Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDSD-2023-151 - OPA22/001/K/KA - ZBA22/001/K/KA - King-Charles Properties (Kitchener) Limited - 1001 King Street EastStaff Report r NJ :R Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee DATE OF MEETING: April 24, 2023 SUBMITTED BY: Garett Stevenson, Interim Director of Planning, 519-741-2200 x.7070 PREPARED BY: Katie Anderl, Senior Planner, 519-741-2200 x.7987 WARD INVOLVED: Ward 9 DATE OF REPORT: March 27, 2023 REPORT NO.: DSD -2023-151 SUBJECT: Official Plan Amendment Application OPA22/001/K/KA Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA22/001/K/KA King -Charles Properties (Kitchener) Limited 1001 King Street East RECOMMENDATION: That Official Plan Amendment Application OPA22/001/K/KA for King Charles Properties (Kitchener) Limited requesting a land use designation change from `Mixed Use Corridor with Special Policy Area V to `Mixed Use Corridor with Special Policy Area 10' to permit a mixed use development on the lands specified and illustrated on Schedule `A', be adopted, in the form shown in the Official Plan Amendment attached to Report DSD -2023-151 as Appendix `A', and accordingly forwarded to the Region of Waterloo for approval; and That Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA22/001/K/KA for King Charles Properties (Kitchener) Limited be approved in the form shown in the `Proposed By-law', and `Map No. 1', attached to Report DSD -2023-151 as Appendix `B'; and further That COUNCIL adopt the Urban Design Brief for 1001 King Street East attached to Report DSD -2023-151 as Appendix `C'. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: The purpose of this report is to evaluate and provide a planning recommendation regarding the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment applications for the subject lands located 1001 King Street East. It is planning staffs recommendation that the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments be approved, and the Urban Design Brief be adopted. The proposed Amendments support the creation of a high intensity mixed use development in a Major Transit Station Area. Community engagement included: o circulation of a preliminary notice and neighbourhood meeting invite postcard to property owners and residents within 240 metres of the subject site, and publishing notice in the Record; o installation of large billboard notice signs on the property; o follow up one-on-one correspondence with members of the public; *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 280 of 601 o Neighbourhood Meeting held on March 23, 2022; o postcard advising of the statutory public meeting was circulated to all residents and property owners within 240 metres of the subject site, and those who responded to the preliminary circulation; o notice of the public meeting was published in The Record on March 31, 2023. This report supports the delivery of core services. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The owner of the lands addressed as 1001 King Street East is proposing to change the Official Plan (1994) land use designation from `Mixed Use Corridor with Special Policy Area 1' to `Mixed Use Corridor with Special Policy Area 10' in the King Street East Secondary Plan, and to change the zoning from High Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU -3) with Special Use and Special Regulation Provisions in Zoning By-law 85-1 to `High Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU -3)' in Zoning By- law 85-1 with Special Regulation Provisions 544R and 788R and Holding Provision 100H to allow for an increased Floor Space Ratio (FSR), further regulate parking, permit reduced setbacks to the street, allow for dwelling units and commercial uses to both be located on the ground floor, and to apply a Holding Provision to require remediation of site contamination and an updated noise study. Staff recommend that the applications be approved. BACKGROUND: King Charles Properties (Kitchener) Limited has made applications to the City of Kitchener for an Official Plan Amendment and a Zoning By-law Amendment proposing to amend the land use designation and zoning of the lands at 1001 King Street East to permit the lands to be developed with a 30 -storey mixed use residential building with a proposed Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 8.1. The lands are currently designated `Mixed Use Corridor with Special Policy Area Tin the City of Kitchener King Street East Secondary Plan and zoned `High Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU -3) with Special Regulation Provision 544R and 401 U' in Zoning By-law 85-1. The existing zoning permissions permit: • a range of uses including multiple dwellings, commercial and institutional uses, • a maximum building Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 4.0, • buildings with no maximum building height, subject only to the Floor Space Ratio (FSR) maximum requirement, • an on-site parking rate of 1 parking space for each dwelling unit over 51 square metres of floor area, • Special regulation 544R which allows for an increase Floor Space Ratio (FSR) to 5.0 for a mixed-use development with a food store and permits a building setback of 1.5 metres to King Street East and Charles Street East. • Special use 401 U which restricts sensitive uses until a Record of Site Condition is completed. Site Context The proposed development includes lands on King Street East and Charles Street East which have been consolidated and are now addressed as 1001 King Street East and are located mid -block between Borden Avenue and Ottawa Street South. The subject lands have a lot area of 0.65 hectares. The subject lands currently contain a car parts supplier store (formerly Onward Manufacturing), a repair shop, an e -waste collection facility, 2 single detached dwellings and 1 duplex dwelling. The applicant has advised that the dwellings are currently subject to short-term and interim leases with tenants. The surrounding neighbourhood consists of a variety of uses including commercial, industrial, office, singles detached dwellings and small multiples. High-rise residential uses have also been recently approved in proximity to the subject lands at 20 Ottawa Street North and 926 King Street East. The subject lands are located within 150 metres of the Borden ION station, which is located on Charles Street East near the intersection with Borden Avenue South. Existing bus routes operate along King Page 281 of 601 Street East, Ottawa Street, Charles Street including an Npress Route, and the subject lands are in close proximity to the downtown cycling grid and Iron Horse Trail. � N7Z �`��Fj ST pd T ceiyT � S U BJ ECT A R EA 0����� �y CD r� Q$k� CD 4�CO Xxb �a DELTA ST Ccs SQL Figure 1 — 1001 King Street East REPORT: The applicant is proposing to develop the subject lands with a mixed-use residential building consisting of a 30 -storey tower (Building A) and an 11 -storey building (Building B) and a 4 -storey podium with a shared roof -top amenity area and structured parking facility. The development is proposed to have an FSR of 8.1 (based on the pre -road -widening lot area). The mixed use building proposes a total of 464 residential units with approximately 450 square metres of commercial/retail space at grade fronting King Street East and 7 two-storey live -work units fronting Charles Street East. A parking rate of 0.64 parking spaces per dwelling unit is proposed. Parking is primarily located within a parking garage with one storey of underground parking and four storeys of above -grade parking within the podium. Building step -backs are provided at the 4t"floor and the 11th floor. Outdoor amenity space is proposed on the 4th level of the podium that connects the 30 storey tower with the 11 storey building. Page 282 of 601 KING STREET EAST Figure 2 - Conceptual Site Plan Figure 3 - Conceptual Massing Model (King Street East elevation) Page 283 of 601 T- — -- — -- I Mum ti -14 � ' I ± I � CIIAR[[.5,3-,Rrr1 TCWFFL A z TOWERS LJ I Figure 2 - Conceptual Site Plan Figure 3 - Conceptual Massing Model (King Street East elevation) Page 283 of 601 CIIAR[[.5,3-,Rrr1 Figure 2 - Conceptual Site Plan Figure 3 - Conceptual Massing Model (King Street East elevation) Page 283 of 601 The initial Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment applications proposed a 30 -storey single tower, mixed-use development, with an FSR of 8.27 and a parking rate of 0.54 parking spaces per dwelling unit. Through the review process, the applicant has worked with staff to refine the building so that it better achieves Urban Design policies and the Tall Building Guidelines. The updated building and site design (as shown in Figures 2 & 3) proposes an `L' shaped building having a 30 - storey tower oriented to Charles Street East and a 11 storey building oriented to King Street East, all sitting upon a 4 -storey podium. The parking structure is wrapped with commercial and residential units along the King Street East frontages, and live -work units are proposed at grade along the Charles Street East frontage. Planning staff is supportive of the revised building design, in accordance with the comments and discussion in the following sections of this report and recommend that the proposed site-specific Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments be approved and the Urban Design Brief be adopted. Table 1 below highlights the development concept statistics. Table 1. Proposed Development Concept Statistics To facilitate the redevelopment of 1001 King Street East with the proposed development concept, an Official Plan Amendment and a Zoning By-law Amendment are required. The lands are currently designated `Mixed Use Corridor with Special Policy Area 1' in the City of Kitchener King Street East Secondary Plan and is zoned `High Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU -3)' with `Special Regulation Provision 544R' and `Special Regulation Provision 401 U' applying to two smaller former lots. The owner is proposing to change the land use designation to `Mixed Use Corridor with Special Policy 10' in the King Street East Secondary Plan and the zoning of the entire parcel to `High Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU -3) with Special Regulation Provisions 544R, 788R and Holding Provision 100H' in Zoning By-law 85-1, to allow for a FSR of 8.1; reduce the required parking; reduce setbacks to the street; require secure and weather protected bicycle parking; allow live -work units on the ground floor; and prohibit geothermal energy systems. A Holding Provision is also proposed to be added to the property to prevent the development of the site with sensitive uses, including residential uses, until the Region is in receipt of a Record of Site Condition and a noise study is completed to the satisfaction of the Region of Waterloo. Page 284 of 601 Development Concept Number of Units 464 dwelling units Commercial Space 450 square metres Parking Spaces 300 parking spaces (approx.) Building Height 30 storeys Podium Height 4 storeys Class A (indoor secured) Bicycle Parking Minimum of 0.5 spaces per unit Class B (outdoor visitor) Bicycle Parking Minimum of 6 Electric Vehicle Ready Parking Stalls Minimum of 20% Floor Space Ratio 8.1 Unit Types 1 -bedroom units (130) — 28% 1 -bedroom + den units (202) — 43.5% 2 -bedroom units (115) — 25% 3 -bedroom units (10) — 2% Live -work units 7 — 1.5% To facilitate the redevelopment of 1001 King Street East with the proposed development concept, an Official Plan Amendment and a Zoning By-law Amendment are required. The lands are currently designated `Mixed Use Corridor with Special Policy Area 1' in the City of Kitchener King Street East Secondary Plan and is zoned `High Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU -3)' with `Special Regulation Provision 544R' and `Special Regulation Provision 401 U' applying to two smaller former lots. The owner is proposing to change the land use designation to `Mixed Use Corridor with Special Policy 10' in the King Street East Secondary Plan and the zoning of the entire parcel to `High Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU -3) with Special Regulation Provisions 544R, 788R and Holding Provision 100H' in Zoning By-law 85-1, to allow for a FSR of 8.1; reduce the required parking; reduce setbacks to the street; require secure and weather protected bicycle parking; allow live -work units on the ground floor; and prohibit geothermal energy systems. A Holding Provision is also proposed to be added to the property to prevent the development of the site with sensitive uses, including residential uses, until the Region is in receipt of a Record of Site Condition and a noise study is completed to the satisfaction of the Region of Waterloo. Page 284 of 601 Planning Analysis: Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13 25. Section 2 of the Planning Act establishes matters of provincial interest and states that the Minister, the council of a municipality, a local board, a planning board and the Tribunal, in carrying out their responsibilities under this Act, shall have regard to, among other matters, matters of provincial interest such as, a) The adequate provision and efficient use of communication, transportation, sewage and water services and waste management systems; b) The minimization of waste; c) The orderly development of safe and healthy communities; d) The adequate provision of a full range of housing, including affordable housing; e) The adequate provision of employment opportunities; f) The appropriate location of growth and development; g) The promotion of development that is designed to be sustainable, to support public transit and to be oriented to pedestrians; h) The promotion of built form that, i) Is well-designed, (ii) Encourages a sense of place, and (iii) Provides for public spaces that are of high quality, safe, accessible, attractive and vibrant; j) 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, 2020, as it directs how and where development is to occur. The City's Official Plan is the most important vehicle for the implementation of the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 and to ensure Provincial policy is adhered to. 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 designation and zoning facilitate a compact form of development which efficiently uses the lands, is in close proximity to transit options including bus and light rail and makes efficient use of both existing roads and active transportation networks. The lands will be remediated through the development process and noise mitigation will be implemented. Provincial policies are in support of providing a broad range of housing. The proposed mixed-use development represents an attainable form of market-based housing. Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposed application will facilitate the intensification of the subject property with a mixed-use development that is compatible with the surrounding community, helps manage growth, 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 have 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. Page 285 of 601 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, 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 complete communities will: a) feature a diverse mix of land uses, including residential and employment uses, and convenient access to local stores, services, and public service facilities; b) improve social equity and overall quality of life, including human health, for people of all ages, abilities, and incomes; c) 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; d) expand convenient access to: i. a range of transportation options, including options for the safe, comfortable and convenient use of active transportation; ii. public service facilities, co -located and integrated in community hubs; iii. an appropriate supply of safe, publicly -accessible open spaces, parks, trails, and other recreational facilities; and iv. healthy, local, and affordable food options, including through urban agriculture; e) provide for a more compact built form and a vibrant public realm, including public open spaces; f) mitigate and adapt to the impacts of a changing climate, improve resilience and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and contribute to environmental sustainability; and g) 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 can accommodate a range of household sizes in locations that can provide access to transit and other amenities. Policy 2.2.4 requires that planning be prioritized for Major Transit Station Areas (MTSA) 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 ION stations 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 the Borden Station MTSA. The proposed development provides residential intensification and will help the City achieve density targets of the MTSA. 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. Planning staff is of the opinion that the applications conform to the Growth Plan. Page 286 of 601 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 Regional Official Plan Amendment No. 6) in August 2022. The minimum density target for an MTSA is 160 people and jobs per hectare (ppj's/ha). Planning staff completed an evaluation of the existing density for each MTSA for the 2021 Growth Monitoring Report based on 2019 statistics. The Borden Station MTSA consists of an area of about 54 hectares and had an overall density of 44 residents and jobs per hectare in 2019. The subject proposal having 464 units and about 450 m2 of commercial floor space represents about 864 residents and jobs. Therefore, this development will contribute about 16 people and jobs per hectare to the Borden Station MTSA. The Region of Waterloo have requested a holding provision be added to the site-specific zoning. Planning staff are of the opinion that the applications conform to the Regional Official Plan. City of Kitchener Official Plan (OP) The City of Kitchener 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 designated `Mixed Use Corridor with Special Policy Area 1' (Map 10) in the King Street East Secondary Plan (1994 Official Plan). The Mixed Use Corridor land use designation provides residential redevelopment opportunities together with appropriate commercial and institutional uses that primarily serve adjacent residential neighbourhoods. Over time it is intended that the Mixed Use Corridors shall intensify and provide a balanced distribution of commercial, multiple residential and institutional uses. The policies of Special Policy Area 1 were deleted through OPA 111. Urban Structure 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 (MTSA), 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 MTSAs 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. Policies also require that development applications in Major Transit Station Areas give consideration to the Transit -Oriented Development policies contained in Section 13.C.3.12 of the Official Plan. Generally, the Transit -Oriented Development policies support 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 stops, 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. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed Page 287 of 601 development will help to increase density in an area well served by nearby rapid transit. The building and development will contribute to a high quality public realm. Through the Site Plan Approval process, the applicant will be required to make parkland dedication. The applicant is proposing to dedicate lands for an urban green at the southeast corner of Bordon Ave and King Street East (967- 977 King Street East). In addition, private amenity space will be provided on site for future residents. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed Official Plan Amendment will support a development that not only complies with the City's policies for a Major Transit Station Area but also contributes to the vision for a complete and healthy city. Growing Together The Growing Together project is the continuation of the City's ongoing planning review process that began with PARTS and advanced through the Neighbourhood Planning Review (NPR) project, while also responding to new direction from the province, implementing the updated Regional Official Plan, and addressing new and emerging city priorities. PARTS Rockway Plan The subject lands are located within the PARTS Rockway Plan which is a guiding document for land uses within and around rapid transit station stops. The PARTS Rockway Plan made recommendations for amendments to the Secondary Plans within MTSAs, which have not yet been implemented. Some of the primary recommendations are to encourage the development of underutilized sites with higher density live -work environments and to increase housing supply with multi -unit residential while protecting existing stable neighbourhoods. The proposed development provides for a higher density housing options and the proposed amendment is in keeping with the PARTS Rockway vision for development within and around the ION stops. Neighbourhood Planning Review (NPR) The subject lands are within the King East Neighbourhood Planning Review (NPR) area. The proposed zoning and policies for this site contemplated most intensive mixed use zoning permissions. Housing Policies: Section 4.1.1 of the City's Official Plan contains policies with the primary 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. The proposed development increases the number of rental apartment units available in the city. The development is contemplated to include a range of unit types including one, two and three bedroom units, and live -work units, which will appeal to a variety of household needs. 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, 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 Plan and that sustainable development design standards are achieved. Sustainable development initiatives will be further implemented at the time of Site Plan Application. Page 288 of 601 Health and Safety Policies: Official Plan policies seek to minimize and mitigate land use conflicts between sensitive land uses and sources of noise and vibration, and potential contamination. The Region of Waterloo has identified that the lands are located in proximity to noise sources (roads), potential stationary noise sources, and have been identified as having environmental threats (contamination) on and adjacent to the subject lands. Official Plan policies permit the use of holding provisions where it is desirable to zone lands for development or redevelopment in advance of the fulfillment of specific requirements and conditions. The Region has requested that a Holding Provision be applied to the lands through the site-specific zoning to require filing of a Record of Site Condition and completion of a noise and vibration study prior to residential uses being permitted. Parkland Acquisition: Official Plan policies support the dedication of parkland in accordance with the Parks Strategic Plan. The subject area has been identified as being underserved by parks. The applicant is proposing to dedicate lands at the southeast corner of King Street East and Borden Street to the City of Kitchener as an Urban Green through the future Site Plan process. Parks staff is supportive of this proposal and will continue to pursue park land dedication through the subsequent Site Plan process. Proposed Urban Green 7 Q Z LU O X Q M MNG STREET EAST I M 111iiFfi f J roniuw + TOWER A J L5.01 i TOWER E cn - lsa Figure 4 — Proposed Urban Green .j Urban Design The City's urban design policies are outlined in Section 11 of the Official Plan. In the opinion of staff, the proposed development meets the intent of these policies, specifically: Streetscape; Safety; Universal Design; Site Design; Building Design, and Massing and Scale. To address these policies, an Urban Design Brief was submitted and has been reviewed by City staff. The Urban Design Brief outlines the vision and principles guiding the site design and informs the proposed zoning by-law regulations and the future Site Plan review process. The Urban Design Brief is attached as Appendix `C' and staff recommend that it be adopted by Council to guide the Site Plan Application Approval Process. Page 289 of 601 Streetscape: The building has been designed to address and create a positive and active streetscape along both the King Street East and Charles Street East frontages. The King Street East frontage is activated by at -grade commercial units, the primary entrance to the residential lobby, and an enhanced landscaped area commemorating the Onward Manufacturing Plant. Seven two-storey live -work units are proposed along the Charles Street East frontage activating the street, together with a secondary residential lobby entrance. Principal entrances and lobbies are located at grade with direct access to public sidewalks. The proposed tower includes a 4 storey -podium base, and the upper storey of the base fronting King Street East is wrapped with dwelling units which will further enhance the character of the street. Safety: As part of the site plan approval process, staff will ensure Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles are achieved 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 and the Ontario Building Code. Skyline: The proposed buildings will provide a new feature on the City's skyline. The proposed building will create visual interest from several different vantage points. Site Design, Building Design, Massing and Scale: The scale of the proposed building and resulting FSR is higher than those presently built in the MTSA, however staff is of the opinion that it is compatible with the existing and planned built form of the MTSA and the surrounding neighbourhood. Nearby developments approved at 20 Ottawa St North and at 1251 King Street East (at Sheldon Ave) are of a comparable height and scale. The proposed mixed use building has been designed in a contemporary style and includes a well defined 4 -storey podium and an `L' shaped tower with 11 and 30 storey sections which help to break up the massing. The mass of the 30 -storey tower has been oriented towards Charles Street East, where it interfaces with existing industrial uses south of Charles Street East, and the 4 and 11 storey components of the building are oriented to King Street East, which is the primary pedestrian focus. The proposed building and at grade uses contribute to the streetscape and provides for a transition to the low-rise residential neighbourhood to the north. The proposed built form includes above grade structured parking internal to the building. Due to a high water table, only one level of below -grade parking is feasible (and for the same reason, why geothermal is proposed to be prohibited). As such, 4 levels of above -grade parking internal to the building are proposed. The parking structure is proposed to be wrapped with commercial and residential units along King Street East, and live -work units along Charles Street East. The above - grade parking within the building is screened from view along the ground floor, thereby maintaining a pedestrian focussed and activated streetscape. Staff note that the building floor area occupied by the above grade parking structure, contributes to the total FSR, however the massing of this portion of the building is well screened, and structured parking is strongly preferred to surface parking. City policies support the construction of structured parking in order to maximize intensification opportunities and minimize surface parking. Tall Building Guidelines: The proposed development has also been reviewed for compliance with the City's Design for Tall Buildings Guidelines. The objective of this document is to: • achieve a positive relationship between high-rise buildings and their existing and planned context; Page 290 of 601 • create a built environment that respects and enhances the city's open space system, pedestrian and cyclist amenities and streetscapes; • create human -scaled pedestrian -friendly streets, and attractive public spaces that contribute to livable, safe and healthy communities; • promote tall buildings that contribute to the view of the skyline and enhance orientation, wayfinding and the image of the city; • promote development that responds to the physical environment, microclimate and the natural environment including four season design and sustainability; and, • promote tall building design excellence to help create visually and functionally pleasing buildings of architectural significance. The proposed development concept has been reviewed with these objectives in mind. Urban Design staff has confirmed that the proposed towers are generally consistent with and meet the overall intent of the City's Design for Tall Building Guidelines. More specifically, the proposed development aligns with acceptable onsite and offsite separations and overlook which provides opportunities for future development of tall buildings on neighbouring lands. Shadow Impact Study: The owner has completed a Shadow Impact Study which is attached as part of the Urban Design Brief in Appendix 'C'. Staff have reviewed the study and are satisfied the shadow study meets the City's requirements, with respect to shadow impacts, as noted in the City of Kitchener Urban Design Manual. The placement of the tower avoids most shadow impacts on the residentially zoned lands north of King Street East during daytime hours in the spring, summer and autumn. Wind Study: A wind study was prepared for the consideration of this development proposal and reviewed by staff. The wind conditions surrounding the proposed development are generally suitable. Wind control features will be required through the site plan application. Cultural Heritage Policies of the Official Plan seek to conserve cultural heritage resources. The property municipally addressed as 1027 King Street East (and located within the subject lands) is listed as a non- designated property of cultural heritage value or interest on the City's Municipal Heritage Register. The property is also located within the Onward Avenue Neighbourhood- a significant cultural heritage landscape as per the Kitchener Cultural Heritage Landscape Study (CHLS) which was prepared by The Landplan Collaborative Ltd and approved by Council in 2015. A Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) was prepared and contemplates the demolition of the existing listed structure. The HIA found that only the Art Deco Tower in the middle of the building possessed cultural heritage value, with the adjacent buildings having lost its cultural heritage integrity due to many alterations and a fire that damaged the existing structure. However, the report found that preserving the tower without the two other structures would not be possible as it is structurally reliant on the adjacent buildings. Other alternatives, such as retaining only the Art -Deco Tower were explored but were ultimately not recommended. The listed property also had historical and contextual value, specifically with regards to its the views from Onward Avenue. The findings and recommendations of the HIA were presented and discussed at the January 4, 2022, meeting of Heritage Kitchener. Heritage Planning staff are of the opinion that the recommended mitigation measures including documentation and commemoration are appropriate for the conservation of the cultural heritage value of the existing resource. As outlined in the Urban Design Brief and HIA, the commemoration will be completed at the Site Plan Application stage and will include: • Installing the 'Eureka' signage - inspired from the 'Eureka' tiles found inside the existing building - in front of the proposed development; Page 291 of 601 • a large "Memorial Wall" at the terminating view from Onward Ave, where the existing building currently is located, and at the entrance of the podium which details the history of the site and its evolution over time to commemorate and preserve the existing terminating views, and • re -use of salvaged elements of the Art Deco Tower (including original Eureka tiles, window and door elements, and existing metal columns). 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 land use designations and urban design initiatives that make a wide range of transportation choices viable. The subject lands are located within 150 metres of the Borden ION station stop, and several bus routes including an iXpress bus route. The building has good access to cycling networks, including existing on and off-street cycling facilities and is located in proximity to the downtown cycling grid. Secure, weather protected bicycle parking, and short-term visitor bicycle parking will be required as part of the proposed Zoning By-law amendment. The proposed development applications would permit compact mixed-use development that supports walkability within a pedestrian -friendly environment, and that allows walking to be safe, comfortable, barrier -free and a convenient form of urban travel. Pedestrian lobbies are provided to both King Street East and Charles Street East, and commercial and live -work units will also connect directly with the public sidewalks. Recessed weather protected pedestrian entrances are proposed which will enhance the comfort of pedestrian entering/exiting the building, and those passing by along the public street. The location of the subject lands, in the context of the City's integrated transportation system, supports the proposal for transit -oriented development on the subject lands and a parking reduction is proposed. Policy objectives of the Official Plan seek to ensure adequate parking, while also reducing demand by supporting public transit and active transportation, especially in intensification areas. Further discussion with respect to the proposed parking reduction is provided in the Zoning By-law discussion below. A Transportation Impact Study was completed in support of the application and has been reviewed and accepted by City and Regional transportation staff. The TIS find that no off-site improvements are required for the proposed development (such as turning lanes or changes to intersections). Staff is satisfied that the proposed development and parking rates comply with the Transportation Policies of the Official Plan. Proposed Official Plan Amendment: The applicant is proposing to add Special Policy Area 10 to the King Street East Secondary Plan to permit a maximum Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 8.1 whereas the current Official Plan policies allow for a maximum FSR of 4.0. The proposed site-specific increase to the Floor Space Ratio will permit the proposed development concept. Based on the above -noted policies and planning analysis, staff is of the opinion that the proposed Official Plan Amendment represents good planning and recommends that the proposed Official Plan Amendment be approved. Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment: The subject lands are zoned `High Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU -3)' in Zoning By-law 85- 1. The existing zoning permits Multiple Dwellings and a wide range of Commercial uses. The MU -3 zone currently allows for a maximum Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 4.0 and there is no maximum building height. The existing zoning also requires 1.0 parking spaces for each dwelling unit over 51 square metres of floor area. Page 292 of 601 The applicant has requested an amendment to Zoning By-law 85-1 to change the zoning of Area 1 from `High Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU -3) with Special Regulation Provision 544R' to `High Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU -3) with Special Regulation Provision 544R, Special Regulation Provision 788R and Holding Provision 100H' and Area 2 from `High Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU -3) with Special Use Provision 401U and Special Regulation Provision 544R' to `High Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU -3) with Special Regulation Provision 544R, Special Regulation Provision 788R and Holding Provision 100H'. The proposed Special Regulation Provision is to permit an increased Floor Space Ratio (FSR), permit reduced setbacks, reduce the required parking rate, permit live -work units on the ground floor, and to prohibit geothermal energy systems. Official Plan policies 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 788R: a) That the maximum Floor Space Ratio (FSR) shall be 8.1. The purpose of this regulation is to cap the Floor Space Ratio and ensure development does not exceed the density presented in the concept plans. As discussed in the context of the proposed Official Plan Amendment in the preceding section, staff is of the opinion that the proposed development concept including 464 dwelling units in 30 storey and 11 storey towers with a 4 storey podium, which includes active uses at grade, structured parking and dwelling units fronting the primary pedestrian street, represents an appropriate development in a MTSA and in close proximity to an ION station. The building has an acceptable degree of compliance with the Tall Building Guidelines and does not compromise the development potential of neighbouring or nearby lands. The building has been oriented to minimize impacts to established low-rise residential lands north of King Street East and east of Ottawa Street South. Staff is of the opinion that a FSR of 8.1 is appropriate for this site. b) The minimum yard abutting Charles Street East shall be 1.2 metres for the ground floor and 0.0 metres for storeys above the ground floor and the minimum yard abutting King Street East shall be 1.2 metres for portions of the building containing commercial, residential and amenity uses and 5.0 metres for portions of the building containing mechanical and/or parking structure. The applicant is proposing to reduce the yards abutting the street to accommodate for the proposed built form. Staff note that a road widening of about 3.0 m is required along the Charles Street East frontage and 4.0 metres is required along the King Street East frontage. The purpose of these widenings is to provide additional right-of-way width for future street improvements. Staff anticipate that in both cases such improvements would not necessarily include expansion for vehicles but would likely include improved pedestrian and cycling infrastructure. Further, the proposed setback aligns with or exceeds the minimum setback required by Enova for the existing hydro poles (these can exceed, and also supersede, zoning setback regulations). The proposed building setback would be from the future lot line and regulations clarify that they are to be measured from the post -road - widening property line. Staff is of the opinion that permitting a 1.2 metre setback to the ground floor uses along Charles Street East provides an appropriate distance between the building and future property line to incorporate on-site hard and soft landscaping, and the proposed 0.0 metre setback for upper storeys allows the building to project on upper storeys of the podium to provide for a weather protected entrance to the residential lobby and live -work units. The proposed 1.2 metre setback along King Street East applies to all levels and accommodates for the minimum setback to the hydro lines, while also allowing some space for hard and soft landscaping. The building is proposed to have variation in the fagade setbacks allowing for commercial units to be close to the Page 293 of 601 street, and the residential lobby to be somewhat recessed with a weather protected overhang. The zoning will also require that sections of the building not incorporating active uses be setback for 5.0 to accommodate for enhanced landscaped area and commemoration features. c) That parking be provided at a rate of 0.54 parking spaces per dwelling unit and that 0.1 parking spaces per dwelling unit be reserved for visitor parking and non-residential uses. Bicycle and electric vehicle parking are to be provided in accordance with Zoning By-law 2019-051. The purpose of this regulation is to provide for a parking rate which is appropriate for the development. A Transportation Impact Study and Parking Justification Study were submitted in support of the applications. Transportation staff have reviewed the study and are supportive of the proposed parking rate of 0.54 parking spaces per dwelling unit subject to Transportation Demand Management techniques including provision of secure and weather protected bike parking, unbundled parking, provision of TDM educational materials, subsidized transit passes and provision of a car share parking space. The subject lands have excellent access to public transit including Ion, Npress and local bus routes, and pedestrian/cycling networks. Staff recommend an additional 0.1 parking spaces per dwelling unit be reserved for shared use between residential visitors and commercial units. The proposed visitor parking rate of 0.1 parking spaces per dwelling unit is consistent with the visitor rate for multiple dwellings in a mixed use zone in Zoning By-law 2019-051. While in many cases it may be appropriate to reduce visitor parking rates, in this instance there is no on -street parking on many adjacent streets including on Ottawa Street, King Street East, Charles Street East, and Borden Avenue South, and unlike in the downtown, there are currently no public off-site parking lots or garages in close proximity. Staff also heard concerns from residents about impacts to the availability of on -street parking on local roads such as Onward Avenue and Crescent Street. While short-term on -street parking will continue to be available to the general public, due to the limited availability, it is appropriate provide for visitor parking on-site. Staff is of the opinion that while a landlord may be able to manage parking generated by tenants through lease agreements and TDM measures, it is more difficult to manage that of visitors. Staff is satisfied that based on the location of the site, and proposed TDM measures that a parking ratio of 0.64 (0.54 resident parking spaces per dwelling unit and 0.1 visitor parking spaces per dwelling unit) is appropriate. d) Live -work units shall be permitted to be located on the ground floor fronting Charles Street East. The purpose of this regulation is to allow for live -work units to be located on the ground floor along the Charles Street East frontage. The current zoning of the property does not allow for dwelling units to be located on the ground floor unless the development is entirely residential. Live -work units are a hybrid living/working space, the regulation clarifies this use is permitted on the ground floor along Charles Street East. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed live -work units will provide an appropriate active use along the Charles Street East frontage. d) Geothermal Energy Systems shall be prohibited. The Region of Waterloo has indicated Geothermal Energy Systems need to be prohibited to mitigate the risks associated with groundwater contamination. Removal of Special Use Provision 401 U Special Use Provision 401 U is proposed to be removed. This regulation currently only applies to former lots which contained residential uses and restricts new sensitive uses until a Record of Site Condition has been completed and the Region has received a Ministry Acknowledgment Letter. Holding Provision 100H takes the place of the Special Use Provision and applies to the entirety of the subject lands. Page 294 of 601 Holding Provision 100H Official Plan policies require 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. The City will enact a by-law to remove the holding symbol when all the conditions set out in the holding provision have been satisfied, permitting development or redevelopment in accordance with the zoning category assigned. Planning staff is recommending that a Holding Provision, in accordance with Regional comments and requirements, be applied to the zoning of the subject lands. The proposed Holding Provision will restrict residential uses until: • a Record of Site Condition has been completed; and • a detailed transportation (road), vibration and stationary noise study has been completed and mitigation measures have been implemented. Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment Conclusions Staff is of the opinion that the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment to change the zoning of the subject lands to `High Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU -3)' with Special Regulation Provisions 544R, 788R and Holding Provision 100H represents good planning as it will facilitate the redevelopment of the lands with a mixed-use development that is compatible with the existing neighbourhood, which will add visual interest at the street level and skyline, and will appropriately accommodate on-site parking needs. Staff are supportive of the proposed development and recommend that the proposed Zoning By-law amendment be approved as shown in Appendix "B". Department and Agency Comments: Circulation of the Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment was undertaken in January 2022 to all applicable City departments and other review authorities. No major concerns were identified by any commenting City department or agency and any necessary revisions and updates were made. Copies of the comments are found in Appendix "E" of this report. The following Reports and Studies were considered as part of this proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment: • Planning Justification Report Prepared by: MHBC Planning, November 2021 (updated November 2022 and February 2023) • Urban Design Brief & Shadow Study Prepared by: MHBC Planning, November 2021 (updated November 2022 and March 2023) • Conceptual Site Plan, Elevations, Floor Plans Prepared by: Neo Architecture Inc., March 2021 (updated November 2022 and February 2023) • Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment Report Prepared By: MHBC Planning, November 2021 (updated November 2022) • Transportation Impact Study, Parking Study and Site Circulation Review Prepared by: Paradigm Transportation Solutions, November 2021 (Addendum Letter dated February 2023) • Pedestrian Level Wind — Preliminary Impact Assessment Page 295 of 601 Prepared by: Boundary Layer Wind Tunnel Laboratory, June 2021 (updated November 2022) • Site Servicing Feasibility Study Prepared by: SBM, August 2021 (updated December 2022 and revised February 2023) • Provisional Risk Management Plan, Section 58(6) Notice & Section 59(2) Notice Prepared by: Region of Waterloo, November 2021 • Topographical Survey Prepared by: ACI Survey Consultants, October 2019 • Sustainability Statement Prepared by: MHBC Planning, November 2021 • Tree Management Plan Prepared By: Dan Weagant, August 2021 • Noise Feasibility Study Prepared by: HGC Engineering, October 2021 Community Input & Staff Responses WHAT WE HEARD 0 344 addresses (occupants and property owners) were circulated and notified Approximately 13 people/households/businesses provided comment A City -led Neighbourhood Meeting was held on March 23, 2022, and 12 different users logged on Several responses received indicated a general level of support for the proposed development and an overall increase in densities near transit stations, however identified concerns with certain aspects of the proposal. One respondent is supportive of the proposal and shared family history associated with the lands. An overview of the identified concerns and staff responses are found below. What We Heard Staff Comment Concerns with increase to traffic A Traffic Impact Study was submitted and reviewed by Regional and City Transportation staff. The TIS did not identify any major traffic concerns or need for road improvements as a result of the proposed development. Page 296 of 601 Page 297 of 601 The applicant is proposing a full moves access to the parking garage to King Street East, and a right -in, right - out service only access to Charles Street East. The study finds that the driveways will operate at an acceptable level of service, and that turning lanes are not warranted. Concerns with reductions to parking As discussed in the context of the proposed zoning rates and impacts to on -street regulations, staff are recommending an overall parking parking availability rate of 0.64 parking spaces per dwelling unit. Staff is supportive of the recommended parking rate of 0.54 parking spaces per residential unit for residents given the proximity to the ION station, and other public transit options and the transportation demand management measures proposed. Staff recommends that an additional 0.1 parking spaces per dwelling unit be reserved for visitors and commercial units. This is consistent with the visitor parking rate required by new Zoning By-law 2019- 051 for residential units in mixed use zones. Residents expressed concerns with spillover parking onto surrounding neighbourhood streets. On -street parking on local roads is available equally to the general public, however, is limited to a maximum length of 3 hours. Staff recognize the limited availability of on -street parking in proximity to the subject lands and is of the opinion that that the proposed parking resident and visitor parking rates will result in a development where parking can be accommodated on-site. Concerns with compatibility of high- A number of residents expressed concerns regarding the rise development with nearby low- compatibility of the proposed high-rise development with rise residential uses and shadow nearby low-rise residential uses. The subject lands are impacts. located on a Regional Road and a City Arterial road in close proximity to the Borden Ion station. High-rise development is appropriate in this location. Through the application review process, staff have worked with the applicant to reorient the massing of the 30 -storey tower on the site so that it is located away from King Street East. This has helped to reduce shadow impacts on the residential lands north of King Street East. The 4 -storey podium and 11 -storey building are oriented towards King Street East, which provides for a transition in heights and orients the active uses to King Street East which is the primary pedestrian frontage. Questions about compliance with Urban Design staff has confirmed that the proposed Tall Building Guidelines towers are generally consistent with and meet the overall intent of the City's Design for Tall Building Guidelines. More specifically, the proposed development aligns with an acceptable on-site and off-site separations and overlook which provides opportunities for future development of tall buildings on neighbouring lands. Page 297 of 601 Provision of park and amenity spaces The development will include appropriate on-site amenity spaces for future residents which will be further detailed and designed, in accordance with Urban Design Guidelines through the Site Plan process. The applicant is proposing to dedicate park lands at the south-east corner of Borden Avenue and King Street East for an Urban Green. These lands will be conveyed through the Site Plan Approval process. Concerns with the public Through the application review process, the developer (pedestrian) interface of the building has worked with staff to refine the building design and (streetscape, pedestrian realm, and massing. Active uses including commercial units, and a terminating views) residential lobby have been located along King Street East and live -work units and a residential lobby to Charles Street East. A larger landscaped area including commemoration features will be include on King Street East and form the terminating view from Onward Avenue. These measures are articulated in the Urban Design Brief and will be implemented and further refined through the Site Plan process. Concerns about lack of affordable Through the review process the applicant has improved housing and range of dwelling units the range of dwelling unit types to include one bedroom, one bedroom plus den, two bedroom and three bedroom rental dwelling units, as well as live -work units. While not deeply affordable, the applicant has indicated that the building will provide market-based, attainable housing. Planning Conclusions In considering the foregoing, staff are supportive of the proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit 1001 King Street East to be developed with a 30 -storey 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. It is recommended that the applications be approved. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: The recommendations of this report supports the achievement of the City's strategic vision through the delivery of core service. 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. A large notice signs were posted on the property and information regarding the application was posted to the City's website in January of 2022. Following the initial circulation referenced below, an additional postcard advising of the Neighbourhood Meeting and the statutory public meeting was circulated to all residents and property owners within 240 metres of the subject lands, those responding to the preliminary circulation and who attended the Neighbourhood Page 298 of 601 Meetings. Notice of the Statutory Public Meeting was also posted in The Record on March 31 , 2023 (a copy of the Notice may be found in Appendix D). CONSULT —The proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment were circulated to residents and property owners within 240 metres of the subject lands in January 2022. In response to this circulation, staff received written responses from 13 members of the public, which were summarized as part of this staff report. Planning staff also had one-on-one conversations with residents on the telephone and responded to emails. PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: • Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13 • Growth Plan, 2020 • Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 • Region of Waterloo Official Plan • City of Kitchener Official Plan, 1994 • City of Kitchener Zoning By-law 85-1 REVIEWED BY: Tina Malone -Wright— Interim Manager of Development Review, Planning Division APPROVED BY: Justin Readman - General Manager, Development Services APPENDICES: Appendix A — Proposed Official Plan Amendment Appendix B — Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment Appendix C — Urban Design Brief Appendix D — Newspaper Notice Appendix E — Department and Agency Comments Appendix F — Public Comments Page 299 of 601 AMENDMENT NO. XXX TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER CITY OF KITCHENER 1001 King Street East Page 300 of 601 AMENDMENT NO. XXX TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER CITY OF KITCHENER 1001 King Street East INDEX 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 (April 24, 2023) APPENDIX 2 Minutes of the Meeting of Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee (April 24, 2023) APPENDIX 3 Minutes of the Meeting of City Council (May 8, 2023) Page 301 of 601 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. ### to the Official Plan of the City of Kitchener (1994). 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 10 — Secondary Plan - King Street East Neighbourhood Plan for Land Use by redesignating lands, municipally addressed as 1001 King Street East from `Mixed Use Corridor with Special Policy Area T to `Mixed Use Corridor with Special Policy Area 10' • Adding Policy 13.2.3.10 to Section 13.2.3 to permit a maximum Floor Space Ratio of 8.1. SECTION 3 — BASIS OF THE AMENDMENT Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13 25. Section 2 of the Planning Act establishes matters of provincial interest and states that the Minister, the council of a municipality, a local board, a planning board and the Tribunal, in carrying out their responsibilities under this Act, shall have regard to, among other matters, matters of provincial interest such as, a) The adequate provision and efficient use of communication, transportation, sewage and water services and waste management systems; b) The minimization of waste; c) The orderly development of safe and healthy communities; d) The adequate provision of a full range of housing, including affordable housing; e) The adequate provision of employment opportunities; f) The appropriate location of growth and development; g) The promotion of development that is designed to be sustainable, to support public transit and to be oriented to pedestrians; h) The promotion of built form that, i) Is well-designed, (ii) Encourages a sense of place, and (iii) Provides for public spaces that are of high quality, safe, accessible, attractive and vibrant; j) 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, 2020, as it directs how and where development is to occur. The City's Official Plan is the most important vehicle for the implementation of the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 and to ensure Provincial policy is adhered to. 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 Page 302 of 601 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 designation and zoning facilitate a compact form of development which efficiently uses the lands, is in close proximity to transit options including bus and light rail and makes efficient use of both existing roads and active transportation networks. The lands will be remediated through the development process and noise mitigation will be implemented. Provincial policies are in support of providing a broad range of housing. The proposed mixed-use development represents an attainable form of market-based housing. Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposed application will facilitate the intensification of the subject property with a mixed-use development that is compatible with the surrounding community, helps manage growth, 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 have 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 major transit station areas, 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 complete communities will: a) feature a diverse mix of land uses, including residential and employment uses, and convenient access to local stores, services, and public service facilities; b) improve social equity and overall quality of life, including human health, for people of all ages, abilities, and incomes; c) 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; d) expand convenient access to: i. a range of transportation options, including options for the safe, comfortable and convenient use of active transportation; ii. public service facilities, co -located and integrated in community hubs; iii. an appropriate supply of safe, publicly -accessible open spaces, parks, trails, and other recreational facilities; and iv. healthy, local, and affordable food options, including through urban agriculture; e) provide for a more compact built form and a vibrant public realm, including public open spaces; f) mitigate and adapt to the impacts of a changing climate, improve resilience and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and contribute to environmental sustainability; and Page 303 of 601 g) 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 can accommodate a range of household sizes in locations that can provide access to transit and other amenities. Policy 2.2.4 requires that planning be prioritized for Major Transit Station Areas (MTSA) 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 ION stations 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 the Borden Station MTSA. The proposed development provides residential intensification and will help the City achieve density targets of the MTSA. 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. 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 Regional Official Plan Amendment No. 6) in August 2022. The minimum density target for an MTSA is 160 people and jobs per hectare (ppj's/ha). Planning staff completed an evaluation of the existing density for each MTSA for the 2021 Growth Monitoring Report based on 2019 statistics. The Borden Station MTSA consists of an area of about 54 hectares and had an overall density of 44 residents and jobs per hectare in 2019. The subject proposal having 464 units and about 450 m2 of commercial floor space represents about 864 residents and jobs. Therefore, this development will contribute about 16 people and jobs per hectare to the Borden Station MTSA. The Region of Waterloo have requested a holding provision be added to the site-specific zoning. Planning staff are of the opinion that the applications conform to the Regional Official Plan. City of Kitchener Official Plan (OP) The City of Kitchener 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 designated `Mixed Use Corridor with Special Policy Area 1' (Map 10) in the King Street East Secondary Plan (1994 Official Plan). The Mixed Use Corridor land use designation provides residential redevelopment opportunities together with appropriate commercial and institutional uses that primarily serve adjacent residential neighbourhoods. Over Page 304 of 601 time it is intended that the Mixed Use Corridors shall intensify and provide a balanced distribution of commercial, multiple residential and institutional uses. The policies of Special Policy Area 1 were deleted through OPA 111. Urban Structure 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 (MTSA), 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 MTSAs 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. Policies also require that development applications in Major Transit Station Areas give consideration to the Transit -Oriented Development policies contained in Section 13.C.3.12 of the Official Plan. Generally, the Transit -Oriented Development policies support 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 stops, 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. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed development will help to increase density in an area well served by nearby rapid transit. The building and development will contribute to a high quality public realm. Through the Site Plan Approval process, the applicant will be required to make parkland dedication. The applicant is proposing to dedicate lands for an urban green at the southeast corner of Bordon Ave and King Street East (967-977 King Street East). In addition, private amenity space will be provided on site for future residents. Staff is of the opinion that the proposed Official Plan Amendment will support a development that not only complies with the City's policies for a Major Transit Station Area but also contributes to the vision for a complete and healthy city. Growing Together The Growing Together project is the continuation of the City's ongoing planning review process that began with PARTS and advanced through the Neighbourhood Planning Review (NPR) project, while also responding to new direction from the province, implementing the updated Regional Official Plan, and addressing new and emerging city priorities. PARTS Rockway Plan The subject lands are located within the PARTS Rockway Plan which is a guiding document for land uses within and around rapid transit station stops. The PARTS Rockway Plan made recommendations for amendments to the Secondary Plans within MTSAs, which have not yet been implemented. Some of the primary recommendations are to encourage the development of underutilized sites with higher density live -work environments and to increase housing supply with multi -unit residential while protecting existing stable neighbourhoods. The proposed development provides for a higher density housing options and the proposed amendment is in keeping with the PARTS Rockway vision for development within and around the ION stops. Page 305 of 601 Neighbourhood Planning Review (NPR) The subject lands are within the King East Neighbourhood Planning Review (NPR) area. The proposed zoning and policies for this site contemplated most intensive mixed use zoning permissions. Housing Policies: Section 4.1.1 of the City's Official Plan contains policies with the primary 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. The proposed development increases the number of rental apartment units available in the city. The development is contemplated to include a range of unit types including one, two and three bedroom units, and live -work units, which will appeal to a variety of household needs. 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, 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 Plan and that sustainable development design standards are achieved. Sustainable development initiatives will be further implemented at the time of Site Plan Application. Health and Safety Policies: Official Plan policies seek to minimize and mitigate land use conflicts between sensitive land uses and sources of noise and vibration, and potential contamination. The Region of Waterloo has identified that the lands are located in proximity to noise sources (roads), potential stationary noise sources, and have been identified as having environmental threats (contamination) on and adjacent to the subject lands. Official Plan policies permit the use of holding provisions where it is desirable to zone lands for development or redevelopment in advance of the fulfillment of specific requirements and conditions. The Region has requested that a Holding Provision be applied to the lands through the site-specific zoning to require filing of a Record of Site Condition and completion of a noise and vibration study prior to residential uses being permitted. Parkland Acquisition: Official Plan policies support the dedication of parkland in accordance with the Parks Strategic Plan. The subject area has been identified as being underserved by parks. The applicant is proposing to dedicate lands at the southeast corner of King Street East and Borden Street to the City of Kitchener as an Urban Green through the future Site Plan process. Parks staff is supportive of this proposal and will continue to pursue park land dedication through the subsequent Site Plan process. Page 306 of 601 Urban Design The City's urban design policies are outlined in Section 11 of the Official Plan. In the opinion of staff, the proposed development meets the intent of these policies, specifically: Streetscape; Safety; Universal Design; Site Design; Building Design, and Massing and Scale. To address these policies, an Urban Design Brief was submitted and has been reviewed by City staff. The Urban Design Brief outlines the vision and principles guiding the site design and informs the proposed zoning by-law regulations and the future Site Plan review process. The Urban Design Brief is attached as Appendix `C' and staff recommend that it be adopted by Council to guide the Site Plan Application Approval Process. Streetscape: The building has been designed to address and create a positive and active streetscape along both the King Street East and Charles Street East frontages. The King Street East frontage is activated by at -grade commercial units, the primary entrance to the residential lobby, and an enhanced landscaped area commemorating the Onward Manufacturing Plant. Seven two-storey live -work units are proposed along the Charles Street East frontage activating the street, together with a secondary residential lobby entrance. Principal entrances and lobbies are located at grade with direct access to public sidewalks. The proposed tower includes a 4 storey -podium base, and the upper storey of the base fronting King Street East is wrapped with dwelling units which will further enhance the character of the street. Safety: As part of the site plan approval process, staff will ensure Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles are achieved 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 and the Ontario Building Code. Skyline: The proposed buildings will provide a new feature on the City's skyline. The proposed building will create visual interest from several different vantage points. Site Design, Building Design, Massing and Scale: The scale of the proposed building and resulting FSR is higher than those presently built in the MTSA, however staff is of the opinion that it is compatible with the existing and planned built form of the MTSA and the surrounding neighbourhood. Nearby developments approved at 20 Ottawa St North and at 1251 King Street East (at Sheldon Ave) are of a comparable height and scale. The proposed mixed use building has been designed in a contemporary style and includes a well defined 4 -storey podium and an `L' shared tower with 11 and 30 storey sections which help to break up the massing. The mass of the 30 -storey tower has been oriented towards Charles Street East, where it interfaces with existing industrial uses south of Charles Street East, and the 4 and 11 storey components of the building are oriented to King Street East, which is the primary pedestrian focus. The proposed building and at grade uses contribute to the streetscape and provides for a transition to the low-rise residential neighbourhood to the north. The proposed built form includes above grade structured parking internal to the building. Due to a high water table, only one level of below -grade parking is feasible (and for the same reason, why geothermal is proposed to be prohibited). As such, 4 levels of above -grade parking internal to the building are proposed. The parking structure is proposed to be wrapped with commercial Page 307 of 601 and residential units along King Street East, and live -work units along Charles Street East. The above -grade parking within the building is screened from view along the ground floor, thereby maintaining a pedestrian focussed and activated streetscape. Staff note that the building floor area occupied by the above grade parking structure, contributes to the total FSR, however the massing of this portion of the building is well screened, and structured parking is strongly preferred to surface parking. City policies support the construction of structured parking in order to maximize intensification opportunities and minimize surface parking. Tall Building Guidelines: The proposed development has also been reviewed for compliance with the City's Design for Tall Buildings Guidelines. The objective of this document is to: • achieve a positive relationship between high-rise buildings and their existing and planned context; • create a built environment that respects and enhances the city's open space system, pedestrian and cyclist amenities and streetscapes; • create human -scaled pedestrian -friendly streets, and attractive public spaces that contribute to livable, safe and healthy communities; • promote tall buildings that contribute to the view of the skyline and enhance orientation, wayfinding and the image of the city; • promote development that responds to the physical environment, microclimate and the natural environment including four season design and sustainability; and, • promote tall building design excellence to help create visually and functionally pleasing buildings of architectural significance. The proposed development concept has been reviewed with these objectives in mind. Urban Design staff has confirmed that the proposed towers are generally consistent with and meet the overall intent of the City's Design for Tall Building Guidelines. More specifically, the proposed development aligns with acceptable onsite and offsite separations and overlook which provides opportunities for future development of tall buildings on neighbouring lands. Shadow Impact Study: The owner has completed a Shadow Impact Study which is attached as part of the Urban Design Brief in Appendix `C'. Staff have reviewed the study and are satisfied the shadow study meets the City's requirements, with respect to shadow impacts, as noted in the City of Kitchener Urban Design Manual. The placement of the tower avoids most shadow impacts on the residentially zoned lands north of King Street East during daytime hours in the spring, summer and autumn. Wind Study: A wind study was prepared for the consideration of this development proposal and reviewed by staff. The wind conditions surrounding the proposed development are generally suitable. Wind control features will be required through the site plan application. Cultural Heritage Policies of the Official Plan seek to conserve cultural heritage resources. The property municipally addressed as 1027 King Street East (and located within the subject lands) is listed as a non- designated property of cultural heritage value or interest on the City's Municipal Heritage Register. The property is also located within the Onward Avenue Neighbourhood- a significant cultural heritage landscape as per the Kitchener Cultural Heritage Landscape Study (CHLS) which was prepared by The Landplan Collaborative Ltd and approved by Council in 2015. Page 308 of 601 A Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) was prepared and contemplates the demolition of the existing listed structure. The HIA found that only the Art Deco Tower in the middle of the building possessed cultural heritage value, with the adjacent buildings having lost its cultural heritage integrity due to many alterations and a fire that damaged the existing structure. However, the report found that preserving the tower without the two other structures would not be possible as it is structurally reliant on the adjacent buildings. Other alternatives, such as retaining only the Art - Deco Tower were explored but were ultimately not recommended. The listed property also had historical and contextual value, specifically with regards to its the views from Onward Avenue. The findings and recommendations of the HIA were presented and discussed at the January 4, 2022, meeting of Heritage Kitchener. Heritage Planning staff are of the opinion that the recommended mitigation measures including documentation and commemoration are appropriate for the conservation of the cultural heritage value of the existing resource. As outlined in the Urban Design Brief and HIA, the commemoration will be completed at the Site Plan Application stage and will include: • Installing the 'Eureka' signage - inspired from the 'Eureka' tiles found inside the existing building - in front of the proposed development; • a large "Memorial Wall" at the terminating view from Onward Ave, where the existing building currently is located, and at the entrance of the podium which details the history of the site and its evolution over time to commemorate and preserve the existing terminating views, and • re -use of salvaged elements of the Art Deco Tower (including original Eureka tiles, window and door elements, and existing metal columns). 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 land use designations and urban design initiatives that make a wide range of transportation choices viable. The subject lands are located within 150 metres of the Borden ION station stop, and several bus routes including an iXpress bus route. The building has good access to cycling networks, including existing on and off-street cycling facilities and is located in proximity to the downtown cycling grid. Secure, weather protected bicycle parking, and short-term visitor bicycle parking will be required as part of the proposed Zoning By-law amendment. The proposed development applications would permit compact mixed-use development that supports walkability within a pedestrian -friendly environment, and that allows walking to be safe, comfortable, barrier -free and a convenient form of urban travel. Pedestrian lobbies are provided to both King Street East and Charles Street East, and commercial and live -work units will also connect directly with the public sidewalks. Recessed weather protected pedestrian entrances are proposed which will enhance the comfort of pedestrian entering/exiting the building, and those passing by along the public street. The location of the subject lands, in the context of the City's integrated transportation system, supports the proposal for transit -oriented development on the subject lands and a parking reduction is proposed. Policy objectives of the Official Plan seek to ensure adequate parking, while also reducing demand by supporting public transit and active transportation, especially in intensification areas. Further discussion with respect to the proposed parking reduction is provided in the Zoning By-law discussion below. A Transportation Impact Study was completed in support of the application and has been reviewed and accepted by City and Regional transportation staff. The TIS find that no off-site improvements are required for the proposed development (such as turning lanes or changes to 10 Page 309 of 601 intersections). Staff is satisfied that the proposed development and parking rates comply with the Transportation Policies of the Official Plan. Proposed Official Plan Amendment: The applicant is proposing to add Special Policy Area 10 to the King Street East Secondary Plan to permit a maximum Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 8.1 whereas the current Official Plan policies allow for a maximum FSR of 4.0. The proposed site-specific increase to the Floor Space Ratio will permit the proposed development concept. Based on the above -noted policies and planning analysis, staff is of the opinion that the proposed Official Plan Amendment represents good planning and recommends that the proposed Official Plan Amendment be approved. SECTION 4—THE AMENDMENT The City of Kitchener Official Plan (1994) is hereby amended as follows: a) Part 3, Section 13.2.3 Special Policies is amended by adding new Section 13.2.3.10 thereto as follows: 1110. Notwithstanding the Mixed Use Corridor land use designation and policies for lands addressed 1001 King Street East the maximum permitted Floor Space Ratio shall be 8.1. A Holding provision pursuant to Section 17.E.13 of the Official Plan will apply to residential uses, day care uses and other sensitive uses. The Holding provision will be lifted through a by-law amendment and will not be removed until such time as a Record of Site Condition has been completed and a Noise and Vibration Study has been approved by the Region and releases have been issued by the Region. b) Map 10 — King Street East Neighbourhood Plan for Land Use is amended by designating the lands, municipally addressed as 1001 King Street East, as `Mixed Use Corridor with Special Policy Area 10' instead of `Mixed Use Corridor with Special Policy Area 1', as shown on the attached Schedule `A'. 11 Page 310 of 601 APPENDIX 1: Notice of the Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee Meeting (April 24, 2023) NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING for a development in your neighbourhood 1011 Ding Street East x Concept Drawing Have Your Voice Heard! Date: April 24, 2023 Location: Council Chambers, Kitchener City Hall 200 Kin g 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: kite h ene r.c alm a eti ngs To learn more about this project. including information on your appeal rights, visit: www.kitchenenca/ �� � F'IarGningApplications or contact: Mixed Use 30 Storeys Floor Space Katie Anderl, Senior Planner DeveLoprnent Ratio of 8.1 519.741.2200 x 7987 katie.anderltwa)kitchener,ca The City of Kitchener will consider applications to amend the Official Plan and goring By-law for the property at 1601 King Street East to permit a mixed-use development including 464 residential units. 7 live/work units, 450 ml of commercial space, and a parking rate of 0.64 parking spaces per dwelling unit. The development proposes an 'L' shaped building with a 30 -storey and a 11 -storey tower and a parking structure with a Floor Space Ratio {FSR) of 3.1. 12 Page 311 of 601 APPENDIX 2: Minutes of the Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee Meeting (April 24, 2023) 13 Page 312 of 601 APPENDIX 3 - Minutes of the Meeting of City Council (May 8, 2023) 14 Page 313 of 601 r IIII II IIIIIIIII + 4 �' i �'•_ + 4' �' �(qj/ +_ t > > + CITY OF KITCHENER OFFICIAL PLAN I Il llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllln _ -`' AMENDMENT TO MAP 10 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII '"—�_;-��:� . KING STREET EAST IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII i:. Q,.'•'' :' -_` �� . .. NEIGHBOURHOOD SECONDARY PLAN I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I �'• �<� •. .. Low Rise Conservation h\\\ II II IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !�1 iliuuuiiil •� : SC ..: •..::. N Illlul QQ: -•: c:':.;:'' :.,FNT::`:. lull" I I Low Rise Multiple Residential ST I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I �� IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII +'�i ;�� s Low Density Multiple Residential 0 Medium Density Multiple Residential Low Density Commercial Residential ••-. uuiliiiiI� Iii ' - � �_,' IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII � ` � ' �' �� . �S►TrF iiuuiiiiiuuuuuiin �� �; ' S Neighbourhood Mixed Use Centre II II IIIIIIIIIIIIIII 5 !`� � '9 �i x�, t IIIIIIIIIIIII ��� _ — �� Mixed Use Corridor >t >t IIIIIIIIIIIII Neighbourhood Institutional , Open Space Boundary of Secondary Plan Special Policy Area J cyq , EL Primary Arterial Road Secondary Arterial Road Major Collector Road SCHEDULE 'A' KING - CHARLES PROPERTIES (KITCHENER) LIMITED 1001 KING ST E ST 0 METRES SCALE 1:4,000 Im DATE: MARCH 15, 2023 u CO Minor Collector Road �O Area 1 of Amendment From Mixed Use Corridor With Special Policy Area 1 To Mixed Use Corridor • With Special Policy Area 10 REVISED: OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT OPA22/001/K/KA ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT ZBA22/001/K/KA City of Kitchener FILE OPA22001 KKA MAP 10 Development Services Department, Planning mxd - PROPOSED BY — LAW 2023 BY-LAW NUMBER OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER (Being a by-law to amend By-law 85-1, as amended, known as the Zoning By-law for the City of Kitchener — King -Charles Properties (Kitchener) Limited — 1001 King Street East) WHEREAS it is deemed expedient to amend By-law 85-1 for the lands specified above; NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Corporation of the City of Kitchener enacts as follows: 1. Schedule Number 143 of Appendix "A" to By-law Number 85-1 is hereby amended by changing the zoning applicable to the parcel of land specified and illustrated as Area 1 on Map No. 1, in the City of Kitchener, attached hereto, from High Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU -3) with Special Regulation Provision 544R to High Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU -3) with Special Regulation Provision 544R, Special Regulation Provision 788R and Holding Provision 100H. 2. Schedule Number 143 of Appendix "A" to By-law Number 85-1 is hereby amended by changing the zoning applicable to the parcels of land specified and illustrated as Area 2 on Map No. 1, in the City of Kitchener, attached hereto, from High Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU -3) with Special Regulation Provision 544R and Special Use Provision 401U to High Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU -3) with Special Regulation Provision 544R, Special Regulation Provision 788R, and Holding Provision 100H. 3. Schedule Number 143 of Appendix "A" to By-law Number 85-1 is hereby further amended by incorporating additional zone boundaries as shown on Map No. 1 attached hereto. 4. Appendix "D" to By-law 85-1 is hereby amended by adding Section 788 thereto as follows: Page 315 of 601 "788. Notwithstanding Sections 5.9, 6.1.2 and 55.2 of this By-law within the lands zoned MU -3 and shown as being affected by this subsection on Schedule Number 143 of Appendix `A', the following special regulations shall apply: a) The maximum Floor Space Ratio shall be 8.1. For clarity, the floor space ratio shall be calculated based on a pre -road widening lot area of 6,492 square metres. b) The minimum yard abutting Charles Street East shall be: i. 1.2 metres for the ground floor ii. 0.0 metres for storeys above the ground floor For clarity, the setback shall be measured based on the post -road widening lot line. c) The minimum yard abutting King Street East shall be: i. 1.2 metres for portions of the building containing commercial, residential and amenity uses; ii. 5.0 metres for portions of the building containing mechanical and/or parking structure. For clarity, the setback shall be measured based on the post -road widening lot line. d) Live -work units shall be permitted to be located on the ground floor fronting Charles Street East. e) On-site Parking shall be provided as follows: Use Minimum Off -Street Parking Spaces Class B Bicycle Stall Required Multiple Dwelling 0.54 spaces per unit Visitor 0.1 spaces per unit and shall be shareable with ground floor non-residential uses Ground Floor Non- 0 spaces Residential Uses f) Bicycle parking is to be provided as follows: Use I Class A Bicycle Stall Class B Bicycle Stall Multiple Dwelling 1 0.5 per unit 6 For the purposes of this regulation a `Class A Bicycle Stall' shall be a bicycle space which is either in a building or structure or within a secure Page 316 of 601 area such as a supervised parking lot or enclosure with a secure entrance or within a bicycle locker. For the purposes of this regulation a `Class B Bicycle Stall' shall be a bicycle space which is located in accessible and highly visible locations near the entrance of a building and are accessible to the general public. g) A minimum of 20 percent of the parking spaces required for multiple dwellings shall be designed to permit the future installation of electric vehicle supply equipment. h) Geothermal Energy Systems shall be prohibited." 5. Appendix "F" to By-law 85-1 is hereby amended by adding Section 100H thereto as follows: "100. Notwithstanding Section 55 of this Bylaw, within the lands zoned MU -3 and shown as being affected by this Subsection on Schedule Number 143 of Appendix "A": i) No residential use shall be permitted until a Record of Site Condition (RSC) has been filed on the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) Environmental Site Registry in accordance with O. Reg. 153/04, as amended. This Holding Provision shall not be removed until the Regional Municipality of Waterloo is in receipt of a letter from the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) advising that a Record of Site Condition has been filed. ii) No residential use shall be permitted until such time as a a detailed transportation (road), vibration and 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 points of reception (e.g. HVAC systems) on the sensitive points of reception and the impacts of the development on adjacent noise sensitive uses. This Holding Provision shall not be removed until the City of Kitchener is in receipt of a letter from the Regional Municipality of Waterloo advising that such noise study or studies 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." Page 317 of 601 6. This By-law shall become effective only if Official Plan Amendment No. _, (1001 King Street 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 2023. Mayor Clerk Page 318 of 601 P NU -2 54AR_--------- 15H I-1 0 - MU -3 R —535R 5"R MU -31R, 535R,544R M-2 1R 159U, 165U 42OU / 31 MU -3 1R 536R, 544R 1 R, 159U E-1 E-1 MU -3 537R 544R MAP NO. 1 - CHARLES PROPER (KITCHENER) LIMITED 1001 KING ST E R-7 s- SUBJECT AREA(S) AMENDMENT TO BY-LAW 85-1 S_ 42 O AREA 1 - N _ _ _ _ _ _ ' ' ' ' ' ' ' FROM MU -3 HIGH INTENSITY MIXED USE 14 CORRIDOR ZONE WITH SPECIAL REGULATION PROVISION 544R TO MU -3 HIGH INTENSITY MIXED USE C-2 CORRIDOR ZONE CRFR- CIAL REGULATION PROVISIONS 544R SCFNT 1 AWITH ND788R AND HOLDING PROVISION 100H 5 s+� AREA 2 - 193R-1-1 93 FROM MU -3 HIGH INTENSITY MIXED USE CORRIDOR ZONE MU -3 WITH SPECIAL REGULATION PROVISION 544R R 1 Ull AND SPECIAL USE PROVISION 401 U 777R, 92H TO MU -3 HIGH INTENSITY MIXED USE 54 fR CORRIDOR ZONE WITH SPECIAL REGULATION PROVISION 544R 1-1 AND 788R U-2 AND HOLDING PROVISION 100H R-1 541 R 15H MU -2 J- 23 BY-LAW 85-1 4 '9� C-2 NEIGHBOURHOOD SHOPPING CENTRE F,q MU -2 R 7 ZONE r -8 CR -1 COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL ONE ZONE CR -2 COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL TWO ZONE M - AR 2 CR -3 COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL THREE ZONE 2 401U E-1 EXISTING USE ONE ZONE AR MU- 1-1 NEIGHBOURHOOD INSTITUTIONAL ZONE 2 -3 5 M-2 GENERAL INDUSTRIAL ZONE M-2 159U MU -2 MEDIUM INTENSITY MIXED USE CORRIDOR -2 ZONE - MU -3 HIGH INTENSITY MIXED USE CORRIDOR 401U ZONE P-2 OPEN SPACE ZONE R-5 RESIDENTIAL FIVE ZONE - R-6 RESIDENTIAL SIX ZONE / CFSr R-7 RESIDENTIAL SEVEN ZONE CR -2 142R R-8 RESIDENTIAL EIGHT ZONE -2 A CR -2 1R 0 50 100 METRES SCALE 1:4,000 DATE: MARCH 15, 2023 CR -3 <(Jf3 4 ZONE GRID REFERENCE 2 SCHEDULE NO. 143 OF APPENDIX'A' KITCHENER ZONING BY-LAW 85-1 AND 2019-051 CR -3 143R � ZONE LIMITS ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT ZBA22/001/K/KA OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT OPA22/001/K/KA City of Kitchener FILE ZBA22001 KKA _MAP1 DEVELOPME T SERVICES DEPARTMENT, PLANNING mxd s `�nLUU 11 r 7] All 11111 I URBAN DESIGN BRIEF M EUREKAH @ LOWER KITCHENER 1001 1007 1015 1027 AND 1051 KING STREET EAST AND 530 534 542 AND 564 CHARLES STREET EAST v I ve", CITY OF KITCHENER D E v E l o P M E N T PREPARED BY: MHBC PLANNING P L A N N I N G (with additional graphics provided by NEO Architecture Inc.) / / / URBAN DESIGN Revised: March 2023 M H BC &1 LANDSCAPE Original: November 2021 with amendments November 2022 CONTENTS PART ONE: PROPOSED DESIGN 1.1 INTRODUCTION 1.2 DESIGN PROPOSAL 1.3 TRANSIT SUPPORTIVE DESIGN 1.4 SUSTAINABLE DESIGN 1.5 AMENITY AREA DESIGN PARTTWO: DESIGN VISION AND GUIDELINES 2.1 VISION AND DESIGN GUIDELINES PART THREE: RESPONSE TO CITY POLICIES, GUIDELINES AND DESIGN ANALYSIS 3.1 DESIGN RESPONSE TO CITY OF KITCHENER POLICIES AND GUIDELINES 3.2 COMPATIBILITY ANALYSIS 3.2 ANALYSIS OF MICROCLIMATE IMPACTS 3.3 CONCLUSIONS APPENDIX A: SHADOW STUDY PART 1 PROPOSED DESIGN 1.1 INTRODUCTION MHBC has been retained by King Charles Properties (Kitchener) Limited to prepare an Urban Design Brief Amendment in support of the proposed development located at 1001, 1007, 1015, 1027, and 1051 King Street East and 530, 534, 542, and 564 Charles Street East, in the City of Kitchener, referred to herein as the subject lands. This Report has been prepared based on the City of Kitchener Terms of Reference for Urban Design Reports. The subject lands are located along King Street East and Charles Street East near the intersection of Ottawa Street North. The lot consolidation is comprised of a total area of 0.655 hectares. The purpose of this Report is to ensure that a comprehensive urban design plan will be implemented to promote an attractive development that is appropriate for, and well integrated with, the surrounding community. This Report has been prepared in support of an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment required to facilitate a mixed use development on the subject lands. 1.2 DESIGN PROPOSAL The proposed development for the site is a high quality mixed use and multiple -residential development that will provide new residential, live -work, and commercial units near downtown Kitchener and adjacent existing Transit Corridors. The current proposed development integrates the following principle elements: A 30 storey mixed use residential building including shared amenity areas. 457 residential units proposed in the form of purpose built rental units to assist in the provision of attainable housing forms. 7 live -work units proposed at grade along the Charles Street East frontage. 452 square metres of at grade commercial floor area proposed along the King Street East frontage. 313 parking spaces proposed in the form of structured parking incorporated into a single level of underground parking, part of the ground floor and second to fourth floors of the proposed building. Minimal surface visitor and commercial uses parking spaces are proposed to be provided as an interim use. • 228 secure indoor bicycle parking spaces and 9 secure outdoor bicycle parking spaces. • One vehicular access point from King Street East which provides access to the screened parking structure. • One vehicular access for point from Charles Street East which provides right-in/right-out service access to the building structure for garbage and servicing purposes. Page 323 of 601 • Pedestrian drop-off and loading areas internal to the subject lands. • Direct pedestrian connections from the public sidewalk along King Street East and Charles Street East to the proposed building entrances. • Well defined building base and prominent building entrances will provide for an attractive streetscape along King Street East and Charles Street East. • Commercial uses provided at -grade along the street line facing King Street East provide active uses and engage pedestrians • Live -work uses provided along the street line facing Charles Street provides active uses at grade to encourage natural surveillance and provide 'eyes on the street' • Balconies provided for units located in upper storeys. • Large windows to provide eyes on the street. • A mix of building materials and colours. • Proposed parkland dedication at the corner of King Street East and Borden Avenue. • A total lot area of 0.655 hectares, with a proposed Floor Space Ratio of 8.93. The Owner's primary objective is to develop the site with an attractive and cost-efficient building to provide for housing at a more attainable price point on lands adjacent the King Street East Transit Corridor and designated within the mixed use corridor with direct access to higher order public transportation and in close proximity to the downtown core of Kitchener. SITE DESIGN The site will be accessed from the King Street East frontage, with service access provided from the Charles Street East frontage. Natural weather mitigation strategies have been incorporated including covered building entrances. With the exception of additional visitor use spaces, all proposed parking is accommodated within the interior of the building reducing heat island effect and providing shaded areas for parking. These surface spaces are proposed to be an interim use, and redeveloped in the fullness of time should the lands be consolidated with adjacent lands. The main access to the proposed mixed use building will connect directly to the surrounding public sidewalk system. The building lobbies will be accessible to pedestrians from the public sidewalk system on King Street East and Charles Street East as well as internally connected to the structured parking area. A shared outdoor amenity area, to be designed through the site plan process, is provided on the top of the podium level and accessed from the fifth level of the proposed building. Page 324 of 601 Page 325 of 601 BUILT FORM DESIGN The massing of the proposed building is broken up using a number of techniques including changes in building materials/colours; projections; recessions; and varying window sizes. Two towers are proposed with appropriately placed stepbacks to minimize the visual intrusion onto the public realm while providing engaging pedestrian level street frontages to assist in creating a continuous streetscape and engaging public realm along King Street East and Charles Street East. The use of building materials, projections and recessions establish a defined pedestrian entry and building base adjacent King Street East which helps to ensure a human scale of development and preserves a significant view -shed from Onward Avenue. Stepbacks and architectural projections above the base provide visual interest within the tower portions of the building. The proposed development has been designed with consideration to the existing and planned built form context, including high rise permissions associated with the urban corridor and location on the King Street East Transit Corridor, as well as the established low-rise pit a residential areas north of the subject lands on Onward Avenue. The subject lands, combined with the Regional road corridors and adjacent mixed use corridor designated lands, provide for an appropriate height transition between the subject lands and low-rise residential uses in the neighborhood. 7 Page 326 of 601 r 0 Op Vi I Page 327 of 601 - t r 4-- ` t t a m i t f £ f F Pag 1.3 TRANSIT SUPPORTIVE DESIGN The proposed development has been designed to prioritize active and public transit. The principal entrances are oriented towards both the King Street East transit corridor and Charles Street East transit corridor, encouraging future residents to walk to and from nearby residential, commercial, office and retail uses, services and public amenities. The development is within a few minutes walk of the Borden ION stop. Existing GRT bus stops are located on King Street East and Charles Street East directly adjacent the subject lands. The subject lands are also well connected to the City and Region's arterial road network. The development has been designed to encourage active transit through safe and comfortable pedestrian connections through the site to existing public sidewalks, and on-site cycling storage areas supportive of existing/planned regional cycling routes. The application plans to implement Transportation Demand Management measures including unbundling parking, providing bicycle storage facilities in excess of the minimum requirements, providing subsidized transit passes, and car share facilities. The proposed development supports active transportation and transit investment in the Region by providing a density supportive of higher order public transportation and alternative transit modes. 1.4 SUSTAINABLE DESIGN As a general planning and design principle, higher density development in proximity to the amenities associated with downtowns and in support of higher -order transit is considered to be sustainable development. Future occupants wishing to seek alternative forms of transportation will have options for walking, biking, or public transit available. This will be facilitated by the provision of indoor bicycle parking, as well as the provision of future pedestrian connections to both the existing sidewalk system and surrounding uses. The proposed development is located in close proximity to a number of transit stops, making public transit a viable option. The provision of reduced parkina minimizes land consumption. Energy efficient construction practices, building technologies, and mechanical systems will be encouraged in the development of the subject lands. A sustainability statement will be submitted in support of the future Site Plan application and will provide a summary of the sustainable building design elements as required by Official Plan policies. 10 Page 329 of 601 1.5 AMENITY AREA DESIGN The proposed development is committed to providing a variety of high quality amenity areas sufficient for all potential residents in the form of common amenity area (indoor and outdoor), as well as private amenity areas in the form of individual patios and balconies. The Urban Design Manual provides required amenity space calculations for general amenity area and children's play facilities in multiple residential developments. The development as proposed is required to provide 928m2 of general outdoor amenity area (2m2 x 464 units), and 928.5m2 of children's play facility area (2.5m2 x 557 bedrooms - 464 units), for a total of 1856.5m2 of outdoor amenity space. A 495m2 outdoor rooftop amenity area is proposed to provide opportunities for general amenity area and children's play facilities for the proposed mixed-use development. Further 537m2 of indoor amenity area is provided with direct access to the outdoor amenity area, and extends the potential amenity opportunities for residents of all ages and abilities, in all seasons. The detailed design of the amenity areas will be completed through the site plan approval process and will provide consideration for a variety of actives to support universal and age friendly design principles and promote positive multi -generational social interactions. In addition to the proposed on-site common amenity area, an opportunity to create a new public open space at the south-east corner of the King Street East and Borden Avenue is contemplated as part of the overall redevelopment proposal. New park space has been identified as a critical need for the City of Kitchener and the location the potential public open space block will act as a connection and open space linkage between open spaces north of the subject lands (Luther Green, Knollwood Park, ect) and the Schneider Creek Greenway to the south. The below precedent images identify a variety of design elements and principals to be employed in the detailed design of common amenity areas, and provide a range of active to passive uses. Design features that provide robust amenity spaces suitable for all ages and abilities are to be considered. Page 330 of 601 PRELIMINARY RENDERING VIEW FROM KING STREET EAST & BORDEN AVENUE PRELIMINARY RENDERING CHARLES STREET FRONTAGE 12 Page 331 of 601 PART 2 DESIGN VISION & GUIDELINES 2.1 VISION & DESIGN GUIDELINES It is envisioned that the subject lands will be redeveloped with a contemporary mixed use development that achieves a transit supportive density and is sympathetic to the surrounding urban context. The vision for the development is to provide attainable rental market residential units in a form of development that provides active and engaging public realm interfaces to improve the streetscape and contribute to the creation of a gateway to downtown Kitchener. The following guidelines have been identified for the purposes of achieving the vision for the redevelopment: 1. Provide active uses on the ground floor facing the King Street East and Charles Street East public street frontages, a human scaled public realm design, infrastructure to encourage active and public transportation use, a building form which address the street in terms of architectural detailing and massing, and enhanced landscaping along both public street frontages. 2. Provide for development that will be supportive of transit investment in the Region and the use of alternative transit modes. The provision of a variety of Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures are proposed to encourage future residents to utilize active and public transportation modes and reduce the reliance on individual automobile trip generation. 3. Locate highest densities and most active uses in closest proximity to the Borden LRT stop, achieved by introducing additional building height within lands designated urban corridor and adjacent a designated transit corridor in a manner that is sympathetic to surrounding uses. 4. Achieve a high-quality of architectural design and construction that is innovative and timeless and contributes positively to the area and Kitchener's identity. Encourage contemporary architecture that complements rather than competes with the surrounding built form. 5. Active uses including commercial space, live -work units, and residential units are to wrap any structured parking along King Street. All structured parking is to be screened from the public realm and no at grade direct frontage is to be provided on King Street East or Charles Street East. No blank walls are to be proposed. 6. Design a high quality pedestrian realm focused around the connections to the open space network and commemorative of the existing cultural heritage vista of the Eureka tower. Public realm improvements including public art is to be considered in the detailed design of the development. 7. As redevelopment of the subject lands and adjacent lands occurs, the proposed redevelopment will consider incorporating opportunities to create new public open space. Vive Green, located at the intersection of King Street East and Borden Avenue, and in close proximity to the Borden LRT Stop, is contemplated as a potential new park space area. 14 Page 333 of 601 PART 3 RESPONSETO CITY POLICIES, GUIDELINES & DESIGN ANALYSIS 3.1 DESIGN RESPONSE TO CITY OF KITCHENER POLICIES AND GUIDELINES CITY OF KITCHENER OFFICIAL PLAN (2014) The subject lands are located within the King Street East Secondary Plan Area in the City of Kitchener. The subject lands are currently designated Mixed Use Corridor. The subject lands are located within an Major Transit Station Area and adjacent to existing and planned transit corridors. Lands designated urban corridors and adjacent to transit corridors are planned to support primary intensification within the urban boundaries. Section 11 of the City of Kitchener Official Plan contains Urban Design Policies. It is intended that the Urban Design Policies will provide guidance and direction as the City grows, develops and evolves. The following is a summary of how the proposal meets the relevant policies from Section I I (Urban Design) of the current Official Plan: 11.C.1.11 Streetscape: The City will support the character of streets through the coordination of site, building and landscape design on and between individual sites with the design of the street. Design Response: The proposed buildings and the primary building entrances have been oriented to the King Street East and Charles Street frontages. The proposed development will have direct access to the public sidewalk system. The proposed building facades includes a defined building base which further enhances the public streetscopes adjacent the subject lands. 11.C.1.13, 14 & 15 Safety. The City will apply Crime Prevention through Environmental Design principles in the review of new developments, redevelopments and infrastructure projects to implement crime prevention strategies that will enhance the effective use of the space. Where feasible, and in compliance with the other policies of this Plan, the City will ensure that the efficiency of emergency medical, fire, and police services be considered in the design of communities, neighbours and individual sites. Development applications will be reviewed to ensure that they are designed to accommodate fire prevention and timely emergency response. Design Response: General CPTED considerations were analyzed in previous versions of the Urban Design Brief and have been considered in the design of the subject lands. The subject lands are located in a built up area within close proximity to emergency services. Emergency services vehicles will be able to access the development from the surrounding road network and the building will be designed in compliance with the Ontario Building Code including aspects related to fire prevention suppression. The proposed development is located in a highly visible location with sufficient eyes on the property from surrounding buildings. 16 Page 335 of 601 11.C.1.30 Site Design: Policy 11.C.1.30 includes a number of factors to be considered through the Site Plan Control Process. Design Response: The various considerations included in Policy 1 I.C. 7.30 have been addressed through the proposed design of the site. This includes: improvements to the aesthetic quality of the site from the public realm; the provision of safe, comfortable and function site circulation; and the incorporation of mitigating techniques to minimize adverse impacts onto adjacent properties. 11.C.1.31 - 11.C.1.33 Building Design, Massing and Scale Design: The Official Plan contains three policies related to Building Design, Massing and Scale Design. These policies encourage redevelopment projects to create attractive streetscapes and to contribute to rich and vibrant urban places. These policies encourage attractive building forms, facades and roof designs which are compatible with surrounding buildings. For infill development, the policies encourage development which complement existing buildings and contribute to neighbourhood character, particularity if located within close proximity of a recognized cultural heritage resource. Architectural innovation and expression is also encouraged. Design Response: The proposed development will provide a unique built form in the neighbourhood. The buildings are proposed to be contemporary in style using traditional materials and will be a positive addition to an area that has a wide range of building forms and architectural styles. The proposed development will improve the streetscape and will also enhance the surrounding public realm. The proposed development has been designed to complement existing buildings while still providing an intensification of the site. 17 Page 336 of 601 CITY OF KITCHENER URBAN DESIGN MANUAL In September 2019 Council for the City of Kitchener approved a new Urban Design Manual which contains City-wide design guidelines as well as more specific guidelines that apply to various types of development and/or various locations within the City. These guidelines are to be reviewed and evaluated with all planning processes and approvals. The purpose of the Guidelines is to ensure that new development is consistent with the City's Vision for urban design. For the purpose of this Brief we have reviewed the most relevant sections of the Design Manual: City-wide Design; Major Transit Station Areas; Nodes & Corridors; Design for Tall Buildings; and Structured Parking. Section 9. Design for Tall Buildings is most a pplica ble to the proposed development and the guidelines are reviewed in their entirety below. Section 1: City-wide Guidelines, Section 2: Major Transit Station Areas, Section 6: Nodes & Corridors, and Section 13: Structured Parking area Iso applicable, however, there are a number of overlapping directives and guidelines from Section 9: Design for Tall Buildings. Where specific guidelines pertain to the proposed development, section references have been included to identify how all sections of the Urban Design Manual have been considered. CITY-WIDE DESIGN GUIDELINES The purpose of the City -Wide Design section of the Urban Design Manual is to set forth the universal design expectations which apply to all of Kitchener. This Section includes urban design objectives that are relevant to all geographies and building typologies and is divided into two sections: Community Design and Site Design. For the purpose of this brief we have focused on the Site Design guidelines which includes guidelines related to Built Form, Shared Spaces and Site Function with sub -categories within each of these two sections. The proposed development has appropriately considered the Cit)EWide guidelines as follows: • The proposed development focuses height and mass where it provides the best public realm opportunities while minimizing impacts on surrounding lands. • Massing techniques are incorporated into the building design including projections, recesses, variation in colour, materials and texture, all of which help to reduce and diversify the massing of the building. • The building is designed with a defined podium to enhance the public realm along King Street East • The primary building entrance is designed to be visible from and directly accessible from the public street. • All building elevations will be designed to provide transparency, architectural continuity and visual interest. No blank walls are proposed immediately abutting the public realm. As a result of proposed windows and balcony placements there will be sufficient natural surveillance onto the surrounding public street. • The proposed buildings will have a contemporary design, meaning the buildings will be designed with a present-day building style, with varied architectural details, materials, colours and textures. 18 Page 337 of 601 • The design of the building provides for pedestrian weather protection including covered building entrances. • Lighting will be designed according to City standards and will be designed to minimize glare and light spilling onto surrounding areas. • Energy-efficient lamps will be used and over lighting will be avoided. • The site has been designed with reductions in parking to reduce the demand of private automobiles. • Driveway access to the proposed development is located off of King Street East, with service access located off of Charles Street East. The King Street East site entrance provides direct access from the street to the parking area and is screened from view of the public realm and streetscape. Other sections of the City -Wide guidelines including Servicing and Utilities, Waste and Recycling and Snow Storage will be considered through the detailed site plan review process and prior to final site plan approval. MAJORTRANSIT STATION AREA AND STRUCTURED PARKING DESIGN GUIDELINES The purpose of the Major Transit Station Area section of the Urban Design Manual is to set forth the specific guidelines that apply to the designated Major Transit Station Areas (MTSA's). The purpose of the Structured Parking section of the Urban Design Manual is to provide appropriate design responses are sometimes different from those of other uses. Likewise, evolving standards and expectations for how (and how much) parking is provided mean that structured parking designs need to be sustainable, flexible and adaptable; from being positioned to add more amenity for bicycles, ride sharing options and electric vehicles, to allowing for adaptive reuse over time. The proposed development has appropriately considered the Rockway Major Transit Station Area and Structured Parking guidelines as follows: • The proposed development provides the highest densities and active uses along the Charles Street East frontage closest to the Borden LRT Stop. • A ground floor height of 4.5m is provided to ensure a variety of active uses can be accommodated in the building base and to preserve for changing uses over time. • Transit demand management strategies (including unbundling parking) are proposed. • The proposed redevelopment assists in transforming King St. E. into a gateway to the city core with active frontages, a human -scaled public realm, setbacks to accommodate street trees and wide pedestrian pathways. • Opportunities for public art and patio area is being contemplated as part of the building facade treatment along King St. • A interim mid -block interim pedestrian connection has been provided where possible, linking transit stops and streets to surrounding areas and providing greater north/south connectivity throughout the Rockway Station Area. • Active uses including live -work units and commercial space wrap the facade of all structured parking facing the public realm. No above grade structured parking fronts onto King St. or Charles St. • An opportunity to create a new public open space at the south-east corner of the King Street East and Borden Avenue is 19 Page 338 of 601 contemplated as part of the overall redevelopment proposal. New park space has been identified as a critical need for the City of Kitchener and the location the potential public open space block will act as a connection and open space linkage between open spaces north of the subject lands (Luther Green, Knollwood Park, ect) and the Schneider Creek Greenway to the south. • The structured parking has been incorporated into the design of the building, and is screened behind live -work units, commercial uses and a public art feature wall from the public street frontages. • Where structured parking is exposed or otherwise visible, it has been designed as a fully integrated component of the building design, including massing, materials, and articulation. No blank walls are proposed immediately abutting the public realm. • Pedestrian access points, garage entrances, and openings to the structured parking are proposed to be visually permeable through the use of glazing and/or open-air screening to promote safety and natural surveillance for both users of the garage and the public. These areas will be well lit and prioritize pedestrian safety through the use of paving treatments and/or physical separation to delineate pedestrian routes, and providing memorable wayfinding and signage internally and externally. • Design for adaptability has been considered by creating flat surfaces for parking levels with discreet ramps rather than continuously sloped 'spiral' parking structures. • The garage driveway and entrances have been located where they interfere least with pedestrians and cyclists, the streetscape and the public realm. • Identification signage is to be incorporated into the detailed design of the parking structure. DESIGN FORTALL BUILDINGS Kitchener City Council approved the Design for Tall Buildings guidelines on December 11, 2017. The guidelines apply to all development proposals that are nine or more storeys in height. The following is a general assessment of the proposal relative to the various sections within the Tall Building Guidelines. • The proposed building addresses King Street East and Charles Street East in design, massing, and orientation and is a compatible built form for mixed use corridor designated lands, contributing toward a continuous public realm and uninterrupted pedestrian network. • The proposed development includes two tall buildings with a defined building base. The building base has been designed to prioritize pedestrian utility, comfort and safety. • The base of the proposed building will be designed to engage pedestrians and contribute to an active experience, including large windows along King Street East and Charles Street East. Active ground floor uses are proposed along the public street frontages, including ground floor commercial area facing King Street East, and live -work units fronting Charles Street East. • The ground floor height of the buildings will be designed such that it could support the inclusion of additional non-residential uses in the future. • Pedestrian and cycling connections on adjacent sidewalks will be strengthened through streetscape improvements along the King 20 Page 339 of 601 Street East and Charles Street East street frontages. An interim sidewalk connection has been provided along the eastern property line to provide a mid -block connection from Kind Street East to Charles Street East. • Enhanced landscaping that contributes positively to the public realm and promotes sustainability is proposed, and will be implemented through the detailed landscape design process. • Based on the criteria established in the Tall Building Guidelines— the proposed towers would be classified as a large slab buildings. Visual variety will be provided through well -articulated massing and high quality materials. • Building mass will be broken up through vertical and horizontal articulation, changes in materials, and architectural features. • Balconies are provided for residential units along street -facing elevations allowing for natural surveillance. • Parking is provided primarily underground and in structured parking incorporated in the design of the proposed building, with the exception of minimal surface parking proposed for visitor and commercial parking use. The proposed surface parking is located at the side of the building, and will be screened using hard and soft landscaping from the public realm and pedestrian circulation routes. The surface parking is proposed as an interim use and is contemplated to be redeveloped with the adjacent lands in the fullness of time. • A single vehicle access from King Street East is proposed. A second right-in/right-out service access is provided from Charles Street East. The number of vehicular access points has been limited to those required for site function. PHYSICAL SEPARATION The City's guidelines include formulas for calculating physical separation between towers. Physical Separation is the measured setback in metres from a tall building tower's faces to its side and rear property lines. The proposed 30 storey tower development physical separation (based on the City's formula) is calculated to be 23.22 metres. The proposed 11 storey tower development physical separation (based on the City's formula) is calculated to be 11.22 metres. RECOMMENDED PHYSICAL SEPARATION (BASED ON GUIDELINE CALCULATIONS) Tower A Recommended Physical Seperation / Proportion Provided Seperation Height 39.10 HxL 11.22 16.65 North - King Street E Length 57.40 200 56.10 East - Property Line Width 26.10 L/W 2.20 20.65 South - Charles Street S Area 1498.19 9.20 1 West -Property Line Tower B Recommended Physical Seperation / Proportion Provided Seperation Height 100.10 HxL 23.22 45.35 North - King Street E Length 46.40 200 27.90 East - Property Line Width 25.70 L/W 1.81 1 20.65 South - Charles Street S Area 1192.48 15.90 West - Property Line 21 Page 340 of 601 PROVIDED PHYSICAL SEPERATION 16.65m (to CL of King Street East) RING STREET EAST 1 PODIUM L1 - L4 y pp� TOWER A ' I L5-Lii ] f TOWER s 27.9m L12 - L30 ( T 20.65m (to CL of Charles Street East) CHARLES STREET 1' The physical separation guidelines are, in part, intended to ensure that one tall building does not restrict the ability for an abutting property owner to also construct a tall building on their property. Rather than prescribe a fixed number for physical separation, the City recognizes that tall buildings come in all shapes and sizes, and that a dynamic, scalable approach to separation is key to providing towers that are responsive to their specific contexts. Tower A is proposed to be setback 3.65 metres from the King Street East right of way, 56.1 metres from the eastern property line, 5.65 metres from the Charles Street East right-of-way, and 9.2 metres from the western property line. Tower B is proposed to be setback 32.35 metres from the King Street East right of way, 27.9 metres from the eastern property line, 5.65 metres from the Charles Street East right-of-way, and 15.9 metres from the western property line. The King Street East right of way has a current width of 18.00 metres adjacent the property frontage. This frontage is subject to a 4.0 metre conveyance for road widening as King Street East has a planned right of way width of 26.00 meters in accordance with the City's Official Plan. The Charles Street East right of way has a width of 30.00 metres adjacent the property line, with an additional 3.185 metres to be conveyed for road widening. Physical separation of 11.22 metres as recommended for Tower A is exceeded to the north, east and south. Physical separation of 23.22 metres as recommended for Tower B is exceeded to the north and east. The southern facing Tower B facade, adjacent Charles Street East, is proposed 11% below the recommended separation. The proposed physical separation of 20.65 metres maintains the intent of the guidelines as the subject lands are adjacent properties opposite Charles Street East not designated for residential development. 22 Page 341 of 601 The western facing Tower A facade, adjacent the side lot line, is proposed to have a physical separation of approximately 9.2 metres, while Tower B provides a physical separation of 15.9 metres. The proposed physical separations maintain the intent of the guidelines as overlook impacts to potential future re -development of lands to the west will be limited as any proposed towers would be oriented to the adjacent public street frontages due to the minimal lot size and configuration of lands. The orientation and placement of the proposed towers represents the most logical placement for redevelopment within the block. The lands to the east of the subject property are limited in re -development potential due to the building height limits related to airport restrictions. By orienting the towers as proposed the maximum re -development potential is maintained for the block on a whole. OVERLOOK One of the techniques to relate appropriate building height and consider compatibility with adjacent lands is through the use of physical separation calculations and overlook analysis. With respect to an overlook analysis, overlook is referred to as the overlap that exists between two neighbouring towers. It is measured as a percentage of tower Width or Length. It is determined by a perpendicular projection of one tower facade onto its neighbouring tower facade. The urban design manual provides acceptable maximum overlook percentages as a function of physical separation. As the proposed building has a recommended physical separation distance greater than 14 metres, the maximum recommended overlook between the towers is 30%. As no existing tall buildings are located adjacent the subject lands anticipated overlook is limited. The building has been oriented on site so that the majority of the views are onto the public right of ways or internal to the east side of the subject lands. Where views overlook onto adjacent properties the tower of the building has been setback from the side lot line to provide distance between the adjacent lot where future development may occur. Window and balcony placement will be designed to provide privacy from overlook. The proposed development will additionally mitigate the impacts of overlook through privacy screening where appropriate. Wind and shadow impacts will not negatively impact adjacent land uses and will be further reviewed at detailed design. 23 Page 342 of 601 3.2 COMPATIBILITY ANALYSIS The subject lands are located within a Mixed Use Corridor, which are linear in form and recognize the evolution of uses along the major corridors in the inner city. Mixed Use Corridors are planned to provide residential redevelopment opportunities together with appropriate commercial and institutional uses that primarily serve adjacent residential neighbourhoods. The subject lands are located within the middle of a block identified as Mixed Use Corridor, bounded by King Street East, Ottawa Street South, Charles Street East, and Borden Avenue South. Properties within this block are generally underutilized and planned for a mix of uses which include High Intensity Mixed Use Development and Medium Intensity Mixed Use Development. The subject lands location in the center of the above described block provides for redevelopment that will have minimal impacts in terms of height, shadow and traffic on neighbouring land uses (such as the low density residential neighbourhood to the north on Onward Avenue — approximately 60 metres away). This low density neighbourhood is setback from King Street East and separate from the Mixed Use Corridor Block. The subject lands are permitted to develop with a maximum Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 4.0. There is no maximum height specified in the Secondary Plan or Zoning By-law. Notwithstanding, additional analysis has been completed to ensure minimal impacts on adjacent and nearby land uses, in particular areas designated Low Rise Residential and consideration for redevelopment of adjacent properties. The proposed development has been designed with consideration of the following: • The proposal is for a mixed use multiple residential building, which is a use currently permitted by the Secondary Plan and Zoning By- law; • The proposed development is located on a site with no maximum height restriction; • Shadow studies have been completed which demonstrate that the proposed building height will not result in unacceptable shadow impacts on properties within the Low Rise Residential areas; and • Pedestrian level wind studies have been completed to demonstrate the proposed development will not result in undesirable pedestrian environments and provides mitigation strategies for the same. Further wind analysis will be completed at the site plan stage once the detailed design is more refined. The 2014 City of Kitchener Official Plan contains general policies related to compatible development. Where a special zoning regulation or minor variance is requested, proposed or required to facilitate residential intensification or a redevelopment of lands, Policy 4.C.1.8 of the 2014 City of Kitchener Official Plan directs that the overall impact of the special zoning regulation or minor variance will be reviewed, to 24 Page 343 of 601 ensure a number of compatibility criteria are satisfied. A zoning by-law amendment is required to facilitate the proposed development and as such, Policy 4.0.8 applies and must be considered. It is noted that Policy 4.0.8 applies in large part to development within established neighbourhoods. The subject lands are located along a Regional Road, are located outside of the Low Rise Residential area that forms the established neighbourhood, and are designated and zoned for high density development. Notwithstanding, the following is a response to the applicable criteria set forth in 4.C.1.8: a) Any new buildings and any additions and/or modifications to existing buildings are appropriate in massing and scale and are compatible with the built form and the community character of the established neighbourhood. Desitin Response: The revised design of the proposed development provides for appropriate massing and scale with respect to the Official Plan Designation (Urban Corridor and Mixed Use Corridor). The Official Plan provides policy for the future development for the subject lands and surrounding sites with respect to uses as densities. The subject lands and immediately adjacent land uses are planned for intensification that provides for a mix of residential and commercial units with increased densities which differs from what currently exists today. Currently, the subject lands and adjacent land uses are all low rise commercial/service uses. The proposed development and site specific requests align with the Urban Corridor and Mixed Use Corridor policy which provides direction for future intensification on the subject lands and adjacent properties. Given the location of the subject lands, the increase in the Floor Space Ratio is appropriate as it is located within a priority area for intensification and not located near sensitive uses. One of the techniques to relate appropriate building height to consider redevelopment of adjacent lands is through the use of physical separation calculations and overlook analysis. With respect to physical separation, the design of the building incorporates the minimum required separation distance into the building base such that adjacent lands impacted by the Region of Waterloo Airport height restriction are not precluded from re -developing as a tall building. d) New buildings, additions, modifications and conversions are sensitive to the exterior areas of adjacent properties and that the appropriate screening and/or buffering is provided to mitigate any adverse impacts, particularly with respect to privacy. Design Response: The buildings have been oriented on site so that the majority of the views are onto the public right of way or internal to the site. Where views overlook onto adjacent properties the tower of the building has been setback from the side lot line (approximately 9.2 and 15.9 metres) to provide distance between the adjacent lot where future mixed use development may occur. e) The lands can function appropriately and not create unacceptable adverse impacts for adjacent properties by providing both on appropriate number of parking spaces and on appropriate landscaped/amenity area on the site. Design Response: The proposed development provides adequate parking to serve the commercial and residential uses proposed on 25 Page 344 of 601 site. The application plans to implement Transportation Demand Management measures to educate the occupants on alternative forms of transportation and active transportation, unbundling parking, providing bicycle storage facilities in excess of the minimum requirements, subsidized transit passes, and car share facilities. In addition, direct connection to Grand River Transit services are available on both King Street East and Charles Street East. Private and shared amenity spaces are also provided within the building. The majority of the units will have a private patio off of their units, in addition to a large shared outdoor amenity space on top of the podium level. fl The impact of each special zoning regulation or variance will be reviewed prior to formulating a recommendation to ensure that a deficiency in the one zoning requirement does not compromise the site in achieving objectives of compatible and appropriate site and neighbourhood design and does not create further zoning deficiencies. Design Response: The proposed zone change application will be reviewed by Planning staff prior to approval. It is our opinion that the proposed zoning will result in a development that achieves appropriate site design. When considering compatibility, it must be weighted against other planning objectives. The subject lands are located within a Major Transit Station Area, and designated Urban Corridor which are key intensification areas within the Region and City. The planned function for Mixed Use Corridors is to provide residential redevelopment opportunities together with appropriate commercial and institutional uses that primarily serve adjacent residential neighbourhoods. The subject lands are an underutilized parcel within the King Street East Neighbourhood representing a unique development opportunity. The lands immediately surrounding the site are also designated either High Intensity Mixed Use Development or Medium Intensity Mixed Use Development. When reviewing the land use plan for the King Street East Neighbourhood it is clear that King Street East and Charles Street East are intended to be developed at a higher intensity than the areas internal to the established residential neighbourhood of the secondary plan. The proposed development represents an opportunity to develop the site in a manner which is compatible with the area. A shadow analysis has been completed for the proposed development (Appendix A) to analyze the potential impact of the proposed development on surrounding properties. As confirmed in Section 3.3 of this Brief, the shadow analysis demonstrates that the height and location of the buildings will not generate unacceptable amounts of shadows over low rise residential uses in proximity to the subject lands. 26 Page 345 of 601 HERITAGE COMPATIBILITY The existing building located at 1027 King Street East is known locally as the former home of the Onward Manufacturing Company, which operated at this location from 1916 until approximately 1980. The Art Deco style tower located within the existing building is the only remaining component of the subject lands which continues to have design/physical value from a heritage perspective. The mixed use re- development of the subject lands as designed proposes a celebration of the history of the former headquarters of the Onward Manufacturing Company though the incorporation of the Art Deco tower elements that were the centerpiece of the collection of attached structures that amounted to the expanded original building that Onward Manufacturing once inhabited. IMAGE FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY AND NOT REFLECTIVE OF ALL PROPOSED DESIGN DETAILS IN �. ONWARD AXIS !AMIF i- 11 Mlci-cen,ury d (Clean') vernacular for the 11 11 - - - - portion of building above Eureka Memory Wall, _ counterposed with otherwise contemporary .y , architecture proposed. -MOM _ s 111 Zi 11 Wilift 11 Al 11 i.Al C14 27 Page 346 of 601 To fully acknowledge and celebrate the history of this storied company, a representation of the original Eureka signage is proposed to act as an entry feature adjacent the vehicular access from King Street East. A'memory wall' presenting the story of the company, the history of the site, and an explanation of heritage considerations and features is proposed to be incorporated in the facade design of the ground floor adjacent the King Street East streetscape and public realm. Direct pedestrian connections from the public sidewalk on King Street East are proposed to access the main building entrances and at grade commercial uses. As requested through the review process, the location of the main vehicular access from King Street East has been shifted westerly such that the Onward Avenue terminating view leads to the at -grade commercial uses, memory wall, and residential units above. The design of the proposed building provides for all structured parking to be screened from the public realm and no at grade direct frontage is provided on King Street East or Charles Street East. It is further contemplated an art deco style mural will clad sections of the structured parking not directly fronting the public streetscapes. IMAGES FOR ILLUSTRATIVE PURPOSES ONLY AND NOT REFLECTIVE OF ALL PROPOSED DESIGN DETAILS The Heritage Impact Assessment, prepared by MHBC Planning, in support of the complete application submission recommends the following mitigation measures are considered in the redevelopment of the subject lands; Submission of a Salvage and Documentation Report which includes: • Photographic descriptions and photo maps of the property and the various sections of the building; and • Recommendations regarding salvage of any remaining original features; That consideration be given to retaining salvaged elements on-site for commemorative purposes; That consideration be given to the erection of a small bronze plaque which indicates that the property was once occupied by the Onward Manufacturing Co.; 28 Page 347 of 601 It is contemplated the terrazzo floor that remained intact in the lobby of the original tower (including the Eureka brand), existing windows and doors, and the existing silver column will be repurposed in the flooring and design of the proposed redevelopments lobby. A mounted plaque presenting the storey of the company, the history of the site, and an explanation of heritage considerations and features is proposed to incorporated in the detailed design of the lobby. EURE14A MEMORY STAND kepurpose Existing Historical Building Elements for Proposed Lobby. ! � i r t Current silver column t F ------------------------------ t t r ■ t r t f r Historical review --------------------------------------------------------------------- QoorslWindows as standalone decor/art Pieces GOONy` -__________________________________________________ F s� ms's r w r Original "Eureka" the incorporated I 1 into lobby floor S J I I ♦ r it �+10 29 Page 348 of 601 3.3 ANALYSIS OF MICROCLIMATE IMPACTS SHADOW STUDY A shadow impact analysis was requested to allow staff to better understand the net impact the proposed massing will have on adjacent properties. The shadow study diagrams are included as Appendix A. The following is a short summary of the shadow study findings: March/September 21: During the Spring /Fall time periods shadows fall, for the most part, within the subject lands and within non -low-rise residential properties. The adjacent mixed use corridor lands will experience minimal shadows in the morning time periods. No adjacent properties or nearby low-rise residential lands will experience shadows for more than four consecutive hours during the spring/fall. June 21: During the summer time period the shadows are generally contained within the subject lands and adjacent non- residential use lands. The adjacent mixed use corridor lands west of the subject lands will experience partial shadows during the morning time period. Existing low-rise residential lands to the north will not be impacted by shadows from the proposed development during any time period during the summer, and existing low-rise residential lands to the east will experience partial shadows in the late afternoon (4pm-6pm). Shadow impacts are not anticipated to impact any adjacent lands for more than four consecutive hours. December 21: Residential properties fronting Borden Avenue and Onward Avenue will experience partial shadows from the proposed development in the late morning and early afternoon time periods on December 21. Shadow impacts are not anticipated to impact any adjacent low-rise residential lands for more than two consecutive hours. Generally winter shadows are considered more acceptable as people are less likely to use their backyards during this time of year. The shadow study diagrams demonstrate that the height and location of the building will not generate unacceptable amounts of shadows on adjacent lands, and on lands designated Low -Rise Residential. PEDESTRIAN WIND STUDY A pedestrian wind study has been completed by The Boundary Layer Wind Tunnel Laboratory (BLWTL) in support of the proposed development. The purpose of this study was to conduct a qualitative street -level, wind environment assessment for the proposed development. Further wind analysis will be completed at the site plan stage along with design mitigations. 30 Page 349 of 601 3.4 CONCLUSION The proposed development presented in this Urban Design Brief conforms with the policies of the City of Kitchener's Official Plan and meets the urban design objectives as well as the site specific goals and objectives identified herein. Overall, the proposed redevelopment represents a significant investment in Kitchener and will create new residential units in a high-quality development, all of which contribute positively to the surrounding neighbourhood. In summary, the proposed development will: • Capitalize on the existing location of the subject lands in on the King Street East Transit Corridor, and designated Urban Corridor and Mixed Use Corridor; • Provide for intensification that is sensitive to the existing and planned surrounding context and will result in the clean up of an existing brownfield site; • Result in a pedestrian friendly development that supports active transportation while supporting existing and planned transit services, thereby minimizing future occupants' reliance on the automobile; Create strong visually appealing street edges; Result in a more efficient and sustainable use of the property; Increase the variety of unit types within the area by offering smaller multiple residential units at an attainable price point; and Define the King Street East and Charles Street East street edges by incorporating high quality architectural detailing. The proposed redevelopment is appropriate for this location and will contribute positively to the character and built form of the King Street East corridor. The proposal additionally supports the vision to provide a variety of high density residential uses through redevelopment on lands adjacent the King Street East Transit Corridor and new transit focused neighbourhood planned. 31 Page 350 of 601 APPENDIX A SHADOW STUDY p J rr Z w U a> cq d UI N L U cq 3 O Y N N O r N N O n i U N O d N 1n cq z Q LL W J LL Q N _O N O M N O N D F 0 MARCH 21st SPRING EQUINOX 10H 1 : 1500 SPRING EQUINOX 16H 1 : 1500 SPRING EQUINOX 12H 1 : 1500 SPRING EQUINOX 18H 1 : 1500 SPRING EQUINOX 14H 1 : 1500 Project Status ARCHITECTURE INC OWNER ,y v e D E V E L O P M E N T PROJECT KING — OTTAWA — CHARLES 1001 King St E DRAWING SPRING EQUINOX SHADOW STUDY PROJECT No. 17-022 PROJECT SH01 DATE Feb 10 - 2023 DRAWN BY Author Page 352 of 601 a �YLO m Y � n s m ro d Z N M17 m LD 71iTECTS x O Z DEC 14/21 Xr' X i mDREW ROUERTSO" LICENCL 4921 ry�rrr+rr rrrnr n0ry'r"� OWNER ,y v e D E V E L O P M E N T PROJECT KING — OTTAWA — CHARLES 1001 King St E DRAWING SPRING EQUINOX SHADOW STUDY PROJECT No. 17-022 PROJECT SH01 DATE Feb 10 - 2023 DRAWN BY Author Page 352 of 601 p J rr Z w U a> cq d UI N L U cq 3 O Y N N O r N N O n i U N O d N 1n cq z Q LL W J LL Q co Lp N _O N O M N O N ii D F 0 JUNE 21st SUMMER SOLSTICE 10H 1 : 1500 SUMMER SOLSTICE 16H 1 : 1500 SUMMER SOLSTICE 12H 1 : 1500 SUMMER SOLSTICE 18H 1 : 1500 SUMMER SOLSTICE 14H 1 : 1500 Project Status ARCHITECTURE INC OWNER ,y v e D E V E L O P M E N T PROJECT KING — OTTAWA — CHARLES 1001 King St E DRAWING SUMMER SOLSTICE SHADOW STUDY PROJECT No. 17-022 PROJECT SH02 DATE Feb 10 - 2023 DRAWN BY Author Page 353 of 601 a �YLO m Y � n s m ro d Z N M17 m LD 71iTECTS x O Z DEC 14/21 Xr' X i mDREW ROUERTSO" LICENCL 4921 ry�rrr+rr rrrnr n0ry'r"� OWNER ,y v e D E V E L O P M E N T PROJECT KING — OTTAWA — CHARLES 1001 King St E DRAWING SUMMER SOLSTICE SHADOW STUDY PROJECT No. 17-022 PROJECT SH02 DATE Feb 10 - 2023 DRAWN BY Author Page 353 of 601 p J rr Z w U a> cq d UI N L U cq 3 O s= Y N N O r N N O n i to U N 2 d N 1n cq Z Q LL W J LL Q LO qq LO N _O N O M N O N Iii Q D F 0 SEPTEMBER 21st I FALL EQUINOX 10H 1 : 1500 � I � I — �� I L. I a FALL EQUINOX 16H 1:1500 FALL EQUINOX 12H 1 : 1500 FALL EQUINOX 18H 1 : 1500 FALL EQUINOX 14H 1 : 1500 Project Status ARCHITECTURE INC OWNER ,y v e D E V E L O P M E N T PROJECT KING — OTTAWA — CHARLES 1001 King St E DRAWING FALL EQUINOX SHADOW STUDY PROJECT No. 17-022 a �YLO DATE Feb 10 - 2023 SH03 m Y � n s m ro d Z N M17 m LD 3".--xF/-HITECT5 "DEC 14/21 4 i ANDREW RO UERTSON! LICENCL 4921 ry�rrr+rrrrrnni ''ry'rx,x OWNER ,y v e D E V E L O P M E N T PROJECT KING — OTTAWA — CHARLES 1001 King St E DRAWING FALL EQUINOX SHADOW STUDY PROJECT No. 17-022 PROJECT DATE Feb 10 - 2023 SH03 DRAWN BY Author Page 354 of 601 p J rr Z w U a> cq d UI N cq L U 0 Y N N O r Q Lp LO N _O N O M N O N Q D F 0 DECEMBER 21st WINTER SOLSTICE 12H UMPT11( WINTER SOLSTICE 14H iMPT1111 , WINTER SOLSTICE 16H 1 : 1500 Project Status ARCHITECTURE INC OWNER ,y v e D E V E L O P M E N T PROJECT KING — OTTAWA — CHARLES 1001 King St E DRAWING WINTER SOLSTICE SHADOW STUDY PROJECT No. 17-022 a �YLD DATE Feb 10 - 2023 SH04 m Y � n s m ro d Z N M17 O ^ a -fes/� �r' ~ ITECTS Z DEC 14/21 XmDREW ROUERTSO" LICENCL 4921 ry�rrr+rrrrrnni 1'ry'r"� OWNER ,y v e D E V E L O P M E N T PROJECT KING — OTTAWA — CHARLES 1001 King St E DRAWING WINTER SOLSTICE SHADOW STUDY PROJECT No. 17-022 PROJECT DATE Feb 10 - 2023 SH04 DRAWN BY Author Page 355 of 601 NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING for a development in your neighbourhood 1001 King Street East A Concept Drawing [1A Have Your Voice Heard! Date: April 24, 2023 Location: Council Chambers, Kitchener City Hall 200 King Street West orVirtuaI Zoom Meeting To view the staff report, agenda, meeting details, start time of this item orto appearasa delegation, visit: kitchener.ca/meetings To learn more about this project, including information on your appeal rights, visit: www.kitchener.ca/ PlanningApplications or contact: Mixed Use 30 Storeys Floor Space Katie Anderl, Senior Planner Development Ratio of 8.01 519.741.2200 x 7987 katie.anderl@ kitchener.ca The City of Kitchener will consider applications to amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-law for the property at 1001 King Street East to permit a mixed-use development including 464 residential units, 7 live/work units, 450 m2 of commercial space, and a parking rate of 0.64 parking spaces per dwelling unit. The development proposes an `U shaped building with a 30 -storey and a 11 -storey tower and a parking structure with a Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 8.01. Page 3556 of 601 From: Mike Seiling Sent: Friday, December 2, 2022 9:02 AM To: Katie Anderl Subject: RE: RE -CIRCULATION - OPA/ZBA (1001 King Street East) Building; no concerns From: Katie Anderl <Katie.Anderl@kitchener.ca> Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2022 9:59 AM To: Carlos Reyes <Carlos.Reyes@kitchener.ca>; Dave Seller <Dave.Seller@kitchener.ca>; David Paetz <David.Paetz@kitchener.ca>; Ellen Straus <EIIen.Straus@kitchener.ca>; Enova Power Corp. - Greig Cameron <greig.cameron@enovapower.com>; Enova Power Corp. - Shaun Wang <shaun.wang@enovapower.com>; Greg Reitzel <Greg.Reitzel@kitchener.ca>; Mike Seiling <Mike.Seiline@kitchener.ca>; Park Planning (SM) <Park.Planning@kitchener.ca>; Region - Planning <PlanningApplications@regionofwaterloo.ca>; Steven Ryder <Steven.Ryder@kitchener.ca>; Sylvie Eastman <Sylvie.Eastman@kitchener.ca>; WRDSB - Board Secretary (elaine burns@wrdsb.ca) <elaine burns@wrdsb.ca>; WRDSB - Planning <planning@wrdsb.ca> Cc: Lenore Ross <Lenore.Ross@kitchen er.ca>; Angela Mick <Angela.Mick@kitchener.ca>; Deeksha Choudhry <Deeksha.Choudhry@kitchener.ca>; Pegah Fahimian <Pegah.Fahimian@kitchener.ca>; 'Jason Wigglesworth' <iwigglesworth@region ofwaterloo.ca>; MMohr <MMohr@regionofwaterloo.ca>; Sandro Bassanese<Sandro.Bassa nese @kitchener.ca>; Gaurang Khandelwal <Gaurang.Khandelwal@kitchener.ca> Subject: RE -CIRCULATION - OPA/ZBA (1001 King Street East) Hello, The City of Kitchener has received an updated submission from King -Charles Properties (Kitchener) Limited for the proposed Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment. Please see attached circulation letter. Updated documentation is saved in AMANDA (folders 22-100385 & 22-100386) for internal staff reference & for external agencies ShareFile. Comments or questions should be directed to Katie Anderl, Senior Planner (copied on this email). Katie Anderl Senior Planner I Planning Division I City of Kitchener 519-741-2200 x7987 I TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 katie.anderl@kitchener.ca ang ij You S(115 Page 357 of 601 From: Trevor Jacobs Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2022 11:41 AM To: Katie Anderl Subject: RE: Circulation for Comment - OPA/ZBA (1001 King Street East) Hi Katie, The following is Engineering comments. They will need to update and re -submit their water distribution report to reflect the comments below from Angela Mick, Kitchener Utilities: "There is an existing 150mm water service already servicing the site from Charles St E (installed as part of LRT) so I'm not sure why they would suggest a new 150mm service from King St E. All of the other existing unused services along Charles will need to be cut off at the main with coordination from LRT. King St from Ottawa St to Stirling Ave is being reconstructed in 2023 so it would make sense to leave the King St servicing for the reconstruction project to remove. " Regards, Trevor From: Katie Anderl <Katie.Anderl@kitchener.ca> Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2022 1:03 PM To: Trevor Jacobs <Trevor.Jacobs@kitchener.ca> Subject: RE: Circulation for Comment - OPA/ZBA (1001 King Street East) Hi Trevor, All the reports submitted for this OPA/ZBA are saved here: O:\Secured\Digital Planning Review\Development Application Submissions\1001-1051 King St E & 530-564 Charles St. I attached the Servicing Study thye submitted, however if it doesn't include the details you need, they will need to update the report to provide what you need. Thanks for the quick review, Katie From: Trevor Jacobs <Trevor.Jacobs@kitchener.ca> Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2022 11:56 AM To: Katie Anderl <Katie.Anderl@kitchener.ca> Subject: RE: Circulation for Comment - OPA/ZBA (1001 King Street East) Thanks, Katie. I have not received the required documents for the review, or do I just ask for these again? Page 358 of 601 Since the pre -app, our comments on these applications has changed slightly as it relates to increased FSR's: Zoning Bylaw Amendment: • For the OPA/ZBA a Functional Servicing Report showing outlets to the municipal servicing system along with the storm and sanitary design sheets are required to the satisfaction of Engineering Services. The sanitary zoned and actual peak flow must also be submitted to run the sanitary capacity modeling. The City of Kitchener will use this information to determine if there are any downstream issues. If the capacity analysis determines that the pipes will need to be upgraded to support the development, then these upgrades will be rolled into the development costs. Further studies will be required at the time of development to determine the approximate amount of sanitary sewers that will need to be upgraded to accommodate the above developments. • FOR SITES LOOKING FOR A SPECIAL REGULATION TO THE EXISTING ZONING THAT WILL SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASE THE FLOOR SPACE RATIO (POPULATION) i.e. NOT CHANGING THE ZONING (if applicable) - Please note that since zoned flows for this development are not reflective of the development application, population should be based off of the Regions 2020 Water and Wastewater Monitoring Report. Section 2.4 — Development Data establishes a People Per Unit (PPU) based on Structure Type and assigns Apartments as having a PPU of 1.77. Please multiply 1.77 by the number of units in the building. Furthermore, the City's Average Daily Residential Sanitary Flow rate is 305L/day/cap and the City's Average per second Residential Sanitary Flow rate is 0.0035L/sec/cap. Please be advised that the process Engineering is noting above is specific to this development. • For the OPA/ZBA a Water Distribution Report is required to the satisfaction of Engineering Services in consultation with Kitchener Utilities and the Region of Waterloo. Regards, Trevor From: Katie Anderl <Katie.Anderl@kitchener.ca> Sent: Monday, January 17, 2022 2:27 PM To: Trevor Jacobs <Trevor.Jacobs@kitchener.ca> Cc: Christine Kompter <Christine.Kompter@kitchener.ca> Subject: RE: Circulation for Comment - OPA/ZBA (1001 King Street East) Hi Trevor, No, no meetings yet - this is an application for OPA/ZBA. The pre -app for this one was held last May. There may be a Neighbourhood Information meeting scheduled in a couple of months, or possibly and post -circulation meeting or issue specific meetings depending on the comments that emerge from the circulation. Thanks, Katie Page 359 of 601 From: Eric Riek Sent: Tuesday, March 7, 2023 9:29 AM To: Katie Anderl Subject: RE: RE -CIRCULATION - OPA/ZBA (1001 King Street East) Thanks Katie, No engineering concerns. I circulated to KU and they had the following comment: i don't see that there are any changes on the water side so no issues. At the site plan phase they will need to use modelling from Charles St since they are servicing from there. Any questions, please advise. Eric Riek, C.E.T. Project Manager I Development Engineering I City of Kitchener From: Katie Anderl <Katie.Anderl@kitchener.ca> Sent: Monday, March 6, 2023 11:46 AM To: Eric Riek <Eric.Riek@kitchener.ca> Subject: RE: RE -CIRCULATION - OPA/ZBA (1001 King Street East) Hi, I received an updated Site Servicing Feasibility Study as part of the final resubmission — do you wish to review? (I know you said you had no further comments as per your email below...) Thanks, Katie From: Eric Riek <Eric.Riek@kitchener.ca> Sent: Wednesday, December 14, 2022 8:52 AM To: Katie Anderl <Katie.Anderl@kitchener.ca> Subject: RE: RE -CIRCULATION - OPA/ZBA (1001 King Street East) Good Morning Katie, Engineering and Kitchener Utilities are satisfied with the supporting documents for the OPA/ZBA for these properties. No further concerns, additional comments will be supplied at the site plan stage. Cheers, Eric Riek, C.E.T. Project Manager I Development Engineering I City of Kitchener From: Ellen Straus <EIIen.Straus@kitchener.ca> Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2022 4:08 PM To: Eric Riek <Eric.Riek(@kitchener.ca> Page 360 of 601 Internal memo Development Services Department Date: January 6, 2023 To: Katie Anderl, Senior Planner From: Deeksha Choudhry, Heritage Planner cc: Subject: OPA22/001 /K/KA ZAB22/002/K/KA 1001-1051 King Street East & 530-564 Charles Street East Heritage Planning Comments www.kitchener.ca Heritage Planning staff have reviewed the updated Heritage Impact Assessment, updated Urban Design Brief and updated the updated site plan, renderings and elevations submitted in support of Official Plan Application OPA22/001/K/KA and Zoning By-law application ZBA22/001/KA regarding 1001- King Street East and 530-564 Charles Street East and provide the following comments. Current Heritage Status of Subject and Adjacent Properties The property municipally addressed as 1027 King Street East is listed as a non -designated property of cultural heritage value or interest on the City's Municipal Heritage Register. Both the original circa 1914 Industrial Vernacular building and the 1946 Art Deco influenced addition are identified as having cultural heritage value. In addition to the Industrial Vernacular and Art Deco architectural styles and their corresponding heritage attributes, the contextual value of the buildings location and design providing a clear view down Onward Avenue to the front fagade of the original circa 1914 building is important. The site has historic and associative value linked to the original owner (Theodore Adam Witzel of the Onward Manufacturing Company Limited), the use of the building (manufacturing of vacuums) and the architect of the 1946 Art Deco addition (William Stuart Jenkins and Sherman W. Wright). The property is also located within the Onward Avenue Neighbourhood significant cultural heritage landscape as per the Kitchener Cultural Heritage Landscape Study (CHLS) which was prepared by The Landplan Collaborative Ltd and approved by Council in 2015. A description of the significant cultural heritage landscape along with its cultural heritage value and character defining features is provided in Appendix 6 of the CHLS. Conclusions and Recommendations of the Scooed Heritaae Imoact Assessment A Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) was prepared by MHBC Planning Limited, dated November 9, 2021, and most recently revised in November 2022 . The updated development proposal assessed in the November 2022 HIA contemplates the demolition of the existing listed structure and all other structures on the site to build a comprehensive mixed-use development with two towers — Tower A and Tower B. Tower A is proposed to be 13 -storeys with 144 units and Tower B is proposed to be 30 storeys with 238 units. The development proposal also includes 348 parking spaces in the form of structured parking internal to the building. The HIA evaluated the impact of the proposed development on the listed property as well on the Cultural Heritage Landscape and recommends the following mitigation strategies to mitigate impacts: Page 361 of 601 Internal memo Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca • Submission of a Documentation report which would include photographic descriptions and photo maps of the property. The HIA concludes that demolishing all structures apart from the Art Deco Tower were considered as neutral impacts as those structures had been altered and did not have significant design/architectural value. However, the HIA also concluded that demolishing the Art Deco would be considered an adverse impact, as there are not many examples of surviving examples of Art Deco -style buildings in the city. Preserving the Art Deco Tower without the two other structures would not be possible due to its structural reliability on the other structures. The listed property also had historical and contextual value, specifically with regards to its placement and the views of Onward Avenue. The HIA is still in the `draft' stage and has not yet been approved by the Director of Planning. Heritage Planning Staff Comments The findings and recommendations of the HIA were presented and discussed at the January 4, 2022, meeting of Heritage Kitchener. Even though the proposed development is predicated on the demolition of the existing structure, staff are appreciative to see a more comprehensive commemoration effort of the existing structure by the applicant. This includes the installation of the `Eureka' signage infront of the proposed development, and a large "Memorial Wall" at the entrance of the podium which details the history of the site and its evolution over time. The proposed development will also re -use the following salvaged elements of the Art Deco Tower to commemorate the site at the interior of the proposed lobby area: 1. Original Eureka Tiles 2. Window and Door Elements 3. Existing Metal columns. Staff would like further information on specifically what elements will be salvaged and how they will be used in the proposed development. As such, Staff require that in addition to a Documentation Report, that a Salvage and Re -use Plan also be submitted, which can be submitted along with the Documentation Report, that details the salvaging and re -use of these materials. This can be done at the Site Plan Application stage. Staff would also like further clarification on how the proposed `Art Deco' mural commemorated the Art Deco Tower of the existing building. Staff would also like the applicant to explore alternative locations for the garage entrance. Currently, the location of the entrance of the garage is where the existing `Art Deco' tower is, and is meant to be the focal point of the building. The proposed garage entrance, in its current location, might detract from that portion of the proposed development serving as a `terminal view' looking down from Onward Avenue, as well as the proposed commemoration efforts. Page 362 of 601 From: Deeksha Choudhry Sent: Thursday, March 9, 2023 4:07 PM To: Katie Anderl Subject: Re: RE -CIRCULATION - OPA/ZBA (1001 King Street East) Hi Katie, I am okay with the commemoration efforts proposed at this stage. I am also okay with the latest changes proposed re: garage door relocation, and placing units back on the side fronting King. Rest of the details can be worked out at the site plan stage. Thanks! Kind Regards, Deeksha Choudhry, MSc, BES Heritage Planner l Planning Division I City of Kitchener 519-741-2200 ext. 72911 TTY 1-866-969-9994 deeksha.choudhry@kitchener.ca Residents are encouraged to visit kitchener.ca/covidl9 for the most up-to-date information about City services. From: Katie Anderl <Katie.Anderl@kitchener.ca> Sent: Monday, March 6, 2023 12:28 PM To: Deeksha Choudhry <Deeksha.Choudhry@kitchener.ca> Subject: RE: RE -CIRCULATION - OPA/ZBA (1001 King Street East) Hi Deeksha, Do you need to issue a final set of comments for this application? I am looking for prepare my report over the next couple of weeks. Does Garett need to approve the HIA? Or does this get done at SP, or through a Holding Provision? Thanks! Page 363 of 601 From: Wang, Shaun <swang@kwhydro.ca> Sent: Thursday, March 24, 2022 10:06 AM To: Katie Anderl Cc: Cameron, Greig Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Circulation for Comment - OPA/ZBA (1001 King Street East) Hi Katie, Sorry I missed this one. Kitchener -Wilmot Hydro has the following comments: The developer shall make satisfactory arrangements with Kitchener Wilmot Hydro Inc. for servicing: 1. Kitchener -Wilmot Hydro has existing overhead pole lines on both King St side and Charles St side, close to the property line. 2. Any proposed above grade building fagade must have a minimum clearance of 5.5 meters from the center of hydro pole line. 3. Any adjustment to Kitchener Wilmot Hydro Inc. existing facilities will be at the developers cost. 4. To service the site, on-site distribution transformer (either pad -mounted or room type) may be required, as per Kitchener -Wilmot Hydro standards. The transformer room shall be at grade. Regards, Shaun Wang, P. Eng. System Planning & Projects Engineer Kitchener -Wilmot Hydro Inc. P: 519-745-4771 x6312 F: 519-745-0643 swang(cDkwhydro.ca ?�T IM{ Page 364 of 601 L 6-1 f Y From: Cameron, Greig <gcameron@kwhydro.ca> Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 12:27 PM To: Wang, Shaun <swang@kwhydro.ca> Subject: FW: Circulation for Comment - OPA/ZBA (1001 King Street East) Hello Shaun, Page 365 of 601 FYI. Please respond. Greig Cameron (he/him), PEng, MSc Vice President, Engineering & IT PH: 519-749-6182 From: Katie Anderl <Katie.Anderl@kitchener.ca> Sent: March -23-22 12:25 PM Subject: FW: Circulation for Comment - OPA/ZBA (1001 King Street East) Mimecast Attachment Protection has deemed this file to be safe, but always exercise caution when opening files. Hi, This is a friendly reminder to please provide any comments you may have with respect to the proposed OPA/ZBA for 1001 King St E. Thanks, Katie From: Christine Kompter<Christine.Kompter@kitchener.ca> Sent: Friday, January 14, 2022 4:05 PM To: _DL_#_DSD_Planning <DSD-PlanningDivision@kitchener.ca>; Aaron McCrimmon-Jones <Aaron.McCrimmon-Jones@kitchener.ca>; >; Dave Seller <Dave.Seller@kitchener.ca>; David Paetz <David.Paetz@kitchener.ca>; Feds <vped@feds.ca>; GRCA - Planning (planning@grandriver.ca) <planning@grandriver.ca>; Greg Reitzel <Greg.Reitzel@kitchener.ca>; >; 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>; Linda Cooper <Linda.Cooper@kitchener.ca>; Mike Seiling <Mike.Seiling@kitchener.ca>; Ontario Power Generation<Executivevp.lawanddevelopment@opg.com>; Park Planning (SM) <Park.Planning@kitchener.ca>; Region - Planning <PlanningApplications@regionofwaterloo.ca>; Property Data Administrator (SM) <PropDataAdmin@kitchener.ca>; Robert Morgan <Robert.Morgan@kitchener.ca>; Steven Ryder <Steven.Ryder@kitchener.ca>; Sylvie Eastman <Sylvie.Eastman@kitchener.ca>; WCDSB - Planning <planning@wcdsb.ca>; WRDSB - Board Secretary (elaine burns@wrdsb.ca) <elaine burns@wrdsb.ca>; WRDSB - Planning <planning@wrdsb.ca> Cc: Katie Anderl <Katie.Anderl@kitchener.ca> Subject: Circulation for Comment - OPA/ZBA (1001 King Street East) Please see attached. Additional documentation is saved in AMANDA (folders 22-100385 & 22-100386) for internal staff reference & ShareFile for external agencies. Comments or questions should be directed to Katie Anderl, Senior Planner (copied on this email). Page 366 of 601 Region of Waterloo April 28, 2022 Erica Bayley, P. Eng. Senior Project Manager Paradigm Transportation Solutions 5A-150 Paradigm Road Cambridge, ON N1 R 81_2 Dear Ms. Bayley: PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES 150 Frederick Street, 8th Floor Kitchener ON N2G 4A Canada Telephone: 519-575-4400 TTY: 519-575-4608 Fax: 519-575-4449 www. reg i o n ofwate r l o o. ca File No.: C14-60/64 VIVE DEVELOPMENTS Re: OPA 22/01 and ZBA 22/01, VIVE Developments (Eureka!), 1001-1051 King Street East and 534-564 Charles Street East, City of Kitchener — Transportation Study Review Comments Region of Waterloo staff have reviewed the Transportation Impact Study (TIS) entitled "Eureka! (King Charles Block) Kitchener, ON Transportation Impact Study, Parking Study and Site Circulation Review" dated November 2021. The TIS was completed in support of the proposed Official Plan Amendment (OPA 22/01) and Zoning By-law Amendment (ZBA 22/01) for the proposed site redevelopment at the proposed property amalgamation bound by Regional Road 04 (Ottawa Street), Regional Road 64 (Charles Street East) and King Street East. Region of Waterloo staff provide the following TIS comments: • The study has used the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2010 signal report for the subject intersection analysis tables. As noted in the Region of Waterloo Transportation Impact Study Guidelines (updated July 2014) the intersection analysis tables should be completed using only the Synchro Lanes, Volumes and Timing Report. No further action required. • The proposed development will obtain vehicular access to King Street East, under the jurisdiction of the City of Kitchener, and to Charles Street East. The TIS states "The developer install signs on-site (including in the parking garage) to direct residents and visitors to the King Street East driveway." There is to be no residential access from on site parking garage to Charles Street East, the Charles Street East access is only for delivery vehicles and garbage removal. Document Number: 3992436 Page 367 of 601 Overall, the Region of Waterloo has no major concerns with the conclusions and recommendations of the study and recommend that the OPA/ZBA application move forward. Under future Site Plan applications, Region of Waterloo staff will work with the developer to complete any necessary vehicular access design changes. Yours Truly, Jason Wigglesworth, C.E.T. Transportation Planner (519) 505-4536 CC: Steven Ryder, C.E.T. — City of Kitchener Pierre Chauvin, MA, MCIP, RPP — MHBC Melissa Mohr, MCIP, RPP — Region of Waterloo Paula Sawicki, P. Eng. — Region of Waterloo Greg Proctor, C.E.T. — Region of Waterloo Page 368 of 601 N* Region of Waterloo Katie Anderl, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner City of Kitchener 200 King Street West, 6t" Floor P.O. Box 1118, Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 Dear Ms. Anderl, PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES Community Planning 150 Frederick Street 8th Floor Kitchener Ontario N2G 4A Canada Telephone: 519-575-4400 TTY: 519-575-4608 Fax: 519-575-4466 www.regionotwaterloo.ca Melissa Mohr 226-752-8622 File: D17/2/22001 C14/2/22001 March 23, 2023 Re: Proposed Official Plan Amendment OPA 22/01 and Zoning By-law Amendment ZBA 22/01 — 31d submission 1001-1051 King Street East and 534-564 Charles Street East MHBC Planning (C/O Pierre Chauvin) on behalf of King - Charles Properties (Kitchener) (C/O Stephen Litt) CITY OF KITCHENER MHBC Planning on behalf of King Charles Properties has resubmitted an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment for a development proposal at 1001-1051 King Street East and 534-564 Charles Street East (referred to as subject lands) in the City of Kitchener. The applicant is proposing to develop the subject lands with two towers 12 and 30 Storeys tall atop a five (5) storey podium that shall contain a total of 464 residential apartments and 451.54 square metres of commercial space. Parking is proposed within the podium and through at grade visitor parking with access to the parking structure from King Street East. An additional service access is proposed from Charles Street East and provides access to the garbage and loading/move-in area. The subject lands are designated Mixed Use Corridor within the King Street East Secondary Plan Area and the applicant has applied for an Official Plan Amendment to add a Special Policy Area to the existing land use designation to increase the maximum Floor Space Ratio from 4.0 to 8.93. The subject lands are zoned High Intensity Mixed Document Number: 4341491 Version: 1 Page 1 of 10 Page 369 of 601 Use Corridor Zone (MU -3) Zone and the applicant has applied for a Zoning By-law Amendment to add Special Provisions to the zone to permit a maximum floor space ratio of 8.93 whereas the maximum FSR permitted is 4.0; to permit a front yard setback from King Street East at 1.4 metres (whereas 1.5m is required); to permit a minimum rear yard setback from Charles Street of 1.3 metres (whereas 1.5m is required); to permit dwelling units to be located at grade in a mixed use building; to permit a parking rate of 0.62 spaces/unit, visitor parking at 0.05/unit of the required parking and to permit parking for a Plaza Complex to be 0 spaces. The Region has had the opportunity to review the proposal and offers the following: Regional Comments Development Planning Comments The subject lands are designated "Urban Area" and "Built -Up Area" on Schedule 3a of the Regional Official Plan (ROP) and the site is designated Mixed Use Corridor in the City of Kitchener Official Plan. Planned Community Structure The ROP supports a Planned Community Structure based on a system of Nodes, Corridors and other areas that are linked via an integrated transportation system (ROP objective 2.1 and 2.2). Components of the Planned Community Structure include the Urban Area, Nodes, Corridors and other development areas including Urban Growth Centres (UGC's) and Major Transit Station Areas (MTSA's). Mostly all of the Region's future growth will occur within the Urban Area and Township Urban Area designations, 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.B). Regional staff understand that the subject lands are located in a Major Transit Station Area of the City of Kitchener (Borden Station) and the applicant has proposed to add a special policy area to the existing Mixed Use Corridor Designation that will permit an increased Floor Space Ratio of 8.93 (whereas a max. of 4.0 is permitted currently). Regional staff acknowledge that the subject lands are within the vicinity of the ION Phase 1 Borden stop and that the subject lands are located adjacent to two existing transit corridors (King Street East and Charles Street East) with multiple bus routes that link directly to rapid transit stops within the Region of Waterloo. Furthermore, the subject lands are located in close proximity to a Planned Cycling Route (Ottawa Street South) within the Region. Document Number: 4341491 Version: 1 Page 2 of 10 Page 370 of 601 Land Use Compatibility: Following the review of the Land Use Compatibility study provided within the second submission, Regional staff acknowledge that the subject lands are located in the Mixed Use designation of the City of Kitchener Official Plan where residential uses are permitted. In addition, the subject lands are also located in the Regional Council Adopted Borden ION Major Transit Station Area (MTSA) which is an area where a change of use and infilling is to occur (e.g. from commercial and industrial to mixed-use residential and commercial uses). According to the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) D-6 Series Guidelines, a reduced setback may be considered subject to the submission of a study (e.g. submission of a noise study). The applicant has submitted a noise feasibility study that addressed both transportation and stationary noise; which has been accepted by Regional staff. In addition, due to the area being located in a MTSA (an area to transition from one use to another with higher density developments) Regional staff have no further objection to the application from a land use compatibility perspective. In addition to the above, the following technical comments apply to the development proposal: Record of Site Condition There are multiple medium and high environmental threats located on and adjacent to the subject lands in accordance with the Region's Treats Inventory Database (TID) due to past land uses. The applicant is proposing a sensitive land use on site and as a result, a Record of Site Condition (RSC) and Ministry Acknowledgement Letter shall be required in accordance with the Region's Implementation Guidelines for the Review of Development Applications on or Adjacent to Known or Potentially Contaminated Sites. The Record of Site Condition shall be completed and filed with the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) in accordance with O.Reg 153/04 and the Region requires a copy of the Record of Site Condition and Ministry Acknowledgment letter once the RSC has been filed and the Acknowledgement letter has been issued by the Ministry. Regional staff understand that the applicant has proposed to extend a special regulation applying to portions of the subject lands that requires a Record of Site Condition. A special regulation is not an option to implement the Record of Site Condition requirement within the Region's Implementation Guidelines. Therefore, the Region shall require a holding provision be implemented within the Zoning By-law until the RSC and Ministry Acknowledgement letter have been received to the satisfaction of the Region for the entirety of the subject lands (except the lands to be dedicated as part of the road allowance). Document Number: 4341491 Version: 1 Page 3 of 10 Page 371 of 601 The following is the required wording for the holding provision: That a holding provision shall apply to the entirety of the subject lands until a Record of Site Condition (RSC) has been filed on the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) Environmental Site Registry in accordance with O. Reg. 153/04, as amended and the Ministry's Acknowledgement letter is received to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo. Please ensure that any lands to be dedicated to the Region of Waterloo through the site plan process (road dedication lands) are excluded from any Record of Site Condition (RSC) for the proposed development. Region of Waterloo International Airport The Region can support the proposed development (building and crane) to a maximum elevation of 477m ASL based on the aeronautical report submitted with the application. Regional staff require the elevation to be clearly labelled on all plans moving forward and that details of any construction cranes be provided. The aeronautical assessment submitted with the application identifies a maximum allowable height of 477m ASL prior to impacting airport instrument approach procedures. The limit of 477m ASL cannot be exceeded as it would impact the Runway 08 instrument approach procedures and airport operations. Regional staff require the maximum height of 477m ASL to be implemented in the regulations of the Zoning By-law for both the proposed building and any related construction cranes. Any crane used for the construction of this development (e.g. towers, rooftop HVAC, communication towers/antennas) must be below the maximum height of 477m ASL. The applicant shall submit a land use submission form to NAV Canada as soon as possible. The application form can be found here: https://www.navcanada.ca/en/aeronautical-information/land-use-program.aspx. A separate land use form is also required for the crane. The applicant shall submit an Aeronautical Assessment Form for both the building and crane to Transportation Canada as soon as possible. The application form can be found on their website here: https://tc.canada.ca/en/aviation/general-operating-flight- rules/marking-lighting-obstacles-air-navigation. Corridor Planning Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment Stage: Environmental (Transportation) Noise.- Regional oise:Regional staff have received the "Noise Feasibility Study, Proposed Residential Development, Eureka! (King Charles Block) Kitchener, Ontario" dated October 29, 2021 Document Number: 4341491 Version: 1 Page 4 of 10 Page 372 of 601 and completed by HGC Engineering and accept the conclusions and recommendations made within the Feasibility Study at this time. A Holding Provision shall be required to obtain a detailed transportation and vibration study that assesses noise from the Charles Street side -running ION. Furthermore, the signed Owner/Authorized Agent Statutory Declaration was not included in the noise report and must be included in the detailed noise study. Please be advised that the accepted mitigation measures and noise warning clauses shall be implemented through the future site plan agreement and through a Registered Development Agreement with the Region of Waterloo and/or the City of Kitchener as well as incorporated into a future condominium declaration, should a Condominium be proposed. Stationary Noise Review.- Regional eview:Regional staff have reviewed the stationary noise aspects of the noise report entitled "Noise Feasibility Study Proposed Residential Development (King Charles Block) Kitchener, Regional Municipality of Waterloo, Ontario" dated October 29, 2021, prepared by HGC Engineering Limited. Regional staff are satisfied with the conclusions and recommendations within the Noise Feasibility Study at this stage (Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment stage). As the detailed design has yet to be known, a Holding Provision shall be required to obtain a detailed stationary noise study that includes details relating to floor plans, building elevations, mechanical drawings and equipment selections. Furthermore, the equipment selected shall comply with the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) NPC -300 Noise Guideline. Finally, the detailed stationary noise study shall review the potential impacts of the points of reception (e.g. HVAC systems) on the sensitive points of reception and the impacts of the development on adjacent noise sensitive uses. The review of the detailed noise study shall be through the Region's third party noise consultant. The owner/developer shall be required to pay $4000.00 plus HST ($4,520.00 total) once the detailed noise study has been prepared and has been submitted to the Region. The accepted mitigation measures and noise warning clauses shall be implemented through the future site plan agreement and through a Registered Development Agreement with the Region of Waterloo and/or the City of Kitchener and shall be incorporated in the Condominium Declaration and Offers of Purchase and Sale, Lease/Rental Agreements. The stationary noise -warning clause to be included in the Registered Development agreement and Condominium Declaration at this time is: "Purchasers/tenants are advised that due to the proximity of the adjacent Commercial Facilities and proposed residential development roof -top and other Noise sources, noise from the Commercial Facilities and proposed residential development roof -top and other Noise sources may at times be audible" Document Number: 4341491 Version: 1 Page 5 of 10 Page 373 of 601 Additional mitigation measures and warning clauses may be required and shall be determined through the detailed noise study. Transportation Impact Study Review.- The eview:The Transportation Impact Study, Parking Study and Transportation Demand Study (TIS/TDM) entitled "EUREKA! (King Charles Block) Kitchener, ON Transportation Impact Study, Parking Study, and Site Circulation Review" dated November 2021 and completed by Paradigm Transportation Solutions Limited has been reviewed and the Region has no objections to the TIS/TDM study at this stage (Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment Stage). Please be advised that if any improvements to the Regional Road network are recommended through the site plan application process and approved by the Region of Waterloo, the developer may be responsible for any financial and property requirements associated with the road improvements. Access.- The ccess: The original concept proposed six (6) vehicular parking spaces within the service court area with access to Charles Street East, which was acceptable to the Region. The redesign of the concept proposes five (5) vehicular parking spaces to be accessed via the proposed Charles Street access. In addition, the site plan (dated February 10, 2023) shows that the access from Charles Street is not connected to the at -grade vehicular parking area adjacent to the commercial unit and parking garage. Regional staff have no further objection to the service access and shall continue to require that the Charles Street Service Area is separated from the adjacent parking area through the future site plan process. Stormwater Management & Site Grading: Region of Waterloo staff have received an electronic copy of the "Site Servicing Feasibility Study, Proposed Multi -Residential Development, 1027 King Street East, Kitchener" dated August 20, 2021, completed by Strik Baldinelli Moniz in support of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment Applications and have no objection to the report at this stage. The following shall be addressed through the detailed design at the site plan stage: Water Servicing.- As ervicing:As noted in the study, the site is flanked by both Charles Street East (Regional Road 64) and King Street East, which is under the jurisdiction of the City of Kitchener in this area. There are existing watermain lines in both the King Street East and Charles Street East right of way. The study notes that water servicing for the proposed development would come from the existing 150mm diameter watermain in the King Street East right of way, but a design is not provided. Under detailed site servicing design for the development, Regional staff shall review any proposed water service connection. Please be advised that any redundant water service connections to the subject property from the Charles Street East right of way will need to be removed at Document Number: 4341491 Version: 1 Page 6 of 10 Page 374 of 601 the time of construction. Additional comments will be provided through the site plan review process. Sanitary Servicing.- As ervicing:As noted in the study, the site is proposed to connect to the existing 200mm/225mm diameter sanitary sewer within the King Street East right of way, specifically at MH2A. This section of King Street East is under the jurisdiction of the City of Kitchener and the Region of Waterloo has no concerns related to this proposed connection. When a detailed design for the sanitary sewer connection is submitted, Regional staff will provide detailed comments, including comments related to the removal of redundant sanitary sewer connections within the Charles Street East right of way. Stormwater Servicing.- Through ervicing:Through the study, it is assumed that the site development will have a storm sewer outlet to the King Street East right of way and that post -development flows will be restricted to the pre -development levels during the 5 -year and 100 -year storm events. The study does not provide a preliminary design of the stormwater features on site, but notes that detailed design will be completed in association with a future Site Plan application. The study also identifies a Weber Street East right of way in a few sections, but it appears that these are just typos, as the subject property does not abut Weber Street. This section of the report should be updated at the site plan application stage. Regional Road Dedication: While not a requirement through the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment Applications, please ensure that the required road dedication along Charles Street East (Regional Road 64) is shown correctly through the future site plan submission. Regional staff have estimated the road dedication along Charles Street East to be approximately 3m (1 Oft), but the exact amount of road widening dedication must be determined by an Ontario Land Surveyor (OLS) in consultation with the Region's Transportation Planner. The land must be dedicated to the Region of Waterloo for road allowance purposes, and must be dedicated without cost and free of encumbrance. The completion of the road widening can be deferred to a future Site Plan application. In addition, a Phase I ESA, and possibly a Phase II ESA based on the findings of the Phase 1, will be required for land to be dedicated to the Region of Waterloo. Please ensure that any lands to be dedicated to the Region of Waterloo are excluded from any Record of Site Condition (RSC) for the proposed development. Transit Planning.- Grand lanning:Grand River Transit (GRT) currently operates numerous Routes along the area of King Street East, Charles Street East, Ottawa Street South and Borden Avenue North with existing transit stops in close proximity to the proposed development. Document Number: 4341491 Version: 1 Page 7 of 10 Page 375 of 601 Region of Waterloo Transportation Capital Program.- Ottawa rogram:Ottawa Street North is being reconstructed in 2022 as per the Region of Waterloo's 10 - Year Transportation Capital Program (TCP). For more information regarding this project, please contact Mr. Greg Proctor(gproctor(a)regionofwaterloo.ca). Regional Water Services Regional staff acknowledge that connections to local services in the King Street East right-of-way have been proposed. Regional staff have no objection to this approach as no connection to regional watermains located in the Charles St East right-of-way shall be permitted in accordance with Section B.2.1.4.1 of the Design Guidelines and Supplemental Specifications for Municipal Services, January 2021. Housing Services The Region supports the provision of a full range of housing options, including affordable housing. The Region's 10 -Year Housing and Homelessness Plan contains an affordable housing target for Waterloo Region. The target is for 30% of all new residential development between 2019 and 2041 to be affordable to low and moderate income households. Staff recommend that the applicant consider providing a number of affordable housing units on the site. Staff further recommend meeting with Housing Services to discuss the proposal in more detail and to explore opportunities for partnerships or programs. 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 purchase price of a resale unit in the $576,347 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. Document Number: 4341491 Version: 1 Page 8 of 10 Page 376 of 601 For the purposes of evaluating the affordability of a rental unit (based on the definition of affordable housing in the Regional Official Plan), the average rent is compared to the least expensive of: A unit for which the rent does not exceed 30 per cent of the gross annual household income for low and moderate income $1,470 renter households A unit for which the rent is at or below the average market rent Bachelor: $950 (AMR) in the regional market area 1 -Bedroom: $1,134 2 -Bedroom: $1,356 3 -Bedroom: $1,538 4+ Bedroom: $3,997 `Based on the most recent information available from the PPS Housing Tables (2021) In order for a unit to be deemed affordable, the average rent for the proposed units must be at or below the average market rent in the regional market area, as listed above. Fees By copy of this letter, the Region of Waterloo acknowledges receipt of the review fees of $7,400.00 (received May 5, 2022). Conclusions and Implementation measures: The Region has no objection to the above noted Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment subject to the following being implemented within the Zoning By- law: The maximum height permitted on site for buildings any associated structures (e.g. rooftop HVAC, communication towers/antennas) and construction cranes shall be 477m ASL. 2. A holding provision for the Record of Site Condition and Ministry Acknowledgement Letter. The required wording is: That a holding provision shall apply to the entirety of the subject lands until a Record of Site Condition (RSC) has been filed on the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) Environmental Site Registry in accordance with O. Reg. 153/04, as amended and the Ministry's Acknowledgement letter is received to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo. 3. A holding provision to obtain a detailed transportation (road), vibration and stationary noise study. The required wording shall be: That a holding provision shall apply to the entirety of the subject lands until a detailed transportation (road), vibration and stationary noise study have been completed and Document Number: 4341491 Version: 1 Page 9 of 10 Page 377 of 601 implementation measures addressed to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo. The detailed stationary noise study shall review the potential impacts of the points of reception (e.g. HVAC systems) on the sensitive points of reception and the impacts of the development on adjacent noise sensitive uses. General Comments 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. 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. King -Charles Properties (Kitchener) C/O Stephen Litt (Owner) Pierre Chauvin, MHBC Planning (Applicant) Document Number: 4341491 Version: 1 Page 10 of 10 Page 378 of 601 City of Kitchener - Comment Form Project Address: 1001, 1007, 1015, 1027, 1051 King Street E and 530, 534, 542, 564 Charles Street E Application Type: OPA and ZBA Comments of: Environmental Planning (Sustainability) — City of Kitchener Commenter's name: Gaurang Khandelwal Email: gaurang.khandelwal@kitchener.ca Phone: 519-741-2200 x 7611 Written Comments Due: February 21, 2022 Date of comments: February 22, 2022 1. Plans, Studies and/or Reports submitted and reviewed as part of a complete application: • Sustainability Statement — 1001, 1007, 1015, 1027, 1051 King Street East and 530, 534, 542, 564 Charles Street East, prepared by MHBC, dated November 10, 2021 2. Comments & Issues: I have reviewed the documentation (as listed above) to support an Official Plan Amendment and a Zoning By-law Amendment to develop the subject lands with a 30 storey (92 metre) high tower containing 491 residential units, 461 m2 of commercial space, and 282 vehicular parking spaces, regarding sustainability and energy conservation and provide the following: • Although the Ontario Building Code (OBC) is advanced, going forward all developments will need to include robust energy conservation measures as the City (and Region of Waterloo) strive to achieve our greenhouse gas reduction target. • The subject property is located within the PARTS Rockway Plan Area, Section 10.13 of the PARTS Rockway Plan recommends that development is equivalent to achieving a minimum LEED/LEED ND — Silver rating or comparable sustainable development standard. • The proposed development should be equivalent to achieving a minimum LEED silver rating or comparable sustainable development standard. • Program certification is not required but is encouraged. • Based on my review of the supporting documentation, a number of sustainable measures have been proposed such as: o Buildings designed and certified to achieve Energy Star requirements and reaching more than 5-R values in wall insulation o Low consumption plumbing fixtures o Roof structure designed to support future PV installation 1IPage Page 379 of 601 • An updated Sustainability Statement is required to support the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment, incorporating a more progressive energy conservation and efficient design. Potential items for consideration are: o Electric vehicle charging stations o Community/ common gardens and urban agriculture o Green roofs o On-site composting o Use of alternative water supply and demand management systems such as rainwater harvesting and grey water reuse o Sustainable sourcing of construction and building materials 3. Policies, Standards and Resources: • Kitchener Official Plan Policy 7.C.4.5. The City will encourage and support, where feasible and appropriate, alternative energy systems, renewable energy systems and district energy in accordance with Section 7.C.6 to accommodate current and projected needs of energy consumption. • Kitchener Official Plan Policy 7.C.6.4. In areas of new development, the City will encourage orientation of streets and/or lot design/building design with optimum southerly exposures. Such orientation will optimize opportunities for active or passive solar space heating and water heating. • 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. • PARTS Rockway Plan Section 10.13. The City has an interest in positioning the Rockway Station Area to exhibit leadership and advance best practices in the areas of sustainability and resilience. It is recommended to ensure that development in the PARTS Rockway Area is equivalent to achieving a minimum LEED / LEED ND — Silver rating or comparable sustainable development standard for Kitchener. The plans is available online at... https://www.kitchener.ca/en/resourcesGeneral/Documents/DSD PLAN PARTS Rockway Plan. pdf 4. Advice: ➢ As part of the Kitchener Great Places Award program every several years there is a Sustainable Development category. Also, there are community-based programs to help with and celebrate and recognize businesses and sustainable development stewards (Regional Sustainability Initiative - http://www.sustainablewaterlooregion.ca/our-programs/regional-sustainability- initiative and TravelWise - http://www.sustainablewaterlooregion.ca/our-programs/travelwise). ➢ The 'Sustainability Statement Terms of Reference' can be found on the City's website under 'Planning Resources' at ... https://www.kitchener.ca/SustainabilityStatement 21 Page Page 380 of 601 From: Gaurang Khandelwal Sent: Tuesday, January 3, 2023 4:48 PM To: Katie Anderl Subject: RE: RE -CIRCULATION - OPA/ZBA (1001 King Street East) Hi Katie, Thanks for bringing this to my notice The section in the updated Urban Design Brief does not suffice the updated sustainability statement requirements. I'd like to see more progressive measures incorporated so that the development is equivalent of achieving a LEED silver rating or comparable standard. Although I'm not able to support the OPA and ZBA based on what was submitted, it would be acceptable for an updated SS to be submitted at Site Plan as most measures are incorporated into development design at a later stage. Let me know if you have any further questions. 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. khandelwala-kitchener.ca ®oV0oo04o ... . more �. . .. .-walking tours From: Katie Anderl <Katie.Anderl@kitchener.ca> Sent: Tuesday, January 3, 2023 4:25 PM To: Gaurang Khandelwal <Gaurang.Khandelwal@kitchener.ca> Subject: FW: RE -CIRCULATION - OPA/ZBA (1001 King Street East) Hi Gaurang, I'm just finalizing my review of this updated submission. In response to the original circulation you had requested an updated to the sustainability work. They have included a short section (3.3) in the updated Urban Design Study. Does this meet your expectations/fulfill the requirements? Please see the ShareFile link below. Thanks! Katie From: Katie Anderl Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2022 9:59 AM To: Carlos Reyes <Carlos.Reyes@kitchener.ca>; Dave Seller <Dave.Seller@kitchener.ca>; David Paetz <David.Paetz@kitchener.ca>; Ellen Straus <EIIen.Straus@kitchener.ca>; Enova Power Corp. - Greig Cameron <greig.cameron@enovapower.com>; Enova Power Corp. - Shaun Wang Page 381 of 601 City of Kitchener OPA/ZBA COMMENT FORM Project Address: 1001 King Street East Date of Meeting: No meeting — OPA/ZBA updated materials Application Type: ZBA & OPA Comments Of: Transportation Services Commenter's Name: Steve Ryder Email: steven.ryder@kitchener.ca Phone: (519) 7412200 ext. 7152 Date of Comments: January 5, 2023 ❑ I plan to attend the meeting (questions/concerns/comments for discussion) ❑ I do NOT plan to attend the meeting (no concerns) 1. Site Specific Comments & Issues: • Based on the Agency Recirculation Letter (dated November 30, 2022), Transportation Services offer the following comments and questions: o The agency recirculation letter notes that the updated application still includes 486 units plus five (5) live/work units, however, the site plan submitted as part of the revised application notes that there are 465 units with five (5) live/work units. Confirmation of the exact amount should be provided; however, it is recognized that this would affect the site plan application rather than the zoning by-law amendment application which will legalize a parking rate, not the exact number of parking spaces that will be included in the development); o As noted in the Transportation Services comments from March 31, 2022, the minimum parking rate that Transportation Services would support is 0.6 parking spaces per unit. The revised application includes a proposed parking rate of 0.77 parking spaces per unit, which Transportation Services can support; o As noted in the Transportation Services comments from March 31, 2022, Transportation Services noted that a supportable rate of visitor parking spaces would equal 10% of the required parking as per the zoning by-law regulations. The revised application includes a total of 45 visitor spaces. ■ Under ZBL 2019-051, the required amount of visitor parking would equal 46.5 (or 47, rounded up) visitor parking spaces. A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community Page 382 of 601 ■ The proposed zoning by-law application is requesting "visitor parking at 9% of required parking", which can be interpreted as 9% of the total 465 spaces required (or 42 visitor spaces), or 9% of the approved rate of parking through this zoning by-law amendment application; ■ Given the circumstances and site context, Transportation Services would be able to support the application with a visitor parking rate of 0.1 spaces per (residential) unit; o Transportation Services can support the requested rate of 0.0 parking spaces for the commercial GFA as long as visitor parking is shared with commercial parking as there is virtually no on -street parking available in the immediate vicinity of the proposed development to support short-term commercial parking; o As noted in the Transportation Services comments from March 31, 2022, it was noted that the site would need to meet the minimum zoning regulations for Class A and Class B bicycle parking under ZBL 2019-051; ■ The revised application of 465 units would require a minimum of 233 Class A (secured) bicycle spaces, and the site plan submitted notes a total of 258 are being provided; ■ Transportation Services is satisfied with the proposed rate of 0.55 Class A spaces per unit. 2. Plans, Studies and Reports to submit as part of a complete Planning Act Application: • N/A 3. Anticipated Requirements of full Site Plan Approval: • N/A 4. Policies, Standards and Resources: • N/A 5. Anticipated Fees: • N/A A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community Page 383 of 601 City of Kitchener Zone Change Comment Form Address: 1001, 1007, 1015, 1027 and 1051 King St E and 530, 534, 542 and 564 Charles St E Owner: King -Charles Properties (Kitchener) Limited Application #: OPA 22/001/K/KA ZBA22/001/K/KA Comments Of: Urban Design- Planning Commenter's Name: Pegah Fahimian Email: Pegah.fahimian@kitchener.ca Phone: 519-741-2200 Ext. 7342 Date of Comments: March 15, 2023 ❑ I 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: • Updated Urban Design Brief, MHBC, March 15, 2023 • Updated Architectural Floor plans by NEO Architecture Inc, Feb 10, 2023 • Updated Shadow Study by NEO Architecture Inc, Feb 10, 2023 • Updated Wind Study - Pedestrian Level Wind — Preliminary Impact Assessment. Boundary Layer Wind Tunnel Laboratory report 2. Site -Specific Comments & Issues: I have reviewed the updated/revised documentation noted below that has been submitted in support of an OPA and ZBA to add Special Provisions to the existing High -Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU - 3). 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. Updated Design Brief- March 15, 2023 Tall Building Design Analysis: The tall building design guidelines are an excellent compatibility test for proposals exceeding their zoning permissions. The proposal meets %76 of the separation target on the West side and exceeds the separation target on the east side. Building Design: 4 -storey pedestrian -scaled podium along King and Charles 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 are to be refined through the site plan process. A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community 16 of 601 City of Kitchener Zone Change Comment Form On-site Amenity area: • Required amenity space calculations are contained in the Urban Design Manual and include two parts — one for a general amenity area and one for children's play facilities in multiple residential developments. (2m2 x #units) + (2.5m2 x #bedrooms - #units) = outdoor amenity space. (2x464) + (2.5 x 557- 464) = 928 + ( 1392 -464) = 1857 sq.m • The updated UDB did not provide any commentary or precedent images related to "the provision of robust on-site amenity space for all ages and abilities" that was requested. Additional information should be provided regarding the various on-site amenity spaces in the UDB (common, individual, indoor, and outdoor). • The Urban Design Brief should include text and conceptual images that demonstrate the commitment to providing sufficient and appropriate amenity space for all potential residents on site Updated Shadow Studies, NEO Architecture Inc, Feb 10, 2023: 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. Updated Wind Study - Pedestrian Level Wind — Preliminary Impact Assessment. Boundary Layer Wind Tunnel A further quantitative wind study coupled with a detailed wind tunnel analysis will be required as part of the full site plan application package. A revised design proposal should be developed that addresses the wind impacts outlined in the submitted wind study. According to the submitted study, the main public street -level areas along King and Charles Streets are expected to experience wind conditions consistent with the intended usage year-round; this includes the entrances and sidewalks. For the amenity terrace area, some strategies have been identified to improve upon comfort, with focus on extending summer usage of the areas. A revised design proposal should be developed that addresses the wind impacts outlined in the submitted wind study. A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community 0IOU � 0f 601 City of Kitchener Zone Change Comment Form 3. Comments on Submitted Documents Updated Architectural Floor plans- NEO Architecture Inc, • For tall buildings with retail or other active uses at grade, provide a ground floor height of 4.5m (minimum) to permit a variety of retail types and activities. • The building facades fronting King and Charles Street should contain an appropriate amount of glazing and articulation, particularly along the lower 5m where the building addresses the sidewalk. • The underground parking structure should have a sufficient setback from the property lines to accommodate the necessary soil volume to support required large-statured, high -canopy trees. • The location of residential and commercial garbage storage, loading area and Passenger pick up /drop-off area should be noted on the site plan. • 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, seamless private, semi -private and public spaces. • Provide natural surveillance by employing high percentages of glazing, active uses at ground level and incorporating more units with windows and balconies on the main facade with views onto the street • The building's interface and relationship with the street and adjacent properties should be thoroughly explored. • 3 -bed units are desirable as they provide more living space for families. A higher percentage of these units might help with community engagement. • All utility locations, including the meter room and transformer room to be shown on the layout. Building -mounted or ground-based AC units should be located away from public view and fully screened. • Wind assessment and shadow study is required for outdoor amenities and the pedestrian realm. 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 O1,609 of 601 City of Kitchener Zone Change / Official Plan Amendment Comment Form Address: 1001 et al King St E Owner: King -Charles Properties (Kitchener) / Vive Application: OPA22/001/K/KA and ZBA22/001/K/KA recirculation Nov 2022 Comments Of: Parks & Cemeteries Commenter's Name: Lenore Ross Email: Lenore. ross@kitchener.ca Phone: 519-741-2200 ext 7427 Date of Comments: Jan 06 2023 ❑ I 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: I have reviewed the updated/revised documentation noted below that has been submitted in support of an OPA and ZBA to add Special Provisions to the existing High Intensity Mixed Use Corridor Zone (MU -3) and permit: • a maximum floor space ratio of 9.05 instead of 4.0. • a dwelling unit to be located at grade in a mixed use building • a parking rate of 0.77 spaces per unit, visitor parking at 9% of required parking, and to permit parking for commercial uses to be 0.0. • a 0.0 metre setback to both King St and Charles St. Agency re -Circulation Letter dated Nov 30 2022 Updated — Planning Justification Report (Addendum) Updated — Site Plan, Floor Plan and Elevation Drawings — NEO Architecture no rev#, dated Nov 18 2022 Updated — Urban Design Brief MHBC report amended November 2022 Updated — Shadow Study — NEO Architecture no rev #, professional seal date Dec 14/21 Updated — Renderings — no author, no date Updated — Wind Study— BLWTL report dated Nov 29 2022 2. Site Specific Comments & Issues: 1) The gross and net site area statistics vary across documents and planning submissions and should be verified and coordinated. 2) The King East Planning Community is critically underserved by active park space with only 0.6 sq.m./person of active park space — well below the city wide average of 9.8 sq.m./person. This deficiency will increase as a result of the proposed intensification. Current active local park access is reliant upon Knollwood Park and Kauffman Park which are located in adjacent Planning Communities and over 500m away. A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community aw of 601 City of Kitchener Zone Change / Official Plan Amendment Comment Form The City is expecting that parkland dedication will be met, at least in part, through the dedication of physical parkland within the neighbourhood to support the proposed residential growth on site. Parks & Cemeteries is willing to consider dedication alternatives involving offsite dedication of suitable land with cash in lieu of land comprising the balance of the dedication requirement. The developer has previously proposed a 0.88ha (0.21 ac) parcel of land at the southeast corner of King St E and Borden Ave (967 and 977 King St E) as a physical land dedication to fulfil parkland dedication requirements. Is this still part of the development proposal; it is referenced in the Updated Urban Design Brief pg 19? The City of Kitchener Park Dedication Bylaw and Park Dedication Policy have recently been updated and new parkland dedication criteria, rates and land values have been approved by Council on August 22, 2022. The transition provisions that are included within the Bylaw allow for formal Planning Act applications that have been deemed complete to proceed under the old Park Dedication By-law 2008-93 but require that the application receive final site plan approval within 12 months. If final site plan approval is not granted within this time the new Park Dedication Bylaw, Policy and rates will apply. The Bylaw is under appeal. Further changes to the Bylaw may be required as a result of the Bill 23 — More Homes Built Faster Act. Parkland dedication will be assessed based on the land use class(es) and density approved through the OPA and ZBA and assessed at the required Site Plan application and required as a condition of final Site Plan approval. Based on the transition provisions in the Park Dedication Bylaw 2022- 101 and Park Dedication Policy, this development proposal (465 units — 6 existing and a net site area of 0.5855ha) is eligible to utilize the Multiple Residential (Apartment) land class valuation of $1,359,000.00 per hectare and applying the MHBFA revised parkland dedication rate of 1ha/1000 units $623,781 would be required. Using the rates and caps associated with bylaw 2022-101 and the MHBFA, park dedication of $1,149,509 would be required 3) As there is little active public parkland in the immediate neighbourhood, the provision of on-site amenities suitable to all ages, including children's play facilities, will be critical to this proposal. The site plan, PJR, UDB, shadow studies and wind studies should reflect and accommodate on- site amenity spaces and public dedication of off-site land for parkland as appropriate. 3. Comments on Submitted Documents 1) Updated — Site Plan, Floor Plan and Elevation Drawings — NEO Architecture no rev#, dated Nov 18 2022. Updated — Shadow Study — NEO Architecture no rev #, professional seal date Dec 14/21. Updated — Renderings — no author, no date a) The conceptual site and building layout should be revised to incorporate comments below b) Section 2.1.5 Vision and Design Objectives and Section 3.2 Transit Supportive Design of the Updated Urban Design Brief indicate that mid -block connections and 'safe and comfortable pedestrian connections through the site' will be provided; the preliminary site plan should be adjusted to indicate clear, safe at -grade pedestrian connections between King St E and Charles St E. that will also serve the at -grade parking and allow barrier free access to the King St E entrance to the building if approaching from Charles St E. Anticipated wind impacts should be considered in building design. A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community Paaw "2969 of 601 City of Kitchener Zone Change / Official Plan Amendment Comment Form c) The Site Plan Concept pg 20 and 37 of the UDB differs from the Updated NEO Site Plan, Floor Plan and Elevation Drawings submission. d) Section 3.1 Site Design pg 21, indicates that the outdoor amenity area is provided on the seventh level of the proposed building and will be detailed through detailed landscape design. This section should be expanded upon to include a commitment to providing robust on-site outdoor amenity space that achieves — as a minimum - the City of Kitchener Urban Design Manual amenity space standards and incorporates active and passive amenity features for all ages and abilities including children's play equipment. Conceptual design details/images for this commitment should be included illustrating active and passive features along with play equipment. e) All technical studies should support the preliminary site design including on-site amenity spaces and show good solar access and adequate protection from wind and noise; solar access for the proposed outdoor amenity area appears limited. f) Section 4.2 Analysis of Microclimate Impacts — Shadow Study; no commentary is provided with respect to the shadow impacts on the proposed outdoor amenity area within the site; solar access for the proposed outdoor amenity area appears limited. g) Section 4.2 Analysis of Microclimate Impacts — Pedestrian Wind Study; a detailed quantitative study is required. A detailed wind tunnel study should be submitted as part of a complete Site Plan application — see additional comments below h) A revised Urban Design Brief is required 2) Planning Justification Report — MHBC document dated November 2021 (Addendum) a) The site is within the King East Planning Community which is critically underserved with active park space and through previous Parks and Cemeteries comments for the Planning applications P&C have requested that the Planning Justification Report include an analysis and discussion of how the proposed development will impact the existing neighbourhood including... the availability of services and infrastructure related to parks, open space, urban forests and community facilities relative to the..... increase in density specifically referencing the objectives and policies and in Part C Section 8: Parks, Open Space, Urban Forests and Community Facilities and indicating how the proposal will implement / achieve the policy objectives. b) The PJR Addendum contained in a letter from MHBC included the following statement regarding Amenity Spaces: Common amenity space is planned internal to the development (on Floor 7 at the base of the towers). The amenity room extends between both towers and is intended for use by all residents. In addition, there is an outdoor common amenity space planned on top of the podium structure. The outdoor amenity space is framed by the 'L' shaped tower. The outdoor amenity space will be detailed through the site plan process, and will include both hard and soft landscaping for passive recreation. c) Considering the critical deficit of active park space in the immediate neighbourhood and the proposed increase of over 800 new residents, this commentary should be updated to include a commitment to providing robust on-site outdoor amenity space that achieves — as a minimum - the City of Kitchener Urban Design Manual amenity space standards and A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community 0IOU § 0f 601 City of Kitchener Zone Change / Official Plan Amendment Comment Form incorporates active and passive amenity features for all ages and abilities including children's play equipment. d) The anticipated zoning should be updated to include specific provisions for minimum outdoor amenity spaces that reflects these standards: (2m2 x #units) + (2.5m2 x #bedrooms - #units) = outdoor amenity space. For the current development concept with 344 1 - bedroom units and 1212-bedreoom units, which would be 1232 m2 of outdoor amenity space; 506m2 is shown on level 7 of the preliminary site plan. e) The Urban Design Brief should include conceptual design details/images for this commitment illustrating suitable amenities for all ages and abilities including seating and play equipment. All technical studies should support the preliminary site design showing on-site amenity spaces and demonstrate good solar access and adequate protection from wind and noise. f) A revised Planning Justification Report/Addendum is required 3) Pedestrian Level Wind Preliminary Impact Assessment— BLWTL report dated Nov 29, 2022. a) The report indicates that it is a preliminary high-level desk -top assessment and that a detailed quantitative study is required. That detailed wind tunnel study should be submitted as part of a complete Site Plan application and include receptors at several points on the proposed podium amenity space; several sidewalk locations on both King St E and Charles St E and representative locations across the anticipated parkland dedication parcel: no off-site wind analysis has been provided. b) With a O.Om proposed building setback along both King St E and Charles St E, much of the vegetation and landscape features that the Report recommends for reducing wind speeds along public sidewalks will required to be located within the right of way rather than on the development site. The presence of ION catenary lines along Charles St E will further limit / eliminate tree plantings within the right of way and alternative means of wind mitigation will be required. The presence of underground parking structure will also limit the ability to implement tree planting on-site. c) Building and site design changes should be considered in conjunction with requested zoning setbacks to accommodate the identified wind mitigation requirements. 4) Proposed Zoning a) If off-site park dedication is anticipated, zoning should reflect the anticipated park use for the lands (OSR-1) b) The anticipated zoning for the development site should be updated to include specific provisions for minimum outdoor amenity spaces that reflects the Urban Design Manual standards: (2m2 x #units) + (2.5m2 x #bedrooms - #units) = outdoor amenity space. For the current development concept with 3441 -bedroom units and 121 2-bedreoom units, this ould be 1232m2Of outdoor amenity space. 506m2 is shown on level 7 of the preliminary site plan. A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community O"30166 of 601 City of Kitchener Zone Change / Official Plan Amendment Comment Form c) The adverse streetscape and microclimate impacts of a O.Om building setback along both Charles St E and King St E should be considered. The developer should demonstrate the ability and commitment to provide on-site mitigation prior to recommended approval. 3. Policies, Standards and Resources: • Kitchener Official Plan Policy • City of Kitchener Parkland Dedication Policy and Bylaw 2022-101 • City of Kitchener Development Manual • PARTS Rockway Plan • Cycling and Trails Master Plan (2020) • Chapter 690 of the current Property Maintenance By-law • Multi -Use Pathways & Trails Masterplan • Urban Design Manual 4. Anticipated Fees: The parkland dedication requirement for this submission is deferred and will be assessed at a future Site Plan Application. Parkland dedication will be assessed based on the land use class(es) and density approved through the OPA and ZBA and required as a condition of Site Plan Approval Parkland dedication will be required for the site plan application as a combination of physical parkland/park investment on-site (or within the neighbourhood) and cash -in -lieu of land. As part of the physical dedication of land a number of conditions will apply: A Park, Trail and Open Space Development Financing Agreement (PDFA/PTOSDFA): prepared and executed by legal services. Soil testing and report is required as outlined in the development manual including due diligence in environmental analyses including Phase I ESA as per current version of CSA - Z768), and, if required Phase 11 ESA as per current version of CSA Z769. If results of ESA are deemed acceptable by City of Kitchener, the property will be accepted as parkland dedication, given that all other requirements are met. If contamination is revealed through ESA, the developer shall incur all costs to remediate prior to dedication of property to the City of Kitchener Legal survey of the dedication portion of the property Topographic survey of the dedication portion of the property following park block development A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community PWA of 601 City of Kitchener Zone Change / Official Plan Amendment Comment Form Demolition and removal of all existing structures within the dedicated property including but not limited to all foundations, servicing, above ground structures, and hard surfacing Removal of all existing rubbish or debris within the property boundaries Park Block development minimum requirements are met, as specified in section L.S. of the Kitchener Development Manual, including grading, servicing, topsoil, seeding and sodding Dedication requirements are subject to the Parkland Dedication Policy current at the time of a formal site plan application. Please be advised that the City of Kitchener Park Dedication Bylaw 2022-101 and Park Dedication Policy have been updated by Council in August 2022 and the Bylaw is currently under appeal. A City for Everyone Working Together — Growing Thoughtfully — Building Community 09&969 of 601 From: planninganddevelopment <planninganddevelopment@bell.ca> Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 2:22 PM To: Katie Anderl Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Circulation for Comment - OPA/ZBA (1001 King Street East) Good afternoon Katie, Bell Canada doesn't have any comments for the OPA/ZBLA. We will provide comments at the Draft Plan of Subdivision/Condo phase. Thanks Ryan Courville Access Network Provisioning Manager I Planning and Development C: 416-570-6726 100 Borough Dr. FI. 5 Toronto, Ontario From: Katie Anderl <Katie.Anderl@kitchener.ca> Sent: March 23, 2022 12:25 PM Subject: FW: Circulation for Comment - OPA/ZBA (1001 King Street East) Hi, This is a friendly reminder to please provide any comments you may have with respect to the proposed OPA/ZBA for 1001 King St E. Thanks, Katie From: Christine Kompter<Christine.Kompter@kitchener.ca> Sent: Friday, January 14, 2022 4:05 PM To: _DL_#_DSD_Planning <DSD-PlanningDivision@kitchener.ca>; Aaron McCrimmon-Jones <Aaron.McCrimmon-Jones@kitchener.ca>; >; Dave Seller <Dave.Seller@kitchener.ca>; David Paetz <David.Paetz@kitchener.ca>; Feds <vped@feds.ca>; GRCA - Planning (planning@grandriver.ca) <planning@grandriver.ca>; Greg Reitzel <Greg.Reitzel@kitchener.ca>; >; 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>; Linda Cooper <Linda.Cooper@kitchener.ca>; Mike Seiling <Mike.Seiling@kitchener.ca>; Ontario Power Generation <Executivevp.lawanddevelopment@opg.com>; Park Planning (SM) <Park.Planning@kitchener.ca>; Region - Planning<PlanningApplications@regionofwaterloo.ca>; Property Data Administrator (SM) <PropDataAdmin@kitchener.ca>; Robert Morgan <Robert.Morgan@kitchener.ca>; Steven Ryder <Steven.Ryder@kitchener.ca>; Sylvie Eastman <Sylvie.Eastman@kitchener.ca>; WCDSB - Planning <planning@wcdsb.ca>; WRDSB - Board Secretary (elaine burns@wrdsb.ca) <elaine burns@wrdsb.ca>; WRDSB - Planning <plannine@wrdsb.ca> Page 393 of 601 From: Trevor Heywood <theywood@grandriver.ca> Sent: Monday, January 17, 2022 2:30 PM To: Katie Anderl Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Circulation for Comment - OPA/ZBA (1001 King Street East) Hi Katie, This is not regulated by the GRCA and we have no comment. Thanks, Trevor Heywood Resource Planner Grand River Conservation Authority theywood(a)grand river. ca www.grandriver.ca I Connect with us on social media From: Christine Kompter<Christine.Kompter@kitchener.ca> Sent: Friday, January 14, 2022 4:05 PM To: _DL_#_DSD_Planning <DSD-PlanningDivision@kitchener.ca>; Aaron McCrimmon-Jones <Aaron.McCrimmon-Jones@kitchener.ca>; Bell - c/o WSP <circulations@wsp.com>; Dave Seller <Dave.Seller@kitchener.ca>; David Paetz <David.Paetz@kitchener.ca>; Feds <vped@feds.ca>; Planning <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>; Linda Cooper <Linda.Cooper@kitchener.ca>; Mike Seiling <Mike.Seiling@kitchener.ca>; Ontario Power Generation <Executivevp.lawanddevelopment@opg.com>; Park Planning (SM) <Park.Planning@kitchener.ca>; Region - Planning <PlanningApplications@regionofwaterloo.ca>; Property Data Administrator (SM) <PropDataAdmin@kitchener.ca>; Robert Morgan <Robert.Morgan@kitchener.ca>; Steven Ryder <Steven.Ryder@kitchener.ca>; Sylvie Eastman <Sylvie.Eastman@kitchener.ca>; WCDSB - Planning <planning@wcdsb.ca>; WRDSB - Board Secretary (elaine burns@wrdsb.ca) <elaine burns@wrdsb.ca>; WRDSB - Planning <planning@wrdsb.ca> Cc: Katie Anderl <Katie.Anderl@kitchener.ca> Subject: Circulation for Comment - OPA/ZBA (1001 King Street East) Please see attached. Additional documentation is saved in AMANDA (folders 22-100385 & 22-100386) for internal staff reference & ShareFile for external agencies. Comments or questions should be directed to Katie Anderl, Senior Planner (copied on this email). Christine Kompter Administrative Assistant Planning Division I City of Kitchener 200 King Street West, 6t" Floor I P.O. Box 1118 Kitchener ON N2G 4G7 519-741-2200 ext. 7425 TTY 1-866-969-9994 christine.kompter@kitchener.ca Page 394 of 601 From: Jordan Neale <Jordan.Neale@wcdsb.ca> Sent: Monday, February 21, 2022 4:23 PM To: Katie Anderl Cc: Christine Kompter Subject: [EXTERNAL] FW: Circulation for Comment - OPA/ZBA (1001 King Street East) From: Planning Sent: Monday, February 21, 2022 4:21 PM To: Christine Kompter <Christine.Kompter@kitchener.ca> Subject: RE: Circulation for Comment - OPA/ZBA (1001 King Street East) Good Afternoon Katie, The Waterloo Catholic District School Board has reviewed the subject application and based on our development circulation criteria have the following comment(s)/condition(s): A) That any Education Development Charges shall be collected prior to the issuance of a building permit(s). B) 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 point." If you require any further information, please contact me by e-mail at Jordan. Neale@wcdsb.ca. Thank you, Jordan Neale Planning Technician, WCDSB 480 Dutton Dr, Waterloo, ON N2L 4C6 519-578-3660 ext. 2355 From: Christine Kompter<Christine.Kompter@kitchener.ca> Sent: Friday, January 14, 2022 4:05 PM To: _DL_#_DSD_Planning <DSD-PlanningDivision@kitchener.ca>; Aaron McCrimmon-Jones <Aaron.McCrimmon-Jones@kitchener.ca>; Bell - c/o WSP <circulations@wsp.com>; Dave Seller <Dave.Seller@kitchener.ca>; David Paetz <David.Paetz@kitchener.ca>; Feds <vped@feds.ca>; GRCA - 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 Page 395 of 601 Appendix 'E'— Community Comments Name Date Comment Dave and Wendy Feb 1, 2022 We are strenuously opposed to the proposed New Development Plan for 1001 King St. E., Kitchener. March The development that is being proposed for the block framed by Ottawa/King/Bordon and Charles Streets, of a 30 story building, is totally incompatible with the area. Such a large tower being 'plopped' on top of an neighbourhood that is composed mostly of older, single family homes, is completely at odds with the character of the area. The Ottawa Street corridor, along with King and Weber Streets, are already heavily trafficked. Erecting a multi storied building such as this, will add substantially to the traffic volume. This development, which holds 486 units, is in addition to the the proposed development on the property around the corner at 20 Ottawa St. N.. That proposal is for another 26 story building, along with 3 or 4 shorter multi storey buildings, adding an additional 464 new residential units to our area. Such a combined influx of population cannot be handled in this neighbourhood! Traffic will be horrendous. As well, both proposals call for a significant lower ratio of parking spaces to units. Although the City Officials like to think that everyone is suddenly going to give up their vehicles to take public transit now that the ION is in operation, that is just not the case. We have a smaller apartment building (3 floors) in our neighbourhood that was given approval for expansion with that same thought in mind. They were allowed to add units to the building (basement), without adding parking spaces to account for an increase in vehicles. As a result we have tenants parking on the street in front of our homes constantly, and sometimes for days at a time over a weekend. It would not be a stretch to imagine that the same situation is going to occur if such a radically low amount of parking spaces are provided for the King St. building, 198 less parking spaces than housing units. Combined with the 121 less parking spaces are provided at the Ottawa St. development, we are going to be facing a monumental problem! Those new residents will be parking all over the neighbourhood streets and walking in. While we realize that development is going to happen no matter what, we strongly hope that these plans are revised to cut back on the volume of units in, and the number of stories of these buildings. Super towers do not belong in our neighbourhood. However, if multi -storied units are inevitable, a scaled down version of the building, 12 or 15 stories, would be unquestionably better than 30 stories! Ultimately, an attractive development of Town Houses would be a preferable fit for the area. Sincerely, ------------------- Kitchener, Ont. Page 396 of 601 Appendix 'E'— Community Comments Geoff Schwarz Feb 10, 2022 Hello Craig, Debbie, Katie and Sarah, and Ivy Holt I am a resident in the area of both of these developments. I live at ----------------- in Kitchener. I want to say that I openly support and welcome the development of the area. What troubles me is the constant need to push the limits of the by-law. What is the point of having zoning by-laws in place if developers push the limits without any sort of meaningful penalty? As a homeowner, if I want to push the limits I have to go through the same steps and at a substantial personal cost. I get that these larger developments have greater hoops to jump through but it seems to me that the costs of those hoops are too low as they all push the limits. So what concerns me about 1001 King Street is the five additional stories they are proposing. What is wrong with the 25 in the by-law? That additional height significantly impacts the shadowing of the building to the surrounding community. The set -back limits of 20 Ottawa do not have an effect on me but it may on my neighbors. The reduction of parking spaces for both is fine for me as I understand that alternative transit options are present. I would fully support these adjustments if these developers were forced to ensure that 5 - 10% of the units were affordable housing. Why is the City not implementing a program to force developers to have a low percentage of units set aside for affordable housing? I don't want to see a couple of trees added in order for them to have greater footprints and impacts on the community. What I want to see is a more diverse community being able to live in these new buildings. So there you have it. No support for either by-law adjustment from my household unless they have a minimum of 5% of the units go towards affordable housing. Cheers, Geoff Schwarz and Ivy Holt Robert Chlumsky Mar 23, 2023 Hi Katie I am a resident on -------------------- and was in attendance at the public session this evening. Here are some comments on the development application at 1001 King St East put forth by MHBC Planning. In principal, intensification and reduced parking near transit is appropriate, and redevelopment of this site will bring a lot of potential growth to the neighbourhood. However, there are some concerns with this application in its current state that I would like to highlight below. 1. Commercial units should be maintained on the ground floor on both King and Charles St. There is no guarantee that live/work will provide any activation of the street. Further, this area is in need of commercial spaces. 2. There are significant concerns regarding the design of the tower. For example, the slab's proportion and size are Page 397 of 601 Appendix 'E'— Community Comments Page 398 of 601 inappropriate for the site, and it should be redesigned based on the tall building guidelines. Any building of that height should be a point tower, not a slab, with stepbacks from the base. 3. Given that there are plans for a future tower on the same site, these towers should be included in a master plan, and the cumulative impacts of the two towers should be considered together. 4. The redesign of the tower based on the tall building guidelines would also help mitigate the substantial shadow impacts of the building. I would like to request a copy of the shadow study and further information about the year- round impacts, including a time lapse of how the development will impact the surrounding neighbourhood. 5. A variety of rental unit types and sizes are needed in this development. Family friendly units, including three bedroom units, should be included. 6. In the meeting, it was mentioned that the terminating vista was focused on the low building rather than the tower. However, based on the perspectives included in the Urban Design Brief, the vista from Onward Avenue draws significant attention to the massive tower and not the smaller heritage building. This objective does not seem to be met, and the design should be reconsidered to meet this stated goal. 7. There should be park and amenity space available to all in the community on this site. 8. Under existing conditions, it can already be very difficult to turn left onto King Street from Onward Avenue due to the queuing on King Street approaching Ottawa Street. This development will exacerbate this issue. Please include this intersection in your traffic study. Thank you, Robert Chlumsky, MASc., P.Eng. Page 398 of 601 Appendix 'E'— Community Comments Armando Damiao Jan 24, 2022 Hello My name is Armando Damiao and I have lived on ----------------- in Kitchener for (26 Years). It has come to my attention that there is a proposal for new development in Ottawa between King and Weber. I strongly believe that there is a need for rental housing in our region but having said that I am strongly opposed to a 30 story building in front of my house, and the added traffic that will cause in our neighborhood. We have young families on our street with young children. There will be blockage of sunlight in the morning that is vital, I am strongly not in favor of a 30 stories building in our quiet neighborhood. This needs to be discussed with further detail on noise pollution, traffic on our street etc Thank you for your attention. Am hoping that our City Councilor (Debbie Chapman) will agree with this. Armando Damiao Murray Jan 22, 2022 Hello Ms. Anderl and Mr. Dumart, Armstrong I am a resident with a family of five living on --------------- and I wanted to express my concerns regarding the planned developments at 1001 King St East. and 20 Ottawa St N. I understand the need for housing, and for intensification. I also supported the construction of the LRT and understand that one of the main reasons for its development was to encourage development along its corridor. I am also excited about the mixed use plans, as I believe that is the best approach to development. However, the size of both these projects is beyond anything reasonable. 30 Stories and 26 stories are incredibly high buildings, and is not appropriate directly adjacent to residential neighbourhoods. 10- 12 story buildings are more reasonable like the one being built at 926 King St E. at Borden. Additionally, the building at 1001 King St. E. in its current configuration will be almost 200 parking spots short relative to the number of residential units. That is only 59% availability! I am not sure where the cars will go?!? I know the hope is that people will take the ION instead, but that is a big shortfall, that will be a problem for the neighbourhood as people look for additional parking on neighbouring streets. Add to that, the plan to build a 26 story building around the corner at 20 Ottawa St. S. (approximately 200m away from each other) and the shortage of 131 parking being proposed there, and the problems will be compounded. Not to mention our neighbourhood will have 2 massive buildings surrounding us here on Onward, with no room for the cars to go. I think it is interesting to point out that while these 2 projects are in such close proximity to each other, they Page 399 of 601 Appendix 'E'— Community Comments Page 400 of 601 are in two different wards (9 and 10). Regardless of this fact, both building are in the same neighbourhood and should be considered that way. I can not support either project as they are currently planned. Please add me to the list of concerned citizens that would like to be involved and have a voice in the next steps for both these projects. Thank you for your time and consideration, Regards, Murray Armstrong Page 400 of 601 Appendix 'E'— Community Comments Mike Sabo (summary of comments provided by phone call) Supports height and density on this site provided there is sufficient green space and streetscaping. Supports widening to ensure sufficient road with and provision of appropriate transit stops. Also supportive of cycling facilities in appropriate locations. Phil Roberts Hello, I am writing as a private citizen, and resident owner of the Ward 10 property located ------------------------ to express my vehement opposition to the proposal redevelopment per planning application OPA22/001/K/KA at 1001 King Street East. The Eastwood neighbourhood within which I live is a quiet and serene neighbourhood consisting of mainly single-family dwellings, which is the primary motivating factor in my decision to purchase my home here. This neighbourhood would be severely impacted by not only the visual uglification of the surrounding neighbourhood by way of impositions of tall structures on the skyline, but also by the unwanted population intensification which will manifest itself in many ways, including but not limited to: • Increased intensity of traffic in, out and through the community, in an area where traffic enforcement is already lacking in its effectiveness to establish safe travel speeds and compliance with road safety regulations. • Increased traffic noise, again in an area where traffic enforcement is already lacking in its effectiveness to ensure that vehicles operated in and around the community meet established legislated vehicle noise emission standards, resulting in further worsening of street noise already above a reasonable level due to traffic both along Highway 7 and within the community's own streets. • Increased general noise directly caused by the population intensification in an area already plagued by noise not only from the aforementioned lack of enforcement of established legislated vehicle noise emission standards, but by increased air traffic in and out of the municipal international airport (YKF). • Increased disruption by construction activities as the developer would implement planned facility. • Increased crime due to the intensification of population in the community that this project will cause. • Erosion of our voices as voters and as property owners within the physical boundaries of this neighbourhood. Page 401 of 601 Appendix 'E'— Community Comments Page 402 of 601 I ask that the City of Kitchener to: 1. Deny this application and prevent the project from going forward, 2. Withhold from use any funds from the tax base at the municipal, regional, provincial, and federal levels into which our community residents contribute, saving those funds from being diverted away from the neglected community standards enforcement already plaguing this community to further enhance profitability of the commercial interests of this property owner and commercial entities working with them. 3. Reject this application with prejudice so as to set a precedence to not further entertain applications of this nature in this community going forward by this applicant or by other applicants. 4. Not prove the ineffectiveness of democratic process by reviewing and subsequently ignoring this request. 5. BE BETTER in its proactive and EFFECTIVE informing of residents affected by proposals such as these (all residents, at least within a 1km radius of proposed project sites). Sincerely, Phil Roberts, Canadian Citizen, Voter and Resident Owner Bill Cressman Hello Ms. Anderl, I am writing as a private citizen, resident, and owner of the Ward 10 property located at ----------------------- to express my vehement opposition to the proposal redevelopment per planning application OPA22/001/K/KA as shown above at 1001 King Street East, Kitchener ON. The Eastwood neighbourhood within which I live is a quiet and serene neighbourhood consisting of mainly single-family dwellings, which is the primary motivating factor in my decision to purchase my home here. This neighbourhood would be severely impacted by not only the visual uglification of the surrounding neigbourhood by way of impositions of tall structures on the skyline, but also by the unwanted population intensification which will manifest itself in many ways, including but not limited to: • Increased intensity of traffic in, out and through the community, in an area where traffic enforcement is already lacking in its effectiveness to establish safe travel speeds and compliance with road safety regulations. • Increased traffic noise, again in an area where traffic enforcement is already lacking in its effectiveness Page 402 of 601 Appendix 'E'— Community Comments Page 403 of 601 to ensure that vehicles operated in and around the community meet established legislated vehicle noise emission standards, resulting in further worsening of street noise already above a reasonable level due to traffic both along Highway 7 and within the community's own streets. • Increased general noise directly caused by the population intensification in an area already plagued by noise not only from the aforementioned lack of enforcement of established legislated vehicle noise emission standards, but by increased air traffic in and out of the municipal international airport (YKF). • Increased disruption by construction activities as the developer would implement planned facility. • Increased crime due to the intensification of population in the community that this project will cause. • Erosion of our voices as voters and as property owners within the physical boundaries of this neighbourhood. I ask that the City of Kitchener to: 1. Deny this application and prevent the project from going forward, 2. Withhold from use any funds from the tax base at the municipal, regional, provincial, and federal levels into which our community residents contribute, saving those funds from being diverted away from the neglected community standards enforcement already plaguing this community to further enhance profitability of the commercial interests of this property owner and commercial entities working with them. 3. Reject this application with prejudice so as to set a precedence to not further entertain applications of this nature in this community going forward by this applicant or by other applicants. 4. Not prove the ineffectiveness of democratic process by reviewing and subsequently ignoring this request. 5. BE BETTER in its proactive and EFFECTIVE informing of residents affected by proposals such as these (all residents, at least within a 1 km radius of proposed project sites). Sincerely, William (Bill) Cressman Citizen, Resident, Owner Rhonda Cressman Hello Ms. Anderl, I am writing as a private citizen, resident, and owner of the Ward 10 property located at ------------------------- - to express my vehement opposition to the proposal redevelopment per planning application OPA22/013/K/KA as shown above at 1001 King Street East, Kitchener ON. The Eastwood neighbourhood within which I live is a quiet and serene neighbourhood consisting of mainly single-family dwellings, which is the primary motivating factor in my decision to purchase my home here. This neighbourhood would be severely impacted by not only the visual uglification of the surrounding neigbourhood by way of impositions of tall structures on the skyline, but also by the unwanted population intensification which will manifest itself in many ways, including but not limited to: • Increased intensity of traffic in, out and through the community, in an area where traffic enforcement is Page 403 of 601 Appendix 'E'— Community Comments Page 404 of 601 already lacking in its effectiveness to establish safe travel speeds and compliance with road safety regulations. • Increased traffic noise, again in an area where traffic enforcement is already lacking in its effectiveness to ensure that vehicles operated in and around the community meet established legislated vehicle noise emission standards, resulting in further worsening of street noise already above a reasonable level due to traffic both along Highway 7 and within the community's own streets. • Increased general noise directly caused by the population intensification in an area already plagued by noise not only from the aforementioned lack of enforcement of established legislated vehicle noise emission standards, but by increased air traffic in and out of the municipal international airport (YKF). • Increased disruption by construction activities as the developer would implement planned facility. • Increased crime due to the intensification of population in the community that this project will cause. • Erosion of our voices as voters and as property owners within the physical boundaries of this neighbourhood. I ask that the City of Kitchener to: 1. Deny this application and prevent the project from going forward, 2. Withhold from use any funds from the tax base at the municipal, regional, provincial, and federal levels into which our community residents contribute, saving those funds from being diverted away from the neglected community standards enforcement already plaguing this community to further enhance profitability of the commercial interests of this property owner and commercial entities working with them. 3. Reject this application with prejudice so as to set a precedence to not further entertain applications of this nature in this community going forward by this applicant or by other applicants. 4. Not prove the ineffectiveness of democratic process by reviewing and subsequently ignoring this request. 5. BE BETTER in its proactive and EFFECTIVE informing of residents affected by proposals such as these (all residents, at least within a 1 km radius of proposed project sites). Sincerely, Rhonda Cressman Citizen, Resident, Owner Janet Stewart March 11, 2022 Hello, I am writing as a condominium owner of the Ward 10 property located at to express my vehement opposition to the proposal redevelopment per planning stated above. The Eastwood neighbourhood within which I live is a quiet and serene neighbourhood consisting of mainly single-family dwellings, which is the primary motivating factor in my decision to purchase my Page 404 of 601 Appendix 'E'— Community Comments Page 405 of 601 home here. This neighbourhood would be severely impacted by not only the visual uglification of the surrounding neigbourhood by way of impositions of tall structures on the skyline, but also by the unwanted population intensification which will manifest itself in many ways, including but not limited to: • Increased intensity of traffic in, out and through the community, in an area where traffic enforcement is already lacking in its effectiveness to establish safe travel speeds and compliance with road safety regulations. • Increased traffic noise, again in an area where traffic enforcement is already lacking in its effectiveness to ensure that vehicles operated in and around the community meet established legislated vehicle noise emission standards, resulting in further worsening of street noise already above a reasonable level due to traffic both along Highway 7 and within the community's own streets. • Increased general noise directly caused by the population intensification in an area already plagued by noise not only from the aforementioned lack of enforcement of established legislated vehicle noise emission standards, but by increased air traffic in and out of the municipal international airport (YKF). • Increased disruption by construction activities as the developer would implement planned facility. • Increased crime due to the intensification of population in the community that this project will cause. • Erosion of our voices as voters and as property owners within the physical boundaries of this neighbourhood. I ask that the City of Kitchener to: 1. Deny this application and prevent the project from going forward. 2. Withhold from use any funds from the tax base at the municipal, regional, provincial, and federal levels into which our community residents contribute, saving those funds from being diverted away from the neglected community standards enforcement already plaguing this community to further enhance profitability of the commercial interests of this property owner and commercial entities working with them. 3. Reject this application with prejudice so as to set a precedence to not further entertain applications of this nature in this community going forward by this applicant or by other applicants. 4. Not prove the ineffectiveness of democratic process by reviewing and subsequently ignoring this request. 5. BE BETTER in its proactive and EFFECTIVE informing of residents affected by proposals such as these (all residents, at least within a 1km radius of proposed project sites). Sincerely, Janet Stewart Page 405 of 601 Appendix 'E'— Community Comments Page 406 of 601 Citizen, Resident and Owner Anonymous Feb 5, 2022 Hi Katie, I really don't care about the new potential development between King and Charles at Ottawa. If anything it will just be another pain with all the roads shut down due to construction. Chureb Kowtecky Jan 21, 2022 Hello, Ms. Anderl: I just noticed in today's Record the "Notice of Development Application" info for 1001 King St. East here in Kitchener. I know you must be very busy, but I wondered if you might enjoy a little "history" of the site, just for interest. The former house at 1001 belonged to my father's aunt, Ruth Tompkins (d. 1944) and her husband, Charles Norton who established and ran the "Berlin Soda Works" on that site. According to our family records, Ruth was born in 1860 on the family farm at Listowel, one of 16 children (plus 2 adoptees) of George & Isabella Tompkins. My father (who was one of her many nephews) had fond memories of going with his siblings on Sunday visits to visit "Aunt Ruth at 1001 King St." which was at that time, on the edge of the city. Ruth, her husband and son lived in the two-story house on the property (1001 King St.) and ran the Soda Works out of their factory behind, which faced Charles St. On August 17, 2012, Jeff Outhit did a story on Ruth for the Record ("Empty Land Full of Mystery"), as some of their land was needed for the new Ion Project. I just thought that, coming from such a large family, and always eager to welcome visitors to her home, Ruth would be delighted to know that 1001 will be home again, this time to lots of families, workers and businesses. 'Hope this little story brings a smile to your busy day! Sincerely, Chureb (Tompkins) Kowtecky Page 406 of 601 Comment Submission to Planning Department February 18, 2022 Ann Welch Kitchener, On RE: purposed build 1001 King St E It is not the responsibility of the residents of Kitchener or their elected representatives to accommodate a developer's project when they knowingly purpose a project that is not within the zoning or within the true meaning of a minor adjustment to that zoning. Developers do not have us in their best interest; they are legally bound to maximize profit for their shareholders and investors. I do not say this as a negative, it is law. That is why the planning department and our elected representatives have been trusted as the gatekeepers and tasked with trying to find the balance between the current residents and developers on how the King East area will evolve. This is a new territory and we will only get one shot to get it right. Having been an observer to the Ontario Land Tribunal hearing of January 13th 2022 "Albrecht v. Kitchener (City)" I have to question what really is the purpose of sharing our thoughts on this development as it appears to me that "the fix" is in. The city decided not to represent or defend its own planning department that spent hundreds of hours and tens of thousands of taxpayer's money to plan the future growth of the King Street East Neighbourhood and instead supported the decision of the volunteer committee of adjustment whose chairman is taking the city to the Ontario Land Tribunal over his own interest.' But residents aren't convinced the committee of adjustment is designed for public process. "if the city planning department says it is not minor in nature, that's it," Snyder said. "That should automatically mean it's not a committee of adjustment issue. ,2 The only possible way for Mr. Albrecht to have even been taken seriously at that hearing was for him and his neighbours to mortgage their homes to hire a lawyer and several experts to defend the City of Kitchener planning department's recommendations against the developer's expert, Pierre Chauvin, a planner with MHBC Planning representing Vive, who appears to know better about what should be built then the city's planning department. And if that is the case, why bother with the expense of a planning department? And now the province is adding an additional burden for residents to challenge these types of intrusions into established neighbourhoods require a $10,000 filing fee for third -party appeals to the tribunal? ' https://www.therecord.com/news/waterloo-region/2021/09/20/proposed-highrise-in-downtown-kitchener- sparks-controversy.html Denny Cybalski, the applicant behind the development, is also the volunteer chair of Kitchener's committee of adjustment, a city -appointed committee made up of volunteers who grant variances, as well as allowing changes to zoning bylaws such as building setbacks. 210 -storey tower can move ahead on King Street block January 19`h 2022 https://therecordepaper.pressreader.com/waterloo-region-record/20220119/textview Written comments against planning application: 1001 King St E Kitchener, On Page 1 Page 407 of 601 Larger builds lead to less-livable cities4 —The Record February 21, 2022 Dismantling urban design protections such as setbacks, stepbacks, and sh" _ i,ngf,guidoa ,ne , terrible idea. While it may result in larger builds, it won't result in more I' s. Design protections preserve the function, esthetics, and environmental health of cities. I we build dense, poorly designed cities, bereft of sunlight and open space, everyone who can leave, will. Those who can't leave, like houseplants in a dark corner, will suffer reduced physical and mental health. "It's up to citizens to preserve their mature neigh bourhoodsi5 - The Record January 21, 2022 "Other neighbours' commitment to oppose this development took nine months and thousands of dollars. We fought for the integrity of the neighbourhood, all the way to the Ontario Land Tribunal. As homeowners with pride in our distinct neighbourhood, we were treated as underdogs by the city. Can we count on the city to protect these neighbourhoods? When it bumps into policies favouring intensification, don't count on their support." Hysterical NIMBYism isn't driving opponents of Belmont Village development6 - The Record January 21, 2022 "Luxury condos are not needed in Belmont Village, but affordable family housing, rental options, and green space development would be enthusiastically welcomed. That the applicant and institutional enablers refuse to address these needs, choosing instead to ignore or misrepresent residents' legitimate objections, speaks to the tacit NIMBYism inherent in profit - driven planning. This, however, is conspicuously absent from the public discourse. Such.analysis, it would seem, is too long and complex a conversation to have." The planning department went to great effort and time to update the zoning, including massing models, wind studies, shadow studies, and application of design guidelines and community input to arrive at the current vision to grow and current zoning, only to have developers disregard the zoning and want what they want. To truly appreciate the work that the planning department did to find the correct balance between old and new I recommend that you take the time to read all 631 pages of "Planning Staff Reponses to Written and Verbal Submissions received 'Before', 'At' and'After'the Statutory Public Meeting held on December 9, 2019 to consider Official Plan Amendment OPA19/004/COK/TMW and Zoning By-law Amendment ZBA19/ 010/COK/TMW (Neighbourhood Planning Review Project)"' Example: page 213 Staff Response In responses to the comments received at the various Open Houses with respect to the 3 httPs://www.therecord.com/news/waterloo-region/2022/02/15/provincial-task-force-report-on-housing-crisis- favours-easing-obstacles-to-development. html 4 https://www.therecord.com/opinion/2022102/21/larger-builds-lead-to-less-livable-cities.htm1 5 https://therecordepaper.pressreader.com/waterloo-region-record/20220121/textview ' https://www.therecord.com/opinion/letters-to-the-editors/2022/01/21lhystericaI-nimbyism-isnt-driving- opponents-of-belmont-village-development.htmI letter to editor ' https://www.kitchener.ca/en/resourcesGeneral/Documents/DSD PLAN DSD -2021-92 Appendix-B.pdf Written comments against planning application: 1001 King St E Kitchener, On Page 2 Page 408 of 601 transition of medium and high-rise developments and their compatibility with adjacent low-rise residential areas, planning staff completed extensive 3D modelling. The purpose of this modelling was to determine the most appropriate combination/correlation of Floor Space Ratio (FSR) with maximum building height and to determine the most appropriate distance or setback of a medium and high-rise development from an adjacent low-rise neighbourhood. What Planning Staff were finding is that when a property had a maximum FSR and building height that did not correlate the development would meet one zoning requirement first, and put forward that they could exceed this zoning requirement because the other zoning requirement had not been met. Both FSR and Maximum Building Height were meant to work together, and this was not happening. The miscorrelation was being taken as an interpretation that one of the zoning requirements could be exceeded if the other zoning requirement had not been maxed out. For example, if the maximum FSR of a property was 4.0 and the maximum building height was 10 storeys, a proposal for a development having a FSR of 6.0 would be put forward because the maximum building height on the site was 10 storeys. The fact that the MIX -4 zone does not have a maximum building height is being put forward in the submissions, by both the development industry and the community, that this means this zone has "unlimited" height. It does not. A development's maximum building height in the MIX - 4 zone would be limited by the amount of building floor area that would be permitted by the lot area and the arrangement of this building floor area on the lot based on the MIX -4's setback requirements from lot lines, including the setbacks from low rise residential zones. No maximum building height in the MIX -4 zone does not mean unlimited height and that an FSR of 8.0, 10, or 12.0 is justified and appropriate. All the direction of this intensification is about supporting the LRT, adding up towards 10,000 new residence per year but what is not talked about is all the supporting infrastructure that is already outdated and under serious stress. Hospitals were already full before the pandemic, how and where will the city be able expand without adequate services in hospital/fire/paramedics/ambulance Regional Chair Karen Redman said the province also needs to be looking at hospitals, schools and highways to support any new growth. "We can't just build houses and not have services available that everybody expects to be there and they need to be funded by the province," Redman said. She added, "I think that you can't impose things on the community. I think that there still has to be due process, I still believe in managed growth."8 Hospitals: Dec. 18, 2021 "At Grand River Hospital, for example, patient occupancy is regularly over 95 per cent, with some key departments, such as stroke, oncology and mental health, at beyond 100 per cent capacity, said Bonnie Camm, executive vice-president of clinical services: i9 Fire: Oct 05, 2021 "The Kitchener Fire Department (KFD) says it needs more firefighters and a new station to better handle the growing number of emergency calls they are receiving as a result of the city's growing population." "Firefighters are very expensive and we've been doing a good job of running 8 https://www.therecord.com/news/waterloo-region/2022/02/15/provincial-task-force-report-on-housing-crisis- favou rs-easing-obstacles-to-development. html 9 httos://www.therecord.com/news/waterloo-region/2021/12/18/omicron-inferno-poses-threat-to-alreadv- overtaxed-waterloo-region-hospital-system-officials-warn. html Written comments against planning application: 1001 King St E Kitchener, On Page 3 Page 409 of 601 efficiently and lean, but with the population growth and intensification, especially in the downtown, now we're finding response times and getting firefighters on the scene in a timely fashion is becoming more difficult," he said. The addition of more high-rise buildings in the city also puts a strain on resources, Gilmore said, because more firefighters are required to safely respond.10 ' Paramedics/Ambulance: Jan. 18, 2022 - Region of Waterloo paramedics say code red has been issued a lot more lately -- when there are no ambulances available to respond to an emergency call. In December, the region's paramedics saw 11 periods of code red." Comments on 1001 King St E purposed build: Although each project has to be addressed as "site specific" and each study the developer submits will only look at what is in place now it is really important to look at the big picture. From Vive Development's webpage: A celebration of history, this project will pay homage to the former headquarters of the Onward Manufacturing Company by incorporating original design details into this new residential development. A wide variety of amenities including a pool, dog exercise area and live -work units will provide residents with an exciting live -play opportunity, while also having direct access to the LRT outside their front door.12 1001 King St E is pushing the envelope by purposing a 30 story tower having an 8.27FSR in the middle of a block surrounded by one and two story buildings on either side of the street and positioning the building very close to the street. During the virtual open house we were told that the shadow of the building would go half way to Weber St. One just gets the feeling that the King Street East neighbourhood is being treated like "low hanging fruit". Even though we have the infrastructure for children, both public and separate schools, the developers are only purposing to build 1 and 2 bedroom rental "units" not a place that families can call home. And these units don't come cheap ($1,400 to $1,800 per month) and being aimed at the $50K and above market. There is no green space being purposed, no additions to the city's tree canopy and outdoor amenities will be 4 stories above the street leading to a disconnect from the existing community. This is not a case of not wanting new development, we all welcome it, what is concerning is that the character of the neighbourhood will be overwhelmed by "sky towers". 10 https://www.cbc.ca/news/ca nada/kitchener-waterloo/Kitchener-fire-department-more-staff-new-station- 1.6198944 11 https://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/paramedics-battle-code-red-influx-in-waterloo-region-1.5745540 12 https://vivedevelopment.com/proiect/king-charles-ottawa/ Written comments against planning application: 1001 King St E Kitchener, On Page 4 Page 410 of 601 1001 King St 30 story rental tower, less than 300 meters away to the north, 20 Ottawa St N is purposing a'26 story condo tower, 400 meters to the east at 1251 King St E is purposing a 24 story rental tower (see Table A) ,It' /```� 2001tawa Street Northo- `�`� o fj�;"fi 9ml 020011owo Stn:cICHN ' 4 W A`tAli Ch rrch \l` Cnrr; i'1;J Q� lch�ner 91te �\t\ o �tinnoanm, �E'��nl ✓ 0 4 jl 00 CI poca ,:z V� '-..� q 6 min' h / lU 4 "Y h / 11M17,11',snk nl0.lorerurl 000 I ._f Gas Slalinn rt�c00,��"�\, 00 0 ���},�World Nl h'on ©O 10 i 1 'i fE 6 min 00 61Z nrlan A4nrt al Afts 00069 005 t.,C4er rlr n m o �� nr•RDOF Ynuth!L' Un0'0000 00 sI JCI VA r0. @�, fitr I 1 � • Podiotrlc Cur idonr - At mer 4 1251 KIn9 Slrcel Eoatp `*?I)A�F Q 61 meters west on King to 936 King St E there is already a 10 story building that has been approved. td Sl Source soo / ( 6 min 600m EasnvoDA 7 400936 King Street East , 000 "-� 020 Ottawa S1 I'= HnrtnnO©CGY Skl n Cycle-htl"� �., I rh I•S l.l�rr--�� Sii •Polo �''� PY000 00 WM0 o0 X00 Kilche 0 MAO flank rtfLNrontreal Stanley Park Auto Repair e„/ 00V id River - v 0001 0 ( Towne nowt 1:111.1101 . o o 550. ,mr� h �lr,. 7 min T0�0 QDUIUH PB.. d ae In this space of a couple of blocks within a well established neighbourhood there appears to be a lack of diversity in the buildings being purposed. Based on the purposed builds known, the increase of the population in this area is now between 2,355 — 4,710 with the majority of those "rental units" • Where are the townhomes? • Where are the low rise apartment buildings? • Where are the stacked townhomes? • Where are the mid rise condos? • Where are the semi detached houses? The demand is there but it appears that the will is not. Lack of Diversity in housing: Jan. 11, 2022 "Townhomes we just launched this week, for 10 units we had 1,500 people sign up showing interest," said Geoff McMurdo, chief administrative officer at Activa. By the time the list had been whittled down to serious buyers, it still had a whopping 750 names on it.13 1251 King Street E added 9 three bedroom rental townhomes and 20 Ottawa St N has included two six storey buildings with 68 dwelling units each but no information how many bedrooms these units contain or what the rental rates will be. 13 https:Hwww.therecord.com/news/waterloo-region/2022/01/11/bizarre-housing-market-1500-people-sign-up— to-buy-l0-new-townhomes-in-cambridge.html Written comments against planning application: 1001 King St E Kitchener, On Page 5 Page 411 of 601 Floor Space Ratio (FSR): My understanding is this ratio is to find a balance between lot size and building(s) and to prevent overbuilding. From the proposals I have seen there appears to be a push to go up much higher then what this area was made to believe. "What Planning Staff were finding is that when a property had a maximum FSR and building height that did not correlate the development would meet one zoning requirement first, and put forward that they could exceed,this zoning requirement because the other zoning requirement had not been met. Both FSR and Maximum Building Height were meant to work together, and this was not happening. The miscorrelation was being taken as an interpretation that one of the zoning requirements could be exceeded if the other zoning requirement had not been maxed out. For example, if the maximum FSR of a property was 4.0 and the maximum building height was 10 storeys, a proposal for a development having a FSR of 6.0 would be put forward because the maximum building height on the site was 10 storeys .04 We were told during the review of the King Street East Neighbourhood that this was an example of the type of development we should be expecting, one that blended and balanced with the existing properties with lots of parking, green spaces and a diversity of housing. Not something that overwhelmed the neighbourhood like this current proposal. 15 0 Facilitate redevelopment of the mid-sized site bounded by Charles St, Delta St and Sydney St. �. New streetsto creel r onleyeA enhance wnnectwdy and hreak up the block Taller elements located awayfrom fcei nae I,., T eiyhbourhaod �F New open space ''• t eg' nei•+and to acing resid and Currently there no "sky towers" in the area and there are actually not that many mid -rise buildings either but several come to mind that show excellence in their development and a balance/blend within the current neighbourhoods. The common element into blending these buildings is that they have a small street foot print but run deep, amply parking for residents and visitors, surrounded by green space and have a human scale. 14 https://www.kitchener.ca/en/resourcesGeneral/Documents/DSD PLAN DSD -2021-92 Appendix-B.pdf " https://www.kitchener.ca/en/resourcesGeneral/Documents/CSD_PLAN_PARTS-Rockway-Preferred- Scenario.pdf Written comments against planning application: 1001 King St E Kitchener, On Page 6 Page 412 of 601 Rockway Gardens Village -142OKing St. E 50 unit six -story apartment building 1522 King Street East Kitchener Eastwood Community -1414King StE 70Sydney Street South Apartments 10 story condo underground parking KW Habilitation IM Habilitation Skx.Toxver :|ackhunnanyoa|e,theneisaboatendencytoOUthebui|dingkt|eavnQ|ittle if any green space at ground level. Instead those amenities are several stories above and people living in these towers may feel a disconnected from the community. Written comments against planning application: 1001 King St E Kitchener, On Page Page 413 of 601 Table A: Approved/Purposed Builds King Street East Address Units Parking Occupancy Floor Floor Building Type Range space Space Ration Ratio Permitted Requested 1001 King St E 486 286 486-972 4 8.27 30 Story rental tower 20 Ottawa St N 464 343 464-928 1 3.00 26 story rental tower 936 King St E17 98 50 98-196 n/a n/a 10 story rental tower 1668 King St E 616 371 616-1,232 4 7.20 two 23 - storey rental towers 1251-1253 King E 332 199 341-682 5 7.15 24 storey rental tower 9 townhouses 50 Borden Ave 518 350 350-700 5 unknown contemplate a multi -tower 851 King Street E19 Unknown Unknown unknown 5 unknown unknown 1440 King St E20 Unknown Unknown unknown 4 unknown unknown Total 1249 2,355- 4,710 Parking rates: Some of the justification we are being given for the reduction of parking are: High water table — that is not our problem but a poor business decision to try to build "sky towers" on land that is not compatible Cost of building parking — again the developer knew going in what the requirements were but wants an exemption because it would affect their "profit" I gave up on trying making sense of this idea that people are going to be riding bikes everywhere, even during the winter months. Instead I think I would offer up that a great business opportunity exists for someone to purchase land and build a parking garage for all those missing a spot where they rent. 16 Page 394 #e 17 Page 385 #128 18 httos://www.kitchener.ca/en/resourcesGeneraI/Documents/DSD PLAN DSD -2021-92 Appendix- B.pdf#%5B%7B%22num%22%3A1830%2C%22een%22%3AO%7D%2C%7B%22name%22%3A%22XYZ%22%7D%2C70 %2C284%2C0%5D page 274 #512 19 page 448 #138 20 page 274 #91 Written comments against planning application: 1001 King St E Kitchener, On Page 8 Page 414 of 601 There isstill alot ofland atChedes/Borden/Courtland/Knt that will come onto the market aswell as the former Schneider property that will offer more than enough intensification to meet with the 160 residence per acre and support the ILIRT and other transit options, so why the rush to put up all these "sky towers". In summary: I would support a development that is within the current zoning restricted to the FSR4 and the building pushed back from the street to allow for some greening of the property and give it a more residential appearance. Although itbjust wishful thinking, having a percentage of the units as 3 bedrooms would appeal to fami|iesasweUauthe"voungprofessiona|sand/ordovvnsimeo"^^thedeve|operisdineotin8thisbui|dto and the bonus would be that less parking would be needed as there would be fewer units. People need homes, not "units" Sincerely Ann Welch Kitchener, On 21 VIVE invitation tovirtual open house flyer July 21,2O21 Page 415 of 601 Page 416 of 601 SHAPING GREAT COMMUN|T|ES February 17`2O21 Facet Design Studio Ltd. 4SODutton Drive, Suite B1 Waterloo, ON N2L6H7 Attn: Steve Burrows Facet Design Studios RE: Planning and Urban Design Commentary Regarding 1001-1051 King Street East &&53U-5G4Charles Street Official Plan Amendment OPA22/001/NJKA Zoning AmnmndmmmntZBA22/001/K/KA Dear Mr. Burrows, Background File No: 22053 As requested, please find enclosed our preliminary planning and urban design commentary regarding the proposed applications for an Offiom) Plan Amendment (]PA) and Zoning By-law Amendment (Z8A) for the properties. We have reviewed the relevant application materials on the Qh/o website and offer the following general commentary on planning and urban design matters (the latter in consultation with GSP's urban design group) as it affects the property at 991 King Street East. It needs to be stressed that this commentary is a cursory review and focused on potential implications for the development of8S1 King Street East. The following commentary iobased onthe proposed development associated with the applications for Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-|sm(which includes the following: One large slab tower with structured parking, ground floor commercial uses, 5 live/work units along Charles Street and 486 multipleresidential dwellings (total of401dwelling units) Structure parking to include 260 parking spaces, with surface parking providing an additional 28parking spaces Building height of 30 storeys (92 metres) with a total Floor Space Ratio of 8.27 PLANNING I URBAN DESIGN I LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE 7uVictoria Street South, Suite u01.Kitchener, 0N N2G4Y8 5195688883 1OuLocke Street South, Suite ono Hamilton, ON L8P4A9 9055727477 Page 417 of 601 Urban Design Commentary GSP's urban design team reviewed the Site Plan, Urban Design Brief, Architectural Renderings and Shadow Study, and Wind Assessment for the proposed OPA and ZBA applications. Our commentary focuses on the application of the Tall,Building Guidelines (the "TBG") for the proposed applications and any potential implications affecting the future design and development of 991 King Street East. The below are the principal massing and form considerations of the TBG as it relates to potential implications for 991 King Street East. a) Floorplate The proposed 30 -storey tower floorplate is large relative to contemporary comparisons; per the submitted Urban Design Brief, it is a 1,530 square metre tower footprint measuring generally 27 metres wide by 57 metres long. This floorplate is continuous for the height of the proposed 30 - storey tower. The TBG characterize the proposed building as a "Large Slab" owing to the combination of its tower floor area and tower proportions. The TBG generally prefer "Compact Point" towers for intensification areas, rather than "Large" tower forms. The proposed 30 -storey tower, however, is approximately 55% greater than the threshold for "Compact" and approximately 33% greater than the threshold for "Point". The proposed development has a very large tower mass in totality. On its own, the characterization as a Large Slab to this extent does not necessarily determine appropriateness but, rather, it influences some of the other considerations (and calculations) of physical fit and form, including physical separation, overlook and microclimatic impacts. The TBG does not preclude "Large" tower forms but sets high design expectations for massing and form to accommodate such buildings: "Large Point Towers and Large Slabs must demonstrate significant design measures to reduce the visual impact of their mass". b) Separation The TBG suggests physical separation distance between tower forms to property lines as a function of the relationship between a building's height and length. Per the submitted Urban Design Brief, the TBG suggests a 26.27 metre physical separation to the property line shared with 991 King Street East owing to the proposed 30 -storey tower's length and height. The proposed tower is set back only 10 metres from its own property line with the remaining approximately 16 metres of the suggested physical separation extending onto 991 King Street East. This puts over 60% of the suggested physical separation onus onto the abutting property at 991 King Street, an overburdening which the TBG specifically seeks to avoid with the physical separation guidance. Further, this 16 -metre extension onto 991 King Street East is in addition to any physical separation distance required for future redevelopment of 991 King Street East that would need to be accommodated on 991 King Street East. For instance, the TBG suggests for a 15 -storey building with an 875 square metre (25 metres by 35 metres) floorplate a physical separation distance in the order of 8.5 metres. This results in a suggested total tower setback on 991 King Street East in the order of 25 metres to the shared property line with the subject OPA and ZBA property (where required to include the off-site 16 metre setback), resulting in a setback of approximately half the depth of 991 King Street East from Borden Avenue. For comparison purposes, a mid -rise 8 -storey building with a 1,125 square metre floorplate (28 metres by 40 metres) situated along GSP Group 1 2 Page 418 of 601 Charles Street more fully using the area of 991 King Street East would require a cumulative physical separation of 20 metres, which could not be achieved given the proposed 30 -storey tower form. c) Overlook The TBG suggests a maximum overlook (or overlap) between tower forms related to the extent of suggested physical separation: a greater physical separation distance results in a lower maximum overlap between towers. The Urban Design Brief notes a maximum overlap of 30% owing to the suggested separation distance greater than 14 metres for the proposed 30 -storey tower. The placement and mass of the proposed 30 -storey tower, however, virtually guarantees a full overlap between itself and any proposed taller building on 991 King Street East and/or the property assembly at the corner of King and Borden. The TBG instructs that design mitigations should be employed where suggested overlook is not achieved, such as greater physical separation, mitigative massing and thoughtful balcony placements. Such measures have not been employed for the proposed 30 -storey tower as it rises consistently in shape and form through its height. d) Placement The placement of the proposed 30 -storey tower mass aligned with and closer to western property line shared with 991 King Street East appears on its face to be principally driven by the location of the "memory tower" situated mid -site on the King Street frontage. This is a "commemoration" of the existing heritage building, involving demolition and recreation the vertical element in the same location. Regardless of the merits and rationale for positioning this recreated vertical element in situ, it should not excuse the proposed 30 -storey tower's design from the balance.of the TBG outlined above and below. e) Shadow The proposed 30 -storey tower mass casts wide shadows onto 991 King Street East for most of the morning hourly periods through different seasons. When 991 King Street East is developed, the core developable portion of 991 King Street East along Charles Street sunlight will be limited on any proposed "eastern" -facing elevations and rooftop terraces. In the morning, these elevations and areas will be largely shaded by the proposed 30 -storey tower mass and in the afternoon periods shaded by itself. This is a consideration that should be taken together with the above commentary regarding building separation and overlook. f) Wind The provided Wind Assessment is a qualitative assessment of anticipated wind conditions post - development of the proposed 30 -storey tower, as compared to a quantitative desktop or wind tunnel assessment. This provides expectations for wind conditions but not predictions based on modelling. Given this, it is not possible to conclusively identify wind impacts on and surrounding 991 King Street East. Based on the above considerations related to the TBG, the proposed tower placement, height and massing presents constraints to the flexibility of development options for 991 King Street East on an individual basis or when hypothetically combined with the remaining property assembly at the corner GSP Group 1 3 Page 419 of 601 of King and Borden. Recognizing the TBG are meant aoaflexible design guideline tool to shape tall bui|dinga, and are not meant as rigid reQulationo, the design of the proposed 30 -tower does not incorporate the mitigative design measures (placement, massing, or shape) contemplated by the TBG hocounter the very large mass ofthe proposed 3&-etoraytower. We trust the above and enclosed satisfies your needs at this time for providing input into the proposed applications for the captioned properties. Sincerely, GSP Group Inc. Kristen Bahodale.MC|P Associate, Senior Planner Q8PGroup 14