=�����
Q < LL
r— 1-
d
LL,
=�
p 0 7----- o
m¢ 2 o- a ai� i� D� m¢
O U W~
0 1
V
I
�
z
d
N
6S4 gInagips
sok 3ina3Nas
�' � �� �� uuremuuuu �IIIIII
M
�
CL
z
CL
L NVI syr
C
w
O
p
O
U
LU Cl)O
D W
0 0
W W W N
Z Z w
N
o
rn
O
p
Z
¢
ao
LO �
VVIIIIIIIIiIV �,
LO
o
r-
F-
oM
rn
C
LO
CD
CN
r-
O
FL
oM
c
r5
LO
o
N
O
FL
m
U)
(�
\
t0
a
a
of
J LL K
LL
m
N
N � 1
N 1
LU 0 Z 0 w
Z F LU
Of ON J
J
W
p }
>
�
o
m
\L
w W Z 2
Ow 00N0-
U
LU
(n
T
C�
W U
L� z
U)
o
Ln
z
�z �wZQQQrnO
D— U Q--- o Q
LU--
o
w
m
N
Q
Q
L J
a a J z z z w w
w p
Of z x N
z
0
a
=
m
a
=
is
a
=
is
m
~O
a
�>> ( W W W c�
w2p
p LLj
zW
N
p
p
N
F-
a
�ZQpppN(L'
?�WLU mwN(n(n(n?�a
c7oaw
�I......I
M
Q�
�QNzdO=�����
zxQU
I
I
LL,
=�
p 0 7----- o
m¢ 2 o- a ai� i� D� m¢
O U W~
0 1
V
I
�
z
d
N
N W
CO
z
UJ
w
r
-
>
ui
...-�
Q
!• '-^ --ssiainaaHas
----
--
-- -
- - -
--
z
+�
- zoi 3ina3Hos
t
1
arrli��' 1111111
1
VVIIIIIIIIiIV �,
� = 1
n ti 1
t0
N � 1
N 1
a
10� r
In
Wn� 1 4 1 tel. m N S M r
uttttr".' for � � ti
4 t IIII VIII uuuur �mna'
p0 � W�
a ('
�rrrrror' I
u
��urrrr��!I�Imnmwrrroir�rrr�or�rrr� � <c Q
e � .,m�raarm���� �_ � ..��uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuml�
muV0
Z � o
z m
O CO
N
O
o N
L
W ui
w
m
�ui o 0
U
O
CD Q LU
� o
H
w 0
a Z
r O
�� J
W J
z z T-
0 fl�
a.C) LLJ
Q (n
J
fWnLLJ W
V Q
J �
StaliBeport
l
IKgc.;i' r� R
Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee
DATE OF MEETING: January 10, 2022
SUBMITTED BY: Bustamante, Rosa, Director of Planning, 519-741-2200 ext. 7319
PREPARED BY: Schneider, Eric, Senior Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7843
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 5
DATE OF REPORT: December 8, 2021
REPORT NO.: DSD -2022-004
SUBJECT: Zoning By-law Amendment ZBA21/011/H/ES - 1673 Huron Road
Huron Road Apartments Kitchener 2021 Ltd
RECOMMENDATION:
That Zoning By-law Amendment application ZBA21/011/H/ES for Huron Road Apartments
Kitchener 2021 Ltd be approved in the form shown in the "Proposed By-law" and "Map No.
1" attached to Report DSD -2022-004 as Attachment "A"; 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
ZBA21/011/H/ES.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
The purpose of this report is to evaluate and provide a planning recommendation to approve the
proposed Zoning By-law Amendment application for the property located at 1673 Huron Road
Community engagement included:
o Circulation of the notice of application postcard was mailed to occupants and property
owners within 240 metres of the subject property;
o Installation of 2 notice signs on the property;
o Follow up one-on-one correspondence with members of the public;
o Notice postcard advising of the Neighbourhood Meeting was circulated to all occupants
and property owners within 240 metres of the subject site;
o a Neighbourhood Meeting was held on November 4, 2021; and
o Notice of the Statutory Public Meeting was advertised in the Waterloo Region Record on
December 17, 2021.
This report supports the delivery of core services.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The owner of the property at 1673 Huron Road is requesting a Zoning By-law Amendment to add a
Site Specific Provision to the subject property to allow:
• A maximum front yard setback from West Oak Trail to be 8.4 metres whereas a maximum
front yard setback of 7.5 metres in currently permitted, and
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Page 50 of 114
• To permit a maximum building height of 17 metres whereas a maximum building height of
13.5 metres is currently permitted.
BACKGROUND:
Huron Road Apartments Kitchener 2021 Ltd. has made application to the City of Kitchener for a
Zoning By-law Amendment to establish a Site Specific Provision to allow for increased building
height and front yard building setback for a multiple residential development proposal. The owner is
proposing to construct three (3) buildings containing a total of 261 residential units. The lands are
split -designated Mixed Use One and Medium Density Residential One in the Rosenberg Secondary
Plan in the City's Official Plan and split -zoned Low Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU -1) with
Special Use Provision 434U and Holding Provision 70H and Residential Six Zone (R-6) in Zoning
By-law 85-1. The subject application is for site specific regulations only as the use as multiple
residential is permitted under the current Zoning. No Official Plan amendment is required or
requested.
The subject site is located west of Fischer Hallman Road and north of Huron Road. The site is a
through lot, with frontages on Huron Road and West Oak Trail. The lot is 2.14 hectares in area, with
145 metres of frontage on Huron Road and 108 metres of frontage on West Oak Trail as shown in
Figure 1. The majority of the site is currently vacant, with a portion of the lands containing a single
detached dwelling near the Huron Road frontage.
Page 51 of 114
U)
-;3
ry
L.
SUBJECT
AREA
Page 51 of 114
Figure 1 — Location Map: 1673 Huron Road
REPORT:
The applicant is proposing to develop the site with a multiple residential development containing
three (3) buildings and 261 residential units. The use (multiple dwelling) is currently permitted in
the Zoning By-law. The density, both in number of units (261) and Floor Space Ratio (1.21) also
complies with the Zoning By-law. The purpose of this application is only to establish a Site Specific
Provision to permit an increase in building height and an increased maximum front yard building
setback on the subject lands.
The application was received and circulated for comment in August 2021. Staff have reviewed the
materials submitted by the applicant, including an Urban Design Brief that details the requested
increases in height and setback regulations. The buildings have been positioned to be as far from
the existing low rise residential lands abutting the western property line as possible in order to
mitigate adverse impacts. The closest portion of proposed building is over 40 metres away from
existing residential lots, which greatly exceeds the minimum of 7.5 metre setback required by the
zoning. Lands will also be dedicated through the site planning process to the City of Kitchener to
increase the size of the adjacent park, Ferguson Heritage Green. Planning Staff is of the opinion
that this increased buffer will adequately mitigate impacts to existing residential properties that
abut the site. Staff is supportive of the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment to establish a Site
Specific Provision for an increase to building height and front yard setback.
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. Section 1.4.3(d) of the PPS promotes densities for
new housing which efficiently use land, resources, infrastructure and public service facilities. The
PPS sets out a policy framework for sustainable healthy, liveable and safe communities. The PPS
promotes efficient development and land use patterns, as well as accommodating an appropriate
mix of affordable and market-based residential dwelling types with other land uses, while supporting
the environment, public health and safety. Provincial policies promote the integration of land use
planning, growth management, transit -supportive development, intensification, and infrastructure
planning to achieve cost-effective development patterns, optimization of transit investments, and
standards to minimize land consumption and servicing costs.
Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposed application will contribute to an appropriate mix of
housing types within the suburban context of the surrounding neighbourhood. The subject lands are
within a plan of subdivision that has been planned for servicing capacity, road network capacity, and
other required infrastructure and therefore represents a cost-effective development pattern that
minimized land consumption and servicing costs.
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 supports the development of complete and compact communities that are designed
to support healthy and active living, make efficient use of land and infrastructure, provide for a range
and mix of housing types, jobs, and services, at densities and in locations which support transit
viability and active transportation.
Growth Plan policy 2.2.6.1(a) requires that municipalities support housing choice through the
achievement of the minimum intensification and targets by identifying a diverse range and mix of
Page 52 of 114
housing options and densities, including additional residential units and affordable housing to meet
projected needs of current and future residents.
Policy 2.2.1.4(a) states that the achievement of Complete Communities will be supported by
planning for a diverse mix of land uses, including residential and employment uses, and convenient
access to local stores, services and public service facilities.
The proposed multiple dwelling residential development will contribute to a greater mix of housing
types in the neighbourhood that is currently made up of mostly low-rise residential housing forms
such as single detached dwellings and townhouse dwellings. It will also help facilitate a Complete
Community by providing convenient access to local stores and services at the adjacent commercial
plaza at the corner of Huron and Fischer Hallman, as well as public service facilities such as RBJ
Schlegel Park located directly across Huron Road. Planning staff is of the opinion that the
development proposal conforms to the Growth Plan.
Regional Official Plan (ROP), 2010:
Urban Area policies of the ROP identify that the focus of the Region's future growth will be within the
Urban Area. The subject lands are identified as an Urban Designated Greenfield Area in the ROP.
The proposed development conforms to Policy 2. D.1 of the ROP as this neighbourhood provides for
the physical infrastructure and community infrastructure to support the proposed residential
development, including transportation networks, municipal drinking -water supply and wastewater
systems, and a broad range of social and public health services. Regional policies require Area
Municipalities to plan for a range of housing in terms of form, tenure, density and affordability to
satisfy the various physical, social, economic and personal support needs of current and future
residents. Regional staff have indicated that they have no objections to the proposed applications
(Attachment `C'). Planning staff are of the opinion that the applications conform to the Regional
Official Plan.
City of Kitchener Official Plan:
Urban Structure
The subject lands are identified as a `Community Node' in the City's Urban Structure (Map 2).
Community Nodes are located along existing or planned transit corridors. The planned function of
Community Nodes is to provide for commercial uses with a mix of residential and institutional uses
necessary to support and complete surrounding residential communities. Community Nodes
primarily serve an inter -neighbourhood market and are intended to intensify, be transit -supportive
and cycling and pedestrian -friendly.
Land Use Designation
The subject lands are split -designated Mixed Use One and Medium Density Residential One (Map
22e) within the Rosenberg Secondary Plan in 2014 Official Plan. The majority of the site is within
the Mixed Use One designation; all of the proposed buildings are located within this area. The Mixed
Use One designation permits multiple dwellings and contemplates heights between 2 and 5 storeys
(13.10.3.2)
Planning staff is of the opinion that the requested zoning by-law amendment conforms with the Mixed
Use One land use designation within the Rosenberg Secondary Plan.
Transportation
The Rosenberg Secondary Plan contains specific policies for development within the secondary plan
area:
Page 53 of 114
13.10.2.8 (Policy 9) Development along Arterial and Collector Roads shall be "street -facing",
meaning that parcels will be front -lotted and buildings will have primary facades and entrances
oriented towards the public realm.
With regards to Policy 9, the proposed development concept positions the long side of the South
building along Huron Road, identified as an arterial street in the City's Official Plan. The positioning
of the building helps to achieve the objective of adequately addressing the public realm.
13.10.2.8 (Policy 11) Development will be transit -supportive and transit -oriented.
With regards to Policy 11, the subject lands are within 100 metres of a Grand River Transit stop
(Route 33). The intersection of Huron Road and Fischer Hallman is identified in the Official Plan as
the site of a "potential transit hub". Additional development surrounding this intersection, such as
additional residential units on the subject site, and further development of nearby RBJ Schlegel Park
will contribute to future demand for transit and necessity of a transit hub in the future.
Urban Design
The City is committed to achieving a high standard of urban design, architecture and place -making
to positively contribute to quality of life, environmental viability and economic vitality. Urban design
is a vital component of city planning and goes beyond the visual and aesthetic character of individual
buildings and also considers the functionality and compatibility of development as a means of
strengthening complete communities.
Urban Design policies in the 2014 Official Plan support creating visually distinctive and identifiable
places, structures and spaces that contribute to a strong sense of place and community pride, a
distinct character and community focal points that promote and recognize excellence and innovation
in architecture, urban design, sustainable building design and landscape design. The City will
require high quality urban design in the review of all development applications through the
implementation of the policies of the Official Plan and the City's Urban Design Manual.
The proposed development concept has contemplated building positioning in relation to the scale
and massing in order to address the compatibility within the surrounding area. The positioning of the
building wraps the 3 buildings in a "U" shape in order to concentrate the majority of the massing
toward the eastern property line, closest to the rear of the abutting commercial plaza and furthest
from the abutting low rise residential lands to the western property line. Large landscaped areas and
parking areas provide a buffer between the proposed buildings and the western property line. The
development concept also proposes a high level of architectural detailing, including a variety of
materials and colours that complement the architectural styles of the surrounding community.
Housing
The City's primary objective with respect to housing in the Official Plan is to provide for an
appropriate range, variety and mix of housing types and styles, densities, tenure and affordability to
satisfy the varying housing needs of our community through all stages of life.
Policy 4.C.1.12. The City favours a land use pattern which mixes and disperses a full range of
housing types and styles both across the city as a whole and within neighbourhoods.
Policy 4.C.1.22: The City will encourage the provision of a range of innovative housing types and
tenures such as rental housing, freehold ownership and condominium ownership including common
element condominium, phased condominium and vacant land condominium, as a means of
increasing housing choice and diversity.
Based on the above housing policies, staff is of the opinion that the application conforms to the
Official Plan.
Page 54 of 114
Policy Conclusion
Planning staff are of the opinion that the proposed Zoning By-law amendment is consistent with
policies of the Provincial Policy Statement, conforms to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden
Horseshoe, the Regional Official Plan and the City of Kitchener Official Plan, and represents good
planning.
Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment:
The subject lands are currently split -zoned Low Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU -1) with
Special Use Provision 434U and Holding Provision 70H and Residential Six Zone (R-6) in Zoning
By-law 85-1.
The applicant has requested to remove the following special regulations be added as an amendment
to Zoning By-law 85-1:
774R:
Notwithstanding Section 53.2.1 of this By-law, within the lands zoned MU -1 on Schedule 97 of
Appendix `A ; as affected by this section the following regulations shall apply.
a) Maximum building height shall be 17.0 metres
b) Maximum front yard setback shall be 8.4 metres.
In addition, City Staff are recommending the following special regulations to be added:
c) Minimum height of required visual barrier shall be 2.44 metres.
d) Minimum indoor secured bicycle parking shall be 0.5 spaces per unit.
e) Minimum future electric vehicle parking spaces shall be 17.5% of required parking spaces.
Staff offer the following comments with respect to the requested special regulations:
Maximum building height shall be 17.0 metres
Staff identify that the current permitted height is 13.5 metres (approximately 4 storeys), whereas the
requested building height is 17 metres (approximately 5 storeys). Staff acknowledge that the Mixed
Use One land designation within the Rosenberg Secondary Plan contemplates building heights of
up to 5 storeys. Staff has considered the request for additional building height with respect to impacts
to the adjacent low rise residential area to the west. Staff is of the opinion that impacts from building
heights are strongly related to building setback—the further a building is from an abutting property
line, the less impact it will have on the abutting lands. The proposed application contemplates
buildings to be 40 metres at minimum from the adjacent low rise residential lands to the west, with
surface parking and landscaped areas providing a buffer in between. Staff is of the opinion that the
proposed design for site layout and building positioning adequately addresses the request for a one
storey increase in height and that the increase in height will not cause adverse impacts to
neighbouring properties.
Maximum front yard setback shall be 8.4 metres.
Staff identify that the current maximum front yard setback is 7.5 metres. The objective of this
regulation is to orient buildings towards the street edges to animate the streetscape. The proposed
north building along West Oak Trail is oriented toward the street and will contribute to an active and
animated streetscape. The additional requested setback area is for enhanced landscaping and tree
plantings. Staff are supportive of the request for an increase to maximum front yard setback.
Staff are recommending the following special regulations to be added:
Minimum height of required visual barrier shall be 2.44 metres.
Page 55 of 114
Through circulation, residents identified privacy as a concern in regards to the western property line
of the subject site, which abuts low rise residential lands. Residents requested a 2.44 metre high
visual barrier be installed rather than the City's minimum required height of 1.8 metres. The applicant
has agreed to provide the additional fence height to address the resident concerns. Final
consideration and design will be determined through the site plan process.
Minimum indoor secured bicycle parking shall be 0.5 spaces per unit.
The City's new by-law (19-051) requires multiple dwelling developments to provide indoor secured
bicycle parking spaces. This special regulation would bring that standard to this development as the
site is currently zoned in Zoning By-law 85-1. The applicant has agreed to provide and slightly
exceed this requirement in order to encourage active transportation and provide safe, secure bike
storage for future residents.
Minimum future electric vehicle parking spaces shall be 17.5% of required parking spaces.
The City's Zoning By-law 2019-051 requires multiple dwelling developments to provide "future
electric vehicle parking spaces". These parking spaces are installed with a conduit leading to the
electrical source so that electric vehicle charging stations can be added easily in the future as
needed. Staff are recommending this regulation be included in the site specific zoning regulation.
Removal of Holding Provision 70H
The applicant has also requested to remove Holding Provision 70H as a result of providing a Noise
Study with this application:
70H: Notwithstanding Sections 40.1, 53.1 and Section 54.1 of this Bylaw, within the lands zoned
MU -1 and MU -2 on Schedule Nos. 96,9 7, 108, and 109 of Appendix 'A'; and described as Areas 1,
2, 3 and 4 on Map No. 1 to this By-law:
Prior to Site Plan Approval of any stage, a detailed Noise Study to address road traffic and
stationary noise sources shall be submitted and approved by both the Region of Waterloo and the
City of Kitchener, and further, prior to final Site Plan approval, an agreement has been entered into
with the City and/or Region, as necessary, providing for the implementation of any recommended
noise mitigation measures.
Staff acknowledge that the applicant has submitted a detailed noise study to the Region of Waterloo
for review. Regional Staff have indicated that they have reviewed the noise study and that it is
satisfactory in their comments (Attachment C). Regional and City Planning staff do not have
objections with the requested removal of Holding Provision 70H.
Zoning of Parkland to be Dedicated to the City as Public Park Zone (P-1)
Through the Site Plan application, the applicant will be required to dedicate lands to the City for
parkland dedication. (as shown as Area 3 & 4 on Map 1). Staff is recommending that these lands be
zoned Public Park Zone (P-1). These lands will serve as an extension of the existing adjacent
Ferguson Heritage Green.
Department and Agency Comments:
Preliminary circulation of the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment was
undertaken on August 30, 2021 to applicable City departments and other review authorities. No
major concerns were identified by any commenting City department or agency. Copies of the
comments are found in Attachment "C" of this report.
The following reports and studies were considered as part of this proposed Official Plan Amendment
and Zoning By-law Amendment:
• Planning Justification Report
Page 56 of 114
Prepared by GSP Group Inc., July 21, 2021
• Urban Design Brief
Prepared by GSP Group Inc., July 21 2021
• Functional Servicing and Stormwater Management Report
Prepared by MTE Consultants, June 15, 2021
• Traffic Impact Assessment
Prepared by MTE Consultants, June 15, 2021
• Fire Flow Analysis Report
Prepared by Paradigm Transportation Solutions Limited, April 30, 2021
• Vegetation Management Plan
Prepared by GSP Group Inc., June 3, 2021
• Arborist Report
Prepared by GSP Group Inc., June 8, 2021
Community Input and Staff Response:
Staff received written responses from 27 residents with respect to the proposed development. These
can be found in Attachment `D'. A Neighbourhood Meeting was held on November 4, 2021 and was
attended by 9 residents. A summary of what we heard, and staff responses are noted below.
What We Heard
Staff Comment
The building form is not appropriate
The current zoning permits this type of housing form and
for this area. We would prefer 3
density. The Official Plan permits up to 5 storeys. Planning
storey townhouses.
staff are confident that there will be no adverse impacts
from the proposed buildings onto low rise residential uses
to the west of the subject lands.
The number of units permitted on a site is related most
strongly to the Floor Space Ratio (FSR). The proposed
FSR of 1.21 is below the maximum permitted 2.0 FSR. The
Too many units are being proposed.
number of units is less than what is currently permitted and
is not the subject of this application. Adequate and
appropriate on-site amenities and parking are provided for
the proposed number of units.
The subject site is located within a planned subdivision and
located on transportation networks that were designed with
the subject development and density in consideration for
The proposed development will
future vehicular demand. The applicant has submitted a
result in an increase in traffic that
Transportation Impact Assessment that demonstrates that
will cause congestion on the roads.
the peak hour/peak directional traffic volumes on Huron
Road and West Oak Trail are well within their road
capacities, and will have minimal impacts on Huron Road
and West Oak Trail including driveway operations.
Development will affect privacy for
The building setback of 40 metres or greater to abutting
current homes on Orr Court and
residential properties will provide adequate space for
privacyand will not result in overlook or shadows. A visual
Page 57 of 114
West Oak Trail that share a property
line with the subject site.
barrier in the form of a fence will be provided along the
entire western property line as well as landscaping to
provide a buffer and barrier.
The Zoning By-law requires a minimum of 1 parking space
per unit on the subject lands. The development proposal
contemplates providing 1.23 parking spaces per unit,
exceeding the minimum requirement. It is also proposing
Not enough parking provided on site
153 bicycle parking spaces, including 135 secure, indoor
and will result in on street parking on
bicycle spaces within the underground parking garage.
surrounding residential streets.
Parking on residential streets is not a long-term solution as
the maximum length is 3 hours and on -street parking is not
permitted overnight during the winter. The applicant is also
proposing to provide 53 visitor parking spaces in alignment
with the Zoning By-law to service short term visitor parking
needs on site.
Planning Conclusions:
In considering the foregoing, staff are supportive of the Zoning By-law amendment. Staff is of the
opinion that the subject applications are consistent with policies of the Provincial Policy Statement
(2020), conform to Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, the Regional Official Plan, and
the City of Kitchener Official Plan and represent good planning. Staff recommends that the
application be approved.
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
Council / Committee meeting. Large billboard notice signs were posted on the property and
information regarding the application was posted to the City's website in August of 2021. Following
the initial circulation referenced below, an additional courtesy notice of the public meeting was
circulated to all property owners and occupants within 240 metres of the subject lands, those
responding to the preliminary circulation and Notice of the Public Meeting was posted in the Waterloo
Region Record on December 17, 2021 (a copy of the Notice may be found in Attachment `B').
CONSULT — The proposed Zoning By-law Amendment was originally circulated to property owners
and occupants within 240 metres of the subject lands on September 1, 2021. In response to this
circulation, staff received written responses from 27 residents, which are included in Attachment `D'.
A neighbourhood meeting was held on November 4, 2021. Changes to the site specific regulations
are being recommended in response to community consultation comments.
PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES:
• Zoning By-law 85-1
• Zoning By-law 2019-051
• Official Plan, 2014
Page 58 of 114
• Regional Official Plan, 2010
• Provincial Policy Statement, 2020
• Planning Act, 1990
• A Place to Grow Growth Plan, 2020
REVIEWED BY: Stevenson, Garett — Manager of Development Review, Planning Division
APPROVED BY: Justin Readman - General Manager, Development Services
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A — Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment
Attachment B — Newspaper Notice
Attachment C — Department and Agency Comments
Attachment D — Neighbourhood Comments
Page 59 of 114
follows:
DSD -2022-004 Attachment "A"
PROPOSED BY — LAW
, 2021
BY-LAW NUMBER
OF THE
CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER
(Being a by-law to amend By-law 85-1, as amended, known as
the Zoning By-law for the City of Kitchener
- Huron Road Apartments Kitchener 2021 Ltd. — 1673 Huron
Road)
WHEREAS it is deemed expedient to amend By-law 85-1 for the lands specified above;
NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Corporation of the City of Kitchener enacts as
Schedule Number 97 of Appendix "A" to By-law Number 85-1 is 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 Low Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU -1) with
Special Use Provision 434U and Holding Provision 70H to Low Intensity Mixed Use Corridor
Zone (MU -1) with Special Use Provision 434U and Special Regulation Provision 774R.
2. Schedule Number 97 of Appendix "A" to By-law Number 85-1 is hereby amended by changing
the zoning applicable to the parcel of land specified and illustrated as Area 2 on Map No. 1, in
the City of Kitchener, attached hereto, from Residential Six Zone (R-6) to Residential Six Zone
(R-6) with Special Regulation Provision 774R.
3. Schedule Number 97 of Appendix "A" to By-law Number 85-1 is hereby amended by changing
the zoning applicable to the parcel of land specified and illustrated as Area 3 on Map No. 1, in
the City of Kitchener, attached hereto, from Residential Six Zone (R-6) to Public Park Zone (P-
1).
4. Schedule Number 97 of Appendix "A" to By-law Number 85-1 is hereby amended by changing
the zoning applicable to the parcel of land specified and illustrated as Area 4 on Map No. 1, in
the City of Kitchener, attached hereto, from Low Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU -1) with
Special Use Provision 434U and Holding Provision 70H to Public Park Zone (P-1).
5. Appendix D of By-law 85-1 is hereby amended by adding Section 774R thereto as follows:
Page 60 of 114
DSD -2022-004 Attachment "A"
774. Notwithstanding Section 53.2.1 of this By-law, within the lands zoned MU -1 as shown
on Schedule Number 97 of Appendix "A" and shown as being affected by this
subsection, the following special regulations will apply:
a) Maximum building height shall be 17.0 metres;
b) Maximum front yard setback shall be 8.4 metres;
c) Minimum height of required visual barrier shall be 2.44 metres;
d) Minimum indoor secured bicycle parking shall be 0.5 spaces per unit;
e) Minimum future electric vehicle parking spaces shall be 17.5% of required parking
spaces."
PASSED at the Council Chambers in the City of Kitchener this day of
,2021.
Mayor
Clerk
Page 61 of 114
w
ZO a
0 0 of
� 0 o a
0 r` 0 0 CT)NI
o '� LU
z (]fO N LL?
z Of
O O_ O w Z o
U v vU � U v U Q a
LU
cwn -t OU � >O � ,- 0 oC ai � L Q z � U) m
fq 7 0 OLu oW Od LU 0- w 0 Oo� 0 X Z W Z W LJ\J
Q w 0z0 LOz Owz Or W Dz LU z O o W NO O w Q _
W X >Z0 >O NZO Nd X > w X O N N Z N D J
Q 02X O7 XOQ XW O�W z LZ w W N w�LU 0 w~ LU
U } U)
Q w a�� a� �NJ Uz _� aU5z ON U z z w� M X> c=7 D z m C:)
z
H w0} wD -i JO cn WOO J~ W NOOOHOw-Lu U W U W CD g z
IU m z in Q'� U) ♦-JW ♦—Y Z CnofY < Z ~ Y W J J J J J J W - Z J N z
O w �acn w �d ? Q¢¢ Q Q Q �n 0 w Q z w Q
H Z�QZW QQ WOZQ LU M0- z QZd z d d z z z z z z W � z0 X O O m W a
co L ��U�z�UU U U- N - 00 D - = U Cn W W W W w W o p W 0 W N N Q F-
p�0��03: n- c:,Ef�� chuj Orm v��UD Lu 0m ? O LU m w D o 0 0-- d w ~ z LU
wWOz=O-Jz 0 Waw= WOO- WQz=_O -i¢ z N z a O of z= Q v W Z
2waf0~z00~z ��O~ wcCo wc�O~z0 Y O H O- N M y cfl r� T} CD O U LL H WW a
QQwN�QHN�Q <LL 3: QwI- QwN�QF m Q 2 N 2 N d d 2 Of Of0! Of0� m Q N CO O Y G �� W
...................
CO
a
__
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Z �
VIII lip IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ......................... W ZLIJ
Ln O `000 ................................................ -
' uuuuulluuuuu u Q
ui
N � T - >
01 �uuulllumouuuuuuuuul .........................uuuluuulllllllu°umuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuum
r
0 LU
N ..... Z
.. Q Z
M 1 ' _ _ iO `� uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu uu O
� N uuuuuum
J
Q
Illllluuulluuullmuuuuuum
uum
uuu W
;,w,,,,.
LU
1 VVpppppppppppVVVIIIIIIIIVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVu
0-
." uuuluuulluuuuuuuuuu`uuum uuuum � O a
Q O m U O
m m
m , d LU
>
moluuumuuuuuuuul6
ul0tuuuuuuuuumuuuuuuumuuuuuuu HSS ' SOb 37n03 S Q LU
- - ss 37- -- ;--------------3i-� -------------------- ? U
x
L6 37nG
Z LL
O LL
r
� � ' g � � luullllllllllllllluuuulllluuumumuuumuuumuuumm
Q C, ' N
a1 10 � Q a
N
a �
R � 1 Q
CO cn W
W
LU
LU O m
W�' �" �nw p W
S' Q 2 U
Qla
W
WW 0
U N o
Lij
UI J
y1y Z VMUIV m Q
CD
ca U 0
Illly ........ T T
VO�fiE� �R W a
_....
pOS ..
04
7 r
F-
0 0
� U Lu Q Z
Ev-pR , r g � 0
_ 1111111 •
0 QNo 2
Z
0-
..................
-"" uuuumuulllllllll11°°°°°°°°°°°IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIjjjjjjjj111°°°°°°°°°°°Illllllllllumuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuum loom � 0 W �
W
VIII .........-•......... r
_Illllllllllllllll� llllllllllllllllla o w Z
_ IIIIIIIIIIII
_ ....... VIII
_111111 ......,...... � o
J r
muull. Q _
uuumumuuuuuluuuuuuuuuul uuumuulllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll�llluuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuullllllll � � �
uuuuum
N
Y co
a o... _ 0 _
NOTICE O PUBLIC
for a development in your neighbourhood
1673 Huron Road
1"I',"", ri;:::IL.. U° u.
�,., e„ C15 e :� I
et a (w.14.
� �k14.. ✓����fl AN�rY TQ k�a' ii.
Date:
Time:
Location: Virtuaog
To view the staN report,agenda,
meetingfind
appear as a delegation, visit:
kitchener.cr
To learn more about this project,
including information on your
appeal g
r,,
plan r rio
Eric Schneider, Senior Planner
519.741.2200 x 7843
eric.schneider@ kitchener.ca
The City of Kitchener has received an application for Zoning By-law Amendment for
1673 Huron Road. The applicationr g
increase• permit a maximum building height of 5 -storeys (17.0 metres),
• the maximum front yard d bb ao 8.4 metres
• remove holding provision 70H to acknowledge the completion of a noise study.
Attachment B
Page 63 of 114
Eric Schneider
From: Mike Seiling
Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2021 10:14 AM
To: Eric Schneider
Subject: FW: Circulation for Comment - Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment (1673 Huron
Road)
Attachments: Circulation Letter .pdf; MAP1.pdf, Site Concept Plan.pdf
29
Building has no concerns with this application.
Mike
From: Joanne Sutherland <Joanne.Sutherland@kitchener.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 202110:11 AM
To: Aaron McCrimmon-Jones <Aaron.McCrimmon-Jones@kitchener.ca>; Bell - c/o WSP <circulations@wsp.com>; Dave
Seller <Dave.Seller@kitchener.ca>; David Paetz <David.Paetz@kitchener.ca>; DSD - Planning Division
<DSDPlanningDivision@kitchener.ca>; Feds <vped@feds.ca>; GRCA (North Kitchener) - Trevor Heywood
<theywood@grand river.ca>; GRCA (South Kitchener) - Chris Foster-Pengelly<cfosterpengeIly@grandriver. ca>; GRCA
(South Kitchener) - Jenn Simons <jsimons@grandriver.ca>; Greg Reitzel <Greg.Reitzel@kitchener.ca>; Hydro One -
Dennis DeRango <landuseplanning@hydroone.com>; Jim Edmondson <Jim.Edmondson@kitchener.ca>; Katherine
Hughes <Katherine.Hughes@kitchener.ca>; K -W Hydro - Greig Cameron <gcameron@kwhydro.on.ca>; Linda Cooper
<Linda.Cooper@kitchener.ca>; Mike Seiling <Mike.Seiling@kitchener.ca>; Ontario Power Generation
<Executivevp.lawanddevelopment@opg.com>; Park Planning (SM) <Park.Planning@kitchener.ca>; Parmi Takk
<Parmi.Takk@kitchener.ca>; Region - Planning<PlanningApplications@regionofwaterloo.ca>; Property Data
Administrator (SM) <PropDataAdmin@kitchener.ca>; Robert Morgan <Robert.Morgan@kitchener.ca>; Steven Ryder
<Steven.Ryder@kitchener.ca>; UW - SA <Steven.amirikah@uwaterloo.ca>; WCDSB - Planning <planning@wcdsb.ca>;
WRDSB - Board Secretary (elaine_burns@wrdsb.ca) <elaine_burns@wrdsb.ca>; WRDSB - Planning
<planning@wrdsb.ca>
Cc: Eric Schneider <Eric.Schneider@kitchener.ca>; Christine Kompter<Christine.Kompter@kitchener.ca>
Subject: Circulation for Comment - Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment (1673 Huron Road)
Please see attached. Additional documentation can be found in AMANDA 21-126783 (for internal staff) and
ShareFile (for external agencies). Comments or questions should be directed to Eric Schneider, Planner.
Joanne Sutherland, CPT
Program Assistant, Site Development
Planning Division / City of Kitchener
519-741-2200 ext. 7316 / TTY 1-866-969-9994
Joanne.sutherland@kitchener.ca
Page 64 of 114
Eric Schneider
From: Chris Foster -Pengelly <cfosterpengelly@grandriver.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2021 10:23 AM
To: Eric Schneider
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Circulation for Comment - Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment (1673
Huron Road)
Hi Eric,
The subject properties are not regulated by the GRCA under Ontario Regulation 150/06. As such, we will not be
providing comments.
Thank you,
Chris
Chris Foster -Pengelly, M.Sc.
P: (519) 621-2763 x2319
F: (519) 621-4844
www.grandriver.ca
From: Joanne Sutherland <Joanne.Sutherland@kitchener.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 202110:11 AM
To: Aaron McCrimmon-Jones <Aaron.McCrimmon-Jones@kitchener.ca>; Bell - c/o WSP <circulations@wsp.com>; Dave
Seller <Dave.Seller@kitchener.ca>; David Paetz <David.Paetz@kitchener.ca>; DSD - Planning Division
<DSDPlanningDivision@kitchener.ca>; Feds <vped@feds.ca>; Trevor Heywood <theywood@grand river. ca>; Chris
Foster-Pengelly<cfosterpengeIly@grandrive r.ca>; Jenn Simons <jsimons@grandriver.ca>; Greg Reitze)
<Greg.Reitzel@kitchener.ca>; Hydro One - Dennis DeRango <landuseplanning@hydroone.com>; Jim Edmondson
<Jim.Edmondson@kitchener.ca>; Katherine Hughes<Katherine.Hughes@kitchener.ca>; K -W Hydro - Greig Cameron
<gcameron@kwhydro.on.ca>; Linda Cooper <Linda.Cooper@kitchener.ca>; Mike Seiling <Mike.Seiling@kitchener.ca>;
Ontario Power Generation<Executivevp.lawanddevelopment@opg.com>; Park Planning (SM)
<Park.Planning@kitchener.ca>; Parmi Takk <Parmi.Takk@kitchener.ca>; Region - Planning
<PlanningApplications@regionofwaterloo.ca>; Property Data Administrator (SM) <PropDataAdmin@kitchener.ca>;
Robert Morgan <Robert.Morgan@kitchener.ca>; Steven Ryder <Steven.Ryder@kitchener.ca>; UW - SA
<Steven.amirikah@uwaterloo.ca>; WCDSB - Planning <planning@wcdsb.ca>; WRDSB - Board Secretary
(elaine_burns@wrdsb.ca) <elaine_burns@wrdsb.ca>; WRDSB - Planning <planning@wrdsb.ca>
Cc: Eric Schneider <Eric.Schneider@kitchener.ca>; Christine Kompter<Christine.Kompter@kitchener.ca>
Subject: Circulation for Comment - Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment (1673 Huron Road)
Please see attached. Additional documentation can be found in AMANDA 21-126783 (for internal staff) and
ShareFile (for external agencies). Comments or questions should be directed to Eric Schneider, Planner.
Joanne Sutherland, CPT
Program Assistant, Site Development
Planning Division / City of Kitchener
519-741-2200 ext. 7316 / TTY 1-866-969-9994
Joanne.sutherland@kitchener.ca
Page 65 of 114
Eric Schneider
From: ChrisbneGou|e{
Sent: Wednesday, September 8,2O218/|6AK4
To: Eric Schneider
Subject: 1673Huron Rd Z8Acomments
Hi Eric,
Engineering has reviewed the ZBA application and are in support of the zone change for a sanitary peak flow of 5.87 L/s.
Kitchener Utilities has reviewed the FSR for water distribution and have one comment. Please add inthe 'condusion'
section of the report that the needs of the proposed development must meet what is available in the existing
distribution system.
I did not review the report in detail for stormwater management, as that is a requirement of site plan and not the
Z0A. But their approach looks acceptable. They are proposing a municipal storm sewer through their property, which
would require plan and profile drawings, an ECA, design sheets and an easement in favour of the City. Their design
should account for Huron Road becoming 4 lanes and the site should take into account the overland flow route from
Huron. | will review it in more detail when they apply for a site plan application.
Christine Goulet, C.E.T.
Project Manager | Development Engineering
518-741-22OOExt. 7820
From: Linda Cooper <Unda.[ooper0Dkitohenecca>
Sent: Tuesday, August 21,202llU39AM
To: Christine Gnu|et«Chhstine.Gou|et@kitchenerza>
Subject: FW: Circulation for Comment - Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment (1673 Huron Road)
Hi,
For your review and comments.
Linda
Linda Cooper,L.E.T, C.E.l[
Manager | Development Engineering | City of Kitchener
519-741-2200 ext. 7974 | TTY 1-866-969-9994 |
����!��|�������i��
Page 66 of 114
Eric Schneider
From:
Dave Seller
Sent:
Monday, September 13, 2021 9:44 AM
To:
Eric Schneider
Subject:
Zoning By-law Amendment comments: 1673 Huron Road
City of Kitchener
Application Type: Zoning By-law Amendment
Project Address: 1673 Huron Road
Comments of: Transportation Services
Commenter's Name: Dave Seller
Email: dave.seller@kitchener.ca
Phone: 519-741-2200 ext. 7369
Date of Comments: September 13, 2021
a. After reviewing the Transportation Impact Assessment (July 13, 2021) submitted by Paradigm Transportation
Solutions Ltd., Transportation Services offer the following comments.
The site is expected to generate approximately 88 AM and 111 PM peak hour vehicle trips, with access points
servicing the site along the frontages of Huron Road and West Oak Trail. Both Huron Road and West Oak Trail are
estimated to operate within their respective roadway capacities. The estimated traffic per day would include site
generated traffic and forecasted Huron Road and West Oak Trail traffic.
Huron Road and West Oak Trail were analyzed at the site access points and are expected to provide vehicular traffic
with an acceptable level of service, delay and queuing in the AM and PM peak hours under 2026 Total Future Traffic
conditions. Also, a left turn lane analysis was completed along Huron Road and West Oak Trail at each of the site
access points and it was determined that left turn lanes are not warranted in either the AM or PM peak hours under
2026 Total Future Traffic conditions.
Therefore, based on the analysis completed and the conclusions included within the report, Transportation Services
can support Paradigms Traffic Impact Assessment.
b. The truck movement plan submitted by MTE for garbage pick-up on drawing MS 2.1 is acceptable.
c. The residential parking rate and visitor parking percentage should be noted on drawing - Site Plan, Location Map,
Project Data on sheet number SK10.
Dave Seller, C.E.T.
Traffic Planning Analyst I Transportation Services I City of Kitchener
519-741-2200 ext. 7369 l TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 dave.5 eller(aDkitchener.ca
0 10 0 0 C.) 0
m�
Page 67 of 114
City of Kitchener
Sustainability Statement - Comment Form
Project Address: 1673 Huron Road
Application Type: Zoning By-law Amendment ZBA21/011/H/ES)
Comments of: Environmental Planning (Sustainability) — City of Kitchener
Commenter's name: Carrie Musselman
Email: carrie.musselman@kitchener.ca
Phone: 519-741-2200 x 7068
Comments requested by: September 30, 2021
Comments provided on: September 22, 2021
1. Plans Studies and/or Reports submitted and reviewed as part of a complete application:
0 1673 Huron Road, Sustainability Statement, prepared by GSP Group, dated July 20, 2021
2. Comments & Issues:
I have reviewed the documentation (as listed above) to support a Zoning By-law Amendment to permit
the removal of the existing building and construction of three buildings (261 -unit multiple dwelling
development) with associated parking regarding sustainability and energy conservation and provided the
following:
Based on my review of the supporting study the Zoning By Law Amendment can be supported.
A sustainability statement (as per the City's Terms of Reference) will be required as part of a
complete Site Plan Application.
The sustainability statement can build upon the information already provided and can
further explore additional energy reduction measures that are best suited to the site or
buildings that would go beyond the Ontario Building Code (OBC) to conserve energy and
reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
3 Policies, Standards and Resources:
a 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.
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.
1(Page
Page 68 of 114
City of Kitchener
Sustainability Statement - Comment Form
4.
�
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 - htLp://vvww.sustainab|ewater|ooregion.ra/our-prngramc/reQiona|-sustainabi|ity-
= The can be found on the City's website under
'Planning Resources' at ...
� https://wvvvv.kitchenerza/en/resourcesGenera|/Documents/DSD_PLAN_Sustainabi|ity_
2|Page
Page 69 of 114
City of Kitchener
Zoning By-law Amendment Comment Form
Address: 1673 Huron Road
Owner: Huron Road Apartments
Application: Zoning By-law Amendment ZBA21/011/H/ES
Comments Of: Parks & Cemeteries
Commenter's Name: Lenore Ross
Email: Lenore. ross@kitchener.ca
Phone: 519-741-2200 ext 7427
Date of Comments: Sept 24 2021
❑ I plan to attend the meeting (questions/concerns/comments for discussion)
® No meeting to be held
❑ I do NOT plan to attend the meeting (no concerns)
1. Documents Reviewed: Circulation Letter dated Aug 30 2021; Map 1; Site Design Package — Zeidler
Architecture dated 2021.07.12; presubmission consultation record dated March 04 2021; GSP Group
Vegetation Management Plan L0.0 and L0.1 dated June 012021; Instrument #WR916932; 58R-18664.
2. Site Specific Comments & Issues:
I have reviewed the documentation (as listed above) to support an ZBA to revise the existing zoning (split -
zoned Low Intensity Mixed Use Corridor (MU -1) and Residential Six Zone (R-6) with special provisions
434U and 70H) to incorporate a new special regulation provision to increase the maximum building height
to 17 metres (5 storeys), increase the maximum front yard setback to 8.4 metres, and to remove a holding
provision that requires a noise study to facilitate the construction of a 3 building, 261 -unit multiple
dwelling development. A parcel of land in the Southwest corner of the site is proposed to be dedicated as
parkland.
Parks & Cemeteries has no concerns with the ZBA application. Parkland dedication requirements and
plans submissions related to conditions of WR916932 will be satisfied through site plan applications and
other development application milestones.
3. Comments on Submitted Documents
GSP Group Vegetation Management Plan L0.0 and L0.1 dated June 012021
a) The plan submitted does not contain all required signatures
b) A revised Tree Management Plan will be reviewed and approved as part of a Site Plan
application.
4. Policies Standards and Resources:
Kitchener Official Plan Policy ^^^^m^^^^^^^^
As per Section 8.C.2 — Urban Forests of the Official Plan ...
A City for Everyone
Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community
PaOpabgfh of 114
City of Kitchener
Zoning By-law Amendment Comment Form
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.
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 (UDM) and the
Development Manual.
o Please see UDM Part C, Section 13 and www.kitchener.ca/treemanaeement for detailed
submission requirements
City of Kitchener Parkland Dedication Policy
City of Kitchener Development Manual
Chapter 690 of the current Property Maintenance By-law
Parks Strategic Plan
Multi -Use Pathways & Trails Masterplan
+� Urban Design Manual
. Antici ated.Eees.
Conveyance of Lot H/Part 13 and Lot L/Part 19 as land prior to Final Site Plan Approval — see P&C
comments in the presubmission consultation record dated March 04 2021 and City of Kitchener
Development Manual for requirements prior to conveyance of land and final site plan approval.
Parkland Dedication Cash in lieu of land for the balance of the required dedication amount — see
P&C comments in the presubmission consultation record dated March 04 2021 prior to final site
plan approval
A City for Everyone
Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community
Pa'Page I1 of 114
Eric Schneider
From: Victoria Grohn
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2021 3:05 PM
To: Eric Schneider
Subject: RE: Circulation for Comment - Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment (1673 Huron Road)
Hi Eric,
Heritage Planning staff has reviewed the following in relation to the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment
application at 1673 Huron Road:
Application Form
Cover Letter
Existing Conditions Plan
Site Design Package
Planning Justification Report
Urban Design Brief
Arborist Report
Tree Management Plan
Heritage Planning staff note that Lot L and H (Parts 13 and 19 of 58R-18664) are to be conveyed to the City of
Kitchener, and that the existing trees on these lots as well as the existing trees on the adjacent heritage
property are recommended for protection and retention. Heritage Planning staff do not have concerns with the
massing and location of buildings.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks,
Victoria
Victoria Grohn (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@kitchener.ca
From: Joanne Sutherland <Joanne.Sutherland@kitchener.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 202110:34 AM
To: _DL_#_DSD_Planning <DSD-PlanningDivision@kitchener.ca>; Aaron McCrimmon-Jones <Aaron.McCrimmon-
Jones@kitchener.ca>; Bell - c/o WSP <circulations@wsp.com>; Dave Seller <Dave.Seller@kitchener.ca>; David Paetz
<David.Paetz@kitchener.ca>; Feds <vped@feds.ca>; GRCA (North Kitchener) - Trevor Heywood
<theywood@grand river.ca>; GRCA (South Kitchener) - Chris Foster-Pengelly<cfosterpengeIly@grandrive r.ca>; GRCA
(South Kitchener) - Jenn Simons <jsimons@grandriver.ca>; Greg Reitzel <Greg.Reitzel@kitchener.ca>; Hydro One -
Dennis DeRango <landuseplanning@hydroone.com>; Jim Edmondson <Jim.Edmondson@kitchener.ca>; Katherine
Hughes <Katherine.Hughes@kitchener.ca>; K -W Hydro - Greig Cameron <gcameron@kwhydro.on.ca>; Linda Cooper
<Linda.Cooper@kitchener.ca>; Mike Seiling <Mike.Seiling@kitchener.ca>; Ontario Power Generation
<Executivevp.lawanddevelopment@opg.com>; Park Planning (SM) <Park.Planning@kitchener.ca>; Parmi Takk
<Parmi.Takk@kitchener.ca>; Region - Planning<PlanningApplications@regionofwaterloo.ca>; Property Data
Administrator (SM) <PropDataAdmin@kitchener.ca>; Robert Morgan <Robert.Morgan@kitchener.ca>; Steven Ryder
<Steven.Ryder@kitchener.ca>; UW - SA <Steven.amirikah@uwaterloo.ca>; WCDSB - Planning <planning@wcdsb.ca>;
WRDSB - Board Secretary (elaine_burns@wrdsb.ca) <elaine_burns@wrdsb.ca>; WRDSB - Planning
Page 72 of 114
Eric Schneider, MCIP, RPP
Planner
Planning Division, Community Services Dept.
City of Kitchener
200 King Street West
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.regionofwaterloo.ca
Shilling Yip (226) 753-1064
File: C14-60/4/20005
October 14, 2021
Re: Post Circulation Comments
ZBA 21 /011 /H/ES
1673 Huron Road
Huron Road Apartments Kitchener 2021 Ltd.
CITY OF KITCHENER
Region staff has reviewed the above -noted application and provide the following
comments for your consideration at this time. The owner is proposing to demolish the
existing building and construct a 3 building, 261 -unit multiple dwelling development. To
facilitate this development the owner has requested that a new special regulation
provision be added to the zoning by-law to increase the maximum building height to 17
metres (5 storeys), increase the maximum front yard setback to 8.4 metres, and to
remove a holding provision that requires a noise study, which has been provided with
this application. A parcel of land in the Southwest corner of the site is proposed to be
dedicated as parkland.
The lands are designated Urban Area (Designated Greenfield Areas) in the Regional
Official Plan; and designated City Urban Area (Designated Greenfield Area) and Mixed
Use One / Medium Density Residential One and Community Node within the Rosenberg
Secondary Plan area in the City of Kitchener Official Plan. Majority of the approximately
2.14 ha site is currently zoned MU -1 (Low Intensity Mixed Use Corridor) and the
balance (a small portion to along the western limit of the property) zoned R-6
Residential Six.
Document Number: 3850185 Version: 1
Page 73 of 114
Water Services
We have no concern with the application(s) and offer no comments.
Hydrogeology and Source Water
The lands are designated in Wellhead Protection Sensitivity Areas 7 and 8 (WPSA) on
Map 6a, and Regional Recharge Area on Map 6g) of the Regional Official Plan (ROP).
The purpose of the WPSAs and Recharge Area and corresponding policies in Chapter 8
of the ROP is to protect the Region's long-term municipal groundwater supplies.
Geothermal wells are permitted within WPSA 7 and 8 designation but subject to further
study. The applicant must confirm whether geothermal wells will be considered as part
of this development, if so provision will need to be made as part of this ZBA or other
application(s) to secure such future studies.
The Planning Justification Report (GSP, July 21, 2021) notes the proposal includes
underground parking. How many levels of underground parking are being proposed?
Additional study may be required pursuant to Policy 8.A.8 (WPSA 7) of the ROP.
Hydrogeology and Source Water (HSW) staff has reviewed the Functional Servicing
and Stormwater Management Report (MTE, June 15, 2021). It appears storm sewer
CBMH14 shown in Figure 3 (Conceptual Site Servicing Plan) is directing parking lot
runoff to one of the proposed infiltration galleries. MTE has clarified that the pipe shown
between CBMH14 and the infiltration gallery is an overflow pipe only (so the slope arrow
on the pipe is correct, but the inverts (at detailed design) will show that there is no flow
into the gallery. No asphalt areas will drain to the galleries, only roofwater and some
landscape areas.
A Salt Management Plan will be required at time of site plan application.
Please ensure detail design for stormwater management, and salt management plans
are circulated to HSW staff for review and approval at time of site plan application.
Corridor Planning
Environmental Noise Study
Staff has reviewed the feasibility noise report entitled "Feasibility Noise Study Proposed
Residential Development 1673 Huron Road Kitchener, Ontario" (HGC Engineering,
June 15, 2021).
Road Traffic Noise
The following comments are provided pertaining to the transportation noise component
of the report. The primary road traffic noise source is Huron Road. The study
demonstrates that the proposed development would be feasible with appropriate noise
attenuation measures. The following noise attenuation measures would be required for
the proposed development and must be secured to be implemented through a
registered agreement with the City of Kitchener or Region.
Document Number: 3850185 Version: 1
Page 74 of 114
The South Building
a) All units/building will be designed and installed with a central air conditioning system
prior to occupancy, to allow the exterior windows to remain closed.
b) The south fagade of the building will require special walls and window and must be
designed with minimum Acoustical Insulation Factor (AIF) of 26 for bedroom and
living/dining rooms. The report notes that any well sealed thermopane unit have a
Sound Transmission Class (STC) rating of 30, that is two 3mm panes and a 13mm
inter -pane gap will provide sufficient noise insulation as long as the window to floor
area is less than 63% for bedroom and living/dining rooms.
c) The following noise warning clauses will be required for all units:
The purchasers/tenants are advised that, despite the inclusion of noise control
features in the development and within the building unit, sound levels due to
increasing road noise traffic on Huron Road/Fischer-Hallman Road may
occasionally interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants, as the sound
levels exceed the noise criteria of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo (RMOW)
and the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP).
The dwelling unit has been supplied with a central air conditioning system, which
will allow windows, and exterior doors to remain closed, thereby ensuring that the
indoor sound levels are within the noise criteria of the Regional Municipality of
Waterloo (RMOW) and the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks
MECP.
The East and North Buildings
a) All units/building will be installed with air -ducted heating and ventilation system
suitably sized and designed for provision of a central air conditioning system at
occupant's discretion.
b) The following noise warning clauses will be required for all units:
The purchasers/tenants are advised that, despite the inclusion of noise control
features in the development and within the building unit, sound levels due to
increasing road noise traffic on Huron Road/Fischer-Hallman Road may
occasionally interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants, as the sound
levels exceed the noise criteria of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo (RMOW)
and the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP).
The dwelling unit has been fitted with a forced air -ducted heating and ventilation
system etc. has been suitably sized to accommodate a central air conditioning.
Installation of central air conditioning will allow windows and exterior doors to
remain closed, thereby ensuring that the indoor sound levels are within the noise
criteria of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo (RMOW) and the Ministry of
Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP).
Document Number: 3850185 Version: 1
Page 75 of 114
Implementation of Noise Study
As special building components are required for the South Building, the following are
recommended;
1) When detailed floor plans and building elevations are available for the South Building,
an acoustical consultant must refine the glazing requirements based on actual
window to floor area rations.
2) Prior to issuance of any Building Permit(s) the South Building, the City's building
Inspector or a qualified acoustic consultant must verify that the required noise
attenuation features are deigned and incorporated in the plans.
3) Prior to issuance of the any Occupancy Permit within the development, the City's
building Inspector or a qualified acoustic consultant must verify that the required
noise attenuation features have been installed.
Stationary Noise
Staff also provides the following comments related to the stationary noise component of
the feasibility noise study. The report assessed the impact of off-site stationary noise
sources on the subject site and concluded the upper floors of the north and east
buildings (closest to the adjacent commercial facilities) exceed the Ministry of the
Environment, Conservation and Parks' NPC -300 noise guideline objectives for a Class
1 acoustical environment by up to 4 dBA during the daytime and nighttime periods.
The Report recommends use of balcony barriers (parapet made of solid glass) or
rooftop barriers at the noise source. Both these options need to be explored further to
determine the feasibility and acceptability of the mitigation measures (for example,
discussion with adjacent landowner on mitigation at source, and details on balcony
barriers) prior to the Region supporting this noise study. The Study has also
recommended 1) that an on-site visit be conducted during the cooling season to confirm
the make and model of all mechanical equipment noted in the report, and 2) to
undertake noise measurements to confirm modelling results of the current study and to
inform final mitigation measures.
Use of a warning clause in all agreements of purchase and/or rental/lease agreements
has also been recommended. The recommended warning clause as follows,
"Purchasers/tenants are advised that due to the proximity of the existing fire station and
commercial/retail facilities, sound levels from these facilities may at times be audible."
Are there any on-site stationary noise sources that may impact on-site sensitive
receptors?
Are there any common outdoor living areas on the site plan?
Document Number: 3850185 Version: 1
Page 76 of 114
Transit Planning
The nearest service on Ludolph Street is within 200m of the proposed development will
provide satisfactory transit service. There are no transit requirements for the this
development. Staff provides the following comments for the City's consideration:
Given the scale of the proposed development the City should consider extending
the Multi -Use Trail / sidewalks on both sides of Huron Road in front of this
development towards the east and also add a mid -block crossing in order to
facilitate connectivity to the City's park and to the existing trails towards the
Huron/Fischer-Hallman roundabout.
• The plans should be designed to enhance pedestrian connectivity between the
proposed buildings; and to the adjacent municipal street system in the vicinity.
• Any TDM measures, if required by the City of Kitchener, should be circulated to
Region staff for review and comment.
Functional Servicing and Stormwater Management (Advisory Comments)
It is noted that the subject lands formed parts of original Pumpkin Patch Lands which
were subject to consent applications. The lands are surrounded by area municipal
streets and do not abut any Regional Road. As such, staff has not reviewed the
Functional Servicing and SWM Report and functional grading plans, but notes the
development must be designed in conformity with the original reports completed in
support of the overall Pumpkin Patch lands which have received prior approval by the
City and the Region.
Archaeology
Cultural Heritage staff have received and reviewed the report titled "Stage 1-2
Archaeological Assessment: 1673 Huron Road" (Stantec, June 15, 2021) in support of
the below noted Zoning By-law Amendment and have no further comments or concerns.
Housing
The Region supports the provision of a full range of housing options, including
affordable housing. The Region's 10 -Year Housing and Homelessness Plan contains an
affordable housing target for Waterloo Region. The target is for 30% of all new
residential development between 2019 and 2041 to be affordable to low and moderate
income households. Staff recommend that the applicant consider providing a number of
affordable housing units on the site.
In order for affordable housing to fulfill its purpose of being affordable to those who
require rents or purchase prices lower than the regular market provides, there should be
an agreement in place with conditions. The conditions should establish the income
levels of the households who can rent or own the homes as well as conditions on how
long those units need to remain affordable. A security should be registered on title to
ensure the affordable units are maintained over the term of the agreement.
Staff further recommends meeting with Housing Services to discuss the proposal in
more detail and to explore opportunities for partnerships or programs.
Document Number: 3850185 Version: 1
Page 77 of 114
Policy 3.A.5 in the Regional Official Plan applies to this site. It states:
"Where a development application proposing residential uses is submitted for a site
containing two hectares or more of developable land, the Region and Area
Municipalities will require, wherever appropriate, a minimum of 30 per cent of new
residential units to be planned in forms other than single -detached and semi-detached
units, such as town homes and multi -unit residential buildings."
A review of the proposed unit types indicates that this proposal adheres to Policy 3.A.5.
Affordability
For the purposes of evaluating the affordability of an ownership unit, based on the
definition in the Regional Official Plan, the purchase price is compared to the least
expensive of:
Housing for which the purchase price
results in annual accommodation costs
$1,420
which do not exceed 30 percent of gross
$368,000
annual household income for low and
moderate income households
Bachelor: $863
Housing for which the purchase price is
1 -Bedroom: $1,076
at least 10 percent below the average
$487 637
purchase price of a resale unit in the
3 -Bedroom: $1,359
regional market area
4+ Bedroom: $1,359
*Based on the most recent information available from the PPS Housing Tables (2020).
In order for an owned unit to be deemed affordable, the maximum affordable house
price is $368,000.
For the purposes of evaluating the affordability of a rental unit, based on the definition of
affordable housing in the Regional Official Plan, the average rent is compared to the
least expensive of:
A unit for which the rent does not exceed
30 per cent of the gross annual
$1,420
household income for low and moderate
income renter households
A unit for which the rent is at or below the
Bachelor: $863
average market rent (AMR) in the
1 -Bedroom: $1,076
regional market area
2 -Bedroom: $1,295
3 -Bedroom: $1,359
4+ Bedroom: $1,359
*Based on the most recent information available from the PPS Housing Tables (2020)
Document Number: 3850185 Version: 1
Page 78 of 114
In order for a unit to be deemed affordable, the average rent for the proposed units must
be at or below the average market rent in the regional market area, as listed above.
Please do not hesitate to contact Judy Maan Miedema directly by email at
JMaanMiedema()regionofwaterloo.ca should you have any questions or wish to
discuss in more detail.
Planning Fees
Pursuant to Region Fee By-law 21-01 staff acknowledges receipt of the required ZBA
planning review fee received September 30, 2021.
Regional Development Charges
Any future development on the subject lands will be subject to provisions of Regional
Development Charges By-law 19-037 or any successor thereof.
Region staff is unable to support the ZBA application at this time subject to the additional
information on source water protection and noise study noted in the comments above.
Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned.
Yours truly,
4 �F
Shilling Yip, MCIP, PRPP
Principal Planner
cc. Heather Price, GSP Group
Document Number: 3850185 Version: 1
Page 79 of 114
Eric Schneider, MCIP, RPP
Planner
Planning Division, Community Services Dept.
City of Kitchener
200 King Street West
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.regionofwaterloo.ca
Shilling Yip (226) 753-1064
File: C14-60/4/20005
December 8, 2021
Re: Revised Noise Study Comments
ZBA 21 /011 /H/ES
1673 Huron Road
Huron Road Apartments Kitchener 2021 Ltd.
CITY OF KITCHENER
Region staff provided comments dated October 14, 2021 on the above -noted
application and noise study. Since then, the applicant has submitted a revised noise
study (HGC, November 21, 2021) based on the latest site plan and to address the
Region's comments. Staff concurs with the conclusions and recommendations of the
revised Study. Our review of the revised noise study follow below.
A revised feasibility noise report entitled "Noise Feasibility Study Proposed Residential
Development 1673 Huron Road Kitchener, Ontario" (HGC Engineering, November 21,
2021) has been provided in support of the application. The following comments are
based on staff review of the transportation and stationary noise components of the
Report.
Transportation Noise
Based on the assessment made in the Report, Huron Road is the primary source of
transportation noise. Predicted noise levels are expected to exceed noise level
objectives of both the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks NPC -300
and Region of Waterloo noise guidelines for the daytime and nighttime periods. The
study demonstrates that the proposed development would be feasible with appropriate
noise attenuation measures as detailed in the following sections.
Document Number: 3893440 Version: 1
Page 80 of 114
The report has recommended noise mitigation measures for all three buildings as noted
in section 3.4.3 (pp. 6-7) and summarized in Table 6 (p. 13) of the Report. These
measures, which must be secured in an agreement between the City of Kitchener and
the applicant through future planning or other application(s), include the following:
South Building
a) All units will be designed and installed with a central air conditioning system prior to
occupancy, to allow the exterior windows to remain closed.
b) All fagades of the building will be designed with special walls and window with
minimum STC rating of 33 (based on bedroom and living/dining rooms windows
area of 25% and 20% of floor area). Operable elements will require tight seals
sufficient to achieve acoustical performance not more than 2 points less.
c) The following noise warning clauses will be required for all units:
The purchasers/tenants are advised that, despite the inclusion of noise control
features in the development and within the building unit, sound levels due to
increasing road noise traffic on Huron Road/Fischer-Hallman Road may
occasionally interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants, as the sound
levels exceed the noise criteria of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo (RMOW)
and the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP).
The dwelling unit has been supplied with a central air conditioning system, which
will allow windows, and exterior doors to remain closed, thereby ensuring that the
indoor sound levels are within the noise criteria of the Regional Municipality of
Waterloo (RMOW) and the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks
(MECP).
East Buildina and the North Buildin
a) All units will be installed with air -ducted heating and ventilation system suitably
sized and designed for provision of a central air conditioning system at occupant's
discretion.
b) All fagades of the building will be designed with special walls and window with
minimum STC rating of 33 (based on bedroom and living/dining rooms windows
area of 25% and 20% of floor area). Operable elements will require tight seals
sufficient to achieve acoustical performance not more than 2 points less.
c) The following noise warning clauses will be required for all units:
The purchasers/tenants are advised that, despite the inclusion of noise control
features in the development and within the building unit, sound levels due to
increasing road noise traffic on Huron Road/Fischer-Hallman Road may
occasionally interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants, as the sound
levels exceed the noise criteria of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo (RMOW)
and the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP).
The dwelling unit has been fitted with a forced air -ducted heating and ventilation
system etc. has been suitably sized to accommodate a central air conditioning.
Installation of central air conditioning will allow windows and exterior doors to
Document Number: 3893440 Version: 1
Page 81 of 114
remain closed, thereby ensuring that the indoor sound levels are within the noise
criteria of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo (RMOW) and the Ministry of
Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP).
Implementation
As special building components are required for the South Building, the following are
recommended;
1) When detailed floor plans and building elevations are available for the South Building,
an acoustical consultant must refine the glazing requirements based on actual
window to floor area rations.
2) Prior to issuance of any Building Permit(s) the South Building, the City's building
Inspector or a qualified acoustic consultant must verify that the required noise
attenuation features are deigned and incorporated in the plans.
3) Prior to issuance of the any Occupancy Permit within the development, the City's
building Inspector or a qualified acoustic consultant must verify that the required
noise attenuation features have been installed.
Stationary Noise
The report assessed the impact of off-site stationary noise sources on the subject site
and concluded the facades of the upper floors of the buildings (closest to the adjacent
commercial facilities) exceed the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks'
NPC -300 noise guideline objectives for a Class 1 acoustical environment. These
excesses are up to 5 dBA and 7 dBA during the daytime and nighttime periods
respectively, depending on the building and building facades.
Region staff supports the Report recommendations on the use of rooftop barriers of up
to 2.6m in height to attenuate noise from closest HVAC systems on the rooftop of the
adjacent Tepperman's Kitchener facility. The Study has also recommended 1) that an
on-site visit be conducted during the cooling season to confirm the make and model of
all mechanical equipment noted in the report, and 2) to undertake noise measurements
to confirm modelling results of the current study and to inform final mitigation measures
where needed. Region staff recommends these Study recommendations be addressed
as part of the site plan.
Use of a warning clause in all agreements of purchase and/or rental/lease agreements
has also been recommended. The recommended warning clause as follows,
"Purchasers/tenants are advised that due to the proximity of the existing fire station and
commercial/retail facilities, sound levels from these facilities may at times be audible."
Implementation of Noise Study Recommendations
Staff would usually recommend in this case, that the additional follow up work required to
fully implement the recommendations of the noise study be secured through use of a
holding provision; or as noted above, implementation of the recommendations be secured
in an agreement with the City of Kitchener. Staff notes provision has been made through
Document Number: 3893440 Version: 1
Page 82 of 114
earlier Planning Act applications and agreement(s) to amend existing agreements where
necessary to provide for future noise mitigation on the lands. This should be explored
further by City staff. Alternatively, use of a holding provision is recommended.
Summary
In summary, subject to the above -noted comments together with the Region's earlier
comments of October 14, 2021, staff has no objection to City staff moving forward with a
recommendation to City of Kitchener Council on the zone change application at this time.
Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned.
Yours truly,
4 �F
Shilling Yip, MCIP, RPP
Principal Planner
cc. Valerie Schmidt, GSP Group
Document Number: 3893440 Version: 1
Page 83 of 114
Attachment D
Eric Schneider
From:
Sent: Friday, September 3, 2021 5:59 PM
To: Eric Schneider
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 1673 Huron Road
Hi Eric,
We received the card in the mail regarding the proposed development for 1673 Huron Road and have a couple
questions before we submit our comments as requested.
Our home is located immediately west of the property in question. It faces and originally had a municipal address on
Huron Road. Our address today i� a property with a heritage designationfrom the City of Kitchener.
The drawings on the postcard aren't clear, is a barrier of some sort part of the proposal for the western edge of the
property? Our lot covers about half of the property line bordering the proposed development. There are two other lots
that back onto the property in question going towards Westoak. I'm assuming this type of build would have a significant
fence or barrier. Also, are there mature trees planned for the narrow green space that also runs along the west side of
the development?
What is the minimum number of parking spots the city of Kitchener requires for this type of development?
Has the Heritage Planning committee been approached for their opinions and/or comments
considering the proximity of this development to a property designated as historically significant?
Thank you for your time. The answers to these questions will help us provide comments regarding this proposed
development.
Kitchener
Get Outlook for Android
Page 84 of 114
Eric Schneider
From:
Sent: Tuesday, September 7, 2021 9:17 AM
To: Eric Schneider
Cc: Kelly Galloway-Sealock
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Applications for Development - 1673 Huron Road
Hi there,
Thank you for the card that I received in the mail regarding an application for development in my
neighbourhood. I have lived in the Mattamy Wildflowers Community for the past 5 years and enjoy our
community very much, with the exception of high volume traffic. My concern with the application for another
high density housing project is that we don't have the infastructure for moving people in and out easily from
the Fischer Hallman and Huron Road area.
am opposed to having a 5-storey/17 metre building in our area. I think a 3 storey building is plenty.
If you have any further questions or would like me to do something further to express my opposition, please
let me know. I have never opposed anything like this before.
Regards,
Page 85 of 114
Eric Schneider
From:
Sent: Sunday, September 12'ZU2l9:44PM
To: Eric Schneider
Subject: [EXTERNAL]Reject theapp|icadondeve|opment
Hello Eric,
I hope you are doing well. I am writing regarding the development project with 261 units at 1673 Huron Road. I live on
West Oak Trail which is right behind the street where this development is located.
I strongly oppose this development project because it will massively over populate this area that it can even handle. I
remember one ofmyfriends saying "Day by day the system is getting more and more corrupt. Monopolistic real estate
investors will buy all the land in Ontario, make smaller and smaller condos and build 'prison' like homes and stuff us in
there."Thank you for taking the time tounderstand.
Page 86 of 114
Eric Schneider
From:_
Sent: Monday, September 27,20217:5lpKx
To: Eric Schneider; ke|lyoaUoway-sea|ick@kitchener.ca
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Development of 1673 Huron road
Hello,
K0yname b and I live in the Huron road area and I would like to express my concern in the plan development
for 1673 Huron road and I am against that planning due to the fact that we already have traffic problems as it is in this
area, if the plan was to be approved it would mean more traffic and noise also people would park on the streets or the
tepperman plaza more loitering/littering, might also be uptick in crime/vandalism when you add 261 units.
Right now it's manageable even though I notice lots of loitering happening at the plaza of teppermans so please don't
grant the development of 1673 Huron road, we are trying to live a peaceful life in the outskirts of the downtown core.
Thankyou
Page 87Of114
Eric Schneider
From:
Sent: Monday, September 27'20218:10PM
To: Eric Schneider; Kelly GaUoway'Sealock
Subject: [EXTERNAL) Application for development - 1673 Huron Road
Hello,
I am a resident of Netherby Lane, which is located next to the new development at 1673 Huron Road, and would like to
share myfeedback.
I feel that this development should be limited to 4 stories as per the current zoning for our neighborhood.
AS story building will not fit the neighborhood, as currently the tallest buildings in the area are 3 stories.
Additionally, I have concerns regarding parking for 261 new units. Visitor parking is already a big issue in our
neighborhood as there is not enough street parking available. Adding so many new units will exacerbate this problem.
Please donot change the zoning and keep the limit to4stories.
Thank you,
Page 88 of 114
Eric Schneider
From:
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2021 8:22 PM
To: Kelly Gal owmy'Sealock; Eric Schneider
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Application for development
Hello
I am a resident on Postmaster Dr in Kitchener. We 100% DO NOT agree to the zoning changes that have been applied
nor.
We DO NOT want a 3 apartment buildings, five stories high to go into our neighborhood! This neighborhood isn't built
for such ostructure.
The high traffic this would cause .. having 261 units in this area vvpu|d be unbearable. The flow wfpeople would just be
too much as well. This is a quiet, safe, family neighborhood. We would like to keep it that way. We do not agree to the
zoning changes,
Thank you for your time,
Aconcerned resident
Sent from my iPhone
Page 89 of 114
Eric Schneider
From:
Sent: Monday, September 27,2U21 8:31 PM
To: Eric Schneider, Kelly Ga||ovvay-Sealock
Subject: [EXTERNAL]Development inthe Neighborhood
Hello,
We received a request requiring we submit comments for an application for a recent Development in the
neighborhood.
We have concerns about the intended plan because of parking spaces . The developer is literally allocating 1 parking per
household, which is NOT realistic for the most part and street parking is currently an issue |nthe environ.
In addition, this will affect the aesthetic and appearance of this area.
we politely disagree to this intended development.
Thank You,
Resident
Page 90 of 114
Eric Schneider
From:
Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2021 8:56 AM
To: Eric Schneider; Kelly Galloway-Sealock
Cc:
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Concerned on Development on Property 1673 Huron Road Kitchener
Hi,
I agree with the concerns raised from the owner 920 Orr Court Kitchener Ontario, regarding the development of the S
story building on 1673 Huron Road Kitchener.
Thanks
Kitchener
Page 91 of 114
Eric Schneider
From
Sent Tuesday, September 2fL2021 9:30 AM
To: Eric Schneider
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 4 or 5 story apartment
Hi
I am resident living in the area of tepperman plaza. I am against not only for 5 story but against 4 story as well. Due to
shortage ufparking space.
Please do not let this project go through.
Regards
Concern citizen
Page 92 of 114
Eric Schneider
From:
Sent: Tuesday, September 28'2O21 10:17 AM
To: Eric Schneider; Kelly GaUowoy'Sealock
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 1673 Huron Road development plans
Hello
|amreaching out regarding the development for 1673 Huron Road Kitchener. The development concept outlines a 261
Multiple Dwelling unit that is 5 storeys. I have been advised that the original plan for this property were 4 storey
apartments and itiscurrently zoned for this.
I live in the surrounding neighborhood, very close to and within eye distance of this property. If this Multiple Dwellings
unit isbuilt, it is going to look completely disproportional to the neighborhood. This will not only negatively impact the
appearance of the neighborhood to home and business owners, but it will impede on the little privacy we currently
have.
As a resident of this neighborhood for over 5 years, I feel there is not enough infrastructure in place to currently support
people who already live here. This includes roads/parking but also schools and child care. I have 3 young children, I could
not get my oldest son into preschool at Janet Metcalfe as there were 100 kids in front of him. He has been on the list for
2 years. We have to drive him 10 minutes in towards the city to find a preschool that had the capacity to accept him.
Adding this many units to the neighborhood will only add to the overpopulation of schools/claycare facilities.
Furthermore, this is a quiet subdivision with slow traffic flow and away from busy streets. I feel that adding the 261
multiple Dwelling until will take away from this aspect of the neighborhood that many of us love. The existing roads and
parking spaces are already overwhelmed and we make due how we can.
It is my hope you can take these points and the current residents of this neighborhood into consideration. We have no
problem with the original plan for this property and hope that the original zoning can be adhered to.
Sincerely
Page 93 of 114
Eric Schneider
III
From:
Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2021 2:44 PM
To: Eric Schneider
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Development Concerns - Huron Rd
Hello Eric,
I am sending this email as I would like to oppose the new development plans in the Huron area.
I am a home owner nearby, and i believe the developer should adhere to the zoning regulations already set by the city of
Kitchener.
Thank you for your time,
Page 94 of 114
Eric Schneider
99000
From:
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2021 8:18 AM
To: Eric Schneider
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 1673 Huron Road
Good morning,
I received notice of an application for a multi dwelling development at 1673 Huron Road.
I'm really not a fan of this application. I live just a few streets over from the proposed lot and I feel it would diminish the
atmosphere of our neighbourhood.
There doesnt seem to be enough parking provided for the residents which means there will be a spill over on our streets
and parking in our neighbourhood is already getting bad, especially in winter.
Please consider rejecting this application.
Thanks,
Page 95 of 114
Eric Schneider
From:
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2021 9:59 AM
To: Eric Schneider; Kelly Galloway-Sealock
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 1673 Huron Road
Goodmorning.
My name is . I relocated to Stratus Street in Kitchener from Galt, Cambridge in March of 2016.
Needless to say, the growth around us in less than 6 years has been staggering.
I contact you today regarding the proposed development at 1673 Huron Road.
I understand the need for more affordable housing in the region.
Having said that, this choice of location for a 261 unit apartment complex in this area is absurd. We barely have the
roads ( minimum 2 cars per home folks ) and infrastructure to handle the amount of people and cars that Mattamy and
all the other builders have attracted to this area.
if this monstrosity cannot be avoided, the zoning in place for this area has to be adhered to. Maximum 4 stories in
height.
Lastly..... Interested in buying a townhouse on Stratus Street?
Respectfully.
Page 96 of 114
Eric Schneider
Fronx
To:
Good afternoon Eric and Kelly,
Wednesday, September 2l2021 11:22 AM
Eric Schneider; Kelly GaUoway'Sealock
[EXTERNAL] Property development at 1673 Huron Rd.
We recently received notice about the building plans for 1673 Huron Rd about a potential development of a S story
buildings.
K4ypartner and | agree with and vvefeel that a5story building would not beappropriate for the land and
area surrounding considering the limited parking availability, as well as the negative impacts on the aesthetics of the
area.
Please feel free to ask us any questions by email or cell:
Thank you,
Page 97Of114
Eric Schneider
From:
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2021 3:43 PM
To: Eric Schneider
Cc: Kelly Galloway-Sealock
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Objection to zoning change
Dear Eric and Councilor Kelly
I live on t, Kitchener, in the same subdivision of the area requesting zoning change to accommodate 5 story
apartment building. This request is should NOT be granted because the impact on the character of the neighborhood
and huge impact on already stretched parking space.
We categorically reject this proposal.
Thanks
Page 98 of 114
Eric Schneider
PON
From:
Sent: Wednesday, September 29,2O21]:47PK4
To: Eric Schneider; Kelly GoUoway-Sealock
Subject: [EXTERNAL] proposed amendment to zoning
I am writing to say that I am opposed to the amendment for the development at 1673 Huron Road in Kitchener. | live on
Stratus St and am already concerned with the density of development in the area in relation to pedestrian traffic and
lack oftransit and support services. The original plan for 3 story 1ownhomesfits with the region, 5story is high density
for this area that is already lacking in parking spaces. It's not likely to relieve any affordable housing crisis but rather
shows alevel ofgreed that isalready consuming the development world.
K4yvote isno.
Store Manager / Service Manager
Page 99 of 114
Eric Schneider
From:
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2021 4:07 PM
To: Eric Schneider; Kelly Galloway-Sealock
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 1673 Huron Road Development/Against 5 Story Buildings
Attachments: 20210928_095314 jpg
As per the letter attached, we are also completely against the 5 story buildings to be built at 1673 Huron Road
as per the reasons in the letter.
We are totally in agreeance to the 4 story buildings according to the current
zoning.
We have been here since 2015 and have seen a lot of changes, especially the corner of Fischer-Hallman/West
Oak Trail where several townhomes are crammed in that lot.
Respectfully,
Page 100 of 114
street parking available on any
that if this development wa:s'ta
e suNy er e rndd anal daLjs 1
streets fihroughout the subdivis
street parking is already a prof
Public-transit in this area of Kitc
residents in each of these mart
would like to see more detalle
allowed for adequate charging
charge,bectri yei°ricies Ir ' 4,61 n
nelghborliood c,661d support th
the neighboring residential`are
rr t'hseesan'io ttil,.
City of Kitchener when ourneigh,borho(
if fou egr e'with;llh- erns off' M aj
S Ot mb r tJI)'rr,y %J1
jj
Eric Schneider, City of Kitchener'Planne
Galloway-Sealock,'Ward 5 City Councill
If you have any questions, feel free`to e
these important concerns. `
Eric Schneider
Frmnn
Sent Wednesday, September2021 4:28 PK4
To: Eric Schneider
Cc: Kelly GaUoway'5ealock
Subject: [EXTERNAL]1E8Huron Road comments
Hello Eric,
Myname b� id I am living in the Huron area, in Mattamy Wildflowers subdivision. I would like to
provide you with some of my concerns/comments regarding the upcoming project
VVeare living close tnthis project site.
- The zoning of this area allows only upto 4 storeys building if my understanding is correct. Considering how busy this
street (West Oak Trail) and nearby areas already is and one under construction (right opposite to the newly proposed
one), allowing another S story building with 261 units would be way overcrowding this area for sure.
5 storey buildings would be out of proportion with all of the surrounding homes and businesses. (I even think same for
4 storey buildings here, I know it is allowed per zoning regulation though)
The plan allows for only 1 parking place per unit, I feel this drastically under -represents the parking requirement of the
residents. There is no/very|h1|e street parking available surrounding the newly proposed building. Considering the
current street parking is already a problem in our division, this will add more fuel to the problem.
For these reasons I would expect the builder to adhere to the zoning regulations established by the City when this
Mattamywildflower subdivision was originally planned.
Stay safe and Thank you,
Kitchener, NIRCU2
Cc: City councillor: Kelly Galloway -Sea lock
Page 102 of 114
Eric Schneider
From:
Sent: Wednesday, September 29,2031 8:27 PM
To: Eric Schneider; Kelly Gal oway-5ealock; hphce@gapgrnupza;Mayor
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 1673 Huron Road - Proposed Development
To whom it may concern,
VVgwish t0 provideCOD101eOtGiOregapdstOth8p[OOO8edd8V8|OpOlent8t1873HUnDnRogd.\8/e8Pethe
owners and residents of an existing residential hOO18 , that will Shane a direct property line with
this proposed development. To say we are upset at the possibility of 5 story apartment buildings is an
understatement. When we purchased our current home it was with the intention of living in a subdivision with
low traffic flow and away from busy streets. We purchased our home on a court for the additional privacy, noise
and traffic reduction. The fact that our backyard will now be home to potentially 261 units changes our entire
home life experience. It is our hope that our frustrations are considered and the proposal is kept to the
currently zoned 4 story buildings with extra barriers for both visual and purposeful means being put in place for
the existing residents tOcontinue tOenjoy SO[D8 SeDlb|aOCB of living in 8 quiet subdivision.
The CU[ReOt proposal lacks the infrastructure for sufficient parking and traffic flow. It is our understanding that
the City OfKitchener requires only 1 parking spot per unit which means that the 32Oparking spots for 2G1 UOd5
is inadequate for not only the residents, never mind any visitors to those residents. Given the existing
neighborhood and adjacent plaza, there is absolutely no additional parking available toresidents of this
development. Our concern isthat these additional vehicles ofboth residents and their guests will encroach DD
our neighboring streets that are already poorly suited tovisitor parking and are used tobypass traffic on main
streets causing them to be congested. This, combined with residents parking in existing business parking \otS,
will cause those local businesses to suffer the !oSB of spaces. Leaving these proposed structures at the current
legal limit of stories certainly won't eliminate the iGSu8S, but vvOu}d |83S8O the severity of the CVOCernS listed
above.
The proposed 2O1 units will also add b]the already overpopulated neighbouring schools. The two existing
elementary schools iOthe area, Janet Metcalfe and Jean SteCkJg, along with the one public high SChOO[ HUn]D
Heights, are already exceeding capacity. With the new zoned school not built yet, many existing
neighbourhood children are already bussed out of their neighbourhoods and well into the city tOattend schools.
The 5stories will add tOthe overpopulation Ofall three schools and the lack Ofday care facilities iOthe area will
mean even more of the existing residents will have to send their children outside of their neighborhoods for
oena.
In addition, current public transit in the area does not support this development having only one parking space
per UDb. nor the necessary travel that may be involved with schooling, dayC8reS and work. We, along with
other neighbours, also have concerns about whether or not this development is taking into consideration
sustainability measures such as adequate power and EV charging infrastructure to fulfill the Provincial and
Federal government's mandates tOeliminate fossil -fueled vehicles by2O3O-2O35.
Given that our property line is shared with this proposed development we have researched the City of
Kitchener requirements for barriers between parking areas and existing residential spaces. It is our
understanding that this is typically 8 8'VVOOdgD privacy fence. This is not to our liking as the noise from the
Units and traffic will directly impact our living envinODDl6nL Not to Dl8DtiOD S8fGiy and privacy issues that
towering buildings encroaching ODour yard will have. There iSalready 8O8'VVODdgDfence bordering the
proposed development along more than half Dfthe property line and @ chain link 4'fence along our section.
Ourselves along with our neighbours, would like to see the developer board and extend the existing 8' fence by
erecting 8D8'vvODdBOfence iDthe same style along our property line and the other properties towards
Westoak Trail. This would not only be the more cost-effective approach but would also provide a uniform look,
Page 103 of 114
consistent barrier and reduction of noise pollution between the development and the four neighboring
properties. This will allow the existing neighbours to feel as though they will continue living in a neighborhood
and not a towering condo/parking lot development. Our feeling is that an 8' privacy fence would also provide us
with more security considering we would now by neighbouring a full and busy parking lot.
Given our noise, privacy and safety concerns we would also like to see a green space be included by the
developer between the property line (8' proposed fence) and the development's parking lot on its western
edge. We would like this space to accommodate mature trees and grass. We request that 16' evergreen trees
be used to provide an additional, attractive visual and sound barrier for the existing residential properties.
Considering the location of the City of Kitchener's Heritage designated property, ( �i it next door
neighbour), all neighbouring residents were contractually committed to respecting the Heritage designation in
the design of our homes. This included, but was not limited to, the design of our homes, colour selections of
our exteriors, and the landscaping of our properties. We would like the development to take this into
consideration in the design of their structures as well as providing the aforementioned aesthetic tree barrier
across the entire back of the development respectful of the Heritage Home, along with the neighbouring
homes.
We hope that the City and developer seriously consider our concerns and recommendations as they move
forward with the planning of this development. We recognize the importance of providing housing in the area
and feel that there isa solution that addresses this need respecting the conditions and concerns of the
neighbouring properties and our neighbourhood, as a whole.
Respectfully,
Page 104 of 114
Eric Schneider
From:
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 202110:34PK4
To: Eric Schneider
Cc: KeUyGaUoway-Sea|ock
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Concerns Re: Zoning Change 1673 Huron Road
Hello,
|amwriting to you as a concerned resident of the Huron Park neighborhood. I live in the Netherby Lane townhouse
complex near Fisher Hallman and Huron Road, located behind the Tepperman's plaza.
It is my understanding that community feedback is currently being considered for a zoning change and prospective
property development at 1673 Huron Road. The proposed 5 storey (over 60 feet in height) 261 unit apartment buildings
would directly impact my daily life.
| strongly discourage the City ofKitchener from approving GSPGroup's proposed building plans. Asaresident ofthe area
that would become a neighbour to these 3 new apartment buildings, I do not believe that this location is ideal for a
project ofthis magnitude.
Firstly, with housing expansion already rampant near the surrounding Fisher Hallman/Huron Road intersection traffic
conditions have been impacted. Both main roads being only one lane could not reasonably sustain further increased
traffic flow to this area.
Secondly, the Orr Court/Netherby Lane subdivision located behind the Tepperman's plaza is already struggling to
accommodate resident and visit parking. I do not believe that there is adequate space or means for the amount of
resident and visitor parking spaces that would be required, particularly to support multi -resident dwellings, for three
entire five story apartment buildings in that particular lot on Huron Road.
Thirdly, not only would this proposed plan severely and negatively impact the daily lives of current residents of the area
due to increased traffic and parking but it would also decrease the aesthetic appeal of the subdivision and potentially
decrease our property value.
This is currently a family friendly neighbourhood which was once peaceful and safe. This community has already been
struggling with an increase in criminal activity in recent months. Increasing the population size and density further will
only intensify this issue.
There is a reason that the current zoning rules for this area are currently set at 4 stories for residential structures. I hope
that the city of Kitchener will keep it's current tax paying residents best interest in mind and will deny GSP Group's
detrimental request.
Best regards,
Page 105 of 114
Eric Schneider
From
Sent Thursday, September 30, 2021 8:31 AM
To: Eric Schneider; Kelly Galloway-Sealock
Cc:
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 1673 huron road, kitchener
Hi Eric, Kelly,
We would like to express out concerns on the application for development of apartment buildings at 1673 Huron Rd,
Kitchener.
We live at, 5 and the entire neighborhood has townhouses, single and double detached homes. There
are already condo units being constructed behind our home (on West oak trail) and across from 1673 huron road. This
will bring more traffic to West Oak trail, Fisher Hallman Rd, and Postmaster Dr.
We are concerned that apartments built across from these condo, there will be too much traffic in a family friendly
neighborhood, and parking will be even more scarce.
Apartments buildings also do not fit the aesthetics of the area. We are also concerned that if this variance is approved,
even more units will be built along Hurom Road.
We ask that you please consider our concerns and ask the developer to adhere to the existing zoning regulations of our
neighborhood.
Thank you
Get Outlook for Android
1
Page 106 of 114
Eric Schneider
From:
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2021 12:11 PM
To: Eric Schneider; Kelly Ga I loway-Sea lock
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 1673 Huron Road
Good afternoon Eric & Kelly,
I live in Huron/Fischer Hallman area on Postmaster Dr. I've owned this home since May 2017, enough time to
see how the neighborhood has developed.
It's been brough to my attention that 1673 Huron Road might be developed in a different zoning manor than
originally planned for. This would increase the apartments buildings from being 4 level to being 5 level. I have
multiple concerns surrounding this, such as limited parking for the residents. I foresee an outpour of parking in
surrounding streets (such as my own) to accommodate parking needs.
I would request that the developer adhere to the zoning regulations established by the City of Kitchener when
our neighborhood was originally planned.
Page 107 of 114
Eric Schneider
From:
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2021 1:33 PM
To: Eric Schneider; Kelly Galloway-Sealock
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Application for development at 1673 Huron Road
To all members of the Planning Committee and City Council;
Good afternoon;
I am writing on behalf of my husband & myself. We live on West Oak Trail.
We are the original owners who purchased from Mattamy and we have already been severly let down when our street
became a thouroughfair to the mall. According to the Mattamy drawings, we bought on a dead end street! There are so
many people that use our street to avoid the roundabout, race, and some don't even stop at Ludolph Street so they can
beat the traffic & get out onto Huron Road before the ones in the roundabout. This is also very unsafe for all the children
playing at our end of the street. We have seen many close calls of a child biking or playing & almost getting hit. In
addition, there was nothing that showed the other development that is currently underway, or anything about this
one. We were told that these areas were for future expansion of the mall.
Another issue is the parking in this neigbourhood. It is very difficult to say the least & given that the mall doesn't allow
parking, it is in high demand. Current residents are already renting spots from each other. This proposed high density
dwellings will only make more parking issues, more safety issues for the kids around the cars. Additionally the current
schools are already at capacity. Aside from all of the aforementioned issues, the proposed multiple dwelling units do not
suit the neighbourhood. We firmly reject this proposal & would only accept more towns, like the current ones being
built.
Thank you for the opportunity to express our concerns.
Sincerely;
Sent from my Galaxy
Page 108 of 114
Eric Schneider
From:
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2821 2:22 PM
To: Eric Schneider; Kelly Ga||owmy-Sealock
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 1673 Huron Road Develpment Comments
Thank You for the opportunity to comment of the proposed development on Huron Road. | would like tostate first that
my wife and I are not opposed to development in general, we understand that all municipalities including the City of
Kitchener must use all of their available space where appropriate to provide for housing, commercial and industrial
opportunities. In particular we recognized the need for new apartment construction to house the growing population in
the region.
When we moved to our home in 2019 we understood that the property in question would be developed. At the time
the plan was for it to be 3 story townhomes similar to many already constructed in our neighbourhood. We now
understand that the zoning for this type of townhome is the same for 4 story apartment buildings. While wewould
prefer the initial concept of homes similar to those already in the subdivision we understand that the zoning allows for
the change.
We do however believe that when a community is planned, many things are considered. The number ofresidents,
traffic flow, needs for public transportation, parking and schools all come to mind. Planning also includes appearance
and aesthetics. For all of these factors we believe this development is best left to what it was zoned and planned for in
the initial concept for the neighbourhood.
I have outlined some of our concerns and requests for consideration from both the City and the Developer below:
1. It is understood that the City of Kitchener requires a barrier between parking areas and existing residential space that
isusually aG'wooden privacy fence. There is already an 8' wooden fence bordering the proposed development along
more than half o|property line. I would suggest the developer board the development side of the existing fence and
erect an 8' fence in the same style at the back and side of the two properties along the property line towards
VVestoak. This would provide a clean, consistent barrier between the development and the 3 neighboring properties.
3. It would be beneficial for a green space to be allowed by the developer between the property line fence and the
development's parking lot on its western edge. This space should be of appropriate size to accommodate mature trees
and grass. 16' evergreen trees would provide an additional, attractive visual and sound barrier for the existing
residential properties. It would also provide an aesthetic barrier respectful of the City of Kitchener's Heritage designated
property (our home) immediately tnthe west ofthe development,
3. The neighborhood around the proposed development on both sides of Fisher -Hallman is comprised of 2 story free
standing homes and 3story attached town homes and condominiums. The current zoning allowing for 4story structures
isappropriate for the neighboring homes and businesses. The proposed 5stories would not suit the existing
neighborhood and potentially negatively impact the property values of the neighboring homes. |fthe master plan
originally allowed for 4stories why isSeven being considered?
3. The proposed development lacks sufficient parking. | understand that the City ofKitchener requires only 1parking
place per unit. With absolutely no ancillary parking available to residents of this development this seems to be gravely
inadequate. There isnoadjacent street parking atall onHuron Road, West Oak and certainly not onFisher-
Hallman. The majority of these units will have more than one resident, this will mean an average of more than one
vehicle per unit. With 320 parking spots for 2GI units, where will these vehicles be parked? My concern is that
residents and their guests vehicles will be encroaching on neighboring streets that are already poorly suited to visitor
Page 109 of 114
parking for the current residents OR residents will park in existing business parking lots. Leaving these proposed
structures at the current legal limit of 4 stories will allow for an appropriate number of parking spotsfor residents and
their guests.
Current public transit in the area also does not support this development having only one parking place per unit.
4. With the Provincial and Federal Governments both encouraging the elimination of fossil fuel powered vehicles and
most automotive manufacturers committed to eliminating production of these vehicles in the time frame of 2030-2035
(less than 10 years away) has this development allowed for a minimum of 280 charging station for residents and guests
intheir proposal?
This should bearequirement ofthe City ofKitchener for a development ofthis size. |Sthe power grid inthis
area capable nfsupporting this development, all Dfits residents power needs AND the inevitability O[many
electric vehicles being present inthe near future?
5. We purchased our home from the person who restored it to the standards for which it won the 2019 Mike
& Pat Wagner Heritage Award from the City OfKitchener. It's our understanding that the standards Ofthe
entire neighbourhood were influenced bythe presence O[our house. With this iDmind the 4story maximum
for buildings would make sense. We also want tO ensure that KitChgO8r'S Heritage Committee has had @
chance toreview and add their input onthis proposal aswell.
Thank you again for the opportunity to have input in this important process. VVetruly hope our thoughts and
those Ofthe other residents Ofthe existing community near the proposed development are thoroughly
Page 110 of 114
Eric Schneider
From:
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2021 225 PM
To: Eric Schneider; Kelly Gal oway-Sealock
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Resident with Concerns Regarding Requested Variance at 1673 Huron Road
Hello,
K4yname is �,myself and myfamily reside at Kitchener, Ontario. Our home overlooks
the property of 1673 Huron Road and I recently learned there has been a variance requested to build three 5 storey
apartment buildings on the property. | vvmu|d like to formally express my concern with the requested variance, | believe
5 story buildings should not be allowed on the property and the developer should be required to comply with the
current zoning of the property and build no taller than 4 storey buildings, I have significant concerns regarding the large
number of units and lack of adequate parking spots proposed by the developer. There is absolutely no street parking
available on Huron Road and I believe the 1 parking spot per unit with a total of 61 guest parking spots proposed by the
developer drastically underrepresents the necessary parking requirements for such a apartment complex. Furthermore,
5 storey buildings would be out of proportion with the surrounding homes, condos and businesses which are largely 3
storeys orless.
Thank you very much for considering my concerns.
Kind regards,
Page 111 of 114
Eric Schneider
From:
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2021 10:25 PM
To: Eric Schneider
Ce: Kelly Gal loway-Sealock
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 1673 Huron- ZBA21/011/H/ES
Hello Eric
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to discuss this amendment to the zoning by-law on the application for 1673
Huron application #ZBA21/011/H/ES/
I live in the neighbourhood of this proposed project. This week I noticed the sign posted on West Oak Trail, near the
Tepperman's informing the neighbourhood about the amendment to the zoning by-law. We walk this way every few
days. The first time I saw this was on September 29th.
My concerns are;
- The neighbourhood has not had enough time to review the plans for this project. The sidewalk beside the sign is very
overgrown with weeds making it difficult for anyone to walk there and read the sign.
-The project is proposing 5 stories which is higher than any in the neighbourhood. It is also 2 floors higher than the
zoning by-law. This could create a precedent for future development in this growing area of South Kitchener, adding
strain on the infrastructure of the future neighbourhood amenities, services and parks.
-Increased height will also create more parking issues. This areas parking is already difficult to find, especially in the
winter.
Recommendations and Comments
-Extend the comment, share your thoughts time past the September 30th date giving people a chance to read all the
documents including the Urban Design Report. Please try to notify entire community of upcoming meetings.
-The Urban Design Report is very comprehensive. It has many well designed and thoughtful features.
Thank you
Page 112 of 114
Eric Schneider
From:
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2021 10:55 PM
To: Eric Schneider
Cc: Kelly Galloway-Sealock
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 1673 Huron Road
Hi Eric,
I have some concerns about the notice I received regarding the development for the property located at 1673 Huron
Road.
I have read through the Functional Servicing and Stormwater Management Report which indicates that the proposed
sanitary sewer for the Pumpkin Patch Lands has a flow rate of 5.649 L/s (as calculated by Stantec Consulting Ltd.).
However, the newly proposed 5 -storey apartments sanitary flow design anticipates peak flow rate from the site to be
5.87 L/s. This is 0.221 L/s more than what the current capacity allows for. I understand this isn't significant, but my
concern is that the current infrastructure cannot support this extra flow based on 216 units for an area of 2.19ha.
However, if the zoning by-law was not to go through and the height remained at the current allowable limit, then the
sanitary peak flow rate should be sufficient. I have concerns that the current calculations show that the current design is
already exceeding the limits of the existing infrastructure. I'm also concerned that as this project progresses (if the
zoning by-law amendment is passed), that further calculations will show that the anticipated flows calculated for the site
will be even higher than the 5.87 L/s. Is the City able to confirm at this time that downstream capacity can hold this extra
flow?
I also feel that the proposed 5 -storey apartment buildings will stick out as the tallest structures in the neighbourhood
are 3 -storey's and already stand out as it is.
For the reasons above, I am firmly against the proposed zoning amendment. I purchased my house in this
neighbourhood one year ago. My wife and I had reviewed the zoning of the land adjacent to Tepperman's Furniture
Warehouse and had been happy with the current zoning. This application for a zoning by-law amendment would have
influenced our decision to purchase our house. We live in the townhouses adjacent to the historic farmhouse and are
concerned that 5 -storeys will allow apartment building residences to look at our porches and violate our privacy.
I have one final question for the City, has there been any agreements made with the Developer to provide funding for
any future City of Kitchener projects (i.e. road widening of Huron Road in this area, or stormwater management
provisions at RBJ Schlegel Park) that are required for this project?
I would also like to be added to any contact lists available for this project to be made aware of any future public
communications.
Thank you kindly,
Page 113 of 114
Eric Schneider
From;
Sent: Friday, October 1, 2021 10:02 PM
To: Eric Schneider
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 1673 HURON RD
Hi Eric
hope this e-mail reaches you well I'm one who own a property right beside the Huron rd development site and I see that
13.5 m height is just enough No need to have 17m as this will affect our privacy and the sunshine we are enjoying in our
back yards + it is planned before as to be 13.5m why we increase to the 17 m and also the place around is overcrowded
already beside the street parking issue ..
If I have the right to protest so I'm doing that now and I need that to go back as planned before "13.5 m" which I see is
enough Thank you "
2rOj4 Sent from my Whone
Page 114 of 114