HomeMy WebLinkAboutPSI Agenda - 2023-03-06Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee
Agenda
Monday, March 6, 2023, 7:00 p.m. - 9:15 p.m.
Council Chambers - Hybrid
City of Kitchener
200 King Street W, Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7
People interested in participating in this meeting can register online using the delegation registration
form at www.kitchener.ca/delegation or via email at delegation kitchener.ca. Please refer to the
delegation section on the agenda below for registration in-person and electronic participation
deadlines. Written comments received will be circulated prior to the meeting and will form part of the
public record.
The meeting live -stream and archived videos are available at www.kitchener.ca/watchnow.
*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 P. Singh
Vice -Chair: Councillor D. Chapman
Pages
1. Commencement
2. Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest and the General Nature Thereof
Members of Council and members of the City's local boards/committees are
required to file a written statement when they have a conflict of interest. If a
conflict is declared, please visit www.kitchener.ca/conflict to submit your written
form.
3. 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.
3.1 None.
4. Delegations
Pursuant to Council's Procedural By-law, delegations are permitted to address
the Committee for a maximum of five (5) minutes. All Delegations where
possible are encouraged to register prior to the start of the meeting. For
Delegates who are attending in-person, registration is permitted up to the start
of the meeting. Delegates who are interested in attending virtually must register
by TIME on March 6, 2023, in order to participate electronically.
4.1 Item 6.1 - Andrea Sinclair and Juliane vonWesterholt, MHBC Planning
4.2 Item 6.2 - Kristen Barisdale, GSP Group
5. Discussion Items
5.1 None.
6. 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.
6.1 Oficial Plan Amendment OPA22/10/C/BB and 45 m 3
Zoning By-law Amendment ZBA22/17/C/BB,
45-53 Courtland Avenue East, Cantiro
Courtland GP, DSD -2023-065
(Staff will provide a 5 minute presentation on this matter.)
6.2 Oficial Plan Amendment OPA21/009/K/AP and 90 m 74
Zoning By-law Amendment ZBA21/014/K/AP,
4396 King Street East & 25 Sportsworld Drive,
Sportsworld Shopping Centre and Taylorwood
Park Homes Inc, DSD -2023-021
(Staff will provide a 5 minute presentation on this matter.)
7. Information Items
7.1 Significant Planning Applications Update - Quarterly Report - DSD -2023- 288
084
8. Adjournment
Mariah Blake
Committee Administrator
Page 2 of 307
Staff Report
J
IKgc.;i' r� R
Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee
DATE OF MEETING: March 6, 2023
SUBMITTED BY: Garett Stevenson, Interim Director of Planning, 519-741-2200
ext 7070
PREPARED BY: Brian Bateman, Senior Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7869
WARD(S) INVOLVED: Ward 9
DATE OF REPORT: February 3, 2023
REPORT NO.: DSD -2023-065
SUBJECT: Official Plan Amendment Application OPA22/10/C/BB and Zoning
By-law Amendment Application ZBA22/17/C/BB, 45-53 Courtland
Avenue East, Cantiro Courtland GP
RECOMMENDATION:
A. That Official Plan Amendment Application OPA22/10/C/BB for Cantiro Courtland GP
requesting a change to the Land Use Designation on the parcel of land specified and
illustrated on Schedule `A', be adopted, in the form shown in the Official Plan
Amendment attached to Report DSD -2023-065 as Appendix `A' and 'Al', and
accordingly forwarded to the Region of Waterloo for approval; and further
B. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA22/17/C/BB for Cantiro Courtland GP
be approved in the form shown in the "Proposed By-law" and "Map No. 1" attached to
Report DSD -2023-065 as Appendix `B' and `131'.
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
The purpose of this report is to evaluate and provide a planning recommendation regarding
Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment applications for subject lands located
at 45-53 Courtland Avenue East. It is Planning staff's recommendation that the applications be
approved.
The proposed Amendments support the development of mid -rise housing.
Community engagement included:
o circulation of a notice postcard to residents and property owners within 240m of the
subject site;
o installation of billboard notice sign on the property;
o a City -led Neighbourhood Meeting (November 14, 2022);
o discussions with interested members of the public;
o a third notice of statutory public meeting postcard was circulated to all residents and
property owners within 240 metres of the subject site, as well as those who responded
to the preliminary circulation; and,
o notice of the public meeting was given in The Record on February 10, 2023.
*** 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 307
This report supports the delivery of core services.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Cantiro Courtland GP is seeking Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments to build a 6 storey
multiple dwelling containing 64 residential units and 52 parking spaces. Staff recommends that the
applications be approved.
REPORT:
The subject lands consist of three properties to be merged together, 45 Courtland Avenue East (the
second lot east of the intersection of Benton Street and Courtland Ave. E.), 49 and 53 Courtland
Avenue East. All three buildings were former single detached residential uses. The buildings had
been vacant for years. There was a building fire early in January of 2022 and as a result, the buildings
have been demolished. The subject lands are approximately 0.26 ha (0.64 acres) in size.
The subject lands are in proximity to Downtown Kitchener. The immediate surrounding area includes
a mix of land uses including commercial, mixed use, residential and institutional.
0' r
uBJECT AREA
N,.
4
Figure 1 — Location Map
Page 4 of 307
Development Proposal:
The proposed development consists of a 6 -storey multiple residential building. At the base of the
building, there are 5 townhouse style units facing Courtland Avenue. The building is proposed to
contain a mix of 1, 2 and 3 bedroom units for a total of 64 residential units. One level of structured
parking below grade is proposed with a total of 52 parking spaces. In addition, 4 barrier -free and 3
visitor parking spaces are located at the rear of the building on a surface parking area.
The proposed building is rectangular in shape addressing the street along the Courtland Avenue
frontage, thereby maintaining a consistent setback of 19.9 metres from the properties along Martin
Street to the rear. The parking garage will have direct access from Courtland Avenue through a
cantilevered structure design providing screening of the garage entrance from the street and the
neighbouring property to the west. The gross floor area of the building is approximately 5,607.5 m2
with a Floor Space Ratio of 2.4. The site plan and building renderings are shown below in Figures 2
and 3, respectively.
An indoor amenity area comprising 88 sq, m is provided and is located adjacent to the outdoor
amenity area and a landscaped patio space thereby creating an indoor/outdoor combined amenity
area at the rear of the building for the exclusive use of the building's residents. The entire rear yard
will be screened from view or the rear yards along Martin Street through a combination of a solid
fence and vegetation along the common property line.
Figure 2 - Proposed Site Plan (Edge Architects)
Page 5 of 307
11
PNGPVaSCtl
NIYI �N
%YtYWC WhIALI XC5
IY 41 I 14 s1�
°v1"'
i
7
m �
Figure 2 - Proposed Site Plan (Edge Architects)
Page 5 of 307
Figure 3— Renderings (Edge Architects)
Proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment Applications:
To implement the proposed development both an Official Plan Amendment (OPA) and Zoning By-
law Amendment (ZBA) are required.
The purpose of the OPA is to add a special policy area to Map 12, the Mill Courtland Woodside Park
Neighbourhood Land Use Plan Plan. The Official Plan Amendment relates to policy 13.4.1.7 and
13.4.4.6 of the Mill Courtland Woodside Park Neighbourhood Secondary Plan which limits density
to a Floor Space Ratio (FSR) to 1.0 for 43 and 49 Courtland and to 1.5 for 53 Courtland Avenue.
The Secondary Plan also limits the maximum height on 53 Courtland Avenue to 11.5 metres. The
Official Plan Amendment is requesting that the subject lands be permitted a maximum Floor Space
Ratio of 2.4, a maximum building height of 21 metres, and a minimum rear yard setback of 19 metres.
In addition to the Official Plan Amendment, the applicant will require a Zoning By-law Amendment.
The subject lands are zoned `Commercial Residential One Zone (CR -1)' and `Commercial
Residential One Zone (CR -1) with Special Regulation Provision 130R' as per Schedule 85 of Zoning
By-law 85-1. The ZBA will be requesting the following:
1. A Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 2.4, whereas an FSR of 1.0 is permitted.
2. A side yard setback from eastern property line of 2.0 metres, whereas 3.0 m is required.
Page 6 of 307
3. A maximum building height of 21 m, whereas 18 m is permitted.
4. A minimum rear yard setback of 19 metres.
5. A rate of 0.81 per unit for Multiple Dwelling Units, greater than 51.0 sq.m. in size whereas
1.25 spaces per dwelling unit is required for a total of 52 spaces.
6. Seeking permission to amend Section 6.2.1 b) vi) B) to permit Visitor Parking at a rate of
13% of required parking whereas a 20% is required (i.e.,7 Visitor Parking spaces whereas
11 are required).
Planning Analysis:
Provincial Policy Statement, 2020
The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) provides policy direction on matters of provincial interest
related to land use planning and development. The PPS 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 context of the surrounding neighbourhood. The subject lands are within an
existing neighbourhood in a Transit Station Area with adequate 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. Policies of the Growth Plan promotes growth within strategic
growth areas including major transit station areas, to provide a focus for investments in transit and
other types of infrastructure. The Growth Plan supports planning for a range and mix of housing
options and higher density housing options that can accommodate a range of household sizes in
locations that can provide access to transit and other amenities.
The subject lands are located within the City's delineated built-up area, within a Major Transit Station
Area and on a Regional Roadway. The proposed development represents intensification and will
help the City achieve density targets. The proposed designation and zoning will support a higher
density housing option that will help make efficient use of existing infrastructure, parks, roads, trails,
and transit. The multiple dwelling is also proposed to include a range of 1, 2 and 3 bedroom
apartment units, with direct access to Courtland Avenue, increasing the variety of housing options
for future residents.
City of Kitchener Official Plan:
Urban Structure
Page 7 of 307
The Official Plan establishes an Urban Structure for the City of Kitchener and provides policies for
directing growth and development within this structure. Intensification Areas are targeted throughout
the Built-up Area as key locations to accommodate and receive the majority of development or
redevelopment for a variety of land uses. Primary Intensification Areas include the Urban Growth
Centre, Major Transit Station Areas, Nodes and Corridors, in this hierarchy, according to Section
3.C.2.3 of the Official Plan.
The subject lands are located within a Major Transit Station Area. The planned function of the Major
Transit Station Areas is to provide densities that will support transit, and achieve a mix of residential,
office, institutional and commercial uses. They are also intended to have streetscapes and a built
form that is pedestrian -friendly and transit -oriented. Staff are of the opinion that the proposed Official
Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment will support a development that complies with the
policies for a Major Transit Station Area.
The proposed development addresses the Major Transit Station Development Criteria from Section
3.C.2.22 of the City of Kitchener Official Plan as follows:
The proposed development conforms to the Regional Official Plan as discussed in Section
5.0 of this report.
The development also meets the intent of the Transit -Oriented Development Policies of
Section 13.C.3 as it plans for a development that is a medium density - compact urban form
that is within 5 minutes to a transit stop, provides multiple residential use that contributes to
the mix of uses in this evolving transit station area along Courtland Avenue.
A singular vehicular access point off of Courtland Avenue is planned for the site
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. This medium rise
multiple dwelling proposal is a mid -rise built form that provides an option that bridges the gap
between high density residential towers and low density housing such as single detached dwellings.
The proposed housing type is an important segment in Kitchener's housing continuum.
Policy 4.C.1.9. states that residential intensification and/or redevelopment within existing
neighbourhoods will be designed to respect existing character. A high degree of sensitivity to
surrounding context is important in considering compatibility.
Policy 4.C.1.12. notes that 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. states that 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.
The subject lands provide an opportunity for intensification within a Major Station Transit Area
(MTSA) on lands that are currently underutilized. The proposed building is planned as medium
density multiple residential development. The density proposed provides for a transit
supportive/transit-oriented development. The variety of unit types (one, two and three bedroom(s))
have been planned to provide more attainable housing options to future residents to accommodate
various housing needs within the MTSA and along the transit corridor. The proposed built form
compliments the existing scale of develop in this area while providing modest intensification.
Page 8 of 307
Despite the increase in height and Floor Space Ratio for the proposed development, the six -storey
height only slightly exceeds the maximum height permitted by the proposed zoning that is being
advanced as part of the Neighbourhood Planning Review (NPR) which is recommending 16 metres
or 5 stories and the proposed building is 6 storeys with a height of 21 metres. The proposed building
is in closer alignment with the regulations and direction in By-law- 2019-051, however, is not in effect
yet for these lands as the completion of the NPR is pending. The proposed regulations for
implementation in By-law 2019-051 do not apply to the lands yet. The current zoning By-law 85-1
did not contemplate intensification corridors as MTSAs did not exist in 1985, and as such the zoning
regulations do not reflect the current direction for height, massing, and density associated with
today's intensification objectives along the LRT and within th City's MTSAs.
The additional density and multiple residential housing will support the development of complete
communities by contributing the residential component of a mix of uses that are forming along
Courtland Avenue. The density of the units also contributes to energy conservation, using less
materials for more housing, and sharing of heating and cooling resources for smaller space. The
density will contribute to the ridership which supports municipal infrastructure and connects to
existing municipal services. Lastly, there are no natural heritage or cultural heritage features located
on the site.
Mill Courtland Woodside Park Secondary Plan
The subject lands are designated the as a Low Density Commercial Residential. The intent of the
Low Density Commercial Residential designation is to recognize existing areas of small scale
commercial and residential development as well as to allow for the low rise, lower density
redevelopment of such areas with commercial institutional and residential uses. Lands within this
designation are intended to create transitional or buffer areas between some industrial and
surrounding residential areas and as such the maximum residential density shall be limit to 100 units
per hectare with a Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 1.0. One of the three properties (53 Courtland)
contains site-specific regulation 130R that permits a FSR of 1.5 and and restrictsthe building height
to 10.5 metres within 30 metres of Martin Street.
The Secondary Plans were established prior to a final determination of the LRT route and prior to
the establishment of MTSAs. As such, MTSA policies in the Official Plan need to be considered as
they provide a framework to guide new development within Secondary Plan areas.
The proposed 6 storey mid -rise pedestrian -scaled development is at an appropriate density for
supporting a MTSA while remaining compatible with the low rise development in this neighbourhood.
Both height and massing of the building is directed towards Courtland Avenue and away from
existing low rise residential properties along Martin Street. Given the proposed height of 21 metres
and a proposed rear yard setback of 19 metres, the building height to separation distance is almost
at a ratio of 1:1. From an urban design perspective, a 1:1 ratio demonstrates a positive relationship
from a privacy and shadow impact perspective.
The main entrance to the building has direct access to the street and is a five minute walk to the
Queen ION station, with bus transit directly on Courtland Avenue and Benton Street. Resident
vehicle parking is located within underground parking and will be screened from the street frontage
and adjacent lands through building design and on-site fencing. Seven (7) surface parking spaces
are located at the rear of the building for barrier free and visitors and will be shielded through the
fencing along the rear property line. Bicycle parking will be proposed for use by residents through
secure bicycle storage provided internal to the building and outdoor visitor bicycle storage. A bicycle
maintenance room is also proposed in on the ground floor of the building for residents' usage.
Spaces have also been provided for cargo and oversized bikes.
Urban Design
Page 9 of 307
Section 11 of the City's OP outlines policies with respect to urban design. To address these policies,
the applicant has submitted an Urban Design Brief, and conceptual site plans, elevations, and
renderings. This documentation has been reviewed by City Urban Design staff and will be
implemented through the subsequent Site Plan Review process. In accordance with Urban Design
Policies, staff is of the opinion that the site design provides for a high-quality public realm, safe site
circulation for all modes of transportation, and that site servicing components are functional and
screened from view from the public realm. The development will enhance pedestrian usability,
respect, and reinforce human scale, create an attractive streetscape, and complements and
contributes to the character of the Cedar Hill neighbourhood. Through the detailed site plan review
process, staff will ensure that appropriate landscaping will be installed to enhance the building and
streetscape, and lighting will be provided to maintain safe and appropriate light levels which minimize
light spill onto neighbouring properties and are dark sky compliant. Staff will continue to work with
the applicant to review the detailed elevations and materials, to ensure implementation of the
proposed built form and high standard of building design.
Proposed Cedar Hill/Schneider Creek Secondary Plan
The City of Kitchener drafted updated Secondary Plan policies in 2019 as part of the Neighbourhood
Planning Reviews (NPR) project. The Draft Cedar Hill and Schneider Creek Secondary Plan
proposes a Mixed -Use Low -Rise designation for the subject lands. Since that time, the Region of
Waterloo has recently undertaken a review of their Official Plan, including the delineation of Major
Transit Station Area boundaries. The Region has delineated the MTSA boundaries, and the subject
lands continue to be located within a MTSA. The Region's Official Plan review will inform the City of
Kitchener's MTSA implementation work, including updates to the Secondary Plans.
Policy Conclusion
Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposed Official Plan 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 zoned Commercial Residential One Zone (CR -1) and CR -1 with Special
Regulation Provision 130 as per Schedule 85 of Zoning By-law 85-1.
Area 1: From Commercial Residential One Zone (CR -1) in Zoning By-law 85-1 to Commercial
Residential One Zone (CR -1) with Special Regulation Provision 786R and Holding
Provision 98H in Zoning By-law 85-1.
Area 2: From Commercial Residential One Zone (CR -1) with Special Regulation Provision
130R in Zoning By-law 85-1 to Commercial Residential One Zone (CR -1) with Special
Regulation Provision 786R and Holding Provision 98H in Zoning By-law 85-1.
Official Plan policies in section 4.C.1.8. indicate that where special zoning regulations are requested
for residential intensification or a redevelopment of lands, the overall impact of the site specific
zoning regulations will consider compatibility with existing built form; appropriate massing and
setbacks that support and maintain streetscape and community character; appropriate buffering to
mitigate adverse impacts, particularly with respect to privacy; avoidance of unacceptable adverse
impacts by providing appropriate number of parking spaces and an appropriate landscaped/amenity
area.
Staff offer the following comments with respect to the proposed Special Regulation Provision 786R
and Holding Provision 98H.
1. Seeking permission to amend Section 44.3.1 of Zoning By-law 85-1 to permit a Floor Space
Ratio (FSR) of 2.4, whereas an FSR of 1.0 is permitted.
Page 10 of 307
Floor Space Ratio (FSR) regulates the amount of building massing permitted to be developed on
the property based on lot size to ensure site development is at an appropriate scale for the
neighbourhood. The intent of the FSR that currently applies to the subject lands is to maintain a
relatively lower rise -built form in this area. The proposal is to increase the FSR from 1.0/1.5 to 2.4.
Through design considerations (i.e., increased rear yard setbacks, building stepbacks), the applicant
has demonstrated that any potential impacts (ie. shadow, privacy) associated with the increased
FSR can been mitigated. As such, it is the opinion of staff an appropriate balance has been achieved
that allows for intensification yet is sensitive to adjacent low-rise development.
2. Seeking permission to amend Section 44.3.6 b) of Zoning By-law 85-1 to permit a side yard
setback from eastern property line of 2.0 metres, whereas 3.0 metres is required.
To improve compatibility and minimize impacts, the proposed building was shifted further away from
existing residences located to the west. This has resulted in the proposed building positioned 2.0
metres from the eastern property limit instead of 3.0 metres required under the by-law. A reduced
easterly side yard is supportable in this instance given that it is located next to a commercial building.
To achieve compatibility with existing low-rise residences, this is an appropriate positioning of the
building.
3. Seeking permission to amend Section 44.3.6 of Zoning By-law 85-1 to require a minimum
rear yard setback of 19 metres, whereas 7.5 metres or one half the building height,
whichever is greater is required.
Again, to improve compatibility and minimize impacts, the proposed building was shifted further away
from existing residences located to the south along Martin Street. This has resulted in the proposed
building positioned being 19+/- metres from the rear property limits instead of 7.5 metres required
under the by-law. This regulation ensures this larger setback is maintained through the site plan
process.
4. Seeking permission to amend Section 44.3.6 of Zoning By-law 85-1 to permit a maximum
building height of 21 metres, whereas 18 metres is permitted.
An increase in the building is being sought that in effect, would allow for an additional storey being
added to the proposed multiple dwelling. Given the height and massing have been situated closer
to Courtland Avenue and further away from the Martin Street dwelling units, shadow impacts are
negligible, and privacy is maintained. Staff has no concern with increasing the building height from
18 metres allowed through Zoning By-law 85-1 to 21 metres.
5. Seeking permission to amend Section 6.2.1 a) to permit parking at a rate of 0.81 per unit for
Multiple Dwelling Units, greater than 51.0 sq.m. in size whereas 1.25 parking spaces per
dwelling unit is required for a total of 52 spaces.
6. Seeking permission to amend Section 6.2.1 b) vi) B) to require that 13% of the required
parking be in the form of Visitor Parking, whereas 20% is required.
The subject lands are located within a Major Transit Station Area (MTSA). Official Plan policies
regarding lands within a MTSA contemplate parking reductions for sites well served by transit. A
parking rate of 0.81 spaces per unit is being proposed resulting in a total of 52 spaces. The site is
within a 5 minute walk to an LRT station stop, 10 minutes to the downtown and is situated on a
regular transit route, which provide the visitors and residents a choice for alternative modes of
transportation. Additionally, the applicant has submitted a Planning Justification Report that included
justification about a decrease in the required parking supply. It also recommends a number of
Transportation Demand Management measures aimed at reducing vehicle usage and to promote
Page 11 of 307
alternative modes of transportation (ie. public transit, bicycles, etc.). Staff has reviewed the study
and is supportive of its findings and recommendations.
7. Holding Provision 98H
The Region of Waterloo is requesting that a holding provision be applied to these lands until such
time as a Record of Site of Condition and a detailed Stationary Noise study have been approved.
Proposed Zoning through Neighbourhood Planning Reviews
Properties located within the central MTSAs are undergoing Neighbourhood Planning Reviews
which includes updates to the Official Plan/Secondary Plans and to the proposed Zoning By-law.
The City of Kitchener has recently updated their Zoning By-law (2019-051) but did not include lands
within anticipated Major Transit Station Areas or within Secondary Plan areas. As part of the
Neighbourhood Planning Review the City has prepared draft amendments to the Official Plan and
Zoning By-law 2019-051, but these have not been formally approved by Council and are subject to
change.
WHAT WE HEARD
17 people provided comments
1 Neighbourhood Meetings held
984 households circulated and notified
Department and Agency Comments:
Preliminary circulation of the OPA and ZBA was undertaken on August 10, 2022, to applicable City
departments and other review authorities. No major concerns were identified by any commenting
City department or agency. Site Design and Building details will continue to be refined through the
Site Plan Approval process and will be generally consistent with the design considered through this
development application. Copies of comments are found in Appendix `D' of this report.
The following reports and studies were considered as part of this proposed OPA and ZBA:
1. Completed Application Form and Fees
2. Existing Conditions Plan
3. Conceptual Site Plan
4. 3D Massing Model
5. Planning Justification Report
6. Urban Design Score Card
7. Sustainability Statement
8. Conceptual Building Elevation Drawings
9. Conceptual Floor Plans
10. Environmental and Noise Report
11. Functional Servicing Report
12. Water Distribution and Storm Water Management Report
13. Parking Justification Brief
Page 12 of 307
Neighbourhood Comments and Staff Response:
Planning staff received 17 written submissions which are attached as Appendix "F". Comments were
received following the initial circulation in August 2022 and a Neighbourhood Meeting held on
November 14, 2022. The comments received from community members during the consultation on
these applications is described in greater detail below.
Overall, of the responses received in writing, 6 indicate general support for the proposed land use
and development. Of those expressing concern and comments, most were in the following areas:
• Building Design
• Tree Removals
• Grading, Berm & Retaining Walls
• Tenure
• Units Sizes & Affordability
• Construction Hours
• Traffic & Site Access
Building Design
In response to comments regarding the rear fagade, including comments from residents living on
Martin Street, significant improvements have been made to the rear building fagade to better break
up the massing. In addition, a stepback has been added above the ground floor. Main rooftop
mechanical equipment will be contained within a penthouse; any exposed mechanical systems on
the rooftop will be set back and partially screened by the perimeter parapet.
Tree Removals
Concerns were raised regarding the removal of trees and questions asked regarding the planting of
new trees. Due to underground parking several trees will have to be removed. New trees will be
planted as part of the development proposal and any street trees will be protected and if need be,
replaced. This will be addressed through the Site Plan Approval process and submission of a Tree
Management Plan.
Site Grading, Berm & Retaining Wall
There were concerns raised regarding the existing berm and retaining wall and whether the new
building would sit higher than surrounding properties. The berm will be removed resulting in a site
that will be flat at its four corners is and more in keeping with grades of surrounding properties.
Detailed grading plans will be prepared through the site plan approval process. It is not anticipated
that retaining walls will be required.
Tenure
Questions were asked as to whether the project would be rental or condominium. According to the
owner, tenure is yet to be determined at this point in time.
Unit Sizes, Types and Affordability
There were multiple comments regarding the need to incorporate 3 bedroom units. Questions were
asked as to the different types of units proposed and the affordability of the project. The current unit
breakdown includes a mix of 1 bedroom; 1 bedroom + Den; 2 bedroom and 3 bedroom units. The
project is not being planned as an affordable housing project, but rather a form of housing that is
more attainable.
Construction Hours/Disruptions
Construction work will occur during permitted hours as regulated by City By-laws. The intent is for
construction activity to occur between 7:OOam — 5:OOpm during weekdays. Evening / overnight and
Page 13 of 307
weekend work is not anticipated to be a regular occurrence. Any road closures will be communicated,
and a construction strategy formalized with City/Regional Transportation staff.
Traffic and Site Access
Courtland Ave. E. is a Regionally designated roadway and any development/re-development along
this corridor is subject to a Regional Road Access permit. As such, access for the proposed re-
development of 45-53 Courtland Ave. will be determined at the Site Plan Approval stage by the
Region. This could potentially include a right-in/right-out traffic movement, according to Regional
Transportation Planning staff.
Staff acknowledges there are several new developments which will create additional traffic at the
intersection of Benton and Courtland and along Courtland Avenue. The proposed development at
45-53 Courtland Avenue E. is expected to generate approximately 23 trips during the AM Peak Hour
(approximately 1 new trip every 3 minutes), and approximately 28 trips during the PM Peak Hour
(approximately 1 new trip every 2 minutes). Although Courtland Ave in this area is only two (2) lanes,
it is a Regional Arterial roadway and is designed to carry large amounts of vehicular traffic. Staff do
not anticipate the expected site generated trips to have a significant impact on the existing traffic
network.
The Region of Waterloo maintains a computerized model for the traffic network throughout the
Region that includes all known development proposals that have been approved to ensure that they
are addressing traffic impacts as needed. They Region also monitor signalized intersections to
evaluate volume -to -capacity ratios, vehicle delay, and more to ensure that signal timing is optimized
to reduce delay and help traffic flow as efficiently as possible.
Planning Conclusions
In considering the foregoing, staff is supportive of the proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning
By-law Amendment to permit 45 — 53 Courtland Avenue East to be developed with a multiple
dwelling. Staff is of the opinion that the subject applications are consistent with policies of the
Provincial Policy Statement (2020), conform to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe,
the Regional Official Plan, and the City of Kitchener Official Plan and represent good planning. Staff
recommends that the applications 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. Notice signs were posted on the property and information regarding
the application posted to the City's website in August of 2022. Following the initial circulation
referenced below, an additional courtesy notice of the public meeting was circulated to all property
owners and residents within 240 metres of the subject lands, and those responding in writing to the
preliminary circulation or after the Neighbourhood Meeting, which was held on November 14, 2022,
and Notice of the Public Meeting was posted in The Record on February 10, 2023 (a copy of the
Notice may be found in Appendix C).
Page 14 of 307
CONSULT — The OPA and ZBA were originally circulated to property owners and residents within
240 metres of the subject lands on August 10, 2022. In response to this circulation, staff received
written responses from 17 households. A Neighbourhood Meeting was then held on November 14,
2022.
PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES:
• Municipal Act, 2001
• Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13
• Provincial Policy Statement, 2020
• A Place to Grow. Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020
• Regional Official Plan, 2010
• City of Kitchener Official Plan, 2014
• Kitchener Growth Management Strategy
• Zoning By-law 85-1 & 2019-051
• City of Kitchener Urban Design Manual
REVIEWED BY: Tina Malone -Wright, Interim Manager of Development Review, Planning
Division
APPROVED BY: Barry Cronkite - Acting General Manager, Development Services
APPENDIX
Appendix A—
Proposed Official Plan Amendment
Appendix B
— Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment
Appendix C
— Newspaper Notice
Appendix D
— Department and Agency Comments
Appendix E
— Community Comments
Page 15 of 307
AMENDMENT NO. TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN
OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER
CITY OF KITCHENER
45-53 Courtland Avenue East
DRAFT DATED June 14, 2022
Page 16 of 307
AMENDMENT NO. TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN
OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER
45-53 Courtland Avenue East
INDEX
SECTION 1 TITLE AND COMPONENTS
SECTION 2 PURPOSE OF THE AMENDMENT
SECTION 3 BASIS OF THE AMENDMENT
SECTION 4 THE AMENDMENT
Page 17 of 307
AMENDMENT NO. TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN
OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER
SECTION 1 — TITLE AND COMPONENTS
This amendment shall be referred to as Amendment No. XX to the Official Plan of the City
of Kitchener. This amendment is comprised of Sections 1 to 4 inclusive and Schedule `A'.
SECTION 2 — PURPOSE OF THE AMENDMENT
The purpose of this amendment is to amend Special Policy 13.4.4.6 in the Mill Courtland
Woodside Park Secondary Plan to increase the maximum permitted Floor Space Ratio
and density on the subject lands and to amend the boundary of Special Policy Area No. 6
on Map 12 — Mill Courtland Woodside Park Secondary Plan.
SECTION 3 — BASIS OF THE AMENDMENT
The subject lands are located at 45-53 Courtland Avenue East. The subject lands are
designated Low Density Commercial Residential in the Mill Courtland Woodside Park
Secondary Plan, which forms part of the 1994 Official Plan. The Low Density
Commercial Residential designation in the Mill Courtland Woodside Park Secondary
Plan recognizes existing small scale commercial and residential development and
allows low density redevelopment with commercial, residential and institutional uses to
a maximum Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 1.0 and a maximum density of 100 units per
hectare per lot, provided the maximum FSR is not exceeded. The subject lands are also
located within a Major Transit Station Area (MTSA) which is considered a primary
intensification area.
An Official Plan Amendment is required to add a Special Policy to permit a maximum
Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 2.4 and a maximum residential density of 251 units per
hectare prior to any development occurring on the lands.
Since the adoption of the 1994 Plan and the associated Secondary Plans the City has
adopted a new Official Plan in 2014 and is currently in the process of reviewing the
Secondary Plan Areas as part of a Neighbourhood Planning Review (NPR) which is
ongoing. The preliminary indicators of the NPR propose a reorganization and
delineation of the Secondary Planning Areas including these lands, which will be
included in the future Cedar Hill and Schneider Creek with a proposed designation of
Mixed Use Low Rise. The Mixed Use Low Rise designation proposes a maximum Floor
Space Ratio of 2.0 and a 4 storey or 14 metres height for buildings. However, it is
important to note that this policy direction is not yet in effect, but it demonstrates a
commitment to slightly higher FSR and a mid -rise built form for development, which is
consistent with the proposed mid -rise 6 storey multiple residential development, and
Page 18 of 307
that these properties are an appropriate location for intensification and enhanced built
form along Courtland Avenue. This would also provide transition in the built form
massing, scale and density from the downtown and MTSA and the stable
neighbourhood along Martin Street.
The subject lands are located minutes from the Urban Growth Centre (UGC) and are
within 400 metres of the Queen Street LRT Stop and are identified in the 2014 Official
Plan as being within a Major Transit Station Area (MTSA). The proposed development
includes a medium intensity multiple residential development at a density to support
both transit usage and active transportation. The site will include a variety of
transportation demand management measures in order to encourage the use of
alternative modes of transportation including public transit.
The proposed development will implement the vision as set out in the Official Plan for
lands within a MTSA as being a compact, dense and transit supportive site. The subject
lands are strategically located within the Queen Street Major Transit Station Area, within
a Mixed Use Corridor just minutes from the UGC and directly along the light rail transit
route. Its prominent location makes it ideal for the density proposed.
The maximum floor space ratio, building height, density, front and side yard setbacks for
the building, as well as on-site parking will be regulated in the site-specific amending
zoning by-law to ensure urban design elements are implemented and onsite constraints
are addressed.
The proposal is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conforms to the Growth
Plan and complies with the Regional Official Plan, as it promotes walkability, is transit -
supportive, maximizes the use of existing and new infrastructure, and assists in
development of this area as a compact and complete community through the broad
range of uses. The proposed development implements the redevelopment vision for the
Major Transit Station Area as prescribed in both the current and newly adopted Official
Plan and is, therefore, good planning.
SECTION 4 — THE AMENDMENT
1. The 1994 City of Kitchener Official Plan is hereby amended as follows:
a) Part 3, Section 13.4.4. Special Policies, Policy 13.4.4.16 is added as follows:
"13.4.4.16. Notwithstanding the Low Density Commercial Residential
land use designation and policies for the lands municipally addressed as
45-53 Courtland Avenue East:
i) the maximum permitted Floor Space Ratio shall be 2.4.
ii) the minimum rear yard setback shall be 19 metres;
iii) the maximum building height shall be 21 metres;
iv) a Holding provision pursuant to Section 17.E.13 of the Official Plan
(2014) will apply to residential uses, day care uses and other sensitive
Page 19 of 307
uses. The Holding provision will not be removed until such time as a
detailed Stationary Noise Study and Record of Site Condition has been
acknowledged by the Province and a release has been issued by the
Region.
b) Map 12 — Mill Courtland Woodside Park Neighbourhood Plan for Land
Use is amended by revising the boundary of Special Policy Area No. 6 to
remove it from the lands municipally known as 53 Courtland Avenue East,
as shown on the attached Schedule `A'.
c) Map 12 — Mill Courtland Woodside Park Neighbourhood Plan for Land use
is amended to add Special Policy Area No. 16 to the lands municipally
known as 45-53 Courtland Avenue East, as shown on the attached
Schedule `A'.
Page 20 of 307
z .5 m m ='
z �e U m N
J Q a
IL a in—J C14 LU rY
ti
Q p Q N a) U C'4
a i
IL a) i to a).0Fu - Q N o _I
in z D -U
�HLL 0�0 m " E o o �
000 o m a faO m
Lu M° z oU) E -_ M o >U, ?
Ww z 0 o N L m Q co ° L c d W W
c in U rn � o in U) >. co O N z
2 J O o c c U 75 0 � .- a) Q U 2 E �— 2 � w
_HZ 2 U p p ° o ° a) 8 Q� (D 'o z F
Y LU E aa) E M M a Q U= o o� Q W z S a
L,L�00 � E- -0 m L v �J �� W (� a
ma)°° M�
f
oOo ?: -o E = ai a) Q
JcJO x O Q O O- � U o
CD O m n d (an
2 (n Q LL > z Y W
O i i uuuuum J >
z i i Q Q w
a 11:... �� i to
mu, • } 2 U)
g CO w
C. a, U Wd
LL z O
G
p w
0 N
o
O
LU
D
r � �0 / � � •�m W
co
LO
•� N
U NCD
am
��� • • �� ✓ r ` '- N
/ W
C� C)
Ilio, t
LU
U Q
f• � J
k e W W
OOF.L.� 3; .
z W
W >
a a / p
LU
•ti • •k
J zz
LLJ
h, Q
mu i �...„•” W
C)oV o LO
LOCl) LOz
BY-LAW NUMBER
OF THE
CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER
(Being a by-law to amend By-law No. 85-1, as amended, known as the
Zoning By-law for the City of Kitchener — Cantiro Courtland General Partner Ltd.
— 45-53 Courtland Avenue East)
WHEREAS it is deemed expedient to amend Zoning By-law 85-1 for the lands
specified above;
NOW THEREFORE the Council of The Corporation of the City of Kitchener
enacts as follows:
1. Schedule Number 85 of Appendix "A" to By-law 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 Commercial
Residential One Zone (CR -1) to Commercial Residential One Zone (CR -1) with
Special Regulation Provision 786R and Holding Provision 98H.
2. Schedule Number 85 of Appendix "A" to By-law 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 Commercial
Residential One Zone (CR -1) with Special Regulation Provision 130R to
Commercial Residential One Zone with Special Regulation Provision 786R and
Holding Provision 98H.
3. Schedule Number 85 of Appendix "A" to By-law 85-1 is hereby further amended
by incorporating additional zone boundaries as shown on Map No. 1 attached
hereto.
4. Appendix "D" to By-law 85-1 is hereby amended by adding Section 786R thereto
as follows:
Page 22 of 307
"786. Notwithstanding, Section 6.1.2 a), 6.1.2 b) vi), Section 6 and Sections
44.3.1 and 44.3.6 of this By-law, for the lands zoned CR -1, as shown
on Schedule 85 of Appendix "A", the following additional regulations
shall apply:
i) Required off-street parking for multiple dwellings greater than
51.0 square metres in size shall be provided at a rate of 0.7
spaces per unit for a total of 52 spaces;
ii) Required off-street visitor parking shall be provided at a rate of
10 per cent of the required parking for multiple residential uses
for a total of 7 spaces;
iii) A minimum of 10% of the parking spaces required for multiple
dwellings shall be designed to permit the future installation of
electric vehicle supply equipment;
iv) Where the calculation of the total required electric vehicle parking
spaces or parking spaces designed to permit the future
installation of electric vehicle supply equipment results in a
fraction, then the requirement shall be the next lowest number.
v) For Multiple Residential uses, the minimum requirement for Class
A bicycle parking stalls shall be 0.5 Class A Bicycle Stalls per
unit;
vi) For Multiple Residential uses, a minimum of 6 Class B Bicycle
Stalls shall be provided, and these may be shared with non-
residential uses.
vii) The maximum Floor Space Ratio (FSR) for the entire site shall
be 2.4;
viii) The minimum side yard setback from eastern property line shall
be 2.0 metres;
ix) The minimum rear yard setback shall be 19 metres;
Page 23 of 307
x) The maximum building height for the entire site shall be 21
metres including roof top mechanicals".
5. Appendix F of By-law 85-1 is hereby amended by adding Section 98H thereto as
follows:
"98. Notwithstanding Section 44 of this Bylaw, within the lands zoned CR -1
(786R) as shown as affected by this subsection on Schedule Number 85
of Appendix "A", only those uses which lawfully existed on the date of
passing of this By-law, shall be permitted to continue until such time as this
Holding Provision is removed by by-law once the City of Kitchener is in
receipt of a letter from the Regional Municipality of Waterloo, advising that:
a) a Record of Site Condition (RSC) in accordance with O. Reg. 153/04,
as amended, has been filed with the Ministry of Environment,
Conservation and Parks (MECP) Environmental Site Registry;
b) the Regional Municipality of Waterloo has received and approved a
copy of the RSC and the Ministry's RSC Acknowledgement letter,
c) a detailed stationary noise study has been completed and submitted
to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo which
addresses implementation measures and reviews the potential
impacts of the development on site noise sensitive receptors (e.g.
HVAC system on the sensitive points of reception) and the impacts
of the development on adjacent noise sensitive uses."
6. This By-law shall become effective only if Official Plan Amendment No_, (45-53
Page 24 of 307
NOW
Courtland Avenue East) comes into effect, pursuant to Section 24(2) of the
Planning Act, R.S.O, 1990, c.P.13, as amended.
PASSED at the Council Chambers in the City of Kitchener this _day of
Mayor
Clerk
Page 25 of 307
z w of
wcr
z
X
o
o
Zco
0OW W
W
O
z Z IN
EO
rn
OW00
Z
O O LU ON
of 9
U W'
N
ml
Q
Lu O z
Z N
W Z O z
Z N D
W
W O W W J W
U
O
LL E
o
OwLO
OLI) W D
z x z Q z O
O H H O z U
W
y U
D
Z
Q
N
a
m
Z O�
Z of O o
IN LU
H H a Q O Q Z j
LU
U
C) �
W
U')
M
m
m
IN
_ x x W
N W F Z rn W Z F- Z rn Z Z Z ♦- Z H Z p X 0 W O Z W
LU LU LU
U
m
00 Z U Z
9 O z O Z
z U H J w
W
X_
Z Z N ON O
Lu O Q O_
J
LU 2 a J O
W W W W z H
z0FU)
~
W W Z O ON W x W
U } U
Z m
T-
O
O
C7
JW>>
m
JxW>>
d'w'� W 1.�
�J O
z
OZO>IN -Xw0` Z
O
Z
O
z
Q U W P
W O WQ�d
~
U W W
�OfQXa
Q Q Q W Z p y
UUUQcnx—zz
x
H Z
z w
Y J J J J?
�wzQQQQQ
W oMo -
w Qz w
O
N
Q
N
N
Z
L
W U J U'
Q z �� Q z
W J U J Ur
2¢ 0'¢ Z
of of iY U H J F
T w w w� o 6 E< Z
H
z
Q Q J H H H R H
a a o z z z z z
W O X Z
� z- O
m
Q
a
W U—
V
U W U—
N zi 2i 2i w Z m �
00
x
O
() U rf W W W W W
U) U) CO
p W � N
(D� Z
N
a
O
H
W
O2iaJ0
z r 2i O==
NOa2ac
0 x
0 0 0 2 Cl) Z 0
Q U U U O X W O W J
2
m W N (n CO
d Q W W W W W
W
O LU d 2
Z
-
^+
W 2
m WWOU
Q� x x
WO („)
J NMU W ZUU zNzMzaO2
W' fYCC d'
z2<F
W
Z
iQ
',. ^2 O— Z
y Q Q H Q
cl�— Q— Z
Q W F- Q
} �' L9 r N N O
CD U U U W S S �G N
0 O
2 N 2 N
r N M Cfl 1`
d d d 2' Of� d' �
U —
N y O Y
LU
C
p
M
NIOf
� M
LV 2 III
IIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Z
W
Q
Z
•� Ct)
W
�C.)
Ur
M
WIW
jI?
^
>
1
T
CW
C
of
O
LU �
�
LU LUIIx
a
`
Q
U)S
M
Vulpuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu
III
Q
Z
�
J
w
W
�a
UO
111111 U MIIIIII
V M
/� I
/�/
C
&
m
J
J
>
IIIIIIIM
—`T
T
uluul
M
Z
U
o
!�
v N
Z
LL
111111111111111
M
' M
.�
z s
J
sii a7noaH�s I
�I
O
N
LL
O
8 O3
98 37nogH VI
�S
pppppllll���
��
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
""�Ilil ppppppppp
`2
1
co
IIIIII
V`C
pll
IIIIIIII
C)
N
O
N
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
U
IIIV
111111111111111 W1
W
N= IIIIIIIIIIV
�
N
JIJ
�
��
W
I
> >
1
�
111111
Of
I I
�
O O
Lu Lu
T
o II
� II
II III
o
LO
O
F- O
Q
I I
III IIVIIIM
I
by y
M III
UT II III III
II ulul
II II uuu III IIII I III
d
I
w O
_
Z
1
I
Q
VI
U
�
IIIIIIII
Q
H
N
o
J"W
III
I VW I
U
U)
D
C,4,m
�
VVVVpVWW In `ti
N
N N
I
T
= IIIIIIIIIIII
U
J
Q
�
N IIII
uMW m umuum
u m
I IIII
W
W
NIt jmM
D� Vit»1
III VIII
Z
W
= IIIIIII �
N
V
Q
^ II
�. N
VIII IIIIII
III
LL
O
Q 0
-i
Q
Z
M
N
W III
1
�y/
I..ffii
1111111
x
2
,Z/
Q Of
LU
J
N IIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIII
= �,
W IIIuu
U
M
� Z
M uuuuuuuuuu
T
,IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
a
D~
<
D
= O IIIIIII
�2 IOM VIII
MIIIIIIIII I
M� 1
I II IIIIIIIIIIIIII pp to
I '�
%
Q
O Q
�
O
N
c`
W N {gyp
R
II
Op1111111111111111111111111
T T
IIIIIII
'r�
IIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIII
S
G
�
O
�/
m
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
I'
T III
III
I.L
� a ~ IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
V
'
W
IIIIII �
I I
IIIIIIIIIIII I
IIIIIIINIIIIIW
o
� 0
Z
Q
�
1
y
=
T
' 00 III
VIII VIII
III M N
In
�
U
NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING
for a development in your neighbourhood
45-53 Courtland Avenue East
Concept Drawing
Have Your Voice Heard!
Date: March 6, 2023
Time: 7:00 p.m.
Location: CouncIllChambers,
Kitchener City Hall
200 King Street West
rViirtual Zoom Meeting
To view the staff report, agenda,
meeting details, start time of this item
or to appear as a delegation, visit:
kitchener.ca/meetings
To learn more about this project,
including information on your
appeal rights, visit:
www.kitchenenca/
Plan n i ngAppl ications
or contact:
III�Iiid III° Iii s e S oi: 2 4w 6 Stoi
. eys, Brian Bateman, Senior Planner
N1 i.i II[t i 1) e 2 M e 1. -ef ` 4 Dw6, lJ 1'9 519.741.2200 x 7869
III:w e ori gin
Cl)���:.�Iii brian.bateman@kitchener.ca
Applications to amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-law will be considered to facilitate
the proposed development of a mid -rise multiple residential dwelling, 6 storeys and 21
metres in height, having a Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 2.4, with 64 dwelling units, 52
underground and surface parking spaces and 53 bicycle spaces.
Page 27 of 307
Y Bateman
Y
From: Mike Seiling
Sent: Tuesday, August 9, 2022 2:35 PM
To: Brian Bateman
Subject: FW: Circulation for Comment - 45-53 Courtland Avenue East (OPA/ZBA)
Attachments: 45-53 Courtland Agency Letter.pdf
Building; no comments
From: Christine Kompter<Christine.Kompter@kitchener.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, August 9, 2022 2:33 PM
To: _DL_#_DSD_Planning <DSD-PlanningDivision@kitchener.ca>; Bell - c/o WSP <circulations@wsp.com>; Darren Kropf
<Darren.Kropf@kitchener.ca>; Dave Seller <Dave.Seller@kitchener.ca>; David Paetz <David.Paetz@kitchener.ca>; Ellen
Straus <EIIen.Straus@kitchener.ca>; Feds <vped@feds.ca>; GRCA - Planning (planning@grandriver.ca)
{planning@grandriver.ca>; Greg Reitzel <Greg.Reitzel@kitchener.ca>; Hydro One - Dennis DeRango
<landuseplanning@hydroone.com>; Jim Edmondson <Jim.Edmondson@kitchener.ca>; Justin Readman
<Justin.Readman@kitchener.ca>; Katherine Hughes<Katherine.Hughes@kitchener.ca>; K -W Hydro - Greig Cameron
<gcameron@kwhydro.on.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: Brian Bateman <Brian.Bateman@kitchener.ca>
Subject: Circulation for Comment - 45-53 Courtland Avenue East (OPA/ZBA)
Please see attached. Additional documentation can be found in AMANDA folders 22-118011 & 22-118012 (City staff)
and ShareFile (external agencies).
Comments or questions should be directed to Brian Bateman, 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 i christine.kop2gter�ener.ca
Page 28 of 307
From: Planning <planning@wcdsb.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, September 6, 2022 11:43 AM
To: Brian Bateman
Subject: RE: Circulation for Comment - 45-53 Courtland Avenue East
(OPA/ZBA)
Good Morning Brian,
The Waterloo Catholic District School Board has reviewed the subject application and based on our
development circulation criteria have the following comments)/condition(s):
A) That any Education Development Charges shall be collected prior to the issuance of a building
permit(s).
B) That the developer and the Waterloo Catholic District School Board reach an agreement
regarding the supply and erection of a sign (at the developer's expense and according to the
Board's specifications) affixed to the development sign advising prospective residents about
schools in the area.
C) That the developer shall include the following wording in the site plan agreement to advise all
purchasers of residential units and/or renters of same:
"In order to limit risks, public school buses contracted by Student Transportation Services
of Waterloo Region (STSWR), or its assigns or successors, will not travel on privately
owned or maintained right-of-ways to pick up and drop off students, and so bussed
students will be required to meet the bus at a congregated bus pick-up paint."
If you require any further information, please contact me by e-mail at J!orda:�n.Neale@wcdsb.ca.
Thank you,
Jordan ele
Planning Technician, WCDSB
480 Dutton Dr, Waterloo, ON N2L 4C6
519-578-3660 ext, 2355
From: Christine Komter <Christine.Kc:rnterOkitctlaener.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, August 9, 2022 2:33 PM
To: _DL_#_DSD—Planning <DSD-PVanninDivision(@kitchener.ca>; Bell - c/o WSP
<circulations ws .com>; Darren Kropf <Darren.Kro2f@kitchener.ca>; Dave Seller
<Dave.Seller kitchener.ca>; David Paetz <David,Paetz( kitcliener.ca>; Ellen Straus
<EIIen.Straus kitchener.ca>; Feds <ypfdEr feds.ca>; GRCA - Planning (pLa n njQE_& and river.ca)
< tannin randriver.ca>; Greg Reitzel <Gre& Reutzpl_@kotchene�r.ca>; Hydro One - Dennis DeRango
<landuse,p,lane.coim>; Jim Edmondson <y m.Edmondson kitchener.ca>; Justin Readman
<Justin.Readrnan kitchener.ca>; Katherine Hughes <Katherine Hughes@'kitchener.ca,>; K -W Hydra -
Greig Cameron < Cameron a kwh dro.on.ca>; Mike Seiling <Mike.Seil'on kitcheruer_ca>; Ontario Power
Page 29 of 307
memo����������
����������
Date:
August 25.2O22
To:
Brian Bateman
From:
JasonBr06
Subject:
Zoning By-law Amendment and Official Plan Amendment Application
CaOUrOCourtland GP
45-53Courtland Avenue East, Kitchener
ZBA22/O17/C/BB
OPA22/O10/C/BB
The below comments have been prepared through the review of the supplied Functional Servicing
Report prepared by WqTE Consultants Inc.; dated June 14, 2022 in support Ofthe above Doted
applications circulated August 10. 2022.
General Comments:
1' Engineering isinsupport ofthe applications. Any comments below can beused todirect
detailed design.
Sanitary:
2. Proposed flows were verified in the City's model and indicate no impacts downstream of
this development. Sanitary servicing appears to be fine and Engineering has no further
comments on sanitary.
3. Kitchener Utilities have no issues.
Storm and StOFDDwat8[Management:
4. SWM fees with respect to retention or quality are assessed and calculated in the year in
which they are to be paid. The report ahnvxa o calculation booed on 2022 user fees, but
this changes yearly on January 11t. Given the point in the application process we are at
currently, this site will most likely be paying these fees in calendar year 2023.
'
Jason Bn]WC.E.T.
Page 30 of 307
From:
Melissa Larion <mla rion @grand rive r.ca>
Sent:
Wednesday, August 10, 2022 10:46 AM
To:
Brian Bateman
Subject:
RE: Circulation for Comment - 45-53 Courtland Avenue East
(OPA/ZBA)
Hi Brian,
These properties are not regulated by GRCA so we will not be providing comments,
I hope all is well and that you're having a nice summer!
Melissa Larion, MCIP, RPP
Supervisor of Resource Planning
Grand River Conservation Authority
Email: mlar
aLion@qra nd river. ca
www. ra�ndrive�r.ca I Connect with us on social media
From: Planning
Sent: August 9, 2022 3:29 PM
To: Melissa Lai -ion <mlarion wrandriver.ca>
Subject: FW: Circulation for Comment - 45-53 Courtland Avenue East (OPA/ZBA)
From: Christine Kompter <Christine.Komoter(@kitchener.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, August 9, 2022 2:33 PM
To: —DL—#—DSD—PlanninR <DSD-PlanningDivision@kitchener.ca>; Bell - c/o WSP
<circulation§_@wsp.com>; Darren Kropf <Darren. Kropf @kitchene,r.ca>; Dave Seller
<DLagyveL.�S>eliiier"O@JkKiitchnener.ca>; David Paetz <David. PaetzP kitchene r.ca>; Ellen Straus
<ELillien.�S.trausi2k*itchener.ca>; Feds <v e e s,ca>; Planning <planning@grandriver.ca>; Greg Reitzel
<gLtg.ReitzelL@kitchener.ca>; Hydro One - Dennis DeRango <lancluseplannin @hvdroone.com.>; Jim
Edmondson <Jim.Edmondson2htEhtnLr�>; Justin Readman <Justin.Readman(@kitchener.ca>;
Katherine Hughes <KatheCine.Hughes@lhener.ca>; K -W Hydro - Greig Cameron
< cameroniftwhydro.on.ca>; Mike Seiling Ontario Power Generation
<Executiveyp.lawanddevelopment@opE.com>; Park Planning (SM) <E2LL.PlannIng@kitchener.ca>;
•
Region - Planning Property Data Administrator (SM)
Robert Morgan <Robert.MorganC@kitchener.ca>; Steven Ryder
Sylvie Eastman <Sylvie.Eastman(@kitchener.ca,>; WCDSB - Planning
<p!annjng��,r>; WRDSB - Board Secretary (elaine burns@wrdsb.ca)
WRDSB - Planning
Cc: Brian Bateman <B ria n. Bate ma nL@ kitche ner.ca>
Subject: Circulation for CommentCourtland Avenue East (OPA/ZBA)
Page 31 of 307
City of Kitchener 'I
..1 a r * -
ILLUE
Project Address: 45-53 Cournand Avenue
File Number: CIPA22/010/C/1313, ZBA22/017/C/BB
Comments Of: Heritage Planning
Commenter's Name: Deeksha Choudhry
Email: deeksha.choudhry@kitchener.ca
Phone: 519-741-2200 ext. 7291
Date of Comments: December 8, 2022
Heritage Planning staff has reviewed the resubmission materials provided for this application and
provide the following comments:
�.
Site S „
�?���ecComments:
.� ents: iis �e .,,
The subject properties municipally addressed as 45-53 Courtland Avenue East do not contain any
protected or listed heritage resources under the Ontario Heritage Act. However, they are located within
the Cedar Hill Neighborhood Cultural Heritage Landscape (CHL).
The character defining features of the Cedar Hill Neighborhood CHL includes the elevation of the land;
the variety of street widths and housing types; the range of dates of construction of buildings; the
mingling of early and late housing; high-rise structures; and institutional buildings which creates a varied
and yet integrated community unique to the City.
Furthermore, the Cedar Hill and Schneider Creek Secondary Plan has identified the intersection between
Benton Street and Courtland Avenue East as a gateway to the neighborhood. Thus, it is important to
preserve the views and streetscapes of the neighborhood and analyze the impact the proposed
development might have on the views.
2. Preliminary Heritage Planning Commments
The entrance view that has been mentioned above can be seen highlighted in the visual below:
A City for Everyone
Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community
Page 32 of 307
'.-
,
w—w t,p^�
Heritage planning staff are appreciative that the building has been setback to address some of the
concerns previously outlined and are of the opinion that the proposed development, in its massing and
general form will not have an adverse impact on the views and/or Cedar Hill Neighborhood Cultural
Heritage Landscape. Staff may provide some conditions as part of any future site plan applications.
ACity for Everyone
VVorkingTogether—GrowingThoughtfuUy—Bui|dingCommunity
Page 33 of 307
From: Andrea Sinclair
Sent: Friday, November I8,2O2J4:S7PK4
To: Brian Bateman
Cc ]u|ianevonVVesterho|t
Subject: CANTIRO Courtland/ OPA and ZBA Applications / Response to Circulation Comments
Good Afternoon Brian,
Asofollow uptothe NIM onMonday night, and inresponse tothe public and agency comments, weare
pleased to provide you with the attached materials representing our formal response package. Please
find attached:
-
A letter providing detailed responses to all agency and public comments (including response
tables);
-
Revised site plan and shadow study;
-
Revised renderings; and
- Arevised Parking Study.
The 3D massing model has changed slightly to reflect the reduced building envelope. VVewill send this
under separate cover given the file size.
We look forward to working with you in bringing these applications to Planning Committee in the early
new year.
Should you have any questions regarding the attached documents, please do not hesitate to reach out
to]u|ianeormyself.
Thank you, have a wonderful weekend,
Andrea
Please note that � aim currently working remotely and can be best reached via ernafl or cell.
MHBCPlanning, Urban Design & Landscape Architecture
540 Bingemans Centre Drive, Suite 200 Kitchener I ON I N213 3X9 I T 519 576 3650 X
Page 34 of 307
Brian Bateman
Senior Planner
City of Kitchener
200 King Street West, 6t" Floor
P.O. Box 1118, Kitchener, ON
N2G 4G7
PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT
AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES
Community Planning
150 Frederick Street 8th Floor
Kitchener Ontario N2G 4J3 Canada
Telephone: 519-575-4400
TTY: 519-575-4608
Fax: 519-575-4466
www. regionofwaterl oo.ca
Melissa Mohr 1-226-752-8622
File: D17/2/22008
C14/2/22015
January 23, 2023
Proposed w ,,• - 1 and
• +Amendment
45-53 Courtland
PlanningMHBC • Juiliane Von- - • •
behalf of Cantiro Courtland GP on behalf of Cantir
Courtland I
CITY OF KITCHENER
MHBC Planninci has submitted a Site Specific Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-
law Amendment Application for a development proposal at 45-53 Courtland Avenue
to as subjectof
The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing residential dwellings on site to
construct a 6 -storey multiple residential rental building. The building will contain a mix of
one, two and three bedroom units with a total of 64 residential units. One level of
structured parking below grade is proposed with a total of 52 parking spaces. In addition,
4 barrier free and 3 visitor parking spaces are located at the rear of the building.
The subject lands are located in the Urban Area and designated Built Up Area in the
Regional Official Plan. The site is Designated Low Density Commercial Residential in the
City of Kitchener Official Plan and zoned CR -1 in the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law. The
Owner has requested an Official Plan Amendment to permit a site-specific amendment
to permit a FSR of 2.4, a maximum height of 21 metres and a density of 251 units/ha. The
Applicant has requested a Zoning By-law Amendment to permit an increased FSR of
Document Number: 4298704 Version: 1
Page 35 of 307
2.4, increased building height of 21 metres (68.89 feet) and front and side yard as well as
parking relief.
'-• • • �••r - I I ii^III I I I I -I I•I I��• r • - - • r 0
Consistency with Provincial Legislation and Regional Official Plan Conformity
The subject lands are designated "Urban Area" and "Built -Up Area" on Schedule 3a of
the Regional Official Plan (ROP) and the site is located in a Major Transit Station Area
and designated Medium Density Multiple Residential in the City of Kitchener Official
Plan.
Planned Com munit Structure:
The majority of the Region's future growth will occur within the Urban Area designation
with a substantial portion of this growth directed to the existing Built -Up Area of the
Region through reurbanization. Focal points for reurbanization include Urban Growth
Centres, Township Urban Growth Centres, Major Transit Station Areas, Reurbanization
Corridors and Major Local Nodes (ROP Section 2.13).
Regional staff acknowledge that the subject lands are located within 500-800 metres of
multiple ION stops and the subject lands are within walking distance to multiple bus
stops with routes that connect to the ION. Furthermore, the development proposes
higher density on site that supports the viability of the Region's higher order transit
system.
ROPA 6 Adopted Policies:
The subject lands are located within the Regional Council Adopted Queen Station Major
Transit Station Area (MTSA). The development concept proposes a higher density
development that contributes to the minimum density target established for the Queen
Station MTSA of 160 people and jobs per hectare. As Major Transit Station Areas are
identified as a Strategic Growth Area, the Region is supportive of increased density,
uses and activity within these areas. The density proposed through this development is
supported within ROPA 6.
Development within Major Transit Station Areas are to be transit -supportive with
development that prioritizes access to the transit station. Regional staff understand that
the development includes pedestrian accesses to the sidewalk along Courtland Avenue
East. In addition, the development concept proposes a reduction in the minimum
required parking spaces as well as bicycle stalls facilitating access to local trails and
cycling routes near the subject lands. The development conforms to these policies.
Finally, the housing form proposed through these applications include apartment style
residential units. The type of housing proposed through this development will provide
additional mix of housing form within this area.
Document Number: 4298704 Version: I
Page 36 of 307
In addition to the above planning comments, Regional staff have the following technical
comments relating to the proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law
Amendment:
Environmental Threats/Record of Site Condition:
There are medium and high environmental threats on an adjacent parcel of land due to
the past uses of the site for various automotive and manufacturing uses. As a density
increase of a sensitive land use has been proposed on the subject lands, a Record of
Site Condition and Ministry Acknowledgement letter shall be required for the entirety of
the subject lands in accordance with the Region of Waterloo's Implementation Guideline
for the Review of Development Applications On or Adjacent to Known and Potentially
Contaminated Sites. Since the Record of Site Condition and Ministry Acknowledgement
Letter were not received as part of the Complete Application, the Region shall require a
Holding Provision to be implemented as part of the Zoning By-law Amendment
prohibiting the proposed development until the submission of the RSC and the
Ministry's Acknowledgement Letter have been received to the satisfaction of the
Regional Municipality of Waterloo. The following wording is required for the holding
zone:
That a holding provision shall apply to the entirety of the subject lands until a Record of
Site Condition (RSC) in accordance with O. Reg. 153/04, as amended, has been filed
on the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) Environmental Site
Registry and the RSC and Ministry's Acknowledgement letter is received to the
satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo.
In addition to the above, please e _ the lands that are to be dedicated to the Region
of - o• as part of •. widening are excluded from the RSC that will be filed
with the MECP.
Corridor Planning.
Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment Stade,
Environmental Noise.-
Regional
oise.Regional staff have reviewed the "Draft Road Traffic and Stationary Noise Impact Study,
45-53 Courtland Avenue East" dated May 5, 2022 prepared by JJ Acoustic Engineering
Ltd. and accept the implementation and recommendation measures proposed. The
following recommendations must be implemented through the development and
secured at various stages:
Transportation Noise:
The report indicated that road noise levels are above the acceptable levels of NPC -300
and the following mitigation measures shall be required to be implemented through the
construction of the development and secured through a future consent and/or
condominium application:
Document Number: 4298704 Version: 1
Page 37 of 307
All units in the proposed development shall be installed with a suitably sized and
designed air -ducted heating and ventilation system and shall be installed with a central
air conditioning system prior to issuance of occupancy permits.
The installation of central air conditioning systems, a double -glazed window and
building construction meeting the minimum requirements of the Ontario Building Code
will provide adequate sound insulation for the proposed building; however, a minimum
STC 29 for all exterior glazing for the North Fagade is required to be implemented on
the building to address noise from the road.
In addition, the following noise warning clauses shall be implemented through a
registered development agreement between the Owner/Developer and the Regional
Municipality of Waterloo at a future condominium or consent stage. In addition, the
noise warning clauses shall be included in the Agreements of Offers of Purchase and
Sale/Lease/Rental Agreements and the Condominium Declaration (should a
condominium be proposed):
"Purchasers/tenants are advised that sound levels due to increasing road traffic may
occasionally interfere with some activities of the dwelling occupants as the sound levels
exceed the sound level limits of the Municipality and the Ministry of the Environment,
Conservation and Parks."
"This 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 level limits of the Region of Waterloo and Ministry of the Environment."
If a consent or condominium is not contemplated, the noise warning clauses shall be
included in the site plan agreement and all agreements of Offers of Purchase and
Sale/Lease/Rental Agreements.
In addition, before the issuance of any building/occupancy permits, the City of
Kitchener's Building Inspector shall certify that the noise attenuation measures are
incorporated in the building plans, and upon completion of construction, the City of
Kitchener's Building Inspector shall certify that the dwelling units have been constructed
accordingly.
Stationary.Noise
There are several potential stationary noise sources in the vicinity of the subject lands
that were reviewed for impacts on the proposed development including multiple HVAC
units and chillers located on adjacent properties. Through an assessment of the worst-
case daytime and nighttime sound levels, noise from each fagade will meet the noise
level limits established within MECP NPC -300 Noise Guideline. It is required that the
following noise warning clause be implemented within a Registered Development
Agreement between the Owner/Developer and the City of Kitchener at the future
consent or condominium stage and be included in all offers of Purchase and
Document Number: 4298704 Version: 1
Page 38 of 307
Sale/Lease/Rental Agreements and the Condominium Declaration (should a
condominium be proposed).
"Purchasers/tenants are advised that due to the proximity of the adjacent roof -top units
and commercial facility, noise from the adjacent roof -top units and commercial facility
may at times be audible"
Should a Consent or Condominium not be contemplated, Regional staff require the
above noise -warning clause to be included in the site plan agreement.
Further to the above, noise from the site could not be accounted for because the site
has not undergone the detailed mechanical design. To address this concern, Regional
staff require a. Holding Provision to address the detailed design of the building and
impact of noise from the building on itself and the impact of the building on the adjacent
noise sensitive developments. The required wording of the holding provision is:
That a holding provision shall apply to the entirety of the subject lands until a detailed
stationary noise study has been completed and implementation measures addressed to
the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo. The detailed stationary noise
study shall review the potential impacts of the development on itself (e.g. HVAC system
on the sensitive points of reception) and the impacts of the development on adjacent
noise sensitive uses.
Please be advised that once the detailed stationary noise study described above has
been received, the noise study will be reviewed by a third party external noise
consultant retained by the Region. The applicant will be required pay for a third party
review by an external Noise Consultant retained by the Region. The fee for this third
party review is $4000 + HST. Please submit payment for the third party review along
with the detailed noise study. Additional fees may apply depending on scope of review
required.
Payment can be made either by cheque payable to the Region of Waterloo, or by
contacting Ms. Peggy Walter (PWalter@regionofwaterloo.ca) via other methods at the
time of submission.
Stormwater Management
Regional staff have reviewed the Functional Grading and Servicing Plan and Functional
Servicing Report dated June 16, 2022, prepared by MTE Consultants and have no
objections to the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment from a
stormwater management perspective at this stage.
Through the future site plan application, a detailed lot grading and detailed servicing
plan as well as a stormwater management report shall be required for the Region's
review and approval. Please be advised that the site must be graded and constructed
in accordance with the approved plans and the Regional Road allowance must be
restored to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo.
Document Number: 4298704 Version: 1
Page 39 of 307
Please note that any new servicing connection(s) form the Regional Right-of-way
require Regional approval through a separate process of Municipal Consent and
Regional Work Permit. A Region of Waterloo Work Permit must be obtained from the
Region of Waterloo prior to commencing construction within the Region's right-of-way.
The permit and additional information can be found here: hps://rmow.permitcentral.ca/
Future Site Plan Stage
Regional Road Dedication
While the dedication of the Region's Road allowance can be deferred to the site plan
stage, Courtland Avenue East (Regional Road 53) has a designated road width of
26.213m and a Regional Road dedication is required for the entirety of the subject lands
adjacent to Courtland Avenue East. Regional staff estimate that a road dedication of
3.80m will be required along the property frontage.
The Owner/Applicant must engage an Ontario Land Surveyor (OLS) to prepare a draft
reference plan. Prior to depositing the reference plan at the Land Registry Office, the
OLS must submit a copy of the draft reference plan to the Region's Transportation
Planner for review. The land must be dedicated to the Region of Waterloo for road
allowance purposes and must be without cost and free of encumbrance. In addition, the
road correct road dedication shall be shown on all plans submitted in support of the Site
Plan Application.
Please be advised that a Phase I and possibly a Phase II Environmental Site
Assessment shall be required on the lands to be dedicated to the Regional Municipality
of Waterloo. please ensure the lands that are to be dedicated to the Region of Waterloo
as part of the road widening are excluded from the RSC that will be filed with the MECP.
Access Permit/TIS/Access Regulation:
Please note that a right in, right -out access shall only be permitted at this location due to
the sites proximity to the Courtland Avenue East and Benton Street intersection.
In addition, the proposed access must comply with the Regional Access Policy and the
access width shall be a minimum width of 7.6m with a 6.Om turning radii. This
information is not shown on the concept plan submitted with the Official Plan and
Zoning By-law Amendment, but must be identified on the site plan.
A Regional Access Permit shall be required for the proposed new access to Courtland
Avenue East (Regional Road 53) as well as the closure of the existing accesses along
Courtland Avenue East. There is currently a fee of $230.00 for the new access with no
fee for the closure of existing accesses. The access application can be found here:
ttps://forms.reionofwat rloo.ca/ePa / LS-online-Pq ment-Forms/Commercial-
Access-Permit-A lication .
Document Number: 4298704 Version: 1
Page 40 of 307
Site Plan Application Fee.
A pre -submission consultation fee of $300.00 and a Site Plan Application Review fee of
$805.00 shall be required as part of the future Site Plan Application. Please note that
these fees may be subject to change and the applicant shall pay the fee required as per
the in effect Fees and Charges By-law. It is recommended that the applicant confirm
the fees with Regional staff prior to submitting the application to the Region.
Housing Services
The following Regional policies and initiatives support the development and
maintenance of affordable housing:
Regional Strategic Plan
10 -Year Housing and Homelessness Plan
Building Better Futures Framework
Region of Waterloo Official Plan
The Region supports the provision of a full range of housing options, including
affordable housing. Rent levels and house prices that are considered affordable
according to the Regional Official Plan are provided below. Should this development
application move forward, staff ask the Owner/Developer to consider providing a
number of affordable housing units on the site, as defined in the Regional Official Plan.
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, a mechanism
should be in place to ensure the units remain affordable and establish income levels of
the households who can rent or own the homes.
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
which do not exceed 30 percent of gross $385,500
annual household income for low and
moderate income households
......................... ....
Housing for which the purchase price is
at least 10 percent below the average $576,347
purchase price of a resale unit in the
regional market area
`Based on the most recent information available from the PPS Housing Tables (2021).
In order for an owned unit to be deemed affordable, the maximum affordable house
price is $385,500.
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:
Document Number: 4298704 Version: 1
Page 41 of 307
A unit for which the rent does not excee
d
30 per cent of the gross annual $1,470
household income for low and moderate
incom___ ______.
A unit for which the rent is at or below the Bachelor: $950
average market rent (AMR) in the 1-Bedroom: $1,134
regional market area 2-Bedroom: $1,356
3-Bedroom: $1,538
4+ Bedroom: $3,997
*Based on the most recent iriformation available from the PPS Housing Tables (2021)
In order for a rental unit to be deemed affordable, the average rent for the proposed
units which have fewer than 3 bedrooms must be at or below the average market rent in
the regional market area as shown above. For proposed units with three or more
bedrooms, the average rent for the units must be below $1,470.
Fees
Please be advised that the Region has yet to receive the Official Plan Amendment and
Zoning By-law Amendment review fees totalling $10,000. Regional staff have reached
out to the applicant for these fees.
Conclusions:
Based on the above, Regional staff have no objection to the applications subject to the
implementation of a Holding Provision to obtain a Record of Site Condition and Ministry
Acknowledgement letter for the entirety of the site as well the implementation of a
holding provision to obtain a satisfactory detailed noise study that assesses the impact
of the development on itself and adjacent noise sensitive developments. The required
wording for the holding provisions are:
That a holding provision shall apply to the entirety of the subject lands until a Record of
Site Condition (RSC) in accordance with O. Reg. 153/04, as amended, has been filed
on the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) Environmental Site
Registry and the RSC and Ministry's Acknowledgement letter is received to the
satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo.
h •
That a holding provision shall apply to the entirety of the subject lands until a detailed
stationary noise study has been completed and implementation measures addressed to
the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo. The detailed stationary noise
study shall review the potential impacts of the development on site noise sensitive
receptors (e.g. HVAC system on the sensitive points of reception) and the impacts of the
development on adjacent noise sensitive uses.
Next Steps:
Please be advised that any future development on the lands subject to the above -noted
application will be subject to the provisions of Regional Development Charge By-law 19-
037 or any successor thereof.
Document Number: 4298704 Version: 1
Page 42 of 307
Further, please accept this letter as our request for a copy of the decision pertaining to
this application. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Yours truly,
Melissa Mohr, MCIP, RPP
Senior Planner
C, MHBC Planning Inc. C/O Andrea Sinclair (Applicant)
Cantiro Courtland GP on behalf of Cantirc, Courtland LP (Owner)
Document Number: 4298704 Version: 1
Page 43 of 307
From: Gaurang Khandelwal
Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2022 10:37 AM
To: Juliane vonWesterholt; Brian Bateman
Subject: RE: 45-53 Courtland Avenue questions
Hi Juliane,
Thank you for clarifying.
Please provide, at time of site plan application, an updated sustainability statement incorporating below
comments and confirming sustainability measures that will be included in the development.
Regards,
Gaurang Khandelwal (he/him), MA, MCIP, RPP
Planner (Policy) I Planning Division I City of Kitchener
519-741-2200 x 7611 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 gaurang.khandelwal(a7kitchener.ca
From: Juliane vonWesterholt�von�nrpsr17U„rru„ubc,p„4arq cc,rr�>
Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2022 3,31 PM
To: Brian Bateman <Briian.Batemari a kit ch�grL( .crw�>; Gaurang Khandelwal
�a�ararng; Khand�lprn�gpi(�apkitpl�ener.ca>
Subject: 45-53 Courtland Avenue questions
Hello Brian and Gaurang,
Further to your questions regarding the following I have these responses:
if the design of the building will enable addition of alternative energy and water conservation
systems in the future if required
The client is not presently considering allei native energy opitiouns for th its (project (such
as geothermal, etc:). At the discretion of the future condo corporat.'iorn, there rmnay be
potential for a storrn winter tank to be Installed (likely at the e paerise of 1. parking stalil)
that can Ibe pumped out for landscaping use.
0 At this dir ne, the client plans to incorporate low flow pluinnbing f6xtures for this project
0 if the roof structure will be designed to accommodate solar PV installation in the future if
required
At the discretion ofthe future condo corporatiioirn, there may be aicn oppoirtunit:y to i rist:aii
low -Falope solau° (panels with ballllasted anchorage. Cantiro will need to explore the
Page 44 of 307
inmpNcatimms ofnequflred rough -ins and structural reinforcement measures befmnefuHy
conmnmfttimg tmth�s imftiadxe.
9 Cantiro does inot intend to supply or ir�stall so�ar paneis as pail-. of the irdtW bufld.
I trust this will be of assistance to you and hope this has addressed your questions in this regard. This is
all the information | have atthis time.
|"�oNx�\/Dk� ���A-
_/__— ..~_-~... --
11MMUMAN WIT
MHBCPlanning, Urban Design & Landscape Architecture
540 Bingernans Centre Drive, Suite 200 Kitchener I ON I N213 3X9 I T 519 576 3650
720 1 C 619 604 1044 1 IF 519 576 0121 ivonwesterholt@mhbcplan.com I
Thbcmnmuo�m�nnsinnndedody|yhvthnondor
Nhmw�ye��m�hnnd�ukmu�Nowa�*�con�eoe.pr���m.pm�u�no/o�a��a�mm4|f�maen�(ho�nion��wdp�en�Of
�iuonmmunic��on.pVaoemdvinouammed|oie|yandde|a�|hiuemai|wA(hou'( .uopyingor�nvo��ngii�mnyono
Page 45 of 307
Fromm: Steven Ryder
Sent: Tuesday, December ll2O321U:S4AM
To: Brian Bateman
Subject: RE: CANT|ROCourtland/ OPAand ZBAApplications / Response to
Circulation Comments
Hi Brian,
My comments from the original submission have been addressed through their updated materials. Julia
Salvini and I had a meeting recently regarding this site where we talk through the comments and she has
addressed them in her revised and updated letter for the parking justification and analysis.
If you have any questions or concerns, please let me know.
Steven Ryder, C.E'T.
Traffic Planning Analyst | Transportation Services |City of Kitchener
5l9-74l-220Oext 7l52| 1C]CY. 1-866-969-9994 |
~A P|ease considerthe environment before this e-ma|i
From: Brian Bateman
Sent Monday, November 28,2O2211:23Ak8
To: DeekshaChuudhry Lenore Ross
Steven Ryder « ; GaurangKhande|wa|
Cc: RojanK8ohammadi
Subject: FW: CANTIRO Courtland/ OPA and ZBA Applications / Response to Circulation Comments
Hello Deeksha,Guurang,Lenore &Steve,
Please see attachments from MHBC in response to your comments provided to the application at 45-53
Courtland. Please review and advise me by December 14 if the response adequately addresses your
concerns. Thank you.
Brian
From: Andrea Sinclair
Sent: Friday, November 18, 2022 4:57 PM
To: Brian Bateman
Cc:Ju|ianevonVVeste/hoh
Subject: CANTIRO Courtland/ OPA and ZBA Applications / Response to Circulation Comments
Good Afternoon Brian,
Page 46 of 307
Asafollow uptmthe NIM onMonday night, and inresponse tothe public and agency comments, weare
pleased to provide you with the attached materials representing our formal response package. Please
find attached:
-
A letter providing detailed responses to all agency and public comments (including response
-
Revised site plan and shadow study;
-
Revised renderings; and
- Arevised Parking Study.
The 3D massing model has changed slightly to reflect the reduced building envelope. VVewill send this
under separate cover given the file size.
We look forward to working with you in bringing these applications to Planning Committee in the early
new year.
Should you have any questions regarding the attached documents, please do not hesitate to reach out
to]u|ianeormyself.
Thank you, have a wonderful weekend,
ANDREA SINCLAIR BES, IVIVIDS—,rTICIP, RP?-'
Partner
Please note that � arn currenfly worldrig rernotely arx.1 car) be best reached via emaH or celi.
MHBCPlanning, Urban Design & Landscape Architecture
540 Bingemans Centre Drive, Suite 200 1 Kitchener I ON I N21B 3X9 I T 519 576 3650
ja
Th�con munka8mntr"nUeUun|e|yfu' Ueoanedandmeycnnt� nk�fomn"A, Inn,h� i,,priv||egc�I �d or
o�ew�aexen�hnmdimJusure�Nnnmin��mn�deuxe.�ivi|ege.��e�onmo�enNyoiumm1e�U�muenoi�einm,�ed��pi*n1W
NiymmmooiucWoo.���ood�neuuimmedi��yandd�e<e|h�nemmiv�kou|�euding.o���ngm��aningi\�unyon�
Page 47 of 307
From:
RoianK8ohammadi
Sent:
Monday, December S,203Z11:3OAK4
To:
Brian Bateman
Subject:
RE: CANT|ROCourtland/ OPAand ZBAApplications / Response tu
Circulation Comments
Hi Brian,
| have nVcomments.
RoianK8ohonmmnadi MA MC|P, RPP, PN|P(Sho0Her)
Senior Urban Designer IPlanning Division ICity ofKitchener
519-741-2200x7326
From: Brian Bateman
Sent: Monday, November 28,2O22 11:23 AM
To: Deeksha Choudhry LenoreRoss ;
Steven Ryder GaurangKhande|wa|
Cc: Rojan Mohammadi
Subject: FW: CANTIRO Courtland/ OPA and ZBA Applications / Response to Circulation Comments
Hello Deeksh4Gauong,Lenore &Steve,
Please see attachments from MHBC in response to your comments provided to the application at 45-53
Courtland. Please review and advise me by December 14 if the response adequately addresses your
concerns. Thank you.
Brian
From: Andrea Sinclair <a inclqIL@rQhbcPlan.com>
Sent: Friday, November D\2OZZ4:57PK4
To: Brian Bateman <8han.8ateman@kitchener.00>
Cc:Ju|ianevonVVesterhok
Subject: CANTIRO Courtland/ OPA and ZBA Applications / Response to Circulation Comments
Good Afternoon Brian,
As a follow up to the NIM on Monday night, and in response to the public and agency comments, we are
pleased to provide you with the attached materials representing our formal response package. Please
find attached:
A letter providing detailed responses to ail agency and public comments (including response
tables);
Revised site plan and shadow study;
Revised renderings; and
Page 48 of 307
- A revised Parking Study.
The 3Dmassing model has changed slightly Loreflect the reduced building envelope. VVewill send this
under separate cover given the file size.
We look forward to working with you in bringing these applications to Planning Committee in the early
new year.
Should you have any questions regarding the attached documents, please do not hesitate to reach out
toJu|ioneormyself.
Thank you, have a wonderful weekend
Andrea
ANDREA S@0CLAJR BES, MUDS, W1C|P.RPP
Partner
Please note that l arn currently worHng rernot0y and can be best reached via ernaH or cell.
MHBCPlanning, Urban Design & Landscape Architecture
540 Bingernans Centre Drive, Suite 200 Kitchener I ON I N213 3X9 I T 519 576 3650 X
Thluomnmunn�A Inn1 1 nsoo��)mndmaymn�m|nb/m�ioo���pdw|egm�.nnnh�mh�.pmedeor
olha��aoxamt I e'�uonhUoouayr���og�.nn�erinnsmhe��eism�� K�me�n�Moin�ndmUedp�m10�
N�mmmunineUnnp|��eaU�anon�mme0���yund�o|m���som�|�\hov��oding'copyinQm�m��iog��anywe
Page 49 of 307
From:
Brian Bateman
Sent:
Wednesday, February 8, 2023 11:27 AM
To:
Lenore Ross; Rojan Mohammadi
Cc:
Sandro Bassanese
Subject: RE: CANTIRO Courtland/ OPA and ZBA Applications / Response to
Circulation Comments
Hi Lenore,
have been to contact you to close the loop on this matter. For the OPA/ZBA Planning is satisfied with
the conceptual plan and including the conceptual amenity space being provided. Your comments are
noted and be assured we'll work with MHBC/Cantiro to ensure the amenity space is programmed
appropriately at the site plan stage.
Brian
From: Brian Bateman
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2022 1:42 PM
To: Lenore Ross <Lenore.Ross@kitchener.ca>; Rojan Mohammadi <Boian, ohammadi@a kitchener.ca>
Subject: RE: CANTIRO Courtland/ OPA and ZBA Applications / Response to Circulation Comments
Hi Lenore,
Thanks for the comments - I will follow up with MHBC, as instructed.
Brian
From: Lenore Ross <Lenore.RossC2Li hener.ca>
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2022 1:24 PM
To: Brian Bateman <Brian.Bate rnan@ tc:hener.ca>; Rojan Mohammadi
<Rojan.Moha adi@kitchener.ca>
Subject: RE: CANTIRO Courtland/ OPA and ZBA Applications / Response to Circulation Comments
Hi Brian and Rojan,
Thank you for the revised submission and updated documents related to the OPA22/010/C/BB and
ZBA22/017/C/BB at 45-53 Courtland Ave E.
Documents submitted and reviewed.
MHBC Response Letter dated Nov 18 2022
Edge Architects Ltd — Revised Renderings NIM.3-NIM.5 dated 2022.11.10
* Edge Architects Ltd - Revised Site Plan and Shadow Study SP1.1, SP1.2, SP4.1., SP5.1 dated
2022.11.16
Parks and Cemeteries original comments provided Sept 07 2022 requested that a revised Planning
Justification Report be submitted to provide a response to the availability of services and infrastructure
related to parks, open space, urban forests and community facilities relative to the change in planned
density specifically referencing the objectives and policies contained in City of Kitchener Official Plan
Part C Section 8: Parks, Open Space, Urban Forests and Community Facilities. MHBC has provided a
response within their letter rather than as part of an updated Planning Justification Report and while the
Page 50 of 307
response is adequate, P&C had also requested that the Urban Design Brief include conceptual details
and precedent images illustrating .."robust on-site outdoor amenity spaces with good solar access and
protection from wind will be required as park of the site plan and should include seating and play
equipment for residents of all ages and abilities" and these details have not been provided either
through the Urban Design Scorecard or on the updated renderings which illustrate only casual seating
with low-level landscaping in planters.
While I do appreciate that the detailed design for the amenity area will occur at the site plan stage and
that the Urban Design Manual has specific provisions for children's play spaces on a multiple residential
site, there should be a general commitment and demonstration to providing robust on-site amenities for
all ages and abilities. Sandhills Park is 300m away and the active play spaces at Victoria Park are over
800m away and the provision of on-site amenity spaces will be critical to addressing the needs of future
residents immediate recreation and leisure needs.
Brian, please have the applicant provide either updated site renderings illustrating these conceptual
amenities or static images that can be imbedded in an updated Urban Design Scorecard as previously
requested.
Regards,
Lenore
Lenore Ross MSc, MICIP, RPP
Parks Planning and Development Project Manager
Design & Development I Parks and Cemeteries I City of Kitchener
S19-741-2200 ext 7427 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 Lenore.Ross@Kitchener.ca
pg., I I OR pe IN I"M M I "I
0 01 0 0 ) 0
(PAY) � UIlUU1 'IIII
From: Brian Bateman <Brian.Bateman kitchener.ca>
Sent: Monday, November 28, 2022 11:23 AM
To: Deeksha ChoudhryeDeeksha.Choudhry@kitchener.ca>; Lenore Ross <Lenore. Ross@kitchener.ca>,
Steven Ryder <Steven.Ryderekitchener.ca>; Gaurang Khandelwal <Gaurang. Khandelwal@kitchener.ca>
Cc: Rojan Mohammadi <Roian.ohammai@kitchener.ca>
Subject: FW: CANTIRO Courtland/ OPA and ZBA Applications / Response to Circulation Comments
Hello Deeksha, Gaurang, Lenore & Steve,
Please see attachments from MHBC in response to your comments provided to the application at 45-53
Courtland. Please review and advise me by December 14 if the response adequately addresses your
concerns. Thank you.
Brian
Page 51 of 307
From:
Sent:
Friday, August 12, 2022 1:42 PM
To:
Brian Bateman
Cc:
Debbie Chapman
Subject:
45-53 Courtland Ave East
Hi there, Brian:
I am a resident of Schneider Creek neighbourhood living on Bruder Avenue. I am writing to
provide my support of the proposed development at 43-53 Courtland Ave.
While it would be nice if the design was a bit more interesting, I agree with the conclusions
summarized in Section 11 of the PJR including that intensification of this site is consistent with
provincial, regional, and local policies.
Specifically, there are two overall positives that stand out to me.
1. The introduction of increased density into this neighbourhood. This is an ideal
location and the height and design is suited to the neighbourhood and it appears that effort was
made to minimize impacts on the residents of Martin. The overall design of the massing and
siting of the building with frontage on Courtland and the design on the parking access is well
thought out. It is also appealing that multiple unit types will be provided.
2. The prioritization of active transportation with cycling amenities. This should be
commended and it is a no brainer that the request to not meet the parking minimums is
granted with the access to transit being in an MTSA and ease of active transportation. One
piece of feedback is that I believe I saw a rendering that illustrated insecure, outdoor bike
storage. If that is the intent, in my opinion, that is not ideal due to the risk of theft and
exposure to the elements.
Is it possible to be notified of any upcoming meetings related to this project?
Thank you and have a great weekend,
Page 52 of 307
From:
Sally Gun
Sent:
Thursday, August 11,2O22IJ3PM
To:
Brian Bateman
Subject:
45-53 Courtland
|amwondering if you would let me know the type of unit that is proposed here? I can see there are
roughly 10per floor but size/type?
Thanks.
Sally Gunz
Page 53 of 307
From:
Dan Brown
Sent:
Wednesday, August 17, 2022 10:22 AM
To:
Brian Bateman
Subject:
redevelopment at 45-53 Courtland Ave East
You don't often get email from Learn why this is important
Hi there,
We've received the postcard describing the redevelopment proposal for 45-53 Courtland Ave
E., as we live nearby (in the Arrow Lofts building).
In general, I'm quite supportive of increased density in this part of Kitchener, and of this
project.
I do have one request (and I have no idea how to make this operational, but that's why I'm a
professor not a planner): it would be really, really good that when the developer is narrowing or
closing Courtland for this project, as seems to universally happen with developments
downtown these days, that not every nearby parallel street is also cut off at the same
time. Right now, there is construction on Ontario and Gaukel, for example, and (fairly recently)
there was actually simultaneous construction on Benton, Ontario and Gaukel, and at a different
time, on Ontario, Gaukel and Queen. It's nice to be able to get from one side of downtown
Kitchener to the other, and in particular it's nice to have some idea, week over week, of a
consistent routing with which to do so. Since Courtland is quite busy, I can't imagine that
closing it off is going to be at all pleasant.
Thanks very much.
dan brown ("he")
Professor of Computer Science, University of Waterloo
Page 54 of 307
From:
Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2022 10:14 AM
To: Brian Bateman
Subject: Fwd: 45-53 Courtland Ave E.
t�
You don't often get email from ,Leam_why this is important
Hello Brian,
I wanted to share some thoughts with you about the proposed development at 45-53 Courtland Ave E.
Overall, I find the design to be very attractive, I like that the building is close to the road and that all the
parking is underground or at the rear of the building. The amount of proposed indoor and outdoor bike
parking is also much appreciated.
Sheet 1.4 - Incorrect address on the Zoning By -Law (in effect & analysis). The current Zoning analysis
may indicate one (1) 3 bedroom unit. The Proposed Zoning Analysis appears to be calling for no (0) 3
bedroom units. I strongly recommend that the developer provide a high number of 3 bedroom suites,
perhaps as much as 10-15%.
Sheet 2.1 - Underground parking structure maneuvering appears optimistic, turning simulations should
be provided.
Sheet 2.2- 2.7 - Floor plan legends show 3 bedroom suites, however, it is not clear where or which units
are 3 bedrooms. There are not enough large, multi bedroom suites available in the City, this
neighbourhood needs more.
Sheet 3.1-3.4 - The building is attractive, however the large expanses of red brick is very mundane. The
solid brick elements should be broken up with banding, corbels, and pilasters. Anything that will provide
some interest to the masonry on those elevations. The applicant is referencing the townhomes further
down the street on Courtland. Even those modest townhomes have very detailed masonry. Some
attempt should be made to provide a more interesting elevation, at least along Courtland Ave.
Thank you for reading my comments. I would like to see that smaller developments being proposed in
my neighbourhood. Density is essential for the health of Kitchener, especially the downtown.
Regards,
Nick Stanley
53 Bruder Ave
''I iliiil9'III
Page 55 of 307
From: Allan Hendrickson-Gracie
Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2022 1:47 PM
To: Brian Bateman
Subject: Development proposal 45-53 Courtland Avenue East
[You don't often get email from Learn why this is important at
https:Haka.ms/LearnAboutSenderldentification ]
Hi,
We live in the neighbourhood and would like to express our support for this development. Courtland is
a busy street on the edge of a residential neighbourhood, in which many homes are already multi -family
dwellings, and we see this as a positive addition to the area without impacting quiet residential streets.
Allan and Katherine Hendrickson -Gracie
Sent from my iPad
Page 56 of 307
From:
Andrew Lawrence
Sent:
Wednesday, August 17, 2022 4:21 PM
To:
Brian Bateman
Subject:
45 Courtland
t,
You don't often get emailfrom';,fP�„�%5.,A„r'arkant
Hello Brian
I saw the notice for the development on the corner and I'd like some assurances that noise will be
minimized, especially at night. We have a small baby and another one on the way soon and the nursery
opens up right onto where the construction will be.
Thanks,
Andrew Lawrence
Page 57 of 307
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Follow UpFlag:
Flag Status:
You don't often get email from
Good Morning Mr. Bateman,
OwenBerNn
Monday, August Z2,IOI22O:22AM
Brian Bateman
Development inthe 25.S3Courtland Ave EArea
Follow up
Flagged
|receimed the notice ofdevelopment for myarea and, assuggested, wanted toforward some
comments. Specifically, I wanted to say that while the idea of more construction is never appealing, I am
100% all for having more residential buildings in the area with one caveat: they are affordable.
As a dual income household with no kids, my spouse and I bring home just shy of 100k a year (gross) and
yet even the apartment we have now costs almost half our income in cost of living alone (rent &
utilities) and that's on the cheap end. I am all for more housing in the Downtown Core, but the
community does not need more ungodly expensive condo's that only a choice few can afford. Ultimately
all that will do is bring in more investors who buy the condo out to rent anyway and price gouge.
We already have a plague of homeless in Victoria Park and at the encampment on Victoria St. that
makes it not only an eyesore to go through those areas but also a serious safety issue. Expensive condos
will only aid in making that issue worse.
So in closing, when planning this development of more residential housing please consider making
buildings that are managed to be affordable. Not more expensive condos that no one making less than 6
figures can even consider.
Warmest Regards,
D. Owen 8erkin.
Sent from Mail for Windows
01 2111))
Virus
Page 58 of 307
From:
Michael Brisson
Sent:
Wednesday, August 24, 2022 11:43 AM
To:
Brian Bateman
Subject:
45-53 Courtland E
[You don't often get email fron Learn why this is important at
https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderldentification ]
Hi Brian,
Perhaps you could link me to the reports for this one - the planning applications site is giving me grief ?
Also, has a study of possible configurations for the future of the adjacent Silverwoods Dairy site and
Peter St. & Martin St. properties taken place ?
Thanks
Michael
Sent from my iPhone
Page 59 of 307
From: Michael Brisson
Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2022 2:57 PM
To: Brian Bateman
Subject: Re: 45-53 Courtland E
Thanks Brian,
Sections and Elevations with site and context sections through adjacent lands and buildings are really
needed for this submission . They should actually be required for all submissions to the city as they are
minimal information for any competent professional submission by architects for an existing urban
context.
Given the radical changes here with the removal of the esker sand and elevation of the land and the
apparent attempt to preserve the stunning adjacent oak tree, would not a request for inclusion of site /
context sections be warranted by the special circumstances here ?
As a courtesy to neighbours or any citizen attempting to evaluate the variance requested it would seem
essential, would it not
Thanks for your consideration of these issues.
Michael
Sent from my iPhone
> On Aug 24, 2022, at 12:02 PM, Brian Bateman e
> Hi Michael,
♦ •�0 0., �► i
fi
91KCIM 4 f
'�� ►
) 11 i. �' I am unaware of
enquire.such study but will
> Brian
> -----Original Message-----
* From: Michael Brisson
> Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2022 11:43 AM
> To: Brian Bateman <Brian.Batemankitchener.ca>
> Subject: 45-53 Courtland E
[ g Learn why this is important at
> You don't often et email from ,,
htts. aka.ms LearnAboutSenderldentificatlon ]
> Hi Brian,
Page 60 of 307
From:
Sent
To:
Cc:
You don't often get email from
Hi Brian,
AdomCadin
Thursday, August IS,ZOZ2]:36PM
Brian Bateman
Debbie Chapman; jvnnwesterhnit@mhbop|an.com
Application for development for 45-53Courtland Ave E.
Learn why this is important
I am writing in response to the application for development postcard I received for 4S-53
Courtland Ave E. In general, I am very supportive of this development. I like the overall design
and size for this location. I think it's the perfect transitional size between downtown and the
Schneider Creek neighbourhood where I live. I also particularly like the townhouse element
along Courtland, which is a nice design nod to the rowhouses at Benton and Courtland. As a last
thought, if the developer is willing to make a donation for affordable housing, I think that would
beanappreciated gesture for the requested amendments.
Sincerely,
Adam Carlin
58 Bruder
Page 61 of 307
From: Tim Schaner
Sent: Monday, August 29, 2022 11:44 AM
To: Brian Bateman
Cc: Kim Schaner; tim Schaner
Subject: 45-53 Courtland Avenue East - Application for Development
[You don't often get email from Learn why this is important at
https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderldentification ]
Greetings Brian:
My wife Kim and I are residents at the Arrow Lofts at 112 Benton Street and we recently received notice
of the subject Application for Development at 45-53 Courtland Avenue East. I have reviewed the
planning information and supporting documentation and have no questions on this application. This
proposed development is ideal for this location and we support it moving forward.
Regards,
Tim
Page 62 of 307
From: Cory Albrecht����
Sent: Thursday, September 1, 2022 1:56 PM
To: Brian Bateman; Debbie Chapman; jvonwesterholt@mhbcplan.com
Subject: Proposed development at 45-53 Courtland Ave. E.
You don't often get email from iggEny Alis,i5i IqEL
Hello,
I would like to register my approval for this development, but I think
we can (and should) go further than just the render that was on the
mailing. Given that this is a prime location just on the edge of
Downtown, I think a 5x2 or 6x2 timber -over -concrete build with
commercial space in a 2 floor podium and apartments up top would be
perfect, especially if many of them can be two-bedroom units and not
just one bedrooms.
1) Nahce of ck-McVW0 NeighbGuf I, Staff consia�g aU feedbacch in ordey tc WUw �tq 'k
,",A ad fedback meetings=ted, 3) a r�nertdaflw to be dered by Pla.ing
ReqxnAed lNequited CorrwnitteeandUyCc�
0 .111� 4, �, =tOrmckentswhDrewested
Page 63 of 307
APPLICATION FOR
DEVELOPMENT
IN YOUR NEIGHBOURHOOD
Tolearn more abmithe
st:e=xthurts ar,�'d =11d
y
wwwMtcherterza/PianningAppUcaUons
400000
WEWANTTO
MWuqk,6'
uc g5�h�
�,,�Vf'h,dvh h' rd 1�
HEAR FROM YOUarl,
Ple provide coffintents by:
e�x
Submit comments;'o :
Additioualcoruacfs
September 9.2022
City of Kitchener
Your City Councillor
Applicant
Brian Bateman, Senior Kanner Debbie Chapman, Ward 9 Jutlan*von%ttsledvolt,
519.7412200x7869-
Wambateman@kkk kca
519.7412798
debbiechapmn@kitchenef.ca
MWPLanning
5195763650
200 King SL W, Kltchera ON, N2G 4G7
wrnMSterW10rMbcDtarLcom
1) Nahce of ck-McVW0 NeighbGuf I, Staff consia�g aU feedbacch in ordey tc WUw �tq 'k
,",A ad fedback meetings=ted, 3) a r�nertdaflw to be dered by Pla.ing
ReqxnAed lNequited CorrwnitteeandUyCc�
0 .111� 4, �, =tOrmckentswhDrewested
Page 63 of 307
From: John Hill
Sent: Tuesday, September 6, 2022 1:51 PM
To: Brian Bateman
Cc: Debbie Chapman, jvonwesterholt@mbhcplan.com
Subject: Development Proposal for 45-53 Courtland Ave. E. in Kitchener
Attachments: 45-53 Courtland Ave E Developent.ocx
1,
You don't often get email from hillfamily1950@gmail.com. Learn why this is importaflf
Dear Mr. Bateman,
Attached below are my comments regarding this development proposal for your consideration. I would
appreciate your keeping me informed of any neighbourhood meetings which might be scheduled.
Thank you,
John C. Hill
201-112 Benton St., Kitchener ON, N2G 3H6
Te 1: �U
E-mail::
Page 64 of 307
Development Proposal for 45-53 Courtland Ave. E. in Kitchener
Dear Mr. Bateman,
Since receiving the notice for the proposed development of the property at 45-53
Courtland Ave. E. in Kitchener, I have given it considerable thought and wish to
share some observations and concerns with you.
I understand the city's need for intensification within the core area and I am in
favour of using the Courtland Ave. lot for multiple housing units in order to
accommodate the growing and diverse population of our community; however, I
am also concerned about over -intensification and the ensuing congestion which
will surely follow. Courtland Ave. E. from Ottawa St. to Victoria Park is a narrow
road with very narrow bicycle lanes for much of the length. Most of the current
housing in this area is very old and several of the sidestreets are extremely narrow
or merely one-way laneways. Traffic along this stretch of Courtland is already very
congested at various times of the day making it extremely difficult and dangerous
for vehicles to enter or exit Courtland Ave. at any of the sidestreets where there is
no traffic light. This situation will certainly be worsened by the influx of traffic
emanating from the immense housing development being planned for the former
J.M. Schneider property along Courtland Ave.
My wife and reside in the Arrow Lofts at 112 Benton St. which has parking for
136 units and 9 visitors parking spots. Adjacent to our building is the recently
constructed 16 -storey apartment building (The Bow) which provides parking for its
new residents. Immediately across from the Arrow and The Bow is a large parcel
of vacant land currently for sale for future development. Another large housing
development is being planned starting at the comer of Church St. extending along
Benton St. almost to St George St.
The proposed development for 45-53 Courtland Ave. E. is 6 storeys high with 64
units, 52 parking spaces for vehicles and 53 bicycle parking spots. There is no
indication in the notice you sent out to indicate if the units will be "affordable",
studio apartments, one -bedroom apartments or sufficiently large to house families.
Currently the tallest apartment buildings along Courtland Ave. from Ottawa St. to
Benton St. are 3-4 storeys high which would make a 6 -storey structure the
exception.
Page 65 of 307
As a result of these observations I would ask the planning department to carefully
consider the future traffic gridlock which will ensue from such intensification in
this area. I would also request that consideration be given to restricting the height
of the proposed structure to no more than 4-storeys and contain a reasonable
number of "affordable" units.
Yours truly,
John C. Hill, 201-112 Benton St., Kitchener ON, N2G 3H6
E-mail:
CC : Debbie Chapman, Councillor Ward 9 ( eie.ca mankitchener.ca
CC: Juliane von Westerholt (Jvonwesterholt(ir mlibcolan.com"
Page 66 of 307
From: Hilary
Sent: Friday, September 9, 2022 9:17 AM
To: Brian Bateman
Subject: 45-53 Courtland Ave East
Fallow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
You don't often get email from l N�ert7r,tkM7-9Jrvgf
Hi there! Hope this email finds you well @ I've been getting my steps in at lunchtime so we haven't run
into each other at Pho lately!!!
Hope you had a super great summer with the family and got away from email for a bit!
Just wanted to add some comments to this file if you are still accepting them?
In support of this project and think the size and scale is great for the neighbourhood considering
it's on Courtland and so close to transit, etc.
Design looks great and support the use of brick that match the existing buildings in the
neighbourhood, along with other high-quality finishes through the building and site.
Been noticing AC units on balconies lately, which I think looks terrible, paha. There's got be a
better solution for this! !!
Support the mix of larger unit sizes, but would support more 3bdrm units that would be of
interest to families or folks living together. The neighbourhood is really flourishing with young
kids and a great community vibe, would be great to add to that :D
I would highly support retail at grade. There's a real lack of amenities, services, food options in
the neighbourhood. Would be excellent if this, and every new build added to the inventory of
available spaces for entrepreneurs to start serving this area.
Thank you!
Available for any follow up if required!
Hope we run into each other soon @ Have a great weekend!
H.
HILARY ABEL
14 Mitchell Street
Kitchener ON N2G 2X3
Page 67 of 307
From:
Sent: Friday, September 9, 2022 7:56 PM
To: Brian Bateman
Subject: Comments on development application for 45 Courtland Avenue
East
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
[You don't often get email from }♦���
https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderldentification ]
Hello
I am a home owner at 29 Martin Street.
Learn why this is important at
I got the notice for the development application for 45 Courtland Avenue East.
I note that the first attached document for this proposal lists the address as 45-63 Courtland Avenue
East, Cambridge Ontario.
I have looked at the documents related to this development online and I wish to comment.
I note that the proposed development is six storeys and this concerns me. I wonder why this
development cannot be decreased to a maximum of four stories. Martin Street is an old neighbourhood
with single storey houses, that were built in the early part of the 1900s. The height of the building will
overlook these single family homes 'backyards and will impact the home owners privacy and enjoyment.
note, from the design provided, that there will be balconies for those occupying the suites. The ones at
the back of the building will further impede the home owners enjoyment and privacy. I think that these
should be reduced to an opening with glass doors and a glass wall to look out, but no space to sit
outside.
I note that the proposed building will have 64 units comprised of 30 - one bedroom; 15 -1r two
bedroom; 18 - two bedroom; and 1 - three bedroom unit. In the current news there is ongoing concern
about the housing crisis in this country and this city. I wonder why there are not more three-bedroom
units in this development proposal. Families who require more than one or two bedrooms are ignored
in new developments. Is this because they don't make as much money on these units? The number of
one bedroom units should be decreased and moved to three bedroom units to accommodate the
forgotten members of our community.
Is this a rental or condo building? I I could not find in the online development proposal any indication if
this is a rental or condo building.
We need more rental units in the core of the city!
Rental units in the core area of the city will provide those families with easy access to some public
schools such as Courtland Avenue Senior Public School and Cameron Heights Collegiate. Younger family
Page 68 of 307
members will be bused to schools nearby for Jr Kindergarten to grade six. If Catholic schools are
required then these students are bused to their schools. There is easy access to both the ION and Grand
River Transit. Harry Class pool on Queen Street provides swimming lessons and public swimming in the
summer and they would be close to Victoria Park and other options such as walk or bike to the
Kitchener Public Library, the Kitchener Market, etc.
The proposed building has a very small green area for those that live in the building. 1 know that Victoria
Park is nearby, but to build a sense of community in the building I believe ti it would be important to
provide more green space. Large trees (installed at the time of the build) at the back of the building
property would provide shade for those using the outdoor space and for the homeowners on Martin
Street privacy in their back yards. It would also provide the homeowners with a sense of division from
the building, and decrease the noise from the parking, deliveries to the back of the building and garbage
pickup. Those noises could be muffled with the use of large trees, shrubs, etc.
Sylvia Hannigan
Page 69 of 307
From: Jane Pella I'' WINEW
Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2022 5.33 PM
To: Brian Bateman
Subject: 45 - 53 Courtland Development Proposal
Hi Brian!
Hope you are having a lovely summer! It is zooming past it seems!
I see it is time for public engagement on the Cantiro proposal.
After meeting with Cantiro and the planners and seeing the proposed development earlier this summer
I was pleasantly surprised to see that this developer has a warmth and seemingly genuine interest in
engagement with the community. They made a favourable impression for sure. The interest they have
shown thus far makes me feel that they will hear us out and perhaps consider our ideas for
improvement.
First of all I think generally there are some good wins for the community with this design. I liked the use
of towns, 1, 2 and 3 bedroom units. In fact I would advocate for more family sized units since we seem
to have a glut of 1 bedroom units being built currently . Family sized units also will support our existing
schools and will make good use of the infrastructure already here.
I would like more details on the outdoor space allotted for the residents of this proposed build. I wonder
if it is rather limited in size for the number of residents.
I like that they have included a tree saving plan. (I do wonder what they will be able to save in the end).
As you know there are huge trees on this lot that add a great deal of vital shade, home for song birds etc
and give much needed green to our community. I am happy that they will try to save what they can and
I do know they will add greenery etc when landscaping time arrives. I am personally interested in seeing
large specimen plantings, a mix of trees especially deciduous trees like Blue Spruce or cedars that will
not only grow fast but give winter screening for the Martin Street homes and the homes along Benton
Street.
In terms of overall design I see the architectural nods to Arrow, the use of brick , glass and flat roof. I do
find it quite modern next to its historically significant neighbourhood.
The rectangular design is heavy looking from the back, however, I don't think we are going to see much
of that once the fence and planting are done. I guess that would be a question I have. From our vantage
point at 16 Martin ( in the middle of the build) what exactly will I see? Four of the 6 floors across 3
properties plus plus a very long roof? How can that roof be made more esthetically pleasing? Interesting
architectural features to mask the unsightly mechanicals? A coupala or screen?
am not fond of the idea of the increase in the FSR, however if it allows for more 2 and 3 bedroom
units it is worth thinking about.
I still think that there will need to be some more consideration to the fenced area at the rear of our
properties since it is not on the property line. It is above it on the slope. The Martin St side of the metal
fence is currently gardens or trees. Once the hill is excavated we will still have a slight hill that will need
to be held back. In many ways leaving a bit of a berm would help when it comes to screening the build.
Page 70 of 307
For example fencing and trees would get oslight boost inheight ifthe current fence line was
maintained.
| will say that |would have preferred double stacked towns onthis lot tominimize its dominance on
both the site and the neighbourhood. | find 6storeys still abit overwhelming but all inall |dosee
that this proposal has some benefits aswell.
Thanks for the opportunity to add input.
]anePeUar
Ian Macdonald
Page 71 of 307
From:
Jordan Miller
Sent:
Wednesday, October 26, 2022 9:10 PM
To:
Brian Bateman
Subject:
Planning application 45 COURTLAND AVE E comments
You don't often get ernail fro Learn why this is important
Hi Brian,
I hope it's not too late to add comments about this application. I live on Bruder Ave. I am happy with the
building application description so far. I am in favour of intensifying the downtown core sector since we
should see maturing cities have higher and higher density buildings sprawling from the downtown
outwards. The building fronts onto a main roadway, so there are no concerns from me about additional
traffic. As well, again, since it's on a main street I think those types of streets are suitable for these
higher density buildings.
Overall this is a positive sight to see in regards to higher density buildings being built close to the
downtown core and I look forward actually for more high density buildings in the future.
Thanks,
Jordan Miller
Page 72 of 307
From: Michael L. Davenport
Sent: Monday, November 14, 2022 3:47 PM
To: Brian Bateman
Subject: Response to 45-53 Courtland Avenue East proposal
You don't often get email from earn why this is important
I've given the documents in the 45-53 Courtland proposal a very light skim. Here are my initial
impressions (apologies if I make any errors):
Size seems appropriate for the neighbourhood (we need densification!)
•@ The emphasis on bike amenities is forward -thinking, and I support it
I also support the reduced (and decoupled -from -units) car parking
I didn't see anything in the proposal about affordability. (My skim was very light; if I missed
any affordable unit guarantees, please draw my attention to it)
It's a shame the proposal doesn't include any space for Convenience Retail at the ground
level (or similarly light commercial). Complete neighbourhoods have more than just homes, they
also include amenities / reasons for people to go there. If I'm reading the proposal correctly the
zoning would allow that, yes?
Maybe I'll see you at the meeting tonight!
Cheers,
Michael L. Davenport
212-307 Queen Street S.
Page 73 of 307
Staff Report
l
IKgc.;i' r� R
Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee
DATE OF MEETING: March 6, 2023
SUBMITTED BY: Garett Stevenson, Interim. Director of Planning, 519-741-2200
ext. 7070
PREPARED BY: Andrew Pinnell, Senior Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7668
WARD INVOLVED: Ward 3
DATE OF REPORT: February 17, 2023
REPORT NO.: DSD -2023-021
SUBJECT: 4396 King Street East & 25 Sportsworld Drive
Official Plan Amendment Application OPA21/009/K/AP
Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA21/014/K/AP
Sportsworld Shopping Centre & Taylorwood Park Homes Inc.
RECOMMENDATION:
• That Official Plan Amendment Application OPA21/009/K/AP for Sportsworld
Shopping Centre and Taylorwood Park Homes Inc. requesting a change in land
use designation from Commercial Campus to Mixed Use with Specific Policy
Area No. 59 to permit a high intensity mixed use development on the lands
specified and illustrated on Schedule `A' and Schedule `B', be adopted, in the
form shown in the Official Plan Amendment attached to Report DSD -2023-021
as Attachments `A1' `A2' and `A3', and, accordingly, forwarded to the Regional
Municipality of Waterloo for approval; and
• That Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA21/014/K/AP for Sportsworld
Shopping Centre & Taylorwood Park Homes Inc. be approved in the form
shown in the Proposed By-law and Map No. 1, attached to Report DSD -2023-
021 as Attachments `131' and `132': and further
• That the Urban Design Brief prepared by GSP Group Inc., dated February 2023,
and attached as Attachment `C' to report DSD -2023-021 be endorsed, and that
staff be directed to implement the Urban Design Brief through future Site Plan
Approval processes.
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Page 74 of 307
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
• The purpose of this report is to evaluate and provide planning
recommendations regarding the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law
Amendment applications requested by Sportsworld Shopping Centre &
Taylorwood Park Homes Inc. for the subject lands, addressed as 4396 King
Street East and 25 Sportsworld Drive. It is Planning staffs recommendation
that the Official Plan Amendment be adopted and Zoning By-law Amendment
be approved.
• The proposed amendments support the creation of a high-rise mix -use
development within the Sportsworld Major Transit Station Area (MTSA). This
area will evolve and intensify over time, in advance of the extension of ION
service to the Sportsworld Station. As an MTSA, this station area is planned
to be a focus for intensification for both residential and non-residential land
uses (e.g., commercial). However, the nearby low rise residential
neighbourhood of Pioneer Tower West is not anticipated to be the focus of
intensification.
• Community engagement included:
o Circulation of a preliminary notice postcard to property owners and
occupants within 240 metres of the subject lands;
o Installation of two notice signs on the lands;
o Virtual neighbourhood meeting held on March 31, 2022;
o Follow-up through one-on-one correspondence with members of the
public;
o Postcard advising of the statutory public meeting was circulated to all
property owners within 240 metres of the subject lands, those who
responded to the preliminary circulation, and those who attended the
neighbourhood meeting;
o Notice of the public meeting was published in The Record on February
10, 2023.
• This report supports the delivery of core services.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The owner of the subject lands, addressed as 4396 King Street East and 25 Sportsworld
Drive, is requesting to change the land use designation from Commercial Campus to Mixed
Use with Site Specific Policy Area 59 in the City of Kitchener Official Plan to permit a Floor
Space Ratio of 6.2 and a building height of 99 metres or 30 storeys. The owner is also
requesting to change the zoning from Campus Commercial (COM -4) to Mixed Use Three
(MIX -3) with Site Specific Provision (358) to permit development phasing, require 1,300 m2
of ground floor commercial use, permit a Floor Space Ratio of 6.2, permit a maximum
building height of 99 metres (30 storeys), reduce the side yard setback by 1 metre, and
slightly reduce the parking ratio, among other matters. Holding Provisions 40H and 41 H are
also proposed to require submission of a detailed stationary noise study and a Record of
Site Condition, to the satisfaction of the Region of Waterloo. Planning staff recommends that
the Official Plan Amendment be adopted, and the Zoning By-law Amendment be approved.
Page 75 of 307
BACKGROUND:
Sportsworld Shopping Centre and Taylorwood Park Homes Inc. have made applications to
the City of Kitchener for an Official Plan Amendment (OPA) and a Zoning By-law
Amendment (ZBA) which propose to change the land use designation and zoning of the
subject lands located at 4396 King Street East and 25 Sportsworld Drive.
If approved, these applications would permit the lands to be developed with high intensity
mixed-use development. The Proposed Development Concept, which the subject
applications would facilitate, is comprised of two buildings: an 8 -storey residential building
(Building A; Phase 1) located at the north end of the site and a mixed-use building (Building
B; Phase 2), which features a 30 -storey tower (Tower A) located close to the intersection of
King Street East / Sportsworld Drive and an 18 -storey tower (Tower B) located further east,
which fronts onto King Street East. Tower A and Tower B are connected via a 5 -storey base
(podium).
The Proposed Development Concept includes a total of 616 dwelling units: 88 units in
Building A and 528 units in Building B. Building B also provides 1,378.7 sq.m (14,807 sq.ft.)
of ground floor commercial space within 7 commercial units that are located at -grade and
oriented towards King Street East and Sportsworld Drive. A common outdoor amenity space
is proposed on top of the base/podium for residents, between Tower A and Tower B.
Parking is primarily contained within the base of Building B, in the form of 2 levels of
underground parking and 5 levels of structured parking. The latter parking is screened from
view of the public realm by commercial units on the ground floor and by residential units on
floors two through five. A small surface parking lot is also proposed.
Figure 1. Map showing the Sportsworld MTSA boundary, as defined by Regional
Official Plan Amendment (ROPA) Number 6. The future ION stop is shown as a yellow
dot and the subject lands are outlined in white.
Page 76 of 307
The lands are identified as Major Transit Station Area (MTSA) on Map 2 — Urban Structure
of the Official Plan. The Region recently approved the boundaries of all MTSAs via ROPA
No. 6 (ROPA 6). ROPA 6 confirms the subject lands are within the Sportsworld MTSA (see
Figurel ).
The lands are presently designated Commercial Campus on Map 3 — Land Use.
Furthermore, the lands are zoned Commercial Campus Zone (COM -4) in Zoning By-law
2019-051 (Zoning By-law 85-1 does not apply). The current zoning does not have any
maximum floor space ratio or maximum building height provisions. For example, the current
zoning would allow a hotel without height or massing limits, in addition to a 10,000 square
metre (107,639 sq.ft.) office building with no height limit.
These applications should not be confused with the OPA and ZBA for 4220 King Street East
and 25 Sportsworld Crossing Road, which are located nearby, and have street addresses
that have several similarities. Council approved these applications in December 2022.
Site Context
The subject lands are comprised of two contiguous properties that are proposed to be
consolidated for comprehensive redevelopment. Presently, the property addressed as 4396
King Street East, located at the intersection of King Street East and Sportsworld Drive,
contains a multi -tenant commercial plaza that fronts onto King Street East (tenants:
CashMoney, Forsythe Variety, 2001 Audio Video, Crazy Bill's, Subway, and Tim Hortons).
The property addressed as 25 Sportsworld Drive is presently vacant, used for parking, and
is the site of the former Pioneer Bar-B-Que Family Restaurant that was demolished in recent
years and is now a used motor vehicle dealership. Currently there are no residential
dwelling units on the subject lands. The subject lands are irregular in shape, have a frontage
of approximately 119 metres on King Street East, 122 metres on Sportsworld Drive, and a
site area of 1.0 hectare (2.5 acres).
The subject lands are situated within proximity to existing and planned major transportation
infrastructure (see Table 1).
Table 1: Proximity of Existing and Planning Major Transportation Infrastructure
Transportation Infrastructure
Approx. Distance to
Direction to Feature
Feature
Feature
Go Bus Transit Terminal
300 metres
Northeast
GRT Sportsworld Station
300 metres
Northeast
(Connecting Routes: iXpress
203, iX ress 206, 67, 72, 302
Future Sportsworld ION
330 metres
Northwest
Platform
Highway 8
350 metres
Northeast
Highway 401
1250 metres
Southeast
Page 77 of 307
The subject lands are surrounded by commercially developed and zoned lands to the north,
south, east and west:
• Costco Wholesale is located immediately to the east,
• Starbucks and Blinds To Go are located to the north,
• A multi -tenant commercial plaza is located on the opposite side of King Street East, to
the southeast (tenants: Piper Arms Pub, Wild Birds Unlimited, Popeyes Louisiana
Chicken, Freshii, Gateway Pet Hospital),
• Vacant commercial lands are located on the opposite side of Sportsworld Drive, within
the Sportsworld Crossing development, to the north.
In this location, the King Street East right-of-way varies in width from approximately 36
metres to 46 metres. The Sportsworld Drive right-of-way is approximately 35 metres in width.
King Street East from Sportsworld Drive to Highway 401 is presently under construction and
the Region advises it will be completed mid -2024. The completed road will have two lanes
in both directions and a centre median. The median is being constructed in a manner that
will permit tracks to be installed for the future ION Stage 2. Both King Street East and
Sportsworld Drive are identified on Map 11 — Integrated Transportation System of the City
of Kitchener Official Plan as Regional Roads.
The Pioneer Tower West planning community (e.g., containing Edgehill Drive, Pioneer
Tower Road) is located further to the south and west, beyond the >_60 -metre -deep
commercial properties that line the south/west side King Street East. The subject property
is located more than 112 metres (367 feet) from the nearest residential dwelling within
Pioneer Tower West.
Figure 2 — Subject Lands: 4396 King Street East and 25 Sportsworld Drive
Page 78 of 307
REPORT:
As outlined in the Background section of this report, the applicant is seeking an Official Plan
Amendment (OPA) and Zoning By-law Amendment (ZBA) to facilitate the Proposed
Development Concept, being a high-rise, mixed-use development. A summary of the
Proposed Development Concept can be found in Table 1 and drawings can be found in
Figures 3, 4, and 5.
The purpose of the OPA is to change the land use designation from Commercial Campus
to Mixed Use. The OPA would also add Specific Policy Area No. 59 to permit:
A maximum building height of 99 metres or 30 storeys, and
A maximum Floor Space Ratio of 6.2.
With respect to zoning, the purpose of the ZBA is to change the zoning from Commercial
Campus Zone (COM -4) to Mixed Use Three (MIX -3).
It should be noted that Planning staff are in the process of updating land use and zoning
within Kitchener's Major Transit Station Areas (MTSAs). This work with the Planning Around
Rapid Transit Station areas (PARTS) planning processes after the approval of light rail
transit by the Region of Waterloo. Planning staff intend to bring forward for Council's
consideration updated land use and zoning for all MTSAs (including the Sportsworld MTSA),
in phases, beginning with MTSAs in the vicinity of downtown towards the end of 2023. Until
this occurs, private landowners and developers that are able to submit their own applications
but must justify their proposals of high-rise, mixed use development within MTSAs, and
request to modify existing zoning categories, as anticipated in Kitchener's Official Plan, to
suit the Growth Plan's targets.
Accordingly, a Site -Specific Provision is requested to customize the MIX -3 Zone to facilitate
the Proposed Development Concept and consider the context within the MTSA Urban
Structure Component. The main purpose of the provision is to permit development phasing,
require 1,300 m2 of ground floor commercial use, permit a Floor Space Ratio of 6.2, require
a maximum building height of 99 metres (30 storeys), reduce the side yard setback by 1
metre, and slightly reduce the parking ratio, among other matters.
In addition, the Region has requested that holding provisions be applied to the whole of the
subject lands in order to require the preparation and implementation of a detailed stationary
noise study and to require that a Record of Site Condition (RSC) be filed and acknowledged
by the Province.
The details of the Site -Specific Provision and holding provisions are outlined in the Zoning
By-law Amendment section of this report.
Page 79 of 307
Table 2 - Summary of Proposed Development Concept
Figure 3 — Plan showing the Proposed Development Concept
w
PROP
s� �
tiny
KING STREET EAST
Page 80 of 307
Proposed Development Concept
Number of Buildings
2 buildings: Building A (Phase 1) and
Building B Phase 2
Number of Towers
3 towers(Building A, Tower A, Tower B
Number of Building Storeys
8 storeys (Building A), 30 storeys (Tower A),
18 store s Tower B
Floor Space Ratio
6.07 FSR
Number of Residential Units
616 dwelling units
Dwelling Unit Types
1 Bedroom: 458 units
2 Bedroom: 154 units
3 Bedroom: 4 units
Commercial Use (Area)
1,378.7 sq.m (14,807 sq.ft.)
Number of Parking Spaces
596 spaces
Class A Bicycle Parking Stalls
300 spaces (approx.)
Figure 3 — Plan showing the Proposed Development Concept
w
PROP
s� �
tiny
KING STREET EAST
Page 80 of 307
Figure 4 - Axonometric view of the Proposed Development Concept, looking
towards the subiect lands trom the southwest.
Figure 5 - Perspective view of the Proposed Development Concept, looking towards
the subiect lands trom near the intersection of Kina Street / SDortsworld Drive.
Page 81 of 307
Planningi Analysis:
Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13:
Section 2 of the Planning Act establishes matters of provincial interest and states that the
council of a municipality, in carrying out its responsibilities under the Planning Act, shall have
regard to, among other matters, matters of provincial interest. For example:
• The adequate provision and efficient use of communication, transportation, sewage
and water services and waste management systems;
• The minimization of waste;
• The orderly development of safe and healthy communities;
• The adequate provision of a full range of housing, including affordable housing;
• The adequate provision of employment opportunities;
• The appropriate location of growth and development;
• The promotion of development that is designed to be sustainable, to support public
transit and to be oriented to pedestrians;
• The promotion of built form that,
o Is well-designed,
o Encourages a sense of place, and
o Provides for public spaces that are of high quality, safe, accessible, attractive
and vibrant;
• The mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions and adaptation to a changing climate.
These matters of provincial interest are addressed and are implemented through the
Provincial Policy Statement and Growth Plan which direct how and where development is
to occur. The City's Official Plan is an important vehicle for the implementation of the
Provincial Policy Statement and Growth Plan. Planning staff is of the opinion that the
proposal adequately addresses the matters of provincial interest outlined above.
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.
To support Provincial policies relating to the optimization of infrastructure, transit and active
transportation, the proposed land use designation and zoning facilitate a compact form of
development which efficiently uses the subject lands, the lands are close proximity to transit
options including local bus routes, iXpress routes, future ION station, Go Bus, and Provincial
highway systems, and makes efficient use of existing Regional roads and services.
Page 82 of 307
Provincial policies are in support of providing a broad range of housing. The proposed
development includes the provision of a range of market-based dwelling unit types including
1-, 2-, and 3 -bedroom units.
Planning staff is of the opinion that the requested amendments will facilitate the
redevelopment of the subject lands with high-rise, mixed-use development that is
compatible with the surrounding area, will contribute towards achieving complete
community, is transit supportive and will make use of the existing infrastructure. No new
public roads would be required for the proposed development and Engineering staff has
confirmed there is capacity in the sanitary sewer to permit intensification on the subject
lands.
Based on the foregoing, 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. Policies of the Growth Plan promote
growth within strategic growth areas including MTSAs to provide a focus for investments in
transit and other types of infrastructure.
Policy 2.2.6.1(a) states that municipalities will support housing choice through the
achievement of the minimum intensification and density targets in this plan 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.
Policies 2.2.1.4 states that applying the policies of the Growth Plan will support the
achievement of complete communities that:
• feature a diverse mix of land uses, including residential and employment uses, and
convenient access to local stores, services, and public service facilities;
• improve social equity and overall quality of life, including human health, for people of
all ages, abilities, and incomes;
• provide a diverse range and mix of housing options, including additional residential
units and affordable housing, to accommodate people at all stages of life, and to
accommodate the needs of all household sizes and incomes;
• expand convenient access to:
o a range of transportation options, including options for the safe, comfortable
and convenient use of active transportation;
o public service facilities, co -located and integrated in community hubs;
o an appropriate supply of safe, publicly -accessible open spaces, parks, trails,
and other recreational facilities; and
o healthy, local, and affordable food options, including through urban agriculture;
• provide for a more compact built form and a vibrant public realm, including public
open spaces;
Page 83 of 307
• mitigate and adapt to the impacts of a changing climate, improve resilience and
reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and contribute to environmental sustainability;
and
• integrate green infrastructure and appropriate low impact development.
The Growth Plan supports planning for a range and mix of housing options and higher -
density housing options that accommodate a range of household sizes in locations that
provide access to transit and other amenities.
Policy 2.2.4 requires that planning be prioritized for MTSAs on priority transit corridors,
including zoning in a manner that implements the policies of the Growth Plan. MTSAs on
priority transit corridors will be planned for a minimum density target of 160 residents and
jobs combined per hectare for those that are served by light rail transit or bus rapid transit.
The Region of Waterloo's ION is a form of light rail transit and the areas surrounding ION
stops are MTSAs that are required to achieve the minimum density target of 160 residents
and jobs combined per hectare.
The subject lands are located within the City's delineated Built-up Area, and within an MTSA.
The Region of Waterloo commenced the Regional Official Plan Review project and as part
of that work, revised MTSA boundaries were approved in August 2022 and confirm that the
subject lands are within the Sportsworld MTSA. Planning staff notes that the Sportsworld
ION platform is located only 330 metres to the northwest (Regional Official Plan Amendment
No. 6). The proposal represents redevelopment and intensification and will help the City
achieve density targets in the Sportsworld MTSA. The proposed land use designation and
zoning will facilitate a higher density housing option that will help make efficient use of
existing infrastructure, roads, and transit. Planning staff is of the opinion that the applications
conform 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 designated Built-up 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.
The subject lands are within the MTSA boundary that was approved in August 2022 (ROPA
No. 6). The Region of Waterloo has indicated it has no objections to the proposed application
or to higher density within the MTSA area, subject to the application of holding provisions in
the zoning to require a detailed stationary noise study (and appropriate implementation of
mitigation measures) and a Record of Site Condition (Attachment E). Planning staff is of the
opinion that the requested Official Plan Amendment conforms to the Regional Official Plan.
Page 84 of 307
Proposed Official Plan Amendment City of Kitchener Official Plan, 2014:
Land Use Designation
The City of Kitchener Official Plan (OP) provides the long-term land use vision for Kitchener.
The vision is further articulated and implemented through the guiding principles, goals,
objectives, and policies which are set out in the Plan. The Vision and Goals of the OP strive
to build an innovative, vibrant, attractive, safe, complete, and healthy community.
The subject lands are currently designated Commercial Campus on Map 3 — Land Use of
the City of Kitchener Official Plan. Lands designated Commercial Campus are intended to
serve the day-to-day and weekly commercial needs of the surrounding community and are
intended to be developed as comprehensively planned commercial uses functioning as a
unit and consisting of individual buildings or multi -unit building groupings. The Commercial
Campus designation does not impose any maximum height, massing, or density limitations.
Moreover, the lands are identified as Major Transit Station Area (MTSA) on Map 2 — Urban
Structure of the Official Plan.
The applicant is proposing to change the land use designation of the subject lands from
Commercial Campus to Mixed Use, along with Site Specific Policy Area 59. The applicant
is not requesting to change the MTSA Urban Structure Component.
Policy 15.D.4.1. of the OP confirms that the Mixed -Use designation is an appropriate land
use designation to be applied within an MTSA. The Mixed -Use designation plays an
important role in achieving the planned function of the Intensification Areas of the City Urban
Structure, including MTSAs. Lands designated Mixed Use have the capacity to
accommodate additional density and intensification. Development and redevelopment of
lands within lands designated Mixed Use must implement a high standard of urban design.
The Mixed -Use designation permits medium and high-rise residential uses as well as a wide
range of non-residential uses, including:
• compatible commercial uses such as, but not limited to, retail, commercial
entertainment, restaurants, financial establishments;
• personal services;
• office;
• health-related uses such as health offices and health clinics and institutional uses
such as daycare facilities, religious institutions, and educational establishments;
• social service establishment; and,
• studio and artisan -related uses.
In this case, the applicant is proposing high rise residential uses in conjunction with non-
residential uses that are outlined within the above list of uses.
The Mixed -Use designation states that the maximum building height within MTSAs may be
regulated in the Zoning By-law. Although no height limit is specified, as part of the OPA, the
applicant has requested a Site -Specific Policy Area to limit the building height within the
requested Mixed -Use designation to 99 metres or 30 storeys. In addition, within MTSAs,
the Mixed -Use designation states that the Floor Space Ratio (FSR) is limited to 4.0. Policy
15.D.4.20 states that the FSR may be increased to 5.0 if the redevelopment achieves certain
Page 85 of 307
criteria, one of which is incorporation of a below -grade parking structure, which is proposed
in this case. Notwithstanding, through the OPA, the applicant is requesting a Site -Specific
Policy Area to increase the FSR to 6.2.
Moreover, Policy 17.E.13.1. of the City of Kitchener Official Plan requires that holding
provisions be applied in situations where it is necessary or desirable to zone lands for
development or redevelopment in advance of the fulfillment of specific requirements and
conditions, and where the details of the development or redevelopment have not yet been
fully resolved. Holding provisions may be used to implement this Plan to ensure that certain
conditions, studies, or requirements related to a proposed Zoning By-law Amendment are
met. In this case, the Region has requested application of two holding provisions: one
related to the requirement for a Record of Site Condition and the other related to the
requirement for detailed stationary noise study and implementation of mitigation measures.
These holding provisions are discussed in greater detail in the Zoning By-law Amendment
section of this report.
Planning staff is of the opinion that application of the Mixed -Use designation, along with the
requested Site -Specific Policy Area is appropriate in this context.
Kitchener Structure and Urban Structure:
The Official Plan states that the forecasted population and employment growth for the city
is to be accommodated within the City's Urban Area, which consists of the Built-up Area and
the Designated Greenfield Area. The Built -Up Area is established by the Province. Growth
that is directed to the Built-up Area makes efficient use of land, existing physical
infrastructure, transit, and community infrastructure. A significant portion of growth is
allocated to the Built-up Area. The subject lands are identified within Kitchener's structure
as being within the Built-up Area. Policy 3.C.1.10 states that "The majority of residential
growth in the Built-up Area will occur within Intensification Areas."
The Official Plan establishes an Urban Structure for the city and provides policies for
directing growth and development within this Structure. Intensification Areas are identified
throughout the city as key locations to accommodate and receive most of the development
and redevelopment at high densities for a variety of land uses.
The subject lands are located within a Major Transit Station Area (MTSA) and the applicant
is not proposing to change the Urban Structure Component.
MTSAs are identified as being Primary Intensification Areas on the hierarchy of
Intensification Areas, within the same category as the Urban Growth Centre (Downtown).
The planned function of MTSAs is to:
• provide a focus for accommodating growth through development to support existing
and planned transit and rapid transit service levels,
• provide connectivity of various modes of transportation to the transit system;
• achieve a mix of residential, office, institutional and commercial development; and
• facilitate streetscapes and built form that is pedestrian friendly and transit oriented.
Page 86 of 307
The Official Plan also requires that development applications in MTSAs consider the Transit -
Oriented Development (TOD) policies contained in Section 13.C.3.12 of the Official Plan.
Generally, the TOD policies facilitate a compact urban form that supports walking, cycling
and the use of transit, by providing a mix of land uses near transit, to support higher
frequency transit service and optimize transit rider convenience. These policies also support
developments which foster walkability by creating safe and comfortable pedestrian
environments and a high-quality public realm.
The proposed development is in an excellent location and represents high-rise, mixed-use
development. The subject lands are located only 300 metres from the current GRT
Sportsworld Station and Go Bus Transit Terminal and only 330 metres from the future
Sportsworld ION station. The lands are within proximity to Highway 8 and Highway 401.
The subject lands are well separated from the nearest low density residential uses (Pioneer
Tower West Planning Community) by the 36-46 metre -wide King Street right-of-way and
>_60 -metre -deep commercial properties that line the opposite side of King Street East.
The proposed development introduces multiple residential housing to the Pioneer Tower
East Planning Community (along with the recently approved development at 4220 King
Street East and 25 Sportsworld Crossing Road) and includes a mix of 1-, 2-, and 3 -bedroom
units. The Pioneer Tower East Planning Community currently only contains two residential
properties, closer to the Grand River (both are single detached dwellings), with the balance
of the community predominantly comprising commercial uses and some institutional use.
The Pioneer Tower West Planning Community, on the opposite side of King Street East, is
dominated by owner -occupied, low-rise dwellings in the form of single detached, semi-
detached and townhouse units. The proposed development would help to diversify housing
in the area and provide a greater housing choice, to assist in meeting the needs of an
increasingly diverse population. Through a future Station Area Planning exercise, the City
will explore even greater housing variety within the area. However, until this work is
underway, the subject applications provide an opportunity to begin achieving the Official
Plan goals to increase housing diversity and choice.
Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-
law Amendment will support redevelopment that conforms to the City's MTSA policies and
assists in achieving the City's vision of a sustainable and environmentally friendly city.
Urban Design Policies:
The City's urban design policies are outlined in Section 11 of the City's Official Plan.
Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposed development meets the intent of these
policies, specifically: Streetscape; Safety; Universal Design; Site Design; Building Design,
and Massing and Scale Design. To address these policies, an Urban Design Brief was
submitted by the applicant and has been reviewed by City staff (see Attachment C). The
Urban Design Brief outlines the vision and principles guiding the site design and informs the
proposed applications.
Streetscape — The larger building, Building B (Phase 2), is located at the intersection of King
Street East and Sportsworld Drive. The building fronts onto King Street East and
Sportsworld Drive. The street -facing portions of this building are proposed to be activated
Page 87 of 307
by seven at -grade commercial units — a total of 1,300 square metres of commercial space
— as well as two lobbies: one facing King Street and the other facing Sportsworld Drive. The
commercial units would be directly accessed from the abutting streets and connect to
municipal sidewalks. Ground floor structured parking would be hidden from the public realm
by these active uses. On upper floors of the building base (podium), dwelling units are
proposed to line the exterior of the building, so the parking structure would be hidden from
view from the public realm. Building B includes a well-defined base which will enhance the
streetscape of both King Street and Sportsworld Drive.
The smaller building, Building A (Phase 1), is a multiple dwelling and contains only
residential units. The side of the building is oriented to Sportsworld Drive while the front is
oriented to Building B. The ground floor of Building A facing Sportsworld Drive contains an
indoor amenity room and a dwelling unit, while upper floors contain dwelling units.
Skyline — The proposed buildings, along with those at the recently approved Tricar
development at 4220 King Street East and 25 Sportsworld Crossing Road, will begin to
establish a distinctive skyline within the Sportsworld MTSA. These buildings will contribute
positively to the skyline which will evolve as the MTSA develops over time.
Safety — As part of the future site plan approval process, staff will ensure Crime Prevention
Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles are implemented and that the site meets
the Ontario Building Code and the City's Emergency Services Policy.
Universal Design — The development will be designed to comply with Accessibility for
Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA) and the Ontario Building Code.
Site Design, Building Design, Massing and Scale — The proposal is designed to be
developed at a scale that is compatible with the existing and planned built form for the
surrounding neighbourhood. The buildings have adequate setbacks, step backs, building
heights and massing, considering their context within an MTSA and separation from low rise
residential land uses. Through a future site plan process, the building designs will be refined
to contribute to a high-quality public realm and sense of place.
Planning staff recommends that the Urban Design Brief be endorsed by Council and that
staff be directed to apply the Urban Design Brief through future Site Plan Approval
processes.
Transportation Policies:
The Official Plan supports an integrated transportation system which incorporates active
transportation, allows for the movement of people and goods and promotes a vibrant,
healthy community using a combination of land use designations and urban design
initiatives that make a wide range of transportation choices viable. As aforementioned, the
subject lands are located within the Sportsworld MTSA and only 330 metres from the future
ION LRT platform and only 300 metres from the current Go Bus Transit Terminal and GRT
Sportsworld Station which connects to two Xpress routes and three local bus routes. The
lands are within proximity to Highway 8 (350m) and Highway 401 (1,250m). The location of
the subject lands is well suited to the proposed transit -oriented development. Moreover, the
subject proposal will support current and future transit service and build transit ridership.
Page 88 of 307
Regional staff advise that a Multi -Use Trail (MUT) will be constructed later this year that
extends along the King Street frontage of the property from Sportsworld Drive to Highway
401. The MUT would be 3 metres wide and would be separated from vehicular traffic by a
grassed boulevard. The MUT would facilitate cycling and pedestrian movement in the area.
The Region is proposing to extend the MUT northwest from Sportsworld Drive to the
Freeport Bridge (and possibly beyond) in 2028-2029. Also, a MUT is proposed to be
constructed along the Sportworld frontage of the property from King Street to Gateway Park
Drive in 2027, with plans to extend it to Maple Grove Road and beyond in the following
years. These planned and proposed pedestrian and cycling upgrades will greatly improve
alternative transportation in this area and further improve the modal split.
Policy 3.C.2.22 states that until such time as Station Area Plans are completed, any
development application submitted within an MTSA will be reviewed generally in accordance
with the Transit -Oriented Development Policies included in Section 13.C.3.12. The
proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment applications support a
compact, high-density, mixed-use development that achieves this policy.
The location of the subject property and the proposed site-specific provisions will result in a
compatible built form that encourages walkability within a pedestrian -friendly environment,
supporting safe, comfortable, barrier -free walking.
Additionally, approximately 300 secured bicycle parking stalls will be implemented as well
as visitor parking spaces, as required by Zoning By-law 2019-051.
Housing Policies:
Section 4.1.1 of the City's Official Plan states that it is a City objective 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.
In addition, 4.C.1.12. states that "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." The proposed development will increase the range of dwelling units
available in the city, and within the Pioneer Tower East / Sportsworld MTSA. The site
development concept includes a mix of 1-, 2-, and 3 -bedroom dwelling units. The range of
unit types in this location will appeal to a variety of household needs. Moreover, the mixed-
use nature of the proposed redevelopment as well as the building form will assist in
achieving complete community.
Sustainable Development:
Section 7.C.4.1 of the City's Official Plan ensures developments will increasingly be
sustainable by encouraging, supporting and, where appropriate, requiring:
a) compact development and efficient built form;
b) environmentally responsible design (from community design to building design) and
construction practices;
c) the integration, protection and enhancement of natural features and landscapes into
building and site design;
d) the reduction of resource consumption associated with development; and,
Page 89 of 307
e) transit -supportive development and redevelopment and the greater use of other
active modes of transportation such as cycling and walking.
Development applications are required to demonstrate that the proposal meets the
sustainable development policies of the Official Plan and that sustainable development
design standards are achieved.
The applicant submitted an initial Sustainability Statement in support of the subject
applications. This document states that energy modelling was completed for the first phase
of the proposed development, which confirms adherence and/or exceedance of components
of Energy Star, R-2000, and Built Green programs with respect to energy conservation and
reduced greenhouse gas emissions. City Environmental Planning staff are satisfied with
the Sustainability Statement and will continue to work with the applicant through the future
site plan processes to explore additional sustainable development initiatives.
Proposed Official Plan Amendment Conclusions:
The Official Plan Amendment application requests that the land use designation as shown
on Map 3 — Land Use of the 2014 Official Plan be changed from Commercial Campus to
Mixed Use with a Site -Specific Policy Area to allow a maximum building height of 30 storeys
or 99 metres and a maximum Floor Space Ratio of 6.2. Based on the above noted policies
and analysis, Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposed Official Plan Amendment
represents good planning and recommends that the requested Official Plan Amendment be
adopted in the form shown in Attachment A.
Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment and Zoning By-law 2019-051:
The subject lands are zoned Commercial Campus Zone (COM -4) in Zoning By-law 2019-
051. The existing zoning permits a wide range of retail and commercial uses. No residential
uses are permitted. Also, the COM -4 Zone does not have any building height or floor space
ratio limitations. Moreover, Planning staff notes that there are several commercial pads that
are zoned COM -4 within the immediate area that remain undeveloped many years after their
establishment.
The applicant has requested an amendment to change the zoning from Commercial
Campus Zone (COM -4) to Mixed Use Three (MIX -3) with Site Specific Provision (358),
Holding Provision 40H, and Holding Provision 41H, under Zoning By-law 2019-051.
The MIX -3 Zone permits a wide variety of commercial and residential uses within mixed-use
buildings and mixed-use developments at a medium density within Community Nodes and
City Nodes (types of Urban Structure Components). The MIX -3 Zone was not intended to
be applied in the MTSA Urban Structure Component, where higher densities and building
heights may be justified. Accordingly, the MIX -3 Zone limits Floor Space Ratio to 2.0 and
limits building height to 32 metres / 10 storeys.
At this time, the Zoning By-law does not yet have a zoning category intended to be applied
within MTSAs. In this regard, the requested Site -Specific Provision tailors the MIX -3 Zone
for the MTSA context, allowing high-rise mixed use development. The Site -Specific
Page 90 of 307
Provision also tailors the MIX -3 Zone to facilitate the Proposed Development Concept and
has the following effect:
1. Allows the first, residential -only, phase to occur while ensuring that the mixed-use
component is built as a future phase.
2. Does not require Building A to have non-residential uses on the ground floor or have
a base (podium).
3. Does not require Building A to have a base (podium). It should be noted that the
larger building, Building B, which abuts the intersection of King Street East /
Sportsworld Drive and abuts the length of the King Street East street line, would have
a base.
4. Requires Building B to have a minimum of 1,300 m2 of non-residential use on the
ground floor and 45 metres of frontage on Sportsworld Drive. The proposed non-
residential gross floor area (GFA) is approximately the same as the existing plaza,
so the demolition of the plaza to facilitate the proposed development would not result
in a loss of non-residential use. Also, the requested MIX -3 Zone requires that 20
percent of the GFA be devoted to non-residential use. This percentage requirement
would be eliminated in favour of the GFA requirement.
5. Requires a maximum Floor Space Ratio of 6.2. Presently, the COM -4 Zone does not
regulate Floor Space Ratio. However, the requested MIX -3 Zone has a standard
maximum Floor Space Ratio of only 2.0.
6. Requires a maximum building height of 99 metres and 30 storeys. Presently, there is
no building height or maximum number of storeys in the COM -4 Zone. However, the
requested MIX -3 Zone has a standard maximum building height of 32 metres and
standard maximum number of storeys of 10.
7. Allows the minimum interior side yard setback (i.e., setback from the easterly side lot
line) to be 3.0 metres. The proposed setback applies to the side of the property
abutting the Costco Wholesale parking lot. The requested MIX -3 Zone requires a
standard minimum setback of 4.0 metres.
8. Requires the minimum number of parking spaces for Dwelling Unit and Multiple
Dwelling to be 0.85 spaces per dwelling unit, whereas the standard parking rate in
the MIX zones is 0.9.
Official Plan policies require that where special zoning regulations are requested for
residential intensification or a redevelopment of lands, the overall impact of the site specific
zoning regulations will consider compatibility with existing built form; appropriate massing
and setbacks that support and maintain streetscape and community character; appropriate
buffering to mitigate adverse impacts, particularly with respect to privacy; avoidance of
unacceptable adverse impacts by providing appropriate number of parking spaces and an
appropriate landscaped/amenity area.
In this case, Planning staff is satisfied that the requested Site -Specific Provision satisfies
the above noted policies. In addition, The City's Transportation Services supports the minor
parking reduction and notes that the property is well positioned to take advantage of many
modes of transportation and will provide approximately 300 secured bicycle parking spaces.
The Region has requested that two holding provisions be applied to the whole of the subject
lands. The applicant has agreed to these provisions, the purpose of which is to:
Page 91 of 307
Require the owner to prepare a detailed stationary noise study and to implement any
recommended mitigation measures, to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality
of Waterloo. The purpose of this study is to ensure that residents of the proposed
residential use are protected from noise generators (e.g., HVAC equipment), and
2. Require that a Record of Site Condition (RSC) be filed with the Ministry of
Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) Environmental Site Registry and a
Ministry Acknowledgement letter be submitted to the satisfaction of the Region. The
purpose of RSC is to ensure that the lands are not contaminated before the proposed
residential use is established.
Planning staff offers the following comments with respect to the holding provisions. Official
Plan policies state that holding provisions will be applied in those situations where it is
necessary or desirable to zone lands for development or redevelopment in advance of the
fulfillment of specific requirements and conditions, and where the details of the development
or redevelopment have not yet been fully resolved. In this case, holding provisions are
proposed to facilitate the implementation of the MIX -3 Zone and Site -Specific Provision
(358). Once the requisite conditions have been fulfilled, the matter will return to Council for
removal of the holding provisions, thereby permitting redevelopment to proceed.
in noEIA'11 I VA no ink] C
63 people provided comments
1 Neighbourhood Meetings held, 42 households in attendance
�110 households circulated and notified
Department and Agency Comments:
Circulation of the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment was undertaken
in September 2021 to all applicable City departments and other review authorities. All
comments received in response have been satisfactorily addressed through the application
review no technical issues related to the applications persist. Copies of the comments are
found in Attachment E of this report.
The following reports and studies were considered by City staff and external agencies as
part of this proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment:
Planning Justification Report
Prepared by: GSP Group, May 2021
Revised Urban Design Brief
Page 92 of 307
Prepared by: GSP Group, February 2023
Design Brief
Prepared by: ABA Architects, January 18, 2023
Pedestrian Windy Assessment
Prepared by: SLR Consulting, March 22, 2021
Environmental Noise Assessment
Prepared by: SLR Consulting, May 3, 2021
Transportation Impact Study:
Prepared by: Paradigm Transportation Solutions Limited, May 2021
Tree Management Plan
Prepared by: GSP Group, May 12, 2021
Engineering Feasibility, Stormwater Management, and Servicing Report
Prepared by: Walter Fedy, February 12, 2021
Sustainability Statement
Prepared by: GSP Group, May 14, 2021
Community Input & Staff Responses
Planning staff received written responses from 63 households with respect to the proposed
development. These are included in Attachment F. A virtual neighbourhood meeting was
held on March 31, 2022. The meeting was attended by approximately 42 households. A
high-level summary of the main comments received from the community, as well as Planning
staff responses, are below.
Community
Concern
Details of
Community
Concern
Planning Staff Response
Traffic and
The existing King
King Street East and Sportsworld Drive are
Intersection
Street East and
Regional roads. The nearby Highway 8 and 401 are
Impacts
Sportsworld Drive
under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of
intersection as well
Transportation (MTO). As part of the application
as surrounding road
review, Region staff reviewed a Transportation
network in the area
Impact Study prepared by a transportation
is already
engineering firm on behalf of the applicant, which
overburdened and
recommended that, "...no improvements be made
will not be able to
to accommodate the development." The Region
accommodate the
stated that it has no concerns with the proposal,
increased volume of
subject to the application of holding provisions for
traffic the proposed
unrelated matters.
development will
cause. Further, not
In addition, the MTO completed a review of the
applications and commented that the site has been
Page 93 of 307
Page 94 of 307
enough parking is
provided.
considered in accordance with the Public
Transportation and Highway Improvement Act
(PTHIA), MTO's Highway Corridor Management
Manual (HCMM) and all related guidelines and
policies. MTO further stated that it has no
requirements or comments related to the
applications.
The City's Transportation Services reviewed the
requested parking reduction and has stated that it
has no concerns. It should be noted that the
requested rate of 0.85 spaces per unit is only 0.05
spaces per unit less than the current rate under the
current zoning. Also, as outlined in this report,
transit infrastructure in this area is excellent.
Pedestrian
The existing
A Multi -Use Trail (MUT) will be constructed later this
and Cyclist
transportation
year that extends along the King Street frontage of
Safety
network and auto-
the property from Sportsworld Drive to Highway
centricity of the area
401, which will help facilitate cycling and pedestrian
is not conducive to
movement in the area. Also, a MUT is proposed to
pedestrian and
be constructed along the Sportworld frontage of the
cyclist movements.
property from King Street to Gateway Park Drive in
There is concern
2027. There are plans to extend these MUTs in all
over safety as well
directions in the coming years. These planned and
as overwhelming
proposed upgrades will improve cycling and
transit that does
pedestrian comfort and further improve the modal
exist within the area.
split in the Sportworld MTSA.
Also, the proposed intensification will support transit
ridership in this area and help to offset the cost of
transit service and infrastructure.
Availability
There is insufficient
The subject lands are located within an MTSA as
of Amenities
supporting
defined by the Province, Region, and City. Such
amenities and
areas are intended to be focus areas for growth and
recreational space
intensification. The Pioneer Tower East /
available within the
Sportsworld MTSA has much land that is currently
area to
zoned Commercial and contains many commercial
accommodate the
uses, including two grocery stores (Costco
proposed increase
Wholesale and Dutchies). Excellent transit and
in residents. This
other transportation infrastructure in the area
includes grocery
ensures that other services are accessible.
stores and green
space. What is
Although parkland is needed in this area, the
available will be
applicant is providing a significant amount of on-site
overwhelmed.
amenity space, including a large common outdoor
amenity space on the 51" floor building podium.
Other outdoor, indoor, and private amenity spaces
Page 94 of 307
Page 95 of 307
are provided on-site. These will provide significant
recreational opportunities for residents until the City
prepares a comprehensive plan for the Sportsworld
MTSA, including consideration for parkland.
Currently, Policy staff anticipate commencing the
initial stages of the Sportsworld MTSA work later in
2023.
In the meantime, the proposal is alignment with the
Official Plan Policies for MTSAs and Provincial and
Regional policies.
Built Form
The proposed
The subject lands and surrounding properties are
and
development is
identified as an MTSA. MTSAs are intended to be
Character of
incompatible with
focus areas for growth. Planning staff is of the
Area
the existing scale,
opinion that the proposed buildings will begin to
height, and density
establish a desirable skyline that is consistent with
of the surrounding
the character of an MTSA. It is anticipated that the
area. This will mar
Sportworld MTSA will continue to evolve with the
the skyline of the
addition of future high-density commercial and
area and severely
residential development proposals.
impact the character
of the area and
The subject lands are well separated from low rise
adjacent
residential development by the 36m -46m wide King
neighbourhoods.
Street East right-of-way, and >60 -metre -deep
Further, no transition
commercial properties that line the south/west side
in provided.
King Street East. The subject property is located
more than 112 metres (367 feet) from the nearest
dwelling within Pioneer Tower West.
Advance
Proper notification
Notice of the applications was circulated via
Notification
was not provided to
postcard to all owners and occupants within 240m
&
surrounding
of the subject lands and notice was placed in The
Community
residents or
Record in September 2021. Two signs were posted
Consultation
adjacent
on the property — one on each frontage in
communities. There
September 2021. A virtual neighbourhood meeting
is some concern
was held in March 2022, notice for which was sent
regarding the
via postcard to all owners and occupants within
amount of
240m and all those who responded to the original
consideration which
circulation notice. Notice of the PSIC meeting was
will be given to the
be published in The Record on February 10, 2023
comments provided
and a postcard was sent to all owners and
by the community.
occupants within 240m in advance of the PSIC
meeting. This notification approach goes far beyond
the minimum requirements in the Planning Act.
Also, comments provided by the community are
attached to this report as Attachment F and are
available for review by all Council members.
Page 95 of 307
Planning Conclusions
Considering the foregoing, Planning staff recommends approval of the Official Plan
Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment applications to permit 4396 King Street East
and 25 Sportsworld Drive to be redeveloped with a high-density, mixed-use development.
Staff is of the opinion that the subject applications are consistent with policies of the
Provincial Policy Statement, conform to Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, the
Regional Official Plan, and the City of Kitchener Official Plan and represent good planning.
Accordingly, Planning staff recommends that the Official Plan Amendment be adopted, and
the Zoning By-law Amendment 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 Committee / Council meeting. Two large notice signs were posted on the subject
property and information regarding the application was posted to the City's website in
September 2021. Following the initial circulation referenced below, an additional postcard
advising of the Neighbourhood Meeting was sent by mail. A third postcard was mailed with
notice of the statutory public meeting was circulated to all owners and occupants within 240
metres of the subject lands, those who responded to the preliminary circulation and those
who attended the neighbourhood meeting. Notice of the Statutory Public Meeting was also
posted in The Record on February 10, 2023 (a copy of the Notice is attached as Attachment
D).
CONSULT — The requested Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment were
circulated to residents and property owners within 240 metres of the subject lands on
September 16, 2021. In response to this circulation, staff received written responses from
63 households, which are summarized as part of this staff report. A virtual neighbourhood
meeting was held in March 2022, notice for which was sent via postcard to all owners and
occupants within 240m and all those who responded to the original circulation notice.
Planning staff also had several one-on-one conversations with residents on the telephone
and responded to several emails.
PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES:
• Planning Act, R. S. O. 1990, c. P.13
• Provincial Policy Statement, 2020
Page 96 of 307
• A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (Growth Plan),
2020
• Regional Official Plan, Regional Municipality of Waterloo, 2015
• City of Kitchener Official Plan, 2014
• City of Kitchener Zoning By-law 2019-051
• Planning Around Rapid Transit Stations (PARTS)
REVIEWED BY: Tina Malone -Wright — Interim Manager of Development Review
APPROVED BY: Justin Readman — General Manager, Development Services
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A —
Proposed Official Plan Amendment
Attachment B —
Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment
Attachment C
— Urban Design Brief
Attachment D
— Newspaper Notice
Attachment E —
Department and Agency Comments
Attachment F —
Community Comments
Page 97 of 307
Atta��,ent A
AMENDMENT NO. _ TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN
OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER
CITY OF KITCHENER
4396 King Street East and 25 Sportsworld Drive
Page 98 of 307
AMENDMENT NO. _ TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN
OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER
CITY OF KITCHENER
4396 Kina Street and 25 SDortsworld Drive
iNinFY
SECTION 1 TITLE AND COMPONENTS
SECTION 2 PURPOSE OF THE AMENDMENT
SECTION 3 BASIS OF THE AMENDMENT
SECTION 4 THE AMENDMENT
APPENDICES
APPENDIX 1 Notice of the Meeting of Planning & Strategic Initiatives
Committee of March 6, 2023
APPENDIX 2 Minutes of the Meeting of Planning & Strategic Initiatives
Committee
APPENDIX 3 Minutes of the Meeting of City Council
Page 99 of 307
AMENDMENT NO. —TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER
SECTION 1 – TITLE AND COMPONENTS
This amendment will be referred to as Amendment No. xx to the Official Plan of the City of
Kitchener (2014). This amendment is comprised of Sections 1 to 4 inclusive.
SECTION 2 – PURPOSE OF THE AMENDMENT
The purpose of the Official Plan Amendment is to:
• Amend Map 3 – Land Use by redesignating lands from Campus Commercial to
Mixed Use,
• Amend Map 5– Specific PolicyAreas by adding the subject lands addressed as 4396
King Street East and 25 Sportsworld Drive as Specific Policy Area 59, and
• Add Site Specific Policy 15.D.12.59 as follows:
o to allow a maximum floor space ratio of 6.2;
o to allow a maximum building height of 99 metres;
o to allow the maximum number of storeys to be 30;
o A Holding provision pursuant to Section 17.E.13 will apply to residential
uses and other sensitive uses. The Holding provision will not be removed
until such time as a detailed stationary noise study has been provided to the
Regional Municipality of Waterloo, any mitigation measures have been
implemented, and a release has been issued by the Region; and
o A Holding provision pursuant to Section 17.E.13 will apply to residential
uses and other sensitive uses. The Holding provision will not be removed
until such time as a Record of Site Condition has been acknowledged by
the Province and a release has been issued by the Regional Municipality of
Waterloo.
SECTION 3 – BASIS OF THE AMENDMENT
Planning Analysis:
Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13:
Section 2 of the Planning Act establishes matters of provincial interest and states that the
council of a municipality, in carrying out its responsibilities under the Planning Act, shall
have regard to, among other matters, matters of provincial interest. For example:
• The adequate provision and efficient use of communication, transportation,
sewage and water services and waste management systems;
• The minimization of waste;
• The orderly development of safe and healthy communities;
• The adequate provision of a full range of housing, including affordable housing;
• The adequate provision of employment opportunities;
• The appropriate location of growth and development;
• The promotion of development that is designed to be sustainable, to support public
transit and to be oriented to pedestrians;
• The promotion of built form that,
o Is well-designed,
Page 100 of 307
o Encourages a sense of place, and
o Provides for public spaces that are of high quality, safe, accessible,
attractive and vibrant;
• The mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions and adaptation to a changing climate.
These matters of provincial interest are addressed and are implemented through the
Provincial Policy Statement and Growth Plan which direct how and where development
is to occur. The City's Official Plan is an important vehicle for the implementation of the
Provincial Policy Statement and Growth Plan. Planning staff is of the opinion that the
proposal adequately addresses the matters of provincial interest outlined above.
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.
To support Provincial policies relating to the optimization of infrastructure, transit and
active transportation, the proposed land use designation and zoning facilitate a compact
form of development which efficiently uses the subject lands, the lands are close proximity
to transit options including local bus routes, Xpress routes, future LRT, Go Bus, and
Provincial highway systems, and makes efficient use of existing Regional roads and
services.
Provincial policies are in support of providing a broad range of housing. The proposed
development includes the provision of a range of market-based dwelling unit types
including 1-, 2-, and 3 -bedroom units.
Planning staff is of the opinion that the requested amendments will facilitate the
redevelopment of the subject lands with high-intensity, mixed-use development that is
compatible with the surrounding area, will contribute towards achieving complete
community, is transit supportive and will make use of the existing infrastructure. No new
public roads would be required for the proposed development and Engineering staff has
confirmed there is capacity in the sanitary sewer to permit intensification on the subject
lands.
Based on the foregoing, staff is of the opinion that this proposal is in conformity with the
PPS.
4
Page 101 of 307
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. Policies
of the Growth Plan promote growth within strategic growth areas including Major Transit
Station Areas (MTSAs) in order to provide a focus for investments in transit and other
types of infrastructure.
Policy 2.2.6.1(a) states that municipalities will support housing choice through the
achievement of the minimum intensification and density targets in this plan 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.
Policies 2.2.1.4 states that applying the policies of the Growth Plan will support the
achievement of complete communities that:
• feature a diverse mix of land uses, including residential and employment uses, and
convenient access to local stores, services, and public service facilities;
• improve social equity and overall quality of life, including human health, for people
of all ages, abilities, and incomes;
• provide a diverse range and mix of housing options, including additional residential
units and affordable housing, to accommodate people at all stages of life, and to
accommodate the needs of all household sizes and incomes;
• expand convenient access to:
o a range of transportation options, including options for the safe, comfortable
and convenient use of active transportation;
o public service facilities, co -located and integrated in community hubs;
o an appropriate supply of safe, publicly -accessible open spaces, parks,
trails, and other recreational facilities; and
o healthy, local, and affordable food options, including through urban
agriculture;
• provide for a more compact built form and a vibrant public realm, including public
open spaces;
• mitigate and adapt to the impacts of a changing climate, improve resilience and
reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and contribute to environmental sustainability;
and
• integrate green infrastructure and appropriate low impact development.
The Growth Plan supports planning for a range and mix of housing options and, in
particular, higher -density housing options that accommodate a range of household sizes
in locations that provide access to transit and other amenities.
Policy 2.2.4 requires that planning be prioritized for MTSAs on priority transit corridors,
including zoning in a manner that implements the policies of the Growth Plan. MTSAs on
Page 102 of 307
priority transit corridors will be planned for a minimum density target of 160 residents and
jobs combined per hectare for those that are served by light rail transit or bus rapid transit.
The Region of Waterloo's ION is a form of light rail transit and the areas surrounding ION
stops are MTSAs that are required to achieve the minimum density target of 160 residents
and jobs combined per hectare.
The subject lands are located within the City's delineated Built-up Area, and within an
MTSA. The Region of Waterloo commenced the Regional Official Plan Review project
and as part of that work, revised MTSA boundaries were approved in August 2022 and
confirm that the subject lands are within the Sportsworld MTSA. Planning staff notes that
the Sportsworld ION platform is located only 330 metres to the northwest (Regional
Official Plan Amendment No. 6). The proposal represents redevelopment and
intensification and will help the City achieve density targets in the Sportsworld MTSA. The
proposed land use designation and zoning will facilitate a higher density housing option
that will help make efficient use of existing infrastructure, roads, and transit. Planning staff
is of the opinion that the applications conform 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 designated Built-up 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.
The subject lands are within the MTSA boundary that was approved in August 2022
(Regional Official Plan Amendment No. 6). The Region of Waterloo has indicated it has
no objections to the proposed application or to higher density within the MTSA area,
subject to the application of holding provisions in the zoning to require a detailed
stationary noise study (and appropriate implementation of mitigation measures) and a
Record of Site Condition. Planning staff is of the opinion that the requested Official Plan
Amendment conforms to the Regional Official Plan.
Proposed Official Plan Amendment City of Kitchener Official Plan, 2014:
Land Use Designation
The City of Kitchener Official Plan (OP) provides the long-term land use vision for
Kitchener. The vision is further articulated and implemented through the guiding
principles, goals, objectives, and policies which are set out in the Plan. The Vision and
Goals of the OP strive to build an innovative, vibrant, attractive, safe, complete and
healthy community.
Page 103 of 307
The subject lands are currently designated Commercial Campus on Map 3 — Land Use
of the City of Kitchener Official Plan. Lands designated Commercial Campus are
intended to serve the day-to-day and weekly commercial needs of the surrounding
community and are intended to be developed as comprehensively planned commercial
uses functioning as a unit and consisting of individual buildings or multi -unit building
groupings. The Commercial Campus designation does not impose any maximum height,
massing, or density limitations. Moreover, the lands are identified as Major Transit Station
Area (MTSA) on Map 2 — Urban Structure of the Official Plan.
The applicant is proposing to change the land use designation of the subject lands from
Commercial Campus to Mixed Use, along with Site Specific PolicyArea 59. The applicant
is not requesting to change the MTSA Urban Structure Component.
Policy 15.D.4.1. of the OP confirms that the Mixed Use designation is an appropriate land
use designation to be applied within an MTSA. The Mixed Use designation plays an
important role in achieving the planned function of the Intensification Areas of the City
Urban Structure, including MTSAs. Lands designated Mixed Use have the capacity to
accommodate additional density and intensification. Development and redevelopment of
lands within lands designated Mixed Use must implement a high standard of urban
design. The Mixed Use designation permits medium and high rise residential uses as
well as a wide range of non-residential uses, including:
• compatible commercial uses such as, but not limited to, retail, commercial
entertainment, restaurants, financial establishments;
• personal services;
• office;
• health-related uses such as health offices and health clinics and institutional uses
such as daycare facilities, religious institutions, and educational establishments;
• social service establishment; and,
• studio and artisan -related uses.
In this case, the applicant is proposing high rise residential uses in conjunction with non-
residential uses that are outlined within the above list of uses.
The Mixed Use designation states that the maximum building height within MTSAs may
be regulated in the Zoning By-law. Although no height limit is specified, as part of the
OPA, the applicant has requested a Site Specific Policy Area to limit the building height
within the requested Mixed Use designation to 99 metres or 30 storeys. In addition, within
MTSAs, the Mixed Use designation states that the Floor Space Ratio (FSR) is limited to
4.0. Policy 15.D.4.20 states that the FSR may be increased to 5.0 if the redevelopment
achieves certain criteria, one of which is incorporation of a below -grade parking structure,
which is proposed in this case. Notwithstanding, through the OPA, the applicant is
requesting a Site Specific Policy Area to increase the FSR to 6.2.
Moreover, Policy 17.E.13.1. of the City of Kitchener Official Plan requires that holding
provisions be applied in situations where it is necessary or desirable to zone lands for
development or redevelopment in advance of the fulfillment of specific requirements and
Page 104 of 307
conditions, and where the details of the development or redevelopment have not yet been
fully resolved. Holding provisions may be used to implement this Plan to ensure that
certain conditions, studies or requirements related to a proposed Zoning By-law
Amendment are met. In this case, the Region has requested application of two holding
provisions: one related to the requirement for a Record of Site Condition and the other
related to the requirement for detailed stationary noise study and implementation of
mitigation measures. These holding provisions are discussed in greater detail in the
Zoning By-law Amendment section of this report.
Planning staff is of the opinion that application of the Mixed Use designation, along with
the requested Site Specific Policy Area is supportable in this context.
Kitchener Structure and Urban Structure:
The Official Plan states that the forecasted population and employment growth for the city
is to be accommodated within the City's Urban Area, which consists of the Built-up Area
and the Designated Greenfield Area. The Built -Up Area is established by the Province.
Growth that is directed to the Built-up Area makes efficient use of land, existing physical
infrastructure, transit, and community infrastructure. A significant portion of growth is
allocated to the Built-up Area. The subject lands are identified within Kitchener's structure
as being within the Built-up Area. Policy 3.C.1.10 states that "The majority of residential
growth in the Built-up Area will occur within Intensification Areas."
The Official Plan establishes an Urban Structure for the city and provides policies for
directing growth and development within this Structure. Intensification Areas are identified
throughout the city as key locations to accommodate and receive the majority of
development and redevelopment at high densities for a variety of land uses. MTSAs are
identified as being Primary Intensification Areas on the hierarchy of Intensification Areas,
within the same category as the Urban Growth Centre (Downtown). The planned function
of MTSAs is to:
1. provide a focus for accommodating growth through development to support
existing and planned transit and rapid transit service levels,
2. provide connectivity of various modes of transportation to the transit system;
3. achieve a mix of residential, office, institutional and commercial development; and
4. facilitate streetscapes and built form that is pedestrian friendly and transit oriented.
As aforementioned, the subject lands are located within an MTSA and the applicant is not
proposing to change the Urban Structure Component.
The Official Plan also requires that development applications in MTSAs consider the
Transit -Oriented Development (TOD) policies contained in Section 13.C.3.12 of the
Official Plan. Generally, the TOD policies facilitate a compact urban form that supports
walking, cycling and the use of transit, by providing a mix of land uses in close proximity
to transit, to support higher frequency transit service and optimize transit rider
convenience. These policies also support developments which foster walkability by
creating safe and comfortable pedestrian environments and a high-quality public realm.
Page 105 of 307
The proposed development is located in an excellent location and represents high-
intensity, mixed-use development. The subject lands are located only 300 metres from
the current GRT Sportsworld Station and Go Bus Transit Terminal and only 330 metres
from the future Sportsworld ION platform. The lands are within close proximity to Highway
8 and Highway 401. The subject lands are well separated from the nearest low density
residential uses (Pioneer Tower West Planning Community) by the 36-46 metre wide King
Street right-of-way and >_60 -metre -deep commercial properties that line the opposite side
of King Street East.
The proposed development introduces multiple residential housing to the Pioneer Tower
East Planning Community (along with the recently approved development at 4220 King
Street East and 25 Sportsworld Crossing Road) and includes a mix of 1-, 2-, and 3 -
bedroom units. The Pioneer Tower East Planning Community currently only contains two
residential properties, closer to the Grand River (both are single detached dwellings), with
the balance of the community predominantly comprising commercial uses and some
institutional use.
The Pioneer Tower West Planning Community, on the opposite side of King Street East,
is dominated by owner -occupied, low rise dwellings in the form of single detached, semi-
detached and townhouse units. The proposed development would help to diversify
housing in the area and provide a greater housing choice, to assist in meeting the needs
of an increasingly diverse population. Through a future Station Area Planning exercise,
The City will explore even greater housing variety within the area. However, until this
work is underway, the subject applications provide an opportunity to begin achieving the
Official Plan goals to increase housing diversity and choice.
Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning
By-law Amendment will support redevelopment that conforms to the City's MTSA policies
and assists in achieving the City's vision of a sustainable and environmentally friendly
city.
Urban Design Policies:
The City's urban design policies are outlined in Section 11 of the City's Official Plan.
Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposed development meets the intent of these
policies, specifically: Streetscape; Safety; Universal Design; Site Design; Building Design,
and Massing and Scale Design. To address these policies, an Urban Design Brief was
submitted by the applicant and has been reviewed by City staff. The Urban Design Brief
outlines the vision and principles guiding the site design and informs the proposed
applications.
Streetscape — The larger building, Building B (Phase 2), is located at the intersection of
King Street East and Sportworld Drive. The building fronts onto King Street East and
Sportsworld Drive. The street -facing portions of this building are proposed to be activated
by seven at -grade commercial units — a total of 1,300 square metres of commercial space
— as well as two lobbies: one facing King Street and the other facing Sportsworld Drive.
The commercial units would be directly accessed from the abutting streets and connect
to municipal sidewalks. Ground floor structured parking would be hidden from the public
Page 106 of 307
realm by these active uses. On upper floors of the building base (podium), dwelling units
are proposed to line the exterior of the building, so the parking structure would be hidden
from view from the public realm. Building B includes a well-defined base which will
enhance the streetscape of both King Street and Sportsworld Drive.
The smaller building, Building A (Phase 1), is a multiple dwelling and contains only
residential units. The side of the building is oriented to Sportsworld Drive while the front
is oriented to Building B. The ground floor of Building A facing Sportsworld Drive contains
an indoor amenity room and a dwelling unit, while upper floors contain dwelling units.
Skyline — The proposed buildings, along with those at the recently approved Tricar
development at 4220 King Street East and 25 Sportsworld Crossing Road, will begin to
establish a distinctive skyline within the Sportsworld MTSA. These buildings will
contribute positively to the skyline which will evolve as the MTSA develops over time.
Safety — As part of the future site plan approval process, staff will ensure Crime
Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles are implemented and that
the site meets the Ontario Building Code and the City's Emergency Services Policy.
Universal Design — The development will be designed to comply with Accessibility for
Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA) and the Ontario Building Code.
Site Design, Building Design, Massing and Scale — The proposal is designed to be
developed at a scale that is compatible with the existing and planned built form for the
surrounding neighbourhood. The buildings have adequate setbacks, step backs, building
heights and massing, considering their context within an MTSA and separation from low
rise residential land uses. Through a future site plan process, the building designs will be
refined to contribute to a high-quality public realm and sense of place.
Planning staff recommends that the Urban Design Brief be endorsed by Council and that
staff be directed to apply the Urban Design Brief through future Site Plan Approval
processes.
Transportation Policies:
The Official Plan supports an integrated transportation system which incorporates active
transportation, allows for the movement of people and goods and promotes a vibrant,
healthy community using a combination of land use designations and urban design
initiatives that make a wide range of transportation choices viable. As aforementioned,
the subject lands are located within the Sportsworld MTSA and only 330 metres from the
future ION LRT platform and only 300 metres from the current Go Bus Transit Terminal
and GRT Sportsworld Station which connects to two iXpress routes and three local bus
routes. The lands are within close proximity to Highway 8 (350m) and Highway 401
(1,250m). The location of the subject lands is well suited to the proposed transit -oriented
development. Moreover, the subject proposal will support current and future transit
service and build transit ridership.
10
Page 107 of 307
Regional staff advise that a Multi -Use Trail (MUT) will be constructed later this year that
extends along the King Street frontage of the property from Sportsworld Drive to Highway
401. The MUT would be 3 metres wide and would be separated from vehicular traffic by
a grassed boulevard. The MUT would facilitate cycling and pedestrian movement in the
area. The Region is proposing to extend the MUT northwest from Sportsworld Drive to
the Freeport Bridge (and possibly beyond) in 2028-2029. Also, a MUT is proposed to be
constructed along the Sportworld frontage of the property from King Street to Gateway
Park Drive in 2027, with plans to extend it to Maple Grove Road and beyond in the
following years. These planned and proposed pedestrian and cycling upgrades will
greatly improve alternative transportation in this area and further improve the modal split.
Policy 3.C.2.22 states that until such time as Station Area Plans are completed, any
development application submitted within an MTSA will be reviewed generally in
accordance with the Transit -Oriented Development Policies included in Section
13.C.3.12. The proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment
applications support a compact, high-density, mixed-use development that achieves this
policy.
The location of the subject property and the proposed site specific provisions will result in
a compatible built form that encourages walkability within a pedestrian -friendly
environment, supporting safe, comfortable, barrier -free walking.
Additionally, over 300 secured bicycle parking stalls will be implemented as well as visitor
parking spaces, as required by Zoning By-law 2019-051.
Housina Policies:
Section 4.1.1 of the City's Official Plan states that it is a City objective 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. In addition, 4.C.1.12. states that "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." The proposed development will increase the range of
dwelling units available in the city, and in particular within the Pioneer Tower East /
Sportsworld MTSA. The site development concept includes a mix of 1-, 2-, and 3 -
bedroom dwelling units. The range of unit types in this location will appeal to a variety of
household needs. Moreover, the mixed-use nature of the proposed redevelopment as
well as the building form will assist in achieving complete community.
Sustainable Development:
Section 7.C.4.1 of the City's Official Plan ensures developments will increasingly be
sustainable by encouraging, supporting and, where appropriate, requiring:
a) compact development and efficient built form;
b) environmentally responsible design (from community design to building design)
and construction practices;
c) the integration, protection and enhancement of natural features and landscapes
into building and site design;
Page 108 of 307
d) the reduction of resource consumption associated with development; and,
e) transit -supportive development and redevelopment and the greater use of other
active modes of transportation such as cycling and walking.
Development applications are required to demonstrate that the proposal meets the
sustainable development policies of the Official Plan and that sustainable development
design standards are achieved.
The applicant submitted an initial Sustainability Statement in support of the subject
applications. This document states that energy modelling was completed for the first
phase of the proposed development, which confirms adherence and/or exceedance of
components of Energy Star, R-2000, and Built Green programs with respect to energy
conservation and reduced greenhouse gas emissions. City Environmental Planning staff
are satisfied with the Sustainability Statement and will continue to work with the applicant
through the future site plan processes to explore additional sustainable development
initiatives.
Proposed Official Plan Amendment Conclusions:
The Official Plan Amendment application requests that the land use designation as shown
on Map 3 — Land Use of the 2014 Official Plan be changed from Commercial Campus to
Mixed Use with a Site Specific Policy Area to allow a maximum building height of 30
storeys and 99 metres and a maximum Floor Space Ratio of 6.2. Based on the above
noted policies and analysis, Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposed Official Plan
Amendment represents good planning and recommends that the requested Official Plan
Amendment be adopted.
SECTION 4 — THE AMENDMENT
The City of Kitchener Official Plan (2014) is hereby amended as follows:
a. Amend Map No. 3 — Land Use by designating the lands municipally
addressed as 4396 King Street East and 25 Sportsworld Drive as Mixed
Use instead of Commercial Campus, as shown on the attached Schedule
`A';
b. Amend Map No. 5 — Specific Policy Areas by adding Specific Policy Area
No. 59 to the lands municipally addressed as 4396 King Street East and 25
Sportsworld Drive, as shown on the attached Schedule `8'; and
c. Add Site Specific Policy 15.D.12.59 as follows:
59. 4396 King Street East and 25 Sportsworld Drive
Notwithstanding the Mixed Use land use designation and the policies
of the lands located at 4396 King Street East and 25 Sportsworld
Drive:
i) The maximum floor space ratio will be 6.2;
ii) The maximum number of storeys will be 30;
12
Page 109 of 307
iii) The maximum building height will be 99 metres;
iv) A Holding provision pursuant to Section 17.E.13 will apply to
residential uses and other sensitive uses. The Holding
provision will not be removed until such time as a detailed
stationary noise study has been provided to the Regional
Municipality of Waterloo, any mitigation measures have been
implemented, and a release has been issued by the Region;
and
v) A Holding provision pursuant to Section 17.E.13 will apply to
residential uses and other sensitive uses. The Holding
provision will not be removed until such time as a Record of
Site Condition has been acknowledged by the Province and a
release has been issued by the Regional Municipality of
Waterloo.
13
Page 110 of 307
APPENDIX 1: Notice of the Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee Meeting (March 6,
2023)
NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING
for a deveLopment in your neighbourhood
4396 King Street East Et 25 Sportsworld Drive
Concept Drawing
Have Your Voice Heard!
Date: March 6, 2023
Time: 7:00 p.m.
Location: Council Chambers,
Kitchener City Hall
200 King Street West
orVirtual Zoom Meeting
To view the staff report, agenda,
meeting details, start time of this item
or to appear as a delegation, visit:
kitchener.ca/meetings
To learn more about this project,
including information on your
appeal rights, visit:
www.kitchenerca/
PlanningApplications
or contact:
11fted Use FSR of 62, 30 Stoi eys,, Andrew Pinnell Senior Planner
hncVudrig 99 Nletres 616 Il') �At e [ I u r1 9 519.741.2200 x 7668
Cornm& dal un iBeight U'iits andrew.pinnell@kitchener.ca
Applications to amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-law will be considered to facilitate
a mixed-use development having a maximum building height of 99 metres (30 storeys),
a Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 6.2, providing 616 dwelling units and 1,300 square metres of
commercial floor area, and having a reduced parking rate of 0.85 spaces per dwelling
unit.
14
Page 111 of 307
APPENDIX 2: Minutes of the Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee Meeting (March 6,
2023)
1s
Page 112 of 307
APPENDIX 3 - Minutes of the Meeting of City Council (March 20, 2023)
16
Page 113 of 307
a
a
Z a ��
Q 6j j Q a
M O —
/,/ r/��Y
IL li C: C r d
LU
Q O > Q O p o
W Q T N E O
2 J O W Q o U N Q z
CL H N c Q0 Q CO z
z
V a� m d O N
`1aWZ (n U Y m a) m Z L a
LL v� Q co 70 CL �a a� a C: Z W z
OLL J N L L (i C: Z Q c E 0� W
H O
W U X
p
Ziof
L) _ OE
LLJa
-i
Z(,3 00- Q U U Im LL O
_. oQ Yui
I ' Z
h.
Q J QW
}
2F—
co —
z
, w
U
ti.IL LU
LL Z
LLI
0>
` n
n
x IN
i�.y` • ®'.� a. � . � ®` i�.l • r'.� a. � �� 1119 �� "' ��5�, , �n �� ��II�9 � 4 ill
n nig, n W
III
r*'ii din in yin in n
n
..... .... $ . s , ° � in in'ii ii in in in i'iiiin lulu a •. Y � � 1 ' W
n
';4°��• nnnnnnki'� '' n ,'nn„,” - $' 4,��.�xr;$'' �'
IIL.... ..- : i • , ' �
.. n
i'. Y a i.l • i'. a
III i ,�{�•• �- � � n �n �"?"n nn�'nnn n� �a �.® ,$• � a.: �, c+�
-t a
inn
6' n n nn nX. ,� O
n n n n
y N
�'�',:�° glad^,M I ,� '� I��„�g ",ala"71,�i1M � Q-111.4 �n�n 716 ,� �n�n n ���n.n �n6� �n�n TIY n n„� '� �• Y '� � r �
�A” , A"" A"��' u��a " � n n n nn nn 6'Wn e, ` a y .b••' ° • e, ° t y' (A
n n6�' n n 6 ..In 4L. , 3a 4 W O
,� "I� o„m I,nnn'nn n n tam r Of o
n LU
~
�I M1:rA r nom,° n 7
non
b
Iti �
”
Iti , �n �n�Y n ��� ^,, ' ,ti. 4 ; . �
A"' { M1 ,' M11 { W W C n i {{ i L$ O LLQ
Li
�I.
h�la�,1,�1itip, M' � I", �, n'T ;, ",, n",n� n'7'u; n n n' � *• ' l * v ~
'
II
hpi�' ^ � in ^' lin " � Y
Ia���M �pp Ia���� ✓ � n " �n n in �� n � p ... k. . •�•� U) 0
�.b IA M1n wy �� in 'Vnin s s;+i.s IL
`• 9 .
M n l , •.
alb M1;"• �"A " � �n �I, �n C ' � •' �, � ; • ; � . , .. �
n
6 '
i':Aa e.. a:4x•' e,- YL°�•'$.a� i. dam'
,
6
°I.,�n �� Iti tip n � ,� n :s •� � : �; •� , �,' •� � : �; o � z
w n n
ni
�y, g
M1 1 •Y
�wv l k
n nn n ? ° ' e. y� �Y yqr, ti ..4'� Y a ► " ypr '
{CIA'M1,4L LLI (if
.. n 'nn�7 n n' W0 Z
n
Ir,',m n n n n 0 .• e,ej�. rt {, I . e�JOLU W
U
n
Soy
+' 'ISR n n � � • ®` �
r. a• �
T6 Tkl Y �, _ c y.' ,. a+4 . w. -„ c ' e. i. W Q ( N
m 06
Wn
n x, n Z .{. �.{. Z-0—
Z
ii, n in •, C S q Y ® S qe Y S
�n'S ��'Wn �n �n e ► y,,r y,,r, �'�'•'��//J�U)
n l ' IL i . " t
r.
y � ya�
t, ��^ t, J Z
ci��n� t�; x `rt{ �`; t*;;,�- krt{�`; 0-0 Y
LU
W Z Q
W a Q
UJ
IL
Yaz0
LLUwa
o
LL
0 U
U Qa
U)
w
U)
O7
C
Y
00
O
v
N �
O c6
67
Q co
0-
CL
cn
L
L
O
U)
O
N (n
Q LO
N
U C -f
O w
dcn
� U
� U 0)
E QY
m U) co
c �
E Q
a FZLO
w
O
d
L
a
�
— 41 i
"V''s,Qp A
°s
w
C7
Z
Z
L Z
z
w
VQ
a
}� wo
w
U
�~ >
Q w
U)
�+
z
4.0 w
VO
J
W
W
0
U)
W
w
W
� O
O
O
C:)_
LU
o Q
U
CO
W
J
LU
D
V
cn
0
J
U)
d
U)
Cld
U
z
w
2
O
2
M
N
O
N
N}
LL
Q
z
Q
w
a
0
0
0
J
O
U)
O
LO
N
06
w
U)
c�
z
Y
rn
M
It
Attach rr�ent
PROPOSED BY — LAW
2023
BY-LAW NUMBER
OF THE
CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER
(Being a by-law to amend By-law 2019-051, as
amended, known as the Zoning By-law for the City of
Kitchener
— Sportsworld Shopping Centre Inc. and Taylorwood
Park Homes Inc. — 4396 King Street East and 25
Sportsworld Drive)
WHEREAS it is deemed expedient to amend By-law 2019-051 for the lands
specified above;
NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Corporation of the City of Kitchener
enacts as follows:
1. Zoning Grid Schedule Number 289 of Appendix "A" to By-law Number 2019-051 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 Commercial Campus Zone (COM -4) to Mixed Use Three Zone (MIX -3) with
Site Specific Provision (358) and Holding Provision 40H and Holding Provision
41 H.
2. Zoning Grid Schedule Number 289 of Appendix "A" to By-law Number 2019-051 is
hereby further amended by incorporating additional zone boundaries as shown on
Map No. 1 attached hereto.
3. Section 19 of By-law 2019-51 is hereby amended by adding Site Specific
Provision (358) thereto as follows:
"(358). Notwithstanding Section 5.6, Table 5-5, Section 8.3, Table 8-1, and Table
8-2 of this By-law within the lands zoned MIX -3 and shown as being
affected by this subsection on Zoning Grid Schedule Number 289 of
Appendix "A", the following special regulations shall apply:
a) One multiple dwelling, with a maximum of 88 dwelling units, shall be
permitted on a lot without a non-residential use where there is an
approved Urban Design Brief that includes a Master Site Plan that
Page 116 of 307
demonstrates the overall development can provide a non-residential
use through future development phases. Said building shall be
permitted to have a street line fagade, and no additional street line
fagade regulations from the MIX -3 Zone shall apply to the building.
b) For the Sportsworld Drive street line, there shall be no minimum
ground floor street line fagade width as a percent of the width of the
abutting street line where there is an approved Urban Design Brief
that includes a Master Site Plan that demonstrates the overall
development can provide a minimum ground floor street line fagade
width of 45 metres.
c) The minimum percent street line fagade openings of the MIX -3 Zone
shall only apply to a building immediately abutting the intersection of
the King Street East and Sportsworld Drive.
d) A mid -rise building shall not be required to have a base (podium) and
shall not be subject to stepback requirements.
e) For a building immediately abutting the intersection of King Street
East and Sportsworld Drive, the minimum amount of non-residential
gross floor area on the ground floor shall be 1,300 m2.
f) There shall be no requirement for minimum percent of non-residential
gross floor area.
g) The maximum Floor Space Ratio shall be 6.2.
h) The maximum building height shall be 99 metres.
i) The maximum number of storeys shall be 30.
j) The minimum interior side yard setback (i.e., setback from the
easterly side lot line) shall be 3.0 metres.
k) The minimum number of parking spaces for Dwelling Unit and Multiple
Dwelling shall be 0.85 spaces per dwelling unit."
4. Section 20 of By-law 2019-51 is hereby amended by adding Section (40H)
thereto as follows:
"(40H). Notwithstanding Section 8 of this By-law within the lands zoned MIX -3
and shown as being affected by this subsection on Zoning Grid Schedule
Number 289 of Appendix "A", no residential use or other sensitive land
use shall be permitted until such time as a detailed stationary noise study
has been completed and implementation measures have been addressed
to the satisfaction of the Region of Waterloo. The detailed stationary
noise study shall review the potential impacts of the development on itself
Page 117 of 307
(e.g., HVAC system on the sensitive points of reception) and the impact
of the development on the adjacent sensitive land uses. This Holding
Provision shall not be removed until the City of Kitchener is in receipt of a
letter from the Regional Commissioner of Planning, Housing and
Community Services advising that such noise study has been approved
and an agreement, if necessary, has been entered into with the City
and/or Region, as necessary, providing for the implementation of any
recommended noise mitigation measures."
5. Section 20 of By-law 2019-51 is hereby amended by adding Section (41H)
thereto as follows:
"(41 H). Notwithstanding Section 8 of this By-law within the lands zoned MIX -3
and shown as being affected by this subsection on Zoning Grid Schedule
Number 289 of Appendix "A", no residential use or other sensitive land
use shall be permitted until such time as a Record of Site Condition
(RSC) in accordance with O. Reg. 153/04, as amended, has been filed on
the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP)
Environmental Site Registry and the Ministry Acknowledgement letter has
been submitted to the satisfaction of the Region. This Holding Provision
shall not be removed until the City of Kitchener is in receipt of a letter
from the Regional Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community
Services advising that said Ministry Acknowledgement letter has been
submitted to the satisfaction of the Region."
6. This By-law shall become effective only if Official Plan Amendment No. _ (4396
King Street East and 25 Sportsworld Drive) comes into effect, pursuant to
Section 24(2) of The Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P. 13, as amended.
PASSED at the Council Chambers in the City of Kitchener this day of
, 2023.
Mayor
Clerk
Page 118 of 307
i� IIIIIIIIIII„IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
� �000000
�IIIII
2g29t.b
es
g
00
Illlllllum��.... 1 r
bd
7
� 2g29
d0 b�
U slb
b
bd
�a
VIII m
,-. b� � � IIIIIIIIIIIII�
y U
uuuuu151�u�uuuuumuuuuullV0
` �uuuuuuuuuWuuuuuullllllu
�3 VIII
��� '�` uuuuuuuluuuuu �a
uuulW ,
O
O
� 2
W
O
O F
U 0
co
N
W M_Q
NO
4 0
W O N O Z
~_j INJ
N O v
LOO
o � W D
N az>z
Q ZO
a Q°�o
IN W U
07 Z a
J UWIL<n
_
J W
In Q -O
w
2 —
O Q
Q
WCOaO
U m
Z Z
Q Lu
LUL,
W� C7
z
OLu
p�
IM
LU
WOa0
W W O D
v
Z X N
aaLL
>>LLJ
in W'
J Z W
i� IIIIIIIIIII„IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
� �000000
�IIIII
2g29t.b
es
g
00
Illlllllum��.... 1 r
bd
7
� 2g29
d0 b�
U slb
b
bd
�a
VIII m
,-. b� � � IIIIIIIIIIIII�
y U
uuuuu151�u�uuuuumuuuuullV0
` �uuuuuuuuuWuuuuuullllllu
�3 VIII
��� '�` uuuuuuuluuuuu �a
uuulW ,
O
zo
0
U �
O
W Z
Z O
W
O
O F
W z
ZIN
N
J W >
Q Z W�
z O Z W
NO
z
W O N O Z
~_j INJ
z
} O
W
LOO
O Q? O�
Q ZO
IN W U
07 Z a
z
Z Z N
Q
dOWQ
Z Q
LU
W LU
W J
2— O H
O0
U m
OQOQ
Uw
JUx
ww
W� C7
z
JO
Up�FoQ WQ
QLU W
U)U)D
LU
WOa0
Z w 2i�
Z
Z X N
W uJ r � D
2_ 0 O Q
>>LLJ
in W'
J Z W
m N
�2C�tn?�Q0Z
O W o�'T
a> x
Oc�
c�7paw
a=
LU 7N
J U Z J g Uz a U) m
LU
Z2QU
M0-. 0O}OO0ZNOOOf 2
IN U)
...
I
�
.....
0
zo
0
U �
N
N
1% O
U
1
1`
1
1
1
NIN
WI`W
�'J
1
1
UIU
ti.lq
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
a
�I
a
¢ X
LL '
o
Q N
IN
N
Y
N o Y
H 2 0-)C7
O 0 O O Z_
Z WO Z
J o W N � z
w Q N L
z�
a
O O O N a�a
O W
W Z
ui 0w
�2 o
OS” V w Cz U
b�S Q G `~ >
0 LU
Z ~
SSS ��vv a
a
rn < W
Z U o
z LL
O LL
C)
O
O N
W
O
r, W
C:,
Q
O 3
�44, s'b14 ash
Q
w. w, ➢
C:)
W
�'' , J w
U) 0
0
P Ji
i
'L4
U �
J
Z Ix
W W
r U (n
O C9
�£5” Q = Z O
(A 11
41, a Qoz Lo
0cq
6
Q O>� W
cD
Q�
HO rn
a M
m uull l„ ^ U)
�
III
Q
LLJ
�6
Q
�
mss
4�
gs
lid
a
¢
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
U
��
II IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
'
I
�
.„uIVVVVVVVVVV IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
I u
O
L)
M
M
N
N
1% O
U
1
1`
1
1
1
NIN
WI`W
�'J
1
1
UIU
ti.lq
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
a
�I
a
¢ X
LL '
o
Q N
IN
N
Y
N o Y
H 2 0-)C7
O 0 O O Z_
Z WO Z
J o W N � z
w Q N L
z�
a
O O O N a�a
O W
W Z
ui 0w
�2 o
OS” V w Cz U
b�S Q G `~ >
0 LU
Z ~
SSS ��vv a
a
rn < W
Z U o
z LL
O LL
C)
O
O N
W
O
r, W
C:,
Q
O 3
�44, s'b14 ash
Q
w. w, ➢
C:)
W
�'' , J w
U) 0
0
P Ji
i
'L4
U �
J
Z Ix
W W
r U (n
O C9
�£5” Q = Z O
(A 11
41, a Qoz Lo
0cq
6
Q O>� W
cD
Q�
HO rn
a M
m uull l„ ^ U)
GSP
Uhd,-)r",Iin Report
Aerial view of the Site
Page 121 of 307
Groi.p I [�"earc, ary, 20Z")'
1. BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
1.1 Project Background
1.2 Project Scope
1.3 Subject Site
1.4 Proposed Development
1.5 Content
2. CONTEXTUAL FIT
2.1 Neighbourhood Context
2.2 Immediate Context
3. DESIGN POLICY AND GUIDELINE REFERENCES
3.1 Official Plan
3.2 Urban Design Manual
4. SITE AND BUILDING DESIGN OVERVIEW
4.1 Building Positioning
4.2 Building Scale and Massing
4.3 Access and Circulation
4.4 Loading and Service
4.5 Car Parking
4.6 Bicycle Parking
4.7 Streetscape and Landscape Design
4.8 Building Materials and Articulation
5. MICROCLIMATE ANALYSIS
5.1 Shadow Analysis
5.2 Pedestrian Wind Analysis
6. RESPONSE TO POLICY AND GUIDELINE FRAMEWORK
6.1 Response to Official Plan Policy
6.2 Response to Urban Design Manual Guidelines
161111III&INZI&UM
3
Page 122 of 307
GSP
Uhd,-)r",Iin ori Report
Overall Site Context - Aerial view
4
Page 123 of 307
MIIL" r 10.S&D
1.1 Project Background
Taylorwood Construction Limited owns 4396
King Street East (a small strip commercial
development) at the corner of King Street
East and Sportsworld Drive as well as 25
Sportsworld Drive (property immediately to the
north that previously contained the Pioneer
BBQ restaurant. The Site is approximately 1.05
hectares in area and is part of the Commercial
Campus in the Sportsworld Drive area.
In late 2017 and 2018 Taylorwood began a
Site Plan Approval process for the northern
property (formerly the restaurant) and looked
at options to develop the Site for drive through
restaurants and commercial developments in
demand to market needs at the time. After
working through a variety of options with City of
Kitchener planning staff, Taylorwood concluded
that the best option for the Site is to consolidate
the two parcels and consider a more intensive
development that looks beyond short term
commercial opportunities and starts to create a
more complete community in this area building
on the proposed rapid transit system.
In May of 2018, The Region of Waterloo
confirmed an alignment for the extension of the
ION LRT system from Kitchener to Cambridge
which includes traversing this area along King
Street East and establishing a station about
300 metres west of the subject Site on King
Street East.
A higher density redevelopment of the Site
recognizes a number of factors at play, both
contextually and with respect to the Site,
including:
:ew Grmlp I ["e arc, aiy 20Z`)'
• The King/Sportsworld area is maturing and
the area is no longer between Kitchener and
Preston.
• Commercial markets are changing and there
is less demand for "bricks and mortar" as
evidenced by the vacancies in the area as
well as the inability of Sportsworld Crossing
to complete its retail component.
• In addition to the retail space in the area,
there is an office component and in total
a lot of jobs are available close to the
Site. The Cambridge business park is also
located very close and easily accessed from
Sportsworld Drive.
• The Site is very close to Highway 401 for
residents who may need to commute out of
town for work.
• The extension of the LRT service as well
as the nearby local and regional bus
terminal gives this area significant transit
infrastructure.
An Official Plan amendment and zoning by-
law amendment are required to facilitate
this development. The proposed Official
Plan Amendment seeks to redesignate from
Commercial Campus to Mixed -Use (MIX -3
zone).The MIX -3 Zone permits a wide range of
commercial uses, such as retail, restaurants,
and offices. Dwelling units are permitted in
both mixed-use buildings as well as multiple
residential buildings.
1.2 Project Scope
This Urban Design Report is prepared for
an Official Plan amendment as well as a
Zoning By-law amendment for the Proposed
Development, required per the December 2019
5
Page 124 of 307
JJllllJlGSP
Pre -Submission Consultation. The Kitchener
Official Plan defines an Urban Design Report as
follows: "an urban design document that maybe
required of an owner/applicant to demonstrate
how a development application implements the
City's Urban Design Manual".
1.3 Subject Site
The Site is approximately 1.05 hectares in
area, located at the intersection of King Street
East and Sportsworld Drive. The Site has dual
frontages and is trapezoidal in shape, with
approximately 118 metres of frontage along
King Street East and approximately 126 metres
of frontage along Sportsworld Drive.
The southern portion of the Site - 4396
King Street East - is currently occupied by a
1 -storey commercial retail building containing
approximately 1,400 m2 (72m length by 2Om
depth), set back approximately 37m from
King Street East, and 25m from Sportsworld
Drive. The building is serviced by a parking
lot of an approximately similar size to the
building footprint, as well as additional parking
perpendicular to Sportsworld Drive. A drive
through lane, parallel to King Street East,
offers drive through access to the Tim Hortons
restaurant located at the south east corner of
the building.
The northern portion of the Site - 25 Sportsworld
Drive - is currently vacant, with the footprint of
the former building (Pioneer BBQ restaurant)
still visible, along with surrounding parking
areas. An asphalt road and row of coniferous
trees demarcates the transition between the
two sites.
l.JI,L)aIn I cl,tirn Report " rlg K4 tch(,,�Fne'r
1.4 Proposed Development
The Proposed Development is a high-density
mixed-use project comprising of residential
and commercial uses at -grade, with a
total of 616 dwelling units. Phase 1 of the
Proposed Development includes a 8 -storey
residential building at the north end of the
Site, containing 88 units. Phase 2 includes
a podium tower development fronting King
Street East, featuring two residential towers
of 30 -storey and 18 -storey, with a combined
total of approximately 528 units, siting atop
a 5 -storey podium with commercial frontages.
The Proposed Development features indoor
and outdoor amenity areas for resident use.
Vehicular access is from Sportsworld Drive for
Phase 1 and Phase 2 and this driveway access
leads to a drop off area. The access from
King Street East is for Phase 2 that leads to
structured parking, integrated into the podium
and out of public view.
1.5 Content
Taylorwood Construction Limited is currently
proposing a mixed-use development on the
property at 4396 King Street East ("the Site")
in Kitchener. The Urban Design Report reflects
the scope identified in the pre -submission
consultation record of the December 19th,
2019 Pre -Submission Consultation Meeting,
including:
• A full Wind Study including snow deposition
analysis;
• A complete Shadow Analysis;
• A Tall Building Analysis including a
discussion of how the proposal meets City
design requirements and rationale;
Page 125 of 307
• 3D massing model including preliminary
building elevations and anticipated building
materials;
• Discussion and assessment of compatibility
and contextual fit of the proposal into
the existing and planned neighbourhood
including a discussion of overlook/ privacy
concerns, contribution to city skyline and
impacts to views and sightlines;
• Discussion of the proposed massing, scale,
design and character including distinction
of the base / middle / top portions of the
building, articulation, stepbacks/ projections
and property setbacks;
• Assessment of functional considerations
such as private and common amenity space;
• Discussion and assessment of proposed
sustainability measures for the development;
• Preliminary Noise Assessment to inform
building design and amenity space location.
KEY POINTS - RECORD OF PRE -SUBMISSION
CONSULTATION
• Support for high density development since
Site is within a Major Transit Station Area
due to being within approximately 300m of
a planned ION station platform (Sportsworld
Cross Rd @King Street East)
Transit Oriented Development (Integrated
Transportation System section) provisions
including:
• Interconnected and multi -modal street
pattern that encourages walking, cycling or
the use of transit and supports mixed use
development
:ew Grmlp I ["e arc, aiy 20Z")'
• Fosters walkability by creating pedestrian -
friendly environments that allow walking
to be a safe, comfortable, barrier -free and
convenient form of urban travel
• Supports high quality pubic realm to
enhance the identity of the area and create
gathering points for social interaction,
community events and other activities
• Provides access from various transportation
modes to the transit facility, including
consideration of pedestrians, bicycle
parking, and passenger transfer and
commuter pick-up / drop off areas
• There is a serious deficiency of accessible
parkland to serve this development, and
therefore on-site amenity space should
be maximized both at -grade and within
available rooftop spaces. At -grade spaces
will need to be protected from both King St.
E. and Sportsworld Drive, which are both
heavily traveled and very wide streets.
• There is very little local park spaces,
especially play areas. On-site amenity
spaces should be maximized.
• Lack of public parks / amenity space in this
neighbourhood, means there is a higher
value placed on-site amenity space. Private
amenity space should be maximized.
Page 126 of 307
GSP
'.)(,a,tigln Report Ihrlg
Page 127 of 307
W116 '
2.1 Neighbourhood Context
The Site is part of the Sportsworld Draft Station
Study Area, included in the Planning Around
Rapid Transit Stations (PARTS) study by the
City of Kitchener.
This area "encompasses approximately 40
hectares of land south of the Sportsworld
ION Station Stop and generally extends to
Gateway Park Drive and Heldmann Road and is
intersected by Highway 8. There are currently
no people living within the draft station area
and, using the assumptions employed by the
Kitchener Growth Management Strategy, it is
estimated that there are 512 jobs located within
the draft station study area for a calculation of
an average of 13 jobs per hectare (p.1O3).
The PARTS Sportsworld Study Area identifiesthe
following existing conditions in the area: 37% of
land within the Sportsworld Draft Station Study
Area is designated Business Park and 63% of
land designated Planned Commercial Campus
in the current Official Plan and is generally in
consistent with the existing zoning; buildings
cover approximately 5% of the land within the
focus area which are mainly dominated by
low rise, large format commercial and office
uses with large areas of surface parking and
underutilized retail uses with limited sidewalks
that adds little to a quality streetscape; there
are no parkland and a City owned community
facility (Sportsworld Arena) currently exists
within the station focus area; 13% of land
within the Sportsworld draft station study area
is designated Natural Heritage System; and
an increase in transit ridership is anticipated,
hence the Sportsworld draft station study area
will be served by existing and future transit
services.
:ew Grmlp I ["e arG, aly 20Z`)'
PARTS Plan: Sportsworld Station Study Area
0
Page 128 of 307
°f URT
450 rn
Draft Stud1y Area;
treet'Ne wworl .
5pori¢aworld
00"Highoway
Walk 'lDiManoes LRT
Road
4 L im
"'Road (Proposed)
1101 1,111,i
'e"— Local' tiree
0
Page 128 of 307
GSP
2.2 Immediate Context
North
The Site abuts two 1 -storey retail buildings
serviced by a parking lot to the north. There
are two entry/exit points to the property:
one from Sportsworld Drive and other from
Gateway Park Drive. The Site also offers a
drive through ATM service at the corner of
Sportsworld Drive and Gateway Park Drive.
East
The abutting property to the east 4438
King St East is a 1 -storey Costco building,
with a large paved surfaces and parking lot
that extends the length of the whole block
between King Street and Gateway Park
Dr. The Costco building is located at the
rear end of the property with back facing
to Gateway Park Dr. and is surrounded by
surface parking on all sides and a 1 -storey
retail store closer to the access point along
Gateway Park Drive.
(2) South
Immediately to the south is a commercial
plaza similar in scale to the Site. Adjacent
to and beyond this plaza is a residential
neighbourhood, primarily comprised of
single detached houses. These houses do
not have frontage along King Street East
and are accessed by side streets.
10
d1,-)arI I grI IJP p,(. °)r1:1'.1glr(."rl[Ear>i - 1K4 tI,,1(,,1rI(:"I,
U4 West
Directly abutting the Site to the west
is Sportsworld Drive. The existing cross
section of Sportsworld Drive at this
location has two -lanes with sidewalks on
either side.
Across Sportsworld Drive is the Sportsworld
Crossing Plaza which includes a few
restaurant and retail spaces, all fronting
along King Street East. There is a single
storey Mc Donald's , situated at the corner
of Sportsworld Drive and Gateway Park Dr.
Page 129 of 307
Girm,q) I [�"ehn,,ary, 20Z`�
Immediate Context - Aerial view
11
Page 130 of 307
GSP
L'Jid"')aIn
I
View looking from King Street East sidewalk.
View looking from the internal driveway at the south-east corner of the Site.
12
Page 131 of 307
13
Page 132 of 307
GSP
LJ 1, ",)a r I )EI' I R (,." x) I, t 1 4 3 J) 61 1' e'e i [a� , I t I el I' I (,I,
View looking from the corner of Sportsworld Drive and King Street East towards the Site.
View looking from the south-west corner of the Site towards Sportsworld Drive and King Street East intersection.
14
Page 133 of 307
15
Page 134 of 307
GSP
L'Jid"')aIn
I . . . . . . . . . .
View looking from north-east side of the Site at 25 Sportsworld Drive.
16
Page 135 of 307
17
Page 136 of 307
GSP
L'Jid"')aIn
View looking from Sportsworld Drive sidewalk towards the Site.
4,11
View looking from the Site towards Sportsworld Drive.
0
10,
Page 137 of 307
19
Page 138 of 307
JJ111111GSP
3.1 Official Plan
The City of Kitchener Official Plan (2014)
designates the Site as "Commercial Campus"
(COM -4 Zone). The COM -4 Zone does not
permit residential uses, therefore a Zoning By-
law Amendment is required to facilitate the
proposed development.
The Official Plan Amendment proposes to
change the designation of the Site from
Commercial Campus (COM -4 Zone) to MIXED
USE (MIX -3) ZONE. The MIXED USE policies
are intended with flexibility to permit a broad
range of uses at different scales and intensities.
The Mixed Use policies (15.D.4) specifically
indicate that "development and redevelopment
of properties will be encouraged to achieve a
high standard of urban design, be compatible
with surrounding areas, be transit -supportive
and cycling and pedestrian -friendly".
The proposed redevelopment supports the
policy direction by providing further uses and
density to the site, that are compatible with
the surrounding area and supports alternative
modes of transportation.
20
U r[-);Iri i,.i Report 1 i rig KtcPieln(,,�Fr
Page 139 of 307
3.2 General Urban Design Policies
Section 11 of the Official Plan contains general
urban design policies that are used to evaluate
movement patterns, the relationship between
built form and open spaces, integration of
natural and cultural resources and development
impacts. They include:
General urban design policies that speak
to the city's skyline, CPTED principles, fire
prevention, barrier -free accessibility, and
shade.
Site Design policies speak to the building's
street relationship landscaping to improve
the streetscape; developments to improve
aesthetic quality and be safe, comfortable,
functional and provide circulation for all
transportation modes; and site servicing
and utilities to be screened from view from
the public realm.
Building Design, Massing and Scale design
policies speak to human -scale proportions to
support a comfortable and attractive public
realm, including attractive building forms,
facades, and roof designs; complementary
design of new buildings; and architectural
innovation and expression.
Section 17.E.10.5 identifies that urban design
briefs together with other design -related are
meant to be used to
a) demonstrate that a proposed development or
redevelopment is compatible;
b) address the relationship to and the privacy of
adjacent residential development; and,
c) ensure compatibility with the existing built form
and the physical character of the established area
and/or neighbourhood.
:ew Gini,g) 20Z`)'
3.3 Urban Design Manual
PART A — Design Guidelines
Part A contains design guidelines on various
land uses, built types, geographic areas, and
urban structure elements. The following topics
of design guidelines are relevant to the Site and
the proposed building.
a) C liii°Illk„ l � r
The City -Wide design guidelines apply to
Kitchener as a whole. The main objective of these
guidelines it to ensure Kitchener is designed as
an inclusive, safe, accessible, comfortable and
appealing placeto live,workand play. Guidelines
are divided into Community Design and Site
Design. The Community Design guidelines
are primarily used by the City in designing the
form and structure of communities through the
application of design best practices in a range
of topics. The Site Design guidelines address
built form, open space and site functionality.
IIW Nodes mriirliii 'oiiii°s
The Nodes& Corridors design guidelines applyto
specific areas marked within Kitchener servicing
as community focal points. These guidelines
have general objectives to support high-quality
sustainable development and are broken down
into node and corridor classification. The Site
is identified within a Neighbourhood Node,
projected to serve commercial needs for the
surrounding residential areas.
IINAa,pr i r&isII Sta Iiioiiia meas
The Major Transit Station Areas guidelines
apply generally for areas surrounding ION
Stations. The Site is within such an area, being
300 to 400 metres to the Kitchener Market
21
Page 140 of 307
JJ111111GSP
Station. Although the guidelines indicate they
do not apply to sites subject to the Downtown
guidelines, they are germane to the Proposed
Development and inform design.
IIPaidlci iii iI g
The Structured Parking guidelines apply to the
development of above -grade parking structures
within Kitchener. The Proposed Development
includes six levels of podium parking. The
Guidelines are to ensure promote compatibility
with the surrounding built form and address
materials, articulation, massing and public
realm design.
22
f.Jr -)r"'Iri i,.i Report I i rig KtcPieln(,,�Fr
r'° IIII IIII IIII°° tai !IIII Ii ling s
The Tall Buildings guidelines guide the design
of tall buildings in the city, which are defined
as those greater than 8 storeys in height. These
guidelines are meant to be read in conjunction
with the policies of the Official Plan and
guidelines of the Urban Design Manual and are
meant to be applied on a case-by-case basis.
Page 141 of 307
4.1 Building Positioning
The Proposed Development (Buildings A and
B) is developed on a trapezoid -shaped Site with
two different axes, measuring approximately
120 metres along King Street and Sportsworld
Drive. Building A is positioned on the northern
portion of the Site, set back 3.3 metres from
the property line fronting Sportsworld Drive and
7.5 metres from the northern property line.
Building B is positioned at the intersection
of King Street and Sportsworld Drive, set
back between 3 and 4 metres. The proposed
building (Building A and B) are set back 6.4
TOWER A
(30 -storeys)
BUILDING A
(8 -storeys)
GS,[" h (3rrrCal:)
and 3 metres, respectively, from the eastern
property line shared with adjacent property.
The building's positioning sets the envelope for
the building's architecture and ground floor uses
to assist in creating a vibrant streetscape along
King Street East and Sportsworld Drive. The
proposed at -grade retail and lobby functions
close to the street will assist with animating
the street edges. The highly transparent ground
floor exterior on the activity focal points along
King and Sportsworld, outlined in the following
sections, provides visibility between building
interiors and public sidewalks.
TOWE
(18-sto
Easy
Highly Articulated
Facades That Relate
to the Surroundings
Page 142 of 307
JJ111111GSP
4.2 Building Scale and Massing
The Proposed Development's massing and
height are generally focused in the southern
portion of the Site, along King Street and
Sportsworld Drive. The Proposed Development
(Buildings A and B) has a collective gross floor
area of 64,128.5 square metres (above grade),
resulting in an FSR of 6.1.
Phase 1 of the Proposed Development (Building
A) includes a 8 -storey, residential building
measuring 26.4 metres from ground floor to
the 8th floor top (plus 4.0 metres to a recessed
mechanical penthouse). The proposed Building
A has a total of 88 units, a mix of 1 -bedroom
and 2 -bedroom typical floor plans ranging
from 540 square feet (50 square metres) to
940 square feet (87 square metres). Building
A features dwelling units on all floors, with a
small portion of the first floor dedicated to a
lobby, amenity areas, bike storage, garbage,
move -in space and utilities.
Phase 2 includes a podium tower development
(Building B) fronting King Street, including two
residential towers of 25 -storey and 13 -storey
atop a 5 -storey podium.
The 5 -storey mixed use podium measures
at 18.9 metres from ground floor to the 5th
floor roofline with at -grade commercial units
along King Street East and Sportsworld
Drive. The podium's ground floor along King
and Sportsworld is lined with continuous
commercial units. The commercial area will be
comprised of a series of individual units with
direct accesses to the sidewalk.
The proposed Building B has two distinct
towers to break up the building mass which
24
Urri t i,.i Report I 4 rig`.tIre'rtK tl helrI(,,�I,
contributes to an interesting skyline, and
minimize impacts on surrounding properties.
The towers (A and B) are positioned atop the
podium with a substantial setback from King
and Sportsworld. The two towers rise in a
slender fashion with a square-shaped, 878.9
square metres footprint, measuring 31.2
metres by 29.6 metres wide. This slender
form coupled with towers setbacks minimize
shadow and wind impacts per the supporting
assessments.
The towers (A and B) contain 509 residential
units (528 units in total, includes podium and
towers) with a mix of 1 -bedroom and 2 -bedroom
units, typical floor plans ranging from 540
square feet (50 square metres) to 1455 square
feet (135 square metres). Preliminary floor
plans show individual unit balconies for both
podium and towers.
The building has a communal rooftop terrace
on the podium rooftop, wrapping the tower
base on all sides. It will provide a range of
recreation, activity and relaxation opportunities
for residents.
Page 143 of 307
M9
Ast
8
14 )RF
NN
2,9r)7
31m
'I OWER A
30 STOR'Eys
PHASE 2
-" ,OPO"u[.Di.
29m
�NXED-USE BULDNGI-
528 LR,MS
E MWER B
m 8 S F0 R EYS
Or
ae
K��'�4G STREET EAST
Girm,iq) I [�"ehin,,aiy 20Z`)'
SITE PLAN SHOWING SETBACKS AND STEP -BACKS
25
Page 144 of 307
JJ111111GSP
4.3 Access and Circulation
Building positioning on the Site provides direct
vehicular and bicycle access to the buildings
from the bounding streets and sidewalks.
Vehicular access to the Site is proposed via two
driveways: one from King Street and; other from
Sportsworld Drive. These two driveways provide
vehicular access to the surface and below -
grade parking. Building entrances (commercial
and residential) are easily accessed by public
sidewalk along the King Street and Sportsworld
Drive.
The Site, including Phase 1 (Building A) and
VehiculE
Pedestri
26
di hr�:�ri J;ri Rq�-.X)I't: `„rF;r "Uls; `�li�kr� i::fa�>I 4i11,Pi�Fri �,r
Phase 2 (Building B), provides an integrated
walkway system and barrier -free pathways are
proposed to connect building entrances from
the public sidewalk. The entrance to Building
A lobby is mid -building, accessed from the
internal driveway.
The Building B has two lobby entrances to the
residential units which can be easily accessed
from King Street and Sportsworld Drive. The
entrance to the smaller commercial units are
located along King Street and Sportsworld Drive,
accessed from multiple walkways leading into
concrete walkway lining the building.
Page 145 of 307
4.4 Loading and Service
Loading and services entrances for the Site are
accessed from Sportsworld Drive, aligned with
surface parking. An internal garbage, loading
and service room is located on the ground
floor of Building A facing the internal shared
driveway. Emergency service vehicles are
accommodated through the surface parking
area. Storage areas are provided in the podium
of Building B.
4.5 Car Parking
The Proposed Development includes at -grading
parking along with two levels of underground
parking and five levels above -grade parking
Surface Parking
Below -Grade Parking (Pl-P2)
Above -Grade Parking (1-1-1-5)
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII Landscape Area
G ('a ru I I J-) I i c 'j I, I I '�i I, Y, � 10 � I " ""),
within the building podium.
Parking in Building B is contained within
an integrated parking garage. The proposed
parking plan consists of 11 surface parking,
228 on two levels of underground parking and
357 located above grade (Level 1-5) structured
parking contained within the proposed building
footprints. The parking garage is accessed from
both King and Sportsworld.
The proposed parking spaces are inclusive of
barrier -free spaces, visitors and commercial
parking and electric vehicle parking. All parking
are located behind the face of the building and
not visible from the streets.
27
Page 146 of 307
JJ111111GSP
4.6 Bicycle Parking
For Building A, an indoor bicycle storage room
is provided at -grade, accessed externally by
the pathway along the building's edge.
For Building B,the indoor bicycle storage rooms
are provided within the integrated parking
garage.
LJI'L)ari I (,a, iJ n �,I:rtrl°1: Je,rF�r I irlsJ; `�li�kr� f::fa�>i 4i11,PirFrir�,r
Page 147 of 307
4.7 Streetscape and Landscape Design
Detailed landscape plans have not been
explored at this time. The building positioning,
ground floor commercial units, and glass
transparency support an animated streetscape
along King Street and Sportsworld Drive. There
are opportunities for comprehensive landscape
treatments that contribute to an attractive,
pedestrian -oriented streetscape.
The streetscape will be designed to encourage
pedestrian connectivity to the public realm
and create emphasis at the commercial and
lobby entrances. The building design provides
pedestrian protection from weather elements
through extended overhead canopies at grade,
strategically placed and designed across
the site to further enhance the pedestrian
A 20
hr rfW I HD
iiI BID
,G.,,�
I BED x.,,l
1 _.
n` 1
itfY
�dE11
n da r+w
Pergolas
Raised Planter Bed
:el Grmlp I h"ebrcaaiy 20Z")'
experience. In addition, there will be a high
concentration of windows and entrances along
both the King Street East and Sportsworld
Drive streetscape to further activate the streets
and provide visual interest.
Conceptually, this includes street trees in
curbside boulevards along Sportsworld Drive
and building foundation plantings lining the
two street -facing edges with planted beds of
trees, shrubs and perennials. The substantial
width along Sportsworld Drive between building
edge and curb edge allows for street trees and
foundation plantings bed in depth as well as
hardscaped spaces with seating elements for
outdoor use.
Raised Planter Bed
LJ � I_..l I l I_ L
2 BED t GE11 7 BEb 8 EEdz
IN, ft,
0Ea
..w
T(7WER B
x
ID
I^bED 1^010 7&@
CONCEPTUAL ROOFTOP TERRACE
rA" r,i
Source: 1iE Architects
29
Page 148 of 307
JJ111111GSP
The provision of indoor and outdoor amenity
spaces offers private open space for building
residents that supplement park and open space
requirements. Outdoor amenity features are
intended to provide space for play, gathering,
sitting, and activity. The intervening space
at grade between the two buildings provides
opportunities for outdoor amenity area for
passive and active social gatherings for the
residents. Building A's ground floor contains
two indoor amenity rooms of 87 square metres
each, with access to the outdoor space. The
outdoor space will provide a range of recreation,
activity and relaxation opportunities for
residents such as space for a shade structure
and cluster seating to accommodate various
group sizes and families, with the remainder
of the space proposed as a playground for
children to use and enjoy.
The above -grade amenity areas consist of the
rooftop communal terrace on the 6th floor
and indoor amenity space on every floor of the
towers (for both Towers A and B) ranging in size
from 55 to 59 square metres. The towers are
spaced around the podium which will assist in
allowing natural light to spill into the rooftop
amenity areas. The rooftop outdoor amenity
space is directly visible and accessible from
the indoor amenity rooms. A detailed landscape
design plan for the rooftop terrace has not
been explored at this time. Conceptually,
this rooftop amenity area is principally a hard
surface treatment of deck pavers for durability
and ease of maintenance. Soft landscape
treatments are added through raised massed
planted beds, including deciduous canopy trees
within the beds and standalone, together with
movable planters around the perimeter of the
30
UrI,I Report I 4 rig`.tIre'rtK tl helrI(,,�I,
terrace. A large pergola structure in the middle
is proposed, to promote the dispersement
and deflection of wind and create a suitable
microclimate within that area.
Indoor amenity uses shall be determined at Site
Plan application. Ata minimum, indoor amenity
spaces shall include a gym and theatre/party
room. Indoor amenity space on the ground floor
provides larger spaces for residents to gather
and use for socializing and relaxation.
Overall, the Proposed Development includes
a combined total of 2,300 square metres of
amenity areas (exceeding the required 1,230
square metres of amenity area). Of this,
approximately 1000 square metres is outdoor
amenity areas; 900 square metres is at -grade
landscaped amenity area; approximately
174.6 square metres of indoor amenity area for
Building A; and approximately 231.8 square
metres of indoor amenity areas for Building B.
Page 149 of 307
Representative example of Galet Seating Arrangement
Representative example of Children's Outdoor Play
Structure
:ew Grrkc.,g) I [ r"eh ci,ary 20Z`,)'
Representative example of Podium furnishings with
Shade Structure to support passive/social recreation
Representative example of Raised Planters Beds
I :j 1011 *1 I 0 *0I s ETI.Tel:Mui7 all It d PTiMOki aiZo7 gift] 7_1►TA 4 01 111 11 V
31
Page 150 of 307
JJ111111GSP
4.8 Building Materials and Articulation
Building materials are preliminary at this time
and will be refined as the detailed design
progresses.
The following pages illustrate the design
inspiration that will inform the detailed
design at the Site Plan Approval stage. The
architectural style is intended as a clean,
contemporary look for the building. The images
show a masonry -based or metal panel emphasis
with aluminum framed window system and
guardrails. Combinations of lighter and darker
natural colours set the base with an emphasis
on symmetry and a grid -like pattern to provide
texture to the elevations. A high degree of
f.drI,I Report I 4 rig `.tIre' i K tl,helI'I(,,�I,
transparency is accommodated along all
building elevations, with a particular emphasis
on the ground floor plane.
32
Page 151 of 307
33
Page 152 of 307
GSP
UrI, I t i,.i Report I 4 rigI re'ei K tchel r I (,I,
VIPM/ from qnf-)rtcIA/r)rlri nril/p
34
Page 153 of 307
2 HD
I BED
I BED
V.e
Grmp I [�"ehn,,ary, 20Z`,�
GROUND FLOOR PLAN (LEVEL 1) - BUILDING A
Source: ABA Architects
TYPICAL FLOOR PLAN - BUILDING A
Source: ABA Architects
35
Page 154 of 307
36
Source: ABA Architects
Page 155 of 307
............
KEY
PLAN
Source: ABA Architects
Page 155 of 307
Grmp I [�"ebn,ary, 20Z")'
%GROUND FLOOR PLAN (LEVEL 1) - BUILDING B
Source: ABA Architects
TYPICAL PODIUM PLAN (LEVEL 2-4) - BUILDING B
Source:
AB..
37
Page 156 of 307
GSP
1, '.)a r I I g I' I R e p (°) r t I 4 1'.1 g I r (."e i [E a 1, - K i t
TYPICAL TOWER A PLAN (LEVEL 6-30) - BUILDING B TYPICAL TOWER B PLAN (LEVEL 6-18) - BUILDING B
Source: ABA Architects Source: ABA Architects
59.9m
q Noll k?
OWEIIR A
9.7m.
Ito VELm, NCI 2 oto
20.8mO/3R1.2m OK
67% ww 2 b
70 B
1, T!"
MD Ito Rll
IM
TYPICAL TOWER PLANS (LEVEL 6) - BUILDING B
Source: ABA Architects
Page 157 of 307
(',,i,ni,q') I [�"ehn,ary, 20Z")'
KEY PLAN
MASSING ELEVATIONS - BUILDING B
Source: ABA Architects
39
Page 158 of 307
KEY
PLAN
MASSING ELEVATIONS - BUILDING B
Source: ABA Architects
39
Page 158 of 307
GSP
40
U,1, r I in R ('." x) I, t 1 46, 1'.1 g r e'e i [Ea'I - K i t
KEY PLAN
........ ....
..........................
..........
L1,;
KEY PLAN
........ ....
..........................
L1,;
L
L
J L"
KEY PLAN
KEY PLAN
MASSING ELEVATIONS - BUILDING B
Source: ABA Architects
Page 159 of 307
........ ....
..........................
KEY PLAN
MASSING ELEVATIONS - BUILDING B
Source: ABA Architects
Page 159 of 307
5.1 Shadow Analysis
A Shadow Analysis is a complete application
submission requirement per the Site's Pre -
Submission Consultation meeting. The Tall
Building Guidelines identify that such shadow
analysis is meant "to demonstrate how a
proposed development is designed to mitigate
unwanted microclimatic impacts".
Generally, acceptable conditions maintain 3 to
4 hours of sunlight on public sidewalks, private
amenity areas / rear yards, and public parks
and spaces.
:ew Groi, p I [ a"e arc, ar 20Z`)'
Analysis of these shadow impact graphics
provided in Appendix A demonstrates
the impacts are acceptable and provide
sufficient sun exposure to affected properties.
Summarizing the graphics, the proposed
building:
• Maintains more than 4 hours of sunlight on
abutting properties and does not affect any
structures or sidewalks.
• Maintains at least 4 hours of sunlight on
affected public sidewalks on both sides of
Sportsworld Drive on March 21, June 21
and September 21st.
Building
Commercial
Costco Property
King Street
Sportsworld Sidewalk
Impacts On
Property
(east)
Sidewalk (south)
(west)
(north)
Opposite - No impacts
No impacts between
Opposite - No impacts
generally from 2pm to 6pm
March 21
loam to 2pm:
partially shaded
No impacts from loam
to 2pm
from loam to 6pm
Adjacent- No impacts
between 2pm - 6pm
(4+ hours)
Adjacent - No impacts
generally from 2pm to
(likely 4 hours)
from loam to 6pm
6pm: partially shaded
between loam - 12pm
Opposite - No impacts
No impacts between
Opposite - No impacts
between 2am to 6pm
June 21
No impacts between
loam to 2pm: partially
between loam to 6pm
Adjacent - No impacts
loam to 6pm
p
shaded at 4 m (like) 4
p Y
Adjacent - No impacts
1 P
generally from 2pm to
hours)
between loam to 6pm
6pm: partially shaded
between 10 am and 12pm
Opposite - No impacts
No impacts
No impacts generally
Opposite - No impacts
pp p
between 2am to 4pm
partially shade at bpm
September
between loam to
between loam to 2pm:
between loam to 6pm
21
12pm:partially shaded
partially shaded at 4pm
Adjacent - No impacts
Adjacent - No impacts
between 4pm to 6pm
(4+ hours)
between loam to 6pm
generally from 2pm to
6pm: partially shaded
between 10 am to 12pm
41
Page 160 of 307
JJ111111GSP
5.2 Pedestrian Wind Analysis
SLR Consulting prepared the Pedestrian Wind
Assessment (February 18, 2021) as part of
the complete application requirements for
the Proposed Development. The Assessment
investigated the potential wind comfort and
safety conditions resulting from the Proposed
Development, based on a qualitative numerical
analysis of existing and proposed conditions,
and recommends mitigation measures as
necessary.
Generally, it concludes that the future wind
conditions at -grade within and surrounding the
Proposed Development are generally expected
to be suitable for the intended usage year-
round in the proposed confirguration. Strong
winds are anticipated near the northwest and
southeast corners of the Phase 2 building in the
winter, for which mitigation is recommended.
Figure 9a: Proposed Configuration - Pedestrian Wind Comfort- Summer - At Grade
05itting. Faint Walking. 0 Main Entrance
EMStanding Uncomfortable ❑'. Commercial Entrance
ElLeisurely Walking * Secondary Entrance/ Exit
42
f.Jr-)r"'Iri i,.i Report Iirig
Additionally, the outdoor amenity terrace
on Level 6 are expected to be windier than
desired in some areas, particularly between the
towers, in the summer, for which mitigation is
recommended. Satisfactory wind speeds can be
achieved through mitigation measures, which
will be addressed through Site Plan Approval.
Mitigation measures may include recessed
retail entrances, installation of canopies or
pergola, fences and/or trellises.
Figure 9b: Proposed Configuration -Pedestrian Wind Comfort« Winter« At Grade
lffffr Shting Fast Walking. O Mam EMvance
EnStanding Uncomfortable 0 Commercial Entrance
IED Leisurely Walking. 4 Secondary (Entrance / Exit
FIEDESTRMF,
■ Consulting
Page 161 of 307
KING STREET EAST
F*,lillul,
Groi,q) I [�"ehin,iairy, 20Z")'
CROSS-SECTION - BUILDING A & B
43
Page 162 of 307
It i It, 11 "M I I I flry1
b ,q, 101H, 11
, 01
""k
m '011�
rlIX, 11 I.vl I
U41 da
0•
fs�
�,�XX� 0 1:
9
Nk
H 1�
B
IIA X, 1, NU
I ,:t
JLVLA SO
W 0 d"M
W4 0
rni T,
M , W 5-
..............
ALf11 L1 Vf
La 4,2
B I i A N",
A2"
61 B
Groi,q) I [�"ehin,iairy, 20Z")'
CROSS-SECTION - BUILDING A & B
43
Page 162 of 307
JJ111111GSP
6.1 Response to Official Plan Policy
f.drhrr"'Iri t i,.i Report 1irlg Ktl,Pieln(,,�Fr
The Proposed Development supports these urban
design policies as it:
• Aids in achieving appropriate mix of uses with a
mix of commercial and residential units within
the Proposed Development (Building A and B).
• Infills an underutilized strip type of commercial
development that adds little to a quality
streetscape with a new development that is
positioned, articulated and containing ground
floor commercial uses to support the public
realm of King Street.
• Fits within a desired condition of more intense
development surrounding transit stations,
scaled to respect the proportions of King
Street through upper storey stepbacks and
demonstrating no adverse shadow or wind
I m pacts.
• Enhances streetscape conditions along both
public frontages with proposed landscaping.
• Contributes to pedestrian comfort with a
high transparency on the ground floors and
commercial entrance facing the street
• Provides articulated built form with recessed
and projecting balconies and a well-defined
base.
The proposed tall buildings are designed in keeping
with the design policy direction of Official Plan
Section 11, as further explored in detail as part of
the Urban Design Manual analysis in the following
section.
44
Page 163 of 307
6.2 Response to Urban Design Manual Guidelines
Inclusive Design
0I IIII IIII't1111111111
OIII' IIIIIIII w A, M1''wt111'tIII11)O� IIR
A, .„IQ111R ”"'1111 Illi"' '"'""I""A""I""IIII011Nl Al't111191111A,'I3
• Direct connections between the building
interior and residential or commercial
spaces and the abutting public sidewalks
on King Street and Sportsworld Drive.
• Pedestrian -scale lighting to be defined at
detailed design stage.
• Uninterrupted sight lines from the building
faces to public sidewalks along King
Street and Sportsworld Drive, featuring
a highly transparent building elevations
at the ground floor and above for natural
surveillance purposes.
• Ground floor commercial units fronting
directly onto King Street or Sportsworld
Drive, animating the street with people and
activity.
• Prominent and large lobby entrance to the
individual commercial units from street
and residential lobby.
• Accessible routes that will be universally
designed at the time of detailed design.
• A mix of different sizes of one -bedroom and
two-bedroom units to provide flexibility of
housing choice.
• Outdoor rooftop amenity areas, individual
unit balconies and indoor areas for
residents' use.
Site Function
41' IIII""'IIII""'y'" IIII IIII't1111111111
MA 10IITIIII"" IIII'i� A IIIINl S III ""'IIIi"' 'A ""I""A""I"" IIII Q11Nl A 1't 111191111 A,'I
111......111...... 1119f U III I D I IN G S
• All parking areas accessed from King Street
and Sportsworld Drive.
• Small surface parking for commercial units
:ew Grmlp I ["e arc, aiy 20Z`)'
and visitors situated between the Proposed
Development (Building A and B).
• Two levels of below -grade and structured
parking proposed within Building B.
• Two driveways proposed to the Site's
parking area, with access from either King
and Sportsworld.
• Proposed design provides for on-site utility
equipment and elements to be away from
public frontage, which is to be addressed
at the time of detailed design.
• Private realm between Proposed
Development (Building A and B) and King
and Sportsworld frontages coordinated with
plantings, trees and continuous walkway
connections to street -facing commercial
units.
• Commercial unit entrances along the
public street frontages for the mixed -used
Building B.
• All residential entrances located prominently
on proposed building development
(Building A and B), also recessed on the
ground floor to provide weather protection
and landing space for entrance and exit.
• Functional areas (garbage, loading, moving)
positioned away from the public street
frontage.
• Interior bicycle storage room provided inside
Building A secure and easily accessible
location.
• Entrances and landing spaces in front
of entrances to be designed to universal
accessibility standards.
Design for Sustainability
0III°°°"uu' X1111111111
A„IIVQ111'it ”"""Ill' IIIIIII""I""A""'IIII'"A""'IIIi"'IIII0111'^1W i;Y.1111111111AA
,111......1 113 tall III IIL......111; i III lNG, S
• Compact intensification of undeveloped
45
Page 164 of 307
JJ111111GSP
site within an area that is served by existing
transit, commercial and community uses.
• Support for high density development since
site is within a Major Transit Station Area
due to being within approximately 300m of
a planned ION station platform (Sportsworld
Cross Rd @King Street East)
• Minimal surface parking with most parking
contained within an integrated parking
garage, reducing associated heat island
effects.
• Indoor bicycle storage room providing
secure location and supporting active
transportation opportunities.
• Stormwater on the Site will be controlled
through on-site measures to reduce peak
flows to existing conditions levels, limiting
pressures on the existing King Street sewer.
• Architectural features (such as canopies)
and building envelope considerations
(Increased insulation, high-performance
glazing and lower window -to -wall ratio) to
be explored through detailed design.
• Material choice and detailing addresses
bird collision avoidance guidelines, which
can be further explored through detailed
design.
• Internal waste collection areas to encourage
the collecting and recycling of waste
produced by residents and tenants.
Design of Outdoor Comfort
GI IIII U W IIII'III
ill„w'w IIII'lill'. Illi"' IIII'i I l :'!IIU IIII ""'Illi"' S1 I A I k"YI1111 F'U Illllllll S
111......1 113 U III I D I IIN G S
• The Pedestrian Wind Assessment
demonstrates acceptable safety and comfort
conditions met at all areas at grade on and
surrounding the Proposed Development.
Wind conditions on outdoor amenity and
at commercial entrances is an exception,
46
f.drI,I hJepor�t. I 4 rig `.tIre' i K tchelI'I(,,�I,
for which mitigation is recommended.
Satisfactory wind speeds can be achieved
through mitigation measures, which will be
addressed through Site Plan Approval.
• The Shadow Analysis demonstrates
satisfactory sun exposure conditions for
surrounding streets, public spaces and
properties.
• Building design to address pedestrian
weather protection through recessed
vestibules from public sidewalks and
covered landing spaces through detailed
design.
• Lighting and landscape plans at the time
of detailed design will address pedestrian
comfort guidelines.
Street Design
GI ""I
A J QIII't ""I"" Ill! JII' 1 S IIII ""I"" " ""'IIIf"A""'IIIf" IIII U'w 11111 '1'. IIIIIIIII A'
• Detailed landscaped design will explore
opportunities for blending surface
treatments between private property and
public sidewalks.
• Consideration of movable planters and
furnishings in certain locations to add to
the streetscape will be explored through
detailed design.
Shared Spaces
���` IIII°°�°°°�i�'" IIII IIII UIIIIIIIII
A.JVGIIIt I I S""'Illi"' ""'Illi"'IIIIGIIINl AIIII'i�IIIIIIIIIA�
A IIL......I B UU III I D I INS
• A rooftop outdoor terrace atop the 5th
storey of Building B will provide shared
amenity space for residents. It will provide
a range of recreation, activity and relaxation
opportunities for residents.
Page 165 of 307
Parks and Open Spaces
��"w�IIII""'1111""'��'" WIIII IIII'Illllllll
m S 'I .�
IIIA IIII ���: IIS °"'IIII'°' � �°"A°°�°° �� ' III �1 F'�� IIIIIIIIII �
• Lack of public parks / amenity space in
this neighbourhood, means on-site amenity
space should be maximized both at -grade
and within available rooftop spaces.
• Private amenity space to be refined through
the detailed design stage.
Compatibility
0I YII.RI 111Y1,11
A J U111' N' ""'1111"" IIII'!ZA 1111Nl &II ""'1111"" S""I""A""I"" IIII 0111 AF!U11111111 S
IIL......IIL...... B U III I D III IIN 'S
• The proposed building is placed and
massed to both public street frontages,
with architectural response to multiple
commercial unit entrances.
• Provides a mixed-use development within
a Neighbourhood Node, accessible to
pedestrian and transit infrastructure.
• 5 -storey podium base scaled to reflect
pedestrian -scaled King Street corridor.
• The two towers along King Street have
visibly distinct heights when viewed from
ground level demonstrating transition in
height and scale through appropriate design
of the project's built form.
• Human scaled -relationship along King
Street and Sportsworld achieved through
ground floor height, uses and activities, and
exterior wall transparency as well as paved
pedestrian entrances and landing areas.
• Contemporary architectural style, detailing
and materiality to be refined through the
detailed design stage.
:ew Grmlp I ["e arc, aiy 20Z`)'
Cultural & Natural Heritage
�� � IIII ""�""''' IIII IIII �IIIIIIIIII
MAJQ1!!Z I°°Ill' 1111 ' IIII °°I°° SIIII""A""'IIII"" IIII Q111N 11R 1!1911111 AS
,IIL......I B G III I D III N G S
• There are no immediate or relevant heritage
resources affecting the Site's design.
• There are no natural heritage areas in the
vicinity.
Building Components
(Ground Floor and Base Design)
AlI B U II I D III IN G S
• Ground floor respects intent of guidelines
with taller ground floor height, 5 metres
along King Street and Sportsworld.
• Most of the ground floor facing King
Street and Sportsworld Drive is designed
as commercial area, with small portion on
garage and residential lobby entrances.
• The 5 metres ground floor height will
contain highest proportions of transparency,
supporting materials and detailing
associated with the commercial units.
• 5 -storey pedestrian -scaled podium
(Building B) along King Street distinguished
by tall towers step -backs and intended
architectural treatment.
• Weather protection for ground floor units
(Building A and B) to be explored at the
time of detailed design.
• Balconies for individual units are provided
along the building's (Building B) King and
Sportsworld elevations to reinforce the
streets
• Servicing elements and utility equipment,
where required, can be accommodated
in the rear area away from the King and
Sportsworld.
47
Page 166 of 307
JJ111111GSP
Building Components
(Building Design)
111......1 13 U I IIL......IIl;1 III III O S
Proposed design includes a 8 storey,
residential building (Phase 1 - Building A)
at the north end of the Site, and a podium
tower development (Phase 2 - Building B)
fronting King Street East, including two
residential towers of 30 and 18 storeys.
Tower Size is a "Large Slab" (tower floor
plate of 878.9 square metres and tower
proportion of 1.1)
Tower A step back from the podium at
approximately 13.66 metres (from King
Street East) and 3 metres (from Sportsworld
Drive) and; Tower B step back at 3 metres
(from King Street East) to minimize impacts
of overlook, shadowing and wind.
Physical Separation calculation per
guidelines for proposed building (Tower 1 &
Tower 2) is 25.2 metres.
Physical Separation for Tower A (15.4m)
and Tower B (9.7m) to the eastern property
line is achieved.
Proposed relative height accommodates
human scaled built form along streetscapes
while accommodating compatibility
matters.
Building Components
(Materials and Details)
IIL......1 13 0 III IIL......IIl;1 III IIIAG S
• Detailed elevation plans have not been
prepared atthetimeofOPA/ZBAsubmission.
• Articulation, details, materiality and colours
to be addressed at the time of detailed
design stage, recognizing the guidance
offered by the relevant design guidelines
documents of Part A.
Urhrr",Iri i,.i Report /irig Ktl,Pieln(,,�Fr
Urban Corridors Specific Guidelines
lfIII'IIIIIIIIIS O111'tlll'tIIIIII'O111't
A J Q1 !!Z ""I l!IX1111&I ""I"" 113 ""'Illi'"A""'Illi"' IIII f'w IIII IIIIIIIII A
• The Proposed Development addresses the
bounding public streets through building
placement close to the street edge,
active ground floor commercial and lobby
entrances, and pedestrian connections
between the building and public sidewalks.
• The mixed-use buildings continuously line
the street edges with a consistent private
realm landscape treatment of planted beds
with street trees.
• Proposed parking is provided is contained
within an integrated parking garage
(includes surface parking, below and above -
grade parking areas. The surface parking
spaces are located between Building A and
B. Two levels of below -grade parking and
structured parking within the podium are
proposed for Building B.
• Access to the Site is limited to a single
driveway from each public street frontages.
• Pedestrian access to the Site is provided by
walkways leading to public sidewalks along
King Street and Sportsworld Drive.
• Promotes walkability by creating pedestrian
friendly environment and improve
connectivity since Site is within a Major
Transit Station Area due to being within
approximately 3O0m of a planned ION
station platform (Sportsworld Cross Rd @
King Street East)
Page 167 of 307
The Proposed Development will see the
intensification of the Site with a 8 -storey
apartment building (Building A) and a mixed-
use building (Building B) consisting of a
5 -storey podium and two residential towers
of 30 and 18 storeys, containing commercial
and residential units.
The Proposed Development will establish a
8 -storey, residential building at the north end
of the Site as part of the Phase 1 of the design,
accommodating approximately 88 units.
Phase 2 includes a podium tower development
fronting King Street East, containing two
residential towers of 25 -storey and 13 -storey
atop a 5 -storey podium (30 and 18 storeys in
total), with a combined total of 528 units.
The proposed building's (Building B) podium
provides a street -oriented and pedestrian -scaled
building form. The building's lot line setbacks
from the public street edges appropriately to
frame the public streetscapes. Active retail
uses in the podium's ground floor line the
King Street frontage and Sportsworld Drive
frontages with multiple direct entrances to the
sidewalks. The bulk of the podium's elevations,
including most of the ground floor elevations,
is transparent glass maximizing transparency
and animation to the street edge. All parking is
contained within an integrated parking garage.
The proposed building's point tower rises in a
slender fashion from the podium. The narrow,
square tower footprints, coupled with tower
setbacks minimize shadow and wind impacts
per the supporting assessments.
:ew Grmlp I ["e arc, aiy 20Z`)'
Based on the review contained in this Urban
Design Report, the proposed design is well-
designed and supports the intent and spirit
of the Official Plan policies and relevant
guidelines of the Urban Design Manual as it:
• Adds further ground floor commercial
activities to the urban corridor along King
Street East and surrounding business
environment, together with upper storey
residential uses to support these businesses.
• Accommodates the bulk of parking within
an integrated parking garage for residents
with a small surface parking area for
commercial uses and visitors;
• Links the Site, entrances and functional
areas through a safe and connected
circulation pattern for pedestrians
• Establishes a pedestrian -scaled base
defined by an intimate relationship to
the street, upper storey step backs to
distinguish, and an active and transparent
commercial ground floor;
• Provides massing that respects urban
street conditions along King Street with tall
towers set back to respect angular plane
considerations to the street.
• Does not create unacceptable micro -
climatic conditions from a wind and shadow
perspective, as concluded by supporting
studies; and
• Will establish a clean, contemporary
architectural aesthetic featuring masonry
and transparent glass, which will be
explored and refined through the detailed
design stage.
Page 168 of 307
GSIS
Uhd,-)r",lln Report Ktcheln(,flr
APPENDIX A
Shadow Impact Graphics
50
Page 169 of 307
March 21, 1 Oam
- - - - - - - - - -
March 21, 2pm
March 21Y bpm ..........
Girmip � [�"ebin,iairy, 20Z")'
March 21, 12pm
March 21, 4pm
51
Page 170 of 307
GSP
June 21, 6pm
................................................ . . . . . I.I.I.I.I.I.I. .......................................................................................................................................................
52
UrI, I Report I 4 rig I re' rtK tchel r I (,I,
Page 171 of 307
September 21, 10am
mm
Sepfember 21, bpm
Girmip � [�"ebin,iairy, 20Z")'
September 21, 12pm
September 21, 4pm
53
Page 172 of 307
GSP
December 21, 10arn
December 21, 2
54
Uhd,-)r",Iln i,.i Report Irig Ktchelln(,flr
December 21, 12pm
December 21, 4
Page 173 of 307
NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING I P
for a development in your neighbourhood -
4396 King Street East & 25 Sportsworld Drive
Concept Drawing
Have Your Voice Heard!
Date: March 6, 2023
Time: 7:00 p.m.
Location: CouncIllChambers,
Kitchener City Hall
200 King Street west
rViirtual Zoom Meeting
To view the staff report, agenda,
meeting details, start time of this item
or to appear as a delegation, visit:
kitchener.ca/meetings
To learn more about this project,
including information on your
appeal rights, visit:
www.kitchenenca/
Plan n i ngAppl ications
or contact:
IIlAi) e(,] L..1 °w Ill is of 6 2, 30 Andrew Pinnell, Senior Planner
I: II[tidiilIg 9 III e1,,re 616 I �� �IILIII.
..� � ...:m � 1 519.741.2200 x 7668
Cor n rn t r i a l in i ........... i i. l t J rl iii
and rew.pinnell@ kitchener.ca
Applications to amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-law will be considered to facilitate
a mixed-use development having a maximum building height of 99 metres (30 storeys),
a Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 6.2, providing 616 dwelling units and 1,300 square metres of
commercial floor area, and having a reduced parking rate of 0.85 spaces per dwelling
unit.
Page 174 of 307
l�ttaorr�ont
City of Kitchener
Zone Change Comment Form
Address: 4396 King St E & 25 Sportsworld Dr
Owner: Sportsworld Shopping Center & Taylorwood Park Homes Inc
Application: OPA/ZBA
Comments Of: City of Kitchener— Urban Design- Planning
Commenter's Name: Pegah Fahimian
Email: Pegah.fahimian@kitchener.ca
Phone: 519-741-2200 Ext. 7342
Date of Comments: January 27, 2023
❑ 1 plan to attend the meeting (questions/concerns/comments for discussion)
❑X No meeting to be held
❑ I do NOT plan to attend the meeting (no concerns)
1. Documents Reviewed:
• Cover Letter
• Urban Design Brief- GSP Group, Dec 2022
• Pedestrian Wind Assessment- SLR Consulting
• Design Brief- 2022/05/24
• Shadow Study -2022/05/24
2. Site -Specific Comments & Issues:
I have reviewed the documentation (as listed above) to support an OPA / ZBA to allow a mixed-use
development consisting of 616 dwelling units and 1,378m of commercial space with a site-specific
provision to allow a maximum building height of 99m (30 storeys), maximum floor space ratio of 6.2,
reduced parking rate of 0.85 spaces per dwelling unit (580 spaces), non-residential gross floor area
reduction.
• While the concept of residential intensification on this site is positive, and many previous staff
comments have been incorporated into the proposal, some design modifications must be addressed
in the site plan application to create a development proposal that is well-designed and appropriate
for this site and neighbourhood.
Design Brief- Submitted 2022/05/24
Tall Building Design Analysis: The tall building design guidelines are an excellent compatibility test
for proposals exceeding their zoning permissions. The proposal meets the tall building guidelines,
specifically with regard to separation.
The physical separation calculation per Tall Building Guidelines for the proposed building (towers 1
and 2) is 25.2 m. Physical separation for Tower A (15.4m) and Tower B ( 9.7m) to the eastern
property line is achieved.
A City for Everyone
Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community
0 0 of 307
City of Kitchener
Zone Change Comment Form
Building Design: 5 -storey pedestrian -scaled podium (Building B) along King Street distinguished by
tall towers, step -backs and intended architectural treatment. The proposed relative height
accommodates human -scaled built form along streetscapes while accommodating compatibility
matters.
Contemporary architectural style, and details to be refined through the site plan process.
On-site Amenity area: Additional information should be provided regarding the various on-site
amenity spaces in the UDB (common, individual, indoor, and outdoor) since this area is parkland
deficient.
Shadow Studies, ABA Architects, 2021/03/11: The submitted shadow analysis is acceptable as it
confirms that the proposal maintained access to at least 5 hours of cumulative direct sunlight to
nearby sidewalks and open spaces
Wind Study - Pedestrian Level Wind Assessment- SLR Consulting
The submitted preliminary Wind Study indicates that strong winds are anticipated near the northwest
and southeast corners of the phase 2 building in winter, for which mitigation is recommended.
Additionally, the outdoor amenity terrace on level 6 is expected to be windier than desired in some
areas, particularly between the towers, in the summer.
A full Wind Assessment should be provided for review at the site plan application stage. A revised
design proposal should be developed that addresses the wind impacts outlined in the submitted wind
study.
3. Comments on Submitted Documents
Urban Design Brief- GSP Group- Dec, 2022
Consider stepbacks for the upper storeys in the tower, both to increase articulation/visual interest in
the building and create room for shared outdoor amenity space. This will also facilitate the
transition to low-rise neighbourhoods.
• The proposed corner treatment to be further enhanced to create visual interest at the street edge.
This could be achieved by special massing and architectural treatments on both streets to give
prominence along the frontages and visually distinguish these sites.
A City for Everyone
Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community
�fM of 307
City of Kitchener
Zone Change Comment Form
• All at -grade parking should be wrapped with active uses.
• The area between the building's face and the property line should be well integrated with the street
and public realm to deliver high quality and seamless private, semi -private and public spaces.
• Due to the lack of public parks/ amenity space in this neighbourhood, outdoor amenity space
should be maximized; please see Urban Design Manual for minimum requirements and
specifications.
• The underground parking structure should have sufficient setback from the property lines to
accommodate the necessary soil volume to support required large-statured, high canopy trees.
Perimeter trees should not be located on the garage slab roof. Within site, required tree plantings
can be accommodated on the garage slab but will still require standard minimum soil volumes.
• This project should play a significant role in reinforcing the character of King Street. There is a need
for public art at the corner, well integrated into the architecture of the building, and suggest the
following as options.
o Public Art (sculpture, mural, digital)
o Living wall (interior or exterior, but visible/prominent)
o Enhanced architecture at the corner
o Community -oriented space
o Enhanced exterior lighting (coloured, programmable, pattered, etc.)
• The building facades fronting on King and Sportsworld Dr should contain an appropriate amount of
glazing and articulation, particularly along the lower 5m where the building addresses the sidewalk.
• The proposed long podium should be broken down using enhanced detailing and articulation.
According to Tall Building Design Guidelines, buildings longerthan 70m should demonstrate enhanced
streetscaping, materials and building articulation.
A City for Everyone
Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community
�O� of 307
City of Kitchener
Zone Change Comment Form
Incorporate creative facade ideas on curtain walls with advanced exterior lighting that could help to
control public flow and could improve the building design. Digital media facades make buildings tell
stories and strike a perfect balance of aesthetic structures and illumination art (for example
sustainable and digital technologies within the curtain wall, colour light -emitting diode or LED
Display Video walls, Photometric system for `interactive skin' to illuminate the screen after dark,
Digitally printed fritted glass)
• Provide multiple above grade rooftops and podium amenities with a minimum of
(2 sq.m X # units) + (2.5 sq.m x # bedrooms - # units) = outdoor amenity space. The amenity space
should be high quality and should connect to the building.
• Active uses including the retail or residential amenity areas should be situated along with King,
Sportsworld Dr.
• Towers are highly visible elements of the urban environment and must meet Kitchener's highest
standards for design excellence. The building should be designed and clad with different materials
and colours so that they read as distinct from one another.
• Provide natural surveillance by employing high percentages of glazing, active uses at ground level
and incorporate more units with windows and balconies on the main facade with views onto the
King Street and Sportsworld Dr.
• Provide materiality and texture shifts at the podium and across the towers and incorporate
variations in tower setbacks from the base to distinguish the tower form from the podium.
• Wind assessment and Noise feasibility study required for outdoor amenity and the pedestrian
realm.
• The proposed towers should have unique top features that are architecturally excellent, highly
visible and makes a positive contribution to the image of Kitchener developing skyline.
A City for Everyone
Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community
agp-4 of 307
City of Kitchener
Zone Change Comment Form
• Residential entrances should be clearly identified and offer access from both the public realm and
the private parking side of the building.
• All utilities should be coordinated with the landscape design and with building elevations to provide
a high-quality pedestrian experience with the site and from the public realm. Infrastructure should
be located within the building in mechanical/electrical rooms and exterior connections located
discretely and incorporate physical screens or landscape plating as required. Surface transformers or
service connections visible from the public realm are not supported.
Summary:
In summary, Urban Design staff are supportive of the zone change/official plan amendment. While the
concept of residential intensification on this site is positive and many previous staff comments have
been incorporated into the proposal, Urban Design staff recommend that the Urban Design Brief be
endorsed and that staff be directed to implement the Urban Design Brief through future Site Plan
Approval processes.
A City for Everyone
Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community
� ?t§ of 307
City of Kitchener - Comment Form
Project Address: 4396 King Street East & 25 Sportsworld Drive
Application Type: Official Plan Amendment OPA21/009/K/AP
Zoning By-law Amendment ZBA21/014/K/AP
Comments of: Environmental Planning (Sustainability) — City of Kitchener
Commenter's name: Carrie Musselman
Email: carrie.musselman@kitchener.ca
Phone: 519-741-2200 x 7068
Written Comments Due: October 18, 2021
Date of comments: October 15, 2021
1. Plans, Studies and/or Reports submitted and reviewed as part of a complete application:
• Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment - Sustainability Statement, 4396 King Street East &
25 Sportsworld Drive. May 14, 2021. GSP Group
2. Comments & Issues:
I have reviewed the documentation (as listed above) to support an Official Plan and Zoning By-law
Amendment to facilitate the development of a mix of residential and commercial uses comprised of two
buildings; an 8 -storey residential building located on the property at 25 Sportsworld Drive and a high-
density, mixed-use building featuring a 30- storey and 18 -storey tower atop a 5 -storey podium with
ground -floor commercial at 4396 King St E and provided the following:
• It is very encouraging to know that this development will be constructed to support a more
sustainable form adhering and/or exceeding components of Energy Star, R-2000, and Built Green
programs.
➢ Based on my review the Sustainability Statement provided in support of the Official Plan and Zoning
Bylaw Amendment is acceptable.
As details of the proposed development will be evolving, an updated sustainability statement will
be required as part of a complete site plan application.
3. Policies, Standards and Resources:
• Kitchener Official Plan Policy 7.C.4.5. The City will encourage and support, where feasible and
appropriate, alternative energy systems, renewable energy systems and district energy in
accordance with Section 7.C.6 to accommodate current and projected needs of energy
consumption.
1 1Il�!11 g
Page 180 of 307
• 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.
4. Advice:
➢ As part of the Kitchener Great Places Award program every several years there is a Sustainable
Development category. Also, there are community-based programs to help with and celebrate
and recognize businesses and sustainable development stewards (Regional Sustainability
Initiative - http://www.sustainablewaterlooregion.ca/our-programs/regional-sustainability-
initiative and TravelWise - http://www.sustainablewaterlooregion.ca/our-programs/travelwise).
➢ The ENERGY STAR® Multifamily High -Rise Pilot Program for new construction is a new five-year
certification program in Ontario that recognizes buildings that are at least 15% more energy-
efficient than those built to the provincial energy code and meet other program requirements.
More information can be found online at https://www.nrcan.gc.ca/energy-
efficiency/buildings/new-buildings/energy-starr-multifamily-high-rise-pilot-program/21966
➢ The 'Sustainability Statement Terms of Reference' can be found on the City's website under
'Planning Resources' at ... https://www.kitchener.ca/SustainabilityStatement
2 1II�!11 g
Page 181 of 307
Andrew Pinnell
From: V1ctohaGrohn
Sent: Friday, September 24,ZOZ18:Z9AM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: RE: Circulation for Comment - OPA/ZBA (4396 King Street East & 25 Sportsworld Drive)
Victoria Gnmhn(she/heh
Heritage Planner | Planning Division | City ofKitchener
519-741-220Uext. 7841 | TTY 1-888-SG9-9984|
Page 182 of 307
City of Kitchener
Zone Change / Official Plan Amendment Comment Form
Address: 4396 King St E and 25 Sportsworld Drive
Owner: Sportsworld Shopping Centre and Taylor Park Homes Inc
Application: OPA21/009/K/AP & ZBA21/014/K/AP
Comments Of: Parks & Cemeteries
Commenter's Name: Lenore Ross
Email: Lenore.ross@kitchener.ca
Phone: 519-741-2200 ext 7427
Date of Comments: October 18 2021 updated
❑ 1 plan to attend the meeting (questions/concerns/comments for discussion)
0 No meeting to be held
❑ I do NOT plan to attend the meeting (no concerns)
1. Documents Reviewed:
1. Agency Circulation Letter dated Sept 23 2021;
2. Tree Management Plan GSP drawing L1-0 and L1-1 dated May 12 2021;
3. Pedestrian Wind Assessment SLR Report stamp date March 22 2021;
4. Environmental Noise Assessment SLR Report dated May 2021
2. Site Specific Comments & Issues:
I have reviewed the documentation to support an OPA / ZBA at 4396 King St E and 25 Sportsworld Drive.
Parks and Cemeteries can support the application subject to the changes outlined below.
3. Comments on Submitted Documents
1. Tree Management Plan GSP drawing L1-0 and L1-1 dated May 12 2021
a. Both Sportsworld Drive and King St E are Regional roads and the RMOW will comment
on the requirements for protection of existing trees (Trees #801 and #803) and the need
for new street trees as part of any future development application
b. Parks & Cemeteries has no concerns with the proposed Tree Management Plan
2. Urban Design Report GSP/ABA document dated May 2021
a. The Urban Design Report acknowledges that the on-site amenity spaces should be
maximized both at -grade and within available rooftop spaces. The preliminary proposed
site plan indicates an at -grade amenity space along the eastern property line between
phase 1 and phase 2 /tower B. Additional amenity space is proposed on the sixth -floor
podium. There is a significant building setback at the Sportsworld Dr/King St E corner
and while it is not labelled as an amenity space, there are references throughout the
text that it will serve this function. If it is to be considered as amenity space, it should
be labelled as such and the area included in the assessment of wind, noise and solar
access. The functionality, inclusivity and range of amenities in these private spaces will
A City for Everyone
Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community
FB AP of 307
City of Kitchener
Zone Change / Official Plan Amendment Comment Form
be critical for the development and the noise assessment, pedestrian wind and solar
access assessments should be utilized as key factors of the project design.
b. Section 5.1- Shadow Analysis and Appendix A Shadow Impact Graphics should be
updated to reflect a specific assessment of the proposed at grade amenity areas and
podium amenity spaces.
c. Section 5.2 — Pedestrian Wind Analysis should be updated and reflect the revised
building placement as recommended in the SLR Report.
d. Noise attenuation should be considered for the Outdoor Living Areas and for the
commercial properties that may have patio spaces
e. A revised/ Updated Urban Design Report is required
f. A revised preliminary site layout that incorporates wind, noise and shadow concerns for
amenity spaces is required in OPA/ZBA documents will be expected at the site plan
application
3. Pedestrian Wind Assessment SLR Report stamp date March 22 2021
a. The CFD study has identified a number issues including impacts at entrances, pedestrian
use of sidewalks at grade and also at the use of the 6t" floor amenity level. In addition to
building and landscape design adjustments, SLR has recommended a revised tower B
placement with an increased set back to address these potential impacts.
b. A revised / updated Wind Study that addresses the above concerns is required
c. A revised preliminary site layout that incorporates wind, noise and shadow concerns for
amenity spaces is required in OPA/ZBA documents will be expected at the site plan
application
4. Environmental Nosie Assessment SLR Report dated May 2021
a. At -grade OLA / amenity area receptors should be included for the area between the phase
1 and phase 2 buildings and also for the area at the corner of Sportsworld Dr/King St E if
that area is intended as formal amenity space. The impact of noise and need for
attenuation for commercial units which may have patio spaces should be considered.
b. A revised noise assessment is required to inform site design
A City for Everyone
Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community
�A4 of 307
City of Kitchener
Zone Change / Official Plan Amendment Comment Form
c. A revised preliminary site layout that incorporates wind, noise and shadow concerns for
amenity spaces is required in OPA/ZBA documents will be expected at the site plan
application
4. Policies, Standards and Resources:
• Kitchener Official Plan Policy
As per Section 8.C.2 — Urban Forests of the Official Plan ...
o policy 8.C.2.16., the City requires the preparation and submission of a tree management plan
in accordance with the City's Tree Management Policy (available on the City's Website), as a
condition of a development application.
o policy 8.C.2.6., the City will incorporate existing and/or new trees into the streetscape or road
rights-of-way and encourage new development or redevelopment to incorporate, protect and
conserve existing healthy trees and woodlands in accordance with the Urban Design Policies
in Section 13 (Landscape and Natural Features) of the Urban Design Manual (UDM) and the
Development Manual.
o Please see UDM Part C, Section 13 and www.kitchener.ca/treemanagement for detailed
submission requirements
• City of Kitchener Parkland Dedication Policy
• City of Kitchener Development Manual
• PARTS General Guidelines
• Cycling and Trails Master Plan (2020)
• Chapter 690 of the current Property Maintenance By-law
• Parks Strategic Plan
• Multi -Use Pathways & Trails Masterplan
• Urban Design Manual
S. Anticipated Fees:
• Parkland Dedication will be taken as cash in lieu of land at the site plan application
A City for Everyone
Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community
�A� of 307
Andrew Pinnell
From: Dave Seller
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 10:43 AM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: RE: OPA/ZBA comments: 4396 King Street East & 25 Sportsworld Drive - parking rates
for residential, commercial, visitor
City of Kitchener
Application Type: Zoning By-law and Official Plan Amendments
Application #: ZBA21/014/K/AP and OPA21/009/K/AP
Project Address: 4396 King Street East & 25 Sportsworld Drive
Comments of: Transportation Services
Commenter's Name: Dave Seller
Email: dave.seller@kitchener.ca
Phone: 519-741-2200 ext. 7369
Date of Comments: March 21, 2022
a. The Transportation Impact Study (TIS) submitted by Paradigm Transportation Solutions Ltd. (May 2021) notes the
site to be completed in a two phased approach. When Phase 2 of the development begins, all Phase 1 parking must
be provided on-site for the existing commercial plaza and the 88 dwelling units within the 8 -storey building. Any
drive aisles and parking areas must be maintained in asphalt. Also, access to the Regional of Waterloo right-of-way
must always be maintained for Phase 1 vehicular, pedestrian and cycling traffic.
b. A thorough, in depth review of the TIS was not completed for King Street East and Sportsworld Drive, as each of the
roadways are under the jurisdiction of the Region of Waterloo. However, a review of the site access points, one at
King Street East and the other at Sportsworld Drive was completed for the Total Traffic Operations scenario and for
the following years: 2024, 2027, 2032 and 2037. The data revealed that in the AM and PM peak hours, each site
access point will operate with acceptable Level of Service (LOS) ranging between B to C, volume to capacity (v/c)
ratios ranging between 0.11 to 0.30 and vehicle delay ranging between 14s to 24s.
c. In consultation with GSP Group Inc. and City of Kitchener Planning staff, the residential parking component has a
proposed parking rate of 0.85 parking spaces per unit, which includes visitor parking at 10%. This equates to 519
parking spaces for 610 units, of which 52 parking spaces could be allocated for visitor parking. However, it should be
noted that there is potential for the commercial use and visitor parking for the residential component to have
shared parking, within the surface parking area.
d. In support of alternative modes of transportation, GSP notes that there is a future ION station approximately 400m
from the site and there are three existing Grand River Transit )GRT) routes in the area (Routes 67, 72 and iXpress
203). Each of the GRT routes have headways of 30 minutes in the AM and PM peak hours. It is expected that the
future ION route would have 15 minute headways, which are similar to the current headways for the existing ION
stations located in Kitchener. Sidewalks are provided on both sides of roadways within the area, which provides
pedestrians convenient access to and from the site and to access the surrounding commercial/retail uses in the area.
The applicant is prepared to supply a minimum of 305 Class A bicycle parking spaces, which, follows the intent of the
future zoning by-law.
Therefore, based on the analysis within Paradigm's TIS, Transportation Services supports their analysis of the site
access points. Based on GSP Groups analysis and findings, the applicant is prepared to provide a minimum 305 Class
A indoor secure bicycle parking space, which would complement the future zoning by-law requirements. Coupled
with the existing GRT routes, pedestrian walkability and future ION station, Transportation Services is confident that
Page 186 of 307
this development can function with the proposed 580 parking spaces that will service tenants, visitors for the
residential use and the commercial use.
Dave Seller, C.E.T.
Traffic Planning Analyst I Transportation Services I City of Kitchener
519-741-2200 ext. 7369 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 dave.sellerPkitchener.ca
Page 187 of 307
Andrew Pinnell
From:
Katie Wood
Sent:
Thursday, November 4, 2021 12:19 PM
To:
Andrew Pinnell
Cc:
'Josh Zehr'; Angela Mick
Subject:
4396 King St E and 25 Sportsworld Dr
Hey Andrew,
I have received the remaining information required from WalterFedy and I can now confirm that Engineering and KU
both support the Zone Change and OPA. I ran the sanitary capacity model with 15.5L/s coming from the site into the
Sportsworld Drive sanitary sewer and there was no capacity concerns noted.
Please note that at the time of Site Plan Engineering will be making sure that the existing water service that runs parallel
to King St (on private property) has the necessary easements over it if it doesn't already.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
'".tie,
Project Manager) Development Engineering I City of Kitchener
519-741-2200 ext. 7135 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 ,Data_ ....wo d..Oa Ici
iP@ s Igo �aRwa ��IINI �N�
1
Page 188 of 307
Andrew Pinnell
From: Mike Seiling
Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2021 4:56 PM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: FW: Circulation for Comment - OPA/ZBA (4396 King Street East & 25 Sportsworld Drive)
Attachments: Dept -Agency Circulation Letter -4396 King St E 25 Sportsworld Dr.pdf
Building; no concerns
Page 189 of 307
Andrew Pinnell MCIP, RPP
Senior Planner
City of Kitchener
200 King Street West, 6th Floor
P.O. Box 1118, Kitchener, ON
N2G 4G7
Dear Mr. Pinnell,
PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT
AND LEGISLATIVE SEPVICES
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
Melissa Mohr 226-752-8622
November 4, 2022
Re: Noise Study Review — OPA 21/09 and ZBA 21/014
4396 King Street East and 25 Sportsworld Drive
GSP Group Ltd. (C/O Kristen Barisdale) on behalf of
Taylorwood Park Homes Inc. (C/O Jim Tolfo)
CITY OF KITCHENER
Items that required follow up from the Region's letter of March 17, 2022
Following the Region's Comment Letter dated March 17, 2022, Regional staff have the
following comments for your review:
Stationary Noise Review:
Regional staff have reviewed the stationary noise aspects of the study entitled
"Environmental Noise Assessment for the proposed Residential Development at 4396
King Street East, Kitchener, Regional Municipality of Waterloo, Ontario" dated May 3,
2021 and the updated Noise letter/Noise response dated October 4, 2022, both
prepared by SLR Consulting Canada Limited. The study and supporting noise letter
have been completed in support of the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law
Amendment for the subject lands addressed as 4396 King Street East and 25
Sportsworld Drive in Kitchener.
The proposed development includes two (2) buildings that are proposed to be
constructed in two phases. Phase 1 proposes an eight (8) storey residential building
that will include a mechanical penthouse with a total height of 30 metres located on the
northern portion of the subject lands. Phase 2 includes two (2) towers atop a five -storey
podium. Tower A is located on the southwest corner of the site and includes a 30 -
Document Number: 4217672 Version: 1
Page 1 of 3
Page 190 of 307
storey tower with a mechanical penthouse 99 m in height. Tower B is located on the
southeast corner of the site and is approximately 18 storeys with a mechanical
penthouse. The Phase 2 building will also include five levels of parking and include
retail/commercial uses on the ground floor adjacent to the south, east and west side of
the building.
The study and addendum letter concludes that the development will meet the elevated
stationary noise limit. The mechanical systems on the proposed buildings (e.g. make-
up air units, cooling units and parking garage vents) have not been designed in detail at
this stage. This equipment has the potential to result in noise impacts on the noise
sensitive spaces within the development; therefore, the potential impacts must be
assessed as part of the final building design with the mechanical systems expected to
meet all on-site receptors to minimize noise impacts within the development and by
incorporating control measures (e.g. silencers, barriers) within the design. An
acoustical consultant must review the mechanical systems prior to the final selection of
the equipment to ensure the selected equipment complies with the MECP NPC -300
Noise Guideline. Furthermore, the detailed noise study shall assess the potential noise
exceedances resulting from the adjacent commercial facilities and assess the impact
due to the development itself and other residential buildings in the vicinity of the site.
To ensure these aspects of the proposal has been assessed, Regional staff require the
implementation of a holding provision to ensure a detailed stationary noise study has
been received and the conclusions, recommendations and implementation measures
for mitigation (if required) have been completed to the satisfaction of the Regional
Municipality of Waterloo.
Subject to the implementation of a holding provision to assess the impact of the
development on itself, Regional staff are satisfied with the conclusions and
recommendations contained within the noise feasibility study at the Official Plan
Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment stage. Regional staff further recommend
the following noise warning clause be implemented through a registered development
agreement between the Owner/Developer and the City of Kitchener at a future Consent
and/or Condominium Application and Site Plan Application stage. In addition, the
following noise -warning clause shall be implemented within the future Condominium
Declaration and all offers of Purchase and Sale/Lease/Rental Agreements:
"Purchasers/tenants are advised that due to the proximity of the adjacent commercial
facilities, noise sources from the development itself, sound from these facilities and
sources may at times be audible."
Document Number: 4217672 Version: 1
Page 2 of 3
Page 191 of 307
Regional staff further recommend that prior to the issuance of any building/occupancy
permits, the City of Kitchener's Building Inspector shall certify that the noise attenuation
measures are incorporated in the building plans and upon completion of construction,
the City of Kitchener's Building Inspector shall certify that the dwelling units have been
constructed accordingly.
Regional Road Dedication:
The required road dedication of 1.5m along King Street East can be deferred to the site
plan stage; therefore, there are no further objections from Regional staff regarding the
Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment.
Conclusions:
Based on the above, the Region has no objection to Official Plan Amendment
OPA21/09 and Zoning By-law Amendment ZBA21/014 subject to the implementation of
a holding provision for the following:
That a holding provision shall apply to the entirety of the subject lands until a detailed
stationary noise study has been completed and implementation measures addressed
to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo. The detailed stationary
noise study shall review the potential impacts of the development on itself (e.g. HVAC
system on the sensitive points of reception) and the impact of the development on the
adjacent sensitive land uses; and
2. That a holding provision shall apply to the entirety of the subject lands until a Record
of Site Condition (RSC) in accordance with O. Reg. 153/04, as amended, has been
filed on the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) Environmental
Site Registry and the Ministry Acknowledgement letter has been submitted to the
satisfaction of the Region.
Please be advised that the accepted Transportation Noise aspects of the Noise study
shall be implemented within a future site plan application and secured through a
Registered Development Agreement between the Owner/Developer and the Regional
Municipality of Waterloo. As per the Region's letter of March 17, 2022, additional items
may be required and secured through the future site plan application(s).
I trust the above is of assistance.
Yours truly,
Melissa Mohr, MCIP, RPP
Senior Planner
C. Kristen Barisdale, GSP Group Inc. (Applicant), Jason Wigglesworth, Transportation Planner,
Monirul Islam, Transportation Planner
Document Number: 4217672 Version: 1
Page 3 of 3
Page 192 of 307
Andrew Pinnell
From: Wang, Shaun <swang@kwhvdnzca>
Sent: Wednesday, October Z(l2O21 10:25 AM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Cc: Cameron, Greig
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Follow-up re Dept/Agenq/Comments OPA/ZBA(4396 King Street East
8/2S3portswoddDrive)
Kitchener -Wilmot Hydro has the following comments on the proposed development at 4396 King Street East & 25
Sportsxwor|dDhve:
Kitchener -Wilmot Hydro has existing overhead pole line on Sports world Dr and King St E.
Any proposed above grade building fagade must have a minimum clearance of S.S meters from the center of
hydro pole line.
To service the site, multiple distribution transformers and HV switchgear may be required. Transformer rooms
and HVSwitchgear room (pad-nnounted transformer / vaulted HVswitchgear asanalternative) will berequired
onthe property, asper Kitchener -Wilmot Hydro standards. Both Transformer room and HVSwitchgear room
shall beabove grade.
Shaun Wang, F.Eng.
System Planning & Projects Engineer
Kitchener -Wilmot Hydro Inc.
P: 510-745-4771x8312
Page 193 of 307
Page 194 of 307
Andrew Pinnell
From: Jenny Thompson <]ennvThompson@enbhdgecom>
Sent: Thursday, February 17'ZOZ211:23AM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Cc: David Paetz Christine Kompter
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Circulation for Comment [)PA/ZBA(4396 King Street East &25
Spurtsmor|dDrive
Good morning Andrew,
Thanks for including me.
There are nucomments atthis time.
Thank you.
Jenny Thompson
Sr Analyst New Business Projects
Construction and Growth
IEIMIBIIIIIIDGIE
TEL:: 51e-8ee'7400exL. 5067488
603 Kumpf Drive, WaLerloo, ON N2V 1 K3
SaVety.. integrity. F."espe��Unciusimn..
Please note that effective January 4Ih 2O22,until further notice, | cannot receive calls atthe office number above. Please
call 225-8B8-9D51Vrsend ene-mail tothis address. Thank you.
Page 195 of 307
Andrew Pinnell
From: Johnston, Jeremiah (MTO) <Jeremiah.Johnston@ontario.ca>
Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2023 10:26 AM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Cc: Secord, David (MTO); McIver, Maureen (MTO)
Subject: MTO Comments: Official Plan Amendment Application OPA21/009/K/AP & Zoning By-
law Amendment Application ZBA21/014/K/AP (4396 King Street East & 25 Sportsworld
Drive)
Attachments: 2022.05.24 2020-104 Design Brief.pdf; Dept -Agency Circulation Letter -4396 King St E
25 Sportsworld Dr.pdf
Hello Andrew,
The Ministry of Transportation (MTO) has completed a review of the proposed Official Plan
Amendment (OPA) and Zoning By-law Amendment (ZBA) for the properties located at 4396 King
Street East & 25 Sportsworld Drive. The site has been considered in accordance with the Public
Transportation and Highway Improvement Act (PTHIA), MTO's Highway Corridor Management
Manual (HCMM) and all related guidelines and policies. MTO has no requirement or comments on
the OPA or ZBA, however the following outlines our comments on the site overall:
The property is located in close proximity to Highway 8, a Class 1A — Provincial Freeway and
designated as a Controlled Access Highway (CAH). As such, all requirements, guidelines and best
practices in accordance with this classification and designation shall apply.
The owner should be aware that the property falls within MTO's Permit Control Area (PCA), and as
such, MTO Permits are required before any demolition, grading, construction or alteration to the site
commences. In accordance with the Ontario Building Code, municipal permits may not be issued until
such time as all other applicable requirements (i.e.: MTO permits/approvals) are satisfied. As a
condition of MTO permit(s) MTO will require (but not limited to) the following for review and approval:
Building and Land Use Permit
MTO Building and Land Use Permit(s) will be required. As a condition of MTO permits, the following
shall be provided;
Site Plans, Site Grading Plans, and Site Servicing Plans shall be submitted to MTO for review
and approval;
Traffic Impact Study
MTO will require the owner to submit a Traffic Impact Study to MTO for review and approval,
indicating the anticipated volumes of traffic and its impact upon the provincial highway network,
inclusive of the intersections which form the interchange of Highway 8 and Sportsworld Drive.
The TIS will be prepared by a Registry, Appraisal and Qualification System (RAQS) qualified
transportation consultant in accordance with MTO TIS Guidelines attached.
The MTO list of Prequalified Engineering Service Providers (ESPs), completing Traffic Impact
Analysis is publicly available on Imml�.."..mml;glllmireiiimlllmmlCm.m,� umirmmiirm website, under Qualifications.
Page 196 of 307
MTO will be available to review the TIS scope of work once prepared, to ensure MTO
concerns are addressed.
Should Highway improvements be identified as warranted and as a condition of MTO permits,
the improvements will be designed and constructed to the standards and approval of MTO at
the cost of the developer.
MTO suggests the owner engage in pre -consultation with MTO to discuss the existing and
proposed trip distribution in tabular and a diagram with the volumes distributed in the network.
The pre consultation process may begin via this website;
IIS t �:Hwww Ilhcilrns,irTm o:,( o.on.ca/III:)ir°eCoiriSLAlllttal:li()ir'n
MTO Sign Permit
MTO Sign Permit(s) will be required for all existing and proposed signage visible from Highway
8. A MTO sign permit will be required prior to installation, this is inclusive of temporary
(including contractor or construction related) signs and permanent signs.
General Comments
Should you have any questions about the above, please contact me directly by email.
Thank you,
De reiniah .uoDhlnst'on Corridor Management Planner
Corridor Management Section
Ministry of Transportation Operations Branch West
659 Exeter Road, London, ON NK 11_3
M: (226)-980-6407
Page 197 of 307
Andrew Pinnell
From:
Jennifer Passy <Jennifer.Passy@wcdsb.ca>
Sent:
Wednesday, November 24, 2021 9:10 AM
To:
Andrew Pinnell
Cc:
Planning; Jordan Neale
Subject:
[EXTERNAL] Replacement - Circulation for Comment - OPA/ZBA (4396 King Street East
& 25 Sportsworld Drive)
Andrew,
The Waterloo Catholic District School Board is in receipt of the information in support of the Official Plan Amendment
and Zoning By -Law Amendment for 4396 King Street East & 25 Sportsworld Drive.
The application proposes to significantly alter the fabric of this historically commercial area of the City. The Planning
Around Rapid Transit Stations (PARTS) background report dated December 2013 identified the Sportsworld Draft
Station Area (MTSA) as a future priority for study. Further exploration of the status of this plan has confirmed that the
work on this MTSA is not yet underway. While ideally the proposed redevelopment would be considered within the
context of a detailed MTSA, WCDSB are aware that the City of Kitchener Official Plan provides policy support for the
review of development applications in advance of Station Area Plans where such development will support the planned
function of a MTSA.
At this time the there are Official Plan Amendment and Rezoning applications only in support of redevelopment of the
subject property to permit the development of and 8 -storey apartment building and 30 -storey mixed use commercial
podium with two residential towers. The property is located at the corner of King Street East and Sportsworld Drive,
which are both designated as Regional Roads.
The board has reviewed the road cross sections for the proposed Phase 2 iON construction through this area. The
nature of proposed development, future generation of school -aged students combined with legal and practical matters
related to student transportation will necessitate the board, city, region and developer working together to review
opportunities and constraints at the site plan level to ensure necessary infrastructure or other improvements are
available to support yellow -bus transport of future students.
The following comments are offered at this time, and the board reserves the right to offer further input on areas of
interest to the board at the time of site plan approval:
a) Education Development Charges shall be collected prior to the issuance of a building permit(s).
b) The developer and the Waterloo Catholic District School Board shall reach an agreement regarding the supply
and erection of a sign (at the developer's expense and according to the Board's specifications) affixed to the
development sign advising prospective residents about schools in the area.
c) The developer shall enter into an agreement with the City of Kitchener to be registered on the title to the
Property that provides:
"All agreement of purchase and sale or leases for the sale or lease of a completed home or a home to be
completed on the Property must contain the wording set out below to advise all purchasers of residential units
and/or renters of same."
"In order to limit liability, public school buses operated by the Student Transportation Services of Waterloo
Region (STSWR), or its assigns or successors, will not travel on privately owned or maintained right-of-ways to
pick up students, and potential busing students will be required to meet the bus at a congregated bus pick-up
point."
Page 198 of 307
d) The developer co-ordinate and reach an agreement with the Waterloo Catholic District School Board and
Student Transportation Services of Waterloo Region regarding the provision and maintenance of infrastructure
for school bus pick-up and drop-off locations.
Jennifer Passy, BES, MCIP, RPP
Manager of Planning
Waterloo Catholic District School Board
480 Dutton Drive
Waterloo, ON N2L 4C6
0: 519-578-3677 X2253
C: 519-501-5285
Watertoo Catholic
Distrilct Schoot Board
Disclaimer - This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and contain privileged or copyright information.
You must not present this message to another party without gaining permission from the sender. If you are not the
intended recipient you must not copy, distribute or use this email or the information contained in it for any purpose
other than to notify us. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately, and delete this
email from your system. We do not guarantee that this material is free from viruses or any other defects although due
care has been taken to minimize the risk. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except
where the sender specifically states them to be the views of the Waterloo Catholic District School Board.
Page 199 of 307
1ttaornent
From:
Ron Hallman
Sent:
Monday, October 18, 202112:42 AM
To:
Andrew Pinnell
Cc:
BVrbanovic@regionofwaterloo.ca
Subject:
[EXTERNAL] 4396 King St E & 25 Sportsworld Dr.
Greetings Mr Pinnell,
I should preface my strongest concern, regarding this proposed development, with a very brief
introduction of my life experience. I am a retired (30 yrs) police officer from Waterloo Regional Police. I
spent many of those years investigating (and assisting) serious and fatal collisions while assigned to our
Traffic Branch.
Mark my words, if this development is allowed to proceed as planned, without major rerouting of the
commercial motor vehicle (Amazon & transport trucks) from the Maple Grove/Fountain area, it will have
fatal results. I beg of you; go to that Tim Horton's parking lot and sit and watch that intersection for no
more than half an hour on any given day, and then imagine injecting 300 bicycles and several hundred
pedestrians to the mix. You should certainly see what I mean. If you're not immediately convinced,
please walk across the intersection from all 4 corners. If you feel "safe" while crossing that intersection,
then you and I come from different planets.
Surely you noticed the traffic study from the developers, identifying that the roads in the area can
handle the development, "EXCEPT" for the intersections closest to the building! This is a transportation
hub, not a residential hub. If we want to turn King/Sportsworld into a downtown setting, then we must
first remove the majority of the commercial traffic from it. You realize that King St is, by far, the most
direct route to the west bound 401 for the majority of central Kitchener and definitely for the entirety of
the Maple Grove/Fountain industrial basin?
I get that the ION is going directly down the centre of King St and I see the logic in it bringing people into
that area to work and thern home again. But I do NOT see the logic in trying to turn that transportation
hub into a residential hub.
The building will have a drastic shortage of parking. Where will the overflow park? I'll answer that for
you; Costco.
The issues I have already addressed are my biggest concerns. An additional issue I'm sure I could get
used to (but don't want to) is having a massive high rise building overlooking my backyard (I guess that
officially makes me a NIMBY). I live on Edgehill Dr. I have worked all my life to afford the means to raise
my children on a street that feels like cottage country. We are all on wells and septic, no sidewalks, no
street lights (for half the length), still enjoying rural mail delivery. How in the world does a high rise
apartment building fit into that landscape?
Thank you for reading this far. I'll say it one more time, without any hyperbole; if this project proceeds
as it is, someone is going to get killed at that intersection. Please help to prevent that.
Respectfully, Ron Hallman
Page 200 of 307
From: Marijan B
Sent: Monday, October 18, 20214:20 PM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 4396 King St E and 25 Sportsworld Dr
Dear Mr. Pinnell,
I am writing to you as a resident of the Deer Ridge subdivision adjacent to the planned highrise
development proposed for 4396 King St E and 25 Sportsworld Dr.
I'll be frank, I'm having a hard time comprehending how this proposal is even being entertained.
We are talking about an area with no grocery store, no green space, no parks, no recreation... and A LOT
of traffic.
There is traffic from Challenger, Toyota, current residents in the neighborhood, Costco, the list goes on.
Rush hour is already crazy.
I also have some serious concerns that the residents of the highrise development will just use our
neighborhood bringing in an incredible amount of foot traffic to an already busy trail system.
As a side note, but also a valid concern, I lived in the grand river woods development in Cambridge just
down king street near fountain Street. It is a cautionary tale of what happens when you build higher
density housing near Conestoga College. The townhomes there are 90% Conestoga College students. It
was unbearable living there. People on the streets at all hours drinking alcohol, street racing, vandalism,
violent crime (there was a homicide there last fall before I moved). Someone even took out the stop sign
in front of my home there and drove over my lawn! It would be naive to think investors won't scoop up
these apartments and fill them to the rafters with international students. Conestoga College increased
its international student intake considerably over the past 5 years. I believe the number sits at about
10,000 and is increasing all the time. Not a single purpose built residence was ever built that is
proportional to this increase. They will end up in this development. They will end up in our
neighbourhood.
As a member of Deer Ridge, and I'm sure my neighbours will agree, we pay some of the highest property
tax in the region. Why? Because it's a beautiful neighbourhood surrounded by nature. Please don't ruin
it.
Sincerely,
Marijan Berecic
Page 201 of 307
From:
Renee Ruszer
Sent:
Monday, October 18, 20213:46 PM
To:
Andrew Pinnell
Subject:
[EXTERNAL] 4396 King St E at 25 Sportsworld Dr, Kitchener
Dear Mr. Pinnell,
I am writing to you as a resident of the area in which Commercial Campus has made an
application for development at 4396 King St E at 25 Sportsworld Dr, Kitchener,
We wish to express a deep level of concern for how the proposed 30 storey, 616
dwelling proposed development would impact this already very busy and mixed used
area.
Dropping a high rise residential development onto the corner of an already
overburdened intersection, busy with Challenger Motor Freight traffic, Toyota plant
traffic, Costco traffic, GO Transit and other bus traffic (whoever picked up Greyhound's
slack), not to mention the Hwy 8 on/off ramps, is a recipe for DISASTER.
That location is NOT conducive to a sudden influx of pedestrian and bicycle traffic, not
to mention the strain it would place on the local transit utilization from that location.
Politely stated, what is the city thinking??!!
There is no LCBO, beer store, regular grocery store, drug store, daycare, parks or open
green spaces nearby. This will push foot and bicycle traffic into the adjacent
neighborhoods, thereby disrupting and overburdening the scant green space and
recreational infrastructure in those areas, negatively impacting our quality of life.
The roads in the area are already overburdened, can you imagine what 580 more cars
per day will do to the South end of Kitchener? And make no mistake, the building may
have 300+ bicycle parking spaces, you will not be able enforce people to use
them. The majority of those residents will be using their cars to go to work, school,
shopping, etc...
We are Not in favour, we OPPOSE this development and OPPOSE the changing of
the zoning of the neighbourhood. Please record our sentiments accordingly.
Renee Ruszer
Sent from my iPhone
Page 202 of 307
From:
Elkin Castano
Sent:
Monday, October 18, 20218:39 PM
To:
Andrew Pinnell
Subject:
[EXTERNAL] 4396 King St East development
Hello,
As feedback, this proposed development is risky and must add restless. High density, low parking ratio,
no green space, and poor surrounding infrastructure (schools, to begging with) make this idea bizarre. It
might work for the core are of KW. Perhaps only the 8 floor building with the rest of the space used for
communal enjoyment will work better, but not as profitable.... and this project is clearly designed to
squeeze dollars not to bring quality of living to the inhabitants.
Best regards,
Elkin Castano
Deer Ridge resident.
Sent from Mail for Windows
Page 203 of 307
From:
Sent: Monday, October 18, 20218:40 PM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 4396 King St East rezoning.
Andrew:
So please let me understand this. You want to put approximately 2000 more people on one of the
busiest intersections in Kitchener???? The infrastructure is zero to support such a move. Extremely busy
roads which will only get busier with the coming of a train driving in the same space. Poor school access.
Poor shopping access. Nowhere close to add such infrastructure ... and you think this is a good idea. You
must live in Listowel where people don't worry about stuff like that. Only good that comes from this is
more revenue for the city to squander on other ridiculous projects that have equally as little foresight.
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhh yes, but that's what politicians do with other people's money right Andrew? Only
problem is you just railroad this stuff through. The builder gets richer. And the infrastructure will follow.
Not. If building stuff in the sky for people to live in is pertinent and it likely is, then there is lots of better
placed sky!! Just imagine.
Bill Dow
Page 204 of 307
From:
Frank Ruszer
Sent:
Monday, October 18, 20213:01 PM
To:
Andrew Pinnell
Subject:
[EXTERNAL] 4396 King St. E development
Dear Mr. Pinnell,
I am writing to you as a resident of the area in which Commercial Campus has made an
application for development at 4396 King St E at 25 Sportsworld Dr, Kitchener,
We wish to express a deep level of concern for how the proposed 30 storey, 616
dwelling proposed development would impact this already very busy and mixed used
area.
Dropping a high rise residential development onto the corner of an ready overburdened
intersection, busy with Challenger Motor Freight traffic, Toyota plant traffic, Costco
traffic, GO Transit and other bus traffic (whoever picked up Greyhound's slack), not to
mention the Hwy 8 on/off ramps, is a recipe for DISASTER.
That location is NOT conducive to a sudden influx of pedestrian and bicycle traffic, not
to mention the strain it would place on the local transit utilization from that location.
Politely stated, what is the city thinking??!!
There is no LCBO, beer store, regular grocery store, drug store, daycare, parks or open
green spaces nearby. This will push foot and bicycle traffic into the adjacent
neighborhoods, thereby disrupting and overburdening the scant green space and
recreational infrastructure in those areas, negatively impacting our quality of life.
The roads in the area are already overburdened, can you imagine what 580 more cars
per day will do to the South end of Kitchener? And make no mistake, the building may
have 300+ bicycle parking spaces, you will not be able enforce people to use
them. The majority of those residents will be using their cars to go to work, school,
shopping, etc...
We are Not in favour, we OPPOSE this development and OPPOSE the changing of
the zoning of the neighbourhood. Please record our sentiments accordingly.
Thank you,
Frank Ruszer
Page 205 of 307
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Good afternoon Andrew
My name is John Hossack.
John Hossack
Monday, October 18, 20213:38 PM
Andrew Pinnell
John Gazzola; Christie & Matt Girdler; John & Sharan Mellor; Jack &
LurdesJordao
[EXTERNAL] 4396 King St. E., Kitchener
IMG 1625.heic
I am a Deer Ridge resident.
I am Writing today,to voice my concern of the plan for the above Kitchener address.
I tried the phone number attached to the article with your name.
Your number is not reachable, otherwise I would called you,l also tried via the city of Kitchener website
with no luck.
This is the first I have heard of this proposal, and have received no prior notification as a local resident.
Therefore I've had no opportunity to voice my concerns and the deadline is today!
Please ensure my comments are attached to this proposal, I will keep record of this email as I want it
entered before the deadline passes.
King and Sportsworld is the busiest intersection at the entry point to the the city of Kitchener from the
401.
We are already at gridlock in this location,
due to business decisions to appease local business 22 years ago and we continue to struggle to access
local roads.
At that time businesses were up in arms about the loss of business due, to a westbound ramp that was
planned for westbound 401 traffic
Hence today's congestion!
it is insane to think we can accommodate such a structure with so many units in this area.
Until a west bound (401) on ramp is built to relieve traffic in this area you can't possibly be serious?
Also the local ambulance station(Fountain Street and Cherry blossom) response times would be
seriously impeded.
Until the necessary infrastructure is built and in place, this proposal but should be Shelved.
Pioneer Tower /Deer Ridge area residents
safety (approximately 3000) would be seriously at risk!
Please respond to this email, as I would like a receipt of your acceptance of this email.
Thankyou
Regards
John Hossack
Sent from my iPhone
Page 206 of 307
From: Bridget Coady
Sent: Monday, October 18, 20211:21 PM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 4396 King St. E
Hello Andrew,
My family lives in the Edge hiI/Settlers Grove/Deer Ridge community and have reservations regarding the
amount of residential units proposed in this development. This existing residential community is grossly
underserved for community park land and amenities ( not to mention kids are 100% bussed) as it is and
any new residents will need to cross a major arterial to seek green space. Please note that one of the
community parkettes in our community will be taken off line for a year or two as the new trunk sewer
from the East Side lands will be constructed through it.
I don't believe this location should be considered for major residential. While Im aware that arterial
commercial does not produce the densities required to support rapid transit, office commercial does,
and this location should be developed more as office and service commercial it is currently designated -
as the "gateway" to support the nearby east side lands. NOT Residential. This and any future mixed use
development in this commercial node would never be able to be considered a complete community and
any future residents would not have great quality of life .... given the lack of community supports and
amenities. Yes it may produce some more residential units for the housing supply, but to what end? Are
we just throwing up units to meet provincial targets or are we thoughtfully planning for a world class
community?
Thanks for your consideration.
The Rowbotham Family.
Sent from my iPhone
Page 207 of 307
From: rocs evans
Sent: Sunday, October 24, 20218:58 PM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 4396 King St. note
Andrew,
I hope this email does not find you too late in the discovery process of this new development
proposal. I live on a block from this new development and I'd like to add my
feedback on the project. I know its along the ION Path but its also likely the most busiest
corner in Kitchener, with all vehicles coming and going from Kitchener to Cambridge and EVERY
vehicle coming and going to the 401 London direction. Currently this is an extremely busy
corner and with the new commercial industrial parks north of Toyota being planned
(6,000acres) this is going to get worse. My street, Edgehill Drive is already being used as a by-
pass for the Deer Ridge residents and many time their speeds far succeeds the posted limits. If
this project was to increase over 600 new units which would increase the amount of people
entering this already busy intersection, our quiet Edgehill drive would be extremely busy.
The second thing is where are these people going to walk their dogs, ride their bikes or simply
walk for exercise.. We have no parks in the area and therefore our road again would get
inundated with more foot, bike and vehicle traffic all of which is not designed for. This
intersection is not designed for all the additional traffic your planning on adding.
I reviewed the recent long-term plans for the 401 intersections for 401 west to and from
London and NOTHING is on the books at this time to add this and therefore that traffic would
be rammed into this intersection that already TODAY this stretch of King street is extremely
congested and rush hours its even worse. I'd like to see traffic studies and projected traffic
studies from the new commercial units already approved plus this new project.
And finally to build a project with 30 stories in this area is not consistent with the short term or
long term plans of this area. There are no buildings in this area higher than the local hotel at 8-
10 stories, so these buildings would be massive on this little corner of King and
Sportsworld. This is not a down town core area and should not have a building of this height
approved for the area.
Thank you Andrew for your time to review this letter of concern for the new development
project at King and Sportsworld in Kitchener.
Sincerely
Ross Evans
Page 208 of 307
From:
Lurdes Jordao
Sent:
Monday, October 18, 20214:56 PM
To:
Andrew Pinnell
Cc:
John Gazzola
Subject:
[EXTERNAL] 4396 King St; Kitchener
Hello; My name is Lurdes Jordao and I live on Deer Ridge Drive. For the past 22 years we have lived
quietly and in peace in our neighbourhood. I am also the president of Settler's Grove Community
Association And represent 273 households and we are voicing our concerns and are completely 100%
against this development. There are already concerns of increased crime and traffic with past
developments. This project does not benefit the well being of our residents. We would like you record
the 273 households against this project.
Further more; we have come to know about this project today. There was no advance communication
of this project and advance warning so residents can attend a meeting would have been appreciated.
Our association is interested in submitting an appeal against this project!
Page 209 of 307
Sent from my iPhone
Page 210 of 307
From: Ashley Berkel
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 202112:24 PM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 4396 King Street East & 25 Sportsworld Drive
Page 211 of 307
From: Bruce and Kimberley Cushing
Sent: Sunday, October 17, 20219:33 PM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 4396 King Street East and 25 Sportsworld Drive
Monolithic eye sore of colossal proportions, that is what I would call this.
I was walking around the Pioneer Tower today, a historical landmark.
Standing at the base having climbed it many times to view the Grand River Valley hoping to glimpse a
bald eagle that nest there.
I live in Grand Hill and have on occasion see one fly over my house.
As I turned, I was ashamed to think that just a few blocks someone wants a 30 -story tower. Wow what a
view that will be from the top of historical landmark that has ties back to the founding of Kitchener.
One of the most valuable neighbourhoods in the city and you step out your front door or be resting in
your backyard and you see this monolithic eyesore, only one property away for some people on Edgehill.
One that will create a shadow like a giant sundial as the sun moves through the sky.
Standing at the corner of King and Sportworld Drive and you can't see a skyscraper anywhere.
It just does not fit in. Where is the midrise development, why does it have to go to 30 storeys?
Even 10 storeys would be a sudden step up when single family homes are less than 100m away.
Building and intensifying along the LRT is creating a steel and glass wall that is splitting the city east and
west sides.
Just look at the insane development in waterloo, and what percentage of those units are still
unoccupied.
Which for some reason has attracted a large number of crows?
Urban planning should involve attractive and welcoming transitional zones. Not a sudden monolith that
doesn't fit in with even the property across the street.
If one tower goes to 30 storeys, then so will the others. How welcoming will Sportworld Crossing be
surrounded by towers on the west side, mid-day sun on the patio of Moose Winooski's, nope.
Development should be greening the street, not hardening the street to the edge of the road and going
99m vertical.
What is missing here is a total vision of what the street could and should look like 25 years from now.
Otherwise, you get the disaster that is King Street in Waterloo where you have concrete jungle that is
one street, blocking sun, unwelcoming, and really architecturally a dog's breakfast.
As for the bike parking, seriously the building will be next to neighbourhoods where the average vehicle
is north of 60 grand.
Plus, the LRT is not designed for bicycle loading, not like Vancouver is. People are not going to bike north
on King St to get to... the Charcoal Steakhouse, or Pepsi Pizza.
There are no grocery stores, beer store, LCBO within walking distance. Occupants are not going to bike
or LRT to get grocs.
I know you could argue if you build, they will come. There is not enough land between King St and the
expressway to house these other anchor stores.
Imagine approaching Kitchener from the west on the 401, looking out at the Grand River Valley and then
seeing the great wall of Kitchener towers that split the city, a mistake Waterloo made.
Page 212 of 307
This application is all about immediate profit, not the long-term vision of Kitchener, or its residents.
The sales pitch will be the view of the valley at the expense of those who have carefully manicured their
properties and have been paying a hefty tax bill all along.
Intensifying along the LRT involves a plan, not bending over for developers short term profits.
Bruce
Page 213 of 307
From: Lindsey Schmalz
Sent: Monday, October 18, 20211:45 PM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] 4396 King Street East Development Idea
Hello Mr. Pinnell,
I am contacting you today about the future development on 4396 King St E in Kitchener. I am a resident
of the Deer Ridge community and I strongly appeal your decision to erect an enormous sky scraper in
our community.
Due to how close to the existing buildings would be to h the proposed building there is a concern for
safety. There is also ergonomic means that must be considered, as well as traffic and means of vehicular
egress.
I am an architecture student and I understand how land is valuable and buildings have to be vertically
built, however please reconsider this horrendous design you have put together.
Have you considered 4607 King St East, it is only slightly further down the road and would not be an eye
sore for the residents of our community. 4585 King St East is currently occupied, however your current
plan does require you to purchase land and evict multiple businesses. It is still in close proximity to the
401 and the 7/8 Expressway as well as other amenities.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Lindsey Schmalz
Page 214 of 307
From:
Sent: Monday, October 18, 20215:47 PM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Against the Proposed Development at 4396 King
Street East & 25 Sportsworld Drive
Dear Mr. Pinnell.....
I am writing to you as a resident of the area in which Commerical Campus has made an application for
development at 4396 King St E at 25 Sportsworld Dr, Kitchener,
We wish to express a deep level of concern for how the proposed 30 storey, 616 dwelling proposed
development would impact this already very busy and mixed used area.
Dropping a high rise residential development onto the corner of an ready overburdened intersection,
busy with Challenger Motor Freight traffic, Toyota plant traffic, Costco traffic, GO Transit and other bus
traffic (whoever picked up Greyhound's slack), not to mention the Hwy 8 on/off ramps, is a recipe for
DISASTER.
That location is NOT conducive to a sudden influx of pedestrian and bicycle traffic, not to mention the
strain it would place on the local transit utilization from that location. Politely stated, what would the
city be thinking?
There is no LCBO, beer store, regular grocery store, daycare, parks or open green spaces nearby. It will
only push non-resident foot and bicycle traffic into the adjacent neighborhoods, thereby disrupting and
overburdening the scant green space and recreational infrastructure in those areas, negatively
impacting our quality of life.
We are NOT in favour.
Please record our sentiments accordingly.
With respect
Page 215 of 307
From: Steve Capling
Sent: Monday, October 18, 202110:43 PM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Application for development - 4396 King St. East and
25 Sportsworld Dr.
Dear Mr. Pinnell,
As a resident of one of the communities adjacent to the area in which Commerical Campus has made an
application for development at 4396 King St E at 25 Sportsworld Dr, Kitchener...
We wish to express deep concern for the proposed 30 -story, 616 dwelling proposed development and
how it will impact an already very busy and mixed -used area.
Putting a residential high rise development on the corner of what is already an overburdened
intersection that sees regular congestion with all the local business traffic, Challenger Motor Freight
traffic, Toyota plant traffic, Loblaws Distribution traffic, Costco traffic, Home Depot traffic, GO and
GRT Transit traffic not to mention the Hwy 8 on/off ramps, and is set to create a plethora of additional
issues on these roads as well as the nearby community.
That location is NOT conducive to a sudden influx of pedestrian and bicycle traffic, not to mention the
strain it would place on the local transit utilization from that location.
This seems a bit ludicrous in theory alone.
There is no LCBO, beer store, regular grocery store, daycare, parks or open green spaces nearby and it
will push non-resident foot and bicycle traffic into the adjacent neighborhoods, thereby disrupting and
overburdening the limited green space and recreational infrastructure in those areas and will negatively
impact our quality of life.
We are NOT in favour. Please record our sentiments accordingly.
Steve Capling & Connie Arnold
Page 216 of 307
From: Scott Reiner
Sent: Monday, October 18, 20213:03 PM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Cc: Jill Reiner
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Commercial Campus - 4386 King St E
Dear Mr. Pinnell
I am writing to you as a resident of the area in which Commerical Campus has made an application for
development at 4396 King St E at 25 Sportsworld Dr, Kitchener,
We wish to express a deep level of concern for how the proposed 30 storey, 616 dwelling proposed
development would impact this already very busy and mixed used area.
Dropping a high rise residential development onto the corner of an already overburdened intersection,
busy with Challenger Motor Freight traffic, Toyota plant traffic, Costco traffic, GO Transit and other bus
traffic (whoever picked up Greyhound's slack), not to mention the Hwy 8 on/off ramps, is a recipe for
DISASTER.
That location is NOT conducive to a sudden influx of pedestrian and bicycle traffic, not to mention the
strain it would place on the local transit utilization from that location. Politely stated, what would the
city be thinking?
Where are all of the Bike paths for these 300+ cyclists that will be putting their lives in peril riding on
King or SportsWorld drives?
There is no LCBO, beer store, regular grocery store, daycare, parks or open green spaces close or part of
the development to support this much of an influx of people. It will only push non-resident foot and
bicycle traffic into the adjacent neighborhoods, thereby disrupting and overburdening the scant green
space and recreational infrastructure in those areas, negatively impacting our quality of life.
We are NOT in favour. Please record our sentiments accordingly.
Best regards,
Scott & Jill Reiner
Page 217 of 307
From:
Mike Mooney
Sent:
Monday, October 18, 202112:21 PM
To:
Andrew Pinnell
Cc:
Michael Mooney
Subject:
[EXTERNAL] Commercial Campus Development COM -4
Dear Mr. Pinnell.....
I am writing to you as a resident of the area in which Commerical Campus has made an application for
development at 4396 King St E at 25 Sportsworld Dr, Kitchener,
We wish to express a deep level of concern for how the proposed 30 storey, 616 dwelling proposed
development would impact this already very busy and mixed used area.
Dropping a high rise residential development onto the corner of an ready overburdened intersection,
busy with Challenger Motor Freight traffic, Toyota plant traffic, Costco traffic, GO Transit and other bus
traffic (whoever picked up Greyhound's slack), not to mention the Hwy 8 on/off ramps, is a recipe for
DISASTER.
That location is NOT conducive to a sudden influx of pedestrian and bicycle traffic, not to mention the
strain it would place on the local transit utilization from that location. Politely stated, what would the
city be thinking?
There is no LCBO, beer store, regular grocery store, daycare, parks or open green spaces nearby. It will
only push non-resident foot and bicycle traffic into the adjacent neighborhoods, thereby disrupting and
overburdening the scant green space and recreational infrastructure in those areas, negatively
impacting our quality of life.
We are NOT in favour. Please record our sentiments accordingly.
With respect
Michael Mooney
Page 218 of 307
From:
Carole Rothwell
Sent:
Monday, April 4, 2022 1:54 PM
To:
Andrew Pinnell
Subject:
[EXTERNAL] Deer Ridge area condo updates
Hello Andrew
I live in Deer Ridge and attended the zoom meeting on Thursday. Could you please add my email to the
list to receive updates.
Unlike many others, I think it is progress and am supportive trusting the project is well managed. It
seems to be heading in the right direction.
My email is
Thank you.
1
CAPOLE ROTHWELL -
Page 219 of 307
From:
Vishal Mandal
Sent:
Friday, April 1, 2022 11:39 AM
To:
Andrew Pinnell
Subject:
[EXTERNAL] Deer Ridge -Add email address please
Hi Andrew,
Trust all is well.
Please add my email address for Deer Ridge surrounding related development as per
yesterday's meeting.
Thank you for your time.
Best regards
lishal� l
Sent from Mail for Windows
Page 220 of 307
From:
Sonika Mandal
Sent:
Friday, April 1, 2022 11:37 AM
To:
Andrew Pinnell
Subject:
[EXTERNAL] Deer Ridge -Add email address please
Hi Andrew,
Trust all is well.
Please add my email address for Deer Ridge surrounding related development as per yesterday's
meeting.
Thank you for your time.
Best regards
Sonika
Page 221 of 307
From:
Sandra Vink
Sent:
Monday, October 18, 202111:07 AM
To:
Andrew Pinnell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Development application 4396 King St East and 25
Sportsworld Dr. Kitchener
Dear Mr. Pinnell:
I wish to comment on the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment and proposed development at this
location. I am a resident and property owner nearby on Edgehill Drive, and I have the following
concerns.
1. Traffic at the intersection of King St East, Sportsworld Dr and Baxter PI is already heavy and
dangerous for vehicle traffic, bicycles and pedestrians, due to there being no direct connection to and
from HWY 401 West. This volume will only increase even without the proposed development, and there
is no plan to remedy this for many (30-40) years in the future, according to my most recent information.
2. The very nearby intersection of Baxter PI and Pioneer Tower Dr is busy and confusing to most
travelling through it currently, including vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians. It includes close access to 2
retail plazas. Illegal U-turns, blocking of the intersection because of the traffic lights on King St, and
failure to stop from Pioneer Tower Dr are frequently observed. Higher traffic volumes from this
development will exacerbate these problems.
3. Some traffic will divert to Edgehill Dr in order to avoid the traffic on King St East. Such drivers are
likely to travel above the non -posted speed limit. Edgehill Dr is currently a sleepy and quiet residential
street, with children, bicycles, dog walkers and elderly people strolling, and without sidewalks or
streetlights in some areas. This is a dangerous situation, and discourages the healthy outdoor lifestyle
residents try to maintain, and chose to live in the area to enjoy.
4. There are significantly fewer parking spots for this development than there are living units. I don't
know what provisions have been made for visitor and retail parking, if any. I have some personal
experience with this arrangement as it occurred at the much smaller development at 49 Queen St East
in (Hespeler) Cambridge. The lack of space for parking at that location caused disputes and aggressive
behavior over parking in unauthorized spots, and illegal parking on adjacent streets and private
property. This development must provide adequate parking for its own requirements rather than
relying on trespassing to service its residents and guests.
4. Edgehill Drive is serviced by rural postal delivery, therefore has mail boxes at the end of the
driveways and delivery by car. Urban residents are unfamiliar with this mode of delivery. When cars or
delivery vans park close to the mail boxes, the letter carrier is unable to deliver, and residents do not
receive their mail. There is the potential for this to happen frequently, since parking from this
development will overflow onto the few adjacent residential streets, most likely Edgehill Drive. Please
refer to the following:
Canada Post Corporation Act (.S.C., 1985, c. C-10)
Page 222 of 307
• 50 (1) Every person commits an offence who, without reasonable cause, refuses
to permit or delays permitting any mail or mail conveyance to pass on or use any
road, ferry or other route or mode of transport access to which is under his
control.
(2) For the purposes of subsection (1), collecting toll, ferriage or other charge for
the use of any route or mode of transport is deemed not to be reasonable cause.
• 1980-81-82-83, c. 54, s. 44
5. There are no parks or green spaces in the area, since the decommissioned school property was
redeveloped by the City of Kitchener into single family homes at Pioneer Grove Ct a few years
ago. Although some provisions are included in the development for this need, pedestrians and dog
walkers will spill onto Edgehill Dr and Pioneer Tower Dr for exercise. Pioneer Tower Dr has no sidewalks
in places, and as mentioned previously, Edgehill Dr has no sidewalks and in some areas no
streetlights. Parking is unlimited, and likely will be used by overflow from the development. Edgehill Dr
was not designed for these volumes of use, and is subject to congestion currently when service vehicles
are parked. Both new residents and old are endangered by the City of Kitchener increasing the volume
of users and failing to address these traffic issues.
6. Edgehill Dr is a small side street lacking in most of the amenities larger and more central streets are
provided with. As mentioned, there are no sidewalks and in some places no street lights. The street is
old, and accommodates only two direction travel with no posted speed limits or parking. It has a tar and
gravel surface, replaced approximately 5 years ago. There are no curbs or storm sewers, instead ditches
and culverts at the driveways. Cars frequently park with two wheels on the grass, causing damage to
the turf, especially in wet weather. It does not have the capacity to absorb increased use safely.
Please consider the above issues as planning on this site progresses. I would appreciate being included
in the dialogue and receiving information releases pertaining to it.
Thank -you,
Sandra Vink
Sandra
Page 223 of 307
From:
Sent: Monday, October 18, 20213:11 PM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Development application at king & sportsworld dr
Good afternoon Mr. Pinnell,
As a resident of the area in which there has been an application for develop at 4396 King St E at 25
Sportsworld Dr, Kitchener, I am writing to you with major concerns.
Having a high rise residential development will lead to many issues for local residents, as well as
commuters. This will create even more traffic on an already congested area in Kitchener. I am also very
concerned for the foot and bicycle traffic this could cause heading towards Preston, an area that has no
actual sidewalk or bike path. This is very dangerous around the 401 on/ off ramps and under the bridge.
My next concern is the lack of green space. There is absolutely no green space, parks, etc provided for
this development. This will cause a significant impact on my community, which is not designed for 600+
residents. Our neighbourhoods were designed for what has been built here. If there is going to be a
development, it should be on the development to provide adequate green space for their residents. If
there is no green space provided this will also lead to a significant increase in foot traffic across king st
and Sportsworld Dr., an EXTREMELY busy intersection. My last concern in regards to this development is
the lack of amenities located near by. There is no grocery store, pharmacy, LCBO, Beer store, etc. that
would be needed for this kind of development. Please note: by grocery store and pharmacy I list that as
ones with extended hours, the pharmacy in the area and Costco do not provide you with the same hours
as a regular grocery store or larger pharmacy would. These are essential for a development of this size
and type (lack of transportation for many).
We are not in favour of this development!
Thank you,
Jamie Kelly
Page 224 of 307
From: Thien Nguyen
Sent: Monday, October 18, 20211:53 PM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Development Application Concern
Hi Andrew,
I just received this notice and have some concerns with this development in a highly
congested area.
Are the neighbourhoods going to be able to put forth their concerns in a public forum
before this gets approved?
Please let me know,
Thanks,
Thien.
Page 225 of 307
From:
Eric Heutschi
Sent:
Monday, October 18, 20217:10 PM
To:
Andrew Pinnell
Cc:
Mollie Weichel
Subject:
[EXTERNAL] Development at 4396 King St E at 25 Sportsworld Dr,
Kitchener,
Dear Mr. Pinnell,
We are writing to you as a residents in the area in which Commercial Campus has made an application
for development at 4396 King St E at 25 Sportsworld Dr, Kitchener.
We wish to express a deep level of concern for how the proposed 30 storey, 616 dwelling proposed
development would impact this already very busy and mixed used area.
Dropping a high rise residential development onto the corner of an ready overburdened intersection,
busy with Challenger Motor Freight traffic, Toyota plant traffic, Costco traffic, GO Transit and other bus
traffic (whoever picked up Greyhound's slack), not to mention the Hwy 8 on/off ramps, is a recipe for
DISASTER.
That location is NOT conducive to a sudden influx of pedestrian and bicycle traffic, not to mention the
strain it would place on the local transit utilization from that location. Politely stated, what would the
city be thinking?
There is no LCBO, beer store, regular grocery store, daycare, parks or open green spaces nearby. It will
only push non-resident foot and bicycle traffic into the adjacent neighborhoods, thereby disrupting and
overburdening the scant green space and recreational infrastructure in those areas, negatively
impacting our quality of life.
We are NOT in favour. Please record our sentiments accordingly.
Thank you,
Eric Heutschi and Mollie Weichel
Page 226 of 307
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Dear Mr. Pinell,
Craig Wilson
Monday, October 18, 20214:49 PM
Andrew Pinnell; John Gazzola; Mayor
[EXTERNAL] Development at 4396 I<ing Street
I have only become aware today of this proposed zoning change and proposed for 4396 King St
East development. As far as I am aware, none of the residents of the Grand Hill Village, which is
in the vicinity of this development, have been informed of this proposal. Additionally, I
understand that the residents of Deer Ridge Drive may have not been aware till today either. This
is hardly consulting widely in the adjacent communities.
I am a long time resident of Grand Hill Village and served on the joint committee of planners
and residents when the Deer Ridge community was under consideration. One of the major
criteria that was used at that time was the concept of 'Transition'. There was to not to be a sudden
increase in intensity that would have a serious impact on existing communities. I am very
concerned that this proposal violates that concept and will impose on the existing communities
an inner city high rise concept that is not acceptable in our area.
I think it is important that you set up a committee that will consist of representatives from the
Deer Ridge, Grand Hill Village and Pioneer Tower communities as well as the developer and
city planners to discuss the future developments for our area. The approach you currently are
taking is undemocratic and contradicts the examples that was et some 20 years ago when the
Deer Ridge community was being planned
I am copying this letter to Mayor Vrbanovich and our councillor John Gazzola so they are
informed of the opposition of one citizen.
Yours truly
Craig Wilson
Page 227 of 307
Page 228 of 307
From: gordon.n gordon.n
Sent: Monday, October 18, 20213:47 PM
To: Andrew Pinnell; John Gazzola; Mayor
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Development at 4396 King Street
Dear Mr. Pinell,
I have only become aware today of this proposed zoning change and proposed for 4396 King St East
development. As far as I am aware, none of the residents of the Grand Hill Village, which is in the vicinity
of this development, have been informed of this proposal. Additionally, I understand that the residents
of Deer Ridge Drive may have not been aware till today either. This is hardly consulting widely in the
adjacent communities.
I am a long time resident of Grand Hill Village and served on the joint committee of planners and
residents when the Deer Ridge community was under consideration. One of the major criteria that was
used at that time was the concept of 'Transition'. There was to not to be a sudden increase in intensity
that would have a serious impact on existing communities. I am am very concerned that this proposal
violates that concept and will impose on the existing communities an inner city high rise concept that is
not acceptable in our area.
I think it is important that you set up a committee that will consist of representatives from the Deer
Ridge, Grand Hill Village and Pioneer Tower communities as well as the developer and city planners to
discuss the future developments for our area. The approach you currently are taking is undemocratic
and contradicts the examples that was et some 20 years ago when the Deer Ridge community was being
planned
I am copying this letter to Mayor Vrbanovich and our councilor John Gazzola so they are informed of the
opposition of one citizen.
Yours truly
Gordon Nicholls
Jennifer Leat
Page 229 of 307
Page 230 of 307
From: Colin Yee
Sent: Friday, April 1, 2022 10:47 AM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Development Sportsworld and King St
Hi Andrew,
I was present yesterday for the Zoom meeting regarding this development.
Is this the applicant's website?
https://www.gspgroup.ca/
Thanks,
Colin Yee
Page 231 of 307
From: Claudia K
Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2022 8:36 PM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Follow up - Sportsworld developments
Hi Andrew,
I would like to reiterate the need for addressing traffic concerns, and creating a plan that doesn't disrupt
the community, before implementing these projects.
It appears that the City is willing to overlook real challenges with the current traffic state to move
forward with its own agenda for diversification and growth.
Claudia
Page 232 of 307
From: Slobodan Martinovic
Sent: Monday, October 18, 20215:10 PM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] FW: Notice of development application concerns
Dear Mr. Pinnell.....
I am writing to you as a resident of the Deer Ridge area in which Commercial Campus has made an
application for development at 4396 King St E at 25 Sportsworld Dr, Kitchener.
We wish to express a deep level of concern for how the proposed 30 story, 616 dwelling proposed
development would impact this already very busy and mixed used area.
Dropping a high rise residential development onto the corner of all ready overburdened intersection,
busy with Amazon, Loblaw distribution, Challenger Motor Freight traffic, Toyota plant traffic, Costco
traffic, GO Transit and other bus traffic, not to mention the Hwy 8 on/off ramps, and the exit for the 401
toward London is a recipe for DISASTER.
That location is NOT conducive to a sudden influx of pedestrian and bicycle traffic, not to mention the
strain it would place on the local transit utilization from that location. Politely stated, what would the
city be thinking?
There is no regular grocery store, no daycare, no Beer store neither LCBO, no parks or open green
spaces nearby. It will only push non-resident foot and bicycle traffic into the adjacent neighborhoods
(our area) thereby disrupting and overburdening the scant green space and recreational infrastructure
in those areas, also increasing crime that will negatively impacting our quality of life.
We are AGAINST this application. Please record our sentiments/concerns accordingly.
With respect
Slobodan Martinovic
Page 233 of 307
From: Don Nguyen
Sent: Monday, October 18, 20211:17 PM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Fwd: 200 king street development ?
> Hi,
> I have just been told about this development at 200 king street that I would like more information and
do not currently agree with the proposed plan .
> Don
> - grand hill resident
> Sent from my Whone
Page 234 of 307
From: Lori Wilson
Sent: Monday, October 18, 20213:14 PM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Fwd: Proposed development
> Dear Mr. Pinnell,
> I am writing as a resident of the area in which Commerical Campus has made an application for
development at 4396 King St E at 25 Sportsworld Dr, Kitchener.
> We wish to express a deep level of concern for how the proposed 30 storey, 616 dwelling proposed
development would impact this already very busy and mixed used area.
> Dropping a high rise residential development onto the corner of an ready overburdened intersection,
busy with Challenger Motor Freight traffic, Toyota plant traffic, Costco traffic, GO Transit and other bus
traffic (whoever picked up Greyhound's slack), not to mention the Hwy 8 on/off ramps, is a recipe for
DISASTER.
> That location is NOT conducive to a sudden influx of pedestrian and bicycle traffic, not to mention the
strain it would place on the local transit utilization from that location. Politely stated, what would the
city be thinking?
> There is no LCBO, regular grocery store, daycare, parks or open green spaces nearby. It will only push
non-resident foot and bicycle traffic into the adjacent neighbourhoods, thereby disrupting and
overburdening the scant green space and recreational infrastructure in those areas, negatively
impacting our quality of life.
> We are not in favour. Please record our sentiments accordingly.
> With respect
> Lori & Stephen Cook
Page 235 of 307
the areas to probe and what to look for so that you get a complete picture of the property and community
you're considering.
Kind Regards,
Ciril Nemec
Page 236 of 307
From:
Dana Mousa
Sent:
Monday, October 18, 20213:13 PM
To:
Andrew Pinnell
Subject:
[EXTERNAL] Fwd: Zoning By-law Amendment
From: Dana Mousa
Date: October 18, 2021 at 2:59:41 PM EDT
To: nclrew.lFl(nr�ell.11� II<itcf� e n_e.ir ca
Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment
Dear Mr. Pinnell.....
I am writing to you as a resident of the area in which Commerical
Campus has made an application for development at 4396 King St E at
25 Sportsworld Dr, Kitchener,
We wish to express a deep level of concern for how the proposed 30
storey, 616 dwelling proposed development would impact this already
very busy and mixed used area.
Dropping a high rise residential development onto the corner of an
ready overburdened intersection, busy with Challenger Motor Freight
traffic, Toyota plant traffic, Costco traffic, GO Transit and other bus
traffic (whoever picked up Greyhound's slack), not to mention the Hwy
8 on/off ramps, is a recipe for DISASTER.
That location is NOT conducive to a sudden influx of pedestrian and
bicycle traffic, not to mention the strain it would place on the local
transit utilization from that location. Politely stated, what would the city
be thinking?
There is no LCBO, beer store, regular grocery store, daycare, parks or
open green spaces nearby. It will only push non-resident foot and
bicycle traffic into the adjacent neighborhoods, thereby disrupting and
overburdening the scant green space and recreational infrastructure in
those areas, negatively impacting our quality of life.
We are NOT in favour. Please record our sentiments accordingly.
Thank you,
Page 237 of 307
Dana Mousa
Page 238 of 307
From: Sunny Ng
Sent: Monday, October 18, 20211:08 PM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] High rise building on King St
Hello Andrew,
I just received notification from my neighbour today that the city is planning on building a large high rise
at King St and Sportsworld.
I am a resident of the Deer ridge community just across the street from this proposed site. I am most
disappointed that I did not receive notification of this myself in advance. Me, along with many of my
neighbours did not receive the letter or plan information. We are all very concerned about the impact
this will have on the local traffic and population density. What are the proposed changes for things such
as green space or schools or other infrastructure that would be needed for the increase in population
this high rise would bring?
I would like to formally write to ask the pause this development or to cancel it so that all residents in the
neighbourhood have been given the opportunity to review and understand the impacts.
Thank you,
Sunny Ng
Page 239 of 307
From: Judy Bayly-Hanna
Sent: Friday, March 25, 2022 10:38 AM
To: Craig Dumart; Andrew Pinnell
Cc: John Gazzola
Subject: [EXTERNAL] High Rise Developments at 4396 and 4220 King St East
in Kitchener
Dear Sirs,
As a resident of Grand Hill Drive for almost 30 years I consider myself very fortunate to be enjoying such
a beautiful part of Kitchener. Although the area has changed, grown, developed considerably during this
time,it remains a lovely combination of city/country living.
The most recent commercial developments along King St East/Highway 8 have resulted in a huge
increase in traffic and congestion along Highway 8 as well as Deer Ridge Drive.We already experience
traffic congestion and frequent speeding along Deer Ridge leading to Grand Hill.
The introduction of 2 high rise buildings in this area is of great concern to all of us. Both in terms of our
clean water supply (as we all use well water and septic systems) and the social and physical implications
of a large increase in population in a relatively small area without green space.
I am not against low rise apartment buildings but let's keep them below 8-9 stories.
Will a water study be done?
Will a traffic study be done?
We look forward to discussing these issues further at the March 31st Zoom meeting.
Thank you for considering my thoughts,
Judy Bayly-Hanna
Page 240 of 307
From: Hyacinth Easo
Sent: Monday, October 18, 20214:29 PM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] New developement Sports World
Hello Mr. Pinnell,
As a family living in close proximity to Sports World Drive I wanted to reach out to express concern for
the proposed application for commercial building (mixed use area) for development at 4936 King St East
and Sportsworld Drive.
This is already a very high traffic area whereby adding 616 dwellings could cause further congestion with
direct impact on nearby residential areas.
I hope you will take into consideration I would NOT be in favor of this commerical development,
Sincerely,
Hyacinth Easo
Page 241 of 307
From: Christie & Matt Girdler
Sent: Monday, October 18, 20212:23 PM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] New development proposal near Costco
Dear Mr. Pinnell.....
I am writing to you as a resident of the area in which Commerical Campus has made an application for
development at 4396 King St E at 25 Sportsworld Dr, Kitchener, and only today have I been made aware
of a proposal! I live in deer Ridge and did not receive this flyer until a digital copy was sent to me by an
associate.
We wish to express a deep level of concern for how the proposed 30 storey, 616 dwelling proposed
development would impact this already very busy and mixed used area.
Dropping a high rise residential development onto the corner of an ready overburdened intersection,
busy with Challenger Motor Freight traffic, Toyota plant traffic, Costco traffic, GO Transit and other bus
traffic (whoever picked up Greyhound's slack), not to mention the Hwy 8 on/off ramps, is a recipe for
DISASTER.
That location is NOT conducive to a sudden influx of pedestrian and bicycle traffic, not to mention the
strain it would place on the local transit utilization from that location. Politely stated, what would the
city be thinking?
There is no LCBO, beer store, regular grocery store, daycare, parks or open green spaces nearby. It will
only push non-resident foot and bicycle traffic into the adjacent neighborhoods, thereby disrupting and
overburdening the scant green space and recreational infrastructure in those areas, negatively
impacting our quality of life.
We are NOT in favour. Please record our sentiments accordingly.
With respect,
Christie Girdler
Page 242 of 307
Page 243 of 307
From:
Sent: Monday, October 18, 20211:36 PM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Notice of Development Application 4396 King Street
East
Mr. Pinell
I apologize for this very brief email but I just found out about this Notice for Development application
today.
I live in the Settler's Grove neighbourhood and I can't stress my concerns and disagreement with this
proposal strongly enough.
A 30 story apartment complex is entirely inconsistent with the commercial and residential buildings in
the area.
Traffic flow in the vicinity of King Street and Maple Grove can be severely congested and this will only
exacerbate it, making it even more difficult for the people who already live here to access their
neighbourhoods.
You are looking to put a residential building in the middle of a commercial plaza.
I am definitely not in favour of this development.
Scott Warnez
�11Ji
Virus -free. .e 0.a�oi� ,
Page 244 of 307
From:
MJ
Sent:
Monday, October 18, 20212:55 PM
To:
Andrew Pinnell
Cc:
marie-josee guerin
Subject:
[EXTERNAL] Notice of development application concerns
Dear Mr. Pinnell.....
I am writing to you as a resident of the Deer Ridge area in which Commerical Campus has made an
application for development at 4396 King St E at 25 Sportsworld Dr, Kitchener.
We wish to express a deep level of concern for how the proposed 30 storey, 616 dwelling proposed
development would impact this already very busy and mixed used area.
Dropping a high rise residential development onto the corner of an ready overburdened intersection,
busy with Amazon, Loblaw distribution, Challenger Motor Freight traffic, Toyota plant traffic, Costco
traffic, GO Transit and other bus traffic, not to mention the Hwy 8 on/off ramps, and the exit for the 401
toward London is a recipe for DISASTER.
That location is NOT conducive to a sudden influx of pedestrian and bicycle traffic, not to mention the
strain it would place on the local transit utilization from that location. Politely stated, what would the
city be thinking?
There is no regular grocery store, no daycare, no Beer store neither LCBO, no parks or open green
spaces nearby. It will only push non-resident foot and bicycle traffic into the adjacent neighborhoods
(our area) thereby disrupting and overburdening the scant green space and recreational infrastructure
in those areas, also increasing crime that will negatively impacting our quality of life.
We are AGAINST this application, NOT in favour. Please record our sentiments/concerns accordingly.
With respect
Marie-Josee Guerin
Deer Ridge resident
Sent from my iPad
Page 245 of 307
From: Margaret Gadsby
Sent: Monday, October 18, 20219:10 PM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Notice of Development Application response
For the proposal at 4396 King St and 25 Sportworld Drive
This proposal is just too big! I also remain very angry that notice of this proposal has not been well
circulated to our community.
I and my husband object strongly
Margaret Gadsby
Brad Fairley
Sent from my iPad
Page 246 of 307
From: Tanya Staples
Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 202110:23 AM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Notice of Development Application
Andrew, I trust this message finds you well.
My husband and I only received the flyer for the 4396 King Street East & 25 Sportsworld Drive
development on the 18th of October, 2021— hence the delay in our response.
We do not outright disagree with this development as we know cities need to grow. That being said IF
access to Edgehill Drive at Baxter cannot be blocked off from the King Street access we would not
support this build. We would propose that the access to Edgehill be blocked off right on Baxter at the
Pipers Arms plaza.
Edgehill drive is not a city street, but rather much more like a rural road. There are no sidewalks,
minimal street lights and the residents have turned down/refused to have sidewalks and city services
brought in for more than 30 years. The additional traffic would be dangerous as children roam free on
our streets. Further our street cannot support residents from 616 dwellings as there is no where for
them to walk other than our street and that needs to be preserved. I suspect this will also devalue our
properties as it will not longer be a hidden gem, but rather fully exposed and explored.
The difference between Pioneer Tower Road and Edgehill Drive is beyond striking. Edgehill is a classic
example of "country in the city" and I would be shocked if my neighbours would support such a
development. My husband and I are simply trying to compromise and be reasonable.
Thanks in advance for your time
Take care
Page 247 of 307
From: Jeffrey Dow
Sent: Monday, October 18, 202112:55 PM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Notice of Development King and Sportsworld
Hi Andrew,
Hope all is well. My name is Jeffrey Dow and I am a local CPA and realtor here in KW. I have
lived in Deer Ridge for quite some time now, growing up and now as an adult. I saw this in the
paper and I think it's a bit sneaky each resident in Deer Ridge did not receive this notice.
Could you please provide some information on appeal rights for this building? I am not sure if
you live in the area, but the traffic is already very dense already. Adding another 616 units
(1500+ people to the area) someone is going to get hurt. Between the Costco, Home Depot and
other businesses in the area, this doesn't make a lot of sense. That corner might be one of the
most dangerous in KW.
There is very minimal green space in this area and it is not accessible for those on bicycles. This
building will likely become an additional residence building to Conestoga college and I am
worried it is going to diminish the area for a number of reasons.
Any additional information you can provide would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Jeffrey Dow CPA, CMA, MAcc
Page 248 of 307
From: Susan Gignac
Sent: Monday, October 18, 20211:02 PM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] OPPOSITION TO PROPOSAL OF 4396 KING ST E. & 25
SPORTSWORLD DRIVE
Dear Mr. Pinnell:
Firstly, I want to tell you how shocked I am that I was not made aware of this proposal to my
home address. I reside in
Deer Ridge and would have anticipated some responsibility on the City of Kitchener to inform
our area of this. Instead, I find out today which is the day you would like comments made by.
Let me say this. You should notify everyone in our community and surrounding area of this
proposal and minimally a meeting to discuss. Trying to just sweep this under the carpet quickly
is frankly insulting.
To propose this type of density within that area is absolutely ridiculous. This needs to be
delayed/postponed for further inquiry.
Thankyou
Susan Gignac
Page 249 of 307
From:
Catherine Hale
Sent:
Tuesday, April 5, 2022 8:48 PM
To:
Andrew Pinnell
Subject:
[EXTERNAL] Fwd: Request and Comments re: King & Sportsworld
Development
Hi Andrew,
As a business owner across from the proposed sight on King Street at Sportsworld Drive, I listened to the
virtual meeting held last week. Please include me in your email updates.
I read an article written by a U of W professor specifically about the many high rise towers going up and
proposed in the City of Kitchener. I believe it was in The Record late last week; I will forward it to you
when located. It spoke to the option of "Urban Village", including residential buildings with low height
restrictions, including green space and creating a community. As a participant so wisely commented in
the Q & A session we need to do what is right for future generations, not just ourselves.
As a mature resident, I have seen developers become richer and communities cluttered with high rise
buildings, when the official plan is not followed.
My store is located on King Street and I have "weathered the storm" of the road construction/utilities
being relocated thus far and know that the summer will see the widening of the road and the centre
medium installed for the future ION. I see the traffic during all times of the day and know that four
lanes will not support the development being proposed. To stop traffic for a school bus along
Sportsworld Drive or King Street will cause delays in both directions, resulting in frustrated single car
and commercial truck drivers and therefore ultimately collisions. Please send me the link to the traffic
study that was completed.
I have forwarded the following primarily as I wanted you to view the sentence in bold within this
paragraph:
KWAR is optimistic Waterloo Region
will be bold about housing in their
official plan update
Ending exclusionary zoning to allow for gentle density in our neighbourhoods is critical to filling the
lack of "missing middle" supply for family -sized households.
While Minister Clark states that some municipalities (such as Toronto and Mississauga) were not
ready, KWAR is optimistic that the Region of Waterloo (ROW) will take a more progressive view
toward increasing density. On the development side, the Waterloo region has been exceeding
density targets set by the province. At KWAR's recently held Where Do We Grow From Here
Page 250 of 307
Symposium we learned from the ROW's Commissioner, Rod Regier the Region is proposing policies
for the ROW official plan that would see a tiered approach to missing middle housing by allowing 4
units and up to 4 storeys, as -of -right, on all land currently zoned residential and on any new
greenfield land (residential); and allow a range of 8 to 12 storeys. along specific corridors, such as
the ION corridor.
Thank you Andrew.
Take good care.
All the best,
Catherine Hale
KITCHENER-WATERLOO HOME SALES UP IN
MARCH, AVERAGE PRICE DIPS FROM
FEBRUARY
Homes for Everyone Act
KITCHENER-WATERLOO, ON (April 4, 2022) —The 725 residential homes sold through the Multiple
Listing Service® System (MLS® System) of the Kitchener -Waterloo Association of REALTORS®
(KWAR) in March 2022 is a decrease of 27.1 per cent compared to March 2021, which continues to
hold the record for most home sales in a single month. On a month -over -month basis, sales in March
were up 19.4 per cent compared to February 2022. The previous ten-year average number of
residential sales for March is 599.
Page 251 of 307
"The skyrocketing prices of the last two months took a bit of a breather in March, with the overall
average price dipping five per cent compared to what we saw in February," said Megan Bell,
President of KWAR. "While it is too soon to draw conclusions from just one month of home sales,
know many will be comforted to see a leveling off on the average price, no matter how incremental."
Total residential sales in March included 416 detached (down 29.7 per cent from March 2021), and
114 condominium units (down 9.5 per cent). Sales also included 64 semi-detached homes (down
17.9 per cent) and 131 townhouses (down 33.8 per cent).
In March, the average sale price for all residential properties in the Kitchener -Waterloo area was
$960,181. This represents a 25.5 per cent increase over March 2021 and a 4.6 per cent decrease
compared to February 2022.
The average price of a detached home was $1,132,637. This represents a
25.9 per cent increase from March 2021 and a decrease 6.4 per cent
compared to February 2022.
The average sale price for an apartment -style condominium was $565,782.
This represents an increase of 33.4 per cent from March 2021 and a
decrease of 1.2 per cent compared to February 2022.
The average sale price for a townhouse was $796,696. This represents a
27.4 per cent increase from March 2021 and a decrease of 7.6 per cent
compared to February 2022.
The average sale price for a semi was $876,371. This represents an increase
of 34.5 per cent compared to March 2021 and a decrease of 5.0 per cent
compared to February 2022.
Page 252 of 307
March Average Sales Price - By Property Type
Shgle d~aHy 1111 lbwnho use 0 d:,r,,ndo �� emu-E)etached Ell AH Pmpea ty'Fypes
$1.W
$1.21M
$1.011 i
$0 8M
$0.61M
$0.1111V
$0,211A
^r, f3, 'ru aaa. �� � nx.xrr ��,„ .��fa m. f uroa.� x 1254^'r�u
1,020 2021... "lJwi�... c`020 2021 2022
2022... 2020 2021.... 022 ... 2020 2l'21 ... 2022 ... xfli`Ci... 1021 .... 2022
....
Sio qr e 4 zanily Townhouse Condo Semi Dddcrhed AIII Property Types
Iti"[Ir,lCa' nei-VVaYe�icur Fasscr(' a loo of Rll ALT OlFf : ,' )
: Eaa',Pr rl.rlra gat7unt i�, aa�Ev �r��nrfYi cab €ca.fwRV CJM a i c fmin App 4 2022
KWAR cautions that average sale price information can be useful in establishing long-term trends but should not
be used as an indicator that specific properties have increased or decreased in value. The MLS°O Home Price
Index (HPI) provides the best way to gauge price trends because averages are strongly distorted by changes in
the mix of sales activity from one month to the next.
Page 253 of 307
The MLS® HPI composite benchmark price for all residential properties in Kitchener -Waterloo was
$960,100 in March. This represents a 29.6 per cent increase over March 2021 and a 1.5 per cent
decrease compared to February 2022.
The benchmark price for a detached home was $1,046,200. This represents a
28.1 per cent increase from March 2021 and 4.0 per cent decrease compared
to February 2022.
c;
The benchmark price for an apartment -style condominium was $484,000.
This represents a 32.9 per cent increase from March 2021 and a 4.2 per cent
increase compared to February 2022.
The benchmark price for a townhouse is $765,500. This represents a 41.3 per
cent increase from March 2021 and a 4.9 per cent increase compared to
February 2022.
Page 254 of 307
MLS ` om(,,,,� Price Index
"ck (Ii tx> lk rrrrr rrr,.a^iv
ropedy Type (AppOos to wV gajbs�
Karttf@';'W wrarawues
Wed taw Rnqe:
Much 2016 to Mawrwctw 2022
HN wum Benchmark Friar Adftq taw atf'
J,Appres to aft, tabs)
Q �Ipl IV (aa ) Wild SOW p6nts & w tho Chm, t to stwow rniuMpW datetvahieWbots
Bawndwr'awaifk Prim
r roporty Type Setection Aj>pho$ aua �,u l U,%bs)
auaat au VWU".
8�D tl?M wrp CW QW d°iV �w'W tl!hW &'wk C+k
KJtrh n*r- Wrutnra _- Composifte Kftd* er- W'aKau, -- Mingle Family Kitchener W wu400 _- Townhouse Ki hen er-Wyater . Apartment
t
IN III
hEewW koas with i wa*s am no4 i bora Ifie HN W;°:onlact yww.x Wal REALTOR i- tor exclusNe rww'W 6n <W kh n,"0itwxeNxA WvwA pricio umnkwma ,am
uwtc*, K6tn�k'wwmawrum wrvw'awtwamta wu Assouatkoi of REAL I RS"
"Even though the average price decreased across all property types on a month-to-month basis, the
MLS® HPI showed continued monthly gains for both townhouse and apartment property types,"
notes Bell. "As the province feels its way out of the pandemic, we are beginning to see some very
preliminary signs of a potential cooling. We are not seeing quite as many multiple offers and some
offers are coming in with conditions. Of course, when we say cooling, we're talking about a market
that has been scorching hot which is why we are pleased to see this happening."
There were 1,131 new listings added to the MLS® System in KW and area last month, a decrease
16.8 per cent compared to the record topping number of listings added in March of last year, and a
28.0 per cent increase compared to the previous ten-year average for March.
The total number of homes available for sale in active status at the end of March was 441, an
increase of 1.1 per cent compared to March of last year, and 59.0 per cent below the previous ten-
year average of 1,072 listings for March.
Page 255 of 307
The number of months of inventory nudged up to 0.7 months in March from 0.5 months in February.
Inventory has been under the one-month mark since October 2020. The number of months of
inventory represents how long it would take to sell off current inventories at the current rate of sales.
The average number of days to sell in March was 8 days, the same as it was in March 2021. The
previous 5 -year average is 16 days.
The More Homes for Everyone Act
Statement from KWAR President Megan Bell
Last week the Government of Ontario introduced a new bill, the More Homes for Everyone Act to
address the province's housing affordability crisis.
While we welcome several aspects of the proposed More Homes for Everyone bill, such as
measures to support more timely municipal decision making and developing policies and tools to
support multi -generational homes in existing neighbourhoods—bolder actions to increase supply
were notably missing.
Ontario's Housing Affordability Task Force had recommended limiting exclusionary zoning and
allowing "as of right" residential housing up to four units and up to four storeys on a single
residential lot. Instead, the government has committed to the Task Force's recommendations as
part of a "long term roadmap".
KWAR is optimistic Waterloo Region
will be bold about housing in their
official plan update
Ending exclusionary zoning to allow for gentle density in our neighbourhoods is critical to filling the
lack of "missing middle" supply for family -sized households.
While Minister Clark states that some municipalities (such as Toronto and Mississauga) were not
ready, KWAR is optimistic that the Region of Waterloo (ROW) will take a more progressive view
toward increasing density. On the development side, the Waterloo region has been exceeding
density targets set by the province. At KWAR's recently held Where Do We Grow From Here
Symposium we learned from the ROW's Commissioner, Rod Regier the Region is proposing policies
for the ROW official plan that would see a tiered approach to missing middle housing by allowing 4
units and up to 4 storeys, as -of -right, on all land currently zoned residential and on any new
greenfield land (residential); and allow a range of 8 to 12 storeys, along specific corridors, such as
the ION corridor.
Page 256 of 307
KWAR encourages the Region of Waterloo to stay the course on its bold proposals for its Regional
Official Plan and create ways to bring a broad range of housing options to our community.
Those requiring specific information on property values should contact a localREALTOR& Working
with a Realtor is the best way to get a complete picture of the property and community you are
considering.
View our HPI tool here to learn more: https://kwar.ca/h pi -d ash board
SaKes,~By Property Type
Single Pam:y�NNNN,Tbwmoouse — Condm—Gemi-Dcaooeu�AnPmpcnyTypes
1,200
IM
400
ME
D
1-2009 1a010 1-2011 1-2012 1-2013 1-2014 1am15 1a016 1-2o17 1-2018 1-2019 1-2020 1-2021 1-2022
mxhcnet-WotenomAssociation uYREm-T)R5,J�r
Page 257 of 307
Months Supply of Homes for Sale
`w.O
4 �O
20
m
— Kitchenei -Watedoo AssocIafion of REALTORS(R)
00 T ................................................. r. �l ................................................... .................................................. r y III ................................................... I .................................................. I .................................................. ................................................... III .................................................. v ................................................... T .................................................. III ..........
1-2009 1-2010 1-x011 1-2012 1-x013 1-2014 1-2015 -2016 1 -2017' 1-2018 T-2019 1-2020 1-2021 1-2022
KJVcheneI- VVaIei loo Asscic,.Iaflon (tf REIALC OR,&r,J
F� ,�,wlh: data poii it is ono- rinoi ith of a,,wfivily rs fi nm ApI 14, 2022
Page 258 of 307
Historical Median Sales Price — By Property Type
Median Sales Price - By Property Type
Slngle Fairnlily Townt)ouse — Condo — fie rnd-Detached — All Pmpety Types
$1 21M
$1 01M
$0 81M
$C1.61 a1
$0 41m
$0 21M
$0 v .... ... ..o.. w w w I w w w w W,roe w w w w0 r"W w w w - - - - - - - - - ---
1-2009 1-2010 1-`011 1 -2()l 2 1-2013 1-2014 1 -20 15 1,2016 1-2017 1.018 1.2019 1-2020 1-2021 1 .2022
loosocl�,Oion (:wf RE'iAL TOF'IS,',,,
xClh cjata I'"wit is orwf-,, rn,,,n,�ffi (,)I achvi�y IDaa horin Apill 4 2022
Page 259 of 307
Historical Average Sales Price — By Property Type
Average Sales Price - By Property Type
Nuffm SIngle FaimlIy — Townhouse ... - Condo —, Seml-Defached — All PropeNy Types
$1AM
$1.2M
$1 01M
11.81M
$ 0.6 IIV
$0( 11.1
$U 2M
$0 -------- --------
I-ZXG 1-2010 1-2011 1-2012 1.24713E 1.2014 1-2015 1.24712 1.2017 1-2018 1-2019 1.2020 1-2021 1-2022
(,,rf R1:1:A1-,MRS(r,)
1:1,1r,wh d"A"I pol I ;t Is (7I Icy r I cqIhi of �,id IV ify 11 rot,,,i IV fi onn Api I1 4 2()22
Page 260 of 307
Average Days on Market Chart
60
0
N ita,faa rneW-Waate.a' :,aaa As, a'aa:faflc)iru of RE AL Ut R; 04)
CMr..µ.µ.µ.µ.µ.µ.µ.µ dµ.µ.µ.µ.µ.µ.µ.µ.µ.„ r µ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... µ.r .... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .... I„ µ.........................Iµ 7 .V
1-21119 1-2010 1.2011 1-2012 1.2013 1 -20 14 1.2015 1.2016 1-2017 1.2018 1-2019 2()20 1.2021 1•2022
^,eta,[ietie�-ftWedw ooAw,,ocivatiuic of FRI° ALTORSO)
SO)
I� ,�ac.k� elaaf,a ��Eainf ins raraea o�i�¢riii.fi ��l` aaa�fw�f1 laa'^hfaa i�, f�EkraaAl��il �k,;vl!f,M2?
KWAR cautions that average sale price information can be useful in establishing long term trends but should not be
used as an indicator that specific properties have increased or decreased in value. The average sale price is calculated
based on the total dollar volume of all properties sold. Months Supply is the inventory of homes for sale at the end of
a given month, divided by the average monthly closed sales from the last 12 months Those requiring specific
information on property values should contact a local REALTOR®. REALTORS® have their fingers on the pulse of the
market. They know the questions to ask, the areas to probe and what to look for so that you get a complete picture of
the property and community you're considering.
Kind Regards,
Ciril Nemec
Page 261 of 307
From:
Karen Marshall
Sent:
Sunday, October 24, 20217:16 AM
To:
Andrew Pinnell
Subject:
[EXTERNAL] Opposition to Zoning Change Proposal at Sportsworld
Drive and King
Dear Mr. Pinnel,
I am writing today in opposition to the zoning change proposal for the development at
Sportworld Drive and King Street for the following reasons:
1. It will result in additional traffic congestion, which is already pretty heavy. In addition,
until an exit ramp between Highway 8 and the 401 westwards is finished there is literally no
more capacity for traffic along King Street towards the 401 exit.
2. A high rise building is not in keeping with the rest of the area which is all low rise and
will significantly impact the character of the area. This area is not meant to be a city centre -
type environment.
3. This zoning change will be the gateway to future zoning changes and further high rise
developments. I have seen all to well what has happened in areas such as North York and in
Mississauga... which is why I left.
I am also concerned with what little information was made available to our community with
respect to this proposal. I would request that you contact me directly with any future dates
for Information/Feedback sessions as I fully intend to be an active voice of opposition going
forward.
Thank you for your consideration,
Karen Marshall
Page 262 of 307
From:
Dianne Beletz
Sent:
Monday, October 18, 20214:34 PM
To:
Andrew Pinnell
Cc:
Dianne Beletz
Subject:
[EXTERNAL] Proposed Development 4396 King St. East, Kitehener
Dear Mr. Pinnell.....
I am writing to you as a resident of the area in which Commerical Campus has made an application for
development at 4396 King St E at 25 Sportsworld Dr, Kitchener.
We wish to express a deep level of concern for how the proposed 30 storey, 616 dwelling proposed
development would impact this already very busy and mixed used area.
Dropping a high rise residential development onto the corner of an ready overburdened intersection,
busy with Challenger Motor Freight traffic, Toyota plant traffic, Costco traffic, GO Transit and other bus
traffic (whoever picked up Greyhound's slack), not to mention the Hwy 8 on/off ramps, is a recipe for
DISASTER.
That location is NOT conducive to a sudden influx of pedestrian and bicycle traffic, not to mention the
strain it would place on the local transit utilization from that location. Politely stated, what would the
city be thinking?
There is no LCBO, beer store, regular grocery store, daycare, parks or open green spaces nearby. It will
only push non-resident foot and bicycle traffic into the adjacent neighborhoods, thereby disrupting and
overburdening the scant green space and recreational infrastructure in those areas, negatively
impacting our quality of life.
We are NOT in favour. Please record our sentiments accordingly.
With respect,
Dianne Beletz
Deerridge Neighbourhood
Page 263 of 307
From: fbeletz
Sent: Monday, October 18, 20214:45 PM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Proposed development 4396 king street east.
Dear Mr. Pinnell
First of all I am very disturbed that the city of kitchener did not formally circulate such a notice to at
least the residents of the deerridge area as it will greatly affect us on a very personnel level and affect
our quality of life given that we are essentially an island of residents.
I am deeply disturbed that there is no planning of any greenspace for such as development and that the
intended greenspace will likely be to utilize what is present for the deerridge and area. Those areas were
established yes for other people as well as deerridge residents but I suspect only in the deerridge
development plan for those immediate residents. to add such a population and expect it to blend into
what has been assigned for a landlocked upper level residential area will be problematic selfish as that
may sound. There needs to be more green space added to the area if this is at all even remotely
considered.
Also if this goes ahead which it should not, will the city undertake major roadway expansions to allow
for all the current and growing 401 london bound traffic and all the added traffic from 600 units and the
expected regular growth.
and now all the other stuff too below....
I am writing to you as a resident of the area in which Commerical Campus has made an application for
development at 4396 King St E at 25 Sportsworld Dr, Kitchener,
We wish to express a deep level of concern for how the proposed 30 storey, 616 dwelling proposed
development would impact this already very busy and mixed used area.
Dropping a high rise residential development onto the corner of an ready overburdened intersection,
busy with Challenger Motor Freight traffic, Toyota plant traffic, Costco traffic, GO Transit and other bus
traffic (whoever picked up Greyhound's slack), not to mention the Hwy 8 on/off ramps, is a recipe for
DISASTER.
That location is NOT conducive to a sudden influx of pedestrian and bicycle traffic, not to mention the
strain it would place on the local transit utilization from that location. Politely stated, what would the
city be thinking?
There is no LCBO, beer store, regular grocery store, daycare, parks or open green spaces nearby. It will
Page 264 of 307
only push non-resident foot and bicycle traffic into the adjacent neighborhoods, thereby disrupting and
overburdening the scant green space and recreational infrastructure in those areas, negatively
impacting our quality of life.
We are NOT in favour. Please record our sentiments accordingly.
With respect
Frank Beletz
Sent from my Galaxy
Page 265 of 307
From:
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2022 3:40 PM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Proposed Development at - 4396 King St. E. & 25
Sportsworld Dr.
Hi Andrew,
My apologies for missing your April 14th deadline in voicing any concerns regarding the above noted
development and planning application.
I attended the March 31St on line two hour public information meeting and listened to everyone's
presentation, as well as the concerns expressed by the public regarding the overall height of the towers
and proposed residential density at this confined retail commercial location.
Please keep me informed on the progress of your staff report for this application, and let me know if any
additional public meetings will be scheduled to address the public's concerns expressed in the above
noted March 31St meeting.
Thank you for your kind consideration in this matter.
Best Regards,
Tony Bocchino
Page 266 of 307
From:
NANCY WOOLNER
Sent:
Monday, October 18, 20217:26 PM
To:
Andrew Pinnell
Subject:
[EXTERNAL] Proposed King/Sportsworld development
Dear Mr. Pinell...
As a long time resident of the area, I am quite concerned about the rather large proposed development in
the vicinity of our neighbourhood. Some of my concerns are lack of green space, limited parking,
increased traffic in the area.
I feel the the city is running roughed shod over the affected residents and the city should allow more time
for consulting the affected neighbourhoods.
Regards
Nancy Woolner
Page 267 of 307
From:
Ken Osborne
Sent:
Friday, April 8, 2022 2:54 PM
To:
Andrew Pinnell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: 4396 King Street East & 25 Sportsworld Drive
Further Clarification:on this Development required.
Does this development have a name?
Could you provide me with the name of the Developer? And contact information?
I would like to know the upcoming planning and city/regional council events scheduled for this
development.
Do you know the distance from the or 4396 King Street East & 25 Sportsworld Drive
development to the Grand River Valley and then to the Grand River?
Because of a lack of green space parks:
Have you projected the additional walking, bicycle and car traffic on Edgehill Drive and
Pioneer Tower Road coming from the residents of these towers? The residents will need
to get out of their units for air and exercise. Need I say recreate? And a reminder there
are no sidewalks or bicycle paths on these streets.
If the questions here and their implied concerns are too much for you to handle or
outside your scope, I would appreciate it if you would please forward them on to a proper
liaison to be answered.
Sincerely
Ken Osborne
Virus -free. ...................w. aY .:I;,.�.gim .
Page 268 of 307
From: Bill Dow
Sent: Monday, November 1, 20217:46 PM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Comments regarding 4396 King Street East & 25
Sportsworld Drive (Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law
Amendment)
My address s
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 19, 2021, at 5:50 PM, Andrew Pinnell < rn_dre` .Piiij elll. .I1 tchener.,ca> wrote:
Hello,
Thank you for your comments regarding the subject development applications. So
far, I have received a significant amount of feedback from the community regarding
these applications.
Your comments may be considered and summarized, as part of the planning
process, in the following ways:
• In the preparation of a `What We Heard' summary report;
• As part of my Planning analysis; and
• In a recommendation report to Council.
Here are the next steps in the planning process:
<image001 Jpg>
I will reach out to you with the details of the upcoming Neighbourhood Meeting,
when it is scheduled.
I can confirm that I have added you to the circulation list and you will receive further
updates regarding these applications. However, I request that you please provide
me with your mailing address as well.
Learn more about the project, share your thoughts and understand your appeal
rights, visit.........................Jkil.tp,lh lmeirX /p.![22.!]ii.Iig rl�lliica�ions.
Sincerely,
Andrew Pinnell, MCIP, RPP
Senior Planner I Planning Division I City of Kitchener
519-741-2200 x7668 I TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 andrew.pinnell@kitchener.ca
<1mage003.png>
Page 269 of 307
From: S Capling
Sent: Friday, October 22, 20218:59 AM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Comments regarding 4396 King Street East & 25
Sportsworld Drive (Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law
Amendment)
Hi Andrew,
Thank you for the expedient response.
I look forward to being included in the planned neighbourhood meeting.
I included my address in my initial email but here it is again for quick reference.
regards,
Steve Capling
On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 5:50 PM Andrew Pinnell <Andrew.Pinnell @kitchener.ca> wrote:
Hello,
Thank you for your comments regarding the subject development applications. So far, I have
received a significant amount of feedback from the community regarding these applications.
Your comments may be considered and summarized, as part of the planning process, in the
following ways:
• In the preparation of a `What We Heard' summary report;
• As part of my Planning analysis; and
• In a recommendation report to Council.
Here are the next steps in the planning process:
Page 270 of 307
ts Z)� 'n'!h in backto fmidenhwho partibipated
Midon by Phinnimg Comm iftep aind Cily Council 4),' jin inlairmationsesslions
I will reach out to you with the details of the upcoming Neighbourhood K8eetnQ, when it is
scheduled.
| can confirm that | have added you tothe circulation list and you will receive further updates
regarding these applications. However, / request that you please provide nna with your mailing
address as well.
Learn more about the project, share your thoughts and understand your appeal rights, visit
Sincerely,
Andrew Pinnell, MCIP, RPP
Senior Planner | Planning Division | City of Kitchener
Page 271 of 307
From:
Susan Leat
Sent:
Sunday, April 2'20224:57PM
To:
Andrew Pinnell
Subject:
[EXTERNAL] RE: Development at 4396 King Street
You suggested at the Public meeting last Thursday that I could request a breakdown of how many
people (and percentage) were against the proposed development, so I am taking you up on that offer.
So I would like to know the number and percentage of people who expressed that they were against this
development AS IT IS PROPOSED including all those who were obviously against, even though they may
not have specifically stated this.
TV
was particularly useful to know about the feedback that you have received so far and that the
Information session is still an opportunity for feedback. I
where it is available. And I will look out for the Information Session, and I am also on the list to be
notified about this.
IMITIM
From: Andrew Pinnell
Sent: J0'Oct-219:51AM
To: Susan Leat
Subject: RE: Development at 4396 King Street
Hi Susan,
How does Friday at 9:00am sound?
Page 272 of 307
Andrew Pinnell, MCIP, RPP
Senior Planner I Planning Division I City of Kitchener
519-741-2200 x7668 I TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 andrew.pinnell@kitchener.ca
in
Ju Mumftv
,
From: Susan Leat
Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 20219:37 AM
To: Andrew Pinnell <A,indirew.111i. nr�ellll� II<itdheinerxa>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Development at 4396 King Street
'" I3lTiM
I would be more than happy1 this afternoon doesn't work for
me. I can do anytime tomorrow or Friday, if you would like to suggest a time.
From: Andrew Pinnell<Aind.hemi.Piilrninellll_��._kitcheneir.ca.>
Sent: 19 -Oct -21 5:54 PM
To: Susan Leat
Cc: John Gazzola <,Dalnn, zol I irtclheineir.ca>; Garett Stevenson < a ret:t.:_S.teveinsein...... kir�cheineir.ca>
.... ......... @ ..__.... ........ .......@..........................................................
Subject: RE: Development at 4396 King Street
Hi Susan,
Thanks for your comments. We have received a significant amount of feedback from the
neighbourhood. I should let you know that the October 181h 'deadline' is not the end of the public
consultation process by any means. We have to put a date on the postcard / newspaper notice in order
to propose a target for residents to get back to us by.
I would be happy to discuss this application with you later tomorrow afternoon. Could I call you at
3:30pm? If so, what number should I call you on?
Thanks,
Andrew Pinnell, MCIP, RPP
Senior Planner I Planning Division I City of Kitchener
519-741-2200 x7668 I TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 andrew.pinnell@kitchener.ca
�KN,��kffi;; 4 :." d,
„fnr/nU�IIU MST
Page 273 of 307
From: Susan Leat
Sent: Monday, October 18, 20211:33 PM
To: Andrew Pinnell <find.ir .,lf iirnrn ]II kil.tclheiner cp
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Development at 4396 King Street
Importance: High
Dear Mr. Pinell,
I have only just become aware (within the last hour) of this proposed zoning change and development.
As far as I am aware, none of the residents of the Grand Hill Village, which is in the vicinity of this
development, have been informed of this proposal. And as President of the GHVA, I have also not been
informed. Additionally, I understand that the residents of Deer Ridge Drive may have not been aware till
today either. This is hardly consulting gathering widely.
I see that the deadline for comments is TODAY. As President of the Grand Hill Village Association, I am
asking for an extension of this Stage 1 deadline, so that we have time to study this and make our
comments. I think another 2 weeks would be reasonable.
Jennifer Leat
Jennifer Leat
Page 274 of 307
From: Martha Holt
Sent: Monday, October 18, 20214:06 PM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Notice of Development Application, 4396 King St. E.
& 25 Sportsworld Drive
Dear Mr. Pinnell.....
I am writing to you as a resident of the area in which Commerical Campus
has made an application for development at 4396 King St E at 25
Sportsworld Dr, Kitchener,
We wish to express a deep level of concern for how the proposed 30
storey, 616 dwelling proposed development would impact this already very
busy and mixed used area.
Dropping a high rise residential development onto the corner of an ready
overburdened intersection, busy with Challenger Motor Freight traffic,
Toyota plant traffic, Costco traffic, GO Transit and other bus traffic
(whoever picked up Greyhound's slack), not to mention the Hwy 8 on/off
ramps, is a recipe for DISASTER.
That location is NOT conducive to a sudden influx of pedestrian and bicycle
traffic, not to mention the strain it would place on the local transit
utilization from that location. We are firmly against the development
getting approval.
There is no LCBO, beer store, regular grocery store, daycare, parks or open
green spaces nearby. It will only push non-resident foot and bicycle traffic
into the adjacent neighborhoods, thereby disrupting and overburdening
the scant green space and recreational infrastructure in those areas,
negatively impacting our quality of life.
We are NOT in favour. Please record our sentiments accordingly.
With respect,
Martha Holt and Brad Lewis
Page 275 of 307
From:
Sent: Friday, October 8, 202111:32 AM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Question from Bob McColl
Second is ground water. Almost all of the homes in the Pine Grove neighbourhood are still on private
wells. Will there be a Hyrogeoloic Impact study on the effect this project will have on our drinking
water?
If I understand correctly, the next step will be a public meeting/consultation. Can you inform me as to
what format that will be and when it will occur?
From: Andrew Pinnell [mailto:Andrew.Pinnell@kitchener.ca]
Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2021 5:54 PM
To:
Cc: Garett Stevenson; Brian Bateman
Subject: RE: Question from Bob McColl
Hi Bob,
The development proposal you likely saw was for 4396 King St E & 25 Sportsworld Drive. More
information regarding this Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment can be found on our
Kitchener Planning Applications webpage. Please let me know if you have any specific questions.
Thanks,
Andrew Pinnell, MCIP, RPP
Senior Planner I Planning Division I City of Kitchener
519-741-2200 x7668 I TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 andrew.pinnell@kitchener.ca
.... .......�f q fu
Page 276 of 307
From: Brian Bateman <Brian.Bateman@kitchener.ca>
Sent: Thursday, October 7, 202112:23 PM
To:
Cc: Andrew Pinnell <Andrew.Pin nelI@kitchener.ca>; Garett Stevenson
<Garett.Stevenson@kitchener.ca>
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] Question from Bob McColl
Hi Bob,
I will ask Andrew Pinnell to send that to you.
Brian
From:
Sent: Thursday, October 7, 202112:05 PM
To: Brian Bateman <Brian.Bateman@kitchener.ca>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Question from Bob McColl
Hello Brian,
A few weeks ago there was a City notice in the Record concerning a proposed development at the
corner of King St and Sportsworld Dr. I clipped it out of the paper so I could follow up on it later.
Unfortunately, I have misplaced that clipping.
Can you send me the link to info concerning this project?
Cheers,
Bob
Page 277 of 307
From: Scott Cook
Sent: Monday, October 18, 20212:36 PM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re:4396 King Street - Potential Development
Dear Mr. Pinnell
I am a concerned resident writing regarding the proposed development of a 30 story high
apartment building at 25 Sportsworld Drive -4396 King Street Kitchener. My wife and I wish to
object strongly to this development.
The reasons we are opposed to the 616 unit apartment building are as follows:
1.
1. Highway safety - traffic going to and from the 401 nearby is already strained
and dangerous
2. Traffic generation from the development itself - this is already a busy
corner. Dropping a 616 unit building will make this intersection impossible to
navigate. Deer Ridge is already difficult to access during peak hours.
3. Layout and density of building - There are no regular grocery stores, daycares,
schools, parks nearby. This will push non-resident foot/bike traffic into the
adjacent neighbouhood overburdening our scant green space.
4. Road access - the intersections going around Deer Ridge and the commercial
buildings on King are already overburdened. We have major concerns about
access for emergency vehicles being able to access our neighbourhood during
both the building phase and completion phase.
Please ensure that our remarks have been formally registered in objection to this
project.
Sincerely,
Scott Cook and Alison Delicaet
Page 278 of 307
From: VPS
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 20217:44 PM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re Application for development at 4396 King St E at
Sportsworld Dr, Kitchener
Dear Mr. Pinnell,
I am writing to you as a resident of the area in which Commercial Campus has made an
application for development at 4396 King St E at 25 Sportsworld Dr, Kitchener,
We wish to express a deep level of concern for how the proposed 30 storey, 616 dwelling
proposed development would impact this already very busy and mixed used area.
Dropping a high rise residential development onto the corner of an ready overburdened
intersection, busy with Challenger Motor Freight traffic, Toyota plant traffic, Costco traffic, GO
Transit and other bus traffic (whoever picked up Greyhound's slack), not to mention the Hwy 8
on/off ramps, is a recipe for DISASTER.
That location is NOT conducive to a sudden influx of people and traffic, it's already insane busy
as it is.
We are NOT in favour. Please record our sentiments accordingly.
With respect,
Chad Kreutzweiser
Page 279 of 307
From:
Marcel Portelance
Sent:
Monday, October 18, 20211:33 PM
To:
Andrew Pinnell
Subject:
[EXTERNAL] regarding 4396 king street east and 25 sportworld dr
Andrew this subject of new construction of new buildings on this site has just been brought to my
attention .
Now I am all in for new development but:
I would like to voice my concerns on a couple of very important matters.
1) What will be done to reduce the traffic on King street east. We already have a large congestion of
traffic on King st trying to go west on the 401 and then the same congestion coming back from traffic
coming from the west 401. This will now become even worse from both the new developments planned
in the same area and of course the ION.
I think that the city should be planning and implementing traffic reduction in this area first and
foremost. Why has the highway 8 exit and entrance from the 401 west not been planned and
implemented as of yet . This would eliminate most, if not all, traffic congestion in this area. All vehicle
and transport truck traffic coming from 8 west and from sportsworld dr wanting to go west on the 401
would be removed and the same with the 401 east traffic exiting to come into Kitchener/Waterloo. I just
can't imagine trying to navigate King street with all this new traffic and with an ION train on top of that
causing more backups everyday .
2) 1 am all in for WELL PLANNED new development but 30 storeys is too much for this area.
Andrew, I live in the Edgehill area and have seen first hand the ever increasing traffic on king street with
all the new development that has taken place over the past 20 years. Please note it is not the new
development that I resent IT IS the lack of proper traffic planning and road construction that I have a
major concern with.
Something has to be done before more is added.
Appreciate hearing back from you on this matter.
Regards
M a I :ITeI
Page 280 of 307
From:
Carrie Mountford
Sent:
Monday, October 18, 20213:40 PM
To:
Andrew Pinnell
Subject:
[EXTERNAL] Response for 4396 King St E & 25 Sportsworld Dr
Development
Dear Mr. Pinnell,
I am writing as a current resident, tax -paying citizen of the area of the proposed development at 4396
King St E and 25 Sportsworld Dr.
I wish to express extreme concern for the proposed 30 storey, 616 dwelling development, and the
impact that it would have on this area, which is already extremely busy, and under current strain.
Placing a building of that size into that location further burdens an already overwhelmed intersection,
which already sees significant traffic from all freight traffic and vehicles going to the 401 West bound
from highway 8, in addition to all traffic from businesses and industrial facilities in the area (e.g. Toyota
Manufacturing, Challenger Motor Freight, Amazon Warehouse, GP Transit to name a few). This
intersection already has significant issues with traffic flowing through it, at any given point each day for
the current residents of the area. Allowing a high-density residential structure would further increase
the strain and negatively impact the safety of this intersection.
The intersection currently is not conducive to pedestrians nor bicycle traffic, nor safe. With the
significant increase in the population of both with the proposed development, the current busing
system would also be burdened.
The area is also a food desert - there is no proper grocery store, amenities, other than a membership
required store.
The proposed development and space leave no room for the creation of green space. That area already
is lacking in green and recreational infrastructure; a development that large will push those residents
into adjacent neighbourhoods, disrupting and overburdening the scant amounts of green space in the
immediate surrounding areas, furthering the negative impact of the quality of life to the current
residents of the area.
On behalf of myself and my household, we are adamantly NOT in favour of the proposal. Please record
our sentiments accordingly.
Regards,
Carrie Mountford
Page 281 of 307
From: Kyle Loveless
Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2022 8:46 PM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Support for 4396 King St. E. and 25 Sportsworld Dr
Hi,
Just writing in as a Kitchener resident, who supports building lots of dense housing quickly - and support
these developments.
While there maybe concerns about traffic, we need to start requiring non -car solutions (like the planned
LRT) - rather than building out.
Thanks!
Kyle
Page 282 of 307
From: Mike and Jen Hughes
Sent: Thursday, October 28, 202110:33 AM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Cc: Michael Hughesl
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Urban Design Report - 4396 King St
Hello, I'm a resident of Kitchener's Deer Ridge neighbourhood. I'm writing to indicate that I don't
support the zoning of a 30 storey building at 4396 King Street.
I do NOT think that the zoning should be changed for the following reasons:
1. The intersection at Sportsworld Drive and King Street is already over -congested. And until an
exit ramp between Highway 8 and the 401 westwards is built, there is NO MORE capacity for traffic
along King Street between the off -ramp of Hwy 8 and the exit to the 401 in the London direction.
My daughter walks across this intersection to get to work at Moose Winooski's and it's very, very
busy. Driving her to school from that intersection takes ages for the light to change. And, with the
LRT scheduled to go through that area, we will have even more congestion. We chose this area for
the "quick" access to the 401. However, whenever visitors come to our home, they comment on the
requirement to add more time to their travel time to visit us to account for the long wait to enter
and exit our development. Several people from KW and other areas of Ontario have told me that
they have never seen such a long wait at lights to exit a development ever. We also have a long wait
at the only other exit point from our neighbourhood (traffic light at Deer Ridge and King St).
2. It will change the character of this area of Kitchener. It is not meant to be a city centre -type
environment. It was agreed when the Deer Ridge area was developed that the area would not be
impacted in terms of the character of the area. A thirty storey building is not compatible with the
rest of the area which is all low rise and it will impact the character of the area. The fact that it is all
low-rise around it can be seen from the developers own proposal at
https:[/app2.kitchener.ca/... /634205 Urban%20Design.... There is NO OTHER high rise in the area.
3. This zoning change will lead to a precedent of further high-rise development, which is NOT
consistent with the area. It is NOT a city centre.
Thanks so much for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Jennifer and Michael Hughes
Page 283 of 307
From: Mohanad Shaqo
Sent: Monday, October 18, 20213:00 PM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Zoning By-law Amendment
Dear Mr. Pinnell.....
I am writing to you as a resident of the area in which Commerical Campus has made an application for
development at 4396 King St E at 25 Sportsworld Dr, Kitchener,
We wish to express a deep level of concern for how the proposed 30 storey, 616 dwelling proposed
development would impact this already very busy and mixed used area.
Dropping a high rise residential development onto the corner of an ready overburdened intersection,
busy with Challenger Motor Freight traffic, Toyota plant traffic, Costco traffic, GO Transit and other bus
traffic (whoever picked up Greyhound's slack), not to mention the Hwy 8 on/off ramps, is a recipe for
DISASTER.
That location is NOT conducive to a sudden influx of pedestrian and bicycle traffic, not to mention the
strain it would place on the local transit utilization from that location. Politely stated, what would the
city be thinking?
There is no LCBO, beer store, regular grocery store, daycare, parks or open green spaces nearby. It will
only push non-resident foot and bicycle traffic into the adjacent neighborhoods, thereby disrupting and
overburdening the scant green space and recreational infrastructure in those areas, negatively
impacting our quality of life.
We are NOT in favour. Please record our sentiments accordingly.
Thank you,
Mohanad Shaqo
Page 284 of 307
From:
M R
Sent:
Monday, October 18, 20212:12 PM
To:
Andrew Pinnell
Subject:
[EXTERNAL]
Hello Andrew,
I am contacting you regarding the Notice of Application for 4396 King Street East
Kitchener.
I would like to inform you that the City of Kitchener did not send any information
regarding this development to our neighbourhoods. There were no notices sent to Deer
Ridge, Grand Hill Village or Settlers Grove. As these subdivisions are largely affected
by this development, I find the City's lack of notification unprofessional. This is on the
City's website: "Depending on the renovation or new development, public information
may be available to you and you will be made aware of projects happening in your
neighbourhood."
This rule was clearly not followed, it appears that you were trying to approve this
development without hearing from anyone in our neighbourhoods.
My family and I oppose this development, and do not wish to change the neighbourhood
zoning by-law. We live at
We would like to also receive any further notifications of public consultations regarding
this project, as well as any other projects in our neighbourhood.
Thank you,
Melinda Ruszer
Frank Ruszer
Renee Ruszer
Page 285 of 307
Kieran Luckhai
From: R. Bruce Connell
Sent: Wednesday, April 6, 2022 7:17 PM
To: Andrew Pinnell
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: 4396 King St E & 25 Sportsworld Dr - Neighbourhood Meeting Survey and
Presentation Materials
Hello Andrew:
We missed the meeting as we are still visiting friends in Kauai (Hawaii) and did not have internet access at that time.p
We are very concerned about, and vehemently opposed, to the city approving those proposed high rise buildings along
King Street East in Sportsworld!
In addition to the important concerns about traffic, is the total absence of nearby parkland.
We back onto small Kuntz Park with a view of the Memorial tower. The parking lot there is already becoming overused
at times and our fear is that the residents of these new buildings will discover that Kuntz Park is their nearest outdoor
recreation area. That parking lot is also used by trail users to access the Walter Bean trail, and there are already times
when cars end up parking illegally along the access road that leads to that very small parking lot.
Please express our serious concerns to city council in the hope that those highrise tower projects can either be
significantly downsized, somehow have parkland or at least a children's playground area added, or be entirely rejected.
Thanks, Bruce and Maeve Connell
Dr. Bruce Connell, C.Psych.
Psychologist, private practice
On Apr 6, 2022, at 4:22 AM, Andrew Pinnell <An.d.rew._Piin nell.l.@Jk tclh_ein_e.ir.ca> wrote:
You don't often get email from andrew.pinnellftitchener.ca. Learn why this is iMDortant
Hello,
Thank you for participating in the virtual Neighbourhood Meeting for the Official Plan
Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment applications for 4396 King Street East & 25
Sportsworld Drive held on March 31, 2022. It was good meeting with you.
Here are the next steps:
Page 286 of 307
<image010.jpg>
I have attached the presentation from this meeting. A YouTube link to the recording of the
meeting can be foundIhere. These materials will also be uploaded to the Kitchener Planning
Applications website in the next few days (www.:Ikii;t Ih ,in ir,: /ipllanniin all 1plliicait M).
We know it is important for community members to be involved in decisions that affect them. In
order to better serve the community, we would like to understand who currently participates in
City -led engagement activities related to development services (e.g. urban planning,
transportation planning, engineering, economic development). Please complete a short survey:
I Ip .;//yu..................:: irt. .g :�:::: u,ir .::°.I ..!!gj I iin.g::...We will use this information to help
develop new engagement strategies that reach all members of our community.
In the coming days, I will be preparing a "What We Heard" summary from the meeting. I will
email this to you when it is available.
Thank you for your participation at the meeting and for your comments and questions on these
applications. I will evaluate the comments received to date and will be in touch on the next steps
for engagement.
If you have any additional (new) comments, please let me know by April 14, 2022.
Sincerely,
Andrew Pinnell, MCIP, RPP
Senior Planner I Planning Division I City of Kitchener
519-741-2200 x7668 I TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 and rew. pin nell(Qkitchener. ca
<image001.png><image002.png><image003 .png><image002.png><image004.png><image002.
png><image005.png><image002.png><image006.png><image002.png><image007.png><imag
e002.png><image008.png><image002.png><image009.png>
<Neighbourhood Meeting Presentation_4396 King St E_For Website.pdf>
Page 287 of 307
Staff Report
J
IKgc.;i' r� R
Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca
REPORT TO: Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee
DATE OF MEETING: March 6, 2023
SUBMITTED BY: Stevenson, Garett — Interim Director of Planning, 519-741-2200 ext.
7070
PREPARED BY: Stevenson, Garett — Interim Director of Planning, 519-741-2200 ext.
7070
WARDS INVOLVED: All Wards
DATE OF REPORT: February 23, 2023
REPORT NO.: DSD -2023-084
SUBJECT: Significant Planning Applications Update - Quarterly Report
RECOMMENDATION:
For Information
BACKGROUND:
Planning staff provide a quarterly update report every March, June, September, and December of
each year of all current significant development applications. It is important to be providing greater
transparency on significant development applications with the community and Council.
REPORT:
Attached to this report, the Significant Planning Applications Quarterly Report (Q1 2023) provides a
summary of the current Planning applications under review at the time of the preparation of this
report.
The current significant development applications section includes Subdivision, Official Plan
Amendment, and Zoning By-law Amendments that have not received final approval. These are the
bulk of the applications that Planning Staff consult with the community on an application specific
basis. Significant development applications include property specific proposals as well as new
greenfield communities (subdivisions). Additional details on the development applications can be
found using the online mapping tool available at www.kitchener.ca/planningapplications.
STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT:
This report supports the delivery of core services.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Capital Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget.
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
Page 288 of 307
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.
CONSULT — Significant development application specific engagements are undertaken for Official
Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law, and Subdivision applications. Engagement includes mailing
postcards to property owners and occupants of all buildings within 240 metres of the subject lands,
publishing a newspaper notice when the application is first circulated and when the statutory public
meeting is scheduled, as well as informal community meetings including Neighbourhood Meetings
and/or site walks. A large plain language sign is also posted on the property.
PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES:
There are no previous reports/authorities related to this matter.
APPROVED BY: Garett Stevenson — Interim Director, Planning
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A— Significant Planning Applications Quarterly Report (Q1 2023)
Page 289 of 307
Attachment A — Significant Planning Applications Quarterly Report (Q1 2023)
Current Significant Development Applications
Subdivision (SA), Official Plan Amendment (OPA), Zoning By-law Amendment (ZBA)
WARD 1
528 LANCASTER ST W
Proposal: A development with 5 multiple residential buildings of varying heights (i.e., 26, 20, 20, 16, and 10
storeys), and commercial uses on the ground floor of the 16 -storey building.
File Number: OPA21/010/L/AP Description: The main purpose of the Official Plan Amendment is to
re -designate the whole of the lands to Mixed Use and modify the
Specific Policy Area to allow a maximum floor space ratio (FSR) of
5.8 and a maximum building height of 83m (26 storeys).
Application Type: OPA Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
File Number: ZBA21/015/L/AP Description: The main purpose of the Zoning By-law Amendment is
to re -zone the whole of the lands to MIX -2, and to modify the site-
specific provisions to allow an FSR of 5.8, a building height of 83m
(26 storeys), a parking rate of 0.72 spaces per unit, among other
requests for relief.
Application Type: ZBA Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
Staff Contact: Andrew Pinnell Neighbourhood Meeting Date: January 20, 2022
Owner: 528 LANCASTER STREET Applicant:
WEST INC, 550 LANCASTER INC MHBC PLANNING
Update Since Last Quarterly Report: Planning Staff and the Applicant are considering input provided at the
Neighbourhood Meeting. A Zoning By-law application has been received for 26 Bridge Street to allow multiple
dwellings and the existing buildings are proposed to be moved to that location.
104 WOOLWICH ST
Proposal: Two 3.5 -storey multiple dwellings (stacked townhouses) with 24 dwelling units each (total of 48
dwelling units).
File Number: OP18/007/W/AP
Description: The owner is requesting a Site -Specific Policy to allow
an FSR of up to 0.9.
Application Type: OPA
Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
File Number: ZBA18/009/W/AP
Description: The owner is requesting to change the zoning
from Agricultural (A-1) to Residential Six Zone (R-6) along with a Site
Specific Provisions to: a) reduce the minimum front yard from 4.5
metres to 1.0 metres, b) eliminate the requirement for Private Patio
Areas for at -grade dwelling units, c) increase the maximum Floor
Space Ratio from 0.6 to 0.9, and d) reduce the required parking from
1.75 spaces per unit to 1.2 spaces per unit.
Application Type: ZBA
Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
Staff Contact: Andrew Pinnell
Neighbourhood Meeting Date: TBD
Owner: 1238455 ONTARIO LIMITED
Applicant: GSP GROUP INC
Update Since Last Quarterly Report:
Planning Staff and the Applicant are considering input provided through
the initial circulation.
Page 290 of 307
507 FREDERICK STREET, 40-44-48 BECKER STREET
Proposal: An addition to the existing funeral home is proposed with a crematorium, as well as an expanded
parking lot along Becker Street.
File Number: OP17/003/F/GS Description: The property municipally addressed as 507 Frederick
Street is designated as Commercial and the four Becker Street
properties (triangle shaped property and 40, 44, and 48 Becker
Street) are designated as Low Rise Residential in the City's Official
Plan. A portion of lands form part of a Community Node in the City's
Urban Structure. The application proposes to amend the land use
designation of 40, 44, and 48 Becker Street, as well as the triangle -
shaped portion of land), from Low Rise Residential to Commercial.
Further, the application proposes to add Specific Policy Area 58 in
the Official Plan to permit a crematorium/cremator use on all lands.
Application Type: OPA Status: The Statutory Public Meeting for this application was held by
the Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee meeting on January
9, 2023. This application has now been referred to Kitchener City
Council on March 20, 2023 at 7:OOpm.
File Number: ZC17/010/F/GS Description: The property addressed as 507 Frederick Street is
zoned as COM -2 (General Commercial), and a small portion
previously addressed as 36 Becker Street is zoned as MIX -1, in
Zoning By-law 2019-051. 40, 44, and 48 Becker Street are zoned as
Residential Five (R-5) in Zoning By-law 85-1 and RES -4 in Zoning
By-law 2019-051. The triangle -shape piece of land is zoned as
Residential Six (R-6) with Special Use Provision 362U, which permits
a funeral home, in Zoning By-law 85-1. These lands are zoned as
Low Rise Residential Five (RES -5) with Site Specific Provision 205
in Zoning By-law 2019-051. The application proposed to amend both
zoning by-laws so that all lands are zoned as COM -2 — the same
zoning as the existing funeral home property. Additionally, Site
Specific Provision 367 in the Zoning By-law will;
• permit a crematorium/cremator use on the lands 56 metres from a
residential property
• legalize the retention of existing residential dwellings,
• permit a building with no setback to Becker Street,
• allow a building within the required Driveway Visibility Triangles
along Becker Street,
• permit a reduced an on-site vehicle parking rate of 1 space per 25
square metres of floor area,
• allow for tandem parking for employees
• define Frederick Street as the front lot line, and
• prohibit certain sensitive land uses until a Record of Site Condition
is completed and a Ministry Acknowledgement Letter is provided.
Application Type: ZBA Status: The Statutory Public Meeting for this application was held by
the Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee meeting on January
9, 2023. This application has now been referred to Kitchener City
Council on March 20, 2023 at 7:00 m.
Staff Contact: Garett Stevenson Neighbourhood Meeting Date: November 23, 2021
Owner: Henry Walser Funeral Home Applicant: GSP GROUP INC.
LTD
Update Since Last Quarterly Report: The Statutory Public Meeting for this application was held by the Planning
and Strategic Initiatives Committee meeting on January 9, 2023. This application has now been referred to
Kitchener City Council on March 20, 2023 at 7:OOpm.
Page 291 of 307
26 STANLEY AVENUE & 31 SCHWEITZER STREET
Proposal: The Site is proposed to be developed with a residential subdivision consisting of 42 single detached
dwelling lots, 12 semi-detached dwelling lots (total of 24 dwellings) and a 5 -unit street -townhouse block totaling
71 residential units. The Proposed Development will be accessed by a future municipal road connecting to
Stanley Avenue.
File Number: 30T-21201 Description: A residential plan of subdivision consisting of single
detached dwellings, semi-detached dwellings, and townhouse
dwellings, totaling 72 units.
Application Type: SA Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
File Number: ZBA21/19/S/BB Description: To rezone the Site from Residential Four (R-4) and
Residential Five (R-5) to the Low Rise Residential Five (RES -5) Zone
with a Site -Specific Provision to permit a maximum building height of
12.5 metres.
Application Type: ZBA Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
Staff Contact: Brian Bateman Neighbourhood Meeting Date: May 31, 2022.
Owner: Newo Holdings Limited Applicant: GSP Group Inc.
Update Since Last Quarterly Report: A Neighbourhood Meeting was held on May 31, 2022 and Planning Staff
and the Applicant are considering input provided at the Neighbourhood Meeting.
67-71 NELSON AVE
Proposal: The Site is proposed to be developed with a private road with 23 single detached dwelling
condominium units with a maximum building height of 11.0 metres. 23 private, at -grade parking spaces are
proposed within garages. Nineteen (19) of the condominium units will front onto the proposed private
condominium road while four (4) of the units will front onto Nelson Avenue. To facilitate the proposed
development, the applicant is proposing to purchase a portion of the right-of-way lands that extend from Tagge
Street from the City.
File Number: ZBA22/011/N/AP Description: Proposing to rezone the property from Residential 3 (R-
3) to Residential 4 (RES -4) to permit a private road with 23 single
detached dwelling condominium units with a maximum building
height of 11.0 metres. 23 private, at -grade parking spaces are
proposed within garages. To facilitate the proposed development, the
applicant is proposing to purchase a portion of the right-of-way lands
that extend from Tagge Street from the City.
Application Type: ZBA Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
Staff Contact: Andrew Pinnell Neighbourhood Meeting Date: September 20, 2022
Owner: 2415274 Ontario Inc. Applicant: MHBC Planning Inc.
Update Since Last Quarterly Report: A Neighbourhood Meeting was held on September 20, 2022 and
Planning Staff and the Applicant are considering input provided at the Neighbourhood Meeting.
Page 292 of 307
26 BRIDGE STREET
Proposal: To relocated two dwellings with heritage status from 544 and 546 Lancaster St W to the subject
property and used as a single -detached and a duplex.
File Number: ZBA22/011/N/AP Description: To add site-specific zoning to allow 2 dwellings on the
one lot; allow for a reduced side yard setback of 0.7 metres, rather
than the required 1.2 metres; and allow for a reduced rear yard of 7.0
metres, rather than the required 7.5 metres. This would allow the
relocation of two dwellings with heritage status to be relocated from
544 and 546 Lancaster St W to the subject property and used as a
single -detached and a duplex.
Application Type: ZBA Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
Staff Contact: Andrew Pinnell Neighbourhood Meeting Date: TBD
Owner: 550 Lancaster Inc. Applicant: MHBC Planning Inc.
Update Since Last Quarterly Report: The applications are under review in conjunction with Applications
OPA21/010/L/AP and ZBA21/015/L/AP.
Page 293 of 307
WARD 2
1157 WEBER ST E
Proposal: A mixed-use development consisting of a building with a 15 and 18 storey tower with a total of 378
residential dwelling units and ground floor commercial units.
File Number: OPA21/007/W/BB
Description: To change the land use designation from Commercial
to permit an increased maximum floors ace ratio from 0.6 to 0.9.
Corridor to Mixed Use with a Special Policy Area.
Application Type: OPA
Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
accepting and reviewing comments.
File Number: ZBA21/010/W/BB
Description: To change the zoning of the lands from Commercial Two
increased building height and reduced rear yard setback in order to
to High Intensity Mixed Use Corridor with Site Specific regulations
Application Type: ZBA
Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
Staff Contact: Brian Bateman
Neighbourhood Meeting Date: November 9, 2021
Owner: M K G HOLDING
Applicant: GSP GROUP INC.
CORPORATION
Update Since Last Quarterly Report: Planning Staff and the Applicant are considering input provided at the
Update Since Last Quarterly Report: Planning Staff and the Applicant are considering input provided at the
Neighbourhood Meeting.
7 MORRISON RD
Proposal: A stacked townhouse development with 32 units and 45 parking spaces.
File Number: OPA22/013/M/BB
Description: To redesignate the property with a Special Policy Area
to permit an increased maximum floors ace ratio from 0.6 to 0.9.
Application Type: OPA
Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
File Number: ZBA22/024/M/BB
Description: To increase the floor space ratio, reduce parking,
increased building height and reduced rear yard setback in order to
develop the property with 32 unit stacked townhouses.
Application Type: ZBA
Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
Staff Contact: Brian Bateman
Neighbourhood Meeting Date: November 29, 2022
Owner: Klondike Homes Ltd
Applicant: MHBC Planning
Update Since Last Quarterly Report: Planning Staff and the Applicant are considering input provided at the
Neighbourhood Meeting.
Page 294 of 307
WARD 4
448 NEW DUNDEE RD
Proposal: A condominium development with 24 single detached houses with frontage onto a private
condominium road.
File Number: ZBA20/003/N/AP Description: the application requests to change the zoning from R-1
Zone (allows single detached dwellings on lots with a min. lot area of
4,000 m2 and min. lot width of 30 m2) to R-6 (allows single detached
dwellings on lots with a min. lot area of 235 m2 and min. lot width of
9 m2).
Application Type: ZBA Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
Staff Contact: Andrew Pinnell Neighbourhood Meeting Date: November 25, 2021.
Owner: HAYRE PROPERTIES INC Applicant: GSP Group Inc.
Update Since Last Quarterly Report: Planning Staff and the Applicant are considering input provided at the
Neighbourhood Meeting. Additional technical study is underway.
86 PINNACLE DR
Proposal: A 3.5 storey 16 -unit multiple residential building.
File Number: ZBA19/003/P/KA Description: To change the zoning to Residential Six (R-6) to permit
a multiple residential dwelling.
Application Type: ZBA Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
Staff Contact: Katie Anderl Neighbourhood Meeting Date: January 10, 2023
Owner: A & F GREENFIELD HOMES Applicant: IBI Group
LTD
Update Since Last Quarterly Report: A revised development concept was received and shared with the
community through a second Neighbourhood Meeting and on-site meeting. Planning Staff and the Applicant
are considering input provided on the revised concept.
1000 NEW DUNDEE RD
Proposal: A 127 unit Common Elements Condominium townhouse development which also includes private
amenity space and a private SWM pond.
File Number: 30T-22202
Description: The draft Plan of Subdivision (30T-22202) would create
two blocks. Block 1 is planned to be developed with the subject
townhouses. Block 2 contains Blair Creek, associated wetlands and
a buffer and is proposed to be zoned Natural Heritage Conservation
and dedicated to the City of Kitchener.
Application Type: SA
Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
File Number: ZBA22/021/N/KA
Description: To change the zoning to Residential Six (R-6) to permit
a multiple residential dwelling.
Application Type: ZBA
Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
Staff Contact: Katie Anderl
Neighbourhood Meeting Date: December 1, 2022
Owner: Cachet Developments (New
Applicant: Glen Schnarr & Associates Inc
Dundee) Inc
Update Since Last Quarterly Report: Planning Staff and the Applicant are considering input provided at the
second Neighbourhood Meeting.
Page 295 of 307
WARD 4 — New Applications
404-430 NEW DUNDEE RD
Proposal: The proposed development intends to establish ten (10) stacked townhouse buildings containing
a total of 160 residential dwelling units on the subject lands. Each building would contain sixteen (16) dwelling
units. Access to the property is proposed through one full -movement access driveway from New Dundee Road
that would connect to the internal private road system. Parking is provided at a rate of 1.15 spaces per dwelling
unit, for a total of 186 parking spaces. All parking spaces are surface level, and secure indoor bicycle storage
spaces are to be provided throughout the site. The proposed residential development also includes a central
common amenity area.
File Number: OPA22/014/N/BB Description: To add a special policy area to the Low Rise Residential
designation such that the subject lands be permitted a maximum
Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 0.9 and a density exceeding 30 units per
hectare
Application Type: OPA Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
File Number: ZBA22/025/N/BB Description: The Zoning by-law amendment is proposing re -zoning
the subject lands from R-1 in By-law 85-1 to RES -5 in By-law 2019-
051 with a site-specific provision for FSR, building height, parking,
and visitor parking.
Application Type: ZBA Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
Staff Contact: Brian Bateman Neighbourhood Meeting Date: January 19, 2022
Owner: Klondike Homes Ltd. Applicant: MHBC Planning
Update Since Last Quarterly Report: Planning Staff and the Applicant are considering input provided at the
Neighbourhood Meeting.
Page 296 of 307
WARD 5
161 GEHL PL
Proposal: A new community with up to 235 residential dwelling units and open space blocks.
File Number: OP18/006/G/GS
Description: Proposing amendment to the Rosenberg Secondary
File Number: OP16/001/R/KA
Plan to revise land use designations for various lands to implement
the proposed plan of subdivision.
Application Type: OPA
Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
Application Type: OPA
accepting and reviewing comments.
File Number: ZBA18/007/G/GS
Description: The proposed amendment to the Zoning By-law is to
File Number: ZC16/009/R/KA
apply new zoning to the lands to implement the Rosenberg
Secondary Plan (also proposed to be amended) to implement the
Application Type: ZBA
proposed plan of subdivision.
Application Type: ZBA
Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
File Number: 30T-16201
accepting and reviewing comments.
File Number: 30T-18202
Description: A proposed Plan of Subdivision with up to 235 residential
units and open space blocks.
Application Type: SA
Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
Staff Contact: Garett Stevenson
Neighbourhood Meeting Date: N/A
Owner: 2079546 ONTARIO LIMITED
Applicant: SGL PLANNING & DESIGN INC
Update Since Last Quarterly Report: No update at this time.
ROCKCLIFFE DR (FREURE SOUTH)
Proposal: A new community with 471
new residential units including single detached, street townhouses &
multiple dwellings. Parkland open sace & stormwater management facilities are also proposed.
File Number: OP16/001/R/KA
Description: To change the designation of the easterly portion of land
to high rise residential, designate a future park area as open space,
and to adjust the limits of wooded areas designated as open space.
Application Type: OPA
Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
File Number: ZC16/009/R/KA
Description: To change the zoning from Restricted Business Park (B-
2) to residential and natural heritage conservation zones.
Application Type: ZBA
Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
File Number: 30T-16201
Description: The plan of subdivision includes single detached, street
townhouses & multiple dwellings along with parkland open space &
stormwater management facilities.
Application Type: SA
Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
Staff Contact: Katie Anderl
Neighbourhood Meeting Date: TBD
Owner: FREURE DEVELOPMENTS
Applicant: MHBC PLANNING LTD
LIMITED
Update Since Last Quarterly Report: No update at this time. Archeological assessment work continues.
Page 297 of 307
2219 OTTAWA ST S & 808 TRUSSLER RD
Proposal: A new community with 240-409 new residential units including single detached, street townhouses
& multiple dwellings. Institutional uses, a multi -use trail, a stormwater management system, parkland and open
space blocks for the conservation of natural features on the property are also proposed. The existing buildings
on the property will be demolished for the proposed development with the exception of the Shantz House,
which will ultimately be designated a heritage property.
File Number: OPA22/009/0/AP Description: The lands are currently designated Low Rise
Residential, Natural Heritage Conservation and Mixed Use. The
amendment proposes to align the proposed land uses with the
proposed Plan of Subdivision. A Mixed Use land use designation is
proposed on Blocks 11 and 12 to accommodate higher density
multiple -residential developments. The Natural Heritage
Conservation designation is proposed to apply to lands on which
environmental features are located. Blocks 15, 16 and 18 are
proposed to be designated as Open Space. Blocks 15 and 16 are
proposed to be public parks, totaling 0.478 hectares of parkland.
Block 18 is proposed to accommodate the stormwater management
pond.
Application Type: OPA Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
File Number: ZBA22/016/0/AP Description: The Subject Lands are currently zoned Agricultural (A-
1) in Zoning By-law 85-1. The amendment proposes to bring the
lands into Zoning By-law 2019-051 and apply the following zoning
categories; RES -5 Low Rise Residential Five Zone with Site Specific
Provisions, INS -1 Neighbourhood Institutional Zone with Site Specific
Provisions, OSR-1 Recreation Zone, OSR-3 Open Space:
Stormwater Management Zone, and NHC-1 Natural Heritage
Conservation Zone.
Application Type: ZBA Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
File Number: 30T-22201 Description: The plan of subdivision includes single detached, street
townhouses & multiple dwellings along with parkland open space &
stormwater management facilities.
Application Type: SA Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
Staff Contact: Andrew Pinnell Neighbourhood Meeting Date: TBD
Owner: Kitchener Trussler Holdings Applicant: Polocorp Inc.
I nc.
Update Since Last Quarterly Report: The initial circulation of the notice of application is completed and a
Neighbourhood Meeting will be held this year.
Page 298 of 307
490 HURON RD
Proposal: The development proposal includes three multiple residential apartment buildings and commercial
development along Huron Road and a combination of structured and surface parking. Full build out of the
subject lands is anticipated to occur in phases. Vehicular access to the proposed development is proposed
from both Huron and Strasburg Roads with two accesses from Huron Road and one access from Strasburg
Road.
File Number: OPA22/012/H/CD Description: The purpose of the OPA is to amend the existing special
policy area for the subject lands to allow for a maximum height of 17
storeys within the portion of the site that is designated `Mixed Use'.
Application Type: OPA Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
File Number: ZBA22/019/H/CD Description: To amend the site specific zoning regulations for the
portion of the lands zoned MIX -3 to permit the ground floor of any
building located within 25 metres of the Strasburg Road street line to
have a minimum height of 4.5 metres, that no minimum or maximum
percent of non-residential gross floor area be required, to permit a
maximum building height of 17 storeys and 53 metres, to permit a
maximum FSR of 3, and that no minimum Ground Floor Street Line
Fagade Width as a Percentage of the Width of the Abutting Street
Line shall apply.
Application Type: ZBA Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
Staff Contact: Craig Dumart Neighbourhood Meeting Date: TBD
Owner: 2517293 Ontario Inc. Applicant: MHBC Planning Ltd.
Update Since Last Quarterly Report: The initial circulation of the notice of application is completed and a
Neighbourhood Meeting will be held this year.
Page 299 of 307
WARD 5 — New Applications
265 COTTON GRASS STREET
Proposal: A 28 unit stacked townhouses building.
File Number: OPA22/015/C/KA
Description: Proposing to add a site-specific policy to permit a multiple
Description: The applicant is proposing to change the A-1 zoning to
Res -6 to allow for a medium rise residential development.
dwelling whereas the applicable Commercial land use designation only
Status: The application has been circulated and a virtual Neighbourhood
Meeting scheduled for March 9, 2023.
permits dwelling units if they are located above ground floor commercial
Neighbourhood Meeting Date: January 31, 2023
uses
Application Type: OPA
Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
File Number: BA22/026/C/KA
Description: The applicant is proposing to change the designation and
zoning to permit the lands to be developed with a 28 unit stacked
townhouse.
Application Type: ZBA
Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
Staff Contact: Katie Anderl
Neighbourhood Meeting Date: January 31, 2023
Owner: Schlegel Urban Developments
Applicant: GSP Group
Update Since Last Quarterly Report: Planning
Staff and the Applicant are considering input provided at the
Neighbourhood Meeting.
1385 BLEAMS RD
Proposal: 8 townhouses dwellings
and one dwelling is retained.
File Number: ZBA23/001/B/BB
Description: The applicant is proposing to change the A-1 zoning to
Res -6 to allow for a medium rise residential development.
Application Type: ZBA
Status: The application has been circulated and a virtual Neighbourhood
Meeting scheduled for March 9, 2023.
Staff Contact: Brian Bateman
Neighbourhood Meeting Date: January 31, 2023
Owner: loan Solomes
Applicant: Polocorp Inc.
Update Since Last Quarterly Report: The application has been circulated and a virtual Neighbourhood Meeting
scheduled for March 9, 2023.
Page 300 of 307
WARD 6
1257 OTTAWAT STREET SOUTH
Proposal: The Site is proposed to be developed with a 3 -storey, 20 unit multiple dwelling building.
File Number: ZBA22/009/0/ES
Description: The application proposes to rezone the subject lands
from R-3 in Zoning By-law 85-1 and RES -2 in Zoning By-law 2019-
051 to RES -5 in Zoning By-law 2019-051 with site specific provisions
for increase in Floor Space Ratio. This would facilitate the
redevelopment of the site that is proposing to remove the 2 existing
single detached homes and replace it with a 3 -storey, 20 unit multiple
dwelling building.
Application Type: ZBA
Status: This application is under appeal.
Staff Contact: Eric Schneider
Neighbourhood Meeting Date: November 8, 2022
Owner: Yuliya Dotsenko, Thor
Applicant: Patterson Planning Consultants
Dotsenko
Update Since Last Quarterly Report: This application was approved by Council and has been appealed.
Page 301 of 307
WARD 8
400 WESTWOOD DR
Proposal: To demolish the existing house and create four new lots for single detached dwellings.
File Number: ZBA21/0121W/ES Description: To rezone the developable portion of the lands to site
specific Residential Four (R-4).
Application Type: ZBA Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
Staff Contact: Eric Schneider Neighbourhood Meeting Date: January 13, 2022
Owner: NASIR BROMAND, ZAKIA Applicant: IBI GROUP
BROMAND
Update Since Last Quarterly Report: A Neighbourhood Meeting was held with the community on January 13,
2022. Planning Staff and the Applicant are considering input provided at the Neighbourhood Meeting.
Page 302 of 307
WARD 9
321 COURTLAND AVE E
Proposal: A new mixed-use community with residential, commercial, and employment uses. Three existing
buildings are proposed to remain, including the six storey office building, the large distribution warehouse
building, and the former maintenance garage. The remainder of the buildings are currently being demolished.
The existing buildings will be repurposed for a mix of employment uses. New buildings are proposed to range
from three storeys along Stirling Avenue South, to five -to -seven storeys along Courtland Avenue East, and
between twenty-three and thirty-eight storeys along the rail line. In total, approximately 2818 residential units
are proposed in various forms throughout the site.
File Number: OP19/002/C/GS Description: An Official Plan Amendment is requested to implement
new land use permissions for the proposed development. The
existing land use designation for the subject lands is General
Industrial with a site-specific policy in the Mill Courtland Woodside
Park Secondary Plan. An amendment is requested to change the
land use designations to Mixed Use, High Density Multiple
Residential, and Neighbourhood Park.
Application Type: OPA Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
File Number: ZBA19/005/C/GS Description: The proposed subdivision application contains two
medium density residential blocks, a high-density residential block, a
medium density mixed use block, a mixed-use employment block, a
park block, a street townhouse block, and two future development
blocks. Road widening blocks are proposed along Courtland Avenue
East. The blocks are arranged along a new proposed road to be
named Olde Fashioned Way, running parallel to Courtland Avenue
East from Palmer Avenue to Borden Avenue South. Palmer Avenue
and Kent Avenue are proposed to be extended through the site to
intersect with the proposed road.
Application Type: ZBA Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
File Number: 30T-19201 Description: The Zoning By-law Amendment proposes to implement
the proposed land use designations with corresponding zoning. The
proposed zoning is Medium Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone MU -
2 (a medium intensity mixed use zone that permits residential and
commercial uses), Residential Nine R-9 (a high-rise residential
zone), and Public Park Zone P-1 (a zone that is applied to public park
spaces).
Application Type: SA Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
Staff Contact: Craig Dumart Neighbourhood Meeting Date: Jul 15, 2019. August 24, 2022.
Owner: 321 COURTLAND AVE Applicant: GSP Group Inc.
DEVELOPMENTS INC
Update Since Last Quarterly Report: A second Neighborhood Meeting was held on August 24, 2022 to update
the community on changes to the application. Updated information has been posted to the City's website.
Page 303 of 307
1001 KING STREET E & 530-564 CHARLES STREET E
Proposal: A 30 storey building that is 92.0 metres in height with 461 square metres of commercial space and
486 residential units.
File Number: OPA22/001/K/KA
Description: The requested Official Plan Amendment, proposes a
special policy area for the subject lands on Map 10 of the King
Street East Secondary Plan to permit a maximum Floor Space
Ratio of 8.27.
Application Type: OPA
Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
File Number: ZBA22-001/K/KA
Description: The main purpose of the Zoning By-law Amendment is
to add Special Provisions to the existing High Intensity Mixed Use
Corridor Zone (MU -3) to permit a maximum floor space ratio of 8.27
instead of 4.0; a dwelling unit to be located at grade (along Charles
Street for live work units) in a mixed use building; and a parking rate
of 0.54 spaces per unit, visitor parking at 4% of required parking, and
to permit parking for a Plaza complex to be 0.
Application Type: ZBA
Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
Staff Contact: Katie Anderl
Neighbourhood Meeting Date: March 23, 2022
Owner: King -Charles Properties
Applicant:
MHBC PLANNING
Update Since Last Quarterly Report:
A Neighbourhood Meeting was held with the community on March 23,
2022. Planning Staff and the Applicant
are considering input provided at the Neighbourhood Meeting.
459-509 Mill Street
Proposal: The proposed development is comprised of 6 towers (ranging from 11 to 32 storeys in height)
including up to 1500 residential units and 2013 square metres of commercial space. The Site fronts on to Mill
Street and is located adjacent to the Mill ION station. Parking is provided through an underground parking
structure and a podium parking structure. The Site will also include over 1200 bicycle parking spaces.
File Number: OPA22/008/M/CD Description: The proposed Official Plan Amendment redesignates
the Site from General Industrial Employment to Mixed Use with a
Special Policy Area to permit an increase to the permitted Floor
Space Ratio. The proposed amendment proposes a maximum FSR
of 7.0 whereas the existing maximum FSR is 5.0.
Application Type: OPA Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
File Number: ZBA22/015/M/CD Description: The application proposes to remove the site from Zoning
By-law 85-1 and add it to Zoning By-law 2019-051 and zone as
"Mixed Use Three (MIX -3) Zone". The proposed site specific Zoning
By-law regulations include a reduction to minimum rear yard from 7.5
metres to 5.5 metres for the building podium; a reduction to minimum
rear yard from 7.5 metres to 2.5 metres for the building tower; and a
reduction to minimum interior side yard from 4.0 metres to 0 metres
for the building odium.
Application Type: ZBA Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
Staff Contact: Craig Dumart Neighbourhood Meeting Date: January 24, 2023.
Owner: Polocorp Inc. Applicant: Polocorp Inc.
Update Since Last Quarterly Report: A Neighbourhood Meeting was held with the community on January 24,
2023. Planning Staff and the Applicant are considering input provided at the Neighbourhood Meeting.
Page 304 of 307
130-142 VICTORIA ST S
Proposal: A 25 storey mixed use building which includes 249 dwelling units and 4 retail units on the ground
floor.
File Number: OPA22/004//V/KA
Description: The applicant is requesting a new Site Specific Policy be
added to the current Mixed Use designation to permit a maximum
FSR of 12.73.
Application Type: OPA
Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
File Number: ZBA22/006/V/KA
Description: The applicant is proposing to add Special Regulations
to the existing MU -1 proposes an FSR of 12.73, a height of about 86
metres, as well as reductions to setbacks and reduced parking.
Application Type: ZBA
Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
Staff Contact: Katie Anderl
Neighbourhood Meeting Date: July 18, 2022
Owner: 1936026 ONTARIO INC
Applicant: IBI Group
Update Since Last Quarterly Report:
A Neighbourhood Meeting was held with the community on July 18, 2022.
Planning Staff and the Applicant are considering input provided at the Neighbourhood Meeting
146-162 Victoria Street s, 92-110 Park Street
Proposal: A 3 tower (38, 36, & 25 storeys), mixed-use development containing 1,124 residential dwelling
units, 1,750 square metres of ground -floor commercial space, 3 green roof/outdoor amenity areas on top of
a 4-6 storey shared podium, 699 vehicle parking spaces and 675 secure bicycle parking spaces.
File Number: OPA21 /011 //V/ES Description: Proposing a Special Policy Area to increase maximum
floor space ratio and allow mixed use development with commercial
on the ground floor and residential above.
Application Type: OPA Status: Under Appeal
File Number: ZBA21/017/V/ES Description: Proposes to remove the Subject Site from Zoning By-
law 85-1 and add it to Zoning By-law 2019-051 as a "Mixed Use
Three (MIX -3) Zone" with Special Regulations and Special Use
Provisions.
Application Type: ZBA Status: Under Appeal
Staff Contact: Eric Schneider Neighbourhood Meeting Date: February 8, 2022
Owner: Innovations Developments Applicant: GSP Group Inc.
Kitchener Ltd
Update Since Last Quarterly Report: The applications were refused by Kitchener City Council and appealed
by the Owner. A second Case Management Conference has been scheduled on March 1, 2023.
Page 305 of 307
WARD 9 — New Applications
130-140 HIGHLAND ROAD WEST & 270 SPADINA AVE.
Proposal: A seventeen (17) storey purpose built rental apartment building (with a 5 -storey podium and a 12 -
storey tower) with 211 additional units comprised of 1- and 2 -bedroom units, as well as 1 and 2 bedrooms with
optional dens.
File Number: OPA22/016/H/BB Description: Re -designate the subject lands from "Low Density
Commercial Residential' and "Medium Density Residential" to "High
Density Commercial Residential"
Application Type: OPA Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
File Number: ZBA22/028/H/BB Description: A Zoning By-law Amendment is requested to rezone the
lands from the `Commercial Residential One Zone (CR -1) Zone",
"Residential Eight Zone" and "Special Regulation Provision 738R" to
"Commercial Residential Three Zone (CR -3) Zone" with a site
specific regulation to permit a Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 3.17 and
118 parking spaces are proposed within Phase III bringing the overall
total of 281 parking spaces and 404 units for the entire site.
Application Type: ZBA Status: This application has been circulated and Planning staff are
accepting and reviewing comments.
Staff Contact: Brian Bateman Neighbourhood Meeting Date: February 9, 2023
Owner: 270 Development Inc. (Vive Applicant: MHBC Planning
Development Corporation)
Update Since Last Quarterly Report: A Neighbourhood Meeting was held with the community on February 9,
2023. Planning Staff and the Applicant are considering input provided at the Neighbourhood Meeting
Page 306 of 307
WARD 10
22 WEBER ST W
Proposal: A 19 -storey multiple residential building with 162 units, including 25 barrier free units. A total of 24
parking spaces are proposed at grade.
File Number: OPA20/005/W/JVW Description: The applicant is now proposing to amend the
designation to High Density Commercial Residential with a Special
Policy Area in order to permit a floor space ratio FSR of 7.8.
Application Type: OPA Status: Under appeal
File Number: ZBA20/013/W/JVW Description: The subject lands are currently zoned Commercial
Residential Three (CR -3) in Zoning By-law 85-1. The applicant is
proposing the same base zone with site specific special regulations
to permit; an increase in height to 19 storeys, an increase in Floor
Space Ratio to 7.8, To require a minimum ground floor fagade height
of 4.5m, to reduce the required minimum landscaped area required
from 10% to 8%, to reduce front and rear yard setbacks, and to
reduce the required on-site parking to 24 spaces, including 8 visitor
parking spaces.
Application Type: ZBA Status: Under appeal
Staff Contact: Garett Stevenson Neighbourhood Meeting Date: Sept. 8, 2021 & March 3, 2022.
Owner: 30 DUKE STREET LIMITED Applicant: MHBC PLANNING LTD
Update Since Last Quarterly Report: Council refused the related Heritage Permit Application on August 22,
2022. This appeal was adjourned. This application has been appealed to the Ontario Land Tribunal (formerly
LPAT) which has suspended this matter for a period of 6 months. A request for an adjournment was approved
by the OLT. The Applicant is directed to provide a written status update to the OLT and parties by no later
than July 6, 2023.
Page 307 of 307