No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDSD-2023-198 - ZBA22/011/N/AP - 30CDM-22208 - 67 and 71 Nelson Avenue and portion of th eundeveloped Tagge Street Right-of-way - 2415274 Ontario Inc.Staff Report r NJ :R Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee DATE OF MEETING: May 8, 2023 SUBMITTED BY: Garett Stevenson, Interim Director of Planning, 519-741-2200 ext. 7070 PREPARED BY: Andrew Pinnell, Senior Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7668 WARD INVOLVED: DATE OF REPORT: April 19, 2023 REPORT NO.: DSD -2023-198 SUBJECT: Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA22/01 1 /N/AP Draft Plan of Condominium Application 30CDM-22208 67 & 71 Nelson Avenue and portion of the undeveloped Tagge Street right-of-way 2415274 Ontario Inc. RECOMMENDATION: • That Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA22/011/N/AP for 67 & 71 Nelson Avenue be approved in the form shown in the Proposed By-law and Map No. 1, attached to Report DSD -2023-193 as Attachment A; and • That the City of Kitchener, pursuant to Section 51(31) of the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13, as amended, and By-law 2005-170 as amended by By-law 2007-042, hereby grants draft approval to Condominium Application 30CDM-22208 for 67 & 71 Nelson Avenue and a portion of the undeveloped Tagge Street right-of-way, in the City of Kitchener, subject to the conditions shown in Attachment B. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: The purpose of this report is to evaluate and provide planning recommendations regarding the Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Condominium (Vacant Land) applications requested by 2415274 Ontario Inc. for the subject lands. It is Planning staffs recommendation that the Zoning By-law Amendment be approved, and the Draft Plan of Condominium be draft approved. Community engagement included: o Circulation of a preliminary notice postcard to owners and occupants within 240m of the subject lands; o Installation of notice signs on the lands; o Virtual neighbourhood meeting held on September 20, 2022; o Postcard advising of the statutory public meeting was circulated to all property owners and occupants within 240 metres of the subject lands, those who responded to the preliminary circulation, and those who attended the neighbourhood meeting; and, o Notice of the public meeting was published in The Record on April 14, 2023. This report supports the delivery of core services. *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 323 of 387 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The owner of the lands, known as 2415274 Ontario Inc., has made application for Draft Plan of Condominium (Vacant Land) for the subject lands, which consist of the lands addressed as 67 & 71 Nelson Avenue and a portion of the undeveloped Tagge Street right-of-way that the applicant is requesting to purchase from the City via a separate process. The condominium comprises 23 vacant land condominium units, each of which is planned to contain a future single detached dwelling with an attached garage. Units (lots) range between 224 square metres and 374 square metres in area, while lot widths range between 9.0 metres and 13.3 metres. Each unit is wide enough to accommodate a single detached dwelling with an attached garage. Proposed common elements of the condominium include a private driveway, landscaped areas, and a narrow parcel of land to be used for a noise wall. The owner is also requesting a Zoning By-law Amendment to facilitate the proposal. A holding provision is recommended to prohibit development until a stationary noise study is completed to the satisfaction of the Region. Planning staff recommends approval of the applications. BACKGROUND: The owner of the lands, known as 2415274 Ontario Inc., has made application for Draft Plan of Condominium and Zoning By-law Amendment for the subject lands, which consist of the lands addressed as 67 & 71 Nelson Avenue and a portion of the undeveloped Tagge Street right-of-way that the applicant is requesting to purchase from the City (the disposition of these lands is not the subject of this report). These applications would facilitate the redevelopment of the lands with 23 vacant land condominium units for single detached dwellings (details found in the Report section). vvaozwrc 00 1- � G SUBJECT AREAYNO �.4 (z p 75T �RlGG� E -o N� G3m Figure 1 — Subject Lands comprised of 67 & 71 Nelson Avenue and a portion of the undeveloped Tagge Street right-of-way Page 324 of 387 The subject lands are designated Low Rise Residential on Map 3 — Land Use within the 2014 Official Plan and are identified as Community Areas on Map 2 — Urban Structure. The lands are presently zoned Residential Three Zone (R-3) under By-law 85-1. Applicable highlights of the current zoning permissions are as follows: • Permitted uses include Additional Dwelling Unit (Detached), Duplex Dwelling, Home Business, Private Home Daycare, Residential Care Facility, and Single Detached Dwelling. • Single detached dwellings are subject to the following regulations: o Minimum lot area of 411 square metres; o Minimum lot width of 13.7 metres; o Minimum corner lot width of 15.0 metres; o Minimum front yard and minimum side yard abutting a street of 4.5 metres, except no part of any building used to accommodate off-street parking shall be located closer than 6.0 metres to the street line. The subject lands are located northeast of the intersection Nelson Avenue and Tagge Street, in the Bridgeport East Planning Community. The lands have approximately 62 metres of frontage on Nelson Avenue and are 0.8 hectares (2 acres) in area. The lands also have approximately 20 metres of frontage at the terminus of Sylvia Street. The lands presently contain a single detached dwelling on 67 Nelson Avenue and a single detached dwelling on 71 Nelson Avenue. The surrounding residential neighbourhood to the north and west is composed of low rise residential land uses, mainly single detached dwellings. Lots within this neighbourhood vary greatly in size and shape. Also, dwellings in this area vary greatly in built form and date of construction. Sylvia Park abuts the subject lands to the east. Although the travelled portion of Tagge Street terminates at the intersection with Nelson Avenue (directly in front of the subject lands), the undeveloped Tagge Street right-of-way abuts the subject lands to the south, extending eastward approximately 450 metres to the Croatian Roman Catholic Church. The lands south of Tagge Street comprise Bridgeport Industrial Park East, which is accessed via Hollinger Crescent (off Bridge Street). Currently, pedestrian access to Sylvia Park is achieved by walking south along Sylvia Street. Alternatively, pedestrians may walk along the undeveloped Tagge Street right-of-way (not a formal City trail) to access the park. A Site Plan Application was circulated to City departments and agencies in June 2022 (Application SP22/103/N/AP). At the July 20, 2022 Site Plan Review Committee (SPRC), Site Plan Approval in Principle was not granted, pending the outcome of the aforementioned, necessary land disposition decisions and necessity of a Zoning By-law Amendment. Since that time, the Site Plan has been revised to address the SPRC comments and remains under review, pending decision on the sale of the portion of Tagge Street (see Figure 2). A conceptual site plan rendering is included as Figure 3 and the most updated version of the site plan (under review) is included as Figure 4. The plans show 23 single detached dwellings served by a private driveway, as well as common areas for snow storage, utilities, landscaping, etc. A future City trail is also shown south of the subject lands which would facilitate access to Sylvia Park (would be developed through a separate process). Page 325 of 387 Figure 2 — Plan showing the proposed sale of a portion of the undeveloped portion of Tagge Street, proposed easement for noise wall, and proposed trail connection L I. . � 104 UNITS I I I I I I � VNITB � l NIT J O I I UNIT' 1 UNIT 13 � UNIT 12 Figure 3 — Conceptual Site Plan Rendering F; e Page 326 of 387 w I —y UNn v UNIR 1 11 P Rrumrr _ _ UNI16 UNIT U076 UN115 UNIIb UNIi3 tri Q �NItD I a U 12` —� VNI�13 VN�'4 LIN VN16 IIN�f n13 UNIT 18 llNli l9 UNIT 20 UNIT 21 UNIL22 UNITS ]3 I zu:x1 via viiM�l xry �`55sa Dn 12 TAGGEST-—r--—�__L_-1_L s -,. -.. Landscaped U0. Prapasetl Noise. WdI nreo )11 45m I SITE PLAN R-5 10 20 2415274 ONTARIO INC. SCALE 750 67-71 NELSON AVE DATE JANUARY 2,2023 REPORT: SITE STATISTICS 2-g- RESd{Pmpre -73A 22CINIAP) LWArra- O811m Density -29 Wphn Sirgle Dst ftd UW&(UW11) BI 165.1m'(44.1%) LarWsraped Ansa 19O.Im°(50.8%) Aaphall 1 N W Sutlaoe Area- 18.8m' ISA%) Padag ft mored 2711.0 sV em'unn} P.k.g Pm ded 23 (IX spscef ndl .Intl "9srmeugm spews P-0-9 BPa M DimelrsWas-2,5m R5.5m INemal G -S DI enswns-37m a 5,5m LEGEND MAX BUILDING ENVELOPE (DOES NOT REFLECT PROPOSED BUILDINGS) NOTE: -ALL ASPHALT AREAS TO RE DEFINED WITH 0.15M HIGH POURED CONCRETE CURBING -IVEWAY LOCATIONS ARE CDNCEPTUAL GARBAGE PICK-UP WILL BE CURBSIDE REVISED SITE PLAN APPLICATION No. SP22l143/N1AP LEGAL DESCRIPTION: PT LT 9 ON PLAN 575 AND PART 2 S 3 ON PLAN 5884637 City of Kitchener CAD FILE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT SP,DWG Figure 4 — Site Plan drawing (under review) The owner is requesting Draft Approval of Vacant Land Condominium (VLC) to facilitate a redevelopment concept consisting of single detached dwellings fronting on a private driveway that extends between the current terminus of Sylvia Street and Nelson Avenue (see Figure 5). Specifically, the VLC comprises 23 vacant land condominium units (total of 0.608 hectares), each of which is planned to contain a future single detached dwelling. Units (lots) range between 224 square metres and 374 square metres in area, while lot widths range between 9.0 metres and 13.3 metres. Each unit is wide enough to accommodate a single detached dwelling with an attached garage. Proposed common elements of the condominium comprise 0.213 hectares and include: A private driveway, including space for: o "On -street" parking on the north side, o A 1.5 metre wide sidewalk along the north side, and o A pedestrian crossing. Landscaped areas, including space for: o Snow storage abutting Sylvia Park, o A Canada Post centralized mailbox adjacent to the connection to Sylvia Street, and 0 1.5 metre wide servicing easements, for utilities and plantings, located between Nelson Avenue and abutting units, and along the south side of the private driveway. A 1.1 -metre -wide by 130 -metre -long parcel of land abutting the industrial lands to the south. This common element of the condominium is not contiguous with the land to be developed for residential purposes and would be used for the construction of a noise wall. The parcel Page 327 of 387 would continue to be owned by the City and would be made subject to an easement in favour of the owner / future condominium corporation. The future noise wall would mitigate noise generated by the adjacent industrial lands. The long-term maintenance and all cost associated with the noise wall would be the responsibility of the condominium corporation. The land parcel located between the subject lands and the aforementioned noise wall parcel is not subject to the proposed draft plan of condominium, contains a City -owned sanitary sewer, and is proposed to be retained by the City for future trail purposes. Figure 5 — Draft Plan of Condominium (Vacant Land) A recommended Draft Plan of Condominium condition would require that Site Plan Application SP22/103/N/AP receive final Site Plan Approval, prior to condominium registration. Also, prior to the registration, the land transactions related to the sale of an undeveloped portion of the Tagge Street right-of-way and the establishment of an easement on City lands for a noise wall shall be complete. The disposition of these lands will occur through a separate process. It must be noted that City Council has the ultimate authority regarding whether to sell the lands and the sale price. The Draft Plan, as outlined in this report, cannot proceed if Council denies sale of the lands. Planning staff recommends that the draft approval be granted to the Draft Plan of Condominium Application. In addition, the applicant is also requesting a Zoning By-law Amendment (ZBA) to facilitate the Draft Plan of Condominium. The ZBA is discussed in the below Planning Analysis. Page 328 of 387 UJ V) b N6F 11 20E 178.735- UNIT 9 UNIT 1 10037h©r0.0vi—I f0.037her0.031x1 j ,6 W Z UNIT 8 UNIT 7 UNIT 6 UNIT 5 NIT 4 UNIT 3 L1J 10.023hor 10073ho/ IOA? W (0A73— :'3h.7 � . i .'I 0057MI 0057ao) 0.057M1 0057ac� .%ocl xl Q UNIT l0 UNIT 2 a� i Z 10.036ho70O&Vxl 10036WO.009-1 O W----- - - - - - - - - - - - - - Z -C M MON Ki' RW (4.19B111t/0.�4ae) UNIT I I (0.035h07o,086oc) z UNIT 13 UNIT 14 UNIT 15 UNIT 16 UNIT 17 UNIT 18 UNIT 14 UNIT 20 UNIT 21 NIT 22 jNIT 23 10 023h.1 ia4z3nor roatalw (4.073ho7 I0,023har ro.023har ro.ozznar foaZMcv roan7, :27hcv 10.027nei OD57MI 0.057oc) O.as7aCl OAs7x) 0.057x1 0.09.cl O.OS4=J 0:054oc) 0.054. .;54ocJ 0067x1 UNIT 12 N65°05'0 P100058d NOK@WQI&fen : 178737M COMMON ELEMENT (0,015hal0.037ac) Figure 5 — Draft Plan of Condominium (Vacant Land) A recommended Draft Plan of Condominium condition would require that Site Plan Application SP22/103/N/AP receive final Site Plan Approval, prior to condominium registration. Also, prior to the registration, the land transactions related to the sale of an undeveloped portion of the Tagge Street right-of-way and the establishment of an easement on City lands for a noise wall shall be complete. The disposition of these lands will occur through a separate process. It must be noted that City Council has the ultimate authority regarding whether to sell the lands and the sale price. The Draft Plan, as outlined in this report, cannot proceed if Council denies sale of the lands. Planning staff recommends that the draft approval be granted to the Draft Plan of Condominium Application. In addition, the applicant is also requesting a Zoning By-law Amendment (ZBA) to facilitate the Draft Plan of Condominium. The ZBA is discussed in the below Planning Analysis. Page 328 of 387 Plannina Analvsis: Provincial Policy Statement, 2020: The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) sets the policy foundation for regulating the development and use of land. The PPS promotes building healthy, liveable and safe communities, the efficient development of lands and provision of a range of housing types and densities. Planning staff is of the opinion that the requested applications are consistent with the policies and intent of the PPS. A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 (Growth Plan): The subject lands are within the `Built -Up Area" as defined by the 2020 Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. The Growth Plan promotes development that contributes to complete communities, creates street configurations that support walking, cycling and sustained viability of transit services. The proposal conforms with the policies of 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 proposal conforms to the policies of this plan. Through the review of the application, the Region of Waterloo has no objections to the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment or Draft Plan of Condominium, subject to application of the aforementioned holding provision and certain conditions of Draft Approval (see Attachment B). City of Kitchener Official Plan: Urban Structure The subject lands are located within the Community Areas in the City's Urban Structure (Map 2 of the Official Plan). The planned function of Community Areas is to provide for residential uses as well as non-residential supporting uses intended to serve the immediate residential areas. Per Policy 3.C.2.52 limited intensification may be permitted within Community Areas in accordance with the applicable land use designation on Map 3 and the Urban Design Policies in Section 11. The proposed development must be sensitive to and compatible with the character, form and planned function of the surrounding context. Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposed development is sensitive to and compatible with the character, form, and planned function of the surrounding context. The proposal would facilitate single detached dwellings which are the predominant land use in the area, while allowing for compatible intensification. The proposed condominium units are smaller than most other lots within the area created through previous subdivision approvals. However, the location of the subject lands on the periphery of the residential neighbourhood creates an appropriate transition from the existing neighbourhood to the adjacent industrial area. Also, the built form of the dwellings is compatible with the surrounding neighbourhood, noting that there is great variety in the building form and construction dates of existing dwellings in the neighbourhood. Land Use Designation The subject lands are designated Low Rise Residential in the 2014 Official Plan. The Low Rise Residential land use designation permits a full range of low density housing types which may include single detached dwellings, semi-detached dwellings, street townhouse dwellings, and low-rise multiple dwellings. The Low Rise Residential land use designation considers a Floor Space Ratio up to 0.75 and allows a maximum building height of 3 storeys or 11 metres. The condominium units and proposed development conforms to the Low Rise Residential policies. Floor Space Ratio is not a consideration for single detached dwellings. However, it should be noted that the dwellings outlines shown on the Draft Plan of Condominium comply with the requested RES - 4 Zone with respect to lot coverage. Building heights are expected to be 3 storeys or less. Page 329 of 387 It should be noted that an Official Plan Amendment is not required to facilitate the proposal. Policy Conclusion: Planning staff is of the opinion that the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Condominium are consistent with policies of the Provincial Policy Statement, conform to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, the Regional Official Plan and City of Kitchener Official Plan, and represent good planning. Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment: Similar to other areas in the City subject to Secondary Plans in the Official Plan, and for lands within Major Transit Station Areas, the Bridgeport East area was not comprehensively rezoned via Stage 2B of the City's Comprehensive Review of the Zoning By-law (CRoZBy). Accordingly, Bridgeport East remains under Zoning By-law 85-1 and will be comprehensively rezoned through a future planning exercise. In the meantime, to facilitate the VLC, the applicant has requested a Zoning By-law Amendment (ZBA) to change the zoning of the subject lands from Residential Three Zone (R-3) under By-law 85-1 to Low Rise Residential Four Zone (RES -4) with Site Specific Provision (365) and Holding Provision (45H) under By-law 2019-051. This approach tailors the zoning to the proposed development concept. A comparison of the current, proposed base zoning, and requested Site Specific Provision is included below: Page 330 of 387 Current R-3 Zone Base RES -4 Zone Site Specific Provision (By-law 85-1) (By-law 2019-051) (365) Minimum Lot Area 411 square 235 square metres 224 square metres metres Minimum Lot Width 13.7 metres 9.0 metres Same as RES -4 Minimum Corner Lot 15.0 metres 12.8 metres 12.5 metres Width Minimum Front Yard 4.5 metres Average of the 4.5 metres for any dwelling front yards of the not directly abutting Nelson abutting lots minus Ave, provided that no part of one metre any building used to accommodate off street parking shall be located closer than 6.0 metres to the street line; 6.0 metres for any dwelling directly fronting Nelson Avenue. Maximum Front Yard N/A Average of the Not required front yards of the abutting lots plus one metre Minimum Side Yard 1.2 metres 1.2 metres Same as RES -4 Minimum Rear Yard 7.5 metres 7.5 metres Same as RES -4 Maximum Building 10.5 metres 11.0 metres Same as RES -4 Height Maximum Lot Total: 55%, 55% Same as RES -4 Coverage Habitable: 45% Minimum Parking for 1 space per 1 space per Same as RES -4 Single Detached dwelling unit dwelling unit Dwelling Section 6 Section 5 Page 330 of 387 Also, because of the unique "lot" orientation of Unit 23 and its connection to a curve in the common driveway, a typical driveway leading to a future single detached dwelling would not comply with the parking regulations. Accordingly, a Site Specific Provision is requested to ensure a typical driveway can be constructed [Provision f)]. Furthermore, Section 4.4.2 of Zoning By-law 2019-051 will apply and will require units within the Vacant Land Condominium to comply with all zoning regulations that apply to single detached dwellings on lots created by plan of subdivision. This general regulation of the Zoning By-law ensures future unit owners redevelop or modify their homes in accordance with the vision and policies of the City's Official Plan. Holding Provision (45H) As a result of the nearby industrial operations, as part of the application submission, the applicant submitted a Stationary Noise Impact Study, prepared by GHD Consulting. The Region reviewed this study and advised that the consultant assessed the cumulative impact of all noise sources on the proposed development. The stationary noise exceeds the noise level limits of the Province by 3 decibels for daytime and 1 decibel for nighttime. The consultant recommended a 1.8 metre high noise wall (approximately 132.77 metres in length) along the southern property line of the City -owned lands (lands directly adjacent to the industrial land uses) to address stationary noise concerns. The Region advises that this exceedance is not acceptable and the exceedance and any required noise mitigation measures must be addressed to the satisfaction of the Region. This may be done by increasing the height of the proposed noise wall or including a berm and wall combination to reduce the exceedances. Accordingly, Regional staff require the implementation of a holding provision to obtain an updated stationary noise study that provides adequate mitigation for the cumulative impact of the stationary noise sources on the proposed sensitive development. In this regard, Holding Provision (45H) is requested to apply to the entirety of the subject lands to prohibit all permitted land uses until such time as a Stationary Noise Study has been completed and implementation measures have been addressed to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo and this holding provision has been removed by by-law. Planning staff recommends that the ZBA be approved as shown in Attachment A. Department and Agency Comments: Preliminary circulation of the Zoning By-law Amendment and the Draft Plan of Condominium (Vacant Land) was undertaken in June 2022 to applicable City departments and other review authorities. All concerns were satisfactorily addressed through the application review. At the request of the Region, Planning staff is recommending a holding provision to prohibit development until such time as a Stationary Noise Study has been completed and implementation measures have been addressed to the satisfaction of the Region. A consolidation of Department and Agency comments has been included as Attachment D. The following reports and studies were considered as part of this proposed Zoning By-law Amendment and Draft Plan of Condominium: • Draft Plan of Vacant Land Condominium Prepared by: MHBC Planning, March 30, 2023 • Site Plan Drawing Prepared by: MHBC Planning, January 2, 2023 Page 331 of 387 • Parking Plan Prepared by: MHBC Planning, January 2, 2023 • Truck Turning Plan Prepared by: MHBC Planning, January 2, 2023 • Urban Design Brief Prepared by: MHBC Planning, April 2022 (Updated January 2023) • Sustainability Statement Prepared by: MHBC Planning, January 23, 2023 • Functional Servicing and Preliminary Stormwater Management Report Prepared by: MTE Consultants Inc., December 17, 2021 • Geotechnical Investigation Report Prepared by: MTE Consultants Inc., September 28, 2021 • Salt Management Plan Prepared by: MTE Consultants Inc., December 17, 2021 • Transportation Impact Brief Prepared by: Paradigm Transportation Solution, October 28, 2021 • Tree Inventory, Protection, and Removals Plan Prepared by: MHBC Planning, November 12, 2021 • Stationary Noise Impact Study GHD Consulting, October 26, 2021 • Scoped Planning Justification Report Prepared by: MHBC Planning, January 2022 Community Input & Staff Responses WHAT WE HEARD 280 households (occupants and property owners) were circulated and notified Approximately 13 people/households provided comments A City -led Neighbourhood Meeting was held on September 20, 2022 and approximately 12 people logged on Page 332 of 387 In response to community circulation related to the proposed applications, Planning staff received written responses from 13 households. These are found in Attachment E. A summary of what staff heard from the community regarding the proposal, along with staff responses, are noted below: What Staff Heard from the Community Staff Response Traffic and Parking Concerns: The City's Transportation Services (TS) staff reviewed the • Concern that parking and Transportation Impact Brief (October 28, 2021) submitted by traffic congestion will worsen Paradigm Transportation Solutions and supports its in Bridgeport, especially on conclusions. TS also advises that: dead-end streets (Nelson Ave • Transportation Services is of the opinion that the & Sylvia St). estimated traffic generated by this development will have • Concern that new minimal impact on the surrounding road network. developments in Bridgeport • Under existing traffic operations, the intersection of will generate more traffic and Sylvia Street at Schweitzer Street is functioning in the AM congestion. and PM peak hours with acceptable levels of service and • Concern that insufficient operate within capacity. parking for proposed • The vehicle trips expected to be generated as a result of development will overflow the proposed development are as follows (based on the vehicles onto Sylvia and Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip General Nelson. Manual): o Site traffic estimated during AM peak hour: 21 vehicles (enter 5/exit 16). This results in 1 vehicle every 2 minutes 51 seconds. o Site traffic estimated during PM peak hour: 25 vehicles (enter 16/exit 9). This results in 1 vehicle every 2 minutes 24 seconds. • Sufficient parking is proposed supplied for tenants and visitors. [Planning staff also notes that each dwelling will have an attached garage and the proposed private, common element driveway provides sufficient space for "on -street" parking spaces]. Regarding the community concerns regarding traffic in the larger neighbourhood of Bridgeport, Transportation Services has provided the following information (complied from multiple stakeholders, including the Region): • As per Regional staff the current levels of service at the Bridge St/Lancaster St roundabout are generally acceptable. There is some queueing that is occurring on Lancaster Street between Bridge Street and Bridgeport Road in the PM peak caused by the interaction of the traffic signal at Bridgeport Road and the roundabout, and higher volumes of vehicle commuters. Based on the Region's growth model, the level of service at the roundabout in the peak hours is expected to remain the same or deteriorate slightly. There are capacity constraints that prevent increasing vehicle capacity at the roundabout on all three legs that limit the amount of traffic that can access the roundabout. There have been several Environmental Assessments that have occurred on all three legs of Page 333 of 387 the roundabout to consider road widenings. The results of these studies have consistently shown the impact was too great to the natural, social and economic environments to widen either Lancaster Street or Bridge Street (including the consideration of a new bridge to twin the existing Bridgeport Bridge). When the Bridgeport Bridge area Environmental Assessment was undertaken many options were considered. The preferred option was to rehabilitate the exiting historical bridge structure and add the roundabout due to significant natural, social and economic impacts of the alternatives. • There are no plans to modify the roundabout to increase vehicle traffic capacity given engineering constraints identified through the Environmental Assessments. There is no technical, financial, or environmentally sustainable way to accommodate more capacity at this location, except by significantly increasing the modal share of non -auto trips. The Region's long-term plan is to increase the person carrying capacity of its transportation network by improving transit service (for medium and longer distance trips), the cycling network (for short and medium distance trips), and walking (for short trips). There are plans in the area to improve the cycling infrastructure to Triple A facilities (All Ages and Abilities) along Bridgeport Road and Erb Street (from Uptown Waterloo to Lancaster Street) and along Lancaster Street (south of Bridgeport Road). • With the new Highway 7, volumes at the roundabout are expected to be reduced in the future as this is a known alternative for auto trips to and from the Guelph area. The Province has been moving forward with purchasing land and design. In the spring of 2023 MTO is planning to commence the design build process to widen the Frederick Street bridge to accommodate new highway interchange ramps. This is one of the last major infrastructure projects to be undertaken before mainline construction can occur for the new Highway 7. While full funding is not identified in the Provincial Highway Programs at this time, the Province has continued to be committed to moving new Hiahwav 7 alona to construction. Neighbourhood Character The proposal would facilitate the development of single Concerns: detached dwellings which are the predominant land use in the • Concern that proposed surrounding neighbourhood. While the lot area and width of development will change the vacant condominium units ("lots") are smaller than many existing neighbourhood lots in the area, there entire streets in the immediate area that character. comprise lots that are of a similar size (e.g., Schueller St, • Concern that proposed Daniel Ave., and Stanley Ave south of Tagge St). development will not match existing low density Also, the location of the subject lands is on the periphery of neighbourhood character. the low rise residential area, noting the lands are adjacent to Bridgeport Industrial Park. Page 334 of 387 Page 335 of 387 Policy 4.C.1.22. of the Official Plan states that "The City will encourage the provision of a range of innovative housing types and tenures such as rental housing, freehold ownership and condominium ownership including common element condominium, phased condominium and vacant land condominium, as a means of increasing housing choice and diversity." In this case, a new and innovative approach to providing housing is proposed for the area: constructing single detached dwellings on units within a vacant land condominium, on a common element road. The proposal is consistent with this policy. Lastly, the built -form and date of construction within this area is highly varied and there does not appear to be a consistent neighbourhood character. The proposed development will not alter the varied character of the area. Neighbourhood Safety Concerns: Policy 4.1.1. of the Official Plan states than an objective of the City is "To provide for an appropriate range, variety and mix • Concern that "Low-income housing" will create safety of housing types and styles, densities, tenure and affordability issues and increase crime. to satisfy the varying housing needs of our community • Concern that lack of sidewalks through all stages of life." As aforementioned the proposal and bike lanes in Bridgeport will increase housing choice within the Bridgeport area. neighbourhood will create safety conflicts between Transportation Services staff has advised that they have no pedestrians and increased concerns with the proposed development from a safety traffic. perspective and no emergency services concerns have been • Concern that increased traffic flagged. and street parking will impede access to emergency services. Availability of Amenities: The City's Places and Spaces Report states that, "Bridgeport • Concern that residents of East is well above the city-wide average for local park proposed development will provision (25.4 sq.m. per person) through 5 local parks - overcrowd Sylvia Park and Schaefer (1), Sylvia (2), Marisa (3), Paige (4) and Tyson Park push out existing community. (5). The parks are well distributed through the community, • Concern of costs associated though do offer similar recreational features (3 of the 5 with local schools having to contain playgrounds and trails, no other infrastructure expand to accommodate present). Within the community are 2 additional City park residents of new facilities in Joe Thompson Sportsfield and Bridgeport developments in Bridgeport. Sportsfields (6). The ball diamonds and soccer fields are highly programmed and isolated from the community by Bridge St E., but are open to the public during non-active times. The parks do feature a raised pathway on the Grand River levee offering a unique vista of the river, adding value to community use. Conclusion: The community is well serviced for park and recreation service delivery. There is no long term need to consider park acquisitions or expansions. Improvements to the infrastructure within the parks should be prioritized based on asset management or other initiatives." In this regard, Planning staff is not concerned about potential overcrowding of Sylvia Park. Page 335 of 387 In addition, it is proposed that as part of the sale of the a portion of the Tagge Street lands that the owner would enter into a developer -build agreement with the City to construct a formal, public trail along the undeveloped Tagge Street right- of-way, south of the subject lands. This would provide greater access to Sylvia Park. A transit shelter for GRT Route #5 (local bus route) is located near the intersection of Nelson Ave/Schweitzer St, approximately 150 metres from the subject lands. The public and Catholic school boards have not raised any concerns about school accommodation / capacity within this area as a result of the proposed development. Planning Conclusions In considering the foregoing, Planning staff supports the Draft Plan of Condominium (Vacant Land) and associated Zoning By-law Amendment. Staff is of the opinion that the subject applications are consistent with policies of the Provincial Policy Statement (2020), conform to Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, the Regional Official Plan, and the City of Kitchener Official Plan and represent good planning. Staff recommends that the applications be approved. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports the delivery of core services. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Capital Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budget. Operating Budget — The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: INFORM — This report has been posted to the City's website with the agenda in advance of the Council / Committee meeting. Two large notice signs were posted on the subject lands and information regarding the applications was posted to the City's website in June 2022. Following the initial circulation referenced below, an additional postcard advising of the statutory public meeting was circulated to all residents and property owners within 240 metres of the subject lands, those who responded to the preliminary circulation, and those who attended the Virtual Neighbourhood Meeting on September 20, 2022. Notice of the Statutory Public Meeting was also posted in The Record on April 14, 2023 (see Attachment C). CONSULT — The applications were circulated to occupants and property owners within 240 metres of the subject lands in June 2022. In response to this circulation, staff received written responses from 13 households, which are summarized as part of this staff report. PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: • Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13 • Growth Plan, 2020 • Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 • Regional Official Plan Page 336 of 387 • City of Kitchener Official Plan, 2014 • City of Kitchener Zoning By-law 2019-051 • City of Kitchener Zoning By-law 85-1 APPROVED BY: Justin Readman - General Manager, Development Services ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A — Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment Attachment B — Recommended Conditions of Draft Plan of Condominium Approval and Draft Plan of Condominium Attachment C — Newspaper Notice Attachment D — Department and Agency Comments Attachment E — Community Comments Page 337 of 387 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, and By-law 2019-051, as amended, known as the Zoning By-laws for the City of Kitchener — 2415274 Ontario Inc. — 67-71 Nelson Ave) WHEREAS it is deemed expedient to amend By-law 85-1 and By-law 2019-051 for the lands specified above; NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Corporation of the City of Kitchener enacts as follows: 1. Schedule Number 181 of Appendix "A" to By-law Number 85-1 is hereby amended by removing 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. 2. Schedule Number 181 of Appendix "A" to By-law Number 85-1 is hereby further amended by removing the zone boundaries as shown on Map No. 1 attached hereto. 3. Zoning Grid Schedule Number 181 of Appendix "A" to By-law Number 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding hereto the lands specified and illustrated as Area 1 on Map No. 1, in the City of Kitchener, attached hereto, and by zoning the Area 1 lands thereafter as Low Rise Residential Four Zone (RES -4) with Site Specific Provision (365) and Holding Provision (45H). 4. Zoning Grid Schedule Number 181 of Appendix "A" to By-law Number 2019-051 is hereby further amended by incorporating additional zone boundaries as shown on Map No. 1 attached hereto. 5. Section 19 of By-law 2019-51 is hereby amended by adding Site Specific Provision (365) thereto as follows: "(365). Notwithstanding Section 4.4.2, Section 5.4, Table 5-2, Section 7.3, Table 7-2, and Section 7.6 of this By-law within the lands zoned RES -4 and shown as being affected by this subsection on Zoning Grid Schedule Number 181 of Appendix "A", the following site specific provisions shall apply: a) The minimum lot area shall be 224 square metres; Page 338 of 387 b) The minimum corner lot width shall be 12.5 metres; c) The minimum front yard setback shall be 4.5 metres for any dwelling not directly abutting Nelson Avenue, provided that no part of any building used to accommodate off street parking shall be located closer than 6.0 metres to the street line; d) The minimum front yard setback shall be 6.0 metres for any dwelling directly fronting Nelson Avenue; e) No maximum front yard setback shall be required; and f) A single detached dwelling directly abutting the easterly lot line shall be permitted to have an associated driveway with a maximum width of 4.5 metres as measured at the garage attached to the dwelling. Any increased driveway width resulting from the intersection of the driveway at the curvature of a private road will not result in non- compliance." 6. Section 20 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section (45H) thereto as follows: "(45). Notwithstanding Section 8 of this By-law within the lands zoned RES -4 and shown as being affected by this subsection on Zoning Grid Schedule Number 181 of Appendix "A", no land uses shall be permitted until such time as a Stationary Noise Study has been completed and implementation measures have been addressed to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo and this holding provision has been removed by by-law." PASSED at the Council Chambers in the City of Kitchener this day of , 2023. Mayor Clerk Page 339 of 387 NGE OSR-3 11N, NO ILI W_�.A I R-5 MAP NO. 1 2415274 ONTARIO INC. 67 & 71 NELSON AVE � N< L i y N� OSR-2 0 50 100 METRES SCALE 1:4,000 DATE: APRIL 12, 2023 OR BY-LAW 85-1 B-2 RESTRICTED BUSINESS PARK ZONE R-3 RESIDENTIAL THREE ZONE R-4 RESIDENTIAL FOUR ZONE R-5 RESIDENTIAL FIVE ZONE B-2 25U BY-LAW 2019-051 OSR-2 OPEN SPACE: GREENWAYS ZONE OSR-3 OPEN SPACE: STORMWATER MANAGMENTZONE RES -4 LOW RISE RESIDENTIAL FOUR ZONE ZONE GRID REFERENCE SCHEDULE NO. 136 AND 181 OF APPENDIX 'A' KITCHENER ZONING BY-LAW 85-1 AND 2019-051 ZONE LIMITS ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT ZBA22/011/N/AP OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT N/A City of Kitchener FILE ZBA22011NAP_MAP1 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, PLANNING mxd 182_ _ _ _ _ _ SUBJECT AREA(S) �1 AMENDMENT TO BY-LAW 85-1 N 181 AND 2019-051 R-4 AREA 1 - FROM RESIDENTIAL THREE ZONE (R-3) UNDER BY-LAW 85-1 TO LOW RISE RESIDENTIAL FOUR ZONE (RES -4) WITH SITE SPECIFIC PROVISION (365) AND HOLDING PROVISION (45H) UNDER BY-LAW 2019-051 BY-LAW 85-1 B-2 RESTRICTED BUSINESS PARK ZONE R-3 RESIDENTIAL THREE ZONE R-4 RESIDENTIAL FOUR ZONE R-5 RESIDENTIAL FIVE ZONE B-2 25U BY-LAW 2019-051 OSR-2 OPEN SPACE: GREENWAYS ZONE OSR-3 OPEN SPACE: STORMWATER MANAGMENTZONE RES -4 LOW RISE RESIDENTIAL FOUR ZONE ZONE GRID REFERENCE SCHEDULE NO. 136 AND 181 OF APPENDIX 'A' KITCHENER ZONING BY-LAW 85-1 AND 2019-051 ZONE LIMITS ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT ZBA22/011/N/AP OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT N/A City of Kitchener FILE ZBA22011NAP_MAP1 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, PLANNING mxd Attachment B Report DSD -2023-198 DRAFT APPROVAL OF CONDOMINIUM 30CDM-22208 67 & 71 NELSON AVE. & PORTION OF UNDEVELOPED TAGGE ST. RIGHT-OF-WAY 2415274 ONTARIO INC. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF DRAFT APPROVAL The Kitchener City Council, pursuant to Section 51(31) of the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13, as amended, and By-law 2005-170 as amended by By-law 2007-042, of the City of Kitchener, hereby grants draft approval of Condominium Application 30CDM-22208 for the property municipally known as 67 & 71 Nelson Avenue in the City of Kitchener, subject to the following conditions: That this approval applies to Draft Condominium 30CDM-22208 owned by 2415274 Ontario Inc., dated April 12, 2023 proposing a Vacant Land Condominium Plan for 0.821 hectares of land comprised of common elements and 23 unit: Units 1-23: Residential vacant land condominium units for single detached dwellings (23 units; total of 0.608 hectares). Common Elements: Private road, walkway, servicing, and landscaped area, snow storage area, and noise wall on City lands and subject to an easement in favour of the Owner (total of 0.213 hectares). 2. That the final plan shall be prepared in general accordance with the above noted plan, with a copy of the final plan being approved by the City's Manager of Development Review. 3. That prior to registration, the Owner obtain approval form the City's Addressing Analyst of the following: A. An addressing plan showing the proposed units with Condominium Unit Numbering; and; B. A summary table containing the proposed Condominium Unit Numbering and assigned municipal addresses. 4. That the Condominium Declaration proposed to be registered (the "Declaration") or any amendment thereto to effect the registration of a condominium phase shall be submitted for approval to the City's Manager of Development Review and Regional Municipality of Waterloo's Commissioner of Planning, Development and Legislative Services. The said Declaration shall contain: Provisions, to the satisfaction of the City's Manager of Development Review and Regional Municipality of Waterloo's Commissioner of Planning, Development and Legislative Services, regarding ownership details and rights and obligations for common elements including, but not limited to, noise wall, access lanes, sanitary, storm and water services, gas utilities and open space/amenity areas, if any. In addition, the Declaration shall contain specific provisions 4 ii) through 4 v), as outlined below, to the satisfaction of the City's Manager of Development Review. ii) That the condominium corporation agrees to maintain the subject lands in compliance with approved Site Plan. Page 341 of 387 iii) Provisions that obligate the condominium corporation to be created upon the registration of the Declaration and Description (the "Condominium Corporation") to implement and maintain any Region required salt management plan related to winter snow and ice clearing obligations of the Condominium Corporation; iv) Provisions that obligate the Unit Owners of the condominium plan to implement and maintain any Region required salt management plan related to winter snow and ice clearing obligations of the said Unit Owners. v) Provisions that identify if the approved condominium plan is to be phased pursuant to the Act that ensure that: a. the lands in the registered condominium plan created by the registration of the Declaration and Description have either direct access or access pursuant to one or more easements satisfactory to the City's Manager of Development Review and the Region's Commissioner of Planning, Development and Legislative Services to all required municipal and other services and such adjacent street(s) for ingress and egress as required by the said Manager and Commissioner; b. the lands in any phase registered after the initial registration of the Declaration and Description have, following the registration of such phase, either direct access or access pursuant to one or more easements satisfactory to the City's Manager of Development Review and the Region's Commissioner of Planning, Development and Legislative Services to all required municipal and other services and such adjacent street(s) for ingress and egress as required by the said Manager and Commissioner; the remainder of the lands of the approved condominium plan not yet registered as part of the proposed condominium plan have, following the initial registration of the Declaration and Description or any phase thereof, either direct access or access pursuant to one or more easements satisfactory to the City's Manager of Development Review and the Region's Commissioner of Planning, Development and Legislative Services to all required municipal and other services and such adjacent street(s) for ingress and egress as required by the said Manager and Commissioner. d. the City's Manager of Development Review and/or the Region's Commissioner of Planning, Development and Legislative Services may require solicitors' and/or engineers' written opinions as such Manager or Commissioner may deem necessary to establish compliance with any one or more of the conditions set out in the three subparagraphs immediately above. 5. That the Owner provide a written undertaking directed to the City's Manager of Development Review to register a Condominium Declaration which shall include the approved provisions as required in condition 4 hereof. 6. That the Owner provide a written undertaking directed to the City's Manager of Development Review advising that the new home purchasers will be advised in Offers of Purchase and Sale of the location of Centralized Mailboxes. 7. That the Owner shall obtain a tax certificate from the City of Kitchener to verify that there are no outstanding taxes on the subject property to the satisfaction of the City's Revenue Division. Page 342 of 387 8. That the Owner shall make arrangements for the granting of any easements for utilities and municipal services. The Owner agrees to comply with the following easement procedure: a. For any of such easements that are not blanket easements covering the whole property to provide drafts of any required reference plan(s) portraying the proposed easement(s) location for written approval by the City's Manager of Development Review prior to the registration thereof showing the proposed location of such easements and to circulate such draft reference plan(s) for comment to Enova Power Corp., and any telecommunication companies and the City's Director of Engineering Services to ensure that there are no conflicts between the desired locations for utility easements and those easement locations required by the City's Director of Engineering Services for municipal services. b. If utility easement locations are proposed within lands to be conveyed to, or owned by the City, the Owner shall obtain prior written approval from the City's Manager of Development Review; and C. To provide to the City's Manager of Development Review a clearance letter from each of Enova Power Corp. and the telecommunications company(ies) (if any) supplying telecommunication services to the property. Such letter shall state that company in question has sufficient wire -line communication/telecommunication infrastructure available within the proposed development and have received all required grants of easement, or alternatively, no easements are required. 9. That the Owner shall submit to the City of Kitchener a Letter(s) of Credit to cover 100 percent of the remaining cost of all outstanding and/or uncertified site development works to the satisfaction of the City's Manager of Development Review. If the approved condominium plan is to be phased according to the Act, the outstanding and/or uncertified site development works in question shall be only those outstanding and/or uncertified site development works within the lands to be included in the condominium plan by the upcoming registration in question. The Letter(s) of Credit shall be kept in force until the completion and certification of the required site development works in conformity with their approved designs. If a Letter(s) of Credit is about to expire without renewal thereof and the works have not been completed and certified in conformity with the approved designs, the City may draw all of the funds so secured and hold them as security to guarantee completion and/or certification, unless the City Solicitor is provided with a renewal of the Letter(s) of Credit forthwith. ii) In the event that the Owner fails to complete the required site development works, to the satisfaction of the City's Manager of Development Review, then it is agreed by the owner that the City, its employees, agents or contractors may enter on the lands and so complete and/or certify the required site development works to the extent of the monies received under the Letter(s) of Credit. The cost of completion of such works shall be deducted from the monies obtained from the Letter(s) of Credit. In the event that there are required site development works remaining to be completed, the City may by by-law exercise its authority under Section 326 of the Municipal Act to have such works completed and to recover the expense incurred in doing so in like manner as municipal taxes. Page 343 of 387 iii) Other forms of performance security may be substituted for a Letter(s) of Credit, at the request of the owner, provided that approval is obtained from the City Treasurer and City Solicitor. 10. That prior to the initial registration and subsequent amendment phases, the Owner shall provide documentation indicating that any required visitor parking, barrier free parking, rights-of-way for access and easements for servicing, including the maintenance thereof, have been provided over the lands included in preceding registrations as well as any adjacent development lands which are included in this application to the satisfaction of the City's Manager of Development Review. 11. That prior to the initial registration, where required, at the discretion of the Chief Building Official, that the Owner enter into a shared servicing agreement to be registered on title, to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor. In addition, where the shared servicing agreement is required: The Owner shall provide a written undertaking to cause the condominium corporation created by the initial registration to enter the same shared servicing agreement after said registration and have the agreement registered on title to the initial registration and proposed future phases, to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor. A solicitor shall provide an undertaking not to register the shared servicing agreement in any form other that the form approved by the City. 12. That prior to the initial registration, all properties are merged on title, or the Owner provides evidence to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor (which may, without limitation, take the form of a solicitor's firm undertaking) that upon initial registration that all properties shall be merged on title, with no separate mortgages, liens or other encumbrances that would have the potential effect of separating the properties without a Planning Act decision to the satisfaction the of the City Solicitor and Director of Planning. 13. That prior to the initial registration, that Site Plan Application SP22/103/N/AP receive final Site Plan Approval, to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Planning. 14. That prior to the initial registration, the land transactions related to the sale of a portion of the Tagge Street right-of-way and the establishment of an easement on City lands for a noise wall, to facilitate the proposed condominium, shall be complete, to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor and City's Manager of Realty Services. 15. That prior to the initial registration, the Owner shall ensure that the Condominium Declaration and/or Condominium Description outlines the construction, maintenance and ownership requirements related to the required noise wall, to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor, City's Director of Planning, and that a firm solicitor's undertaking (to the satisfaction of the City Solicitor) shall be provided as confirmation that the Condominium Declaration will be registered in the same form as provided to the City in satisfaction of this condition. 16. That prior to the initial registration, the Owner shall provide a letter from an Engineering/Geotechnical Engineer regarding Unit 12, verifying that the bottom of footing elevation is not within the 1:1 zone of influence, if the existing sanitary pipe to the south needs to be excavated in the future, to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Engineering Services. Page 344 of 387 17. That prior to the initial registration, the Owner shall provide a letter from an Engineering/Geotechnical Engineer verifying that infiltration galleries will not be negatively impacted during future maintenance or replacement of the existing sanitary sewer to the south. 18. That prior to the initial registration, the Owner shall ensure that the Condominium Declaration includes the following wording to advise all purchasers of residential units and / or renters of the 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. " 19. That prior to the initial registration, the Owner shall enter into an agreement with the City of Kitchener, to be registered on the title of the property that implements the following: "All agreements of purchase and sale or leases for the sale or lease of a completed home or a home to be completed on the property must contain the wording set out below to advise all purchasers of residential units and/or renters of same: `In order to limit 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. "' 20. That the Owner/Developer agrees to phase/stage development of this condominium in a manner satisfactory to the Commissioner of Planning, Development and Legislative Services and the City of Kitchener, including any easements or other requirements as a result of staging. 21. That prior to final approval, the Owner/Developer shall submit a revised Stationary Noise Study and if necessary, shall enter into a registered development agreement with the City of Kitchener to provide for implementation of the recommended noise study attenuation measures and noise warning clauses to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo. 22. That prior to final approval, the Owner/Developer shall submit a detailed noise wall design report to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo. 23. That prior to final approval, the Owner/Developer shall include the following noise warning clause within the Condominium Declaration and Purchase and Sale/Lease/Rental Agreement(s) to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo: "Purchasers/tenants are advised that due to the proximity of the adjacent commercial and industrial facilities, noise from the facilities may at times be audible." And if the noise wall is recommended form of mitigation include the following: "The Developer agrees to preserve the function of and to maintain the noise wall along the southern edge of City owned lands. The purpose of the noise wall is to attenuate noise from the industrial lands to the south. The Developer agrees that the City, through its Page 345 of 387 employees and agents has the right to enter onto the lands to inspect the noise wall. The Developer agrees to repair or, if necessary replace the noise wall. Should the Developer fail to repair or replace the noise wall upon receipt of a written notice from the City, as the City deems necessary, the Developer agrees that the City may undertake such work upon the expiration of the time set out in the notice. If such work is undertaken by the City, the Developer hereby agrees to permit entry upon the lands for this purpose and agrees to reimburse the City fully for all costs of undertaking such work. " 24. That prior to final approval, the Owner/Developer shall include the accepted provisions of the Salt Management Plan for the Unit Owners and Condominium Corporation within the Condominium Declaration; all to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo. 25. That prior to final approval, the Regional Municipality of Waterloo be provided with a copy of the registered development agreement between the Owner/Developer and the City of Kitchener. 26. That prior to final approval, that the Condominium Declaration be forwarded to the Commissioner of Planning, Development and Legislative Services at the Regional Municipality of Waterloo. CLEARANCES: That prior to the signing of the final plan by the City's Manager of Development Review, the Owner shall submit a detailed written submission outlining and documenting how conditions 3 through 19 inclusive have been met. The submission shall include a brief but complete statement detailing how and when each condition has been satisfied. 2. That prior to signing of the final plan by the City's Manager of Development Review, the Regional Municipality of Waterloo shall notify the City's Manager of Development Review that Conditions 4i), 4)iii), iv), v), and 20 through 26 have been satisfied. NOTES: The owner is advised that the provisions of the Development Charge By-laws of the City of Kitchener and the Regional Municipality will apply to any future development on the site. 2. The condominium plan for Registration must be in conformity with Ontario Regulation 43/96 as amended, under the Registry Act. 3. It is the responsibility of the owner of this draft plan to advise the Regional Municipality of Waterloo Department of Planning, Development and Legislative Services and the City of Kitchener Development Services Department of any changes in ownership, agent, address and phone number. 4. The owner is advised that the Regional Municipality of Waterloo and City of Kitchener require fees, pursuant to Section 69 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13, for modification to draft approval and registration release of plans of condominium. 5. This draft plan was received on January 28, 2022 and deemed complete on May 20, 2022 and shall be processed and finally disposed of under the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P. 13, as amended as of that date. 6. To ensure that a Regional Release is issued by the Region's Commissioner of Planning, Development and Legislative Services to the City of Kitchener prior to year end, it is the responsibility of the owner to ensure that all fees have been paid, that all Regional Page 346 of 387 conditions have been satisfied and the required clearance letters, agreements, prints of plan to be registered, and any other required information or approvals have been deposited with the Regional Planner responsible for the file, no later than December 151h for consideration. Regional staff cannot ensure that a Regional Release would be issued prior to year end where the owner has failed to submit the appropriate documentation by this date. 7. When the proposed Description or any amendment thereto to effect the registration of a phase has been completed and approved by the Land Titles Office the same should be forwarded to the City of Kitchener. If the plans comply with the terms of the approval, and the City of Kitchener has received all required fees, the Regional Release and satisfactory evidence that all conditions of approval have been satisfied, the Manager of Development Review signature will be endorsed on the Description plan or amendment thereto and it will be forwarded to the Land Titles Office for registration. The following is required for registration and under The Registry Act and for our use: Two (2) original mylars Five (5) white paper prints One (1) digital copy Page 347 of 387 Mun, Na, 61 Mun, No. 63 --y UNIT 12 (o.D35hao.ae6ac) Mun. No. 65 E Mun. No, 16 N6W WOVE N65° 11' 2C'E Mun. No. 20 E n UNIT 9 W 10.037ha/0.091 oc) [ s3 Z , Lu W P 4 8 ZQ UNIT 10 f'4-436hW0.46Pacj 0 LAND USE MINIMAX # UNITS AREA (ha.) C/) Residential 23 0.608 'L �i UNIT 11 � I I0.035ho70A8dac} §11 DRAFT PLAN OF VACANT LAND CONDOMINIUM 2415274 ONTARIO INC. 67-71 NELSON AVE Proposed Noise Wall COMMON ELEMENT [0.015ha/0.0370C REVISED: 1iy CONDOMINIUM APPLICATION 30CDM-22248 SCALE: 1:750 City of Kitchener CAD FILE: DATE: APRIL 12, 2023 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, PLAI`A* g UNIT 12 (o.D35hao.ae6ac) � 4 z� Mun. No, 16 N6W WOVE DRAFT PLAN OF VACANT LAND CONDOMINIUM 2415274 ONTARIO INC. 67-71 NELSON AVE Proposed Noise Wall COMMON ELEMENT [0.015ha/0.0370C REVISED: 1iy CONDOMINIUM APPLICATION 30CDM-22248 SCALE: 1:750 City of Kitchener CAD FILE: DATE: APRIL 12, 2023 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, PLAI`A* g Mun. No, 16 Mun. No. 20 L W W oe LAND USE MINIMAX # UNITS AREA (ha.) C/) Residential 23 0.608 Common Element 0.213 3 TOTAL 23 0.821 128.735m -= UNIT 1 e 10.437 �a10.0P 1 ae ) CITY OF KITCHENER APPROVAL BLOCK UNIT 8 UNIT 7 UNIT 6 UNIT 5 UNIT 4 UNIT 3 Subject to the conditions, if any, set Forth in our letter dated {0.023ho1 0.057oc) 10,023ha1 0.Wocl 10.023ho1 0.057ocl I0.023ha1 0.0570ct 11:.023ho/ .357ac) I0.023ha1 O.o57oc] - 20J this draft plan is approved under Section UNIT UNIT 2 51 of The Planning Act, 13,5.0. 1990 as amended, this of 10.036ha/O.DBPac} 4.20_ and shall come into effect on the - day Of _ . 20_ provided no appeal is filed pursuant to subsection 51(39) of The Planning Act, COMMON ELEMEHf Garert[ Sleuenson, MCIP, RPP (0.198ha/0.489ac) Manager of Development Review N .NIT 13 UNIT 14 UNIT 15 UNIT 16 UNIT 17 UNIT 18 UNIT 19 UNIT 20 UNIT 21 UNIT 22 UNIT 23 a z .'123hv/ 10,023ho1 i0.023ha/ 10..023ho/ 10-023ho/ 10-023W {0.022ha1 10.022ha! {0.022ho/ 10.022ha/ (0.027ho/ C57vc) 0.057ac) 0.057oc) Q-0wac) O.D57oc) 0.0,57oc) 0.05443c) 0.054ac) 0.054ac1 0.054oct 0.067ac) eb DRAFT PLAN OF VACANT LAND CONDOMINIUM 2415274 ONTARIO INC. 67-71 NELSON AVE Proposed Noise Wall COMMON ELEMENT [0.015ha/0.0370C REVISED: 1iy CONDOMINIUM APPLICATION 30CDM-22248 SCALE: 1:750 City of Kitchener CAD FILE: DATE: APRIL 12, 2023 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, PLAI`A* g NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING for a development in your neighbourhood 67-71 Nelson Avenue 177 Have Your Voice Heard! Date: May 8, 2023 Location: Council Chambers, Kitchener City Hall 200 King Street West orVirtuaI Zoom Meeting To view the staff report, agenda, ----------------- .1&T-x'meeting details, start time of this item Conceptual Site Plan Drawing orto appearasa delegation, visit: kitchener.ca/meetings To learn more aboutthis project, including information on your ®©appeal rights, visit: ©m© www.kitchener.ca/ �Ij PlanningApplications Yor contact: 23 Single Maximum Vacant Andrew Pinnell, Senior Planner Detached 3 Storeys Land 519.741.2200 x 7668 Dwellings Condominium andrew.pinnell@kitchener.ca The City of Kitchener will consider applications proposing a Zoning By-law Amendment and a Vacant Land Condominium (VLC) to facilitate the development of the lands with 23 single detached dwelling units and common element areas consisting of a common driveway, landscaped areas, and noise wall adjacentto nearby industrial lands. Units (lots) would have a minimum lot area of 224 square metres and would be larger fronting Nelson Ave and Sylvia Street (348 m2 to 374 m2). The slFDj@g0n349o©tlj87 portion of the undeveloped Tagge Street right-of-way that that applicant is proposing to purchase from the City. Andrew Pinnell From: Carrie Musselman Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2023 12:00 PM To: Andrew Pinnell Subject: RE: REVISED Submission re Vacant Land Condominium & Zoning By-law Amendment & Site Plan (67 & 71 Nelson Avenue) No updated/amened environmental information ... no concern/comment. From: Andrew Pinnell <Andrew.Pinnell @kitchener.ca> Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2023 11:24 AM To: Carrie Musselman <Carrie.Musselman@kitchener.ca>; Eric Riek <Eric.Riek@kitchen er.ca>; Mark Parris <Mark.Parris @kitchener.ca>; Gaurang Khandelwal <Gau rang. Khandelwal @ kitchener.ca>; 'Joginder Bhatia' <JBhatia@regionofwaterloo.ca>; MMohr <MMohr@regionofwaterloo.ca> Subject: RE: REVISED Submission re Vacant Land Condominium & Zoning By-law Amendment & Site Plan (67 & 71 Nelson Avenue) Just a reminder to please send me any updated comments by today (especially regarding the ZBA and Condo) since this item is going to the May 8t" PSI Committee and needs to be advertised. Thanks, Andrew Pinnell, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner I Planning Division I City of Kitchener 519-741-2200 x7668 I TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 andrew.pinnell@kitchener.ca 0 4D00 0 Ite G KIT t FF FR'z -GREAT P1 A( -F _ • Page 350 of 387 City of Kitchener - Comment Form Project Address: 67 Nelson Ave, 71 Nelson Ave, and portion of Tagge Street right-of-way Application Type: Vacant Land Condominium 30CDM-22208 Zoning By Law Amendment ZBA22/011/N/AP Comments Of: Environmental Planning — City of Kitchener Commenter's Name: Carrie Musselman Email: carrie.mussel man@kitchener.ca Phone: 519-741-2200 x 7068 Date of Comments: June 20, 2022 1. Plans, Studies and Reports submitted as part of a complete Planning Act Application: • Urban Design Brief 61 & 71 Nelson Ave. Prepared by MHBC. April 2022. • Tree Inventory, Protection, and Removals. Dwg. TI -2. Prepared by MHBC. November 2021. 2. Site Specific Comments & Issues: I have reviewed the supporting documentation (as listed above) to support a Vacant Land Condominium (VLC) and Zoning By-law Amendment (ZBA) to facilitate the development of 23 single detached dwellings with private driveways and amenity space and provide the following: City Environmental Planning have no concerns regarding the proposed VLC and ZBA from a natural heritage policy perspective. The Tree Management Plan submitted in support of the applications assessed 49 trees, none being a Species at Risk (Butternut or Black Ash). Treed vegetation is comprised mostly of non-native or ornamental species (i.e., Norway Maple and Colorado Spruce) All assessed trees are located interior to the site; therefore, the proposed development (and associated grading and servicing) will not be able to incorporate or conserve the existing trees. Based on my review of the supporting studies the VLC and ZBA can be supported. As noted in the application, tree loss will be offset by integrating street trees, as well as landscaping in the front and rear yards of each of the units in the condominium. 3. Policies, Standards and Resources: • As per Section 8.C.2 — Urban Forests of the Official Plan ... o policy 8.C.2.16., the City requires the preparation and submission of a tree management plan in accordance with the City's Tree Management Policy (available on the City's Website), as a condition of a development application. o policy 8.C.2.6., the City will incorporate existing and/or new trees into the streetscape or road rights-of-way and encourage new development or redevelopment to incorporate, protect and conserve existing healthy trees and woodlands in accordance with the Urban Design Policies in Section 13 (Landscape and Natural Features) of the Urban Design Manual (UDM) and the Development Manual. o Please see UDM Part C, Section 13 and www.kitchener.ca/treemanagement for detailed submission requirements 4. Advisory Comments: N/A Page 351 of 387 City of Kitchener - Comment Form Project Address: 67 & 71 Nelson Ave Application Type: Zoning By-law Amendment and Vacant Land Condominium 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: March 28, 2023 Date of comments: March 28, 2023 1. Plans, Studies and/or Reports submitted and reviewed as part of a complete application: • 67 & 71 Nelson Avenue, Kitchener — Sustainability Statement, prepared by MHBC, dated January 21, 2022 • 67 & 71 Nelson Avenue, Kitchener—Addendum to Sustainability Statement, prepared by MHBC, dated January 23, 2023 2. Comments & Issues: I have reviewed the documentation (as listed above) to support a Zoning By-law Amendment and Vacant Land Condominium to develop the subject lands with 23 single detached condominium units, regarding sustainability and energy conservation and provided 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. ➢ Based on my review of the supporting documentation, some sustainable measures are being considered for the development of the lands. Further, the applicant has considered sustainability principles from programs such as Energy Star, LEED and Net Zero. ➢ The Zoning Bylaw Amendment and Vacant Land Condominium can be supported. ➢ An updated Sustainability Statement building on the considerations and confirming the sustainability measures being incorporated into the development and site design evolves will be required for the Site Plan application. 3. Policies, Standards and Resources: • Kitchener Official Plan Policy 7.C.4.5. The City will encourage and support, where feasible and appropriate, alternative energy systems, renewable energy systems and district energy in accordance with Section 7.C.6 to accommodate current and projected needs of energy consumption. 1IPage Page 352 of 387 • Kitchener Official Plan Policy 7.C.6.4. In areas of new development, the City will encourage orientation of streets and/or lot design/building design with optimum southerly exposures. Such orientation will optimize opportunities for active or passive solar space heating and water heating. • Kitchener Official Plan Policy 7.C.6.8. Development applications will be required to demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the City, energy is being conserved or low energy generated. • Kitchener Official Plan Policy 7.C.6.27. The City will encourage developments to incorporate the necessary infrastructure for district energy in the detailed engineering designs where the potential for implementing district energy exists. 4. Advice: ➢ As part of the Kitchener Great Places Award program every several years there is a Sustainable Development category. Also, there are community-based programs to help with and celebrate and recognize businesses and sustainable development stewards (Regional Sustainability Initiative - http://www.sustainablewaterlooregion.ca/our-programs/regional-sustainability- initiative and TravelWise - http://www.sustainablewaterlooregion.ca/our-programs/travelwise). ➢ The 'Sustainability Statement Terms of Reference' can be found on the City's website under 'Planning Resources' at ... https://www.kitchener.ca/SustainabilityStatement ➢ Green Building Resources • Canada Green Building Council - https://www.cagbc.org// • Developer's guide to passive house buildings - https://www.passivehousecanada.com/passive-house-resources/ • Energy Efficient programs for builders — NRCAN - https://www.nrcan.Rc.ca/energy- efficiency/buildings/new-buildings/20673 • Canada's Building Strategy - https://www.nrcan.Rc.ca/energy- efficiency/buildings/canadas-building-strategy/20535 • Passipedia -The Passive House Resource - https://passipedia.org/ 21 Page Page 353 of 387 Andrew Pinnell From: Rojan Mohammadi Sent: Monday, March 27, 2023 8:21 AM To: Andrew Pinnell Subject: RE: REVISED Submission re Vacant Land Condominium & Zoning By-law Amendment & Site Plan (67 & 71 Nelson Avenue) Hi Andrew, I have no further comments. Good luck! Rojan Mohammadi MA, MCIP, RPP, PMP (She/Her) Senior Urban Designer I Planning Division I City of Kitchener 519-741-2200 x 7326 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 Roian.mohammadi kitchener.ca 000 00 00G - how and p _.. - orn ... Page 354 of 387 Internal memo [Development Services Department Date: May 27, 2022 To: Andrew Pinell, Senior Planner From: Deeksha Choudhry, Heritage Planner cc: Garett Stevenson, Manager of Development Review Subject: ZBA22/01 1 /N/AP 67-71 Nelson Avenue Heritage Planning Comments No heritage planning issues or concerns. 1 K[rr%�r R www.kitchener.ca Page 355 of 387 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT BUILDING DIVISION Robert Schipper, CBCO Manager of Building City Hall, P.O. Box 1118 200 King St. W., 51" Floor Kitchener, Ontario Canada, N2G 4G7 Phone: (519)741-2836 Fax: (519 741-2775 robert.schipper(o-)kitchener.ca June 6, 2022 Attn: 2415274 Ontario Inc. Subject: Vacant land Condominium application 30CDM-22208 for 67 & 71 Nelson Ave., Kitchener Building Division has no concerns with the vacant land Condominium application. Thank you for giving us this opportunity to respond to this application. Sincerely, Robert Schipper, CBCO Manager of Building c.c. Andrew Pinnell 1 Page 356 of 387 Andrew Pinnell From: Eric Riek Sent: Monday, April 17, 2023 9:24 AM To: Andrew Pinnell Subject: FW: REVISED Submission re Vacant Land Condominium & Zoning By-law Amendment & Site Plan (67 & 71 Nelson Avenue) Hi Andrew, Per the email below, the following conditions should be pasted into the condo plan as clearance conditions: A letter from an Engineering/Geotechnical Engineer will be required for the unit shown in Section A -A (Unit 12) verifying that the bottom of footing elevation is not within the 1:1 zone of influence if the sanitary pipe needs to be excavated in the future. The proposed infiltration galleries are within the 1:1 excavation. If groundwater elevations permit, we recommend that these are installed as deep as possible so they are located outside the 1:1 excavation zone. If groundwater elevations don't allow these to be installed deeper (1.0m offset is required from underside of gallery to groundwater elevation), a similar letter from an Engineer/Geotechnical Engineer would be required stating these won't be impacted during future maintenance or replacement of sewer. Any questions, please advise. Eric Riek, C.E.T. Project Manager I Development Engineering I City of Kitchener Page 357 of 387 Andrew Pinnell From: Eric Riek Sent: Tuesday, April 4, 2023 9:22 AM To: Andrew Pinnell Subject: RE: 67 & 71 Nelson Ave - Resubmission of Materials Hi Andrew, No concerns with the condo plan from an CPA/ZBA perspective. Engineering will have site plan conditions of course but no concerns with moving forward with this plan now. Any questions, please advise. Eric Riek, C.E.T. Project Manager I Development Engineering I City of Kitchener Page 358 of 387 Andrew Pinnell From: Dave Seller Sent: Wednesday, April 5, 2023 8:54 AM To: Andrew Pinnell Subject: RE: 67 & 71 Nelson Ave - updated condo plan Attachments: Vacant Condo Schedule -30 March 2023.pdf Transportation Services have no concerns with the condo plan. Dave Seller, C.E.T. Traffic Planning Analyst I Transportation Services I City of Kitchener 519-741-2200 ext. 7369 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 dave.sellerCakitchener.ca Page 359 of 387 Andrew Pinnell From: Dave Seller Sent: Monday, July 4, 2022 9:39 AM To: Andrew Pinnell Subject: ZBA and Condominium Application comments: 67 & 71 Nelson Avenue City of Kitchener Application Type: Zoning By-law Amendment and Condominium Application Applications: ZBA22/011/N/AP & 30CDM-22208 Project Address: 67 & 71 Nelson Avenue Comments of: Transportation Services Commenter's Name: Dave Seller Email: dave.seller@kitchener.ca Phone: 519-741-2200 ext. 7369 Date of Comments: July 4, 2022 a. Transportation Service have no concerns with the proposed Zoning By-law amendment or Vacant Land Condominium application being proposed for this development. b. Transportation Services have no concerns with the sale of the Tagge Street right-of-way for the purposes of development and for a trail corridor. c. After reviewing the Transportation Impact Brief (October 28, 2021) submitted by Paradigm Transportation Solutions Limited, Transportation Services offer the following comments. The applicant is proposing to develop 23 single detached family houses. The development is estimated to generate 21 AM and 25 PM peak hour vehicle trips, with two access points servicing the site. One access at Nelson Avenue and the second access along Sylvia Street. Under existing traffic operations, the intersection of Sylvia Street at Sweitzer Street is functioning in the AM and PM peak hours with acceptable levels of service and operate within capacity. The 2026 Total Traffic Operations revealed that the intersections of Sylvia Street at Sweitzer Street and Nelson Avenue at the site access are both forecasted to operate with acceptable levels of service and operate within capacity in the AM and PM peak hours. A left turn lane analysis was completed for Sylvia Street at Sweitzer Street and Nelson Avenue at the site access and under the 2026 Total Traffic Operations conclude that a left turn lane is not warranted at either location. The warrants for left -turn lanes follow the requirements in the Ministry of Transportation of Ontario's (MTO) Design Supplement for Transportation Associations of Canada's (TAC) Geometric Design Guide for Canada Roads (TAC- GDGCR). Therefore, based on Paradigm's analysis and conclusions within their report, Transportation Services are of the opinion that the traffic generated by this development will have minimal impact on the surrounding road network. Dave Seller, C.E.T. Traffic Planning Analyst I Transportation Services I City of Kitchener 519-741-2200 ext. 7369 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 dave.sellerCakitchener.ca 0005� 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Page 360 of 387 Andrew Pinnell From: Mark Parris Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2023 4:37 PM To: Andrew Pinnell Subject: RE: REVISED Submission re Vacant Land Condominium & Zoning By-law Amendment & Site Plan (67 & 71 Nelson Avenue) OK that makes it straight forward for Parks then since all of our requirements are tied to the SPA and land sale. I do not have any direct ZBA/Condo comments. The SPA requirement that was linked to the ZBA to "consult with the community on how the turning circle is being used"was completed and did not result in any feedback from the community. Mark From: Andrew Pinnell <Andrew.Pinnell @kitchener.ca> Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2023 4:32 PM To: Mark Parris <Mark.Parris@kitchener.ca> Subject: RE: REVISED Submission re Vacant Land Condominium & Zoning By-law Amendment & Site Plan (67 & 71 Nelson Avenue) Hi Mark, The main thing I'm looking for is whether there are any ZBA / Condo comments. SP comments would be great, but ZBA/ Condo comments are vital. Thanks, Andrew Pinnell, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner I Planning Division I City of Kitchener 519-741-2200 x7668 I TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 andrew.pinnell@kitchener.ca 00% 000 WOO 4 r"VAA GREAT 1 Page 361 of 387 N* Region of Waterloo Andrew Pinnell, BES, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner City of Kitchener 200 King Street West, 6t" Floor P.O. Box 1118, Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 Dear Mr. Pinnell, PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES Community Planning 150 Frederick Street 8th Floor Kitchener Ontario N2G 4A Canada Telephone: 519-575-4400 TTY: 519-575-4608 Fax: 519-575-4466 www.regionotwaterloo.ca Melissa Mohr 1-226-752-8622 File: D1920/2/22218 C1460/2/22208 March 28, 2023 Re: Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment ZBA 22/011 and Vacant Land Plan of Condo 30CDM-22208 67-71 Nelson Avenue MHBC Planning Ltd. (C/O Pierre Chauvin) on behalf of 2415274 Ontario Inc. CITY OF KITCHENER The Region has prepared the following comments relating to the above noted Zoning By-law Amendment and Vacant Land Plan of Condominium proposed on the lands addressed as 67-71 Nelson Avenue in Kitchener. The purpose of these comments is to identify any items that need to be address prior to consideration of the Zoning By-law Amendment and/or draft approval and those that can be imposed as conditions of approval or through the use of a Holding Provision. Original Proposal: The proposed Zoning By-law Amendment and Vacant Land Plan of Condominium are associated with a Site Plan application to facilitate the redevelopment of the lands with 23 vacant units that are planned for single detached dwellings serviced by a private condominium road. The private condominium road would extend from Sylvia Street to Nelson Avenue creating two access points for the development. In addition, the applicant is proposing to acquire a portion of the adjacent Tagge Street right-of-way for development purposes from the City of Kitchener. The balance of the right-of-way is proposed to be retained by the City for trail purposes. Document Number: 4344908 Version: 1 Page 362 of 387 The subject lands are located in the Urban Area of the Region and Designated Built Up Area in the Regional Official Plan. In addition, the subject lands are designated Low Rise Residential in the City of Kitchener Official Plan and zoned Residential Three (R-3) Zone in the City of Kitchener Zoning By-law 85-01. The applicant has proposed to rezone the majority of the site from the R-3 Zone to the RES -4 Zone. The applicant is proposing to rezone lands immediately south of 67-71 Nelson Avenue (portion applicant is requesting to purchase from the City) from R-3 to RES -4 to allow an expansion of the buildable area for the above noted development. The applicant has also proposed to rezone the lands described as Area 2 on Map 1 of the Media Release from the Restricted Business Park Zone (B-2) with Special Regulation Provision 36R under By-law 85-1 to Open Space Greenways Zone (OSR-2). In addition, the applicant has proposed to rezone the lands that are identified as Area 3 on Map 1 of the Media Release from the Restricted Business Park Zone (B-2) with Special Provision 36R to Open Space Greenways Zone (OSR-2) with a Site Specific Provision. Current Proposal: The applicant continues to propose 23 residential units through a vacant land plan of condominium and rezone the lands to permit the increased density on site. It is Regional staff's understanding that the applicant is proposing to purchase a portion of lands directly adjacent to 67 and 71 Nelson Avenue and that the City will retain the remainder of the lands. Regional staff also understand that the proposed noise attenuation wall/barrier will be on lands that will be owned by the City and the Owner/Developer of 67-71 Nelson Avenue will retain rights over the noise barrier/wall. The lands addressed as 67-71 Nelson Avenue will be rezoned from R-3 to RES -4 with site specific provisions, the lands to be purchased from the City will be rezoned from Restricted Business Park Zone (B-2) Zone to RES -4 with site specific provisions and the lands retained by the City will be rezoned from the Restricted Business Park Zone (B-2) Zone to an Open Space Greenways Zone (OSR-2) with a site specific provision. These comments relate to the Draft Plan of Vacant Land Plan of Condominium prepared by MHBC Planning Inc.; dated September 30, 2021; signed by the Owner January 21, 2022 and the Surveyor January 19, 2022; File No. 16233G (to be updated to reflect the current proposal): Regional Comments Community Planning Consistency with Provincial Legislation and Regional Official Plan Conformity The subject lands are designated "Urban Area" and "Built -Up Area" on Schedule 3a of the Regional Official Plan (ROP) and is designated Low Rise Residential in the City of Kitchener Official Plan. Document Number: 4344908 Version: 1 Page 363 of 387 Regional staff acknowledge that the Built Up Area is intended to provide gentle density and other missing middle housing options that are designed in a manner that supports the achievement of 15 -minute neighbourhoods. This development shall contribute to the intensification target of 60% within the City of Kitchener's Built Up Area. Land Use Compatibility: The development proposal includes a density increase of a sensitive land use in proximity to existing industrial land uses to the south of the site. Regional staff consider the industrial land uses to be Class II land uses. Class II industrial land uses are recommended to be set back a minimum of 70 metres from sensitive land uses in accordance with the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) D-6 Series Guidelines. Regional staff acknowledge that the existing land use permissions include residential land uses that are adjacent to existing permitted industrial land uses. As the subject lands contain existing permitted residential land uses, Regional staff have no objection to the proposed development from a land use compatibility perspective. Further to the above, Regional staff have no objection to the applications, subject to the following technical comments and conditions related to the proposal: Stationary Noise Regional staff have reviewed the stationary noise study entitled "Stationary Noise Impact Study, Proposed Residential Development — 67 & 71 Nelson Avenue, Kitchener, Ontario" (GHD, October 26, 2021), and cannot accept the study at this time. A holding provision shall be implemented to ensure an updated study and recommended implementation measures are received to the satisfaction of the Region. The report identifies a number of stationary noise sources that may be classified as Class I or Class II industrial uses within the vicinity of the site. The noise consultant has modelled the predicted stationary noise impacts of these facilities on the subject site and based on the assumptions used in the modelling, the individual facilities meet noise level limits for a Class 1 acoustical area under NPC -300 at points of reception for the daytime and nighttime at the proposed development. Although noise level limits are met by the noise sources facilities individually, the Region requires that the cumulative impact of stationary noise sources to be assessed and addressed appropriately. The cumulative impact of all noise sources on the development have been assessed by the noise consultant and stationary noise exceeds the noise level limits by 3 dBA for daytime and 1 dBA for nighttime. The noise consultant has recommended a 1.8m high noise wall (approximately 132.77m in length) along the southern property line of the City owned lands (lands directly adjacent to the industrial land uses) to address stationary noise concerns. This exceedance is not acceptable and the exceedance and any required noise mitigation measures must be addressed to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo. This may be done by increasing the height of the Document Number: 4344908 Version: 1 Page 364 of 387 proposed noise wall or including a berm and wall combination to reduce the exceedances. Regional staff shall require the implementation of a Holding Provision to obtain an updated stationary noise study that provides adequate mitigation for the cumulative impact of the stationary noise sources on the noise sensitive development. The required wording of the Holding Provision is: That a holding provision shall apply to the entirety of the subject lands until a satisfactory stationary noise study has been completed and implementation measures addressed to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo. In addition to the above, the study shall include a discussion whether any facilities referred to in the report have a MECP Environmental Compliance Approval and whether there is any hitching and unhitching of trailers from the W.S. Bell Cartage noise source (transportation parking facility). In addition, please be advised that the Region does not have a noise by-law and this should be updated within the report. Finally, the any recommended noise wall shall be designed to have a minimum surface density of 20 kg/m2 and be constructed without gaps within and beneath the extent of the wall. Hydrogeology and Water Programs Regional staff have reviewed the salt management plan entitled "67-71 Nelson Avenue Salt Management Plan" dated December 17, 2021 prepared by MTE and accept the plan. Regional staff require the following to be implemented as a condition of draft plan approval: THAT prior to final approval, the Owner/Developer shall include the accepted provisions of the Salt Management Plan for the Unit Owners and Condominium Corporation within the Condominium Declaration; all to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo; Housing Services The Region supports the provision of a full range of housing options, including affordable housing. Rent levels and house prices that are considered affordable according to the Regional Official Plan are provided below in the section on affordability. Staff recommend that the applicant consider providing a number of affordable housing units on the site. In order for affordable housing to fulfill its purpose of being affordable to those who require rents or purchase prices lower than the regular market provides, 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. Document Number: 4344908 Version: 1 Page 365 of 387 Staff further recommend meeting with Housing Services to discuss the proposal in more detail and to explore opportunities for partnerships or programs and mechanisms to support a defined level of affordability. For the purposes of evaluating the affordability of an ownership unit, based on the definition in the Regional Official Plan, the purchase price is compared to the least expensive of: Housing for which the purchase price results in annual accommodation costs which do not exceed 30 percent of gross $385,500 annual household income for low and moderate income households Housing for which the purchase price is at least 10 percent below the average $576,347 purchase price of a resale unit in the regional market area *Based on the most recent information available from the PPS Housing Tables (2021). In order for an owned unit to be deemed affordable, the maximum affordable house price is $385,500. Conclusions relating to Zoning By-law Amendment: Regional staff have no objection to Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA22/011 subject to the following Holding Provision being implemented within the Zoning By-law Amendment: That a holding provision shall apply to the entirety of the subject lands until a satisfactory stationary noise study has been completed and recommended implementation measures addressed to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo. Conclusions related to Draft Plan of Condominium: The Region has no objections to draft approval of Vacant Land of Condominium 30CDM-22208, subject to the inclusion of the following conditions of Draft Approval set out below: 1) THAT the Owner/Developer agrees to phase/stage development of this condominium in a manner satisfactory to the Commissioner of Planning, Development and Legislative Services and the City of Kitchener, including any easements or other requirements as a result of staging; 1) THAT prior to final approval, the Owner/Developer shall submit a revised Stationary Noise Study and if necessary, shall enter into a registered development agreement with the City of Kitchener to provide for implementation of the recommended noise study attenuation measures and noise warning clauses to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo. Document Number: 4344908 Version: 1 Page 366 of 387 2) THAT prior to final approval, the Owner/Developer shall submit a detailed noise wall design report to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo. 3) THAT prior to final approval, the Owner/Developer shall include the following noise warning clause within the Condominium Declaration and Purchase and Sale/Lease/Rental Agreement(s) to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo: "Purchasers/tenants are advised that due to the proximity of the adjacent commercial and industrial facilities, noise from the facilities may at times be audible." And if the noise wall is recommended form of mitigation include the following: "The Developer agrees to preserve the function of and to maintain the noise wall along the southern edge of City owned lands. The purpose of the noise wall is to attenuate noise from the industrial lands to the south. The Developer agrees that the City, through its employees and agents has the right to enter onto the lands to inspect the noise wall. The Developer agrees to repair or, if necessary replace the noise wall. Should the Developer fail to repair or replace the noise wall upon receipt of a written notice from the City, as the City deems necessary, the Developer agrees that the City may undertake such work upon the expiration of the time set out in the notice. If such work is undertaken by the City, the Developer hereby agrees to permit entry upon the lands for this purpose and agrees to reimburse the City fully for all costs of undertaking such work. " 4) THAT prior to final approval, the Owner/Developer shall include the accepted provisions of the Salt Management Plan for the Unit Owners and Condominium Corporation within the Condominium Declaration; all to the satisfaction of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo; 5) THAT prior to final approval, the Regional Municipality of Waterloo be provided with a copy of the registered development agreement between the Owner/Developer and the City of Kitchener; and, 6) THAT prior to final approval, that the Condominium Declaration be forwarded to the Commissioner of Planning, Development and Legislative Services at the Regional Municipality of Waterloo. Fees By copy of this letter, the Region of Waterloo acknowledges receipt of the Plan of Condominium and Zoning By-law Amendment Review Fee of $10,255.00 (deposited July 21, 2022). Document Number: 4344908 Version: 1 Page 367 of 387 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 Cc (via email). MHBC Planning Ltd. C/O Pierre Chauvin (Agent), 2415274 Ontario Inc. (Owner) Document Number: 4344908 Version: 1 Page 368 of 387 Andrew Pinnell From: Planning <planning@wcdsb.ca> Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2022 11:52 AM To: Andrew Pinnell Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Circulation for Comment - Vacant Land Condominium & Zoning By-law Amendment (67 & 71 Nelson Avenue) Good Morning Andrew, 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 condominium declaration to advise all purchasers of residential units and/or renters of same: "7n 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." C) That the developer enter into an agreement with the City of Kitchener to be registered on the title to the Property that provides: "All agreement of purchase and sale or leases for the sale or lease of a completed home or a home to be completed on the Property must contain the wording set out below to advise all purchasers of residential units and/or renters of same." "7n 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 Page 369 of 387 Andrew Pinnell From: Sent: To: Subject: 2022-06-28 Andrew Pinnell Kitchener Attention: Andrew Pinnell circulations@wsp.com Tuesday, June 28, 2022 10:59 AM Andrew Pinnell [EXTERNAL] ZBLA (ZBA22/011/N/AP) and Draft Plan of Condominium (30CDM-22208); 67 and 71 Nelson Ave., Kitchener Re: ZBLA (ZBA22/011/N/AP) and Draft Plan of Condominium (30CDM-22208); 67 and 71 Nelson Ave., Kitchener; Your File No. 30CDM-22208,ZBA22/011/N/AP Our File No. 93767 Dear Sir/Madam, We have reviewed the circulation regarding the above noted application. The following paragraphs are to be included as a condition of approval: "The Owner acknowledges and agrees to convey any easement(s) as deemed necessary by Bell Canada to service this new development. The Owner further agrees and acknowledges to convey such easements at no cost to Bell Canada. The Owner agrees that should any conflict arise with existing Bell Canada facilities where a current and valid easement exists within the subject area, the Owner shall be responsible for the relocation of any such facilities or easements at their own cost." The Owner is advised to contact Bell Canada at planninganddevelopment@bell.ca during the detailed utility design stage to confirm the provision of communication/telecommunication infrastructure needed to service the development. It shall be noted that it is the responsibility of the Owner to provide entrance/service duct(s) from Bell Canada's existing network infrastructure to service this development. In the event that no such network infrastructure exists, in accordance with the Bell Canada Act, the Owner may be required to pay for the extension of such network infrastructure. If the Owner elects not to pay for the above noted connection, Bell Canada may decide not to provide service to this development. To ensure that we are able to continue to actively participate in the planning process and provide detailed provisioning comments, we note that we would be pleased to receive circulations on all applications received by the Municipality and/or recirculations. Page 370 of 387 Please note that WSP operates Bell's development tracking system, which includes the intake of municipal circulations. WSP is mandated to notify Bell when a municipal request for comments or for information, such as a request for clearance, has been received. All responses to these municipal circulations are generated by Bell, but submitted by WSP on Bell's behalf. WSP is not responsible for Bell's responses and for any of the content herein. If you believe that these comments have been sent to you in error or have questions regarding Bell's protocols for responding to municipal circulations and enquiries, please contact planninganddevelopment@bell.ca Should you have any questions, please contact the undersigned. Yours truly, Ryan Courville Manager - Planning and Development Network Provisioning Email: planninganddevelopment@bell.ca NOTICE: This communication and any attachments ("this message") may contain information which is privileged, confidential, proprietary or otherwise subject to restricted disclosure under applicable law. This message is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any unauthorized use, disclosure, viewing, copying, alteration, dissemination or distribution of, or reliance on, this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, or you are not an authorized or intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by replying to this message, delete this message and all copies from your e-mail system and destroy any printed copies. You are receiving this communication because you are listed as a current WSP contact. Should you have any questions regarding WSP's electronic communications policy, please consult our Anti -Spam Commitment at www.wsp.com/casl. For any concern or if you believe you should not be receiving this message, please forward this message to caslcompliance(cDwsp.com so that we can promptly address your request. Note that not all messages sent by WSP qualify as commercial electronic messages. AVIS : Ce message, incluant tout fichier I'accompagnant (<< le message v), peut contenir des renseignements ou de ('information privilegies, confidentiels, proprietaires ou a divulgation restreinte en vertu de la loi. Ce message est destine a I'usage exclusif du/des destinataire(s) voulu(s). Toute utilisation non permise, divulgation, lecture, reproduction, modification, diffusion ou distribution est interdite. Si vous avez requ ce message par erreur, ou que vous n'etes pas un destinataire autorise ou voulu, veuillez en aviser 1'expediteur immediatement et detruire le message et toute copie electronique ou imprimee. Vous recevez cette communication car vous faites partie des contacts de WSP. Si vous avez des questions concernant la politique de communications electroniques de WSP, veuillez consulter notre Engagement anti-pourriel au www.wsp.com/Icap. Pour toute question ou si vous croyez que vous ne devriez pas recevoir ce message, priere de Ie transferer au conformitelcapa-wsp.com afin que nous puissions rapidement traiter votre demande. Notez que ce ne sont pas tous les messages transmis par WSP qui constituent des messages electroniques commerciaux. Page 371 of 387 Andrew Pinnell From: Trevor Heywood <theywood@grandriver.ca> Sent: Wednesday, June 8, 2022 5:20 PM To: Andrew Pinnell Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Circulation for Comment - Vacant Land Condominium & Zoning By-law Amendment (67 & 71 Nelson Avenue) Hey Andrew, This is not regulated by the GRCA and we have no comment. Thanks, Trevor Heywood Resource Planner Grand River Conservation Authority theywood@grandriver. ca www.grandriver.ca I Connect with us on social media Page 372 of 387 Andrew Pinnell From: LANDUSEPLANNING <LandUsePlanning@HydroOne.com> Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2022 10:23 AM To: Andrew Pinnell; Christine Kompter Subject: [EXTERNAL] Kitchener - 67 and 71 Nelson Avenue - 30CDM-22208 Hello, We are in receipt of your Draft Plan of Condominium Application, 30CDM-22208 dated June 3, 2022. We have reviewed the documents concerning the noted Plan and have no comments or concerns at this time. Our preliminary review considers issues affecting Hydro One's 'High Voltage Facilities and Corridor Lands' only. For proposals affecting 'Low Voltage Distribution Facilities' please consult your local area Distribution Supplier. To confirm if Hydro One is your local distributor please follow the following link: http://www.hydroone.com/StormCenter3/ Please select " Search" and locate address in question by entering the address or by zooming in and out of the map ■om ? mom MENU HELP SEARCH Customers Affected: 0 >5000 501-5000 0 51-500 0 21-50 () <=20 Huntsville 77 • pr l�wa ICawaes i Lees s"-I—�"i����Tii"1 Peterrauyh If Hydro One is your local area Distribution Supplier, please contact Customer Service at 1-888-664-9376 or e-mail CustomerCommunications@HydroOne.com to be connected to your Local Operations Centre Thank you, Kitty Luk Real Estate Assistant I Land Use Planning Hydro One Networks Inc. 185 Clegg Road Markham, ON I L6G 1137 Email: landuseplanning@hvdroone.com 1 Page 373 of 387 Andrew Pinnell From: Wen Xiao Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2022 1:59 PM To: Andrew Pinnell Subject: [EXTERNAL] Feedback about 67&71 Nelson Avenue Development Project Dear Andrew; I am the homkim Kitchener. We bought this house in February this year with a high price because we love this low density quiet area, especially the big green space To be honest, I am so disappointed to see the current development plan to build 23 dwelling Units in such a small area! This high density 23 dwelling Unit development plan does not match the overall zoning layout in this area. And this plan does not show enough parking space which would create high traffic in this area especially in front of my house. And now the grand river bridge on Bridge street East has very heavy traffic especially during the rush hour. This plan would make the traffic worse for sure. The other point is the new street added in this plan would create flood or blow heavy snow into Nelson street because the land at Sylvia Street is much higher than Nelson Ave. This development plan does not specify either the maximum height or the square footage for each dwelling unit. And why do they want to change the zoning By-law? Most homes in this area have a big backyard. If that's the case, does this mean everybody can apply the zoning By-law change and build multiple small dwelling units in the backyard? I suggest we keep the same zoning with a low density residential plan and maintain the existing street layout - Sylvia street and Nelson Ave. I don't mind if they build 5 to 6 multi -generation houses (Single detached or Semi) on each street (10 to 12 houses in total), which may generate the same amount of property tax for the City, and also good investment income for the developer (the developer only bought 2 houses on this land with very low investment). Please consider my suggestion and look forward to your support! Best regards, Wen Xiao Page 374 of 387 Andrew Pinnell From: Candice Belben Sent: Friday, June 24, 2022 12:48 AM To: Andrew Pinnell Subject: [EXTERNAL] 67 Nelson Ave Hello, This email is in regards to the 67 Nelson Ave proposed purpose. Adding 23 detached home to such a small area, where driveways can only fit 1 vehicle only creates problems such as: 1. More parking on the street because of tiny driveways. This creates issues for snow removal, garbage/recycling collections. Also poses safety hazards to pedestrians 2. Sylvia St is a dead end street and should remain that way to avoid busy roads around the park. 3. 23 houses means at the very least 46 more vehicles. You add in those vehicles to the other vehicles with the houses/new builds in the area and you are going to have a lot worse traffic back ups than you already have. Bloomingdale Rd is usually backed up at least twice a day as well as Bridge St from Lancaster to past Schweitzer 4. This area is not designed for more growth. 5. If you insist on building in this area at least try to keep some of the integrity. 6. There are new builds on Bridge St (opposite of Hollinger Cres). New builds/complex on Schweitzer/Stanley from what I've heard. New houses throughout the area on property that was vacant before. You also have a huge building on Lancaster/Bridgeport that is going to cause major traffic concerns Page 375 of 387 Andrew Pinnell From: Derek Hammer Sent: Monday, July 4, 2022 1:02 AM To: Andrew Pinnell Cc: Pamela Hammer Subject: [EXTERNAL] 67 & 71 Nelson Avenue Application for Development Hello Andrew, Our family resides on Nelson Avenue a few houses away from the proposed development at 67 and 71 Nelson Avenue. We have concerns as well as some suggested changes that we'd like to bring forward for your consideration. Our main concern is the amount of units being proposed. We moved to this area of town because we wanted to raise a family in a quiet neighbourhood and on a low traffic and lower density residential street. The proposed development would require the removal of 2 existing houses and building 23 units on the same amount of land, which is almost 12 times the density of the surrounding established neighbourhood. With this amount of units, there brings other concerns, such as congestion on our roads (traffic and parking), increased use of the park, and the potential for an increase in criminal activity in our well established neighbourhood. These concerns are also amplified due to the additional nearby proposed development at 26 Stanley Ave & 31 Schweitzer St, as well as the glass factory that is currently being developed on Bridge St. The current amount of traffic in our neighbourhood has increased substantially since moving into the Bridgeport area in 2016. The traffic over the bridge and through the roundabout at Bridge/Lancaster is frequently congested, as Bridgeport is an access point for people commuting from the east (e.g. Guelph), on top of our existing Bridgeport traffic. Building another 23 units, in addition to the 71 units proposed for the Stanley/Schweitzer development brings additional concerns on the traffic situation in the area. The road going in and out of Bridgeport (Bridge St.) has no potential to be widened due to the proximity of existing residences to the road. With the increased residential density proposed for this and other development in the area, there brings concerns on the general increase in traffic in the area (longer travel times to work, appointments, etc.) but more importantly, concerns about emergency vehicle access to our community. In addition to the main roads, we also have concerns that the units will add traffic to our street, compromising the safety of our children playing on or near our street. Parking on Nelson Ave will also be affected by the number of units proposed due to the small property sizes. Most home owners have more than one vehicle, especially in this area since the transit system does not run 24/7 and the length of time it takes to get in/out of our community. Nelson Ave will likely serve as a parking overflow from this proposed development, as with the current design, there will be no room for more than one vehicle per driveway (they are considerably smaller than the driveways in our existing neighbourhood), and "Street One" is guaranteed to be full of parked vehicles. The street parking on this section of Nelson Ave is already regularly more than half full from existing residents. Residents in the area (including our family) frequently use Sylvia Park, which has a small playground for young children. The additional units adjacent to the park will increase playground traffic. The playground is quite small, and we feel as though the park would be taken over by residents of the new development, making it difficult for children in the existing community to access. We are also concerned that increasing the density of housing in the area will come with an increase in criminal activity to our community, and specifically to residents on our street. Page 376 of 387 In summary, we are concerned the number of units proposed is not in the best interest of our community and we ask that you strongly consider reducing the amount of units proposed, and possibly consider semi-detached or larger detached homes with larger property sizes in place of the smaller units, which would make the development more uniform with the existing community. Thanks for your time and consideration, Derek and Pam Hammer Page 377 of 387 Andrew Pinnell From: James Kuttelwascher Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2022 8:28 PM To: Andrew Pinnell Subject: [EXTERNAL] 67 & 71 Nelson Ave. Kitchener building proposal Hello Andrew, I am writing to you today to voice my concerns with the proposed building plan for 67 and 71 Nelson Ave. in kitchener. We live across the street, and this development affects us directly. Firstly, our neighbourhood cannot accommodate the increase in population as the roads are small. Traffic is already an issue coming in and out of bridgeport. This increase in population will bring more traffic and more issues. Secondly, with the proposed visitor parking being on the road, this is not a realistic plan for the neighbourhood. The roads are narrow, we do not have sidewalks and we barely have enough road parking for the current residents. This will not only congest these roads, but make it unsafe for our family to go walking as well as our neighbours families. Lastly, this is a mature neighborhood. We do not want this new development in the area. We moved here to enjoy the quietness and maturity. Creating this many homes in the area is going to ruin a wonderful place to live. This will bring chaos and noise to a quiet area. With this being "low income housing", it will also bring the negative effects that low income housing brings. A prime example is Paulander Dr and Howe drive in Kitchener. We have a small family and would like to continue living in a safe and quiet neighbourhood. We understand this land is going to be developed at some point. It would be greatly appreciated if you would take into consideration all the people it affects. We can all work together to come up with a plan that suits everyone. We recommend no more than 4 houses be built on this land. 2 on Nelson, 2 on Sylvia. This would maintain the current appearance and traffic flow of the neighbourhood. Thank you, James Kuttelwascher Page 378 of 387 Andrew Pinnell From: Jim Meagher Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2022 5:12 PM To: Andrew Pinnell Subject: [EXTERNAL] 67 and 71 Nelson Avenue Hello Andrew, I am responding to a feedback request. Firstly I am concerned as to the limited distribution of this request, a straw poll of the neighbours has revealed a great mistrust of this process, especially on the heels of the Stanley St proposed development. The site plan drawing has no scale, lot sizes, unit sizes, setbacks from the street and sidewalk allowance are not revealed. There is no indication of parking for individual units. I can only speculate that the density of the project is far different than the rest of the established subdivision, so where are the vehicles going to park? How are emergency vehicles going to be able to service? From what I can see this project does not meet the established standard of neighbourhood. Unfortunately there are not sidewalks and curbs throughout the whole subdivision most notably on Schweitzer, hence the roadway has pedestrian component constantly. By introducing more cars you are increasing the risk to the individuals of the neighbourhood. Thank you for the opportunity to provide feedback. Jim Meagher Ps the scale of this project does not work as presented, and does not align with the Complete Street Kitchener vision Sent from Mail for Window Page 379 of 387 Andrew Pinnell From: KATHERINE VAN OORDT Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2022 6:56 PM To: Andrew Pinnell Subject: [EXTERNAL] Proposed housing on Nelson Ave. Mr. Pinnell: I am writing you on behalf of my family and myself regarding the proposed building that are to be built at the end of Nelson Ave and Tagge St. My family and I have lived in this area for over 31 years and we choose this area because it was quiet , neighbours weren't close and you feel like you are in the country but still close to stores. I have raised all my children here and now one child is living in the same area as it is quiet and close to their work. My daughter and her husband have built a 3 bay garage and 2 bedroom apartment on our land. Children can play on the street with no traffic. The problem with this proposal is: 1. Increased traffic coming and going into Bridgeport. 2. Safety issues that we have already with fire, police and ambulance unable to get through during anytime of day. 3. Parking on our street will increase for visitors from that area and parking can be troublesome at times. 4. Increased traffic on a dead end street. 5. Crossing the bridge at the round about will be unbelievable. 6. 75 more houses are to be built on Stanley which will increase traffic again. Again more problems. 7 The area that was once Stead and Evans is now getting ready to build whatever there and then there is more traffic 8.Schools will have to increase in size due to many more children attending. More expense. We would like to see Tagge Street go straight through to relieve traffic flow on Nelson and build possible 6 semi -detach houses instead with no first time buyers buildings as this becomes a problem with people not looking after their homes. No low rental housing should not be allowed as this becomes a hazard with drug or meth houses which is a big problem. Respectfully Kathy, Jim , Lindsay Van Oordt and Rocky Jean Page 380 of 387 Andrew Pinnell From: Larry Musselman Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2022 9:14 PM To: Andrew Pinnell Subject: [EXTERNAL] 67&71 Nelson Ave I am writing to you about the possible zone change for these properties. As a residential property owner that will be directly impacted by this proposal, I can say this is not welcome or wanted. The proposed development does not in any way fit or conform to the existing neighborhood and surrounding homes. I purchased my property at twelve years ago because of the large lot, quiet location and minimal traffic. As a homeowner I strongly disagree that a developer/builder should have the ability to take my reasons for choosing to live in this neighborhood away from me. This is an existing, established neighborhood and to completely change it, just to profit for themselves and give absolutely no benefits to the surrounding area and owners is extremely one sided. I think we all can come up with a much better solution for these properties that will be satisfactory to everyone Looking forward to hearing from you. Larry Musselman Page 381 of 387 Andrew Pinnell From: Mary Ann Scroggins Sent: Monday, June 20, 2022 8:04 PM To: Andrew Pinnell Subject: [EXTERNAL] Application for Development Hi Andrew - I see that you are the senior planner for the city of Kitchener, so I hope you can help me out. I live I moved here about 4 years ago. I used to live in uptown Waterloo, but it was getting too crowded for me. I moved to Nelson Avenue because it is a quieter area with larger lots. This is still the case. However, if the development goes through at 67 & 71 Nelson Ave, which is literally 2 houses down, my move 4 years ago will have been a waste of time and money. I realize that there will be some development however, putting in 23 new units, and some of them appear to be low rise apartments, is ridiculous and should not happen. It will completely turn the area into a much busier, louder neighborhood than it is now. I am close to retirement. That is the main reason I moved here. I really can not afford to move again before retiring. Please, help keep the uniqueness and quiet of Bridgeport. It is a great place! Sincerely, Mary Scroggins Page 382 of 387 Andrew Pinnell From: Rachel Dann Sent: Sunday, July 3, 2022 6:29 PM To: Andrew Pinnell Subject: [EXTERNAL] Sylvia/Nelson development comments Hello Andrew, I live on Daniel Ave in Kitchener, in the neighborhood of the proposed Bridgeport development. I am strongly against this development as it will cause a great increase in traffic to the area, especially on Nelson Street and the Bridge St.. Nelson and Daniel are already street parking heavy, and the bridge is completely congested during rush hours of 7 to 9 am and 3 to 7 pm right now. The bridge is the only nearby pathway from Bridgeport to the rest of the city. Existing traffic from Cambridge and Guelph already makes it a nightmare for those who live in Bridgeport and Bloomingdale. Emergency services such as an ambulance would never get through on time as it stands now, so I can't imagine adding more houses, people and vehicles to that equation. That's an accident waiting to happen. Bridgeport has already seen recent new builds making things more crowded, please do not make it even worse!! Also, the bridge is scheduled for closure right now until Fall 2022, making traffic extra slow and jammed ....this is without adding approximately 50 more vehicles. Please stop building in Bridgeport unless you can make another nearby roadway to the rest of the city!! Thank you, Rachel Dann Kitchener, ON. Get Outlook for Android Page 383 of 387 Andrew Pinnell From: Robin Runstedler Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2022 6:16 PM To: Andrew Pinnell Cc: Pat Runstedler Subject: [EXTERNAL] 67 & 71 Nelson Ave. Kitchener Dear Andrew, We live at We moved here 18 years ago, knowing we wanted a home to grow old in. The quiet neighborhood was what sold us on the area. Our house needed ALOT of work and since then have put our renovations before trips or boats, snowmobiles, etc. This development does not belong in our neighborhood. We would like to discuss further at a public meeting. Please inform us when and where this will take place. Thank you, Robin and Pat Runstedler Page 384 of 387 Andrew Pinnell From: Sandra Levesque > Sent: Tuesday, June 14, 2022 11:42 AM To: Andrew Pinnell Cc: Scott Davey Subject: [EXTERNAL] Application for Development in Bridgeport I received the notice of a planned development in the Nelson/Sylvia Street area in the Bridgeport area of Kitchener. I am replying for a number of neighbours on Schweitzer Street between Nelson and Daniel Streets. Our concern is not so much with the type of development but the impact on traffic. Currently, only as a result of recent building, traffic backs up daily at rush hours (3-6 pm) on Lancaster Street at Bridgeport Road bumper to bumper several blocks on Bloomingdale Road and on Bridge Street well past Schweitzer and Logel's. This is as bad as it was before the roundabout was built. There already have been built multiple condos on Bridge Street going toward University as well as the first of several proposed buildings where the church was at the corner of Lancaster and Bridgeport Road. Now to add 23 more homes will only add to the congestion. Our question for the city is: What plans do you have to alleviate traffic congestion so that residents of Bridgeport are not physically "trapped" each day for several hours. I am not exaggerating. I invite you to sit at the roundabout some day and see for yourself. Our suggestion would be to either build a roundabout at Lancaster and Bridgeport Road or build the bridge across the river that will ultimately serve the new? road to Guelph, giving residents an alternate path to the rest of the city. On behalf of my neighbours I would urge you to schedule a Neighbourhood meeting to discuss further plans. Thank you for the opportunity to express my concerns. Mrs. Sandra Levesque Page 385 of 387 Andrew Pinnell From: Schneider Garland, Trena Sent: Tuesday, June 28, 2022 11:21 AM To: Andrew Pinnell; Scott Davey Subject: [EXTERNAL] Application for Development 67 & 71 Nelson Ave Hi Andrew and Scott, I wanted to provide some feedback and I have a few questions regarding the Application for Development for 67 and 71 Nelson Ave. In order to support a build like this the infrastructure around Bridgeport needs to be improved. Some points that need to be addressed: 1. The traffic bottle necks at the bridge over the Grand River all of the time. The quickest access to any emergency services is over this bridge. 2. The roads in this area do no have sidewalks or bike lanes. This is a safety concern for our children and citizens that play and walk in this area. The increased traffic is going to make it less safe. 3. The speed limit in this whole area is still 50 km/h and many people drive way faster than that. The speed limit needs to be reduced with increase signage as well as crosswalks, speed humps, and road lane signs. What is the plan for the park on Sylvia SO Will it be removed? Will there be fencing put up around it? What will the speed limit be around this park? That is all I can think of for now. Thanks, Trena Garland 1 Page 386 of 387 Andrew Pinnell From: TAMMY LAPPAGE Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2022 3:12 PM To: Andrew Pinnell Subject: [EXTERNAL] Comments to Application for Re -Zoning at 67 & 71 Nelson Avenue ZBA22/011/N/AP Hello Andrew, My name is Tammy Lappage and I live at and I would like to offer the following comments to the proposed development and Re -zoning application. I have lived at for 22 years. When my husband (now deceased) and I were purchasing our new home, we looked at various properties in the Kitchener area. We happily settled here in the Bridgeport East Community as the area had exactly what were looking for. A quiet neighbourhood, low traffic streets, large back yards, street scapes mostly the same (bungalows) and minimal people. Granted, we did have to give up some amenities such as street lights, no schools, no shopping plaza such as groceries etc., last on the list for snow removal etc. but we happily did that as the latter was more important to us. BEFORE we purchased our home we did our due dilicience and investigated the as that area was forest back in 2000 and had not yet been developed. ALL of the Zoning was R-3, single residential and still is. We also investigated that Tagge Street had a right of way proposed to be extended to Daniel St. Over the years, I have invested time and money into making my home and my back yard my oasis and I did all of this with the existing layout of the houses surrounding me and with consideration for my neighbours. When the property at 67 Nelson was purchased, due to the death of the original property owner, I was content to know that, yes, I would get new neighbours but it would be a single family. Possibly a new build but still only one house and one family. Actually, another family currently does live in the house at 67 Nelson Ave. I have reviewed all of the Supporting Documents listed on the City website and I could provide all of my comments about all that is wrong with the current proposal BUT will simply say this: I am NOT in agreement to the current proposal. This proposal is in no way compatible to the existing neighbourhood and certainly not to the homes that are on Nelson Ave. So where do we go from here? Firstly I would like to thank you for listening and hopefully hearing my concerns. Has the developer provided other options for our community to look at? I would be quite happy if both parcels of land remained R-3 single residential but I am not naive and know that something will change but this first proposal cannot and should not be it. It will be too intrusive to the way of life for the current residents in the area. I will await your response and any instruction for the next step that is to be taken. Tamm La a e Page 387 of 387