Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDSD-2024-005 - Growing Together - Protected Major Transit Station Area Land Use and Zoning FrameworkStaff Report Development Services Department www.kitchener.ca REPORT TO: Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee DATE OF MEETING: January 29, 2024 SUBMITTED BY: Rosa Bustamante, Director of Planning and Housing Policy/City Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7319 PREPARED BY: Adam Clark, Senior Urban Designer, 519-741-2200 ext. 7027 John Zunic, Senior Planner, 519-741-2200 ext. 7685 WARD(S) INVOLVED: Wards 9 & 10 DATE OF REPORT: January 11, 2024 REPORT NO.: DSD -2024-005 SUBJECT: Growing Together — Protected Major Transit Station Area Land Use and Zoning Framework RECOMMENDATION: That City Initiated Official Plan Amendment OPA23/016/K/JZ, for the purpose of implementing a land use planning framework for seven of the City's Protected Major Transit Station Areas, including amendments to the Urban Structure, Land Use, Specific Policy Areas, and Cultural Heritage Resources mapping and text amendments, be adopted, in the form shown in the Official Plan Amendment attached to Report DSD -2024-005 as Attachment `A', and accordingly forwarded to the Region of Waterloo for approval; That City Initiated Official Plan Amendment OPA23/017/K/JZ, for the purpose of adding lands into the 2014 Official Plan and updating the land use planning framework for specific lands currently within Secondary Plans within the 1994 Official Plan, including amendments to the Urban Structure, Land Use, and Specific Policy Areas, inclusive of mapping and text amendments, be adopted, in the form shown in the Official Plan Amendment attached to Report DSD -2024-005 as Attachment `B', and accordingly forwarded to the Region of Waterloo for approval; That City Initiated Official Plan Amendment OPA23/022/K/JZ, for the purpose of deleting existing secondary plan policies and mapping from the 1994 Official Plan, be adopted, in the form shown in the Official Plan Amendment attached to Report DSD - 2024 -005 as Attachment `C', and accordingly forwarded to the Region of Waterloo for approval; That City Initiated Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA23/028/K/JZ to amend Zoning By-law 2019-051 for lands within seven of the City's Protected Major Transit Station Areas, be approved in the form shown in the "Proposed By-law" attached to Report DSD -2024-005 as Attachment `D'; and *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. Page 3 of 1179 That City Initiated Zoning By-law Amendment Application ZBA23/029/K/JZ to amend Zoning By-law 2019-051, for lands recommended to be removed from existing Secondary Plans be approved in the form shown in the "Proposed By-law" attached to Report DSD -2024-005 as Attachment `E'. REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: The primary purpose of this report is to provide a planning recommendation for the Protected Major Transit Station Areas (PMTSAs) within the Growing Together study area geography. This includes the following 7 of Kitchener's 10 PMTSAs: o Grand River Hospital o Central Station (Innovation District) o Victoria Park & Kitchener City Hall o Frederick & Queen o Kitchener Market o Borden o Mill • It is planning staff's recommendation that the Official Plan amendments be adopted and that the Zoning By-law amendments be approved. • There are no financial implications associated with this recommendation. • Infrastructure capacity was assessed through early phases of this work and determined sufficient to accommodate medium term growth. Infrastructure capacity will continue to be monitored as the PMTSAs continue to welcome more people. • Community engagement included: 0 13 unique engagements totalling over 72 hours and involving more than 1,100 members of the community. o In-person workshops, pop -ups and walk-ins as well as regular updates and virtual engagement methods on the Growing Together EngageWR page. This report is one of many housing -related reports considered by Council since Council's endorsement of Kitchener's Housing Pledge in March 2023, as seen in the diagram below. Municipal Housing Pledge Missing Middle and Affordable Housing Study Update r� F 2023 Bill 13, Bill 23, Bill 109 Implementation Plan Growing Together Engagement Summary Inclusionary Zoning Direction Lower Doan Land Use Study Implementation Eviction & Displacement Webpage & Online Reporting Update Proposed Lodging House Official Plan and Zoning Implementation Lived Expertise I Working Group Year 2 Work Plan Development Eviction & Displacement Toolkit Options Rental Replacement By- law Information Report Figure 1 A diagram showing Kitchener's housing related studies and initiatives. 2029+ Evictions & Displacement Toolkit Implementation Rental Replacement By- law Implementation Shared Accommodations Licensing By-law Updates Lodging House Official Plan and Zoning Approval Growing Together Implementation Inclusionary Zoning Implementation Page 4 of 1179 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report recommends Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments that will establish a new planning framework for development within strategic growth areas in Kitchener and implements that framework on lands within the Growing Together Protected Major Transit Station Areas (PMTSAs). Lands outside of the PMTSA boundary but within historical central neighbourhood secondary plan areas are also being updated as part of this work. Growing Together implements Kitchener's Municipal Housing Pledge and plans to accommodate 18,000 of Kitchener's target total 35,000 units by 2031 within the 7 of Kitchener's 10 PMTSAs that form the Growing Together geography. Additional growth capacity to an estimated minimum 60 -year horizon has the potential to be accommodated within the Growing Together geography, largely on underutilized opportunity sites. Growing Together also implements the following recommendation from the Enabling Missing Middle and Affordable Housing report DSD -2023-160: "That the Enabling Missing Middle and Affordable Housing Feasibility Study be used to inform the Growing Together project for planning in Major Transit Station Areas and future updates to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law;" It does this through the removal of required parking minimums and by no longer regulating maximum density via Floor Space Ratio (FSR). These policy changes, as recommended by the study, will help unlock low-rise and mid -rise missing middle housing supply. In place of FSR maximums, Growing Together proposes built -form regulations that have been carefully calibrated to enable a healthy long-term supply of housing and jobs while upholding a high quality of life for existing and future residents, workers, and visitors. Growing Together implements the following recommendation from the Growing Together — Engagement Summary Report Overview report DSD -2023-251: "That staff use the community input as summarized in the Growing Together Engagement Summary attached as Attachment A to report DSD -2023-251 to inform continued work on Growing Together." It does this through the proposed land use policies and zoning regulations, as detailed in Attachment G to this report (DSD -2024-05). Community feedback received at the 13 engagements, (including 6 community workshops, 3 pop -ups, 3 office hours engagements and an open house) was used to inform the land use and zoning mapping, the permitted uses within zones, the priority streets framework, and other proposed policies and regulations. Growing Together represents a best -fit from over 1,300 conversations with community members and collaborators cultivated through a 4 -time award-winning engagement process. It proposes an innovative and flexible structure that is custom designed to help address the housing crisis, perform in the complex and challenging environment of the City's PMTSAs, and plan responsibly for the future. Page 5 of 1179 BACKGROUND Why We Are Growing Together 4 Figure 2 A photo from the pilot workshop with the Downtown Community Working Group in January 2023. The City has been working on an updated planning framework for the lands around the ION LRT since the initiation of the Planning Around Rapid Transit Stations (PARTS) project in 2013. When planning staff re -launched Kitchener's Protected Major Transit Station Areas (PMTSAs) planning work in early 2023, we named it Growing Together, with a purpose. All current and future Kitchener residents, workers and visitors, community builders and housing providers, City staff and council members are building our future together. We are experiencing growth and change together and navigating the housing crisis together, to make high-quality housing more abundant and affordable for all. We are addressing the climate emergency together, by building up around the ION and empowering people to walk, cycle, roll and take transit more often. We are working together with other City divisions and departments, including Parks, Economic Development, Transportation, Engineering, Building, Communications, and others. This includes work to better understand and plan for sufficient ongoing infrastructure capacity to support growth and change. Growing Together is intertwined with other planning work, particularly inclusionary zoning, rental replacement, and downtown district energy. We are working together with the Region of Waterloo to implement relevant portions of Regional Official Plan Amendment 6 (ROPA 6), including land use permissions that will help enable complete communities and missing middle housing. We are working together with the Province of Ontario to meet Kitchener's PMTSA intensification minimums, the Housing Pledge target of 35,000 new units by 2031, and the objectives, regulations, and policies of the Planning Act, the Provincial Policy Statement, and A Place to Grow. Page 6 of 1179 We are working together with the federal government, through the Housing Accelerator Fund, to bring more housing online more quickly. Growing Together was a key component of Kitchener's Housing Accelerator Fund application, which resulted in $42.4 million in federal funding. We are working together with the development industry and housing providers, land economists, planners, architects, designers, and other collaborators to grapple with the complexities of building complete communities in this critical time. But most importantly, we are working together with the Kitchener community through an equity -first engagement process that has allowed us to speak– at length, in detail, and in person– with over 1,100 community members from all walks of life. We have met people where they are through 13 community engagements within the past 10 months. We have mailed residents and property owners a total of 36,716 postcards. Our website, engagewr.ca/growingtogether, has been visited over 8,000 times. The materials posted on our EngageWR page have been downloaded over 4,700 times. We have created innovative, industry leading, internationally recognized award-winning materials, tools and processes that help show clearly, realistically, and intuitively what growth and change looks like, how it occurs, why it is necessary, and who it impacts. What Growing Together Does Growing Together is designed to achieve several objectives including: Aligning the City's PMTSA planning framework with the way growth is already happening. This means more closely matching our policies and regulations to the kinds of development that are already being approved by Council through site-specific applications. This helps provide more certainty for everyone—the community, the development industry, city staff and council—about how our PMTSAs will evolve, which: • Helps us plan more accurately for the future, including better understanding our parkland and hard and soft infrastructure needs. Schools, community facilities and public transit are among the other things we will collectively be able to plan for more efficiently and sustainably. • Reduces process and speeds up approvals, with fewer development applications requiring Official Plan Amendments and Zoning By-law Amendments to proceed, and delivering more housing, in a greater variety of forms, more quickly. • Gives the community a better understanding of what future change might look like. • Gives the City access to more tools and funding sources enabled by conformity with regional, provincial, and federal policies. Bringing pioneering methods to the complex challenges of station area planning. This means being the first or among the first municipalities in the country to achieve things like: • Designing and deploying a more equitable, interactive engagement process that also demonstrates to participants how their input has been evaluated and used to inform the proposed policies and regulations. Page 7 of 1179 Implementation of a PMTSA planning framework that translates the City's Municipal Housing Pledge target directly into our policies and regulations and meets the objectives of the federal Housing Accelerator Fund. The implementation of new land uses and zones that are custom designed to perform in a PMTSA context, and with a sophisticated understanding of the current market. Zoning which permits a full range of missing middle housing forms and mix of uses, implements carefully calibrated built -form regulations to ensure good and compatible building design at appropriate densities, and eliminates vehicular parking minimums. Ensuring that as intensification happens, a high quality of life can by enjoyed by all. This means developing land use policies and zoning by-law regulations that protect for the health, safety, and quality of life of both existing and new Kitchener residents by: • Using built -form zoning regulations such as building length and floor plate area maximums, as well as physical separation. These work in combination to protect the privacy of new residents, ensure access to light for all units, and provide "breathing space" between buildings much like yard setbacks do for single detached houses. It also limits shadow, wind and other impacts on existing and future nearby residents. Without these regulations, buildings can create significant effects on the surrounding environment and can impact the future development potential of nearby properties. This includes limiting how much total housing can be built if one development frustrates or neutralizes development on neighbouring sites. • `Graduating' built form requirements based on height ranges. This helps permit a full range of building types while mitigating impacts. As a building gets taller, the built form regulations change proportionally. • Requiring amenity space as part of larger developments. This will create meaningful private and shared common spaces for new residents, visitors and others to enjoy. • Built -form zoning regulations are a critical component of building a healthy, safe environment for all who live, work, and visit Kitchener's PMTSAs, while still allowing for abundant housing supply. The following diagrams give an example of how the proposed zoning framework uses built -form regulations to guide density and maximize the total provision of housing at a high quality of life for all. Figure 3 In the above diagram, the purple buildings represent a large block of high-density development in- line with the tallest and densest development approved and built in Kitchener, which are represented by the assembly of white buildings along the bottom. This diagram shows how the proposed built -form regulations guide density while ensuring a high-quality urban environment for existing and new community members. Page 8 of 1179 Planning for a more affordable and more sustainable future. This means creating policies and rules that, over time, enable housing affordability and address the climate emergency by: • Implementing Inclusionary Zoning in partnership with Growing Together, requiring affordable units as part of new development. The permissions in Growing Together help offset the negative financial implications of inclusionary zoning that could curtail new market housing supply. • Providing for more pathways to a broader range of housing types across the full spectrum of the housing market, including missing middle and mid -rise housing. • Planning for a downtown district energy system, which includes enabling sufficient density and mix of uses to support the investment over the long-term. • Providing more housing and jobs around transit and active transportation options, which is critical in meeting Kitchener's greenhouse gas reduction targets. • Providing more housing and jobs that can be efficiently serviced with existing infrastructure, keeping the life -cycle costs of infrastructure low and causing fewer road disruptions over time. Over time, this has the potential to help keep property taxes lower than other forms of growth. Planning for greater equity for all. Through our engagement plan, Growing Together committed to a more equitable community engagement process, creating methods and materials that made staff and our work more accessible and interactive than ever before. The feedback received has resulted in a planning framework that meets the full range of needs of current and future Kitchener residents, workers and visitors by: • Providing opportunities for all types of housing, including singles, duplexes, triplexes, additional dwelling units (ADUs), multiplexes, and apartment buildings in low, mid, and high-rise forms. This greater mix will help support a broader range of family and household types and provide options for people to remain in their neighbourhood throughout the various phases of their lives. • Allowing a range of uses in each zone to create more complete communities, with shops and services that meet people's daily needs within accessible distances. • Encouraging home businesses, small businesses, and start-ups by permitting more uses in more zones which provides better opportunities for people's ideas to emerge, supporting employment and complete communities. What Growing Together Is Growing Together continues the planning review process that began in 2013 with the Planning Around Rapid Transit Stations (PARTS) plans and advanced through the Neighbourhood Planning Review (NPR) project through 2021. Growing Together proposes a planning framework, which includes new land use and zoning for 7 of Kitchener's 10 PMTSAs: • Grand River Hospital • Kitchener Market • Central Station (Innovation District) • Borden • Victoria Park & Kitchener City Hall • Mill • Frederick & Queen Page 9 of 1179 Figure 4 A map showing the 7 PMTSAs that form Growing Together. Growing Together also contains the entirety of the Urban Growth Centre (UGC), or Downtown Kitchener. Lands outside of the PMTSA boundary but within historical central neighbourhood secondary plan areas are also being brought into a new and updated planning framework as part of this work (shown in yellow above). Kitchener's PMTSA boundaries were determined by the Region of Waterloo and approved by the Province through ROPA 6. These boundaries are final and cannot be changed through the Growing Together process. Growing Together Planning Analysis Growing Together has considered and implements several factors that are important and also required to be considered when recommending changes to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law. This section provides an overview of what was considered and how the proposed Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments implement these factors. A detailed planning analysis is contained within Attachment F. Note that the City's Official Plan for PMTSAs is to be updated within one year of the Minister's decision on Regional Official Plan Amendment No. 6, issued on April 11 t", 2023. Community engagement feedback Growing Together has considered community, collaborator, and agency feedback, which was received through: • Over 20 PARTS and NPR engagements between 2013 and 2021. • The 6 Community Workshops held in March and April 2023. • The Missing Middle Block exercise, Priority Streets exercise, and Office Hours engagement held in June and July 2023. • Walk-in Office Hours and Open House in November 2023. Page 10 of 1179 The Planning Act The proposed Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments have regard for matters of Provincial interest outlined in the Planning Act including: • The removal of density bonusing from the Official Plan. Both the existing and previously proposed draft planning frameworks for downtown depended on density bonusing to deliver housing units in downtown. That tool is no longer available. • Limiting inclusionary zoning to PMTSAs only. Cities can only require affordable units through an inclusionary zoning by-law within PMTSA boundaries. If a greater share of housing is built in PMTSAs, more of our housing will be more affordable overall. • Matters of Provincial interest. • Required updates to conform with the Region of Waterloo's Official Plan, including Regional Official Plan Amendment Number 6. • Required Official Plan policies for PMTSAs including minimum residents and jobs per hectare, establishing the ways that land can be used, and identifying minimum densities required. The Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 The proposed Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments are consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement by: • Creating healthy, safe, and livable communities with a range and mix of housing options and complementary non-residential uses. • Promoting the wise and efficient use of land and existing infrastructure through intensification and redevelopment around higher -order transit. • Encouraging development within existing settlement area boundaries, which supports energy and natural heritage conservation and contributes to reduced greenhouse gas emissions. A Place to Grow, 2020 The proposed Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments conform with A Place to Grow by: • Establishing a planning framework that achieves the minimum required density targets of 160 residents and jobs per hectare in these PMTSAs and 200 residents and jobs per hectare in the Urban Growth Centre (Downtown Kitchener). Kitchener's Official Plan sets the minimum target for the UGC at 225 residents and jobs per hectare. • Creating complete communities that are designed to support healthy and active living by providing for a range and mix of housing types, jobs, and services at densities and in locations which support transit viability and active transportation. • Prohibiting land uses and built form that would adversely affect the achievement of transit supportive densities and providing alternative development standards such as reduced parking requirements. Page 11 of 1179 Regional Official Plan The proposed Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments conform with the Regional Official Plan, including Regional Official Plan Amendment Number 6 by: • Incorporating Kitchener's PMTSAs as established through the Regional Official Plan and approved by the province into the urban structure of Kitchener's Official Plan. • Establishing land use, height, and density policies for PMTSAs that supports the achievement of growth targets outlined in the ROP and Kitchener's Housing Pledge, supports climate change objectives, and optimizes the use of existing infrastructure including ION light rail. • Directing the majority of forecasted population and employment growth to strategic growth areas including Downtown Kitchener and Protected Major Transit Station Areas. • Creating new official plan policies requiring Kitchener to plan for complete communities and missing middle housing; and provide for a range and mix of housing within Kitchener's PMTSAs. Recent Decisions of Kitchener Council for Site -Specific Approvals Taking a consistent approach to carry forward site-specific regulations from applications approved by Council through Official Plan Amendments and Zoning By- law Amendments over the previous 5 years. Kitchener's Missing Middle and Affordable Housing Study Kitchener's Missing Middle and Affordable Housing Study was endorsed by Council in April 2023. Growing Together implements recommendations from this study by: • Not requiring a minimum amount of vehicular parking. The cost of parking can be very high, and the space required to accommodate parking can prevent smaller, missing middle development from occurring at all. Parking can still be provided to meet demand, while people who don't need parking won't need to pay for it. • Enabling flexibility for all types of housing by determining density through built -form regulations rather than floor -space -ratio maximums. This also makes development more consistent within PMTSAs, where properties come in all shapes and sizes. Kitchener's Municipal Housing Pledge In March 2023, Council endorsed Kitchener's Municipal Housing Pledge, which committed to adding 35,000 homes by 2031. Provincial funding provided through the Building Faster Fund is dependent on reaching this target, in stages over the next several years. Growing Together advances the commitments in the Municipal Housing Pledge by: • Planning for 18,000 of those units within the Growing Together PMTSAs where there is significant demand for new housing and existing infrastructure to do so sustainably, responsibly, and quickly enough to help meet the target deadlines. Page 12 of 1179 The Downtown Vision In 2022/23, through a community -led, staff -supported process, a new vision for Downtown Kitchener was created. This new vision was endorsed by Council in November 2023. Growing Together adds the new vision to the City's Official Plan, providing a connection between the vision and how it will guide the future of downtown through land use planning. Staff also piloted the 3D model workshop with the Downtown Community Working Group, and their feedback can be found in the Workshop Engagement Summary in Attachment G. Heritage Conservation Districts and Cultural Heritage Landscapes A detailed assessment of the proposed Official Pan amendments and Zoning By-law amendments as they relate to cultural heritage resources was provided in a report to the Heritage Kitchener committee and presented on January 9, 2024 (DSD -2024-009). In 2014, Kitchener completed a Cultural Heritage Landscapes Study that inventoried and recommended 55 cultural heritage landscapes throughout Kitchener. Growing Together includes the delineation of 14 cultural heritage landscapes located wholly within the PMTSAs in the Official Plan, enabling heritage related studies to be requested through development application processes. Additionally, a series of policies are proposed to be included in the Official Plan to implement recommendations from the Cedar Hill Cultural Heritage Landscape Study that recognize and facilitate views into and out of the neighbourhood. Finally, a policy is proposed to be added to confirm that where there is a conflict between the Official Plan and a Heritage Conservation District Plan that the Heritage Conservation District Plan prevails. The proposed land use and zoning changes are not anticipated to result in loss of cultural heritage resources. The existing heritage tools currently in use—including Heritage Conservation District Plans, and the policies within them, provide guidance on how development should occur, designation, and the ability to request heritage studies in certain situations – remain in effect. The Planning Around Rapid Transit Stations (PARTS) Plans for Midtown, Central and Rockway The PARTS plans included a wide range of key directions, which have been used together with new legislation and evolving community needs since 2013 to inform the proposed Official Plan policies and zoning framework for Growing Together. Additional Considerations Housing Affordability. Like many Canadian cities, Kitchener has been impacted by a housing affordability crisis. Growing Together is proceeding in partnership with the Inclusionary Zoning By-law, which will require affordable housing units as part of new development (refer to report DSD -2024-029). Growing Together also creates more pathways to a broader range of housing supply. New infill development has been shown through multiple academic studies to lower the cost of housing within a neighbourhood, in both the short and the long term. Page 13 of 1179 Real House Prices Mortgage Payments Vacancy Rate Canada Britain Japan 2000 2010 2021 Housing prices in Canada far exceed those of other G7 nations and are more than 3x higher than the 2000 average. $2.500 $2000 $1.500 S1.000 2016 2018 2020 2022 The average mortgage payment increased by 40% in just 2022, and by well over 200% since 2016. October 2022 Vacancy Rate 0.0 Kitchener CMHC reports Kitchener's vacancy rate at 1.2%, far below a `healthy' vacancy rate of 3%-5% Figure 5 Cards from the Growing Together card deck. On the left, the graph shows how rapidly housing costs have increased in Canada compared to other countries. The middle graph shows how rapidly mortgage payments have increased since 2016. On the right, the graph shows Kitchener's vacancy rate compared to other Ontario cities. Links to the studies referenced above can be found here, here, here and here. Sustainability. Kitchener City Council declared a climate emergency in June of 2019. Research shows that policies that encourage intensification via infill development, particularly along transit, are by far the most impactful policies a city can implement to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions. Further, Growing Together supports the downtown district energy project by locating density where it can be serviced by a potential future district energy plant (refer to staff report DSD -20-151). GHG Reduction Potential — Hea[i ng Electrification —Co�merelal Efficiency VMTRedu tion Aj� IV —Electric Vehicl s Urban Infill — Enew Effic envy =$Healthy Dista hift Curni— an Renewable El—trIcky � avatar &waste Alrrravel Reduction N 50+ MPG Vehicles 40k 80k 120k 160k Metric Tans CO2e Researchers analyzed 700 cities and found that infill housing policies have byfar the biggest impact on GHGs. Household Energy Use Sin le -Detached Townhouse Apartment hill 1111lllm Total energy use is lowest for apartments. The left bar represents energy used by the building, the right for transportation. GHG Emissions 44% Transportation 27% Workplace 1% Waste 5%Agriculture 18%Homes In 2015, nearly half of all emissions in Waterloo Region were caused by driving/transportation. Figure 6 Cards from the Growing Together card deck. On the left, the graph shows how much potential impact urban infill policies can have on GHG reductions. The middle graph shows how much energy use is used by the building and for transportation for different types of housing. On the right, the graph shows a breakdown of Waterloo Region's GHG emissions. Page 14 of 1179 How We're Growin_g Together AW " Figure 7 A photo from our March 25th community -wide workshop at the Kitchener Market. With the arrival of the ION light rail and the evolving needs of our community, change is occurring more quickly and in new ways in within Kitchener's PMTSAs. With this real change came a responsibility to evolve our engagement methods to: • Help the community break down the complexities of how growth and change are occurring through intuitive, easy to access and understand tools. • Base those tools in the real-world by studying building typologies, development trends, and market conditions. • Provide opportunities for community input to be captured, analysed, and quantified. • Create a process that reaches a more equitable cross-section of community members by making our engagements accessible, fun, intuitive and rewarding. What Growing Together Prioritized The Growing Together process was intentionally designed to be: • Equitable: To reach a more diverse and representative set of community members. • Educational: To create intuitive exercises using realistic buildings and parameters. • Measurable: To collect community input that can be analyzed and quantified. Where We Started In March 2023, through a series of hands-on workshops, planning staff engaged with the community to develop scenarios for growth that are tied to various real-world targets and needs. A presentation explaining the workshop is available here. Participants were asked to place an additional 18,000 housing units on the model, represented by low, mid, and high-rise building typologies that were 3D -printed in bright yellow. This number of new units aligns with Kitchener's housing pledge target for growth, in forms that align with recent, under construction and planned developments in the area. A full explanation of the methodology used is available here. Page 15 of 1179 While working through the exercise, participants discussed their thought process around where they placed different building types, helping staff better understand their priorities. For those interested in going into greater depth about a particular issue, staff also prepared a `card deck' of 24 visualized facts on growth, development and housing, available here. After each workshop, the results were translated exactly into a smart modeling software that allowed staff to measure and evaluate the results. Heat maps of the building placement from each workshop were created and layered on top of one another to create a unified community map for how to distribute different forms of growth. Those maps were used to inform the proposed distribution of land uses and zones in the final recommendations. Those results are summarized in our engagement summary, in Attachment G, and were presented to Council on June 19th 2023 with the Growing Together — Engagement Summary Report Overview, DSD -2023-251. Through these workshops, staff met with 562 community members across 34 hours of engagement. We mailed residents 10,598 postcards, posted an advertisement in the Record on March 17th, published a news release on March 9th, and notified people via our EngageWR page, social media and email. Where That Led Figure 8 Staff in conversation with two groups; on the left is the missing middle block exercise, and on the right is the priority streets mapping exercise. Building on the workshops, staff released a Draft Approach to Growth and Change in June 2023, which has been downloaded over 1,000 times. This included initial direction on zoning, mapping, and more. In our Draft Approach, staff introduced the following key principles: That Growing Together maximizes our ability to address the housing crisis by improving housing choice and affordability in our PMTSAs. That Growing Together addresses the climate emergency by creating transit - supportive communities, maximizing the use of existing infrastructure, and leveraging potential new infrastructure such as district energy. Page 16 of 1179 That Growing Together encourages a gradual modal shift to active transportation and transit, within complete communities that provide for people's daily needs. That Growing Together helps bring more people, activity, life and diversity to Kitchener's PMTSAs, with more amenities, shops and services for all. This principle is also reflected in the Downtown Vision work that was ongoing concurrently, ultimately resulting in a vision centered on vibrancy, connection and belonging. To achieve these key directions, staff introduced new zoning categories- the Strategic Growth Areas (SGA) zones. This responded to feedback received during the workshops and subsequent analysis of the conditions present within PMTSAs; staff heard a clear desire for a simplified, more consistently applied zoning approach, but also one that accounts for the many unique opportunities and challenges of developing with PMTSAs. What Came Next V" 3 ,l Figure 9 A photo from the missing middle block exercise taken during RibFest on July 19th at our Gaukel Block Pop-up engagement. As part of our June/July 2023 engagement, staff developed two additional engagement exercises based on questions that had surfaced during our March 2023 workshops. These were the Missing Middle Block Exercise and the Priority Streets Exercise. During the June/July 2023 engagement period, staff popped -up on Gaukel Street as part of both the Multicultural Festival and Downtown Kitchener Ribfest. We also attended Summer Series, a regular afternoon and evening event on Wednesdays at the Kitchener Market, and offered Office Hours appointments to the community and collaborators, where people could meet one-on-one with staff. Feedback received at these events directly informed the types of uses and regulations proposed for the SGA -1 zone, as well as the locations and policies for priority streets. During our summer engagement, staff also heard from the community on our approach and continued to refine our draft materials from there. The results of this phase of engagement were used to inform our draft materials, which were released in November 2023. Page 17 of 1179 In June and July, staff met with 322 community members across 25 hours of engagement. We notified people via our EngageWR page, social media and email. The greatest priority of this engagement was to `go where the people are' by appearing during evening and weekend hours at already -popular summer events. An Award -Winning Process The Growing Together engagement process has received four awards to date: • A Smart50 Award, an international award honouring the year's 50 most transformative smart projects. At the Smart Cities Connect conference in Denver in May 2023, Growing Together was announced as one of the top -3 projects overall. • A 2023 Excellence in Municipal Systems award by the Municipal Information Systems Association of Ontario. • Honorable mention at the 2023 International Association for Public Participation (IAP2) Canada Core Values Awards • A finalist for the World Smart City Awards in the Infrastructure and Building project award category. Smart City Expo World Congress is the world's biggest and most influential event on urban innovation. SMART , • sa...: AWARDS : • SMARTCITY EXPO WORLD CONGRESS ►0 • Figure 10 Logos of the four organizations that have awarded the Growing Together process. First Draft — Fall 2023 In November 2023, staff published draft materials to engagewr.ca/growingtogether, which included: • Community Guide to Land Use and Zoning • Community Brief to Land Use and Zoning • Draft Official Plan Amendment • Draft Official Plan Mapping • Draft Zoning By-law Amendment • Draft Zoning Mapping • Summer 2023 Engagement Summary This included detailed Official Plan policies and Zoning By-law regulations. The final draft recommended Official Plan Amendments and Zoning By-law Amendments can be reviewed further in Attachments A through E of this report. Page 18 of 1179 Figure 11 Proposed land use map. For illustrative purposes only. Highlights of the draft Official Plan Amendment include: • The delineation of all 10 of Kitchener's PMTSAs and associated updates to urban structure policies. • Establishing 3 new land use categories, Strategic Growth Areas A, B, and C, for the Growing Together PMTSAs to guide growth and change within theses areas. • Incorporating the new community -developed vision for downtown Kitchener into the Official Plan. • A flexible approach to enable changes in land use and zoning which ensures that important criteria like compatibility, lot suitability, adherence to built -form regulations, and consideration of cultural heritage resources are addressed. The following diagram demonstrates the flexibility of the proposed land use and zoning approach, enabling multiple pathways to different forms of development while adding certainty into the process for all community members and collaborators: Land Uses Strategic Growth Area s A Strategic Growth Areas B Strategic Growth Areas C Zones SGA1 SGA2 SGA2 SGA3 SGA3 SGA4 I ZBA I ZBA I ZBA sl 3.5 Storeys BStoreys BStoreys 25 Storeys 25 Storeys No Height Limit Minor Variance Minor Variance Minor Variance 4 Storeys � 10 Storeys OPA/ZBA OPA1ZRA Figure 12 A diagram showing the many available pathways enabling changes in land use and zoning. Page 19 of 1179 �• w � — __ __ —________N Low Rise Residential Medium Rise Residential ----- _ High Rise Residential -- Mixed Use Strategic Growth Area R Strategic Growth Area B -- --- — Strategic Growth Area C -- — — — Commercial Campus Commercial _ 4— _ — `- Heavy Industrial Employment General Industrial Employment --- — — -- Business Park Employment -- — Institutional Prime Agriculture e _Rural Natural Heritage Conservation Open Space Major Infrastructure and Utilities Refer to Secondary Plan For Detail Area of Amendment V� ® Lands subject to th;s amendment Figure 11 Proposed land use map. For illustrative purposes only. Highlights of the draft Official Plan Amendment include: • The delineation of all 10 of Kitchener's PMTSAs and associated updates to urban structure policies. • Establishing 3 new land use categories, Strategic Growth Areas A, B, and C, for the Growing Together PMTSAs to guide growth and change within theses areas. • Incorporating the new community -developed vision for downtown Kitchener into the Official Plan. • A flexible approach to enable changes in land use and zoning which ensures that important criteria like compatibility, lot suitability, adherence to built -form regulations, and consideration of cultural heritage resources are addressed. The following diagram demonstrates the flexibility of the proposed land use and zoning approach, enabling multiple pathways to different forms of development while adding certainty into the process for all community members and collaborators: Land Uses Strategic Growth Area s A Strategic Growth Areas B Strategic Growth Areas C Zones SGA1 SGA2 SGA2 SGA3 SGA3 SGA4 I ZBA I ZBA I ZBA sl 3.5 Storeys BStoreys BStoreys 25 Storeys 25 Storeys No Height Limit Minor Variance Minor Variance Minor Variance 4 Storeys � 10 Storeys OPA/ZBA OPA1ZRA Figure 12 A diagram showing the many available pathways enabling changes in land use and zoning. Page 19 of 1179 • The delineation of 14 cultural heritage landscapes and associated policies. • The introduction of Priority Streets. Priority streets are street segments within PMTSAs whose primary purpose is to connect LRT and other transit with key destinations, cultural facilities and community spaces through enhanced streetscape design that prioritizes walking, rolling and cycling. Priority streets help achieve this through regulations requiring active uses on the ground floor of buildings and a minimum percentage of windows along the street while reducing some setback requirements to encourage a consistent or continuous streetwall. The following map shows the Priority Streets identified for the Growing Together PMTSAs: / Soo L O 7Z 0 T� f �r, SrF Ix 01 5° N 2'O Figure 13 A map of proposed priority street segments. IA •,h I \ E f S_ _ - - -- Figure 14 Proposed zoning map. For illustrative purposes only. Page 20 of 1179 -A 71111 G— aptl,o oma°�de� tle oryo��l�pp.��pmm�pl �_:.aee E=I1Mx"M . o� 0.:, pW Flootlpbin � �9nrirtull"onelaM1�uilma a �Ilnsxl Maprinat�mnal u w�enmlpea.eaz ORAE6a�ml+a�ae - �e��sloinpwea HeEae Imlala.. ziw I�'a�eei ��weas�rmamm pose Mwe aMl u� Mp nhasvucwre �emga 1 Ilm�smsi Page 20 of 1179 Highlights of the draft Zoning By-law Amendment include: • Four new zones; SGA -1 (low-rise), SGA -2 (mid -rise), SGA -3 (a high-rise with limited heights), and SGA -4 (high-rise without a height limit). These zones have been designed to meet the complex needs of infill development within PMTSAs. • Minimum densities are defined using floor -space -ratio (FSR), and maximum densities are defined through built -form regulations such as height, maximum building length, maximum floor plate areas and minimum physical separation between buildings. Figure 15 A diagram that demonstrates in plan how built form regulations are used to shape building design. Figure 16 A diagram that demonstrates in elevation how physical separation is used to ensure a healthy, safe environment for building occupants and surrounding community members. Page 21 of 1179 Storeys 37+ - - 30m ? 15m Storeys 19-364m 12m Storeys 13-18 9m r Storeys 7-12 .-. 12m ., 6m Storeys 1-6 Interior Side or Rear Yard Lot Line Figure 16 A diagram that demonstrates in elevation how physical separation is used to ensure a healthy, safe environment for building occupants and surrounding community members. Page 21 of 1179 • These regulations more closely align with real-world built outcomes. This is critical in complex, built-up areas with land parcels of all shapes and sizes, dimensions, and configurations, as it helps create more certainty around the scale and size of building forms than an FSR -based density approach. Built -form regulations include: o Transitional regulations between taller buildings and low-rise buildings. o Limits on building length and floor plate area tied to different height ranges, to ensure the impacts of tall buildings are managed as they get taller. o Physical separation requirements between taller buildings, to allow for access to sunlight as well as privacy and a high quality of life for all residents, both within new developments and in existing surrounding areas. o Many of these built -form regulations are adapted from Kitchener's Tall Building Guidelines, adjusted to work within the framework of a zoning by-law. • No minimum required vehicle parking. Requiring more parking than necessary adds substantial cost to development, forces some people to pay for parking they don't use or need, and can create `induced demand' for personal vehicle use, negatively impacting the City's ability to meet GHG reduction goals. • Regulations for SGA -1 and SGA -2 zones that are tailored to the needs of missing middle and mid -rise housing development. These regulations will help make a range of smaller -scale housing options more viable. These materials were followed by continuing community and collaborator engagement through the month of November 2023. This included two walk-in office hour engagements where staff answered questions and had conversations with community members, as well as a workshop at the Kitchener Market, where we returned with the 3D -printed model to loop back with the community on how our engagements were used to inform our draft materials. In November 2023, staff met with 250 community members across 13 hours of engagement. People were notified via the project EngageWR page, social media, and email. 13,059 postcards were sent to all residents and property owners in the area. The open house was advertised in The Record on October 27, 2023. Staff also presented to and obtained input from the following Kitchener advisory committees: • Kitchener Development Liaison Committee on November 17, 2023 • Economic Development Advisory Committee on November 22, 2023 • Downtown Action Advisory Committee on November 23, 2023 • Active Transportation and Trails Advisory Committee on December 12, 2023 • Mayor's Advisory Council of Kitchener Seniors on January 4, 2024 • Heritage Kitchener on January 9, 2024. The materials posted in November 2023 also included a detailed Community Guide and a shorter Community Brief which helped explain in plain language how the draft materials were developed and what they meant. These guides have been downloaded over 700 times. In total, through the community engagement in 2023, staff have met with 1,134 community members across 72 hours of engagement. Including other collaborators, staff have met with more than 1,300 people across more than 100 hours of engagement. Page 22 of 1179 t Figure 17 A photo from our November 18th engagement at the Kitchener Market. List of Community Engagements Table 1: Location and Number of Participants at Public Engagement Events Date Group/Event Location Participants March 212023 Focused Community Workshop, Kitchener City Hall 60 2023 Mid -rise and High-rise Residents Rotunda March 23 2023 Focused Community Workshop, Kitchener Public 75 Low-rise Non -multiple Residents Library Central Branch March 25 2023 Community Wide Workshop Kitchener Market 370 March 27 2023 Community Wide Workshop Stanley Park 25 Community Centre March 30 2023 Community Wide Workshop Forest Heights KPL 20 April 4 2023 Focused Workshop, Low-rise Downtown Community 12 Multiple Residents Centre June 24 2023 Kitchener -Waterloo Multicultural Gaukel Street 159 Festival July 15 2023 Downtown Kitchener Ribfest and Gaukel Street 95 Craft Beer Show July 19 2023 Summer Series at Kitchener Eby Street 58 Market July 212023 Staff Office Hours Kitchener City Hall 10 November 14 Walk-in Office Hours Mill Courtland 20 2023 Community Centre November 18 Open House Kitchener Market 200 2023 November 20 Walk-in Office Hours 2023 Total Downtown Community 30 Centre 1,134 Page 23 of 1179 How Growing Together Has Evolved Growing Together was designed to adapt to changing conditions and to respond to community and collaborator feedback. From the workshops inviting the community to share their thoughts on growth and change, to the Draft Approach proposing new zones that are shaped to meet a variety of needs, to the many tweaks and adjustments made to the final draft amendments based on community and collaborator feedback, Growing Together has been shaped, re -shaped and adjusted in many ways over the past year: • During the engagement that followed the November 2023 draft Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments (comments can be found in Attachment J), staff received several submissions requesting that site-specific regulations be applied to a particular property. However, it is generally not in the project scope to apply new site-specific regulations that would be better justified through site-specific, applicant -initiated development applications. The new base zones have been carefully calibrated to create a balanced and mix of all community and collaborator perspectives. • Staff received comments requesting changes based on assumptions about the types of people who would live in certain kinds of buildings. Zoning is a tool that is used to regulate uses of land, not the people that use land. As such, changes to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law are not recommended to address these comments. The proposed Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments include the following changes from earlier iterations in consideration of the matters outlined in this report: • Adjustments to the built -form transition regulations to make mid -rise development more viable and to provide additional transition between low-rise and high-rise zones. • Adjustments to specific built -form regulations, with small increases to some floor plate area maximums and building length for taller buildings to encourage more purpose- built rental buildings, larger unit sizes, and more units with 3 -bedrooms. • Changes to the non-residential uses proposed in the SGA -1 zone, to create greater consistency with the permitted non-residential uses in the MIX -1 and COM -1 zones. • Zoning has been adjusted to a higher zone category on several properties in response to various submissions based on additional information provided to address all required matters outlined in draft Official Plan policy 15.D.2.5 (i.e. proof of lot ownership for the subject properties, a design concept demonstrating conformity with the regulations of the requested zone and a scoped planning justification addressing all other matters outlined in proposed Official Plan Policy 15.D.2.5). • Additionally, zoning has been adjusted to a lower zone category where property owners requested such a change with further consideration by staff on the planning merits of the request and broader feedback received from our equity -based community -wide engagements. The following holding provisions are proposed to be applied based on collaborator and agency feedback: • Requirement for a Record of Site Condition, applied to 81 properties, • Requirement for an aeronautical assessment for all properties zoned SGA -4, to determine maximum building heights until such time as the Region of Waterloo International Airport Master Plan is updated and implemented through a Federal Airport Zoning Regulation as necessary. Page 24 of 1179 • Requirement for a Sanitary Capacity Analysis applied to 36 properties zoned SGA - 4, where a large increase in permissions is proposed relative to the draft Neighbourhood Planning Review zoning tested in the City's sanitary capacity model. For the reasons outlined in this report, staff recommend that the proposed Official Plan amendments and Zoning By-law amendments attached to this report be adopted/approved as they conform to Provincial policies and plans, are consistent with the Region of Waterloo's Official Plan, as amended, are consistent with Kitchener's Official Plan, and represent good planning. PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: • Municipal Act, 2001 • Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13 • Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 • A Place to Grow, 2020 • Regional Official Plan • City of Kitchener Official Plan, 2014 • City of Kitchener Zoning By-law 2019-051 • Growing Together — Engagement Summary Report Overview DSD -2023-251 • Downtown Kitchener (DTK) Vision and Growing Together Workshop DSD -2023- 197 • Neighbourhood Specific Urban Design Guidelines DSD -2021-92 • Statutory Public Meeting Neighbourhood Planning Review DSD -19-252 • PARTS Rockway Plan CSD -17-100 • PARTS Midtown Plan CSD -17-090 • PARTS Central Plan CSD -16-015 REVIEWED BY: Natalie Goss, Manager, Policy & Research APPROVED BY: Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A — Proposed Official Plan Amendment (PMTSA lands) Attachment B — Proposed Official Plan Amendment (non-PMTSA lands) Attachment C — Proposed Official Plan Amendment (removal of secondary plans) Attachment D — Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment (PMTSA lands) Attachment E — Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment (non-PMTSA lands) Attachment F — Planning Analysis Attachment G — Engagement Summaries Attachment H — Waterloo Region Record Open House Notice (October 27th, 2023) Attachment I — Waterloo Region Record Statutory Public Meeting Notice (January 5t", 2024) Attachment J — Public Comments since November 3, 2023 and November Engage Summary Page 25 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'A' AMENDMENT NO. ## TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER Cy��'�i]�:��r�la�►1�:7 Growina Toaether— Protected Maior Transit Station Areas Page 26 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'A' AMENDMENT NO. ## TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER CITY OF KITCHENER Growing Together — Protected Maior Transit Station Areas 1101§10-4 SECTION 1 TITLE AND COMPONENTS SECTION 2 PURPOSE OF THE AMENDMENT SECTION 3 BASIS OF THE AMENDMENT SECTION 4 THE AMENDMENT APPENDICES APPENDIX 1 Notice of the Meeting of Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee — January 5, 2024 APPENDIX 2 Minutes of the Meeting of Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee — January 29, 2024 APPENDIX 3 Minutes of the Meeting of City Council xdatex Page 27 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'A' AMENDMENT NO. ## TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER SECTION 1 — TITLE AND COMPONENTS This amendment shall be referred to as Amendment No. ## to the Official Plan of the City of Kitchener. This amendment is comprised of Sections 1 to 4 inclusive. SECTION 2 — PURPOSE OF THE AMENDMENT The purpose of the Official Plan Amendment is to incorporate modifications to the text and mapping of the Official Plan in order to implement a new land use planning framework for seven of the City's ten Protected Major Transit Station Areas. SECTION 3 — BASIS OF THE AMENDMENT Planning staff have undertaken the Growing Together project, which includes developing a new planning framework for the City's PMTSAs. This project continues the planning review process that began in 2013 with the Planning Around Rapid Transit Stations (PARTS) plans and advanced through the Neighbourhood Planning Review (NPR) project through 2021. A significant portion of the lands within the 7 PMTSAs that form the Growing Together study area are currently located within existing secondary plans. These secondary plans are comprised of policy text and land use mapping. The existing secondary plan policies include policy language that is repetitive with other secondary plans and the parent Official Plan document. Additionally, the existing secondary plan boundaries do not align with the confirmed PMTSA boundaries as established by the Region and approved by the Province in April 2023. The recommended planning framework being brought forward as part of Growing Together focuses on the application of new "Strategic Growth Area" land use designations on lands within a PMTSA and previously designated in a secondary plan, or lands with an existing Urban Growth Centre land use designation. The amendment does not apply to lands with an active development application and/or lands subject to an Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT) appeal. The application of the recommended Strategic Growth Area land use designations provides a consistent land use planning approach across all PMTSAs and is applies exclusively to the regionally established and provincially approved boundaries. The following text provides additional information on the basis of this Official Plan Amendment. Urban Structure Modifications City staff are recommending that lands identified as the "Area of Amendment" on Schedule `A' be assigned "Protected Major Transit Station Areas" on Map 2 — Urban Structure. The Urban Structure modifications are administrative in nature, as the recommended mapping amendment would reflect the PMTSA boundaries that were established by the Region through Regional Official Plan 6 (ROPA 6) and approved by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing on April 11, 2023. Land Use Modifications City staff are recommending that lands identified as "Lands subject to this amendment' on Schedule `B' be redesignated as shown on Schedule `B'. The purpose of the recommended land use changes are to introduce and apply 3 new Strategic Growth Area land uses to lands within the affected PMTSAs, and redesignate lands from existing land use designations in applicable secondary plans or from existing Urban Growth Centre land use designations to equivalent land use designations in the 2014 City of Kitchener Official Plan. New Strategic Growth Area land uses were developed to apply within these PMTSAs to help ensure that there is a land use framework that performs well in complex, challenging, and highly diverse areas. Page 28 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'A' Protected Major Transit Station Areas and Urban Growth Centre Planning staff are recomending that existing Official Plan Map 4 Urban Growth Centre be repealed and replaced with the map contained in Schedule `C' to delineate the boundaries of the Protected Major Transit Station Areas within Kitchener and maintain the delineation of the Downtown Kitchener Urban Growth Centre. The map contained in Schedule `C' is consistent with the delineated Protected Major Transit Station Area boundaries identified in Region of Waterloo Official Plan Amendment 6. Specific Policy Area Modifications Planning staff are recommending amendments to several Specific Policy Areas, as shown on Schedule `D'. Existing policy 15.D.12.18 is recommended to be repealed as 134 & 152 Shanley Street are subject to site-specific zoning provisions and is currently under construction. This specific policy area number is recommended to be repurposed for a specific policy area for 301 Victoria Street South, subject to another amendment, which is an existing Special Policy Area of the Victoria Street Secondary Plan that applies to this property. This amendment will bring the existing Specific Policy Area into the 2014 Official Plan from the Victoria Street Secondary Plan. Existing policy 15.D.12.28 pertaining to Glasgow/Strange Street is recommended to be amended to change the land use reference from Mixed Use to Strategic Growth Area C to align with the recommended land use change for these lands. Existing policy 15.D.12.39 is recommended to be repealed as the recommended official plan amendment will make the existing Specific Policy Area that applies to these lands unnecessary. The Specific Policy Area applying to Breithaupt Block Phase 3 includes language that establishes a maximum floor space ratio of 4.5. This specific policy area number is recommended to be repurposed for a specific policy area for 607-641 King Street West which is an existing Special Policy Area for these lands from the KW Hospital Secondary Plan. This amendment will facilitate the deletion of the KW Hospital Secondary Plan. Existing policy 15.D.12.54 is recommended to be repealed as the recommended official plan amendment will make the existing Specific Policy Area that applies to these lands unnecessary. The Specific Policy Area applying to 368-382 Ottawa Street South & 99-115 Pattandon Avenue includes language that establishes a maximum floor space ratio of 2.5. This specific policy area number is proposed to be repurposed for a specific policy area for 79 Joseph Street which is an existing Special Policy Area for these lands from the Victoria Park Secondary Plan. This amendment will facilitate the deletion of the Victoria Park Secondary Plan. Existing policy 15.D.12.62 is recommended to be repealed as the recommended official plan amendment will make the existing Specific Policy Area that applies to these lands unnecessary. The Specific Policy Area applying to 455-509 Mill Street includes language that establishes a maximum floor space ratio of 8.5. Cultural Heritage Resources Modifications Planning staff are recommending text amendments to Section 12 — Cultural Heritage Resources of the Official Plan to implement policies specific to the Cedar Hill and Schneider Creek Neighbourhood Cultural Heritage Landscape and mapping amendments to Map 9 of the Official Plan, as shown on Schedule `E'. Planning staff are recommending that Map 9 be amended to introduce the geographic extent of all Cultural Heritage Landscapes (CHL) located wholly within the Growing Together geography, allowing for the continued conservation of cultural heritages resources within the City. Text amendments are recommended to be added to confirm that where there is a conflict between the Official Plan and a Heritage Conservation District Plan, the Heritage Conservation District Plan prevails. Page 29 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'A' Planning staff are of the opinion that the Official Plan Amendment is consistent with and conforms to the Planning Act, Provincial Policy Statement (2020), A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2020), and the Regional Official Plan (2010), and represents good planning. SECTION 4 — THE AMENDMENT The City of Kitchener Official Plan is hereby amended as follows: a. Map 2 — Urban Structure is amended as shown by "Lands subject to this amendment on the attached Schedule `A'; b. Map 3 — Land Use is amended as shown by "Lands subject to this amendment' as shown on the attached Schedule 'B'; c. Map 4 — Urban Growth Center (Downtown) is repealed in its entirety and replaced with Map 4 Protected Major Transit Station Areas and Urban Growth Centre on the attached Schedule 'C': d. Map 5 — Specific Policy Areas is amended by: Deleting existing Specific Policy Area 39 'Breithaupt Block Phase 3' and replacing it with new Specific Policy Area 39'607-641 King St W as shown on the attached Schedule 'D'; Deleting existing Specific Policy Area 54 '368-382 Ottawa St S & 99-115 Pattandon Ave' and replacing it with new Specific Policy Area 54 '79 Joseph St' as shown on the attached Schedule 'D'; iii. Deleting existing Specific Policy Area 62 '450-509 Mill St' as shown on the attached Schedule 'D'; e. Map 9 — Cultural Heritage Resources is amended as shown by "Lands to be added subject to this amendment" on the attached Schedule 'E';: The City of Kitchener Official Plan is hereby further amended by replacing the term "Major Transit Station Areas" with "Protected Major Transit Station Areas" throughout.; 3. The City of Kitchener Official Plan is hereby further amended by adding the portions of the below text that are highlighted in grey, and deleting the portions of the below text in with a 4;kgI4 thereto as follows: a. Part B, Section 2.13.1 is amended by adding the following after the section titled "Healthy Community": A vision for Downtown (DTK) Kitchener's Downtown has historically been known by its four design districts. The Innovation District, focused along Victoria Street, features the adaptive reuse of historical buildings and continues to evolve into a contemporary urban mixed-use neighbourhood with a focus on high-density residential with high-tech and health science offices. The Civic District, planned through a mid-century district plan as a centre for civic and cultural institutions, continues to evolve, maintaining its status as an arts and culture hub but adding a broader mix of uses that will help create a more complete community in and around it. The Market District is focused around the Kitchener Market mixed-use development and features a variety of building forms with Page 30 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'A' unique opportunities for a market -related mix of uses such as along Market Lane and Moyer Place. The City Centre District is the heart of urban life within the core of downtown Kitchener. Shops, services, events and celebrations are focused along King Street and supported by Gaukel Street, Ontario Street and Queen Street. This includes the intersection of King Street and Queen Street as "The Royal Crossroads" — the historical nexus of old Berlin. In 2023, through a city -initiated project, a community led working group developed a vision and series of principles to guide the future of downtown Kitchener. The vision and principles are centered on vibrancy, connection and belonging. Vibrancy DTK is at its best when it has a feeling of electricity in the air, but it shouldn't be reliant on programming and events to create this feeling. Vibrancy should be a permanent fixture. It's not just about bustling streets, it's about an undercurrent of creativity and a positive energy in DTK that makes people want to be there any day of the week. Connection Connection isn't only about being social and it's not just for those who live in DTK — it's for anyone who spends time here. It's about comfort and accessibility. It's about being drawn to particular spaces. It means staying rooted in past places and memories while being part of new shared experiences. Belonging Belonging is bigger than the people you spend time with — it's when you know what to expect from a place or experience and always find it. There's an element of deep familiarity and relaxation. You feel free to be your authentic self without fear of being judged. b. Part C, Section 3, Policy 3.C.2.12 is amended as follows: 3.C.2.12 The Urban Growth Centre (Downtown) is toe a primary Urban Structure Component and Intensification Area. The planned function of the Urban Growth Centre (Downtown) is to accommodate a significant share of the region's and city's future population and employment growth."; c. Part C, Section 3, Policy 3.C.2.14 is amended as follows: 3.C.2.14 The Urban Growth Centre (Downtown) is planned to be a vibrant regional and citywide focal point and destination and is intended to be the-Glty''s a primary focal point for residential intensification as well as for investment in institutional and region -wide public services, commercial, office, recreational, cultural and entertainment uses."; d. Part C, Section 3, Policy 3.C.2.15 is amended as follows: 3.C.2.15 aepepdiRg ^.A +"P- iAtepdedG1es+gn^"�Gter, FaRge Gf616e6 a d- deals+t;esd-ee1:Red apprGpriate fgF aGhReViRgth-re—GVefi ;ned 1, 2Rd4, The predominant land use designations for the Urban Growth Centre (Downtown) as detailed in Section 15.D.2 will include Page 31 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'A' +thn Gi yG +ro n+ n Iii n+ n„n+inr, Iii n+ rL �+t ens,-� s#-r�� s#�'�� 8t1'-�� 2t DiiGtin+�- d MixedI-hse Strategic Growth Area A, Strategic Growth Area B, and Strategic Growth Area C." e. Part C, Section 3.C.2 is amended by adding "Protected" to the heading titled "Major Transit Station Area"; f. Part C, Section 3, Policy 3.C.2.16 is amended as follows: 3.C.2.16. Protected Major Transit Station Areas are dosed delineated in the Regional Official Plan; and are identified on Map 2 and Map 4. awe a nnnnon+6lal Fepre SeRtatinn of. +ho of. -A +on RA -Rite WalkiRg ror1iis Major Transit Station Areas are Protected Major Transit Station Areas in accordance with Section 16(16) of the Planning Act." g. Part C, Section 3, Policy 3.C.2.17 is amended as follows: ith4p s; ;;t3tp�. ept�ai--r'T��nhhn� ice, rt a� �nihinh nro �� r�rim�� 6fGF +hrnl gh the nni irse nF I 4ron Dln nniRn ovorniccc Policies a) through d) above should not be interpreted to mean that every property located within a Protected Major Transit Station Area is necessarily appropriate for major intensification. h. Part C, Section 3.C.2 is amended by adding new policy 3.C.2.18 as follows: "3.C.2.18. The following Protected Major Transit Station Areas shall be planned to achieve the following minimum densities: a) Grand River Hospital Station: 160 residents and jobs combined per hectare; b) Central Station: 160 residents and jobs combined per hectare; C) Victoria Park and Kitchener City Hall Station: 160 residents and jobs combined per hectare; d) Queen and Frederick Station: 160 residents and jobs combined per hectare; e) Kitchener Market Station: 160 residents and jobs combined per hectare; f) Borden Station: 160 residents and jobs combined per hectare; g) Mill Station: 160 residents and jobs combined per hectare; h) Block Line Station: 80 residents and jobs combined per hectare; i) Fairway Station: 160 residents and jobs combined per hectare; and, 7 Page 32 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'A' D Sportsworld Station: 160 residents and jobs combined per hectare." Part C, Section 3, existing Policy 3.C.2.18 is renumbered to 3.C.2.19 and Part C, Section 3 existing policy 3.C.2.19 is renumbered to 3.C.2.20; Part C, Section 3 existing policy 3.C.2.20 is deleted in its entirety; k. Part C, Section 3 policy 3.C.2.48 is amended as follows: "3.C.2.48 New major institutional uses should be located in the Urban Growth Centre (Downtown), a Protected Major Transit Station Area or a City Node `Vhoro I_apds aro designated- IHc+l+li4inR-al ;c id-eptifie-d nn Map 2 in accordance with the applicable land use policies in Section 15." Part C, Section 3, Figure 6: Summary of the Urban Structure and Predominant Land Uses is amended by adding the portions of the below text that are highlighted in grey, and deleting the portions of the below text in with a strikethrough thereto as follows: Figure 6: Summary of the Urban Structure and Predominant Land Uses Urban Growth Centre (Downtown) Protected Major Transit Station Area City ren+re nis+rir_ Strategic Growth Area A �GiVin DiStrin+ Strategic Growth Area B Innny�+inn nic+rin+ Strategic Growth Area C fi WArl llcA TBD by Q+a+inn Arna Plan Cvnrnicn Strateaic Growth Area A Strateaic Growth Area B Strategic Growth Area C m. Part C, Section 11 is amended by adding the following policies after policy 11.C.1.33, as follows: 11.C.1.34. New tall building development and/or redevelopment will have consideration for tall building design principles including physical separation, overlook, relative height, floor plate area, building length, tower placement, orientation and building proportion, among others. The City will provide design criteria for tall buildings through zoning regulations and the urban design manual, where appropriate. This is to: a) mitigate environmental impacts caused by tall buildings such as shadows, accelerated winds, access to light and sky and more; b) create high-quality design relationships between the built -forms of multiple adjacent or nearby towers that account for occupant privacy and quality of life, contribute toward a visually interesting skyline, and ensure good compatibility between buildings in dense, urban environments. Page 33 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'A' c) ensure good compatibility with surrounding low and mid -rise contexts. d) ensure that the development of future, adjacent or nearby tall buildings is not frustrated and can continue to achieve high-quality design principles.; Design in Cultural Heritage Landscapes 11.C.1.35. New development or redevelopment in a cultural heritage landscape will: a) support, maintain and enhance the major characteristics and attributes of the cultural heritage landscape further defined in the City's 2014 City of Kitchener Cultural Heritage Landscapes; b) support the adaptive reuse of existing buildings; c) be compatible with the existing neighbourhood, including but not limited to the streetscape and the built form; and, d) respond to the design, massing and materials of the adjacent and surrounding buildings.; Design in Protected Major Transit Station Areas 11.C.1.36. In addition to the policies in this section, development and/or redevelopment and public works will require a high standard of urban design in Protected Major Transit Station Areas and will require a site- specific urban design brief and/or urban design report in accordance with Section 17.E.10 to demonstrate how the development application exemplifies high quality urban design and will contribute to the public realm and placemaking in the station area and around the station stop. 11.C.1.37. The City will require development and/or redevelopment and public works in the Protected Major Transit Station Area to support and contribute to a high quality public realm. To do this the City will: a) ensure streetscape design supports safe and comfortable walking, cycling and rolling throughout the station area, including to and from transit stops. b) require a high quality public realm at grade which includes sidewalks, street furniture, street trees and landscaping. Where this is not achieved within the public right of way, encourage these placemaking elements to be located on private property or in shared ownership. C) require developments to support, maintain and/or increase the tree canopy, where possible, to support Kitchener's Sustainable Urban Forestry Strategy. Page 34 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'A' d) Encourage Low Impact Development ("LID") water management techniques, including materials and plantings that have a high infiltration rate within boulevards and setbacks, to reduce the impact on the city's stormwater management system; e) encourage landscape screening between the public right of way and any visible surface parking, loading/service areas or back of house functions. f) encourage pedestrian shelter and bicycle parking along streets that connect to transit stops and/or contain existing or planned active transportation infrastructure. g) encourage direct connections from private and public development to existing and proposed active transportation infrastructure, such as public trails; h) encourage the provision of public open spaces, public art, wayfinding, and other creative placemaking interventions in private developments; and, i) require active transportation connections and mid -block connections through development and/or redevelopment, where appropriate." n. Part C, Section 12 is amended by adding the following after policy 12.C.1.49: "Cedar Hill and Schneider Creek Neiahbourhood Cultural Heritaae Landscaoe 12.C.1.50. Policies 12.C.1.51 through 12.C.1.53 apply to lands identified as Cedar Hill and Schneider Creek Neighbourhood Cultural Heritage Landscape on Map 9 — Cultural Heritage Resources. 12.C.1.51. The Cedar Hill and Schneider Creek Neighbourhood contains several Priority Locations at gateway locations which facilitate views into and out of the neighbourhoods, accentuating the unique topography of Cedar Hill interfacing with existing low density residential uses on local streets. They include: a) the intersection of Charles Street East and Cedar Street looking to the southwest; b) the intersection of Courtland Avenue East and Cedar Street looking to the northeast; C) the intersection of Courtland Avenue East and Madison Avenue North looking to the northeast; d) the intersection of Courtland Avenue East and Peter Street looking to the northeast; e) the intersection of Charles Street East and Eby Street looking to the southwest; 10 Page 35 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'A' f) the intersection of Benton Street at St. George Street looking to the southeast; and, g) the intersection of Benton Street at Church Street looking to the southeast. Corner properties framing the above referenced intersections are identified as being Property of Specific Cultural Heritage Landscape Interest. In these locations, consideration will be giving to transition of built form to protect and enhance views of the hill and the local streetscape features characteristic of this neighbourhood. New development and/or redevelopment should appropriately frame the intersection, especially where a building of cultural heritage interest is located at the corner."; 12.C.1.52. The view atop Cedar Hill from Cedar Street looking to the southwest is a unique view from the Cedar Hill Schneider Creek Neigbourhood of the City and of the countryside beyond. Properties contained within Cedar Hill viewshed are identified as being Property of Specific Cultural Heritage Landscape Interest. The City will regulate building height, setbacks and built form along Cedar Street and along Courtland Avenue East to protect and enhance this view. The City will also encourage and support enhancements to the public realm in the location atop of Cedar Hill to contribute and enhance the pedestrian experience and enjoyment of the view. 12.C.1.53. The principal facades of buildings and park frontages will be encouraged to locate and orient themselves at the termination of a street or view corridor or at a street intersection, in order to support and enhance the significance of the Priority Location or the view or vista."; o. Part D, Figure 9: Land Use Designations is amended as follows: Figure 9: Land Use Designations Gity G,,t,c nic+rin+ Strategic Growth Area t � Sty rategic Growth Area WEB� Innn�in+inn nic+rin+ Strategic Growth Area C LDistrWic Innovation 11 Page 36 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'A' p. Part D, Section 15.D.2 is amended by deleting the title "Urban Growth Centre (Downtown) and replacing it with "Strategic Growth Area"; q. Part D, Section 15.D.2 is amended by deleting the text in the preamable in its entirety and replacing it with the following: "Strategic growth area land use designations are applied within the Urban Growth Centre and Protected Major Transit Station Areas, which are Intensification Areas that will be planned and designed to meet the needs of all who live, work, and visit here. These lands will provide opportunities for all housing types and a range of commercial, employment and institutional uses to create complete communities. Strategic growth areas include lands within the Urban Growth Centre (Downtown) and Protected Major Transit Station Areas. These areas will accommodate a significant portion of Kitchener's growth. Strategic growth areas will prioritize housing and employment growth, sustainability, active transportation and public transit, and high- quality urban design. The whole of the Downtown is identified as an Urban Growth Centre in both the Province's A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe and the Regional Official Plan which demonstrates the importance of Kitchener's Downtown. The Urban Growth Centre (Downtown) will accommodate a significant portion of the city's new population and employment growth. Strategic growth areas predominantly include three land use designations: Strategic Growth Area A; Strategic Growth Area B; and Strategic Growth Area C."; Part D, Section 15, objective 15.2.1 is amended by replacing "a lively and livable Downtown" with "vibrancy, connection and belonging in strategic growth areas"; s. Part D, Section 15, objective 15.2.2 is amended as follows: 15.2.2 To encourage non-residential uses that support complete communities. nnmmorni�l iicoc ;;Ad thncc rot;;il ;;Ad nnrrmmorni;;l neve that cinnnr4 r� ei4inrr�deVeIGPPReRt iithiR Oho d_GWRtGWn and Within adjaGeRt ReighbG64gAGIS Part D, Section 15, objective 15.2.3 is amended as follows: 15.2.3. To support King Street within the City G8RtFe Iiic+rin+ ahr_ +ho U;rkpt F)2s;trept Downtown as a primary retail and events destination"; u. Part D, Section 15, objective 15.2.4 is amended as follows: 15.2.2 To increase all forms of residential development v.xi+hir, the 11r",r, CpAtFe in strategic growth areas." v. Part D, Section 15, objective 15.2.5 is deleted in its entirety; w. Part D, Section 15, objectives 15.2.6 through 15.2.8 are renumbered as objectives 15.2.5 through 15.2.7; x. Part D, Section 15, objective 15.2.9 is amended by being renumbered 15.2.8 and is further amended as follows: 12 Page 37 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'A' 15.2.8. To promote the effective use of existing infrastructure by attracting and encouraging more residents and jobs to strategic growth areas." y. Part D, Section 15, objective 15.2.10 is deleted in its entirety; z. Part D, Section 15, objective 15.2.11 is amended by being renumbered 15.2.9, and is further amended as follows: 15.2.9. To support the Downtown3 as a centre for government, marts, culture, sra, and entertainment, and events. A ga+heY,nn plane fnY eVen+c and evper,epnes as a P%aRG +n aa. Part D, Section 15, objective 15.2.12 is amended by being renumbered 15.2.10, and as is further amended as follows: 15.2.10. To create and maintain walkable, cyclable, and rollable strategic growth areas." bb. Part D, Section 15, objective 15.2.13 is amended by being renumbered as objective 15.2.11; cc. Part D, Section 15, policy 15.D.2.1 is amended as follows: 15.D.2.1. The Urban Growth Centre (Downtown) and Protected Major Transit Station Areas, as shown on Map 3 and Map 4, apa-aT:e kPAW4A asthe City of Ki+nhepeY lin,e,p+n,.,p will be the primary focus areas in the city for intensification. dd. Part D, Section 15, policy 15.D.2.2 is amended by repealing the text in its entirety and replacing it as follows: 15.D.2.2. The Strategic Growth Area land use designation will only apply to lands identified on Map 2 as Urban Growth Centre (Downtown) or Protected Major Transit Station Areas. The City may apply the Strategic Growth Area land use designations to other areas though a future City -initiated process." ee. Part D, Section 15, policy 15.D.2.3 is amended as follows: 15.D.2.3. The Urban Growth Centre (Downtown) and Protected Major Transit Station Areas will be planned: a) as a focal area for public gatherings, institutions, and services, irn,ec+men+ in inc+i+, i+inpal and Yeninn Wid8 p„hlin ceY"inec as well as commercial recreational, cultural, and entertainment uses; b) to accommodate and support major transit infrastructure; c) to serve as a high density major employment location that will attract provincially, nationally e -r and internationally significant employment uses; d) to accommodate a significant share of the city's population and employment growth; and, 13 Page 38 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'A' e) to provide services and amenities to attract population growth. ff. Part D, Section 15, policy 15.D.2.4 is amended as follows: 15.D.2.4. The Urban Growth Centre (Downtown) and Protected Major Transit Station Areas will be planned for continued commercial viability and all other land use designations allowing commercial development will have regard for and in no way compromise this planned function of the Urban Growth Centre (Downtown) and Protected Major Transit Station Areas. gg. Part D, Section 15 is amended by adding new policies 15.D.2.5 through 15.D.2.8 after policy 15.D.2.4: 15.D.2.5. Notwithstanding policies 4.C.1.8 and 4.C.1.9, site specific applications which seek relief from the implementing zoning through a minor variance(s) or amendment to the Zoning By-law, and/or seek to amend this Plan will consider the following factors: a) compatibility with the planned function of the subject lands and adjacent lands; b) suitability of the lot for the proposed use and/or built -form; c) lot area and consolidation as further outlined in Policy 3.C.2.11; d) compliance with the City's Urban Design Manual and Policy 11.C.1.34; e) cultural heritage resources, including Policy 15.D.2.8; and, f) technical considerations and other contextual or site specific factors. 15.D.2.6. The implementing zoning may regulate matters related to built form including, but not limited to, building length, floor plate area, on-site separation between buildings, and off-site separation between buildings. 15.D.2.7. Large scale developments will be expected to provide appropriate landscaping in accordance with the City's Urban Design Manual through the Site Plan Control process. 15.D.2.8. In a Heritage Conservation District, where there is a conflict between the policies in this land use designation and the Heritage Conservation District Plan, the Heritage Conservation District Plan will prevail." hh. Part D, Section 15, existing policy 15.D.2.5 is amended by being renumbered 15.D.2.9, and is further amended as follows: 15.D.2.9. The City will direct new major office and major institutional developments to locate within the Urban Growth Centre (Downtown) and Protected Major Transit Station Areas, PaPtin61arl„ VVi+hi.R +ho Irrni�4inrI'lic4rin4 14 Page 39 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'A' ii. Part D, Section 15, existing policy 15.D.2.6 is amended by being renumbered to 15.D.2.10, and is further amended as follows: "15.D.2.10. The City will discourage the development or retention of some uses within or in close proximity to the Downtown and Protected Major Transit Station Areas which would conflict with the planned function of the Urban Growth Centre (Downtown) and Protected Major Transit Station Areas." jj. Part D, Section 15, existing policy 15.D.2.7 is amended by being renumbered 15.D.2.11, and is further amended as follows: 15.D.2.11. The City will encourage the development and retention of food stores within the Urban Growth Centre (Downtown) and Protected Major Transit Station Areas." kk. Part D, Section 15, existing policy 15.D.2.8 is amended by being renumbered 15.D.2.12, and is further amended as follows: 15.D.2.12. The City will encourage the development and retention of institutional uses and cultural facilities within the Urban Growth Centre (Downtown) and Protected Major Transit Station Areas." II. Part D, Section 15, existing policy 15.D.2.9 is amended by being renumbered 15.D.2.13 mm. Part D, Section 15 existing policy 15.D.2.10 is amended by being renumbered 15.D.2.14, and is further amended as follows: 15.D.2.14. New predominately auto -exclusive uses such as car washes, drive- through facilities, gas stations, the sale and/or repair of motor vehicles and commercial parking facilities will only be permitted in the Urban Growth Centre (Downtown) and Protected Major Transit Station Areas on the basis of a sitespecific amendment to this Plan. In considering applications for site-specific Official Plan amendments, such applications will need to demonstrate the following: a) the use can maintain consistency with the objectives of this Plan, and in particular the objectives of the Urban Growth Centre (Downtown) and Protected Major Transit Station Areas; b) will not conflict with the planned function of the Urban Growth Centre (Downtown) and Protected Major Transit Station Areas, and will not preclude the intensification of the site;" nn. Part D, Section 15is amended by adding the following after policy 15.D.2.14: 15.D.2.15. The City recognizes that new sensitive uses will be introduced through development and redevelopment within areas historically designated for industrial employment. The City anticipates the eventual relocation of existing industrial uses. In the interim, new sensitive uses should prioritize sensitivity to existing industrial uses, acknowledging their unique operational requirements. Emphasizing land use compatibility, development applications for new sensitive uses should proactively engage with industrial stakeholders to address potential conflicts and implement measures that enable coexistence until a full land use transition is realized." 15 Page 40 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'A' oo. Part D, Section 15, existing policies 15.D.2.11 through 15.D.2.17 are amended by being renumbered, as 15.D.2.16 through 15.D.2.22 accordingly; pp. Part D, Section 15, existing policy 15.D.2.18 is amended by being renumbered 15.D.2.23, and is further amended as follows: 15.D.2.23. The City may limit the fid -height of buildings along the strppt edge alGRg King Street wheFe appr^r at8 tG 8RGW�8 aa8q„a+ rt expGswro eAh_anno RAe_.At of the pedestri-ap realm app_ 4n or�c�pro hW J:RaR ^"'e ^f d_eQye'r,r,r,%Rt to conserve a historical main street condition intended to serve a public realm where frequent large scale events and celebrations are held. qq. Part D, Section 15, existing policy 15.D.2.19 is deleted in its entirety, inclusive of the subheading titled "Bonusing"; rr. Part D, Section 15is amended by adding the following after policy 15.D.2.23: "Parkland 15.D.2.24. New parks and active or passive recreational uses will be permitted within any Strategic Growth Area land use designation. 15.D.2.25. As a part of the required parkland dedication, land dedication will be encouraged over alternative forms such as cash -in -lieu for the creation of new public parks."; ss. Part D, Section 15, policy 15.D.2.20 is amended by being renumbered 15.D.2.26, and is further amended as follows: 15.D.2.26. The Urban Growth Centre (Downtown) and Protected Major Transit Station Areas will be part of an integrated provincial, regional and city transportation system while at the same time provide a transit -oriented, pedestrian -friendly, and walkable environment."; tt. Part D, Section 15, existing policies 15.D.2.21 and 15.D.2.22 is amended by being renumbered 15.D.2.27 and 15.D.2.28 accordingly; uu. Part D, Section 15, existing policy 15.D.2.23 is amended by being renumbered to policy 15.D.2.29, and is further amended as follows: 15.D.2.29. All development or redevelopment will embrace, celebrate and conserve the Cultural Heritage Resources in the Urban Growth Centre (Downtown) and Protected Major Transit Station Areas and will be subject to the Cultural Heritage Resources Policies in Section 12 and subject to any other supporting documents, adopted by Council, including Heritage Conservation District Plans." vv. Part D, Section 15, existing policy 15.D.2.24 is amended by being deleted in its entirety; ww. Part D, Section 15, existing policies 15.D.2.25 and 15.D.2.26 are amended by being renumbered 15.D.2.30 and 15.D.2.31, accordingly; 16 Page 41 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'A' xx. Part D, Section 15, existing policy 15.D.2.27 is amended by being renumbered 15.D.2.32, and is further amended as follows: 15.D.2.32. A high quality of urban design will be expected of the buildings, building elevations, building massing, storefronts, store signs, patios, streetscapes and public spaces to enhance street life and create local pride and interest as well as tourism interest. The City will encourage innovation and architectural excellence in urban development. €#er Oho I Irh�n GrnVnhh GPRtPc (IinWRtGWR) is nnntaiRla l in Oho I IFh__;;R DeGinn Dnlinios in Q8n4inrP 4 4 -nrd the rderigR n6 iid8liReS fnr the DAVVn4nnin in the Gity's I FbaR DeGinn AAAR''Al " yy. Part D, Section 15, existing policy 15.D.2.28 is amended by being renumbered to policy 15.D.2.33, and is further amended as follows: 15.D.2.33. The City will prepare and maintain Urban Design Guidelines for the Downtown and Protected Major Transit Station Areas that will provide new guidelines and standards for new buildings, new storefronts, storefront modifications, new outdoor patios and will also address such elements as the streetscape, massing of buildings, architecture, cultural heritage resource conservation, public art, signage, and the landscaping of private property abutting green areas." zz. Part D, Section 15, existing policies 15.D.2.29 through 15.D.2.31 inclusive are amended by being renumbered, as 15.D.2.34 through 15.D.2.36 accordingly; aaa. Part D, Section 15, existing policy 15.D.2.32 is amended by being renumbered 15.D.2.37, and is further amended as follows: "15.D.2.37. Where new development or redevelopment is proposed he%p des at the edge of a strategic growth area land use designation, the scale and massing ofh—y�rs�e:�e-et;eet �60T ateEl 4n nrn�iirdo a I_1Ri�fA_4Rq stleet pe aR d red4993+riaR e�,_118RGe it will consider compatibility with and transition to the adjacent land use designation." bbb. Part D, Section 15, existing policy is amended by deleting section 15.D.2.33, inclusive of the subheading titled "Green Areas", in its entirety; ccc. Part D, Section 15, is amended by adding the following policies after new policy 15.D.2.37: "Priority Streets 15.D.2.38. The City may identify street segments within the Strategic Growth Area land use designation as priority streets. The Zoning By-law may provide additional regulations for priority streets. 15.D.2.39. The following will be considered in identifying priority streets: a) proximity to rapid transit and high frequency transit corridors; 17 Page 42 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'A' b) proximity to major trip generators; and, c) walking, rolling, and cycling connectivity between Rapid Transit station stops, key destinations, active uses, cultural facilities, and community infrastructure. 15.D.2.40. The City may require pedestrian refuge for development and redevelopment along priority streets."; ddd. Part D, Section 15.D.2 under the heading "Land Use Designations" is amended as follows: "The City's strategic growth areas include three lands use designations: Strategic Growth Area A, Strategic Growth Area B, and Strategic Growth Area C. Certain lands within the T#e Urban Growth Centre (Downtown) that at the time of the application of the Strategic Growth Area land uses were part of active development applications or were under appeal continue to be designated, including lands designated Innovation District and Market District. +ho Gity i`cn+ro Dic+rin+ +ho QVin Dic+rin+ the 1RRA_V_;;tinn Dic+rin+ d aR the Ar Market dic+rin+ _apd the Mixed- rico 1168 deSigRatinn Cash of +ho LAnrd 1169 rdocinn +innc (li GWRtnWR) as 86tabIi6horl n'ior +irrmc -nrd Veihinh nh-Aran+or is eXpeG+ord +n nnn+in, io +n ho ornh_Annord dWFinn+ho of+his, PI-AR." eee. Part D, Section 15.D.2 is amended by deleting in its entirety the heading titled "City Centre District" and all text contained under this heading; fff. Part D, Section 15.D.2.34 through policy 15.D.2.41, inclusive, is deleted in its entirety; ggg. Part D, Section 15 is amended by deleting in its entirety the heading titled "Civic District" and all text contained under this heading; hhh. Part D, Section 15, existing policy 15.D.2.42 through policy 15.D.2.48, inclusive, is deleted in its entirety; iii. Part D, Section 15, existing policies 15.D.2.49 through 15.D.2.62 are renumbered 15.D.2.41 through 15.D.2.55 accordingly; jjj. Part D, Section 15 existing policy 15.D.2.63, inclusive of its heading titled "Lands Within Mixed Use Areas" is deleted in its entirety; kkk. Part D, Section 15 is amended by adding the following after policy 15.D.2.62: "Strateaic Growth Area A The Strategic Growth Area A land use designation is generally intended to accommodate intensification within existing predominantly low-rise residential neighbourhoods, lands further away from Rapid Transit station stops, and/or lands where existing lots are generally too small to support high rise buildings. It is anticipated that the majority of development and/or redevelopment will occur through infill including missing middle housing and compatible non-residential uses. 15.D.2.63. The Strategic Growth Area A land use designation will accommodate a range of low and medium density residential housing types including 18 Page 43 of 1179 15.D.2.65 15.D.2.66 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'A' those permitted in the Low Rise Residential and Medium Rise Residential land use designation. Where compatible, permitted non-residential uses within the Strategic Growth Area A land use designation may include the following: a) commercial uses such as, entertainment, restaurants, repair operations; b) personal services; c) offices; but not limited to, retail, commercial financial establishments, and light d) health-related uses such as health offices and health clinics; e) institutional uses such as daycare facilities, religious institutions, community facilities, and educational establishments; f) social service establishment; and, g) studio and artisan -related uses. To ensure compatibility, the implementing zoning may limit the full range and scale of uses listed in Policy 15.D.2.42. No building will exceed 8 storeys in height. The implementing zoning may permit maximum building heights of less than 8 storeys. 15.D.2.67. Where the implementing zoning does not permit the maximum building height outlined in Policy 15.D.2.37, the City may consider site specific increases to the permitted building height in accordance with Policy 15.D.2.5. On these lands, a Zoning By-lawAmendment will be required for a building more than 4 storeys in height. 15.D.2.68. A minimum Floor Space Ratio of 0.6 will apply to all development and redevelopment. The implementing zoning may exempt single detached dwellings, additional dwelling units, semi-detached dwellings, street townhouse dwellings, and low-rise multiple dwellings from the minimum Floor Space Ratio. Strategic Growth Area B The Strategic Growth Area B land use designation is intended to accommodate significant intensification at building heights between those in the Strategic Growth Area A land use designation and those in the Strategic Growth Area C land use designation. Lands designated Strategic Growth Area B are also intended to serve as a transition between Low Rise Residential Uses on lands within the Strategic Growth Area A designation, and medium and high density uses within the Strategic Growth Area C designation. Some areas within the Strategic Growth Area B land use designation contain smaller lots and/or existing Low Rise Residential Uses. While significant intensification is planned for these lands, the implementing zoning may restrict building heights as an interim measure to ensure orderly development through a development application. 19 Page 44 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'A' 15.D.2.69. The Strategic Growth Area B land use designation will accommodate a range of medium and high density residential housing types including those permitted in the Medium Rise Residential and High Rise Residential land use designations. 15.D.2.70. Permitted non-residential uses within the Strategic Growth Area B land use designation may include the following: a) compatible commercial uses such as, but not limited to, retail, commercial entertainment, restaurants, financial establishments, hotels, and light repair operations; b) personal services; c) office; d) exhibition and/or conference facilities; e) health-related uses such as health offices and health clinics; f) institutional uses such as hospitals, daycare facilities, religious institutions, community facilities, and educational establishments; g) social service establishment; and, h) studio and artisan -related uses. 15.D.2.71. No building will exceed 25 storeys in height. The implementing zoning may permit maximum building heights of less than 25 storeys. 15.D.2.72. Where the implementing zoning does not permit the maximum building height outlined in Policy 15.D.2.42, the City may consider site specific increases to the permitted building height in accordance with Policy 15.D.2.5.On these lands, a Zoning By-IawAmendmentwill be required for a building more than 10 storeys in height. 15.D.2.73. A minimum Floor Space Ratio of 1.0 will apply to all development and redevelopment. The implementing zoning may contain transition regulations to facilitate and permit lands to ultimately meet the minimum Floor Space Ratio requirements. Strategic Growth Area C The Strategic Growth Area C land use designation is intended to accommodate significant intensification at high density. Lands designated Strategic Growth Area C are generally centrally located within Intensification Areas and/or represent redevelopment opportunities at higher density. It is anticipated that some areas within the Strategic Growth Area C land use designation will require the assembly of lands for development. Further, some lands designated Strategic Growth Area C are adjacent to lands planned for medium density uses or which contain existing Low Rise Residential Uses. As such, the implementing zoning may restrict building height as an interim measure to ensure orderly development through a development application demonstrating that the policies of this plan are met. 20 Page 45 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'A' 15.D.2.74. Permitted uses may include those permitted in the Strategic Growth Area B land use designation. 15.D.2.75. Lands designated Strategic Growth Area C may have no maximum building height. The implementing zoning may limit building heights. 15.D.2.76. Where the implementing zoning has a maximum building height in accordance with Policy 15.D.2.46, the City may consider site specific increases to the permitted building height in accordance with Policy 15. D.2.5. 15.D.2.77. A minimum Floor Space Ratio of 2.0 will apply to all development and redevelopment. The implementing zoning may contain transition regulations to facilitate and permit lands to ultimately meet the minimum Floor Space Ratio requirements." III. Part D, Section 15 is amended by deleting in its entirety the heading titled "Area Specific/Site Specific Policy Areas"; mmm. Part D, Section 15, existing policy 15.D.2.64 through existing policy 15.D.2.69, inclusive, is deleted in its entirety; nnn. Part D, Section 15, policy 15.D.4.1 is amended as follows: 15.DA. 1. Lands designated Mixed Use are located within the Grp-v.dh G8R48 (n.,,.,,,+.,WR) a Protected Major Transit Station Area, a City Node, a Community Node, a Neighbourhood Nodes or a an Urban Corridor as identified on Map 2. Accordingly, the applicable Urban Structure in Section 3.C.2 will also apply." 000. Part D, Section 15, policy 15.D.4.13 is amended as follows: ._ .-toil =707-0, ppp. Part D, Section 15, policy 15.D.4.15 is amended as follows: "b) permit food store outlets of up to a maximum gross floor area of 5,000 square metres within lands designated Mixed Use identified as an Urban Corridor on Map 2, if the food store outlet is located in a mixed use development and provided all applicable policies within this land use designation are satisfied."; qqq. Part D, Section 15. Policy 15.D.4.17 is amended as follows: rrr. Part D,Section 15 is amended by deleting policies 15.D.4.20 and 15.D.4.21 in their entirety; 21 Page 46 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'A' sss. Part D, Section 15, policies 15.D.4.22 through 15.D.4.24 are renumbered, as 15.D.4.20 through 15.D.4.22 accordingly; ttt. Part D, Section 15, policy 15.D.12.28 is amended as follows: ,,a) Notwithstanding the rMixed Strategic Growth Area C land use designation on lands located near the southwesterly corner of Glasgow Street and Strange Street, the continuation of the existing industrial and commercial parking facility uses will be permitted until such time as the site transitions into uses permitted by the land use designation The transition of the site may occur in phases;"; uuu. Part D, Section 15 is amended by deleting policy 15.D.12.39 in its entirety and replacing it with: 1115.D.12.39. 607-641 King Street West Notwithstanding the Strategic Growth Area C land use designation and policies: a) Retail uses shall be permitted to have a maximum gross floor area of 10,000 square metres. b) Prior to development and/or redevelopment of the lands municipally addressed as 607-641 King Street West, a Master Plan will be required to be completed and approved by the City. The Master Plan will be required to be updated and approved by the City through the City's Site Plan Approval Process prior to and in conjunction with each stage of development and/or redevelopment. Substantial deviation from the approved Master Plan will require Council approval."; vvv. Part D, Section 15 is amended by deleting 15.D.12.54 in its entirety and replacing it with: 1115.D.12.54. 79 Joseph Street Notwithstanding the Open Space land use designation and policies on the lands municipally known as 79 Joseph Street, office uses will also be permitted."; www. Part D, Section 15 is amended by deleting policy 15.D.12.62 in its entirety: xxx. Part D, Section 15 is amended by adding the following after policy 15.D.12.68: "15.D.12.69. 1668 King Street East The maximum permitted floor space ratio shall be 7.6."; yyy. Part D, Section 16 is amended by deleting policies 16.D.1.1 and 16.D.1.2 in its entirety; zzz. Part D, Section 16, existing policy 16.D.1.3. is amended by being renumbered 16.D.1.1, and is further amended as follows: 22 Page 47 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'A' 16.D.1.3. The following Secondary Plans are deferred and do not form part of this Official Plan: a) Civic Centre Secondary Plan b) Lunn 94884 Cnc4 COG_A_R aFy Plan eb) Cedar Hill Secondary Plan 44c) Mill Courtland -Woodside Park Secondary Plan fd) Victoria Street Secondary Plan #e) North Ward Secondary Plan +f) Central Frederick Secondary Plan }g) Rosenberg Secondary Plan aaaa. Part E, Section 17 is amended by adding new policy 16.D.1.2 after policy 16.D.1.1 as follows: "Despite policy 16.D.1.1, for lands within the Secondary Plans referenced within policy 16.D.1.1 that are also shown on Map 3 of this Official Plan, all of the policies of this Official Plan shall prevail." bbbb. Part E, Section 17 existing policy 16.D.1.4 is amended by being renumbered 16.D.1.3; cccc. Part E, Section 17 is amended by deleting policy 17.E.6.7 in its entirety; dddd. Part F — Schedule A is amended by adding "Protected" before "Major Transit Station Area" for the Glossary of Term definition for "Intensification Areas"; eeee. Part F — Schedule A is amended as follows: "Complete Community - a complete community, also referred to as a 15 -minute neighbourhood, meets people's needs for daily living throughout at entire lifetime by providing convenient access to an appropriate mix of jobs, local services, a full range of housing, and community infrastructure including affordable housing, schools, recreation and open space for their residents. Convenient access to public transportation and options for safe, non -motorized travel is also provided."; ffff. Part F — Schedule A is amended by adding the following after "Priority Location" in the Glossary of Terms: "Priority Street — streets with buildings that contain a mix of non-residential ground floor uses that help achieve complete communities by creating engaging and activated pedestrian places. These places contribute to an enhanced streetscape and pedestrian realm by creating a visually stimulating pedestrian experience. Regulations contained within the City's Zoning By-lawthat may guide the implementation of priority streets that includes, but is not limited to: minimum ground floor fagade heights; minimum fagade openings; minimum amount of active uses at the street level; and/or restrictions on the location of vehicular parking."; 23 Page 48 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'A' gggg. Part F — Schedule A is amended by adding "Protected" before "Major Transit Station Area" for the Glossary of Term definition for "Station Area Plan"; hhhh. Part F — Schedule A is amended by adding "Protected" before "Major Transit Station Area" for the Glossary of Term definition for "Transit -Oriented Development". 24 Page 49 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'A' APPENDIX 1 Notice of the Meeting of Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee of January 5, 2024 NOTICE OF A PUBLIC MEETING proposing changes to land use and zoning in Kitchener's Protected Major Transit Station Areas III Jerir lWark f ION Stop Map of Growing Together study area .ad®1�I� MCf'""" 7 V `'I� 0 '! 1'14 Land use h Growth ft Built Farm Zoning Change Adam Clark, Senior Urban Designer 519.741.2200 x 7027 growing.together;dikitchener.ca Have Your Voice Heard! Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee Date: January 29, 2024 Location: Council Chambers Kitchener City Hall 200 King Street West orVirtual Zoom Meeting Go to kite h ener.ca/meetings . current agendas and reports (posted 10 days before meeting) . appear as a delegation • Watch meeting To learn more, visit~ www.engagewr.ca/growingtogether The City of Kitchener will consider city -initiated applications to amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-law for Protected MajorTransit Station Areas (PMTSAs) west of the e)pressway and lands adjacent to PMTSAs within existing secondary plans. These amendments will introduce new land uses, and zoning to guide growth and change in Kkhene(s PMSTAS and surrounding lands. 25 Page 50 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'A' APPENDIX 2 Minutes of the Meeting of Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee — January 29, 2024 26 Page 51 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'A' APPENDIX 3 Minutes of the Meeting of City Council — February X, 2024 27 Page 52 of 1179 aaO P ° CITY OF KITCHENER s % eINGMPsR ,, Pe OFFICIAL PLAN P AMENDMENT TO MAP 2 URBAN STRUCTURE � � z o \ Rive `Grand Intensification Areas N o STOP, s e 410 Urban Growth Centre (Downtown) ° PW P ® Protected Major Transit Station Area '`'• i� - City Node 40 Community Node a 44D Neighbourhood Node �1 Urban Corridor o v ��+ Arterial Corridor Other Areas Community Areas Industrial Employment Areas SFS Green Areas ti Transit ti s P Existing Transit Corridor Planned Transit Corridor G o WPO PNP _ __.-• ^� Light Rail Transit Corridor '= MS F° z Adapted Bus Rapid Transit Corridor Rapid Transit Station S } Area of Amendment Lands subject to this amendment Is, =' ZJ S. m SCHEDULE W omizso METRES REVISED: OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT OPA23/016/K/JZ APPLICANT: CITY OF KITCHENER ZONING BY-LAWAMENDMENT ZBA23/028/K/JZ City of Kitchener OPA2323006KJZ_MAP2 SCALE 1:65,000 CITY OF KITCHENER DATE: NOVEMBER 24, 2023 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, PLANNING mxd CITY OF KITCHENER OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO MAP 3 LAND USE Mo oqm N Low Rise Residential Medium Rise Residential N . .0 °\A e�E�P =` — JG �� High Rise Residential mho Mixed Use Strategic Growth Area A m� o cn °O PNeSS w o kF — NST ST i Strategic Growth Area B Z Pie Fir Strategic Growth Area C r Innovation District y� �GSrF Market District e s Commercial Campus vo Commercial Heavy Industrial Employment General Industrial Employment 9�mF —_- ° — — a Business Park Employment Institutional 9� s R\NG Prime Agriculture S °O Rural AGN PNJRJ Natural Heritage Conservation \AS 55 tiR Open Space GR s Major Infrastructure and Utilities °R - •„ 0 Refer to Secondary Plan For Detail °°� P��E Area of Amendment r '°c2 PJE NPS ° P9 Q Lands subject to this amendment Po q<p �O �' NS ND 9L�m SCHEDULES' o 1000 METRES REVISED: OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT OPA23/016/K/JZ APPLICANT: CITY OF KITCHENER ZONING BY-LAWAMENDMENTZBA23/028/K/JZ City of Kitchener OPA23016KJZ_MAP3 SCALE 1:30,000 CITY OF KITCHENER DATE: NOVEMBER 24, 2023 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, PLANNING mxd SCHEDULE `C' Page 55 of 1179 0 Legend Protected Major Transit Station Area Urban Growth Centre (Downtown) Notes: 1. This map forms part of the Official Plan of the City of Kitchener and must be read in conjunction with the policies of this Plan. Adopted by City Council - Approved by Regional Council - EW ed Date - Last Revised - November 22, 2023 Revised by Amendments - AODA: If you require this document in an accessible format, please contact Planning Division, planning@kitchener.ca 519-741-2426 Page 57 of 1179 CITY OF KITCHENER 22 OFFICIAL PLAN N AMENDMENT TO MAP 5 GGA S� 23 O 29 SPECIFIC POLICY AREAS pN 22" �O,y Specific Policy Areas �1 58 0 17. 1077 Queens Blvd N 20. 65 Hanson Ave and 300 Ardelt 22. Industrial Employment Area Lands S� 0 23. St Leger St (1 Adam St) SGp�I �P �Q F OC 27.6 Shirley Ave 28 39 '9A 29.820 Victoria St N f� 0 32. 491, 525 and 563 Highland Rd W 454� 34.809 Wellington St N 51 38. Block Line Rd & Courtland Ave E 51. 155 & 169 Borden Ave N 53. 298 Lawrence Ave 58. 507 Frederick St & 40 & 44 Becker St For Details Refer to Urban Growth Centre 63 and Secondary Plans 22, /� �� ST F Area of Amendment Lands to be Removed subject to this amendment Lands to be Added subject to this ® 17 amendment 32 4� 17— 28. Glasgow St/Strange St King St W �j 54. 79. Joseph St BOG 2� �O 20 38 SCHEDULE V 0 1000 METRES REVISED: OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT OPA23/016/K/JZ APPLICANT: CITY OF KITCHENER ZONING BY-LAWAMENDMENTZBA23/028/K/JZ City of Kitchener OPA23016KJZ_MAP3 SCALE 1:30,000 CITY OF KITCHENER DATE: NOVEMBER 24, 2023 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, PLANNING 'I" Page 57 of 1179 Page 58 of 1179 cn CITY OF KITCHENER OFFICIAL PLAN N AMENDMENT TO MAP 9 S� CULTURAL HERITAGE RESOURCES O �5 � ) �����N � Heritage Conservation District 8 9 kyNG N 10 8 T O OAF Heritage Corridor 6 S� �\G� S �O Canadian Heritage River CIVIC CENTRE 7 NEIGHBOURHOOD HCD C9A Area of Amendment eFRs Lands to be Added subject to this ® 11 1,2 amendment Z� VICTORI TF Cultural Heritage Landscape PARK HC � 4 18 16 2. 4 Floral Crescent (Rockway � 10 �F 17 Gardens) 4— 13 15 F 6. Gildner Green Neighbourhood 12 1.2 9 7. Gruhn Neighbourhood 11 10 k7�/C, 8. Mount Hope Cemetery 9. Union Boulevard �6) 2 10. Iron Horse Trail 11 �DMASRTYS 11. Canadian National Railway Line 12. Victoria Park Neighbourhood HCD 13. Victoria Park ave 17— 14. Jubilee Drive 15. Cedar Hill and Schneider Creek Neighbourhood OG 16. Onward Avenue Neighbourhood 17. First Mennonite Cemetery �Q 18. St Peter's Lutheran Cemetery SCHEDULE 'E' o i000 METRES REVISED: OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT OPA23/016/K/JZ APPLICANT: CITY OF KITCHENER ZONING BY-LAWAMENDMENT ZBA23/028/K/JZ City of Kitchener OPA23016KJZ_MAP9 SCALE 1:30,000 CITY OF KITCHENER DATE: NOVEMBER 24, 2023 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, PLANNING mxd Page 58 of 1179 AMENDMENT NO. ## TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER Cy��'�i]�:��r�la�►1�:7 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'B' Page 59 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'B' AMENDMENT NO. ## TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER CITY OF KITCHENER Growing Together — Non-PMTSA Lands 1101§10-4 SECTION 1 TITLE AND COMPONENTS SECTION 2 PURPOSE OF THE AMENDMENT SECTION 3 BASIS OF THE AMENDMENT SECTION 4 THE AMENDMENT APPENDICES APPENDIX 1 Notice of the Meeting of Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee — January 5, 2024 APPENDIX 2 Minutes of the Meeting of Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee — January 29, 2024 APPENDIX 3 Minutes of the Meeting of City Council xdatex 2 Page 60 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'B' AMENDMENT NO. ## TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER SECTION 1 — TITLE AND COMPONENTS This amendment shall be referred to as Amendment No. ## to the Official Plan of the City of Kitchener. This amendment is comprised of Sections 1 to 4 inclusive. SECTION 2 — PURPOSE OF THE AMENDMENT The purpose of the Official Plan Amendment is to incorporate modifications to the text and mapping of the Official Plan in order to implement a consistent land use planning framwork for lands that have been part of one of the following secondary plans but not located within a Protected Major Transit Station Area (PMTSA): Civic Centre; King Street East; Cedar Hill; Mill Courtland Woodside Park; Victoria Park, Victoria Street, and KW Hospital. SECTION 3 — BASIS OF THE AMENDMENT Planning staff have undertaken the Growing Together project, which includes developing a new planning framework for the City's PMTSAs. This project continues the planning review process that began in 2013 with the Planning Around Rapid Transit Stations (PARTS) plans and advanced through the Neighbourhood Planning Review (NPR) project through 2021. A significant portion of the lands within the 7 PMTSAs that form the Growing Together study area are currently located within existing secondary plans. These secondary plans are comprised of policy text and land use mapping. The existing secondary plan policies include policy language that is repetitive with other secondary plans and the 2014 Official Plan document. Additionally, the existing secondary plan boundaries do not align with the confirmed PMTSA boundaries as established by the Region and approved by the Province in April 2023. This Official Plan amendment removes certain lands from the Civic Centre, Cedar Hill, Mill Courtland Woodside Park, and Victoria Street Secondary Plans, and removes all lands from the King Street East, Victoria Park, and KW Hospital Secondary Plans, and includes them within the 2014 Official Plan with new land uses. The application of new land use designations on the applicable lands provides a land use planning approach that is consistent with the rest of the City and removes policy duplication. Urban Structure Modifications Planning staff are recommending that lands identified as the "Area of Amendment" on Schedule `A' be amended as shown on Schedule W. The Urban Structure modifications are administrative in nature, with the proposed mapping seeking to reflect the accurate urban structure component for the "Area of Amendment", which includes lands previously depicted as being located within the conceptually drawn 800m radius around rapid transit stations but not located within a PMTSA. Land Use Modifications Planning staff are recommending that lands identified as "Lands subject to this amendment" on Schedule `B' be amended as shown on Schedule `B'. The proposed land use amendments would generally implement an equivalent land use designation from the 2014 official Plan as the land use designation applied through the respective secondary plan. Specific Policy Area Modifications Planning staff are recommending that Specific Policy Area 18 be repealed and replaced, and that Specific Policy Area 69 and 70 be added to the 2014 Official Plan, as shown on Schedule `C'. These Specific Policy Areas reflect the unique land use conditions of the property and respect recent development application decisions on the part of City Council. Page 61 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'B' Existing policy 15.D.12.18 is recommended to be repealed and replaced as the subject property, 134 & 152 Shanley Street, is subject to site-specific zoning provisions and is currently under construction. Existing policy 15.D.12.18 is recommended to be replaced with existing Special Policy Area 1 in the Victoria Street Secondary Plan, referred to as policy 13.6.4.1 of Part 3, Section 13 of the 1994 Kitchener Official Plan. Policy 13.6.4.1 states "Notwithstanding the Major Infrastructure and Utilities land use designation which applies to the lands located on the block generally bounded by Patricia Avenue, Victoria Street South, the Grand River Railway, West Avenue and the Henry Sturm Greenway, the executive and administrative offices of Enova Power Corporation located at 301 Victoria Street South and the associated warehousing and outdoor storage uses shall be permitted uses." Specific Policy Area 69 is existing Special Policy Area 7 in the King Street East Secondary Plan, referred to as policy 13.2.3.7 of Part 3, Section 13 of the 1994 Kitchener Official Plan. Policy 13.2.3.7 states "The maximum permitted floor space ratio shall be 7.6." Specific Policy Area 70 is existing Special Policy Area 11 in the King Street East Secondary Plan, referred to as policy 13.2.3.11 of Part 3, Section 13 of the 1994 Kitchener Official Plan. Policy 13.2.3.11 states "The maximum permitted floor space ratio shall be 6.0." Planning staff are of the opinion that the Official Plan Amendment is consistent with and conforms to the Planning Act, Provincial Policy Statement (2020), A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2020), and the Regional Official Plan (2010), as amended, and represents good planning. SECTION 4 — THE AMENDMENT The City of Kitchener Official Plan is hereby amended as follows: a. Part D, Section 15.D.12 is amended by repealing Specific Policy Area 15.D.12.18 and replacing it with the following: "15.D.12.18. 301 Victoria Street South Notwithstanding the Major Infrastructure and Utilities land use designation which applies to the lands located on the block generally bounded by Patricia Avenue, Victoria Street South, the Grand River Railway, West Avenue and the Henry Sturm Greenway, the executive and administrative offices of Enova Power Corporation located at 301 Victoria Street South and the associated warehousing and outdoor storage uses shall be permitted uses."; Part D, Section 15.D.12 is amended by adding Specific Policy Area 15.D.12.69 after Specific Policy Area 15.D.12.68 as follows: 15.D.12.69. 1668 King Street East The maximum permitted floor space ratio shall be 7.6."; c. Part D, Section 15.D.12 is amended by adding the following after policy 15.D.12.69 as follows: "15.D.12.70. 1770 King Street East, 815 & 825 Weber Street East The maximum permitted floor space ratio shall be 6.0."; d. Map 2 — Urban Structure is amended by: Page 62 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'B' Amending lands identified as "Lands subject to this amendment" as shown on the attached Schedule `A'; e. Map 3 — Land Use is amended by: i) Amending lands identified as "Lands subject to this amendment" as shown on the attached Schedule `B'; f. Map 5 — Specific Policy Areas is amended by: Adding Specific Policy Area 18 — 301 Victoria St S identified as "Lands to be Added subject to this amendment" as shown on the attached Schedule `C'; Adding Specific Policy Area 69 —1668 King St E identified as "Lands to be Added subject to this amendment" as shown on the attached Schedule `C'; iii. Adding Specific Policy Area 70 —1770 King St E, 815 & 825 Weber St E identified as "Lands to be Added subject to this amendment" as shown on the attached Schedule `C'. Page 63 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'B' APPENDIX 1 Notice of the Meeting of Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee of January 5, 2024 NOTICE OF A PUBLIC MEETING proposing changes to land use and zoning in Kitchener's Protected Mayor Transit Station Areas L*t ITT+ iF Map of Growing Together study area A0 0� Land Use Et growth & Built Form Zoning Change Adam Clark, Senior Urban Designer 519.741.2200 x 7027 growl ng.together d!kitchener,ca Have Your Voice Heard! Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee Date, January 29, 2024 Location: Council Chambers Kitchener City Hall 200 King Strut West orVirtual Zoom Meeting Go to kitchener.ca/meetings • current agendas and reports (posted 10 days before meeting) • appear as a delegation a watch meeting To learn more. visit: www,engagewr.ca /grow i ngtogether The City of Kitchener will consider city -initiated applications to amend the Official Pian and Zoning By-law for Protected M.ajorTransit Station Areas (PMTS,As) west of the e)rressway and lands adjacent to PMTSAs within existing secondary plans. These amendments will introduce new land uses, and zoning to guide growth and change in Kitchener s PMSTAs and surrounding lands. 6 Page 64 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'B' APPENDIX 2 Minutes of the Meeting of Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee — January 29, 2024 Page 65 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'B' APPENDIX 3 Minutes of the Meeting of City Council — February X, 2024 Page 66 of 1179 CITY OF KITCHENER �Z\���1 O OFFICIAL PLAN A JAG AMENDMENT TO MAP 2 URBAN STRUCTURE N -ON s ���NG a N � �� �. Intensification Areas Urban Growth Centre (Downtown) O Protected Major Transit Station Area - City Node �N� o O 0 A 4& Community Node 4W Neighbourhood Node Ile 4W Urban Corridor c Z� 4r Arterial Corridor mO Other Areas pCommunity Areas Industrial Employment Areas Green Areas Transit /'N/ Existing Transit Corridor Planned Transit Corridor NS �� Light Rail Transit Corridor Rapid Transit Station N�A Area of Amendment OG 2� ® Lands subject to this amendment �a T� F spy SCHEDULE W o i000 METRES REVISED: OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT OPA23/017/K/JZ APPLICANT: CITY OF KITCHENER ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT ZBA23/029/K/JZ City of Kitchener OPA232300 �KJZ_MAP2 SCALE 1:35,000 CITY OF KITCHENER DATE: NOVEMBER 24, 2023 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, PLANNING mxd CITY OF KITCHENER N OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO MAP 3 LAND USE MOORF --_—_ _ _ —_-- _�__—__-- ,��J�' N Low Rise Residential —__ — ♦ � Medium Rise Residential — —_ _— --- _ w High Rise Residential — m ---—9 Mixed Use Commercial Campus Commercial __ — eye___ Heavy Industrial Employment PES General Industrial Employment —___=----s Park Employment _—_—Business Institutional Natural Heritage Conservation uN = _= i — ---- Open Space PL D E Major Infrastructure and Utilities 4k G Urban Growth Centre (Downtown) Refer to Map 4 o Refer to Secondary Plan For Detail cgRW Go ., , ' c�a coNN AU Area of Amendment ae oR 55 Q Lands subject to this amendment y r y OR FOR�9 �g�00� EiJ PJJ G OG2 ..Sod NP P 9 F � SCHEDULE W o 1000 METRES REVISED: OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT OPA23/017/K/JZ APPLICANT: CITY OF KITCHENER ZONING BY-LAWAMENDMENTZBA23/029/K/JZ City of Kitchener OPA23017KJZ_MAP3 SCALE 1:30,000 CITY OF KITCHENER DATE: NOVEMBER 24, 2023 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, PLANNING mxd cn CITY OF KITCHENER 22 OFFICIAL PLAN N O S� 29 2 AMENDMENT TO MAP 5 SPECIFIC POLICY AREAS 3 ON 22 O� Specific Policy Areas , 58 0 17. 1077 Queens Blvd 18. 134-152 Shanley St N ST 982 �0�� elt SG 39 �\G�S Sj 022. Industrial Employ enttAea 23. St Leger St Adam SGO P OC (1 G� 27. 6 Shirley 28 �iF 9A /rte 28. Glasgow St/Strange St 29. 820 Victoria St N Z�rF 0 32. 491, 525 and 563 Highland Rd W 34. 809 Wellington St N 51 38. Block Line Rd & Courtland Ave 39. Breithaupt Block Phase 3 d COQ FS 51. 155 & 169 Borden Ave < 52. 859 & 867 Frederick St & 39 Avon ®a 18 O, b 53. 298 Lawrence 53 �9� �F 0 54.368- 82 Ottawa St S & 99-115 Pattand0 Ave 22, 70 58. 507 Frederick St & 40 & 44 Becker St 69 0 62.455-509 Mill St For Details Refer to Urban Growth Centre and Secondary Plans 17 NS 32 4�� 17— �+ 54 62 Area of Lands to be Removed subject to this io �0 amendment Lands to be Added subject to this ® amendment <'2 18. 301 Victoria St S 1p 69. 1668 King St E 69. 20 38 70. 1770 King St E & 815-825 Weber St E SCHEDULE V 0 1000 METRES REVISED: OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT OPA23/017/K/JZ APPLICANT: CITY OF KITCHENER ZONING BY-LAWAMENDMENTZBA23/029/K/JZ City of Kitchener OPA23017KJZ_MAP3 SCALE 1:30,000 CITY OF KITCHENER DATE: NOVEMBER 24, 2023 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, PLANNING mxd DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'C' AMENDMENT NO. ## TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER Cy��'�i]�:��r�la�►1�:7 Growing Together — 1994 Official Plan Amendment (Secondary Plans) Page 70 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'C' AMENDMENT NO. ## TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER CITY OF KITCHENER Growing Together — 1994 Official Plan Amendment (Secondary Plans) 1101§10-4 SECTION 1 TITLE AND COMPONENTS SECTION 2 PURPOSE OF THE AMENDMENT SECTION 3 BASIS OF THE AMENDMENT SECTION 4 THE AMENDMENT APPENDICES APPENDIX 1 Notice of the Meeting of Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee — January 5, 2024 APPENDIX 2 Minutes of the Meeting of Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee — January 29, 2024 APPENDIX 3 Minutes of the Meeting of City Council xdatex Page 71 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'C' AMENDMENT NO. ## TO THE OFFICIAL PLAN OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER SECTION 1 — TITLE AND COMPONENTS This amendment shall be referred to as Amendment No. ## to the 1994 Official Plan of the City of Kitchener. This amendment is comprised of Sections 1 to 4 inclusive. SECTION 2 — PURPOSE OF THE AMENDMENT The purpose of the Official Plan Amendment is to delete the entirety of the King Street East, Victoria Park, and KW Hospital Secondary Plans in order to implement a new land use framework for seven of the City's ten Protected Major Transit Station Areas (PMTSAs). SECTION 3 — BASIS OF THE AMENDMENT Planning staff have undertaken the Growing Together project, which includes developing a new planning framework for the City's PMTSAs. This project continues the planning review process that began in 2013 with the Planning Around Rapid Transit Stations (PARTS) plans and advanced through the Neighbourhood Planning Review (NPR) project through 2021. A significant portion of the lands within the 7 PMTSAs that form the Growing Together study area are currently located within existing secondary plans. These secondary plans are comprised of policy text and land use mapping. The existing secondary plan policies include repetitive language with other secondary plans and the parent Official Plan document. Additionally, the existing secondary plan boundaries do not align with the PMTSA boundaries as established by the Region and approved by the Province in April 2023. The proposed planning framework being brought forward as part of Growing Together focuses on the deletion of 3 secondary plans through this Official Plan amendment and the application of new land uses through a companion Official Plan amendment to the 2014 Official Plan. The deletion of these Secondary Plans, together with the proposed land uses, provide a refined and comprehensive approach to managing growth and development across 7 of the City's 10 PMTSAs, remove repetitive policy language within the Official Plan, and allow the City to more efficiently monitor growth targets set out by the Province and Region. Planning staff are of the opinion that the Official Plan Amendment is consistent with and conforms to the Planning Act, Provincial Policy Statement (2020), A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (2020), and the Regional Official Plan (2010), as amended, and represents good planning. SECTION 4 — THE AMENDMENT The City of Kitchener 1994 Official Plan is hereby amended as follows: a. Part 3, Section 13 is amended by deleting section 13.2 in its entirety; b. Part 3, Section 13 is amended by deleting section 13.5 in its entirety; c. Part 3, Section 13 is amended by deleting section 13.7 in its entirety; d. Map 10 — King Street East is deleted in its entirety; e. Map 14 — Victoria Park is deleted in its entirety; Page 72 of 1179 f. Map 15 — Victoria Park Environmental is deleted in its entirety; g. Map 18 — KW Hospital is deleted in its entirety. DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'C' Page 73 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'C' APPENDIX 1 Notice of the Meeting of Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee of January 5, 2024 NOTICE 0 A PUBLIC MEETING proposing changes to land use and zoning in�' Kitchener's Protected Major Transit Station Areas � 0 ION Stop Map of Growing Together study area AtlkkA -00 Land Use Ft Growth Ek Buitt Form Zoning Change Adam Clark, Senior Urban Designer 519.741, 22 GO x 702 7 growing_together lkitchener.ca Have You rVoice Heard! Planning & Strategic Initiatives Committee Date: January 29, 2024 Location: Council Chambers Kitchener City Hall 200 King Street West orVirtual Zoom Meeting Go tc- kitchener.ca/meetings * current agendas and reports (posted 10 days before meeting) . appear as a delegation a watch meeting To learn more. visit. www.engagewr.ca/growingtogether The City of Kitchener will consider city -initiated applications to amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-law for Protected Major Transit Station Areas (PMTSAs) west of the expressway and lands adjacent to PMTSAs within existing secondary plans. These amendments vAl introduce new land uses, and zoning to guide growth and change in Kitchene(s PMSTAs and surrounding lands. 5 Page 74 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'C' APPENDIX 2 Minutes of the Meeting of Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee — January 29, 2024 Page 75 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'C' APPENDIX 3 Minutes of the Meeting of City Council — February ##, 2024 Page 76 of 1179 PROPOSED BY — LAW '2024 OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER (Being a by-law to amend By-law 2019-051, as amended, known as the Zoning By-law for the City of Kitchener - Growing Together (PMTSA Lands) WHEREAS it is deemed expedient to amend By-law 2019-051 for the lands specified above; NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Corporation of the City of Kitchener enacts as follows: 1. Zoning Grid Schedule Numbers 39, 40, 41, 73, 74, 75, 83, 84, 85, 86, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 142, 143, 144, 145, and 175 of Appendix A of By-law 2019-051 are hereby amended by adding thereto the parcels of land to By-law 2019-051 as shown on Attachment 1. 2. Section 2.2.1 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding the portions of the below text that are highlighted in grey, and deleting the portions of the below text with a strikethrough thereto as follows: Urban Growth Gentrn ( GG) Zones Symbol Strategic Growth Area (SGA) Zones R(Qd-Strategic Growth Area One Zone Reda SGA -1 Strategic Growth Area Two Zone SGA -2 Strategic Growth Area Three Zone SGA -3 Strategic Growth Area Four Zone SGA -4 3. Section 3 of By -Law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding "Building Length — means the horizontal measurement of any fagade of a building" after the definition of "Building Height' and before the definition of "Building Material and Decorating Supply Establishment'. 1 Page 77 of 1179 4. Section 3 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding "Creative Products Manufacturing - means the use of a premises that may be made available for community shared use as a maker space to design, proto-type and manufacture products using tools and technological manufacturing equipment such as laser cutters, waterjet cutters, computer numerical control (CNC) routers, 3D printers and 4D systems." after the definition of "Craftsperson Shop" and before "Crematorium". 5. Section 3 of By -Law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding "Floor Plate Area — means the gross floor area of a storey of a building" after the definition of "Fitness Centre" and before the definition of "Floor Space Ratio". 6. Section 3 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by deleting the definition of "Nightclub" in its entirety. 7. Section 3 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding "Physical Separation - means the distance from a building's facade to its interior side lot line and rear lot lines. When two or more buildings are on the same lot, the total distance between each pair of facades in any direction is to be calculated as the sum of both individual physical separations." after the definition of "Personal Services" and before the definition of "Place of Worship". 8. Section 3 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding "Private Amenity Space - means the use of a premises for indoor or outdoor active or passive recreation for the exclusive use of occupants of a dwelling unit. Private amenity space may include features such as outdoor patios, above ground decks, balconies (in accordance with the requirements in Section 6.7 b).), communal indoor spaces (such as gyms), communal indoor social spaces (such as entertainment rooms), swimming pools, and outdoor rooftop amenity space (such as rooftop decks and terraces). Private amenity space shall not include lobbies, washrooms, laundry facilities, storage areas, hallways, elevators, reception areas, management offices, parking areas, access driveways, unprogrammed landscaped open space (excluding outdoor patios), receiving areas, loading 2 Page 78 of 1179 spaces, and the like." after the definition of "Print Shop" and before the definition of "Private Garage". 9. Section 4.5 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by replacing "UGC zones" with "the SGA -2, SGA -3, and SGA -4 zones," in subsections c), d), and e), and adding "the" after "and" and before "MIX Zones" for subsections d) and e), and replacing Illustration 1: Corner Visibility Triangle, Corner Visibility Area and Driveway Visibility Triangle Dimensions with the following image: 10. Section 4.14.2 of By -Law 2019-051 is hereby amended by replacing "UGC' with "SGA" in subsection d). 11. Section 4.14.8.1 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by replacing "UGC' with "SGA zone" in subsection c). 3 Page 79 of 1179 12. Section 4.15.10 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by replacing "UGC" with "SGA". 13. Section 5.3 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding "or SGA -1 zone" after "residential zone" and before ", a visual barrier" in subsection a) and is hereby further amended by adding "or SGA -1" after "abutting residential" and before "lot line". 14. Section 5.3.2 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by deleting subsection c) in its entirety and renumbering subsection d) and subsection c). 15. Section 5.3.4 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by deleting "UGC zone, or' after "In a" and before "MIX zone" in subsection a). 16. Section 5.6 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by replacing "UGC" with "SGA" in subsection c). 17. Section 5 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding the portions of the below text in "Table 5-5: Regulations for Minimum and Maximum Parking Requirements" that are highlighted in grey, and deleting the portions of the below text with a strikethrough thereto as follows: Table 5-5: Regulations for Minimum and Maximum Parking Requirements 4 Page 80 of 1179 Minimum and Maximum Required Rates for Parking Spaces, Visitor Parking Spaces, and Use Bicycle Parking Stalls I IGGSGA Zones I MIX Zones All Other Zones RESIDENTIAL Multiple Minimum parking No minimum 0.9 per dwelling 1.0 per dwelling unit Residential spaces: unit Buildings: 10% of provided 5-80 dwelling units: 0.15 per parking spaces, only 0.1 per dwelling dwelling unit Cluster Townhouse Minimum visitor where 11 or more unit only where 5 Dwelling; parking spaces: dwelling units are on or more dwelling OR a lot units are on a lot Dwelling Unit; 81 + dwelling units: 0.1 per dwelling unit 4 Page 80 of 1179 Page 81 of 1179 Minimum and Maximum Required Rates for Parking Spaces, Visitor Parking Spaces, and Use Bicycle Parking Stalls 1IGGSGA Zones MIX Zones All Other Zones Multiple Dwelling; Maximum parking 1.3 per dwelling spaces (including 1.3 per dwelling unit unit 1.4 per dwelling unit visitor): Residential Care Minimum parking Facility, Small spaces: PW-a-No minimum 2 per facility 2 per facility Single-Detached Dwelling, Semi- Minimum parking Detached Dwelling, �No minimum n/a 1 per dwelling unit and Street spaces: Townhouse Dwelling; Additional Dwelling Unit (Attached) and Minimum parking PW-a-No minimum n/a 1 per dwelling unit Additional Dwelling spaces: Unit Detached NON-RESIDENTIAL Light Repair Minimum 1 parking PW-a-No minimum 90 m2 GFA 90 m2 GFA Operation spaceper: AAinimiim nark ing &paces iNNa iNNa iNNa �Aovimim 1 cn „P N/^ N/^ AAinimum 1 !`h cc d ^^nnnn „„,,�� t �� ��..,, ``,,..,, i4/a NN//^^ 44/a �Ainimim /`h cc R ��+yy�R� dta 2 nor night G" 44a 444 Minimum 1 parking PW-a-No minimum 35 m2 GFA 35 m2 GFA space per: Maximum 1 X24 m2 GFA 24 m2 GFA 24 m2 GFA parking space per: Multi-Unit Parking Rate (2)(3)(4) Minimum 1 Class A Bicycle Parking X1,000 mz GFA 1,000 m2 GFA 1,000 m2 GFA Stall per: Minimum 1 Class B X333 mz GFA Bicycle Parking 333 m2 GFA 333 m2 GFA Stall per: Page 81 of 1179 18. Section 5.8 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by replacing "UGC' with "SGA" in subsection e). 19. Section 6 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by repealing and replacing Section 6 in its entirety with the text contained in Attachment 2. 6 Page 82 of 1179 Minimum and Maximum Required Rates for Parking Spaces, Visitor Parking Spaces, and Use Bicycle Parking Stalls I IGC SGA Zones MIX Zones All Other Zones Office and Office- Related: Biotechnological Establishment; Computer, Electronic, Data Processing, or Server Establishment; 50 m4 GF= eRly fer Industrial Minimum 1 parking z 33 m GFA z 33 m GFA Administrative space per: Gf 4,9994# Office; No minimum Office; Research and Development Establishment; and, Social Service Establishment Minimum 1 parking P�a No minimum n/a 100 mz GFA, including space per: portables Maximum 1 P�a 75 m2 GFA, n/a 75 mz GFA, including parking space per: including portables portables School, Elementary Minimum 1 Class A Bicycle Parking 44/a 1,000 mz GFA n/a 1,000 mz GFA Stallper: Minimum 1 Class B Bicycle Parking q�a 100 mz GFA n/a 100 m2 GFA Stallper: 18. Section 5.8 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by replacing "UGC' with "SGA" in subsection e). 19. Section 6 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by repealing and replacing Section 6 in its entirety with the text contained in Attachment 2. 6 Page 82 of 1179 20. Section 18 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding the following after Section 18.3: "18.4 DEEMED TO COMPLY: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS INA STRATEGIC GROWTH AREA ZONE a) For the following lots, nothing in this By-law applies to prevent the issuance of any building permit, site plan control approval, plan of subdivision approval, or plan of condominium approval where a complete application was made on or after the effective date of this By- law, where said application fully complied with the provisions of By-law Number 85-1 or 2019-051 as it existed immediately before the effective date of this By-law, or where said application fully complied with a minor variance from the provisions of the same which was approved on or after January 1, 2017: i) 20 & 30 Breithaupt Street (By-law 2018-071, S.8) ii) 471, 475, 481 & 505 King Street East and 18-24 Cameron Street South (By-law 2018-073, S.4) iii) 607-641 King Street West (By-law 2021-067, S.8) iv) 61 & 65 Roy Street (By-law 2021-085, S.2) v) 134-152 Shanley Street (By-law 2022-024) vi) 890-900 King Street West (By-law 2022-038, S.2) vii) 30 Francis Street South (By-law 2022-039, S. 3) viii) 20 Ottawa Street North (By-law 2022-070, S.3) ix) 276 King Street East (By-law 2022-080, S.4) x) 95-101 Cedar Street South (By-law 2022-094, S.3) A) 27 Roy Street (By-law 2022-110) xii) 368, 372, 374 and 382 Ottawa Street South and 99, 103, 107, 111 and 115 Pattandon Avenue (By-law 2022-114) xiii) 1251-1253 King Street East and 16 Sheldon Avenue South (By- law 2022-138, S.3) 7 Page 83 of 1179 xiv) 206 & 210 Duke Street East and 46-50 Madison Avenue North (By-law 2022-140, S.4) xv) 45-53 Courtland Avenue East (By-law 2023-033, S.4) xvi) 1001 King Street East (By-law 2023-061) xvii) 455-509 Mill Street (By-law 2023-063) xviii) 146-162 Victoria Street South and 92-110 Park Street (By-law 2023-052) xix) 787-851 King Street East / 432 Charles Street East / 5 Stirling Avenue South (SP23/035/S/KA) b) Nothing in Section 18 shall be deemed to provide an exemption from requirements to set aside Affordable Units, beyond those exemptions included in Section 4; and, "18.5 TRANSITION SUNSET CLAUSE —STRATEGIC GROWTH AREA (SGA) ZONED LOTS Despite Section 18.3, Sections 18.1, 18.2, 18.4, and 18.5, as they apply to lots zoned SGA -1, SGA -2, SGA -3, or SGA -4, are automatically repealed on the tenth anniversary of the effective date of this By-law, and the provisions of Section 34(9) of the Planning Act shall thereafter apply in respect of any buildings, structures, or uses established or erected pursuant to any such complete application. 21. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (1) thereto as follows: 11 1. Within the lands zoned SGA -2 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedules 84, 85, 120, and 121 of Appendix A, the following shall apply: a. the maximum building height shall be 6 storeys, and a 3 metre stepback shall be required after the 5th storey; and, b. for existing buildings exceeding 6 storeys, the maximum building height shall be the existing building height." 22. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (2) thereto as follows: M. Page 84 of 1179 "2. Within the lands zoned SGA -2, SGA -3 or SGA -4 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedules 84, 85, 120, and 121 of Appendix A, the following shall apply: a) the minimum front, interior side, rear, and exterior side yard setback shall be Om for storeys 1 through 6; b) the minimum King Street, Ontario Street, and Queen Street street line ground floor fagade openings shall be 50%; c) residential uses, office and any Creative Industry Use listed in Table 6-1 shall not be permitted on the ground floor, except for access; and, d) the minimum setback for a building base to a lot line abutting Halls Lane, Bell Lane, and Goudies Lane shall be Om." 23. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (3) thereto as follows: "3. Within the lands zoned SGA -2 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedule 84 of Appendix A, the maximum building height shall be 10 storeys or 29 metres, whichever is less." 24. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (166) thereto as follows: "166. Within the lands zoned OSR-1 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedule 85 of Appendix A, office shall also be permitted." 25. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by repealing Section 19 (189) in its entirety and replacing it thereto as follows: "189. Within the lands zoned SGA -2 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedule 83 of Appendix A, the following shall apply: 9 Page 85 of 1179 a) On-site parking shall be provided as follows: parking for multiple dwellings shall be provided at a rate of 0.7 parking spaces per unit plus 0.1 visitor spaces per unit; b) the minimum and maximum height of the required visual barrier shall be 2.44 metres; c) the maximum building height shall be 27.75 metres; d) the maximum floorspace ratio shall be 3; e) the minimum front yard setback (Duke Street frontage) shall be 4.1 metres; f) the minimum exterior side yard setback (Shanley Street frontage) shall be 5.8 metres; g) the minimum side yard setback shall be: i. 3 metres for buildings up to 5 storeys; and, ii. 9.3 metres for any portion of the building 6 or more storeys. h) the minimum rear yard setback shall be: i. 9 metres for buildings up to 2 storeys; and, ii. 12 metres for any portion of the building 3 or more storeys. i) the following uses shall also be permitted on the ground floor. i. artisan's establishment; ii. studio and craftsperson shop; iii. convenience retail; iv. day care facility; V. health office; vi. personal services; vii. office; viii. restaurant; and, ix. social service establishment. 10 Page 86 of 1179 j) Geothermal Energy systems shall be prohibited." 26. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by repealing Section 19 (341) in its entirety and replacing it thereto as follows: "341. Within the lands zoned SGA -4 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedule 73 of Appendix A, the following shall apply: a) the minimum front yard setback to Park Street shall be 0 metres; b) the minimum exterior side yard setback to Victoria Street South shall be 0 metres; c) the maximum building height shall be 122 metres; d) the maximum number of storeys shall be 38; e) the maximum floorspace ratio shall be 11.68; f) the minimum amount of non-residential gross floor area shall be 1,750 square metres; g) the minimum ground floor street line fagade width as a percent of the width of the abutting street line shall be 70%; h) the minimum percent street line fagade openings shall be 70%; i) the minimum required rate of parking spaces for multiple dwelling shall be 0.6 spaces per dwelling unit; j) the minimum required rate of Class A bicycle parking stalls for multiple dwelling shall be 0.6 spaces per dwelling unit; and, k) geothermal wells are prohibited on site. A geothermal well is a well defined as a vertical well, borehole or pipe installation used for geothermal systems, ground -source heat pump systems, geo- exchange systems or earth energy systems for heating or cooling; including open -loop and closed-loop vertical borehole systems. A geothermal well does not include a horizontal system where construction or excavation occurs to depths less than five metres unless the protective geologic layers overlaying a vulnerable aquifer have been removed through construction or excavation." 11 Page 87 of 1179 27. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by repealing Section 19 (348) in its entirety and replacing it thereto as follows: "348. Within the lands zoned SGA -2 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedules 117 and 118 of Appendix A, the following shall apply: a) the maximum floor space ratio shall be 2.5 and shall be calculated pre road -widening; b) parking shall be provided at a rate of 0.84 parking spaces per dwelling unit plus 0.1 visitor parking spaces per dwelling unit; c) the minimum rear yard setback shall be: i. 22.5 metres for any portion of the building 4 or more storeys in height; ii. 26.2 metres for any portion of the building 7 or more storeys in height; iii. 33.3 metres for any portion of the building 8 storeys; and, d) Geothermal Energy Systems shall be prohibited." 28. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by repealing Section 19 (362) in its entirety and replacing it thereto as follows: "362. Within the lands zoned SGA -4 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedules 118, 144 and 145 of Appendix A, the following shall apply: a) the maximum floor space ratio shall be 8.5 and shall be calculated pre -road widening and pre -conveyance of parkland; b) the maximum building height shall be 145 metres; c) the maximum number of storeys shall be 44; d) that parking be provided at a rate of 0.55 parking spaces per dwelling unit plus 0.05 visitor parking spaces per dwelling unit; 12 Page 88 of 1179 e) the minimum rear yard building base setback shall be 0 metres; f) the minimum rear yard building tower setback shall be 2.5 metres; g) the minimum interior side yard building setback shall be 2.9 metres and regulated pre- conveyance of parkland; h) the minimum ground floor street line fagade width as a percent of the width of the abutting street line shall be 25%; i) the maximum number of storeys in the base of a mid -rise building or tall building shall be 8; j) the minimum non-residential gross floor area shall be 2000 square metres; and, k) Geothermal Energy Systems shall be prohibited." 29. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (16) thereto as follows: 16. Within the lands zoned SGA -4 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedules 40, 41, 73 and 74 of Appendix A, the following uses shall only be permitted as an accessory use in the manufacturing of industrial equipment and machinery Stamping, Blanking or Punch -Pressing of Metal Vulcanizing of Rubber or Rubber Products: a) Refining, rolling, forging or extruding of metal." 30. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (17) thereto as follows: "17. Within the lands zoned SGA -3 or SGA -4 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedules 73, 74, 83, 84, 117, 118, 119, 144, and 145 of Appendix A, a day care facility, dwelling unit, home occupation, hotel, lodging house, school, large residential care facility, and small residential care facility shall not be permitted in any building unless: 13 Page 89 of 1179 a) existing on the date of passing of this By-law; or b) Located within a portion of a building located a minimum of 15.0 metres from the railway right-of-way." 31. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (51) thereto as follows: "51. Within the lands zoned SGA -3 or SGA -4 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedules 40, 41, 73, 74, 83, 84, and 122 of Appendix A, a day care facility, dwelling unit, home occupation, hotel, lodging house, school, large residential care facility, and small residential care facility shall not be permitted in any building unless: a) existing on the date of passing of this By-law; or b) Located within a portion of a building located a minimum of 30.0 metres from the railway right-of-way." 32. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (52) thereto as follows: "52. Within the lands zoned SGA -3 or SGA -4 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedule 84 of Appendix A, day care facility, dwelling unit, home occupation, lodging house, school, large residential care facility, small residential care facility shall not be permitted in any building, except for where: a) a setback of 30.0 metres from the lot line abutting the CN Rail right- of-way has been provided for any parts of a building used for a day care facility, dwelling unit, lodging house, residential care facility, school, or social service establishment; and, b) a detailed Noise and Vibration Assessment, to assess both potential off-site and on-site transportation and stationary noise sources, has been completed to the satisfaction of the Region." 14 Page 90 of 1179 33. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (54) thereto as follows: "54. Within the lands zoned SGA -3 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedules 74 and 84 of Appendix A, the following uses shall not be permitted: a) commercial entertainment; b) conference, convention, or exhibition facility; c) cultural facility; d) dwelling unit; e) home occupation; f) hospice; g) hotel; h) lodging house; i) place of worship; j) residential care facility; k) school; and, 1) social service establishment." 34. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (125) thereto as follows: "125. Within the lands zoned SGA -3 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedules 74 and 84 of Appendix A, the following shall apply: a) commercial entertainment, conference, convention, or exhibition facility, cultural facility, hotel, lodging house, or place of worship shall not be permitted; and, b) day care facility, dwelling unit, hospice, hotel, lodging house, residential care facility, school, or social service establishment shall not be permitted unless the City has received acknowledgement from 15 Page 91 of 1179 the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks advising that a Record of Site Condition has been completed in accordance with the relevant Ontario legislation and/or regulations." 35. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (130) thereto as follows: 130. Within the lands zoned SGA -4 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedules 74 and 84 of Appendix A, a brewpub shall be permitted." 36. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (131) thereto as follows: 131. Within the lands zoned SGA -4 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedules 119 and 143 of Appendix A, the following shall apply: a) no building or structure having a height greater than 0.9 metres shall be permitted within the area defined in the image below; and, b) the maximum exterior side yard setback from the Charles Street street line shall be 3 metres beyond the area defined in the image below, or 7.5 metres from the street line, whichever is greater." 16 Page 92 of 1179 Region of Waterloo Sight Line Governing Driver Visibility Vehicular Access Points v to 432 Charles St- Subject Area �� ff '16 V f _ _ IY- 5gR_jB137 e+m vnm s e �197r ¢� o- Q !� ..ter .. 37. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (132) thereto as follows: "132. Within the lands zoned SGA -3 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedules 74 and 84 of Appendix A, a mixed-use development shall be permitted in accordance with the following: a) the required off-street parking for all uses shall be 1 parking space per 93 square metres of gross floor area; 17 Page 93 of 1179 b) all off-street parking spaces provided on the lands shall be located at or below grade; c) a minimum of 1 bicycle parking stall , which is either in a building or structure or within a secure area such as a supervised parking lot or enclosure with a secure entrance or within a bicycle locker, per 333 square metres of gross floor area of all uses shall be provided; d) a minimum of 1 bicycle parking stall, which is located in accessible and highly visible locations near the entrance of a building and are accessible to the general public, per 500 square metres of gross floor area of all uses shall be provided; e) the front yard shall be the lot line abutting Breithaupt Street; and, f) the maximum floorspace ratio shall be 4.5." 38. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (133) thereto as follows: 133. Within the lands zoned SGA -3 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedules 74 and 84 of Appendix A, the following shall apply: a) the rear lot line shall be the lot line abutting Wellington Street North; i) The minimum rear yard setback shall be 15 metres for any portion of a building with a building height of less than 21 metres; ii) The minimum rear yard setback shall be 31.5 metres for any portion of a building with a building height of less than 21 metres; b) a building used for access to underground parking which is combined with an amenity of landscape feature shall not be subject to regulation a) above; c) the maximum building height shall be 50 metres; d) the minimum front yard setback from Breithaupt Street shall be 0 metres for any portion of a building; and, e) the minimum exterior side yard setback from Moore Avenue shall be 0 metres for any portion of a building." 18 Page 94 of 1179 39. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (136) thereto as follows: 136. Within the lands zoned SGA -3 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedules 74 and 84 of Appendix A, the following shall apply: a) the maximum building height shall be 18.0 metres; and, b) the minimum side yard setback where the lot abuts a lot with an SGA - 2 zone shall be 7.5 metres." 40. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (137) thereto as follows: "137. Within the lands zoned SGA -3 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedule 120 of Appendix A, the following shall apply: a) Definitions for the purpose of this regulation: i) "Tall Building" shall mean any building that is 9 storeys or more; ii) "Tower' shall mean the `middle' portion of a Tall Building connecting the Base or Podium to the top and housing the primary function; iii) "Base" or "Podium" includes the ground floor and any additional floors with a direct relationship to the streetscape and public realm. This can include multistorey podiums, portions of a Tower which extend to the ground floor and structured parking areas; iv) "Floor Plate" shall mean the building floor area of the Tower portion of the building; v) "Public Art' shall mean visual art integrated into the building design or provided on site which is accessible and visible to the general public; vi) "Streetscape" shall mean those functional and decorative elements that are placed, laid, erected, planted or suspended within a public or communal urban space. They include public 19 Page 95 of 1179 utilities and amenities, visible elements of service infrastructure, street lights, traffic signs and signals, street trees and other horticultural elements, general public furniture, advertising signs and decorations. b) The maximum floor space ratio shall be 7.1; c) The minimum front yard setback and side yard setback abutting streets and rear yard setback for a Podium with a maximum height of five storeys shall be 0.0 metres; d) The minimum stepback for a tower above the Podium is 2.8 metres; e) The maximum building heights of two Tall Buildings are 72 metres and 59.5 metres; f) The minimum parking shall be required at a rate of 0.84 parking spaces per dwelling unit; g) The minimum visitor parking rate shall be 10% of the total required residential parking spaces; h) The minimum parking requirement for permitted commercial uses shall be 1 space per 55 square metres of gross floor area of the retail space; i) The maximum permitted gross floor area of retail space shall be 1169 square metres. 41. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (140) thereto as follows: "140. Within the lands zoned SGA -4 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedules 74 and 84 of Appendix A, the following shall apply: a) For the purposes of regulations (b) to (h), the following definitions shall apply: "Tall Building" shall mean any residential or mixed use building containing residential uses that is 9 storeys or more; ii. "Tower' shall mean the `middle' portion of a Tall Building connecting the Base to the top and housing the residential use; 20 Page 96 of 1179 iii. "Base" shall mean the ground floor and any additional floors with a direct relationship to the streetscape and public realm. This can include multi-storey podiums, portions of a Tower which extend to the ground floor and above grade structured parking areas; iv. "Tower Floor Plate" shall mean the Building Floor Area of a typical storey of the Tower portion of the building; V. "Heritage House" shall mean the original structure constructed in 1897 which has cultural heritage significance and has historically been known or referred to as the `Kaufman House'; vi. "Crash Wall" shall mean the structure that meets accepted safety standard that is intended to provide protection from a potential derailment; vii. "Below Grade" shall mean any portion of a building where the finished grade meets the exterior wall at an elevation not more than 0.5 metres below the elevation of the underside of an interior ceiling and the maximum slope taken from the closest lot line is not more than 18 degrees (3:1 slope). In the case where a retaining wall has been installed to meet these criteria, that portion of the building shall in no way be considered to be below grade; viii. "Building Floor Area" shall mean the aggregate horizontal floor area measured from the exterior walls of all storeys of a building excluding any floor area located below grade. The midpoint of a common wall shall be considered the face of the exterior in the case of common walls located on a lot line; b) Setbacks from Railways shall be in accordance with Section 4.16 of this By-law, with the following special regulations: No minimum setback shall be required for any building or part thereof devoted to parking or to non-residential use; and ii. The setbackfrom the railway to any building or part thereof used for residential dwellings shall be a minimum of 30 metres. The setback may be measured as the sum total of the following two measurements provided that a Crash Wall, or combination berm and fence are provided within the horizontal setback between the residential use and the lot line abutting the CN Rail right-of- way; 21 Page 97 of 1179 iii. The horizontal setback to the residential use from the lot line abutting the CN Rail right-of-way; and iv. The vertical distance from the finished elevation of the CN railway line at the centerline of the tracks to the finished elevation of the residential use. c) Parking on the subject lands shall be subject to the following regulations: All required off-street parking spaces shall be provided on a per - phase basis, to be calculated based on the uses proposed for the respective phase and all previously completed phases; ii. Underground parking spaces shall have a minimum dimension of 2.6 m in width and 5.5 m in length; iii. Underground parking is permitted with a setback of 0 metres from King Street and 0 metres from Wellington Street; iv. Required off-street parking spaces (including visitor parking) may be shared among the permitted uses; V. Required off-street parking spaces for residential uses shall be provided at a rate of 0.65 spaces per unit (including visitor parking); vi. Required off-street parking spaces for non-residential uses (including office and retail) shall be provided at a rate of 1 space per 69 square metres of gross floor area; vii. Off-street parking spaces shall not be required for non- residential uses (including any community space) with a gross floor area of less than 1500 square metres; viii. A shared parking reduction of 15% shall be applied to the total parking requirement; ix. A minimum of 20% of the parking spaces required for multiple dwellings shall be designed to permit the future installation of electric vehicle supply equipment; X. Where the calculation of the total required electric vehicle parking spaces or parking spaces designed to permit the future installation of electric vehicle supply equipment results in a 22 Page 98 of 1179 fraction, then the requirement shall be the next lowest number; and, A. The number of parking spaces required for any non-residential uses requiring shower and change facilities may be reduced by 1 parking space per required shower. d) Bicycle Parking on the subject lands shall be subject to the following regulations: The minimum requirement for Class A Bicycle Parking Stalls shall be 0.5 Class A Bicycle Parking Stalls per dwelling unit. ii. For Office uses, the minimum requirement for Class A Bicycle Parking Stalls shall be 1 per 500 m2 of gross floor area. iii. For Retail uses, the minimum requirement for Class A Bicycle Parking Stalls shall be 1 per 1,000 m2 of gross floor area. iv. Shower and change facilities shall be provided in conjunction with the Class A Bicycle Parking Stalls required for any non- residential uses in accordance with the following table: Required Number of Class A Bicycle Parking Stalls Minimum Total Area of Shower and Change Facilities Minimum Number of Showers within Shower and Change Facilities 5-60 8 m2 2 showers 61-120 12 m2 4 showers 121-180 16 m2 6 showers Greater than 180 20 m2 8 showers V. Notwithstanding the above, shower and change facilities shall not be required for individual non-residential units with an area of 1,000 m2 or less. e) Buildings on the subject lands shall be subject to the following regulations: No minimum setback from the abutting railway shall be required for any building or part thereof devoted to parking or to non- residential use; 23 Page 99 of 1179 ii. Dwelling units shall be permitted on the ground floor of a mixed use building; iii. The minimum width of a primary ground floor facade shall be 0%; iv. The maximum Floor Space Ratio (FSR) shall be 7.5; V. The maximum gross floor area for an individual retail outlet may exceed 1,000 metres squared; vi. A maximum gross floor area of 10,000 metres squared of non- residential uses is permitted. Office use shall not be included for the purpose of the non-residential gross floor area cap of 10,000 metres squared; vii. The minimum percentage of non-residential uses required shall be 0%. viii. The maximum residential Tower Floor Plate for a Tall Building shall be 850 square metres. ix. The maximum Base height for a residential Tall Building shall be 24 metres. f) The Heritage House on the subject lands shall be subject to the following regulations: No buildings shall be permitted between the Heritage House and the King Street street line; ii. A porch attached to the Heritage House shall be permitted between the building and the King Street street line and the maximum height regulation of Section 4.14.7 b) shall not apply; iii. A canopy over the building entrance of the Heritage House may be permitted between the building and the King Street street line and the maximum projection regulation of Section 4.14.3 b) shall not apply; iv. The minimum horizontal separation distance from the Heritage House to a new building up to 8.0 metres in height to its northwest shall be 5.5 metres; 24 Page 100 of 1179 V. The minimum horizontal separation distance from the Heritage House to a new building above 9.5 metres in height to its northwest shall be 18.5 metres; vi. The minimum horizontal separation distance from the Heritage House to a new building up to 8.0 metres in height to its southeast shall be 11.5 metres; vii. The minimum horizontal separation distance from the Heritage House to a new building above 8.0 metres in height to its southeast shall be 40 metres; viii. A building addition of up to 6.0 metres in depth may be permitted along the rear elevation of the Heritage House; ix. The minimum horizontal separation distance from the Heritage House to a building above 8.0 metres in height to its southwest shall be 17.5 metres; X. The Heritage House shall be deemed to comply to all applicable zoning regulations, including yards, building height, fagade regulations and floor space ratio; and A. Retail and other non-residential uses shall be permitted in the Heritage House and shall not be required to be located only on the ground floor with other permitted uses in upper floors of the Heritage House. g) Any building or portion of a building within 45 metres of the King Street street line shall also be subject to the following regulations: The minimum setback from the lot line shared with the railway shall be 0.0 metres for a Crash Wall and 5.0 metres for a building used for parking or non-residential use where no Crash Wall is provided; ii. The minimum setback from the King Street street line shall be 1.5 metres except if located within 105 metres of the Wellington eStreet street line, in which case it shall be 4.5 metres with a maximum building height of 8.0 metres; iii. The maximum setbackto the King Street street line shall be 7.5 metres except if located within 110 metres of the Wellington Street street line, in which case there shall be no maximum setback; 25 Page 101 of 1179 iv. For a building with frontage on King Street, a minimum stepback from the King Street fagade Base of a Tall Building to a Tower shall be 3.0 metres; V. The minimum setback from the Wellington Street street line shall be 1.5 metres. Ground level patios may encroach within this setback; vi. The maximum setback from the Wellington Street street line shall be 7.5 metres; vii. A minimum stepback from the Wellington Street facade Base of a Tall Building to a Tower shall be 3.0 metres; viii. A building having frontage on King Street as well as Wellington Street: a) Shall be subject to the fagade openings regulations of Section 55.2.1 of this By-law in relation to the King Street fagade; and b) Shall not be subject to the fagade openings regulations of Section 55.2.1 of this Bylaw in relation to the Wellington Street facade. ix. Canopies and stairs shall be subject to a 0.0 metre minimum setback in relation to the King Street street line. h) Any building or portion of a building that is not within 45 metres of the King Street street line shall also be subject to the following regulations: Within 7 metres of the Wellington Street streetline the maximum height shall be 15 metres; and ii. The minimum setback to the Tower portion of a Tall Building from the southern lot line shall be 7.5 metres". 42. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (141) thereto as follows: "141. Within the lands zoned SGA -2 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedule 120 of Appendix A, the following shall apply: 26 Page 102 of 1179 a) A multiple dwelling and mixed-use building shall be permitted in accordance with the following: i. The minimum lot width shall be 30.0 metres; ii. The minimum front yard setback shall be 3.0 metres; iii. The minimum exterior side yard setback shall be 3.0 metres; iv. The minimum side yard setback shall be 4.5 metres; V. The maximum floorspace ratio shall be 3.6; vi. The maximum building height shall be 25.0 metres; vii. The maximum number of storeys shall be 8. b) Off-street parking spaces shall be provided in accordance with the following: Use Minimum Off -Street Parking Spaces Required Maximum Off -Street Parking Spaces Permitted Multiple Dwelling 0.18/unit 1/unit Multiple Dwelling Visitor 0.02/unit c) Bicycle Parking Stalls shall be provided in accordance with the following: Use Class A Bicycle Stall Class B Bicycle Stall Multiple Dwelling 0.5 per unit without a private 6 garage d) For the purpose of regulation c) above, a Class A Bicycle Parking Stall shall be a bicycle space which is either in a building or structure or within a secure area such as a supervised parking lot or enclosure with a secure entrance or within a bicycle locker; e) For the purpose of regulation c) above, a Class B Bicycle Stall shall be a bicycle space which is located in accessible and highly visible locations near the entrance of a building and are accessible to the general public." 27 Page 103 of 1179 43. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (153) thereto as follows: "153. Within the lands zoned SGA -1 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedules 84 and 121 of Appendix A, no greater than 5 dwelling units shall be permitted within an existing building." 44. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (162) thereto as follows: "162. Within the lands zoned SGA -3 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedules 39 and 75 of Appendix A, the following shall apply: a) Canopies and stairs shall be subject to a 0 metre minimum setback in relation to the lot line abutting King Street; b) Parking on the subject lands shall be provided according to the following regulations: i) Required off-street parking spaces (including visitor parking spaces) may be shared among the permitted uses; ii) Required off-street parking spaces for multiple dwellings greater than 51.0 square metres in size shall be provided at a rate of 0.165 spaces per dwelling unit; iii) Required off-street parking spaces for multiple dwellings less than 51.0 square metres in size shall be provided at a rate of 0.165 spaces per dwelling unit; iv) Required off-street visitor parking spaces shall be provided at a rate of 10% of the required parking spaces for multiple dwellings; v) A minimum of 10% of the parking spaces required for multiple dwellings shall be designed to permit the future installation of electric vehicle supply equipment; vi) Where the calculation of the total required electric vehicle parking spaces or parking spaces designed to permit the future installation of electric vehicle supply equipment results in a fraction, then the requirement shall be the next lowest number; 28 Page 104 of 1179 vii) For multiple dwellings, the minimum requirement for Class A bicycle parking stalls shall be 0.5 Class A bicycle parking stalls per unit; viii) For multiple dwellings, a minimum of 6 Class B bicycle parking stalls shall be provided, and these may be shared with non- residential uses; c) No shower and change facilities shall be required for non-residential uses; d) Geothermal Wells are prohibited on site. A geothermal well is defined as a vertical well, borehole or pipe installation used for geothermal systems, ground -source heat pump systems, geo-exchange systems or earth energy systems for heating or cooling; including open -loop and closed-loop vertical borehole systems. A geothermal well does not include a horizontal system where construction or excavation occurs to depths less than five metres unless the protective geologic layers overlaying a vulnerable aquifer have been removed through construction or excavation. e) Any building on the subject lands shall be subject to the following regulations: i) The rear yard setback from the lot line abutting the lands municipally addressed as 904 King Street West shall be 0.7 metres; ii) The side yard setback from the lot line abutting Dodds Lane shall be 0.6 metres; iii) The maximum floor space ratio shall be 10.1; iv) The minimum percentage of non-residential uses required shall be 0%; v) The minimum number of storeys in the base of a tall building shall be 2 storeys or 7.0 metres; vi) The maximum number of storeys in the base of a tall building shall be 6 storeys or 24.0 metres; vii) The minimum setback from Dodds Lane to the Tower portion of a building shall be 5.0 metres; viii)The maximum building height shall be 81 metres; and 29 Page 105 of 1179 ix) The maximum number of storeys shall be 25 not including the mechanical penthouse." 45. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (163) thereto as follows: "163. Within the lands zoned SGA -4 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedule 84 of Appendix A, the following shall apply: a) Dwelling units shall be permitted in a building containing non- residential uses on the ground floor; b) Dwelling units and accessory amenity use shall not be located on the ground floor; c) The minimum building floor area on the ground floor for any use(s) listed in Section 17.1 of this By-law, except for those uses listed in subsection (b) above, shall be 250 square metres; g) The minimum rear yard setback shall be 0 metres." 46. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (165) thereto as follows: "165. Within the lands zoned SGA -4 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedule 143 of Appendix A, the following shall apply: a) Dwelling units shall be permitted to be located on the ground floor with non-residential uses; b) On-site parking spaces shall be provided as follows: i) Parking spaces for multiple dwellings shall be provided at a rate of 0.74 for dwelling units over 51 square metres; ii) Visitor parking spaces shall be sharable with non-residential uses and shall be provided at a rate of 7% of the required parking spaces; c) The minimum rear yard setback shall be 15.0 metres for any portion of a building with a building height of 5 storeys or greater that is abutting any property with an SGA -1 zone; d) The minimum side yard setback shall be 4.5 metres for any portion of a building abutting any property with an SGA -1 zone; and, 30 Page 106 of 1179 e) The minimum and maximum height of the required visual barrier shall be 2.44 metres." 47. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (167) thereto as follows: "167. Within the lands zoned SGA -2 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedule 120 of Appendix A, the following shall apply: a) The maximum floorspace ratio shall be 4.8; b) The maximum building height shall be 28.5 metres or 7 storeys; c) The minimum front yard setback abutting King Street shall be 2.0 metres; d) The maximum front yard setback abutting King Street shall be 2.0 metres; e) The minimum exterior side yard setback abutting Eby Street shall be 0 metres; f) The maximum exteriorside yard setback abutting Eby Street shall be 2.0 metres; g) The minimum side yard setbackfrom the northwest property line (I.e., abutting 270 King Street East) shall be 1.2 metres; h) The minimum rear yard setback shall be 4.0 metres; i) Dwelling units shall not be located on the ground floor; j) An outdoor rooftop amenity area shall be provided for a building containing dwelling units. The outdoor rooftop amenity area shall have a minimum area of 100 square metres; k) No outdoor storage of goods, materials or equipment shall be permitted. This shall not, however, prevent the display of goods for retail purposes; I) The minimum number of secured, long-term bicycle parking stalls shall be 33; m) The minimum number of short-term publicly accessible bicycle parking stalls shall be 12; and, n) No off-street parking spaces shall be required for any permitted use." 31 Page 107 of 1179 48. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (168) thereto as follows: "168. Within the lands zoned SGA -1 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedules 119 and 120 of appendix A, the following shall apply: a) The minimum lot width for a lot containing a building with more than 3 dwelling units shall be 36 metres; b) The maximum building height for a multiple dwelling which includes partially below grade structured parking shall be 16 metres. Any multiple dwelling not incorporating structured parking shall have a maximum building height of 14 metres; c) The maximum floorspace ratio for a multiple dwelling which includes structured parking shall be 1.46; d) The minimum front yard setback for lands be: 3.0 metres for any portion of the building not exceeding 4.0 metres in height; ii. 5.2 metres for any portion of a building exceeding 4.0 metres in height, provided however that 3rd and 4th floor building projections are permitted to have a setback of 3.95 metres. e) For the purposes of regulations 168 f) to g) "Building Height" shall mean the vertical distance between the lowest finished grade elevation along the lot line related to such yard at that point closest to the building and the horizontal extension of the uppermost point of the building: f) The minimum rear yard setback for any portion of a building not exceeding 3.0 metres in Building Height shall be 3.5 metres; g) The minimum side yard setback along the northerly lot line shall be: 1.5 metres for any portion of a building not exceeding 9.0 metres in Building Height, and; ii. 3.0 metres for any portion of a building exceeding 9.0 metres in Building Height; 32 Page 108 of 1179 h) Dwelling units located on the ground floor are not required to have an exclusive use patio area. i) Stairs, access ramps and porches having height greater than 0.6 metres above finished grade level are permitted within the front yard and within 3.0 metres of a street line. j) That a "driveway visibility triangle" shall be measured from the point of intersection of a street line and the edge of a driveway a distance of 3 metres from the street line and 4.5 metres from the edge of the driveway." 49. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (170) thereto as follows: "170. Within the lands zoned SGA -1 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedule 121 of Appendix A, the following shall apply: a) An artisan's establishment and restaurant shall be permitted uses and may locate within a building containing residential uses; b) The minimum lot area shall be 418.06 square metres; c) The minimum lot width shall be 13.72 metres; d) Off-street parking for commercial uses shall be 1 parking space per 167 square metres of gross floor area; and, e) The maximum number of dwelling units in a multiple dwelling shall be 4 dwelling units." 50. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (172) thereto as follows: "172. Within the lands zoned SGA -3 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedule 143 of Appendix A, the following shall apply: a) The maximum floorspace ratio shall be 8.6; b) On-site parking shall be provided as follows: i) Parking spaces for multiple dwellings shall be provided at a rate of 0.43 spaces per dwelling unit; 33 Page 109 of 1179 ii) Visitor parking spaces shall be sharable with non-residential uses and be provided at a rate of 10% of the required parking spaces; iii) Bicycle and electric vehicle parking are to be provided in accordance with Section 5 of this By-law. c) Dwelling units shall be permitted to be located on the ground floor with non-residential uses; d) Geothermal Energy Systems shall be prohibited." 51. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (173) thereto as follows: "173. Within the lands zoned SGA -2 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedule 85 of Appendix A, the following shall apply: a) Required off-street parking for multiple dwellings greater than 51.0 square metres in size shall be provided at a rate of 0.7 parking spaces per dwelling unit; b) Off-street visitor parking shall be provided at a minimum rate of 10%; c) A minimum of 10% of the parking spaces required for multiple dwellings shall be designed to permit the future installation of electric vehicle supply equipment; d) Where the calculation of the total required electric vehicle parking spaces or parking spaces designed to permit the future installation of electric vehicle supply equipment results in a fraction, then the requirement shall be the next lowest number. e) For multiple dwellings, the minimum requirement for class A bicycle parking stalls shall be 0.5 class A bicycle parking stalls per unit; f) For multiple dwellings, a minimum of 6 class 8 bicycle parking stalls shall be provided, and these may be shared with non-residential uses. g) The maximum floor space ratio for the entire site shall be 2.4; h) The minimum side yard setback from eastern property line shall be 2.0 metres; i) The minimum rear yard setback shall be 19 metres; j) The maximum building height for the entire site shall be 21 metres including roof top mechanicals." 34 Page 110 of 1179 52. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (175) thereto as follows: "175. Within the lands zoned SGA -4 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedule 143 of Appendix A, the following shall apply: a) The maximum floor space ratio shall be 8.1. For clarity, the floor space ratio shall be calculated based on a pre -road widening lot area of 6,492 square metres. b) The minimum exterior side yard setback abutting Charles Street East shall be: i) 1.2 metres for the ground floor, - ii) 0.0 metres for storeys above the ground floor c) The minimum exterior side yard setback abutting King Street East shall be: i) 1.2 metres for portions of the building containing commercial, residential and amenity uses; ii) 5.0 metres for portions of the building containing mechanical and/or parking structure. For clarity, the setback shall be measured based on the post -road widening lot line. d) Live -work units shall be permitted to be located on the ground floor fronting Charles Street East. e) On-site parking spaces shall be provided as follows: Use Minimum Off -Street Parking Spaces Required Multiple Dwelling 0.54 spaces per unit Visitor 0.1 spaces per unit and shall be shareable with non-residential uses Ground Floor Non -Residential Uses 0 spaces f) Bicycle parking is to be provided as follows: Use Class A Bicycle Stall Class B Bicycle Stall Multiple Dwelling 0.5 per unit 8 35 Page 111 of 1179 For the purposes of this regulation a 'Class A Bicycle Stall' shall be a bicycle space which is either in a building or structure or within a secure area such as a supervised parking lot or enclosure with a secure entrance or within a bicycle locker. For the purposes of this regulation a 'Class B Bicycle Stall' shall be a bicycle space which is located in accessible and highly visible locations near the entrance of a building and are accessible to the general public. g) A minimum of 20 percent of the on-site parking spaces required for multiple dwellings shall be designed to permit future installation of electric vehicle supply equipment. h) Geothermal Energy Systems shall be prohibited." 53. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (388) thereto as follows: "388. Within the lands zoned SGA -3 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedule 120 of Appendix 'A', the following special regulations shall apply: a) The maximum Floor Space Ratio shall be 9.8. b) On-site Parking shall be provided as follows: i) Parking for multiple dwellings shall be provided at a rate of 0.4 parking spaces per dwelling unit. ii) Visitor parking spaces shall be sharable with non-residential uses and be provided at a rate of 8% of the required parking. iii) Bicycle parking stalls and electric vehicle parking spaces are to be provided in accordance with By-law 2019-051; c) The minimum rear yard (opposite Charles Street East) setback shall be 3.0 metres from the building and a 0 metre setback from the stairwell. d) The minimum ground floor building height along the Charles Street East street line fagade shall be 4.5 metres. e) The minimum Side Yard Abutting a Street setback (setback to Betzner Avenue South) shall be 0.0 metres and shall allow the projections into Driveway Visibility Triangles." 36 Page 112 of 1179 54. Section 20 of By-law 2019-51 is hereby amended by adding Holding Provision (18) thereto as follows: "(18H). "Despite the permitted uses within the applicable SGA -1, SGA -2, SGA -3, and SGA -4 zones, within the lands shown as affected by this provision on a Zoning Grid Schedule of Appendix A, the following uses, shall not be permitted unless the City has received acknowledgement from the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks advising that a Record of Site Condition has been completed in accordance with the relevant Ontario legislation and/or regulations: a) cultural facility; b) day care facility; c) dwelling unit; d) elementary school; e) hotel; f) lodging house; g) personal services; h) post -secondary school; i) secondary school; j) small and large residential care facility; or k) social service establishment." 55. Section 20 of By-law 2019-51 is hereby amended by adding Holding Provision (19) thereto as follows: "(19H). Within the lands zoned SGA -4 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedules 39, 40, 41, 73, 74, 75, 83, 84, 85, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 142, 143, 144, and 145 of Appendix A, buildings and structures shall not exceed a maximum height in accordance with the "Land Use Assessment CYKF — KITCHENER/WATERLOO, ON RNAV (RNP) Y RWY 08-RNP0.3" prepared by IDS North America dated October 3, 2023 and additionally as follows: 37 Page 113 of 1179 i) Areas 1 through 6 — 1,600 feet above sea level ii) Area 7 — 1,573 feet above sea level iii) Area 8 — 1,530 feet above sea level iv) Area 9 — 1,596 feet above sea level v) Area 10 — 1,534 feet above sea level Until such time as: a) a detailed Aeronautical Assessment has been completed to the satisfaction of NAV Canada and the holding symbol affecting these lands has been removed by by-law; or b) the Region has completed the Region of Waterloo International Airport Master Plan update in progress at the time of the application of this holding provision in 2024 and any necessary updates to the Federal Airport Zoning Regulations have been completed and the holding symbol affecting these lands has been removed by by-law." 56. Section 20 of By-law 2019-51 is hereby amended by repealing Holding Provision (36) in its entirety and replacing it thereto as follows: "(36H). Within the lands zoned SGA -4 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedule 73 of Appendix A, dwelling units shall not be permitted until such time as the City has received acknowledgement from the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks advising that a Record of Site Condition has been completed in accordance with the relevant Ontario legislation and/or regulations, and the holding symbol affecting these lands has been removed by by-law." 57. Section 20 of By-law 2019-51 is hereby amended by repealing Holding Provision (37) in its entirety and replacing it thereto as follows: "(37H). Within the lands zoned SGA -2 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedule 117 and 118 of Appendix A, dwelling units shall not be permitted until such time as a Stationary Noise Study is submitted and approved to the satisfaction of the Regional Commissioner of Planning, 38 Page 114 of 1179 Housing and Community Services, if necessary. This Holding Provision shall not be removed until the City is in receipt of a letter from the Regional Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services advising that such noise study or studies has been approved and an agreement, if necessary, has been entered into with the City and/or Region, as necessary, providing for the implementation of any recommended noise mitigation measures." 58. Section 20 of By-law 2019-51 is hereby amended by repealing Holding Provision (43) in its entirety and replacing it thereto as follows: "(43H). Within the lands zoned SGA -4 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedules 118, 144 and 145 of Appendix A, the following shall apply: a) Dwelling units shall not be permitted until such time as the City has received acknowledgement from the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks advising that a Record of Site Condition has been completed in accordance with the relevant Ontario legislation and/or regulations, and the holding symbol affecting these lands has been removed by by-law. b) Dwelling units shall not be permitted until such time as a Stationary Noise Study is submitted and approved to the satisfaction of the Regional Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services, if necessary. This Holding Provision shall not be removed until the City is in receipt of a letter from the Regional Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services advising that such noise study or studies has been approved and an agreement, if necessary, has been entered into with the City and/or Region, as necessary, providing for the implementation of any recommended noise mitigation measures." 59. Section 20 of By-law 2019-51 is hereby amended by adding Holding Provision (64) thereto as follows: 39 Page 115 of 1179 "(64H). Within the lands zoned SGA -3 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedule 120 of Appendix A, the following shall apply: i) No residential use shall be permitted until a detailed transportation (road) and stationary noise study has been completed and implementation measures recommended to the satisfaction of the Region. The detailed stationary noise study shall review the potential impacts of noise (e.g. HVAC systems) on the sensitive points of reception and the impacts of the development on adjacent noise sensitive uses. ii) No development on the lands shall occur until a detailed Site Servicing Study has been completed and implementation measures addressed to the satisfaction of the Region. iii) No development on the lands shall occur until such time as an Urban Design Brief is approved by the City's Director of Planning demonstrating a high quality of urban design that contributes positively to the public realm and streetscapes with adequate onsite amenity." 60. Section 20 of By-law 2019-51 is hereby amended by adding Holding Provision (69) thereto as follows: "(69H). Within the lands zoned SGA -2 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedules 119 and 143 of Appendix A, a day care facility, dwelling unit, hotel, lodging house, residential care facility, school, or social service establishment shall not be permitted until such time as: a) A detailed Noise and Vibration Assessment, to assess both potential off-site and on-site transportation and stationary noise sources, has been completed to the satisfaction of the Region and any necessary agreement has been entered into, between the City and the owner of the property, providing for the implementation of any recommended noise mitigation measures; b) The City has received acknowledgement from the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks advising that a Record of Site 40 Page 116 of 1179 Condition has been completed in accordance with the relevant Ontario legislation and/or regulations; and, c) The holding symbol affecting these lands has been removed by by- law." 61. Section 20 of By-law 2019-51 is hereby amended by adding Holding Provision (70) thereto as follows: "(70H). Within the lands zoned SGA -3 or SGA -4 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedule 84 of Appendix A, a commercial parking facility (not requiring building permits), transportation depot (not requiring building permits), wayside pit, construction trailer, sales office and/or office of up to 500 square metres of gross floor area on each property (unless located within an existing building and in accordance with the regulations of Section 5 of this By-law, in which case no maximum gross floor area shall apply) shall be permitted in accordance with the regulations of Section 5 of this By-law. The holding symbol shall not be removed until such time as: a) The City has received acknowledgement from the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks advising that a Record of Site Condition has been completed in accordance with the relevant Ontario legislation; b) A detailed Servicing Capacity Study for all phases of development has been completed to the satisfaction of the Citys Director of Engineering and Director of Utilities; and c) The holding symbol affecting these lands has been removed by by- law." 62. Section 20 of By-law 2019-51 is hereby amended by adding Holding Provision (72) thereto as follows: "(72H). Within the lands zoned SGA -3 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedules 74 and 84 of Appendix A, only existing uses, including those uses approved by Site Plan Application SP1 9/081 /K/JVW, shall be permitted until such time as the holding symbol is removed by the 41 Page 117 of 1179 City's Director of Planning. The holding symbol can be removed once a detailed Noise and Vibration Assessment, to assess both potential off-site and on-site transportation and stationary noise sources, has been completed to the satisfaction of the Region. The holding provision may be removed incrementally with each stage of site plan approval subject to receipt and approval of the detailed Noise and Vibration Assessment relating to the corresponding stage." 63. Section 20 of By-law 2019-51 is hereby amended by adding Holding Provision (73) thereto as follows: "(73H). Within the lands zoned SGA -4 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedule 143 of Appendix A, dwelling units shall not be permitted until such a time as: a) A detailed Noise and Vibration Assessment, to assess both potential off-site and on-site transportation and stationary noise sources, has been completed to the satisfaction of the Region and any necessary agreement has been entered into, between the City and/or the Region and the owner of the property, providing for the implementation of any recommended noise mitigation measures; and, b) The City has received acknowledgement from the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks advising that a Record of Site Condition has been completed in accordance with the relevant Ontario legislation and/or regulations." 64. Section 20 of By-law 2019-51 is hereby amended by adding Holding Provision (74) thereto as follows: "(74H). Within the lands zoned SGA -2 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedule 120 of Appendix A, a day care facility, dwelling unit, hotel, lodging house, residential care facility, school, or social service establishment shall not be permitted until such time as a detailed Noise and Vibration Assessment, to assess both potential off-site and on-site transportation and stationary noise sources, has been completed to the satisfaction of the Region." 42 Page 118 of 1179 65. Section 20 of By-law 2019-51 is hereby amended by adding Holding Provision (75) thereto as follows: "(75H). Within the lands zoned SGA -3 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedule 143 of Appendix A, the following shall apply: a) Dwelling units shall not be permitted until such time as the City has received acknowledgement from the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks advising that a Record of Site Condition has been completed in accordance with the relevant Ontario legislation and/or regulations and the holding symbol affecting these lands has been removed by by-law. b) Dwelling units shall not be permitted until such time as a Stationary Noise Study is submitted and approved to the satisfaction of the Regional Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services, if necessary. This Holding Provision shall not be removed until the City is in receipt of a letter from the Regional Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services advising that such noise study or studies has been approved and an agreement, if necessary, has been entered into with the City and/or Region, as necessary, providing for the implementation of any recommended noise mitigation measures." 66. Section 20 of By-law 2019-51 is hereby amended by adding Holding Provision (76) thereto as follows: "(76H). Within the lands zoned SGA -2 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedule 85 of Appendix A, only those uses which lawfully existed on the date of passing of this By-law, shall be permitted to continue until such time as this Holding Provision is removed by by-law once the City is in receipt of a letter from the Region, advising that: a) A Record of Site Condition (RSC) in accordance with O. Reg. 153/04, as amended, has been filed with the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) Environmental Site Registry; b) The Region has received and approved a copy of the RSC and the Ministry's RSC Acknowledgement letter; and, 43 Page 119 of 1179 c) A detailed stationary noise study has been completed and submitted to the satisfaction of the Region which addresses implementation measures and reviews the potential impacts of the development on site noise sensitive receptors (e.g. HVAC system on the sensitive points of reception) and the impacts of the development on adjacent noise sensitive uses." 67. Section 20 of By-law 2019-51 is hereby amended by adding Holding Provision (77) thereto as follows: "(77H). Within the lands zoned SGA -4 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedule 143 of Appendix A, the following shall apply: a) Dwelling units shall not be permitted until such time as the City has received acknowledgement from the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks advising that a Record of Site Condition has been completed in accordance with the relevant Ontario legislation and the holding symbol affecting these lands has been removed by by-law. b) Dwelling units shall not be permitted until such time as a Stationary Noise Study is submitted and approved to the satisfaction of the Regional Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services, if necessary. This Holding Provision shall not be removed until the City of Kitchener is in receipt of a letter from the Regional Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services advising that such noise study or studies has been approved and an agreement, if necessary, has been entered into with the City and/or Region, as necessary, providing for the implementation of any recommended noise mitigation measures." 68. Section 20 of By-law 2019-51 is hereby amended by adding Holding Provision (78) thereto as follows: "(78H). Within the lands zoned SGA -4 and shown as affected by this provision on a Zoning Grid Schedules 39, 40, 41, 73, 74, 75, 83, 84, 85, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 142, 143, 144, and 145, no development or redevelopment shall be permitted until such time as a detailed Servicing Capacity Study 44 Page 120 of 1179 has been deemed to be required and completed to the satisfaction of the City's Director of Engineering and Director of Utilities and the holding symbol affecting these lands has been removed by by-law." 69. Section 20 of By-law 2019-51 is hereby amended by adding Holding Provision (79) thereto as follows: "(79H). Within the lands zoned SGA -4 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedule Number 85, no development or redevelopment shall be permitted until such time as all lands subject to this holding provision have been consolidated and the holding symbol affecting these lands has been removed by by-law." 70. Section 20 of By-law 2019-51 is hereby amended by adding Holding Provision (81) thereto as follows: "(81H). Within the lands shown as affected by this provision in Appendix A, development and redevelopment shall not be permitted until such time as a detailed Noise and Vibration Assessment, to assess both potential off- site and on-site transportation and stationary noise sources, has been completed to the satisfaction of the Region and any necessary agreement has been entered into, between the City of Kitchener and the owner of the property, providing for the implementation of any recommended noise mitigation measures and the holding symbol affecting these lands has been removed by by-law." 71. Appendix G — Priority Streets is hereby added to By-law 2019-051 in accordance with Attachment 3. 72. This By-law shall become effective only if Official Plan Amendment No. _ (Growing Together - 1994 Official Plan (Secondary Plans)) comes into effect, pursuant to Section 24(2) of The Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended. 45 Page 121 of 1179 73. This By-law shall become effective only if Official Plan Amendment No. (Growing Together (PMTSA Lands)) comes into effect, pursuant to Section 24(2) of The Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended. PASSED at the Council Chambers in the City of Kitchener this day of .2024. Mayor Clerk 46 Page 122 of 1179 Attachment: ZBA23/028/K/JZ Appendix A - Zoning Grid Schedule 39 [5000] Zoning By-law Index Number By -Laws Overlays Applicable to By -Law 2019-051 76 �(88) Site Specific Provision Number Lands Subject to this Flooding Ecological Restoration [1 ] Property Detail Schedule Number Zoning By-law Amendment Hazard Areas 39 ' ' .� 7s a Date: November 24, 2023 Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion Significant Wildlife Habitat �1 74 N Zoning By-law Amendment i! Hazard 0 and Landforms Attachment: ZBA23/028/K/JZ Appendix A - Zoning Grid Schedule 40 `J Zoning By-law AmendmentHazard � # +J and Landforms INVINF-1111" MMINQ Z4C*A-'W'w 0 4V 1%1�01 M PWATERLOO al ME (78H) EMU 601 MA 101, [5000] Zoning By-law Index Number By -Laws Overlays Applicable to By -Law 2019-051 (88) Site Specific Provision Number Lands Subject to this Flooding Ecological Restoration [I] Property Detail Schedule Number Zoning By-law Amendment Hazard Areas T.t.- 9A 9T9'I Lands not Subject to this qwguK�� `J Zoning By-law AmendmentHazard � # +J and Landforms Attachment: ZBA23/028/K/JZ Appendix A - Zoning Grid Schedule 41 [5000] Zoning By-law Index Number By -Laws Overlays Applicable to By -Law 2019-051 ff3642 4 (88) Site Specific Provision Number Lands Subject to this Flooding Ecological Restoration 1� Property Detail Schedule Number Zoning By-law Amendment Hazard Areas 3 Date: November 24, 2023 Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion Significant Wildlife Habitat 2 N Zoning By-law Amendment i! Hazard 0 and Landforms Attachment: ZBA23/028/K/JZ Appendix A - Zoning Grid Schedule 73 [5000] Zoning By-law Index Number (88) Site Specrfic Provision Number t❑ Property Detail Schedule Number Date: November 24, 2023 By -Laws r1 Lands Subject to this `J Zoning By-law Amendment Lands not Subject to this Zoning By-law Amendment Overlays Applicable to By -Law 2019-051 Flooding Ecological Restoration 0 Hazard Areas Slope Erosion Significant Wildlife Habitat Hazard 0 and Landforms 4074 as 41 73 85 42 72 Ss N Attachment: ZBA23/028/K/JZ Appendix A - Zoning Grid Schedule 74 [5000] Zoning By-law Index Number By -Laws Overlays Applicable to By -Law 2019-051 2is ss �(88) Site Specific Provision Number Lands Subject to this Flooding Ecological Restoration [1 ] Property Detail Schedule Number Zoning By-law Amendment Hazard Areas 40 74 84 a Date: November 24, 2023 Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion Significant Wildlife Habitat ° ai T s 85 ' N i!. Zoning By-law Amendment i! Hazard 0 and Landforms Attachment: ZBA23/028/K/JZ Appendix A - Zoning Grid Schedule 75 [5000] Zoning By-law Index Number By -Laws Overlays Applicable to By -Law 2019-051 76. 82 �(88) Site Specific Provision Number Lands Subject to this Flooding Ecological Restoration [1 ] Property Detail Schedule Number Zoning By-law Amendment Hazard Areas 9.1 75 8s Date: November 24, 2023 Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion Significant Wildlife Habitat ° 4c ' 4 84 ' N Zoning By-law Amendment i! Hazard 0 and Landforms Attachment: ZBA23/028/K/JZ Appendix A - Zoning Grid Schedule 83 [5000] Zoning By-law Index Number (88) Site Specific Provision Number t❑ Property Detail Schedule Number Date: November 24, 2023 By -Laws r1 Lands Subject to this `J Zoning By-law Amendment Lands not Subject to this Zoning By-law Amendment Overlays Applicable to By -Law 2019-051 Flooding Ecological Restoration Hazard Areas Slope Erosion Significant Wildlife Habitat Hazard 0 and Landforms T. 82 123 83 122r_ N ' 74 ' 8_, 12AI ' Attachment: ZBA23/028/K/JZ Appendix A - Zoning Grid Schedule 84 [5000] Zoning By-law Index Number (88) Site Specific Provision Number t❑ Property Detail Schedule Number Date: November 24, 2023 By -Laws r1 Lands Subject to this `J Zoning By-law Amendment Lands not Subject to this Zoning By-law Amendment Overlays Applicable to By -Law 2019-051 Flooding Ecological Restoration Hazard Areas Slope Erosion Significant Wildlife Habitat Hazard 0 and Landforms ']i7f83 22 /\ 21 4/'20' N Attachment: ZBA23/028/K/JZ Appendix A - Zoning Grid Schedule 85 [5000] Zoning By-law Index Number By -Laws Overlays Applicable to By -Law 2019-051 7M841 �(88) Site Specific Provision Number Lands Subject to this Flooding Ecological Restoration [1] Property Detail Schedule Number Zoning By-law Amendment Hazard Areas 7Date: November 24, 2023 Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion Significant Wildlife Habitat 7 N Zoning By-law Amendment i! Hazard 0 and Landforms Attachment: ZBA23/028/K/JZ Appendix A - Zoning Grid Schedule 86 [5000] Zoning By-law Index Number (88) Site Specrfic Provision Number t❑ Property Detail Schedule Number Date: November 24, 2023 By -Laws r1 Lands Subject to this `J Zoning By-law Amendment Lands not Subject to this Zoning By-law Amendment Overlays Applicable to By -Law 2019-051 Flooding Ecological Restoration 0 Hazard Areas Slope Erosion Significant Wildlife Habitat Hazard 0 and Landforms 73 85 120 72 86 119 71 1 8, 118' N Attachment: ZBA23/028/K/JZ Appendix A -Zoning Grid Schedule 116 Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion= Wildlife Habitat i sa 1'5 1 147 i Date: November 24, 2023 i!. Zoning By-law Amendment i!� Hazard 0 and Landforms RES -6 <V� O F� O V GRES ROS�R-�S [5000] Zoning By-law Index Number By -Laws OverlaysApplicableto By -Law 2019-051 as tt� iq5 (sa) Site Specrfic Provision Number Lands Subject to this Flooding Ecological Restoration � eg i is las Prooertv Detail Schedule Number Zoning By-law Amendment Hazard Areas Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion= Wildlife Habitat i sa 1'5 1 147 i Date: November 24, 2023 i!. Zoning By-law Amendment i!� Hazard 0 and Landforms Attachment: ZBA23/028/K/JZ Appendix A - Zoning Grid Schedule 117 [5000] Zoning By-law Index Number By -Laws Overlays Applicable to By -Law 2019-051 87118 tqq (ss) Site Specrfic Provision Number Lands Subject to this Flooding Ecological Restoration s t❑ Property Detail Schedule Number Zoning By-law Amendment Hazard Areas 117 145 4Aa_ Date: November 24, 2023 Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion Significant Wildlife Habitat ° 89 116 iq0 N Zoning By-law Amendment i! Hazard 0 and Landforms Attachment: ZBA23/028/K/JZ Appendix A -Zoning Grid Schedule 118 [5000] Zoning By-law Index Number By -Laws Overlays Applicable to By -Law 2019-051 E86119 143 �(89) Site Specific Provision Number Lands Subject to this Flooding Ecological Restoration [1] Property Detail Schedule Number Zoning By-law Amendment Hazard Areas 118 144Date: November 24, 2023 Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion Significant Wildlife Habitat ''i1^ 145 N Zoning By-law Amendment i! Hazard 0 and Landforms Attachment: ZBA23/028/K/JZ Appendix A -Zoning Grid Schedule 119 [5000] Zoning By-law Index Number By -Laws Overlays Applicable to By -Law 2019-051 8ff12 42�(89) Site Specific Provision Number Lands Subject to this Flooding Ecological Restoration [1] Property Detail Schedule Number Zoning By-law Amendment Hazard Areas 843 Date: November 24, 2023 Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion Significant Wildlife Habitat 844 N ® Zoning By-law Amendment i! Hazard 0 and Landforms Attachment: ZBA23/028/K/JZ Appendix A - Zoning Grid Schedule 120 [5000] Zoning By-law Index Number By -Laws Overlays Applicable to By -Law 2019-051 ]84M121141 �(88) Site Specific Provision Number Lands Subject to this Flooding Ecological Restoration [1] Property Detail Schedule Number Zoning By-law Amendment Hazard Areas Date: November 24, 2023 Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion Significant Wildlife Habitat N ® Zoning By-law Amendment i! Hazard 0 and Landforms Attachment: ZBA23/028/K/JZ Appendix A - Zoning Grid Schedule 121 [5000] Zoning By-law Index Number By -Laws Overlays Applicable to By -Law 2019-051 83M121141 �(88) Site Specific Provision Number Lands Subject to this Flooding Ecological Restoration [1 ] Property Detail Schedule Number Zoning By-law Amendment Hazard Areas 84_Date: November 24, 2023 Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion Significant Wildlife Habitat 85 N Zoning By-law Amendment i! Hazard 0 and Landforms Attachment: ZBA23/028/K/JZ Appendix A - Zoning Grid Schedule 122 Date: November 24, 2023 Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion Significant Wildlife Habitat MZoning By-law Amendment i!� Hazard 0 and Landforms lap WINIVA MM �� .I �♦ �♦ �I �I � �i � I I ♦ ♦ . Wr 7220 aw 1-19- 'i 1 AFE [5000] Zoning By-law Index Nu ber m By -Laws -0 Overlays A licabletoBy-Law210119 51 (88) Site Specific Provision Number Lands Subject to this Flo ol�p Ing _0 ogca I Restoration Date: November 24, 2023 Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion Significant Wildlife Habitat MZoning By-law Amendment i!� Hazard 0 and Landforms Attachment: ZBA23/028/K/JZ Appendix A - Zoning Grid Schedule 142 Date: November 24, 2023 Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion Significant Wildlife Habitat i 1 is ii 1 143 1 174 MZoning By-law Amendment i!� Hazard 0 and Landforms P_ L WE 312 10al I LF.MoMIM WINE', MM 1*11, MAV &I ok ME kwMal 11 OR a PM or .► �� iii ���� ,� ►� � � � •� . - • o iii MItff 14 4[5000] Zoning By-law Index Number By -Laws Overlays Applicable to By -Law 2019-051 Date: November 24, 2023 Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion Significant Wildlife Habitat i 1 is ii 1 143 1 174 MZoning By-law Amendment i!� Hazard 0 and Landforms Attachment: ZBA23/028/K/JZ Appendix A - Zoning Grid Schedule 143 [5000] Zoning By-law Index Number � (88) Site Specific Provision Number [1 ] Property Detail Schedule Number Date: November 24, 2023 By -Laws Overlays Applicable to By -Law 2019-051 Lands Subject to this Flooding Ecological Restoration Zoning By-law Amendment Hazard Areas Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion=Significant Wildlife Habitat Zoning By-law Amendment MHazard and Landforms Attachment: ZBA23/028/K/JZ Appendix A - Zoning Grid Schedule 144 [5000] Zoning By-law Index Number By -Laws Overlays Applicable to By -Law 2019-051 119 143 174 �(88) Site Specific Provision Number Lands Subject to this Flooding Ecological Restoration [1 ] Property Detail Schedule Number Zoning By-law Amendment Hazard Areas 118 144 ns a Date: November 24, 2023 Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion Significant Wildlife Habitat ° 11 t r 145 1 2 N ® Zoning By-law Amendment i! Hazard 0 and Landforms Attachment: ZBA23/028/K/JZ Appendix A - Zoning Grid Schedule 145 [5000] Zoning By-law Index Number By -Laws Overlays Applicable to By -Law 2019-051 118 144 173 (88) Site Specific Provision Number Lands Subject to this Flooding Ecological Restoration 11] Property Detail Schedule Number Zoning By-law Amendment Hazard Areas 117 145 172 Date: November 24, 2023 Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion Significant Wildlife Habitat ° 11b 14' 17 N Zoning By-law Amendment i! Hazard 0 and Landforms Attachment: ZBA23/028/K/JZ Appendix A - Zoning Grid Schedule 175 [5000] Zoning By-law Index Number By -Laws Overlays Applicable to By -Law 2019-051 141176 191 (ss) Site Specrfic Provision Number Lands Subject to this Flooding Ecological Restoration t❑ Property Detail Schedule Number Zoning By-law Amendment Hazard Areas 1,— 17s 192 Date: November 24, 2023 Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion= Wildlife Habitat 14s 174 193 N Zoning By-law Amendment i! Hazard 0 and Landforms ATTACHMENT 2 Page 145 of 1179 SECTION 6 Page 1 of 14 SECTION 6 — Strategic Growth Area Zones (SGA) The Strategic Growth Area Zones apply to lands designated Strategic Growth Area A, Strategic Growth Area B, and Strategic Growth Area C in the City of Kitchener Official Plan. 6.1 APPLICABLE ZONES SGA -1: Low Rise Growth Zone — the purpose of this zone is to create opportunities for missing middle housing and compatible non-residential uses in low-rise forms up to 11 metres in height. This zone applies to lands designated Strategic Growth Area A in the City of Kitchener Official Plan. SGA -2: Mid Rise Growth Zone — the purpose of this zone is to create opportunities for moderate growth in mid -rise forms up to 8 storeys in height. The SGA -2 zone will permit a mix of residential and non-residential uses. This zone applies to lands designated Strategic Growth Area A or Strategic Growth Area B in the City of Kitchener Official Plan. SGA -3: High Rise Growth Zone (Limited) — the purpose of this zone is to create opportunities for high-density growth in both mid and high-rise forms up to 25 storeys in height. The SGA -3 zone will permit a wide mix of residential and non-residential uses. This zone applies to lands designated Strategic Growth Area B or Strategic Growth Area C in the City of Kitchener Official Plan. SGA -4: High Rise Growth Zone — the purpose of this zone is to create opportunities for high- density growth in both mid and high-rise forms. The SGA -4 zone will permit a wide mix of residential and non-residential uses. This zone applies to lands designated Strategic Growth Area C in the City of Kitchener Official Plan. 6.2 PERMITTED USES No person shall, within any Strategic Growth Area Zone use or permit the use of any lot or erect, alter or use any building or structure for any purpose other than those permitted uses within Table 6-1 below. Table 6-1: Permitted Uses within the Strategic Growth Area Zones Use SGA -1 SGA -2 SGA -3 SGA -4 Residential Uses Dwelling unit ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Hospice (1) ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Large residential care facility (1) ✓ ✓ ✓ Lodging house (1) ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Multiple dwelling ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ City of Kitchener Zoning By-law 2019-051 Page 146 of 1179 SECTION 6 Page 2 of 14 Use SGA -1 SGA -2 SGA -3 SGA -4 Semi-detached dwelling (2) ✓ ✓(3) (4) Single detached dwelling (2) ✓ ✓(3) (4) Small residential care facility (1) ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Street townhouse dwelling (2) ✓ ✓(3) Home Occupations Home occupation (5) (5) (5) (5) Community Uses Adult education school ✓ ✓ ✓ Community facility ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Cultural facility ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Day care facility ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Elementary school ✓ ✓ ✓ Hospital ✓ ✓ Place of worship ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Post -secondary school ✓ ✓ ✓ Secondary school ✓ ✓ ✓ Social service establishment ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Commercial Uses Artisan's establishment ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Brewpub ✓(6) ✓ ✓ ✓ Catering services establishment ✓ ✓ ✓ Commercial entertainment ✓ ✓ ✓ Commercial parking facility ✓ ✓ ✓ Commercial school ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Conference, convention, or exhibition Facility ✓ ✓ City of Kitchener Zoning By-law 2019-051 Page 147 of 1179 SECTION 6 Page 3 of 14 Use SGA -1 SGA -2 SGA -3 SGA -4 Craftsperson shop ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Financial establishment ✓(6) ✓ ✓ ✓ Fitness centre ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Health clinic ✓(6) ✓ ✓ ✓ Hotel ✓ ✓ ✓ Light repair operation ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Office ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Payday loan establishment ✓ ✓ ✓ Pawn establishment ✓ ✓ ✓ Personal services ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Pet services establishment ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Print shop ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Restaurant ✓(6) ✓ ✓ ✓ Retail ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Veterinary services ✓(6) ✓ ✓ ✓ Creative Industry Uses Biotechnological establishment ✓ ✓ ✓ Computer, electronic, data processing or server establishment ✓ ✓ ✓ Creative products manufacturing ✓ ✓ ✓ Research and development establishment ✓ ✓ ✓ Additional Regulations for Permitted Uses Table 6-1 (1) Shall be in accordance with the regulations of the SGA zone and dwelling type in which the lodging house, hospice, or large or small residential care facility is located. (2) Up to 3 dwelling units shall be permitted on a lot containing a single detached dwelling, semi- detached dwelling unit, or street townhouse dwelling unit in accordance with the regulations for additional dwelling units (attached) and (detached) in Section 4.12.1, 4.12.2, and 4.12.3. City of Kitchener Zoning By-law 2019-051 Page 148 of 1179 SECTION 6 Page 4 of 14 Notwithstanding Section 4.12, no minimum lot width or lot area shall apply to additional dwelling units (attached) or (detached) in an SGA zone. (3) Shall only be permitted on a lot containing an existing single detached dwelling, semi- detached dwelling, or street townhouse dwelling. (4) New single detached dwellings and semi-detached dwellings shall not be permitted. Additions and alterations to existing dwellings shall be permitted in accordance with Section 6.3.1, including allowing up to 3 units on a lot. (5) Shall be permitted in accordance with Section 4.7 (Home Occupation). (6) Shall only be permitted on corner lots and shall only be permitted in the front and exterior side yard in accordance with Section 4.14.8.1. 6.3 SGA -1 ZONE REGULATIONS 6.3.1 Single Detached, Semi -Detached, and Street Townhouse Dwelling Units a) Table 6-2 applies to single detached dwellings, semi-detached dwelling units, and street townhouse dwelling units. b) The regulations within Table 6-2 shall not apply to existing buildings or structures. Table 6-2: Single Detached, Semi -Detached, and Street Townhouse Dwelling Units Regulation Single Detached Dwelling Semi -Detached Dwelling unit Street Townhouse Dwelling unit Minimum lot area 235M2 210M2 135M2 Minimum lot width (internal unit) n/a n/a 5.5m Minimum lot width (external unit) n/a n/a 8.5m Minimum lot width 9.Om 7.5m n/a Minimum corner lot width 12.8m 12.Om 11.5m Minimum interior side yard setback 1.2m 1.2m 2.5m Minimum front yard or exterior side yard setback 4.5m(1)(2) 4.5m(1)(2) 4.5m(1) Minimum rear yard setback 7.5m 7.5m 7.5m Maximum lot coverage 55%(3) 55%(3) 55%(3) Maximum building height 11.0m 11.Om 11.Om Maximum number of storeys 3 3 3 City of Kitchener Zoning By-law 2019-051 Page 149 of 1179 SECTION 6 Page 5 of 14 Rear yard access n/a n/a (4) Additional Regulations for Table 6-2 (1) For an addition to an existing dwelling or demolition and replacement of an existing dwelling, the existing front and/or exterior side yard setbacks may be used as the minimum requirement. (2) No part of any building used to accommodate off street parking shall be located closer than 6 metres to the street line. (3) A combined total of 55 percent for all buildings and structures on the lot. Accessory buildings or structures, whether attached or detached, and additional dwelling units (detached) shall not exceed 15 percent. (4) Each dwelling unit shall have an unobstructed access at grade or ground floor level, having a minimum width of 0.9 metres, from the front yard to the rear yard of the lot either by: a) direct access on the lot without passing through any portion of the dwelling unit; or, b) direct access through the dwelling unit without passing through a living or family room, dining room, kitchen, bathroom, bedroom, or recreation room or any hallway that is not separated by a door to any such room; or c) access over adjacent lands which, if the lands are not owned by the City or the Region, is secured by a registered easement. 6.3.2 Multiple Dwellings, Mixed Use Buildings, and Non -Residential Buildings a) Table 6-3 applies to: i. Multiple dwellings; ii. Mixed use buildings; and, iii. Non-residential buildings. b) The regulations within Table 6-3 shall not apply to existing buildings and structures. c) Existing buildings may be converted to the following, subject only to the applicable minimum lot width, minimum lot area, parking spaces on a driveway in the front and exterior side yard, and maximum non-residential gross floor area of Table 6-3: a multiple dwelling with 4 or more dwelling units; ii. a mixed use building containing 1 or more dwelling units; and, iii. a non-residential building. City of Kitchener Zoning By-law 2019-051 Page 150 of 1179 SECTION 6 Page 6 of 14 Table 6-3: Multiple Dwellings, Mixed Use Buildings, and Non -Residential Buildings Regulation Number of dwelling units Non - Residential Building 4(l) 5-10 11+ Minimum lot width 12.Om 12.Om 18.Om 15.Om Minimum lot area 350mz 450m' 700m' 600m' Minimum front yard setback 4.5m 4.5m 4.5m 4.5m Parking spaces on a driveway in the front and/or exterior side yard (2) (2) (2) n/a Minimum exteriorside yard setback 4.Om 4.Om 4.Om 4.Om Minimum rear yard setback 7.5m 7.5m 7.5m 7.5m Minimum interiorside yard setbackA 1.5m 1.5m 2.5m 2.5m Minimum interior side yard setback B 2.5m 2.5m 2.5m 2.5m Minimum floorspace ratio n/a n/a 0.6 0.6 Maximum building height 11.0m 11.0m 11.0m 11.Om Maximum building length 20.Om 24.Om 36.Om 36.Om Minimum street line fagade openings 20% 20% 20% 20% Minimum landscaped area 30% 30% 30% 30% Minimum rearyard landscaped area 40% 40% 40% 40% Maximum non-residential gross floor area (3) 100mz 150mZ 200mZ 200m2 Additional Regulations for Table 6-3 (1) Shall also apply to a mixed use building containing 1-3 dwelling units. (2) Despite Section 5.3.3 b) i), parking spaces may be provided in the front and exterior side yard, provided they are located on a driveway that conforms with regulations of Section 5.4 and Table 5-2 for single detached dwelling. No additional regulations shall apply for a lot identified on Appendix C - Central Neighbourhoods. Parking spaces may be located on a driveway. (3) Non-residential gross floor area shall not be permitted in a detached accessory building or structure. 6.4 SGA -2 ZONE REGULATIONS City of Kitchener Zoning By-law 2019-051 Page 151 of 1179 SECTION 6 6.4.1 Single Detached, Semi -Detached, and Street Townhouse Dwellings Page 7 of 14 a) For single detached dwellings, semi-detached dwelling units, and street townhouse dwelling units, refer to Section 6.3.1 for regulations. 6.4.2 Multiple Dwellings, Mixed Use Buildings, and Non -Residential Buildings up to 4 Storeys in Height a) For multiple dwellings up to 4 storeys in height, mixed use buildings up to 4 storeys in height, and non-residential buildings up to 4 storeys in height, refer to Section 6.3.2 for regulations. b) Further to subsection a), these buildings may exceed the maximum building height, maximum number of storeys, and maximum non-residential gross floor area within Table 6-3. 6.4.3 Multiple Dwellings, Mixed Use Buildings, and Non -Residential Buildings a) Table 6-4 applies to: Multiple dwellings 5 storeys and greater; ii. Mixed use buildings 5 storeys and greater; and, iii. Non-residential buildings 5 storeys and greater. b) The regulations within Table 6-4 shall not apply to existing buildings or structures. Table 6-4: Multiple Dwellings, Mixed Use Buildings, and Non -Residential Buildings Regulation SGA -2 For Entire Building Minimum lot width 30.0m(1) Minimum lot area 1,500M2 Minimum yard setback 3.Om Minimum floor space ratio 1.0 Maximum building height 8 storeys Minimum fagade openings 10% Minimum street line fagade openings 20% Minimum landscape area 20%(2) For Storeys 7 and Above City of Kitchener Zoning By-law 2019-051 Page 152 of 1179 SECTION 6 Page 8 of 14 Minimum yard setback 6.Om Maximum building length 60.Om Maximum floor plate area 2,000 M2 Transition to Low Rise Zones Maximum building height within 15m of a lot with an SGA -1 zone or a lot with a low-rise residential zone 20.Om(3) Minimum yard setback where the lot abuts a lot with an SGA -1 zone or a low-rise residential zone 7.5m For Lot Lines Abutting a Priority Street Identified on Appendix G Refer to Section 6.6 for additional regulations. Private Amenity Space Requirements Refer to Section 6.7 — Private Amenity Space. Additional Regulations for Table 6-4 (1) Despite Section 3, for a lot with more than one street line, minimum lot width may be measured from the longest lot line abutting a street. (2) The requirement for a lot abutting a Priority Street segment identified on Appendix G shall be 0%. (3) Despite Section 4.19, this regulation shall apply (Transition to Low -Rise Zones). 6.5 SGA -3 AND SGA -4 ZONE REGULATIONS 6.5.1 Multiple Dwellings, Mixed Use Buildings, and Non -Residential Buildings up to 4 Storeys in Height a) For multiple dwellings up to 4 storeys in height, mixed use buildings up to 4 storeys in height, and non-residential buildings up to 4 storeys in height, refer to Section 6.3.2 for regulations. b) Further to subsection a), these buildings may exceed the maximum building height, maximum number of storeys, and maximum non-residential gross floor area within Table 6-3. 6.5.2 Multiple Dwellings, Mixed Use Buildings, and Non -Residential Buildings a) Table 6-5 applies to: Multiple dwellings 5 storeys and greater; ii. Mixed use buildings 5 storeys and greater; and, City of Kitchener Zoning By-law 2019-051 Page 153 of 1179 SECTION 6 Page 9 of 14 iii. Non-residential buildings 5 storeys and greater. b) The regulations within Table 6-5 shall not apply to existing buildings or structures. Table 6-5: Multiple Dwellings, Mixed Use Buildings, and Non -Residential Buildings Regulation SGA -3 & SGA -4 For Entire Building Minimum lot width 30.0m(1) Minimum lot area 1,500ml Minimum yard setback 3.Om Minimum building base height 3 storeys Maximum building base height 6 storeys Minimum floor space ratio 2.0 Maximum building height in the SGA -3 zone 25 storeys Minimum street line ground floor building height 4.5m Minimum fagade openings 10% Minimum street line fagade openings 20% For Storeys 7-12 Minimum lot width 30.Om Minimum lot area 1,500M2 Minimum front and exterior side yard setback 6.Om Maximum building length 60.Om Maximum floor plate area 2,00OM2 Physical separation 6.Om For Storeys 13-18 Minimum lot width 36.Om Minimum lot area 1,800M2 Minimum front and exterior side yard setback 6.Om Maximum building length 54.Om City of Kitchener Zoning By-law 2019-051 Page 154 of 1179 SECTION 6 Page 10 of 14 Maximum floor plate area 1,200M2 Physical separation 9.Om For Storeys 19-36 Minimum lot width 42.Om Minimum lot area 2,000 M2, Minimum front and exterior side yard setback 6.Om Maximum building length 48.Om Maximum floor plate area 1,OOOM2 Physical separation 12.Om For Storeys 37 and Above Minimum lot width 48.Om Minimum lot area 2,400M2 Minimum front and exterior side yard setback 6.Om Maximum building length 42.Om Maximum floor plate area 900M2 Physical separation 15.Om Transition to Low Rise Zones Maximum building height within 15m of a lot with an SGA -1 zone or a lot with a low-rise residential zone 20.Om(2) Maximum building height within 30m of a lot with an SGA -1 zone or a lot with a low-rise residential zone 30.Om(2) Minimum yard setback where the lot abuts a lot with an SGA -1 zone or a low-rise residential zone 7.5m For Lot Lines Abutting a Priority Street Identified on Appendix G Refer to Section 6.6 — Priority Streets. Private Amenity Space Requirements Refer to Section 6.7 — Private Amenity Space. Additional Regulations for Table 6-5 (1) For a lot with more than one street line, minimum lot width may be measured from the longest lot line abutting a street. City of Kitchener Zoning By-law 2019-051 Page 155 of 1179 SECTION 6 (2) Despite Section 4.19, this regulation shall apply (Transition to Low -Rise Zones). City of Kitchener Zoning By-law 2019-051 Page 11 of 14 Page 156 of 1179 SECTION 6 Page 12 of 14 Illustration 6-1: Physical Separation, Building Length, and Floor Plate Area V( This diagram demonstrates in plan how the built form regulations are generally applied. For illustrative purposes only. Illustration 6-2: Physical Separation Storeys 37+ -- 30m 15m Storeys 19-36 •--. 24m 12m Storeys 13-18 18m �" 9m Storeys 7-12 12m 6m Storeys 1-6 Interior Side or Rear Yard Lot Line This diagram demonstrates in elevation how the physical separation regulation is generally applied. For illustrative purposes only. City of Kitchener Zoning By-law 2019-051 Page 157 of 1179 SECTION 6 6.6 PRIORITY STREETS Page 13 of 14 a) For lot lines abutting street line segments identified on Appendix G — Priority Streets, the following shall apply: a Community Use or Commercial Use listed in Table 6-1 shall occupy a minimum of 50% of the street line ground floor, excluding office and commercial parking facility; above grade structured parking spaces shall not be permitted along the street line ground floor or street line second floor, except for access; iii. above grade structured parking spaces shall not occupy more than 50% of the area of the street line fagade within the base of a building; iv. surface parking spaces shall not be permitted within 6 metres of the street line; v. on lots zoned SGA -2, the minimum street line ground floor building height shall be 4.5 metres. The requirement for lots zoned SGA -3 and SGA -4 shall be in accordance with Table 6-5; vi. the minimum street line ground floor facade openings shall be 40%, measured between 0.5m and 4.5m above exterior finished grade along the entire width of the street line fagade; Illustration 6-3: Street Line FaQade Openings Measurement This diagram demonstrates in elevation how fagade openings are measured. For illustrative purposes only. vii. for storeys 1-6, the minimum interior side yard setback shall be Om; and, City of Kitchener Zoning By-law 2019-051 Page 158 of 1179 j 0%� 'F ,%%0 ............. This diagram demonstrates in elevation how fagade openings are measured. For illustrative purposes only. vii. for storeys 1-6, the minimum interior side yard setback shall be Om; and, City of Kitchener Zoning By-law 2019-051 Page 158 of 1179 SECTION 6 Page 14 of 14 viii. for storeys 2-6, the minimum front and exterior side yard shall be Om; 6.7 PRIVATE AMENITY SPACE a) Private amenity space shall be required as follows: I. In an SGA -2 zone, 4m2 of private amenity space is required per dwelling unit; and, II. In an SGA -3 and SGA -4 zone, 8m2 of private amenity space is required per dwelling unit. b) Further to subsection a), balconies, where provided, may count towards private amenity space requirements where they achieve: I. A minimum depth of 1.2m; and, II. A minimum area of 4m2, excluding area occupied by mechanical equipment such as air conditioning units. 6.9 OUTDOOR STORAGE a) No outdoor storage shall be permitted. This shall not however prevent the display of goods for retail purposes. City of Kitchener Zoning By-law 2019-051 Page 159 of 1179 ATTACHMENT 3 Page 160 of 1179 Appendix G: Priority Streets Priority Street Listing: Benton St - FROM King St E TO Charles St E Cedar St S - FROM King St E TO Charles St E Charles St E - FROM Stirling Ave S TO Ottawa St S Charles St W - FROM Victoria St S TO Benton St i Duke St E - FROM Queen St N TO Frederick St Duke St W - FROM Young St TO Queen St N EbyStN - FROM King StETO Duke StE Frederick St - FROM King St E TO Weber St W Gaukel St - FROM King St W TO Joseph St TF King St - FROM Waterloo Boundary TO Preston St Ontario St - FROM Weber St W TO Joseph St Ottawa St N - FROM King St E TO Weber St E Ottawa St S - FROM King St E TO MTSA Boundary Queen St - FROM Weber St W TO Joseph St BR o�ESjE Victoria St N - FROM King St W TO MTSA Boundary Victoria St S - FROM King St W TO MTSA Boundary PORP Water St N - FROM King St W TO Duke St W z e Water St S - FROM King St W TO Joseph St >- PE Young St - FROM King St W TO Duke St W p `� :Q Protected MTSA Priority Streets g4EPM� Lot lines abutting street line segments shown on this appendix are subject to additional zoning requirements in accordance with Section 6 — Strategic Growth Area Zones (SGA). MP o ETto A �+ C7 I °of 1179a Meters N 0� TF Lot lines abutting street line segments shown on this appendix are subject to additional zoning requirements in accordance with Section 6 — Strategic Growth Area Zones (SGA). MP o ETto A �+ C7 I °of 1179a Meters N PROPOSED BY — LAW '2024 BY-LAW NUMBER OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF KITCHENER (Being a by-law to amend By-law 2019-051, as amended, known as the Zoning By-law for the City of Kitchener - Growing Together (Non-PMTSA Lands) WHEREAS it is deemed expedient to amend By-law 2019-051 for the lands specified above; NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Corporation of the City of Kitchener enacts as follows: 1. Zoning Grid Schedule Numbers 72, 73, 75, 85, 86, 87, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 142, 143, 144, 173, and 174 of Appendix A of By-law 2019-051 are hereby amended by adding thereto the parcels of land to By-law 2019-051 as shown on Attachment 1. 2. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (5) thereto as follows: 11 5. Within the lands and shown as affected by this provision on a Zoning Grid Schedule of Appendix A, the following uses shall not be permitted unless existing at the date of passing of this By-law or the City of Kitchener has received acknowledgement from the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks advising that a Record of Site Condition has been completed in accordance with the relevant Ontario legislation. a) day care facility; b) dwelling unit; c) home occupation; d) hotel; Page 162 of 1179 e) lodging house; f) residential care facility; g) school; and, h) social service establishment." 3. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (6) thereto as follows: "6. Within the lands zoned COM -1 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedule 118 of Appendix A, the following shall apply: a) automotive detailing and repair operation excluding body repair or rust proofing shall be permitted only within buildings which existed prior to the passing of By-law Number 90-180, and the sale or rental of motor vehicles or major recreational equipment as an accessory use to an automotive detailing and repair operation in accordance with the regulations of the COM -2 zone; and, b) Where the lands abut a residential zone, a visual barrier shall be provided and maintained along the lot line in accordance with Section 4.18 of this By-law." 4. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (7) thereto as follows: 7. Within the lands zoned MIU-1 on Zoning Grid Schedules 72 and 73 of Appendix A, the following shall apply: a) office and outdoor storage shall be permitted for the exclusive use of the public utility operating on the lands; and, b) where the lands abut a Residential zone, a visual barrier shall be provided and maintained along the lot line in accordance with Section 4.18 of this By-law." 5. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (8) thereto as follows: Page 163 of 1179 "8. Within the lands zoned RES -4 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedule 120 and 121 of Appendix A, a multiple dwelling with 6 dwelling units shall be permitted in accordance with the regulations of the RES -5 zone." 6. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (9) thereto as follows: 11 9. Within the lands zoned EUF-1 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedule 86 of Appendix A, the following shall apply: a) For the purposes of this regulation, the existing use shall be deemed to be a demonstration centre established within a building existing on August 24, 2015, and a single detached dwelling. In this case, a demonstration centre is an establishment for showing to the public and educating the public on technologies related to energy and water sustainability; and, b) A minimum of 3 parking spaces shall be provided and no barrier -free accessible parking spaces shall be required for a demonstration centre use established within a building existing on August 24, 2015." 7. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (10) thereto as follows: "10. Within the lands zoned MIX -2 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedule 86 of Appendix A, the following shall apply: a) the minimum side yard setback abutting an open space zoned property shall be 0 metres b) the maximum building height: within Area A, as shown in the image below, shall be 13.5 metres and 4 storeys; ii. within Area B, as shown in the image below, shall be 22 metres and 6 storeys; iii. within Area C, as shown in the image below, shall be 37.5 metres and 11 storeys. Page 164 of 1179 0 c) all new dwelling units, lodging houses and residential care facilities shall have a minimum setback of 15.0 metres from the lot line of the railway right-of-way and shall have along such lot line a berm; combination of berm and fence; or a crash wall having a minimum depth of 0.45 metres, designed to be vibration isolated and designed in accordance with AECOM Submission Guidelines for crash walls, dated June 2005, last revised July 29, 2014, and to the satisfaction of CN Rail; and, d) dwelling units shall not be located at or below grade." h 3 h N q ° o Height Restriction Areas a Area A - Maximum Height 13 5 m and 4 Storeys s� �p Area B - Maximum Height a4Q 4 Q 22.0 m and 6 Storeys Area C - Maximum Height sr a 37.5 m and 11 Storeys mh © cm Nvrd MINIM � ' ,ry 0 RIXJ HOHSETR�L I, y,dvd 6968-ii99 A - a C I-Z4d - 77V F- C v j^ HOMEWOO D qVE -OT t7acr F, Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (11) thereto as follows: 11. Within the lands zoned MIX -2 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedule 122 of Appendix A, the following shall apply: Page 165 of 1179 a) new driveways providing vehicular access to and from Hermie Place shall not be permitted; b) outdoor storage shall be set back 15 metres from the lot line abutting Hermie Place, except for deep well waste systems which may be permitted within 4.5 metres from the Hermie Place lot line; c) the minimum side yard setback shall be 3 metres; and, d) the rear lot line shall be the lot line abutting Hermie Place and the lot lines abutting the lots municipally addressed as 14, 18, 22, 26, or 30 St. Leger Street." 9. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (12) thereto as follows: 12. Within the lands zoned RES -6 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedules 86 and 87 of Appendix A, the following shall apply: a) The minimum front yard setback shall be 4.6 metres; b) The minimum rear yard setback shall be 3.3 metres; c) The minimum westerly side yard setback shall be 4.4 metres; d) The minimum easterly side yard setback shall be 5.9 metres; e) The maximum building height shall be 17 metres or 6 storeys; f) The maximum floorspace ratio is 2; and, g) The minimum visitorparking rate shall be 10% of the required parking spaces." 10. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (13) thereto as follows: 13. Within the lands zoned RES -6 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedules 86 and 87 of Appendix A, the following shall apply: a) On-site parking shall be provided as follows: Page 166 of 1179 Parking for multiple dwelling units (back-to-back townhouse units) fronting Mill Street shall be provided at a rate of 1.0 parking spaces per unit and visitor parking will not be required for these units; ii. Parking for multiple dwellings shall be provided at a rate of 0.75 parking spaces per unit plus 0.1 visitor parking spaces per unit; b) Minimum building setbacks for multiple dwellings on a lot having a minimum lot width of 100 metres and a minimum lot area of 0.7 hectares, shall be: The minimum side yard setback shall be 3.0 metres for portions of a building with a building height greater than 10.5 metres; ii. The minimum rear yard setback shall be 4.5 metres; c) Covered terraces, porches and decks exceeding 0.6 metres in height may be located within side and rear yards provided they are set back a minimum of 2.0 metres from a lot line; d) In addition to Home Occupation, the following uses shall be permitted to locate within a multiple dwelling: i. Indirect Sales shall also be permitted; ii. Artisan's establishment may include retail and instruction; iii. A home occupation may attract a maximum of one customer or client at any one time; and e) A multiple dwelling shall have a central air conditioning system, and building components as identified in the Noise and Vibration Feasibility Study and addendum letter for 19-41 Mill Street, dated March 16, 2021 prepared by HGC Engineering." 11. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (14) thereto as follows: "14. Within the lands zoned MIX -2 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedules 173 and 174 of Appendix A, the following shall apply: a) The maximum floorspace ratio shall be 7.2; Page 167 of 1179 b) On-site parking shall be provided as follows; i) Parking spaces for multiple dwellings shall be provided at a rate of 0.64 per dwelling unit; ii) Visitor parking spaces shall be sharable with non-residential uses and be provided at a rate of 7% of the required parking spaces; iii) Bicycle and electric vehicle parking spaces are to be provided in accordance with Section 5 of Zoning By-law 2019-051. c) The minimum rear yard setback shall be 9.4 metres; and, d) Geothermal Energy Systems shall be prohibited." 12. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (15) thereto as follows: "15. Within the lands zoned MIX -1 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedules 86 and 87 of Appendix A, the following shall apply: a) The maximum floor space ratio for the entire site shall be 5.17; b) The minimum front yard setback shall be 0.0 metres along Spadina Road East; c) The minimum rear yard setback shall be 0.0 metres; d) The minimum exterior side yard setback abutting Highland Road East shall be 0.6 metres; e) The minimum interior side yard setback shall be 0.0 metres; f) The maximum building height shall be 17 storeys or 52.0 metres (not including mechanical penthouse); g) The minimum step back above the 11th storey along the rear lot line shall be 3.0 metres and shall be 1.5 metres along the Highland Road frontage; h) The minimum required off street parking spaces shall be 0.5 spaces per unit; i) Zero parking spaces shall be provided for non-residential uses; j) The total visitor parking shall be 0.095 parking spaces per unit; Page 168 of 1179 k) A minimum of 98 square metres (1000 square feet) of at grade commercial uses shall be provided; 1) A minimum of 4 live work units shall be provided; m) For multiple dwellings, a minimum of 92 Class A bicycle parking stalls and 6 Class 8 bicycle parking stalls shall be provided; and, n) Geothermal wells are prohibited." 13. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (38) thereto as follows: "38. Within the lands zoned MIX -2 and shown as affected by this provision on a Zoning Grid Schedule of Appendix A, the maximum floor space ratio shall be 4, and the maximum building height may exceed 8 storeys and 25 metres." 14. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (45) thereto as follows: "45. Within the lands zoned MIX -2 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedules 86 and 174 of Appendix A, the maximum floor space ratio shall be 4." 15. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (161) thereto as follows: "161. Within the lands zoned RES -4 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedules 85 and 86 of Appendix A, office shall be permitted in accordance with the regulations of the COM -1 zone." 16. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (164) thereto as follows: Page 169 of 1179 "164. Within the lands zoned RES -4 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedules 85 and 86 of Appendix A, a large residential care facility shall be permitted with a maximum of 10 residents in accordance with the regulations for a single detached dwelling in the RES -4 zone." 17. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (169) thereto as follows: "169. Within the lands zoned RES -4 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedule 122 of Appendix A, a bed and breakfast within the existing building shall also be permitted." 18. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (171) thereto as follows: "171. Within the lands zoned RES -5 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedules 143 and 174 of Appendix A, the maximum floor space ratio shall be 1.0 and the maximum building height shall be 4 storeys or 11.5 metres, whichever is greater, at the highest grade." 19. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (174) thereto as follows: "174. Within the lands zoned COM -1 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedule 86 of Appendix A, the following shall apply: a) required parking spaces, where ingress and egress of motor vehicles to and from the street is not provided in a forward motion, shall be permitted; b) the minimum width of each angled parking space shall be 2.54 metres; c) dwelling units shall not be required to be located in a mixed use building; and, d) dwelling units shall be permitted to locate on the ground floor." Page 170 of 1179 20. Section 19 of By-law 2019-051 is hereby amended by adding Section 19 (387) thereto as follows: "(387). Within the lands zoned MIX -2 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedule 173 of Appendix A, the following shall apply: a) The maximum Floor Space Ratio shall be 6.0. b) On-site Parking shall be provided as follows: i) Parking for multiple dwellings shall be provided at a rate of 0.58 parking spaces per dwelling unit. ii) Visitor parking spaces shall be sharable with non-residential uses and be provided at a rate of 7% of the required parking. iii) Bicycle parking stalls and electric vehicle parking spaces are to be provided in accordance with By-law 2019-051; c) In no case shall any parking spaces be located within 16.0 metres of the street line unless located underground or internal to a building. d) Dwelling units shall be permitted to be located on the ground floor with non-residential uses. e) The minimum ground floor building height for any building with street line fagade shall be 4.5 metres. f) The minimum non residential gross floor area shall be 650 square metres. g) Geothermal Energy Systems shall be prohibited." 21. Section 20 of By-law 2019-51 is hereby amended by adding Holding Provision (59) thereto as follows: "(59). Within the lands zoned MIX -2 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedule 174 of Appendix A, only day care facility, dwelling, dwelling unit, home occupation, hotel, lodging house having less than 9 residents, small residential care facility shall be permitted only within buildings existing on January 24, 1994, until such a time as the lands have been consolidated with lands fronting King Street East and a site plan including appropriate site access and site buffering measures has been approved by the City's Director of Planning." Page 171 of 1179 22. Section 20 of By-law 2019-51 is hereby amended by adding Holding Provision (60) thereto as follows: "(60). Within the lands zoned MIX -2 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedule 86 of Appendix A, day care facility, dwelling unit, hotel, lodging house, residential care facility, school, or social service establishment shall not be permitted until such time as: a) A detailed Noise and Vibration Assessment, to assess both potential off-site and on-site transportation and stationary noise sources, has been completed to the satisfaction of the Region and any necessary agreement has been entered into, between the City of Kitchener and the owner of the property, providing for the implementation of any recommended noise mitigation measures; b) The City of Kitchener has received acknowledgement from the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks advising that a Record of Site Condition has been completed in accordance with the relevant Ontario legislation; and c) The holding symbol affecting these lands has been removed by by- law." 23. Section 20 of By-law 2019-51 is hereby amended by adding Holding Provision (61) thereto as follows: "(61). Within the lands zoned MIX -2 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedules 173 and 174 of Appendix A, dwelling units shall not be permitted until such a time as: a) A detailed Noise and Vibration Assessment, to assess both potential off-site and on-site transportation and stationary noise sources, has been completed to the satisfaction of the Region and any necessary agreement has been entered into, between the City of Kitchener and/or the Region and the owner of the property, providing for the implementation of any recommended noise mitigation measures; and, b) The City of Kitchener has received acknowledgement from the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks advising that a Page 172 of 1179 Record of Site Condition has been completed in accordance with the relevant Ontario legislation." 24. Section 20 of By-law 2019-51 is hereby amended by adding Holding Provision (62) thereto as follows: "(62). Within the lands zoned MIX -1 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedules 86 and 87 of Appendix A, the following shall apply: a) Dwelling units shall not be permitted until such time as the City of Kitchener has received acknowledgement from the Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks advising that a Record of Site Condition has been completed in accordance with the relevant Ontario legislation and the holding symbol affecting these lands has been removed by by-law. b) Dwelling units shall not be permitted until such time as a Stationary Noise Study is submitted and approved to the satisfaction of the Regional Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services, if necessary. This Holding Provision shall not be removed until the City of Kitchener is in receipt of a letter from the Regional Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services advising that such noise study or studies has been approved and an agreement, if necessary, has been entered into with the City and/or Region, as necessary, providing for the implementation of any recommended noise mitigation measures. c) Legal access is obtained over Highland Courts Park to the satisfaction of the City of Kitchener." 25. Section 20 of By-law 2019-51 is hereby amended by adding Holding Provision (63) thereto as follows: "(63). Within the lands zoned MIX -2 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedule 173 of Appendix A: i) No residential use shall be permitted until such time as a Record of Site Condition is submitted and approved to the satisfaction of the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP). This Holding Provision shall not be removed until the Region of Waterloo Page 173 of 1179 is in receipt of a letter from the Ministry of the Environment, Conservation and Parks (MECP) advising that a Record of Site Condition has been completed to their satisfaction. ii) No residential use shall be permitted until such time as a Road Traffic, and Stationary Noise Study is submitted and approved to the satisfaction of the Regional Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services, if necessary. This Holding Provision shall not be removed until the City of Kitchener is in receipt of a letter from the Regional Commissioner of Planning, Housing and Community Services advising that such noise study or studies has been approved and an agreement, if necessary, has been entered into with the City and/or Region, as necessary, providing for the implementation of any recommended noise mitigation measures. iii) No development on the lands shall occur until such time as an Urban Design Brief is approved by the City's Director of Planning demonstrating a high quality of urban design that contributes positively to the public realm and streetscapes with adequate onsite amenity." 26. This By-law shall become effective only if Official Plan Amendment No. _ (Growing Together - 1994 Official Plan (Secondary Plans)) comes into effect, pursuant to Section 24(2) of The Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended and this By-law shall become effective only if Official Plan Amendment No. _ (Growing Together (Non-PMTSA Lands)) comes into effect, pursuant to Section 24(2) of The Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended. PASSED at the Council Chambers in the City of Kitchener this day of 2024. Mayor Clerk Page 174 of 1179 Attachment: ZBA23/029/K/JZ Appendix A - Zoning Grid Schedule 72 [5000] Zoning By-law Index Number By -Laws Overlays Applicable to By -Law 2019-051 41 73 85 (ss) Site Specrfic Provision Number Lands Subject to this Flooding Ecological Restoration t❑ Property Detail Schedule Number Zoning By-law Amendment Hazard Areas az 72 ss Date: November 24, 2023 Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion= Wildlife Habitat ° 43 s� ' N Zoning By-law Amendment i! Hazard 0 and Landforms Attachment: ZBA23/029/K/JZ Appendix A - Zoning Grid Schedule 73 [5000] Zoning By-law Index Number By -Laws Overlays Applicable to By -Law 2019-051 40M4/2 �(88) Site Specific Provision Number Lands Subject to this Flooding Ecological Restoration [1 ] Property Detail Schedule Number Zoning By-law Amendment Hazard Areas 41a Date: November 24, 2023 Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion Significant Wildlife Habitat 42 N Zoning By-law Amendment i! Hazard 0 and Landforms Attachment: ZBA23/029/K/JZ Appendix A - Zoning Grid Schedule 75 Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion Significant Wildlife Habitat '4 1 84 Date: November 24, 2023 i Zoning By-law Amendment i!� Hazard 0 and Landforms i 4o N N II i�� IIIA PM [5000] Zoning By-law Index Number By -Laws Overlays A to By -Law 2019-051 (88) Site Specific Provision Numb Lands Subject to this Flo ol�plgicable co ogical Restoration Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion Significant Wildlife Habitat '4 1 84 Date: November 24, 2023 i Zoning By-law Amendment i!� Hazard 0 and Landforms i 4o N N Attachment: ZBA23/029/K/JZ Appendix A - Zoning Grid Schedule 85 [5000] Zoning By-law Index Number By -Laws Overlays Applicable to By -Law 2019-051 [4 a4 121 (ss) Site Specific Provision Number Lands Subject to this Flooding Ecological Restoration t❑ Property Detail Schedule Number Zoning By-law Amendment Hazard Areas �s as izo Date: November 24, 2023 Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion Significant Wildlife Habitat ° 72 ss LL j N Zoning By-law Amendment i! Hazard 0 and Landforms Attachment: ZBA23/029/K/JZ Appendix A - Zoning Grid Schedule 86 [5000] Zoning By-law Index Number By -Laws Overlays Applicable to By -Law 2019-051 73 85 dl (88) Site Specrfic Provision Number Lands Subject to this Flooding Ecological Restoration t❑ Property Detail Schedule Number Zoning By-law Amendment Hazard Areas 72 r ss Date: November 24, 2023 Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion Significant Wildlife Habitat ° 71 8+ 1 I8' N Zoning By-law Amendment i! Hazard 0 and Landforms Attachment: ZBA23/029/K/JZ Appendix A - Zoning Grid Schedule 87 [5000] Zoning By-law Index Number By -Laws Overlays Applicable to By -Law 2019-051 72Fr_ 119 [aa] Site Specrfic Provision Number Q Lands Subject to this 0 Flooding Ecological Restoration t❑ Property Detail Schedule Number Zoning By-law Amendment ���— Hazard Areas ��_ 118 Date: November 24, 2023 Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion Significant Wildlife Habitat ° 70 N Zoning By-law Amendment i! Hazard 0 and Landforms Attachment: ZBA23/029/K/JZ Appendix A - Zoning Grid Schedule 117 [5000] Zoning By-law Index Number By -Laws Overlays Applicable to By -Law 2019-051 87 118 tqq (ss) Site Specrfic Provision Number Lands Subject to this Flooding Ecological Restoration t❑ Property Detail Schedule Number Zoning By-law Amendment Hazard Areas as_ 117 ia5 4A Date: November 24, 2023 Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion Significant Wildlife Habitat ° 89 116 110' N Zoning By-law Amendment i! Hazard 0 and Landforms Attachment: ZBA23/029/K/JZ Appendix A - Zoning Grid Schedule 118 [5000] Zoning By-law Index Number By -Laws Overlays Applicable to By -Law 2019-051 E86M118L144 (89) Site Specific Provision Number Lands Subject to this Flooding Ecological Restoration ❑ Property Detail Schedule Number Zoning By-law Amendment Hazard Areas Date: November 24, 2023 Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion Significant Wildlife Habitat N Zoning By-law Amendment i! Hazard 0 and Landforms Attachment: ZBA23/029/K/JZ Appendix A - Zoning Grid Schedule 119 [5000] Zoning By-law Index Number By -Laws Overlays Applicable to By -Law 2019-051 85 120 142 � (89) Site Specific Provision Number Lands Subject to this Flooding Ecological Restoration [1 ] Property Detail Schedule Number Zoning By-law Amendment Hazard Areas 86 119143 a Date: November 24, 2023 Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion Significant Wildlife Habitat 87 11& 144' N Zoning By-law Amendment i! Hazard 0 and Landforms Attachment: ZBA23/029/K/JZ Appendix A - Zoning Grid Schedule 120 `J Zoning By-law AmendmentHazard � # +J and Landforms N j4 # 1,14 HIM jy / � ' III /// ♦. �' ` `� �, r ,�� % ♦ ��� �IW4 104 IF WN @W 1% 40d [5000] Zoning By-law Index Number By -Laws Overlays Applicable to By -Law 2019-051 (88) Site Lands Subject to this Flooding Ecological Restoration By Areas Hazard ffjl2O_M [1] Property .Provision. -lawAmendment T.t.- 9A 9T9q Lands not Subject to this `J Zoning By-law AmendmentHazard � # +J and Landforms N Attachment: ZBA23/029/K/JZ Appendix A - Zoning Grid Schedule 121 [5000] Zoning By-law Index Number By -Laws Overlays Applicable to By -Law 2019-051 as 122 140 (ss) Site Specrfic Provision Number Lands Subject to this Flooding Ecological Restoration t❑ Property Detail Schedule Number Zoning By-law Amendment Hazard Areas a4_- 121 iai Date: November 24, 2023 Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion Significant Wildlife Habitat ° 85 ' 120 142 N Zoning By-law Amendment i! Hazard 0 and Landforms Attachment: ZBA23/029/K/JZ Appendix A - Zoning Grid Schedule 122 Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion=Significant Wildlife Habitat i 84 1 12', 1 141 j Date: November 24, 2023 i!. Zoning By-law Amendment i!� Hazard and Landforms a N lap MINE� SII 1 ♦ I I ♦ I , 01 ".0-1-010, M,44WIM, I # 1 For W,000.11 M [5000] Zoning By-law Index Number By -Laws Overlays Applicable to By -Law 2019-051 (88) Site Specific Provision Numb Lands Subject to this Flooding Ecological Restoration Pro De MMU Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion=Significant Wildlife Habitat i 84 1 12', 1 141 j Date: November 24, 2023 i!. Zoning By-law Amendment i!� Hazard and Landforms a N Attachment: ZBA23/029/K/JZ Appendix A - Zoning Grid Schedule 142 Date: November 24, 2023 Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion Significant Wildlife Habitat j 119 143 1174 M j1," 1431 174 i Zoning By-law Amendment i!� Hazard 0 and Landforms N 11110- ­11�l P_ L WE 312 100.011 LF.MoMIM WINE', MM 1*11, MAV &I ok ME kwMal 11 OR a AN �' .oma ��i.-- %�r� ♦- ► _ , ►� � � � o� � O ��I D 00, � ♦ ♦ SII '� ���� >O �� ��� moi._ 46 �I[5000] IIS .` _ •fir_ Zoning By- law Index Number By -Laws Overlays Applicable to By -Law 2019-051(88) Site Specffic Provision Numbe�, to this �S.b�ectt, FloodingLands Date: November 24, 2023 Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion Significant Wildlife Habitat j 119 143 1174 M j1," 1431 174 i Zoning By-law Amendment i!� Hazard 0 and Landforms N Attachment: ZBA23/029/K/JZ Appendix A - Zoning Grid Schedule 143 [5000] Zoning By-law Index Number By -Laws Overlays Applicable to By -Law 2019-051 120 142 175 (ss) Site Specrfic Provision Number Lands Subject to this Flooding Ecological Restoration t❑ Property Detail Schedule Number Zoning By-law Amendment Hazard Areas 119 flas 174 Date: November 24, 2023 Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion= Wildlife Habitat ° 11. 144 173' N Zoning By-law Amendment i! Hazard 0 and Landforms Attachment: ZBA23/029/K/JZ Appendix A - Zoning Grid Schedule 144 [5000] Zoning By-law Index Number By -Laws Overlays Applicable to By -Law 2019-051 119 143 174 tss] Site Specrfic Provision Number Lands Subject to this Flooding Ecological Restoration 11a laa 173 t❑ Property Detail Schedule Number Zoning By-law Amendment Hazard Areas r Date: November 24, 2023 Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion Significant Wildlife Habitat ° 1 i; ' 145 172 N M Zoning By-law Amendment i! Hazard 0 and Landforms Attachment: ZBA23/029/K/JZ Appendix A - Zoning Grid Schedule 173 [5000] Zoning By-law Index Number By -Laws Overlays Applicable to By -Law 2019-051 143 174 193 [aa] Site Specrfic Provision Number Q Lands Subject to this 0 Flooding Ecological Restoration 1 t❑ Property Detail Schedule Number Zoning By-law Amendment ���— Hazard Areas 144 173 1sa Date: November 24, 2023 Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion Significant Wildlife Habitat ° 145 172 195' N Zoning By-law Amendment i! Hazard 0 and Landforms Attachment: ZBA23/029/K/JZ Appendix A - Zoning Grid Schedule 174 [5000] Zoning By-law Index Number By -Laws Overlays Applicable to By -Law 2019-051 142 175 192 [aa] Site Specrfic Provision Number Q Lands Subject to this0 Flooding Ecological Restoration 143 174193 — t❑ Property Detail Schedule Number Zoning By-law Amendment ���– Hazard Areas 1 Date: November 24, 2023 Lands not Subject to this Slope Erosion= Wildlife Habitat ° 144 173 1s4' N Zoning By-law Amendment i! Hazard 0 and Landforms DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' Growing Together — Planning Analysis The following constitutes planning analysis in support of the Growing Together Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments. The amendments identified and proposed through the Growing Together project (the "proposed amendments") have regard for matters of Provincial interest under the Planning Act, are consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, conform with, or do not conflict with A Place to Grow: Growth Plan and the Region of Waterloo Official Plan, and represent good planning. Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13 25. Section 2 of the Planning Act establishes matters of provincial interest and states that the Minister, the council of a municipality, a local board, a planning board, and the Tribunal, in carrying out their responsibilities under this Act, shall have regard to, among other matters, matters of provincial interest such as: a) The protection of ecological systems, including natural areas, features and functions; b) The protection of the agricultural resources of the Province; c) The conservation and management of natural resources and the mineral resource base; d) The conservation of features of significant architectural, cultural, historic, archaeological or scientific interest; e) The supply, efficient use and conservation of energy and water; f) The adequate provision and efficient use of communication, transportation, sewage and water services and waste management systems; g) The minimization of waste; h) The orderly development of safe and healthy communities; h.1) The accessibility for persons with disabilities to all facilities, services and matters to which this Act applies. i) The adequate provision and distribution of educational, health, social, cultural and recreational facilities; j) The adequate provision of a full range of housing, including affordable housing; k) The adequate provision of employment opportunities; 1) The protection of the financial and economic well-being of the Province and its municipalities m) The co-ordination of planning activities of public bodies; n) The resolution of planning conflicts involving public and private interests; o) The protection of public health and safety; p) The appropriate location of growth and development; q) The promotion of development that is designed to be sustainable, to support public transit and to be oriented to pedestrians; r) The promotion of built form that, i. Is well-designed, ii. Encourages a sense of place, and Page 192 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' iii. Provides for public spaces that are of high quality, safe, accessible, attractive and vibrant; s) The mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions and adaptation to a changing climate. These matters of provincial interest are addressed and are implemented through the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020, as it directs how and where development is to occur. The City's Official Plan is the most important vehicle for the implementation of the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 and to ensure Provincial policy is adhered to. Section 16 of the Planning Act outlines the contents of an Official Plan, including goals, objectives and policies established primarily to manage and direct physical change and the effects on the social, economic, built and natural environment of the municipality or part of it. This section identifies Protected Major Transit Station Areas (PMTSAs) and notes the official plan of an upper -tier municipality — in this case the Region of Waterloo - may include policies that identify the area surrounding and including an existing or planned higher order transit station or stop as a PMTSA and that delineate the area's boundaries, and if the official plan includes such policies, it must also contain policies that; (a) identify the minimum number of residents and jobs, collectively, per hectare that are planned to be accommodated within the area; and (b) require official plans of the relevant lower -tier municipality or municipalities to include policies that, (i) identify the authorized uses of land in the area and of buildings or structures on lands in the area; and (ii) identify the minimum densities that are authorized with respect to buildings and structures on lands in the area. 2017, c. 23, Sched. 3, s. 5 (2). Through Regional Official Pan Amendment Number 6 (ROPA 6), the above Planning Act provisions have been satisfied. Further, this section (16(17)) requires area municipalities, like Kitchener, update their Official Plans to identify land uses and minimum densities within the PMTSAs within 1 year of the effective date of ROPA 6 (April 2023). If Kitchener's Official Plan is not updated within this 1 -year timeframe, the Region of Waterloo is authorized to amend the Official Plan. Planning staff are of the opinion that the proposed amendments have regard for the matters of Provincial interest outlined in section 2 of the Planning Act. By directing growth, development and intensification within built-up areas in close proximity to transit, the proposed amendments: • Protect ecological systems, agricultural resources, and conserve and manage natural resources • Have regard for the supply, efficient use and conservation of energy and water, • Have regard for the adequate provision and efficient use of communication, transportation, sewage and water services and waste management systems, and Page 193 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' the minimization of waste as growth is directed to areas where the infrastructure required to accommodate the additional growth already exists, minimizing the need to add new infrastructure. • Have regard for the protection of the financial and economic well-being of the Province and of the City of Kitchener by directing growth around rapid transit stations, making better use of existing infrastructure and reducing the need for capital investments in growth where infrastructure does not currently exist. In doing so, the proposed amendments also have regard for the orderly development or safe and healthy communities. • Have regard for the adequate provision of a full range of housing and employment opportunities through the implementation of a land use and zoning framework that permits a full range of building typologies in a manner that promotes a high quality of urban design, encourages a sense of place, and provides for public spaces. This is achieved through zoning regulations that promote a high quality streetscape and that introduces a priority streets regulatory framework that prioritizes the interaction between pedestrians and the built form at the sidewalk level. • Promote development that is designed to be sustainable, to support public transit, and oriented to pedestrians. This is done by directing growth to locations where growth and development are appropriate, such as the Downtown Kitchener Urban Growth Centre and Protected Major Transit Station Areas. • Conserve cultural and historical features through the introduction of 14 cultural heritage landscapes (CHLs) within the study area, in addition to the retention of existing heritage planning tools, specific to the two heritage conservation districts (HCDs) that are partially within the study area. The Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing is proposing an integrated province -wide land use planning policy document, potentially replacing the Provincial Policy Statement and A Place to Grow: Growth plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, with a singular Provincial Planning Statement (PPS) which is in draft form and not in effect at the time this report was prepared. Page 194 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) provides policy direction on matters of provincial interest related to land use planning and development. Key policy themes from the PPS are addressed by the proposed amendments, including: • Where and How we Grow; • Providing for a Range and Mix of Housing; • Achieving Efficient Use of Existing Infrastructure; • Achieving Long Term Economic Prosperity; • Preparing for a Changing Climate; and • Wise Use and Management of Resources. The PPS promotes the integration of land use planning, growth management, transit - supportive development, intensification, and infrastructure planning to achieve cost- effective development patterns, optimization of transit investments, and standards to minimize land consumption and servicing costs. Efficient development and land use patterns are promoted, as well as accommodating an appropriate mix of affordable and market-based residential dwelling types with other land uses, while supporting the environment, public health, and safety. Additionally, healthy livable safe communities are supported through efficient development patterns, planning for a full range and mix of housing, commercial, employment, institutional and community infrastructure. Policy 1.1.1 speaks to the ways in which healthy, liveable and safe communities are sustained, including: promoting efficient development and land use patterns which sustain the financial well-being of the Province and municipalities over the long term; accommodating an appropriate affordable and market-based range and mix of residential types; and promoting the integration of land use planning, growth management, and transit -supportive development. Further, healthy, liveable and safe communities are also sustained by intensification and infrastructure planning that achieves cost-effective development patterns, optimizes transit investments, and minimizes land consumption and servicing costs. Policy 1.1.3.3 promotes transit -supportive development, accommodating a significant supply and range of housing options through intensification and redevelopment where this can be accommodated, considering existing building stock or areas, including brownfield sites, and the availability of suitable existing or planned infrastructure and public service facilities required to accommodate projected needs. Policy 1.1.3.4 promotes development standards that facilitate intensification, redevelopment and compact form, while avoiding or mitigating risks to public health and safety. Policy 1.2.6.1 speaks to sensitive land uses avoiding, minimizing, or mitigating any potential adverse effects from odour, noise and other contaminants, as well as minimizing risk to public health and safety, and to ensure the long-term operational and Page 195 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' economic viability of major facilities in accordance with provincial guidelines, standards and procedures. Policy 1.3.1 speaks to promoting economic development and competitiveness by, among other things, providing for an appropriate mix and range of employment, institutional, and broader mixed uses to meet long-term needs, providing opportunities for a diversified economic base, and encouraging compact, mixed-use development that incorporates compatible employment uses to support liveable and resilient communities, with consideration of housing policy 1.4. Policy 1.4.3 directs new housing towards locations with existing infrastructure and public service facilities and requires transit -supportive development and the prioritization of intensification in proximity to transit. It further requires the establishment of development standards for intensification which minimize the cost of housing and facilitate compact form, while maintaining appropriate levels of public health and safety. The PPS promotes the development of housing at densities that efficiently use land, resources, infrastructure, and support the use of active transportation and public transit. Policy 1.6.1 states that planning for infrastructure and public service facilities shall be coordinated and integrated with land use planning and growth management to ensure their financial viability over their life cycle and that they are available to meet current and projected needs. Policy 1.6.7.4 states that a land use pattern, density, and mix of uses should be promoted that minimize the length and number of vehicle trips and support current and future use of transit and active transportation. Policy 1.6.9.1 a) states that planning for land uses in the vicinity of airports, rail facilities and marine facilities shall be undertaken so that their long-term operation and economic role is protected. Additionally, planning shall be undertaken to protect their long-term operation and economic role, and to appropriate design, buffer, and separate sensitive land uses from airports and rail facilities. Policy 1.6.11.1 speaks to providing opportunities for the development of energy supply, including district energy to accommodate current and projected needs. Policy 1.7.1 speaks to planning for long-term economic prosperity, including by promoting opportunities for economic development, optimizing the long-term availability and use of land, resources, infrastructure and public service facilities, maintaining and enhancing the vitality and viability of downtowns and mainstreets, promoting the redevelopment of brownfield sites, and encouraging a sense of place by promoting well- designed built form and cultural planning and by conserving built heritage resources and cultural heritage landscapes. Policy 1.8.1 states that planning authorities shall support energy conservation and efficiency, improved air quality, reduced greenhouse gas emissions, and preparing for a Page 196 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' changing climate. Planning authorities' support for abovementioned actions is to be undertaken through land use and development patterns which promote compact form and a structure of nodes and corridors, promotes the use of active transportation and transit, focuses major employment, commercial, and other travel -intensive land uses on sites well served by transit, and encourages transit -supportive development and intensification to improve the mix of employment and housing uses to shorten commute times. Section 2.1 speaks to the protection of natural features and areas for the long term, and notes that the diversity and connectivity of natural features and the long-term ecological function and biodiversity should be maintained, restored, or improved. Policy 2.6.1 states that significant built heritage resources and significant cultural heritage landscapes shall be conserved. Planning Analysis The proposed amendments allow for the provision of a broad range of uses within the Growing Together study area. The proposed amendments help manage growth, are transit supportive, and will make use of existing infrastructure by facilitating a compact built form which efficiently uses land around rapid transit stations. Lands within the Growing Together study area are municipally serviced and are in proximity to parks, trails and other community uses. The proposed amendments align with provincial policies, namely policy 1.4.3 by permitting and facilitating all types of residential intensification in Protected Major Transit Station Areas, directing development where appropriate levels of infrastructure are available, and requiring transit -supportive and active transportation supportive development in close proximity to transit. The proposed amendments are consistent with the PPS as it relates to matters of land use compatibility by permitting and facilitating transit -supportive residential and employment intensification within the study area in a manner that is cognizant of and seeks to minimize and mitigate adverse impacts. The proposed amendments recommend the use of various planning instruments, namely holding provisions and site- specific provisions, to avoid, minimize, and mitigate potential adverse impacts of major facilities within the study area, including active railways, identified potentially contaminated properties, and the Region of Waterloo International Airport. In doing so, the proposed amendments protect the long-term operation and economic role of the airport and rail facilities within the study area. The PPS promotes the efficient development of lands within existing settlement area boundaries to create healthy, safe, and liveable communities. The proposed approach to land use planning as proposed in Growing Together will facilitate the intensification and redevelopment of lands, including brownfield lands and lands within existing neighbourhoods to facilitate efficient use of land, resources, and infrastructure. Specific zoning approaches that are proposed to achieve the efficient development of lands Page 197 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' include the removal of minimum parking requirements across the entirety of the study area, the removal of maximum Floor Space Ratio values, and the removal of maximum building heights in select areas. The PPS promotes the creation of safe and liveable communities through appropriate development standards. The proposed approach of determining maximum densities through built -form regulations for buildings rather than Floor Space Ratio is an innovative approach to creating safe and liveable communities in a way that aligns with the direction set out in the PPS and will permit and facilitate all housing options. The built -form zoning regulations proposed through Growing Together are a fundamental component of building a healthy, safe environment for all who live, work and visit Kitchener's PMTSAs, while still allowing for abundant housing supply. Using built -form zoning regulations such as physical separation between taller buildings, in combination with floor plate area and building length maximums, is critical for protecting the privacy and safety of new residents and ensures access to light for all units. It also limits shadow, wind and other impacts on existing and future nearby residents. In combination with the City's Urban Design Manual, which provide further guidance on concepts such as overlook, building placement, orientation and relative height, the result is a high-density, efficient, compact urban environment that also manages the relationships between building forms to promote a safe, healthy, high quality of life for all. The PPS promotes that municipal planning authorities provide for a range and mix of housing options at various densities to create healthy, safe, and liveable communities. The proposed land use planning frameworks permits and facilitates a range and mix of housing options, including housing forms at different densities, including missing middle housing, to meet the requirements of current and future residents. The proposed amendments include the removal of minimum parking requirements across the study area. This recommendation aligns with direction from the PPS to establish development standards for residential intensification and redevelopment which minimize the cost of housing and facilitate compact urban form. The removal of parking minimums will minimize overall costs associated with housing and will support affordable and diverse housing options, and a compact urban form. The PPS promotes the efficient use of existing infrastructure through transit -oriented development. The minimum density regulations applicable to new development will support existing infrastructure, including public transit infrastructure, with compact development. The residential and non-residential intensification enabled by the proposed amendments will allow for existing infrastructure to be used more efficiently and help to achieve financial viability for infrastructure projects over the long term. These actions Page 198 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' contribute to the City's ability to accommodate a 15 -year supply of housing and with zoning and services in place to support a minimum of three years' residential growth. The PPS promotes the long-term economic prosperity of municipalities by encouraging the provision of housing, employment, and commercial uses alongside efficient infrastructure and a multimodal transportation system. The proposed amendments permit and facilitate housing supply and a mix of uses within the study area. Planning for additional development and redevelopment within Downtown Kitchener supports its long-term economic prosperity and will foster a sense of place. The PPS directs planning authorities to utilize land use planning to encourage development that supports energy conservation, contributes to reduced greenhouse gas emissions, and prepares for the impact of a changing climate. Redevelopment of lands within the existing built-up area will reduce development pressure for greenfield lands. Transit -oriented development and the creation of mixed-use and walkable communities will reduce the reliance on the automobile for transportation. The proposed land use and zoning approach will facilitate the intensification of land near rapid transit stations, contributing to an overall reduction in greenhouse gas emissions and preparing for the impacts of a changing climate. By promoting and permitting intensification and development in close proximity to rapid transit stations, additional residential and non- residential uses, including employment uses, are be located close to public transit, which increases convenience and improves the overall transit experience. Further, a concentration of uses in close proximity to one another reduces the travel distance between uses and makes using active transportation or public transit a more convenient option for getting around. The proposed Priority Streets approach reinforces several PPS policies by enhancing downtown streets and other `mainstreets' in proximity to transit, promotes economic prosperity through a requirement for active uses on the ground floor of buildings, and makes for more walkable and complete communities. The proposed amendments conserve natural heritage features through the application of land use categories that preserve and maintain the existing natural heritage function. The PPS also promotes the conservation of significant cultural heritage resources. The proposed amendments ensure that redevelopment of lands containing cultural heritage resources have the opportunity to conserve and incorporate heritage features into unique developments that contribute to healthy and liveable communities, while maintaining existing planning instruments that enable the City to protect and conserve our cultural heritage resources. This includes the ability to require the submission of a Heritage Impact Assessment for lands within or adjacent to HCDs and CHLs. Based on the foregoing, the proposed amendments are consistent with the PPS. Page 199 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' A Place to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020 (Growth Plan): The Growth Plan supports the development of complete and compact communities that are designed to support healthy and active living, make efficient use of land and infrastructure, provide for a range, and mix of housing types, jobs, and services, at densities and in locations which support transit viability and active transportation. Policies of the Growth Plan promote growth within strategic growth areas, in order to provide a focus for investments in transit and other types of infrastructure. The Growth Plan identifies a number of guiding principles related to how land is developed, resources are managed and protected, and how public investments are made. These principles include, but are not limited to: supporting the achievement of complete communities that are designed to support healthy and active living; prioritize intensification and higher densities in strategic growth areas to make efficient use of land and infrastructure and support transit viability; support a range and mix of housing options; improve the integration of land use planning with public investment in infrastructure; conserve and promote cultural heritage resources, and integrate climate change considerations into land use planning. Policy 2.2.1.4 states that complete communities will: a) feature a diverse mix of land uses, including residential and employment uses, and convenient access to local stores, services, and public service facilities; b) improve social equity and overall quality of life, including human health, for people of all ages, abilities, and incomes; C) provide a diverse range and mix of housing options, including additional residential units and affordable housing, to accommodate people at all stages of life, and to accommodate the needs of all household sizes and incomes; d) expand convenient access to: i. a range of transportation options, including options for the safe, comfortable and convenient use of active transportation; ii. public service facilities, co -located and integrated in community hubs; iii. an appropriate supply of safe, publicly -accessible open spaces, parks, trails, and other recreational facilities; and iv. healthy, local, and affordable food options, including through urban agriculture; e) provide for a more compact built form and a vibrant public realm, including public open spaces; f) mitigate and adapt to the impacts of a changing climate, improve resilience and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and contribute to environmental sustainability; and g) integrate green infrastructure and appropriate low impact development. Policy 2.2.2.3 states that "all municipalities will develop a strategy to achieve the minimum intensification target and intensification throughout delineated built-up areas, which will: Page 200 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' a) identify strategic growth areas to support achievement of the intensification target and recognize them as a key focus for development; b) identify the appropriate type and scale of development in strategic growth areas and transition of built form to adjacent areas; c) encourage intensification generally throughout the delineated built up area; d) ensure lands are zoned and development is designed in a manner that supports the achievement of complete communities; e) prioritize planning and investment in infrastructure and public service facilities that will support intensification; and f) be implemented through official plan policies and designations, updated zoning and other supporting documents." Policy 2.2.3.1 states "Urban growth centres will be planned: a) as focal areas for investment in regional public service facilities, as well as commercial, recreational, cultural, and entertainment uses; b) to accommodate and support the transit network at the regional scale and provide connection points for inter- and intra -regional transit; c) to serve as high-density major employment centres that will attract provincially, nationally, or internationally significant employment uses; and d) to accommodate significant population and employment growth." Policy 2.2.3.2 b) identifies Kitchener's downtown as an Urban Growth Centre with a minimum density target of 200 residents and jobs combined per hectare by 2031. Policy 2.2.4.3 b) states that "major transit station areas on priority transit corridors or subways lines will be planned for a minimum density target of: b). 160 residents and jobs combined per hectare for those that are services by light rail transit or bus rapid transit;" Policy 2.2.4.9 states "Within all major transit station areas, development will be supported, where appropriate, by: a) planning for a diverse mix of uses, including additional residential units and affordable housing, to support existing and planned transit service levels; b) fostering collaboration between public and private sectors, such as joint development projects; C) providing alternative development standards, such as reduced parking standards; and d) prohibiting land uses and built form that would adversely affect the achievement of transit -supportive densities." Policy 2.2.4.10 states "Lands adjacent to or near to existing and planned frequent transit should be planned to be transit -supportive and supportive of active transportation and a range and mix of uses and activities." Policy 2.2.5.1 states "Economic development and competitiveness in the GGH will be promoted by: Page 201 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' a) making more efficient use of existing employment areas and vacant and underutilized employment lands and increasing employment densities; b) ensuring the availability of sufficient land, in appropriate locations, for a variety of employment to accommodate forecasted employment growth to the horizon of this Plan; C) planning to better connect areas with high employment densities to transit; and d) integrating and aligning land use planning and economic development goals and strategies to retain and attract investment and employment." Policy 2.2.5.2 states "Major office and appropriate major institutional development will be directed to urban growth centres, major transit station areas or other strategic growth areas with existing or planned frequent transit service." Policy 2.2.5.3. states "Retail and office uses will be directed to locations that support active transportation and have existing or planned transit." Policy 2.2.5.4. states "In planning for employment, surface parking will be minimized and the development of active transportation networks and transit -supportive built form will be facilitated." Policy 2.2.5.13 states "Upper- and single -tier municipalities, in consultation with lower - tier municipalities, will establish minimum density targets for all employment areas within settlement areas that: a) are measured in jobs per hectare; b) reflect the current and anticipated type and scale of employment that characterizes the employment area to which the target applies; C) reflects opportunities for the intensification of employment areas on sites that support active transportation and are served by existing or planned transit; and d) will be implemented through official plan policies and designations and zoning by- laws." Policy 2.2.5.15 states "The retail sector will be supported by promoting compact built form and intensification of retail and service uses and areas and encouraging the integration of those uses with other land uses to support the achievement of complete communities." Policy 2.2.6.1 (a) states that municipalities will "support housing choice through the achievement of the minimum intensification and density targets in this plan by identifying a diverse range and mix of housing options and densities, including additional residential units and affordable housing to meet projected needs of current and future residents." Policy 3.2.2.1 states that "Transportation system planning, land use planning, and transportation investment will be co-ordinated to implement this Plan." Page 202 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' Policy 3.2.2.3 states "In the design, refurbishment, or reconstruction of the existing and planned street network, a complete streets approach will be adopted that ensures the needs and safety of all road users are considered and appropriately accommodated." Policy 3.2.2.4 states "Municipalities will develop and implement transportation demand management policies in official plans or other planning documents or programs to: a) reduce trip distance and time; b) increase the modal share of alternatives to the automobile, which may include setting modal share targets; C) prioritize active transportation, transit, and goods movement over single -occupant automobiles; d) expand infrastructure to support active transportation; and e) consider the needs of major trip generators. Policy 4.2.7 states: 1. Cultural heritage resources will be conserved in order to foster a sense of place and benefit communities, particularly in strategic growth areas. 2. Municipalities will work with stakeholders, as well as First Nations and Metis communities, in developing and implementing official plan policies and strategies for the identification, wise use and management of cultural heritage resources. 3. Municipalities are encouraged to prepare archaeological management plans and municipal cultural plans and consider them in their decision making. The Growth Plan supports planning for a range and mix of housing options and, in particular, higher density housing options that can accommodate a range of household sizes in locations that can provide access to transit and other amenities. It also supports the co-ordination of transportation system planning and land use planning, the conservation of cultural heritage resources, and identification of actions that address climate change. Planning Analysis The Growth Plan directs municipalities to achieve the minimum intensification and density targets outlined in the Plan. The minimum density target for the Downtown Kitchener UGC is 200 residents and jobs per hectare, and the minimum density target for the Protected Major Transit Station Areas is 160 residents and jobs per hectare. The Region's Official Plan includes these minimum density targets through ROPA 6 and has established a minimum density target of 80 residents and jobs per hectare for the Block Line PMTSA which has been approved by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Kitchener's Official Plan contains an existing policy that establishes a minimum density target for the Downtown Kitchener UGC of 225 residents and jobs per hectare. The proposed Official Plan amendment includes a policy establishing minimum density targets in accordance with the Growth Plan and ROPA 6 for all of Kitchener's PMTSAs. The proposed amendments include the application of minimum density requirements through the implementing zoning framework. These minimum density requirements are Page 203 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' implemented through Floor Space Ratio (FSR) minimums of 0.6 FSR for non-residential buildings and buildings of 11 units or more in the SGA -1 zone, 1.0 FSR for all buildings within the SGA -2 zone, and a minimum of 2.0 FSR for all buildings in the SGA -3 and SGA -4 zones. The minimum required densities proposed in Growing Together result in approximately 111,429 people and jobs combined. This does not include any potential people and job yield from lands proposed to be zoned SGA -1 nor does it account for existing developments that exceed these density minimums. Across the approximately 519 hectares of land within the Growing Together PMTSAs, this creates a minimum planned density of approximately 218 people and jobs per hectare at 100% build out, exceeding the minimum target of 160 persons and jobs for these PMTSAs. Therefore, the proposed density minimums represent development permissions that provide a planning framework that can meet required minimum density targets. It is important to note that development of all parcels within these PMTSAs is not expected nor a realistic assumption, which is one reason why a range of zones that includes a range of permitted uses at varying heights and built form typologies is proposed. The build out scenario presented is based on the following assumptions: • A 2:1 ratio of people to jobs • 80m2 gross floor area per unit • 1.8 people per unit • 50 m2 of gross floor area per job Further, the Victoria Park & Kitchener City Hall PMTSA, Frederick & Queen PMTSA and Urban Growth Centre (UGC) already exceed or have approved developments with enough density to meet their respective minimum density targets. Additionally, the Growing Together framework includes the removal of maximum floor space ratio values in all proposed zone categories and the removal of maximum building heights for new development in the SGA -4 zone. In place of FSR maximums, Growing Together proposes several built form regulations based on graduated height ranges, such as minimum setbacks, building length maximums, floor plate area maximums, and physical separation requirements between buildings. These regulations, in combination, set maximum density permissions for sites by applying consistent built -form standards. While there is not a technical density maximum prescribed in the SGA -4 zone due to the unlimited height permissions, there is a practical maximum, where market, context and engineering feasible heights, combined with setbacks, building length, floor plate area and physical separation regulations effectively constitute a maximum density. Sites in the SGA -1, SGA -2 and SGA -3 zones do have a technical maximum density through the implementation of these regulations. Those maximum densities are not, however, able to be expressed through a static number such as FSR or bedrooms per hectare. Rather, the maximum densities defined in this approach are observed through Page 204 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' the physical size and shape of the buildings themselves and can only be determined through the evaluation of development concepts or constructed buildings. This alternative approach to density maximums results in maximum achievable densities that cannot be specifically quantified, as they are subject to contextual considerations such as lot consolidation, individual lot sizes and shapes, and more. However, the built - form regulations, as tested, achieve a variety of high-density outcomes, and can achieve potential `typical' or `generic' maximum densities of more than 1 FSR for the SGA -1 zone, more than 5 FSR in the SGA -2 zone, more than 12 FSR in the SGA -3 zone and more than 20 in the SGA -4 zone. These maximum densities are multiple times those of the minimum density requirements and represent conditions that satisfy all target minimums in the Growth Plan, are aligned with the Municipal Housing Pledge target, and meet the intent of the federal Housing Accelerator Fund. Additional capacity modeling from earlier in the project process used form -based assumptions as well, alongside accurate existing built context and proposed and approved development applications. This exercise also assumed minimal displacement and/or demolition of existing larger structures such as apartment buildings. This modeling suggests, at a tested 50% of the expected full build -out, the following station area densities as listed below. Please note, this is not a 50% build -out of the zoning permissions, but rather an aggregate build -out of a combination of existing context, proposed development, and typical new development primarily distributed to opportunity sites. A 50% build -out of total permissions would result in much higher densities than listed below. The below listed densities are a `real-world' estimate of achievable densities within a medium-term planning horizon: PMTSA Grand River Hospital, 170 ppj/ha Central Station Innovation District, 250 ppj/ha Victoria Park & Kitchener City Hall, 250 ppj/ha Frederick & Queen, 250 ppj/ha Kitchener Market, 160 ppj/ha Borden, 195 ppj/ha Mill, 220 ppj/ha Urban Growth Centre, 340 ppj/ha Please note that visualizations from this analysis cannot be shared as they contain potentially confidential information about development applications in progress. The Growth Plan supports the development of complete and compact communities that are designed to support healthy and active living, make efficient use of land and Page 205 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' infrastructure, provide for a range and mix of housing types, jobs, and services, at densities and in locations which support transit viability and active transportation. The proposed amendments facilitate and promote residential and employment intensification at densities that are transit -supportive and make efficient use of land and existing infrastructure. A broad range and mix of housing types are permitted in the proposed land use and zoning approach, including multiplexes and multiple residential buildings in all zones. The recommended policies and regulations implementing the zones have been developed to enable viable building typologies of all kinds, including Additional Dwelling Units (ADUs), townhouses, duplexes, triplexes, multiplexes, and multiples in low, mid and high-rise forms. Further, a range and mix of non-residential uses, including employment and commercial uses, are broadly permitted in the proposed land use and zoning framework. The recommended regulations have been developed to enable non- residential uses through the study area, including compatible non-residential uses within existing predominantly residential neighbourhoods, to support the development of complete and compact communities. The proposed amendments broadly support the achievement of complete communities by featuring a diverse mix of land uses, including residential and employment uses that are transit -supportive, active transportation supportive, and compact in form. Through the implementing zoning, the proposed amendments permit a broad and diverse mix of residential, commercial, and employment uses that reflect the current and anticipated type and scale of those uses within the study area. Access to a range of transportation options and public service facilities is greatly expanded by permitting and promoting residential and employment intensification in close proximity to transit, parks, trails, and other recreational facilities. The proposed amendments allow for a more compact built form, aided by the removal of minimum parking requirements for all land uses in the entirety of the study area, contributing to environmental sustainability and the achievement of compact built form by removing the space and resources required to accommodate vehicular parking. The residential and employment intensification proposed through the proposed amendments, in addition to the compact built form and built -form regulatory approach, facilitates green infrastructure such as district energy, by creating the scale required to make such infrastructure viable. Based on the foregoing, Planning staff are of the opinion that the proposed amendments conform to the Growth Plan. Page 206 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' Region of Waterloo Official Plan (2010): The Regional Official Plan (ROP) sets a high-level direction for growth and change across the Region. Section 1.2 outlines the vision and foundational themes of the plan. "Over the next 30 years, Waterloo Region will need to accommodate approximately 306,000 new residents and 168,000 new jobs. This Plan provides the framework for accommodating this growth in a manner that achieves the following vision adopted by Regional Council: "Waterloo Region will be an inclusive, thriving, and sustainable region of connected urban and rural communities with global reach, fostering opportunities for current and future generations." This vision embraces the three foundational themes of social equity, a thriving community, and environmental sustainability as the cornerstones for the policies and future actions set out in this Plan. These three themes are fundamentally connected and must be achieved together. Seeing the connections between these three areas makes it possible to address problems in one area with holistic solutions that improve the other areas." Regional Official Plan Amendment Number 6 (ROPA 6) was adopted by Region of Waterloo Council on August 25, 2022, and approved by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing on April 11, 2023. ROPA 6 updated the regional planning horizon to the year 2051, in which it forecasts Kitchener to grow to 409,200 residents and 170,500 jobs by 2051. ROPA 6 also identified a minimum intensification target of 60% for Kitchener. This represents a minimum of approximately 31,660 new residential units being constructed within Kitchener's Built-up Area between 2022 and 2051 to meet population forecasts and minimum intensification targets. The ROP requires the City to plan for: • the achievement of these targets and to support climate change objectives; • supporting infrastructure and services; and • optimizing the use of existing infrastructure including ION light rail. Chapter 2 — How and Where we Grow Chapter 2 sets out the urban structure for the Region. Most growth is planned to take place by way of intensification, with most of the intensification directed to Strategic Growth Areas. Policy 2.A.5 states "Area municipalities will not restrict the amount or timing of development in an Urban Area or Township Urban Area on the basis that the growth forecasts in Table 1 could be exceeded, provided that integrated planning for infrastructure and public service facilities would ensure that any proposed developments would not exceed existing or planned capacity." Page 207 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' Table 1 identifies regional population and employment forecasts for each of the municipalities within the Region. Table 1: Reaional PoDulation and EmDlovment Forecasts Population Ernto ment 2021 2051 2021 2051 Kitchener 269,100 409,200 111,000 170,500 Notes 1. Population figures in this table show census -based population plus four percent under coverage. As such, it does not include university and college students who temporarily reside in the Region (either in student residences or other accommodation) to study at postsecondary institutions. 2. All population and employment in this table represent mid -year figures. Policy 2.13.1.1 states: "The Region and the area municipalities will direct the majority of the forecasted population and employment growth in Table 1 to the following key structural components of the Regional urban system: (a) the Urban Area and Township Urban Areas as shown on Map 1; (b) strategic growth areas as shown on Map 2, where the highest levels of growth and development will generally be directed based on the following hierarchy; (i) Downtown Cambridge, Downtown Kitchener, and Uptown Waterloo Urban Growth Centres; (ii) Major Transit Station Areas; (iii) Regional Intensification Corridors; (iv) Local Centres and Intensification Corridors; and (v) Township Urban Growth Centres. Map 1 — Regional Structure identifies the lands subject to the proposed amendments as "Urban Area", with "Regional Intensification Corridors" bisecting the subject lands. ROPA 6 notes that "the Urban Area designation broadly identifies where the majority of the region's future growth will occur." Objectives of the Urban Area designation include "achieving transit -supportive development and 15 -minute neighbourhoods throughout the Urban Area with a diverse mix of land uses, housing types and open spaces in proximity to each other" and "supporting the development of a vibrant Urban Area characterized by more compact development patterns that support climate change mitigation and adaptation, and provide a diversity of opportunities for living, working, recreation and entertainment." ROPA 6 defines Regional Intensification Corridors as "sharing similar characteristics as nodes, but are oriented along existing or planned frequent transit service or higher order transit routes. They represent key routes between strategic growth areas, creating a continuous and integrated mobility network for walking, cycling, and rolling, and taking transit across the region. Existing corridors will be reinforced through infill and Page 208 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' redevelopment, and supported with strategic investments in enhanced transit service and protected infrastructure for walking, cycling and rolling." Map 2 — Urban System, identifies nine Major Transit Station Areas, the Kitchener Urban Growth Centre, and Regional Intensification Corridors within the lands subject to the proposed amendments. 2.D Strategic Growth Areas Section 2.D of ROPA 6 notes "Strategic growth areas are nodes, corridors and other areas that will accommodate most of the planned intensification in the region. Nodes, including Urban Growth Centres, Major Transit Station Areas, Local Centres, and Township Urban Growth Centres, will be planned as areas of more intense density, use and activity. They are compact clusters of uses that can range in scale and intensity of development, such as the downtown cores of the cities and townships, mixed-use communities, and postsecondary educational campuses or other higher -density uses both large and small." Additionally, ROPA 6 states "the policies in this Section are grounded in the principle of transit -supportive development. This principle broadly supports the clustering of uses and activities to growth areas that support walking, cycling, and rolling and that have existing or planned transit services. As the density of people and jobs across the region continues to increase, the distances between uses and destinations will gradually decrease over time. This will help realize this Plan's vision to create equitable, thriving and sustainable communities, and achieve other important benefits." Urban Growth Centre Section 2.D.1 of the ROP outlines policies applying to the Downtown Kitchener Urban Growth Centre (UGC). Downtown is the primary business, civic, commercial, and cultural centre in the City. Policy 2.D.1.2 states "Area municipalities, in collaboration with the Region, will ensure that Urban Growth Centres are planned: (a) as focal points for investment in regional public service facilities, as well as commercial, recreational, cultural and entertainment uses; (b) to accommodate and support the transit network at the regional scale and provide connection points for inter- and intra -regional transit; (c) to serve as high-density major employment centres that will attract provincially, nationally, or internationally significant employment uses; (d) to accommodate significant population and employment growth; (e) to achieve, by 2031 or earlier, a minimum density target of: (i) 200 residents and jobs combined per hectare for each of the Downtown Kitchener and Uptown Waterloo Urban Growth Centres; (f) to be consistent with the relevant transit -supportive development policies in Section 2.D.6; Page 209 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' Major Transit Station Areas Policy 2.D.2.1 states: "Major Transit Station Areas are identified on Map 2 and further delineated on Figures 4a to 9d of this Plan. These station areas identify lands along the Stage 1 and planned Stage 2 ION light rail transit route that are typically located within a 500 to 800 metre radius of the transit stop, representing about a 10 -minute walk." Policy 2.D.2.2 states: "Area municipalities will undertake detailed planning and establish official plan policies and zoning by-laws to ensure that Major Transit Station Areas are planned and designed in a manner that: (a) achieves the minimum density targets set out in Table 2; (b) is transit -supportive, supports planned transit service levels, and prioritizes access to the station area and connections to any nearby major trip generators by providing: (i) connections to regional and provincial transit services to support transit service integration; and (ii) mobility networks for walking, cycling, and rolling, including sidewalks, bicycle lanes, and secured bicycle parking; (c) provides for a diverse mix of uses, including additional residential units and affordable housing, where residential uses are permitted, to support existing and planned transit service levels; (d) fosters collaboration between public and private sectors, such as joint development projects; (e) provides alternative development standards, such as reducing or eliminating minimum automobile parking standards, or providing maximum parking standards, for uses near transit routes, to maximize intensification opportunities and minimize surface parking areas; (f) prohibits land uses and built form that would adversely affect the achievement of the minimum density targets set out in Table 2; (g) protects existing significant employment uses by ensuring land use compatibility with adjacent new development; (h) supports the implementation of inclusionary zoning by identifying: (i) the authorized uses of land in the station area and of buildings or structures on lands in the area; and (ii) the minimum densities that are authorized with respect to buildings and structures on lands in the station area; and (i) is consistent with the relevant transit -supportive development policies of Section 2.D.6. Page 210 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' Table 2: Minimum Densities of Major Transit Station Areas identifies the minimum density targets for each of the City's PMTSAs. Major Transit Station Area Name Location Minimum Density Targets* City of Kitchener Grand River Hospital Figure 5d 160 Central Station Figure 6a 160 Victoria Park and Kitchener City Hall Figure 6b 160 Queen plus Frederick Figure 6c 160 Kitchener Market Figure 6d 160 Borden Figure 7a 160 Mill Figure 7b 160 Block Line Figure 7c 80 Fairway Figure 7d 160 S ortsworld Figure 8a 160 *Minimum density target is calculated in terms of people and jobs combined per gross hectare measured over the entire station area. Policy 2.D.2.4 states "Area municipalities are encouraged to plan lands adjacent to or near a Major Transit Station Area to support transit -supportive development, prioritize walking, cycling, and rolling, taking transit over automobile trips, and provide for a broad mix of uses and activities." Policy 2.D.2.5 states "Area municipalities are encouraged to initiate station area planning for Major Transit Station Areas to: (a) articulate a clear vision for the station area to guide area municipal decision- making in terms of capital expenditures, infrastructure design and community needs; (b) apply industry, Provincial and Regional best practices, design guidelines and development standards to create an urban form that prioritizes walking, cycling, and rolling, and taking transit over automobile travel; (c) provide clear direction to development proponents about appropriate scale and form of building, open space and streets; (d) create the planning and regulatory framework that can be formally adopted by the area municipal Council and integrated into the official plan and zoning by-laws required in Policy 2.D.2.2; and (e) identify and implement strategies for automobile dependent areas that enable the transition over time to more transit -supportive places that enable most trips to be made by walking, cycling, and rolling." Policy 2.D.2.6 states "For the purposes of implementing the use of inclusionary zoning by the area municipalities, all Major Transit Station Areas delineated on Figures 4a to 9d are recognized as Protected Major Transit Station Areas in accordance with Section 16(16) of the Planning Act." Page 211 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' Policy 2.D.6.1 states "In addition to the general development policies described in this Chapter, the Region and the area municipalities will apply the following transit -supportive development criteria in reviewing and evaluating development applications or site plans, within strategic growth areas and other intensification areas identified by the area municipality: (a) creates an interconnected, multimodal street pattern that prioritizes walking, cycling, and rolling, and taking transit over automobile trips, and supports vibrant mixed-use developments; (b) supports a more compact built form that locates the majority of transit -supportive uses within a comfortable walking distance of a transit stop or Major Transit Station Area; (c) provides an appropriate mix of land uses, including a range of food destinations, local services, and amenities to meet peoples' daily needs for living; (d) promotes medium and higher -density development as close as possible to the transit stop to support higher frequency transit service and optimize transit rider convenience; (e) supports a high quality public realm to enhance the identity of the area and create gathering points for social interaction, community events and other activities; and (f) provides access from various transportation modes to the transit facility, including consideration of pedestrian, bicycle parking, and where applicable, passenger transfer and commuter pick-up/drop off areas." 2.H Employment Areas Employment objectives identified in ROPA 6 include: • Promote intensification and increased densities in both new and existing employment areas to support a more compact and connected urban form; and • Prioritize the provision, maintenance and staging of the necessary Regional infrastructure to support current and projected employment needs. Policy 2.H.1.4 states "Area municipalities will direct major offices and appropriate major institutional development to Urban Growth Centres, Major Transit Station Areas or other strategic growth areas with existing or planned frequent transit service." Policy 2.H.1.5 states "Area municipalities will direct retail and office uses to locations that support walking, cycling, and rolling, and have existing or planned transit." Policy 2.H.1.6 states "In planning for employment, the Region and the area municipalities will minimize vehicle parking and facilitate the development of mobility networks for walking, cycling, and rolling, and a transit -supportive built form." Policy 2.H.1.14 encourages the City to identify and designate local employment lands outside of Regional Employment Areas and to develop policies to protect these lands for employment uses over the long-term. The city is encouraged to retain space for a similar number of jobs to remain accommodated on sites proposed for redevelopment within local employment lands. Page 212 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' Policy 2.H.1.16 states "The Region and the area municipalities will plan to support the retail sector by promoting compact built form and intensification of retail and service uses and areas, and encouraging the integration of those uses with other land uses to support the achievement of 15 -minute neighbourhoods." ROPA 6 constituted a Municipal Comprehensive Review and Identified Employment Areas for long term protection on Map 3. There are no Regional Employment Lands within the lands subject to this amendment. 2.1.1 Land Use Compatibility Policy 2.1.1.1 states "The Region and the area municipalities will ensure that major facilities and sensitive land uses are planned and developed to avoid, or if avoidance is not possible, minimize and mitigate any potential adverse effects from odour, noise and other contaminants, minimize risk to public health and safety, and to ensure the long- term operational and economic viability of major facilities in accordance with Provincial guidelines, standards and procedures." 2.1.2 Noise from Stationary and Transportation Sources Policy 2.1.2.2 states "Where a development application for a sensitive land use is submitted in the vicinity of an Existing Regional Road, Provincial Highway, Planned Regional Road or Provincial Highway, the rapid transit system, transit terminals, railways or area Municipal roads, a noise study may be required in accordance with the provisions of the Regional Implementation Guideline for Noise Policies. The noise criteria shown on Table 5 will be used in determining appropriate noise mitigation measures for the proposed development. Any required noise mitigation measures will be implemented through the development application review process." 2.1.3 Contaminated Sites Policy 2.1.3.1 states "Where a development application is proposed on, or adjacent to, a known or potentially contaminated site, planning approvals will be subject to the submission of a Record of Site Condition in accordance with the provision of the Regional Implementation Guideline for the Review of Development Applications On or Adjacent to Known and Potentially Contaminated Sites." 2.1.5 Implementation of Intensification and Densitv Taraets Policy 2.1.5.1 states "The minimum intensification and density targets in this Plan are minimum standards and the area municipalities are encouraged to go beyond these minimum targets, where appropriate, except where doing so would conflict with any policy of this Plan." Page 213 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' Policy 2.1.5.3 states "Except as provided in Policy 2.G.1.3, the minimum intensification and density targets in this Plan will be measured across all lands within the relevant area, including any lands that are subject to more than one target" Policy 2.1.5.4 states "Area municipalities will implement the minimum density targets in this Plan through: (a) official plan policies that identify the minimum density targets and through secondary planning or other initiatives, to establish permitted uses within the relevant area and identify densities, heights, and other elements of site design; (b) zoning all lands in a manner that would implement the official plan policies; and (c) the use of any applicable legislative and regulatory tools that may establish area or site-specific minimum densities, heights, and other elements of site design." 3.A Range and Mix of Housing Section 3 identifies the need for full range and mix of housing options, including rental housing, affordable housing and missing middle housing as imperative to the success of the Region. Additionally, it is an objective of the ROP to "Support a diverse range and mix of housing options and densities, including additional residential units, affordable, and missing middle housing, to serve all sizes, incomes, and ages of households." ROPA 6 defines "missing middle housing" as "Multiple unit housing including, but not limited to multiplexes, stacked townhouses, apartments, and other low-rise housing options." Policy 3.A.2 states "Area municipalities, in collaboration with the Region, will plan to provide a diverse range and mix of housing options with an overall target of a minimum of 30 percent of new ownership and rental housing being affordable to low and moderate income households. The range and mix of housing options provided will vary in terms in terms of form, tenure, density, and number of bedrooms to accommodate the needs of all sizes, incomes, and ages of households." Policy 3.A.20 states "The Region encourages the area municipalities to apply alternative development standards as -of -right to help streamline the development of affordable housing provided health, safety, servicing, and other reasonable standards or criteria can be met. Examples of such alternative development standards may include, but are not limited to, reduced parking standards, setbacks and road allowances." Policy 2.D.5.1 required municipalities to develop policies to and zoning regulations to permit missing middle housing throughout the urban area and Region of Waterloo International Airport The Region's Official Plan contains policies to ensure the protection and long term viability of the Region of Waterloo International Airport. Policy 5.A.20 requires that area municipalities establish Official Plan policies that: Page 214 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' (a) support the long-term operation and economic role of the Airport; (b) Protect the Airport from development that would preclude or hinder its expansion or continued use, or which would be incompatible for reasons of pubic health, public safety or environmental concerns; (c) Ensure that the Airport and sensitive land uses are designed, buffered and/or separated from each other to prevent adverse effects from odour, noise and other contaminants (d) Provide for the inclusion of warning clauses advising property owners in the vicinity of the Airport of potential outdoor lighting and height restrictions, and of the potential for occasional noise -related impacts; (e) Prohibit any and uses that may cause a potential aviation safety hazard; and (f) Be in conformity with Transportation Canada's Region of Waterloo International Airport Zoning Regulations. 15 Minute neighbourhoods ROPA 6 introduces the concept of 15 -minute neighbourhoods into the Regional Official Plan. The vision is for a Region comprised of 15 -minute neighbourhoods that are compact, vibrant, and where people can meet their daily needs within a 15 -minute trip by walking cycling, and rolling. 15 -minute neighbourhoods promote health and well-being through physical activity, provide access to parks and recreation and healthy food. 15 -minute neighbourhoods support climate objectives by reducing the energy our community needs for transportation. They also balance jobs and housing at a neighbourhood scale. Planning Analysis 2.D. Strategic Growth Areas The proposed amendments broadly implement the policies contained in section 2.D.2 of the ROP by promoting and permitting transit -supportive, 15 -minute neighbourhoods with a diverse range and mix of uses in a manner that enables walking, cycling, and rolling. The proposed amendments promote and permit intensification of a broad mix of uses in close proximity to ION station stops. Policy 2.D.2.1 and 2.D.2.6 are implemented through the delineation of Protected Major Transit Station Areas in the Kitchener Official Plan that form the basis of the proposed amendments. Recommended land use and zoning changes enable a range and mix of uses on every property that provide opportunities for more trips to occur through active transportation. The proposed amendments include the removal of minimum vehicle parking requirements in all land use designations and zone categories within the study area and introduce minimum bicycle parking requirements that support the ROP policy 2.D.6.1 and 3.A.20. The minimum density target for the Downtown Kitchener UGC required by the Growth Plan and ROP is 200 residents and jobs per hectare, and the minimum density target for the Protected Major Transit Station Areas is 160 residents and jobs per hectare for all PMTSAs except Block Line, which has a minimum density target of 80 residents and Page 215 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' jobs per hectare. Kitchener's Official Plan already contains a policy establishing a minimum density target for the Downtown Kitchener UGC of 225 residents and jobs per hectare. The proposed Official Plan amendment includes a policy establishing minimum density targets in accordance with the Growth Plan and ROPA 6 for all of Kitchener's PMTSAs. The proposed zoning by-law amendments include the removal of maximum floor space ratio values in all proposed zone categories and the removal of maximum building heights for new development in the SGA -4 zone providing flexibility in achieving the minimum Growth Plan and ROP density targets. 2.F Intensification Targets in Delineated Built -Up Areas The ROP identifies "meet[ing] or exceed[ing] the minimum intensification targets of this Plan to make better use of land and infrastructure, and transition Waterloo Region into an energy-efficient, low -carbon community" and "Support[ing] the gradual transition of existing neighbourhoods into 15 -minute neighbourhoods that are denser, have a broad mix of land uses where people can meet their daily needs for goods, services, and employment within a 15 -minute trip by walking, cycling, and rolling, and where other needs can be accessed using direct, frequent, and convenient transit" as objectives of the Plan. The proposed amendments support the stated objectives of the ROP by implementing a planning framework that has been developed to meet and exceed the minimum intensification targets specific to PMTSAs, as well as the minimum intensification target of 60% in Delineated Built -Up Areas that has been prescribed to Kitchener. The proposed amendments represent a refinement of the implementation of a planning framework for strategic growth areas in Kitchener, as described in Section 2.13 of the ROP, and broadly enable residential and employment intensification throughout the study area, support the achievement of 15 -minute neighbourhoods, and guide and prioritize planning and investment in efficient and modern infrastructure, namely the ION rapid transit system. The proposed amendments include minimum density requirements within the zoning framework to achieve a minimum of 160 residents and jobs per hectare within each of the seven PMTSAs included as part of the Growing Together project. The proposed amendments support the urban structure, hierarchy of intensification areas, intensification targets and city-wide population and employment targets established through the ROP. Regional policies encouraging the development of non -statutory station area plans to ensure the success of MTSAs were addressed through the creation of the City of Kitchener's Planning Around Rapid Transit Stations (PARTS) plans. The proposed amendments support the primacy of the UGC, with recommended land use policies and regulations that support the achievement of the Downtown Kitchener UGC density target, as identified in the ROP and Kitchener Official Plan. Based on the City's 2022 Annual growth monitoring report, the 2031 UGC minimum density target of 225 residents and jobs per hectare has already been exceeded. Page 216 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' The proposed amendments broadly support the policies contained in Section 2.D.3 Regional Intensification Corridor Policies, specifically for delineated Protected Major Transit Station Areas along the existing ION rapid transit alignment. A review of the planning framework associated with the Ottawa Street Regional Intensification Corridor does not form part of the Growing Together project and will be undertaken as part of the forthcoming Kitchener Official Plan Review scheduled to begin in early 2024. 2.H Employment Areas The ROP identifies Employment Areas on Map 3 — Employment Areas. The study area does not include any lands identified on Map 3. The proposed amendments align with policies 2.H.1.4, 2.H.1.5, 2.H.1.6, 2.H.1.14, and 2.H.1.16 in the ROP. The planning framework that continues directing major office and institutional uses to the Downtown Kitchener UGC, in addition to PMTSAs, and broadly permits retail and other non-residential uses across the entirety of the study area in all land use designations and implementing zone categories. Additionally, minimum parking requirements have been removed for all land uses and zone categories within the study area, including employment uses. The removal of parking minimums promotes a compact built form and intensification of retail, service, and other non-residential uses, and supports the achievement of 15 -minute neighbourhoods. 2.1 General Urban Development Policies The ROP identifies a number of general urban development policy categories, including land use compatibility, noise from stationary and transportation sources, contaminated sites, the implementation of intensification and density targets, and the recognition of the Region of Waterloo International Airport. The proposed amendments recommend the application of planning instruments, namely holding provisions and site-specific provisions, to address a number of these categories. The following provisions are recommended through the proposed amendments: • The requirement for a Record of Site Condition on lands that may be contaminated; • The requirement for a Noise and Vibration Study for lands within 75m of a railway; and • The requirement to determine whether an Aeronautical Assessment is required on lands proposed to be zoned SGA -4, which does not include a maximum building height regulation. The recommended provisions address matters of land use compatibility, noise, and contamination, and allow for the continued long-term operational and economic viability of major facilities within the study area, including active railways and the Region of Waterloo International Airport. Page 217 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' Through the Planning Around Rapid Transit Stations (PARTS) project, the City retained consultants to undertake noise assessments pertaining to transportation and stationary noise, with reports created for the PARTS Central, Midtown and Rockway study areas. The PARTS Central study noted that "the noise models did not identify the need for any necessary mitigation measures to be implemented through policies, zoning, design or potentially as future conditions of development approval." The PARTS Midtown and Rockway studies note that for both study areas, "POW's (plane of windows) associated with proposed developments just beyond the Right of Way of various roadways would not require additional mitigation to ensure the development can be designed to achieve the required indoor noise limits". In the Midtown and Rockway study areas, the report does note that mitigation may be required for Outdoor Living Areas (OLAs). As none of the studies note the need for mitigation for POW's, and the PARTS Central study demonstrates a 1db, or imperceptible increase in noise impacts, the impacts of noise on OLAs can continue to be implemented through the application of the City's Urban Design Manual which states, for all development: Mitigate against noise -related impacts, including noise created by vehicular traffic, building construction, incompatible land uses and site access/servicing areas. Within Central Neighbourhoods, which covers a large portion of the Growing Together geography, the Urban Design Manual requires the following to specifically mitigate the impacts of noise on Outdoor Living Areas: Orient buildings to avoid the need for noise attenuation walls for amenity spaces. Locate and design amenity areas to respect the privacy of surrounding development. 3.A Range and Mix of Housing The ROP supports the development of complete and compact communities that are designed to support healthy and active living, make efficient use of land and infrastructure, provide for a range and mix of housing types, jobs, and services, at densities and in locations which support transit viability and active transportation. The proposed amendments facilitate and promote residential intensification at densities that are transit -supportive and make efficient use of existing infrastructure. Inclusionary Zoning, which is subject to a separate amendment, is enabled by the proposed amendments, which include delineating the boundaries of Major Transit Station Areas in the Kitchener Official Plan. The delineation of all Major Transit Station Area boundaries in Kitchener, per policy 2.D.2.6, recognizes these lands as Protected Major Transit Station Areas for the purposes of implementing the use of Inclusionary Zoning. The proposed amendments provide a framework for enabling a full range and mix of housing types across the PMTSAs, including missing middle housing. The proposed Page 218 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' regulations focus on built form elements of developments and do not rely on a static maximum Floor Space Ratio (FSR) value. The merits of regulating density through built form elements is described in detail in the zoning by-law amendment analysis section of this appendix. Existing low-rise neighbourhoods proposed to be zoned SGA -1 and SGA - 2 permit missing middle housing types, including multiplexes and low-rise apartments. Recommended zoning regulations enable missing middle housing typologies as -of -right. Growing Together supports the provision of affordable housing through enabling more housing supply and increasing development permissions that can help offset the financial impacts of inclusionary zoning, which are permitted within PMTSAs and subject to a separate amendment. 15 -minute neighbourhoods are supported by zoning regulations that permit a broad range of uses and densities across the Strategic Growth Area A, B and C land use designations. Additional small scale compatible non-residential uses are permitted throughout the geography as -of -right. Further, existing publicly funded school sites are recommended to retain an institutional land use designation and zone category. Based on the foregoing, Planning staff are of the opinion that the proposed amendments conform to the Region of Waterloo Official Plan. Page 219 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' City of Kitchener Official Plan (2014) The City of Kitchener Official Plan (2014) provides the long-term land use vision for Kitchener. The vision is further articulated and implemented through the guiding principles, goals, objectives, and policies which are set out in the Plan. The vision and goals of the OP strive to build an innovative, vibrant, attractive, safe, complete, and healthy community. The Official Plan includes objective 4.1.1, which aims to provide for an appropriate range, variety and mix of housing types and styles, densities, tenure, and affordability to satisfy the varying housing needs of the Kitchener community through all stages of life. This objective speaks to the preference for a land use pattern that accommodates a range of housing types across the city as a whole and within neighbourhoods. The Official Plan also includes objective 12.1.1 which aims to conserve the City's cultural heritage resources through their identification, protection, use and/or management in such a way that their heritage values, attributes and integrity are retained. This objective has been met by identifying and conserving heritage attributes within the Cedar Hill and Schneider Creek Neighbourhood Cultural Heritage Landscape and through updated policies to embed the role of Heritage Conservation District Plans. Proaosed Amendments The purpose of the proposed Official Plan amendments includes introducing and applying new Strategic Growth Area land uses to lands within the affected PMTSAs, redesignating lands in the downtown and existing secondary plans with the equivalent land use designations in the 2014 City of Kitchener Official Plan, amending specific policy area mapping and policy text, and amending cultural heritage resourcing mapping and policy text. The proposed Official Plan amendment includes the introduction and application of new Strategic Growth Area land uses applying only to lands within the affected PMTSAs. Institutional land use designations are proposed to be retained on publicly funded school properties within the Growing Together study area. Complete Community A complete community creates and provides access to a mix of land uses including, a full range and mix of housing, including affordable housing, recreation, commerce, community and cultural facilities, health care facilities, employment, parks, and open spaces distributed and connected in a coherent and efficient manner. A complete community also supports the use of public transit and active transportation, enabling residents to meet most of their daily needs within a short distance of their homes. Kitchener will be planned as a complete community that creates opportunities for all people to live, work and interact within close proximity. Planning for a complete community will aid in reducing the cost of infrastructure and servicing, encourage the Page 220 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment ' F' use of public transit and active modes of transportation, promote social interaction, and foster a sense of community. Urban Structure The Official Plan establishes an Urban Structure for the City of Kitchener and provides policies for directing growth and development within this structure. Intensification Areas are planned throughout the City's urban area as key locations to accommodate and receive the majority of development or redevelopment for a variety of land uses. Section 3.C.2.3. of the Official Plan identifies the Urban Growth Centre, Major Transit Station Areas, Nodes and Corridors as Primary Intensification Areas. Planning staff are recommending that lands identified as "Lands subject to this amendment" on Figure 1 be amended to delineate the PMTSA boundaries as established by the Region of Waterloo and approved by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing on April 11, 2023. The delineation of the PMTSA boundaries implements Policy 2.D.2.6 of ROPA 6 for the purposes of implementing the use of inclusionary zoning. Figure 1: Proposed Amendment to Map 2 Urban Structure Page 221 of 1179 c CITY OF KITCHENER OFFICIAL PLAN m AMENDMENT TO MAP 2 URBAN STRUCTURE f � _ i Intensification Areas N 40 urban Growth Centre (Downtown) (2) Protected Major Transit Station Area - City Node 40 Community Node 40 Neighbourhood Node 40 Urban Corridor s hf Arterial Corridor V 7n \\ Other Areas Community Area s Industrial Employment Areas Green Areas Transit Existing Transit Corridor t•' i~r� Planned Transit Corridor aw IN Light Rail Transit Corridor Adapted Bus Rapid Transit Corridor g - Rapid Transit Station 9 Area of Amen dment Q } tP l Y la Lands subject to this amendment pa • _ SCHEDULE *A' m o METRES REVISED: OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT OPA2310161KIJZ APPLICANT: CITY OF KITCHENER ZONING BY -L_ AW AMENDMENT Z13A23{028/KIJZ City of Kitchener FILE SCALE 1:65,000 CITY OF KITCHENER DATE: NOVEMBER 24, 2423 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, PLANNING m0 Figure 1: Proposed Amendment to Map 2 Urban Structure Page 221 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' Planning staff are also recommending that lands identified as "Lands subject to this amendment" on Figure 2 be amended to reflect the proposed urban structure component for lands that were previously contained within a secondary plan and not assigned an urban structure component on Map 2 — Urban Structure, or lands that were previously covered by the illustrative 800m MTSA radius on the existing iteration of the Urban Structure mapping. Figure 2: Proposed Amendment to Map 2 Urban Structure The entirety of the Growing Together study area includes lands that are identified as Protected Major Transit Station Area on Map 2 — Urban Structure of the Official Plan. The planned function of Protected Major Transit Station Areas is to- provide a focus for accommodating growth through development to support existing and planned transit and rapid transit service levels-, provide connectivity of various modes of transportation to the transit system; achieve a mix of residential, office (including major office), institutional (including major institutional) and commercial development (including retail commercial centres), wherever appropriate-, and have streetscapes and a built form that is pedestrian -friendly and transit -oriented. The affected PMTSAs include Kitchener's Urban Growth Centre (UGC), a second Urban Structure component identified on Map 2 — Urban Structure. The planned function of the Page 222 of 1179 CITY OF KITCHENER OFFICIAL PLAN `r n AMENDMENT TO MAP 2 y URBAN STRUCTURE h 4LtN0Cr� f3 N ISS — Intensi ication Areas y� d� 40 Urban Growth Centre (Downtown) Protected Major Transit Station Area 40 City Node ry �r ' Gy 40 Community Node d.� i U✓ ��R 40 Neighbourhood Node 40 Urban Corridor Arterial Corridor 7/ � C DtherAreas q��-,� ° Community Areas Industrial Employment Areas Green Areas ti Transit Existing Transit Corridor PlannedTransitCorridor Light Rail Transit Corridor �V15 �� Rapid Transit Station 'PA Area of Amendment O� Q Lands subject to this amendment SCHEDULE W � METRES REVISED: OFFICIAL FLAN AMENDMENT OPA231017fKJJZ ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENTZBA2310291KlJZ APPLICANT: CITY OF KITCHENER SCALE 115,000 FILE: City of Kitchener CITY OF KITCHENER DATE- NOVEMBER 24, 2023 LVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, PI_I'JNIRG mxp Figure 2: Proposed Amendment to Map 2 Urban Structure The entirety of the Growing Together study area includes lands that are identified as Protected Major Transit Station Area on Map 2 — Urban Structure of the Official Plan. The planned function of Protected Major Transit Station Areas is to- provide a focus for accommodating growth through development to support existing and planned transit and rapid transit service levels-, provide connectivity of various modes of transportation to the transit system; achieve a mix of residential, office (including major office), institutional (including major institutional) and commercial development (including retail commercial centres), wherever appropriate-, and have streetscapes and a built form that is pedestrian -friendly and transit -oriented. The affected PMTSAs include Kitchener's Urban Growth Centre (UGC), a second Urban Structure component identified on Map 2 — Urban Structure. The planned function of the Page 222 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' Urban Growth Centre (Downtown) is to accommodate a significant share of the Region's and City's future population and employment growth. Land Use Planning staff are recommending that lands identified as "Lands subject to this amendment" on Figure 3 be amended to apply new Strategic Growth Area land use designations to lands located within Protected Major Transit Station Areas. Figure 3: Proposed Amendment to Map 3 Land Use The purpose of the proposed land use changes is to introduce and apply 3 new Strategic Growth Area land uses to lands within the affected PMTSAs, and redesignate lands from existing land use designations in applicable secondary plans to equivalent land use designations in the 2014 City of Kitchener Official Plan. New Strategic Growth Area lands uses were developed to apply within these PMTSAs to help ensure that there is a land use framework that performs well in complex, challenging, and highly diverse areas. The purpose of the 3 new Strategic Growth Area land uses are: Page 223 of 1179 'i. CITY OF KITCHENER OFFICIAL PLAN / AMENDMENT TO MAP 3 LAND USE Ir Low Rise Residential Medium Rise Residential N � High Rise Residential r� 8 Mixed Use w — — — — Strategic growth Area A Strategic Growth Area S Strategic Growth Area C _ Innovation District __-___ — Market District Commercial Campus Commercial Heavy Industrial Employment General Industrial Employment — -- — — — Business Park Employment _— —_ — Institutional �Prime Agriculture �+ Rural Natural Heritage Conservation Open Space a� os` Major Infrastructure and Utilities F� OR _! Refer to Secondary Plan For Detail Area of Amendment Lands subject to this amendment SCHEDULES'— o 313 REVISED: "^eTRES OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT 0PA23/016JKJJZ APPLICANT: CITY OF KITCHENER ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT ZBA2310281KJJZ City of Kitchener SCALE 1:30,000 CITY OF KITCHENER DATE: NOVEMBER 24, 2023 BEVELOPr1ENTSERVICESDEPARTPiENT,PLANNING Figure 3: Proposed Amendment to Map 3 Land Use The purpose of the proposed land use changes is to introduce and apply 3 new Strategic Growth Area land uses to lands within the affected PMTSAs, and redesignate lands from existing land use designations in applicable secondary plans to equivalent land use designations in the 2014 City of Kitchener Official Plan. New Strategic Growth Area lands uses were developed to apply within these PMTSAs to help ensure that there is a land use framework that performs well in complex, challenging, and highly diverse areas. The purpose of the 3 new Strategic Growth Area land uses are: Page 223 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' • Strategic Growth Area A — to provide for low and mid -rise building forms up to a maximum of 8 storeys. This designation also provides for compatible non- residential uses and is proposed to apply to existing low-rise, predominantly residential neighbourhoods. • Strategic Growth Area B — provides for mid -rise and moderate high-rise buildings while continuing to recognize existing and permit new low rise buildings. A full range of non-residential uses are also proposed to be permitted. This land use is proposed to apply mostly on the edges of existing low-rise areas. • Strategic Growth Area C — provides for high-density residential intensification with a full range of non-residential uses. Existing low-rise and all mid -rise buildings are permitted. This land use is proposed to apply to large, underutilized sites and properties next to ION station stops. The 3 Strategic Growth Area land uses were applied through several evaluation criteria, including community and collaborator input, good planning principles, and technical and design considerations. These included: • Compliance with provincial and regional legislation, plans, and policies; • Consideration of other City priorities like inclusionary zoning, Kitchener's municipal housing pledge, the Downtown Kitchener vision, the Missing Middle and Affordable Housing Study, Places and Spaces: An Open Space Strategy for Kitchener, the Cycling and Trails Master Plan, the Downtown District Energy Study and cultural and natural heritage policies; • Guidance from the Planning Around Rapid Transit Stations (PARTS) Plans and Neighbourhood Planning Review (NPR) processes; • Site specific/area specific opportunities and constraints such as lot size, area and width; proximity to ION stops and the Multi -Modal Hub and relationships to different street typologies; and relationships to existing context, including buildings, open spaces and streets. The introduction and application of 3 new Strategic Growth Area land uses on lands identified in Figure 3 supports Policy 3.C.2.17, which states: "The planned function of Protected Major Transit Station Areas, in order to support transit and rapid transit, is to: a) provide a focus for accommodating growth through development to support existing and planned transit and rapid transit service levels; b) provide connectivity of various modes of transportation to the transit system; c) achieve a mix of residential, office (including major office), institutional (including major institutional) and commercial development (including retail commercial centres), wherever appropriate; and, d) have streetscapes and a built form that is pedestrian -friendly and transit - oriented." The recommended land use changes are aligned with objective 4. 1.1 of the Official Plan by providing for an appropriate range, variety and mix of housing types and styles, densities, tenure, and affordability to satisfy the varying housing needs and enhance the overall livability of the PMTSAs and broader Kitchener community through all stages of life. Page 224 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' The recommended Strategic Growth Area land use designations implement policy direction provided by the Provincial Policy Statement, Growth Plan, and ROP in support of intensification, compact built -form, transit -supportive development, provision for a broad mix and range of uses, and the achievement of 15 -minute neighbourhoods. Additionally, the recommended land use designations directly implement the planned function of PMTSAs as identified in Policy 3.C.2.17 of the Kitchener Official Plan. Recommended policies within the Strategic Growth Area land use designations identify minimum density requirements to achieve the density targets identified in the ROP for the PMTSAs subject to this amendment. Direction is provided regarding permitted uses, which implement direction from the Province and Region with respect to providing for a diverse mix of uses. Publicly funded school lands are recommended to retain an Institutional land use designation to allow for continued institutional uses on the affected lands. Planning staff are recommending that lands identified as "Lands subject to this amendment" on Figure 4 be amended to redesignate lands from the existing land use designation in applicable existing secondary plans to an equivalent land use designation in the 2014 City of Kitchener Official Plan. This is required as a result of existing secondary plans recommended to be deleted, which include the associated land use maps for each geography. Page 225 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' --- -- " + CITY OF KITCHENER Ir OFFICIAL PLAN s — _ AMENDMENT TO MAP 3 a LAND USE Z Iy- _ `-� Low Rise Residential -- —. -- _ — _ --- Medium Rise Residential High Rise Residential Mixed Use "yrs` commercial campus — — — - — _ Commercial .. Heavy Industrial Employment —_— -- _-- General Industrial Employment AVEC Business Park Employment Institutional = _ Natural Heritage Conservation e Open Space Major Infrastructure and Utilities Urban Growth Centre (Downtown) ORefer _ -- toMap 4 Refer to Secondary Plan For Detail cq Area of Amen dment Q Lands subject to this amendment SCHEDULE 'B"n I REVISED. OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT OPA23/0171KlJZ u J APPLICANT: CITY OF KITCHENER L METRES ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENTZBA2310291KIJZ SCALE 1150,000 City of Kitchener FILE: avAssoinc.rz.mn�a CITY OF KITCI ENTER DATE: NOVEMBER 24, 2 023 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTUENT, PLANNING Figure 4: Proposed Amendment to Map 3 Land Use Protected Maior Transit Station Areas and Urban Growth Centre Planning staff are recommending that Map 4 be repealed and replaced in its entirety with the map identified in Figure 5. The purpose of repealing Map 4 and replacing it with the map depicted below is to delineate the boundaries of PMTSAs in Kitchener, in addition to the Downtown Kitchener UGC boundary. The delineation of the PMTSA boundaries implements policy 2.D.2.6 of ROPA 6 for the purposes of implementing the use of inclusionary zoning, and clearly depicts the boundaries of each PMTSA for monitoring purposes in support of achieving the required density targets. Page 226 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' 91 Legend Protected Major Transit Station Area 0 Urban Growth Centra (Downtown) 4W ntes t This map Corms part of dre Official Peen of fhe City ¢t ,", ne! antl IRUst h¢ teed In WntUn¢[IOn wM Ina p¢llaies of tM1ls Peen_ Adopted byy City 0— 1h - Apppp edbyReg'wnalCounctl- Elfacdve Deta - I.aslRe ..-Nar Mr]>, 2p23 Revised try Amendments - ADpAIf you mg -this document in an accessible format please contact Planning Division, planningg—hen¢r.ra 519-]41-2426 Figure 5: Proposed Amendment to Map 4 Protected Major Transit Station Areas and Urban Growth Centre Cultural Heritage Resources A detailed assessment of the proposed amendments as they relate to cultural heritage resources was provided in a report to the Heritage Kitchener Committee and presented on January 9, 2024 (DSD -2024-009). The proposed amendments are in alignment with objectives 12.1.1, and 12.1.2, and policy 12.C.1.9 of the Official Plan which state: 12.1.1. To conserve the city's cultural heritage resources through their identification, protection, use and/or management in such a way that their heritage values, attributes and integrity are retained. 12.1.2. To ensure that all development or redevelopment and site alteration is sensitive to and respects cultural heritage resources and that cultural heritage resources are conserved. 12.C.1.9 Significant cultural heritage landscapes will be identified on Map 9 in accordance with the Regional Official Plan and this Plan. An amendment to this Plan will not be required to identify cultural heritage landscapes on the Municipal Heritage Register. Page 227 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' From Heritage Planning's staff report to Heritage Kitchener on January 9th, 2024: "The key finding of this report is that the proposed changes are not anticipated to result in loss of cultural heritage resources. The existing heritage tools currently in use— including Heritage Conservation District Plans, designation, and the ability to request heritage studies in certain situations—remain in effect. Further, the proposed amendments include the introduction of new policies intended to implement and protect cultural heritage landscapes." The proposed amendments allow for the continued conservation of cultural heritage resources within the City. The values and interests of the two Heritage Conservation Districts within the Growing Together study area are protected through the introduction of new heritage -related policies and refinement of existing policies that ensures compatibility between the Official Plan and Heritage Conservation District Plans. Further, the boundaries of 14 cultural heritage landscapes are delineated and general CHL policies established, as well as detailed policies developed for the Cedar Hill and Schneider Creek Neighbourhood CHL specifically, which allows for additional heritage considerations during planning processes. Urban Design The proposed Official Plan amendment includes new and amended urban design policies to address the critical design attributes of both tall building design and design in Protected Major Transit Station Areas. Specific Policy Areas Several specific policy areas are proposed to be repealed and replaced through the proposed Official Plan amendment. These are outlined in this section. Repeal and Replace Policy 15.D.12.18 Planning staff are recommending that existing policy 15.D.12.18, which applies to 134 & 152 Shanley Street, be repealed and replaced with the following: 15.D.12.18. 301 Victoria Street South "Notwithstanding the Major Infrastructure and Utilities land use designation which applies to the lands located on the block generally bounded by Patricia Avenue, Victoria Street South, the Grand River Railway, West Avenue and the Henry Sturm Greenway, the executive and administrative offices of Enova Power Corporation located at 301 Victoria Street South and the associated warehousing and outdoor storage uses shall be permitted uses." Existing policy 15.D.12.18 is recommended to be repealed as 134 & 152 Shanley Street are subject to site-specific zoning provisions and is currently under construction. This Page 228 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' specific policy area number is proposed to be repurposed for a specific policy area for 301 Victoria Street South which is an existing Special Policy Area of the Victoria Street Secondary Plan that applies to this property. This amendment will facilitate the deletion of the Victoria Street Secondary Plan. Amend Policy 15.D.12.28 Planning staff are recommending that existing policy 15.D.12.28 be amended as follows: 15.D.12.28. Glasgow Street/Strange Street a) "Notwithstanding the Strategic Growth Area C land use designation on lands located near the southwesterly corner of Glasgow Street and Strange Street, the continuation of the existing industrial and commercial parking facility uses will be permitted until such time as the site transitions into uses permitted by the land use designation. The transition of the site may occur in phases. b) A Holding provision pursuant to Section 17.E.13 will apply to residential uses, day care uses, and other sensitive uses. The Holding provision will not be removed until such time as a Record of Site Condition has been acknowledged by the Province and a release has been issued by the Region." Subsection a). is recommended to be revised to reference the Strategic Growth Area C land use designation, rather than the existing Mixed Use land use designation. Repeal and Replace Policy 15.D.12.39 Planning staff are recommending that existing policy 15.D.12.39, which applies to Breithaupt Bock Phase 3, be repealed and replaced with the following: 15.D.12.39. 607-641 King Street West Notwithstanding the Strategic Growth Area C land use designation and policies: a) "Retail uses shall be permitted to have a maximum gross floor area of 10,000 square metres. b) Prior to development and/or redevelopment of the lands municipally addressed as 607-641 King Street West, a Master Plan will be required to be completed and approved by the City. The Master Plan will be required to be updated and approved by the City through the City's Site Plan Approval Process prior to and in conjunction with each stage of development and/or redevelopment. Substantial deviation from the approved Master Plan will require Council approval." Existing policy 15.D.12.39 is recommended to be repealed as the recommended land use designation through this official plan amendment for Breithaupt Block Phase 3 will Page 229 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' make the existing Specific Policy Area that applies to these lands unnecessary. The Specific Policy Area applying to Breithaupt Block Phase 3 includes policies establishing a maximum floor space ratio of 4.5. This specific policy area number is proposed to be repurposed for a specific policy area for 607-641 King Street West which is an existing Special Policy Area for these lands from the KW Hospital Secondary Plan. This amendment will facilitate the deletion of the KW Hospital Secondary Plan. Repeal and Replace Policy 15.D.12.54 Planning staff are recommending that existing policy 15.D.12.54, which applies to 368- 382 Ottawa Street South & 99-115 Pattandon Avenue, be repealed and replaced with the following: 15.D.12.54. 79 Joseph Street "Notwithstanding the Open Space land use designation and policies on the lands municipally known as 79 Joseph Street, office uses will also be permitted." Existing policy 15.D.12.54 is recommended to be repealed as recommended zoning through this zoning by-law amendment for 368-382 Ottawa Street South & 99-115 Pattandon Avenue will make the existing Specific Policy Area that applies to these lands unnecessary. The Specific Policy Area applying to 368-382 Ottawa Street South & 99- 115 Pattandon Avenue includes policies establishing a maximum floor space ratio of 2.5. This specific policy area number is proposed to be repurposed for a specific policy area for 79 Joseph Street, which is an existing Special Policy Area for these lands from the Victoria Park Secondary Plan. This amendment will facilitate the deletion of the Victoria Park Secondary Plan. Delete Policy 15.D.12.62 Planning staff are recommending that existing policy 15.D.12.62, which applies to 455- 509 Mill Street be deleted, as the recommended land use designation will make the existing Specific Policy Area that applies to these lands unnecessary. Add new Policy 15.D.12.69 Planning staff are recommending that new Specific Policy Area 15.D.12.69 be added as follows: "15.D.12.69. 1668 King Street East The maximum permitted floor space ratio shall be 7.6." This new policy is text that is proposed to be brought into the 2014 Official Plan from Special Policy Area 7 of the King Street East Secondary Plan that currently applies to Page 230 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' these lands. This amendment will facilitate the deletion of the King Street East Secondary Plan. Add new Policy 15.D.12.70 Planning staff are recommending that new Specific Policy Area 15.D.12.70 be added as follows.. "15.D.12.70. 1770 King Street East, 815 & 825 Weber Street East The maximum permitted floor space ratio shall be 6.0." This new policy is text that is proposed to be brought into the 2014 Official Plan from Special Policy Area 11 of the King Street East Secondary Plan that currently applies to these lands. This amendment will facilitate the deletion of the King Street East Secondary Plan. Proposed Official Plan Amendment Conclusions Based on the above -noted policies and planning analysis planning staff are of the opinion that the proposed Official Plan Amendments represent good planning and recommends that the proposed Official Plan Amendments be adopted as shown in Attachment `A', `Attachment `B, and Attachment `C'. Page 231 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' City of Kitchener Zoning By-law 2019-051 The purpose of the proposed zoning by-law amendments are to bring all properties within the study area into Zoning By-law 2019-051 from Zoning By-law 85-1, as shown on Attachment `D' and Attachment `E'. The existing zoning in in the study area includes a broad range of zones dating back to the mid 1990s. The proposed zoning by-law amendments include the application of new Strategic Growth Area (SGA) zones to lands within delineated PMTSAs, and the application of equivalent zones in Zoning By-law 2019-051 for lands outside of the delineated PMTSAs but subject to the Growing Together project. Proposed SGA Zones The recommended Strategic Growth Area (SGA) zones include four zone categories: SGA -1; SGA -2; SGA -3; and SGA -4. The SGA zones are exclusive to lands designated Strategic Growth Area and located within a PMTSA. The purpose of these zones are: • The SGA -1: Low Rise Growth Zone is intended to create opportunities for missing middle housing and compatible non-residential uses in low-rise forms up to 11 metres in height. This zone applies to lands designated Strategic Growth Area A in the Official Plan. A minimum floor space ratio value does not apply to lands zoned SGA -1. • The SGA -2: Mid Rise Growth Zone is intended to create opportunities for moderate growth in mid -rise forms up to 8 storeys in height. The SGA -2 zone will permit a mix of residential and non-residential uses. This zone applies to lands designated Strategic Growth Area A or Strategic Growth Area B in the Official Plan. A minimum floor space ratio value of 1.0 applies to lands zoned SGA -2. • The SGA -3: High Rise Growth Zone (Limited) is intended to create opportunities for high-density growth in both mid and high-rise forms up to 25 storeys in height. The SGA -3 zone will permit a wide mix of residential and non-residential uses. This zone applies to lands designated Strategic Growth Area B or Strategic Growth Area C in the Official Plan. A minimum floor space ratio value of 2.0 applies to lands zoned SGA -3. • The SGA -4: High Rise Growth Zone is intended to create opportunities for high- density growth in both mid and high-rise forms. The SGA -4 zone will permit a wide mix of residential and non-residential uses. This zone applies to lands designated Strategic Growth Area C in the Official Plan. A minimum floor space ratio value of 2.0 applies to lands zoned SGA -3. The recommended SGA zones introduce new form -based regulations, in place of existing maximum floor space ratio (FSR) values as a means of regulating density. In existing, built-up areas, such as downtown Kitchener, parcels and parcel assemblies vary in size, shape, configuration and orientation. FSR as a means of regulating density performs well in locations where lands are of a consistent size and shape. Where uniformity in the Page 232 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' parcel fabric does not exist, a maximum FSR value can produce unpredictable results with respect to development permissions, including very large and/or tall or very small and/or short buildings within the same zone depending on lot size. The form -based approach regulates important built -form elements and relationships to ensure that development matches the intent of the zone regardless of the lot size and shape. These elements include lot width, lot area, setbacks, building height, facade openings, street line ground floor building height, floor plate area, building length, and physical separation. Through Growing Together, staff are proposing that FSR maximums are not applied to any of the SGA zones. However, the recommended SGA zones include FSR minimums to ensure that development meets the minimum required density targets of 160 people and jobs per hectare within each Growing Together PMTSA as well as 225 people and jobs per hectare within the Downtown Kitchener Urban Growth Centre. Proposed Institutional Zone The Growing Together study area recommends zoning all publicly funded school properties INS -2: Major Institutional zone. The INS -2 zone is intended to accommodate institutional uses primarily intended to serve at a city or regional scale. The recommended application of the INS -2 zone is intended to maintain the institutional use on the affected lands. Priority Streets The proposed amendments include additional regulations for lot lines abutting a Priority Street. The priority street regulations: apply to the ground floor of buildings and restrict some ground floor uses; prohibit above grade structured parking along the street line for the first two floors; and restrict structured parking to no more than 50% of the street line fagade above the second floor. The priority streets regulations align with direction in ROPA 6 to support a high-quality public realm and creating spaces that are supportive of active transportation and transit. Holding Provisions and Site -Specific Provisions The proposed amendments carry forward a number of existing holding provisions and site-specific provisions currently in effect in Zoning By-law 85-1 to Zoning By-law 2019- 051. New holding provisions and Site -Specific Provisions have been applied to select lands based on comments provided by the Region of Waterloo regarding potential contamination, noise, and airport impacts. All recommended holding provisions and site- specific provisions are included in Attachment `D' for lands within Protected Major Transit Station Areas and Attachment `E' for lands not within Protected Major Transit Station Areas. Page 233 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' Non-PMTSA Lands For lands outside of the delineated PMTSAs, an equivalent zone category in by-law 2019-051 is proposed to be applied. The proposed application of zone categories in by- law 2019-051 is administrative and maintains existing use permissions and regulations. Proaosed Zonina By-law Amendment Conclusions Planning staff are of the opinion that the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment to bring all properties within the Growing Together study area into Zoning By-law 2019-051 from Zoning By-law 85-1 represents good planning as it will allow for the implementation of provincial and regional direction on PMTSAs and permit a broad range and mix of uses. The proposed Zoning By-law amendments specific to lands within PMTSAs aligns with Provincial and Regional direction to promote intensification and transit -supportive development around transit stations, provide for a range and mix of uses and densities, and support 15 -minute neighbourhoods and complete communities. The proposed Zoning By-law amendments for lands not located within a delineated PMTSA bring properties into Zoning By-law 2019-051 from Zoning By-law 85-1 through the application of equivalent zones. The proposed Zoning By-law amendments are consistent with the proposed Official Plan amendments. Planning staff recommend that the proposed Zoning By-law Amendments be approved as shown in Attachment `D' and Attachment `E'. Page 234 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' Technical Considerations There are multiple additional technical considerations informing the Growing Together planning analysis. Municipal Sanitary Capacity A sanitary capacity analysis was performed through the Planning Around Rapid Transit Stations (PARTS) Central, Midtown and Rockway plans. In the PARTS Central plan: "The preferred scenario was modelled using the highest variation whereby potential development assumptions were considered at 100% of the density provision of each land use category for all lands." "The flows were tracked downstream to the treatment plant to ensure no negative impacts." "Modelling the highest possible variation of the preferred scenario yields a fairly large increase to the potential flows downstream up to approximately 538 litres/second. The increase in flow rate would not result in any surcharging sewers or downstream capacity issues." "These are high assumption scenarios. Typically, variations are considered that are closer to 50% of the density of the land use (so it can be assumed that the likely flow rate will be much lower). Note: "100% of the density provision of each land use category for all lands" refers to an assumption that all lots in all land uses in the subject area are assumed to be built at 100% of the Floor -Space -Ratio density permissions within the land use category. In the PARTS Midtown plan: "The City of Kitchener Infrastructure Services Department completed modeling for sanitary sewer infrastructure in Midtown, which compared the existing condition and the Preferred Scenario at 100% build -out to determine any impacts to the infrastructure within the study area." "The modeling concluded that the impacts of the Preferred Scenario for the Midtown station area are very minor, without accounting for recent improvements from the ION reconstruction that should improve capacity beyond what was modeled." "Through this review it can be concluded that the Preferred Scenario yields negligible impacts to the City's sanitary infrastructure." Page 235 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' In the PARTS Rockway plan: "the existing condition (was compared to) the Preferred Scenario at the maximum potential zoning capacity to determine any possible impacts to the infrastructure within the study area." "The modeling concluded that the impacts of the Preferred Scenario for the Rockway station area are very minor, namely that the length of pipe at capacity does not increase and that only one 36.8m pipe length results in surcharging at the maximum zoning density, without accounting for recent improvements from the ION reconstruction that should improve capacity beyond what was modeled." "Should redevelopment for certain areas propose densities that are higher than what is shown in the Rockway Plan, these may be assessed on a site specific basis." In all 3 PARTS Plans, modeling of 100% of the land use capacity resulted in only one pipe surcharge. For context, the PARTS/NPR land use and zoning was designed to meet the PMTSA minimum density target of 160ppj/ha for each PMTSA at 50% of zone capacity build out. 75% was calibrated to a 2051 build -out assumption. Growing Together takes a different approach to planned capacity and density maximums, but the numbers end up in similar ranges. Growing Together plans for a minimum of 18,000 new residential units by 2031, to align with the City's housing pledge target of 35,000 new homes across the city by the end of 2031. For the Growing Together PMTSAs, 18,000 units, alongside proportional new non- residential growth, also results in 160 people and jobs per hectare across the seven PMTSAs, almost exactly. The Victoria Park & Kitchener City Hall and Frederick & Queen PMTSAs have already met their minimum density targets, with Victoria Park & Kitchener City Hall having attained a density of 178 residents and jobs per hectare as of 2019, and Frederick & Queen having attained a density of approximately 180 residents and jobs per hectare as of 2022. By most scenarios, the Central Station Innovation District will be the next PMTSA to reach the minimum density target. The other four PMTSAs; Grand River Hospital, Market, Borden and Mill are expected to remain well short of the 160ppj/ha minimum target by 2031. A 50% zone capacity analysis of the PARTS/NPR land uses and zones is therefore reflecting approximately the same amount of growth as the Growing Together 18,000 unit threshold planned for 2031. Page 236 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' However, as PARTS was tested at 100% zone capacity, not 50%, and the NPR zoning was tested at 75% capacity, and neither analysis showed capacity constraints, there are no anticipated near-term capacity constraints through at least 2031. Additionally, there are currently an estimated 18,000 units that have been approved within the Growing Together PMTSAs but not yet built. Expected construction of these approved units stretches as far as 2035. No capacity concerns have been raised to date through the approval of those units, which coincidentally represent the same number of units as both the pro -rated housing pledge target for PMTSAs and the number of units required to meet the minimum density target for the geography as a whole. Yet, to ensure sanitary capacity continues to be evaluated appropriately moving forward, and as Growing Together proposes increased zoning permissions in several areas, staff undertook an additional exercise to model these areas of significant change to evaluate the relative increase in people and jobs. Staff identified where the zoned capacity greatly exceeds that of what was proposed through PARTS/NPR. This mostly captures areas that PARTS/NPR had zoned as industrial employment or innovation employment, where Growing Together permits mixed use instead. These new people and job estimates were compared to the estimates from the sanitary capacity model's 75% or 2051 assumptions based on the proposed zoning from the Neighbourhood Planning Review (NPR) project. Comparing the two scenarios, four areas of significant change were noted. As a result, properties proposed to be zoned SGA -4 within these areas of significant change (primarily existing industrial areas in the Grand River Hospital station area between Glasgow St. and Strange St., within the Central Station area along Victoria St. N., and within the Mill station area between the rail corridor and Mill St. and between the rail corridor, Ottawa St. and the Conestoga Parkway) are proposed to receive a holding provision requiring site specific sanitary capacity analysis to determine if the existing sanitary infrastructure can support the development. Noise Noise assessment reports were created for the PARTS Central, Midtown and Rockway. For PARTS Central: "a continuous ambient noise monitoring program in Downtown Kitchener was undertaken in October 2015. Noise measurements were conducted in accordance with the Ontario Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change (MOECC) noise publication NPC -103. Five monitoring locations were identified within the study area as follows: • Corner of Weber St. and Victoria St. • 44 Walter St. Page 237 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' • Corner of Weber St. and Cedar St. • 10 Madison Ave. • 19 Courtland Ave. The monitoring locations were selected based on areas most likely to be affected by significant developments or other changes through the implementation of the preferred land use scenario." "The noise models show minor differences in ambient noise levels due to traffic volumes between the baseline and preferred scenarios at the selected receptor locations. Rail noise would be identical in both instances and there would be no relative differences in the results. The largest modeled increase in traffic noise between the baseline and the preferred scenario is approximately 1 dba, a noise level so low that it is not perceptible to human hearing. As a result, it can be concluded that the traffic associated with the additional population and employment growth occurring as part of the preferred scenario will not lead to a significant impact in noise pollution in Downtown Kitchener." "Also, the noise models did not identify the need for any necessary mitigation measures to be implemented through policies, zoning, design or potentially as future conditions of development approval." For PARTS Midtown and Rockway, a similar noise assessment was conducted, using the CadnaA software to analyze various streets and rail lines. The assessment found that "POW's (plane of windows) associated with proposed developments just beyond the Right of Way of various roadways would not require additional mitigation to ensure the development can be designed to achieve the required indoor noise limits." "new Outdoor Living Areas near the assessed roadways may require mitigation to demonstrate compliance with acceptable noise limits. Noise levels associated with the various roadways should be within acceptable limits for indoor living conditions." "Any new sensitive land uses should be carefully considered in proximity to railway operations. Potential noise and vibration impacts would restrict such uses to minimum setback distances (i.e.- 30m from a Principal Main line) along with requiring a number of other mitigation measures and warning clauses." The Region of Waterloo has requested that Growing Together require a detailed transportation noise study for all properties within 200 metres of a Regional Road and a detailed noise and vibration study for all properties within 75 meters of a rail line. The Page 238 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' Region also requests that a stationary noise study be required for all development within the Growing Together PMTSAs. Staff are recommending the use of a holding provision requiring a noise and vibration study for all properties within 75m of a rail line, as requested by the Region of Waterloo which is consistent with the approach for this matter city-wide. With respect to the request for detailed transportation noise studies within 200 metres of a Regional Road, should this requirement be applied, approximately 80% of the total geographical area, or approximately 3,090 of the roughly 3,840 properties within the Growing Together PMTSAs would be subject to such a holding provision. This would include approximately 2,400 properties proposed to be zoned low-rise or mid -rise, and could have an impact on the ability of this work to enable missing middle and mid -rise housing. As the PARTS studies recommend no mitigation for indoor spaces, applying a holding provision for a transportation noise study to such a significant percentage of all properties in Growing Together could have a negative impact on housing supply—particularly missing middle and low-rise housing supply. Encumbering missing middle housing supply would not be consistent with City, Region and Provincial policies and would not meet the intent of either the Housing Pledge or the Federal Housing Accelerator Fund. Given that the above noted area already contains significant housing supply in low, medium and high density forms, and that an estimated 18,000 residential units are currently approved within these PMTSAs without transportation noise being identified as a significant concern, and that the PARTS Central plan specifically noted an imperceptible increase in transportation noise levels through that study, staff recommend that a broad holding provision requiring a transportation noise study not be applied at this time. It is important to also note that while Growing Together does plan for greater long-term densities than PARTS did, it does so with a significantly lowered expectation for personal vehicle use. PARTS was developed at a time when the expected framework for parking minimums was within the range of one space per unit. Growing Together proposes no minimum parking requirement at all. Over the past decade, parking demand has steadily decreased, and many developments are being approved with fewer than 0.5 parking spaces per unit. Two high-density projects have already been approved in the Growing Together PMTSAs with zero parking required. An increase in residential units from the projections in PARTS to Growing Together does not come with a similar increase in car use, as demonstrated through the proposed policy planning framework and ongoing trends in development approvals. With respect to stationary noise studies, staff do not recommend the implementation of this study requirement across the entirety of the Growing Together geography as this is likely to have a significant negative impact on the provision of missing middle housing forms and is similarly not consistent with City, Region, Provincial and Federal policy and Page 239 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' direction on housing supply, intensification around transit, and complete communities (15 -minute neighbourhoods). Again, a broad range of low, medium, and high-density housing already exists across the Growing Together context, and an estimated 18,000 units are currently approved without stationary noise being identified as a significant concern. Floodway The Growing Together PMTSAs include lands within the Schneider and Shoemaker Creek floodway/ecological restoration area (ERA). Adjacent lands are subject to ERA policies in the Official Plan. Growing Together proposes not to apply a land use or zone to any property within the Schneider/Shoemaker Creek Naturalization EA project until such time as the project has been completed. Record of Site Condition City Staff have worked with Regional Staff to identify properties where a Record of Site Condition is required. Planning Staff have also worked in collaboration with the City's Chief Building Official (CBO) to determine which of those properties are appropriate to require the submission of a Record of Site Condition through a building permit process and which properties need to have a holding provision applied to require the same. As a result, 76 properties are recommended to have a holding provision requiring a Record of Site Condition through the proposed Zoning By-law amendment. Aeronautical Assessment The Region of Waterloo has requested that a maximum height limit be applied to all lands within the Growing Together geography to ensure that no buildings, including temporary structures like cranes, exceed a height of 1,600 feet above sea level. The Region has indicated that determination of the final height of buildings is necessary on a site specific basis and should be supported by an aeronautical assessment acceptable to the Region. Through conversations with Region of Waterloo staff, and NAV CANADA staff, Planning Staff understand that the Region is currently in the process of updating the Region of Waterloo International Airport Master Plan which may inform improvements to the airport that may result in updates to Federal Airport Zoning Regulations for the airport. Until such time as these are completed, staff are prepared to implement the Region's request through a holding provision requiring developments within SGA -4 zones—the only zone without a height limit in zoning—to provide an aeronautical assessment to determine maximum building height. This holding provision acknowledges that an aeronautical assessment would be required until such time as the Region of Waterloo International Airport Master Plan and any updates to the Federal Airport Zoning Regulations are completed. Staff continue to propose that the SGA -4 zone not have a height limit in zoning, which is consistent with City, Regional, Provincial and Federal legislation, policy and guidance for Page 240 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' intensifying around transit and addressing the housing crisis. To ensure the long-term operation and economic role of the Region of Waterloo Airport, a holding provision requiring an aeronautical assessment is proposed for buildings exceeding heights of: • 1,600 feet above sea level for the Grand River Hospital, Central Station (Innovation District), Victoria Park & Kitchener City Hall and Frederick & Queen PMTSAs • 1,573 feet above sea level for the Market station area • 1,530 feet above sea level for the Borden station area and; • 1,596 feet above sea level for the Mill station area Built -Form Approach to Regulating Density Traditionally, Kitchener has—in most but not all cases—regulated maximum densities through Floor Space Ratio (FSR). Staff analysis has determined that there are several challenges with an FSR -based approach within Protected Major Transit Station Areas; • In already built-up, complex geographies such as PMTSAs, parcels and parcel assemblies come in all shapes, sizes, configurations, and orientations. Some of the smallest lots in the City are within PMTSAs. Some of the largest lots in the City are as well. Nearly all parcels have existing structures on them. Nearly all parcels are candidates for land assembly, or to otherwise evolve from their existing conditions. • Additionally, in a historical city -centre context, one which is not based on a predictable grid street layout, many lots are oddly shaped, can be narrow or shallow, deep or wide, rectangular or angular. In other words, there is very limited uniformity within the parcel fabric throughout the Growing Together geography. • FSR can only create a consistent built context, as implemented through a zoning by-law, where the subject properties are also consistently sized and shaped. Otherwise, the same maximum FSR can result in dramatically different built forms, even within the same zone. For example; o For high-density development without a height limit, an FSR of 8 could result in an assembled block developing multiple towers at heights exceeding 50 storeys. A neighbouring, smaller site with the exact same zoning could be limited to a single building of 10-12 storeys. While the zoning would be the `same', the built results would not be similar. The perceived maximum densities would also not be similar. o If these two theoretical sites developed with similar built -forms, the block - sized parcel may still achieve a high-density outcome at 8 FSR, but the smaller parcel may require 20 or more FSR for a similar result. In most other ways, these two developments may perform similarly, have similar impacts on surroundings, be visually and contextually alike, and more. • With the existing zoning permissions for FSRs often topping out at 2, 3 or 4 in Kitchener's PMTSAs, along with the contextual factors listed above, it is clear why nearly all development within Kitchener's PMTSAs over the last decade has required an Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to proceed, with relief from FSR requirements being consistently sought. Page 241 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' • If Kitchener were to continue to guide appropriate densities via FSR, the challenge would be in determining a number that can perform consistently. For high-density development, this is not feasible. A number that is calibrated to the redevelopment of large properties would be overly restrictive for small properties and create under -sized development (or continue to force most development through an OPA/ZBA process). A number that is calibrated to the redevelopment of smaller properties would be overly permissive for large properties and create over -sized development with serious negative impacts on the users and residents of that development, as well as surrounding areas. There is an alternative approach to guiding maximum densities, and this is the approach staff are recommending for Kitchener's Strategic Growth Area zones. It is a `form -based' approach where the zoning by-law regulates important built -form elements and relationships to ensure that development matches the intent of the zone regardless of the lot size and shape. Through Growing Together, staff are proposing that Floor Space Ratio maximums do not apply to any of the SGA zones. Staff do, however, recommend the implementation of FSR minimums to ensure that development meets the minimum required density targets of 160 people and jobs per hectare within each Growing Together PMTSA as well as 200 people and jobs per hectare within the Urban Growth Centre. There are several proposed regulations that help determine appropriate maximum densities on properties within Kitchener's SGA zones; • Traditional lot setbacks (front, exterior side, interior side and rear yard), which ensure a minimum amount of space between buildings on adjacent lots. • Height limits. 3 of the 4 SGA zones propose height limits. The SGA -1 zone limits height to 11m and is applied within low-rise contexts. The SGA -2 zone limits height to 8 storeys and is applied to lands where a mid -rise context is planned. The SGA -3 zone limits height to 25 storeys and is applied to lands where a high- rise context is planned. The SGA -4 zone does not limit height and is applied to lands where the highest and most dense future context is planned. • Building length, floor plate area and physical separation are the key additional built -form regulations that guide maximum densities. These regulations are designed to permit high-density intensification while promoting a high quality of life for existing and future residents, workers and visitors. This includes careful consideration of the quality of life for residents within the new buildings subject to these regulations. Quality of life factors considered include; safety, privacy, physical and mental health and comfort, access to sunlight, shadow impacts, and protection from accelerated winds and weather. • These three built -form regulations are applied at graduated height intervals, consistently across the SGA zones. These height intervals are; from the 7th - 12th storeys, from the 13th — 18th storeys, from the 19th - 36th storeys and from the 37th storey and above. These height intervals were modeled in 3D and tested under real world contextual conditions. These regulations are not applied to the first 6 Page 242 of 1179 DSD -2024-005 Attachment 'F' storeys of a building to allow for shared podiums on larger, multi -tower developments, and to otherwise not frustrate moderate mid -rise development. • The principles guiding these regulations are the same principles that have guided Kitchener's tall building guidelines, which have been successfully implemented for over 6 years: that as a building gets taller, its form becomes more compact, with more space between it and other buildings. This allows for tall, high-density development, and the creation of abundant housing supply, while still considering the quality of life of all members of the current and future Kitchener community. • In moving these principles from guidelines into a zoning by-law, staff were careful to re -calibrate the applicable numbers to perform through that tool. Therefore, there are differences between the guidelines and the proposed zoning regulations, with the zoning regulations being more permissive and simplified, for easier and more consistent implementation. Where the guidelines calculate physical separation through a calculation of a building's height and tower length, the regulations instead apply static but more generous numbers for both physical separation and building length within the graduated height categories listed above. For the reasons outlined in this planning analysis, staff recommend that the proposed Official Plan amendments and Zoning By-law amendments be adopted/approved as they conform to Provincial policies and plans, are consistent with the Region of Waterloo's Official Plan, as amended, are consistent with Kitchener's Official Plan, and represent good planning. Page 243 of 1179 Growing Together What We Heard: Workshop Engagement Summary Detailing Public Workshop Engagements Held in March and April of 2023 Prepared by: LURA Consulting & City of Kitchener Page 244 of 1179 Contents ProjectOverview........................................................................................................................ 1 Engagement and Communications Approach............................................................................ 1 Summary of Workshop Results.................................................................................................. 6 NextSteps................................................................................................................................14 Appendix A: Summary and Analysis of Community Workshops.................................................15 Appendix B: Engagement and Communications Materials........................................................58 Appendix C — City of Kitchener Downtown Community Working Group Meeting #7 Summary..62 Page 245 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Project Overview The City of Kitchener is growing and faces many challenges. There is a housing affordability crisis and Council has declared a climate emergency. Land use policies and zoning regulations can play a significant role in addressing these challenges. Major Transit Station Areas (MTSAs) have unique provincial and regional policies, and intensification around transit is a core fundamental principle of Ontario's planning structure. The City has launched Growing Together to implement these policies by updating the City's planning framework in MTSAs. Kitchener's MTSAs have been established through the approval of the Region of Waterloo's Official Plan. Growing Together is the continuation of the ongoing planning review process that began with Planning Around Rapid Transit Stations (PARTS) and advanced through the Neighbourhood Planning Review (NPR) project. Over 20 engagements were held through these projects to gather community input. These engagements are detailed in Appendix B of this report. Growing Together focuses on the land use and zoning framework for seven of Kitchener's ten MTSAs (the MTSAs west of the expressway), which include the Urban Growth Centre and Downtown Kitchener. The seven MTSAs are as follows: 1. Grand River Hospital 2. Central Station Innovation District 3. Victoria Park & Kitchener City Hall 4. Frederick & Queen 5. Kitchener Market 6. Borden 7. Mill Throughout 2023, the City is engaging on the Growing Together project, which began with a series of interactive workshops using a 3D -printed model of the Growing Together geography. This report summarizes and analyses the feedback collected at these community engagement workshops, which were held in March and April of this year. Engagement and Communications Approach The last few years have seen many changes to the provincial and regional planning frameworks. Several new City priorities have emerged as well. Due to these changes, it was important that staff meaningfully re-engage with the community to explore what these changes mean. An interactive workshop format was chosen to ensure that this re-engagement was accessible, represented realistic parameters for future change, and led to community feedback that is implementable within the current land use planning process. Those changes, how they have impacted the project, and how they led to the creation of the Growing Together Workshop can be found in the workshop presentation. The Growing Together workshop format was intentionally designed to be: • Equitable: To reach a more diverse and representative range of community members. • Educational: To create an intuitive exercise using realistic building types and quantities to simulate growth and set expectations for future change. • Measurable: To collect community input that can be meaningfully analyzed and quantified. 1 Page 246 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report An Award -Winning Process Growing Together has won two awards to date: • A Smart50 award, an international award honouring the 50 most transformative smart projects of the year. Additionally, at the Smart Cities Connect conference in Denver in May 2023, Growing Together was announced as one of the top 3 projects overall. • A 2023 Excellence in Municipal Systems award by the Municipal Information Systems Association of Ontario. Ontario Figure 1: The Logos for the Smart 50 Awards and MISA Ontario How the Workshops Were Organized The initial suite of 6 workshops were designed to engage community members in two categories; three focused workshops for residents of the Growing Together MTSAs, and three community -wide workshops that were broadly advertised for anyone to attend. How We Reached Out In March 2023, a project webpage and email address were launched to provide details about the project, workshop engagements, and information on ways to stay involved. A presentation detailing the workshop exercise and explaining the context around the exercise was posted on the project webpage. The Growing Together engage webpage received 1,400 total visits through April 19th, 2023. Postcard Notices As part of advertising the three targeted workshops, 10,598 postcards were mailed to property owners and tenants for the following three categories: 2 Page 247 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report fable 1: Target Audience of Postcards and Number of Postcards Mailed Target Audience Description # of Postcards Low-rise detached People who live in single detached, duplex, and 3,013 dwelling residents triplex dwellings. Low-rise apartment People who live in small apartments that are 4 2,937 residents storeys or less. Mid -rise and high- People who live in apartments in mid -rise and 4,648 rise apartment high-rise buildings. residents TOTAL 10,598 A sample postcard is in Appendix B. Growing Together Card Deck A card deck was prepared with key facts about growth, housing, and land development in the City of Kitchener. This card deck was meant to be informative for workshop participants and was made available at the individual sessions. A sample from the card deck is in Appendix B. A .pdf of the full card deck is available on the Growing Together engage page. Advertisement in The Record A notice (Appendix B) advertising the 3 community -wide workshops was posted in the Waterloo Region Record on March 17th, 2023, in printed and online formats. News Release A City of Kitchener news release was sent on March 9, 2023 that highlighted project information and invited the community to engage online or in person at the three community -wide workshops. Email Notification The Growing Together Engage page allows anyone interested in this project to sign up for e-mail subscriptions to receive updates and notices of events relating to the project. 80 community members are subscribed to the engage page. Additionally, email notification was sent to everyone on the notification list to update them on the project and direct them to the Growing Together Engage page. How the Workshop Works The Growing Together workshop is based around an accurate, 3D -printed physical model representing the 7 MTSAs west of the expressway, at a 1:1000 scale. White buildings represent the existing context. Yellow buildings represent 18,000 new housing units, an amount consistent with our Housing Pledge target of 35,000 units by the end of 2031. These units are represented by 6 different typical buildings in three broad categories of low, medium and high-rise development, consistent with the types of development the MTSAs are experiencing and are likely to experience moving forward. A detailed methodology is available here. 3 Page 248 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Figure 2: A photo from the April 17th Council Strategy Session Workshop. Each workshop asked participants to place the provided buildings within the Growing Together geography. Staff were in continuous discussion with participants about their priorities, concerns, and ambitions for what Kitchener's MTSAs will become. To date, staff have run 12 workshops in total, including a suite of 6 community workshops that form the core of this report and the analysis we have produced. The other workshops included groups such as City Staff, Waterloo Region District School Board teachers, the Waterloo Region Association of Realtors, and others. The full list can be found in Appendix B. Table 2: Location and Number of Participants at Engagement Events Date Group/Event Location March 21 2023 Focused Community Workshop, Kitchener City Hall Mid -rise and High-rise Residents Rotunda March 23 2023 Focused Community Workshop, Kitchener Public Low-rise Non -multiple Residents Library March 25 2023 Community Wide Workshop Kitchener Market March 27 2023 Community Wide Workshop Stanley Park Community Centre March 30 2023 Community Wide Workshop Forest Heights KPL April 4 2023 Focused Workshop, Low-rise Downtown Community Multiple Residents Centre Total Participants 60 75 370 25 20 12 The results of each workshop were captured at the end of each event. Each workshop was photographed in detail. Each building placed by a community member was recreated in a digital smart model unique to each workshop. 4 Page 249 of 1179 City of Kitchener - Growing Together - Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Figure 3: Left: A close-up photo from the March 25th workshop. Right: The same area in an image from the smart model. The smart model contains information about every building within it; how many housing units it represents, and how many people and jobs are contained within. It provides instant access to data on station area density, people to job ratios, and more. What makes this so unique and valuable is that staff can directly align the community input received with various technical land use planning requirements, making direct comparisons possible, translating workshop results into mapping and datasets with real-world applicability. '- w Ere.�.siav nx=.R c1 Fila Teals Dara Dpkpns Help t e.,.a•==�. onr e, ,,,, cyrvxs our Whole Rat 41T/Bliek Land Use a- .......,... . Add F.W" Edt Lewd Use' E= w _Kohl J cd l KI Add Iles Land Use v*es Is the sum low E IAdd only Paddng vuluss to the sum natal urvI Primary Uric. Ppadmanl _ Bacandry unit:Rasidual rve1 Ei uoaaaF.NFA FaalarInlenlaC @p 94 NFA Re. Tecmce: F-25 % NFAFador LoggiwF 75 % cnn-1GFA per Apadmam: 90.00 mr „ NFA pet Amanmerr4.�..m` Whale PWl I Land Uses I City Bkds � Cly Blocku land Uses 4 City Bkcb Laved U4e Summary(Exeal U* + Buildings compWx HaLlirg4 Complex Buildings Land Uaes CpmpWx BUildiwgs Paas Bulking Sm.y Grass Fkpr Areas (Excel Orly} P""g1.90 Building M0350 49.5 49.5 0.1 1 4.85 9.9 2.07 74.25 1.98 C.. Emslllg-Parldug 39.6 1 ! 1 I layer0 Building M0251 49 5 495 -.. 01 1 495 99 2 97 74.25 190 Packing SPaoes 190 {;nrs F�s9ng,Park" 390 _. 1 I 1 Y U"M Building 1110352 49.5 49.5 0.1 1 4.95 9 2.97 74.75 I.98 Packing 1:98 Cars Exrsllwg_P.,kCg 39.6 1 1 1 1 LayacU Spaces Building 1110353 495 19.5 01 1 495 9.9 2.97 7425 1.90 Packinpacesg S 1.98 Cars ERSI!Ikg Pa+kmg 39.8 f 1 1 I LaY.0 Building 1110354 30*11] 75011 1209 40 90.000.0 L875.0 375.0 9.375.0 375.0 Auxft is 630.0 Residenls WorkshopHghRes 24.000.0 1 1 1 f Buld.g_E.d pec W Building ill0355 5760 578.0 9.0 1 2304.0 72.0 1aA 380.9 14.4 Shoos 144 Empkvees- Warkshao_Re9ail 463.0 1 ! f Y 8uiking_Envolooas_W Building MOM 407'20 10060 _ 120 _ 4 12,0960 2520 544 1110 50.4 Apartments_ 8064 Residents Workshop HlghRes 32250 I 1 f I aulding Envelopes W Building 1110357 6.490.0 1.296A i0.9 5 20,738,0 1,296.8 398.0 6,720.0 2592 SPsces 2592 Cars WorkshopPkmg 5,184,0 1 f- I �BwW.e_Emdopes_W Figure 4: A screenshot of the digital smart model. Testing the Workshop Format Prior to the community workshops, the workshop format was trialed with the Downtown Community Working Group that was formed to guide the Downtown Vision project. Their feedback helped shape the final workshop format and served as an opportunity to hear from that group on how growth and change can be shaped from their perspective. The feedback received is detailed in Appendix C. 5 Page 250 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report The workshop was tested on a second occasion internally at the Planning Division Staff Meeting on March 1St, with the intention of evaluating the format for final improvements. Figure 5: Left: A photo from the January 24th workshop with the Downtown Community Working Group. Right, a photo from the March 1st Planning Division Staff Meeting workshop. Summary of Workshop Results Consolidated Results from the Six Public Workshops Through the 6 public workshops, staff consulted with 562 total participants. The following pages summarize the feedback received and document the smart modeling analysis across these 6 workshops combined. Following this broad summary are summaries and analyses for each workshop individually in Appendix A. A summary of the April 17th Council workshop is also available in Appendix A. Key Findings, Overall Summary There were several consistent themes across all workshops; • Broad support for growth and intensification within the MTSAs, with participants highlighting favourable access to transit, services, and amenities. • Transit -oriented development contributes to a walkable and vibrant downtown Kitchener by bringing a greater number of more diverse people to the city core. • Additional green space and parks needs to be considered as the city grows. 6 Page 251 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report • Participants stated their concern for housing affordability and accessibility. • Some community members shared concerns with tall buildings, including their impacts on shadows, wind, and urban design. Others supported tall buildings as part of a vibrant city, adding visual interest and variety to the architecture and urban design of the Kitchener. • Staff heard multiple perspectives supporting a greater variety of housing styles and types, to serve the full range of needs in the community and to provide options for people who want to live here. An interest in larger units was commonly expressed. • There was consistent interest in seeing high-rise development on currently vacant, industrial, or underutilized lands. • Workshop participants placed the most and the highest density growth in the Urban Growth Centre — particularly around the Central Station/Innovation District stop — and surrounding the Borden and Mill stops. Higher density growth was also directed along King Street, Victoria Street, Charles Street, Ottawa Street and Weber Street. • Many community members noted the importance of community infrastructure keeping pace with new growth, particularly schools, hospitals, and grocery stores. Mapping Summary The maps below show the combined results of the six community workshops. The first map demonstrates where low, medium, and high-rise buildings were placed by all 562 workshop participants combined. Key Findings, Overall Building Placement Low � Medium / High Figure 6: Map showing where all buildings were placed by workshop participants across the six public workshops. 7 Page 252 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report As seen in the image above; • Medium and high-density growth was focused at LRT stops, along the LRT corridor and also along major streets like Victoria Street, Charles Street, King Street, and Ottawa Street. • Significant growth was also focused on large "opportunity sites" such as various large surface parking lots and existing industrial lands around the Borden and Mill Stations. • Low-rise growth was generally placed in existing low-rise neighbourhoods. In some cases, low-rise buildings were placed in areas otherwise populated by mid and high-rise buildings. In other cases, mid and high-rise buildings were placed within existing low-rise neighbourhood contexts. However, broadly across the workshops, low-rise buildings were placed within low-rise existing neighbourhood contexts. • A large amount of new high-density growth was placed within the Urban Growth Centre (downtown). Workshop participants demonstrated significant "room to grow" within downtown Kitchener, and broadly indicated a preference for the continued build out of the downtown and other key areas over a more `even' distribution of high-rise forms across the Growing Together geography. Key Findings, Low-rise Building Placement Figure 7: Map showing where low-rise buildings were placed across the six public workshops. 8 Page 253 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report As seen in the image above; • A significant concentration of low-rise buildings was placed near the Kitchener Market, generally between Cedar Street, King Street East, Stirling Avenue, and Weber Street East. Other areas of focus include Victoria Park and the Mt. Hope/Breithaupt Neighbourhood. • Aside from these areas of focus, low rise buildings were broadly placed across the entire MTSA geography. • In general, low-rise buildings were placed further away from LRT stations than other forms of growth and within existing low-rise neighbourhoods. Key Findings, Mid -rise Building Placement Figure 8: Map showing where mid -rise buildings were placed across the six public workshops. • Mid -rise buildings were distributed fairly evenly throughout the MTSAs, with no obvious concentrations observed in one particular area. • These buildings were often placed on larger roads like Ottawa Street, King Street, Courtland Avenue, Weber Street, or Victoria Street. They usually lined these streets. • In general, mid -rise buildings were placed on the outside edges of low-rise neighbourhoods, appearing to serve as a "transition" between high and low-rise buildings. We can see this along Benton Street, Courtland Ave., Ottawa Street, and others. • Mid -rise buildings were often placed in the same areas as high-rise buildings, indicating that a mix of mid and high-rise forms was often preferred for larger opportunity sites, with multiple buildings at a range of heights. 9 Page 254 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Key Findings, High -Rise Building Placement High Figure 9: Map showing where high-rise buildings were placed across the six public workshops. • High rise buildings were generally clustered in the immediate vicinity of LRT stations. • The Urban Growth Centre (downtown) also saw a significant concentration of high-rise buildings placed there. This suggests capacity for continued growth. • Borden Station received a significant amount of new high-rise growth surrounding the station stop. • A few tall buildings were placed in the "Civic District" near Centre in the Square and the Kitchener Central Library. • The north-east side of King Street (opposite Grand River Hospital) saw a concentration of high-rise buildings. The hospital side did not receive many tall buildings, with the notable exception of the large parking lot at Union/King, which saw significant growth added. • Victoria Street, Mill/Stirling, and the Catalyst 137 property also saw tall buildings placed there, despite these areas being slightly further away from LRT stations. These areas were viewed as underutilized "opportunity sites" with large lots that are further away from low rise neighbourhoods and could be suitable for significant density. • Very few tall buildings were placed in the middle of an existing low-rise neighbourhood. 10 Page 255 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Key Findings, `Best Fit' of all Building Placement Figure 10: A map showing a broadly generalized `best fit' of all building placement. • This map removes the low/medium/high categories and shows a broadly generalized best fit of where all growth was placed throughout all six workshops combined. It shows that some form of growth can happen nearly everywhere within the Growing Together MTSAs. • The least amount of growth was placed within parks and cemeteries, followed by the existing low-rise residential areas the furthest away from ION stops, such as the far southwest of the Mill station and the westernmost extremes of the Grand River Hospital Station. However, some growth was placed in every part of each MTSA at one point or another. • Because this layers all 6 workshops together, areas of greater transparency indicate areas where fewer workshops concentrated buildings. Areas of greater opacity indicate areas where there was the most consensus around locating growth. These areas include the Urban Growth Centre boundary within the concentrated placement of buildings in the Central Station/Innovation District, Victoria Park/City Hall and Queen/Frederick MTSAs. This again shows strong community support for continued intensification of Downtown Kitchener. • Intensification can also be read strongly along the entirely of the LRT route; along King Street, Charles and Duke, and Borden and Ottawa. • Additional concentrations are clearly seen surrounding the Borden stop, including nearly all of the Borden MTSA (with the exception of the cemetery). The Mill stop sees a similar concentration around the station stop, but also extending along the rail corridor within underutilized industrial lands. 11 Page 256 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Key Findings, Aggregated Data Analysis A full quantitative analysis is available for each community workshop in Appendix A. An aggregated summary of that analysis covering all workshops combined is provided below. • On average, participants placed 16,116 of the 18,000 units, or 90% of the provided housing. This ranged from a low of 68% to a high of 98%, with higher turnout workshops generally placing more of the buildings (suggesting that more participants led to higher overall participation in the exercise). • People placed the most growth in the Central station (22% of all units). The fewest number of units were placed in the Market station (6%). Significant growth was placed in the Urban Growth Centre (35% of all units). The following table shows the average distribution of units across the six community workshops. Table 3: Number of Units Placed in MTSAs (Average of all Engagement Sessions) Ma'or Transit Station Areas Total GRH Central City Queen Market Borden Mill UGC* MTSA Hall Units 16,116 1,731 3,947 1,968 1,326 1,066 3,527 2,550 6,211 Placed % of 90% 10% 22% 11% 7% 6% 20% 15% 35% 18k *The UGC boundary includes portions of the Central, City Hall, Queen, and Market MTSAs • Including existing buildings, the largest amount of total people, on average, would be living in the Central station (11.5k). The smallest populations are found in the Grand River Hospital (5.9k) and Market (5.0k) station areas. • Including existing buildings, the largest amount of total jobs, on average, would be located in the Central station (7.4k). The lowest job totals are found in the Borden (2.0k) and Market (2.0k) stations. • Including existing buildings, the lowest people -to -jobs ratio is found in the Grand River Hospital (1.13 people per job) and Frederick and Queen station areas (1.27 people per job). The highest ratio is found in the Borden station (3.28 people per job). A common best practice is to target a ratio of between 2:1 and 3:1, which is a mix of people and jobs that leads to a good balance of daytime and evening activity to support local businesses and other amenities. Generally speaking, an area with a ratio of less than 2:1 means we should consider ways to add additional housing. An area with a ratio of greater than 3:1 means we should consider ways to add additional employment. 12 Page 257 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Table 4: Number of New People and Jobs in MTSAs (Average of all Engagement Sessions) Major Transit Station Areas MTSA Total GRH Central City Queen Market Borden Mill UGC MTSA 154 125 201 Hall 209 115 146 84 341 Total People 51141 ' 5,854 11,520 8,707 6,801 5,049 6,696 6,513 19,608 Total Jobs 29,504 ' 5,164 7,351 5,295 5,334 1,972 2,041 2,346 16,146 Ppl/Job Ratio 1.73 1.13 1.57 1.64 1.27 2.56 3.28 2.78 1.21 • On average, the workshops met the provincial minimum density target of 160 people and jobs per hectare for Central Station, City Hall & Victoria Park and Queen & Frederick stations (green in map below). It did not reach the minimum density targets for Grand River Hospital, Kitchener Market, Borden or Mill stations (red in map below). • Significant capacity was demonstrated in the Urban Growth Centre, achieving an average density across the workshops of 341 people and jobs per hectare. Table 5: Density of People and Jobs per Hectare in MTSAs (Average of all Engagement Sessions) Major Transit Station Areas MTSA Total GRH Central City Hall Queen Market Borden Mill UGC Density 154 125 201 250 209 115 146 84 341 13 Page 258 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Figure 11: A map showing whether, on average, each station was able to meet its minimum density target through the workshop exercise. Next Steps In early summer, draft land use and zoning direction will be available for review and comment. That overview will detail how the community input summarized here has been considered in the draft directions into the project moving forward. It will also summarize how the policies being developed through Growing Together are being designed to align with various City priorities and objectives. Community engagement on draft directions will occur in person at events and virtually through the Growing Together engage page. In late summer/early fall, a full set of draft materials, including draft Official Plan land uses and policies, and zoning regulations will be available for review and comment. Council consideration of a decision on amendments to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law are expected towards the end of 2023. 14 Page 259 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Appendix A: Summary and Analysis of Community Workshops Mid -Rise and High -Rise Resident Workshop (March 21, 2023) Engagement Event Overview • Focused engagement for residents of mid -rise and high-rise apartments living within the MTSAs. • 60 participants in the workshop. • 4,648 promotional postcards mailed to residents. • Held in the Kitchener City Hall Rotunda on March 21St, 2023, from 2pm-8pm Figure 12: Photo of the workshop in progress. Staff spoke with a former Forest Heights resident of 20+ years who moved downtown because his partner felt it would be better for their lifestyle. He was indifferent about the change at the time but now thinks it was a good fit for this stage of their life. Y 15 Page 260 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Figure 13: Image from the smart model of the workshop results. Several people expressed that they enjoyed the workshop exercise and that it helped them to visualize the amount of housing that the City needs to plan for. Where People Placed Growth "We need to develop in empty spaces that are widely underutilized like the Borden Station Area and Airboss factory." One person who recently moved from the GTA to the Kaufman Lofts discussed the need for more services, amenities, and events in the downtown core and major transit station areas. They stressed a need for greater growth as it will bring more of these services, amenities, and events to the Downtown and the MTSAs. The following "heat map" represents where workshop participants placed low, medium, and high- rise housing units through the workshop exercise. Concentrations of growth are found around ION LRT stops. Parts of Victoria Street and Ottawa Street also see significant growth potential identified. 16 Page 261 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report rr /f LOW `L�, ✓ Medium High ti�> Figure 14: A heat map of where participants placed low, medium and high-rise buildings. • 98% of the 18,000 total units were allocated during the workshop. • Growth was generally placed near MTSA station stops, along the ION route, and throughout the Downtown. • Low-rise growth was distributed widely. • Mid -rise growth was also placed broadly throughout, but more mid -rise buildings were placed closer to ION stops. "The ION is very convenient. Multiple participants stacked towers on top of Many stops are already very busy office buildings, expressing a desire for and have a lot of use. But Mill and vertical mixed use. Others stacked towers on Borden are not as busy as other top of towers, noting that specific locations stops. More development would (the hub, for example) could be density help fix that." carriers beyond the tallest building typology provided. High-rise growth was placed in closer proximity to station stops and on large opportunity sites. The placement of low, medium and high-rise buildings can be seen separated out in the maps below. A fourth map shows a continuous map zone capturing all growth, as placed by participants. 17 Page 262 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Low PW Figure 15: A series of four maps showing where participants placed low, medium, and rise growth, as well as a best fit map of all growth combined. • People placed the most growth in the Central station (24% of all units). The fewest number of units were placed in the City Hall/Victoria Park station (9%). Significant growth was placed in the Urban Growth Centre (39% of all units) Table 6: Number of Units Placed in MTSAs (Mid -Rise and High -Rise Resident Workshop) Major Transit Station Areas Total GRH Central City Queen Market Borden Mill UGC* MTSA Hall Units 17,571 2,352 4,297 1,682 1,534 1,739 3,255 2,711 6,947 Placed % of 98% 13% 24% 9% 9% 10% 18% 15% 39% 18k *The UGC boundary includes portions of the Central, City Hall, Queen, and Market MTSAs • Including existing buildings, this workshop resulted in the largest amount of total people living in the Central station (12.2k). The smallest populations are found in the Borden (6.2k) and Market (6.2k) station areas. However, the distribution of population among station areas is relatively even in this workshop scenario compared to some others. • Including existing buildings, this workshop resulted in the largest amount of total jobs being located in the Central (7.7k) station. The lowest job total is found in the Borden station area (1.4k). 18 Page 263 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report • Including existing buildings, the lowest people to jobs ratio is found in the Frederick and Queen station area (1.3 people per job). The highest ratio is found in the Borden station (4.4 people per job). Table 7: Number of New People and Jobs in MTSAs (Mid -Rise and High -Rise Resident Workshop) Major Transit Station Areas MTSA Total GRH Central City Queen Market Borden Mill UGC MTSA 161 130 212 Hall 219 136 127 97 359 Total People 53,619 ' 6,891 12,206 8,306 7,182 6,150 6,209 6,666 20,957 Total Jobs 30,572 ' 4,554 7,688 5,693 5,540 2,128 1,411 3,559 16,707 Ppl/Job Ratio 1.75 1.51 1.59 1.46 1.30 2.89 4.40 1.87 1.25 • This workshop met minimum density targets for Central Station, City Hall & Victoria Park, and Queen & Frederick stations (green in map below). It did not reach the minimum density targets for Grand River Hospital, Kitchener Market, Borden or Mill stations (red in map below). • Significant capacity was demonstrated in the Urban Growth Centre, achieving a density in this workshop of 359 people and jobs per hectare. Table 8: Density of People and Jobs per Hectare in MTSAs (Mid -Rise and High -Rise Resident Workshop) Major Transit Station Areas MTSA Total GRH Central City Hall Queen Market Borden Mill UGC Density 161 130 212 250 219 136 127 97 359 19 Page 264 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Figure 16: A map showing which MTSAs would meet their minimum required density targets as a result of this workshop. I Multiple participants stacked towers on top of office buildings, expressing a desire for vertical mixed use. Others stacked towers on top of towers, noting that specific locations (the hub, for example) could be density carriers beyond the tallest building typology provided. What We Heard & What We Saw There is a significant amount of recurring interest in specific services and amenities; hospital access to serve a growing population was top of mind for many. More grocery stores were often noted as a need. Staff wanted to better understand the comments and asked for clarification, as there are many small grocery stores operating in our MTSAs; people generally meant larger -format, nationally branded grocers. Participants in this workshop generally agreed that growth and intensification is inevitable and would prefer to see high-rise buildings continue to be built along the LRT. Participants expressed that the city could accommodate the most growth near LRT stations such as Borden and Mill. Feedback expressed general satisfaction with the way Kitchener has been developing tall buildings over the last several years. One participant called for more interesting, `less boxy' architectural forms. One participant cautioned against creating `canyons' of too -similar towers. When discussing building height, participants noted that the downtown could accommodate high- rise developments in line with currently proposed developments. Participants in the workshop noted they would like to see architecturally significant building design and high-quality building materials in new developments. 20 Page 265 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Some participants expressed a need for more `family -sized' units in Kitchener's MTSAs. However, since `family' means many different things to many different people, staff wanted to better understand this concern. People generally meant that they did not believe there were large enough units being created within new developments to serve the needs of households with multiple children. One participant suggested that building height does not concern him, but unit size does. Participants commented on the housing affordability crisis and wanted to see the City encourage affordable housing. Participants had questions about the definitions of affordability and would like to see the definition broadened. It was expressed that larger units for larger household sizes should be provided through new development. be Several comments were made by participants indicating they enjoy living in high-rise buildings downtown and that they would be happy to see more tall buildings downtown. They noted this would bring vibrancy and life to the streets of downtown. More people living downtown would encourage new businesses, such as a downtown grocery store. Participants expressed interest in seeing mixed-use buildings hosting new companies and housing units. CParking/traffic was discussed thoughtfully; with some concerned about the impact of additional cars on existing roads, but with others talking through cycling, transit, and trail opportunities as ways to help people rely less often on personal vehicles. Some participants believe that a personal vehicle is still necessary, even downtown. Others feel the opposite, and rely on the ION, cycling, and other methods to get around. While participants generally supported more housing development downtown, concern about traffic management was expressed. Participants spoke about the need to ensure that City infrastructure and services such as water, transportation and fire can meet the needs of an increased population. Participants also spoke of the need for more green space to accommodate additional residents. Specifically, they mentioned the Iron Horse Trail/Schneider Creek as important opportunities for green space. 21 Page 266 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Figure 17: An additional photo of the workshop. 22 Page 267 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Low -Rise Non -Multiple Resident Workshop (March 23, 2023) Engagement Event Overview ➢ Focused engagement for residents of low-rise non -multiple homes within the MTSAs. ➢ 75 participants in the workshop. ➢ 3,013 promotional postcards mailed to residents. ➢ Held in the Central Branch Kitchener Public Library on March 23 d 2023 from 6pm-8pm Residents discussed the positive benefits that the MTSA geography has — walkability, access to transit, shops, grocery stores, entertainment. They discussed how it is important to protect these functions/activities and that growth should accommodate these positive 1 attributes. Figure 18: Photo from the workshop. Figure 19: Image from the smart model of the workshop results. 23 Page 268 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report r"Ottawa and Borden got a lot of density during the activity. It is a large area that is underutilized and right on the LRT. It is realistic for it to be taller here, adding office buildings, and a broader mixed of uses." �x Where People Placed Growth The following "heat map" represents where workshop participants placed low, medium, and high-rise housing units during the workshop exercise. Concentrations of growth are found around ION LRT stops, particularly the Grand River Hospital and Borden stations. Growth was also distributed throughout the Urban Growth Center and by the Mill station stop. Several comments noted "Mixed use development should be on King Street, near parking lots in the the LRT. It would make sense to see business on the downtown that could be ground floor and housing above." redeveloped. Figure 20: A heat map of where participants placed low, medium and high-rise buildings. 24 Page 269 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report "Stirling and Courtland could be redeveloped. It doesn't back onto many houses and it wouldn't be disruptive to develop. It is also close to a station and very convenient" "I think there should be more high-rises downtown. I want it to be more vibrant, give more life to the city, and attract business, restaurants, and places where people can walk to work". • 96% of the 18,000 total units were allocated during the workshop. Growth was generally placed near MTSA station stops, along the ION route, and throughout the west end of Downtown. Low-rise growth was distributed widely. Mid -rise growth was also placed broadly throughout but often placed closer to ION stops. High-rise growth on large opportunity sites and on lands in close proximity to station stops. • The placement of low, medium and high-rise buildings can be seen separated out in the maps below. Low High "Best Fit" of All Growth Figure 21: A series of four maps showing where participants placed low, medium, and rise growth, as well as a best fit map of all growth combined. • People placed the most growth in the Borden station (31 % of all units). The fewest number of units were placed in the Queen and Frederick and Market stations (3% in each). Significant growth was placed in the Urban Growth Centre (30% of all units) 25 Page 270 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Table 9: Number of New Units in MTSAs (Low -Rise Non -Multiple Resident Workshop) Major Transit Station Areas Total GRH Central City Queen Market Borden Mill UGC MTSA Hall Units 17,301 2,448 3,981 1,509 562 503 5,647 2,654 5,474 Placed 53,236 ' 7,012 11,602 7,958 5,516 4,128 10,294 6,726 18,242 % of 96% 14% 22% 8% 3% 3% 31% 15% 30% 18k 30,967 ' 6,229 7,275 4,864 5,109 1,679 3,123 2,687 15,457 • People placed the most new units in Central station. While this is the most populated MTSA today, this suggests that people see additional capacity for growth. • Including existing buildings, this workshop resulted in the largest amount of total people living in the Central station (11.6k) and Borden station (10.3k). The smallest population is found in the Market station area (4.1 k). • Including existing buildings, this workshop resulted in the largest amount of total jobs being located in the Central (7.3k). The lowestjob total is found in the Market station area (1.7k). • Including existing buildings, the lowest people to jobs ratio is found in the Frederick and Queen station area (1.08 people per job). The highest ratio is found in the Borden station (3.3 people per job). Table 10: Number of New People and Jobs in MTSAs (Low -Rise Non -Multiple Resident Workshop) Major Transit Station Areas Total GRH Central City Queen Market Borden Mill UGC MTSA Hall Total People 53,236 ' 7,012 11,602 7,958 5,516 4,128 10,294 6,726 18,242 Total Jobs 30,967 ' 6,229 7,275 4,864 5,109 1,679 3,123 2,687 15,457 Ppl/Job Ratio 1.72 1.13 1.59 1.64 1.08 2.46 3.30 2.50 1.18 • This workshop met minimum density targets for Central Station, City Hall & Victoria Park, Queen & Frederick and Borden stations (green in map below). It did not reach the minimum density targets for Grand River Hospital, Kitchener Market, or Mill stations (red in map below). • Significant capacity was demonstrated in the Urban Growth Centre, achieving a density in this workshop of 321 people and jobs per hectare. 26 Page 271 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Table 11: Density of People and Jobs per Hectare in MTSAs (Low -Rise Non -Multiple Resident Workshop) Major Transit Station Areas MTSA Total GRH Central City Hall Queen Market Borden Mill UGC Density 16 1 150 201 229 183 95 224 90 321 Figure 22: A map showing which MTSAs would meet their minimum required density targets as a result of this workshop. "Mill and Ottawa can accommodate growth. The houses "The Market Squarearea is underutilized, there are getting to be around 70 years old and it could be and well -located along a great place to raise a family." transit." What We Heard & What We Saw Participants shared that housing near transit is necessary because it can allow more accessible connections to amenities, including shops and entertainment. Participants also spoke about the positive impact of more people living downtown, including more vibrant street life, foot traffic to support businesses, improved public realm and a more diverse community. Participants noted that mixed-use development would encourage walkability. Participants noted they would like the City to direct growth to the under-utilized areas of the MTSAs, including redeveloping factory spaces in and around Borden Station and behind the Metz development. Participants want the City and Region to facilitate the development of more affordable housing. 27 Page 272 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Participants discussed the importance of gradually transitioning building heights from high-rise buildings to low-rise neighbourhoods. Specific locations mentioned for high-rise buildings included: • Mill Street/Borden Parkway • Mill Street/Ottawa Street South • Stirling Ave South/Courtland Ave East • Charles Street West/Francis Street South. CAhis session there was some general opposition to growth among certain participants. Specific concerns noted include what they felt was an over -emphasis on high-rise buildings and the need to balance development with greenspace and community -building efforts. Concern was also noted regarding the potential for wind tunnels and shadowing. The need to plan for traffic considerations was also noted. Other participants expressed frustration with the anti -tower sentiment they heard from some others. They mentioned that they were excited about how Kitchener is growing. They believe that intensification brings great benefits with respect to local business and retail options, the quality of the public realm and the diversity of people occupying downtown, etc. Participants noted the need for green space within the MTSAs, especially park space near the new buildings. They also mentioned that all the new units need access to city services. Participants also noted the need to protect heritage buildings. 11 Figure 23: An additional photo of the workshop. 28 Page 273 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Low -Rise Multiple Resident Workshop (April 4, 2023) Engagement Event Overview • Focused engagement for residents of low-rise multiple homes within the MTSAs. • 12 participants in the workshop. • 2,937 promotional postcards mailed to residents. • Held in the Downtown Community Centre on April 4th, 2023, from 2pm-8pm "Not everyone can afford a detached house. We need to provide options. Apartments are way more affordable than houses these days." Figure 24: Photo from the workshop. 29 Page 274 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Figure 25: Image from the smart model of the workshop results. One resident noted that it would be nice to have intensification focused in close proximity to ION Stations without being directly at the stations themselves. Where People Placed Growth CMultiple participants indicated that they do not want to see all of the growth and intensification focused exclusively along King Street. Some residents mentioned that they would love to live closer to transit if the cost of those units were lower. The following "heat map" represents where workshop participants placed low, medium, and high- rise housing units through the workshop exercise. Concentrations of growth are found around ION LRT stops, particularly the Borden and Mill stations. Buildings were also distributed throughout the Urban Growth Centre. 30 Page 275 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Figure 26: A heat map of where participants placed low, medium and high-rise buildings. A couple noted that the Catalyst 137 site is massive and could be redeveloped to house a lot of people while having great access to the Iron Horse Trail. Some discussed a lack of safety when crossing Weber Street and would prefer to live on the City Hall side of Weber where they can better access transit, shops, and services they need. They said that Weber limits their housing choices in the MTSAs because of safety. • 68% of the 18,000 total units were allocated during the workshop. This is due to low overall turnout at the workshop. • Growth was generally placed near MTSA station stops, along the ION route, and throughout the west end and central Downtown. Overall, growth is distributed more evenly than other workshops, with taller buildings often located further away from ION stops. The placement of low, medium and high-rise buildings can be seen separated out in the maps below. A fourth map shows a continuous map zone capturing all growth, as placed by participants. 31 Page 276 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Figure 27: A series of four maps showing where participants placed low, medium, and rise growth, as well as a best fit map of all growth combined. • People placed the most growth in the Mill station (21% of all units). The fewest number of units were placed in the Queen and Frederick (4%) and Market stations (2%). Moderate growth was placed in the Urban Growth Centre (17% of all units) Table 12: Number of New Units in MTSAs (Low -Rise Multiple Resident Workshop) Major Transit Station Areas Total GRH Central City Queen Market Borden Mill UGC* MTSA Hall Units Placed 12,321 ' 21085 1,316 1,959 683 308 2,196 3,773 2,985 % of 18k 68% 12% 7% 11% 4% 2% 12% 21% 17% *The UGC boundary includes portions of the Central, City Hall, Queen, and Market MTSAs • Including existing buildings, this workshop resulted in the largest amount of total people living in the City Hall/Victoria Park station (8.6k) and Mill station (8.4k). The smallest population is found in the Market station area (3.8k). • Including existing buildings, this workshop resulted in the largest amount of total jobs being located in the Central (8.0k). The lowestjob total is found in the Borden station area (1.4k). • Including existing buildings, the lowest people to jobs ratio is found in the Central station area (0.9 people perjob). The highest ratio is found in the Mill station (3.6 people perjob). 32 Page 277 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Table 13: Number of New People and Jobs in MTSAs (Low -Rise Multiple Resident Workshop) Ma'or Transit Station Areas MTSA Total GRH Central City Queen Market Borden Mill UGC MTSA 138 120 162 Hall 186 90 98 103 289 Total People 44,647 ' 6,378 7,199 8,600 5,701 3,828 4,492 8,449 14,120 Total Jobs 27,565 ' 4,141 8,039 4,893 5,113 1,669 1,382 2,328 16,225 Ppl/Jo b Ratio 1.62 1.54 0.90 1.76 1.12 2.29 3.25 3.63 0.87 • This workshop met minimum density targets for Central Station, City Hall & Victoria Park, and Queen & Frederick stations (green in map below). It did not reach the minimum density targets for Grand River Hospital, Kitchener Market, Borden or Mill stations (red in map below). • Even with so few buildings placed overall, significant capacity was again demonstrated in the Urban Growth Centre, achieving a density in this workshop of 289 people and jobs per hectare. Table 14: Density of People and Jobs per Hectare in MTSAs (Low -Rise Multiple Resident Workshop) Major Transit Station Areas MTSA Total GRH Central City Hall Queen Market Borden Mill UGC Density 138 120 162 241 186 90 98 103 289 33 Page 278 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Figure 28: A map showing which MTSAs would meet their minimum required density targets as a result of this workshop. What We Heard & What We Saw Participants commented on the notion of walkability and expressed that connectivity and frequency of transit lines would benefit development within MTSAs. Many participants did question why there was so much anticipated growth for the MTSAs, but noted that if the City does need to grow, it would indeed make most sense along the LRT routes and within MTSAs where residents can easily access transit and amenities. Staff spoke with a participant who owns a small rental building. They generally like growth and are excited that Kitchener is growing and is in a better place now than it used to be. They think that older buildings should be preserved in some cases and that heritage is important. They think that there should be a grocery store and some more mixed use inthe area. That would serve Kitchener well. There was a preference expressed for more growth to be accommodated within existing neighbourhoods surrounding the stations so that people feel a part of a neighbourhood. Specific mention was made to intensify near Mill Station, and numerous participants said the area of the Ottawa Street South corridor near Mill Street is a place which can accommodate growth. Mill Street and Stirling Ave were also noted as a specific location well-suited for growth. One participant expressed excitement about the growth and intensification of the downtown and the potential for more business and mixed-use commercial buildings to open. 34 Page 279 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Participants generally favoured a variety of housing sizes and affordability and encouraged a greater variety of housing choices in neighbourhoods. Participants discussed having neighbourhoods intensified by building more low and mid -rise units within them. Some people preferred to have more growth accommodated in neighbourhoods surrounding the stations so that people can still have denser housing options while living "in the neighbourhoods" themselves and not "along busy streets". Participants noted that high-rises should be well -integrated into neighbourhoods if they are to be built. Some concern was expressed regarding the amount of concrete used in high-rise buildings and the lack of open sky. Some participants noted wanting to see heritage buildings maintained. Participants expressed an interest in seeing green space accompanying new development. One resident was interested in hearing about district energy plans for the downtown and supported those initiatives. It was noted that most people find detached houses unaffordable, and more housing options should be provided. The Catalyst site was mentioned as a place which should be redeveloped for housing. 35 Page 280 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Community -Wide Workshop (March 25, 2023) Engagement Event Overview ➢ Community -wide engagement open to all. ➢ 370 participants in the workshop. ➢ Held at the Kitchener Market on March 25th, 2023, from 7am-2pm Several participants were interested in the ways we would report this exercise back to the public, as well as how we would translate this exercise into our digital model for analysis. Several participants expressed a great appreciation for being able to participate in a workshop that can more directly inform the planning process as compared to other methods of engaging. Figure 29: Photo from the workshop. 36 Page 281 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Figure 30: Image from the smart model of the workshop results. "Change and progress has negative impacts for a few people but many positive impacts for many people over the longer term." �1- Where People Placed Growth The following "heat map" represents where workshop participants placed low, medium, and high- rise housing units through the workshop exercise. Concentrations of higher densities are found around ION LRT stops, particularly the Central and Borden stations. Density was also distributed throughout the Urban Growth Center and along the ION route generally. Many participants noted how important downtown Kitchener is to them and how much better it will be with more people living there, particularly with respect to feeling safer and more comfortable downtown, especially at night. "The downtown is kind of quiet. It needs more life and businesses." 37 Page 282 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Several participants identified the Borden MTSA and King/Ottawa area as a key area for development, in order to create a cluster of `stuff' to serve the surrounding neighbourhoods. • 96% of the 18,000 total units were allocated during the workshop. • Growth was more strongly correlated to the ION line itself compared to other workshops, with buildings being distributed fairly linearly along the transit route between Grand River Hospital and Borden stations. Low-rise growth was distributed widely. Mid -rise and high-rise growth followed the ION route quite closely in this workshop. The placement of low, medium and high- rise buildings can be seen separated out in the maps below. A fourth map shows a continuous map zone capturing all growth, as placed by participants. 38 Page 283 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report LOW Major Transit Station Areas Total GRH Central City Queen Market Borden Mill UGC MTSA Hall Units 17,264 3,192 4,814 1,981 1,164 950 3,819 1,343 7,099 Placed % of 96% 18% 27% 11% 6% 5% 21% 7% 40% 18k • Including existing buildings, this workshop resulted in the largest amount of total people living in the Central station (12.9k). The smallest population is found in the Mill station area (4.6k). • Including existing buildings, this workshop resulted in the largest amount of total jobs being located in the Central (6.9k) station area. The lowest job total is found in the Borden station area (1.4k). • Including existing buildings, the lowest people to jobs ratio is found in the Frederick and Queen station area (1.11 people per job). The highest ratio is found in the Borden station (4.98 people per job). 39 Page 284 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Table 16: Number of New People and Jobs in MTSAs (March 25th Workshop) Major Transit Station Areas MTSA Total GRH Central City Queen Market Borden Mill UGC MTSA 159 160 211 Hall 216 128 143 61 355 Total People 53117 ' 8,249 12,947 8,692 6,600 4,900 7,139 4,589 20,946 Total Jobs 29,729 ' 5,835 6,891 4,882 5,942 2,932 1,433 1,814 16,329 Ppl/Job Ratio 1.79 1.41 1.88 1.78 1.11 1.67 4.98 2.53 1.28 This workshop met minimum density targets for Grand River Hospital station, Central Station, City Hall & Victoria Park, and Queen & Frederick stations (green in map below). It did not reach the minimum density targets for Kitchener Market, Borden or Mill stations (red in map below). Significant capacity was demonstrated in the Urban Growth Centre, achieving a density in this workshop of 355 people and jobs per hectare. Table 17: Density of People and Jobs per Hectare (March 25th Workshop) Major Transit Station Areas MTSA Total GRH Central City Hall Queen Market Borden Mill UGC Density 159 160 211 242 216 128 143 61 355 Figure 33 A map showing which MTSAs would meet their minimum required density targets as a result of this workshop. 40 Page 285 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report What We Heard & What We Saw A couple with a newborn who currently live in a 2 -bedroom apartment expressed that they love living in a walkable area and would like more options for larger units to serve their needs. Without those larger unit options, they are instead looking at small detached houses and townhouses instead. Participants noted that density is ideally achieved through a mix of mid and high-rise units and that low-rise units should be allowed everywhere within the MTSAs. Other community members expressed concerns about high-rises, noting increased traffic and lack of parking. Montreal was identified as an example of a city that has dense, low-rise neighbourhoods. Community members commented that they liked Montreal's dense neighbourhoods because they are walkable and diverse, with many amenities. Multiple participants, including one who had duplexed their home and a couple who lived in the Victoria Park neighbourhood, expressed that parking is a barrier to development and that the City should remove parking requirements, particularly near transit stations. Participants generally favour new housing developments along the LRT and pointed out that the transit hub should have nearby amenities such as shops and restaurants. Participants would like the City to encourage mixed-use buildings with mixed retail options at grade. Specifically, participants noted they would like to see lands near Borden Station, King/Victoria, and King/Ottawa developed with mixed -uses providing access to amenities for nearby neighbourhoods. Participants spoke about downtown's importance and would like to see it busier and more vibrant and noted that more people living downtown would contribute positively towards this. They expressed that they would like to see downtown become more activated, with a better pedestrian experience and an emphasis on walkability. Many participants indicated they would like more housing style variety in new developments, particularly larger unit sizes. Numerous participants noted they were looking for larger units to accommodate their families but were having issues with affordability. Parks and green space were noted numerous times as a necessary ingredient of a community. Participants would also like to see high-quality public realm and community space in the downtown area. Public services, such as schools, were important considerations for an increasing population. 41 Page 286 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report "It's very important that "All that low-rise (referring to "Our preference is we don't keep building the low-rise areas of the to not live above the h on our farmland." workshops model) sure takes 6 storey. That's too up a lot of space, doesn't it?" high for us." Figure 34: An additional photo from the workshop. 42 Page 287 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Community -Wide Workshop (March 27, 2023) Engagement Event Overview ➢ Community -wide engagement open to all. ➢ 25 participants in the workshop. ➢ Held at the Stanley Park Community Centre on March 27th 2023 from 2pm-8pm Figure 35: Photo from the workshop. Figure 36: Image from the smart model of the workshop results. 43 Page 288 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Where People Placed Growth The following "heat map" represents where workshop participants placed low, medium, and high- rise housing units through the workshop exercise. Concentrations of growth are found along the ION LRT route, particularly in the MTSAs surrounding downtown. Low Medium High g Figure 37: A heat map of where participants placed low, medium and high-rise buildings. A member of the Conestoga College Student Association discussed the importance of housing for a growing student population. "We moved to downtown to be in the downtown action. We'd love to continue to live downtown but find construction and parking to be a continuous issue." • 95% of the 18,000 total units were allocated during the workshop. • Very little growth was placed in the Grand River Hospital MTSA in this workshop. Most buildings were concentrated in the downtown along the ION route, along Victoria Street, and along Ottawa Street. The industrial areas on the west side of the Mill station were also allocated high-rise growth. The placement of low, medium and high-rise buildings can be seen separated out in the maps below. A fourth map shows a continuous map zone capturing all growth, as placed by participants. 44 Page 289 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report 5 � f Figure 38: A series of four maps showing where participants placed low, medium, and rise growth, as well as a best fit map of all growth combined. • People placed the most growth in the Mill station (23% of all units). The fewest number of units were placed in the Grand River Hospital station (0%). Significant growth was placed in the Urban Growth Centre (38% of all units) Table 18: Number of New Units in MTSAs (March 27th Workshop) Major Transit Station Areas Total GRH Central City Queen Market Borden Mill UGC MTSA Hall Units 17,123 6,796 Placed 0 3,554 1,758 2,374 2,577 2,761 4,098 % of 95% 0% 20% 10% 13% 14% 15% 23% 38% 18k • Including existing buildings, this workshop resulted in the largest amount of total people living in the Central station (10.9k). The smallest population is found in the Grand River Hospital station area (3.0k). • Including existing buildings, this workshop resulted in the largest amount of total jobs being located in the Central (6.9k) station area. The lowest job total is found in the Market station area (1.8k). • Including existing buildings, the lowest people to jobs ratio is found in the Grand River Hospital station area (0.57 people per job). The highest ratio is found in the Mill station (4.75 people per job). 45 Page 290 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Table 19: Number of New People and Jobs in MTSAs (March 27th Workshop) Major Transit Station Areas MTSA Total GRH Central City Queen Market Borden Mill UGC MTSA 159 95 189 Hall 235 151 141 104 356 Total People 52,810 ' 10,902 8,508 8,487 7,437 5,424 9,036 10,902 21,166 Total Jobs 30156 ' 6,852 6,098 5,167 1,755 3,062 1,901 6,852 16,186 Ppl/Job Ratio 1.75 0.57 1.59 1.40 1.64 4.24 1.77 4.75 1.31 • This workshop met minimum density targets for Central Station, City Hall & Victoria Park, and Queen & Frederick stations (green in map below). It did not reach the minimum density targets for Grand River Hospital, Kitchener Market, Borden or Mill stations (red in map below). • Significant capacity was demonstrated in the Urban Growth Centre, achieving a density in this workshop of 356 people and jobs per hectare. Table 20: Density of People and Jobs per Hectare (March 27th Workshop) Major Transit Station Areas MTSA Total GRH Central City Hall Queen Market Borden Mill UGC Density 159 95 189 261 235 151 141 104 356 Figure 39 A map showing which MTSAs would meet their minimum required density targets as a result of this workshop. 46 Page 291 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report What We Heard & What We Saw Participants spoke about the benefits of living within an MTSA boundary, including walkable amenities and access to transit and other public services. Participants would like the City to continue establishing green space within MTSAs and noted the importance of playgrounds. Students from the nearby college noted that more student housing should be available, lessening the burden on affordable units in the area. Younger students recommended that housing be built near transit to access everything they need, including schools. A professor from the University of Waterloo discussed the importance of tower separation between tall buildings. A group of grade 7 and 8 students discussed how development should be near transit because they can access things they need more easily. The considered impacts from buildings such as shadows and wind to not be the most important issues when it comes to development. One community member expressed concern about living in high rises and would like to see bigger units and a better housing type mix considered. 47 Page 292 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Community -Wide Workshop (March 30, 2023) Engagement Event Overview ➢ Community -wide engagement open to all. ➢ 20 participants in the workshop. ➢ Held at the Forest Heights KPL on March 30th 2023 from 2pm-8pm. Figure 40: Photo from the workshop. Figure 41: Image from the smart model of the workshop results. 48 Page 293 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Where People Placed Growth The following "heat map" represents where workshop participants placed low, medium, and high- rise housing units through the workshop exercise. Concentrations of higher densities are found around ION LRT stops, particularly the Central and Borden stations. Density was also distributed throughout the Urban Growth Center and along the ION route generally. ,ure 42: A heat map of where nts placed low, medium and high-rise buildings. "Development should occur in Borden (the MTSA). It's underused, with a lot of factory space and open areas that could be filled with housing. There aren't enough services there now, and development would help provide direction." • 84% of the 18,000 total units were allocated during the workshop. • Growth was more strongly correlated to the ION line itself compared to other workshops, with buildings being distributed fairly linearly along the transit route, albeit with very few buildings places in the Grand River Hospital, Market and Mill Station Areas The placement of low, medium and high-rise buildings can be seen separated out in the maps below. A fourth map shows a continuous map zone capturing all growth, as placed by participants. 49 Page 294 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report High Figure 43: A series of four maps showing where participants placed low, medium, and rise growth, as well as a best fit map of all growth combined. People placed the most growth in the Central station (32% of all units). The fewest number of units were placed in the Grand River Hospital (2%) and Market stations (2%). Significant growth was placed in the Urban Growth Centre (44% of all units) Table 21: Number of New Units in MTSAs (March 30t' Workshop) Major Transit Station Areas Total GRH Central City Queen Market Borden Mill UGC MTSA Hall Units Placed 15114 ' 311 5,717 2,921 1,639 321 3,483 723 7,967 % of 18K 84% 2% 32% 16% 9% 2% 19% 4% 44% Including existing buildings, this workshop resulted in the largest amount of total people living in the Central station (14.3k). The smallest population is found in the Grand River Hospital (3.6k) and Mill station areas (3.6k). Including existing buildings, this workshop resulted in the largest amount of total jobs being located in the Central (7.4k) station area. The lowest job total is found in the Market station area (1.7k). Including existing buildings, the lowest people to jobs ratio is found in the Grand River Hospital station area (0.73 people perjob). The highest ratio is found in the Borden station (3.61 people per job). 50 Page 295 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Table 22: Number of New People and Jobs in MTSAs (March 30t'' Workshop) Major Transit Station Areas MTSA Total GRH Central City Queen Market Borden Mill UGC MTSA 148 96 230 Hall 215 91 141 51 364 Total People 49.417 3,576 14,265 10,176 7,318 3,852 6,620 3,609 22,217 Total Jobs 28,035 4,905 7,362 5,341 5,135 1,669 1,835 1,789 15,971 Ppl/Job Ratio 1.76 0.73 1.94 1.91 1.43 2.31 3.61 2.02 1.39 • This workshop met minimum density targets for Central Station, City Hall & Victoria Park, and Queen & Frederick stations (green in map below). It did not reach the minimum density targets for Grand River Hospital, Kitchener Market, Borden or Mill stations (red in map below). • Significant capacity was demonstrated in the Urban Growth Centre, achieving a density in this workshop of 364 people and jobs per hectare. Table 23: Density of People and Jobs per Hectare in MTSAs (March 30t' Workshop) Major Transit Station Areas MTSA Total GRH Central City Hall Queen Market Borden Mill UGC Density 148 96 230 277 215 91 141 51 364 Figure 44 A map showing which MTSAs would meet their minimum required density targets as a result of this workshop. 51 Page 296 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report What We Heard & What We Saw One participant had recently experienced a disability and was looking to move closer to downtown to be closer to transit and other services that they need. This person was struggling to find options that were affordable and suited their needs. They preferred a smaller apartment in a low-rise form, such as a backyard home, multiplex or apartment building. They still valued their independence and didn't feel suited to a retirement home or the assisted living arrangements available to them. �w Community members agreed that new housing developments should be built along transit routes. They noted that housing should be developed near services and amenities. It was noted that areas around Borden Station could be developed into housing. Building housing would then attract other services and amenities to the site. Additional dwelling units (ADUs or backyard homes) were also cited as another way for the City to accommodate increased density. Community members spoke about the need for investment in transportation infrastructure, including buses, GO transit and cycling. Participants commented that focus should be placed on building spaces for children as the city grows. Affordability concerns were noted amongst participants, with one indicating that co-operative and non-profit style affordable housing is preferable when discussing affordability. Community members suggested the City mandate affordability targets. The City -owned property at Courtland and Borden was noted as having the potential for affordable housing and community space. 52 Page 297 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Council Workshop (April 17, 2023) Engagement Event Overview Focused engagement with members of Kitchener City Council. 11 participants in the workshop. Held in the Kitchener City Hall Learning Room on April 17th, 2023, from 3pm-4:30pm Through a council strategy session, Kitchener City Council participated in the Growing Together Workshop. This was an opportunity for Council to complete the same exercise as our public participants, provide feedback, and better understand the ways growth and change are shaping Kitchener's MTSAs. Figure 45: Photo from the workshop. 53 Page 298 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Figure 46: Image from the smart model of the workshop results. Where Council Placed Growth The following "heat map" represents where workshop participants placed low, medium, and high- rise housing units through the workshop exercise. This workshop demonstrates a very even mix of low, medium and high across each MTSA. Higher densities are placed in closer proximity to the ION route, particularly along Charles Street. LOW Medium High Figure 47: A heat map of where participants placed low, medium and high-rise buildings. 54 Page 299 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report • 92% of the 18,000 total units were allocated during the workshop. • Growth was generally placed very consistently across the geography, with fewer clusters of density as compared to other workshops. • Low-rise growth was distributed widely, predominately in existing low-rise areas. • Mid -rise growth was also placed broadly throughout, but more mid -rise buildings were placed closer to the ION route. • High-rise growth was placed in patterns that are very similar to mid -rise growth. The placement of low, medium and high-rise buildings can be seen separated out in the maps below. A fourth map shows a continuous map zone capturing all growth, as placed by participants. Medium Major Transit Station Areas Total GRH Central City Queen Market Borden Mill UGC* MTSA Hall Units 16,647 3,687 4,439 913 1,231 1,894 2,659 1,824 4,666 Placed 55 Page 300 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Major Transit Station Areas MTSA Total GRH Central City Queen Market Borden Mill UGC* MTSA 155 151 200 Hall 225 139 132 64 324 % of 92% 20% 25% 5% 7% 11% 15% 21% 26% 18k 52,058 ' 9,073 12,292 7,058 6,687 6,360 5,273 5,316 16,890 *The UGC boundary includes portions of the Central, City Hall, Queen, and Market MTSAs • Including existing buildings, this workshop resulted in the largest amount of total people living in the Central station (12.3k). The smallest populations are found in the Borden (5.3k) and Mill (5.3k) station areas. However, the distribution of population among station areas is relatively even in this workshop scenario compared to some others. • Including existing buildings, this workshop resulted in the largest amount of total jobs being located in the Central (6.5k) and Queen & Frederick (6.3k) stations. The lowest job total is found in the Mill station area (1.4k). • Including existing buildings, the lowest people to jobs ratio is found in the Frederick and Queen station area (1.05 people perjob). The highest ratio is found in the Mill station (3.74 people per job). Table 25: Number of New People and Jobs in MTSAs (City Council Workshop) Major Transit Station Areas MTSA Total GRH Central City Queen Market Borden Mill UGC MTSA 155 151 200 Hall 225 139 132 64 324 Total People 52,058 ' 9,073 12,292 7,058 6,687 6,360 5,273 5,316 16,890 Total Jobs 28,886 ' 4,177 6,468 5,668 6,362 2,146 2,642 1,423 17,101 Ppl/Job Ratio 1.80 2.17 1.90 1.25 1.05 2.96 2.00 3.74 0.99 • This workshop met minimum density targets for Central Station, City Hall & Victoria Park, and Queen & Frederick stations (green in map below). It did not reach the minimum density targets for Grand River Hospital, Kitchener Market, Borden or Mill stations (red in map below). • Significant capacity was demonstrated in the Urban Growth Centre, achieving a density in this workshop of 324 people and jobs per hectare. Table 26: Density of People and Jobs per Hectare in MTSAs (City Council Workshop) Major Transit Station Areas MTSA Total GRH Central City Hall Queen Market Borden Mill UGC Density 155 151 200 227 225 139 132 64 324 56 Page 301 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Figure 49: A map showing which MTSAs would meet their minimum required density targets as a result of this workshop. What We Heard & What We Saw Council expressed the importance of staying consistent with the plan to build up around the ION LRT. They talked about the integration of green development standards and district energy. Members of council also spoke to the importance of providing for more opportunities to build missing middle housing supply, to create better connectivity and walkability in the MTSAs, and to plan for green space and parkettes. Council also spoke to the importance of built form transition between areas of low-rise and high- rise buildings, while continuing to build up along Kitchener's mixed-use corridors. Council identified opportunities for growth to be directed to Charles Street, Mill Street, Stirling Ave, Victoria Street and more, as well as on underutilized surface parking lots. There was also an interest in seeing more office and mixed-use in the Borden station area. One councilor noted a concern that some constituents had been in contact with them to express that the workshop format was not their preferred way to engage. 57 Page 302 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Appendix B: Engagement and Communications Materials Previous Engagements Over 20 engagements were held throughout the Planning Around Rapid Transit Stations (PARTS) and Neighbourhood Planning Review (NPR) projects that continue to inform the Growing Together work. Those engagements included; • Planning Around Rapid Transit Stations (PARTS) Central Plan o Community Engagement Session 1, November 19th 2014. A feedback report was produced for this engagement. Stakeholder and Landowner Interviews held December 9th and 10th, 2014. A feedback report was produces for these engagements. o Attendance at the Downtown Neighbourhood Alliance General Meeting, May 23 2015, to engage with the neighbourhood associations in and around the PARTS geography and encourage their participation in the process moving forward. o Community Engagement Session 2, May 26th 2015 • Planning Around Rapid Transit Stations (PARTS) PARTS Midtown & Rockway Plans o Public Information Centre 1, May 5th 2016. o Public Information Centre 2, September 29th 2016 o Stakeholder Workshop, December 14th & 15th, 2016 o Public Information Centre 3, May 18th, 2017 • Neighbourhood Planning Review (NPR) o A series of seven open houses were held for residents of each existing secondary plan neighbourhood area in the MTSAs. These were held between May 29th 2018 and April 18th 2019. ■ Midtown Secondary Plan ■ Victoria Park Secondary Plan ■ Cedar Hill & Schneider Creek Secondary Plan ■ Former Victoria Street Secondary Plan ■ Rockway Secondary Plan ■ King Street East Secondary Plan ■ Civic Centre Secondary Plan o A series of six urban design charrettes were also held in this time period to develop urban design guidelines specific to each neighbourhood. These were approved in 2019. o A statutory public meeting was held in December 2019, with a follow up report presented to council in June 2021. While the workshop summary details the feedback and analysis received at the 6 community workshops, 12 workshops in total have been run to date with a variety of groups and stakeholders. That full list is provided below: Table 27: History of Growing Together Engagement Workshops Date Group/Event Location Participants January 24 Downtown Community Working Downtown Community 19 2023 Group Centre March 1 2023 City of Kitchener Planning Staff Kitchener City Hall 30 March 21 2023 Focused Community Workshop, Kitchener City Hall 60 Mid -rise and Hiah-rise Residents Rotunda 58 Page 303 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Date Group/Event Location Participants March 23 2023 Focused Community Workshop, Kitchener Public 75 Growth 8 Change Low-rise Non -multiple Residents Library March 25 2023 Community Wide Workshop Kitchener Market 370 March 27 2023 Community Wide Workshop Stanley Park 25 Community Centre March 30 2023 Community Wide Workshop Forest Heights KPL 20 April 4 2023 Focused Workshop, Low-rise Downtown Community 12 Multiple Residents Centre April 17 2023 Council Strategy Session Kitchener City Hall 11 April 21 2023 WRDSB Geography Teachers Downtown Community 28 Centre May 2 2023 Waterloo Region Association of Bingemans 30 Realtors Conference Centre May 18 2023 Cambridge/Kitchener/Waterloo Kitchener City Hall 10 Planners Total Growing Together Engagement Materials 690 The engagement and communications process included a variety of engagement materials, as shown below. Sample Postcard Notice Krr�lvER GROWIN TOGETHER) PLANNING FOR KITCHENERS MAJOR TRANSIT STATION AREAS To team mote about the project and see additional availabledates and mimes, visit wwwxngagewr WVvwinVogelher YOU'RE INVITED TO A WORKSHOP ON: March 23 2023 Begin ting at Spm at IGldt�rer Public library, 85 Queen S, N. Meeting Roan D w Submit comrnent5to. Additlonolinformatiort City of Kitchener Join us for a hands -an workshop where we will use a 3D printed Adam Clark Senior Urban designer model of Kitchener to explore how growth and change are 514.741-2206 x 7027 shaping the areas around the ION light-rail system. Paricipate in growingtogethercHitcherecca aguldedworkshop heginningat6ptn 200 King St W. Kitchener ON, N2G 4G7 Current status: r Communityworkshopsinspring PuhlishdraItpok Broad mmmunityarduakeholderengagementon Remmmendation reporthrought 1 2623 to explore themes of growth, docunenuineady 3 draft materiatsinorder tofinalize arecommendation 4 tocouncil lardedsion drange.housing. andmure, summer2023. to be considered by Planning Committee andCouncil Figure 50: A sample of one of the postcards that were mailed out to residents. 59 Page 304 of 1179 FIA& as Land Use a Zoning Growth 8 Change Housing Sas,ts Mobility Submit comrnent5to. Additlonolinformatiort City of Kitchener Join us for a hands -an workshop where we will use a 3D printed Adam Clark Senior Urban designer model of Kitchener to explore how growth and change are 514.741-2206 x 7027 shaping the areas around the ION light-rail system. Paricipate in growingtogethercHitcherecca aguldedworkshop heginningat6ptn 200 King St W. Kitchener ON, N2G 4G7 Current status: r Communityworkshopsinspring PuhlishdraItpok Broad mmmunityarduakeholderengagementon Remmmendation reporthrought 1 2623 to explore themes of growth, docunenuineady 3 draft materiatsinorder tofinalize arecommendation 4 tocouncil lardedsion drange.housing. andmure, summer2023. to be considered by Planning Committee andCouncil Figure 50: A sample of one of the postcards that were mailed out to residents. 59 Page 304 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Newspaper Article (left) and Flyer Handout (right) NOTICE OFA PLANNING STUDY Growing Together Workshops 1,` E NER Join Us At These Events! Dare: Mamh25,2023 Time: 7:00 a.m. - 2:00 p.m. Location: Kitchener Market 300 King Street East Date: Mamh27,2023 Time: 2'00 p.m. - 8:00 p.m. Location: Stanley Park Comm unity Centre 505 Franklin St N. AM 0 0 Date: March 30, 2023 ©f"I i © Time: 2'00 March p.m. 30, 2 :00 p.m. IILocation: Forest Heights Library RP 251 Fischer -Hallman Rd. Land Use I& Growth it Housing Zoning Change To learn moreaboutthrs pmieet,visit Oremailusat www.kitchenecea/gruwingtogether growingtogether@ itchener.ca City planning staffare engagingwith the communitythrough a series ofworkshops that explore. in a hands-on way. how growth and change are occurring in the areas surrounding the ION light rail system in Kitchener. Through the Growing Together project we will be updating our policies to address issues concerning housing and growth. The workshop is centered around a 31) -printed model of the city where participants can explore these issues together with staff In a fun, all -ages and abllities exercise. You can drop-in at anytime and stay as briefly or as long as yorid like[ Figure 51: The Record Ad published to advertise the Growing Together workshops. � GROWING K R TOGETHER low 00 ��_ 0 0 Land Use Growth& Housing Sustainability Built Fo Zoning Change Figure 52 The flyer handout made available at the workshops to direct people to the engage page. 60 Page 305 of 1179 Visit us online! am� w .rengagewcca/growinglogethergmwinglogelher(Mkitchener.ca Learn more, give us your feedback and participate in other online activities. Check back regularly for project updates and more! low 00 ��_ 0 0 Land Use Growth& Housing Sustainability Built Fo Zoning Change Figure 52 The flyer handout made available at the workshops to direct people to the engage page. 60 Page 305 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Sample of Growing Together Card Deck Growing Together Net Housing Gain For every residential unit lost to demolition, 47 are built in Kitchener. 0 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 000000 Saurce: City of Kitchener Figure 53 Left; A sample of the front of the Growing Together card deck. Right; A sample of the back of one of the cards from the Growing Together card deck. 61 Page 306 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Appendix C: City of Kitchener Downtown Community Working Group Meeting #7 Summary The seventh Downtown Community Working Group (DCWG) meeting was held on January 24, 2023, from 4:30 to 7:00 pm at the Downtown Community Centre. 19 of 29 members were in attendance. Discussions at the meeting are summarized below. Growth and Housing Activity The following input was collected during the activity as the group worked through two different considerations in a hands-on growth and housing activity: 1. Adding 18,000 units of housing to provide more housing choice. 2. Adding an additional 13,500 units to provide housing affordability. Consideration 1 Input following the first consideration included the following: • Important to have low-rise units to make it feel like a neighbourhood — to allow for a transition from existing lower density neighbourhoods to higher density development. • Want to see additional housing units near transit stations. • Want to see mid -rise units over the old police station and other business. • Add low-rise units to support the population of people experiencing homelessness, near to where they are staying now. • Use former industrial lands for housing. • Develop housing on the parking lot at Charles and Water Streets. • There is underutilized land near the square. Consideration 2 Input following the second consideration included the following: • Density can be a good thing if done in a mixed way. • This is a good visual reminder that density does not mean the entire city gets demolished; we can intensify but still retain our identity. • It is really amazing that we can add this much density and the city remains vibrant. • If there is this much density, there needs to be schools and other supports in place. • Need to include how traffic will work with and around this new growth. • The corridors can handle the density we need to add. Roundtable Discussions — Growth and Housing Following the activity, DCWG members were asked to engage in small roundtable discussions on growth and housing in DTK. Discussions from each roundtable are summarized below. What locations are suitable for low, medium, or high-density growth? Why? Group 1 • It is important for all areas to have a mix of density and types of housing. 62 Page 307 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report • Density should be concentrated near the LRT line. • Medium and higher density areas need supports and amenities such as schools, shops, and parks. • All areas need to include green space. • Medium and high density should be concentrated along transit lines. • Important to examine opportunities for additional units in laneways, backyards etc. • Need to disperse density across the City of Kitchener and not just downtown. • Necessary to protect green space and build around it. • Proximity to the LRT should determine the density. • Growth should occur in corridors such as Queen and Ottawa. • Have low and medium density as buffer areas for established neighbourhoods. • Use underutilized land like parking lots; avoid demolition for environmental reasons. • Important to protect green space. • Limit sprawl of growth outside of the city. • Distribute the higher density, have transition zones, options for families. • Ensure higher density is livable (i.e., people, excitement, parks, and green space.) • Medium and high density along the corridors. How would you organize and distribute intensification? Group 1 • Close to ION stations and other transit, across from hospital. • Creation of destinations near amenities. • Clustering in a way that makes sense. • Mixed use is important. Group 2 • Ensure that space is left for businesses, arts, and culture. • Integrate the new construction into the existing fabric of the city. • Proximity to shops, restaurants, and groceries. • Organize in an integrated fashion, services need to be present before density. Group 3 • Intensification near the transit routes. • Understand what is enticing people to move to Kitchener. • Mixed use is important. • We need to encourage the public's understanding of this topic. 63 Page 308 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report • Organized alongside schools, parks, daycares, and businesses. • Mixed use and distributed, not all in the same spot. • Development that works across socio-economic spectrum. • Growth should be across the city. How important are housing choice and affordability to you and is this reflected in this exercise? Group 1 • Diversity in housing choice and supply mix i.e.: deeply affordable units. • Rent control should be considered. • Variety of housing types is very important. • Expansion of housing types, not just single units. Group 2 • Housing choice and affordability are incredibly important. • Supply is not enough to drive affordability. • City needs to look at other options to encourage affordability and housing type diversity. • Encourage people to move through the housing spectrum. Group 3 • Variety of housing is very important, mix needs to include the missing middle. • Need to have more medium sized dwelling units. • Encouragement of co-op housing. • Density can be achieved without relying on high rises (i.e.: multigenerational housing). Group 4 • Encourage affordable housing across the city; this is currently lacking. • Choice of housing form is important, range of unit sizes. • City could incentivize missing housing types. • Important to destigmatize rental units. Based on our discussion today, how would you summarize the future of growth and housing in downtown Kitchener in a single statement? Group 1 • Intentionally planned neighbourhoods with a diversity of housing types and densities including affordable and accessible housing. Welcoming to everyone and a diversity of transportation types. Group 2 • Intentional, thoughtful, livable, diverse, and unique. 64 Page 309 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report • Communities should feel unique and `not cookie cutter'. Group 3 • Well designed, intentional, integrated. • Livable, transit -oriented, mix of housing types. • Downtown Kitchener is well designed, intensified core neighbourhood, where housing is integrated with commercial retail, arts, culture, and green space. Group 4 • Livable, variety, mixed income. • The future of growth and housing in DTK offers well thought out, livable housing, with a variety of choices and walkable amenities. Growth and Housing Activity Input The group also provided input on the growth and housing activity, summarized below: • Low-density foam blocks do not stay in place. • A delight to be in an optimistic attitude in the group — excited to envision more buildings. • Having the ability to make some of the housing unit pieces modular, so that they can be stacked. • Label more streets, trails, and green spaces. • Show the rail lines more clearly. • Addition of transit terminals would be good. • The model shows that there is still a lot of white space — the city has not been erased even when we add the density. • Actively encourage participants to be creative and to dive into the exercise. 65 Page 310 of 1179 Growing Together Phase 2 What We Heard: Pop -Up Engagement Summary Detailing Public Workshop Engagements Held in June and July of 2023 K i Prepared by- City of Kitchener ' F2 Page 311 of 1179 Contents ProjectOverview.........................................................................................................................1 Engagement and Communications Approach..............................................................................1 How the Events Were Organized.............................................................................................2 HowWe Reached Out.............................................................................................................2 TheEngagement Activities......................................................................................................4 PriorityStreets.....................................................................................................................4 WhatWe Heard and Saw.....................................................................................................5 Missing Middle Block Exercise.............................................................................................7 WhatWe Heard and Saw.....................................................................................................8 TheList................................................................................................................................8 AdditionalInformation..........................................................................................................9 Page 312 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Project Overview In phase 1 of Growing Together (March and April, 2023), staff led several workshops with the community and other stakeholders. The background, parameters and instructions for those workshops can be found here. Staff detailed the results of these workshops and provided mapping and analysis of the exercise in the What We Heard: Workshop Engagement Summary that was presented to council at the June 19th Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee. Combining the workshop results with other inputs, including contextual analysis of our MTSAs, staff developed a Draft Approach to Growth & Change which introduced the key elements of the proposed planning framework behind the Growing Together project. Staff released this draft approach at the end of June 2023, to continue to receive community input into the process while the detailed policies and regulations were developed. Staff also identified and developed two additional engagement activities to help better understand community priorities: the Priority Streets Exercise and the Missing Middle Block Exercise. The results of these exercises are detailed in this summary Engagement and Communications Approach As with our Phase 1 workshops, the Growing Together summer engagement materials were intentionally designed to be: • Equitable: To reach a more diverse and representative range of community members. • Educational: To create an intuitive exercise using realistic building types and other parameters. • Measurable: To collect community input that can be meaningfully analyzed and quantified. Figure 1: A photo from staff's June 241" presence on Gauke/ St. as part of the KW Multicultural Festival. Page 313 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report How the Events Were Organized Staff chose to align our engagements through a `pop-up' presence at three events; • Kitchener -Waterloo Multicultural Festival on June 24th, 2023 from 12pm-8pm • Downtown Kitchener Ribfest and Craft Beer Show on July 15th, 2023 from 12pm-8pm • Summer Series at Kitchener Market on July 19th, 2023 from 2pm-8pm Staff also held public office hours to meet with community members on July 21St, 2023 from 9am-12pm, with two slots available for each half-hour interval. In this phase of engagement, staff engaged with the community for a total of 25 hours. Including phase 1's public workshops, staff have, to date, engaged with the community for over 59 hours. As with phase 1, the phase 2 events were chosen to help staff meet the equity criteria of our engagement plan. By creating a highly visible presence as part of several popular summer events, we were able to engage with a broad range of community members who brought a range of perspectives forward. Additionally, the continued use of hands-on and visually interesting materials (3D printed models and transparent map layers), piqued the interest of many passers-by who stopped out of general interest. Several community members approached us with comments and questions like "This is cool," "What is this?" "Is this about Missing Middle?", etc. How We Reached Out In June 2023, the project webpage was updated with the Phase 1 Engagement Summary, Draft Approach to Growth & Change, and the dates and times of our upcoming engagements. The community was also notified via social media, noting where and when staff would be available for engagement. The greatest priority for this phase of engagement was to "go to where the people are" by engaging as part of already -popular summer events. In an effort to encourage greater participation, staff also provided translated instructions for each exercise in 6 of the most frequently spoken languages in Kitchener (2021 Census); Arabic, Chinese, Hindi, Punjabi, Spanish and French. In total, across the three events and including our office hours, staff engaged with a total of 322 community members. 2 Page 314 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report IV 41 Figure 2: A photo from staff's July 19th presence on Eby St. as part of the Summer Series at Kitchener Market. Table 1: Location and Number of Participants at Engagement Events Date Group/Event Location Participants June 24 2023 Kitchener -Waterloo Multicultural Gaukel Street 159 Festival July 15 2023 Downtown Kitchener Ribfest and Gaukel Street 95 Craft Beer Show July 19 2023 Summer Series at Kitchener Eby Street 58 Market July 21 2023 Staff Office Hours Kitchener City Hall 10 Including the public workshops from Phase 1, staff have now spoken to 884 community members through the Growing Together process. Including the additional stakeholder workshops and 16 additional participants from the development industry as part of Staff Office Hours, staff have now spoken with nearly a thousand community members and other stakeholders (998). Staff spoke with community members on a wide variety of topics, with individual conversations ranging from a few minutes to over an hour. Multiple staff members were present at each event so that multiple conversations could be held simultaneously. At each event, the results of the exercises were captured and reproduced digitally. 3 Page 315 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report IftiMMMI Figure 3: A photo of one configuration from the Missing Middle Block Exercise. The Engagement Activities Priority Streets The first exercise asked participants to identify which streets within the Growing Together geography provided the most amenity and utility as a pedestrian. It also asked people to identify which streets they desired to see more and better amenity and utility as a pedestrian. To gather community input, staff used transparent mapping layers and asked participants to draw these streets onto the map in two colours; pink for existing, yellow for desired. After a participant or group of participants finished drawing their preferred priority streets on the map, staff photographed the map, erased the lines, and prepared the map for the next participant. At the end of our summer engagements, staff digitized the results and consolidated the feedback onto a single map, which was used—alongside other considerations—to form staff's proposed Priority Streets framework. 4 Page 316 of 1179 3 'jj City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report IXG Figure 4: A photo of the transparent map used in the Priority Streets exercise, from staff's July 15th presence on Gaukel St. What We Heard and Saw Many streets and street segments were identified by a broad range of participants, with the downtown core, streets near the market, and King and Victoria Streets being frequently identified as priorities. Charles, Queen, Frederick and Ottawa were also identified. Many participants hope to see more pedestrian -only and pedestrian -first streets in the future. A small number of participants view pedestrian ization of streets and bike lanes as a negative that makes it less convenient to get around the city by private vehicle. On Gaukel Street, one participant asked why the City would take away space from cars by pedestrianizing streets. Thanks to the location of the engagement, staff were able to point out the many people who were, at that moment, walking or rolling comfortably and safely up and down Gaukel Street. This helped the participant better understand the value streets can have to people who aren't driving. Many participants remarked on the importance of providing more to do, particularly downtown, but also widely across the Growing Together geography. This included more and a greater variety of public and private open spaces, plazas, trails and pathways, formal and informal gathering opportunities, and formal or informal community spaces. 5 Page 317 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report A pair of participants spoke to the need for more "African spaces", to serve a strong existing and emerging community need. Both had moved to Waterloo to attend university and had more recently relocated in and around downtown Kitchener but are missing public or private amenity spaces they have enjoyed in other places they've lived. They spoke mostly to the need for more plazas where groups could informally gather without the need for pre -planned programming. A broad general theme was "we need more of every type of amenity, everywhere". Some people specifically meant parks, others meant shops and services, others meant event spaces. The need for better spaces for children and families was noted, as were more and better shops, services and amenities for teens and even pets. Better and more patio spaces for restaurants, cafes and bars, with less noise from traffic, was also identified as a need. The map below shows the consolidated results of our Priority Streets mapping exercise; gI 1~C Figure 5 Consolidated mapping of all community feedback received on Priority Streets. 6 Page 318 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Missing Middle Block Exercise The second exercise asked participants to arrange a series of different missing middle building typologies on a low-rise existing residential block. The intent was to provide a hands-on resource to help guide conversations about the forms and styles of missing middle intensification being pursued in the Growing Together project, as informed by the Missing Middle and Affordable Housing Report. The other intent of the block exercise was to ask people about the types of non-residential uses they would like to see in low-rise central neighbourhoods. Staff kept a list of all uses requested through this engagement, which included many shops and services, food stores, general stores, personal services and community spaces. Support for both missing middle housing and non-residential uses in low-rise areas was nearly universal. As with Priority Streets, the intent for this exercise was to digitize and map the results, to show and extract trends and patterns to help staff develop zoning regulations. However, support was so strong for the full range of building types and non-residential uses that this step became unnecessary, as there was no additional information to extract from the results of the engagement. ��4 ttvnag�F/�m.�klt£eue .dfaV"�R�e2F�umi'�/tb�eNt� e�aive�Pee4Mt'13{ �2uci.'44 go-lxneY. ux��e�e�auL2u�ysrt3� _ CNF/RJ+�az6up5e 4�s T #Y!F �i 'EIH�l1aYU3ft AIA EJfi�.&fii� Figure 6 A photo of the Missing Middle Block exercise from staff's presence on Gauke/ St. as part of Multicultural Festival. 7 Page 319 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report What We Heard and Saw Support for missing middle and non-residential uses in low-rise areas was nearly unanimous. Many participants felt that non-residential uses could be distributed anywhere within neighbourhoods. Some preferred that certain, higher activity uses be limited to street corners. A pair of participants thought that businesses would be nice in low-rise neighborhoods but not necessarily too big so that they wouldn't attract too much parking. They liked the idea of restaurants and places for teens to hang out and also thought that such uses should be generally located on street corners. Participants spoke to missing middle and other forms of intensification as critically important for saving Ontario's farmland. Others noted that more housing, particularly in a wider variety of unit and building types, would help them find suitable housing for themselves or others, would allow them to age in place, raise a family, or otherwise meet their needs. Several participants noted that increased missing middle permissions will help younger people afford housing; whether through newly built multiplexes or apartment buildings, or by adding additional units to a home they purchase to generate income to pay a mortgage they otherwise couldn't afford. Many participants also noted a desire for more grocery and food stores, with several adding clarification that they didn't mean convenience stores, but healthier options with produce. The List Following is the list of non-residential uses that were identified by community members and needed, welcome or desired within existing low-rise neighbourhood areas. Bolded items were uses that were suggested repeatedly; • Bakery • Pharmacy • Repair Tech • Daycare • Ice Cream • Restaurant • Pub • Grocery Store • Green Grocer • Tailor • Community Spaces • Convenience Store • Small Medical/Dental • Cafe/Patio • "Night Out for Teens/Kids" • Market • Office/Mixed Use • Small Craft Vendors 8 Page 320 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report • Pop -Up Shops • Hoteling or co -working spaces • "Change of scenery" spaces for people working from home • Bubble Tea • Amenities for kids • "Sensory walk" amenities with many small things to stop and see/do while walking through a neighbourhood Additional Information Sets of card decks were also made available at all events, as were handouts directing participants to engagewr.ca/growingtogether. Additional maps on transparent paper were also available to help aide conversations and could be layered in any combination desired to present as much or as little information as needed, as clearly and cleanly as possible. Those layers included; • A base layer with the Growing Together boundary and ION LRT route/stops • A map of the draft zoning • A map showing where a built -form transition policy would apply • A series of maps showing the results of the Growing Together Workshops, including where participants placed low, medium and high-rise development • The Priority Streets maps. The results of this phase of engagement are being used to inform the official plan policies and zoning by-law regulations that are currently in development for a September 2023 public release. 9 Page 321 of 1179 Growing Together Phase 3 What We Heard: Draft Materials Engagement Summary Detailing Public Engagements Held in November of 2023 HI= Prepared by: City of Kitchener Page 322 of 1179 Contents ProjectOverview........................................................................................................................ 1 Engagement and Communications Approach............................................................................ 2 How the Events Were Organized............................................................................................ 2 HowWe Reached Out............................................................................................................ 2 What We Heard and Saw, Overall....................................................................................... 4 Walk-in Office Hours........................................................................................................... 4 Open House at Kitchener Market........................................................................................ 5 AdditionalInformation......................................................................................................... 7 Page 323 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Project Overview In phase 1 of Growing Together (March and April, 2023), staff led 12 workshops with the community and other stakeholders. The background, parameters and instructions for those workshops can be found here. Staff detailed the results of these workshops and provided mapping and analysis of the exercise in the What We Heard: Workshop Engagement Summary that was presented to council at the June 19`h Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee. Combining the workshop results with other inputs, including contextual analysis of our MTSAs, staff developed a Draft Approach to Growth & Change which introduced the key elements of the proposed planning framework behind the Growing Together project. Staff released this draft approach at the end of June 2023, to continue to receive community input into the process while the detailed policies and regulations were developed. Staff also identified and developed two additional engagement activities to help better understand community priorities: the Priority Streets Exercise and the Missing Middle Block Exercise. Staff engaged on these materials at several events in the summer of 2023. The results of these exercises are detailed in the phase 2 What We Heard: Pop -Up Engagement Summary. This summary was published to engagewr.ca/growingtogether on November V' 2023 alongside the draft official plan amendment and zoning by-law amendment. Following the public release of these draft materials, staff continued to engage the community through two walk-in sessions and a second full-day presence at the Kitchener Market. The results of those engagements are summarized in this report. Figure 1 A photo from staffs November 18th presence at the Kitchener Market. 1 Page 324 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Engagement and Communications Approach As with our Phase 1 workshops, and Phase 2 pop -ups the Growing Together fall engagement materials were intentionally designed to be: • Equitable: To reach a more diverse and representative range of community members. • Educational: To create an intuitive exercise using realistic building types and other parameters. • Measurable: To collect community input that can be meaningfully analyzed and quantified. How the Events Were Organized Staff offered two office hours walk-in engagements to meet with community members about site or area specific questions and concerns. Comments were also submitted to our Engage page and emailed to staff at growingtogether@kitchener.ca. We also spent a day at the Kitchener Market to engage on the draft materials more broadly; • Walk-in Office Hours at Mill Courtland Community Centre on November 14th, 2023 from 3pm-6pm • An Open House at Kitchener Market on November 181h, 2023 from 7am-2pm • Walk-in Office Hours at the Downtown Community Centre on November 20th, 2023 from 3pm-6pm In this phase of engagement, staff engaged with the community for a total of 13 hours. Including the phase 1 and phase 2 public workshops, pop -ups and office hours, staff have, to date, engaged with the community for over 72 hours. As with phase 1 and phase 2, locations and times were chosen to help staff meet the equity criteria of our engagement plan. By creating a highly visible presence at the market and offering a mix of daytime and evening times for our walk-ins at community centres, we continued to engage with a broad range of community members who brought a range of perspectives forward. How We Reached Out • On November 3rd, the Growing Together project engage page was updated, with subscribers receiving a notification. • An additional email was sent to our public and industry stakeholder lists. • The open house was advertised in The Record on October 271h • The open house was advertised through the City's Twitter account. • Posters were arranged to be posted at all City community centres. • 13,059 postcards were sent to all property owners and residents within the Growing Together geography, including information about the proposed zoning on each property. The greatest priority for this phase of engagement was to ensure broad awareness of the draft materials and opportunities for engagement. Like previous phases of engagement, individual conversations lasted from several minutes to well over an hour, with multiple city staff available at each event. 2 Page 325 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report In total, across the three events, staff engaged with a total of 250 community members. GROWING TOGETHER PLANNING FOR KITCHENER'S MAJOR TRANSIT STATION AREAS To learn more about the project and participate in the process visit: www.engagewr.ca/growingtogether Land Use Grow 01 Zoning Chai Submit comments to: Additional information: Inclusionary Zoning City of Kitchener A property you live on or own is proposed to be re -zoned to Growing Together Team Strategic Growth Area 2. This zone permits mid -rise residential 519.741.2200 x 7027 and non-residential uses up to 8 storeys in height. This change growingtogether@kitchener.ca does not affect how you use your property today, but may allow 200 King St. W., Kitchener ON, N2G 4G7 for new types of mid -rise development in this zone in the future. 1) Draft land use and zoning �� Continued community and stakeholder are now available on the conversations on draft land use and zoning project website. to inform staff recommendation to Council Recommendation report 3 brought to Council for decision. It Figure 2 A sample postcard that was mailed to all property owners and tenants. Table 1: Location and Number of Participants at Engagement Events Date Group/Event Location Participants November 14 Walk-in Office Hours Mill Courtland 20 2023 Community Centre November 18 _ Open House Kitchener Market 200 2023 November 20 Walk-in Office Hours Downtown Community 30 2023 Centre Total 250 Additionally, for this phase of work, staff have presented or met with a number of additional stakeholders and advisory groups, including; • Downtown Action and Advisory Committee (DAAC) • Economic Development Advisory Committee (EDAC) • Mayor's Advisory Council for Kitchener Seniors (MACKS) • Heritage Kitchener • Active Transportation and Trails Advisory Committee Including all phases, staff have now spoken to 1,134 community members through the Growing Together community engagement process. Including the additional stakeholder workshops, 3 Page 326 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report meetings, advisory committees and more, staff have now spoken with over 1,300 people in total across more then 100 hours. What We Heard and Saw, Overall Staff received generally positive feedback through this phase of engagement, with broad support for more housing in a variety of forms and more affordable housing. The methods used to engage throughout the process were also very well received. It is important to note however that several comments received were discriminatory toward certain types of people or populations and will not be included in this summary as there are not planning merits to those types of comments. City of Kitchener planning staff do not evaluate people or their housing needs based on ethnic or cultural background, age, identity, socio- economic status, immigration status, family composition, mental or physical health status, length of tenure as Kitchener residents, type of residential unit resided in, or any other personal factor. Walk-in Office Hours Many of the conversations during our walk-in office hours were focused on site-specific interests and concerns. To protect the confidentiality of those conversations, only general themes will be included in this engagement summary. There were some concerns about the range of uses permitted by the draft SGA1 zone. This is in contrast to the nearly universal support for a wide range of uses heard during our phase 2 summer engagement. Concerns were also expressed over whether heritage conservation district policies and cultural heritage landscape policies would do enough to restrict development. Staff heard a range of perspectives from property owners, with some requesting lower density permissions for areas surrounding their property and others requesting higher density permission for their property and the ones surrounding them. I t - Figure 3 A photo from our Walk-in Office Hours at Mill Courtland Community Centre on November 14th 4 Page 327 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report Open House at Kitchener Market On November 18th, staff returned to the Kitchener Market with our 3d -printed physical model of the Growing Together Major Transit Station Areas. Staff worked with a new model base that showed the draft proposed zoning. The yellow buildings used in the previous workshop were again used, this time to demonstrate the kinds of growth and change that could happen in areas of interest, according to the draft zoning. 1 d amu: �i r„ 'r ei Figure 4 Underneath the existing context buildings, the new model base shows the zoning for each lot in our MTSAs. Feedback at the market was broadly supportive and positive. Several people commented that it is important to get ahead of growth and plan for it in advance. It was also noted that it was very appreciated that input used from the March workshop engagements had been used to inform the draft zoning. Parents of younger children were happy that their children could place buildings on the model while staff explained the exercise to them. They thought it was a really good way for their children to be entertained so that staff could catch a few minutes of the parents' time. The largest ongoing concern in the community remains the lack of green space and parks to accommodate additional growth. People were able to understand how the parkland dedication 5 Page 328 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report process works through development review but would have liked to have seen new parks located on the 3d model/map. Staff also heard concerns about housing affordability, which included conversations about the cost of high-density housing. Staff were able to speak to the fact that while housing affordability is a primary concern in all forms, that high-density housing currently represents the most affordable housing options on the market, as noted in our community guide. Concerns also arose around shadows cast by very tall buildings, bike lanes making travel less convenient for motorists, and the pace of growth and change we're experiencing. Other participants were happy to see taller buildings and excited by the pace of change, and also noted that bike lanes make cycling safer and more convenient. Many of these commonly heard concerns are addressed in our Community Guide, which was posted to engagewr.ca/growingtogether alongside our other November 3rd materials. The community guide, and shorter community brief, have been downloaded a combined 502 times, and the community guide video explainer has been viewed 308 times. I'm Concerned About: Shadows Won't new tall buildings create too many shadows? • Shadow impacts are one of many things we have taken under consideration. Here are a few of the ways we are mitigating shat impacts in Growing Together; o Through built form regulations, particularly physical separation, maximum building length and maximum floor plate are. will ensure that tall buildings aren't too big and/or too close together. o Through the continued implementation of our Urban Design Manual, which considers additional criteria such as tower c placement and orientation. Shadow studies are also required as part of our site plan application process. o Through a transitional regulation that limits building height to 12m within 12m of a low-rise zoned area. Wouldn't limiting building height more also do more to prevent shadow impacts? • Not necessarily. Shadow impacts are dynamic, throughout the day and across the seasons. There is no single measurement thi ensures the least amount of impact from shadowing. • In fact, strict limits on building height can worsen shadow impacts in many cases. With shorter permitted heights, buildings ge and their floor plate areas get larger. This creates significantly greater shadow impacts on areas closest to the development. • Shadows are always in motion. The further away a shadow is from its origin point, the faster it moves over the ground. This mi a taller, more slender tower will cast a longer shadow, but that shadow will be cast on an individual property for a shorter amc time. Shadows from a shorter, wider tower will not reach as far or impact as many properties total., but the properties that are are impacted for a much longer time. Figure 5 A slide from our Community Guide explaining in more detail the way in which shadow impacts work, are studied, and are managed. Overall, people understood that change in these areas is inevitable, and were supportive of the process of planning for and realistically communicating that change. Many participants took photos of the model and interacted with it. People who live in the area enjoyed finding their home on the model and discussing what kind of change might take place around it. An important recurring trend worth noting from this stage of engagement is that community members tend to be very supportive of the Growing Together draft materials when speaking in general terms. Criticism is mostly tied to site or neighbourhood specific concerns, with an even mix between concerns that the zones allow too much growth and concerns that the zones allow 6 Page 329 of 1179 City of Kitchener — Growing Together — Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report too little growth. While staff continue to tweak our draft materials based on feedback where it can be supported by our professional planning opinion, this even balance of feedback suggests that the draft zoning strikes a fair balance and weights input appropriately. While there are always concerns within the community regarding growth and change, there is also a great deal of enthusiasm for a more urban, sustainable future for Kitchener's Major Transit Station Areas. Additional Information Sets of card decks were also made available at all events, as were handouts directing participants to engagewr.ca/growingtogether. Additional land use and zoning maps were also available to help aide conversations. Hard copies of the draft Official Plan Amendment and draft Zoning By-law Amendment were available for review at all events. Staff continue to receive written submissions via our Engage page and through the project email. Staff are meeting with stakeholders about site-specific requests and questions. All written submissions will be included in an additional appendix in the final staff report. Written submissions closely follow the trend of our in person engagement, with strong support for the general principles of Growing Together, and an even split between feedback that the zones allow too much and that they allow too little. The results of this phase of engagement are being used to inform the final draft official plan policies and zoning by-law regulations that are intended to appear before council for decision in early 2024. 7 Page 330 of 1179 Community Workshop Smart Modelling Outputs This report documents the detailed outcomes of each of the six community workshops held for the Growing Together project in March and April of 2023. Each workshop asked participants to place 3D -printed typical building forms onto a 3D -printed context model of the Growing Together geography. Staff then documented these workshop results, translated them into a digital smart model, and analyzed the results to inform the project moving forward. A summary of these materials is found in the Growing Together: What We Heard, Workshop Engagement Summary document that can be found on engagewr.ca/growingtogether. Below are the detailed breakdowns of each workshop by individual MTSA, to show the results of the analysis in a more detailed format. Mid -Rise and High -Rise Resident Workshop (March 21, 2023) Page 331 of 1179 Page 332 of 1179 yC--, Page 333 of 1179 Page 334 of 1179 Page 335 of 1179 March 21st 2023 Tota 1 522 Existing (E) Only 94 Existing (E) & Proposed (P) 135 Existing (E) & Workshop (W) 161 Units (E) Low 3187 Med 3039 High 7101 Total 13528 Units (P) All 12498 Units(W) Low Med High Total 507 3992 13072 17571 of 18k 20274 0.98 of Total Low 30556 n/a of Total Med 62883 n/a of Total High 313 n/a Units(E&W) Low 3250 Med 7032 High 20274 Ppj Ratio (E) Total 30556 of Tota 1 1.00 People (E) 24604 Jobs(E) , 24259 People & lobs (E) aRR63 Ppj Ratio (E) 1.01 242 416 Parking (E) 62883 People (E&P) 44601 Jobs (E&P) 25628 People & Jobs (E&P) 70-.,-. Ppj Ratio (E&P) 1.74 People & Jobs 84191 Parking (E&P) 76166 People (E&W) 53619 Jobs (E&W) 30572 People & Jobs 84191 Ppj Ratio (E&W) 1.75 242 416 Parking (E&W) 65153 People and Jobs per Hectare GRH Central Vic Park Frederick Market Borden Mill 88 94 56 58 61 60 105 81 116 184 167 81 37 35 85 184 235 170 81 72 126 130 212 1 250 219 1 136 1 127 1 97 415 486 230 261 493 225 630 242 416 761 695 446 163 313 888 1826 1155 1641 691 0 0 1545 2728 3146 2597 1631 388 943 202 1 3562 1 1726 1 98 1 0 1 1176 1 5732 0 560 1792 2352 65 1499 2733 4297 178 563 941 1682 27 566 941 1534 32 431 1276 1739 121 311 2823 3255 84 62 2565 2711 0.13 0.24 0.09 0.09 0.10 0.18 0.15 0.00 0.13 0.35 0.05 0.06 0.24 0.17 0.14 0.38 0.14 0.14 0.11 0.08 0.02 0.14 0.21 0.07 0.07 0.10 0.22 0.20 415 551 409 288 525 346 714 802 1915 1324 1261 877 474 375 2680 4559 3096 2582 1968 2823 2565 3897 7025 4829 4131 3370 3643 3654 0.13 0.23 0.16 0.14 0.11 0.12 0.12 3016 4073 5015 5922 5467 4824 4608 5088 3275 1669 912 1303 2307 1380 7nR9 7n937 1n791 9696 4944 7,715 26R7 0.74 0.85 1.13 0.91 1.96 0.70 1.67 11231 11047 8737 11201 5394 6830 8023 3340 4096 10714 6604 8229 4908 4766 5115 1 3275 1669 279811479 1497 1741 173.... 13137 98- -:e95 13220 0.82 1.62 1.68 0.93 1.96 1.87 6.59 11491 13645 10104 11317 5394 1 8714 15082 6891 4554 12206 7688 8306 5693 7182 5540 6150 2128 6209 1411 6666 3559 1.51 1.59 1.46 1.30 2.89 4.40 1.87 12804 13932 9835 12222 6441 9300 1 10361 UGC 105 223 270 359 130 1342 4090 5562 3034 85 2505 4357 6947 0.39 0.17 0.63 0.33 215 3847 8447 12509 0.41 9324 14047 J;271 0.66 23055 14179 14199 378 1.00 25724 20957 16707 1.25 23325 Page 336 of 1179 Low -Rise Non -Multiple Resident Workshop (March 23, 2023) Page 337 of 1179 T,L�� � `2- ( ƒ � �ij����\/\�\ . . ���--- ���», -w� Page 338 0 1179 Page 339 of 1179 Page 340 of 1179 March 23rd 2023 Tota 1 522 Existing (E) Only 94 Existing (E) & Proposed (P) 135 Existing (E) & Workshop (W) 161 Units (E) Low 3287 Med 3039 High 7202 Total 13528 Units (P) All 12498 Units(W) Low Med High Total 873 3872 12556 17301 of 18k 19758 0.96 of Total Low of Tota 1 n/a of Total Med 74868 n/a of Total High 313 n/a Units(E&W) Low 3615 Med 6912 High 19758 Total 30285 of Tota 1 1.00 People (E) 24604 Jobs (E) , 24259 People & lobs (E) Ppj Ratio (E) 1.01 Parking (E) 62883 People (E&P) 44601 Jobs (E&P) �` 25628 People & Jobs (E&P) 70229 Ppj Ratio (E&P) 1.74 People & Jobs 84203 Parking (E&P) 76166 People (E&W) 53236 Jobs (E&W) Iq 30967 People & Jobs 84203 Ppj Ratio (E&W) 1.72 242 416 Parking (E&W) 74868 People and Jobs per Hectare GRH Central Vic Park Frederick Market Borden Mill 88 94 56 58 61 60 105 81 116 184 167 81 37 35 85 184 235 170 81 72 126 150 201 1 229 183 1 95 1 224 1 90 415 486 230 261 493 125 630 242 416 761 695 446 163 313 888 1826 2155 1641 692 0 0 1545 2728 3146 2597 1631 388 943 202 1 3562 1 1726 1 98 1 0 1 1176 1 5732 20 378 2050 2448 335 745 2901 3981 86 314 1109 1509 46 0 516 562 183 62 258 503 93 1622 3932 5647 111 751 1792 2654 0.14 0.22 0.08 0.03 0.03 0.31 0.15 0.02 0.38 0.10 0.05 0.21 0.11 0.13 0.10 0.19 0.08 0.00 0.02 0.42 0.19 0.16 0.23 0.09 0.04 0.02 0.31 0.14 435 821 316 307 675 318 741 620 1162 1076 695 507 1785 1064 2938 4726 3263 2157 950 3932 1792 3993 6709 4655 3159 2132 6035 3597 0.13 0.22 0.15 0.10 0.07 0.20 0.12 3016 4073 5015 5912 5467 4824 4608 5088 3275 1669 912 1303 2307 1380 -`36 17318 13137 9881 -' 4295 13220 0.74 0.85 1.13 0.91 1.96 0.70 1.67 11231 11047 8737 11201 5394 6830 8013 3340 4096 10714 6604 8229 4908 4766 5115 3275 1669 2798 1497 11479 1741 -`36 17318 13137 9881 -' 4295 13220 0.82 1.62 1.68 0.93 1.96 1.87 6.59 11491 13645 10104 11317 5394 8714 15082 7012 6229 11602 7275 7958 4864 5516 5109 4128 1679 10294 3123 6726 2687 13417 9413 1.13 1.59 1.64 1.08 2.46 3.30 2.50 13172 13603 9609 11707 5681 10833 9740 UGC 105 223 270 321 130 1341 4090 5562 3034 204 745 4525 5474 0.30 M 324 2087 8614 11025 0.36 9324 14047 0.66 23055 14179 14199 28378 1.00 25724 18242 15457 33699 1.18 27161 Page 341 of 1179 Community -Wide Workshop (March 25, 2023) Page 342 of 1179 I Page 343 of 1179 Page 344 of 1179 - 'to 1 �v-t�J M1v5 t h,f �uw�t�ai i fzatt �' ` -ry Page 344 of 1179 Page 345 of 1179 March 25th 2023 Tota 1 522 Existing (E) Only 94 Existing (E) & Proposed (P) 135 Existing (E) & Workshop (W) 159 Units (E) Low 3287 Med 3039 High 7202 Total 13528 Units (P) All 12498 Units(W) Low Med High Total 710 3740 12814 17264 of 18k 20016 0.96 of Total Low of Tota 1 n/a of Total Med 62883 n/a of Total High 313 n/a Units(E&W) Low 3452 Med 6780 High 20016 Total 30248 of Tota 1 1.00 People (E) 14604 Jobs(E) , 24259 People & Jobs (E) 48863 Ppj Ratio (E) 1.01 141 416 Parking (E) 62883 People (E&P) Iq 44601 Jobs (E&P) Iq 25628 People & Jobs (E&P) 70229 Ppj Ratio (E&P) 1.74 141 416 Parking (E&P) 76166 People (E&W) 14 53117 Jobs (E&W) 14 29729 People & Jobs ao".` Ppj Ratio (E&W) 1.79 Parking (E&W) 74965 People and Jobs per Hectare GRH Central Vic Park Frederick Market Borden Mill 88 94 56 58 61 60 105 81 116 184 167 81 37 35 85 184 235 170 81 72 126 160 211 1 242 216 1 128 1 143 1 61 415 486 230 261 493 225 630 141 416 761 695 446 163 313 888 1826 2155 1641 692 0 0 1545 1728 3146 2597 1631 388 943 202 1 3562 1 1726 1 98 1 0 1 1176 1 5732 193 434 2565 3192 327 813 3674 4814 34 246 1701 1981 26 622 516 1164 85 440 425 950 13 557 3249 3819 32 628 683 1343 0.18 0.27 0.11 0.06 0.05 0.21 0.07 0.27 0.46 0.05 0.04 0.12 0.02 0.05 0.12 0.22 0.07 0.17 0.12 0.15 0.17 0.20 0.29 0.13 0.04 0.03 0.25 0.05 608 676 814 1229 265 1008 287 1317 577 886 238 720 664 944 3454 5500 3856 2157 1117 3249 683 4738 7543 5129 3761 2580 4207 2291 0.16 0.25 0.17 0.12 0.09 0.14 0.08 3016 4073 5015 5922 5467 4824 4608 5088 3175 1669 911 1303 2307 1380 7089 10937 10191 9696 49, 2215 3687 0.74 0.85 1.13 0.91 1.96 0.70 1.67 11231 11047 8737 11101 5394 6830 8013 3340 4096 10714 6604 8229 4908 4766 5115 3275 1669 2798 1497 11479 1741 ,?Rao i7 9881 4944 4295 13220 0.82 1.62 1.68 0.93 1.96 1.87 6.59 11491 13645 1 10104 11317 5394 8714 15082 8249 5835 12947 6891 8692 4882 6600 5942 4900 2932 7139 1433 4589 1814 ,?Rao 1357". 1.41 1.88 1.78 1.11 1.67 4.98 2.53 13711 14317 8696 12091 5962 9762 9226 UGC 105 223 270 355 130 1341 4090 5561 3034 222 1244 5633 7099 0.39 m 342 2586 9723 12651 0.42 9314 14047 23371 0.66 23055 14179 14199 28378 1.00 25724 20946 16329 1.28 28264 Page 346 of 1179 Community -Wide Workshop (March 27, 2023) Page 347 of 1179 Page 348 of 1179 1l� Page 348 of 1179 s � i Page 349 of 1179 Page 350 of 1179 March 27th 2023 Tota 1 522 Existing (E) Only 94 Existing (E) & Proposed (P) 135 Existing (E) & Workshop (W) 159 Units (E) Low 3287 Med 3039 High 7202 Total 13528 Units (P) All 12498 Units(W) Low Med High Total 428 3623 13072 17123 of 18k 20274 0.95 of Total Low 30106 n/a of Total Med 695 n/a of Total High 313 n/a Units(E&W) Low 3170 Med 6662 High 20274 225 Total 30106 of Tota 1 1.00 People (E) 24604 Jobs (E) 24259 People & Jobs (E) Ppj Ratio (E) 1.01 Parking (E) 62883 People (E&P) 44601 Jobs (E&P) 25628 People & Jobs (E&P) Ppj Ratio (E&P) 1.74 Parking (E&P) 76166 People (E&W) 52810 Jobs (E&W) 30156 People & Jobs Ppj Ratio (E&W) 1.75 Parking (E&W) 75118 People and Jobs per Hectare GRH Central Vic Park Frederick Market Borden Mill 88 94 56 58 61 60 105 81 116 184 167 81 37 35 85 184 235 170 81 72 126 95 189 261 235 151 141 1 104 415 486 230 261 493 225 630 242 416 761 695 446 163 313 888 1826 2155 1641 692 0 0 1545 2728 3146 2597 1631 388 943 202 1 3562 1 1726 1 98 1 0 1 1176 1 5732 0 0 0 0 179 810 2565 3554 13 1062 683 1758 26 375 1973 2374 20 249 2308 2577 78 375 2308 2761 111 751 3236 4098 0.00 0.20 0.10 0.13 0.14 0.15 0.23 0.00 0.42 0.03 0.06 0.05 0.18 0.26 0.00 0.22 0.29 0.10 0.07 0.10 0.21 0.00 0.20 0.05 0.15 0.18 0.18 0.25 415 242 666 1226 249 1824 287 1070 507 695 303 538 743 1067 888 4391 2838 3614 2999 2308 3236 0.74 0.85 1.13 0.91 1.96 0.70 1.67 1545 6283 4911 4971 4201 3149 5046 0.05 0.21 0.16 0.17 0.14 0.10 0.17 3016 4013 1 5015 5922 5467 4824 4608 5088 3275 1669 912 1303 2307 1380 306, 0.74 0.85 1.13 0.91 1.96 0.70 1.67 1 11231 11047 8737 11201 5394 1 6830 8023 3340 4096 10714 6604 8229 4908 4766 5115 3275 1669 2798 1497 11479 1741 0.82 1.62 1.68 0.93 1.96 1.87 6.59 1 11491 13645 10104 11317 5394 8714 15082 3016 5321 10902 6852 8508 6098 8487 5167 7437 1755 5424 3062 9036 1901 0.57 1.59 1.40 1.64 4.24 1.77 4.75 1 11383 13560 9852 13151 7297 8955 10920 UGC 105 223 270 356 130 1342 4090 5562 3034 252 1748 4796 6796 0.38 E 451 3302 8885 12638 0.42 9324 14047 0.66 23055 14179 14199 1.00 25724 21166 16186 1.31 30479 Page 351 of 1179 Community -Wide Workshop (March 30, 2023) Page 352 of 1179 Page 353 of 1179 C Page 354 of 1179 Page 355 of 1179 March 30th 2023 Tota 1 522 Existing (E) Only 94 Existing (E) & Proposed (P) 135 Existing (E) & Workshop (W) 148 Units (E) Low 3287 Med 3039 High 7201 Total 13518 Units (P) All 12498 Units(W) Low Med High Total 156 2995 11963 15114 • of 18k 493 0.84 • of Total Low 242 n/a • of Total Med 695 n/a • of Total High 313 n/a Units(E&W) Low 2898 1.76 Med 6035 493 High 19166 73893 242 Total 28099 of Tota 1 1.00 People (E) 24604 lobs (E) 24259 People & Jobs (E) Ppj Ratio (E) 1.01 Parking (E) 62883 People (E&P) -4 44601 Jobs (E&P) , 25628 People & Jobs (E&P) Ppj Ratio (E&P) 1.74 Parking (E&P) 76166 People (E&W) 49417 Jobs (E&W) 28035 People & Jobs "'S2 Ppj Ratio (E&W) 1.76 261 493 Parking (E&W) 73893 People and Jobs per Hectare GRH Central Vic Park Frederick Market Borden Mill 88 94 56 58 61 60 105 81 116 184 167 81 37 35 85 184 235 170 81 72 126 96 230 1 277 215 1 91 1 141 1 51 415 486 130 261 493 225 630 242 416 761 695 446 163 313 888 1826 1155 1641 691 0 0 1545 1728 3146 2597 1631 388 943 202 1 3562 1 1726 1 98 1 0 1 1176 1 5732 0 311 0 311 13 496 5208 5717 0 188 2733 2921 0 440 1199 1639 7 314 0 321 38 622 2823 3483 98 625 0 723 0.02 0.32 0.16 0.09 0.02 0.19 0.04 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.24 0.63 0.10 0.17 0.06 0.15 0.10 0.21 0.21 0.00 0.44 0.23 0.10 0.00 1 0.24 1 0.00 415 499 231 261 499 263 730 553 912 949 1135 759 784 941 888 1856 7034 8445 4888 6068 2840 692 2823 0 4236 1950 3870 1671 0.07 0.30 0.22 0.15 0.07 0.14 0.06 3016 4073 1 5015 5922 5467 4824 4608 5088 3275 1669 912 1303 2307 1380 ,._.R1 21-'- 1r'.,.., 12453 55...1 .,.y5 5z.-,,. 0.74 0.85 1.13 0.91 1.96 0.70 1.67 1 11231 11047 8737 11201 5394 6830 8023 3340 4096 10714 6604 8229 4908 4766 5115 3275 1669 2798 1497 11479 1741 ,._.R1 21-'- 1r'.,.., 12453 55...1 .,.y5 5z.-,,. 0.82 1.62 1.68 0.93 1.96 1.87 6.59 1 11491 13645 10104 11317 5394 8714 15082 3576 4905 14265 7362 10176 5341 7318 5135 3852 1669 6620 1835 3609 1789 ,._.R1 21-'- 1r'.,.., 12453 55...1 .,.y5 5z.-,,. 0.73 1.94 1.91 1.43 2.31 3.61 2.02 11466 15313 10933 12384 5500 1 9503 8793 UGC 105 223 270 364 130 1342 4090 5562 3034 0 877 7090 7967 0.44 0.00 0.29 0.59 120 2219 11180 13519 0.48 9324 14047 �i. 0.66 23055 14179 14199 1.00 25724 22217 15971 38188 1.39 29295 Page 356 of 1179 Low -Rise Multiple Resident Workshop (April 4th, 2023) Page 357 of 1179 -N {%.. >C� : � J Page 358 0 1179 Page 359 of 1179 Page 360 of 1179 April 4th 2023 Tota 1 522 Existing (E) Only 94 Existing (E) & Proposed (P) 135 Existing (E) & Workshop (W) 138 Units (E) Low 3187 Med 3039 High 7102 Total 13528 Units (P) All 12498 Units(W) Low Med High Total 139 1508 10674 12321 of 18k 17876 0.68 of Total Low Parking (E&P) n/a of Total Med 1.00 n/a of Total High 313 n/a Units(E&W) Low 2881 Med 4547 High 17876 Ppj Ratio (E) Tota 1 Parking (E&P) 25304 of Tota 1 1.00 446 163 People (E) 24604 Jobs (E) 14 14259 People & lobs (E) 48863 Ppj Ratio (E) 1.01 Parking (E&P) 76166 Parking (E) 62883 People (E&P) Jobs (E&P) People & Jobs (E&P) 44601 25628 ^"Q Ppj Ratio (E&P) 1.74 225 630 Parking (E&P) 76166 People (E&W) Jobs (E&W) People & Jobs 44647 27565 130 Ppj Ratio (E&W) 1.62 225 630 Parking (E&W) 71846 People and Jobs per Hectare GRH Central Vic Park Frederick Market Borden Mill 88 94 56 58 61 60 105 81 116 184 167 81 37 35 85 184 235 170 81 72 126 120 162 1 241 186 1 90 98 103 415 486 130 261 493 225 630 142 416 761 695 446 163 313 888 1826 2155 1641 692 0 0 1545 2728 3146 2597 1631 388 943 202 1 3562 1 1726 1 98 1 0 1 1176 1 5732 0 126 1959 2085 0 375 941 1316 0 0 1959 1959 0 0 683 683 120 188 0 308 0 314 1882 2196 19 505 3249 3773 0.12 0.07 0.11 0.04 0.02 0.12 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.86 0.00 0.14 0.08 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.12 0.21 0.33 0.18 0.09 0.18 0.06 0.00 0.18 0.30 415 486 231 261 612 225 651 368 792 762 695 633 476 821 2848 2767 4114 2324 692 1882 3249 3631 4045 5107 3280 1937 2583 4721 0.14 0.16 0.20 0.13 0.08 0.10 0.19 3016 4073 5015 5912 5467 4824 4608 5088 3275 1669 912 1303 2307 1380 7089 10937 ?1 9. =4 2215 3- 0.74 0.85 1.13 0.91 1.96 0.70 1.67 11231 11047 8737 11201 5394 6830 8023 3340 4096 10714 6604 8229 4908 4766 5115 3275 1669 2798 1497 11479 1741 0.82 1.62 1.68 0.93 1.96 1.87 6.59 11491 13645 10104 11317 5394 8714 15082 6378 4141 7199 8039 1 8600 4893 5701 5113 3828 1669 4492 1382 8449 2328 1.54 0.90 1.76 1.12 2.29 3.25 3.63 12559 12225 10029 11707 5457 8513 11354 UGC 105 223 270 289 130 1342 4090 5562 3034 0 252 2733 2985 0.17 m 120 1594 6823 8537 0.34 9324 14047 0.66 23055 14179 14199 }aa,74 1.00 25724 14120 16225 0.87 25726 Page 361 of 1179 Growing Together Background Report Workshop Assumptions This report details how staff determined the housing allocation and building typology breakdown that was used to run the Growing Together community workshops. These workshops asked participants to place buildings in 6 different typological forms representing a total of 18,000 new housing units in the Growing Together geography. These quantities were determined as follows. How We Determined the Unit Allocation On March 20th, 2023, Kitchener City Council unanimously passed a housing pledge that will support the building of 35,000 additional homes in Kitchener by 2031. This is to achieve an identified need of 1.5 million new housing units across Ontario. While we only have 9 years to achieve this target, for the purposes of this analysis we will assume that this is a 10 -year target require Kitchener to build 3,500 units per year. This is because the timing of this target was not fully clear when the analysis was originally completed (fall 2022). Because we have chosen this more conservative figure, it is key to understand that all of the following analysis represents a minimum, if not below the minimum required of us, and that additional growth beyond these minimums should be encouraged. 3,500 units per year is a significant increase over the allocation from the Regional Official Plan (ROP) of 54,615 additional households in Kitchener over a 30 -year span, which is 1,820 per year. The result is 1,680 more units per year, starting immediately, over and above what the ROP contemplates. This is nearly double the amount of new housing allocated by the ROP, and to achieve this level of growth, many of the ROP assumptions must be re-examined. The ROP allocates 60% of Kitchener's future growth to the Built Up Area (BUA) and 40% to greenfield development. Of that 60%, 55% is targeted to MTSAs, 33% to Nodes & Corridors, and 11 % to other areas of the BUA. Using the ROP household projections and percentages, we see growth in Kitchener allocated as follows on the left side of this table, which we will call the `business as usual' scenario. On the right side, we will use the provinces unit target but keep the same % allocation as the ROP: Total Units Per Year 1,820 3,500 Built Up Area 1,092 2,100 Greenfield 728 1,400 M TSA 600 1,155 Nodes & Corridors 360 693 Rest of BUA 120 231 Page 362 of 1179 However, it is important to examine these percentages, and to test them against actual building permit and intensification data. In 2020/2021, the City of Kitchener created 3,794 units at 67% intensification (2,531 BUA, 1,263 DGA). The most recent measures of new residential units by type in the BUA and ❑GA are indicated in Figure 4 below. Figure 4: Intensification and Designated Greenfield Area Development Levels (June 16120 -June 151211 Dwelling Type Designated Greenfield Area New Residential Units Built -Up Area New Residential Units Total Single Detached 558 37 605 Semi -Detached 14 16 30 Duplex 135 235 370 Street Townhouses 190 82 272 Cluster Townhouses 0 0 0 Multiple Dwellings* 356 2,161 2,517 Total 1,263 2,531 3,794 Percent of Total 33% 67% 100% *Includes dwelling units within mixed use buildings In 2019/2020, the city built 3,803 units at 75% intensification (2,852 BUA, 950 DGA). The five- year average (2016-2021) is 2,520 units per year at 56% intensification (1,411 BUA, 1108 DGA). The ten-year average is 2,007 units per year at 51 % intensification (1,023 BUA, 983 DGA). This demonstrates how strongly additional housing supply correlates to intensification. Very broadly, Kitchener sees a range of 1,000 to 1,200 DGA units per year. The fluctuation in new units tends to be caused primarily by significant changes to the number of new units achieved in the built-up area, and particularly MTSAs. In the table below, we see that a 3,500 unit per year target with a DGA range of 1,000 to 1,200 units results in an intensification target of 65% to 70%. This makes sense; as noted above, the two years Kitchener has exceeded a 3,500 unit target, we saw intensification rates of 67% and 75%. There are, of course, many other objectives that are achieved through intensification; it is much more sustainable, both financially and environmentally, uses infrastructure much more efficiently (critical as the province changes the development charge legislation), is transit and active transportation supportive, protects farmland and other natural resources, and more. Therefore, even if we were confident that greenfield development could be accelerated and contribute more to the 3,500 annual unit target, doing so would go against several of Kitchener's Strategic Plan objectives. There is therefore reason to allocate as much growth as possible to the built up area. But what is `as much as possible'? In the two years where Kitchener has exceeded the 3,500 units per year target, 2,852 and 2,531 units were achieved in the BUA. At a 3,500 unit threshold, that represents an intensification range of just over 70% to just over 80%. Page 363 of 1179 Therefore, the full range of intensification targets where Kitchener can plan for 3,500 units per year is 65% on the low end and 80% on the high end. This puts the `middle ground' at between 70% and 75% intensification. To test a variety of growth allocations: 70% Intensification is highlighted, because it represents the most realistic range, as detailed above. It is important to note that this is not a replacement for Kitchener's growth management work; it is only an attempt to adequately capture the evolving provincial planning framework in a way that will let us perform our upcoming public engagement workshops. It is important that these workshops be based on planning realities, so that the feedback captured can be used to inform our Official Plan Policies, Zoning By-law and Urban Design Guidelines. At 70% intensification, Kitchener must therefore distribute 2450 units to the Built -Up -Area. This is a minimum, however, and the city is also not in position to reach the 3,500 unit total for the next couple of years, at a minimum, which eats into our ability to meet our 2031 year target. It will be important to keep this in mind moving forward. We must now consider the percentage allocations given to each type of geography within the BUA. As discussed above, the ROP allocated 55% of BUA units to MTSAs, 33% to Nodes & Corridors, and 11 % to the rest of the BUA. We have the same issue as before; the change in overall units required necessitates change to how that growth is allocated by geography. For example, while the non -intensification lands in the BUA may be able to accommodate 11 % of the ROP allocated growth, it is likely not realistic to create nearly twice that many units within the next 10 years in areas not planned for such significant intensification. Most of these areas are also not physically capable of accommodating much growth; they are subdivisions with low-rise residential and small, individual lots that are unlikely to be consolidated for intensification. We will therefore carry forward the ROP's allocation of 11 % of the 60% BUA target of their 1,820 unit per year projections. The non - intensification areas of the BUA will therefore be 120 units per year. This leaves 2,330 units to be divided between MTSAs and Nodes & Corridors. Page 364 of 1179 Units in Units in MTSA Units (at BUA DGA current 55% assumption) 50% 1750 1750 875 55% 1925 1575 1058 60% 2100 1400 1155 65% 2275 1225 1251 70% 2450 1050 1348 75% 2625 875 1444 80% 2800 700 1540 70% Intensification is highlighted, because it represents the most realistic range, as detailed above. It is important to note that this is not a replacement for Kitchener's growth management work; it is only an attempt to adequately capture the evolving provincial planning framework in a way that will let us perform our upcoming public engagement workshops. It is important that these workshops be based on planning realities, so that the feedback captured can be used to inform our Official Plan Policies, Zoning By-law and Urban Design Guidelines. At 70% intensification, Kitchener must therefore distribute 2450 units to the Built -Up -Area. This is a minimum, however, and the city is also not in position to reach the 3,500 unit total for the next couple of years, at a minimum, which eats into our ability to meet our 2031 year target. It will be important to keep this in mind moving forward. We must now consider the percentage allocations given to each type of geography within the BUA. As discussed above, the ROP allocated 55% of BUA units to MTSAs, 33% to Nodes & Corridors, and 11 % to the rest of the BUA. We have the same issue as before; the change in overall units required necessitates change to how that growth is allocated by geography. For example, while the non -intensification lands in the BUA may be able to accommodate 11 % of the ROP allocated growth, it is likely not realistic to create nearly twice that many units within the next 10 years in areas not planned for such significant intensification. Most of these areas are also not physically capable of accommodating much growth; they are subdivisions with low-rise residential and small, individual lots that are unlikely to be consolidated for intensification. We will therefore carry forward the ROP's allocation of 11 % of the 60% BUA target of their 1,820 unit per year projections. The non - intensification areas of the BUA will therefore be 120 units per year. This leaves 2,330 units to be divided between MTSAs and Nodes & Corridors. Page 364 of 1179 How much near-term development potential do our Nodes & Corridors represent? We don't have analysis on this specifically, since Nodes & Corridors are outside the scope of this work. We can say, however, that without a near-term plan to significantly increase zoning permissions in our Nodes & Corridors, it makes sense to take the same approach we took for non - intensification areas; to translate the region's growth projections for units but not expect our Nodes & Corridors to accommodate a significant portion of the new growth required by the province. In this case, we can calculate 33% of units within a 60% intensification target for a total of 1,820 units annually. The result is 360 units per year in our Nodes & Corridors. This is probably an accurate reflection of annual growth in Nodes & Corridors. While there has been moderate growth interest in areas such as the Belmont urban corridor, most Nodes & Corridors will only intensify with the redevelopment of neighbourhood commercial plazas, and such growth is unpredictable and much longer term. We therefore have non-MTSA areas of the BUA able to accommodate 480 units per year. That leaves 1,970 units per year for Kitchener's MTSAs. Since this is a minimum, we will round up to 2,000. However, this figure represents the growth we need to plan for within all 10 of Kitchener's MTSAs, not just the 7 that are currently within the scope of the Growing Together project. We need to determine, therefore, how many of the 2,000 units per year—over the next 10 years—to allocate to these MTSAs, specifically. To do this, we examine recent, under construction and proposed development. This helps inform our 10 -year horizon as there are many projects in the proposal stages that already have a full build -out beyond 2031. We therefore have a strong sense of where development interest exists and will exist over the next decade. Examining these developments, we see that 90% of all recent, under construction and proposed development (by unit count) is within the Growing Together MTSA geography. 10% is within the remaining MTSAs of Block Line, Fairway and Sportsworld. Therefore we can quickly determine that over the next decade, it is realistic to expect roughly 90% of new housing supply to be provided within the Growing Together MTSAs. Therefore, our engagement workshops will use an 1,800 unit per year growth target for the MTSAs. This will create a 10 -year need for 18,000 units. How We Determined the Building Typologies We produced 6 total building typologies; two each in the categories of low, medium and high rise development. Each is shown in the following image and described below as they appear from left to right; • A 35-45 storey high-rise representing 400-500 units. o This represents the tallest and densest towers being built in Kitchener's MTSAs. Examples include; DTK Condos, 30 Francis, 20 Queen, Station Park Phase 2, and others. • A 20-30 storey high-rise representing 200-300 units o This represents a slightly more moderately scaled high rise. Examples include Charlie West, the Garment Street Condos, Station Park Phase 1, Young Condos, and others. • A 12 -storey mid -rise representing 100 units Page 365 of 1179 o This represents a larger mid -rise building, and is a typology more conducive to purpose-built rental. Examples include The Scott, Civic 66, Ophelia, and others. A 6 -storey mid -rise representing 60 units o This represents a smaller mid -rise building, and is a typology more conducive to a condominium format. Examples include Barra on Queen, Otis, 45 Courtland, Midtown Lofts and more. • A 3 -storey low-rise representing 12 units; and A 3 -storey low-rise representing 6 units. o There are very few new, under construction or planned examples of these low- rise typologies, though there are some. There are many existing/historical examples of multiplexes and low-rise apartment buildings at this scale. These represent the `missing middle' building typologies we intent to plan for moving forward. The quantity of each building type provided was informed by a breakdown of recent, under construction and proposed development. This analysis found that 83% of all units in Kitchener's MTSAs were within a development containing at least one high-rise building. 16% of all units are in mid -rise buildings, and 1 % are within low-rise buildings. To align with our goal of creating more missing middle and mid -rise housing, however, these percentages were adjusted. 75% of units are accounted for by the two high-rise typologies, 20% are in mid -rise forms, and 5% are in low-rise forms. Page 366 of 1179 M 4, Growing Toget- -= V- JJJA 1 11 so 0 a Net HausingGain 1 For every residential unit lost to demolition,, 47 are built in Kitchener. 0 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00000 00 Source: City of Kitchener Page 368 of 1179 Traffic Impacts 2 2i This diagram illustrates how transit oriented design creates fearer traffic impacts than a similar number of units in a low-rise subdivision. Tran sk Oriented Design Low-d'se Subdivision NAMT NMI I 'ISL I --————— — — — — — — I I I I I I I I -� i- -- -- -- -- -- - - -� MW MW - NAM �rI.� ■ WW -'==W 1W • i Awl I-qM mp--�Rqali dw.-I- i1w. � 111W qMder-, -.Iw MFI IM:Fmp dL:-:----------- --------- Source City of Kitehoner Page 369 of 1179 Financial Sustainability � High-density i n it I generates a similar amount of revenue for the City as low-rise greenfield development., but costs far less to operate. This is a key way to keep our property taxes low and service levels high. Ili Sou ree : City of fete Fen e, - Page 370 of 1179 Low -Density High -Density People/Units 790/494 790/494 Land Area Used 32 hectares 0.3 hectaFes UnearinhasUuMwe 4,4ODm 53m Life Cycle Cost $22.000,000 $265.000 Tax Revenue $1.2m/yr (tet) 1 SM/Yr (e Sou ree : City of fete Fen e, - Page 370 of 1179 Cost Breakdown 4 21 These are the relative costs of a typical condominium apartment building. Developer Profit 9-129 Soft !hosts 12-20% istructlon 2- Land Cost 20-25% this et Charges 27 isctlon 4 Source: Alts s Group, Marsch 2022, Tbronto Page 371 of 1179 Last Farmland 1 416. "Ontario has lost Y% of it's farmland since 194 x, i ncludi rig over 1.5 m it lion acres between 1996 and 2016,the most of any Canadian province or territory."' Lost Farmland. 1996-201 6 KftcheneT- 1,500.000 acres 33.810 ,acres Source. National Otbse:rvef Page 372 of 1179 Household Enemy Use 2 =42MM. TotaI e ne rgy us (M BTUs) for thr e different typsoft home., The left bar represents the energy used by the building, the right bear represents the ne rg,y used for transportation. W le-detached Townhouse Apartment Source: Bloomberg Page 373 of 1179 GHG Emissions I n 2015, nea rly ha If of a lI emissions in Waterloo Region were caused by fossil fuel emissions related todrivingand tra nsportation, 49% Transportation 1% waste % Agriculture Source: CIimateActionWR 27% Workplace 18% Homes Page 374 of 1179 GHG Reduction Potential 4 bases rc h ers a n a led 700 cit ies t o measure how well various policies can reduce carbon footprints. Infill housing policies were found to have the biggest impact. M Heats rig El co�mewjal F1 JpElectricVehi4s Energy Ef oency ealthy Diets ift CGnsurip tion Renewbble Electri-ci ty Water &.Waste Air Travel Regi uction I 50+ MPGVehicles rification Fahey Pr#a6 Infill 0 40k 80k 120k 160k Metric Tons CO2e Source: Cool Climate Network '2018 Page 375 of 1179 Current Growth 1 The province requires Kitchener to plan for 3,500 new homes per year. We have averaged 3,488 per year over the past 3 years+ 2019 2022-2031 2020 2021 Source: City of Kitchener Page 376 of 1179 Historical Growth ? The proviince requires Kitchener ener ter plan fbr 3, 500 new homes per year. We have averaged ged 2,648 per year over the past 5 years., 2,145 over the past 1 yea rs a n d 1,867 ove r th a pia st 20 years. 2017 - 2021 202-2- , 2031 2012-2021 PAIW IN Source: City of Kitchener Page 377 of 1179 Room to Grow 3• The re a re over 100 acres of pave d surfaces in Kitchenees 'Major Transit Station Areas, mostly in the fora of surface parking lots, VI } w # Lh r r !+ i Source: City ofKitchener Page 378 of 1179 New Homes per 1000 Residents Waterloo Region ion is building fewer Domes per capita than we used to, and fewer than 10 of the 14 other cities on this Ii t, Calgary Oshawa Vancouver Edmonton Waterloo Regi Halifax StJohn's Tow -onto Quebec Victoria Tris-Rivieres Hamilton Saskatoon St. Cathe d nes Greater Sudbury 1 920 7 0 2008-2-021 4P iE ource: Girl MC Se ss, StatCan Tables 17-10-0135. 17-10-003 Page 379 of 1179 Where Growth is 5 Happening ' This `blob" shows where most development in our Major Transit Station Areas is taking place. It generally follow the )ON route and aligns with Kitchener's Urban Growth Centre. ource: -ter of Kitchener Page 380 of 1179 Growing Fast_•,��,,��� ice' Kitchener is a top -5 fastest growing city in Ontario when measured either by percentage growth or absolute growth from 2021 to 2022). Community Ppl Change Change Toronto +69,786 +2.36% Brampton +25.013 +3.47% Ottawa +19.342 +1.84 London +13.268 +3.05% Kitchener +11,602 +4.28 Hamilton +9F598 +1.63% a u gh a n +5,766 +1.73% Windsor +5,289 +2.2 wate d oo +5.050 +4.07% Oshawa +5,020 +2.75 Source: StatsCan Page 381 of 1179 Real Hauge Prices 1 Housing prices in Canada far exceed those of other G7 nations and are more than 3x higher than the 2000 average. Canada witain Japan 2010 2021 Source: Federai Reserve Bark of Dallas Page 382 of 1179 Mortgage Payments The average mortgage payment increased b in just 2022, and by II ove r 2001% since 2016. M, 1A 2016 2018 2020 2-022 Source: Red in analysis of AILS data Page 383 of 1179 Vacancy Rate CMHC reports l itchener's vacancy rate at 1., below the Ontario average of 1.85v. and far below a *heal thy' a ca n c rate of to October 2022 Vacancy Rate A '*Hea ItW Date Kitchener Source: C M"C, 0dober 2022. Aid ocacy Centf-e for Tenants Ontario Page 384 of 1179 Historical Rental 4 Vacancy �1 The vacs racy rate in Kitchener i s low and decreasing. Historically, rented condos have had lower r vacancy than purpose built rental, but tress rates are converging. 6P. Purpose Built Rental Condominium Rental T ��01MOM Page 385 of 1179 Increasing Rents , Rent in Kitchener is up 28.2 in the Inst year., the second highest increase among mW -size markets ire Canada. )an 2023 Annual Change iIIRP Kitchener Source; Rentals. a - ZO2 30 Page 386 of 1179 Decreasing Housing � Prices 11� From Feb.'22 to Jan'23, housing prices in Kitchener decreased by 22.9%. This follows an increase of 71 between Dec. 1and Feb'22. Dec.19 to peak Peak to jan. `23 r Kitchener I A Source: Deslardins Page 387 of 1179 felf .Size Breakdown 1 of all Fomes i n it honer have or more bedrooms. 14of units have 1 bedroom. Source: 2021 Census Table 8-10-0240-01 Page 388 of 1179 Unit Type Breakdown � More than half of itchener}s units are singles orsemi-detached. ""Missing Middle" building types comprise 18%. High-density typologies represent 15 of all knits in Kitchener. Apartment Flat 3 Source: 2021 Census T lee O-O0T 1 179 g Household Distribution 9 1�1� 59% of Kitchener households are made up of T or 2 people. f our housing units are 3 ormore 3+ People 1 or People I More � Bedrooms I Than People � �—�---� 3+ Bedrooms 1 ar 2 Bedrooms Sou ree: 2021 Cen s us Ta ble 98-10-0240-01 Page 390 of 1179 Core Housing Need 10 �1�1 Core Housing Need represents people whose current housing fails to meet their needs, who also lark the means to move Into housing that does, Over 36,000 people in Kitchener fit this description. That!s 0 of renters and 4 of over rye r. This represents the existing need for more affordable housing options for the people who already live in Kitchener, and is separate from considerations of future growth, 114 of our households are 1 person, but they represent half of all households Frith a core housi ng need. ,amu rcp: 2021 Census Table 98-10-0246-01 Page 391 of 1179 Draft Approach to Growth &Change Key Principles of Growing Together Combining our public and stakeholder feedback with our strategic plan priorities and aligning with other key city objectives and initiatives, we have developed the following key principles; ■ That Growing Together maximizes our ability to address the housing crisis by improving housing choice and affordability in our MTSAs. ■ That Growing Together addresses the climate emergency by creating transit -supportive communities, maximizing the use of existing infrastructure, and leveraging new infrastruct as district energy. ■ That Growing Together encourages a gradual modal shift to active transportation and tran complete communities that provide for people's daily needs. ■ That Growing Together helps bring more people, activity, life and diversity to Kitchener's IN with more amenities for the community, shops and services for all. Project Background • Growing Together is developing the planning framework for Kitchener's Major Transit Station Areas. • Growing Together is the continuation of the ongoing planning review process that began with the Planning Around Rapid Transit Stations (PARTS) plans and advanced through the Neig� hbourh^^ Planning Review (NPR) project. • Growth and change are occurring in our MTSAs. • Many changes have been made at all levels of government to address the housing crisis. T includes a housing pledge target for Kitchener of 35,000 new homes by the end of 2031. • In March and April of this year, staff ran several public workshops to demonstrate what th changes mean and to gather meaningful community input into how to continue to grow responsibly. • The results of those workshops have been analyzed in staff's What We Heard: Workshop Engagement Summary report and have been incorporated into the draft zoning approach presented here. Introducing a New Zoning Category ■ Through the feedback received and the analysis undertaken, there is a clear desire for a simplified zoning approach— but one that also accounts for the many unique opportunities and challenges of developing within a Major Transit Station Area geography. ■ Therefore, we are recommending a new zoning category; Strategic Growth Areas (SGA). T zones will permit a range and mix of uses that will help create complete communities at tH neighbourhood scale. They will enable the complete spectrum of housing typologies on to within the MTSA context. ■ The SGA zones will be implemented in four categories; o SGA1, low-rise o SGA2, mid -rise o SGA3, high-rise limited qL -rise The SGA1 Zone ■ The SGA1 zone is a low-rise zone. It will permit; o Residential uses from detached houses, semis, triplexes, street towns, multiplexes and low-rise apartments. o Small commercial and service uses such as home businesses and corner stores. ■ The SGA1 zone will limit buildings to low-rise height. ■ It will not limit Floor -space ratio (FSR) but will regulate setbacks, building length and built -form. ■ Vehicular parking will not be required. ■ The SGA1 zone implements the recommendations from the Missing Middle and Affordable Housing Feasibility Study presented to Council on May 8th, 2023. ■ It enables a variety of housing forms that already exist within Kitchener's central neighbourhoods. ■ This 'gentle' density will allow the low-rise areas of Kitchener's MTSAs to evolve responsibly to meet community needs. 46, 397 oL:x Grand River Wosp�l Central Station V ,;' ---Victoria Park Queen Areas where workshop participants placed low-rise buildings. O Low -Rise Zone, SGA1, Missing Middle and Neighbourhood Mixed Use Floodwa , Greenspaces & Schneider/Shoemaker Creek naturalization areas. 0 ION LRT route and stops. Kitchener City Hall j <Borden Mill ■ This map shows the areas where participants placed low-rise building forms across all six public workshops as well as the council workshop. GrandRi,e, Hos ital o�o Central Station U Kitchener City Hall Q Victoria Park ` Frederick.' i Queen � Kitche Areas where workshop participants placed low-rise buildings. O Low -Rise Zone, SGA1, Missing Middle and Neighbourhood Mixed Use nFloodwa , Greenspaces & Schneider/Shoemaker Creek naturalization areas. 0 ION LRT route and stops. Mill ■ This map shows the areas where participants placed low-rise building forms across all six public workshops as well as the council workshop. ■ Underneath, the map shows where the draft SGA1, Low -Rise zone has ��rand River Hospital OOO�0 oCentral Station Victoria Pai of Areas where workshop participants placed low-rise buildings. o�(�h� o Kitchener City Hall Frederick Queen O KitC Sof M ra Vo��" 0 f> o� Bortlen O Low -Rise Zone, SGA1, Missing Middle and Neighbourhood Mixed Use nFloodwa , Greenspaces & Schneider/Shoemaker Creek naturalization areas. 0 ION LRT route and stops. Mill ■ This map shows where the draft SGA1, Low -Rise zone has been applied. The SGA2 Zone ■ The SGA2 zone is a mid -rise zone. It will permit; o Many of the residential uses from the SGA1 zone as well as mid -rise apartment and office uses. o A range of commercial and service uses. ■ The SGA2 zone will limit buildings to mid -rise height. ■ It will not limit Floor -space ratio (FSR) but will regulate setbacks, building length and built -form. ■ Vehicular parking will not be required. ■ The SGA2 zone implements the recommendations from the Missing Middle and Affordable Housing Feasibility Study presented to Council on May 8th, 2023. ■ It enables a variety of mid -rise housing forms that will help create a human -scaled public realm and transition between low and high-rise areas of our MTSAs. ■ This moderate density will help provide a greater range of housing options to meet community 46, 401 oL.x • 7*1 Central Station �Uictor�ark ' . Queen Areas where workshop participants placed mid -rise buildings. Mid -Rise Zone, SGA2, Missing Middle Mixed Use Floodwa , Greenspaces & Schneider/Shoemaker Creek naturalization areas. ION LRT route and stops. City ;A Market? i N je do ■ This map shows the areas where participants placed mid -rise building forms across all six public workshops as well as the council workshop. N 0 �dab Central Areas where workshop participants placed mid -rise buildings. O Mid -Rise Zone, SGA2, Missing Middle Mixed Use Floodwa , Greenspaces & Schneider/Shoemaker Creek naturalization areas. ION LRT route and stops. City l� This map shows the areas where participants placed mid -rise building forms across all six public workshops as well as the council workshop. Underneath, the map shows where the draft SGA2, Mid -Rise zone has �G and R\Wospital O �OCentral Station VO O\ Victoria Park < Areas where workshop participants placed mid -rise buildings. O Mid -Rise Zone, SGA2, Missing Middle Mixed Use Floodwa, Greenspaces & Schneider/Shoemaker CreeknaT ralization areas. ION LRT route and stops. 19, H Kitchener City Hall, q l� Mill ■ This map shows where the draft SGA2, Mid -Rise zone has been applied. The SGA3 Zone ■ The SGA3 zone is a high-rise zone. It will permit; o All of the residential uses from the SGA2 zones as well as high-rise apartment and office uses. o A range of commercial and service uses. ■ The SGA3 zone will limit building height. ■ It will not limit FSR but will regulate setbacks, stepbacks, building length and built -form. ■ Vehicular parking will not be required. ■ The SGA3 zone implements the council -approved housing pledge target of 35,000 new homes by the end of 2031. ■ It enables a variety of mid -rise and high-rise forms that will help bring diverse, complementary buildings to Kitchener's MTSAs. 405 o7Ui,R W _,4� Central Areas where workshop participants placed high-rise buildings. High -Rise Zone, SGA3, Mixed Use a Atchener City Hall I a qar -rederick. Queen 16it ener Market Floodwa , Greenspaces & Schneider/Shoemaker Creek naturalization areas. ION LRT route and stops. ■ This map shows the areas where participants placed high-rise building forms across all six public workshops as well as the council workshop. Pv l � 011111111110, a Central Station Kitc•, teener City Victor� redr tit k. Queen it •teener Market • Areas where workshop participants placed high-rise buildings. High -Rise Zone, SGA3, Mixed Use Floodwa , Greenspaces & Schneider/Shoemaker Creek naturalization areas. ION LRT route and stops. ■ This map shows the areas where participants placed high-rise building forms across all six public workshops as well as the council workshop. ■ Underneath, the map shows where the draft SGA3, High -Rise zone has �nd River Fospvl �r a Central Statio����• Victoria Park Areas where workshop participants placed high-rise buildings. High -Rise Zone, SGA3, Mixed Use Floodwa , Greenspaces & Schneider/Shoemaker Creek naturalization areas. ION LRT route and stops. Kitchener Market 40 Borden Mill ■ This map shows where the draft SGA3, High -Rise zone has been applied. The SGA4 Zone ■ The SGA4 zone is a high-rise zone. It will permit; o All of the residential uses from the SGA2 zones as well as high-rise apartment and office uses. o A range of commercial and service uses. ■ The SGA4 zone will not limit building height. ■ It will not limit FSR but will regulate setbacks, stepbacks, building length and built -form. ■ Vehicular parking will not be required. ■ The SGA4 zone implements the council -approved housing pledge target of 35,000 new homes by the end of 2031. ■ It enables a variety of mid -rise and high-rise forms that will help bring diverse, complementary buildings to Kitchener's MTSAs. 409 o7Ui,R W _,4� Central Areas where workshop participants placed high-rise buildings. ® High -Rise Zone, SGA4, Mixed Use a Atchener City Hall I a qar -rederick. Queen 16it ener Market Floodwa , Greenspaces & Schneider/Shoemaker Creek naturalization areas. ION LRT route and stops. ■ This map shows the areas where participants placed high-rise building forms across all six public workshops as well as the council workshop. 6 C•e'` a al Station ' � S ' Kitchener City Hall I Victoria ark _rederick. Market Areas where workshop participants placed high-rise buildings. ® High -Rise Zone, SGA4, Mixed Use Floodwa , Greenspaces & Schneider/Shoemaker Creek naturalization areas. ION LRT route and stops. ■ This map shows the areas where participants placed high-rise building forms across all six public workshops as well as the council workshop. ■ Underneath, the map shows where the draft SGA4, High -Rise zone has Areas where workshop participants placed high-rise buildings. ® High -Rise Zone, SGA4, Mixed Use Floodwa , Greenspaces & Schneider/Shoemaker Creek naturalization areas. ION LRT route and stops. ■ This map shows where the draft SGA4, High -Rise zone has been applied. LM Square M=M,jddfe& Neighbourhood Mixed Use Mid -Rise Missing Middle Mixed Use High -Rise MixLd Use, Height Maximums High -Rise+ M& Use, No Height Maximum Park OtherGreenspace FloodwadycollQi,cal Restoration Area (ERA)* *adjacent langsaresubjec4ka ERApolicies in the Official Plan Floodfringe Lands not included in Growin To ether/ Schneider& ShoemakerCree� Naturalization EA CM ■ This map shows the full draft zoning approach with all four zones. Key Concept: Balance ■ A good balance of building types and scales has been identified through our community engagement as a key concept. ■ Balance is addressed in by Growing Together by; • Allowing a range of housing types and a compatible mix of uses within each of the four SGA zones. • Through a balanced approach to the application of these zones. Out of all the properties zoned (draft) through Growing Together; 0 50% are zoned SGA1 low-rise, or 24% of all land when measured by area. 0 30% are zoned SGA2 mid -rise, or 25% of all land when measured by area. 0 13% are zoned SGA3 high-rise, or 22% of all land when measured by area. 0 7% are zoned SGA4 high-rise, or 29% of all land when measured by area. • By area, each zone has been applied roughly equally across the Growing Together MTSAs. alf of all properties are zoned low-rise, and 80% are zoned for low or mid -rise, with 20% zoned for high-rise. U -S"01. -- Key Concept: Transition ■ Transition in built -form has been identified through our community engagement as a key concept. ■ Transition is addressed in two ways by Growing Together; • Through the application of the SGA zone categories, with SGA1 abutting SGA2, SGA2 abutting SGA3, and SGA 3 abutting SGA4, where possible. Of all the properties zoned through Growing Together, 84% meet this criteria, even when including properties across the street from one another. Not including already built or approved buildings, 89% of all properties meet this criteria. • Through a transition regulation that limits building height next to low-rise areas. Where an SGA2, 3 or 4 zoned property abuts an SGA1 zoned property, staff are developing a regulation that would limit building height within a certain distance of the shared property line. 3tft 0 MR Key Concept: Vibrancy ■ Vibrancy of our urban spaces, buildings, and shops and services has been identified through our community engagement as a key concept. ■ Vibrancy is addressed in Growing Together by; • Allowing a broader mix of uses in each zone that complement neighbourhood needs for shops, services, home business and more. • Exploring a "Priority Streets" framework that will identify which streets currently attract people and activity, and which could be improved by new development with more active uses. • Collaborating with the Places & Spaces project and Cycling and Trails Master Plan, among others. G4 Key Concept: Affordability ■ Housing affordability has been identified through our community engagement as a key concept. ■ Affordability is addressed in Growing Together by; Implementing the recommendations from the Missing Middle and Affordable Housing report. Implementing the C Implementing an Inc Housing Continuum Diagram MX&I SGA4 000 0000❑ o000 00000❑ o000 000000000000 lr.,-,.] M a 0000 0000 00 00 0000 00 B ME MmEYJ-m eL]eq��a d�Rpr����������pq� ��"r� Page 418 of 1179 ■ These are examples, both old and new, of the types of missing middle and mixed-use buildings that are permitted within the SGA1 Low -Rise zone. ■ These are examples, both old and new, of the types of missing middle and mixed-use buildings that are permitted within the SGA1 Low -Rise zone. ■ These are examples, both old and new, of the types of missing middle and mixed-use buildings that are permitted within the SGA1 Low -Rise zone. r� nitillll�l E+ r IiT■� r 6 ! ■ These are examples, both old and new, of the types of residential and mixed-use buildings that are permitted within the SGA2 Mid -Rise zone. ■ These are examples, both old and new, of the types of residential and mixed-use buildings that are permitted within the SGA2 Mid -Rise zone. ■ These are examples, both old and new, of the types of residential and mixed-use buildings that are permitted within the SGA2 Mid -Rise zone. ■ These are examples, both old and new, of the types of residential and mixed-use buildings that are permitted within the SGA3 High -Rise zone. These are examples, both old and new, of the types of residential and mixed-use buildings that are permitted within the SGA3 High -Rise ■ These are examples, both old and new, of the types of residential and mixed-use buildings that are permitted within the SGA4 High -Rise zone. Growing Commun -I } Together ity Guide The City of Kitchener is situated on the traditional territory of the Neutral, Anishinaabeg and Haudenosaunee Peoples. We recognize our responsibility to serve as stewards for the land and honour the original caretakers who came before us. Our community is enriched by the er knowledge and deep-rooted traditions of the diverse First Nations, Metis and Kitchener today. Introduction How to Use the Guide Hopefully, this guide is easy to read and understand. However, we know that there are many complex, challenging, and sometime elements of the work that we do. This guide may not fully explain everything, as much as we'd like it to, but it will try to provide a context as possible. When you see this icon next to something, + it means that we will explore the idea further in smaller text at the bottom of the footnote. ' When you see this icon next to something, �.,�. it means that we will try to answer a 'frequently asked question' about the topic, smaller text at the bottom of the page. When you see this icon next to something, it means that we will try to provide some 'big picture' context that will help us m connections between our policies, regulations or ideas and the important concepts informing them. There are various web links throughout this document. If you are reading a print version of the guide, you can find a .pdf version engagewnca/growingtogether with live links to all the additional content. Acknowledgement City staff would like to thank the nearly 1,000 community members who have provided input into the award-winning -4%, Growing Together process to date. We would also like to thank the hundreds more who have given us your time and energy beginning with the PARTS Plans and throughout the Neighbourhood Planning Review process.i. Your feedback has been invaluable and has helped lead to a balanced, compatible mix of proposed zones and land uses that will help create a more vibrant, diverse, accessible and affordable Kitchener for all who wish to live, work and visit here. Thank you! eTo date, Growing Together has won three awards, one each at the provincial, national and international level. This includes top -3 recognition at the international Smart50 awards, the highest honour awarded at the Smart Cities Connect conference. Your participation made this possible! 21J The PARTS process, or "Planning Around Rapid Transit Stations", began in 2013 and resulted in the approval of three plans by the end of • 2017; PARTS Central, PARTS Midtown and PARTS Rockway. These three plans began to be implemented through the NPR or Neighbourhood Planning Review process from 2017 into 2022. Following several major changes to planning legislation and responding to emerging community needs, the project was re -launched as Growing Together in early 2023. Let's Talk About Growth For more than 150 years, the lands we now call Kitchener's Protected Major Transit Station Areas have been growing. Over the last decade, they've been growing faster. This is on purpose; all orders of government recognize that Ontario's cities need to increasingly grow up, not out. Growing up; • Helps protect the Greenbelt and prime farmland from development. This preserves important ecosystems, protects clean water sources, and ensures sustainable agriculture. • Helps keep city service levels high and property tax rates low, by maximizing the use of existing infrastructure like pipes, roads, and streetlights. • Helps attract talent and investment like shops, startups and small businesses while creating more opportunities and more housing types for many kinds of people with a broad range of needs, backgrounds and experiences. Kitchener continues to grow out as well, through new subdivisions on land that hasn't been built on before. Growth isn't meant to happen in only one form or another, but through a balance that is sustainable, responsible, and meets the needs of Kitchener's community. Lost Farmland 1 1 "Ontario has lost 40% of its farmland since 1941, including een'^996 and 2016,tbe da pre° 1.5 million acres between 1996 and 2016, the most of any °'°"°^'t9'^•'°°"°^°r' Canadian province or territory." In those 20 years alone, Ontario has lost an area of farmland 44x larger than the entire City of Kitchener through urban sprawl. These graphics come from the Growing Together Card Deck, J which you can view in more detail here. See us in person for 2— a printed version of the card deck you can keep! Unit Type Breakdown A , "More than half of ­91­,s,samidetacnM°p'rMissmgare MiddlebWdingtypes priset8X xign-denslNNpoiogies represent t5% Kitchener's units are singles °'°"°^'t9'^•'°°"°^°r' or semi-detached. Missing Middle building types comprise 18%. High-density typologies represent 15% of ® all units in Kitchener." 0 434 of�",1.R Let's Talk About Growth Kitchener's Protected Major Transit Station Areas; are where most of Kitchener's "growing up' will take place. This is because they include downtown Kitchener and other historically higher density areas where growth has always occurred, but also because they are now serviced by the ION light rail transit line. Putting more homes in already well -serviced areas is a core fundamental principle of sustainable city -building, creates complete communities and provides the greatest benefit to the greatest number of people. GHG Reduction Potential 4 ResearcFerz analyzeO'llp ci[iesto pdicies nreGu eod.1 footpnnts.Infill sing policies were 1oun0 tc nave me olgge:f impaec deo leak �nm fin. aw i' What is a Protected Major Transit Station Area? PMTSAs are areas that are generally within a 5 to 10 minute walk of a higher order transit stop. In our case, that's the ION LRT. Growing Together includes the 7 PMTSAs west of the Conestoga Parkway. The boundaries of each PMTSA have been determined by the Region of Waterloo and approved by the Province. Benefits include walkable, cyclable and rollable access to transit, amenities, shops, events and public spaces. High-density housing forms are also significantly more affordable than low-density forms. Transit -oriented development (TOD) is also far more sustainable than other forms of growth, both environmentally and financially. "OtUFMR How Does Growth Happen? Many low, medium and high-rise buildings have been proposed, approved and built in Kitchener's PMTSAs in the last decade. Many factors influence when and how growth occurs. These factors include demand, location, land value, infrastructure such as transit, interest rates, material and labour cost and availability, and much more. Land Use and Zoning guide and regulate growth, but do not directly cause growth. Due to strong demand, most development in Kitchener's PMTSAs over the last decade has happened outside of the existing, in -effect land use and zoning framework, through Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments (OPAs & ZBAs). This is because those policies and regulations have been in place for a long time and aren't tailored to the current needs of our community. Most of these OPAs & ZBAs have received staff support and been approved by Kitchener City Council and Waterloo Region because they represent good planning outcomes and meet our shared and evolving objectives and obligations. This is why we're doing Growing Together. It's time for an update! If our land use policies and zoning regulations can more accurately account for the kinds of growth that are already occurring in our PMTSAs, we can provide more certainty and predictability for everyone about how Kitchener's PMTSAs will evolve. Just as importantly, with a better understanding of current conditions, we can help open more pathways to different kinds of smaller developments that create more mid -rise and low-rise Missing Middle] housing options. The closer our land use policies and zoning regulations can be to viable real-world outcomes, the better, because it will help us plan more accurately for the future. It will help us more successfully implement important programs like Inclusionary Zoning and District Energy. . Missing Middle is defined in the Regional Official Plan as "multiple unit housing including, but not limited to multiplexes, stacked townhouses, "� apartments, and other low-rise housing options." Missing Middle housing is more impacted by policies and regulations than larger developments, because the added time and cost of extra process like an OPA & ZBA can make them too challenging to build. e 43 ofUi�.R What Are Kitchener's Protected Major Transit Statio The Regional Official Plan defines a total of 10 Protected Major Transit Station Areas in Kitchener. They are; • Grand River Hospital • Central Station Innovation District • Victoria Park & Kitchener City Hall • Frederick & Queen • Kitchener Market • Borden • Mill • Block Line • Fairway • Sportsworld Growing Together implements Official Plan policies, land uses and zoning for the 7 Protected Major Transit Stations in bold text above. The remaining station areas will be planned through a similar, upcoming process. The Basics of Land Use & Zoning What are the Basics of Growing Together? In this section, we will look at the following principles of Growing Together; • Through an Official Plan Amendment and a Zoning By-law Amendment, Growing Together proposes new land uses, policies an regulations for properties within Kitchener's PMTSAs. Illustrative Land Use and Zoning maps are found on the next few pages • Growing Together tries to reconcile many different perspectives and tries to provide the greatest possible amount of certainty • Growing Together encourages complementary built form through transition, separation, and zoning regulations that control fc impact of new buildings. • Growing Together no longer requires development to provide a certain amount of parking. • Growing Together no longer uses Floor Space Ratio (FSR) to regulate density, using a variety of form -based regulations instead • Growing Together adds extra guidance for Priority Streets to ensure that they contribute to a better public realm with more ac • Growing Together allows a broader range of uses for all building types. What's the Difference Between Land Use & Zoning? Before we look at the proposed mapping, let's break down the difference between land use and zoning Land use determines what land can be used for, such as housing, industrial, or commercial. Through our official plan policies, we also set some additional requirements through land use, such as maximum heights. Further, we prescribe criteria for how to evaluate development applications if they don't meet our official plan policies and zoning by-law regulations. Zoning acts as the rules that guide what development looks like in 3 dimensions. It regulates things like the size and shape of a lot, where a building can be placed on a lot, and in some cases how tall and wide a building can be or the amount of vehicle and bicycle parking required. In simple terms, land use is the big picture way of determining what can happen on a property, and zoning sets out the detailed requirements for how it happens. Commercial Mixed -Use Natural Heritage Agriculture Residential Institutional Industrial Land Use On the left is a diagram that represents in very broad terms how land use works. On the right is a diagram that similarly represents zoning. 44o ofUi�.R Want to Know More About How Planning Works? The City of Kitchener has produced a series of videos that help explain the basics of how planning works. You can find them all on YouTube, following the links below: • Introduction to Land Use Planning & Development • Our Vision for Kitchener • Planning Tools • Roles and Responsibilities • Zoning By-laws and Minor Variances • Site Plan Review • Tiny Homes • Tall Buildings • Infill & Redevelopment • Cultural Heritage • What is Affordable Housing? • What is Inclusionary Zonine? Land Use Map Let's start with land use. Growing Together proposes to introduce three new land uses to Kitchener's planning framework; Strategic Growth Areas A (SGAA), Strategic Growth Areas B (SGAB) and Strategic Growth Areas C (SGAC). Please note that these maps are for Z purposes only. For a detailed map, please see our other draft materials. By introducing new land uses tailored to strategic growth areas, we can help ensure they perform well in complex, challenging and highly -diverse areas like PMTSAs. This should mean that future development looks more like our planning framework expects it to look, giving everyone more certainty about the future of Kitchener's Al PMTSAs. e 442 o' iM, R How We Applied Land Uses Growing Together applies land uses through several evaluation criteria, including community and collaborator input, good planning principles, technical and design considerations, and more. This includes; • Analyzing community input received through our workshop engagements. o These results are detailed in our report titled What We Heard: Workshop Engagement Summary. o The workshops were digitized into a smart modeling software, analyzed, reviewed and used as a critical input to inform staff where to locate our different land uses and zones. • Listening to community and stakeholder comments and submissions through individual meetings on site or area -specific concerns. • Ensuring compliance with provincial legislation and guiding documents, as well as the Regional Official Plan (ROP). This includes recent changes introduced through the updated ROP, Bill 23, Bill 109, and more. • Implementing and working together with other City priorities such as; n o Inclusionary Zoning City of Kitchener Municipal Housing Pledge o The Housing Pledge �°•, • a,•�°•mMb a°° o The Downtown Vision o The Missing Middle and Affordable Housing Study m�n„ . v,,.°° -=o M•� a o,.,w. o Places & Spaces o The Cycling & Trails Master Plan o The Downtown District Energy study o Cultural and Natural Heritage policies, and more. Parcel 'l .' How We Applied Land Uses Continued from the previous page; • Coordinating with other City divisions such as Economic Development, Transportation, Parks & Cemeteries, Engineering, Utilities, and Legal. • Compatibility with the key directions from the Planning Around Rapid Transit Stations (PARTS) Plans and Neighbourhood Planning Review NPR processes. • Site specific or area specific opportunities and constraints such as; o Lot size, area, width, and more. o Proximity to ION station stops and the Multi -Modal Hub. Relationships to different street typologies, such as main streets, arterial streets, and local streets. o Relationships to existing context, including buildings, open spaces and streets. Land Use Map This map shows the SGAA land use. The SGAA land use limits new buildings to low and mid -rise forms and is applied mostly in and around existing low-rise, predominately residential neighbourhoods. The SGA1 and SGA2 zones are applied within the SGAA land use. Compatible non-residential uses are • • • • • • 777 permitted in the SGAA land use, such as small shops and personal services. No building over 8 storeys is permitted in the SGAA land use. Any development proposal for more than 8 storeys will require an Official Plan Amendment (OPA). The implementing zoning also limits large portions of the SGAA areas to low-rise only. Any development proposal for a mid -rise ' building within a low-rise zone will require �A a Zoning By-law Amendment (ZBA). y, 445 of,,*a Land Use Map This map shows the SGAB land use. The SGAB land use limits new buildings to mid -rise and moderate high-rise forms and is applied mostly on the edges of existing low-rise areas. The SGA2 and SGA3 zones are applied within the SGAB land use. B of, a IA full range of non-residential uses are • • • • • ' • • permitted in the SGAB land use. Existing and new low-rise buildings are still O permitted in the SGAB land use. y> No building over 25 storeys is permitted in the SGAB land use. Any development proposal for more than 25 storeys will require an Official Plan Amendment (OPA). The implementing zoning also limits large portions of the SGAA areas to mid -rise only. Any development proposal for ahigh-rise building within a mid -rise zone will require ire t� _ / a Zoning By-law Amendment (ZBA). B of, a Land Use Map This map shows the SGAC land use. The SGAC land use is applied to large, underutilized sites and properties next to ION station stops, where high-density intensification can be supported, is expected, and is planned for. The SGA3 and SGA4 zones are applied within the SGAA land use �' . .. • A full range of non-residential uses are • • • • • • • • • permitted in the SGAC land use. Existing and many new types of low-rise, as Owell as all types of mid -rise buildings are still permitted in the SGAC land use. =>Z The implementing zoning also limits pmm portions of the SGAC areas to 25 storeys. i. Any development proposal for a taller building within an SGA3 zone will require a �•, Zoning By-law Amendment (ZBA) or a k.o,.,.. Minor Variance application. Zoning Map Growing Together introduces four new zones to Kitchener's planning framework; Strategic Growth Areas 1 (SGA1), Strategic Growth Areas 2 (SGA2), Strategic Growth Areas 3 (SGA3) and Strategic Growth Areas 4 (SGA4). o,� Q Am�R The above map shows the combined results of all public workshops, where participants placed a variety of low, medium and high-rise buildings. Please note that these maps are for illustrative purposes only. For a detailed map, please see our other draft materials. How We Applied The Zones Growing Together applies zones through several evaluation criteria. This includes all of the criteria listed on the "How We Applied Land Uses" page above. It also includes; • The ability of individual properties to meet the regulations of their assigned zone. This means that an existing property is large enough and has the correct dimensions to fit buildings that the zoning regulations permit. • Consideration for how lots could potentially consolidate in the future. • The ability to require affordable housing units through in Inclusionary Zoning by-law, and how to maximize the effectiveness of that by-law. • Analyzing developments that have been approved through an Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment by Kitchener City Council. • The policies in our Heritage Conservation District Plans and Cultural Heritage Landscapes. • Minimum density targets for Protected Major Transit Station Areas, as well as accommodating enough growth to meet our Housing Pledge target. • Transition principles, where one zone generally abuts the next higher or lower zone. o Like most evaluation criteria, this cannot always be achieved perfectly as we seek the best balance of all the above factors. o Staff have also created a specific transition regulation, to ensure that even where higher zones abut the SGA1 zone, a greater building setback is required for taller building elements. 449 ofUi�.R SGA1 Zoning Map This map shows the Strategic Growth Areas 1 (SGA1) zone, where buildings are limited to low-rise heights at a maximum of 11 metres. They will allow missing middle infill housing along with complementary non-residential uses such as small shops, cafes, home businesses and more. City of Kitchener - Growing Together IVITSA's 'y o The above map shows the combined results of all public workshops, where participants placed low-rise buildings. r i of MR SGA1 Zoning Highlights Listed here are a few of the fundamental regulations that apply to the SGA1 zone; • Building heights are limited to 11 metres, which is 3 storeys. • There are minimum lot widths and areas, as well as building length regulations that apply to different sizes of buildings; o If a building has no more than 4 residential units, the minimum lot width is 12.Om and the minimum lot area is 350m2. The maximum building length is 20.Om o If a building has between 5 and 10 residential units, the minimum lot width is The art above represents a neighbourhood with 12.Om and the minimum lot area is 450m2. The maximum building length is 24.Om SGA1 zoning, and is the art used for our fall GR OWING postcard mailout to residents and property owners o If a building has more than 11 residential units, the minimum lot width is 18.Om who fall within a proposed SGA1 zone. The and the minimum lot area is 700m2. The maximum building length is 36.Om postcard is shown below: o For non-residential buildings, the minimum lot width is 15.Om and the minimum lot area is 600m2. The maximum building length is 36.0m. • Parking is not required, but it is permitted. • There are minimum setbacks; o The minimum front yard setback is 6.Om o The minimum exterior side yard setback is 4.Om o The minimum rear yard setback is 7.5m o For interior side yards, one setback must be at least 1.5m o The other interior side yard setback must be at least 2.5m i �a GR OWING TOGETHER PLANNING FOR IQTCHENER'S MATO R TRANSIT STATION AREAS 0 0 0 e oho reGITh e;.ma 1) �I�2�%4��� 3�� b,a .a Page 451 Q�x Zoning SGA1 Building Types Here are some photos of existing, newer buildings that fit within the SGA1 zone; I off MR SGA2 Zoning Map This map shows the Strategic Growth Areas 2 (SGA2) zone, where buildings are limited to mid -rise heights up to 8 storeys. They will allow missing middle and mid -rise infill housing along with a range of non-residential uses including office, shops and services. The above map shows the combined results of all public workshops, where participants placed mid -rise buildings. 1 % of MR SGA2 Zoning Highlights Listed here are a few of the important regulations that apply to the SGA2 zone; • Building heights are limited to 8 storeys. • There are minimum lot widths and areas, as well as building length regulations that apply to different heights of buildings; o Buildings require a minimum lot width of 30.Om and a minimum lot area of 1,500m2. o The 71h and 81h storeys of buildings must be setback an additional 3.Om and cannot exceed 60.Om in building length. They are limited to a 2,000m2 floor plate. o Building height cannot exceed 12.Om (or 4 storeys) within 12.Om of an SGA1 or low-rise residential zone. The minimum setback for a building adjacent to an SGA1 or low-rise zone is 7.5m o Buildings must dedicate 20% of their site to landscaping and are required to provide 4.Om2 of amenity space per unit. • Parking is not required, but it is permitted. • There is a minimum yard setback of 3.0m, which applies to front, rear and side yards. The art above represents a neighbourhood with SGA1 zoning, and is the art used for our fall postcard mailout to residents and property owners who fall within a proposed SGA1 zone. The postcard is shown below: ti;r.'�a GROWING TOGETHER PLANNING FOR KrTCHENERS MAIORTRANSIT STATION AREAS o00*00 o.o Moe Y ❑ski <u rare:m.m�''w�+oe:`rorev:mn.«� 9w��aroa�m,��maimmam n« ne«w�mer«Pnmpnm�emm�a�w m1«w:«�:xm 1mmNoa �mmi::«emm.metre. 2) o 0 3� a«� mom«« Page 455�x SGA2 Zoning Diagram Here's a diagram of what all that roughly looks like. Remember, these aren't real buildings, but just representative of what is possible to build; SGA2 00 -MR SGA2 Building Here are some photos of existing, newer buildings that fit within the SGA2 Aff SGA3 Zoning Map This map shows the Strategic Growth Areas 3 (SGA3) zone, where buildings are limited to high-rise heights up to 25 storeys. They will allow missing middle, mid -rise and high-rise infill housing along with a range of non-residential uses. The above map shows the combined results of all public workshops, where participants placed mid -rise and high-rise buildings. SGA3 Zoning Highlights Listed here are a few of the important regulations that apply to the SGA3 zone; • Building heights are limited to 25 storeys. • There are minimum lot widths and areas, as well as building length regulations that apply to different heights of buildings; o Buildings up to 12 storeys require a minimum lot width of 30.Om and a minimum lot area of 1,500m2. They have a maximum building length of 60.0m, a maximum floor plate area of 2,000m2, and a physical separation requirement of 6.0m. o Buildings up to 18 storeys require a minimum lot width of 36.Om and a minimum lot area of 1,800m2. They have a maximum building length of 54.0m, a maximum floor plate area of 1,200m2, and a physical separation requirement of 9.0m. o Buildings up to 25 storeys require a minimum lot width of 42.Om and a minimum lot area of 2,000m2. They have a maximum building length of 48.0m, a maximum floor plate area of 900m2, and a physical separation requirement of 12.0m. • Parking is not required, but it is permitted. • There is a minimum yard setback of 3.0m. • Building height cannot exceed 12.Om within 12.Om of an SGA1 or low-rise residential zone. The minimum setback for a building adjacent to an SGA1 or low-rise zone is 7.5m • Buildings are required to provide 8.Om2 of amenity space per unit. The art above represents a neighbourhood with SGA3 zoning, and is the art used for our fall postcard mailout to residents and property owners who fall within a proposed SGA3 zone. The postcard is shown below: R GROWING TOGETHER PLANNING FOR KITCHENERS MAIORTRANSTTSTATION AREAS 0 Toneammore^bauctM1�e OmjmaM ��'', en6a6ewra<a/grow nglogelber ©IT© I 0 � oro � n�rr, z,b ❑� k� isie`iz =ai��>w:snmen ne gm Tn:<na a�r�emaewne�wmn��ww� mr o ir°�ine.w��evampmcerrrwaaY.em novamw .� bnranx ��•,rocgmn�nn.�am�memmmb,mremmerm�re. 1�;m� Z��mm�o 3�° •' �r Page 459 o��. r F eR Zoning SGA3 Building Types Here are some photos of existing, newer buildings that fit within the SGA3 zone; ,Pqr SGA4 Zoning Map This map shows the Strategic Growth Areas 4 (SGA4) zone, where buildings are not limited by height. They will allow missing middle, mid -rise and high-rise infill housing along with a range of non-residential uses. The al: result! partici SGA4 Zoning Highlights Listed here are a few of the important regulations that apply to the SGA4 zone; • There are minimum lot widths and areas, as well as building length regulations that apply to different heights of buildings; o Buildings up to 12 storeys require a minimum lot width of 30.Om and a minimum lot area of 1,500m2. They have a maximum building length of 60.0m, a maximum floor plate area of 2,000m2, and a physical separation requirement of 6.0m. o Buildings up to 18 storeys require a minimum lot width of 36.Om and a minimum lot area of 1,800m2. They have a maximum building length of 54.0m, a maximum floor plate area of 1,200m2, and a physical separation requirement of 9.0m. o Buildings up to 36 storeys require a minimum lot width of 42.Om and a minimum lot area of 2,000m2. They have a maximum building length of 48.0m, a maximum floor plate area of 900m2, and a physical separation requirement of 12.0m. o Buildings over 36 storeys require a minimum lot width of 48.Om and a minimum lot area of 2,400m2. They have a maximum building length of 36.0m, a maximum floor plate area of 850m2, and a physical separation requirement of 15.0m. • Parking is not required, but it is permitted. • There is a minimum yard setback of 3.0m. • Building height cannot exceed 12.Om within 12.Om of an SGA1 or low-rise residential zone. The minimum setback for a building adjacent to an SGA1 or low-rise zone is 7.5m • Buildings are required to provide 8.Om2 of amenity space per unit. The art above represents a neighbourhood with SGA4 zoning, and is the art used for our fall postcard mailout to residents and property owners who fall within a proposed SGA4 zone. The postcard is shown below: Iv R „l GROWING TOGETHER PIANNING FOR RRCHENER'S MAIORTRANSITSTATION AREAS .�a�marea�I�oro�,e�tl .an6a6ewr<a/growinpapihx e� AI ® ©� � or o � F.� I ce Gmwh M1 Oro �ry M1m ed A-' ❑k. C xm sum eh fires0-1 ;1� 7027 B 6 � for newrypes 6 tlrvel o� m nt htlzone mayaYaw 2� arw r rom mtla� ro W 3 Page 463Wftx Zoning Building Here are some photos of existing, newer buildings that fit within the SGA4 zone. There are several approved but not built projects that fit the SGA4 zone so we'll also show some renderings of some of those proposals as well; More of the Basics of Growing Together What are the Basics of Growing Together? Now that we've looked through the proposed land use and zoning maps, what are the basics of what Growing Together is planned to • achieve? Through an Official Plan Amendment and a Zoning By-law Amendment, Growing Together proposes new land uses, policies and zoning regulations for properties within Kitchener's Protected Major Transit Station Areas. • Why? PMTSAs are unique. Through our engagement, analysis, and testing, it was clear that we needed land uses and zones that responded to the unique opportunities and challenges that exist within PMTSAs. PMTSAs are the most complex areas of the city, and we'll explore why throughout this guide. Growing Together tries to reconcile a lot of different perspectives and tries to provide the greatest possible amount of certainty and flexibility. • How? Through the way we have set up the land use and zoning framework. We are proposing more pathways to different kinds of development, but with more specific guidance on where and how development can happen. • It's also key that our policies and regulations be realistic and represent building types that can be and are being built in Kitchener today. In doing so, we improve the odds that proposed developments will meet the rules we've proposed, and not proceed through other processes instead (OPAs & ZBAs). Growing Together encourages complementary built form through transition, separation, and zoning regulations that control for the scale and impact of new buildings. • How? While we have been implementing tall building design through our Urban Design Manual since 2017, Growing Together proposes tall building regulations for the first time, including the space between taller buildings to ensure that impacts from shadows and wind are managed appropriately. It also proposes maximum building lengths and tower floor areas. • Additionally, Growing Together proposes a transition policy that restricts the height of higher density development to 12m within a 12m setback of low-rise zoned areas. 4 467O.R What are the Basics of Growing Together? Growing Together allows a broader range of uses for all building types. Why? It is important that all areas of PMTSAs allow for non-residential uses that will lead to more complete communities, where most of a person's daily needs can be met with a short walk, ride, roll or transit ride. By allowing small shops and small businesses in low-rise areas, we can not only meet more people's needs more effectively, but we can also encourage home businesses to establish themselves without the cost and risk of leasing a traditional retail space. This is a photo of the Missing Middle Block exercise that was part of our summer engagement. Staff asked community members to tell us what kinds of shops and services they'd like to see in low-rise neighbourhoods. Not only does this allow a broader range of shops and business types that would struggle to survive if they were more restricted, it also creates more pathways for these businesses to scale up over time and move on to larger spaces in more central areas. This will help encourage more local small businesses and help them become competitive with larger chains. Combining priority streets with broader non-residential permissions overall allows for a lot of different types of business to all survive and thrive within Kitchener's PMTSAs at a time when retail, in particular, is very challenging. We heard very strong support for both approaches through our summer public engagements, which focused specifically on priority streets and small business on low-rise blocks through two separate exercises. What are the Basics of Growing Together? Growing Together no longer requires development to provide a certain amount of vehicle parking. • Why? Required parking rates add significant, usually unnecessary expense to new development. Kitchener's Missing Middle and Affordable Housing report notes that requiring parking is one of the major reasons why low-rise and mid -rise developments are challenging to build. PMTSAs are also walkable, cyclable and rollable, and serviced by transit, and simply don't need that much parking to meet the needs of the community. Most recent developments in Kitchener's PMTSAs have been approved with reduced parking rates. • Does this mean new developments will no longer provide parking? No, it means that new developments will provide the amount of parking that their users need, rather than a flat rate required through zoning. This is one way we can help reduce the cost of new housing. • In the longer term, not requiring parking encourages less dependency on personal vehicles and also leaves more space for landscaping including trees. This will help Kitchener meet its sustainability goals. Growing Together no longer uses Floor Space Ratio (FSR) to regulate density, using a variety of form -based regulations instead.,7� • Why? FSR is not a tool that performs well when guiding infill development in a complex, already built-up area of the city. This is because, to result in similar built -forms, it requires properties to all be the same size, shape and dimension. Kitchener's PMTSAs have properties of all different shapes and sizes. Growing Together uses built -form regulations instead, which will lead to more predictable outcomes, as the regulations guiding our buildings will be based on the building design rather than just the dimensions of the property. -4(,4' There are minimum requirements for bicycle parking. Floor Space Ratio, also known as Floor Area Ratio, is a calculation that allows a building to be a certain size relative to the lot it's built on. For ■ R example, an FSR of 10 means that the building area can be 10x the lot area. If the building footprint was the same size as the lot with no setbacks, the result would be a 10 storey building. If the building footprint was half the size of the lot, it could be 20 storeys. Because lots in PMTSAs come in all shapes and sizes, FSR makes it hard to predict what kinds of buildings can or will be built on a lot. Growing Together does still regulate things like lot width and lot area, to ensure that buildings fit well on their sites. 0 469 oLAMPIR What are the Basics of Growing Together? Growing Together adds extra guidance for Priority Streets to ensure that they contribute to abetter public realm with more active uses. • What are priority streets? Priority streets are streets or street segments that have been identified through our community engagement and analysis as the most important places to concentrate active uses like shops, services and community uses. • They connect ION stops with important destinations like the Kitchener Market, Victoria Park and more. • Priority streets have specific policies that will help ensure development along them helps make Kitchener's PMTSAs better connected with more things to see and do. This is a photo from our July 17th engagement at Kitchener Ribfest. Here, we're having one of many conversations about priority streets with community members. 470 O fU i.R Priority Streets This map shows the results of our community engagement on priority streets. Pink lines represent streets that people felt were already high-quality urban streets. Yellow lines represent streets that people felt should be, but weren't yet, high-quality urban streets. WOR M IHI /y+p-Alount HOOe Cemetery yj /� a Above is a photo of one of the priority streets maps created by Kitchener community members. Staff digitized over 25 of these maps to create the map you see on the left. Priority Streets This map shows the proposed priority streets network. New buildings along these pink segments will need to have active uses on ground floor and will have other regulations applied to ensure they help create more urban streets for all. Priority streets are focuser ION stops to surrounding z that downtown Kitchener 11� 4t asvedi / primary destination for pe over, and enhancing major es4N King, Victoria and Ottawa. Ih. � Questions Addressing Some Questions and Concern.c In this section, we will try to address a series of questions and concerns we have heard from the community. Broadly, the feedbac received from our 10 community engagements to date has been very positive. But as with any complex process with many comp( interests, we also heard a wide range of concerns, opinions, and questions on all kinds of different topics. We seek to find the best balance of policies, regulations and guidelines that provide the most benefit to the most people, while a important big -picture issues like the housing crisis and climate emergency through the planning tools we have available. We're looking to create a good fit between our planning policies and the realities of growth and development both today and in t ensure our policies have success on the ground. On the following slides, we will try to navigate several of these questions and concerns in as straightforward a manner as possible things we heard frequently from the community, some are things we only heard once or twice. Thank you to everyone who has engaged with us for providing your honest feedback throughout the process. L What Are Some Areas of Agreement? Throughout our many public engagements and conversations with stakeholders, we heard many different perspectives on any nu different issues. So what are some common areas of agreement? • Any person who wants to live in Kitchener's PMTSAs should be able to, in housing that suits their needs that they can afforc • Growth and intensification should occur within PMTSAs, because they provide the best access to transit, services and amen • It is important to protect farmland by growing within already built-up areas of the city. • Transit -oriented development contributes to walkable and vibrant PMTSAs by bringing a greater number of more diverse pe city core. • There should be more shops, services and institutions in Kitchener's PMTSAs to serve a growing and diverse population. • Kitchener's PMTSAs and downtown should continue to be a regional centre for commerce, arts & culture, public space and i • More small shops and services should be allowed in low-rise areas of PMTSAs. • Additional green space and parks needs to be considered as the city grows. • Community infrastructure needs to keep pace with growth. Why Do PMTSAs Need New Land Uses and Zones? PMTSAs are unique. They are complex and challenging. We need to allow for more compact development in PMTSAs than elsewhere. Land in PMTSAs is more expensive, in limited supply, and more impacted by things like existing or historical uses and structures, heritage considerations, and more. PMTSAs are the only geography where Inclusionary Zoning can be applied.rtA PMTSAs are the only geography served by the ION light rail transit system, *which has transformed and will continue to transform the way growth and change happens in these areas. PMTSAs serve the greatest number and variety of Kitchener residents. PMTSAs are home to major institutions such as Grand River Hospital and Centre in the Square. They are home to much of our employment base, from major companies like Google to new start ups and small businesses. Many of our post -secondary institutions are in PMTSAs, including buildings/campuses for the University of Waterloo, McMaster University, Laurier University and Conestoga College. PMTSAs are the focus of many of our major events and cultural celebrations. They are home to thousands of people of all ages, abilities, family types, backgrounds and incomes. PMTSAs need to provide for the needs of all kinds of people, in all different housing forms, as well as all kinds of businesses and institutions. To effectively guide growth and change in PMTSAs, we need land uses and zones that are designed to meet their complex needs. -42n't- Inclusionary zoning allows the city to require affordable housing units as part of development and can only be used within Protected Major Transit Station Areas. Land uses and zones in PMTSAs need to accommodate everything from a single detached house to a high-rise apartment building. They need to serve the needs of small businesses and huge multi -national corporations in all kinds of sectors. They need to work for hospitals, high - schools, universities and research institutions. They need to enable social services, supportive and affordable housing, and more. f� tr 476 OfU i t What Are the Form -Based Regulations? Growing Together proposes to regulate several things, some old, some new First, there are proposed regulations for lot width, lot area and building. This makes sure that properties are large enough to comfortably fit the kinds of buildings that are permitted by the rest of the zoning. Next, there are proposed regulations for the building base for mid -rise and tall buildings. We propose minimum and maximum building base heights, to ensure a human -scale streetscape. Additional height must be setback further from the street, minimizing it's impact. We also propose to regulate things like minimum fagade openings, or how many windows are required. This makes sure buildings don't have blank walls along the street. Additionally, we regulated how much structured parking can be visible along the building base. Once buildings start to get taller, we propose to regulate things like maximum building length, maximum floorplate area, and physical separation. These are measurements that ensure taller buildings don't get too long or large, and it makes sure there is enough space between taller buildings to ensure access to light and privacy for building occupants and surrounding residents. Finally, in 3 of our 4 zones, we propose to regulate building height. The SGA1 zone limits building heights to 3 storeys. SGA2 limits heights to 8 storeys. SGA3 limits heights to 25 storeys. SGA 4 does not limit building heights, but does still regulate all the other things mentioned above. tI.I i' Did you know that Kitchener has always had zones without height limits? Our existing downtown zones do not strictly regulate height. One of them, the D4 zone, doesn't regulate height or density, and resembles our proposed SGA4 zone, though it lacks the form -based regulations that we are proposing. The RES7 zone and the MIX4 zone do not have height limits either. 477 ofUi�.R Why Not Keep the Existing Secondary Plans? Currently, there are several secondary plans that overlap with Kitchener's Protected Major Transit Station Areas. These secondary plans fit within the broader Official Plan and are intended to provide additional guidance to these areas. With the introduction of PMTSAs, most of the properties covered by these secondary plans are now part of an PMTSA and must be planned accordingly. • The boundaries for Kitchener's PMTSAs have been defined by the Region of Waterloo and approved by the Province. They are required to meet minimum density targets. Beyond that, they have unique considerations such as; o Inclusionary zoning, which allows us to require affordable housing units and can only be applied within PMTSAs. o They are identified as a primary intensification area, where growth is directed by all orders of government. o They must provide transit -supportive densities through transit -oriented development principles, as they are served by the ION LRT. o They must create complete communities with all forms of housing, businesses, shops, services and institutions. o They can be protected from appeal. • It is therefore necessary to plan for Kitchener's PMTSAs comprehensively, as one district. Dividing PMTSAs into multiple, smaller secondary plan areas that include areas both within and outside of PMTSAs would result in a complicated planning framework that could fail to meet one or more of the above requirements and result in lengthy appeals. • It would also mean that areas within a secondary plan that are divided between areas inside and outside of an PMTSA would need to be subject to broadly different policies and zoning regulations, which would go against the purpose of a secondary plan framework. • Additionally, there are two Heritage Conservation Districts that overlap with our PMTSAs and existing secondary plan areas. Those HCD's have additional policies that must be met, regardless of the underlying zoning and land use. • Furthermore, there are over a dozen Cultural Heritage Landscapes in this area, and there are also guidelines within the Urban Design Manual that apply to specific central neighbourhoods. These guidelines were written by residents of those neighbourhoods through a series of charrettes in 2019. There are many layers of existing tools that help us plan responsibly for the future of Kitchener. Please see the following slides for some mapping that will help explain this further. AN* 478 o L AMP, R Why Not Keep the Existing Secondary Plans? This map shows the six existing secondary plan areas that are proposed to be removed through the Growing Together process: Mill ��- - 2 It's important to note that the unique features of these areas continue to be a part of Growing Together through -`- our official plan policies and zoning regulations and have informed where and how those policies have been applied. Cultural heritage assets such as important buildings, vistas and natural features continue to be protected through multiple layers of heritage policy, including designation, Heritage Conservation Districts and Cultural Heritage Landscapes. Kitchener's Urban Design Manual continues to apply, which includes a dedicated section for Central Neighbourhoods like these, and neighbourhood specific guidelines written by community members. 7 / OAA Why Not Keep the Existing Secondary Plans? This map layers on the PMTSAs in blue: These blue areas have specific, unique considerations like - minimum density targets, the need to create more affordable housing through inclusionary zoning, the need to create more missing middle housing that is served by transit, and other things explored in this document. J O� Why Not Keep the Existing Secondary Plans? This map layers on the heritage conservation districts (HCDs), in red: larke Heritage Conservation District Policies are among the strongest Planning tools in Ontario. Heritage conservation districts offer more specific policy direction and have more authority than secondary plans do. F / ovAk, Why Not Keep the Existing Secondary Plans? This map layers on cultural heritage landscapes (CHLs), in purple: Cultural Heritage Landscapes are intended to identify unique attributes with a natural, built or ccultural significance. Over a dozen CHLs overlap with Kitchener's PMTSAs and/or existing secondary plan areas. Fewer than 100 total properties are within existing secondary plan areas but not within ;C some combination of an PMTSA, HCD or CHL. 7�O\\' , I of�� Why Don't the New Zones; Limit development to low to mid -rise buildings only? Isn't it possible to create high -densities at mid -rise heights? • Yes, it is possible to create a high-density mid -rise context. • However, there are several reasons why, practically, this won't work in Kitchener (or most other cities). o It would be very difficult to meet the provincially required minimum density targets in some of our PMTSAs and would take many decades. o We would be limiting the variety of housing types available to people, and not meet the needs of many of our community members. o We would not be able to build nearly enough housing, nearly fast enough to meet our housing pledge target. o The housing we did build would be less affordable in the long-term, due to a lower supply of housing in areas people want to live. o We would struggle to implement our Inclusionary Zoning by-law on projects of this scale, and would build far fewer affordable units overall. ,- o Ultimately, development in Kitchener's PMTSAs would continue much in the same way it does now, with larger projects proposed through an Official Plan Amendment. Even if such projects are refused by council, the applicant may appeal the decision to the Ontario Land Tribunal, making Kitchener's future less certain and with less 'local control' over how Kitchener evolves. Did you know that cities that are known for their great mid -rise and dense low-rise neighbourhoods like Montreal, Paris, and Barcelona all have hundreds of tall buildings? Like those cities, Growing Together proposes a mix of low, medium and high-rise zones. In early 2023, Kitchener, along with nearly all other mid-sized and larger municipalities, pledged to build a specific number of homes by the end of 2031. For Kitchener, this number is 35,000. Low and mid -rise development takes a very long time to build at the scale needed to z adequately address the housing crisis. olw i�R Why Don't the New Zones; Limit heights for all tall buildings? • Growing Together proposes two zones where tall buildings are permitted. The SGA3 zone limits height to 25 storeys. The SGA4 zone does not limit height. Both zones have new built -form regulations that are proven to be more effective at ensuring good design, such as tower length, floor area, and separation. Kitchener has, for decades, been planned with zones that do not have height limits. So then why limit tall building height at all, if these new built -form regulations are better? • There are a couple of reasons; o We want to create the best possible transition between zones. This is a complex existing geography, so we have to consider many other things as well, but the principle is that we have tried to place the SGA2 zone next to the SGA1 zone, the SGA3 zone next to the SGA2 zone, and the SGA4 zone next to the SGA3 zone. o We have applied the SGA4 zone in two basic ways; to very large sites that can be well designed to meet our proposed by-law regulations at the highest densities, and at key locations closest to ION stops. In other areas, properties are often small and oddly shaped. These areas are still appropriate for tall buildings but their impacts are less predictable, and therefore a height limit is proposed. o It is also important to try to create opportunities for all types of buildings, particular housing. This includes a range of tall buildings that can serve the widest possible variety of needs.1101 By creating as many opportunities as possible for as many different types of buildings as possible, more people's needs can be met more effectively and affordably. Some other cities have only one set of regulations for tall buildings, which results in only one type of tall building being viable to build. This is one reason why some people feel that Toronto's condo towers are 'all the same' and are only suitable for one Are 4 0 specific demographic of people. " TP ,'R Why Don't the New Zones; Allow all areas of PMTSAs to have mid -rise and high-rise buildings? While some community members were concerned about taller buildings, others noted that due to the housing crisis and climate emergency, combined with the investment made in ION LRT, it seemed odd to restrict any areas of our PMTSAs to low-rise forms only. • Our analysis shows that even with roughly % of the geography limited to low-rise buildings, Kitchener's PMTSAs will still be able to grow responsibly for many decades to come. We have the capacity to continue to accommodate demand without widespread displacement. • We are also balancing a wide range of perspectives, including those who value and prefer low-rise areas. We think that people who would like to live in a low-rise area near transit should have the opportunity to do so. By creating permissions to allow a broad range of missing middle low-rise development such as multiplexes and apartment buildings, we can create new housing supply to meet that demand in a low-rise form. • There are many practical challenges to building mid -rise and high-rise buildings in a typical low-rise neighbourhood setting. It can be very difficult and expensive to consolidate enough smaller properties to build larger buildings. It can take much longer as well. • There is room in Kitchener's PMTSAs to accommodate buildings of all shapes and sizes. We want to make sure that our PMTSAs have good opportunities for everyone who wishes to live here, to live in a home that suits their preferences. Opportunity cost is something we considered in this work; allowing larger buildings might result in more overall housing in these existing low-rise areas in the long term, but those larger buildings could take much longer to be built. By creating permissions that allow smaller, incremental development on a single lot in these areas, we can get more housing units built more quickly. 485 0 , F rR Why Don't the New Zones; Require parking? Some community members commented that they felt it wasn't possible to live in Kitchener without a personal vehicle. However, we also met several people who were already living without a car, and others who were actively reducing their personal vehicle use by walking, cycling, rolling and taking transit more often. Growing Together allows development to provide the amount of parking needed to meet demand. Requiring more parking than is needed through by-law regulations results in something called 'induced demand', where we inadvertently subsidize and encoL --- personal vehicle use by designing our city more for the convenience of cars than for the quality of life of its people. Many cities are removing minimum parking requirements. Some within districts like PMTSAs, while others are removing parkii wide. What about people who need a car? That's why we're proposing to let demand for parking determine the provision of parking within new development. People who r car can purchase or rent a unit where parking is provided, while people who don't rely on a car don't have to pay for parking they using. A parking space in an PMTSA can cost well over $50,000 to build and adds significantly to the cost of housing. ' A parking space can also cost $200 or more a month for people who rent their apartments. Increasingly, because of reduced parking rates, this is an optional additional purchase the renter can make if they choose to. However, in most older apartment buildings, the cost is included in the rent with no way to opt out, and is paid by the tenant regardless of whether they have a personal vehicle. Why Don't the New Zones; Regulate density though Floor Space Ratio? Typically—though not always— Kitchener has regulated density with a calculation known as Floor Space Ratio (FSR). FSR is a way to measure how much development can be built on a property, based on the size of that property. FSR is not a very useful or predictable tool for guiding development in a complex, urban, already -built-up area like Kitchener's PMTSAs; Because the denominator in FSR is lot area, it only works well where most lots are approximately the same size. • FSR tells us little about what a building looks like, how well it's designed or how it performs in a particular context. • Kitchener's Missing Middle and Affordable Housing report shows that FSR maximums make it harder and less affordable to bu and mid -rise housing. Growing Together instead proposes a wider range of built form regulations to ensure appropriate built -forms, including; • A wider range of height limits, including zoning limits of 3, 8, and 25 storeys, as well as areas where heights are not directly re! by zoning. • New regulations that have a much more direct impact on building design, including building length, tower footprint size, towe setbacks, tower separation, required windows, and more. For example, Station Park in Midtown has site-specific zoning that allows up to 7.5 FSR, with five towers ranging from 18 to over 50 storeys. To compare, Charlie West has one tower at 31 storeys, with an FSR of 14. � Concerns I'm Concerned About: Displacement Won't new development displace existing residents? Displacement is a serious issue that most impacts lower income residents of Kitchener. The City is taking several steps to mitigate the impacts of displacement, including; • We are currently exploring what tools are available to Kitchener to combat eviction and displacement - tools like a Rental Replacement By-law. An update on the progress of this work will be provided to Council in December. Kitchener currently creates approximately 47 new housing units for every unit lost to redevelopment • We have also considered the impacts of displacement when applying our zoning through Growing Together. By focusing our highest density zones on lands that often do not currently have existing residents, we can add thousands of new homes in the coming decades while minimizing the displacement of existing residents. • That said, some displacement is still occurring. This is mostly due to something known as'renoviction', where an existing rental building evicts residents, renovates the building, and leases to new tenants at a higher cost. This is not something that can be addressed through planning tools like Official Plans or Zoning By-laws. 489 OU�.R I'm Concerned About: Gentrification What is gentrification? Gentrification is an effect on a neighbourhood where wealthier people move in, causing the price of housing to go up, bringing in more expensive shops and services, and making the neighbourhood more difficult for lower income people to stay. Won't new development cause gentrification? Gentrification is an often -misunderstood challenge for growing cities. A common belief is that new development makes housing more expensive within a neighbourhood. However, multiple studies haverp oven this is not true, and that new development lowers the cost of housing within neighbourhoods. The most common cause of gentrification is a lack of new development in a given area. By not building new housing as demand for housing increases, the existing housing stock becomes increasingly more expensive, pricing out existing residents over time and providing no alternatives for people who wish to remain in the neighbourhood. Research shows; • New buildings absorb demand from higher -income households, freeing up lower cost units for lower income residents: "The supply of new market rate units triggers moving chains that quickly reach middle- and low-income neighborhoods and individuals. Thus, new market -rate construction loosens the housing market in middle- and low-income areas even in the short run." –City-wide effects of new housing supply: Evidence from moving chains, 2021. • New residential units within a neighbourhood decrease rents by about 6%. The increase in housing supply has a downward impact on housing price; "New buildings decrease nearby rents by 5 to 7 percent relative to locations slightly farther away or developed later, and they increase in -migration from low-income areas. Results are driven by a large supply effect — we show that new buildings absorb many high-income households — that overwhelms any offsetting endogenous amenity effect. The latter may be small because most new buildings go into already -changing areas. Contrary to common concerns, new buildings slow local rent increases rather tha initiate or accelerate them." –Supply Shock Versus Demand Sock: The Local Effects of New Housing in Low -Income Areas, 2020. i This means that new development actually attracts low-income residents to move to an area, rather than gentrifying them out of an area. It's important to emphasize this because it's the opposite of how gentrification is commonly understood to work. 0 490 o10,, Tt.R I'm Concerned About: Traffic Won't car traffic get worse with all these new people? Yes and no. Traffic impacts can be a challenging thing to understand. Any time more drivers are added to an area, traffic is increased. However, there are a couple of important things to consider; • We say 'drivers' rather than 'people' for a reason. New people don't make traffic worse by themselves, new cars do. By focusing growth around transit, and by making it easier to get around without a car, adding people in PMTSAs results in proportionally less vehicular traffic than other forms of growth. • Here's an example. Let's say a new company locates in one of Kitchener's PMTSAs and hires 1,000 employees. o If all 1,000 of those workers live in a new subdivision or another city, then we will have created 2,000 new car trips into and out of the PMTSA every workday. Those people may also want to come downtown for events, to have a night out, or many other reasons, and would mostly have to drive. o If those 1,000 workers live within an PMTSA, they can walk, cycle, roll or take transit, creating no new daily car trips. They are also able to access events, restaurants and more without having to use a vehicle. o This is an oversimplification. There are many factors informing where people live and work, and the modes they use to travel around the city. A person living on the edge of the city may not be able to afford a personal vehicle and will rely on transit. A person living in the city centre may choose to drive for most of their needs anyway. o However, the principle has been well studied and the conclusions are clear; focusing growth around transit results in far fewer car trips, system -wide. Growth in PMTSAs will result in more traffic than exists today, but much less traffic than if that growth were directed elsewhere. 491 oL i�,R I'm Concerned About: Public Spaces How will we provide enough public space for all these new people? Our colleagues in the Parks division are working on the City's parkland acquisition strategy though their Places & Spaces project. The Spaces component of that work was approved by council in 2022. Since then, changes to provincial legislation have impacted how parkland can be acquired through new development. Staff continue to work on several approaches to better public spaces such as; • Acquiring new and improving existing park spaces through private development. There are new public parks proposed as part of the Station Park, Metz and 30-40 Margaret Ave. developments. The TEK project at 30 Francis is also redesigning and reconstructing Francis Green as part of that development • Adding new Privately Owned Public Spaces or POPS. New POPS are being added through development on projects such as Young Condos, The Breithaupt Block Phase 3, Station Park, The Metz (these last two are in addition to public park spaces also provided). • Creating better streets for pedestrians. We have reallocated Gaukel Street for pedestrians, events and celebrations. The Charlie West development contributed to that by resurfacing a section of the street. Garment Street is a new pedestrian friendly street as part of the 100 Victoria development. • Creating better trail connections and mid -block connections. There have been recent improvements as part of developments such as Catalyst 137 (new multi -use trail), The Bright Building at 741 King W. (new mid -block connection), the 305 King W. office building and the LCBO across the street (new mid -block connection) and The Metz (new multi -use trail through the site to connect the Iron Horse Trail to the Mill ION stop. • Adding more and higher quality amenity space within new development. Many new developments have a range of high quality indoor and outdoor amenity spaces. While amenities are not a replacement for public parks, they do provide significant additional recreational and leisure space for new Kitchener residents. Recent developments have included gyms, swimming pools, basketball , courts, bowling alleys, theatres, and generous outdoor seating areas. 492 oL i�,R I'm Concerned About: Shadows Won't new tall buildings create too many shadows? • Shadow impacts are one of many things we have taken under consideration. Here are a few of the ways we are mitigating shadow impacts in Growing Together; o Through built form regulations, particularly physical separation, maximum building length and maximum floor plate area. This will ensure that tall buildings aren't too big and/or too close together. Through the continued implementation of our Urban Design Manual, which considers additional criteria such as tower overlook, placement and orientation. Shadow studies are also required as part of our site plan application process. o Through a transitional regulation that limits building height to 12m within 12m of a low-rise zoned area. Wouldn't limiting building height more also do more to prevent shadow impacts? • Not necessarily. Shadow impacts are dynamic, throughout the day and across the seasons. There is no single measurement that ensures the least amount of impact from shadowing. • In fact, strict limits on building height can worsen shadow impacts in many cases. With shorter permitted heights, buildings get wider and their floor plate areas get larger. This creates significantly greater shadow impacts on areas closest to the development. • Shadows are always in motion. The further away a shadow is from its origin point, the faster it moves over the ground. This means that a taller, more slender tower will cast a longer shadow, but that shadow will be cast on an individual property for a shorter amount of time. Shadows from a shorter, wider tower will not reach as far or impact as many properties total, but the properties that are affected are impacted for a much longer time. 493 oL�x I'm Concerned About: Affordability What good is new housing if it's not affordable? • Housing affordability is of primary importance. Here are a few ways Growing Together helps with housing affordability; o By implementing Inclusionary Zoning, which allow us to require affordable housing units and can only be applied within PMTSAs. o By removing many of the barriers that are preventing low-rise missing middle and mid -rise housing options. o By allowing for more housing supply of all forms, particularly apartment buildings— either rental or ownership. In August 2023, a detached home averaged $884,000 in Waterloo Region. An apartment averaged $485,000. (source, Waterloo Region Record, "Average price for a detached home drops $120,000 in two months in Waterloo Region" September 61h, 2023)! • It is also important to create new market -rate housing. While deeply affordable and supportive housing is very important, most of Kitchener's growing population does not meet the criteria for subsidized housing, but still needs housing they can afford. These numbers fluctuate and are highly dependent on what kinds of homes are on the market in a given month. In June of 2023, for example, the price of a detached home was over $1 million, and the price of an apartment was $470,000. Generally though, we can say an apartment costs about half as much as a detached home, not including the additional interest paid on a higher mortgage principle. For the last 40 years, housing completions have lagged behind population growth. At the same time, household sizes have been declining, meaning fewer people live in existing homes than ever before. New housing needs to not only keep up with population growth, but also overcome a significant existing housing deficit and changes in household composition. New market -rate housing supply is needed to combat the housing crisis, in addition to new subsidized and affordable housing. It is important to understand thatjust because someone currently has housing, doesn't mean that housing is appropriate for their needs, affordable, or safe. An average home in Kitchener requires more than 60% of an average income to afford. This means that many people are sacrificing other important needs to pay for their housing, such as food, or childcare. It can also mean that in some cases, people are choosing to stay in an unsafe situation, such as living with an abusive partner or family member, because they cannot afford to leave and find new accommodations. Just because someone has a home does not mean they don't have serious housing affordability concerns and consequences. 494 oLP,x I'm Concerned About: Cultural Heritage Won't this new growth and intensification cause us to lose important cultural heritage resources? • Not necessarily. All of the existing heritage tools the city uses remain in effect, including; o Heritage Conservation Districts for both Victoria Park and Civic Centre. The policies in these plans remain and take precedence over the new land use and zoning anywhere there is a conflict, though we have also worked to minimize any potential for conflict. o Cultural Heritage Landscapes will receive new Official Plan policies through Growing Together. o Heritage planning staff and Kitchener city council continue to designate important cultural heritage assets, including some recently and within PMTSAs. o Heritage Impact Assessments continue to be part of the site plan application process for any development application on or adjacent to a cultural heritage resource. • Cultural heritage considerations have also been a huge part of shaping Kitchener's recent growth. This includes successful adaptive reuse projects such as Kaufman Lofts and The Tannery. It includes buildings that are reused with additions such as Arrow Lofts and the Glove Box. And it includes buildings that have incorporated heritage design elements or salvaged important features such as One Young's glass exterior honouring the Mayfair hotel or The Young Condos incorporation of a rebuilt fagade from the John Forsyth building. • In fact, redevelopment of properties through the adaptive reuse of existing structures can save heritage buildings from decay and later demolition. It can also lead directly to designation of those heritage assets, as explained in this recent article. All of this work over the years has allowed us to conserve important cultural heritage resources while allowing Kitchener's PMTSAs to continue to grow, evolve and adapt to meet the needs of its community. 485 o,R I'm Concerned About: Sustainability How does Growing Together help address the climate emergency? • There are several ways that growth in our PMTSAs will help lead to a more sustainable future; o Directing intensification via infill development has been determined as the single most impactful munici aI policy for re greenhouse gas emissions (nearly twice as impactful as heating electrification, which comes in second) o Growing around transit and active transportation options like protected cycling lanes can have a huge impact on our transportation emissions, which are the single biggest source of emissions.0 o The City of Kitchener is pursuing a downtown District Energy strategy, which could supply sustainable geothermal heatir cooling to thousands of new homes in the coming years. o The City of Kitchener is also working on developing Green Development Standards that will apply to development. 2 MILLION TONNES COBE 1 MILLION TONNES RE ZERO TOTAL 6.2%ml �'.. Rtl81pN ea6s A� 2010 2615 2050 4597,417 4,252,461 901.942 ■ ■ ■ ■ lAW6PoAlA1gX WO7NNME/SOpOLS IWMF AOPotlA1NlE WASTE It's important to note that between 2010 and 2015, while overall greenhouse gas emissions in Waterloo Region were reduced by 5.2%, transportation emissions actually increased (cl imateacti onwr.ca). GHG Reduction Potential 4 ttE TIO<hl¢sw Policies that create urban infill have been found to be the most impactful in mitigating climate change, nearly twice as impactful as the next most beneficial change. I'm Concerned About: Change I like Kitchener the way it is, why does it have to change? • Kitchener, like all cities, is always undergoing change, and always will. Cities need to evolve to meet the needs of their constantly changing communities. Yes, Kitchener's PMTSAs are changing more quickly—this is because Kitchener's PMTSAs serve such a huge range of evolving needs. • Change is also accelerated by challenging times. The housing crisis and the climate emergency are both generational challenges that need immediate attention. As we've examined in this guide, PMTSAs have a central role to play in addressing both of these critically important issues. • Change is never easy. But it's important to remember that the policies and regulations proposed by Growing Together aren't the cause of the change we're seeing in our PMTSAs. They are intended to help guide the change we are already experiencing. Background Reports &Studies Background Reports & Studies On the following pages, we will look back at many of the reports and studies that have informed Growing Together. All of the links below are live and working as of November 3rd 2023. The list of studies considered: International City (Con't) City (Con't) • United Nations Sustainable Development Goals City of Kitchener Official Plan Places & Spaces Federal Municipal Housing Pledge Cycling &Trails Master Plan • CMHC Canada's Housing Supply Shortages • Kitchener Growth Management Strategy Downtown Kitchener Vision Provincial • PARTS Central Plan Kitchener's Sustainable Urban Forestry Strategy • Bill 109, More Homes for Everyone Act • PARTS Midtown Plan Urban Design Manual • Bill 23, More Homes Built Faster Act • PARTS Rockway Plan Victoria Park Heritage Conservation District • Ontario Housing Affordability Task Force Report Neighbourhood Planning Reviews Civic Centre Heritage Conservation District • A Place to Grow • Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 Enabling Missing Middle & Affordable Housing Cultural Heritage Landscapes Regional Inclusionary Zoning Downtown District Energy • Regional Official Plan Housing for All • WRCF 2023 Waterloo Region Vital Signs Report Kitchener Corporate Climate Action Plan City Make it Kitchener 1.0 • 2019-2022 Strategic Plan Make it Kitchener 2.0 • 2023-2026 Strategic Plan Shape DTK 2020 Ok. United Nations Sustainable Development Goals Growing Together supports several of the United Nations' Sustainable Development goals, including; • 3. Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages. Transit - oriented development as encouraged through work like Growing Together makes communities more walkable, provides more people with greater access to recreational opportunities, results in cleaner air, and more. • 7. Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all. Working together with our downtown district energy project, Growing Together will help provide more people with greater access to cleaner and more reliable energy. • S. Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth. Growing Together helps provide a planning framework for the continued and sustained growth of Kitchener's economy in many diverse sectors. • 10. Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable. Growing Together works toward achieving all of these objectives by creating a framework that allows for a full range of housing types and employment opportunities, aligns with sustainable urbanism practices, responds to local climate change adaptation and mitigation needs, and fosters a safer, more welcoming city for all. THE 17 GOALS 169 3857 1345 7775 i roIU R CMHC Canada's Housing Supply Shortage Growing Together aligns with the key points of CMHC's Housing Supply Shortage report; • "Housing affordability has become a widespread problem over the last decade. Large- scale additional supply of housing will be required to restore affordability. Conventional Caanadanada's Housing planning approaches for long-term supply needs do not take affordability into account." Supply Shortages: Estimating what • "Our central case—and approach—is that with all else being equal, 3.5 million more is needed to solve Canada's housing housing units are needed by 2030." affordability crisis _ by 2030 • "Critical to understanding affordability then are the economic patterns of housing •..E." E• u•E=a== demand and supply. Having a method to project how much housing supply is required to achieve affordability means that we need to take all the factors driving housing demand into account." j • "If the average household were to buy the average house on sale in 2021, they would be devoting60% of their disposable income to housing costs in Ontario and British p g {i Columbia." • "We project that the stock of housing will be close to 19 million housing units by 2030 if current rate of construction trends continues. But in our central scenario, we project that over 22 million units will be required to achieve affordability for everyone living in Canada." CMHC.ca Canada`" 0-00 \ F j Of *R Bill 109, More Homes for Everyone Act Growing Together aligns with Bill 109, the More Homes for Everyone Act. While most of the changes introduced through Bill 109 aren't specific to land use and zoning work like Growing Together, it's important to ensure that our policies work well with provincial legislation and support the changes in planning process and implementation that the legislation requires. Bill 109, More Homes for Everyone Act, 2022 Versions ones, a' Bill 23, More Homes Built Faster Act Growing Together aligns with Bill 23, the More Homes Built Faster. While most of the changes introduced through Bill 23 aren't specific to land use and zoning work like Growing Together, it's important to ensure that our policies work well with provincial legislation and support the changes in planning process and implementation that the legislation requires. Bill 23, More Homes Built Faster Act, 2022 Versions acrsuwm.cwmivas aeeva aare�wmiien� Ontario Housing Affordability Task Growing Together supports the Ontario Housing Affordability Task Force Report recommendations of; • 1. Set a goal of building 1.5 million new homes in ten years. • 2. Amend the Planning Act, Provincial Policy Statement, and Growth Plans to set "growth in the full spectrum of housing supply' and "intensification within existing built-up areas' of municipalities as the most important residential housing priorities in the mandate and purpose. • 3. Limit exclusionary zoning in municipalities through binding provincial action. • 8. Allow "as of right" zoning up to unlimited height and unlimited density in the immediate proximity of individual Protected Major transit stations within two years if municipal zoning remains insufficient to meet provincial density targets. • 9. Allow "as of right" zoning of six to 11 storeys with no minimum parking requirements on any streets utilized by public transit (including streets on bus and streetcar routes). • 12. Create a more permissive land use, planning, and approvals system. Not all of these recommendations are directly targeted at Kitchener or Kitchener's Protected Major Transit Station Areas, and may or may not be required exactly as written if or when implemented through provincial legislation. However, we are supportive of and aligning with the principles behind these recommendations, which will ensure that the work we do through Growing Together anticipates future provincial direction on housing affordability. Report Report of the Ontario Housing Affordability Task Force A Place to Grow 2020 Growing Together supports the guiding principles of A Place to Grow. They are; • Support the achievement of complete communities that are designed to support healthy and active living and meet people's needs for daily living throughout an entire lifetime. • Prioritize intensification and higher densities in strategic growth areas to make efficient use of land and infrastructure and support transit viability. • Provide flexibility to capitalize on new economic and employment opportunities as they emerge, while providing certainty for traditional industries, including resource-based sectors. • Support a range and mix of housing options, including additional residential units and affordable housing, to serve all sizes, incomes, and ages of households. • Improve the integration of land use planning with planning and investment in infrastructure and public service facilities, including integrated service delivery through community hubs, by all levels of government. • Provide for different approaches to manage growth that recognize the diversity of communities in the GGH. • Protect and enhance natural heritage, hydrologic, and landform systems, features, and functions. • Support and enhance the long-term viability and productivity of agriculture by protecting prime agricultural areas and the agri-food network. • Conserve and promote cultural heritage resources to support the social, economic, and cultural well-being of all communities, including First Nations and Metis communities. • Integrate climate change considerations into planning and managing growth such as planning for more resilient communities and infrastructure —that are adaptive to the impacts of a changing climate — and moving towards environmentally sustainable communities by incorporating approaches to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 Growing Together supports the policies in the Provincial Policy Statement such as; • promoting efficient development and land use patterns which sustain the financial well- being of the Province and municipalities over the long term; • accommodating an appropriate affordable and market-based range and mix of residential types (including single -detached, additional residential units, multi -unit housing, affordable housing and housing for older persons), employment (including industrial and commercial), institutional (including places of worship, cemeteries and long-term care homes), recreation, park and open space, and other uses to meet long-term needs; • promoting the integration of land use planning, growth management, transit -supportive development, intensification and infrastructure planning to achieve cost-effective development patterns, optimization of transit investments, and standards to minimize land consumption and servicing costs; • Planning authorities shall identify appropriate locations and promote opportunities for transit -supportive development, accommodating a significant supply and range of housing options through intensification and redevelopment where this can be accommodated taking into account existing building stock or areas, including brownfield sites, and the availability of suitable existing or planned infrastructure and public service facilities required to accommodate projected needs. • Preparing for the regional and local impacts of a changing climate Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 Regional Official Plan Growing Together supports the Regional Official Plan, specifically Regional Official Plan Amendment No. 6 which; • Establishes the boundaries for Kitchener's 10 Protected Major Transit Station Areas. • Plans for equity and inclusion, including; o Adding objectives to plan in a manner that improves social equity and overall quality of life, including human health, for people of all ages, abilities and incomes. o Introducing policies to improve accessibility for persons of all ages and abilities, and at all times of year by addressing land use barriers that restrict their full participation in society • Requires Affordable and "Missing Middle" housing, including; Avregional official plan _� ` U b li ca-. more equ hle, Driving a su maele community o Setting an overall target of a minimum of 30 percent of new ownership and rental housing being affordable to low- and moderate -income households. o Providing for a diverse range and mix of housing options to accommodate people at all stages of life, and meet the needs of all household sizes and incomes. o Supporting the use of inclusionary zoning in Protected Major Transit Station Areas, to increase the supply of affordable housing close to transit services. o Permitting "missing middle" housing on a residential lot within the Urban Area and Township Urban Areas • Requires climate action including; o Requiring the development of 15 -minute neighbourhoods in the cities and townships where residents can meet their daily needs for living by a short trip from home by walking, cycling, and rolling. o Supporting mobility networks that prioritize walking, cycling and rolling over automobile travel to reduce auto -dependency, support active transportation, and reduce greenhouse emissions. WRCF 2023 Waterloo Region Vital Signs Report Growing Together acknowledges the Vital Signs Report which shows that Waterloo Region is the fastest growing region in Canada, the 71h fastest growing region in Canada and the USA Up 10 fastest growing larger--pRliton areas in Caaada/USA PApMI°tlaD iR 2022 v°"Ms 2013 I Myrtle M. -C.., N ­Myrtle B ... h, EC NC combined, and the only region in Canada in the top 10. R -,UT The report also demonstrates that in 2022, 4.7 people migrated to Waterloo Region for 4.Ausen RantllRxk-Georg toVss+s, T% 0. 5. Boise Ciry, ID 3� . CCorel-Fort Myers, FL -1J. every new home constructed, which is further exacerbating the already severe housing JKI=e" ,-C.m dgaope -wete1.(CMA),On- - B-FoyetteNlle-Bprirgtlele-Rogers, AR - tJ. e crisis. 9. RaleigM1-C." -162% 114. Lm -9.1--g E---- CA -21% Growing Together provides more pathways to a greater variety of housing types. While we C°pad° �9B% can't directly build homes, we can help create more and better opportunities for a range of A- ­ OECD' =`'% D• �..4 % housing types through our official plan policies and zoning by-law regulations. AVereseDJ• M26% w�p�imiee e,t,metmee e,er y e1aM1yar.sae.-Me_Breae.oECD.D­etle. >a;w� atM1w. P°P,I"= 9r & Oh -ds) van°, ha°dtp st°rlf Ith°ta°Rds) -a- Population growth -Housing stoM 250 22,7 200 50 4.3 14.1 11.9 11.5 11.4 10.0 8.8 0 6.9 7.9 9.1 5.6 4.2 3.D 4.1 5.3 4.B 4.1 3.8 4. 5.0 4.1 4.0 3.9 3.85.3 5.6 00 ,p ,p26 2.7 2b ,(2n,3 2.8 3.0 2.9 1.8 4.5 3.2 4.1 3.9 3.1 3.] 4.8 h00ry IP e,idgew ,wp wpWotia mimosmerebr]uly a�evcM1 rb�,��g ca,deaa,`�oaly, : w me atro. e,., yre.I.�.Seu�rca•51tw',�rcPaConarbann�nl Polwbtun [stimMe.ona cMFlc -I % Off*,I2 2019-2022 Strategic Plan Growing Together supports the City's strategic plan objectives, particularly; • People -Friendly Transportation o Our goal is to transform how people move through the city by making the transportation network safe, convenient, comfortable and connected. • Environmental Leadership o Our goal is to achieve a healthy and livable community by mitigating and adapting to climate change and by conserving natural resources. • Vibrant Economy o Our goal is to build a vibrant city by making strategic investments to support job creation, economic prosperity, thriving arts and culture, and great places to live. • Caring Community o Our goal is to enhance people's sense of belonging and connection by providing welcoming community spaces and programs; better engaging, serving and supporting our diverse populations and helping to make housing affordable. Q r MA People -friendly Environmental leadership Vibrant economy transportation �i_ 508 0k�� ,R 2023-2026 Strategic Plan Growing Together supports our strategic plan objectives, particularly; • Building a Connected City Together o We live in all kinds of neighbourhoods and types of housing. We work together to ensure that we each have secure and affordable homes. We get around easily, sustainably and safely to the places and spaces that matter most to us. • Cultivating a Green City Together o We follow a sustainable path to a greener, healthier city. We work together to enhance and protect our parks and natural environment while transitioning to a low - carbon future. We support businesses and residents to make more climate -positive choices. • Creating an Economically -Thriving City Together o We use our collective strengths to grow an agile and diverse local economy powered by talented entrepreneurs, workers and artists. We work together to create opportunities for everyone and a resilient future that propels our city forward.. • Fostering a Caring City Together o We welcome residents of all ages, backgrounds and lived experiences. We work together on the decisions that matter to us and have a meaningful influence in our community. We're healthy and thriving as we easily access the diverse and inclusive programs and services we need to succeed. • Stewarding a Better City Together o We, the City's employees, are stewards of Kitchener's present and its future. We're responsive, innovative, diverse and accountable public servants who work together efficiently to serve residents. We remove barriers and champion residents' collective vision for a better city and a better world.. City of Kitchener Official Plan Growing Together updates and implements the City's Official Plan. A couple of examples; • We will be a healthy and thriving City and will be more walkable, more transit -supportive and ultimately more 'urban' and residents will enjoy a high quality of life. Our city will celebrate creativity in design and support diversity in urban form. We will continue to strive for balanced growth with an ever increasing emphasis on intensification, particularly in our Urban Growth Centre (Downtown), Protected Major Transit Station Areas, nodes and corridors, which maximizes the use of our existing infrastructure and services. A complete community creates and provides access to a mix of land uses including, a full range and mix of housing, including affordable housing, recreation, commerce, community and cultural facilities, health care facilities, employment, parks and open spaces distributed and connected in a coherent and efficient manner. A complete community also supports the use of public transit and active transportation, enabling residents to meet most of their daily needs within a short distance of their homes. CITY OF KITCHENER OFFICIAL PLAN A Complete & HeKitchener ■ ■ As approw:d,'ith with modifications, bythe Region of Waterloo on November 19,2G14 Municipal Housing Pledge Growing Together supports the Municipal Housing Pledge objectives, particularly; • Updates to Kitchener's Official Plan and Zoning By-law to further enable an increased supply of missing middle housing. • Continued advancement of work on updates to land use and zoning within its Protected Major Transit Station Areas • Continued work to implement the recommendations and action items from Kitchener's Housing for All Strategy, specifically including those that enable an increased housing supply or streamlining development approvals. • Continued collaboration with Provincial and Federal governments to develop strategies to increase housing supply capacity including the identification of funding required for infrastructure. • Tracking and monitoring housing supply capacity, housing starts (i.e., building permits) for new housing projects, including attainable, supportive, and affordable housing projects, through the Annual Growth Management Monitoring report. City of Kitchener (3 Municipal Housing Pledge Tackling the housin crisis locally means eveny.ee needs to work together - building on our proven bmnraisirg approach that includes all oilers of government, the private sector, the not-for-profit sada, educational Institutions and moat importantly, all Klchener maidens to help build a stronger Kitchener and a stronger 0n1a6o. Dellvadrg 1.5 million homes in Ontario, Including 35,000 in Kgchererwll require the provincial and federal governments to imwat in change a municipaitks to do thelr part to efficiently enable add III onal housing supply. We Hill rely on the private sects as s vital partner in the delivery of homes and will le-ageWulk bupon our strong working alatiorl with development iMustry partners that includes active cdkbmation to improve all aspects of the housing supply process. We 111 also work with aur eduational institutions and the not-fa-pmfd sect, to bring about effecthe new models for housingaHrdautity and the stilled people to make them happen. Our gm W ng and Wham canmunM1y adl I Conti nue to welcome new people In all neighbourhoods In a variety of housi ng bans as we grow and .lunge. Byworld together acmes the province, we can help meminn gl ire and Ontario, housing .mels Wewill get it done. t uptlalntonlc P.--loaf- 3 rilvipmdekhoumrq; z. canwargalRiki.mronm.ntaawmaMwec[owlma..ewer[.,r.wdr.eaauannen:m�ontatmuwoaaaaite 3. omgkearo fty-owmaepvpalyrevwwaMconeawewarkGwaes Mkijntouseaepuaaruala,hind Ory MslatMdnebpnmtol#Meade,mmmurkN, hebwmaewtrertL,ad/wbdowmaMt amadiyMia'iiqudrs: <. oarthwN alrarmneit T IaunaeasantupateeinlGClereY2m2madogrmttliape BadwwMSNdyb Me fire Muq.usingMebpren1[krpahnekpnperrmttee and othwfootz wTasawia/reMegr�nmis;Mwea, NNT9Is ami[ipaRe to Owmn arrctra'vred arA cook lnyucl NMe 9reanfiab pwv N; i ooninuedaerorcc 111 work onuplafe, to and use aMmnTRwifM'n llz Veim awasut'a,Nea, and, G oontnurw wM to upNtelam use ow IN Helen WIll -onmN linen aM Pmeeetlormearartlary ehn; Contnueawakfoim0lcmentfnorecarunemetionsaMacUmaemslroml(e<MoeisXaragMMSVaIep/,si>[�f aW irdW'upihosafhaf amdaenRvame Ms:gsuRphasueamknrq de+Ammaa+Rwa+k B Comhuetl[otlahwalionwiMlha Yktabo Regan Nome Buktlas.t¢a6albneMgtcM1aero>ItlopnmltWaonCarvnrtrea, aMonMs. foieenfifv laaom�,ataB�aMasu,natselas6,nFattrietueteniq,rmwrcmvkelm }eas.atllard v W Y aM icuvr✓d raivtiN'. IviBp a namery na'ait incl aoih awdn irowinR Ileo aa�aR[amn of roam re�wrea mr Immamnere, ora R hnamamtleanwim inusimsiggyraoairy inu9rg sfafslfe., waaugpem:lslhrmx eediw-hr--�f fa m neaHweadehwsnmpmNofz,tMauRk R..+. Kitchener Growth Management Strateg) Growing Together supports Kitchener Growth Management Strategy, particularly the objectives in Goal 2: Create Vibrant Urban Places; • Add a combination of 10,000 new residents and jobs to the Urban Growth Centre from 2008-2031, with a target of 66% of those as residents in order to increase the ratio of residents to jobs to at least 40:60. • Continually increase the focus of growth to the intensification areas identified through the KGMS and that new intensification areas be added only as necessary. • Determine and implement the urban amenities that can make Kitchener's intensification areas successful, including access to natural lands. • Focus streetscape improvement projects in intensification areas. • Add elements to the urban fabric that enables the city to create, attract, retain and develop talent. • Ensure a mixture of land uses, densities, housing and transportation options. GROWTH MA "PLANN/NG F PARTS Central Plan Growing Together implements the PARTS Central Plan in coordination with new and emerging planning and community needs, changes to legislation, and more. It meets the stated vision objectives of the plan; • Manage Growth & Change • Ensure an Appropriate Mix of Land Uses • Enhance Transportation Choice & Connectivity • Enhance Placemaking, Safety & Community Design • Guide Public & Private Investment The PARTS Central Plan contains many principles that are being implemented through the Cycling & Trails Master Plan and Places & Spaces, for example. We have also considered the land use recommendations of the PARTS Central Plan when applying our new land uses and zones. L.d [13 oL146, ,,,a PARTS Midtown Plan Growing Together implements the PARTS Midtown Plan in coordination with new and emerging planning and community needs, changes to legislation, and more. It meets the stated vision objectives of the plan; • Position the LRT Stop as a Key Gateway into Midtown & Reinforce King Street as a Central Spine • Preserve & Enhance Existing Residential Neighbourhoods • Conserve & Celebrate Identified Cultural Heritage Landscapes & Assets • Expand & Support the Cluster of Regionally Significant Institutions & Employment • Introduce High -Quality Public Spaces as a Focus for New Development • Support Reurbanization of Large Parcels by Introducing Finer Grain Street & Block Patterns. • Improve Northeast -Southwest Connectivity Through the Station Area • Support the Diversification of Midtown's Housing Supply • Reduce the Supply of and Demand For Surface Parking • Incorporate Leadership in Sustainable Development and Green Design The PARTS Midtown Plan contains many principles that are being implemented through the Cycling & Trails Master Plan and Places & Spaces, for example. We have also considered the land use recommendations of the PARTS Midtown Plan when applying our new land uses and zones.146, DVH n•,� n d FN F i OlYSR PARTS Rockway Plan Growing Together implements the PARTS Rockway Plan in coordination with new and emerging planning and community needs, changes to legislation, and more. It meets the stated vision objectives of the plan; • Optimize Investment in Transit by Positioning the LRT Stops as Key Gateways into the Station Area • Better Integrate the Mill Stop With the Broader Station Area • Transform King Street as a Gateway Into Downtown Kitchener • Conserve and Enhance Existing Residential Neighbourhoods • Conserve and Celebrate Identified Cultural Heritage Landscapes and Assets • Support the Ecological Restoration of Schneider and Shoemaker Creeks • Integrate Sustainable Infrastructure and Design Practices • Encourage the Redevelopment of Former Industrial and Underutilized Lands • Establish a Finer -Grained Network of Streets, Blocks and Trail Connections • Ensure Large Redevelopment Projects are Supported With New On -Site Public Spaces • Support the Diversification of Rockway's Housing Supply The PARTS Rockway Plan contains many principles that are being implemented through the Cycling & Trails Master Plan and Places & Spaces, for example. We have also considered the land use recommendations of the PARTS Rockway Plan when applying our new land uses and zones. r Page 51 q OkMR Neighbourhood Planning Review Growing Together continues the work of the Neighbourhood Planning Review process to Neighbourhood Specific Reviews implements the PARTS Plans. Growing Together considers all the NPR draft work and Proposed New Cedar Hill Schneider Creek Secondary Plan engagement, carries forward many of the proposed official plan policies and has evaluated the proposed zoning alongside new and emerging planning and community ' needs, changes to legislation, and more. ! The Central Neighbourhood Urban Design Guidelines, written by residents of those neighbourhoods, have been approved by council and are in effect. They include guidelines for; • Schneider Creek/Cedar Hill Y • Victoria Park • Civic Centre • Mill Courtland/Woodside Park • King Street East • Midtown Enabling Missing Middle & Affordable Housing Growing Together implements the Enabling Missing Middle & Affordable Housing report strategies, particularly; • Improving Housing Diversity ("Choice") - The greatest opportunities for expanding missing middle housing options lie in the Plexes and Low -Rise typologies, which achieve a "sweet spot" of scale, efficiency and ease of entry to the market. The City should consider implementing a comprehensive suite of incentives targeted specifically at either/ both of these typologies, to the full extent possible. • Improving Housing Affordability ("Price") - The affordable housing landscape can benefit indirectly through any form of increased housing supply and diversification. High -Rise built environments where additional efficiencies exist can provide among the most immediate opportunity to leverage the benefits of new market -rate development to help offset lost revenue opportunities in the delivery of more affordable housing. Growing Together also implements the following incentives of the report; • Height & Density Allowance o Introduce further as -of -right provisions in existing City (and potential Regional) policies and by-laws to permit more efficient use of land. • Parking Reduction o Introduce further reductions to parking requirements to both reduce costs and enable more efficient use of available land. Parcel DENSITY NAIfGYWPP DENSITY e '517 07V5r!N dell Inclusionary Zoning Policy and Program Directions Growing Together is being developed alongside our Inclusionary Zoning framework, and the two projects will proceed together to council for approval; • The zoning permissions in Growing Together were developed to provide a balanced mix of a full range of housing options but also seeks to help increase the number of units secured through our inclusionary zoning by-law. This is partially achieved through the implementation of the key direction Building size, o IZ should apply only to buildings with 50 or more residential units (exact threshold to be determined as part of development of draft zoning). Rationale: Focus program on larger developments to avoid potential negative impacts on the financial feasibility of missing middle and medium density housing types, recognizing that these built forms already face significant financial obstacles in PMTSAs. Inclusionary Zoning Policy and Program Directions for Cambridge, Kitchener and Waterloo Discussion Paper Housing For All Growing Together supports the Housing For All strategy, including Priority 1 Actions;��r • Address NIMBYism {'�1 • Develop and promote fact -based research �IT,i1 SIT • Ensure that the right to housing informs and is responsive to climate change • Provide sufficient resources to realize the right to housing Priority 6 Actions; � rI • Report to Council on the feasibility and implications of the following potential �f policies: (I� • Inclusionary Housing Policy and implementing Zoning Bylaw. • Parking Waiver Policy and implementing Zoning Bylaw for affordable housing developments. • Continue improving the development approval process with input from the development industry and the community. • Request the Region to prioritize collaborative determination and designation of Protected Major Transit Station Areas in the Regional Official Plan. i DI ; 0us 9 r ll a blueprint for �,R Kitchener Corporate Climate Action Growing Together aligns with the vision of the Corporate Climate Action Plan; _ • The ultimate vision is to make every decision with the consciousness of ensuring a sustainable world for future generations, embodied through the Iroquois Seventh Generation Principle that the decisions we make today should result in a sustainable world for seven generations. • Growing Together achieves this by; o Supporting the Downtown District Energy plan. o Growing via the intensification of already built-up areas of the city, which has been found as the most impactful municipal policy direction to support the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. o Growing in transit and active transportation supportive ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions related to transportation. Plan Kitchener, Changing For GOOD our mrp,,,t, ni—,au pian Forsu i,,bility is -0 T 1k14 Ef i 0iV5rI2 Make it Kitchener 1.0 Growing Together supports the Make it Kitchener 1.0 objectives for "How to Build A Great City". They are; • Make it Urban o We will continue to develop a dynamic downtown and promote urbanization across the city, lead the way in property redevelopment, and facilitate the creation of sought-after urban amenities. • Make it Vibrant o We will build Kitchener's identity as a festival city, encourage our creative community to use the city as a stage, and support strong communities and neighborhood identities through distinct events and creative expression. • Make it Connect o We will champion the creation of infrastructure to develop an innovation corridor between Waterloo Region and Toronto, build the partnerships needed to support it, and develop the Innovation District as the heart of the system. MAKE IT ITCHENER — SINCE 1854 — In PI'A OR P F 0f 5r!Ni�.`�de,I2 Make it Kitchener 2.0 Growing Together supports all the Make it Kitchener 2.0 objectives, but particularly; • Affordable & Attainable Housing o People can't make a difference in our community if they can't afford to live in our community. We need to ensure a full range of affordable housing options, from supportive housing to attainable home ownership. You told us affordability is our number one challenge. We need to think differently and tackle affordability straight on, by advancing the development of mixed - income housing, where residents of all socioeconomic and cultural backgrounds can flourish together. We also need to think beyond housing to ensure all aspects of our community enable an affordable lifestyle. • A Vibrant, Active City Our community of artists, musicians, restauranteurs, retailers and cultural producers bring our streets and communities to life. They invite us to see and experience the world differently and inspire others to do the same. Collectively, they do more than just nourish our souls, they transform our thinking. They make us feel more, care more and aspire for better. We need to imagine our own vibrant city in our own authentic way. We need to continue to create opportunities and places across our city - in our streets, paths, parks, and places - where difference makers and entrepreneurs can offer experiences and moments that truly matter. We need to think both big and small, to enable the vibrancy, festivals and experiences that can shape Kitchener's culture. Shape DTK 2020 Growing Together supports the Shape DTK 2020 Priorities of; • Ignite downtown as a platform for the next generation of urban shops, restaurants, businesses and services; Foster heartfelt urban experiences; Champion a caring and collaborative community As Shape DTK 2020 says, "Downtown Kitchener (aka DTK) is in the midst of a tremendous transformation. The arrival of the ION transit line will accelerate change: more people, more density, new shops, new buildings, new collisions and creations. Today is a critical moment in time because we have a chance to shape the change to come. We can shape it to match our collective values and desires. We can make sure we're all proud of those changes and involved in realizing them." F i OSU, " Places & Spaces Growing Together supports the City of Kitchener Parks and Open Space Strategy's values; • Wellbeing o Parks are essential to the health and wellbeing of communities. By fostering outdoor activity, parks can contribute to the physical and psychological health of each community by simply providing the opportunity and means to access nature, passive & active exercise, exploration & play, and social respite. • Social Wellness o Parks spaces are often the focal points of communities, fostering community involvement, activity, safety, and awareness of its neighbourhoods. They can deepen peoples' sense of community, and connect diverse neighbourhoods. They provide opportunity for social interactions, relationship building, and support community cohesion. • Environment o Parks are the green assets of the City, serving a valuable role to manage stormwater and home to the majority of the City's large stature trees. They are then critical in the City's effort to adapt to climate changes like increasing rate of high intensity storm events, mitigating rising urban heat effects and extreme weather events. • Economy o Parks most often provide passive economic benefits such as enhancements to residential property values and attractiveness for investments in business, industry and housing developments. • Quality of Life o A city's quality of life is shaped by its community and the amenities that are offered. Communities that are livable, environmentally sustainable, and amenity rich are where people want to live and work. .524 0,tz Cycling & Trails Master Plan Growing Together supports the cycling & trails master plan by; • Aligning with the implementation of the downtown grid network, which brings cycling facilities to downtown Kitchener that are comfortable for people of all ages and abilities. • Through our Priority Streets and other regulations, Growing Together helps meet the Complete Street objectives of the Cycling & Trails Master Plan and helps ensure that development supports; o Walking, cycling and rolling as safe, accessible options for all people within Kitchener's PMTSAs. o Provides adequate indoor secured and outdoor bicycle parking. J_ c nnecting K I T C H E N E R Downtown Kitchener Vision Growing Together includes the Downtown Kitchener Vision as part of our update to the City's Official Plan. A few selected excerpts; Our DTK Radiates Vibrancy • DTK pulses with a positive energy that makes it feel alive — from workdays to date nights and every moment between. It's not just about lively programming; it's about people, places and spaces that hum with purpose. • At its core, our DTK is more than a desirable destination. It's an unmistakable feeling that even if something awesome isn't happening right this minute, it's just around the corner. Our DTK Cultivates Connection • DTK prioritizes pedestrians while making sure smart transportation choices abound. It's the place where accessibility is never an add-on but baked in from the start. In DTK, everyone can easily get where they need to go, within and beyond the core. • DTK is the place to recall fond memories and make new ones. It's where planning draws from rich roots to fortify the future. It's where creating thoughtful public spaces is at the forefront, not an afterthought. It's where being green isn't a talk track, it's a natural choice. It's the place where people form those magnetic bonds that keep drawing them back to the heart of the city. Our DTK Fosters Belonging • People feel seen in DTK. Our downtown community respects and accepts every person for who they are. DTK provides the comforting feeling that they are meant to be here. • Working and living in DTK is not an either/or proposition. Housing is deliberately designed for the diverse majority, not the privileged few. DTK embraces a mix of residents who seek security and take care of their neighbours. • Our DTK evaluates every idea through twin filters of empathy and inclusivity. Only then can an idea become action. The result is a place where every individual can be their authentic self, no matter who else is around. Kitchener's Sustainable Urban Forestry Strategy Growing Together aligns with Kitchener's Sustainable Urban Forestry Strategy by ensuring our policies and regulations consider our ability to conserve and enhance our urban tree canopy. This is done through building setbacks and landscaped area requirements, which facilitate the implementation of the City's Urban Design Manual. Where possible, new medium and large canopy trees are implemented as part of site plan approval and review. Kitchener's Sustainable Urban Forest Strategy 2019-2028 Urban Design Manual Growing Together supports the Urban Design Manual through Official Plan policies and zoning regulations that align with the manual, particularly the sections; • City -Wide • Protected Major Transit Station Areas • Central Neighbourhoods • Downtown • Tall Buildings • Mid -Rise Buildings • Low -Rise Multi -Residential • Low -Rise Commercial & Mixed -Use Buildings • Structured Parking City of Kitchener Victoria Park Heritage Conservation District Growing Together supports the Victoria Park Heritage Conservation District and was developed to support the continued implementation of the policies and objectives within that plan. • `A primary goal of the Plan is to conserve the historic buildings, landscapes and character of the Victoria Park Area, and in a manner that is supportive of and affordable to the resident community - a community with diverse cultural backgrounds, occupations and incomes." Civic Centre Heritage Conservation District Growing Together supports the Civic Centre Heritage Conservation District and was developed to support the continued implementation of the policies and objectives within that plan. "Goal: Maintain the low-density residential character of the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District as the predominant land use, while recognizing that certain areas of the District already have or are intended for a wider range of uses by: • Ensuring that appropriate Official Plan policies, designations and zoning regulations are in effect that support the residential community; • Establishing policies that will consider and mitigate the potential impacts of nonresidential or higher intensity residential uses on the heritage character of low-density residential areas; • Developing area or site-specific policies and guidelines for those areas intended for nonresidential or higher intensity residential uses that will protect key heritage attributes, while allowing greater latitude for potential alterations or redevelopment; • Ensuring that infill development or redevelopment is compatible with the heritage character and pedestrian scale of the District." Cultural Heritage Landscapes Growing Together supports Kitchener's Cultural Heritage Landscapes by implementing a series of Official Plan policies that directly guide the implementation of Cultural Heritage Landscapes. Our policy and zoning regulations also implement completed Cultural Heritage Landscape work done to date. From the study; • Cultural Heritage Landscape Study • We've taken inventory of our cultural heritage landscapes: historic places that blend the built and natural environment, and provide us with valuable insight into the events, people and activities that form the shape of our city. • This inventory, known as our Kitchener Cultural Heritage Landscape Study, has helped us confirm the significance of our cultural heritage landscapes and establish a conservation strategy. • Our cultural heritage landscapes • Some of our most significant landscapes point to our industrial past, predating the arrival of the local railway in the 1850s. Others reflect our historic residential neighbourhoods, some of which were built before the First World War, and others that were constructed right after the Second World War. • Kitchener also boasts one of the best -preserved Victorian -era parks in Canada, Victoria Park, designed between 1894-95. Nineteenth and early 20th Century cemeteries, golf courses, institutions, pioneer farmsteads and residential estates round out our inventory.146, < F HFNER CULTURAL HERITAGE LANDSCAPES DECEMBER 2014 F i 0 R Downtown District Energy Growing Together supports the downtown district energy business case by; • Creating sufficient permissions to achieve the 4.5 million square feet of forecasted new floor space required to support a district energy system. • District energy is a key climate change adaptation and mitigation measure. District energy will allow Kitchener to continue to grow while also reducing our greenhouse gas emissions to meet our climate action plan goals. District energy is also very reliable and can continue to provide service where other energy sources experience shortages or interruptions. Appcndix A to DSD -20-151 Kitchener Innovation District Community Energy System Pre -Feasibility Study 11-11,11, FVl3 EIERGY WC All —7 Df MR NOTICE OF AN OPEN HOUSE proposing changes to land use and zoning in Kitchener's Major Transit Station Areas lr` w Map of Growing Together study area Aflhk AC -%L Land Use Et Growth Et wilt Form Zoning Change Adam Clark, Senior Urban [designer 519.741.2200 x 7027 growing.togeth rCoitchener.c Have You rV ice Heard! open House at Kitchener Market Date: November 18, 2023 Location: Kitchener Market 300 King Street East drop-in anytime between lam-2pm Grow[ ng Together is developing the planning frameworkfor Kitchener''s JajorTransit Station Areas. Visit us during our open house to talk land use and zoning, ask questions, and provide comments. To Learn more, visit: www.engagewr.ca/growlingtogether The City of Kitchener has prepared draft amendments to the official Plan and Zoning By-law for Major Transit Station Areas TAs) west of the expressway as part of the implementation of the GrowingTogether project These amendments wiPrac5 r I i 1+79J zoning to guide growth and change in Iitchener's MTAs. NOTICE EBF A PUBLIC MEETING proposing changes to land use and zoning in Kitchener's Protected Major Transit Station Areas 0 ICON Stop Map of Growing Together study area Land Use Et Growth Et Suitt Fara Zoning Change Adam Clary, Senior Urban Designer 519.741.2200 x 7027 growingloetherC kitchener,ca Have Your Voice Heard! Planning Strategic Initiatives Committee Date: January 29, 2024 Location: Council Chambers Kitchener City Hall 200 Ding Street West orV'irtual Zoom Meeting Go to kitchener.ca/meetings • current agendas and reports (posted 10 days before meeting) . appear as a delegation ,swatch meeting To learn more, visit: www.engagewr.ca/growingtogether The City of Kitchener will consider city -initiated applications to amend the Official Plan and Zoning By-law for Protected Major Transit Station Areas (PMTSAs) gest of the expressway and lands adjacent to PMTSs within existing secondary pla eVg d s " traduce new land uses and zoningto guide growth and a in A er'� As and g g surrounding lands. Attachment J - Public Comments and EngageWR Summary Page 536 of 1179 General Staff Responses Through the November 2023 engagement period on draft materials, staff received many written submissions from community members and other collaborators. Many of these submissions were regarding site-specific opportunities or concerns. Others included more general feedback on policies and regulations. Many submissions touched on similar topics or themes, therefore the purpose of this section of Attachment J is to address these more common topics to provide additional context beyond any individual responses that were or will be sent by staff as part of the engagement process. Site Specific Requests There are two types of site-specific requests that staff received through written submissions from the development industry. The first type concerned requests for site specific regulations, such as site-specific reductions to setbacks, or increases in height, relative to the base Strategic Growth Area zone being proposed. These kinds of changes are not within the scope of the Growing Together project. The second type of site-specific request is for a change to the base land use or zone proposed for a property or assembly of properties. These requests were reviewed by staff with planning management to form a final recommendation to council. To review these types of requests, staff required the following be submitted: • Proof of lot ownership for the subject properties • A design concept demonstrating conformity with the regulations of the requested zone and; • A scoped planning justification addressing official plan policy 15.D.2.5 In cases where staff have not updated our planning recommendation based on a site- specific submission, it is because one or more of the above requirements were not met Most commonly, staff did not receive a conceptual design that was able to demonstrate conformity with the regulations of the requested zone. Additionally, some site-specific requests were received from community members. This included requests for both increased and decreased zoning permissions. These requests can also be categorized as; • Properties owned or occupied by the person(s) submitting the comments and; • Properties not owned or occupied by the person(s) submitting the comments However, community submissions of all types were considered by staff based on their planning merits. The following changes are recommended; Page 537 of 1179 Revise the following properties from SGA -3 to SGA -4; 178 Queen St. S 188 Queen St. S 15 Joseph St. 196 Queen St. S 202 Queen St. S Revise the following properties from SGA -3 to SGA -4; 39 Church St. 51 Church St. 69 Benton St. 73 Benton St. Revise from SGA -1 to SGA -2 19 Acacia St. 217 Lancaster St. Revise from SGA -3 to SGA -4 669-705 Charles St. E. 63-69 Sydney St. S. 48 Preston St. Revise from SGA -2 to SGA -1 6 Oak St. 20 Linden Ave. 38 Agnes St. 39 Agnes St. Page 538 of 1179 42 Agnes St. 43 Agnes St. 45 Agnes St. 46 Agnes St. 48 Agnes St. 49 Agnes St. 52 Agnes St. 53 Agnes St. 57 Agnes St. 61 Agnes St. 65 Agnes St. 67 Agnes St. 73 Walter St. 77 Walter St. 85 Walter St. 89 Walter St. 93 Walter St. Responses to Comments About Policies and Regulations Following are staff responses to general questions and comments received through written submissions. How are balconies regulated when they project within a side yard setback? There is an existing general regulation that limits projections to 0.75m from a lot line. Why regulate height by storeys rather than in metres? Storeys were chosen to regulate height in SGA -2 and SGA -3 to ensure flexibility for different uses, particularly to encourage vertical mixed-use development that may include ground floor retail, office in the podium above, and residential within upper storeys. Page 539 of 1179 That said, typical storey heights are very predictable and don't vary substantially. They are generally 4.5m - 5.Om for a commercial ground floor, 4.Om on average for an office use, and 3.Om to 3.2m for a residential use. The economics of development require these heights be consistent, as it is too costly to build higher floor -to -floor heights. Storeys also allows flexibility to incorporate grade changes into development. There are many significant grade changes across the Growing Together PMTSAs that require flexibility to ensure the best designed outcome for a given site. The only circumstance where a much larger -than -standard floor -to -floor height is likely is in new build, single -detached homes. Because of that, we do propose a height limit in metres for the SGA -1 zone of 11 m. Why don't all the zones have height limits? Kitchener has always had zones without an absolute height limit, in our downtown zones, and in our highest commercial, mixed-use and residential zones, to name a few Implementing an absolute height cap on all development has no measurable positive impact on the surrounding environment. As seen further in this document and throughout our Growing Together materials, other ways of regulating built -form are more successful at guiding tall building development than a strict height cap. Growing Together builds on the City of Kitchener's Tall Building Guidelines, which have been successfully implemented since their approval in 2017. Staff received a number of comments asking to apply certain regulations to non -SGA zones, or to make other changes to other base zones. Implementing changes to other zones such as INS, MIX, RES or other zones is not in scope for the Growing Together Project as it would impact lands outside the subject geography. Why are church properties proposed to be SGA zones and not INS zones? Many church properties are evolving into mixed-use developments. There are several examples already just within the Growing Together PMTSAs. Permitting a range of uses on church properties is one of many important steps staff are taking to ensure more affordable housing supply over time, as many of these properties are transitioning to affordable and supportive housing. Page 540 of 1179 Staff received a number of comments about regulating park land and open space. Planning staff continue to collaborate with Parks staff on their Places & Spaces work, but specific policies and regulations applying to parkland are not in scope for the Growing Together project. Why are non-residential uses allowed in the SGA -1 zone? All of Kitchener's neighbourhoods are to be designed as complete communities. Kitchener is directed to plan for complete communities by regional official plan policies Staff heard nearly unanimous support for mixed -uses within the SGA -1 zone through our Missing Middle Block exercise in the summer of 2023. That said, staff have limited the size of non-residential uses and are proposing to restrict certain permitted uses to corner lots. Staff have also re-evaluated the SGA -1 uses table and removed Pawn Establishment and Payday Loan Establishment from the list of permitted uses to better align with the uses permitted in the MIX -1 zone. Built -form Transition Staff received a broad range of comments on built -form transition, in two major theme areas. First, that the proposed built -form transition regulations would negatively impact the viability of mid -rise buildings. During our engagement, staff heard nearly universal support for more mid -rise buildings in PMTSAs. Our analysis, including the Missing Middle and Affordable Housing report and ongoing industry engagement, shows that mid -rise development can be very challenging to build. Therefore, to ensure that mid -rise buildings are part of Kitchener's PMTSA urban fabric moving forward—which includes mid -rise performing an important role in creating and conserving built -form transition between low-rise and high-rise zones—it is important that the mid -rise SGA -2 zone and the transition regulations (which also apply to the SGA -3 and SGA -4 zones) do not negatively impact our collective ability to create mid -rise buildings. Staff also heard during our engagement that the built -form transitional regulations, as proposed, did not create enough transition between low-rise areas and adjacent high- rise zones. While there are only a few cases where a high-rise zone abuts a low-rise zone within Growing Together, staff analyzed these cases and are recommending an additional transitional area for the SGA -3 and SGA -4 zones. Further, there was a typo in the November draft materials regarding the setback regulation within the `Transition to Low-rise Zones' table, where the term `rear -yard' was used, but the term `yard' was intended. Page 541 of 1179 Therefore, staff are proposing to change the built -form transition regulations in the SGA - 2 zone from: Maximum building height within 12m of a lot with an SGA -1 zone or a lot with a low-rise residential zone. 12m Minimum rear -yard setback where the for abuts a lot with an SGA -1 zone or a low-rise residential zone: 7.5m To: Maximum building height within 15m of a lot with an SGA -1 zone or a lot with a low-rise residential zone: 20m Minimum yard setback where the for abuts a lot with an SGA -1 zone or a low-rise residential zone: 7.5m In the SGA -3 and SGA -4 zones, the built -form transition regulations are proposed to be revised from: Maximum building height within 12m of a lot with an SGA -1 zone or a lot with a low-rise residential zone: 12m Minimum rear -yard setback where the for abuts a lot with an SGA -1 zone or a low-rise residential zone: 7.5m To: Maximum building height within 15m of a lot with an SGA -1 zone or a lot with a low-rise residential zone: 20m Maximum building height within 30m of a lot with an SGA -1 zone or a lot with low- rise residential zone: 30m Minimum yard setback where the for abuts a lot with an SGA -1 zone or a low-rise residential zone: 7.5m These revisions ensure that built -form transition regulations remain in place while supporting viable, high-quality mid -rise and high-rise development and incorporating public and development industry feedback. Staff received several comments about heritage conservation districts, with many revisions suggested. Revisions to the heritage conservation district policies are not in scope. The Growing Together team has worked with heritage planning staff throughout the Growing Together process to ensure compatibility with heritage conservation district plans and cultural heritage landscapes. From heritage staff's January 9th report to Heritage Page 542 of 1179 Kitchener on Growing Together: "The key finding of this report is that the proposed changes are not anticipated to result in loss of cultural heritage resources. The existing heritage tools currently in use — including Heritage Conservation District Plans, designation, and the ability to request heritage studies in certain situations - remain in effect. Further, the proposed amendments include the introduction of new policies intended to implement and protect cultural heritage landscapes." Staff received few comments on parking, with most community members and collaborators showing strong support for a zero parking minimum requirement. Some community members expressed concerns about how parking will work if it's not required as part of new development. Growing Together proposes a zero parking minimum. It does not prevent parking from being provided within a development that meets community need or market demand. Developers may continue to provide parking in the amount needed to meet these needs. A zero parking minimum means that people who do not need parking will not be required to pay for parking, and this is an important policy to help make housing more affordable. People who require parking will continue to rent or purchase housing that provides that needed parking. Please also note that people who choose to live without a personal vehicle are also not occupying parking in any form. It is also important to note that street parking within the City's right of way is available to any user and is not intended for the exclusive use of any community members based on where they live, what type of housing they live in, etc. The proposed rate of zero minimum required parking is a key recommendation of the Missing Middle and Affordable Housing Report, and staff have been directed by council to implement that report through the Growing Together project. Setbacks/stepbacks There have been a few questions and some confusion around how the proposed setbacks work for the SGA zones, particularly the setback for storeys 7 and above of 6m. That setback can be understood as a setback ora stepback. It is written as a setback intentionally, to preserve the most amount of flexibility for the design of buildings, particularly mid -rise buildings. Page 543 of 1179 In the following image, we can demonstrate how this works. On the right is a mid -rise building that maximizes the total building envelope by applying the 6m setback only where required, to storeys 7 and above. On the left is a mid -rise building that is designed for the most efficient built form, using a 6m setback for the entire building. Either is permitted by the zoning. If the 6m setback regulation were instead written as a stepback requirement, the building on the left would not be possible. It's important that the building on the left is possible to build, as it is efficient and can be built more affordably than the building on the right. However, this approach also ensures adequate space between buildings, which is important for the quality of life of residents of these buildings and surrounding areas. Appropriate separation between buildings is a key element of good urbanism, protecting for the privacy of building occupants, and mitigating shadow and wind impacts on the surrounding environment. El 7 y .DDDDDDDD'DDd❑a0� DDDDDDDDDODO ODD DDDDDDDDD❑DaQO� D®DDDDDDCIDDO❑❑❑ DDDDQDC]DDD❑❑L C]❑ DDDDDIIDDDaODD❑© rrr�rrrrrarr rrr�� 000Q©QQQQQQQQQ❑r�fl 0 ❑17©QL7QQQQ"�QQJClLT D❑7Q�QQQQQQdQ[70�Q ©0 911000QQQLIQ1 :31CT07 ❑❑ QDQQQQQQQQQ 7 [1 �7❑0❑©QQ❑Q9C 9[0717DC]'CT Built -form regulations Staff have received many questions and comments regarding the proposed built -form regulations. It is important to understand how these regulations work and what they achieve. Most critically, these regulations (particularly building length, floor plate area and physical separation) combine to replace Floor Space Ratio (FSR) when determining appropriate maximum densities on a site. In a complex, highly variable existing built-up context like the Growing Together PMTSAs, built -form regulations perform better than FSR -based density maximums to deliver higher -quality, more predictable built Page 544 of 1179 outcomes. These built -form regulations are also more achievable as -of -right than FSR density maximums. The following diagram shows visually how these regulations perform to manage density through built -form relationships. In the following images, the blue/purple buildings demonstrate through maximum permissions how the built -form regulations build on one another to create a high-quality urban environment, (within the SGA -4 zone, a height limit would not apply, but the diagram is consistent with the tallest buildings proposed and/or approved in Kitchener). The white buildings are there for comparison, representing an arrangement of some of Kitchener's tallest and densest built and approved projects, representing a real-world outcome for what we might expect to see in the SGA -4 zone. On the top -left (1), the purple buildings are arranged on a bock with varying building heights applied. Of the form -based regulations, only a minimal setback regulation is applied. On the top -right (2), the purple buildings also have the physical separation regulation applied. On the bottom -left (3), building length and floor plate maximums have also been applied. On the bottom -right (4), other design considerations are included, which would continue to be implemented via the existing Tall Building Guidelines. This includes additional measures such as overlook and tower placement and orientation. These diagrams show the importance of having built -form regulations in place to guide development in Kitchener's tallest and densest areas. Some minor adjustments have been made to these built -form regulations based on community and collaborator feedback. Most critically, staff heard broadly that it should be a priority to build more purpose-built rental. Due to the way projects are designed and financed, purpose-built rental has slightly different needs than apartments built for condominium ownership. Therefore the following changes are proposed; For storeys 19-36, staff propose to increase the maximum floor plate area from 900m2 to 1, OOOm2. For storeys 37 and above, staff propose to increase the maximum floor plate area from 850m2 to 900m2 and to increase the maximum building length from 36m to 42m. These changes provide new dimensions and efficiencies that will help allow Kitchener's taller buildings to be either purpose-built rental or ownership -based. Page 545 of 1179 1) Setbacks Only 2) Setbacks & Physical Separation 3) Setbacks Separation, 4) + Other Design Length and Floor Plate Considerations Page 546 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Richard Kelly-Ruetz Sent: Monday, November 6, 2023 8:34 AM To: 'Andrea Sinclair'; Growing Together (SM) Cc: Natalie Goss Subject: RE: Growing Together/ Perimeter Development Corporation / Morning Andrea — sorry we didn't get a chance to respond. I'm assuming you received the project update email on Friday —the detailed Official Plan & ZBA materials are available on our project webpage (www.engagewr.ca/growingtogether). There are some drop-in slots available on the webpage as well with staff. Let me know if you have any specific questions as you work through the materials. Comments are due November 30. Regards, Richard Kelly-Ruetz, BES, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner I Planning Division I City of Kitchener 519-741-2200 ext. 7110 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 richard.kelly-ruetz@kitchener.ca 0 (0101000 0 0 W-0 From: Andrea Sinclair Sent: Monday, October 23, 2023 9:58 AM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Cc: Richard Kelly-Ruetz <Richard.Kelly-Ruetz@kitchener.ca>; Natalie Goss <Natalie.Goss@kitchener.ca> Subject: RE: Growing Together / Perimeter Development Corporation / Great- thank you! Will there be opportunities to meet with staff following the release of the more detailed policies and regulations? From: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Sent: October 18, 2023 8:44 AM To: Andrea Sinclair > Cc: Richard Kelly-Ruetz <Richard.Kelly-Ruetz@kitchener.ca>; Natalie Goss <Natalie.Goss@kitchener.ca>; Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: RE: Growing Together / Perimeter Development Corporation / Breithaupt Block Kitchener/ Our File 07091 Hi Andrea — apologies, we did receive the September 22 email. As for timing, we're expecting more detailed zoning and OP regulations/ policies to be released in early November. Regards, Richard Kelly-Ruetz, BES, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner I Planning Division I City of Kitchener 519-741-2200 ext. 7110 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 richard.kelly-ruetz@kitchener.ca 000000000 Page 547 of 1179 From: Andrea Sinclair Sent: Friday, October 13, 2023 2:05 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca>; Natalie Goss <Natalie.Goss@kitchener.ca>; Richard Kelly- Ruetz <Richard.Kelly-Ruetz@kitchener.ca> Subject: RE: Growing Together / Perimeter Development Corporation / Good Afternoon, I just realized I don't think we got confirmation that our September 22 email was received. Can you kindly confirm. Do you have an anticipated date for when the more detailed policies and regulations will be released? Thank you, Andrea From: Andrea Sinclair Sent: September 22, 2023 12:12 PM To: 'Growing Together (SM)' <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca>; Natalie Goss <Natalie.Goss@kitchener.ca>; 'Richard Kelly-Ruetz' <Richard.Kelly-Ruetz@kitchener.ca> Cc: Craig Beattie > Subject: Growing Together / Perimeter Development Corporation / Good Afternoon, We are writing on behalf of our client, Perimeter Development Corporation, in response to the preliminary "Growing Together" materials that have been released. Please find attached a letter outlining our comments. We look forward to an opportunity to engage with staff directly once the more detailed policies and regulations have been released. In the meantime, kindly confirm receipt of the attached correspondence. Thank you, have a wonderful weekend. Andrea ANDREA SINCLAIR BES, MUDS, MCIP, RPP Partner M H BC Planning, Urban Design & Landscape Architecture Follow us: Webpaqe I Linkedin I Facebook I Twitter I Vimeo I Instagram Page 548 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Monday, November 20, 2023 10:27 AM To: Eric Saulesleja Subject: RE: Growing Together and - Good Morning Eric, Apologies for the late reply, we missed this email. Our current understanding is that the province's bill to revoke changes to the Region's official plan will not have an impact on Growing Together or our timing. Best, The Growing Together Team From: Adam Clark <Adam.Clark@kitchen er.ca> Sent: Monday, November 20, 2023 9:20 AM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: FW: Growing Together and 137 Glasgow From: Eric Saulesleja Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2023 1:12 PM To: Adam Clark <Adam.Clark@kitchener.ca> Cc: Frank Voisin ; Jordan Bizouati Subject: RE: Growing Together and 137 Glasgow Hi Adam, Is the announcement from the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, revoking approval of the Region of Waterloo OP going to have an effect on this? Please reply all with your response. Thanks, GSP group www.gspgroup.ca This communication is intended solely for the named addressee(s) and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, protected or otherwise exempt from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, please advise us immediately and delete this email without reading, copying or forwarding it to anyone. Page 549 of 1179 From: Adam Clark <Adam.Clark0kitchener.ca] Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2023 8:59 AM To: Eric 5aulesleja Subject: RE- Grow's Hi Eric, Not yet, we're headed for a council date of late -January for approval, and plan to post the full details of our 0 P and ZBA on enagevr.calerae, it t: s:l -r during the first week of November. We'll have some staff availability for one on one stakeholder meetings throughout November if you'd like to set something up to talk property -specifics or provide us with any comments in person. Thanks! Adam Clark (he/him) Senior Urban Designer (Architecture & Urban Form) I Planning I City of Kitchener 1 519-741-2200 X7027 TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 adam.clark(O kitchener.ca 0000000O0 From: Eric 5aulesleja Sent: Tuesday, octob , To: Adam Clark <Adarn.Clark�7a kitchener.ca> Subject: RE: Growing Together and You don't often get email from erics@)gspgroup.ca. Learn why this is important Hi Adam, Has the proposed zoning been implemented yet? I his communication is intended solely for the named addressee(s) and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, protected or otherwise exempt from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, please advise us immediately and delete this email without reading. copying or forwarding it to anyone. 2 Page 550 of 1179 From: Adam Clark <Adam.Clark@kitchener.ca> Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2023 4:26 PM To: Eric Saulesleja > Cc: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: Growing Together and - Hi Eric, You can find all the current project information here: engagewr.ca/growingtogether. The most recent and relevant document is the Draft Approach to Growth and Change. As mentioned, we are planning to publicly release the detailed regulations in the coming weeks, and we are happy to add you to our stakeholder contact list to receive notification, though please feel free to subscribe to Growing Together at the top right of the page to get automatic project update emails as well. As discussed, through the Neighbourhood Planning Review process, 137 Glasgow was proposed as "innovation employment". Through Growing Together, we have reviewed all of the lands within the 7 Major Transit Station Areas west of the expressway and have updated the land use and zoning framework. 137 Glasgow is now proposed for an SGA4 zone, which permits a very broad range of uses without height or floor space ratio maximums, no parking minimums, and with new form -based regulations introduced. We have reviewed the letter sent by Glenn in 2019 and believe that the new direction under Growing Together has addressed the majority of the concerns raised. Please let us know if you have any additional comments or questions. Thanks, Adam Clark (he/him) Senior Urban Designer (Architecture & Urban Form) I Planning I City of Kitchener 1 519-741-2200 X7027 TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 adam.clark@kitchener.ca a �Ei OGm D Page 551 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2023 9:56 AM To: Michael Fauber, Growinq Toqether (SM) Cc: Adam Clark Subject: RE: SGA -2 Zoning Hi Michael, Pending council approval, we are anticipating the implementation of the new zoning to be Q1 2024. We have added you to our contact list and will send out an email in advance of when Growing Together will be heading to Council for a vote. Thanks, Adarn Zufferli on behalf of Growing Together From: Michael Huber Sent: Monday, October 30, 202312.08 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Cc: Adam Clark eAdam.Clark@kitchener.ca>, Adam Zufferli <Adam.Zufferli@kitchener.ca> Subject: Re: SGA -2 Zoning You don't often get email from mhuber@biacklinecorp.com. Learn why this is important Thankyou. My wife and I often go to the market so if we are thereon the 18"' 1 will come see you. Do you know when you anticipate all of this new zoning will come into effect? From: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca? Sent: October 27, 2023 2:16 PM To: Michael Huber Cc: Adam Clark <Adam.Clark@kitchener.ca>; Adam Zufferli <Adam.Zufferli@kitchener.ca> Subject: RE: SGA -2 Zoning Hi Michael, Thanks for reaching out to us. The property addressed as 475 Park Street is proposed to be zoned SGA -2 through the Growing Together Zoning By-law Amendment. The SGA -2 Zone is the Mid -Rise Growth Zone. A few highlights: • Permits buildings up to 8 storeys in height • Permits a mix of residential and non-residential uses + No parking minimums + No maximum Floor Space Ratio The draft Zoning By-law Amendment will be released to the public in the coming weeks. Please feel free to keep in touch and consider stopping by the Kitchener Market on November 18th where you can chat with us in person. Thanks, Adam Zufferli on behalf of Growing Together Page 552 of 1179 From: Michael Huber Sent: Friday, October 27, 2023 12:15 PM To: Growing Together (SM) eGrowineToeether0kitchener.cp Subject: SGA -2 Zoning You don't often get email from mhuber@blacklinecorp.com. Learn why this is important Hello, I'm being told that a property I'm interested in at �s going to have a proposed zoning for SGA -2. I can't find any details on what SGA -2 zoning would permit for redevelopment. Are there any details that can be shared with me on this? Sheryl Menezes advised me that your team at this email address should be able to assist. Thanks, Michael Michael Huber Blackline Corporation Page 553 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Wednesday, November 1, 2023 9:11 AM To: Young, Tom; Davidson, Moira; Growing Together (SM); Tim Donegani Cc: Sloan, Amelia Subject: RE: Strategic Growth Areas along MTSA's Meeting - Thursday July 20 Meeting - Comment Follow-up Good morning Tom, Growing Together will be holding three engagement sessions in November giving residents and interested parties an opportunity to review the Draft Official Plan Amendment and Draft Zoning By-law Amendment. The Drafts will also be posted to engagewr.ca/growingtogether at the beginning of next week. Engagement will be held on: • November 14, 3:OOpm — 6:OOpm at Mill Courtland Community Centre • November 18, 7:OOam — 2:OOpm at Kitchener Market • November 20, 3:OOpm — 6:OOpm at Downtown Community Centre If you are unable to attend any of these sessions, please let us know and we can try to schedule some time for a meeting, either virtual or in person. Thank you for your continued interest in Growing Together, and for informing us about the webinars. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Young, Tom Sent: Tuesday, October 31, 2023 5:08 PM To: Davidson, Moira >; Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca>; Tim Donegani <Tim.Donegani@kitchener.ca> Cc: Sloan, Amelia > Subject: RE: Strategic Growth Areas along MTSA's Meeting - Thursday July 20 Meeting - Comment Follow-up Hi Tim and Growing Together team, Two reasons for this email. Firstly, we were wondering how things are progressing with the SGA work? If there are any other opportunities for us to review draft materials on behalf of our clients and/or to provide strategic feedback from a consulting perspective, we would be very interested to see how your work is evolving. We have kept our eyes open for updates on the City website, but don't think we have seen anything new posted recently. The second reason for emailing is to somewhat belatedly let you know about a webinar series that Stantec colleagues are putting on in November and December. The series is focused on the evolution of retail, particularly suburban shopping malls and big box sites, which I thought might be of interest to you and your team. There are two upcoming webinars: Nov 16 — Strategies for Activation and Placemaking, exploring design and programming strategies to help evolve struggling shopping centres. Dec 7 — Tools for Transformation, that will discuss financing tools, public-private partnerships and other strategies to help catalyze change on these types of sites. Page 554 of 1179 There was also a webinar presented last week called "Setting the Stage" which explored the trends that are driving rapid change in retail at the moment. That webinar was recorded and will be posted to the webpage in the next week or so. More information and registration for the webinars can be found here: Mall of the Future Webinar Series (stantec.com) All of the webinars are eligible for American Planning Association certification maintenance credits, which can also be used for CIP/OPPI continuous professional learning (they just need to be inputted manually). The webinars are geared towards both US and Canadian audiences. And they are all free, of course! Thanks, Tom Young Senior Principal Urban Places Geographic Sector Leader I Ontario & Atlantic (3 Star "c From: Davidson, Moira > Sent: Monday, July 31, 2023 3:10 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca>; Tim Donegani <Tim.Donegani@kitchener.ca> Cc: Sloan, Amelia >; Young, Tom > Subject: Strategic Growth Areas along MTSA's Meeting -Thursday July 20 Meeting - Comment Follow-up Hello Growing Together Team, Stantec would again like to thank you for the opportunity to speak with you two Thursday's ago regarding the City's Strategic Growth Areas along MTSA's in initiative. As discussed at the end of our meeting, we'd like to provide you with the attached formal, written comments for your consideration. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to reach out. We look forward to chatting with you again this Fall once the detailed zoning provisions have been established. Regards, MCIP, RPP Intermediate Planner Working on the traditional territory of the Neutral, Anishinaabeg and Haudenosaunee peoples (3 tantec f 9Ma(0 The content of this email is the confidential property of Stantec and should not be copied, modified, retransmitted, or used for any purpose except with Stantec's written authorization. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete all copies and notify us immediately. Please consider the environment before printing this email. From: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2023 11:36 AM Page 555 of 1179 To: Young, Tom >; Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca>; Davidson, Moira > Cc: Sloan, Amelia >; Tim Donegani <Tim.Donegani@kitchener.ca> Subject: RE: Strategic Growth Areas along MTSA's Meeting -Thursday July 20 - Hybrid Meeting Request Hi Tom, I have attached the Missing Middle and Affordable Housing Feasibility Study conducted in the City of Kitchener. I have also copied Tim Donegani, the project lead on this study on this email. We will do our best to answer any questions about the report related to the SGA zoning in the Growing Together meeting on Thursday, but please also feel free to reach out to Tim with any further questions. Looking forward to our meeting Thursday. As a reminder, please join using this MS teams link: Microsoft Teams meeting Download Teams I Join on the web Learn More I Meeting options Happy reading, The Growing Together Team growingtogether@kitchener.ca From: Young, Tom > Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2023 9:44 AM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca>; Davidson, Moira Cc: Sloan, Amelia > Subject: RE: Strategic Growth Areas along MTSA's Meeting -Thursday July 20 - Hybrid Meeting Request Hi again, Apologies, I should have thought to ask when I sent my other email a few minutes ago... in reviewing your background slidedeck, I went to check the May 8th Council agenda, which referenced the Missing Middle and Affordable Housing Feasibility Study. That study appears to include site test fits for the various built form types you are hoping to enable through the new SGA zones. However, I wasn't able to actually find the original report, just excerpts from it. Are you able to share this study? It would help inform our understanding of the SGA zones for feedback. Thanks! T^mva V^i mato^ Senior Principal (3 Stant ►C Page 556 of 1179 From: Growing Together (SM) <GrowineToeether@kitchener.ca> Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2023 9:30 AM To: Davidson, Moira Cc: Sloan, Amelia MYOL&Tom > Subject: RE: Strategic Growth Areas along MTSA's Meeting -Thursday July 20 - Hybrid Meeting Request Hello Moira, The team is looking forward to our discussion on Thursday. We can set up a meeting through Microsoft Teams so that Tom can join. We will send a meeting invite to shortly. See you on Thursday, The Growing Together Team growingtogether@kitchener.ca From: Davidson, Moira Sent: Monday, July 17, 2023 11:43 AM To: Richard Kelly-Ruetz <Richard.Kelly-Ruetz@kitchener.ca>; Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Cc: Sloan, Amelia >; Young, Tom > Subject: Strategic Growth Areas along MTSA's Meeting -Thursday July 20 - Hybrid Meeting Request Importance: High Hello Richard and Growing Together Team, Pleasure to a -meet you. My colleagues and I from Stantec are looking forward to our 10am meeting on Thursday July 20 with your team regarding the proposed Strategic Growth Areas along MTSA's in Kitchener. My colleague Amelia Sloan and I will be joining in person, however, we were wondering if there is the possibility to make the meeting hybrid so that our colleague Tom Young can join? Tom is our Urban Places Sector Leader for Eastern Canada and is excited about the growth potential that this project will bring to Kitchener. He sees this project as an opportunity for knowledge sharing, particularly with his expertise in mixed use precincts, smart cities strategies, suburban retrofit, and transit -oriented development. Please advise if a hybrid meeting can be accommodated. Regardless of in-person or hybrid, we look forward to chatting on Thursday. See you then. nnoira uavidson MCIP, RPP Intermediate Planner Pronouns: she, her, hers ENKMM Working on the traditional territory of the Neutral, Anishinaabeg and Haudenosaunee peoples. tanteG Page 557 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Monday, November 6, 2023 11:06 AM To: Bob Bunker, Growinq Toqether (SM) Cc: Jacquie Bunker Subject: RE: Site -Specific Requests Good morning Bob, The Growing Together Team is holding Office Hours at the following dates and times:. • November 14, 3:00pm — 6:OOpm at Mill Courtland Community Centre • November 20, 3:00pm — 6:00pm at Downtown Community Centre The intention of Office Hours is to facilitate 1 -on -1 meetings between interested parties and Staff. Thank you for your interest in Growing Together and we look forward to meeting with you. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Bob Bunker Sent: Sunday, November 5, 2023 10:31 AM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Cc: Jacquie Bunker Subject: Site-Speci is Requests You don't often get email fr earn whv this is important Good morning, Hope you are doing well. I am writing for site-specific requests for the Growing Together program and hoping to schedule a discussion on the following two sites: Kitchener, currently drafted as SGA1 and hoping to provide context on it being designated as SGA2 Kitchener - currently shown as a photo/example as SGA1 on the city powerpoint but falling outside the SGA1 mapping on the initial drafts. Would it be possible to schedule a meeting to discuss these sites in the near future? Thanks again for your time and I look forward to hearing from you. Bob Bunker New Homes and Pre -Construction I TrilliumWest Page 558 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Monday, November 20, 2023 10:37 AM To: 'Jennifer Krotz' Cc: Growing Together (SM) Subject: RE: Strategic Growth Area 1 Hi Jennifer: Thank you for reaching out to us. We can appreciate the question! You are correct that a property / neighbourhood could be both SGA -A and SGA -1. The SGA -1 is the zoning and any development would be required to meet the zoning. The SGA -A is the land use designation in the City's Official Plan and is higher level and focuses more on vision then rules on specific properties (which is dealt with through zoning). The SGA -1 zoning is firm that 11 metres is the height limit on a property zoned SGA -1. So 11 metres is the height limit proposed through zoning on SGA -1 properties. Because the SGA -A land use designation allows some flexibility, up to 8 storeys could be enabled in the future however any proposal above 11 metres would require a public process. The public process would require notification mailed to surrounding properties (usually between 60-120 metres away) and the decision to approve any height increase would be made by Kitchener Council or one of their Committee's (i.e. Committee of Adjustment, which makes decision on small changes to zoning, called "variances"). The zoning and land use designation are different in this case to offer some flexibility as Kitchener's lands around the LRT stations develop over the long-term. The draft land use designation allows the zoning to impose building heights that are lower than 8 storeys, which is why the building height in SGA -1 zoning is only 11 metres: 15.D.2.44. No Building wiJJ exceed 8 storeys in height. The implementing zoning may permi'L maximum Building heights of less than 8 storeys. A bit more detail here — but here is the types of things that would have to be considered if someone wanted to increase the building height from 11 metres up to 8 storeys: Page 559 of 1179 15.D.2.5. Notwithstanding Policy 4.C.1.8 and 4.0.1.9, site specific applications which seek relief from the implementing zoning through a minor variance(s) or special zoning regulation(s), seek to amend the Zoning By-law to change land use permissions, and/or seek to amend this Plan to change from one land use designation to another, will consider the following factors: a) compatibility with the planned function of the subject lands and adjacent lands b) suitability of the lot for the proposed use and/or built -form; c) lot area and consolidation as further outlined in Policy 3.C.2.11; d) compliance with the City's Urban Design Manual and Policy 11.0.1.34; e) cultural heritage resources, including Policy 15.D.2.8: and, f) technical considerations and other contextual or site specific factors. Hope that helps explain. Happy to give you a phone call as well, let us know. Thank you, The Growing Together Team erowi nQtoEet h e r ft itc he ne r. ca From: Jennifer Krotz Sent: Tuesday, November 7, 2023 7:34 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <Grow ingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: Strategic Growth Area 1 You don't often get email from Imkrotz cPteksawy.com. Learn why this is important Hello, I received your postcard and read your materials. It appears that the same neighbourhoods are designated as both SGA A and SGA -1. How do you reconcile: Official Plan Policies Proposed to be Amended as hart of Growing Together 15.D.2.41. The Strategic Growth Area A land use designation will accommodate a range of low and medium density residential housing types including those permitted in the Low Rise Residential and Medium Rise Residential land use designation. 15.D.2.44. No building will exceed 8 storeys in height. The implementing zoning may permit maximum building heights of less than 8 storeys. with Zoning By-law Sections Proposed to be Amended as part of Growing Together Page 560 of 1179 1. 6.1 APPLICABLE ZONES SGA -1: Low Rise Growth Zone — the purpose of this zone is to create opportunities for missing middle housing and compatible non-residential uses in low-rise forms up to 11 metres in height. This zone applies to lands designated Strategic Growth Area A in the Official Plan. and GROWING TOGETHER COMMUNITY BRIEF SGA1 Zoning Highlights Listed here are a few of the fundamental regulations that apply to the SGA1 zone; Building heights are limited to 11 metres, which is 3 storeys. Is this a bait -and -switch? Which height limits actually apply to SGA A/SGA-1? Thanks, Jennifer Page 561 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (5M) Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2023 10:32 AM To: Jennifer Passy; Growing Together (SM) Cc: Natalie Goss; Lauren Agar Subject: RE: Growing Together Hi Jennifer and Lauren, We have sent a meeting invite for November 23 from 2:00pm — 3:00pm. The link for the virtual meeting is attached below: https://teams.microsoft.com/l/meetur)= join/ 19%3a meeting ZTcOYmNiYWEtMTA3YSooZDExLTgzMiEtNGQ1ZiNkNDZiZmVm%40thread. v2/0?context=%7b%22Tid %22%3a%22c7o3d791-53f6-43x5-9255-622eb33a1 bob%22%2c%220id%22%3a%22c8bf120d-6a2b-412e-9c46- a4fllod8614f%22 %7d Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Jennifer Passy Sent: Tuesday, November 7, 2023 11:53 AM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.caa Cc: Natalie Goss <Natalie.Goss@kitchener.ca>; Lauren Agar' Subject: Re: Growing Together You don't often get email from iennifer.❑assyfa)wcdsb.ca. Learn why this is important Good morning GrowingTogether team, While Lauren is away, I have checked in with her office and it looks Like the Thursday, November 23rd timing works best for both of us. I trust this will be a virtual meeting and you wiIL send a Teams invite? Looking forward to Learning more about this. Jennifer Jennifer Passy, BES, MCIP, RPP (she/her) Manager of Planning Waterloo Catholic District School Board My workday may look different from your workday. 1 Page 562 of 1179 Please do not feel obligated to respond outside of your normal working hours. From: Growing Together (SM)<GrowingTogetherfcDkitchener.ca> Sent: November 7 To: Jennifer Passy Growing Together (SM) <Growin To ether kitchener.caa Cc: Natalie Goss <Natalie.Goss r.� kitchener.ca>; Lauren Aga Subject: RE: Growing Together Caution - External Email - This Message comes from an external organization_ Do NOT click on unrecognized links or provide your username and/or password_ Hi Jennifer and Lauren, Thank you for your interest in Growing Together. We would be happy to meet and discuss draft planning framework with the two of you. We are available to meet during the following dates and times: • Monday, November 20, 1:O0PM — 2:OOPM • Wednesday, November 22, 11:OOAM — 12.00PM • Thursday, November 23, 2:OOPM — 3:OOPM Please let us know whether any of these options align with your schedules. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Jennifer Passy Sent: Monday, October 30, 2023 8:50 AM To: Growing Together (SM) eGro,,-,lineTorgetherPkitchener.ca> Cc: Natalie Goss <Natalie.Goss@kitchener,ca,; Lauren Agar, Subject: Growing Together You don't often get email from iennifer. passyPwcdsb.ca. Learn why this is important Good morning Growing Together Team, We received the notice of public open house distributed on Friday. We are hoping to schedule time with you to review the status of the project and implications for WRDSB and WCDSB student accommodation as a result of the proposed framework to support development in the city's core area MTSAs. Lauren and I would be available the week of November 20th to meet if you are able to provide a few dates / times for coordination. Kind regards, Jennifer Page 563 of 1179 Jennifer Passy, BES, MCIP, RPP Manager of Planning Waterloo Catholic District School Board Note: The offices of the WCDSB are closed on Fridays throughout the summer. Waterloo Catholic COV)— District School Board Disclaimer - This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and contain privileged or copyright information. You must not present this message to another party without gaining permission from the sender. If you are not the intended recipient you must not copy, distribute or use this email or the information contained in it for any purpose other than to notify us. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately, and delete this email from your system. We do not guarantee that this material is free from viruses or any other defects although due care has been taken to minimize the risk. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of the Waterloo Catholic District School Board. Page 564 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2023 2:48 PM To: Stephen Litt; Growing Together (SM) Cc: Pierre Chauvin; Lesley Oakley Subject: RE: Growing Together - November 2023 Draft Materials Hi Stephen, Thank you for reaching out to us. We are available at the following dates and times: Friday, November 17, 1:30P'M — 2:30PM Tuesday, November 21, 1:30PM — 2:30PM Wednesday, November 22, 10:30AM — 11:30AM Please let us know which of these times work for you to meet at City Hall. All of our draft materials are available on the Engage Page. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Stephen Litt Sent: Tuesday, November 7, 2023 1:2.6 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Cc: Pierre Chauvi Lesley Oakley Subject: Re: Growing Together - November 2023 Draft Materia s You don't often get email from sl@vivedevelupment.ca. Learn why this is important Exciting times folks Desperate times demand desperate measures in housing Please send 3 times that work to give us an hour of your time at City Hall Thank you - From: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Date: Friday, November 3, 2023 at 2:09 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: Growing Together - November 2023 Draft Materials Good afternoon, You are receiving this email because you are on the Growing Together stakeholder list and have requested to receive project updates. If you have received this in error, please let us know and we will remove your email from the list. Page 565 of 1179 Growing Together is a City of Kitchener initiated project that is updating the planning framework for Kitchener's Major Transit Station Areas (MTSAs). City of Kitchener planning staff are pleased to announce that the details of the Growing Together Official Plan Amendement and Zoning By-law Amendment have been posted to our project Engage page, engagewr.ca/growingtogether. • Official Plan Amendment • Zoning By-law Amendment • Official Plan Mapping • Zoning Map Staff are engaging on these draft materials throughout November, including walk-in office hours on November 14th and 201h from 3pm to 6pm at community centers, and we will be hosting an open house at the Kitchener Market on November 18th from 7am to 2pm. Details on these engagement opportunities can be found on the Growing Together Engage Page. Additionally, staff will continue to meet with industry stakeholders, and will accommodate meetings on request. "I've submitted a site-specific request, when will I hear back from staff?" For those who have already met with staff or provided a site-specific submission, staff have not finalized site-specific changes at this time, but are continuing to review and are happy to meet with stakeholders throughout November. All property owners on sites where the land use or zoning is changed or will change between the June release of our Draft Approach to Land Use and Zoning and the final draft materials will be notified. Staff plan to bring Growing Together to council in early 2024. Please feel free to provide comments through our engage page comment form, or email them to us at growingtogether@kitchener.ca. Thank you, The Growing Together Team growingtogether@kitchener.ca Page 566 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2023. 1024 AM To: Jerzy J BARAN Cc: Growing Together (SM) Subject: RE: Growth area 2 Good morning, Thank you for your feedback! It is noted. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Jerzy J BARAN Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2023 4:34 PM To: Growing Together (SM) EG rowingTogether@kitchener.ca] Subject: Re: Growth area 2 You don't often get email from am why this is important As a residents of above mentioned area , I would like to draw attention of "green spaces" in such areas where is limited to bare minimums for builder profits at expense of all of us residents. I do not have any problem with increasing density of the area, as long as we do have unrestricted aces to green spaces for relaxation and for pets exercises alike. If such limits occur, than buildings in such areas should have MANDATORY "Green Roofs" 1!1 Where is real grass, and some bushes and small trees for residents to use and enjoy. Couple concrete pots with greens are not good enough II Make the Green Roofs mandatory requirement in all new residential projects . J.Baran Sent from Mail for Windows Page 567 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2023 5:22 PM To: Marla Safa Cc: Growing Together (SM) Subject: RE: Growing Together Hi Marla, Thank you for your feedback! It is noted. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Marla Safa Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2023 2:57 PM To: Growing Together (SM) eGrowingTogether@kitchener.ca] Subject: Growing Together You don't often get email from marlasafaPyahoo.com. Learn why this is important As the owner of Street in Kitchener I am excited to see and would welcome the redevelo ment of my property. I know Europro owns the parking lot property behind me as well as Street and would be interested in development as well as my neighbor on the corner Street. I will be watching this project closely. Thank you Marla Safa Page 568 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2023 5:24 PM To: Peqqy Nickels Cc: Growing Together (SM) Subject: RE: Growing Together - November 2023 Draft Materials Hi Peggy, Thank you for stopping by at Mill Courtland Community Centre today. If you have any further questions about the draft materials, we are engaging at Kitchener Market on November 18, 2023 from 7:OOAM to 2:OOPM and on November 20, 2023 at the Downtown Community Centre from 3:OOP M to 6:OOPM. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Peggy Nickels Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2023 1:54 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <Grow ingTogether@kitchener.ca? Cc: Had Jaeger Shirley Gosselin Subject: Re: Growing Together - November 2023 Draft Materials You don't often get email fron earn why this is important Hi Adam, Could you please send me the current zoning maps for Victoria Park neighbourhood so we can see how they are proposed to change as a result of Growing Together? Also, many people I've talked to from Olde Berlin, Cherry Park, and my own neighbourhood find this a very, very short timeline to digest and respond to such huge changes being proposed for our neighbourhoods and our city. I urge you to extend the time period until at least January 2024, if you want to receive meaningful feedback. Thanks, Peggy Peggy On Fri, Nov 3, 2023 at 2:05 PM Growing Together (SM) <GrowingToeether@kitchener.ca' wrote: Good afternoon, You are receiving this email because you are on the Growing Together stakeholder list and have requested to receive project updates. If you have received this in error, please let us know and we will remove your email from the list. Growing Together is a City of Kitchener initiated project that is updating the planning framework for Kitchener's Major Transit Station Areas (MTSAs). Page 569 of 1179 City of Kitchener planning staff are pleased to announce that the details of the Growing Together Official Plan Amendement and Zoning By-law Amendment have been posted to our project Engage page, engagewr.ca/growingtogether. • Official Plan Amendment • Zoning By-law Amendment • Official Plan Mapping • Zoning Map Staff are engaging on these draft materials throughout November, including walk-in office hours on November 14th and 201h from 3pm to 6pm at community centers, and we will be hosting an open house at the Kitchener Market on November 18th from 7am to 2pm. Details on these engagement opportunities can be found on the Growing Together Engage Page. Additionally, staff will continue to meet with industry stakeholders, and will accommodate meetings on request. "I've submitted a site-specific request, when will I hear back from staff?" For those who have already met with staff or provided a site-specific submission, staff have not finalized site-specific changes at this time, but are continuing to review and are happy to meet with stakeholders throughout November. All property owners on sites where the land use or zoning is changed or will change between the June release of our Draft Approach to Land Use and Zoning and the final draft materials will be notified. Staff plan to bring Growing Together to council in early 2024. Please feel free to provide comments through our engage page comment form, or email them to us at growingtogether@kitchener.ca. Thank you, The Growing Together Team growingtogether@kitchener.ca Page 570 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2023 5:22 PM To: victoria kent Cc: Growing Together (SM) Subject: - zoning change Hi Victoria, Thank you for reaching out to us. is proposed to be zoned SGA -2, which permits: • Mid -rise buildings up to 8 storeys • No minimum parking requirements • No maximum floor space ratio • Mixed-use buildings (e.g. residential and non-residential) If you have any further questions about the Land Use and Zoning changes, we are engaging at Kitchener Market on November 18, 2023 from 7:OOAM to 2:OOPM and on November 20, 2023 at the Downtown Community Centre from 3:00PM to 6:00PM, We are also available by email, Sincerely, The Growing Together Team from: victoria ken Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2023 11:43 AM To: Growing Together (SM) eGrowingTogether@kitchener,ca> Subject: zoning change You don't often get email from victoriaikent@)gmail.com. Learn why this is important Hello, I own a restaurant called the Will the a affected by the zoning changes? It sounds like it might be part of the strategic change #2 mid rise. Thanks for your help:) Victoria Victoria Kent Page 571 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2023 10;24 AM To: Annu Dawar Cc: Growing Together (SM) Subject: and planning question Hi Annu, This was an error made when making the postcards. M be zoned SGA -1, as indicated on the ©raft Zoning Mapping. We apologize for the confusion. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Annu Qawar Sent: Thursday, Navem er Tv: Grvwin To etkid SM) <GrowringTvgether@kitchenef.ca> Subject: planning question You don't often get email from adawar@gmail.com. Learn why this is important Hi all, ) is proposed to I received the attached brochure at my home dvising that my property is proposed to be rezone to Strategic Growth Area 2. However, when comparing to the the map posted on the City' website indicates the street will be SGA 1. Which is correct? Thanks for your help! Annu Page 572 of 1179 Annu Dawar Page 573 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2023 5:16 PM To: Tardif, Jamie Cc: Subject: Growin To ether SM) Hi Jamie, The property at will be re -zoned through Growing Together, however since it is outside the Major Transit Station Areas, it will not receive a Strategic Growth Area zone. The property will be zoned MIX -2 with site-specific provisions (45), 450R(M), and 53H(M). The draft materials can be found at engagewr.ca/growingtogether. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Tardif, Jamie Sent: Thursday, November 9, 2023 10:06 AM To: Growing Together (SM) <Grow ingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: You don't often get email from iamie.tardif(@colliers.com. Learn why this is important Hello, I am looking for information on how the new draft plan affects the noted property we are working on a report for. I was hoping you can provide me with further information on if the property is within the new zoning and the status of the draft plan. Thank you. Respectfully, Page 574 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Natalie Goss Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2023 9:07 AM To: Richard Kelly-Ruetz; Growing Together (SM); Adam Clark; John Zunic Cc: Garett Stevenson Subject: Re: Growing Together Draft Documents - Hi, When we respond to Dave can we reiterate the importance of sending all requests about GT to the GT email address please? It will be easier to keep track of things and less likely for things to get lost. Thanks. N Get Outlook for iOS From: Richard Kelly-Ruetz <Richard.Kelly-Ruetz@kitchener.ca> Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2023 8:31:03 AM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca>; Adam Clark <Adam.Clark@kitchener.ca>; Natalie Goss <NataIie. Goss@kitchener.ca>; John Zunic <John.Zunic@kitchener.ca> Cc: Garett Stevenson <Garett.Stevenson@kitchener.ca> Subject: FW: Growing Together Draft Documents -= FYI Regards, Richard Kelly-Ruetz, BES, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner I Planning Division I City of Kitchener 519-741-2200 ext. 7110 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 richard.kelly-ruetz@kitchener.ca � a foDOGmO� From: Dave Aston Sent: Monday, November 13, 2023 9:43 PM To: Garett Stevenson<Garett.Stevenson@kitchener.ca>; Richard Kelly-Ruetz <Richard.Kelly-Ruetz@kitchener.ca> Subject: Growing Together Draft Documents - King Street (between Francis Street and Water Street) Hi Richard and Garett, Please advise on your availability to meet to discuss the draft OPA/ZBA associated with 'Growing Together' for the lands on ). As noted in our previous submission, the lands represent a significant consolidated block for redevelopment and we would like to discuss and understand the City's intent to put in place the lowest height and density on one of the largest consolidated blocks in the downtown. We would also like to understand the intent of the City in having the limited height and density in a Major Transit Station Area that is within the Urban Growth Centre. Page 575 of 1179 DAVID ASTON, MSc, MCIP, RPP Vice President, Partner M H BC Planning, Urban Design & Landscape Architecture Follow us: Webpaqe I Linkedin I Facebook I Twitter I Vimeo I Instagram ctj$ P x YEARS JHBC P L A N N I N G URBAN DESIGN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE This communication is intended solely for the named addressee(s) and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, protected or otherwise exempt from disclosure. No waiver of confidence, privilege, protection or otherwise is made. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, please advise us immediately and delete this email without reading, copying or forwarding it to anyone. Page 576 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Monday, November 20, 2023 10:23 AM To: Dayna Edwards Subject: RE: Next steps? Good Morning Dayna, We are working toward a PSIC date at the end of January for approval. We are currently accepting meetings with industry stakeholders to discuss site-specific issues or the content of the amendments themselves. After November, we will be concentrating on implementing any changes based on feedback received and preparing for our committee date. Best, The Growing Together Team From: Dayna Edwards Sent: Monday, November 13, 2023 10:00 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: Next steps? Hi Growing Together Group, A lot of great work putting together new policies and regulations for the station areas. It's a lot of material and I have yet to go through it in detail, but I do look forward to doing so. What are the next steps beyond November 30th? When are you planning to take the plan to PSIC and Council for final approval? Thanks for the engagement opportunity, Dayna Dayna Edwards, M.PL, RPP MCIP Partner, Senior Planner & Urban Designer Q9 Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail. I Pensez a Penvironnement avant d'imprimer ce courriel NOTE: This e-mail message and attachments may contain privileged and confidential information. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender and delete this e-mail message. /NOTE: Ce courriel peut contenir de Pinformation privilegiee et confidentielle. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le mentionner immediatement a 1'expediteur et effacer ce courriel. Page 577 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Hi Norman, The email account Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Lingard, Norman Growing Together (SM) Tuesday, November 14, 2023 5:14 PM Lingard, Norman Growing Together (SM) RE: Growing Together - Draft CPA and ZBLA for MTSA's as been added to our email list. Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2023 12:32 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: Growing Together - Draft DPA and ZBLA for MTSA's You don't often get email fro Good afternoon, Learn why this is important Thank you for circulating Bell Canada on the City of Kitchener's upcoming open house for the draft OPA and ZBLA for MTSA's. Bell appreciates the opportunity to engage in infrastructure and policy initiatives across Ontario. While we do not have any specific comments or concerns pertaining to this initiative at this time, we look forward to the City implementing policies which will enable the provision of fiber and wireless infrastructure to enable the MTSA's and Kitchener to be a connected community. We would ask that Bell continue to be circulated on any future materials and/or decisions related to this matter. Please forward all future documents t nd should you have any questions, please contact the undersigned. Yours truly, Norm Lingard Senior Consultant — Municipal Liaison Network Provisioning I Please note that WSP operates Bell Canada's development, infrastructure and policy tracking systems. which includes the intake and processing of municipal circulations_ However, all responses to circulations and Page 578 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2023 5:27 PM To: Sasa Filipovic Sunset Hills Estates Cc: Growin To ether {SMj Subject: Hi Sasa, Our apologies for not getting back to you earlier. Thank you for stopping by at Mill Courtland Community Centre today. If you have any further questions about the draft materials, we are engaging at Kitchener Market on November 18, 2023 from 7:OOAM to 2:OOPM and on !November 20, 2023 at the Downtown Community Centre from 3:OOPM to 6:OOPM. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Sasa Filipovic Sunset Hills Estate Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2023 12: To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca? Subject: You don't often get email from sunsethillsestates ci outlook.com. Learn why this is important :. My Name is Sasa and I have a question regarding my property located a this is 4 Lots assembly that we would like to develop and build a 25 Stories aprox. 280 Unit Multi Residential Building Your proposal for this area is SGA -2 Zoning and SGA- B Land Use, based on your SGA -B looks like we would get support from the City for a 25 Stories Building as we are in the Protected Mayor Transit area, and I would like to know do we need to apply for Zone Change if your proposal is passed by Council, or we will get automatic approval to build the 25 Stories Building as long as we meet all the setbacks and other requirements under the guidelines during the Permit application? Thanks Sasa Filipovic Sunset Hills Estates Corp, Page 579 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Richard Kelly-Ruetz Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2023 2:20 PM To: 'Kevin Muir' Cc: Growing Together (SM) Subject: RE: Growing Together - Queen & Joseph assembly Hi Kevin: Copying our main Growing Together email to ensure your comments are logged. Written comments are encouraged ahead of November 30th — though let's try to meet before you prepare comments. You are welcome to attend any of the drop-in sessions however we can also try and find a time with you next week to come and meet with staff, perhaps at City Hall. If of interest, what's your availability next week? For staff consideration of an increase in zoning category, as a starting point we have been requesting: 1. Proof of property consolidation of subject lands; 2. Concept plan that complies with proposed zoning regulations (i.e. SGA -4); and, 3. Brief PJR / justification of how the draft OP policy below is satisfied for the increase in zoning category: 15.01 2.S. Notwithstanding Policy 4.G.1.8 and 4,G.1.9, site specific applications which seeds relief from the implementing zoning through a minor variance(s) or special zoning regulation(s). seek to amend the Zoning By-law to change land use permissions, and/or seek to amend this plan to change from one land usedesignation to another. will consider the following factors: a) compatibility with the planned function of the subject lands and adjacent lands; b) suitability of the lot tot the proposed use and/or built -form; c) lot area and consolidation as further outlined in Policy 3.0.2.11; d) compliance with the City's urban Design Manual and Policy I I .C_1_34: e) cultural heritage resources, including Policy 15.U2.8; and, f) technical considerations and other contextual or site specific factors, IN o https://www.engagewr.ca/35796/widgets/147255/documents/117732 Regards, Richard Kelly-Ruetz, BES, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner I Planning Division I City of Kitchener 519-741-2200 ext. 7110 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 richard.kelly-ruetz@kitchener.ca �� ZmZ�oI� ,• �Z�� From: Kevin Muir Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2023 11:53 AM To: Richard Kelly-Ruetz <Richard.Kelly-Ruetz@kitchener.ca> Subject: RE: Growing Together - Page 580 of 1179 Hi Richard, We have had a chance to review our conceptual development scheme to the draft zoning regulations. It looks like with minor fine-tuning that the development scheme on the 5 -property assembly satisfies the regulations for the 37+ storey height category (other than the 25 storey cap obviously on the subject SGA3 Zone). Are there individual discussions still available for site-specific consideration or do we participate in the drop -ins? Should we submit something formal for consideration? Thanks, Kevin Muir Director of Land Development Kelly-Ruetz <Richard.Kelly-Ruetz@kitchener.ca> Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2023 1:22 PM To: Kevin Muir > Subject: RE: Growing Together - Queen & Joseph assembly Thanks for this Kevin. Received. Have a good end of your week. Regards, Richard Kelly-Ruetz, BES, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner I Planning Division I City of Kitchener 519-741-2200 ext. 7110 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 richard.kelly-ruetz@kitchener.ca f] It From: Kevin Muir Sent: Friday, September 22, 2023 4:17 PM To: Richard Kelly-Ruetz <Richard.Kelly-Ruetz@kitchener.ca> Subject: Growing Together - assembly Hi Richard, Thanks for the chat yesterday on the potential assembly at the corner of Queen Street and Joseph Street. Zehr Group have had ongoing discussions with the two abutting property owners (Joe Bullas and Ash Singh) regarding a potential assembly of the five properties. The complete assembly is approximately 2,800 square metres comprised of the following five municipal addresses: We are not aware of the particulars of the last parcel, , ownedby the City; it's certainly something we like to explore regarding possible acquisition to include in the assembly but our conceptual development scheme does not include nor require it. The conceptual development scheme for the assembly is a 52 -storey tower with some ground floor commercial, massed respecting the intent of the Tall Building Guidelines. Our desire would have this assembly in the "High Rise+" category, Page 581 of 1179 or alternatively the "High Rise" category with special provisions capturing the greater height of the development scheme. We will be able to share the conceptual development scheme when we have a chance to discuss further in October after the release of the draft OPA/ZBA details. Thanks, Kevin Muir Director of Land Development Page 582 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Monday, November 20, 2023 10:35 AM To: Laura New Cc: Growing Together (SM) Subject: RE: Growing Together Clarification Question Hi Laura, Our Mappingteam is still working on updates to Map 4 and Map 5. The updated Map 2, Map 3, and Map 9 are available on our engage page at this link. If the hyperlink does not work, please visit engagewr.ca/growingtogether and click on the Draft official Plan and Land Use Mapping documents. Share your feedback on our final draft [official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Regulations 03 Nov 702 In 0 1M Over the last few months, the Growing Together team has been working on the details of our proposed planning framework that will guide growth and change within Kitchener's Major Transit Station Areas. We are pleased to present those materials here- • Draft official Plan Amendment • Draft Zoning By-law Amendment • Draft Official Plan and Land Use Mapping •a ing M2pping • Growing Together Community Brief. which provides an easy -to -understand overview of the project; and • Growina Together Community Guide, which provides a more detailed and in-depth look at various factors informing Growing Together Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Laura New Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2023 9:20 AM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: Re- Growing Together Clarification Question You don't often get email from Iaura.new.01@gmail.com. Learnt whv this is iml2ortant Good morning, Thank you for your answers. Regarding the official Plan Maps, the official Plan Amendment says that those maps are proposed to be updated as part of the amendment. I am looking for the draft revised maps (Map 2, Map 3, Map 4, Map 5 and Map 9) from Growing Together to be able to compare them with the existing OP maps. Do I understand this correctly? Can you please send a link to the revised maps? Thank you, Laura Page 583 of 1179 519-341-6007 On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 5:18 PM Growing Together (SM) <GrowingToeether@kitchener.ca> wrote: Hi Laura, We apologize that we do not have an interactive map feature available for Growing Together. To see which site specific regulations apply to which properties, we ask that you use the Draft Zoning Mapping on the Engage page (e n gage wr. ca/grow i ngtogeth e r ). The site-specific regulations can be found in this section of the Draft Zoning By-law Amendment: Section 19-21 Site Spec& Provision, HcAd" Provisions. $ Temporary Use Provisions The Official Plan Maps can be found here: https://%v�vw.kitchener.ca/en/development-and-construction/official-plan.asi)x We hope that this helps you in your review of the draft materials. We are engaging at Kitchener Market on November 18, 2023 from 7:00AM to 2:00PM and on November 20, 2023 at the Downtown Community Centre from 3:00PM to 6:00PM. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Laura New Sent: Monday, Novem_er __, F__:__ ..... To: Adam Clark EAdam.Clark@kitchener.ca>; Growing Together (SM) rGrog,,iingTogether@kitchener.caa Subject: Growing Together Clarification Question You don't often get email from laura.new.010gmail.com. Learn why this is important Dear GT team, Thank you for the complete draft of Growing Together and the postcard. I have a few questions. Page 584 of 1179 1. For the previous Neighbourhood Planning Review, the proposed zoning for each property was available through a dropdown option in Interactive Maps. I found that to be a very helpful tool especially when there are some specific regulations that apply to certain properties but not others. Is it possible for this to be made available now for the growing together proposed zoning? 2. 1 cannot find the updated maps (Map 2, Map 3, Map 4, Map 5 and Map 9) mentioned below on the Growing Together page. Can you please let me know where they are located? official Plan Policies Proposed to be Amended as part at Growing Too ether How to read this document? This document lists all proposed text changes to the City's 2014 Official Plan as part of the Growing Together project. • Text in red is new text proposed to be added to the Official Plan. • Text in black is current Official Plan text not proposed to change, • Solded text with a black bordej details the specific change with Policy numbers_ • Deleted text is not shown in this document. See the Official Plan document on the City's webpage to read text proposed for deletion. • where an entire Pal icy is being deleted, it is referenced in the olded baxe ''Map 2 - UrWn Structure". "Map 3 - Land Use", "Map 4 - Urban Growth Centre {Downtown)", "Map 5 - Specific Policy Areas", and "Map 9 - Cultural Heritage Resources" are proposed to be amended. visit www.EngageWR.ca1GrowingTogether to view updated mapping. Thank you, Laura resident of Olde Berlin Town Civic Centre neighbourhood Page 585 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Friday, November 24, 2423 11:49 AM To: Trevor Heywood Cc: Growing Together (SM); Barbara Steiner; John Zunic Subject: RE: Growing Together - Notice of ©pen House Hi Trevor, Thank you for providing us with your comments on the draft Growing Together materials. We will be updating the Growing Together mapping to illustrate the full extent of the floodplain, inclusive of the flood fringe, per the mapping included in your comments. We will also include additional policy language in the draft Strategic Growth Area land use section that makes note of applicable natural hazard policies within the OP for lands within the flood fringe. Don't hesitate to reach out with any additional comments or questions that you may have about this project going forward. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Trevor Heywood Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2023 1:30 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca>; John tunic <John.Zunic@kitchener.ca> Cc: Chris Nechacov <Chris.Nechacov@kitchener.ca>; Barbara Steiner <Barbara.Steiner@kitchener.ca> Subject: RE: Growing Together - Notice of open House Hey John, Please see the attached letter in response to the draft OPAIZBA_ Please reach out with any comments I concerns. Regards, Trevor Heywood B.Sc.(Env.) Resource Planner From: Growing Together (SM) cGrovlingTogether@a kitchener.ca> Sent: Wednesday, November 8, 2023 10:29 AM To: Growing Together (SM)<GrowineTogether@kitchener.ca>;, i Page 586 of 1179 Subject: RE: Growing Together - Notice of Open House Good morning Public Stakeholders & Agencies: Further to the below, the details of the Growing Together Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment have now been posted to our project Engage page, www.engagewr.ca/growingtogether. • Official Plan Amendment • Zoning By-law Amendment • Official Plan Mapping • Zoning Map Thank you, The Growing Together Team growingtogether@kitchener.ca Page 587 of 1179 Subject: Growing Together - Notice of Open House Good morning Public Stakeholders & Agencies: An Open House for the City's Growing Together project is being held on Saturday, November 18 at the Kitchener Market from 7am — 2pm. Growing Together is the City's project which is updating the land use and zoning in 7 of Kitchener's Major Transit Station Areas (MTSAs) west of the expressway, and select lands outside of and in close proximity to these MTSAs (see attached Notice). Additional information and material about the proposed Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendment(s) will be available at the Open House and posted on our Engage page approximately two weeks ahead of the Open House: - www.engagewr.ca/growingtogether Should you be unable to attend the Open House or would prefer a meeting with staff to discuss the proposed land use and zoning approach, please let us know. Written submissions received prior to November 24, 2023 will be considered in the staff report. If you have no concerns or comments please indicate that by replying to this email. Thank you, The Growing Together Team growingtogether@kitchener.ca Page 588 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Monday, November 20, 2023 10:48 AM To: Gwen Wheeler Subject: RE: FW: Growing Together Good Morning Gwen, Yes, you are correct that the transitional policy numbers have been changed from the 2019 proposed zoning. Updated building typology modeling and financial analysis done since 2019 suggests that these transitional policies are a significant barrier to the construction of mid -rise buildings. However, due to strong community support for transitional regulations, we have maintained the regulation in a form that we hope can be successfully implemented. We no longer have a requirement for a 25m height restriction within 30m of a lot line, however the SGA2 zone, which most commonly abuts the SGA1 zone, is restricted to 8 -storeys, which is equivalent to 25m in height. Best, The Growing Together Team From: Gwen Wheeler Sent: Friday, November 17, 2023 11:23 AM To: Adam Clark <Adam.Clark@kitchener.ca> Subject: Re: FW: Growing Together You don't often get email fro r Learn why this is important Hello Adam, I'm still not clear on the transition regulation. This is copied from the draft zoning by-law and it references 15 meters. it is the second sentence that confuses me. CAn you explain what it means? Would I be correct in concluding that this regulation provides less of a transition than the 2019 regulation which included a 25 meter height restriction within 30 meters of the lot line? 4.19 TRANSITION TO LOW-RISE RESIDENTIAL Despite any maximum Ourklrng height of more than 12 metres applying to any zone. the buckling height shall not exceed 12 metres mthrn 15 metres of a lot with a low-rise residential zone. Where the low-rise resrdentral zone within 15 metres permits a building height of 14 metres. the building height shall not exceed 15 metres within 15 metres o1 a lot with a low-rise residential zone Gwen Wheeler i Page 589 of 1179 On Wed, Nov 8, 2023 at 4:37 PM Adam Clark <Adam.Clark@kitchener.ca> wrote: Good Afternoon Gwen, A new draft official Plan policy has been added regarding landscaping on larger developments; 15. D.2.7. Large scale developments will be expected to provide appropriate landscaping in accordance with the City's Urban Design Manual through the Site Plan Control process. This is to allow staff greater flexibility to implement higher quality greenery on dense, complex developments with a variety of contextual considerations (lot size and shape, underground parking, road widenings). Transition; SGA zones have two transition regulations that apply to lands adjacent to both the SGA3 low-rise zone and low-rise residential zones. They are: Maximum building height within 12m of a lot with an SGA -1 zone or a lot with a low-rise residential zone shall be 12m, and, Minimum rear yard setback where the lot abuts a lot with an SGA -1 zone or a low-rise residential zone shall be 7.5m. These regulations were developed using building typology analysis in coordination with the City's Missing Middle and Affordable Housing Report to enable practical pathways to more mid -rise development. Please feel free to meet with us in person at our public open house at the Kitchener Market on Nov. 18, on the upper level near the main entrance from 7 a.m. to 2 p.m. We will also be available to meet one -on -ane or in small groups during our office Hour Walk -Ins, held on: Page 590 of 1179 • Tuesday, Nov. 14 from 3 to 6 p.m. at the Mill Courtland Community Centre, 216 Mill Street, Multi -Purpose room • Monday, Nov. 20 from 3 to 6 p.m. at the Downtown Community Centre, 35 Weber Street West, Multi - Purpose room Thanks! Adam Clark (he/him) Senior Urban Designer (Architecture & Urban Form) I Planning I City of Kitchener 1519-741-2200 X7027 I TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 adam.clark0)kitchener.ca 000000060 From: Gwen Wheeler Sent: Tuesday, November 7, 2023 10:04 AM To: Adam Clark <Adam.Clark@kitchener.ca> Subject: Growing Together You don't often get email from am why this is important Hello Adam, Could you answer the following two questions Are there any landscaping requirements for SGA 3 and 4? In the past the high density zoning required 15% of the property be landscaped. How is this being addressed in the proposed changes? s Page 591 of 1179 What are the changes to the set backs and step back for high density development adjacent to low-rise residential from the 2019 Regulation to the proposed regulations.? I have read the language in both but it is not clear to me if what is currently proposed is a better transition to low-rise residential (better in that there are greater setbacks) or a loss of buffer for residents living in homes adjacent to SGA3 and SGA4 zones. (Transitions. This is the new language in the proposed zoning by-law: 4.19 TRANSITION TO LOW-RISE RESIDENTIAL Despite any maximum building height of more than 12 metres applying to any zone, the building height shall not exceed 12 metres within 15 metres of a lot with a low-rise residential zone. Where the low- rise residential zone within 15 metres permits a building height of 14 metres, the building height shall not exceed 15 metres within 15 metres of a lot with a low-rise residential zone. ( I don't know what this means) In 2019 the proposed transition was as follows: The maximum building height shall not exceed: a)12 metres within 15 metres of a lot with a low-rise residential zone, and, b) 25 metres within 30 metres of a lot line with low rise residential zone.) Thank you. Gwen Wheeler Page 592 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Monday, November 20, 2023 10:25 AM To: Brenda Shantz Subject: RE: 66 Braun St, Kitchener Hi Brenda, Your property at -s proposed to be zoned SGA -1, which will permit: • Low-rise multiple dwellings up to 11m in height • Certain non-residential uses (e.g. convenience store) No minimum parking requirements • No maximum floor space ratio The land use designation for in the official plan is proposed to be Strategic Growth Areas A. This land use designation permits buildings up to 8 storeys in height. While the land use permits greater height, the implementing zoning regulates building height on the property. Through a zoning by-law amendment process, Planning staff and Council may consider development of up to 8 storeys in height on lands designated Strategic Growth Areas A. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Brenda Shant Sent: Saturday, November 18, 2023 12'52 PM To: GrowinTo etherSM �Growin Together@kitchener.ca> Subject: Re You don't often get email from brendashantz93 agmaTcorn. Learn why this is important Please confirm what our land use definition means on the map I received by email. I do plan to attend the open house at the Downtown Community Centre tomorrow between 3-6 pm. However, would appreciate a quick explanation of what development plans are being proposed in our immediate neighbourhood. Thank you! Page 593 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Monday, November 20, 2023 10:18 AM To: Silvio Mena Cc: Brian Bateman Subject: RE: Planning recurved in the mail. Hi Silvio, The Strategic Growth Area 2 zone is a proposed Mid -Rise Growth Zone that is to be implemented in Kitchener's Major Transit Station Areas. The zone will permit development with the following regulations: • Building height up to 8 storeys • No minimum parking requirements • Mixed-use development is permitted • No minimum floor space ratio The draft materials for Growing Together are available on our Engage page. We are also forwarding this email to Brian Bateman (Brian. Bateman @Kitchener.ca), the file planner for the approved development at 45-53 Courtland Ave. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Silvio Mena Sent: Saturday, November 18, 2023 9:09 AM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: Fwd: Planning recurved in the mail. You don't often get email from silviomena@gmail.com. Learn why this is important Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: From: Silvio Mena Date. November 18, 2023 at 9:05:14 AM EST To: growinetoeetier@kitchener.ca Subject: Planning recurved in the mail. Attached you will something I recieve in the mail that I don't understand. Today I spoke with someone at the kitcheners farmer market booth from kitchener planning. I live in 399 queen st. I was spiking to this lady who told me about the development coming on Courtland and Benton. Would you please let me know. Thanks. Page 594 of 1179 Lmj Page 595 of 1179 R4 Lmj Page 595 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Monday, November 20, 2023 11:04 AM To: Cc: Growing Together (SM) Subject: RE: COMMENTS: Mill Courtland Woodside Park Neighbourhood Planning Review on behalf of 13658724 Canada Inc., owner of , Kitchener Good morning Azar: We agree with this interpretation based off of the definition of "street". As long as the street isn't a public one, the street line ground floor building heights and facade openings only apply to portions of a building abutting the public street. Street — means a public highway greater than 12.19 metres in width, as defined under the Highway Traffic Act or the Municipal Act, which provides access to an abutting lot, and which is dedicated, assumed, andlor maintained by and under the jurisdiction of the City, legion or Province. For the purposes of this By-law, a street does not include a lane or any private street. In contrast, for example, the facade openings regulation would apply to all building faces, even those not abutting a public road: Regulation SGA -3 & SGA -4 For Entire Building Minimum lot width 30.0m(1) Minimum lot area 1.500m2 Minimum yard setback 3.0m Minimum building base height 3 storeys Maximum buiiding base height 6 storeys Minimum floor space ratio 2.0 Maximum budding height in the SGA -3 zone 25 storeys Minimum street lige ground floor building height 4.5m Minimum fagade openings 10% Minimum street line fa ade openings 20% Thank you, The Growing Together Team growingtogether@kitchener.ca From: Azar Davis - Zelinka Priamo Ltd. Sent: Monday, November 20, 2023 9:05 AM To: Adam Clark <Adam.Clark@kitchener.ca> Cc: Dave Hannam ; John Zunic <John.Zunic@kitchener.ca> Subject: RE: COMMENTS: Mill Courtland Woodside Park Neighbourhood Planning Review on behalf of 13658724 Canada Inc., owner of , Kitchener Good morning Adam, hope you've been keeping well. We are reviewing the draft instruments for Growing Together and had a question regarding Table 6-5 of the Draft ZBA. Page 596 of 1179 For provisions such as "minimum street line ground floor building height" and "minimum street line facade openings," given that the definition of "street" excludes private streets, could you please confirm our interpretation that these provisions would not apply where a building does not directly front onto a public street? Kind regards Azar Davis BURPi, CPT Zelinka Priamo Ltd. — Land Use Planners From: Adam Clark <Adam.Clark@kitchener.ca> Sent: 29 September 2023 09:12 To: Cc: ; John Zunic <John.Zunic@kitchener.ca> Subject: RE: COMMENTS: Mill Courtland Woodside Park Neighbourhood Planning Review on behalf of 13658724 Canada Inc., owner of , Kitchener Hi Azar, We should be releasing the full details of the draft official plan and zoning by-law amendments in the next few weeks. That work will be posted on the engage page, so please feel free to subscribe to that page to receive notification when available. I have also added you to our email list so that you will receive notice directly from us as well. Thanks! Adam Clark (he/him) Senior Urban Designer (Architecture & Urban Form) I Planning I City of Kitchener 1 519-741-2200 X7027 TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 adam.clark@kitchener.ca 000 000 Cabo From: Azar Davis - Zelinka Priamo Ltd. <azar.d@zpplan.com> Sent: Friday, September 22, 2023 4:54 PM To: Adam Clark <Adam.Clark@kitchener.ca> Cc: dave.h@zpplan.com; John Zunic <John.Zunic@kitchener.ca> Subject: RE: COMMENTS: Mill Courtland Woodside Park Neighbourhood Planning Review on behalf of 13658724 Canada Inc., owner of , Kitchener Hi Adam, just wanted to check in on the Growing Together process. Can you please advise when we can expect draft policy/zoning for the Draft Approach to Growth and Change schedules to be released for consultation? Kind regards Page 597 of 1179 Azar Davis BURPi, CPT Zelinka Priamo Ltd. — Land Use Planners From: Dave Hannam - Zelinka Priamo Ltd. Sent: 24 March 2023 10:55 To: 'Adam Clark' <Adam.Clark@kitchener.ca>; 'John Zunic' <John.Zunic@kitchener.ca> Cc: 'Azar Davis' Subject: RE: COMMENTS: Mill Courtland Woodside Park Neighbourhood Planning Review on behalf of 13658724 Canada Inc., owner of , Kitchener Thanks for the update Adam Thanks and regards Dave Hannam Zelinka Priamo Ltd. — Land Use Planners From: Adam Clark <Adam.Clark@kitchener.ca> Sent: March 24, 2023 8:44 AM To: John Zunic <John.Zunic@kitchener.ca> Cc: 'Azar Davis' Subject: RE: COMMENTS: Mill Courtland Woodside Park Neighbourhood Planning Review on behalf of 13658724 Canada Inc., owner of Kitchener Hi Dave, My apologies for the late response, we've been all hands on deck preparing the public launch of Growing Together, which is the continuation of the Neighbourhood Planning Review process and will be implementing the land use and zoning framework for Kitchener's Major Transit Station Areas. Please visit us at engagewr.ca/growingtogether for more information and to see regular updates on the project. Right now, we are running a series of public workshops on growth & change to update people on all the changes that have taken place over the last year, and to explain why our planning review process is evolving. All of that background information is on our website, including a downloadable presentation that goes over the evolving conditions of which you are no doubt very aware (our housing pledge target, how inclusionary zoning works, removal of bonusing, the new ROP policies). I will also confirm with my team that you have been added to our stakeholder mailing list to make sure you receive all email updates throughout the process. Once we have completed this phase of workshops, we will be updating the draft official plan policies and draft zoning regulations, and are planning to release those materials in June. These updated materials will incorporate our workshop feedback while also ensuring our planning policies meet our housing pledge commitments, etc. Our recommendation to land owners and consultants at this time is to wait for those new draft materials, as they will allow us to discuss site specific issues with our current thinking in full view, and we won't be basing our conversation on what are now outdated draft regulations. We will continue engagement over the summer months and intend to release final draft materials that incorporate all public and stakeholder feedback in September. We are planning to take this work to council for a decision in December of this year. Page 598 of 1179 If you have any questions in the meantime, feel free to send them along. Thanks, Adam Clark (he/him) Senior Urban Designer (Architecture & Urban Form) j Planning I City of Kitchener 1 519-741-2200 x7027 TTY 1-066-969-9994 1 adam.clark L�kitchener.ca From: Dave Hannam - Zelinka Priamo Ltd. Sent: Friday, March 24, 2023 6:40 AM To: Adam Clark <Adam.ClarkC@kitchener.ca>; John Zunic <John.Zunic@kitchener.ca> Cc: 'Azar Davis ` Subject: RE: C iFRIMouranWoodside Park Neighbourhood Planning Review on behalf of 13658724 Canada Inc., owner of Kitchener You don't often get email fro M Learn why tdns i} important Gents, as below, can you please provide tis with a status update on the progress of the Mill Courtland Woodside Park Neighbourhood Planning Review. Thanks and regards Dave Hannam Zelinka Priamo Ltd. — Land Use Planners From: Dave Hannam - Zelinka Priamo Ltd. Sent: March 7, 2023 2:35 PM To: 'Adam Clark' {Adam,ClarkOkitchener.ca>; 'John Zunic' <John.Zunic@kitchener.ca> Cc: 'Azar Davis Subject: R€: C i Dort an Woodside Park Neighbourhood Planning Review on behalf of 13658724 Canada Inc., owner of Kitchener Hey Adam, can you please provide us with a status update on the progress of the Mill Courtland Woodside Park Neighbourhood Planning Review. Thanks and regards Dave Hannam Zelinka Priamo Ltd. — Land Use Planners a Page 599 of 1179 From: Adam Clark cAdam.Cfark@kitchener.can Sent: December 16 2022 4:15 PM To0=0 W_ "loZunic <John.Zunic kitchener.ca> Cc: Azar Davis Subject: RE: COMMENTS: Mill Courtland Woodside Park Neighbourhood Planning Review on behalf of 13658724 Canada Inc., owner o Kitchener Thanks Dave, We are in receipt of comments for and will include them in our work moving forward. We would also be happy to add you to our stakeholder list to snake sure you're notified of any upcoming opportunities to participate in the process. Have a great weekend— Adam Clark (he/him) Senior Urban Designer (Architecture & Urban Form) I Planning I City of Kitchener j 519-741-2200 X7027 TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 adam.clark(cWtchener.ca From: Dave Hannam - Zelinka Priamo Ltd. Sent: Friday, December 16, 2022 3:45 PM To: John Zunic <John.Zunic kitchener.ca>; Adam Clark <Adam.Clark@kitchener.ca> Cc: Azar Davis Subject: COMMENTS: Mill Courtland Woodside Park Neighbourhood Planning Review on behalf of 13658724 Canada Inc., owner of , Kitchener You don't often get email from dave.hPzpplan.com. Learn Why this is important Gents, please find attached preliminary comments on behalf of 13658724 Canada Inc., owner of the above -noted lands in Kitchener. It would be appreciated if you could confirm receipt by return email. If you have any questions or require anything further please let me know. Thanks and regards Dave Hannam MCIP, RPP Partner Zelinka Priamo Ltd. – Land Use Planners London office Page 600 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Friday, November 24, 2023 11:08 AM To: 'CARRIE KOZLOWSKI'; Growinq Toqether (SM) Cc: Tim Donegani Subject: RE: SGA -1 as proposed is inappropriate for'Onward Ave N'hood' (a cultural heritage asset) Hi Carrie:. Thanks for sending us your comments. They have been passed along to the team and will be included in our record of engagement. We also appreciate you taking the time to come and meet with us on Monday at the Downtown Community Centre. Thank you, The Growing Together Team erowinetoeeth er(@kitchener.ca From: CARRIE KOZLOWSKI Sent: Monday, November 20, 2023 8:45 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Cc: Tim Donegani <Tim.Donegan i@kitchener.ca> Subject: SGA -1 as proposed is inappropriate for'On%vard Ave N'hood' (a cultural heritage asset) You don't often get email from baseborden(a)rogers.corn. Learn why this is important Dear Kitchener, In 2014, you had the wisdom and foresight to undertake a Cultural Heritage Landscapes Study. The study's purpose was to create an inventory of your precious cultural heritage landscapes to serve as a planning tool in the management of the identified assets as the community evolves. Another of your goals with the study was to ,potentially, "redirect the development of the city in such a manner that preserves and protects identified resources that might otherwise go unnoticed or be at risk." Putting that framework in place whilst at the cusp of intensification was smart and self - aware, especially considering your poor track record of valuing and preserving heritage assets that give a city its character. The onward Avenue Neighbourhood (my 'hood—including Borden and Onward Avenues between King and Weber Streets, plus Crescent and Dane Streets) is identified in the study (L-NBR-3—see attached data sheet and page 2 of the evaluation table) as one of the 12 residential neighbourhoods with considerable heritage value and significance. You expressed a desire to ensure that, "the value of the heritage resources in these wonderful neighbourhoods is not ignored or misinterpreted in future planning initiatives." Good on you, I thought at the time. Fast forward to today. Kitchener, what happened? NOW you're proposing to apply SGA -1 zoning to the Onward Avenue Neighbourhood?! Are you really choosing to ignore your own recommendations outlined in the Cultural Heritage Landscapes Study? Doing so would be a grave mistake, and it couldn't be undone. My biggest concern is about the size of infill developments SGA -1 (as proposed) would permit. It's too aggressive for the Onward Neighbourhood. Given the lot sizes. the SGA -1 zoning will permit buildings that have no parking, contain 10 units. are 11m tall, and 24m (!) long. They will seem monstrous, taking up every possible inch of real estate, hulking over and crowding out their neighbours. A less intense form of development could maintain the character and charm of this neighbourhood, while still meeting the intensification goals. Page 601 of 1179 Applying SGA -1 zoning (as proposed) to Onward Ave. Neighbourhood would destroy it—one of the few remaining cultural heritage landscapes of considerable value and significance in our City --one of the rare little gems that gives our city a soul. It should be preserved and protected! Not sacrificed. Kitchener, do the right thing. Amend the proposed SGA -1 zoning in this neighbourhood to address the recommendations you wisely set out in your 2014 Cultural Heritage Landscapes Study. Sincerely, Carrie Kozlowski Page 602 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Sent: To: Subject: Good Morning Gord, Growing Together (SM) Monday, November 20, 2023 10:34 AM i dercor oration@ mail.com In order to consider site specific requests for changes to the draft land use and zoning prior to council approval of Growing Together, staff require; • Proof of lot consolidation and/or proof that lots are under the same ownership • A conceptual design that shows compliance with the requested land use and zoning • A short planning justification speaking to our official plan policy for site specific applications, which sets out criteria for changes in designation. That policy is; • 15.D.2.5. Notwithstanding Policy 4.0.1.8 and 4.C.1.9, site specific applications which seek relief from the implementing zoning through a minor variance(s) or special zoning regulation(s), seek to amend the Zoning By- law to change land use permissions, and/or seek to amend this Plan to change from one land use designation to another, will consider the following factors: u a) compatibility with the planned function of the subject lands and adjacent lands,- * b) suitability of the lot for the proposed use and/or built form; o c) lot area and consolidation as further outlined in Policy 3.0.2.11; o d) compliance with the City's Urban Design Manual and Policy 11.C.1.34; o e] cultural heritage resources, including Policy 15.D.2.8, and, o f) technical considerations and other contextual or site specific factors Please let us know if you have any other questions or concerns. We will also make ourselves available to meet with you and your consultant to discuss the above requirements or to provide any guidance we can on the concept or planning justification. Best, The Growing Together Team From: Gord Snider Sent: Monday, Novem"er, P NWE To: Natalie Goss ¢Natalie.Goss kitchener.caa Subject: You don't often get email fro Warn why this is important Natalie Thank you for taking the time to speak with myself , Andy, and Dan on Tuesday regarding increasing the zoning on the above mentioned properties. I have spoken with Scott Patterson , who used to work for the City of Kitchener, to assist us in putting forward a proposal to the city to show that these properties collectively warrant an increased density. Could you please email me with exactly what we must do to comply with what the city requires to move forward in Page 603 of 1179 presenting our case with the city. Sincerely, Gord Snider Page 604 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Friday, November 24, 2023 12:06 PM To: Gwen Wheeler; Growing Together (SM) Cc: Debbie Chapman; Aislinn Clancy Subject: RE: FW: Growing Together Good Morning Gwen, Thank you for the additional information. We have received several comments on transition from a number of perspectives and are working through those comments to adjust the regulations in response. We will provide an update when available. An additional note, I have continued to CC: the ward councilors on this email for continuity but as they are on leave for the upcoming provincial by-election, future responses from the Growing Together team will not include their emails for the immediate future until such time as one and/or both leaves have concluded. Thanks again, The Growing Together Team From: Gwen Wheel Sent: Monday, November 20, 2023 11:02 AM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Cc: Debbie Chapman <Debbie.Cha pman@kitchener.ca>; Aislinn Clancy <Aislinn.Clancy@kitchener.ca> Subject: Re: FW: Growing Together My concern is that my lot is adjacent to a SGA 4 and so we are not talking about facilitating the development of mid -rise developments but the transition from a low-rise residential property to a development that could be of unlimited height. In these cases should additional transition regulations be in place to balance the interests of home owners and developers? The limit of 25 metres within 30 metres of a lot line with low rise residential should be reinstated in these situations. There seems to be no evidence that developers are having trouble building over 25 stories. Gwen Wheeler On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 10:47 AM Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> wrote: Good Morning Gwen, Yes, you are correct that the transitional policy numbers have been changed from the 2019 proposed zoning. Updated building typology modeling and financial analysis done since 2019 suggests that these transitional policies are a significant barrier to the construction of mid -rise buildings. However, due to strong community support for transitional regulations, we have maintained the regulation in a form that we hope can be successfully implemented. We no longer have a requirement for a 25m height restriction within 30m of a lot line, however the SGA2 zone, which most commonly abuts the SGA1 zone, is restricted to 8 -storeys, which is equivalent to 25m in height. Page 605 of 1179 Best The Growing Together Team From: Gwen Wheeler Sent: Friday, Novemb , To: Adam Clark <Adam.Clark0kitchener.ca> Subject: Re: FW: Growing Together You don't often get email from gwheeler6l@gmaii.com. Learn why this is important Hello Adam, I'm still not clear on the transition regulation. This is copied from the draft zoning by-law and it references 15 meters. It is the second sentence that confuses me. CAn you explain what it means? Would I be correct in concluding that this regulation provides less of a transition than the 2019 regulation which included a 25 meter height restriction within 30 meters of the lot line? 4.19 TRANSITION To LOW-RISE RESIDENTIAL Despite any maximum bolding height of more than 12 metres applying to any roma, the building height shall not exceed 12 metres within 15 metres of a lot with a low-nse residential zone. Where the low-rise residenbal roue within 15 metres permits a building height of 14 metres. the building height shall not exceed 15 metres within 15 metres of a lot with a low-rise residential zone Gwen Wheeler Page 606 of 1179 On Wed, Nov 8, 2023 at 4:37 PM Adam Clark eAdam.Clark@kitchener.ca> wrote: Good Afternoon Gwen, A new draft official Plan policy has been added regarding landscaping on larger developments, 15. D.2.7. Large scale developments will be expected to provide appropriate landscaping in accordance with the City's Urban Design Manual through the Site Flan Control process. This is to allow staff greater flexibility to implement higher quality greenery on dense, complex developments with a variety of contextual considerations (lot size and shape, underground parking, road widenings). Transition; SGA zones have two transition regulations that apply to lands adjacent to both the SGA1 low-rise zone and low-rise residential zones. They are: Maximum building height within 12m of a lot with an SGA -1 zone or a lot with a low-rise residential zone shall be 12m, and, Minimum rear yard setback where the lot abuts a lot with an SGA -1 zone or a low-rise residential zone shall be 7.5m. These regulations were developed using building typology analysis in coordination with the City's Missing Middle and Affordable Housing Report to enable practical pathways to more mid -rise development. Please feel free to meet with us in person at our public open house at the Kitchener Market on Nov. 18, on the upper level near the main entrance from 7 a.m. to 2 p.m. We will also be available to meet one-on-one or in small groups during our Office Hour Walk -Ins, held on: Page 607 of 1179 • Tuesday, Nov. 14 from 3 to 6 p.m. at the Mill Courtland Community Centre, 216 Mill Street, Multi -Purpose room • Monday, Nov. 20 from 3 to 6 p.m. at the Downtown Community Centre, 35 Weber Street West, Multi - Purpose room Thanks! Adam Clark (he/him) Senior Urban Designer (Architecture & Urban Form) I Planning I City of Kitchener 1 519-741-2200 X7027 I TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 adam.clarktakitchener.ca 0�1i400mO4 From: Gwen Wheele Sent: Tuesday, November 7, 2023 10:04 AM To: Adam Clark <Adam.Clark@kitchener.ca> Subject: Growing Together You don't often get email froearn why this is important Hello Adam, Could you answer the following two questions Are there any landscaping requirements for SGA 3 and 4? In the past the high density zoning required 15% of the property be landscaped. How is this being addressed in the proposed changes? a Page 608 of 1179 What are the changes to the set backs and step back for high density development adjacent to low-rise residential from the 2019 Regulation to the proposed regulations.? I have read the language in both but it is not clear to me if what is currently proposed is a better transition to low-rise residential (better in that there are greater setbacks) or a loss of buffer for residents living in homes adjacent to SGA3 and SGA4 zones. (Transitions. This is the new language in the proposed zoning by-law: 4.19 TRANSITION TO LOW- RISE RESIDENTIAL Despite any maximum building height of more than 12 metres applying to any zone, the building height shall not exceed 12 metres within 15 metres of a lot with a low-rise residential zone. Where the low-rise residential zone within 15 metres permits a building height of 14 metres, the building height shall not exceed 15 metres within 15 metres of a lot with a low-rise residential zone. ( I don't know what this means) In 2019 the proposed transition was as follows: The maximum building height shall not exceed: a)12 metres within 15 metres of a lot with a low-rise residential zone, and, b) 25 metres within 30 metres of a lot line with low rise residential zone.) Thank you. Gwen Wheeler Page 609 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Friday, November 24, 2023 1.37 PM To: Marqaret Santos Cc: Debbie Chapman; Growing Together (SM) Subject: RE: Block of Victoria S, Joseph, Linden and Oak Streets Hi Margaret, Thanks for sending us your comments. They have been passed along to the team and will be included in our record of engagement. An additional note, we have continued to cc' the ward councillor on this email for continuity. However, as they are on leave for the upcoming provincial by-election, future responses from the Growing Together team will not include their emails for the immediate future until such time as one and/or both leaves have concluded. Thank you, The Growing Together Team erowi netoeether@ kitche ner.ca From: Margaret Santo Sent: Monday, November 20, 2023 9:42 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca] Cc: Debbie Chapman cDebbie.Chapman@kitchener.ca> Subject: Block of Victoria S, Joseph, Linden and Oak Streets You don't often get email from marLaret(@iohnmacdonaldarchitect.ca. Learn why this is imoortant Hello All, I live in the block bounded by Victoria S, Joseph, Linden and Oak Streets in corner of the block. Your plan proposes a height of 8 storeys for this block. I have a few concerns: The first one is about the streetscapes of Linden and Oak Streets. With 2 storey houses on one side, and 8 storey buildings on the other, it is going to make for unattractive streets. I would like to see that development facing Oak and Linden be on the 4 storey range, and along Joseph and Victoria to be the higher range. Limiting the height along Oak and Linden would make for a more harmonious streetscape that residents can be proud of. The second concern is about how in the afternoons my property would be deprived of sunshine by shadows cast by 8 storey buildings. Finally, I am concerned about the historic smoke stack and how that would relate to nearby 8 storey buildings. I am afraid that it would be dwarfed, be visually obstructed, stop being a landmark by which to orient ourselves, and loose meaning as a historical reminder of Kitchener's industrial past. Page 610 of 1179 I encourage you to rethink a blanket 8 storey limit to this block, and consider more creative solutions to resolve streetscape, and shadow issues, as well as a solution that values this city's history. If you have any questions or comments, please contact me. Kind regards, Margaret Santos, Page 611 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Monday, November 24, 2023 11:26 AM To: 'Paul Steffensen' Cc: Growing Together (SM) Subject: RE: proposed rezoning Hi Paul No problem. Good question. In short, yes it is largely a catch-up in zoning. It's obviously pretty unlikely that anything new at 1 Victoria is proposed anytime soon. To be more specific, all properties in this area are currently in the City's zoning by-law from 1985. This project is bringing these properties into the City's new zoning by-law (including 1 Victoria). So every property is changing zoning names — even if buildings like 1 Victoria already exist on them. So in the case of 1 Victoria, it's largely an administrative exercise. It's properties like the Uhaul property that may develop in the future that would be more impacted by the change in zoning, because they would have to follow the rules of the new zoning before building something there. Hope that helps! Thank you, The Growing Together Team g row i n gtoget h er @ k itc he ne r. ca From: Paul Steffensen Sent: Monday, November 20, 2023 11:12 AM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: Re: proposed rezoning You don't often get email fro earn why this is important Thank you for your response. I appreciate this clarification. I do have a follow up question. I am confused by why there is a zoning change for 1 Victoria when there is already a building here and I don't see how anything can be added. Is this simply a catch-up in zoning to recognize what is already here? Paul Steffensen On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 10:20 AM Growing Together (SM) {GrowinizTogether(@kitchener.ca> wrote: Good Morning Paul, The postcard you received is specific to the zoning of your property, in this case 1 Victoria St. S. As you note, the proposed zoning for the uHaul site is for an SGA4 zone which does not limit building height. There are, however, new Page 612 of 1179 zoning regulations that control for tower length, floor area and physical separation from adjacent properties. These form -based regulations help control for a building's impact on its closest neighbours more than a height limit does. As you mention, two other properties on the block have been proposed at heights in the 40 and 50 storey range. One is under construction, the other has been deferred for approval pending more information on potential conflicts with airport height restrictions. The uNaul property does not currently have an active development application, and the Growing Together project updates the underlying land use and zoning; it does not require that any development take place. Thank you for your comments, they will be added to our engagement summary. Please feel free to provide us with any additional thoughts or concerns. Best The Growing Together Team From: Paul Steffensen Sent: Sunday, November 12, 2€723 12:32 PM To: Growing Together (SNI) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: proposed rezoning You don't often get email from rasteffensenl2(@Rmail.com. Learn why this is important 1 am in receipt of a brochure informing us that you are changing the zoning of a piece of land to accommodate buildings up to 25 stories. I am curious if this is the parcel of land currently occupied by the Uhaul next door to our building? When I look at the zoning maps this parcel is SGA4 which has no height restrictions. Not to mention you are currently allowing construction of a 44 story and a 55 story tower on this same block. So is it really SGA3 with restrictions of no more than 25 stories or actually 5GA4 and your brochure is incorrect. Do you understand the impact of allowing a 19 story building to be built, to then surround it by towers that reach heights that are 2.5 times higher. This has a significant impact on the quality of life for those of us currently living at With the existing towers the sun will literally be blocked out for parts of the day. We currently face south and now your rezoning proposal will block our view and significantly change the quality of life not to mention the property value. It appears you do not care about the impacts on existing property owners and residents. Page 613 of 1179 I hope you respond to this email. I understand your desire to grow Kitchener through increased density but I am deeply disappointed in the lack of consideration for existing property owners. Paul Steffensen Page 614 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Jessica Vieira Sent: Wednesday, December 6, 2023 11:38 AM To: castle.sandi Cc: John Zunic; Growing Together (SM) Subject: FW: Church of the Good Shepherd Hi Sandra, Apologies for the delayed response, John has forwarded me this inquiry and it got lost in my inbox. The Church of the Good Shepherd does hold significant heritage value, and as such is designated under both Part IV and Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act. This means it is recognized for both its individual significance and its significance to the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District as a whole. Further, it is identified as a Group A building, meaning it is considered a very fine example of a defined architectural style and contributes greatly to the character and value of the Civic Centre. The City's Heritage Planners have been involved with the Growing Together work, and the amendments proposed to both the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law as a result are not expected to result in the loss of cultural heritage resources. The heritage value and requirements of the Heritage Conservation Districts (HCD) within the Growing Together study area were part of the evaluation criteria that was used when determining appropriate land use designation and zoning. The existing heritage tools currently in use — including HCD Plans, designation, and the ability to request heritage studies in certain situations - remain in effect. The new policies proposed in the Official Plan (OP) even include a stipulation that, should there be conflict between the OP and the HCD Plan, the HCD Plan prevails. This is in accordance with regulations at the provincial level, within the Ontario Heritage Act. I hope this helps. Please let me know if you have any further questions or concerns. Kind regards, Jessica Vieira, BES Heritage Planner I Planning Division I City of Kitchener 200 King Street West, 6t" Floor I P.O. Box 1118 1 Kitchener ON N2G 4G7 519-741-2200 ext. 7291 1 jessica.vieira@kitchener.ca From: Sandra Castle <castle.sandi@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, November 20, 2023 4:23 PM To: John Zunic <John.Zunic@kitchener.ca> Subject: Church of the Good Shepherd Page 615 of 1179 You don't often get email from castle.sandi@gmail.com. Learn why this is important Hi John, Thanks for your time at Growing Together. As mentioned, one of my primary questions is surrounding the allowed use and development of the property that is currently Church of the Good Shepherd (Queen and Margaret). Are you able to advise how the church building, and the yellow brick manse at the hack of the property, are currently designated with respect to heritage status? How does that impact what *could* be developed there? To me, both structures hold significant heritage value and I'm interested in better understanding how they will be affected by the Growing Together plan. Many thanks, Sandi Sandra Castle Page 616 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2023 5:26 PM To: Hal Jaeger Cc: Growing Together (SM) Subject: RE: Modelling of SGA -3 and SGA -4 zones Hi Hal, Thank you for your email. The Growing Together work is focused on establishing a new land use and zoning framework for 7 of Kitchener's 10 Major Transit Station Areas. This work is being done comprehensively and broadly and is not meant to replace any site specific development proposals that are better suited to assessing stie specific considerations, such as shadow studies. As you note in your email, modeling of any potential build out is problematic as it would provide one option of many many scenarios. While we have done our best through the application of the 4 proposed SGA zones and through thoughtful built form regulations, such as tower separation and tower floorplate size, to address the future build out of the MTSAs, we will continue to rely on our Tall Building Guidelines and other guidelines in our Urban Design Manual to address matters like shadows through a site plan process. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Hal Jaeger - Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2023 4:55 PM To: Adam Clark <Adam.Clark@kitchener.ca> Subject: Modelling of SGA -3 and SGA -4 zones Greetings, Adam, I've managed to attend the engagement sessions on the Growing Together proposal. The team was able to help me understand many facets of the proposal. Thank you. As we in the community grapple to comprehend the big picture, I'm hoping you can help us with a set of renditions of a build -out of an area of SGA -3 and SGA -4 builds. What would the shadowing look like on the equinox dates? What would a pedestrian see from the sidewalks? I realize that there are many ways the individual lots could be consolidated and developed. I nonetheless hope that seeing one possible iteration might assuage our worst imaginations. Thank you, Hal ftm Page 617 of 1179 Virus-freemww. ava . co m Page 618 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2023 9:45 AM To: Matthew Warzecha Cc: Growing Together (SM) Subject: Follow-up Hi Matthew: As a follow-up to our conversation last week about multiple properties, for staff consideration of an increase in zoning category, as a starting point we have been requesting: 1. Proof of property consolidation of subject lands; 2. Concept plan that complies with proposed zoning regulations; and, 3. Brief PJR / justification of how the draft OP policy below is satisfied for the increase in zoning category: 15,0.2.6. notwithstanding Policy 4.0,1.8 and 4.G.1.9, site specific applications which seek relief from the implementing zoning through a minor variance(s) or special zoning regulation(s), seek to amend the Zoning By-law to change land use permissions. and/or seek to amend this Plan to change from one land use designation to another, will consider the fallowing factors a) compatibility with the planned function of the subject lands and adjacent lands; b) suitability of the lot for the proposed use and/or built -form; c) lot area and consolidation as further outlined in Policy 3.0.2.11: d) compliance with the City's Urban Design Manual and Policy I I .C.1_34: e) car/tura/ heritage resources, including Policy 16.D.2.8: and. ft technical considerations and other contextual or site specific factors. o https://www.engagewr.ca/35796/widgets/147255/documents/117732 Thank you, The Growing Together Team growingtogether@kitchener.ca Page 619 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2023 5:29 PM To: Hal Jaeger Cc: Growing Together (SM) Subject: RE: Approval Authority Hi Hal, Currently, the Region of Waterloo is the approval authority of all of Kitchener's Official Plan amendments. Zoning By-law amendments are approved by Council and require no further approval. Approval by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing is not required for any of the amendments proposed through Growing Together. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Hal Jaeger Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2023 6:57 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: Approval Authority Greetings, GT team. Can you please inform me of your take on who is the approval authority for Kitchener's re -zoning of its Major Transit Station Areas? After the vote at Kitchener Council, do you believe the Kitchener decision is a) to be approved by the Region of Waterloo or b) to be approved by the Region of Waterloo and then subject to provincial (MMAH) review? Thank you, Hal ELM Virus-free.www.avq.com Page 620 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Friday, November 24, 2023 11 A8 AM To: Susan Lloyd Swail Cc: Growing Together (SM) Subject: RE: Landscapinq requirements on Priority Streets Attachments: PublicSpaces.)PG Good Morning Susan, Priority Streets are intended to be our highest order urban streets, creating a continuous or nearly continuous built streetwalI with active uses on the ground floor. In the fullness of time, these streets are intended to work similarly to King Street, where there are abundant shops and services and high quality pedestrian streetscapes that help create complete communities. To achieve this, landscaping is not proposed to be required through a zoning by-law regulation, however landscape design will continue to be implemented through the site plan review process by our urban design staff for aH development where there is not a specific size or area requirement in zoning. This is reinforced through a new official plan policy; 15.©.2.7. Large scale developments will be expected to provide appropriate landscaping in accordance with the City's Urban Design Manual through the Site Plan Control process. We appreciate and share your concern about core area greenspace and are working with our colleagues in Parks on their Places & Spaces project to identify areas of need and create new parks. In addition to new park spaces, we are pursuing a range of opportunities to create better public spaces. I will attach a screenshot with more detail on this from our Community Guide, which you can review in more detail here. Thank you for your comment and question, please let us know if you have any further questions or concerns. Best, The Growing Together Team From: Susan Lloyd Swail Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2023 10:00 AM To: Growing Together (SM) cGrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: Landscaping requirements on Priority Streets You don't often get email from susanswaiIL&yahooxa. Learn why this is important Good morning, Thank you for your excellent work in updating the Kitchener Official Plan. It is an impressive plan. My biggest concern is increasing the amount of greenspace in the core area and building connections to existing parks and open space networks. I also have a question. Can you advise why there are no landscaping requirements where priority streets abut an existing lot? Is this a sightline issue? Please advise. Page 621 of 1179 Priority Streets Table 6-4 (page 83 of the PDF) in the draft zoning bylaw amendment, "(2) The [minimum landscape area] requirement for a lot abutting a Priority Street segment identified on Appendix G shall be 0%." Susan Lloyd Swail, MES PI. susanswail(cDvahoo.ca Page 622 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Friday, November 24, 2023 11:08 AM To: Kieran Luckhai Cc: Growing Together (SM) Subject: RE: Growing Together Draft OP & Zoning Questions Hi Kieran, Apologies, we misunderstood your original question. Yes, the lands outside the MTSAs that are still in the 85-1 By-law will be updated into the 2019-051 By-law through Growing Together. These are lands that were included within the previous process, NPR, that were not incorporated into the MTSAs through ROPA6. To summarize, yes —they will be updated concurrently. However — no —the criteria in 15.D.2.5 apply to lands within MTSAs. If there is community/interest group comment for lands outside the MTSAs, we encourage you to reach out to us with more details and we can schedule a meeting to discuss the proposal. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Kieran Luckhai Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2023 12:21 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: RE: Growing Together Draft OP & Zoning Questions Good morning, Thanks for the response, that provides me with more clarity. A follow up on the first question: I understand the areas don't fall within the MTSA as outlined in ROPA. However, my understanding is the "surrounding areas" on the draft mapping are still subject to zoning amendments as they still fall under the 85-1 zoning by-law. Am I understanding that correctly or will that be done at a different time? If it is done concurrently with the MTSA zoning amendments, are they also subject to community comment for zoning change on the same criteria set out in 15.D.2.5. in the draft amendment OP? Thanks, Kieran Luckhai I Student Planner M H BC Planning, Urban Design & Landscape Architecture Follow us: Webpaqe I Linkedin I Facebook I Twitter I Vimeo I Instagram Page 623 of 1179 Y 1pop Y E .,A R S IYlHBC P L A N N I N G URBAN DESIGN & LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE This communication is intended solely for the named addressees) and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, protected or otherwise exempt from disclosure. No waiver of confidence, privilege, protection or otherwise is made. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, please advise us immediately and delete this email without reading, copying or forwarding it to anyone. From: Growing Together (SM) ¢GrowineToeether@kitchener.ca> Sent: Wednesday, November 22 2423 3:30 PM To: Kieran Luckha Cc: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether�lukitchener.cap Subject: RE: Growing Together Draft OP & Zoning Questions Good afternoon Kieran, Responding to your questions in order: The properties on the westerly side of Mill Street were never included within the Major Transit Station Area. The boundaries for MTSAs were approved by the Minister through Amendment 6 to the Regional Official Plan. Growing Together has not and does not have the authority to change the boundaries of MTSAs. The properties currently under OLT Appeal or with site-specific OP amendment applications awaiting Regional approval will not be zoned through this work (shown in gray/white hatching on Zoning Mapping). The Planning Act does not allow the City to rezone properties that are under appeal or awaiting final approvals. As the Region decides on OPAs and the OLT litigates cases, the properties will be brought into the new zoning by-law. Growing Together Phase 2 will include Block Line, Fairway, and Sportsworld MTSAs. This will complete the planning work for all of the MTSAs in Kitchener. The boundaries of the station areas can be found in ROPA6. Hope this is able to answer your questions. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Kieran Luckha Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2423 11:20 AM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether[]a kitchener.ca> Subject: Growing Together Draft OP & Zoning Questions You don't often get email fro Hi Growing Together Team, Learn why this is'rmoortant I had a few general questions on the draft zoning and OP regulations. • Are the properties that have since been removed from the MTSA (for example the west side of Mill St.) that are receiving zoning amendments under the zoning categories set out in 2419-051 subject to the same upzoning criteria outlined in policy 15.D.2.5.? • Will the properties current under OLT appeal or site-specific application be carried into the SGA zoning categories after a decision on the application? • Just to confirm, the second phase set for Q4 of 2024 will include the lands identified as the Block Line Station, Fairway Station, and Sportsworld Station? Page 624 of 1179 Thanks, Kieran Luckhai I Student Planner M H BC Planning, Urban Design & Landscape Architecture Follow us: Webpaqe I Linkedin I Facebook I Twitter I Vimeo I Instagram r C. E Z YEARSMHBC PLAN N I NG URBAN DESIGN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE This communication is intended solely for the named addressee(s) and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, protected or otherwise exempt from disclosure. No waiver of confidence, privilege, protection or otherwise is made. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, please advise us immediately and delete this email without reading, copying or forwarding it to anyone. Page 625 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Richard Kelly-Ruetz Sent: Friday, November 24, 2023 12:04 PM To: 'Marie Schroeder' Cc: Mike Seiling; "Matt Ninomiya'; 'maria.kyveris@rogers.com'; Tim Donegani Subject: RE: IZ and Growinq Toqether Attachments: KDLC Presentation -November 17_2023.pdf Hi Marie: I've attached the presentation from KDLC last week. This can be circulated to the homebuilders. I note that the Growing Together project -which is updating the zoning and land use around 7 of Kitchener's 10 Major Transit Station Areas - now has published drafts of the full Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments posted on our Engage webpage: www.engagewr.calerowingtoeether. Comments are due at the end of the month and it is expected to be brought forward to Council early in 2024. The project team can also be contacted at grog,vinetogether0kitchener.ca. Regards, Richard Kelly-Ruetz, BES, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner I Planning Division f City of Kitchener 519-741-2200 ext. 7110 J TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 rchard.kelly-ruetzOkitchener.ca 0 0 a) 10 G From: maria.kyveris@rogers.com Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2023 2:39 PM To: Tim Donegani <Tim.❑onegani@kitchener.ca>; Richard Kelly-Ruetz <Richard.Kelly-Ruetz@kitchener.ca>;'Marie Schroeder' Cc: Mike 5eiling <Mike.Seiling@kitchener.ca7; "Matt Ninomiy Subject: IZ and Growing Together You don't often get email fron Learn why this is important Good afternoon Tim and Richard - I wanted to thank you for your presentations to KDLC on Friday last week on IZ and Growing Together. I'm looping in Marie re: your request for comments on both the IZ and Growing Together Initiatives that the City of Kitchener is proposing. I know you had mentioned that you had received industry feedback already but I've cc'd in Marie to circulate to the broader industry one last time for further comments if there are any. Could you flip your final presentations/proposals for circulation? Thank you, Maria Maria Kyveris, P. Eng VP, Building and Land Development P.K. Custom Homes Inc. Page 626 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2023 10:40 AM To: Frank Voisin; Steve Voisin; Growing Together (SM) Cc: Adam Clark Subject: RE: 8 Queen - Growing Together Hi Frank and Steve, We have scheduled the meeting on Monday, Nov. 27 from 11:00 am – 12:OOpm. We have booked a room at City Hall where we can hold a hybrid meeting. The meeting invite was sent in a separate email. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Frank Voisin Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2023 10:33 AM To: Steve Voisin ; Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Cc: Adam Clark <Adam.Clark@kitchener.ca> Subject: Re: 8 Queen - Growing Together Hi All, I can also do either slot, though I don't live locally so wonder if it is possible for me to dial in? If not, Steve can meet in person and I'll catch up afterward. Thanks, Frank Voisin President Voisin Capital Inc. On Thu, Nov 23, 2023, at 6:34 AM, Steve Voisin wrote: All, I'm available Monday and Tuesday. I can attend in person. Regards, Steve Sent from my BlackBerry—the most secure mobile device. Page 627 of 1179 From: GrowingTogether(akitchener.ca Sent: November 22 2023 3:21 PM To: Cc: Aam.0 ar (L itc ener.ca Subject: Growing Together Hi Frank and Steve, Thank you for reaching out to us. We would like to offer you an hour at City Hall to discuss the implications of the draft Zoning by-law and Official Plan on the property a We offer the following dates and times to meet with the team at City Hall: Monday, Nov. 27 11:00am — 12:00pm Tuesday, Nov. 28 11:00am—12:00pm Thursday, Nov. 30 9:00am—10:00am Please let us know which time works best for you. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Frank Voisin Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2023 12:57 PM To: Cory Bluhm <Cory.Bluhm@kitchener.ca7 Cc: Steve Voisi Adam Clark <Adam.Clark@kitchener.ca> Subject: Re: 8 ueen - rowing oge er You don't often get email fronE��� earn why this is important Hi Cory, thanks for the context and for the connection to Adam - appreciate the quick response! Hi Adam, nice to meet you. Steve and I certainly appreciate the context that Cory provided below, and we did note the SGA2 application south on queen and a few other side streets off King. To aid in this conversation, we outlined in red on the map below all of the sites in the downtown core that (a) are in SGA -2 rather than SGA -4, and (b) have no frontage on King St. Here's how this looks: Page 628 of 1179 There are only sixteen properties that fit these criteria. Looking at this map, what stands out to us is that - by far, the largest footprint of the sixteen properties, and so is likely the only one that could reasonably be a candidate for major intensification in the future. Our thinking is that among the sixteen sites shown here,_ is unique in that it both (a) has the size to support scale beyond 8 storeys, and (b) the fact that Momentum Developments already has approval to build a tower right across Goudies Lane (on a smaller lot size) means there would be no harm done to the pedestrian experience on Queen St N. In any event, we would appreciate the opportunity to discuss further before final decisions are made and will make ourselves available at your convenience -just let us know some times that work for you. Looking forward to working with you on this. Thanks, Page 629 of 1179 Frank Voisin President Voisin Capital Inc. On Mon, Nov 20, 2023, at 8:58 AM, Cory Bluhm wrote - Hi Frank, Thank you for reaching out. I hope all is well. Congratulations on your recent Great Places Award. You are correct that the driving principle is to protect the pedestrian experience of our key pedestrian streets, King Street and Queen Streets in particular. To do so, the proposed SGA -2 boundary runs from laneway (Goudies & Bell) to laneway (Halls Lane). You'll note that SGA2 was applied further south on Queen to Charles. The same has also been applied along Ontario, Water, etc. These are key to the pedestrian experience in the core. If you want to discuss further or provide formal comment, the Growing Together team is happy to meet with you. I'd suggest reaching out to Adam Clark (cc'd) who is a lead on the engagement. I'm happy to join the conversation if helpful. Cory Bluhm Executive Director I Economic Development I City of Kitchener 519-741-2200 x 7065 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 Irnakeitkitchener.ca downtownkitchener.ca YQu MEJ Is From: Frank Voisi Sent: Friday, Nov£..._. -•, __-- _-•--..... To: Cory Bluhm <Cory.Bluhm@kitchener.caa Cc: Steve Voisi Subject: 8 Queen - Growing Together You don't often get email fro earn why this is important Hi Cory, It's been a while and I hope all is well in your world. Steve and I received the Growing Together postcard from the City about the proposed new zoning downtown and the plan for 8 Queen. We are curious about why Id be included in the SGA -2 zone versus SGA -4, as most of the SGA -2 zoning nto King St and we understand Page 630 of 1179 the desire to keep that at "human scale" whereas_ does not have any frontage on King. Wondering if you could connect us with the right person to discuss this with so we can learn a bit more about the decision here? Thanks, Frank Voisin President Voisin Capital Inc. 4 Page 631 of 1179 'fou Page 632 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Good Afternoon George, Adam Clark Friday, November 24, 2023 3:11 PM Growing Together (SM) Growing Together, City if Kitchener Thanks for taking the time to chat earlier this week. I'm following up so that we may continue to answer any property specific questions via email. As discussed, your propertie(s) on Courtland Ave W. are not within the Major Transit Station Area boundary, and therefore not eligible for Strategic Growth Area zoning through this process. However, you may make a site specific application through the planning department, and can meet with a planning staff member by booking an appointment here; https://www.kitchener.ca/en/council-and-city-administration/book-an- appointment.aspx or by walk-in to our customer service centre on the ground floor of City Hall at 200 King St. W. They will help provide more information about various application types that may be required depending on your vision for the site. Acacia St. is within the Mill Major Transit Station Area. For your propertie(s) on Acacia, most of the block is proposed to be SGA1, thought the properties abutting Ottawa are proposed to be SGA2. SGA1 allows intensification via low-rise development up to 11 metres, or 3.5 storeys, with no density maximum and no parking minimum, but with regulations around lot width, lot area, setbacks and building length. SGA2 allows intensification via mid -rise development up to 8 storeys, again with no density maximums or parking minimums, but also with regulations around lot dimension and built form. Please let us know if you have any additional comments or questions, thanks! Adam Clark (he/him) Senior Urban Designer (Architecture & Urban Form) I Planning I City of Kitchener 1 519-741-2200 X7027 TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 adam.clarkCakitchener.ca Page 633 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Monday, November 27, 2423 1.23 PM To: ether (SM) Subject: Hi David, Once in effect, regulations in the Zoning By-law can be changed for a site-specific context through one of two pathways: 1. Minor Variance • Through a Minor Variance, relief from regulations such as side yard setbacks, lot width, etc... can be granted by the Committee of Adjustment. In this process, the file planner will evaluate the requested relief against the four tests outlined in the Planning Act and provide a recommendation to the Committee. Zoning By-law Amendment (ZBA) Through a ZBA, site-specific zoning regulations can be granted for development proposals. This 90 -day process would be handled by a file planner and urban designer and would be contingent on a decision from council. The Growing Together team is currently considering site-specific requests for changes in zone category through the submission of proof of lot ownership/consolidation as well as a schematic design proposal and a scoped planning justification report demonstrating how a proposed development can meet the desired zone. In this case, the property is already assigned the highest SGA4 zone, and through this process we are not able to make recommendations for site- specific regulations or permissions beyond those found in the base zoning. Please continue to reach out to us with any questions. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Tim Donegani <Tim.Donegani@kitchener.ca> Sent: Friday, November 24, 2023 5:40 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: Fwd: 475 Charles St 'E/ Zone Regulations Get Outlook for Android From: David Johnson Sent: Friday, Novem_-• _ •, __---•_-•-- • --- To: Tim Donegani <Tim.Donegan i kitchener.ca> Subject: 475 Charles St E/ Zone Regulations You don't often get email from Learn why this is important I have reviewed the Growing Together proposed than es to m roperty. one major concern and one minor one. The first, is the lot width for building height. The lot at s about 25 meters wide and we would not be able to build an apartment on this site with the current regulation of minimum width of 30 Meters. Page 634 of 1179 The other concern is having a 6 meter exterior side setback. Could there be a site specific allowance for- for the existing width to allow a 12 storey apartment? This is directly across the street from the Borden LRT Station. Could a developer deal with side yards at the Committee of Adjustment ? Side yards would be a discussion point with the design team and staff. It is not my intention to develop the site, but to ensure the site is able to be developed for its intended use of mid to high rise apartments, in keeping with the beliefs of LRT accommodation. Would appreciate your comments in this matter. Regards David Johnson Page 635 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Good afternoon Matthew, Growing Together (SM) Thursday, December 7, 2023 1:17 PM Matthew Warzecha; Growing Together (SM) Bill Reitzel; Richard Kelly-Ruetz RE: Weber Street Redevelopment Thank you for the submission. The Growing Together team is evaluating submissions beginning December 8t". Changes will be recommended in our staff report as it is finalized over the next few weeks. We will, however, do our best communicate our direction and continue to collaborate on the process in the interim. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Matthew Warzecha Sent: Friday, November 24, 2023 2:59 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Cc: Bill Reitzel Richard Kelly-Ruetz <Richard.Kelly-Ruetz@kitchener.ca> Subject: RE: Weber Street Redevelopment Natalie et al — Further to our previous letter, please find attached updated comments on the Growing Together Draft Zoning By-law Amendment as it relates to the properties municipally known as = The enclosed letter continues to advocate for the inclusion of the lands as SGA3 and provide additional justification for this, including a recent decision for the adjacent lands. I am including Richard Kelly Ruetz as I spoke with him at the November 14, 2023 one -one -one consultation meetings. With the submission of this letter, we would welcome the opportunity to further discuss our comments. Thank you, Warzecha MCIP RPP Director of Planning and Development I Polocorp Inc. x;ORP This e-mail is confidential and intended only for the addressee. Disclosure of this e-mail to anyone else is not intended as a waiver of confidentiality or privilege. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately. From: Matthew Warzecha Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2023 6:36 PM To: growingtogether@kitchener.ca Page 636 of 1179 Cc: Bill Reitzel Subject: Weber Street Redevelopment Natalie et al — On behalf of RJMR Investments, owners of , please find attached letter regarding the current Growing Together Study. The attached letter advocates for the lands to be considered Strategic Growth Area 3 through the ongoing zoning review. The SGA3 Zone would facilitate the redevelopment of Site as a high-density mixed-use building, per the attached Concept Plan. Polocorp intends to pursue a Pre -submission Consultation with City staff for an Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment to pursue the attached Concept Plan in the coming weeks. Prior to doing so, however, I would like to request a brief meeting with you to discuss the implications of the Growing Together Study on the Site and this proposal. If there is alignment on proposed zoning, it could provide an opportunity to avoid duplication of our efforts for both parties. With that, if you could please advise of your availability to discuss the attached it would be greatly appreciated. Thank you, Matthew Warzecha MCIP RPP Director of Planning and Development I Polocorp Inc. POKEORP This e-mail is confidential and intended only for the addressee. Disclosure of this e-mail to anyone else is not intended as a waiver of confidentiality or privilege. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately. Page 637 of 1179 POUICORP November 24, 2023 City of Kitchener — Planning Division 200 King Street West, 6' Floor Pd Box 1118 Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 Via email to planning applications@kitchener.ca Attention: Natalie Goss Reference: Manager, Policy and Research Growing Together Comments on Draft Zoning rM Further to the letters submitted on August 9, 2023 and August 29, 2023 by Bill Reitzel and Polocorp Inc, respectively, Polocorp has reviewed the draft Zoning By-law issued on November 3, 2023. 1 also attended the November 14, 2023 one-on-one consultation session and spoke with staff member Richard Kelly-Ruetz regarding the above-described property. The Draft Amendment identifies the property as Strategic Growth Area Two (SGA -2) Zone. The Owner's do not support the Draft Zoning By-law Amendment as proposed, rather, they request that the property be identified as Strategic Growth Area 3 (SGA3) Zone. Further to the justification provided in the aforementioned letters, the SGA3 Zone is more appropriate for the lands, given the following: C�famne MUM • Polocorp Inc has revised the Concept Plan submitted with the August 29, 2023 letter. The revised Concept Plan reflects the draft zoning regulations of the SGA3 Zone. The revised Concept Plan illustrates the Site as attaining approximately 220 residential units within a 25 -storey building. The revised Concept Plan illustrates that the Site is a viable redevelopment parcel that largely implements the regulations of the SGA3 Zone, as proposed. Minor site-specific considerations could be contemplated through a future Minor Variance application to more efficiently utilize the property, including a reduced setback from a street to the podium. With that said, the Concept Plan, as shown, is viable. Page 638 of 1179 Figure 1: Concept Plan Massing Adiacent ArJrJrovals On October 30, 2023, Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments OPA23 012 CD and ZBA23/022/W/CD) were approved for the lands identified as the "Approved Lands"). The amendments approved the redevelopment of these properties as a 32 -storey residential tower. The Approved Lands are located immediately adjacent to the Site. In comparison, the above- described consolidated lands have —17.5 metres more frontage on Weber Street, an additional —50 metres of frontage on Cedar Street and are —730 square metres lar er than the A roved Lands. While the lot geometries vary, it should be noted that alone, are virtually identical to the Approved Lands. 2 Page 639 of 1179 Given the above, the Approved Lands have been considered and approved by Council. The implementation of the SGA2 zone, as proposed, would cap the building height on the Site to 8 storeys. Given the proximity between the properties, Council have indicated that the higher -density residential uses are appropriate this area. Further, a transition from 32 storeys to 8 storeys, within the same block and immediately adjacent to one another is inappropriate as it would be an inefficient use of lands, would introduce a stark transition in heights and reduce the availability of potential residential units within the community. As such, the SGA3 Zone would be more appropriate for the Site. Ownership The properties comprising the Site are under common ownership by R.J.M.R Investments Inc and are an existing assembly of lands. Given this, the application of the SGA3 Zone would provide an expedient opportunity to realize new housing within Downtown Kitchener as the Owners could move directly to Site Plan application without the need for an Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendment. Proof of ownership has been attached for your reference. Please note that the Owners do not own the unserviced parcel fronting May Place. Given the geometry of the Site, we recommend that it be included within the SGA2 Zone, as well. zs, r 1�1i b � n •? - T" ri /► " ~ 01"ib, / /► • , ,` • Alf /'».• / Figure 2 Site Location 3 Page 640 of 1179 Further to the above, please note that a Pre -submission Consultation meeting for Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments for the Site has been scheduled for December 5, 2023. The Growing Together Study offers an opportunity to zone the lands SGA3 and allow for redevelopment, consistent with the adjacent properties. Coordination between the Owners and the City will efficiently provide the zoning needed to allow for much needed housing to be constructed on the Site in a timely manner, without the need for additional planning applications. With this submission, I trust that Staff will consider revising the Draft Zoning By-law Amendment to reflect the SGA3 Zone on the Site. Should you require additional information, or wish to discuss the above further, please feel free to contact the undersigned. Sincerely, Polocorp Inc. Matthew Warzec YCIP RPP Director of Development and Planning CC: Bill Reitzel, RJMR Investments 4 Page 641 of 1179 Preliminary Response to the November 3, 2023 'Growing Together' Final Draft Hal Jaeger November 25, 2023 Page 642 of 1179 Response to the November 3, 2023 Growing Together Proposal Thank you, Growing Together team, for your innovative and hard work on the re- zoning of 7 of 10 Kitchener's Major Transit Station Areas. Please consider the following preliminary recommendations, which are based on a reading of the Growing Together proposal with an eye on the Olde Berlin Town neighbourhood, the neighbourhood in which I live and understand best. While the suggestions address the lands within the Olde Berlin Town neighbourhood, which is largely governed by a heritage district plan, they may be equally applicable in other heritage districts and neighbourhoods. Regarding the general Zoning Bylaw and Official Plan: 1) Review the proposed minimum interior side yard setbacks in conjunction with the permitted projection of balconies, canopies, location of steps and access ramps. These regulations can combine to leave less than 0.45m of passing space, which may direct occupants to routinely trespass onto a neighbour's property and may be insufficient to maintain a property from within one's own lands. 2) Express all height limits in metres. Storeys can vary significantly in height and the effect multiplied across multiple storeys can be significant. In providing limits in metres, developers will retain design flexibility as to their choice of the number and height of individual storeys and neighbours and the community can comprehend the outer limits of the built form envelope. Without a determinable limit expressed in metres, how can we be assured that an appropriate transition will be delivered? 3) Set the height limits currently defined in storeys as no more than: a) 19.5m for the base height/first setback/physical separation/floor plate reduction of SGA -2, -3, and -4 b) 25.5m for the total height of SGA -2 c) 37.5m for the second setback/physical separation/floor plate reduction on SGA -3 and -4 d) 55.5m for the third setback/physical separation/floor plate reduction on SGA - 3 and -4 e) 76.5m for the total height of SGA -3 f) 109.5m for the fourth setback/physical separation/floor plate reduction on SGA -4 4) Set a height limit on the SGA -4 zone. If current economics or engineering are perceived as providing a limit, please at least set that de facto limit, expressed in metres, into the zoning regulations. If a height limit on SGA -4 zones is not acceptable, please consider additional floor plate reductions. 1 Page 643 of 1179 5) Apply the built form regulations of SGA -3 to lands zoned INS -2. 6) Reconsider the removal of INS zoning on church properties. Alternatively, require a minimum amount of floor space be allocated for one or a combination of the following traditional community -serving uses: Community Facility, Cultural Facility, Day Care Facility, Place of Worship. 7) Regarding Parks and Greenspace: a) I continue to be concerned that up -zoning lands in advance of acquiring any needed parkland could place our parkland targets further out of reach. b) Require that front and exterior side yards and boulevards in SGA -1 be required to be predominantly landscaped with living plants, as opposed to hardscaping or fake plants, including carpeting that simulates grass. c) Consider adding a `Minimum landscaped area' regulation to Table 6-2 for Single Detached, Semi -Detached, and Street Townhouse Dwelling Units in addition to or instead of the `maximum lot coverage' regulation. d) Reconsider proposed Official Plan Section 15.D.2.25, "As a part of the required parkland dedication, land dedication will be encouraged over alternative forms such as cash -in -lieu for the creation of new public parks", so that the City may assemble larger parks. The parkettes achieved via land dedication do not offer the full range of benefits of a larger park, nor do they offer the City's Parks division the required flexibility to meet our park targets in areas of greatest need. Moreover, the preponderance of smaller parks may increase dramatically if developers choose to create Privately Owned Publicly Accessible Spaces. e) Consider cash -in -lieu of meeting minimum landscaping requirements on Priority Streets so that replacement greenspace can be acquired elsewhere, perhaps consolidated into parks. 8) Regarding Use: The Olde Berlin Town neighbourhood is presently well -serviced; I do not see that the proposed additional non-residential uses in SGA -1 zones can contribute to a more complete community. Driving more commercial uses into the interior of the neighbourhood could deplete the desired commercial activity from flanking and abutting SGA -2 zones and priority streets, Victoria St N, Ontario St N and Queen St N and reduce the availability of long-term housing units. Alternatively, broadening the range of permitted home occupations in what are presently residential areas could better recognize the existing reality while preserving the residential character sought by the Heritage District Plan (HDP) and avoiding the introduction of potential conflict between neighbours. In seeking to broaden the uses, I request that we be especially mindful of ensuring adequate capacity for servicing (deliveries, garbage pick-up, etc.) and of the transitions between SGA -1 and SGA -2+ zones that are not separated by a laneway or roadway. A 2 Page 644 of 1179 modification of the chart of permitted non-residential uses in SGA zones is included in Attachment A along with a map recommending adjustments. For the SGA -1 zone, I identify the following possible remedies: a) Limiting the commercial uses to those undertaken by a resident of the building, with no more than a single employee or assistant at a time. b) Preserving separating distances between uses that might invite conflict over smells, pests, noise, etc. I am particularly thinking of establishments with full-scale kitchens and deep fryers, outdoor patios and outdoor sales. c) Removing proposed zoning bylaw amendment Section 4.14.8 c) of the zoning bylaw amendment which would permit restaurant decks and patios in a yard within 30m of a residential zone and SGA -1 zone. d) Limiting the operating hours of the commercial uses. e) Reducing the maximum floor area of the non-residential uses or setting an alternate limit in terms of percentage floor space of the building. f) Prohibiting backlit, electronic or moving signs and limiting signs to a size of no more than 0.75m2, and to a location on or within 0.5m of the building, with a maximum height no more than 1.5m above grade. g) For SGA -1 or low-rise residential properties that front onto, or share a property line with, an SGA -2 zone along Weber St W, Water St N or Victoria St N, enhance the range of uses to assist with the transition and help the viability of these properties without compromising their heritage value. Recommendations included in Attachment A. 9) Regarding Transitions: a) Adjust the "Transition to Low Rise Zones" regulations to read "Minimum yard setback where the lot abuts a lot with an SGA -1 zone or a low-rise residential zone -- 7.5m". I was informed inclusion of `rear' was an error. b) Re-insert a second stepback, such as that proposed via the NPR of a 25m maximum building height within 25m of a lot with an SGA -1 zone or a lot with a low-rise residential zone to better address the transition from an SGA -1 or low-rise zone to any abutting zone that permits more than 25.5 metres of height. c) Where it is deemed necessary to apply zoning that would produce an inappropriate transition, consider compensatory arrangements. Such arrangements need not apply to pre-existing builds. 10) Interaction with Heritage The community may be better able to embrace the Growing Together proposal and accept that the proposed zoning does not fully account for the provisions of the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Plan, if the following 3 Page 645 of 1179 statement is inserted into the Official Plan, perhaps after proposed Section 15. D.2.8: The Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Plan (HDP), shal be read with the following substitutions: Existing language "policies are proposed" "(strongly) discouraged" "strongly encouraged" "should" "avoid" Proposed substitutions "policies shall be followed" "not permitted" "required" "shall" "refrain from" Heritage Planning Staff may have additional suggestions. The HDP was written as a proposal by a consultant, and the words chosen in that context. When Council adopted the plan, the recommendations and proposals became law. The Growing Together proposal is the opportunity to properly integrate the HDP into our planning framework. If fully recognizing the HDP is not an option, then, I would recommend additional transitioning regulations. For example, for SGA -2+ zones abutting an SGA -1 or low-rise residential property along the rear property line, a minimum rear yard setback of 18m, for any portion of the build with height in excess of 19.5m, to permit appropriate transition and light. This may be especially needed where the SGA -2 property is to the south of the SGA -1 property. Furthermore, the proposed zoning on heritage resources would need to better align with the existing built form to avoid tension between the restrictions on the built form from the HDP and the more permissive limits offered via zoning. As a measure of last resort, in the absence of sufficient time, the handling of heritage resources could be overtly deferred to a future planning amendment. A summary of the existing context provided by the HDP from previous submissions by the Olde Berlin Town Neighbourhood Association to the Neighbourhood Planning Review is included as Attachment B. 0 Page 646 of 1179 Attachment A: Modified Uses, Address -Specific Changes and Mapping Suggested Changes to SGA -1 and SGA -2 uses and a proposed additional category of uses. Use SGA -1' SGA -22 Transition Zone Uses Home Occupations Home occupation Y Y Y Community Uses Adult education school N Y N Community facility -Y N Y Y Cultural facility -Y N Y Y Day care facility Y Y Y Elementary school N Y N Hospital N N N Place of worship -Y N Y Y Post -secondary school N Y N Secondary school N Y N Social service establishment -Y N Y Y Commercial Uses Artisan's establishment Y Y Y Brewpub -Y N Y N Catering services establishment N Y Y Commercial entertainment N Y N Commercial parking facility N -Y N N Commercial school Y Y Y Conference, convention, or exhibition facility N N N Craftsperson shop Y Y Y Financial establishment -Y N Y N Fitness centre Y Y Y Health clinic -Y N Y Y Hotel N Y N Light repair operation Y Y Y Office Y Y Y Payday loan establishment -Y N Y N Pawn establishment -Y N Y N Personal services Y Y Y Pet services establishment Y Y Y Print shop Y Y Y Restaurant -Y N Y N Retail Y Y N Veterinary services -Y N Y N Creative Industry Uses Biotechnological establishment N -Y N N Computer, electronic, data processing or server establishment N Y Y Creative products manufacturing N Y N Research and development establishment N -Y N N 1 Must be operated by resident of building, no more than one non-resident assistant/employee at a time. Any signs are limited to no more than 0.75m2 in size, attached to the building or within 0.5m of the building, no more than 1.5m above grade. No backlit, electronic or moving signs. z May require front -in, front -out parking and loading. Page 647 of 1179 Suggested Locations for Transition Zone Uses (outlined in red on map below) # Address Proposed Zone Requested Change(s) 1 87&91 Ahrens St W SGA -1 Transition Zone Uses 2 94-120 (even) and 95 College St Transition Zone Uses 3 47-61 Ellen St W both sides RES -4 Transition Zone Uses 4 7 Lancaster St E RES -4 Transition Zone Uses 5 64 Margaret Ave SGA -2 Transition Zone Uses 6 68-116 Queen St N even SGA -2, -3 Transition Zone Uses 7 194 Queen St N RES -4 Transition Zone Uses 8 23-65 Roy St odd SGA -1 Transition Zone Uses 9 14-46 St Leger St odd RES -4 Transition Zone Uses 10 231 Victoria St N RES -4 Transition Zone Uses 11 341 &343 Victoria St N RES -4 Transition Zone Uses 12 106, 109, 113 Young St SGA -1, -2 Transition Zone Uses Page 648 of 1179 Other Address -Specific Suggestions (outlined in red on map below) # Address Proposed Requested Change(s) Zone 1 119 College St SGA -2 (3) SGA -1 uses, as in above chart. Insert Special Regulation: "The existing build preceded the HDP and the 2024 amendments to the Official Plan and Zoning Bylaw." 2 200 Frederick St SGA -3 Maximum height of 25m, within 50m of the Ellen St E property line and a maximum height of 50m elsewhere, to limit shadow impact. 3 11 Margaret Ave/100 SGA -3 SGA -2 uses, as in above chart. Match height limit Queen St N to existing build. Insert Special Regulation: "The existing build preceded the HDP and the 2024 amendments to the Official Plan and Zoning Bylaw." 4 30-40 Margaret SGA -2 SGA -1 zone. Special Regulations to permit the OMB built -form regulations. The property is at the outer boundary of the SGA and abuts a low-rise residential area. 5 54 Margaret Ave SGA -2 SGA -1 zone. The property is at the outer boundary of the SGA and abuts a low-rise residential area. 6 54-116 Queen St N SGA -2, -3 Maximum podium or base height of no more than (even) 14m and minimum front yard setbacks of 4.5m, to reserve setting. 7 73-101 Queen St N SGA -3 Maximum podium or base height of no more than (odd) 14m and minimum front yard setbacks of 4.5m, to preserve setting. Maximum height of 25m, within 25m of the Queen St N property line and within 50m of the Ellen St E property line and a maximum height of 50m elsewhere, to limit shadow impact. 8 175 Queen St N RES -7 Insert Special Regulation: "The existing build preceded the HDP and the 2024 amendments to the Official Plan and Zoning Bylaw." 9 32 Weber St W MIX -3, Retain Special Regulation 133R. Permit division of RES -3 the property along the line parallel to Roy St, 30 Office metres from the Roy St street line, if owner requests. No vehicular access to Roy St, whether consolidated with 41 and/or 51 Roy St or not. 10 35&37 Weber St W INS -2 Adopt built form regulations of SGA -3. 11 80 Young St SGA -4 SGA -3, for the first 50m south of Weber St W, or a site-specific provision to limit height to SGA -3 limit in the first 50m south of Weber St W to 50m, to limit shadow impact on the north side of Weber St W. 12 Lands to the south of INS-2,Additional measures to reduce or address the the Heritage District SGA -3, shadow burden on neighbours to the north. SGA -4 Page 649 of 1179 a M 214W, �ffi� 1001 A AL AMFF ASM OF `� L k's z MA Attachment B: Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Plan (HDP) Direction Olde Berlin Town is a neighbourhood originally constructed between 1870 and 1930, where "[a]lmost two-thirds of the existing houses were built between 1880 and 1917" (p. 2.3, HDP). The existing low-rise heritage houses (Group A, B, and C houses) make up 91.4% of the buildings in the Heritage District and have: 1. a height at the peak of the roof of under 10 m (compared to a proposed limit of 11 m); 2. a height at the eaves of under 7 metres and sloped roofs which permit light to reach neighbouring properties; The land use goal identified by the HDP is to "Maintain the low-density residential character of the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District as the predominant land use, while recognizing that certain areas of the District already have or are intended for a wider range of uses" (p 3.2). A guiding principle regarding land use is to "Preserve Traditional Setting - A building is intimately connected to its site and to the neighbouring landscape and buildings. Land, gardens, outbuildings and fences form a setting that should be considered during plans for restoration or change. An individual building is perceived as part of a grouping and requires its neighbours to illustrate the original design intent. When buildings need to change there is a supportive setting that should be maintained" (p. 3.4, HDP). The HDP "Encourag[es] individual building owners to understand the broader context of heritage preservation, and recognize that buildings should outlive their individual owners and each owner or tenant should consider themselves stewards of the building for future owners and users" (p. 3.1). Individual property owner buy - in as well as cooperation and support from the Planning Department and the City of Kitchener is required to foster and maintain this partnership of preserving the buildings and the context that supports them. I note that `compatible with' is not synonymous with `the same as'. I propose that two built forms and settings be deemed compatible if 1. the presence of one does not compromise the other, 2. the two can co -exist indefinitely, and 3. either could emerge in the presence of the other. 0 Page 651 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Friday, December 1, 2023 4:12 PM To: Sam Mandy Subject: RE: Feedback for Final Draft Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By -Law Regulations Good Afternoon Sam, Thank you for your comment. The Growing Together team is currently evaluating a range of feedback regarding built - form transition and any changes will be noted as part of our final recommendations. Please visit engagewr.ca/growingtogether and subscribe to receive updates. Best, The Growing Together Team From: Sam Mandy Sent: Sunday, November 26, 2023 7:53 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: Re: Feedback for Final Draft Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By -Law Regulations Dear Growing Together Team, Thank you for getting back to me promptly. Regarding item #1 (Restrictive 12m Transition Requirement for SGA2) below, we do understand your point for Zoning By-law 2019-051 and we don't think such a requirement is there in the current R-7 zoning (by-law 85- 1). We will highly appreciate it if you could please consider making this transition requirement contingent on the lot width. That is, relaxing this requirement for lots that are less than a certain width e.g. 75 meter width. Such a transition requirement makes full sense if the lot is very wide that will result in a wide building. However, if the lot is relatively narrow we think it makes logical sense to relax this requirement as it does not create the same feeling of closeness of the towers / density. I understand your input regarding #2 and #3 below that it can be addressed via minor variance keeping in mind site specifics. Thank you very much again, Best Regards Sam On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 12:00 PM Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> wrote: Good morning Sam, Thank you for your feedback. Page 652 of 1179 1. The team understands the challenges with developing mid -rise buildings. However, the transition to low-rise regulations in the Strategic Growth Area zoning is more permissive than the RES -6 and RES -7 zones. See regulation 4.19 from Zoning By-law 2019-051 below: 4.19 TRANSITION TO LOW-RISE RESIDENTIAL Despite any maximum building height of more than 12 metres applying to any zone, the building height shall not exceed 12 metres within 15 metres of a lot with a low-rise residential zone. Where the low-rise residential zone within 15 metres permits a building height of 14 metres, the building height shall not exceed 15 metres within 15 metres of a lot with a low-rise residential zone. This provision for mid -rise and high-rise buildings states that building height may not exceed 15 metres within a 15 - metre distance of a low-rise residential zone (RES -1 to RES -5). We have opted to maintain a slightly more permissive transition regulation for mid -rise and high-rise buildings in the SGA zones, as this issue was brought up extensively during community engagement. We will be considering your feedback on transition for mid -rise buildings and will notify you if any changes to the proposed zoning are made. 2. With no maximum floor space ratio in the zoning by-law, the maximum building length regulation is used to ensure that the massing of buildings meets the principles of good urban design. For site-specific instances, such as deep lots, the maximum building length regulation can be varied at the Committee of Adjustment through a minor variance. 3. The maximum building height of 11 metres is consistent with the maximum height in low-rise residential zones (RES - 1 to RES -5). Language in the proposed Official Plan allows for site-specific increases in building height to 4 storeys to be considered through a minor variance. 15.0-2.45- Where the implementing zoning does not pennit it Lhe maximum building height outlined in Policy 15.D_2.37, the City may consider site specific increases to the permitted building Freight in accordance with Policy 15.D.2.5_ On these lands, a Zoning By-law Amendment will be required for a building more than 4 storeys in height - Language in the proposed Official Plan also allows for site-specific increases in building height to 8 storeys through a zoning by-law amendment process on lands designated Strategic Growth Areas A. Thank you again for your detailed comments. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Sam Mandy Sent: Sunday, November 19, 2023 8:08 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Cc: Adam Clark <Adam.Clark@kitchener.ca>; Natalie Goss <Natalie.Goss@kitchener.ca> Subject: Feedback for Final Draft Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By -Law Regulations Dear Growing Together Team, Page 653 of 1179 It was a pleasure meeting with you on Tuesday at the Open House. Thank you very much to the Growing Together Team for putting together the Draft Framework for the MTSAs which is very important for the growth of our City. It requires a lot of hard work and dedication to come up with such a detailed plan. I have a few requests for some of the proposed zoning provisions. I will greatly appreciate if you could please consider these requests given below: 1. Restrictive 12m Transition Requirement for SGA2: The Transition requirement of 12m for multiple dwellings in SGA2 adjoining SGA1 (Section 6.4.3, Table 6-4) is very restrictive. This requirement is more restrictive than the current mid -rise R-7 zoning under Zoning By-law 85-1 as well as the mid - rise RES -6 zoning under Zoning By-law 2019-051. a. Under R-7 zoning (by-law 85-1, Section 41.2.6) for multiple dwellings the Minimum Side Yard requirement for buildings taller than 10.5m is only 6m vs. 12m proposed for SGA2. b. Under RES -6 zoning (by-law 2019-051, Section 7.3, Table 7-6) for multiple dwellings the Minimum Side Yard requirement is only 4.5m vs. 12m proposed for SGA2. Furthermore, in RES -6 there is no transition requirement adjacent to lower rise areas. Are we trying to make MTSAs more restrictive vs. all other (non-MTSA) areas in the City? That should not be the case as MTSAs are supposed to be more intensification friendly. The proposed transition requirement for SGA2 makes assembling and developing two adjacent SGA1 lots with zoning change to SGA2, very difficult. For example, let's say the new assembled lot width is 30m, excluding the transition areas on left and right sides (adjacent to SGA1) the resulting building width allowed is only 6m (30-12-12=6m). That means one can only build a very narrow 6m wide strip for 4th to 8th stories which visually will look very odd and may not make much economic sense for the developer. This feels like a missed opportunity for an area in such a close vicinity to the LRT stations. Please consider removing this Transition requirement for SGA2. If that is not possible please consider reducing this Transition requirement to at least match RES -6 (i.e. 4.5m) or current R-7 (i.e. 6m) and limit its application only to the lots that are very wide/long e.g. lots wider/longer than 75m or 100m. You may want to consider the same for SGA3/4 as well. 2. Restrictive Maximum Building Length for SGA1: The Maximum Building Length requirement for SGA1 in Section 6.3.2 Table 6-3 for multiple dwellings does not take lot depth into consideration. For example, deeper lots will be forced to disproportionately limit the building length and have a lot of empty space in the back of the building. There are many deep lots in the proposed SGA1 areas. If someone wants to build 11+ units the building length is restricted to only 36m while the depth of many deep lots maybe 65M+ (and even 85m+). For at least 11+ dwelling units please consider increasing the Max. Building Length requirement for deep lots to something like 60m. Page 654 of 1179 3. Restrictive Maximum Building Height for SGA1: The proposed maximum building height of 3 stories (11 m) for SGA1 is quite disappointing. Given that this area is so close to transit we would have liked to see at least 4 stories allowed without the need for any zoning amendments or minor variances etc. Please consider changing it to 4 stories. To meet the growing demand for affordable housing and increased pressure on green / agricultural lands we need to make sure this Official plan and Zoning amendment makes full use of the huge investment of our tax dollars in building the LRT and put the City of Kitchener on a growth path that will set us up for meeting the housing needs for the upcoming few decades. 10 or 20 years down the road we cannot move the LRT to a new location and start fresh with intensification as it will be impractical. Let's make the best use of existing residential lands such that our future generations can be proud of ourselves and don't blame us for eliminating the green lands. Thank you Best Regards Sam Page 655 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Thursday, December 7, 2023 1:17 PM To: Bill Reitzel Cc: Growing Together (SM) Subject: RE: Weber/Lanc Letter Good afternoon Bill, Thank you for the submission. The Growing Together team is evaluating submissions beginning December Sth. Changes will be recommended in our staff report as it is finalized over the next few weeks. We will, however, do our best communicate our direction and continue to collaborate on the process in the interim. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Bill Reitzel Sent: Monday, November 27, 2023 7:41 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <Grow ingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: Fwd: Weber/Lanc Letter You don't often get email from biilreitze190gmail.com. Learn why this is important Hi Natalie, Please see attached. Should you require any additional information, please let me know. Thank you, Bill Reitzel Page 656 of 1179 November 27, 2023 City of Kitchener —Planning Division 200 King Street West, 6t" Floor PO Box 1118 Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 Attention: Natalie Goss Manager, Policy and Research Reference: Growing Together, Draft Approach Further to the letter submitted August 9, 2023, the Owners of the properties municipally described as (the "Subject Lands") have reviewed the draft Zoning By-law Amendment (the "Draft ZBA") issued on November 3, 2023. The Draft ZBA proposes to zone as Strategic Growth Areas Two (SGA2), however, 217 Lancaster Street East is to be rezoned Strategic Growth Area One (SGA1). Given that the Subject Lands are in common ownership/control, and are anticipated to be redeveloped collectively, the Owners request that Street East be identified as SGA2 in the final Zoning By-law. Doing so will facilitate the efficient redevelopment of the properties without encumbrance of a split zoned parcel. Given the required 12 -meter setback from SGA1 zoned lands, split zoning of the property will create a significant impediment to efficient development of the lands. Should the lands be zoned SGA1, an owner -initiated Zoning By-law Amendment application will be required. Given the time, costs and resources required for a Zoning By-law Amendment application, the most efficient opportunity to rectify this condition would be to revise the zoning to SGA2 as part of the Growing Together study. For your reference, I have appended Geowarehouse Reports showing proof of ownership of the properties. Please note, however, tha have merged on title and are collectively identified as . The merged lands are owned by 1678838 Ontario Inc. Also note that 1, William (Bill) Rietzel and my wife Lisa Willms, are the owners of As I am a partner of 1678838 Ontario Inc, the properties are collectively under the same ownership. The assembled lands have been illustrated below. Page 657 of 1179 f 116* j BRUBACHE4Z5-% I z it I 2C�f Should you require additional proof of title, please advise and I can provide, as necessary. It should also be noted that a Pre -submission Consultation was held with City staff on September 19, 2023 to consider the redevelopment of the Subject Lands. Regards, Bill Reitzel 1678838 Ontario Inc cc: Carl Reitzel, 1678838 Ontario Inc f Page 658 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2023 11:27 AM To: Growing Together (SM) Subject: RE: Message from REITZEL J - Called back and mailed documents. Az From: Planning (SM) <planning@kitchener.ca> Sent: Monday, November 27, 2023 3:02 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: FW: Message from REITZEL J Hi, Please see message attached from the owner of- She is looking for paper copies of the new zoning information. Can you please give her a call back to arrange that? Thanks, Kristen Heinitz Technical Assistant I Planning Division I City of Kitchener 519-741-2200 ext. 7071 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 kristen.heinitz(�bkitchen er.ca From: Cisco Unity Connection Messaging System <unityconnection@kitchener.ca> Sent: Monday, November 27, 2023 11:46 AM To: Zoning Inquiry <zoninginguiry@kitchener.ca> Subject: Message from REITZEL J (5195702191) Page 659 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2023 11:46 AM To: Growing Together (SM) Subject: RE: Message from J WATSON Called back and chatted for 20 minutes about the project -AZ From: John Zunic <John.Zunic@kitchener.ca> Sent: Monday, November 27, 2023 12:19 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: FW: Message from J WATSON John Zunic (he/him), BES, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner I City of Kitchener 519-741-2200 Ext 76851 TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 john.zunic@kitchener.ca From: Cisco Unity Connection Messaging System <unityconnection@kitchener.ca> Sent: Monday, November 27, 2023 11:14 AM To: John Zunic <John.Zunic@kitchener.ca> Subject: Message from J WATSON Page 660 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Good Afternoon Heather, Growing Together (SM) Friday, December 1, 2023 4:12 PM Heather Price; Adam Clark Michael Serra; Hao Zhang; Ahmed Mahmoud RE: Growing Together- Church and Benton Limited We have received the submission and will be evaluating it with planning management beginning December 8�h. Any changes will be reflected in our final recommendations and staff report, however we will work with you to provide communication over the next few weeks on our direction to ensure we can proceed with the appropriate process with respect to Growing Together and your site-specific application. Thank you, The Growing Together Team From: Heather Price <hprice r: gspgroup.ca> Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2023 8:11 PM To: Adam Clark cAdam.Clark@kitchener.ca> i kgifia""hmed gTogether@n kitchener.ca>; Michael Serra ; Hao Zhang Mahmou Subject: Growing Together- Church and Benton Limi e You don't often get email frorr f�.yrn why this is important Good evening, Please find enclosed our submission on the latest draft planning instruments prepared through Growing Together on behalf of our client, Church and Benton Limited. Since the attachments to the letter are large files I have uploaded them for ease of access online here. Please confirm your receipt of these materials. We would be happy to submit hardcopies, if required. Thank -you for your consideration, Heather Price MCIP RPP GSP Vice President J group Development Planning Manager I �U This communication is intended solely for the named addressee(s) and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, protected or otherwise exempt from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, please advise us immediately and delete this email without reading, copying or forwarding it to anyone. Page 661 of 1179 November 28, 2023 SHAPING GREAT COMMUNITIES File No.21239 200 King Street West Kitchener. ON N2G 4G7 Attn: Adam Clark, Senior Urban Designer (Architecture and Urban Form) Re: Church and Benton Limited Growing Together 9TWIM—A '.Eo,1 Further to our letter dated September 22, 2023, the purpose of this submission is to request consideration through the Growing Together initiative that the above -addressed Site be zoned Special Growth Area Four (SGA -4) with a Site-specific Special Provision to permit a tower floorplate of 900 square metres for floors over 37 storeys. In June, 2023 the owner, Church and Benton Limited, had a pre -submission consultation meeting regarding the planned intensification of the Site as a high density mixed use tower comprised of dwelling units in upper floors and commercial uses at grade, with parking located below -grade in a parking structure. A copy of the Concept Plan prepared by Kirkor Architects is enclosed. Numerous technical analysis and studies have been prepared in support of this proposed development concept, including: • Transportation Impact Assessment and Parking Analysis; • Heritage Impact Assessment; • Urban Design Brief; • Pedestrian Wind Comfort Analysis; and • Functional Servicing Report. Copies of these technical analyses are enclosed for ease of reference. In the November 3, 2023 draft planning instruments published through Growing Together, the Site is proposed to be designated Strategic Growth Area C and Zoned SGA -3. We are in support of the Strategic Growth Area C designation. Per the correspondence received on October 20, 2023, we are writing to address the criteria for consideration of a change to the draft planning instruments: 1) Proof of lot ownership. The three lots comprising the Site have been merged on title under the ownership of Church and Benton Limited as per our previous submission and demonstrated in the enclosed transfer documents. PLANNING I URBAN DESIGN I LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Page 662 of 1179 2) Zoning compliance with SGA -4 The enclosed zoning compliance chart confirms compliance of the proposed development relative to the draft SGA -3 and SGA -4 Zones. It illustrates that the proposed development complies with all aspects of both zones except the height limit of the SGA -3 Zone and the max floorplate area for storeys 37 and above. 3) Planning Justification relative to the criteria for changing zoning within the Major Transit Station Areas as set out in draft Official Plan policy 15.D.2.5. The subsections that follow provide a planning opinion relative the six criteria of draft policy 15. D.2.5. 15.D.2.5a) compatibility with the planned function of the subject lands and adjacent lands The subject lands and adjacent lands to the southwest along Benton Street are proposed to be designated Strategic Growth Area C (SGA C), while the abutting lands to the east on Church Street are proposed to be designated Strategic Growth Area B (SGA B). Lastly, the properties abutting the Site to the southeast (having frontage on St. George Street) are proposed to be designated Strategic Growth Area A (SGA A). The planned function of the Strategic Growth Area designations is to provide opportunities to accommodate intensification, including housing, that is transit -supportive in close proximity to ION rapid transit. The SGA C designation specifically is intended to accommodate significant intensification at high density. The proposed development conforms to the planned function for the SGA C designation because it is a high density, mixed use development. The scale of the proposed development at 40 storeys with 900 sq m floorplates rather than 850 sq m floorplates on floors 37-40 maintains the intent of the SGA C designation. Permission to increase the height from 25 storeys to 40 storeys and increase the floor plate of floors 37 to 40 by 50 square metres maintains the intent of the SGA C designation. In fact, it is contemplated by the designation, which allows for such increases to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. It would not undermine the planned transition provisions between the SGA C designation and the SGA B and SGA A designations because the design meets all other design criteria of the zone; providing adequate separation from abutting properties, and shorter building lengths than what is required. Shadow impacts associated with the increase height would not impact the abutting SGA B and C properties whatsoever. 15.D.2.5b) suitability of the lot for the proposed use and/or built -form. The Site is suitable for a 40 storey tower development because it is so near to the Queen/Frederick ION stations, is at the outer periphery of the Cedar Hill neighbourhood and is immediately across the street from the Urban Growth Centre. The Site has adequate existing services, including transit services, to support the use and no transportation improvements are required to accommodate the projected traffic increases from the proposed development. GSP Group 12 Page 663 of 1179 The proposed 40 storey built form with modestly larger tower floorplates in its uppermost floors is appropriate considering that the tower is oriented to the corner with appropriate stepbacks from the podium base of the building, as required by the draft SGA -4 zoning. The separation of the tower from the interior lot lines far exceeds the minimums required by the zone. Shadow impacts associated with the increased height/ upper storey floorplates extends to the north (toward the Urban Growth Centre and away from the Cedar Hill neighbourhood). 15.D.2.5c) lot area and consolidation as further outlined in Policy 3.C.2.11. The Site is an assembly of three smaller lots and has an area of 4,224 sq m, far exceeding the minimum lot area required for the SGA -4 Zone. 15.D.2.5d) compliance with the City's Urban Design Manual and Policy 11. C. 1.34. An Urban Design Brief for the proposed development demonstrates that it conforms with the Urban Design policies of the Official Plan and reflects the direction of the Urban Design Manual, particularly the Tall Building Guidelines. Of note, the Tall Building Guidelines do not prescribe max tower floor plates and rather focus' on the relationship of the tall building to its surroundings. 15.D.2.5e) cultural heritage resources, including Policy 15.D.2.8. A Heritage Impact Assessment was prepared in support of the proposed development. It contains recommended mitigation measures and concludes that with these measures the proposed redevelopment can proceed in a manner that safeguards heritage resources, respects the heritage context, and incorporates commemorative elements, effectively mitigating all identified potential impacts. 15.D.2.50 technical considerations and other contextual or site specific factors. The Site is situated immediately across the street from the City's Urban Growth Centre and is very near to the Queen and Frederick ION Rapid Transit Stations. It is located on the westerly edge of the Cedar Hill neighbourhood, and on the south side of Church Street. These contextual factors support the requested uplift in height and massing as requested herein. A Functional Servicing Report for the proposed development confirms there is sufficient servicing to support the proposed development. A Transportation Impact and Parking Study confirms that the transportation network is adequate to support the proposed development and there are no traffic improvements required. It supports the proposed amount of parking for the proposed development, subject to the provision of transportation demand management measures. A Pedestrian Wind Comfort Analysis concludes that the wind speeds at most locations at grade are anticipated to remain adequate for pedestrian use throughout the year. Wind control options can be considered to improve wind conditions where there are some higher than ideal wind speeds during certain seasons. GSP Group 13 Page 664 of 1179 A Shadow Study, contained in the Urban Design Brief, confirms that the proposed development maintains a minimum three to four hours of sunlight on abutting properties and sidewalks throughout the year. The findings of these technical analyses support the requested uplift in height and massing as requested herein. I trust that the forgoing submission is sufficient to consider our request for consideration of the SGA - 4 Zone with a Site-specific Special Provision to permit a floorplate of 900 square metres on floors 37 and above. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or require any additional information. Thank -you for your consideration, GSP Group Inc. 9Ala"�' Heather Price, MCIP, R P Vice President, Development Planning Manager cc. Church and Benton Limited Encl. (10) GSP Group 14 Page 665 of 1179 CHURCH & BENTON DEVELOPMENT Proposed Mixed -Use Development EZ= 0J8 Amnanv mwlm 11_21.1= Eve - KIRK R ARCHITECTS AND PLANNERS J3DEVELOPMENT GROUP C- Sheet D.s. dAO.00 BENTON STREET" 0lum =atE�Al PLAN 5BR- SHOL O REG= �4RT ,.UN 53R -O'24 —.A P24 PART SCHEDULE PART 3 PART 2 ;7, 1 222 M 7 Q, an-.1 pl. --1. PLAN 21` SURVEY Lar 3 REGISTERED PLAN 2135 LOT 19 R REGISTERED PLAN 393 KIRK OR PARTS, P, N �_Mllvj 1 LOT 41 _ rr REGISTERED PLAN 394 ARCHIT—D AND PLANNERS PART PLAN 1- 113 M OF KITCHENER REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF WATERLOO PART 4 M E «s LM. ONTARIO LAND SURVEYORS N07M- NA. 5 pS�xx��rox y$ MX U— 4�` F`€ !II i `t; 'a$ ' "d E Tr=E11 a" 2 METRAr- 7 7-j! US. - IN BE U�SM.a SURVEYORS CERTIFIC4 J3 DEVELOPMENT LEGEND E R=F. -D U�T D GROUP P c. L T n,c L 0 TPm PFG c.u-..—.--. V-39857 S umey PART 1, PLAN 5aq-11237 MTE n� Site S­y(p dAl.0i zm 9 ® ®®� ®ZNZ Nio z ®®® �® W 1 /LV ❑ ®I r Iw � ®® =i ]� ®�w KIRKOR Efl ( x z =f ®®®® �4 ® IXI� ®� ARCH ITECTS AND PLANNERS to ceA ox Mi onieou -G T_GEOyaIRGE STREET Fli-iF� ✓LL/�� I�/Ji� ® /LV � ml jN � ® VJ ®�LV ,I�LV/���(�F' Content Plan 1 (Coo 0 .PROPOSED / � 40 STOREY BUILDWG: 3 DEVELOPMENT Context Plan ��S -' a�� �Q=��Rn � •'W>'' a -S � ,arc, x'01.:"`-Sg1. _/'..'Y��� _ X16:.; � ��s � ' � ���� Aerial 3D Con[ezt View n \1J �a Lo dA1 A2 r� I ���� 1.� �n 9 .i � ■ i/n Q°i ms's K. �I_ G � � 3�III��e elf ell�ll/ jlld/ VIII I .f r rnr� �il�zt � 1�11 ■r II � a�Rll >II Svi, II •�iuG Irl °L FIX q I■ur�ll II KIRK,. D.. NNERS � III r _ i ��II I I - �� J3DEVEL. dA1.03 � �� s,aEHroHST III' _ — __ .__ _ . �, .. v - ����_��T gip. ��wm�=.���.__�.___. CHURCH STREET -aRq KIRKOR �` PROPOSED 40 STOREY \ W Sa cH—sr ARCHITECTS AND PLANNERS CW..VIII a HD —MV&Ej q AT E 6TE— 0 �-,, rk bt� -Q! J3 DEVELOPMENT GROUP ID WI d a3bdlSlJdb Site Plan Site Statistics IIIK L 08 L9L 889 NVId 9 iaVd Pm� e Plan dA1.04' PARALLEL PARKING SPACE: pTYPE A (END SPACE): TYPE B (INTERIOR SPACE): ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACE: TYPE A: TYPE B: ia4 �- Typical Parking Notes (p TYPICAL BI CYCLE PARKING SPACE: Typical Bicycle Parking Notes (2p AZ0 JJDEVELOPMENT GROUP Level P3 Floor Plan dA2.0i LEGEND: Drive Aisle @ 6.4m min. PARALLEL PARKING SPACE: pTYPE A (END SPACE): TYPE B (INTERIOR SPACE): ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACE: TYPE A: TYPE B: ia4 �- Typical Parking Notes (;4 TYPICAL BI CYCLE PARKING SPACE: Typical Bicycle Parking Notes (& AZ0 JJDEVELOPMENT GROUP Level P2 Floor Plan dMii LEGEND: Drive Aisle @ 6.4m min. PARALLEL PARKING SPACE: pTYPE A (END SPACE): TYPE B (INTERIOR SPACE): ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACE: TYPE A: TYPE B: s fat.- �w o.._..e woMwxr�o�wRiore Typical Parking Notes 1 TYPICAL BI CYCLE PARKING SPACE: Typical Bicycle Parking Notes (& AZ0 Floor Plan - Level P1 %� 00 0 JJDEVELOPMENT GROUP Level P1 Floor Plan dA2.03 m nF:vpi npMPNT L-11 Floor Plan I.— DS, dA2.041 CHURCH STREET aE.o�� - ------------ &TONE BRICK P—ATE -0 8Y8TE WMUST OE "NTk NED TO ENSURE UN MPEDEO To .... ..... T, WTEEPL N"U'll"UT N'T , "'El TIE 0 YE . lsA-0 H -SE _PITY,_ y ------------ 0 2- INala ,D,E.�,71,rl.CA,�.ONO,F,.T.HE.�5.IDE,N,C,EF.OR.PURMSAEI,D.Or.E.DUIZT,...IlT.E MTERAL —CEE BEFORE ORLEFTAFTER COLLECTION IS THE .1.1.1oFI.E—.ea--o I.EPa.PEaTl-..EMENT ,2N .y 1 or IHE . 1s— ..nm zein, USA—S Pr— �EES. ECLIE 1- —TE EOLLEET— --E 1. — W 1— MU jO.LEAPNHOETHEEUOTANOOE5KNEETE 'UM 7 ILEEIV= ELIE.,E_EE OZ 'E6& Z& —.-EM xs Eo«ows 'A' LE (B) DESIEN—D C TY BULK LIFT —ELE IN ADECTIM TO BULDINS WE, 'ELIE"ENTS (E) E��,sTxEAETO.%.El�— —U. —ELE EEEEP T. I— FEP PEEDK EE E L.—N. A —T E TED F RE.FOPCEE _.EEETEEw 'TH canoe NN IT. E.EEPE ­S.)lHKK INE. N SITE —01. —1 MUST E —11ELE TO —EWHE _ PER THE O—SETON DE— D A _ P .... IHEI TIE TI UTE P"ER=1 E.— 1. —1—AITHE—E 1. THE — THE —ETX %8'S N —CLEXN, T, 1, VEHI,,E,I,,_E,,E 0 1� THE -HE-- —LE -K. Waste Management E_,02 SLTL`lN EY I "E 11 E.T. ST Gmte Pom� Floor P m nF:vpi npMPNT L-11 Floor Plan I.— DS, dA2.041 .. ;- g mm I KIRKOR ARCHITECTS AND PLANNERS � I $ � JJDEVELOPMENT GRGUP ID-----..---------J a Floor Plan -Level 1 Mezz � Level Floor Plan i zoo Azo dM ii pl'I gi :Fs Qu I ly I Floor Plan - Level 2 3 n KIRKOR ARCHITECTS AND PLANNERS JJDEVELOPMENT GROUP L-.1 3 Floor Plan dA2.06 9 KIRKOR ARCHITECTS AND PLANNERS lI ,a z=s Ig ®® J DEVELOPMENT GROUPJJ GROUP ID Leve14 Floor Plan Floor Plan - n I 201 au :oa .oi dA2.0i 1. r % g ie�r fr e e15 gas s aa° a S I€ I I I II I" Floor Plan-Level4 KIRKOR ARCHITECTS AND PLANNERS DEVELOPMENT GROUPJJ GROUP ID Leve15 Floor Plan I zoo 0 dA2.0i I a I I TYPICAL FLOOR PLATE: 900m' (LEVEL 6 to 371 ----� our000rz nmewn nr ieve�s I moo....... Typls l Floor Plan -Level -36 1 i :zoo JJDEVELOPMENT GROUP Level 6-37 Floor Plan dA2.6 I ✓ 5 ,aa � I I .i ..a.o I I I ouT000R AMENITY AT iEVEL5 I f/ I' ,. moo••„E,a, I Floor Plan - Level 38-40 KIRKOR ARCHITECTS AND PLANNERS JJ DEVELOPMENT GROUP ID-----..---------J a Level 38-40 Floor Plan —1 dA2.1 I �' S •. y I I I ouT000R AMENITY AT iEVEL5 I f/ I' ,.00••„Ea, IDEVELOPMENT Floor Plan -MPH KIRKOR ARCHITECTS AND PLANNERS JJ GROUP MPH Floor Plan zoo Az.n dA2.11 KIRKOR PROPOSED 40 STOREY ----- € BUILDING f ARCHITECTS AND PLANNERS I 6 I I ouT000a nmeurtrAr �eve�s � I DEVELOPMENT GROUP Roof Plan Roof Plan + dA2.12 '7H 11 --,- ---- LI 1 11 1 11 1 11 111 I U U I III III -__,_—_= 3-6Q �rno.w L -. Lexe�ze(�m EXTERIOR FINISH o1.auEx. III _- L ARCHITECTce:oAND PLAN NERS LEGEN -- _ - - - III I lL II r - .m r.w.o r wWv TTM ocwuwuaamu wwwu ITrr- L—L 14 (Q_ o_..__,......._.a..._.„� L DEVELOPMENT JJ GROUP O - E L O Building Elevation - East B Ex[rerior Finish Legend p Eas[ Eleva[ionmm 1 so to, dA3.01 A o, wl I--. rQ, 131w - `� Ipl6 g VEL 37 �Q _- —IT— _ �V --- ® _ �v - JI KIRKOR EXTERIOR FINISH LEGEND I � TTM— _ __� -. I I I � - LEVE�zs m� ECT� ARCHITce:o n PLANNERS cxuRcxeaExrox xEVELoaxErvT � o uum�.uwr�uarowuv 3� 11111111 1 11 1 11 1 It I I U I u 1 1, I O.rcxneerv.unrx..wnr-m..mr s I _..__,......._.a..._. .. • o III JIM a DEVELOPMENT J� GROUP ..w�r„�............ - Ili — O..b�..e.�..........,...�..�.......a...e, ,u."• me o... _ -a Building Elevation - North u W BEV Extrerior Finish Legend�1 North ELVL Elevation 1 dA3.02 A o =ale , zsa a °gl pl - - -- -:A • „� a ° — — F[In I� ,. re..._.�a,.,,,m,m,m.=Po�.aN.,,K _ �m,�pa�.�ar.m..aH�,� _ _ 1- _ . - — - - - 1177M_$ LE— ITT a+ I I � I cmc EVES EXTERIOR FINISH LEGEND_ _ _ _ _ c�E� AND PLANNERS I I LLI- I ARCHITECTS A zmn - cNu °cN a °—N--1.auE NT _ — LEVEL to cenre.s o.in sum.00 LEVEED m 1 11 LLLLLIJ-u 171171 - � J LEVEL O .......e.,.epw, ..... �.�a.,... -- � S - - - 11 rQ1 I l Gall O rrMIF- S y LEVEL+a/l ..w�r.�............ _ R —EL+a DEVELOPMENT GROUP JJ GROUP rA LEV .7rQ1 a° w•Mc EL If O I LEVELS Building Elevation - South O - - - Extrerior Finish Legend South Elevation 1 A o o �3o dA3.03 EXTERIOR FINISH LEGEND Oc..o�.an.........,00.ua..1uEx1 O � O� Oex.im�ow.muoown �...�. Extredor Finish Legend J JJDEVELOPMENT GROUP Building Elevation - West dA3.04 — - - - J— L - - - -n KIRKOR 9 �L20� ARCHITECTS AND PLANNERS - k � - evEizr /-1�1 - -I 1 14 - �L - �E T. IE� - -T - - IE J3DEVELOPMENT GROUP T. Building Se tion'A' BUILDING SEOTION'A' dA4.01 00 0 UEVE- 1 e,ar.m..a... — -_ -_ - __ ——— -_ -_ -_ . K I R KO R _ ARCHITECTS AND PLANNERS - - LEVE - - - - I - - - L—L 11 1-11. 9 _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ LEVE LL I 9 w - - ---- _ - - - - - - § EEE L DEVELOPMENT JJ GROUPID - - ® _Er — m e cn.raaa MTV - - e - a - Ai pn @ - - IF - - - _ - EL. Le. t —P U Building Section 'B' i1111 = _ nE E[vE BUILDING SECTjON'B' 10 dA4.02 _ - I - - - F - iEyE iEVE - - _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - _ _ - - _ - —L. - -- - - - - - - - - - - - IiyELE - - - �E KIRKOR ARCHITECTS AND PLANNERS LI - - S L+s LEVELS Tm-mTLEVE —EL 1. - - _-- - _ _ - I _ _ _ - 9 _ LEUE mm -- - - J3 DEVELOPMENT - . - - - -E GROUP W § _ Building Section 'C' $ _ —EL LEVEL BUILDING SECT130N'C� dA4.6 � � �� � � ®� vt � � w ►1 e � � ►�� � g, blT ', kV March 21st 010:00 1 March 21st @12:00 2 June 21st @10:00 6 June 21st @12:00 KIRKOR 5.0 Asp ��, % •. ;,�> A50 .0 ��� ,,�. ;�;a ° o o o o o o ARCHITECTS AND PLANNERS �► ® q�,���`,i/��$�j,,.� ®/' ® ' • P d� � ® `�.•'r sem, r � ® '+q�° z ;,/��//`�j�, 9 ACh®w ®e.� � %s° a ®�s:�'n' !. f t _ �+.o �s %c° a ` � !. f 1 ,.�,®w ®e.� m+�. 3. . c�0a �� . m rt �\ _ ,�°® ®u +3° 3'_s° . • $, : _ f March 21st @14:00 g March 21st @16:00 �41 June 21st @14:00 �g June 21 st @16:00 �1 p o ASoi o ♦ ♦ JJ GROUPOPMENT sun shadow sW ay - March &June 21st I ®� ® ®� s � f ► .. .i>� � .w'.• � sf N � M—h 21 sl @18:00 6 June 2ls1018:00 10 o... Asp Asp dMi `V R O�� OYSBh O I � ��/�a-1f O �Y.��+ � O �rh+ Q ♦Y " �€ ®R ` ®(l,;.� "d� s 'V a� 4,il.d B•�K/ -�.. m m.:w v.v.0 1 � �,�\ � � 1 �• °jp ��:�1� rho � Y f ,s'�', fir'_1A ../4/3Z. September 21st @10:00 September 21st@12:00 2 December 21st@9:00 g December 21st@11:00 s.a Aso Aso s. U 4 O i 0 ♦ � 1 KIRKOR ARCHITECTS AND PLANNERS Q®� / �, -AAA xo cegreouMi oreeoo O ®� ®C ®C 5 ..�//���y� � ♦ bQ. �Y 3 �C ��7 � � 0 t \ ® �3°�1 Y � t !�� 1 _ ,fir ��is , 4 1. f • �� .►. � � a E ♦ _ . L, t f September 21 st@14:00 g September 21st @16:00 �41 December 21 st @1 &DO �g� December 21st @15:00 0 0 A5o 0 ♦ J) DEVELOPMENT GROUP "r Sun Shadow Study - Sep. & Dec 21st b September 21at@18:00 5 A5.0 dA5.02 LZ PERSPECTIVE FROM NORTH EAST ON BENTON STREET /—l\ PERSPECTIVE FROM NORTH EAST ON BENTON STREET /'3\ PERSPECTIVE FROM NORTH EAST ON BENTON STREET �\ JJDEVELOPMENT GROUP ID Perspective Views dA6.01 JJDEVELOPMENT GROUP ID Perspective Views dMii JJDEVELOPMENT GROUP ID Perspective Views dA6.6 Church and Benton Zoning Compliance Chart — SGA3 and SGA4 Zones Regulation Required- SGA -3 Required- SGA -4 Provided SGA -3 Compliance SGA -4 Compliance Min. Lot Width 0-6 Storeys: 30.Om 0-6 Storeys: 30.Om 7-12 Storeys: 30.0m 7-12 Storeys: 30.Om 61.91m J J 19-25 Storeys: 42.Om 19-36 Storeys: 42.Om 37+Storeys: 48.Om Min. Lot Area 0-6 Storeys:1,500m2 0-6 Storeys: 1,500m2 7-12 Storeys:1,500m2 7-12 Storeys: 1,500m2 4,224.13 J 19-25 Storeys: 2,000m2 19-36 Storeys: 2,00Om2 37+ Storeys: 2,40OM2 Min. Yard Setback 3.Om 3.2m J Min. Building Base Height 3 Storeys 6 Storeys Max. Building Base Height 6 Storeys 6 Storeys J Min. Floor Space Ratio 2.0 8.86 J Max. Building Height 25 storeys NIA NIA X Min. Ground Floor Building Height 4.5m 4.5nn Min. FaQade Openings 10% >10% J Min. Street Line Facade Openings 20% >20% Maximum Building Length 7-12 Storeys: 60.0m 7-12 Storeys: 6D.Om 7+ Storeys: 32.4 m 13-18 Storeys: 54.Om 13-18 Storeys: 54.Om J J 19-25 Storeys: 48.Om 19-36 Storeys: 48.Om 37+Score s:36.Om Min. Front Yard Setback and Exterior 7+ Storeys: 6.Om Front: 7.8 m J Ext. Side: 9.5 m V Side Yard Setback Max. Floor Plate Area 7-12 Storeys: 2,000m2 7-12 Storeys: 2,00Om2 13-18 Storeys:1,200m2 13-18 Storeys: 1,200m2 7-37: 9ODm2 X X 19-25 Storeys: 90Om2 19-36 Storeys: 90Om2 37+ Storeys: 850m2 Min. Physical Separation 7-12 Storeys: 6.Om 7-12 Storeys: 6.Om 13-18 Storeys: 9.0m 13-18 Storeys: 9.0m 7+ Storeys: 23.72m / 19-25 Storeys: 12.0m 19-36 Storeys: 12.Om 37+Storeys: 15.Om Page 695 of 1179 From: Growing Towther [5M] To: ]u!iane vonWesterholt; Growing Together (5M) Subject: RE: Thank you for your feedback! Date: Tuesday, December 12, 2423 12:23:02 PM Attachments: imaaeO01.ono Good afternoon juliane, Your interpretation is correct. OPAs which give effect to policies in PMTSAs are protected from appeal in accordance with Section 17 {36.1.4} of the Planning Act. ZBAs giving effect to official plan policies in PMTSAs are protected from appeals in accordance with Section 34 (19.5) of the Planning Act. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Juliane vonWesterholt > Sent: Friday, December S, 2023 1:09 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: RE: Thank you for your feedback! Importance: High You don't often get email from _com. Learn ml - x this is 'n� a� rt I Good afternoon. I am hoping to have a letter outlining some comments and concerns on behalf of our client this afternoon. I did have a question though ... my understanding is that this OPA/ZBA is not appealable is that correct? Please advise asap. Thank you. s%wcere4 JI. U00,6 V00, WesteKhO-- JIJLIANE von'WESTERHOLT BES, MCIP, RPP Associate M H B C Planning, Urban Design & Landscape Architecture `�_ PLANNING URBAN DESIGN & LANDSCAPE X E A R s MHBC ARCHITECTURE Page 696 of 1179 This communication is intended solely for the named addressee(s) and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, protected or otherwise exempt from disclosure. No waiver of confidence, privilege, protection or otherwise is made. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, please advise us immediately and delete this email without reading, copying or forwarding it to anyone. From: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogetherno kitchener.ca> Sent: December 5, 2023 11:46 AM To: Growing Together (SM) <Growin Tg_ogetherna kitchener.ca> Subject: Thank you for your feedback! Thank you for participating in the Growing Together engagement throughout November. If you have made a written submission to our email address, provided comments through conversations in November, and/or provided comments through the engage page they have been received. Staff will be reviewing and considering all submissions throughout the month of December as they prepare final recommendations on land use and zoning changes for the Growing Together geography. You can expect to hear from us with a response to your submission if you have made one in early January. Comment responses will be followed shortly thereafter with the staff recommended Official Plan amendment and Zoning By-law amendment that are expected to be considered by Council later in January. This Council meeting is also known as a Statutory Public Meeting. Comments on the staff recommended Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments can be made directly to Council as part of the Statutory Public Meeting. More details on the Statutory Public Meeting will be provided a minimum of 20 days in advance in accordance with the requirements of the Planning Act. Thank you for all your participation throughout the Growing Together process! Sincerely, The Growing Together Team Page 697 of 1179 From: Growing Towther (SM) To: Peagv Nickels: Growina Together NM) Subject: RE: Questions about SGA 2 Zoning Date: Tuesday, December 12, 2023 2:16:21 PM Attachments: image001.01a 500 Queen st s SP.odf Hi Peggy, It is possible that the additional process required from the Official Plan Amendment will encourage some developers to adhere to the "as -of -right" zoning. The process is much lengthier, at 120 days with the City and up to 6 months with the Region of Waterloo before a decision is made. Since the Official Plan did not contemplate the proposed use, the additional time allows staff to adequately review the proposal and ensure that it aligns with other policies in the Official Plan, including draft policy 15.D.2.5 in the proposed Growing Together Official Plan Amendment. In Zoning By-law 2019-051, mid -rise buildings are defined as buildings between 4 and 8 storeys. Tall buildings are defined as buildings of 9 or more storeys. Building heights will be limited by the applicable zone category. It was the team's understanding that site plans are not public materials. After consulting with the file planner for 600 Queen Street, we were told that it would be okay to share the conditionally approved site plan with you. Our apologies - please understand that we don't typically handle development files. The file is attached. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From,: Peggy Nickels m3 Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2023 11:55 AM To. Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kiitchener.ca> Subject: Re: Questions about SGA 2 Zoning You don't often get email why this +s sn� ort�t Hi Growing Together Team, Thanks so much for your very clear reply. Am I correct in thinking that the additional requirement for an Official Plan Amendment from both the City the Region will encourage developers to stay within the 25 storey height limits? Also, could you please provide a definition of mid -rise and highrise? Finally, I may be mistaken, but I think that the site plan for the original building at 600 Queen Street South was shared with the community when the developer was applying for the zoning changes. If this is the case, why would the site plan for this new building by a different developer not be sharable at this stage? Page 698 of 1179 Peggy On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 10:29 AM Growing Together (SM) <Growin Tg_ogetherna kitchener.ca> wrote: Good morning Peggy, The Strategic Growth Area B land use applies to lands zoned SGA -2 or SGA -3. This zoning limits building height to 8 storeys and 25 storeys, respectively. Additionally, the Strategic Growth Area B land use limits building height to 25 storeys. A development proposal which seeks permissions beyond what is permitted by the Zoning By-law would require either Minor Variances or a Zoning By-law Amendment. For example, if a proposal for a 14 -storey building was made on a property zoned SGA -2 and within the Strategic Growth Area B land use, the City would require a Zoning By-law amendment, since the SGA -2 zone limits building height to 8 storeys. However, since the Strategic Growth Area B land use permits building heights of up to 25 storeys, the City would not require an Official Plan Amendment. Another example — if a proposal for a 30 -storey building was made on a property zoned SGA -3 and within the Strategic Growth Area B land use, the City would require a Zoning By-law Amendment and an Official Plan Amendment, since both the zoning and land use designation only permit buildings of up to 25 storeys in height. Both Zoning By-law Amendments and Official Plan Amendments require approval by Council. Official Plan Amendments require approval by the Region of Waterloo. We hope this helps to clarify the relationship between the zoning and the land use designations. At 600 Queen Street South, the conditionally approved Site Plan is for an 11 -storey residential care facility with terraces at the 2nd and 6th storeys. The plan still shows open space on the northwest corner of the property near David Street, however it is our understanding that this will be privately -owned public space, not City parkland. We cannot share the conditionally approved site plan. Page 699 of 1179 Here is a rendering of 600 Queen St S taken from Lifewise's (the developer) website. Thanks for writing to us. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Peggy Nickel Sent: Tuesday, December 5, 2023 2:07 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogetherftkitchener.ca> Subject: Questions about SGA 2 Zoning You don't often fret Hello, On page 18 of the Growing Together Community Guide, there is a description of what is permitted within SGAB land use. One of the stipulations is that "any development proposal for a high-rise building within a mid -rise zone will require a Zoning By-law Amendment. If a 25 -storey highrise requires an Official Plan Amendment, what height of building requires a Zoning By-law Amendment? Also, can you provide definition of mid -rise and highrise? Finally, there is a new building going up at 600 Queen Street South. When the original application was brought forward to the City, the developer promised a partkette at the narrow northwest corner of the property, close to the Iron Horse Trail and David Street. The property changed hands and 1 believe it's now going to be a seniors' residence. Can you tell me if the parkette still planned? Can you direct me to where I can find the site plan? Page 700 of 1179 Thanks, Peggy Nickels Page 701 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Thursday, December 7, 2023 7:40 PM To: Kristen Barisdale; Growing Together (SM) Cc: Natalie Goss; Adam Clark; Vuk Vujevic Subject: RE: Growing Together November 2023 Draft Documents Good afternoon Kristen, Thank you for the submission. The Growing Together team is evaluating submissions beginning December Szh. Changes will be recommended in our staff report as it is finalized over the next few weeks. We will, however, do our best communicate our direction and continue to collaborate on the process in the interim. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Kristen Barisdale <kbarisdale@gspgroup.ca> Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2023 4:00 PM To: Growing Together (SM) =GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Cc: Natalie Goss <Natalie.Goss@kitchener.ca>, Adam Clark <Adam.Clark@kitchener.ca>, Vuk Vujevic Subject: Growing Together November 2023 Draft Documents - You don't often get email fro r earn why this is important Good afternoon, On behalf of our client, 2371125 Ontario Inc., please accept the attached correspondence related to the November 2023 Draft Documents for the Growing Together initiative as it relates to the above -noted properties. Please don't hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or would like to discuss. Kristen Barisdale MClP, RPP This communication is intended solely for the named addressee(s) and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, protected or otherwise exempt from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, please advise us immediately and delete this email without reading, copying or forwarding it to anyone - 1 Page 702 of 1179 November 28, 2023 City of Kitchener Planning Division, 6th Floor 200 King Street West Kitchener, Ontario N2G 4Y9 Attention: Natalie Goss, MCIP, RPP Manager, Policy and Research Dear Ms. Goss: Re: Growing Together Response to November 2023 Draft Materials SHAPING GREAT COMMUNITIES File No. 21303 On behalf of 2371125 Ontario Inc., please accept the following commentary and response to the draft OPA and ZBA documents released on November 3, 2023 for the "Growing Together" initiative as related to the above -noted properties. 2371125 Ontario Inc. is the owner of the properties municipally known as which are legally described as . The properties are currently occupied by two existing employment uses and related surface parking facilities. The properties are proposed to be located in a Protected Major Transit Station Area in the Official Plan Amendment for the "Growing Together" initiative, which are areas intended to support transit through accommodating future growth and development through a mix of residential, office, institutional and commercial uses that provide for connectivity to various modes of transportation and have streetscapes and built forms that are pedestrian and transit -friendly. The properties are proximate to Mill Street LRT Station, which is expected to be planned to achieve a minimum density of 160 residents and jobs per hectare. The properties are proposed to be designated as Strategic Growth Area C in the Official Plan Amendment for the "Growing Together" initiative, which are areas intended to accommodate significant intensification at high density. Permitted land uses include medium and high density residential well as a range of non-residential uses. The Strategic Growth Area C proposes to include no maximum building height, a minimum Floor Space Ratio of 2.0 and no maximum Floor Space Ratio. Finally, the properties are proposed to be zoned High Rise Growth Zone (SGA -4) in the Zoning By- law for the "Growing Together" initiative, which is intended to create opportunities for high-density growth and development in both mid -rise and high-rise forms. The SGA -4 Zone is proposed to PLANNING I URBAN DESIGN I LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Page 703 of 1179 permit a range of medium and high-density residential uses (but does not permit single detached, semi-detached and/or townhouse dwellings) with no maximum building height, a minimum FSR of 2.0 and no maximum FSR. We note that the proposed SGA -4 Zone includes detailed regulations building setbacks, stepbacks, building length and tower separation for the development of all buildings 5 -storeys in height or greater. The proposed SGA -4 also includes no minimum parking requirement for residential uses with a maximum parking requirement of 1.3 spaces per dwelling unit. 2371125 Ontario Inc. supports the proposed Official Plan Amendment for the "Growing Together" initiative that would facilitate the proposed Protected Major Transit Station Area and Strategic Growth Area C designation identified for the subject properties. Additionally, 2371125 Ontario Inc. is in support of the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment for the "Growing Together" initiative that would facilitate High Rise Growth Zone (SGA -4) identified for the subject properties. On behalf of 2371125 Ontario Inc., we respectfully request to be notified of all meetings, reports and progress related to the "Growing Together" initiative in the future. We further reserve the right to provide additional commentary and/or response on this matter should the proposed recommendations of the "Growing Together" initiative change significantly as it relates to the subject properties. Please don't hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or would like to discuss further. Sincerely, GSP Group Inc. Kristen Barisdale, MCIP, RPP Vice President, Planning cc. Vuk Vujevic, 2371125 Ontario Inc. GSP Group 12 Page 704 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Thursday, December 7, 2023 1:18 PM To: Andrea Sinclair; Growing Together (SM) Cc: Jonathan Hann; Kieran Luckhai; cbeattie Subject: RE: Comment Response to Growing Together/ Perimeter Development Corporation / Our File 07091 Good afternoon Andrea, Thank you for the submission. The Growing Together team is evaluating submissions beginning December 8t". Changes will be recommended in our staff report as it is finalized over the next few weeks. We will, however, do our best communicate our direction and continue to collaborate on the process in the interim. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Andrea Sinclair Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2023 5:03 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Cc: Jonathan Hann ; Kieran Luckhai ; cbeattie Subject: Comment Response to Growing Together/ Perimeter Development Corporation / Our File 07091 Good Afternoon, As a follow up to our recent meting, we are pleased to provide further comments to the Growing Together project as it relates to Perimeter's Breithaupt Block. We look forward to further discussions with the Growing Together team in response to our submission. Kindly confirm receipt of the attached. Thank you, Andrea ANDREA SINCLAIR BES, MUDS, MCIP, RPP Partner M H BC Planning, Urban Design & Landscape Architecture Follow us: Webpaqe I Linkedin I Facebook I Twitter I Vimeo I Instagram Page 705 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Friday, December 1, 2023 4:13 PM To: Grant Eveleigh Subject: RE: Draft SGA Zoning Regs & Design Guidelines Good Afternoon Grant, Built -form regulations for tall buildings have been developed for the Strategic Growth Area zones, primarily due to our decision to proceed without floor -space -ratio based density maximums. Those regulations apply to building length, floor plate area and physical separation, as you note, With those numbers now in the zoning by-law, the ZBL will take precedence over the guidelines for those specific tower elements, though the guidelines will remain in place, including for those 3 elements (as they apply city-wide). other elements included in the guidelines will continue to be implemented via the guidelines within Strategic Growth Areas, including relative height and overlook. However, those elements are not proposed to be translated into regulations through this work, as staff feel they require additional flexibility not afforded within a zoning regulation. With regard to angular plane, neither the urban design manual nor the strategic growth area zones have or will have any angular plane -based regulations or guidelines. There remains some angular plane -based policy elsewhere, including, I believe, in the Civic Heritage Conservation District plan. We are working with heritage staff to implement our strategic growth areas zoning in coordination with HCD policies. Please let us know if you have any further questions. Best, The Growing Together Team From: Grant Eveleig Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2023 3:06 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <Grow ingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: Draft SGA Zoning Regs & Design Guidelines You don't often get email from grantPpolocorpinc.com. Learn why this is important Hello, I'm reaching out for some clarity on the interplay between the draft `Growing Together' zoning regulations and the Design for Tall Building Guidelines outlined in the City of Kitchener's Urban Design Manual. With respect to Physical Separation, the by-law provides fixed values associated with various height intervals, presumably replacing the formula outfined in the Urban Design Manual. However, parameters such as Relative Height and Overlook are not specifically regulated by the proposed by-law, it would seem. While it is sensible to assume the draft by-law will take precedence over the design guidelines as it relates to Physical Separation, do the guidelines for Relative Height and Overlook apply within the SGAs as they are currently presented in the manual, or will additional regulations or guidelines be addressed through the Growing Together final ZBAfOPA process? It would also be helpful to understand the effect the new zoning by-law might have on the guidelines related to angular plane setbacks for tall buildings. Thank you greatly,. Page 706 of 1179 Grant F. Eveleigh he/him Planning Technician / Designer I Polocorp Inc. Help us support our region this holiday season! �' We are proudly accepting donations to ' our Food_& Fund drive in support of The Food Bank of Waterloo Legion. POLCCORP Jg7A F8 Bank Page 707 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Hal Jaeger Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2023 11:32 AM To: Growing Together (SM) Subject: Modelling of SGA -3 and SGA -4 zones Greetings, Growing Together team. Thank you for your response below. I remain concerned that the vast majority of the public may be unable to model the Growing Together proposal for areas with SGA -3 and -4 zoning. Without an understanding of what the zoning actually permits and what impacts it might actually produce, I am not sure we can claim to have engaged in requisite consultation. I urge the team to release a massing model and shadow study well in advance of the PSIC meeting on Growing Together. For my purposes, a massing model of potential builds in the area bounded by Weber-Queen-Water-Goudie's Lane, with the full shadow impact study, might suffice. If you need me to appeal to Council for funding of such a modelling, I can try. Thank you, Hal Hal Jaeger From: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Sent: November 23, 2023 5:26 PM To: Hal Jaeger Cc: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: RE: Modelling of SGA -3 and SGA -4 zones Hi Hal, Thank you for your email. The Growing Together work is focused on establishing a new land use and zoning framework for 7 of Kitchener's 10 Major Transit Station Areas. This work is being done comprehensively and broadly and is not meant to replace any site specific development proposals that are better suited to assessing stie specific considerations, such as shadow studies. As you note in your email, modeling of any potential build out is problematic as it would provide one option of many many scenarios. While we have done our best through the application of the 4 proposed SGA zones and through thoughtful built form regulations, such as tower separation and tower floorplate size, to address the future build out of the MTSAs, we will continue to rely on our Tall Building Guidelines and other guidelines in our Urban Design Manual to address matters like shadows through a site plan process. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team Page 708 of 1179 From: Nal Jaeger Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2023 4:55 PM To: Adam Clark <Adam.ClarkPkitchener.ca7 Subject: Modelling of SGA -3 and SGA -4 zones Greetings, Adam, I've managed to attend the engagement sessions on the Growing Together proposal. The team was able to help me understand many facets of the proposal. Thank you. As we in the community grapple to comprehend the big picture, I'm hoping you can help us with a set of renditions of a build -out of an area of SGA -3 and SGA -4 builds. What would the shadowing look like on the equinox dates? What would a pedestrian see from the sidewalks? I realize that there are many ways the individual lots could be consolidated and developed. I nonetheless hope that seeing one possible iteration might assuage our worst imaginations. Thank you, Hal Virus-free.www.avcg.com Page 709 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Friday, December 8, 2023 9:35 AM To: Kristen Barisdale; Growing Together (SM) Cc: Hunter, Will @ Waterloo; Sommerfeld, Dietmar @ Waterloo Subject: RE: Response to Growing Together November 2023 Documents t Good morning Kristen, Thank you for the submission. The Growing Together team is evaluating submissions beginning (today) December Stn Changes will be recommended in our staff report as it is finalized over the next few weeks. We will, however, do our best communicate our direction and continue to collaborate on the process in the interim. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Kristen Barisdal Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2023 11:17 AM To: Growing Together (SM) =GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Cc: Natalie Goss <Natalie.Goss@kitchener.ca>, Adam Clark <Adam.Clark@kitchener.ca>, Hunter, Will @ Waterloo Sommerfeld, Dietmar @ Waterloo Subject: Response to Growing Together November 2023 Documents You don't often get email from kbarisdale€j)Pspproup.ca. Learn why this is important Good morning, On behalf of Hurlbut Corporation, please accept the attached commentary in response to the November 2023 draft documents released for the Growing Together initiative as related to the above -noted properties. Please let us know if you have any questions or would like to discuss further. Kristen Barisdale GP MCIP, RPP group Vice President, Planning This communication is intended solely for the named addressee(s) and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, protected or otherwise exempt from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, please advise us immediately and delete this email without reading, copying or forwarding it to anyone. Page 710 of 1179 November 29, 2023 City of Kitchener Planning Division, 6th Floor 200 King Street West Kitchener, Ontario N2G 4Y9 Attention: Natalie Goss, MCIP, RPP Manager, Policy and Research Dear Ms. Goss: Re: Growing Together Response to November 2023 Draft Materials SHAPING GREAT COMMUNITIES File No. 22155 On behalf of our client, Hurlbut Corporation, please accept the following commentary and response to the draft OPA and ZBA documents released on November 3, 2023 for the "Growing Together" initiative as related to the above -noted properties. Hurlbut Corporation owns the properties at . The properties are generally located on the south side of Mill Street, west of Rockway Golf Course and north of an existing rail line. The properties are located approximately 200 metres east of the Mill Street iON Station/platform The property at s currently occupied by an existing one -storey office/business employment use, and the property at is also occupied by an existing one -storey office/business employment use. The properties currently share one access driveway to Mill Street with each building having immediately surrounding surface parking and loading facilities. The properties are proposed to be located in a Protected Major Transit Station Area in the Official Plan Amendment for the "Growing Together" initiative, which are areas intended to support transit through accommodating future growth and development through a mix of residential, office, institutional and commercial uses that provide for connectivity to various modes of transportation and have streetscapes and built forms that are pedestrian and transit -friendly. The properties are proximate to Mill Street iON Station, which is expected to achieve a minimum density of 160 residents and jobs per hectare. The properties are proposed to be designated as Strategic Growth Area C in the Official Plan Amendment for the "Growing Together" initiative, which are areas intended to accommodate significant intensification at high density. Permitted land uses include medium and high density residential well as a range of non-residential uses. The Strategic Growth Area C proposes to include PLANNING I URBAN DESIGN I LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Page 711 of 1179 no maximum building height, a minimum Floor Space Ratio of 2.0 and no maximum Floor Space Ratio. Finally, the properties are proposed to be zoned High Rise Growth Zone (SGA -4) in the Zoning By- law for the "Growing Together" initiative, which is intended to create opportunities for high-density growth and development in both mid -rise and high-rise forms. The SGA -4 Zone is proposed to permit a range of medium and high-density residential uses (but does not permit single detached, semi-detached and/or townhouse dwellings) with no maximum building height, a minimum FSR of 2.0 and no maximum FSR. We note that the proposed SGA -4 Zone includes detailed regulations building setbacks, stepbacks, building length and tower separation for the development of all buildings 5 -storeys in height or greater. The proposed SGA -4 also includes no minimum parking requirement for residential uses with a maximum parking requirement of 1.3 spaces per dwelling unit. Hurlbut Corporation supports the proposed Official Plan Amendment for the "Growing Together" initiative that would facilitate the proposed Protected Major Transit Station Area and Strategic Growth Area C designation identified for the subject properties. Additionally, Hurlbut Corporation is in support of the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment for the "Growing Together" initiative that would facilitate High Rise Growth Zone (SGA -4) identified for the subject properties. On behalf of Hurlbut Corporation, we respectfully request to be notified of all meetings, reports and progress related to the "Growing Together" initiative in the future. We further reserve the right to provide additional commentary and/or response on this matter should the proposed recommendations of the "Growing Together" initiative change significantly as it relates to the subject properties. Please don't hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or would like to discuss further. Sincerely, GSP Group Inc. Kristen Barisdale, MCIP, RPP Vice President, Planning cc. Will Hunter, CBRE Ian Hurlbut and Catherine Wittke, Hurlbut Corporation GSP Group 12 Page 712 of 1179 From: Growing Together (SMI To: Growing Together (SMI: Matthew Wa(zecha cc:i6ll Reitzel Subject: RE; Cedar/Madison - Draft ZOA Date: Thursday, January 11, 2024 11:36:00 AM Attachments: imaae001.ona Good Morning Matthew, Staff have been working through submissions and finalizing the Growing Together staff report for our January 29th committee date. With respect to the properties outlined in your submission for Cedar/Madison, we would like to further consider the requested change before we finalize our recommendation. However, to meet the submission requirements we have required for all such submissions, we still require an additional scoped planning justification which outlines how the requested change meets the conditions of policy 15.D.2.5 which states: 15.D.2.5. Notwithstanding Policy 4.C.1.8 and 4.C.1.9, site specific applications which seek relief from the implementing zoning through a minor variance(s) or amendment to the Zoning By --law, and/or seek to amend this Plan will consider the following factors: a) compatibility with the planned function of the subject lands and adjacent lands; b) suitability of the lot for the proposed use and/or built -form; c) lot area and consolidation as further outlined in Policy 3.C.2.11; d) compliance with the City's Urban Design Manual and Policy 11.C.1.341 e) cultural heritage resources, including Policy 15.D.2.8; and, f) technical considerations and other contextual or site specific factors. This is time sensitive and we will need this additional information by the end of day tomorrow. This will support the concept plan and proof of lot ownership you have already submitted. We apologize for the short notice, but are working through a large volume of feedback as quickly as we can. Best, The Growing Together Team From: Growing Together (SM) EGrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Sent: Thursday, December 7, 2023 1:19 PM To: Matthew Warzecha . 9@gmail.com>; Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: RE: Cedar/Madison - Draft ZBA Page 713 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Good afternoon Matthew, Growing Together (SM) Thursday, December 7, 2023 1:19 PM Matthew Warzecha Bill Reitzel; Growing Together (SM) RE: Cedar/Madison - Draft ZBA Thank you for the submission. The Growing Together team is evaluating submissions beginning December 8t". Changes will be recommended in our staff report as it is finalized over the next few weeks. We will, however, do our best communicate our direction and continue to collaborate on the process in the interim. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Matthew Warzecha Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2023 4:39 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca>; Richard Kelly-Ruetz <Richard.Kelly-Ruetz@kitchener.ca> Cc: Bill Reitzel Subject: - Draft ZBA Natalie and Team; Please find attached letter regarding in response to the request for comments on the Growing Together Draft Zoning By-law Amendment. The above described properties form the consolidated land holdings of Rietzel Bros General Contractors Inc, however, the parcels are proposed to be split -zoned between SGA1 and SGA2. We request that the entire parcel be identified as SGA2 to facilitate efficient, and appropriate, redevelopment of the consolidated parcel. A preliminary Development Concept and proof of ownership (Geowarehouse Reports) have been included for your refence. Should you have any questions, or require additional information, please feel free to contact me. Thank you, Warzecha MCIP RPP Director of Planning and Development I Polocorp Inc. POKEORP This e-mail is confidential and intended only for the addressee. Disclosure of this e-mail to anyone else is not intended as a waiver of confidentiality or privilege. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately. Page 714 of 1179 POKEORP F November 29, 2023 City of Kitchener — Planning Division 200 King Street West, 6' Floor PO Box 1118 Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 Via email to plan ningapplications@kitchener.ca Attention: Natalie Goss Manager, Policy and Research Reference: Growing Together Comments on Draft Zoning By-law Amendment Polocorp Inc has been retained by the Owners of North (the "Site"). Polocorp has reviewed the Dra Zoning By"awAmEenWmentR(t e "DraZBA"] proposed for the lands as part of the Growing Together Study. The Draft ZBA proposes that the lands be zoned a mix of Strategic Growth Area One (SGAI) and Strategic Growth Area Two (SGA2) Zones, as shown below. The Owners do not support the rezoning of any part of the Sete as Strategic Growth Area One (SGA1) Zone, rather, the entirety of the lands should be zoned SGA2. The properties comprising the Site are in common ownership by Reitzel Bros. General Contractors Inc. Given this, the Site is an assembly of land with the potential for future development. The proposed split zoning, however, introduces constraints on the development feasibility of the Site. Polocorp, on behalf of the Owners, request that the entire Site be identified as SGA2 Zone within the final Zoning By-law Amendment. Doing so will unencumber the assembly from attaining an appropriate level of height and density on the Site, thereby efficiently utilizing the lands for much-needed residential dwelling units. To illustrate the development feasibility of the Site, a Preliminary Development Concept has been prepared. The Development Concept demonstrates that approximately 200 units could be located on the lands if an SGA2 zone were to apply to the entire assembly. The Concept conforms with the Strategic Growth Area 2 (SGA2) regulations including minimum setbacks. To confirm common ownership of the properties, please find attached Geowarehouse reports listing Reitzel Bros General Contractors Inc as owners of the properties. Page 715 of 1179 Further to the above, the unaddressed lands located internal to the block do not form part of the common ownership. It would be reasonable, however, to identify these lands as SGA2 as these lands could be assembled with the current holdings at a later date. F ►-2 (M), M) '_ 2i SGA - Figure 1: Reitzel Bros General Contractors Inc Land Holdings 7,V With this submission, I trust that Staff will consider revising the Draft Zoning By-law Amendment to reflect the SGA2 Zone on the Site. Should you require additional information, or wish to discuss the above further, please feel free to contact the undersigned. Sincerely,. Polocorp Inc. r Matthew Warzec CIP RPP Director of Development and Planning CC: Bill Reitzel, Reitzel Bros General Contractors Inc z Page 716 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Friday, December 1, 2023 4.13 PM To: Rowena Samuel Cc: Peter Samuel Subject: RE: Submission on the Growing Together Draft Proposal dated 3rd November 2023 Good Afternoon Rowena and Peter, Thank you for your thoughtful and detailed comments. They will be included in our report. We are currently evaluating many comments. Any changes will be noted as we finalize the recommendations. Please visit engagewr.cajgrowingtogether and subscribe to receive updates. Best, The Growing Together Team From: Rowena Samuel Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2023 5:37 PM To: Growing Together (SM) =G row ingTogether@kitchener.ca> Cc: Peter Samuel Subject: Submission on the Growing Together Draft Proposal dated 3rd November 2023 You don't often get email from rowena.i.sarr7uel(4�)gmail.com. Learn why this is importdnt, Hi, Please find attached our documented thoughts and comments on the Growing Together Draft Plan dated the 3rd of November 2023 and how it might impact our existing neighborhood.. We hope these comments will provide you with useful input into the proposal as it currently stands and assist you in making planning decisions on this important matter. Please feel free to reach out if you would like further information from us or clarification on anything contained in our submission. Regards, Rowena and Peter Samuel Page 717 of 1179 Preliminary Response to the November 3, 2023 `Growing Together' Final Draft Peter & Rowena Samuel November 29th, 2023 Page 718 of 1179 Response to the November 3, 2023 Growing Together Proposal Firstly, we would like to extend our thanks to the Growing Together team for the work that has so far been placed into the new re -zoning plan for 7 of the ION stop zones within Kitchener's Major Transit Station area. After reviewing the proposed re -zoning plan, together with the existing zoning and the prior Civic Centre Heritage District Plan, we would like to submit the following comments and proposals for consideration. These comments and proposals are mostly focused on potential impact to the SGA -1 and Residential Zone that is part of the Olde Berlin Towne Neighborhood. Regarding Section 5: Parking, Loading, and Stacking We propose that additionally to the current requirements of a visual barrier for parking spaces abutting an SGA -1 or Residential Zone, this barrier should also provide sufficient noise abatement. This noise abatement should reduce the noise levels from parking vehicles and also reduce more egregious noise generated by any servicing vehicles, such as garbage pick-up vehicles, etc. that may need to regularly access the building via the parking lot. Ref 5.3 (a) and 4.18 We propose that this also require that newly installed visual parking barriers for parking lots that abut a SGA -1 or residential zone must also incorporate a landscaped strip of no less than 1.5 metres that is landscaped with living plants, as opposed to hardscaping, and/or artificial plants. Regarding Zoning Transitions The maximum height restrictions and light/noise barrier requirements should also take the slope of the land into consideration when defining zoning limits. For example, the proposed SGA -2 zone along Margaret Ave, between Queen St N and Victoria St N is a meter or two higher than the two-story residential properties abutting on Ellen St W. Should the proposed maximum height restrictions be maintained, the perceived height of any development from Ellen St W will be higher than the measured height from the base of the building(s). Ref 4.19 The environmental impact (sunlight; wind shear etc.) of this additional height should also be considered when defining and amending the height limits for new developments adjacent to residential. Regarding the Civic Centre Heritage District Plan Despite the Heritage District Plan for the Civic Centre/Old Berlin Towne area taking precedence over the proposed Growing Together plans, the site guidelines for the Margaret Ave development (between Queen St N and Victoria St N) were written prior to the remodeling of that section of Margaret Ave and may no longer Page 719 of 1179 apply as the roadway is now significantly narrower. In addition, the Civic Centre Heritage District Plan language is in the form of guidelines and encouragements rather than absolutes. It makes recommendations rather than creating rules. This will make it difficult for the Heritage District Plan to take precedence over the Growing Together plan, should it become law. We recommend that as a part of the Growing Together Plan the terminology of the Civic Centre Heritage District Plan be adjusted to be made more enforceable and for the language of the plan to incorporate phrases such as "must be", "is required" and "shall not" as opposed to language that leaves room for non-compliance. If it is not possible to amend the Civic Centre District Heritage Plan to provide rules rather than recommendations, then we would propose the following restrictions to the re -zoning as follows: • Minimum rear and side setbacks of 18m for building height of 19.5 metres or above where they abut a Residential zone or an SGA -1 zone • Where maximum height of an SGA -2 development is currently restricted to 4 storeys due to proximity to a neighboring low-rise residential or SGA -1 property (Ref 6.4.3(b) Table 6-4), the 4 storey height be defined as a maximum of 11 meters with a minimum rear and side setback of 8.5 meters. • Restrictions to allow for total building height to be measured from lowest point of an abutting SGA -1 or residential zoned property, not from street facing level. This would achieve a more consistent neighborhood feel and prevent a single building from dominating the landscape. • Consideration of additional height and setback restrictions where the development is located on the southern side of a residential zone within the Civic Centre Heritage Neighbourhood. Regarding the SGA -2 Zoning for Margaret Ave The proposed SGA -2 zoning of the Margaret Ave development (between Queen St N and Victoria St N) has been regularly challenged, and continues to be problematic for the transition from SGA -1 to residential. Its North-East and South-West boundaries abut a Low -Rise Residential and proposed SGA -1 zone, respectively. We understand that changing the existing zoning on 30-40 Margaret Ave is not possible but if this zoning is to extend further along Margaret Ave., then more restrictive transition requirements should be introduced to SGA -2 zones regarding height and setbacks to allow the SGA -1 and Residential Zones, which are predominantly 1 — 2 storey dwellings, to remain livable and attractive residential areas. The following changes are proposed: The height for buildings in this area should be expressed in meters and not storeys. Storeys can vary significantly in height and given the proposed maximum height limit of eight storeys Page 720 of 1179 for SGA -2 zoning, a difference in the height of a storey can make a significant difference to the height of a building when the effect is multiplied across that many storeys. By providing guidelines in meters rather than storeys, a more consistent approach would be achieved to the look and the feel of the neighborhood, and allow correct expectations to be set on the impact of future building developments. In addition, without the measurement of building storeys in meters it is almost impossible to enforce Civic Centre Heritage District Plan recommendations in a consistent fashion. We propose setting the height limits currently defined in storeys for SGA -2 where it abuts a Residential Zone or SGA -1 Zone as no more than 24 metres in total height For the SGA -2 zone on Margaret Ave., we still propose restricting development to a maximum of 16.5 metres with a 15m rear yard setback as recommended in the Civic Centre Heritage District Plan. Regarding the Removal of Institutional Zoning The removal of the Institutional zoning for the Swedenborgian Church property on the corner of Margaret Ave and Queen St N is concerning. We propose that churches remain zoned as institutional or are rezoned as SGA -1 not SGA -2 as they represent a community space that brings a neighborhood together and play a vital part in the overall community support network, particularly for the underprivileged. The re -zoning of the Swedenborgian church to SGA -2 opens up the potential for future developments on the site which may not be in keeping with the surrounding predominantly low-rise residential neighborhood. The Swedenborgian Church is a space that is currently used for community activities that bring together and enhance the community we live in. We would welcome zoning that makes this a continued space for the entire community to enjoy. Re -zoning uses of particular concern where the SGA -2 abuts the residential zone and especially in relation to the Swedenborgian Church property are: • Commercial Parking Facility • Biotechnological Establishment • Research and Development Establishment • Hotel • Commercial Entertainment If this property must be re -zoned as SGA -2 we propose restricting the allowed uses in a SGA - 2 zone where it abuts a Residential Zone to ensure a viable community space accessible by all. Overall, the introduction into the SGA -2 zoning of a myriad of more industrial/commercial uses into what is a largely a residential area is perplexing considering the current housing Page 721 of 1179 shortage and the proximity of this area to the downtown commercial core. We propose the following restrictions for all commercial premises where SGA -2 abuts SGA -1 or Residential Zones: • Limiting the operating hours of any commercial establishments • Increasing the setback required for outdoor patios and entertainment areas to at least 30m from a residential property boundary. • The introduction of additional noise and light abatement requirements for commercial properties that abut a residential zone. • Restrictions governing commercial lighting on commercial premises, particularly around size, type, and position of signage, security lighting and the prohibition of commercial LED lighting billboards & systems. Once again, we would like to thank the Growing Together team for their work to date and we hope that our feedback will be taken into consideration as the team moves forward in their planning for our growing community. Regards, Peter and Rowena Samuel Page 722 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Sara Radcliffe Sent: Wednesday, Novem er 29, 2023 9.13 AM To: Adam Clark Cc: Chris Pidgeon; Brandon Flewwelling; Andrew Bousfield; Maria Ottoni; Dobrina Encheva; Growin To ether SM Subject: RE: DB Review You don't often get email fron Learn why this is important Good Morning Adam, That's great to hear. We'll prepare the final package for submission. Kind Regards, Sara Sara Radcliffe, HBAS, MArch, OAA, RAIL Project Architect ac:o architects Inc. orchitecture I site planning I interiors www.abarchitect.ca COPYRIGHT NOTICE Copyright of this electronic document belongs to ABA Architects Inc This electronic document may not be forwarded to others, transmitted, downloaded or reproduced in any format, whether print or electronic, without the express, written consent of the copyright owner. QI5CLAI MER Use of this electronic document is at the User's own risk. The User shall indemnify and save harmless ARA Architects Inc, its Employees, age ntsand consultants from and against all claims, losses, demands, costs and expenses (including legal fees), damages or recoveries (induding any amounts paid in settlement) arising by reason of, caused, or alleged to be caused, by the User's reliance on this electronic document. From: Adam Clark <Adam.Clark@kitchener.ca> Sent: November 28, 2023 3:57 PM To: Sara Rad Cc: Chris Pid rondon Flewwellin Ottoni Dobrina Encheva 1100wingTogdetherJ<row!inToether[7a kitchener.ca> Subject: RE: DB Review Hi Sarah, I haven't been able to take a particularly deep dive, however after a quick review I don't have any concerns. I think the proposal demonstrates well how the property is able to achieve the regulations in the SGA -4 zone. Thanks, Adam Clark (he/him) Senior Urban Designer (Architecture & Urban Form) I Planning I City of Kitchener 1 519-741-2200 X7027 I TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 adarn,c€arkPkitchener.ca Page 723 of 1179 000000000 From: Sara Radcliff Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2023 11:43 AM To: Adam Clark <Adam.Clark@kitchener.ca> Cc: Chris Pidgeon Brandon Flewwelling MM aria Ottonil Subject: - DB Review Good Morning Adam, Dobrina Encheva Thank you to you and your team for taking the time to meet and review with us last week. Andrew Bousfield We are in the process of finalizing the Design Brief for Charles Place ahead of the council meeting and I thought I should double check if you've had a chance to dig into the brief we left with you? If so, is there any more feedback that you feel needs to be incorporated ahead of our final submission? Kind Regards, Sara Sara Radcliffe, HBAS, MArch, OAA, RAIC Project Architect architects Inc, architecture I site planning I interiors www.abarchitect.ca COPYRIGHT NOTICE Copyright of this electronic document belongs to ABA Architects Inc. This electronic document may not be forwarded to others, transmitted, downloaded or reproduced in any format, whether print or electronic, without the express, written consent of the copyright owner. DISCLAIMER Use of this electronic document is at the User's own risk. The User shall indemnify and save harmless ABA Architects Inc, its Employees, agents and consultants from and against all claims, losses, demands, costs and expenses (including legal fees), damages or recoveries (including any amounts paid in settlement) arising by reason of, caused, or alleged to be caused, by the User's reliance on this electronic document. 2 Page 724 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2023 9:26 AM To: Anne Michelle Doran Subject: RE: Concerns about Allowed Businesses in SGA -1 Good Morning Annie and Marcus, Thank you for your comments, the Growing Together team has begun evaluating all submissions received throughout November. We are currently evaluating a range of feedback regarding permitted uses in the SGA -1 zone. Changes will be recommended in our staff report as it is finalized over the next few weeks. Home occupations are proposed to be permitted in the SGA -1 zone, as are other non-residential uses that will help create complete communities to support residential growth, helping to meet a broader range of people`s daily needs in more accessible ways. While the proposed zoning does permit non-residential buildings in the SGA -1 zone, it limits them in size to 200m2, which allows for small, local businesses, boutique -type shops, small cafes and home businesses, which have all been strongly supported throughout our community engagement. A number of those uses are subject to a regulation that requires them to be located only on corner lots. This ensures a focus on missing middle residential development in the SGA -1 zone, while providing flexibility for small, local business owners to meet their unique needs and serve an evolving community. Best, The Growing Together Team From: Anne Michelle Doran Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2023 1:16 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: Concerns about Allowed Businesses in SGA -1 You don't often get email frost . Learn why this is important Good afternoon. and apologies if this is a repeat (i'm experiencing some weird technical issues) Thanks for all the effort going into these consultations_ There was so much work and engagement that went into the previous plan before you were directed to do it all again with the province's new mandate. This is so frustrating for all, and we just couldn't dedicate the same amount of time to attending meetings and asking questions as in the past. That said, we have tried to catch up on where the plan is right now, and have some deep concerns about the business zoning being proposed in our neighbourhood as part of the new Growing Together plan, and are struggling with understanding why this change is even being proposed. Our understanding is that the changes being proposed to our zoning/land use are a requirement of Bill 23, and are meant to increase housing, particularly near transit stations. Why is it then that businesses are being Page 725 of 1179 allowed in SGA -1 that do not have a residential component to them, that are not'home occupations'? How does allowing current available housing to become business -only buildings help create better access to housing, especially when there is lots of access to business -only spaces just a block or two from here? My concern is that this could remove existing housing and would thin out the community that is already here (rather than adding to it!). We would just have fewer neighbours and less community around in the evening and at night, which is especially not desirable in a downtown residential neighbourhood just from a safety perspective. The beauty of home occupations is that they could create the `undercurrent of creativity and a positive energy' and would help our neighbours find that sense of belonging that is so vital. They bring in unique spaces that people are drawn to without jeopardising the community that is already here. We are currently next door to Frontier Music School, and not only does that enrich our lives here with great access to lessons for our kids, we also get to support our neighbours, get to know them better, and be more integrated into the community because of it. And, when the end of a working day comes, we are not next door to a vacant property, we are still next door to our neighbours, we still have people there who care about the community and whom we get to socialise with and help each other out. We still have part of our community, which would not be the case if that was only a business. Instead of being a boon, it would be a liability, a concern, and it would make us more isolated. Please remove the options for non -home occupations from the SGA -1 zone. We need our residential neighbours in order to be a vibrant and healthy community. We need interactions here that are beyond monetary, and we need people to love and care for this place and value it beyond that of a business opportunity. These are the things that keep a community going, and that applies to all the slated SGA -1 zones, not just the one here in Olde Berlin Town. Annie and Marcus Doran Page 726 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Friday, December 1, 2023 4:17 PM To: Andrea Sinclair Subject: RE: Growing Together/ Comments on Behalf of AirBoss/ Our File 20334B Good Afternoon Andrea, Thank you for your comments. They will be evaluated by staff and will be included in our report. Any changes will be noted as we finalize the recommendations. Please visit engagewr.ca/growingtogether and subscribe to receive updates. Best, The Growing Together Team From: Andrea Sinclair Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2023 3:57 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: Growing Together/ Comments on Behalf of AirBoss/ Our File 20334B Good Afternoon, On behalf of our client, AirBoss of America Corp., please find attached comments as it relates to the proposed designation and zoning for the AirBoss site. We are writing in support of the proposed policies and regulations. Thank you for considering our various submissions over the course of the neighbourhood review process. Andrea ANDREA SINCLAIR BES, MUDS, MCIP, RPP Partner M H BC Planning, Urban Design & Landscape Architecture Follow us: Webpage I Linkedin I Facebook I Twitter I Vimeo I Instagram CEIVe Y E -P R S MHB P LAN N I N URBAN DESIGN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE This communication is intended solely for the named addressee(s) and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, protected or otherwise exempt from disclosure. No waiver of confidence, privilege, protection or otherwise is made. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, please advise us immediately and delete this email without reading, copying or forwarding it to anyone. Page 727 of 1179 �Eg ;4W YEARS MHBC November 30, 2023 PLANNING URBAN DESIGN & LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE KITCHENER I WOODBRIDGE I LONDON V BARRIE I BURLINGTON arowinotogetherCc�kitchen er.ca Attn: Natalie Goss - Manager Policy & Research and Richard Kelly-Ruetz — Senior Planner City of Kitchener Planning Division, 6th Floor 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 Dear Ms. Goss and Mr. Kelly-Ruetz: RE: GROWING TOGETHER / DRAFT OFFICIAL PLAN AND ZONING BY -LAIN AMENDMENTS f , KITCHENER - OUR FILE 203348 We are writing on behalf of our client, AirBoss of America Corp, (" Airgoss"), with respect to the above noted matter and as a follow up to our previous submissions. We appreciate the efforts of the Growing Together Team in reviewing and positively responding to our requests throughout both the initial Neighbourhood Review process and the more recent "Growing Together" policy and zoning review. We are pleased to confirm our support of the land use planning and zoning approach for the AirBoss site, which recognizes the long term potential of these lands. Proposed Official Plan Designation The Airboss site is proposed to be designated `Strategic Growth Area C (SGA C)' with Special Policy Area #28. We understand that the SGA C land use designation is intended to highest level of intensification. Special Policy Area #28 permits the existing industrial and commercial parking uses while transitioning to more supportive built forms in a mixed use area. Additionally, Special Policy Area #28 implements a holding provision for the Province to acknowledge the Record of Site Condition prior to permitting the use of any sensitive uses on the subject lands. We are writing to confirm support of the Strategic Growth Area Cdesignation and Special Policy Area 28. Existing & Proposed Zoning The subject property is located within a `General Industrial Zone (M2)' with Special Use Provision 21U. Special Use Provision 21U permits the following uses: Refining, Rolling, Forging or Extruding of Metal only as an accessory use in the manufacturing of industrial equipment and machinery. The proposed zoning under the draft for the Zoning By-law amendment proposes Strategic Growth Area 4 (SGA -4)' with Special Use Provision 21U(M) and Holding Provision (18H). The SGA -4 designation represents the most intense form of development supporting both residential and non- residential development in a mid to high rise form. The Special Use Provision is carried over from that outlined in Zoning By-law 85-1. Holding Provision (18H) indicates that the site shall require clearance from the Ministry of Environment on the Record of Site Conditions prior to the development of the subject lands. We are writing to confirm support of the proposed zoning category ofSGA -4 with Special Use Provision 21U(M) and Ho/ding Provision (18H), The proposed zoning allows for the transitioning to development supportive to the MTSA of the City of Kitchener while recognizing the existing use on site. Thank you again for positively considering our past correspondence, MHBC Andrea Sinclair, MUDS, BES, MCIP, RPP Partner CC. Chris Figel Chris Bitsakakis 2 Page 729 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Friday, December 1, 2023 4:16 PM To: Brian Bateman; 'Andrew Head' Subject: RE: 16610 - 240 Duke Street East (Full Site Plan Application Submission) Good Afternoon Andrew, Throughout the Growing Together project to date, we have spoken with over 1,300 community members and stakeholders and there is a broad consensus that it is important to provide a range and mix of housing types and building scales within Kitchener's Major Transit Station Areas. This includes areas for low-rise and mid -rise missing middle development. Staff have been directed to implement the Missing Middle and Affordable Housing Report recommendations from earlier this year to encourage more missing middle housing within the Growing Together MTSAs, and are recommending a low-rise zone that does not limit floor space ratio, require parking, or directly restrict unit count. Staff have analyzed the context of the Growing Together geography, including consideration for lot size, shape and area, access, servicing, and the ability of parcels to meet the built -form regulations of each zone. Upon consolidation, there are multiple pathways within the Strategic Growth Areas official plan policies to seek more height and density though a range of application types. If you would like to provide further written comments, please submit them to growingtogether@kitchener.ca. Our comment deadline on draft materials was yesterday, but we will do our best to review and respond. Best, The Growing Together Team From: Brian Bateman <Brian.Bateman @kitchener.ca> Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2023 1:19 PM To: 'Andrew Head Cc: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: RE: 16610 - (Full Site Plan Application Submission) Hi Andrew, Thanks for the email. I am forwarding your query to the Growing Together team. They will follow up with you. Brian Bateman, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner City of Kitchener 519-741-2200 x7869, TTY 1-866-969-9994 o�0000moo From: Andrew Head Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2023 1:16 PM To: Brian Bateman <Brian.Bateman @kitchener.ca> Subject: RE: 16610 - (Full Site Plan Application Submission) Page 730 of 1179 Hi Brian, Just following up on regulations on the Growing Together. I am curious to know why the density in this area is being capped at 3 storeys SG1 and 8 storeys SG2. This entire neighborhood is very close to the ION stop and there are several tall buildings and tall building applications located in this area. It certainly shows that development is needed in this area and capping the height is not the answer. Please advise who is heading this up so we can be added to the information list and provide some comments. Thank you. Andrew From: Brian Bateman[mailto:Brian. Bateman@kitchener.ca] Sent: Friday, November 3, 2023 4:21 PM To: 'Sasa Filipovic Sunset Hills Estates' Cc: Andrew Head (Full Site Plan Application Submission) Sasa, The draft regulations for Growing Together Growing Together I EngageWR are now public. Table 6.3, Section 6, pg 5. Outline the proposed regulations for the proposed SGA -1 zone for your property and they will significantly aid your proposal. You should take a look and compare them to your property but I am not seeing any variances..... and you won't have to provide parking as well. Given this new direction, it maybe advantageous to wait until January when it goes to Committee/Council. Brian Bateman, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner City of Kitchener 519-741-2200 x7869, TTY 1-866-969-9994 6100G0G0v0 From: Brian Bateman Sent: Friday, November 3, 2023 11:25 AM To: 'Sasa Filipovic Sunset Hills Estates' Cc: Steven Ryder <Steven.Ryder@kitchener.ca> Subject: RE: 16610 - 240 Duke Street East (Full Site Plan Application Submission) Sasa, Looking into it. Will be in touch. Brian Bateman, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner City of Kitchener 519-741-2200 x7869, TTY 1-866-969-9994 Page 731 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Friday, December 1, 2023 4:15 PM To: WRDSB Planning Subject: RE: [Planning] Growing Together - Notice of Open House Good Afternoon Emily, Thank you for your comments, and we appreciate you meeting with us earlier this month. Your comments will be included in our report, and staff will continue to evaluate all feedback throughout December as we work toward a final recommendation. Thanks again, The Growing Together Team From: WRDSB Planning <planning@wrdsb.ca> Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2023 9:31 AM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: Re: [Planning] Growing Together - Notice of open House Good morning Growing Together Team, Please find the WRDSBs thoughts and comments attached. Thank you, Emily Bumbaco Senior Planner Waterloo Region District School Board On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 11:16 AM Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> wrote: Good morning Public Stakeholders & Agencies: An Open House for the City's Growing Together project is being held on Saturday, November 18 at the Kitchener Market from lam — 2pm. Growing Together is the City's project which is updating the land use and zoning in 7 of Kitchener's Major Transit Station Areas (MTSAs) west of the expressway, and select lands outside of and in close proximity to these MTSAs (see attached Notice). Page 732 of 1179 Additional information and material about the proposed Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendment(s) will be available at the Open House and posted on our Engage page approximately two weeks ahead of the Open House: • www.engagewr.ca/growingtogether Should you be unable to attend the Open House or would prefer a meeting with staff to discuss the proposed land use and zoning approach, please let us know. Written submissions received prior to November 24, 2023 will be considered in the staff report. If you have no concerns or comments please indicate that by replying to this email. Thank you, The Growing Together Team growingtogether@kitchener.ca Page 733 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Friday, December 1, 2023 4:16 PM To: Evan Wittmann; Natalie Goss Cc: Adam Clark; Hugh Handy Subject: RE: 85 Weber Street West, and 60 & 66 College Street I Growing Together Good Afternoon Evan, Thank you for the submission. The Growing Together team is evaluating submissions with planning management beginning December 8". Changes will be recommended in our staff report as it is finalized over the next few weeks. We will, however, do our best to communicate our direction and continue to collaborate on the process in the interim. Best, The Growing Together Team From: Evan Wittmann Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2023 3:35 PM To: Natalie Goss <Natalie.Goss@kitchener.ca> Cc: Adam Clark <Adam.CIark@kitchener.ca>; Growing Together {SM} cGrowingTogether@kitchener.ca>, Hugh Handy Subject: Growing Together You don't often get email from evanw(@Rspgroup.ca. Learn why this is important Good afternoon, Please find attached our commentar and re uest letter regarding the proposed official Plan designation and Zoning of 85 Weber Street West, an n the "Growing Together" project. We would be happy to discuss further and clarify as needed. Thank you, This communication is intended solely for the named addressee{s} and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, protected or otherwise exempt from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, please advise us immediately and delete this email without reading, copying or forwarding it to anyone_ Page 734 of 1179 November 30, 2023 City of Kitchener Planning Division, 6th Floor 200 King Street West Kitchener, Ontario N2G 4Y9 Attention: Natalie Goss, MCIP, RPP Manager, Policy and Research Dear Ms. Goss: Re: Growing Together Response to November 2023 Draft Materials SHAPING GREAT COMMUNITIES File No. 21274 We are writing on behalf of the owners of in downtown Kitchener (the "Site"). In the November 3, 2023 draft planning instruments published through Growing Together, the Site is proposed to be designated Strategic Growth Area C and Zoned SGA -3. We are in support of the Strategic Growth Area C designation. We are requesting consideration through the Growing Together initiative that the Site be zoned Special Growth Area Four (SGA -4) with a Site-specific Special Provisions to address the required setbacks and physical separation. On July 26, 2022, GSP Group, project architect ABA Architects, and the owners of the Site had a pre -submission consultation meeting regarding a 32 -storey development on the Site. The City was generally supportive of the proposal, indicating the location is suitable for redevelopment to contribute to the achievement of the intensification target for the Urban Growth Centre. Further to this pre -submission consultation meeting, discussions were held with the City to demonstrate how the Site would not impact the development potential of the abutting properties at the intersection of Weber and Water Streets, which is also proposed to be designated Strategic Growth Area C and zoned SGA -3. It is our understanding that the following criteria are to be addressed as part of the request for consideration to be zoned SGA -4: 1) Proof of lot ownership. The three lots comprising the Site are under the ownership of two separate groups, who have partnered to explore the redevelopment potential of the Site, as indicated in the pre -submission consultation. PLANNING I URBAN DESIGN I LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Page 735 of 1179 2) Zoning compliance with SGA -4. The enclosed zoning compliance chart confirms general compliance of the proposed development relative to the draft SGA -3 and SGA -4 Zones. It illustrates that the proposed development complies with all aspects of both zones except the height limit of the SGA -3 Zone and the setback and physical separation requirements of both the SGA -3 and SGA -4 zones. 3) Planning Justification relative to the criteria for changing zoning within the Major Transit Station Areas as set out in draft Official Plan policy 15.D.2.5. The subsections that follow provide a planning opinion relative the six criteria of draft policy 15.D.2.5. 15. D. 2.5a) compatibility with the planned function of the subject lands and adjacent lands The Site and abutting lands to the south and west are proposed to be designated Strategic Growth Area C, and zoned SGA -3, while the lands to the east on College Street are proposed to be designated Strategic Growth Area C and zoned SGA -4. The planned function of the Strategic Growth Area designations is to provide opportunities to accommodate intensification, including housing, that is transit -supportive in close proximity to ION rapid transit. The Strategic Growth Area C designation is intended to accommodate significant intensification at high density. The proposed development conforms to the planned function of this designation, as it is a high density development. The properties across to the north of the Site across Weber Street are part of the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District (HCD), and are proposed to be designated Strategic Growth Area A. The properties along Weber Street in the HCD are proposed to be zoned SGA -2, which indicates there may be some level of development anticipated in this area, with heights permitted up to 8 storeys. As tall buildings are permitted in each direction from the Site, with mid -rise permitted to the east across Weber Street, a Regional road, the proposed development will transition appropriately to the planned uses of each. 15. D. 2.5b) suitability of the lot for the proposed use and/or built -form. The Site is suitable for the proposed development because it is within the Urban Growth Centre, and close walking distance to both the current and future location of the Kitchener GO Station, and is near both the Central and Kitchener City Hall ION Stations. The Site is an appropriate size for redevelopment, meeting the requirements of the SGA -3 and SGA -4 zones, and further, is appropriately dimensioned to ensure efficient vehicular and pedestrian circulation within and around the Site. GSP Group 12 Page 736 of 1179 15.D.2.5c) lot area and consolidation as further outlined in Policy 3.C.2.11. The Site is an assembly of three smaller parcels and has an area of 2,493 sq m (after road widenings), exceeding the minimum lot area required for the SGA -4 Zone. 15. D. 2.5d) compliance with the City's Urban Design Manual and Policy 11. C.1.34. The proposed development was prepared by taking into consideration the applicable policies of the City's Urban Design Manual, including those pertaining to tall buildings (former Tall Building Design Guidelines). The point tower is oriented towards the intersection of Weber Street and College Street, providing spacing and distance to the existing lower rise built forms to the west. The at -grade residential units have entrances from the street, contributing to an active streetscape. Further to the above, an Urban Design Report will be required as part of an OPA/ZBA application and is anticipated to remain a requirement of Site Plan Approval if an OPA/ZBA is ultimately not required. 15. D. 2.5e) cultural heritage resources, including Policy 15. D.2.8. A Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report (CHER) was prepared by MHBC in April 2023 to assess the heritage potential of the Site. The evaluation determined that while the property of contains a building that is representative of the Queen Anne architectural style, this property does not meet any other criteria and therefore does not warrant designation under the Ontario Heritage Act. The properties addressed as West do not meet any of the legislated criteria. 15. D. 2.5f) technical considerations and other contextual or site specific factors. Based on the record of pre -submission consultation, a Planning Justification Report, Urban Design Report, Scoped Heritage Impact Assessment, Parking Justification Study, and Environmental and Stationary Noise Reports would be required as part of a complete application. As each of the SGA zones removes required parking, and as a CHER has been prepared, it is not anticipated that any technical considerations or site specific factors would prohibit achieving the additional height granted by the SGA -4 zone. Thank you for consideration of our request. I trust that the forgoing submission is sufficient to consider our request for consideration of the SGA -4 Zone with a Site-specific Special Provision to permit a reduction of the setbacks, as outlined in the attached zone chart. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or require any additional information. Sincerely, GSP Group Inc. GSP Group 13 Page 737 of 1179 Hugh Handy, MCIP, RPP Vice President Cc Clients GSP Group 14 Page 738 of 1179 Zoning Compliance Table Provision (32 storey building) SGA -4 Proposed Minimum lot width 42 m 4 65 m Minimum lot area 2,000 sq m 2,493 sq m Minimum yard setback 3 m 2.5 m interior yard 16 m rear yard Minimum building base height 2 storeys NIA Maximum building base height 6 storeys 4-6 storeys Minimum fagade street openings 10% TBD Minimum street line facade openings 20% TBD Minimum front and exterior side yard setback 6 m 0 m Maximum building length 48 m 44 m Maximum floor plate area 900 sq m 760 sq m Physical separation 12 m 8.5 m Private amenity area 8 sq m 1 unit TBD GSP Group 15 Page 739 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Friday, December 1, 2023 4:15 PM To: Jane Parmfey Cc: Chris Mulligan Subject: RE: Feedback on Growing Together Good Afternoon Jane and Chris, Thank you for your comments, they will be evaluated by staff and included in our report. Any changes will be noted as we finalize the recommendations. Please visit eng_agewr.ca/,growingtogether and subscribe to receive updates. Please note that the proposed SGA -2 zone is part of a long-term planning framework and does not require you to change your property in any way. As you note, there is development occurring or potentially occurring on either side of 54 Margaret, and we appreciate your patience and participation through that change. The proposed SGA -2 zone provides consistent zoning permissions with already approved development on the north side of Margaret and along Victoria Street. However, we would like to reiterate that the zoning applied through Growing Together in no way impacts the ongoing and indefinite use of your property as a single -detached residence. Best, The Growing Together Team From: Jane Parmley Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2023 8:47 AM To: Growing Together (SMI <GrowineToeether@kitchener.ca> Cc: Chris Mulligan Subject: Feedback on Growing Together You don't often get email fro Learn why this is important To Whom It May Concern, Our home at n Kitchener is proposed to be zoned SGA -2 in the new Growing Together plan. We are not in support of this zoning change. Our home is in the Civic Centre Heritage Conservation District and has a Group A designation under the Ontario Heritage Act Part V. We have and continue to invest in our home as a heritage property and our investments are diminished by the roosed rezonin to SGA -2, our home is next door to 2 substantial developments on Margaret Avenue already greatly increasing the density of our neighbourhood. These developmen s I'velus iso a e rom o er similar homes and we do not want to compromise our connections with the rest of our neighbours. Across the street there are multiple heritage homes that reflect the characteristics of aur house and we would like to be zoned in similar manner to ensure these connections are maintained in the long term. Three years ago, we requested that our home be re -zoned R-3 (rather than. R-6 as indicated in the previous secondary plan). We received indication from the City of Kitchener that they would approve this zoning change request and were expecting this to be reflected in the new Growing Together plan. Surprisingly, this was not carried forward. The new proposed zoning would see our house zoned SGA -2 and would threaten the heritage status of our property and the investments that we chose to make in the upkeep and maintenance of our home which qualified for heritage grants. Page 740 of 1179 We are keen to see Downtown Kitchener developed and density increased. We continue to work with the city and developers on either side of us rarely complaining despite years of construction noise, inconvenience, dust and general chaos. We are keen to see these projects finished and have more neighbours move onto our street. There is no need for our property to be zoned SGA -2; these developments can continue as planned and the heritage status of our home can be protected. We purchased our home in 2018 for many reasons, not the least of which was its history and heritage designation. We expect the City of Kitchener to uphold the heritage value of our property and zone our home SGA -1, in line with the rest of our neighbourhood and our home's current heritage designation. Sincerely, Jane Parmley and Chris Mulligan Page 741 of 1179 City of Kitchener Planning Staff City of Kitchener 200 King St. Kitchener N2G 4G7 Re. terms of Growing Together Dear planning staff, RECEIVED NOV 3 a 2023 PLANNING DIVISION I am dismayed at the approach the city (via its planners and most of Kitchener's councilors) is taking toward parking in new and proposed buildings. I spoke to this issue briefly at a Committee of Adjustment hearing on July 19, 2022. Put simply, the city is both encouraging and approving very large residential and commercial towers with fewer parking spaces than the number of units in the towers, or none at all (as was granted to the developers of 21 King St. on July 19'"). This reduction (or elimination) obviously helps developers tremendously, as underground parking is very expensive to construct; the developers save millions. The stated objective is to reduce reliance on automobiles and encourage the use of mass transit. I understand this objective. But I think the rationale and the policy is tremendously flawed. First, the policy to a great degree rests on the premise that renters and condo owners will turn to bicycles as a substitute. Many of the development proposals that I have seen approved in the last few years have cited 75, or 150, or over 200 bicycles stations in their buildings, as if just about everyone will now own and use a bike instead of a car. To me this is actually a form of social discrimination. A very large number of citizens who would like to live in our city in a new condo or an apartment cannot ride a bike. Either they have never learnt, or they are physically too small or too overweight to do so safely, or they are too old and lack the strength, or they are physically challenged. So the idea that bicycles can replace the use of cars is ludicrous, especially when one considers the weather environment we live in — snow and cold for at least five months of the year, and many rainy or windy days in the other months when riding a bike is entirely unsavoury. I, myself, have seen almost no uptick of bicyclists — especially adults over 40 — on any of the relatively new bicycle paths that the city has built in the last ten years. These paths are especially vacant from November to March. And out city, unlike Holland, is not flat. So even teenagers or young adults struggle to climb some of our streets (e.g. Lancaster NW of Wellington), let alone a 50 or 60 -year old who is in so-so health. So the idea of bicycles replacing cars as a basic means of transportation in Kitchener is intrinsically flawed. Secondly, the provincial and federal governments are working in the opposite direction. They are putting 15 billion dollars into plants that will build batteries for electric cars. They are not putting millions or billions into improving bicycles or giving them to men and women who are moving into new residential towers. And there are no highways that I am aware of that permit bicyclists to share the roadways. Our foreseeable future in transportation for regular citizens is going to be dominated by cars and pick-up trucks, not bicycles. Thirdly, as a long-time supporter of minor softball, soccer and hockey, and the father of three sons who played all three sports, I cannot imagine a family putting sports gear on a bicycle and heading off to a field or an arena, nor can I easily imagine such a family putting Page 742 of 1179 several children, plus sports gear, on the ION line (which doesn't go past many fields or arenas to start with) or on a bus. The obvious choice for such a situation is to use a car or SUV. And this is not going to change. Many many families need the use of cars, not five or six bicycles. Fourthly, I am aware that the city thinks that some individuals who own cars, but cannot secure a parking space in a new substantial residential structure, will be prepared to lease or rent space in a city parking garage, and walk from their newly -acquired living accommodation to that space to pick up their vehicle. I — again — think this is a form of discrimination, because there are lots of adults who can walk down a hall, press a button, take an elevator to the basement, and take a few steps to get into a car. But these same adults would be hard-pressed to walk 100 or 200 or 300 meters — outdoors - every time they want to take a trip to a grocery store or visit family or go to a medical appointment. So, in effect, the policy of approving inadequate parking spaces (above ground or underground) in new buildings discriminates against all of the adults who can easily use a vehicle that is easily accessible, and have done so for decades, but are physically unable to live readily or easily with the parameters that the city and developers are now pursuing. They — in effect — are now essentially prohibited from considering a move into one of our new residential buildings, because bicycles and buses and remote parking won't meet their needs. Moreover, this expectation transfers the cost of parking spaces to the city, and in turn taxpayers, which I find inherently unjust and underhanded. Fifthly, the inadequate building of parking spaces is going to have a very negative and destructive effect on local neighbourhoods. If the new buildings are going to have either no parking spaces for visitors, or just a handful for, say 95 new units, then the visitors are going to park on nearby side streets. I am quite certain, for example, that when the building proposed for Frederick and Lancaster, next to Suddaby School, is finally finished, visitors who can't find a space at the new development are going to park repeatedly and endlessly on nearby Bingemen, Chapel, Hohner and Brubacher, and in the process impinge and upset the day-to-day lives of the long-time residences living on those streets. In other words, inadequate provision of parking spaces by or under new developments is going to have a very negative effect on the city's nearby established residential areas. And I don't think any truly serious consideration has been given to this particular inevitable consequence. In closing, I think the city should seriously reconsider the direction it is taking and insist that every new residential development possess substantial surface or underground parking for the new units that are constructed — 80% or better. Anything else, in my opinion, is unfair, illogical, not supported by the inevitable continued use of motorized vehicles in our region and province, and a policy that is going to cause far more social herm and frustration than short or long-term benefits. Yours truly, John Ryrie Page 743 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Friday, December 1, 2023 4:15 PM To: Kevin Muir; Natalie Goss; Adam Zufferli; John Zunic; Richard Kelly-Ruetz Cc: Jim Dodd; Zac Zehr; Ash Singh; Joseph Bullas Subject: RE: Queen & Joseph assembly Good Afternoon Kevin, Thank you for the submission. The Growing Together team is evaluating submissions with planning management beginning December 8t". Changes will be recommended in our staff report as it is finalized over the next few weeks. We will, however, do our best to communicate our direction and continue to collaborate on the process in the interim. Best, The Growing Together Team From: Kevin Muir Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2023 11:27 AM To: Natalie Goss <NataIie. Goss@kitchener.ca>; Adam Zufferli <Adam.Zufferli@kitchener.ca>; John Zunic <John.Zunic@kitchener.ca>; Richard Kelly-Ruetz <Richard.Kelly-Ruetz@kitchener.ca> Cc: Jim DodZac Zehr ; Ash Singh. Joseph Bullas Subject: Queen & Joseph assembly Hi Natalie and Growing Together team, Thanks again for the meeting last week to discuss the properties at the corner of Queen and Joseph. On behalf of the three owners, attached is the collective letter outlining the zoning request, zoning compliance and justification commentary. Recognizing we are still early in the process of potential lot consolidation, we are suggesting a Holding provision on the assembly (similar to an existing holding provision in the by-law) that requires lot consolidation of the full assembly and site plan approval prior to lifting in order to exceed the 25 -storey height threshold. We feel this approach puts in place the appropriate controls to ensure the necessary lot consolidation occurs while providing the basis for the owners to continue the due diligence and lot consolidation process. We appreciate your consideration of this request in finalizing the draft OPA and ZBA and are available to further discuss as needed. Regards, Kevin Muir Director of Land Development Page 744 of 1179 From: Kevin Muir To: Natalie Goss: Adam Zufferii: John Zunc; Richard Kelly-Ruetr cc: Jim Dodd: Zx Zehr Ash SinahJoseph Bullas [2oebullas(ftymoatico.ca) Subject: Queen & Joseph assembly Date: Thursday, November 30, 2023 11:27:04 AM Attachments: OueenWoseoh assembly - Growino Together [Nov 2023].odf Queen+Joseph Assembly - Preliminary rev Plan (July 2023).odf Hi Natalie and Growing Together team, Thanks again for the meeting last week to discuss the properties at the corner of Queen and Joseph. On behalf of the three owners, attached is the collective letter outlining the zoning request, zoning compliance and justification commentary. Recognizing we are still early in the process of potential lot consolidation, we are suggesting a Holding provision on the assembly (similar to an existing holding provision in the by-law) that requires lot consolidation of the full assembly and site plan approval prior to lifting in order to exceed the 25 -storey height threshold. We feel this approach puts in place the appropriate controls to ensure the necessary lot consolidation occurs while providing the basis for the owners to continue the due diligence and lot consolidation process. We appreciate your consideration of this request in finalizing the draft OPA and ZRA and are available to further discuss as needed. Regards, Kevin Muir Director of Land Development Page 745 of 1179 DocuSign Envelope ID: 7D206EE6-7F31-4E[4-0AB3-EOA0949F15O6 ZEHR DEVELOPMENT November 30, 2023 Natalie Goss Manager, Policy and Research Planning Division 200 King Street West, 6th Floor Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 Re: Queen Street & Joseph Street Assembly Growing Together - Draft OPA and ZBA Input Background Zehr Group (178-188 Queen LP and 178-188 Queen Street GP Inca is the owner of 178 and 188 Queen Street South near the corner of the Joseph Street in Kitchener. In the last few months, Zehr Group has had ongoing discussions with the owners of 196 and 202 Queen Street South (York Queen Inc. and York Queen KW Inc.) and 15 Joseph Street (Bullas Glass Limited) regarding a potential consolidation of the five properties ("the assembly") for redevelopment purposes. Collectively, the owners have reviewed the draft Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment released in November 2023 for the City of Kitchener's Growing Together project and are looking to provide input into the process regarding the subject properties and their assembly. Assemblv Details The complete assembly is approximately 2,800 square metres in area. It is generally rectangular in shape with approximately 42 metres of street line length along Joseph Street and 49 metres of street line length along Queen Street South. There are existing buildings on 188 Queen (detached dwelling), 196 and 202 Queen (semi-detached dwellings) and 15 Joseph (commercial building). The former building at 178 Queen was demolished in 2023 and the property sits undeveloped. Currently, the assembly remains as five separate parcels as the respective owners engage in the Growing Together exercise and move through to due diligence efforts. The proposed zoning request recognizes the assembly has not been consolidated at this time. The assembly forms around the 168 Queen Street South property sitting directly at the intersection of Queen Street South and Joseph Street. As we understand, this property of 71 square metres is owned by the City of Kitchener but we are unsure of its function. The owners would be Interested in adding this property to square off the assembly for design flexibility reasons but it is not required for the proposed development scheme. 92-1440 King St North, PO Box 622, St. Jacobs, ON NOB 2N0 I P: 519-576-2233 IF: 519-576-7072 S zeliigroup.ca Page 1 Page 746 of 1179 DocuSrgn Envelope ID: 7206EE6-7F31.4ED4-8AB3-EOA0949F15O6 Figure. Assembly boundaries for 178,188,196 and 202 Queen Street South and 15 Joseph Street Preliminary Development Pians Enclosed are preliminary development plans prepared by ABA Architects for the complete assembly. These pians were prepared in July 2023 following the guidance of the Tall Building Guidelines but prior to the details of the draft zoning being available. The preliminary development plans for the assembly show a 52 -storey development consisting of a 6 -storey podium and a 46 -storey "compact point" tower. There are 495 residential units within the upper levels of the podium and in the tower. There are 248 parking spaces within one underground parking level and six podium parking levels with access to the parking garage from the southwest corner onto Queen Street South. The ground floor contains 257 square metres of commercial floor space lining the building's Queen Street South face and functional areas along the Joseph Street face. Proposed Request The owners support the assembly's inclusion in the "Strategic Growth Area C" of the Official Plan Amendment together with the associated policy changes. Regarding the draft Zoning By-law Amendment, the owners are requesting a modification to the proposed zoning for the properties within the assembly. The modification would change the assembly from the SGA -3 Zone to the SGA -4 Zone. We recognize Planning staff's desire to have confirmation of lot consolidation for the purposes of applying the SGA -4 Zone. While we feel SGA -4 Zone regulations for minimum lot area and physical separation necessitates the assembly's consolidation to "unlock" the maximum height of the SGA -4 Zone, we recognize staff may want further assurance through ##2-1440 King St North, PO Box 622, St. Jacobs, ON NOB 2NO I P: 519-576-2233 1 F: 519-576-0072 S zehrgrtru}.,-(,: Page 2 Page 747 of 1179 DocuSign Envelope ID: 7D206EE6-7F31-4ED4-8AB3-EOA0949F1506 planning controls. Thus, we suggest such an assurance could be achieved with a holding provision using the language of Provision 15H in By-law 85-1, as follows: #-H Within the lands zoned SGA -4 and shown as affected by this provision on Zoning Grid Schedule 85 of Appendix A, building heights greater than 25 storeys shall not be permitted until such time as all properties subject to the provision have been consolidated, a site plan including has been approved by the City's Director of Planning, and the holding symbol has been removed by By-law. " The below sections address the suitability of the requested change. Zoning Compliance Review The preliminary development plan for the assembly could easily satisfy the draft SGA -4 Zone regulations with minor modifications. The enclosed table assesses the preliminary development plan's compliance with the draft SGA -4 Zone regulations, including the built form regulations of Table 6-5 and the parking regulations of Table 5-5. Three changes would be required to comply with the draft SGA -4 Zone regulations: 1. The yard setbacks for the podium from the shared rear and interior side lot lines are deficient (1 metre and 1.5 metres versus 3 metres required) but could easily comply with minor changes to the podium footprint. 2. The exterior yard setback from Queen Street property line of the tower is deficient (5.6 metres versus 6 metres required) but could comply with minor alteration to tower position or size. 3. The Class A parking supply for the residential is deficient (50 spaces versus 495 required) but could comply with additional space within the parking garage. Justification As requested by the Planning Division, the requested change from the SGA -3 Zone to the SGA -4 Zone for the assembly is justified when considering the factors outlined in Policy 15.D.2.5 in the draft Official Plan Amendment, as follows. a) compatibilitywith the planned function of the subject lands and adjacent lands; The preliminary development plans for a high-rise mixed-use development would be compatible with the planned function for the assembly and adjacent properties as they are within the highest order area for intensification and building heights from an urban structure and land use designation perspective. The addition of approximately 500 dwelling units and ground floor commercial spaces through the assembly's redevelopment would contribute to the Downtown's planned function as a focus for population and employment growth. The assembly consolidates five properties within the "Strategic Growth Area C" designation for a significant, high-density intensification at a key corner of Downtown. The remainder of the assembly's block #2-1440 King St North, PO Box 622, St. Jacobs, ON NOB 2NO I P: 519-576-2233 1 F: 519-576-0072 1 zehrgroup.i­ Page 3 Page 748 of 1179 DocuSign Envelope ID: 7D206EE6-7F31-4ED4-8AB3-EOA0949F1506 bounded by Queen, Joseph, David and Courtland shares the same Strategic Growth Area C designation while crossing Queen Street South the begins the compatible transition through the medium/high density Strategic Growth Area B designation. b) suitability of the lot for the proposed use and/or built -form; The assembly provides a suitable lot for a podium and tower development form. The consolidation of the five properties provides a sufficient size lot that can achieve the SGA -4 Zone's built form requirements for the tallest tower heights. The assembly's dual street frontage provides flexibility for access and street fronting design. c) lot area and consolidation as further outlined in Policy 3.C.2.11; The assembly's lot area following consolidation would satisfy (and meaningfully exceed) the minimum lot area requirements for a functional podium and towers over 25 storeys in height. The lot area and configuration of the assembly allows a tower scheme that satisfies and exceeds the physical separation requirements of the SGA - 4 Zone for the tallest heights. Further consolidation of the assembly with abutting properties is unlikely given the nature and built form on the abutting properties at 214 Queen Street South and 25 Joseph Street. d) compliance with the City's Urban Design Manua/and Policy 11.C.1.34; We anticipate that the intent of the Urban Design Manual could be met by a tall building on the assembly. Notably, the preliminary development plan demonstrates: - a slender "compact point" tower form with narrow width and length proportions, - a tower placement situated towards the Queen/Joseph corner maximizing physical separation to shared interior property lines, - a 6 -storey podium as the base reflecting 214 Queen mid -rise height to the south, - the principal Queen Street frontage lined with ground floor commercial space and dwelling units lining the podium edge, - fully internalized parking within underground and podium parking levels, and, - cladding and architectural finish that could respect the area's heritage character. As shown by the zoning compliance table, the preliminary development plans can satisfy the podium and tower massing regulations outlined in the draft SGA -4 Zone with only minor modifications, further to Policy 11.C.1.34. e) cultural heritage resources, including Policy 15.D.2.8; and, None of the five properties are "cultural heritage resources" as defined by the Official Plan, either through non -designated listing or Part IV designation. Four of the five properties (excluding 202 Queen Street South) are Part V designated as part of the Victoria Park Heritage Conservation District. The abutting properties at 25 #2-1440 King St North, PO Box 622, St. Jacobs, ON NOB 2NO I P: 519-576-2233 1 F: 519-576-0072 1 zehrgroup.ca Page 4 Page 749 of 1179 DocuSign Envelope ID: 7D206EE6-7F31-4ED4-8AB3-EOA0949F1506 Joseph (former Victoria Park Public School) and 214 Queen (York Apartments) are Part IV designated. The mid -rise podium and exterior design character of any proposed tall building on the assembly can address the heritage context, subject to further heritage analysis at the time of detailed design. f) technical considerations and other contextual or site specific factors. There are no known technical considerations at this time given the owners are early in the diligence and planning process. The addition of 168 Queen to the assembly would improve design flexibility and options and the owners would like to explore its possible acquisition and inclusion; regardless, we would ask for it be zoned similarly to the assembly should a change to SGA -4 occur. I trust the enclosed is sufficient for consideration of the owners request to change the zoning from SGA -3 to SGA -4 for the assembly in the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment. Should you require anything further or wish to further discuss please let me know. Yours truly, Kevin Muir, MCIP, RPP Director of Land Development Zehr Development �DAocuS igned by: Atw A9CE632BSE642B... Zac Zehr for 178-188 ueen LP and 178-188 Queen Street GP Inc. 178 and 188 Queen Street South —DocuSiigneed�by: YtOE YJLbLG�y F5253AFBE9DD48 oe Bullas for Bullas Glass Limited 15 Joseph Street FDocuSigned by: asp, sly. Ash Singh for"7o'rM2een Inc. and York Queen KW Inc. 196 and 202 Queen Street South #2-1440 King St North, PO Box 622, St. Jacobs, ON NOB 2NO I P: 519-576-2233 1 F: 519-576-0072 1 zehrgroup.ca Page 5 Page 750 of 1179 DocuSign Envelope ID7D206EE6-7F31-4ED4-8AB3-EOA0949F1506 TABLE: Review of Preliminary Development Plan to draft SGA -4 Zone regulations -.ul��M!1111 Requirement Development FOR ENTIRE BUILDING MIN lot width 30 m 49 m {'j Yes MIN lot area 1,500 m2 2,810 m2 Yes MIN yard setback 3 m Queen — 3.5 m Joseph — 4.1 m South —1.5 m West —1 m Yes Yes No No MAX base building height 3 storeys 6 storeys Yes MAX building base height 6 storeys 6 storeys Yes MIN floor space ratio 2.0 17.5 Yes MIN fagade openings 10% > 10% Yes MIN street line facade openings 20% > 20% Yes FOR STOREYS 7-12 MIN lot width 30 m 49 m {'} Yes MIN lot area 1,500 m3 2,810 m2 Yes MIN front yard setback 6 m 13.1 m Yes MAX exterior yard setback 6 m 5.6 m No MAX building length 60 m 29m Yes MAX floor plate area 2,000 ml 785 m2 Yes Physical Separation 6 m West -15.5 m South — 15.3 m Yes Yes FOR STOREYS 13-18 MIN lot width 36 m 49 m {`} Yes MIN lot area 1,800 mz 2,810 m2 Yes MIN front yard setback 6 m 13.1 m Yes MAX exterior yard setback 6 m 5.6 m No MAX building length 54 m 29m Yes MAX floor plate area 1,200 m2 785 m2 Yes Physical Separation 9 m West -15.5 m South —15.3 m Yes Yes FOR STOREYS 19-36 MIN lot width 42 m 49 m {'} Yes MIN lot area 2,000 m2 2,810 ml Yes MIN front yard setback 6 m 13.1 m Yes MAX exterior yard setback 6 m 5.6 m No MAX building length 48 m 29m Yes MAX floor plate area 900 m, 785 ml Yes Physical Separation 12 m West -15.5 m South — 15.3 m Yes Yes 92-1440 King St North, PO Box 622, St. Jacobs, ON NOB 2N0 I P: 519-576-2233 1 F: 519-576-7077 S zehrgroup.ca Page 6 Page 751 of 1179 DocuSign Envelope ID7D206EE6-7F31-4ED4-8AB3-EOA0949F1506 FOR STOREYS 37+ MIN lot width 48 m 49 m {') Yes MIN lot area 2,400 m2 2,810 m2 Yes MIN front yard setback 6 m 13.1 m Yes MAX exterior yard setback 6 m 5.6 m No MAX building length 36 m 29m Yes MAX floor plate area 850 m2 785 m2 Yes Physical Separation 15 m West -15.5 m South — 15.3 m Yes Yes For Lot Lines Abutting a Priority Street Identified on Appendix G N/A — subject portions of Queen and Joseph not identified as Priority Streets Transition to Low Rise Zones N%A — assembly not adjacent to low rise zones Private Amenity Space Requirements MIN Private Amenity Space 8 m2 per unit (3,960 m2 total) 4,000 m2 Yes Parking - Cars MIN Multiple Dwellings -- Residents None 223 Yes MIN Multiple Dwellings -Visitors 10% of provided 25 Yes MIN Commercial None 0 Yes Parking — Bicycles MIN Multiple Dwelling - Class A 1 1 unit (495 total) 50 No MIN Multiple Dwelling - Class B 6 6 Yes MIN Multi -Unit Parking - Class A 1 11,000 m2 GFA {1 total} 1 Yes MIN Multi -Unit Parking - Class B 11333 m2 GFA (1 total) 1 Yes NOTES- * Minimum lot width measured along Queen Street South line per Note (1) for Table 6-5 92-1440 King St North, PO Box 622, St. Jacobs, ON NOB 2N0 I P: 519-576-2233 1 F: 519-576-7077 S zehrgroup.ca Page 7 Page 752 of 1179 QUEEN + JOSEPH 101 RANDALL DRIVE, UNIT B, WATERLOO, ON. N2V 105 Mill 4oxel►50401 K11YNx1 1.1 RESERVED 1.2 DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT 1.3 SITE PLAN 1.4 SITE STATS 2.1 -2.6 FLOOR PLANS 5.1-5.2 PERSPECTIVE VIEWS Page Za2, o 11 architects j— r d ' W O ' z O U w O J ' W W n RESIDENTIAL ■ AM EN ITV / CU LTU RAL COMMERCIAL OFFICE GREEN SPACE PEDESTRIAN d PARKING VEHICULAR aRCULAn/ o'p.g. 754 of 1179 1.2 / cel �---- _ PROPOSED IT 52 STOREY a MIXED-USE BUILDING 495 UNITS w G.F.A: 49,293.3 sq.m r (530.606.0s f) P Lu cel �---- ----------`-- Q U E E N S T R E E T S O U T H M M, % hA Elt,% rJ raw =o y - god _8 1.3 Page 755 of 1179 FNM IT I< p w Lu z L i — T�- �x�mror - w°vneKin° luted ° x o� w I tj El mol I "1 l i O gull Id - ��I� I It I � gu x� I & a mnrnc ----------`-- Q U E E N S T R E E T S O U T H M M, % hA Elt,% rJ raw =o y - god _8 1.3 Page 755 of 1179 IL Lu DATA L-- Q.— Sts&181 ...ph St. BUILDING DATA DEN P..W.d I_ R.,� JR—G—) z A.. UJ Lu G 2,8703 Lu -2 s J.,IMA-MdOm ROW—) xetNxAm.2a zepw,z ph -sifTweerl zz Ive p—, -.11 (z— Gr-) 211. 49,2933 2—.1 • 2'—'X 1. BUBG T landsa­d/I.— Nea 151.E sq 1.6280 fq ft Hack )sown) -5 2 1 1�A me Bro. d1d '1 Min I Gl—d 11— 1­d.150%I.W 1) 1.14 41 94% M- W.dh Ground FI.11 Fl{.d,�50% If 1­k If— UM) J.IqM R.) (MI,h) If G-16 I I I A— I. _ - , 1dej (Q—. . 5I (E..) M.,0—d 11.­ T. d: I_ (1- 411 --d FI., 1­d.)1.) 1 1.1h) _:M T, L-1 1 1—) I U.. I— d 111, (1 —1. 1-1 -="d m m 31x zc lPoai.ml1 III. A. G.— .,A-11— I— --,d 1., 1. :q =-,d V) PgOVII%3frce NMA 1—. T .. 11,1h L) pip—I.—) lI T.— I .X 11G.wnaxoorl FnF— I 4� 4l .a 91A.diuml eve) lJJ —1 1 (1.­ — Parking Provided 1 4 1. 248Ph­1 ­.- ..0 A. (l. MD Page 756 of 1179 : 1.4 z Q J d w 0 Q gN ■STUDIO 1 BED ry 2 BED q 3BED ■ AMENITY H COMMERCIAL OFFICE PARaFgge 757 of 1179 .g 2.1 z Lu C� (/)o J Z 18 a_ agO Ow J > _ LL� gn ■STUDIO 1 BED ry 2 BED 3 BED AMENITY COMMERCIAL OFFICE PARaFgge 758 of 1179 .g 2.2 z Lu C� z J a Ow _ LL� 8n STUDIO I BED ry 2 BED 3 BED ■ AMENITY ■ COMMERCIAL OFFICE PARaFgge 759 of 1179 .g 2.3 z Lu C� z J a ae O� Ow J > _ LL� gn STUDIO 1 BED ry 2 BED 3 BED ■ AMENITY ■ COMMERCIAL OFFICE PARaFgge 760 of 1179 .g 2.4 C CL + _ W MR,OPEN TO BELOW LU D / 167DDI ssoD 1 O 1 l 1 1 11 l 1 l 1 1 O VI 1/ 11 AI 1l Al �! I A Al AI rt � N SUITE Z 153.1 m' J CL rr SUITE Otl 82.4 m` 0 aaF WSURE SUITE SUITE SURE o IJi� 53.2 m' 65.1 m' 56.6m' 56.6 m- 173 IT 700 IP 609 ff� 609 ft= a SUITE 87.2 m' 938 r ■STUDIO ry 1 BED ' o anfcoNr enf..oHv eafcour 2 BED p3BED ■AMENITY ■ COMMERCIAL -- -- -- - -- OFFICE PARYJRgge 761 of 1179 .g 2.5 W W a N Q J a aeO O� J _ LL gn ■STUDIO 1 BED ry 2 BED ■3BED ■ AMENITY ■ COMMERCIAL OFFICE PARaFgge 762 of 1179 .g 2.6 _ � �® -_ �® �� rTr, [r] I I'.'N-- VIEW 01 QUEEN ST LOOKING SOUTH VIEW 02 QUEEN ST LOOKING NORTH Page 763 of 1179 5.1 VIEW 03 JOSEPH ST AT VICTORIA PARK From: Kristen Barisdale To: Growing Together [SM] Cc: Natalie Goss: Fariborz Fallah: Ian Istvan Subject. RE: Growing Together November 2023 Draft Documents - 424 to 944 King Street West Date: Monday, December 18, 2023 5:00:30 PM Attachments: imaae014.ono imaae015.Dna imaae016.nna imaae017.Dna imaae018.ono imaae019.nno imaoe020.ana imaaefflLona imaae002.ona imaaeoOlDna cp22263c-Cl.ndf co22263c-C2.odf You don't often get email Good afternoon, Further to our correspondence last week, please find attached two (2) revised development concepts for the above -noted development. Concept 1 has been prepared in accordance with the new development standards included as part of the proposed SGA -4 Zone, including tower separation and appropriate setbacks from adjacent low rise residential uses.. Concept 2 has also been prepared in accordance with the proposed SGA -4 Zone, but adheres to the tower separation requirements of the current tall building guidelines and standards. Both concepts demonstrate that the subject properties can be developed as high-density mixed use, taking into account its proximity to adjacent low rise residential uses. trust this additional information will assist in your continued review and consideration of our request. Please don't hesitate to reach out if you have any questions or require anything further. Kristen Barisdlale MCIP, RPP Vice President, Planning 00* GSP group VACATION ALERT: Please note that I will be away from the office from December 22, 2023 to January 8, 2024. Page 765 of 1179 r - i DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT 2 924-938, 946, & 944 King Street West, Kitchener Dodds Ln T 11 N x w N r~71 SITE AREA: 2,288rr12 PARKING: 218 spaces UNITS: 320 units RESIDENTIAL: 193 spaces DENSITY: 1,398 upha a COMMERCIAL AREA: 560r712 W $ ¢ 5 STOREY PODIUM 39,570m2 (11 SpacerzzsrDr) FSR: 12 STOREY 22. 30 storeys MIN. TOWER SEPARATION: 16.8 *based on Kitchener r } 30STOREY - MIXED-USE BUILDING 39,570.' GFA 12.0—N it N 320 (f750sq.R) O y O N 560.2 Commercial/Office 4.9 1 5.1 1 39.3 5 STOREY PODIUM KING ST W r - i DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT 2 924-938, 946, & 944 King Street West, Kitchener Dodds Ln T 11 N x w N r~71 SITE AREA: 2,288rr12 PARKING: 218 spaces UNITS: 320 units RESIDENTIAL: 193 spaces DENSITY: 1,398 upha (D 65nN�NNaI COMMERCIAL AREA: 560r712 COMMERCIAL: 25 spaces GFA: 39,570m2 (11 SpacerzzsrDr) FSR: 17.29 ~ = HEIGHT: 30 storeys MIN. TOWER SEPARATION: 22.0m* *based on Kitchener Urban Design Tall Building Separation UNDERGROUND PARKING: Ll PODIUM: 48 spaces 34 spaces ULI=Am; L2 - L4 PODIUM: L5 PODIUM: 102 spaces 34 spaces � o 2 4 6 10 7-=-=,, -77,77. _x-Id� G S P ." .d. pMgroup S®r 4DQ 1 D--, 18, m3 I �N NoIDaW MN Page 766 of 1179 22 ROOFTOP COMMON ■ AMENnY c:. a ... zsD.? 7.2 10.3 Y e sc 5STOREY PODIUM W Dodds Ln 12 STOREY 2,288m' PARKING: 218 spaces UNITS: a RESIDENTIAL: 129 spaces 30 STOREY 1,451 upha (a- ward) COMMERCIAL AREA: 560m2 COMMERCIAL: 25 spaces GFA: MIXED-USE BUILDING (1spacerz2.5N) FSR: 17.66 40,407m' GFA > } N m 332 (t750sq.0) It *based on draft SGA -4 zoning regulations 560m' Commercial/Office m r � 5.6 42.0 9.4 3.0. n — 5 STOREY PODIUM — — — — v } r .b KING ST W mow �. DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT 1 924-938, 946, & 944 King Street West, Kitchener SITE AREA: 2,288m' PARKING: 218 spaces UNITS: 332 units RESIDENTIAL: 129 spaces DENSITY: 1,451 upha (a- ward) COMMERCIAL AREA: 560m2 COMMERCIAL: 25 spaces GFA: 40,407m2 (1spacerz2.5N) FSR: 17.66 HEIGHT: 30 storeys MIN. TOWER SEPARATION: 12.0m* *based on draft SGA -4 zoning regulations UNDERGROUND PARKING: L1 PODIUM: 48 spaces 34 spaces Higiiiiii L2- L4 PODIUM: L5 PODIUM: 102 spaces 34 spaces � 1 4 6 10 r,=—� o�ee�msae� �� GS P ��cea S -148D 1 De, —, 18, zpza I PMN N. YILfi3I nam W MN page 767 of 1179 From: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.caa Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2023 1:49 PM To: Kristen Barisdale >; Growing Together (SM) <G rowi ngTogether@ kitchener.ca> Cc: Natalie Goss <Natalie.Goss@kitchener.ca> Subject: RE: Growing Together November 2023 Draft Documents - 924 to 944 King Street West Good afternoon Kristen, We will accept your submission for review on Monday, December 18th. The team is appreciative of the time taken to thoughtfully respond to the comments provided. Please be advised that due to the holidays, it would be challenging for staff to accept and evaluate a submission made later than December 18th Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Kristen Barisdale <kbarisdale(@gsVF-roup.ca> Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2023 1:21 PM To: Growing Together (5M) rGrowin-TogetherfWkitchener.ca> Cc: Natalie Goss <Natalie.GossPkitchener.ca> Subject: RE: Growing Together November 2023 Draft Documents - 924 to 944 King Street West You don't often get einail Leazi why this is imgortant Thanks for the clarification regarding the concept — this is very helpful. Would the City consider extending the deadline to Monday in this specific circumstance? It would afford us a bit more time to respond to the request from this morning in a more meaningful and helpful manner. Kristen Barisdale MCIP, RPP Vice President, Planning 11011.11 1 G5P group VACATION ALERT: Please note that I will be away from the office from December 22, 2023 to January 8, 2024. Page 768 of 1179 From: Growing Together (SM) c rowingTog _ her(@kitchener_ca> Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2023 10:04 AM To: Kristen Barisdale Cc: Natalie Goss <Natalie_Goss@kitchener_ca> Subject: RE: Growing Together November 2023 Draft Documents - 924 to 944 King Street West Hi Kristen, We are currently not in receipt of a concept plan that demonstrates compliance with the desired zone (SGAA), particularly with respect to setbacks and physical separation to the rear lot line. The tower floor plate area is also not noted. We have also generally been receiving more detailed information about property ownership. However, we are currently considering apply a holding provision to all submissions to require lot consolidation, and can evaluate what you've already submitted with that in mind. Thanks, The Growing Together Team From: Kristen Barisdale Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2023 11:38 AM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogetherCOkitchener.cp Cc: Fariborz Fallah ; Ian Istvan Natalie Goss <Natalie.Goss(@kitchener.ca>; Adam Clark <Adam.Clark(@kitchener.caa Subject: RE: Growing Together November 2023 Draft Documents - 924 to 944 King Street West Importance: High You don't often get email Leam --%vU this is important Hi all,. Just following up on this again as Friday is coming up quickly — I need further direction as to whether or not any additional material is required from our end. Kristen Barisdale MCIP, RPP Vice President, Planning GSP group VACATION ALERT: Please note that I will be away from the office from December 22, 2023 to Page 769 of 1179 January 8, 2024. From: Kristen Barisdale Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2023 12:20 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <Growinp-Together(7kitchener.ca> Cc: Fariborz Fallah ; Ian Istvan Subject: RE: Growing Together November 2023 Draft Documents - 924 to 944 King Street West Good afternoon, Thank you for your response and feedback. Our initial submission to the City on November 30, 2023 includes a detailed summary letter and planning justification for our request, as well as a copy of the preliminary development concept shared with the City as part of our request for Pre -Submission Consultation (please note that our pre -submission consultation occurred on November 23, 2023). Please refer to attached email. believe that our November 30 submission addresses in detail the considerations noted below. Can you please confirm or clarify what additional material and information you would like to see from our group to assist with these discussions? Thank you. Kristen Barisdale MCIP, RPP Vice President, Planning 000 ,r VSP Ull group VACATION ALERT: Please note that I will be away from the office from December 22, 2023 to January 8, 2024. From: Growing Together (SM) <Growin Tg_ogetherPkitchener.ca3 Sent: Monday, December 11, 2023 4:55 PM To: Kristen Barisdale <kbarisdalePgspRroup.ca� Subject: RE: Growing Together November 2023 Draft Documents - 924 to 944 King Street West Hi Kristen, On Friday, staff began our evaluation of site specific submissions with planning management. We wanted to provide a quick response to your submission on 924-944 King Street West. In order to Page 770 of 1179 evaluate site-specific submissions, we have been asking for the following materials; 1. Proof of lot consolidation or lot ownership 2. A conceptual design demonstrating compliance with the desired zone and; 3. A scoped planning justification that addresses proposed official plan policy 15.D.2.5 which states: 15.D.2.5. Notwithstanding Policy 4.01.8 and 4. C 1.9, site specific applications which seek relief from the implementing zoning through a minor variance(s) or special zoning regulation(s), seek to amend the Zoning By-law to change land use permissions, and/or seek to amend this Plan to change from one land use designation to another, will consider the following factors: aj compatibility with the planned function of the subject lands and adjacent lands; bj suitability of the lot for the proposed use and/or built form; cj lot area and consolidation as further outlined in Policy 3.C.2.11; dj compliance with the City's Urban Design Manual and Policy 11.0.1.34,• e] cultural heritage resources, including Policy 15.D.2.8,- and, f ] technical considerations and other contextual or site specific factors. We wanted to provide you with the opportunity to submit these materials for 924-944 King St. W. for evaluation. Our second opportunity to evaluate submissions with planning management is this Friday. However, there is some additional context we should provide. Staff are currently evaluating a lot of feedback about the built -form transition policy between the SGA -2, 3 and 4 zones and the SGA -1 and low-rise residential zones. This will result in some recommended changes—which have not yet been finalized—which may have an impact on a high-rise proposal next to SGA -1 lands such as this one. Depending on the outcome, it may not be possible for staff to recommend a re -zoning of these properties through the Growing Together process, and proceeding with a site-specific OPAjZBA application may be the best option. We just wanted to give you that heads up before you direct any time or resources toward a full submission. Please let us know if you have any questions, The Growing Together Team From: Kristen Barisdale > Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2023 3:03 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether%7kitchener.ca> Cc: Natalie Goss cNatalie.Goss(@kitchener.ca>; Adam Clark <Adam.Clark(@kitchener.caa; Fariborz Fallah Ian Istvan ; Pam Tolton eptolton P a barchitect.ca> Subject: Growing Together November 2023 Draft Documents - 924 to 944 King Street West IYou don't often get email . Learn rn w,'y flik, ii L nt Good afternoon, Page 771 of 1179 On behalf of our client, please find enclosed commentary in response to the Growing Together November 2023 draft documents as they related to the above -noted development. We would like to set up a meeting to review and discuss the attached comments with City staff, prior to the finalization of the proposed OPA and ZBA. Please advise as to your availability over the next few weeks and we will coordinate with our team. Thanks! Kristen Barisdale MCIP, RPP Vice President, Planning 000 GSP group This communication is intended solely for the named addressee{s} and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, protected or otherwise exempt from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, please advise us immediately and delete this email without reading, copying or forwarding it to anyone_ Page 772 of 1179 From: Kristen Barisdale To: Growing Together (SMI Cc: Fariborz FAA; Ian Istvan Subject: RE; Growing Together November 2023 Draft Documents - 924 to 944 King Street West Date: Tuesday, December 12, 2023 12:20:32 PM Attachments: imaae005.ona imaoe006.Dno imaae007.pna imaae008.ona imaae009.ono imaae010.Dna imaae011.pna Growina Together November 2023 Draft Documents - 924 to 944 10n Street West.mso IYou don't often get email larn why this Good afternoon, Thank you for your response and feedback. Our initial submission to the City on November 30, 2023 includes a detailed summary letter and planning justification for our request, as well as a copy of the preliminary development concept shared with the City as part of our request for Pre -Submission Consultation (please note that our pre -submission consultation occurred on November 23, 2023). Please refer to attached email. I believe that our November 30 submission addresses in detail the considerations noted below. Can you please confirm or clarify what additional material and information you would like to see from our group to assist with these discussions? Thank you. Kristen Barisdale MCIP, RPP Vice President, Planning GSP group VACATION ALERT: Please note that I will be away from the office from December 22, 2023 to January 8, 2024. From: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Sent: Monday, December 11, 2023 4:55 PM To: Kristen Barisdale <kbarisdale@gspgroup.ca> Subject: RE: Growing Together November 2023 Draft Documents - 924 to 944 King Street West Hi Kristen, Page 773 of 1179 You don't often get email ca. Leaui nhv this is iurrtrortaut Goad afternoon, On behalf of our client, please find enclosed commentary in response to the Growing Together November 2023 draft documents as they related to the above -noted development. We would like to set up a meeting to review and discuss the attached comments with City staff, prior to the finalization of the proposed OPA and ZBA. Please advise as to your availability over the next few weeks and we will coordinate with our team. Thanks! Kristen Barisdale MCIP, RPP Vice President, Planning GSR gr0Up This communication is intended solely for the named addressee(s) and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, protected or otherwise exempt from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, please advise us immediately and delete this email without reading, copying or forwarding it to anyone. Page 774 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Thursday, December 7, 2023 1:18 PM To: Kristen Barisdale; Growing Together (SM) Cc: Natalie Goss; Adam Clark; Faribor2 Fallah; Ian Istvan; Pam Tolton Subject: RE: Growing Together November 2023 Draft Documents - - Good afternoon Kristen, Thank you for the submission. The Growing Together team is evaluating submissions beginning December Szh. Changes will be recommended in our staff report as it is finalized over the next few weeks. We will, however, do aur best communicate our direction and continue to collaborate on the process in the interim. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Kristen Barisdale <kbarisdale@gspgroup.ca> Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2023 3:03 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Cc: Natalie Goss <Natalie.Goss@kitchener.ca>, Adam Clark <Adam.Clark@kiitchener.ca>- Fariborz Fallah Ian IstvanPam Tolton Subject: Growing Together November 2023 Draft Documents W= You don't often get email fro t."!1 Good afternoon, On behalf of our client, please find enclosed commentary in response to the Growing Together November 2023 draft documents as they related to the above -noted development. We would like to set up a meeting to review and discuss the attached comments with City staff, prior to the finalization of the proposed OPA and ZBA. Please advise as to your availability over the next few weeks and we will coordinate with our team. Thanks! Kristen Barisdale P MCIP, RPP group Vice President, Planning 1 Page 775 of 1179 On Friday, staff began our evaluation of site specific submissions with planning management. We wanted to provide a quick response to your submission on 924-944 King Street West. In order to evaluate site-specific submissions, we have been asking for the following materials; 1. Proof of lot consolidation or lot ownership 2. A conceptual design demonstrating compliance with the desired zone and; 3. A scoped planning justification that addresses proposed official plan policy 15.D.2.5 which states: 15.D.2.5. Notwithstanding Policy 4. C.1.8 and 4.61.9, site specific applications which seek relief from the implementing zoning through a minor variance(s) or special zoning regulation(s), seek to amend the Zoning By-law to change land use permissions, and/or seek to amend this Plan to change from one land use designation to another, will consider the following factors: a) compatibility with the planned function of the subject lands and adjacent lands,- b) ands,b) suitability of the lot for the proposed use and/or built form; c) lot area and consolidation as further outlined in Policy 3.62.11; d) compliance with the City's Urban Design Manual and Policy 11.C.1.34; e) cultural heritage resources, including Policy 15.D.2.8; and, f ) technical considerations and other contextual or site specific factors. We wanted to provide you with the opportunity to submit these materials for 924-944 King St. W. for evaluation. Our second opportunity to evaluate submissions with planning management is this Friday. However, there is some additional context we should provide. Staff are currently evaluating a lot of feedback about the built -form transition policy between the SGA -2, 3 and 4 zones and the SGA -1 and low-rise residential zones. This will result in some recommended changes—which have not yet been finalized—which may have an impact on a high-rise proposal next to SGA -1 lands such as this one. Depending on the outcome, it may not be possible for staff to recommend a re -zoning of these properties through the Growing Together process, and proceeding with a site-specific OPA/ZBA application may be the best option. We just wanted to give you that heads up before you direct any time or resources toward a full submission. Please let us know if you have any questions, The Growing Together Team From: Kristen Barisdale <kbarisdalena gspgroup.ca> Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2023 3:03 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogetherl@kitchener.ca> Cc: Natalie Goss <Natalie.Goss @kitchener.ca>; Adam Clark <Adam.Clarkna kitchener.ca>; Fariborz Fallah <fariborz.fallahna dezcapital.com>; Ian Istvan <ian.istvan(@dezcapital.com.>; Pam Tolton <ptoltonna abarchitect.ca> Subject: Growing Together November 2023 Draft Documents - 924 to 944 King Street West Page 776 of 1179 November 30, 2023 City of Kitchener Planning Division, 6th Floor 200 King Street West Kitchener, Ontario N2G 4Y9 Attention: Natalie Goss, MCIP, RPP Manager, Policy and Research Dear Ms. Goss: Re: Growing Together Response to November 2023 Draft Materials t SHAPING GREAT COMMUNITIES File No. 22263 On behalf of 1000100206 Ontario Inc. ) and 1000187534 Ontario Inc. ), please accept the following commentary and response to the draft OPA and ZBA documents released on November 3, 2023 for the "Growing Together" initiative as related to the above -noted properties. 1000100206 Ontario Inc. and 1000187534 Ontario Inc. acquired the above -noted properties with the intent of providing for a consolidated, comprehensive mixed-use, high density redevelopment project. At the time of acquisition, we had preliminary discussions with City staff regarding this potential redevelopment project in February 2023, at which time the City indicated support in principle for future mixed-use redevelopment. The properties are located on the north side of King Street, approximately 100 metres west of Grand River Hospital and associated iON Station. The property is currently occupied by a few small-scale commercial retail and office buildings. A Pre -Submission Meeting was held by the City on November 23, 2023 based on a preliminary concept that included a mixed-use, higher density development with ground floor commercial retail units and residential above. While the development concept was preliminary in nature, it was purposefully designed to incorporate appropriate building setbacks and step backs from the existing low rise residential uses located on the north side of Dodd's Lane while taking advantage of the rear lane way access. The preliminary development concept included a 30 -storey tower with approximately 319 residential dwelling units as well as underground and podium parking. Please refer to the attached development concept. The property is proposed to be located within a Protected Major Transit Station Area in the Official Plan Amendment for the "Growing Together" initiative, which are areas intended to support transit PLANNING I URBAN DESIGN I LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Page 777 of 1179 through accommodating future growth and development through a mix of residential, office, institutional and commercial uses that provide for connectivity to various modes of transportation and have streetscapes and built forms that are pedestrian and transit friendly. The properties are located approximately 100 metres northwest of the grand River Hospital iON Station, which will be planned to achieve a minimum density of 160 residents and jobs per hectare. The properties are proposed to be designated as Strategic Growth Area B in the Official Plan Amendment for the "Growing Together" initiative, which are areas intended to accommodate a range of medium and high density residential housing types along with non-residential uses, such as commercial uses, personal services, offices, conference facilities, health-related offices, institutional uses and social service establishments with a maximum building height of 25 storeys, a minimum Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 1.0 and no maximum FSR. Finally, the properties are proposed to be zoned SGA -2: Mid Rise Growth Zone in the Zoning By-law Amendment for the "Growing Together" initiative, which permits a range of low and medium -rise residential uses with a maximum building height of 8 storeys, a minimum FSR of 1.0 and no maximum FSR. In addition, the SGA -2 Zone requires a maximum building height of 12.0 metres for development within 12 metres of a low-rise residential zone, and a minimum rear yard setback of 7.5 metres for development abutting a low-rise residential zone. 1000100206 Ontario Inc. and 1000187534 Ontario Inc. supports the proposed Protected Maior Transit Station Area designation. We believe the subject properties represent an excellent opportunity for intensification proximate to the Grand River Hospital iON Station and can be redeveloped as a high-density, mixed-use project designed to be compatible with and sensitive to the existing low rise residential uses on the north side of Dodds Lane. However, 1000100206 Ontario Inc. and 1000187534 Ontario Inc. does not support the proposed Strategic Growth Area B designation and the SGA -2: Mid Rise Growth Zone as applied to the properties. We request the properties be designated Strategic Growth Area C and zoned SGA -4: High Rise Growth Zone. The subject properties are adjacent to existing low rise residential uses on the north side of Dodd's Lane, which will require attention to future building design in terms of massing, scale and privacy. However, it is our opinion that future redevelopment of the property can be designed to be compatible with and sensitive to the low-rise residential uses, as demonstrated through the preliminary concept submitted as part of Pre -Submission Consultation. The proposed Official Plan Amendment for the "Growing Together" initiative identifies the area around Braun Street and Andrew Street (north of King Street) and the area between Park Street and Walter Street (south of King Street) as proposed Strategic Growth Area A immediately adjacent to a proposed Strategic Growth Area C; it is our opinion that these areas are very similar in nature and character to the area surrounding the subject properties. Similar to these areas, we believe that the subject properties should be designated Strategic Growth Area C. GSP Group 12 Page 778 of 1179 Policy 15.D.2.5 of the proposed Official Plan Amendment for the "Growing Together" initiative allows for the consideration of site-specific applications for Zoning By-law Amendment through the consideration of a number of factors. The following provides a summary of the requirements of proposed Policy 15.D.2.5 as well as commentary and justification for the properties to be zoned SGA -4: High Rise Growth Zone as requested. Notwithstanding Policy 4.C.1.8 and 4.C.1.9, site specific applications which seek relief from the implementing zoning through a minor variance(s) or special zoning regulation(s), seek to amend the Zoning By-law to change land use permissions, and/or seek to amend this Plan to change from one land use designation to another, will consider the following factors: a) Compatibility with the planned function of the The properties are located within a Protected subject lands and adjacent lands Major Transit Station Area, which are areas intended to accommodate a significant portion of future growth and development. The properties are located approximately 100 metres northwest of the Grand River Hospital iON Station; future mixed-use, higher density development will assist the City in achieving the required density target of 160 residents and jobs per hectare identified for this area. A large portion of the area that surrounds the Grand River Transit iON Station is occupied by long-standing local business and a Regional trauma centre and hospital that are unlikely to be redeveloped or intensified in the short to medium-term, significantly impacting the ability to accommodate intensification in the Grand River Hospital iON Station Area. With very limited options for redevelopment along this portion of King Street, the subject properties provide an opportunity for transit - supportive intensification that can be designed to be compatible with and sensitive to surrounding land uses. We believe through building refinements and enhancements, the proposed development could be designed to be compatible with the surrounding uses and reasonably -scaled to provide for appropriate residential intensification proximate to the Grand River Hospital iON Station while adhering to the design objectives of the Strategic Growth Area C designation. GSP Group 13 Page 779 of 1179 b) Suitability of the lot for the proposed use and/or built -form The properties are a consolidation of three (3) legal parcels, which combined create an overall site area of approximately 3,100 square metres. The consolidation of the three (3) lots with access to both King Street and Dodds Lane allows for the redevelopment of a larger parcel with the ability to accommodate important design considerations along this area of King Street, including site access, building setbacks and steps, height and massing and compatibility. It is our opinion that it is the consolidation of the three (3) lots that makes the overall site suitable for the proposed redevelopment. c) Lot area and consolidation as further outlined in The proposed development concept includes Policy 3.C.2.11 the three (3) properties at 924 to 938 King Street, 940 King Street and 944 King Street. While the properties have not been formally consolidated and technically are owned by two separate legal entities (1000100206 Ontario Inc. and 1000187534 Ontario Inc), the entities are owned by the holding company Fallah Canadian Investment, and there under the same umbrella. Upon the consideration and approval of planning applications that would allow for high-density residential development, the properties will subsequently be merged on title. d) Compliance with the City's Urban Design Manual Urban Design Manual and Policy 11.C.1.34 The preliminary development concept submitted to the City in support of the Request for Pre -Submission Consultation took into consideration applicable policies of the City's Urban Design Manual, including those pertaining to tall buildings (former Tall Building Design Guidelines). The preliminary development concept includes a rear yard tower setback of 8.4 metres from the property rear property line. Coupled with the width of Dodds Lane, the development concept provides for approximately 14 metres of separation between the future tower and the rear lot line of the adjacent low rise residential uses GSP Group 14 Page 780 of 1179 GSP Group 15 Page 781 of 1179 (approximately 24 metres setback from the tower to the existing dwelling units). In addition, the proposed development includes 21.3 metres tower setbacks for both side yard property boundaries. Proposed Policy 11. C. 1.34 Policy 11. C. 1.34 indicates that new tall building development must have consideration for tall building design principles, including separation, overlook, height, floor plate area, tower placement, orientation and building proportions. The policy further states that the zoning by-law will provide for design regulations to mitigate environmental impacts, create high-quality design, ensure compatibility with surrounding low and mid -rise contexts and ensure the development of future adjacent or nearby buildings are not frustrated. It is our opinion that the development concept demonstrates the subject properties can be redeveloped with a very high degree of sensitivity to and compatibility with surrounding land uses, particularly the existing low rise residential uses on the north side of Dodds Lane. As noted above, the preliminary development concept incorporated a number of urban design guidelines and requirements with respect to tall building design; through further detailed design, we believe that these considerations can be further enhanced to meet the policy objectives of 11. C. 1.34. Furthermore, we believe that the development concept creates an opportunity to provide for a high-quality design along King Street with commercial/retail uses at grade, appropriate podium heights and sufficient tower step backs, enhancing the streetscape and skyline alon this portion of King Street. e) Cultural heritage resources, including Policy Not applicable 15. D.2.8 GSP Group 15 Page 781 of 1179 Based on the commentary noted above, we believe that the properties should be zoned to permit mid to high-rise residential development that is compatible with and sensitive to surrounding land uses. We resoectfullv reauest the orooerties be desianated as Strateaic Growth Area C as part of the proposed Official Plan Amendment and zoned SGA -4: High Rise Growth Zone as part of the or000sed Zonina By-law Amendment for the "Growing Toaether" initiative. We would like to meet with City staff to review this request in further detail, in advance of finalizing the proposed Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments for the "Growing Together" initiative. On behalf of 1000100206 Ontario Inc. and 1000187534 Ontario Inc. we respectfully request to be notified of all meetings, reports and progress related to the "Growing Together" initiative in the future. Please don't hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or would like to discuss further. Sincerely, GSP Group Inc. Kristen Barisdale, MCIP, RPP Vice President, Planning cc. Fariborz Fallah, 1000100206 Ontario Inc. and 1000187534 Ontario Inc. Ian Istvan, 1000100206 Ontario Inc. and 1000187534 Ontario Inc. Pam Tolton, ABA GSP Group 16 Page 782 of 1179 It is our understanding that there are no Designated or Listed heritage resources proximate to the subject properties. f) Technical considerations and other contextual or It is our expectation that all technical site specific factors considerations and requirements for a future planning application will be summarized as part of the formal Record of Pre -Submission Consultation. We expect that these technical studies will include but are not limited to a Traffic Impact Study and Parking Justification Report, Stationary and Traffic Noise Impact, Pedestrian Wind Assessment, Urban Design Brief and Planning Justification Report. Based on the commentary noted above, we believe that the properties should be zoned to permit mid to high-rise residential development that is compatible with and sensitive to surrounding land uses. We resoectfullv reauest the orooerties be desianated as Strateaic Growth Area C as part of the proposed Official Plan Amendment and zoned SGA -4: High Rise Growth Zone as part of the or000sed Zonina By-law Amendment for the "Growing Toaether" initiative. We would like to meet with City staff to review this request in further detail, in advance of finalizing the proposed Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments for the "Growing Together" initiative. On behalf of 1000100206 Ontario Inc. and 1000187534 Ontario Inc. we respectfully request to be notified of all meetings, reports and progress related to the "Growing Together" initiative in the future. Please don't hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or would like to discuss further. Sincerely, GSP Group Inc. Kristen Barisdale, MCIP, RPP Vice President, Planning cc. Fariborz Fallah, 1000100206 Ontario Inc. and 1000187534 Ontario Inc. Ian Istvan, 1000100206 Ontario Inc. and 1000187534 Ontario Inc. Pam Tolton, ABA GSP Group 16 Page 782 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Good afternoon Matthew, Growing Together (SM) Thursday, December 7, 2023 1:18 PM Matthew Warzecha; Growing Together (SM) Gursimran Saini; Daniel Boyer; Greg Lynch RE: 165 Courtland Ave - Comments Thank you for the submission. The Growing Together team is evaluating submissions beginning December 8t". Changes will be recommended in our staff report as it is finalized over the next few weeks. We will, however, do our best communicate our direction and continue to collaborate on the process in the interim. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Matthew Warzecha Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2023 11:33 AM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Cc: Gursimran Saini ; Daniel Boyer Greg Lynch Subject: 165 Courtland Ave - Comments Natalie and Team — On behalf of the owner of , please find attached letter providing comment on the Zoning By-law Amendment proposed through the Growing Together Study. We are requesting that site specific regulations be applied to the property to acknowledge the AIP Site Plan for the property thereby avoiding a non -conforming condition. Should you wish to discuss further, please feel free to contact me. Thank you, Warzecha MCIP RPP Director of Planning and Development I Polocorp Inc. I ='ek I'(_1 "I � i :J This e-mail is confidential and intended only for the addressee. Disclosure of this e-mail to anyone else is not intended as a waiver of confidentiality or privilege. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately. Page 783 of 1179 POLMORP F November 30, 2023 City of Kitchener — Planning Division 200 King Street West, 6" Floor PO Box 1118 Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 Via email to plan ningappIications@kitchener.ca Attention: Natalie Goss Manager, Policy and Research Reference: Strateaic Growth Area Zoning Polocorp Inc has been retained by Dan Boyer, owner of (the "Site"), to review the proposed Growing Together Zoning By-law Amendment. The proposed Zoning By-law Amendment would rezone the property to Strategic Growth Area One (SGA1) Zone whereas it is currently zoned Commercial Residential One (CR1) Zone. The Site is challenging in its geometry with additional servicing and environmental constraints. The property is 18 metres wide and approximately 122 metres deep which demands a unique architectural design to accommodate infill redevelopment. Following numerous iterations and refinements, Approval in Principle for Site Plan Application SP20/064/C/ES was granted on January 26, 2021. The Site Plan granted approval of a 4 -storey residential building with 30 units. Given the Site's geometry, the design required parking to be located under the building, utilizing a cantilevered design. Site Plan Approval was issued in conformity with the CR1 Zone. In comparing the SGA1 Zone, we note some changes that result in more onerous regulations than currently apply to the property including a reduction to be maximum building height, an increase to the minimum front yard setback and the introduction of a maximum building length requirement. Given this, the approved Site Plan will not be in conformity with the SGA1 zone once it is in effect. In an effort to avoid being legally non -conforming, once the building is constructed, the Owner requests that staff consider introducing site-specific provisions to acknowledge the AIP Site Plan for 165 Courtland Avenue. The site-specific provisions would include: Page 784 of 1179 Minimum front yard setback of 3. 6 metres; Maximum building height of 1 5 metres; and, Maximum building length of 70 metres. The AIP Site Plan will be in conformity with the balance of the SGA1 regulations. Should a site-specific SGA1 zone be introduced, the development will be in conformity with the zoning that is in effect. As such, the property will not be encumbered by a non -conforming status in perpetuity. With this submission, I trust that Staff will consider revising the Draft Zoning By-law Amendment to reflect a site-specific SGA1 Zone. Should you require additional information, or wish to discuss the above further, please feel free to contact the undersigned. Sincerely, Polocorp Inc. Matthew Warzec CIP RPP Director of Development and Planning CC: Dan Boyer Page 785 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Thursday, December 7, 2023 1:18 PM To: Melissa Visser; Growinq Toctether (SM) Cc: Dave Aston; Nik Mracic; Alessandro Coletta Subject: RE: Growth Together - Comments on Draft OPAfZBA for MTSAs Good afternoon Melissa, Thank you for the submission. The Growing Together team is evaluating submissions beginning December 8t". Changes will be recommended in our staff report as it is finalized over the next few weeks. We will, however, do our best communicate our direction and continue to collaborate on the process in the interim. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Melissa Visser Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2023 3:19 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Cc: Dave Aston Nik Mracic Alessandro Coletta Subject: Growth Together - Comments on Draft OPA/ZBA for MTSAs You don't often get email froE��� Good Afternoon Natalie, On behalf of our client, please find attached comments on the recently released Draft Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments for the MTSA's. Please kindly confirm receipt and let us know if there are any questions. Thanks, MELISSA VISSER, MSc I Intermediate Planner AMuor+ Architecture Follow us: Webpage I Linkedin I Facebook I Twitter I Virneo I Instagram Y IE A R S MHBC P L A N N I N G URBAN DESIGN & LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE This communication is intended solely for the named addressee(s) and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, protected or otherwise exempt from disclosure. No waiver of confidence„ privilege, protection or otherwise is made. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, please advise us immediately and delete this email without reading, copying or forwarding it to anyone. 1 Page 786 of 1179 �KITCHENER I WOODBRIDGE I LONDON I BARRIE I BURLINGTON CELFB Z 6� Y E A R S PLANNING ' t URBAN DESIGN & LANDSCAPE MHBARCHITECTURE November 30, 2023 Natalie Goss, Manager, Policy and Research City of Kitchener — Planning Division 200 King Street West, 51' Floor PO Box 1118 Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 Dear Ms. Goss: RE: Growing Together— Proposed Official Plan and Zoning for MTSA's Borden Station - OUR FILE 21391A On behalf of our client, Kitchener Stirling Developments Ltd pleased to submit comments regardi it relates to our client's lands located in the City of Kitchener (the 'subject . and Kitchener Charles Developments Ltd., we are The subject lands are comprised of four land parcels having a total area of approximately 1.45 hectares (3.6 acres). The lands are located east of downtown Kitchener and are bounded by King Street East to the north and Charles Street East to the south. Site Plan and Minor Variance Applications were submitted for the subject lands to allow for a mixed-use development containing a podium with commercial/retail uses, two residential towers of 33 and 37 storeys and stacked residential townhouse dwellings. The Site Plan Application was conditionally approved on November 2, 2023 and the Minor Variance application was approved by the Committee of Adjustment on November 21, 2023. We have reviewed the draft Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment and note that the lands are proposed to be designated `Strategic Growth Area C' and split -zoned Strategic Growth Area 3 (SGA -3) and Strategic Growth Area 4 (SGA -4) as follows: • SGA -4 Zone: • SGA -3 Zone: We request the entirety of the subject lands be zoned SGA -4 to recognize the planned development of the lands as one parcel and recognize the conditionally approved Site Plan containing towers with heights of 33 and 37 storeys. The SGA -3 zone permits a building height of 25 storeys whereas the SGA -4 zone has no maximum permitted building height and more accurately reflects the conditionally approved development on the lands. Thank you for consideration of these comments. We would be pleased to meet with staff to review and discuss the draft Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment in more detail. Yours truly, MHBC David Aston, MSc, MCIP, RPP Vice President, Partner CC. Nik Mracic, Lindvest Alessandro Coletta, Lindvest Melissa Visser, MSc Intermediate Planner Page 788 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Friday, December 1, 2023 4:17 PM To: Natalie Proia, Natalie Goss Cc: Adam Clark; Kristen Barisdale, Patrick J. Harrington Subject: RE: Growing Together - Response to November 2023 Draft Materials Good Afternoon Natalie, Thank you for your comments. The team will be evaluating your submission with planning management beginning December Stn and will hopefully be able to provide direction on the questions you raise with respect to Inclusionary Zoning and transition timing. Best, The Growing Together Team From: Natalie Proia <nproia@airdberlis.com> Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2023 4:29 PM To: Natalie Goss <Natalie.Goss@kitchener.ca> Cc: Growin To ether 5M rGrowin Together@kitchener.caa` Adam Clar4<Adam.Clark kitchener._ , KristenBarisdale Patrick,. Harringto Subject: Growing Together - Response to November 2023 ra a eria s is You don't often get email fr Learn why this is important Good afternoon Ms. Goss, Please find attached correspondence of today's date from Patrick Harrington with regards to the above -noted matter, sent on behalf of our client, Innovation Developments Kitchener Limited. Thank you, Natalie Natalie Prroia Assistant to Patrick J. Harrington and Andrea Skinner This email is intended only for the individual or entity named in the message, Please les us know if you have received this entail in efror If you did receive this email in error, the information in this email may be confidential and must not be disclosed to anyone. Page 789 of 1179 AIRD BERLIS C+ r i1:ia'it���►�ilr�c3 :3'aAXi1TVI City of Kitchener Planning Division, 6th Floor 200 King Street West Kitchener, Ontario N2G 4Y9 Attention: Natalie Goss, MCIP, RPP Manager, Policy and Research Dear Ms. Goss Re: Growing Together Response to November 2023 Draft Materials Err6iMEM►[•moi[:�c�'f•'icj On behalf of Innovation Developments Kitchener Limited, please accept the following commentary and response to the draft OPA and ZBA documents released on November 3, 2023 for the "Growing Together" initiative as related to the above -noted properties. As you may be aware, Innovation Developments Kitchener Limited recently received approvals for a multi -tower, mixed-use redevelopment project on the corner of Victoria Street South and Park Street and is currently working towards final site plan approval (SP231041NIES). The proposed development includes the following: A total of three (3) high -residential towers with a total of 1,124 dwelling units and maximum Floor Space Ratio ("FSR") of 11.6 as follows: Tower A (eastern edge of site) with a total building height of 25 -storeys (82.8 metres) and 253 dwelling units Tower B (northwest portion of site) with a total building height of 36 -storeys (115.25 metres) and 440 dwelling units c Tower C (southwest portion of site) with a total building height of 38 -storeys (121.75 metres) and 411 dwelling units A 6 -storey podium connecting the three towers including the following: 1,750 m2 of retail and commercial space along Victoria Street South and a portion of Park Street L Lobbies, mail rooms, loading and delivery areas for each of the residential towers on the ground floor as well as common private amenity space for residents Bicycle and vehicular parking Residential dwelling units atop the 2nd floor Private outdoor amenity space atop the 6 -storey podium Aird & Berlis LLP B,00kfiold Placo, 181 Bay Stroot, Suito 1800. Toronto, Canada M5J 2T9 416.563.150D 416.863.1515 airdborl s.com Page 790 of 1179 November 30, 2023 Page 2 • A large outdoor commercial plaza located at the southwest corner of the site (base of Tower C) with enhanced streetscape for commercial and retail spaces along Victoria Street South and Park Street • Outdoor amenity space and landscape features associated with principal entrance from Park Street The property continues to be located within the Urban Growth Centre (Downtown) in the Official Plan Amendment for the "Growing Together" initiative, which is still intended to be the primary focus area in the City for growth and intensification. In accordance with existing Official Plan policies, the Urban Growth Centre (Downtown) is still required to achieve a minimum gross density target of 225 residents and jobs per hectare. The property is proposed to be designated as Strategic Growth Area C in the Official Plan Amendment for the "Growing Together" initiative, which are areas intended to accommodate significant intensification at high density. Permitted land uses include medium and high density residential well as a range of non-residential uses. The Strategic Growth Area C proposes to include no maximum building height, a minimum Floor Space Ratio of 2.0 and no maximum Floor Space Ratio. The property is proposed to be zoned High Rise Growth Zone (SGA -4) in the Zoning By-law for the "Growing Together" initiative, which is intended to create opportunities for high-density growth and development in both mid -rise and high-rise forms. The SGA -4 Zone is proposed to permit a range of medium and high-density residential uses (but does not permit single detached, semi-detached and/or townhouse dwellings) with no maximum building height, a minimum FSR of 2.0 and no maximum FSR. We note that the proposed SGA -4 Zone includes detailed regulations building setbacks, stepbacks, building length and tower separation for the development of all buildings 5 -storeys in height or greater. The proposed SGA -4 also includes no minimum parking requirement for residential uses with a maximum parking requirement of 1.3 spaces per dwelling unit. In addition, the property is subject to Site Specific Exception (341) in the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment for the "Growing Together" initiative, which is a direct carry forward of the zoning by-law as approved by the OLT (OLT Case No. OLT-22-004211). The property is also subject to Holding Provision (36H) in the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment for the "Growing Together" initiative, which is also a direct carry forward of the zoning by-law as approved by the OLT (OLT Case No. OLT-22-004211). We note that the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment for the "Growing Together" initiative includes transition provisions for implementation. Section 18.4 (a) references properties deemed to comply with the new Zoning By-law and specifically lists the subject property. However, Section 18.4 (b) states that Section 18.4 (a) shall not exempt such properties from any Inclusionary requirements identified in Section 4 of the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment for the "Growing Together" initiative. Furthermore, Section 18.4 (c) further states that all exemptions referenced in Section 18.4 (a) are automatically repealed on the tenth anniversary of the By-law. Innovation Developments Kitchener Limited supports the proposed Official Plan Amendment for the "Growing Together" initiative that would maintain the proposed Urban Growth Centre (Kitchener) designation and facilitate the Strategic Growth Area C designation identified for the subject properties. Additionally, 2371125 Ontario Inc. is in support of the proposed Zoning By-law Amendment for the "Growing Together" initiative that would facilitate High Rise Growth Zone (SGA -4), the Site Specific Exception (341) and Holding Provision (36H) identified for the subject property. Page 791 of 1179 November 30, 2023 Page 3 However, Innovation Developments Kitchener Limited objects to the applicability of Section 18.4 (b) and Section 18.4 (c) as proposed Zoning By-law based on the following: Pursuant to subsection 8(d) of O. Reg. 232/18, an inclusionary zoning by-law does not apply to a development where an application for the approval of a site plan had been made prior to the approval of the inclusionary zoning by-law. There is no statutory time limit imposed on this grandfathering provision. As a complete site plan application has already been filed, accepted and circulated for 100 Park Street ((SP23/041/V/ES), the grandfathering provision applies. We respectfully submit that Sections 18.4(b) and (c) need to be revised to recognize that the City's inclusionary requirements cannot be imposed upon prior applications — even after 10 years. It is our understanding that the City has yet to release the draft Inclusionary zoning framework and regulations; it is not included as referenced in Section 4 of the proposed Zoning By-law. Without being able to review the proposed Inclusionary zoning framework and regulations thoroughly, it is unclear how its implementation may impact the proposed development and the previously approved OPA/ZBA. Furthermore, the proposed development is currently going through detailed site plan review and approval, which is based on detailed, final building design drawings. The requirement to include affordable and rental housing at this stage could significantly impact and alter final detailed building design. In addition, as part of the OLT Decision, Innovation Developments Kitchener Limited committed to providing a financial contribution to the provision of affordable hous. We respectfully request that proposed Section 18.4 (b) not apply to the subject property. The proposed development is a large-scale, complex project. While we are currently working towards site plan approval, we cannot be certain that a project of this scale and size will be able to achieve final site plan approval and complete construction within a 10 -year period. We respectfully request that proposed Section 18.4 (c) not apply to the subject property. On behalf of Innovation Developments Kitchener Limited we respectfully request to be notified of all meetings, reports and progress related to the "Growing Together" initiative in the future. Please don't hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or would like to discuss further. Yours truly, AIRED & BBERLIS LLP Patrick J. Harrington PJH/np Growing Together - ctrowincitociether(c)kitchener.ca Adam Clark - adam.clark(a)kitchener.ca Innovation Developments Kitchener Limited K. Barisdale, GSP Group Inc. 55175507.1 Page 792 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Friday, December 1, 2023 4:16 PM To: Neil Baarda Subject: RE: Comments for 'Growing Together' MTSA plan Good Afternoon Neil, Thank you for your comments. 22 Weber remains subject to OLT appeal and therefore cannot receive land use and zoning through the Growing Together project until and unless its site-specific application is no longer in progress. Regarding the SGA -1 zone uses, we are considering a range of feedback and are making tweaks to the permitted uses. Payday loan and pawnshops are two of the uses we are taking a closer look at. Any changes will be noted as we finalize the recommendations. Please visit engagewr.ca/growingtogether and subscribe to receive updates. We define height in metres in the SGA -1 zone but not others due to the range of uses, complexity of changing grades and elevations, and other considerations that complicate larger buildings, such as minimum ground floor heights. That said, storeys within residential buildings are generally quite standardized, ranging from 3.Om to 3.2m, resulting in an 8 foot or 9 foot ceiling. In an office building, storeys are generally 4m in height. It is important to allow some flexibility here both for the quality of life of building occupants, as well as the desire for vertical mixed use buildings that accommodate a range of uses within a single building. Thank you for this feedback, we are evaluating a range of comments on this issue, and again, any changes will be noted as we finalize the recommendations. The Growing Together team has been working closely with our heritage staff to ensure compatibility between our work and heritage policies, districts and conservation plans. Thank you again for your feedback, we appreciate the thoughtful responses to the draft materials. Best, The Growing Together Team From: Neil Baarda Sent. Thursday, November 30, 2023 1:04 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: Comments for'Growing Together' MTSA plan You don't often get email fro Wea rn whythis is im ortant Thank you for providing thMoppoPuFyyy o comment ❑n this Growing Together plan for Kitchener's Protected Major Transit Station Areas. overall I think it is a good plan. On the zoning map (page 20 Growing Together Community Guide) the lot at 22 Weber Street W. is identified as Subject to GLT appeal. On 01 August 2023 the DLT Tribunal assigned the case "closed file status". Please ensure that 22 Weber is also zoned as SGA -2 just like the adjacent properties on either side. I am concerned about proposed additional non-residential uses in SGA -1 zones. I agree that the residents should be able to have an office and run a small business. I do not think that some of the proposed businesses are really suitable for residential neighbourhoods, for example, Pawnshop/Payday loan places. Let's not rush through this. You can always add something later if it is needed. Page 793 of 1179 Please define all height limits in metres. Storeys can vary significantly in height and the effect multiplied across multiple storeys can be significant. Please ensure that the Civic Centre Neighbourhood Heritage Conservation District Plan (HDP) does not get ignored during this process. My concern is that the 45 degree angular plane referenced in the HDP should be respected by the SGA -2 and SGA -3 buildings in the vicinity of the Heritage Districts. Thank you for all your work, particularly under the time pressures imposed by the province. Regards, Neil Baarda W Page 794 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Thursday, December 7, 2023 1:18 PM To: Peqqy Nickels; Rosa Bustamante Cc: Growing Together (SM); Sheldon Atos; Mario Chilanski; Gail Pool Subject: RE: Growing Together Comments Good afternoon Peggy, Thank you for the submission. The Growing Together team is evaluating submissions with planning management beginning December 8th. Changes will be recommended in our staff report as it is finalized over the next few weeks. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Peggy Nickels Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2023 3:02 PM To: Rasa Bustamante <Rosa.Bustamante@kitchener.ca> Cc: Growing Together (SM) <G rowi n gTogeth e r@ kitchener.ca>; Sheldon Atos aria Chilanski ail Pool Subject: Growing Together Comments You don't often get email from earn why this is important Hello Everyone, Please find attached comments from Victoria Park Neighbourhood Residents. Peggy Nickels Page 795 of 1179 November 30, 2023 Rosa Bustamante Director of Planning City of Kitchener 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON N2G 4V6 Dear Ms. Bustamante, It was a pleasure to meet you at the recent Growing Together public consultation at the Downtown Community Centre. Thank you for making time to meet with the public and hear first-hand the different points of view that citizens are bringing to this planning process. Further to the in-person discussion Seldon and I had with you and Senior Planner John Zunic that day, we are submitting the following comments from a group of us who are residents of the Victoria Park Neighbourhood. We are including concerns and suggestions shared with us by residents who have reached out to us directly, as well as comments at our recent on-line information session, hosted by the Victoria Park Neighbourhood Association and its Development Committee. First, we would like to say that we all wish the feedback process for the Staff Report had been extended to at least January. Residents had less than a month to read and understand the extensive documentation related to the new draft OP Amendment and By-law Amendment and digest what it all meant. That being said, we applaud the staff on making themselves available at the two community centre consultation times and at the Kitchener Market. We attended all three and found staff open to comments and questions, and felt they were really interested in hearing from residents. We noted with appreciation the times they wrote down our comments for further consideration. We also feel they made a significant effort to make the documents understandable, especially the Community Guide, in which they addressed questions they had heard throughout the engagement process; it helped us understand why a number of the changes are being made. We support the growth of the city and welcome the many new residents and advantages they bring in making our city more vibrant, connected, and inclusive. Our interest is in seeing this growth be livable and sustainable for future and current residents. We will focus our comments on two main documents: the Official Plan Amendment and the Draft Zoning Map. Draft Official Plan: Pg. 4 Re: design criteria for tall buildings to mitigate environmental impacts — please also specify the heat island effect of tall buildings, which will be even more serious as we move deeper into climate change. Pg. 5 Re: development or redevelopment in the PMTSAs — We're happy to see these measures that support and contribute to a high-quality public realm. We're particularly glad to see the City commit to Page 796 of 1179 street scape design for safe and comfortable walking, cycling, and rolling, including things like street trees and landscaping. We encourage you to add "strongly encourage" in reference to calling for the private sector to locate these elements on their properties, or partner with the City in shared ownership. We're also happy to see the City "require" developments to support, maintain, and/or increase the tree canopy in line with Kitchener's Sustainable Urban Forestry strategy, and would like to see the "wherever possible" qualification rarely used. We applaud the inclusion of Low Impact Development water management techniques and again urge the use of "require" or at least "strongly encourage". Pg. 11 Re: new parks and active or passive recreational uses will be permitted within any SGAs - We urge you to strengthen this to " Opportunities to create new parks... will be actively sought out in PMTSAs" since the need for greenspace and park space will increase with urban intensification and climate change, and the opportunities to create them will diminish with increased development. Draft Zoning Map As residents of Victoria Park Neighbourhood, this is the geographical area with which we're most familiar and on which we will comment, and we encourage you to address similar issues of transition in other neighbourhoods. Zoning on Joseph, between Ontario and Victoria: Throughout the amendments to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law, the importance of transitions between established residential neighbourhoods is stressed. However, the zoning for Joseph Street on the side opposite the totally residential Victoria Park Heritage Conservation District is SGA4, which means buildings of unlimited height. The Community Guide notes that "Transition is addressed in two ways by Growing Together; through the application of the SGA zone categories, with SGA1 abutting SGA2, SGA2 abutting SGA3, and SGA 3 abutting SGA4, where possible ... Where an SGA2, 3 or 4 zoned property abuts an SGA1 zoned property, staff are developing a regulation that would limit building height within a certain distance of the shared property line." We urged you to consider rezoning that side of Joseph as SGA2, and requiring setbacks from the sidewalk and step -backs in the floors of future buildings to provide for trees and sidewalks along that narrow street to "ensure safe and comfortable walking, cycling, and rolling" as promised in the Official Plan Amendment. Even 8 -storey buildings across from three-storey residential housing is a radical change; it's unimaginable to consider that buildings of unlimited height might be built along Joseph. Perhaps the street -facing buildings could start at 4 storeys and step up to eight. Zoning on the corner of Joseph and David Streets: Years ago, several of us were part of a small group that questioned the rezoning of the properties at the corner of David and Joseph. These properties are actually inside Victoria Park and also the Victoria Park Heritage Conservation District. Our concern was that changing the zoning on these properties would create a legal precedence for other developers who could then use the argument of precedence. We know of examples of developers successfully using this as a legal argument to achieve their development goals in both Toronto and Vancouver and have heard it used by local developers when arguing for zoning amendments in Kitchener. Now, based on the latest drawings, it seems, that this "development" area at Joseph and David has been rebranded and expanded. We urge you to rezone this as parkland, which is what it was always meant to be. Page 797 of 1179 Zoning on Linden, Oak, and Michael Street: SGA2 zoning is proposed to surround this small residential area on three sides, - also part of the Victoria Heritage Conservation District - dwarfing and shadowing many two-storey residences. We recommend a similar transition as described above: 4 storey homes to face the street, with setbacks allow for a ribbon of green front yards or boulevards and trees, in harmony with the opposite residences, stepping up to 8 storey buildings away from the street. This would make for a more harmonious streetscape that all residents, new and existing, could continue to enjoy. Within this same area is the historic smokestack, which was carefully and intentionally preserved when other development took place around it. Will it be visually obstructed and lost as an important landmark and reminder of Kitchener's industrial past? Please consider how to prevent this from happening as we continue to grow the city. Preventing future tension between Heritage and zoning: The Official Plan states that, "Ina Heritage Conservation District, where there is a conflict between the policies in this land use designation and the Heritage Conservation District Plan, the Heritage Conservation District Plan will prevail." The current zoning along Joseph and along Linden, Oak, and Michael Streets will inevitably create tension between the Heritage Conservation District Plan and zoning. We encourage you to harmonize the zoning with this plan now, to avoid future and unnecessary conflicts. We thank you for your consideration of our comments, and we look forward to seeing your final recommendations to Council. Would it be possible for you to share these with us with the same lead time you provide to Council? It would be extremely helpful to have as much time as possible before the Council meeting to review them. Sincerely yours, Peggy Nickels, Sheldon Atos, Mario Chilansky Gail Pool, Cc Natalie Goss, Manager, Policy and Research Adam Clark, Senior Urban Designer (Architecture and Urban Form) John Zunic, Senior Planner Richard Kelly-Ruetz, Senior Planner Page 798 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Friday, December 1, 2023 4:15 PM To: Sandra Castle Cc: Shane Castle Subject: RE: Growing Together Comments Good Afternoon Sandra and Shane, We are in receipt of your comments. Thank you for providing such detailed and thoughtful comments. We are currently evaluating a broad range of comments. Any changes will be noted as we finalize the recommendations. Please visit engagewr.ca/growingtogether and subscribe to receive updates. Best, The Growing Together Team From: Sandra Castl Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2023 12:02 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Cc: Shane Castle Subject: Growing Together Comments You don't often get email from castle.sandl gmail.com. Learn why this is important Hello, I hope you're having a great day. Please find attached our comments in response to the Growing Together final draft. Would you kindly confirm receipt? If you have any questions, please let me know. Thank you so much, Sandra & Shane Castle Page 799 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Thursday, December 7, 2023 119 PM To: Bill Reitzel; Growing Together (SM) Subject: RE: Lancaster and Weber Good afternoon Bill, Thank you for the submission. The Growing Together team is evaluating submissions beginning December Sth. Changes will be recommended in our staff report as it is finalized over the next few weeks. We will, however, do our best communicate our direction and continue to collaborate on the process in the interim. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Bill Retze. Sent: Friday, December 1, 2023 5.12 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: Lancaster and Weber You don't often get email fr Learn why this is important Natalie and Team - Further to my previous email, f have received additional information regarding the proposed Official Plan Amendment. With that, 1 offer the attached additional comments regarding the lands at St East. I welcome the opportunity to discuss. Thank you, Bill Reitzel Page 800 of 1179 November 30, 2023 City of Kitchener —Planning Division 200 King Street West, 6t" Floor PO Box 1118 Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 Attention: Natalie Goss Manager, Policy and Research Reference: Growing Together, Draft Approach Further to the letter submitted November 27, 2023, the Owners of the properties municipally described a (the "Subject Lands") have reviewed the draft Official Plan Amendment (the "Draft OPA") issued on November 3, 2023. After speaking with staff, we have a better understanding of the implications of this policy. With that we offer the following additional comments. The Draft OPA proposes to designate the lands as Strategic Growth Area A (SGA A), whereas the balance of the block fronting Weber Street is to be designated Strategic Growth Area B (SGA B). Terminating the Strategic Growth Area B designation at 102 Weber Street East appears to be arbitrary and, as such, we request that the Strategic Growth Area B be extended to Lancaster Street. Extending the SGA B designation to Lancaster stands to reason as the properties share the same conditions as those to the west, in that, the lands are adjacent existing low-rise residential lots. The above-described lands differ, however, in that the lands include parcels that front Lancaster Street— a Major Community Collector Street per Map 11 of the Official Plan. Given this, granting the ability to accommodate slightly higher density on this parcel would be appropriate. I note that the SGA Zoning regulations requiring stepbacks from low-rise residential uses will continue to remain, however, Weber - Lancaster oriented massing would have additional potential. Below I provide a recommended limit to the SGA B designation. With this letter, I trust staff will consider revising the proposed Official Plan Amendment. Should you wish to discuss, please feel free to contact me. Regards, Bill Reitzel 1678838 Ontario Inc Cc: Carl Reitzel, 1678838 Ontario Inc Page 801 of 1179 Figure 3: Proposed limit of Strategic Growth Area B Page 802 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Sent: To: Subject: Good Afternoon Krista, Growing Together (SM) Friday, December 1, 2023 4:18 PM krista warzecha RE: Mill St,/Ottawa St. Zoning We are currently evaluating a range of comments from the community and other stakeholders. In this and other similar contexts, we are trying to achieve a balance of low, medium and high-rise development that responds to a broad range of community needs. This includes a broad desire for transition between areas of high-rise and areas of low-rise. That said, we are happy to evaluate your request. Any changes will be noted as we finalize the recommendations. Please visit engagewr.cafgrowingtogether and subscribe to receive updates. Staff have analyzed the context of the Growing Together geography, including consideration for lot size, shape and area, access, servicing, and the ability of parcels to meet the built -form regulations of each zone. Upon consolidation, there are multiple pathways within the Strategic Growth Areas official plan policies to seek more height and density though a range of application types. This includes the ability to apply for an SGA -2 zone through a Zoning By-law Amendment process without requiring an Official Plan Amendment. Thank you for your comments, The Growing Together Team From: krista warzecha Sent: Friday, December , Rp:::: WE To: Growing Together (SM) <Grow ingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: Mill St./Ottawa St. Zoning You don't often get email from kristawar@Vahoo.ca. Learn why this is important I am the owner of he proposed Zoning By -low Amendment zones my property as SGA1, however, the properties behind me that front onto Mill Street are zoned SGA2. I am asking that the south side of Acacia, including my property, be zoned SGA2. Doing this will zone the entire block as SGA2. Given the depth of the Mill Street lots and 12 m setback requirement from SGA1 zoned properties, it is unlikely that S storeys will be viable. By zoning the entire block SGA2 it is more likely to see 8 storey buildings constructed and a more appropriate transition in heights down from the approved Mill ions Station redevelopment project. Thank you Krista Warzecha Sent from my iPhone Page 803 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Sent: To: Growing Together (SM) Friday, December 1, 2023 4:17 PM Kristen Barisdale Cc: Natalie Goss; Adam Clark; Nasir Saleem; Pam Tolton Subject: RE: Growing Together November 2023 Documents - 169 to 183 Victoria Street South Good Afternoon Kristen, Thank you for you comments. They will be evaluated by staff and will be included in our report. We have received a range of feedback on the built -form transition regulation from a number of perspectives and are continuing to work toward a best -fit solution. Any changes will be noted as we finalize the recommendations. Please visit eneaeewr.ca/erowinetoeether and subscribe to receive updates. Best, The Growing Together Team From: Kristen Barisdale Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2023 8:54 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Cc: Natalie Goss <Natalie.Goss kitchener.ca]; Adam Clark <Adam.Clark kitchener.ca>; Nasir Saleem Pam Tolton Subject: Growing Together November 2023 Documents - You don't often get email fro earn why this is important Good evening, On behalf of our client, please accept the attached correspondence responding to the Growing Together November 2023 Draft Documents as they relate to the above -noted properties. Please don't hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or require further information. Kristen Barisdale MCIP, RPP Vice President, Planning ,V in GSR group I his communication is intended solely for the named addressee(s) and may contain information that is privileged; confidential, protected or otherwise exempt from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, please advise us immediately and delete this email without reading, copying or forwarding it to anyone. Page 804 of 1179 November 30, 2023 City of Kitchener Planning Division, 6th Floor 200 King Street West Kitchener, Ontario N2G 4Y9 Attention: Natalie Goss, MCIP, RPP Manager, Policy and Research Dear Ms. Goss: Re: Growing Together Response to November 2023 Draft Materials SHAPING GREAT COMMUNITIES File No. 23101 On behalf of 1000002286 Ontario Ltd. and Legion Heights Victoria Inc., please accept the following commentary and response to the draft OPA and ZBA documents released on November 3, 2023 for the "Growing Together" initiative as related to the above -noted properties. 1000002286 Ontario Ltd. and Legion Heights Victoria Inc. acquired the above -noted properties with the intent of providing for a medium -density residential development project, which includes an 8 - storey apartment building with a total of 125 dwelling units along with underground parking. The proposed redevelopment scheme was subject to Pre -Submission Consultation with the City on April 12, 2023 through which it was determined that an application for Zoning By-law Amendment would be required to address a number of site specific variances to the existing zoning, includes setbacks, podium height and parking. The project consulting team is actively working on all required supporting studies and reports with the hopes of submitting a formal application for Zoning By-law Amendment in the near future. The property is proposed to be located within a Protected Major Transit Station Area in the Official Plan Amendment for the "Growing Together" initiative, which are areas intended to support transit through accommodating future growth and development through a mix of residential, office, institutional and commercial uses that provide for connectivity to various modes of transportation and have streetscapes and built forms that are pedestrian and transit friendly. The properties are proposed to be designated as Strategic Growth A in the Official Plan Amendment for the "Growing Together" initiative, which permits all forms of residential development as well as a range of non-residential uses that will support complete communities. Development within a Strategic Growth Area A will have a maximum building height of 8 storeys and a minimum FSR of 0.6. PLANNING I URBAN DESIGN I LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Page 805 of 1179 The properties are proposed to be zoned SGA -2: Mid Rise Growth Zone in the Zoning By-law Amendment for the "Growing Together" initiative, which permits a range of low and medium -rise residential uses with a maximum building height of 8 storeys, a minimum FSR of 1.0 and no maximum FSR and no minimum parking requirement. In addition, the SGA -2 Zone requires a maximum building height of 12.0 metres for development within 12 metres of a low-rise residential zone, and a minimum rear yard setback of 7.5 metres for development abutting a low-rise residential zone. 1000002286 Ontario Ltd. and Legion Heights Victoria Inc. supports the proposed Protected Major Transit Station Area and Strategic Growth Area A designation as well as the proposed SGA -2: Mid Rise Growth Zone intended for the subject properties. However, we have some concerns with the proposed provision to limit building height to a maximum of 12.0 metres for development within 12.0 metres of a low-rise residential zone. The requirement to include podiums and building step backs on a mid-sized residential development project may have a very significant impact on building design and layout optimization, particularly on smaller or awkwardly shaped parcels of land. While we agree with the minimum setback requirement of 7.5 metres from a low-rise residential lot as proposed, we believe that the potential impacts associated with building scale and size can be mitigated through appropriate building design considerations rather than a standard requirement to provide for building steps backs. We respectfully request to engage in further discussion regarding this specific issue prior to the finalization of the implementing OPA and ZBA. On behalf of 1000002286 Ontario Ltd. and Legion Heights Victoria Inc. we respectfully request to be notified of all meetings, reports and progress related to the "Growing Together" initiative in the future. Please don't hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or would like to discuss further. Sincerely, GSP Group Inc. Kristen Barisdale, MCIP, RPP Vice President, Planning cc. Nasir Salem, 1000002286 Ontario Ltd. and Legion Heights Victoria Inc. Pam Tolton, ABA GSP Group 12 Page 806 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Friday, December 1, 2023 4:18 PM To: patricia heiman Subject: RE: Proposed rezoning Good Afternoon Patricia, - proposed to receive a Strategic Growth Area -1 zone. This permits low-rise buildings up to 11m in height. The full details of the policies are regulations are posted at engagewr.ca/ rg owin tg_ogether. This includes our draft official plan amendment and mapping as well as our draft zoning by-law amendment and mapping. Additionally there is a community guide and other materials that will help provide context and guidance about the proposed planning framework. Thank you, The Growing Together Team From: patricia heiman Sent: Friday, December 1, 2023 11:18 AM To: Growing Together (SM) EG row ingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: Proposed rezoning You don't often get email from bluesfan5050@gmail.com. Learn why this is important I am requesting details on the proposed re zoning that would include the property at Thank you Patricia Heiman Page 807 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Frida , December 1, 2023 4:18 PM To: Subject: RE: Growing Together Input Revised Good Afternoon Roy, Thank you for your comments, they will be evaluated by staff and we will include your updated submission in our report. We appreciate your detailed and thoughtful input. Please note that the Civic Centre Heritage Conservation District plan remains in place and the policies within will still be implemented on development applications by heritage staff through the submission of Heritage Impact Assessments. The Growing Together team has worked closely with City heritage staff to ensure that we can continue to conserve heritage conservation districts while allowing all of Kitchener's neighbourhoods the ability to evolve to meet the needs of the community moving forward. We define height in metres in the SGA -1 zone but not others due to the range of uses, complexity of changing grades and elevations, and other considerations that complicate larger buildings, such as minimum ground floor heights. That said, storeys within residential buildings are generally quite standardized, ranging from 3.am to 3.2m, resulting in an 8 foot or 9 foot ceiling. In an office building, storeys are generally 4m in height. It is important to allow some flexibility here both for the quality of life of building occupants, as well as the desire for vertical mixed use buildings that accommodate a range of uses within a single building. Thank you for this feedback, we are evaluating a range of comments on this issue, and again, any changes will be noted as we finalize the recommendations. We are continuing to review feedback we've received on the permitted uses within our strategic growth area zones. Any changes will be noted as we finalize the recommendations. Please visit eneaeewr.calerowinetoeether and subscribe to receive updates. Thank you again, The Growing Together Team From: ajrcame@gmail.com Sent: Friday, December 1, 2 . RIEM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Cc: 'Roy Cameron' Subject: Growing Together Input Revised You don't often get email fro earn why this is important Good morning I revised the version which I sent in haste last night to meet your deadline. I have fixed some glitches in this version. Please replace my old version with this one if you are able. Many thanks! Roy Page 808 of 1179 Input to Growing Together Plan: Final Version November 30, 2023 Roy Cameron, To Staff - I deeply appreciate the work you do under circumstances that make it difficult for you. I write this in a spirt of wanting to support your efforts to make the city the best it can be. I have some concerns about development in Kitchener (which I generally support). I see an emerging heatsink, limited vegetation, loss of tree cover (already trees can't grow along King St), and as ever more ground surfaces are paved, I fear loss of capacity for water to be absorbed by soil will increase flood risk. But here I want to focus on preservation of heritage districts as public assets. So you understand my perspective: I'm 77. 1 was born and raised in Kitchener. I have lived in what is now the Civic Centre Heritage District since 1983. From then until 1999 1 lived at 59 Margaret Ave. I then moved to where I still live; our house abuts two high-rises and a condominium infill. There are set backs and that give us light, and a view. Trees at property lines give privacy; it works for us. I'm not concerned here about my property value. This is not NIMBYism - I already have high-rises in my backyard. / am concerned solely about ensuring that we leave future generations with an appealing, healthy, livable city that can remain prosperous because it retains its ability to attract top talent who drive the economy - people who even now find that they can live in any community in the world. Talent retention is real issue: two celebrated tech leader neighbours left their new custom infill home for BC. We must safeguard public assets, including heritage districts, so that our community becomes even more inviting and promotes the health and wellbeing of incoming residents — many will live in confined condo spaces with limited access to vibrant human scale areas. This is my central concern. In the preamble to the plan, I was pleased to see emphasis on the importance of Connection (including social, comfort and accessibility, rootedness in past places and memories, yet part of new shared experiences). I was also pleased to see emphasis on Belonging - knowing what to expect from a place or experience and always finding it, with deep familiarity and relaxation. / believe that preservation of heritage districts is integral to achieving these stated goals and addressing my concerns. But / believe that heritage districts are put at risk by what / read in the Growing Together documents, especially in the context of current pressures to enable developers to put up as many units as possible, as fast as possible, with virtually all other considerations swept aside. 1/3 Page 809 of 1179 Concerns and Suggestions about SGA -1 Draft Regulations in Heritage Districts 1. Proposed height, set back and step back requirements will grossly affect abutting properties • Proposed height limits are defined by number of floors, not in metres o might this be gamed (e.g., units with very high ceilings and a loft area — shoe horning two stories within one floor)? o In any case, it opens the way to gross heights higher than intended • set backs and step backs allow crowding existing properties vs ensuring adequate separation for sun exposure and privacy, and creating some distance from noise 2. The proposed list of potential uses of land in our area is very permissive • If houses are converted to businesses, we lose housing units at a time when we are urgently trying to increase housing stock. This seems counter productive. • Residential units lost are likely to be more appealing to families than condos • 1 favour strictly limiting commercial uses to home businesses except in transitional areas. 3. Wording intended to preserve the Civic Centre Conservation Distract is weak • Suggestions and recommendations are not enough — this makes the area vulnerable. • It would be very helpful to change weak phrasing to strong wording, such as: o From "strongly discouraged" to "not permitted" o From "strongly encouraged," to "required" o From "should' to "shall or must" Why is it critical to go all out to preserve heritage districts? These areas provide: • Tower dwellers, who have limited access to green space, with access to public outdoor space which has tress, shade, sun, birds, gardens, appealing streetscapes, etc. • Tree cover to help offset heat sinks that come with growing expanses of paved surfaces around tower properties — many areas along King are totally concrete and pavement • Social interaction and belonging — many houses in heritage districts have well used front porches —these are creating interaction and supportive ties with people living in towers • A soulful architectural ambience that draws people from many areas of the city who say they come here to restore themselves by walking through an inviting neighbourhood • Expanses of permeable surface where water can drain into soil, and perhaps mitigate risk of flooding in vulnerable lower lying areas in the heart of downtown 2/3 Page 810 of 1179 The Risks I See 1. Loss of Heritage Districts If we do not limit the height and lot locations of new builds, and if we do not restrict commercial uses of exiting houses, I see a great risk of destabilizing and losing heritage conservation districts like Civic Centre. I saw first hand how destabilization happens. On Margaret Ave. one house, then the next, was neglected, rented out (eventually attracting only disruptive tenants), then boarded up, then inhabited by vagrants, then had fires. In the end, almost all the houses on the north side were condemned and torn down. No one who had a choice wanted to live in this area, aside from a few of us who loved old houses. Working together, the city and residents turned this around, and created our CC Heritage Conservation District. But I fear the destabilization dynamic could recur if Growing Together is not beefed up. Here is how I see that risk. People who live in a heritage district are stewards of properties that are expensive to maintain. In our case, we have spent much more restoring and maintaining our house than we paid for it. Costs never end. We do this because we love the place and support heritage preservation. Suppose you live in a heritage district, and your quality of life is upended by a new business moving in next door, and/or by a tall new build close to your property line - shutting out the sun, making the interior dark, killing your garden, totally closing off your view on one side, invading your privacy, etc. As the house needs expensive repairs or upgrades, will you invest, or be able to sell to someone who will? Or will the property be neglected, and rented out, with more difficulty finding good tenants as it degrades? Eventually, an owner may decide the property is worth more if the house can be condemned and torn down, so it can be marketed for development. As the place deteriorates, neighbours become reluctant to invest in their homes. Can you see how the Margaret Ave deterioration dynamic could recur as dominoes fall? 2. Erosion of faith in government When they entered into heritage district agreements with the city, property owners voluntarily submitted to major restrictions on changes they can make to their homes, and renovations standards they need to meet (often at significant cost) to preserve the architectural features of their homes. They did not do this to enrich themselves, but out of a sense of civic responsibility and the sense of satisfaction that comes from living in and preserving an area like the Civic Centre District. Residents formed a covenant with the city. The city would restrict development within the area. Residents would uphold their responsibility to meet heritage requirements during renovations. There will be a sense of betrayal and futility if the city backs away from its commitment to support us. We are counting on you to strengthen this draft of Growing Together so the city will be a steadfast forceful partner with residents as we work together to preserve this area as a public asset. Again, many thanks for your work on our behalf, and for the opportunity for input. 3/3 Page 811 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Monday, December 4, 2023 4:23 PM To: Sharon Caeser; Growing Together (SM) Subject: RE: Question - Area surrounding Pequegnat Ave Kitchener Good afternoon Sharon, The Growing Together project is not proposing any changes to land use and zoning that would affect properties along Pequegnat Avenue. The scope of the project is limited to Kitchener's Protected Major Transit Station Areas, of which Pequegnat Ave is in proximity to, but does not fall within. Property owners will be notified of any potential future Planning initiatives that would result in a change of zoning or land use on their property. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Sharon Caeser Sent: Sunday, December 3, 2023 12:50 PM To: Growing Together (SM) ¢GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: Question - Area surrounding Pequegnat Ave Kitchener You don't often get email f earn W this is iin ortant Hello, My name is Sharon Caesar and I'm a real estate agent with Royal LePage Wolle Realty Brokerage. I have a client interested in making an offer on a property on Pequegnat Avenue, and prior to making an offer, we wanted to investigate whether there were any upcoming changes planned for the areas immediately surrounding Pequegnat Avenue. For example, any huge development projects planned for the properties immediately surrounding Peqegnat Ave, or on the street itself, which may affect traffic flow to and from the street. I first checked the interactive building permit map showing the currently active building permits...) found 100, and I checked the location of each. done were immediately close to Pequegnat Ave. (I'm not sure if this was an exhaustive list of permits) also went on the Growing Together website to see if I could find any information, as I understand that there is a push for intensification for the areas surrounding the transit lines. However, I'm not sure exactly what to look for, as the information available is a bit overwhelming to consume. was hoping someone might steer me in the right direction. We are particularly interested in whether there is any large future development planned for any of the lots immediately surrounding Pequegnat Ave in Kitchener, or on Pequegnat Avenue itself. Any advise would be deeply appreciated. Page 812 of 1179 Thanks, Sharon LePage Wolle Rea By the way, 1 am never too busy for the referral of your friends and family ... thank you for your trust/ CLICK HERE to sign up for my monthly market update Page 813 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Friday, December 8, 2023 10:41 AM To: Matthew Warzecha; Growing Together (SM) Cc: Joseph Puopolo; Mike Puopolo; Craig Dumart; MCIP RPP David A. Butler Subject: RE: Good morning Matthew, Thank you for the submission. The Growing Together team is evaluating submissions beginning (today) December Stn Changes will be recommended in our staff report as it is finalized over the next few weeks. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Matthew Warzecha Sent: Tuesday, December 5, 2023 10:54 AM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Cc: Joseph Puopolo Mike Puopolo ; Craig Dumart <Craig.Dumart@kitchener.ca>; MCIP RPP David A. Butler Subject: RE: Hello Natalie and Craig — I am following up on my submission from last week and request for a meeting to discuss the proposed zoning. Given the potential impacts of the proposed zoning and scale of the project, it is imperative that we align on approach prior to the final by-law being passed. Can we please schedule a meeting to discuss? Thank you, Matthew Warzecha MCIP RPP Director of Planning and Development I Polocorp Inc. matthew@polocorpinc.com POWCORP This e-mail is confidential and intended only for the addressee. Disclosure of this e-mail to anyone else is not intended as a waiver of confidentiality or privilege. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately. From: Matthew Warzecha Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2023 12:30 PM To: growingtogether@kitchener.ca Cc: Joseph Puopolo ; Mike Puopolo ; Craig Dumart <Craig.Dumart@kitchener.ca>; MCIP RPP David A. Butler ;Richard Kelly-Ruetz <richard.kelly-ruetz@kitchener.ca> Subject: RE: Page 814 of 1179 Natalie, Craig and Team — Further to our previously submitted letter, please find attached comments regarding the Draft Zoning By-law as it relates to our property at We are requesting a meeting with staff to discuss the implications of the proposed zoning on the Council approved Development Concept. Our understanding of the proposed Zoning results in a 'blend' of the current and proposed Zoning By-laws, which potentially compromises the feasibility of the project. Given the complexity of the project, we think it is necessary that this meeting be held to find a mutually agreed upon approach to the revised zoning. Please advise of your availability and we will work to your convenience to the best of our ability. Thank you, Matthew Warzecha MCIP RPP Director of Planning and Development I Polocorp Inc. matthew@polocorpinc.com POKEORP This e-mail is confidential and intended only for the addressee. Disclosure of this e-mail to anyone else is not intended as a waiver of confidentiality or privilege. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately. From: Matthew Warzecha Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2023 5:25 PM To: growingtogether@kitchener.ca Cc: Joseph Puopolo ; Mike Puopolo ; Craig Dumart <Craig.Dumart@kitchener.ca>; MCIP RPP David A. Butler Subject: RE: 455-509 Mill Street Natalie and Team — Following up on my previously submitted letter and email below. Polocorp would like to request a meeting with staff, including Craig Dumart, to discuss the impact of the proposed changes to the zoning o If you could please advise on your availability, it would be appreciated. Thank you, Matthew Warzecha MCIP RPP Director of Planning and Development I Polocorp Inc. matthew@polocorpinc.com POKEORP Page 815 of 1179 This e-mail is confidential and intended only for the addressee. Disclosure of this e-mail to anyone else is not intended as a waiver of confidentiality or privilege. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately. From: Matthew Warzecha Sent: Friday, August 25, 2023 11:41 AM To: growingtogether@kitchener.ca Cc: Joseph Puopolo Mike Puopolo ; Craig Dumart <Craig.Dumart@kitchener.ca>; MCIP RPP David A. Butler Subject: Hi Natalie — Polocorp Inc are the owners of , which received approval of Site -Specific Zoning in May 2023. Please find attached letter in support of the proposed SGA4 Zone proposed through the Growing Together Study, provided the necessary site-specific regulations to facilitate our development concept are carried through to any new zoning category. With this letter, I'd like to request a brief meeting to discuss the proposed SGA4 Zone and the implications on our property. I have cc'd Craig Dumart as he was the Planner on file for the amendment application and is familiar with the necessary site-specific regulations. We are reasonably flexible to meet, if you provide a few times you are available. Thank you, Warzecha MCIP RPP Director of Planning and Development I Polocorp Inc. POKEORP This e-mail is confidential and intended only for the addressee. Disclosure of this e-mail to anyone else is not intended as a waiver of confidentiality or privilege. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately. Page 816 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2023 2:16 PM To: Peggy Nickels; Growing Together (SM) Subject: RE: Questions about SGA 2 Zoning Attachments: Hi Peggy, It is possible that the additional process required from the Official Plan Amendment will encourage some developers to adhere to the "as -of -right" zoning. The process is much lengthier, at 120 days with the City and up to 6 months with the Region of Waterloo before a decision is made. Since the Official Plan did not contemplate the proposed use, the additional time allows staff to adequately review the proposal and ensure that it aligns with other policies in the Official Plan, including draft policy 15.D.2.5 in the proposed Growing Together Official Plan Amendment. In Zoning By-law 2019-051, mid -rise buildings are defined as buildings between 4 and 8 storeys. Tall buildings are defined as buildings of 9 or more storeys. Building heights will be limited by the applicable zone category. It was the team's understanding that site plans are not public materials. After consulting with the file planner for_ we were told that it would be okay to share the conditionally approved site plan with you. Our apologies - please understand that we don't typically handle development fides. The file is attached. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Peggy Nickels Sent: Tuesday, Decem er P, P PW To: Growing Together (SM) <Grow ingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: Re: Questions about SGA 2 Zoning You don't often get email frons nickels.peggyAgmail.corn. Learn why this is important Hi Growing Together Team, Thanks so much for your very clear reply. Am I correct in thinking that the additional requirement for an Official Plan Amendment from both the City the Region will encourage developers to stay within the 25 storey height limits? Also, could you please provide a definition of mid -rise and highrise? Finally, I may be mistaken, but I think that the site plan for the original building at was shared with the community when the developer was applying for the zoning changes. If tis is tRecaseo,wIlywould the site plan for this new building by a different developer not be sharable at this stage? Peggy On Tu e, Dec 12, 2023 at 10:29 AM Growing Together {SM} <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> wrote: Good morning Peggy, Page 817 of 1179 The Strategic Growth Area B land use applies to lands zoned SGA -2 or SGA -3. This zoning limits building height to 8 storeys and 25 storeys, respectively. Additionally, the Strategic Growth Area B land use limits building height to 25 storeys. A development proposal which seeks permissions beyond what is permitted by the Zoning By-law would require either Minor Variances or a Zoning By-law Amendment. For example, if a proposal for a 14 -storey building was made on a property zoned SGA -2 and within the Strategic Growth Area B land use, the City would require a Zoning By-law amendment, since the SGA -2 zone limits building height to 8 storeys. However, since the Strategic Growth Area B land use permits building heights of up to 25 storeys, the City would not require an Official Plan Amendment. Another example — if a proposal for a 30 -storey building was made on a property zoned SGA -3 and within the Strategic Growth Area B land use, the City would require a Zoning By-law Amendment and an Official Plan Amendment, since both the zoning and land use designation only permit buildings of up to 25 storeys in height. Both Zoning By-law Amendments and Official Plan Amendments require approval by Council. Official Plan Amendments require approval by the Region of Waterloo. We hope this helps to clarify the relationship between the zoning and the land use designations. At 600 Queen Street South, the conditionally approved Site Plan is for an 11 -storey residential care facility with terraces at the 2"d and 6t" storeys. The plan still shows open space on the northwest corner of the property near David Street, however it is our understanding that this will be privately -owned public space, not City parkland. We cannot share the conditionally approved site plan. Here is a rendering of 600 Queen St S taken from Lifewise's (the developer) website. Thanks for writing to us. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team Page 818 of 1179 From: Peggy Nickel Sent: Tuesday, Qecem er , M�� To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowineTogether2kitchener.ca3 Subject: Questions about SGA 2 Zoning You don't often get email _ earn why is sirnportant Hello, On page 18 of the Growing Together Community Guide, there is a description of what is permitted within SCAB land use. One of the stipulations is that "any development proposal for a high-rise building within a mid -rise zone will require a Zoning By-law Amendment. If a 25 -storey highrise requires an Official Plan Amendment, what height of building requires a Zoning By-law Amendment? Also, can you provide definition of mid -rise and highrise? Finally, there is a new building going up at 600 Queen Street South. When the original application was brought forward to the City, the developer promised a partkette at the narrow northwest corner of the property, close to the Iron Horse Trail and David Street. The property changed hands and I believe it's now going to be a seniors` residence. Can you tell me if the parkette still planned? Can you direct me to where I can find the site plan? Thanks, Peggy Nickels Page 819 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Good afternoon Andrea, Growing Together (SM) Thursday, December 7, 2023 1:19 PM Andrea Sinclair; Growing Together (SM) Natalie Goss; Garett Stevenson; Brian Bateman RE: Growing Together Submission - Thank you for the submission. The Growing Together team is evaluating submissions beginning December 8t". Changes will be recommended in our staff report as it is finalized over the next few weeks. We will, however, do our best communicate our direction and continue to collaborate on the process in the interim. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Andrea Sinclair Sent: Wednesday, December 6, 2023 7:21 AM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Cc: Natalie Goss <Natalie.Goss@kitchener.ca>; Garett Stevenson <Garett.Stevenson@kitchener.ca>; Brian Bateman <Brian.Bateman @kitchener.ca> Subject: Growing Together Submission File 2144A Good Morning, Please find attached our comments as it relates to Thank you, Andrea ANDREA SINCLAIR BES, MUDS, MCIP, RPP Partner M H BC Planning, Urban Design & Landscape Architecture Follow us: Webpaqe I Linkedin I Facebook I Twitter I Vimeo I Instagram �P YEARS HE P L A N H I H URBAN DESIGN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Page 820 of 1179 A �KITCHENER I WOODBRIDGE I LONDON I BARRIE I BURLINGTON �'�'�+�. PLANNING URBAN DESIGN & LANDSCAPE Y E"A R s MHBC ARCHITECTURE December 5, 2023 arowingtogether(c)kitchen er.ca Attn : Natalie Goss - Manager Policy & Pesea rch City of Kitchener Planning Division, 6th floor 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 Dear Ms. Goss: RE: GROWING TOGETHER DRAFT OFFICIAL PLAN AND ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENTS C AST, KITCHENER - OUR FILE 2144A We are writing on behalf of our client, Cantiro, with respect to the above noted matter. Cantiro has been actively working with the City of Kitchener towards the development of East and in that regard went through an Official Plan Amendment and Zoningy-RmoenWmen process in order to obtain approvals for a six -storey condo building that, once constructed, helps the City in achieving more "missing middle" housing. The applications were submitted in June of 2022 and the Amendments were ultimately approved by Council in March of this year, Since the lands were first acquired by Cantiro, there has been a dramatic shift in the market. While the original intent was to develop the lands as a mid -rise condo building, the project is no longer financially viable for that purpose. Cantiro is now looking to shift the project towards purpose built rental, but financial viability is still challenging with a rental product for the limited number of units that can be developed under the current height and density permissions. Through the City's "Growing Together" process, the subject lands are proposed to be designated Strategic Growth Area A and zoned Strategic Growth Area 2 (SGA -2). The site specific regulations obtained through Cantiro's recent applications are proposed to be carried forward, We are writing to confirm support of the proposed designation and zoning category, but respectfully request that, site specific regulations related to parking, FSR and building height not be carried over. In consideration of this request we offer the following: • The site specific zoning by-law (attached herein) introduces a reduced parking rate for units greater than 51 square metres and requires visitor parking at a rate of 10% of required parking. Through Growing Together, there is no minimum parking requirement. Visitor parking is required at a rate of 10% of parking provided (should parking be provided). The City has been moving towards reduced parking rates, and this reduction should be carried forward onto the Cantiro site as well in order to support alternative modes of transportation including transit and active transportation. While the intent is to still provide parking, increased flexibility is helpful and may allow Cantiro to achieve a greater number of rental units. Currently we are constrained in unit count by parking. • The Site Specific zoning by-law included requirements for Electric Vehicle ready parking stalls and Class A and Class B bicycle parking. These were included in anticipation of updated zoning being approved for the lands in the future. The Growing Together regulations already require EV ready parking and Class A and B bicycle parking, and as such the site specific requirements are no longer needed. • The site specific by-law introduced a maximum FSR of 2.4. Maximum FSR is not contemplated in Growing Together and we would ask that this not carry over through Growing Together in order to provide for increased flexibility. • The site specific zoning by-law included a minimum side yard setback from the easterly property line of 2.0 metres. We ask that this provision be carried over as the current project would not work with the 3.0 metre setback contemplated in Growing Together. It is noted that easterly side yard is shared with a non-residential property. There are no issues with the other setbacks contemplated in Growing Together. • The site specific zoning by-law requires a rear yard setback of 19 metres. Given the extensive consultation with the community, our client is comfortable retaining this regulation, recognizing that it exceeds the rear yard setback requirements of Growing Together. • The maximum building height in the site specific zoning is 21 metres, including roof top mechanicals, we believe this was intended to say "not including" mechanical penthouse as the plans for the property have always had a mechanical penthouse that exceeds 21 metres. To avoid future variances, and to allow for the opportunity to increase missing middle housing, we respectfully request that the height restriction not be carried over, and that instead the site be subject to the same height restriction as other properties proposed to be zoned SGA -2. We understand that inclusion of any additional storeys will be subject to increased setbacks; a maximum building length; and a maximum floor area. Strategic Growth Area A and the implementing SGA -2 zone are intended to provide for more missing middle housing. A significant number of properties within the SGA -2 zone will require lot consolidation before the zoning permissions can realistically be realized. This is certainty the case for the majority of properties along Courtland Avenue in proximity to the Cantiro site. The Cantiro property has already been consolidated; exceeds the low-rise transition requirements (including the rear yard setback to the low density area on Martin Street); and can be developed in the short term to provide much needed rental housing. The ability to provide additional rental units through the added height permissions contemplated in Growing Together, without requiring additional parking or a new zoning by-law amendment helps to keep this project financially viable. 2 Page 822 of 1179 Thank you for your consideration. We look forward to discussing this with the Growing Together team in the near future, MHBC Andrea Sinclair, MUDS, BES, MCIP, RPP Partner CC. Cantiro Project Team Garett Stevenson Brian Bateman Juliane von Westerholt 3 Page 823 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Good afternoon Andrea, Growing Together (SM) Thursday, December 7, 2023 1:19 PM Andrea Sinclair; Growing Together (SM) Natalie Goss; Kieran Luckhai RE: Growing Together/ Thank you for the submission. The Growing Together team is evaluating submissions beginning December 8t". Changes will be recommended in our staff report as it is finalized over the next few weeks. We will, however, do our best communicate our direction and continue to collaborate on the process in the interim. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Andrea Sinclair Sent: Wednesday, December 6, 2023 11:36 AM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Cc: Natalie Goss <Natalie.Goss@kitchener.ca>; Kieran Luckhal Subject: Growing Together/ Good Morning Natalie, We already discussed this one during our meeting on November 15, so I know you are already aware of our concerns. The attached just formalizes our discussion on the 15tH Thank you, Andrea ANDREA SINCLAIR BES, MUDS, MCIP, RPP Partner M H BC Planning, Urban Design & Landscape Architecture 540 Bingemans Centre Drive, Suite 200 1 Kitchener I ON I N213 3X9 I T 519 576 3650 X 750 1 C 519 835 7101 1 F 519 576 0121 1 asinclair(cD-mhbcplan.com Follow us: Webpaqe I Linkedin I Facebook I Twitter I Vimeo I Instagram r Z YE A P, s MHBC P L A N N I V URBAN DESIGN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Page 824 of 1179 �KITCHENER ! WOODBRIDGE I LONDON 9 BARRIE I BURLINGTON Y E �A R S MHBC December 6, 2023 PLANNING URBAN DESIGN & LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE arowingtogetherCc�kitchen er.ca Attn: Natalie Goss - Manager Policy & Research City of Kitchener Planning 6th floor 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 Dear Ms. Goss: RE: NEIGHBOURHOOD PLANNING REVIEW IMPLEMENTATION j YORK STREET APARTMENTS _STREET, KITCHENER OUR FILE Y5122E We are writing on behalf of the owners of the property municipally addressed as e "subject property") which is illustrated in the below aerial image. This letter has been provided a follow up to our previous submissions, as well as our more recent meeting on November 15, 2023. Existing and Proposed Secondary Plan The subject property is located within the K -W Hospital Secondary Plan and is currently designated as High Density Multiple Residential. The lands are also located within a Major Transit Station Area. The property is currently developed with three apartment buildings ranging in height from 9 to 18 storeys. Both underground and surface parking is provided. The proposed land use map implements a new category of land use, Strategic Growth Area. Strategic growth areas will prioritize housing and employment growth, sustainability, active transportation, public transit, and high-quality urban design, to accommodate a significant portion of Kitchener's growth. Under the draft for the Official Plan amendment the subject lands have a proposed land use designation of Strategic Growth Area B (SGA B)'. The SGA B designation is intended to accommodate a range of medium and high density residential housing types. We support the continuation of a high density res/dentia/ designation for the subject property. Existing and Proposed Zoning The subject property is currently zoned Residential Nine (R-9) with Special Use Provision 133U under Zoning By-law 85-1. Special Use Provision 133U implements the Special Policy Area of the current Secondary Plan by adding health clinic and health office to the list of permitted uses. The subject lands have received a zoning category of Strategic Growth Area 3 (SGA -3)' under the final draft for the Zoning By-law Regulations. SGA -3 zoning intends to create opportunity for high- density growth in both mid and high-rise forms up to 25 storeys in height. The SGA -3 zoning category permits all currently permitted uses with the exception of street townhouse dwellings. We support the proposed zoning category of SGA -3. However, we are concerned with the loss of ""street townhouse" as a permitted use. The site currently contains three apartment buildings and surface parking. The apartments are long-term rentals and as such, redevelopment of these is not likely to occur in the immediate future. However, there is an opportunity to intensify the site by incorporating additional units within areas currently used for parking. Street townhomes would be appropriate along the York Street and/or Mt. Hope Street frontage as additional uses beyond what is currently built on the site. This would allow for intensification on the site over the shorter term. We respectfully request that zoning for this property continue to permit all uses that are currently permitted, including street townhomes. 2 Page 826 of 1179 Please ensure that this correspondence forms part of the public record as it relates to proposed Official Plan Amendment (OPA19/004/COK/TMW) and Zoning Bylaw Amendment (ZBA19/010/COK/TMW) and ay future related Amendments. We look forward to Staff's response. Thank you for your consideration, MHBC Andrea Sinclair, MUDS, BES, MCIP, RPP CC. Mike Belgue Eli Kraus 3 Page 827 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2023 9.59 AM To: Yuri Lanqlois; Natalie Goss; Growing Together (SM) Cc: Matthew Chandy; Ashley Graham Subject: RE: Region of Waterloo - Comments on Growing Together SGA zoning (Regional Properties) Good morning Yuri, Thank you for your comments. The team will review your submission with Planning Management this Friday. Changes will be recommended in our staff report as it is finalized over the next few weeks. We will, however, do our best communicate our direction and continue to collaborate on the process in the interim. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Yuri Langlois Sent: Wednesday, December F, 2023 2:27 PM To: Natalie Goss <Natalie.Goss@kitchener.ca>, Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.caa Cc: Matthew Chand Ashley Graha Subject: Region of Waterloo - Comments on Growing Together SGA zoning (Regional Properties) You don't often get email from ylangloisPregionofwaterloo.ca.. Learn why this is important Good afternoon Natalie and the Growing Together team, Please find attached comments on the Final Draft Growing Together Zoning By-law Amendment and Official Plan Amendment, as it relates to Regionally owned sites within the study area. Have a great day, Yuri Confidentiality Notice: This email correspondence (including any attachments) may contain information which is confidential and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law, and is intended only for the use of the designated recipient(s) listed above. Any unauthorized use or disclosure is strictly prohibited. if you are not the intended recipient, or have otherwise received this message by mistake, please notify the sender by replying via email, and destroy all copies of this original correspondence (including any attachments). Thank you for your cooperation. Page 828 of 1179 December 6, 2023 City of Kitchener Planning Division 200 King Street West City of Kitchener Sent via Email: Natalie Goss, Manager Policy Natalie.Goss@kitchener.ca growingtogether@kitchener.ca Dear Growing Together Team, Re: City of Kitchener Strategic Growth Area (SGA) Zoning, Comments from Region of Waterloo Comprehensive Review of the Draft Approach to Growth & Change Further to the correspondence provided by the Regional Municipality of Waterloo, dated August 11, 2023, we offer the following additional comments with regard to the proposed final draft official plan amendments and zoning by-law amendments to allow for the Strategic Growth Area (SGA) zoning under the City's Draft Approach to Growth and Change. The Region's Land Portfolio team has examined the Final Drafts for the Approach to Growth & Change on all regionally -owned sites within the study area, and request your clarification and consideration of the points enclosed. We thank you for the opportunity and look forward to seeing this new zoning take shape. The charts below outline regional properties and existing height permissions. This request relates specifically to properties as follows: Regional Properties — Proposed SGA2 Mid -Rise (Max Height: 8 Storeys) Full Address Comments 119 College St Proposed Site Specific Provision (3) (to permit 10 storeys or 29 meters, whichever is less) acknowledged and no further comment or concern. 126 Breithaupt St n/a 140 Weber St E No Comment. 176 Duke St E No Comment. 74 Church St No Comment. 904 King St W No Comment Document Number: 4454512 Page 1 of 4 Page 829 of 1179 Regional Properties — Proposed SGA3 High -Rise Limited (Max Height: 25 Storeys) Full Address Comments 1 Victoria St S No Comment. 100 Weber St W No Comment 105 Victoria St N No Comment. 134 Frederick St No Comment. 150 Frederick St No Comment. 16 Victoria St N No Comment. 20 Weber St E No Comment. 200 Frederick St No Comment. 230 Charles St E No Comment. 451 Mill St No Comment. 510 King St W No Comment. 520 King St W No Comment. 73 Queen St N No Comment. 77 Queen St N No Comment. Regional Properties — Proposed SGA4 High -Rise (No Height Limit) Full Address Comments 122 Weber St W See Below. 123 Breithaupt St No Comment. 14 Ottawa St S No Comment. 15 Charles St W See Below. 22 Ottawa St S No Comment. 495 Charles St E No Comment. 50 Victoria St N See Below. 60 Victoria St N See Below. 100 Victoria St N No Comment. 1081 King St E No Comment. Regional Properties — Other Full Address Comments 104 Stirling Ave S See Below. Eden Ave Amended to SGA -1 acknowledged. Document Number: 4454512 Page 2 of 4 Page 830 of 1179 Site Specific Requests: 1. 50 Victoria St N. 60 Victoria St N 122 Weber St W 15 Charles Street West The existing site-specific regulation at 15 Charles Street West, which mandates a 3 -meter setback from the Gaukel Street frontage, as outlined in 85-1. In our previous communication dated August 11, 2023, we sought clarification on whether this setback, as specified in 85-1, is to be maintained. At that time, we also respectfully requested the removal of this setback provision to facilitate the anticipated redevelopment of the former bus terminal site. However, in light of the additional zoning regulations recently added to SGA -4, we are now seeking rationale for the increased minimum yard setbacks of 6.0 meters. This consideration also involves 50 Victoria St N, 60 Victoria St N, and 122 Weber St W. A standard yard setback of 6.0 meters, both at the front and exterior side, would significantly deviate from the existing setbacks established by neighboring buildings. This deviation could hinder the establishment of a continuous streetwall, crucial for enabling a new building to offer a variety of gradual setbacks. Such setbacks are integral in forming public spaces, providing pedestrian shelter, and incorporating visual differentiation in fagade details, all contributing to the creation of a human - scale streetscape along pubic interfaces. Most existing buildings, whether historical or contemporary, in the immediate vicinity of these properties have setbacks established directly on the property line or less than 6.0 metres. This precedent underscores the importance of maintaining consistency and harmony in the built environment. Regional staff request the consideration of the removal of front and exterior side yard setbacks and consider allowing for a more contextually sensitive approach to determining appropriate setbacks. 2. 104 Stirling Ave S Regional Staff formally request a site-specific provision for 104 Stirling Ave S, presently housing the former Edith Macintosh Children's Centre and currently serving as a transitional space for individuals experiencing homelessness. The Region owns and operates the existing structure, while the City of Kitchener owns the land, designated as Open Space in the Draft Official Plan Map and zoned OSR-1 in the Draft Zoning Map. In our previous correspondence dated August 11, 2023, Regional staff proposed the consideration of a site-specific provision that recognizes both the current and potential future use of the site. While the categorization of the site as Open Space and Recreation aligns with our objectives, we kindly request an expansion of land use permissions to encompass institutional and residential uses. To illustrate, we point to the Specific Policy Area for 79 Joseph Street outlined in the Draft Official Plan Amendment (15.D.12.54. 79 Joseph Street) and in the Draft Zoning By -Law Amendment under Section 19 — Site Specific Provisions (166). Regional Staff seeks your consideration in incorporating a Specific Policy Area in the Draft Official Plan Amendment and a Site -Specific Provision in the Draft Zoning By -Law Amendment (Defined boundary for Edith Macintosh structure and respective land surrounding that supports Document Number: 4454512 Page 3 of 4 Page 831 of 1179 its functions) to allow for specific institutional uses and residential purposes, notwithstanding the Open Space land use designation. 122 Weber St W Regional Staff respectfully request that the Site Specific Provision 410U (M) identified on 122 Weber St W in the Draft Zoning Map (November 2023) be removed to allow for future mixed- use development opportunity. We look forward to meeting with City staff to continuing to discuss the questions above as they relate to Regional properties, and work together to see this vision for the core come to life. We thank you for your time and consideration with these comments. Yours truly, Yuri Langlois, MSc Urban Design, BES Supervisor of Urban Design, Planning Land Portfolio (Economic Development & Housing) cc. Rod Regier, Commissioner PDLS Danielle De Fields, Director of Community Planning Matthew Chandy, Director of Innovation & Economic Development Ryan Pettipiere, Director of Housing Services Ashley Graham, Senior Development Planner, Land Portfolio Document Number: 4454512 Page 4 of 4 Page 832 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Tim Donegani Sent: Friday, December 8, 2023 10:45 AM To: David Johnson Cc: Growing Together Subject: RE: quick questionG-4 Zone REgulations Hi David, A number in parentheses means there are additional regulations applying to the requirement listed in the table . In this case (1) means" (1) For a lot with more than one street line, minimum lot width may be measured from the longest lot line abutting a street." Best, Tim Tim Donegani Senior Planner I City of Kitchener 519-741-2200 Ext 70671 TTY 1-866-969-9994 J tim.donegani()kitchener.ca From: David Johnso Sent: Friday, December To: Tim Donegani <Tim.Donegani@kitchener.ca> Subject: quick question 475 Charles 5G-4 Zone REgulations You don't often eget email from davidandbrendamCa)gmail.com. Learn why this is important Morning, in section 6, page 7 table 6-5 "minimum lot width" it says 30 meters but there is a (1) after . Could you clarify what the significance is of the (1)? Thanks David Johnson Page 833 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2023 12:23 PM To: Juliane vonWesterholt; Growinq Together (SM) Subject: RE: Thank you for your feedback! Good afternoon Juliane, Your interpretation is correct. oP'As which give effect to policies in PMTSAs are protected from appeal in accordance with Section 17 {36.1.4} of the Planning Act. ZBAs giving effect to official plan policies in PMTSAs are protected from appeals in accordance with Section 34 (19.5) of the Planning Act. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Juliane vonWesterholt Sent: Friday, December 8, 2023 1.09 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: RE: Thank you for your feedback! Importance: High You don't often get email fro earn why this is imp ortant Good afternoon. I am hoping to have a letter outlining some comments and concerns on behalf of our client this afternoon. I did have a question though... my understanding is that this QPA/ZBA is not appealable is that correct? Please advise asap. Thank you. S�v,zereLH, JkL 2we von westelr�ok JULIANE von WESTERHQLT BES, VICIP, RPP Associate M H BC Planning, Urban Design & Landscape Architecture Follow us: Webpa-qe I Linkedin I Facedook I Twitter I Vimeo I Instagram `-`F��+� PLANNING URBAN DESIGN & LANDSCAPE Y E a' R s MHBC ARCHITECTURE This communication is intended solely for the named addressee(s) and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, protected or otherwise exempt from disclosure. No waiver of confidence, privilege, protection or otherwise is made. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, please advise us immediately and delete this email wnthout reading, copying or forwarding it to anyone. 1 Page 834 of 1179 From: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Sent: December 5, 2023 11:46 AM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: Thank you for your feedback! Thank you for participating in the Growing Together engagement throughout November. If you have made a written submission to our email address, provided comments through conversations in November, and/or provided comments through the engage page they have been received. Staff will be reviewing and considering all submissions throughout the month of December as they prepare final recommendations on land use and zoning changes for the Growing Together geography. You can expect to hear from us with a response to your submission if you have made one in early January. Comment responses will be followed shortly thereafter with the staff recommended Official Plan amendment and Zoning By-law amendment that are expected to be considered by Council later in January. This Council meeting is also known as a Statutory Public Meeting. Comments on the staff recommended Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendments can be made directly to Council as part of the Statutory Public Meeting. More details on the Statutory Public Meeting will be provided a minimum of 20 days in advance in accordance with the requirements of the Planning Act. Thank you for all your participation throughout the Growing Together process! Sincerely, The Growing Together Team Page 835 of 1179 �KITCHENER I WOODBRIDGE I LONDON I BARRIE I BURLINGTON .��.��� PLANNING Z URBAN DESIGN �rrr &LANDSCAPE Y E A R S MHBC ARCHITECTURE December Stn , 2023 Natalie Goss Manager Long Range and Policy Planning Kitchener City Hall, Planning Division 6t1 Floor 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 Dear Ms.Goss: RE: Growing Together Comments OUR FILE Thank you for the opportunity to be involved in the community engagement regarding the proposed Growing Together project which intends to designate and rezone lands in the Strategic Growth Areas including the Urban Growth Centre and the Major Transit Station Areas. Generally, we are very encouraged by the forward thinking toward intensification of the Strategic Growth Areas. After reviewing the draft planning instruments (draft Official Plan Amendment and Zoning by-law Amendment) we have the following comments and/ or questions for clarification. The comments are broken down into Official Plan, Zoning by-law and General comments for ease of reference. Official Plan Vision • Vibrancy • Connection • Belonging It is understood that the overall intent of these objectives is to create a vibrant community that is inclusive and diversity. It is suggested that the statements contained therein be stated in a positive statement eg. rather than saying what you do not think the energy is- ...say what it is. While these are only objectives and not policy, they help set the tone of the document and the City's objectives. Section 3.0.2.15 establishes the Strategic Growth Areas as A, B, C with C being the most intensive intensification area and A the least. It is suggested that it be the reverse. It seems area SGA -A should be the most intensive and as you move out of the UGC the areas are less intensive as shown on the map so these areas should be an SGA -C. Policy 11.C.1.34 b) and c) make reference to ensuring "good" compatibility. The adjective good is subjective and perhaps creates some ambiguity. It is suggested that the word "good" be removed, as it can be challenged if relied on in a planning opinion at a tribunal. Policy 12.C.1.51 speaks to the priority and gateway locations in the Cedar Hill and Schneider Creek neighbourhood and in the last paragraph of this section contains a typographical error mid —paragraph the word ""giving" should be replaced with ""given". Policy 15.2. 10 intends ""to create and maintain walkable, cyclable and rollable strategic growth areas". It is suggested that the word "rollable" be replaced with accessible, as this would include more persons with disabilities. Policy 15.D.2.23 indicates that the City may limit height along King Street. It is suggested that development if appropriate and if it complies with objectives of the Tall Building Guidelines, should not be limited to the 3 storey height limit. Cities are organic and evolving and what represented a main street feel 100 years ago is not current and there has been so much momentum and energy in the downtown developments. Policy 15.D.2.39 c) please refer to comment for Policy 15.2.10 above. Strategic Growth Area A (consider renaming to SGA -C see comment 3.C.2.15 above) Policy 15.D.2.41 states that residential housing types permitted in the Low Rise and Medium Rise Residential designations are permitted. Can you confirm that this also includes stacked townhouse dwellings as multiples are listed in the medium rise residential designation? Strategic Growth Area B The downtown core, which is a primary intensification area has a significant portion designated as SGA -B which has height limits to 25 storeys. What is the rationale for this limit on height in particular on lands that do not have heritage significance or are adjacent to a stable neighbourhood eg. block on the north side of King Street West. Strategic Growth Area C Lands within this area are intended to accommodate significant intensification at high density, Policies 15.D.2.52 -15.D.2.54 indicate that there may be no maximum height and refers to site specific increases in building height. This continues to suggest that there height may be limited despite this being the highest intensification area. Is there opportunity for stronger language that creates more certainty, particularly on sites that meet the intent of Tall Building Guidelines and provide for adequate transition to lower density uses? It is encouraging that the language says "may" however the flip side to that is that one ""may not" permit some additional height and this is somewhat subjective. 2 Page 837 of 1179 Zonina by-law Definition Floor Plate Area- means the gross floor area of a storey of a building. It is suggested that you insert the words ""within the tower of a tall" after the word storey and delete the words ""of a"as this should not reference low density or medium density built forms. Suggested derinition Floor Plate Area- means the gross floor area of a storey within the tower of a tall building Physical Separation- means the distance from a tall building tower's faces to its interior side lot line and real lot lines. When two of more towers are on the same lot, the total distance between each pair of towers in any direction is to be calculated as the sum of both individual separations. Can you clarify what is meant by this definition and perhaps provide a diagram. In particular, explain what is meant by the sum of both individual separations. Also, is it necessary to meet internal separations on a site as there are other methods such as tower orientation and positioning to mitigate overlook conditions? By not regulating the on-site tower separation perhaps more flexibility is achieved to provide better off-site separations. Section 6 In Section 6.2 contains a Table 6-1 which lists the permitted uses within the SGA zones. We note that cluster and stacked towns are not permitted specifically and respectfully request that they be permitted as they are under 4 storeys and that the regulations for Table 6-1 be adjusted accordingly. Table 6.4 in Section 6.4.3 sets out regulations for the entire building, for storeys above the 7t" storey and for transition to low rise residential zones. Accordingly, the Section pertaining to the tower above the 7t" storey, has minimum side yard setback of 6.0m, minimum building length of 60m and maximum floor plate size of 2000 M2, which in our opinion are too low. These should be determined by the Tall Building Guidelines and not be embedded in the zoning. Please consider adjusting these as described further below. We would be happy to discuss this matter with you in more detail. In a similar manner Table 6.5 regulates Multiple Dwellings, Mixed Use Buildings and Non -Residential Buildings. We have concerns over the following: Genera/ Minimum Street line ground floor building height should be revised to provide more flexibility 7-12 storey • For storeys 7-12 the minimum front and exterior side yard setback at 6.Om is too restrictive and will result in fewer units per floor 3 Page 838 of 1179 • The maximum building floor length should be increased from 60m to 90 m • The minimum physical separation of 6.Om should not be regulated but should be determined through Tall Building Guidelines to provide flexibility 13-I8 storey • The maximum building length for 13-18 storeys could be achieved but if lengthened • Maximum floor plate site should be increases to 1400 mz 19-36 storey • The maximum floor plate should be revised to 1200 mz 37 and above • The maximum building length should be increased to 48m • The maximum floor plate should be increased to 1200 mz Section 6.6 Priority Streets Section 6.6a) ii and iii which does not permit the location of structured parking in the podium structure or permits only 50% of the area of the street line fagade within the base of the building is problematic for smaller sites. It is suggested that this be permitted above the first two floors, if it cannot be located on the ground floor with some glazing or appropriate screening or wrapped with units where feasible. Section 6.7 Private Amenity Space Section 6.7a) I and II require 4 mz and 8 mz respectively of private amenity space. This seems too high and we suggest reducing this amount to approximately 2.0 mz for a 1 bedroom and 3 M for a two bedroom. It is further suggested that this be reviewed on a case by case basis. General comments • In the situation of a corner lot how the building length would be applied? Is it applied to both frontages? • Also, in the case of an L-shaped building the floor plate size would never be complied with. • After reviewing this information, it became apparent that properties in the King Street East corridor, as well as some downtown areas have not been targeted for increased density, which may be a missed opportunity. We ask that you reconsider these areas as part of your final document as many of these properties do not abut low density stable neighbourhoods. • Consideration should be given to fewer restrictions related to the built form, as this would provide flexibility for tower design. This is particularly important when considering alternative 4 Page 839 of 1179 forms of construction such as energy efficient construction through the use of modular construction methods. The modular form of construction is heavier than traditional cast in place concrete and therefore necessitates that the weight be distributed to a wider area to prevent it from punching through moderately yielding soils. • Additionally, the cost of construction is more efficient in a slab format rather than that of a point tower. These costs or reductions in cost are passed onto the consumer or tenant of the building in the case of a rental apartment. Being less prescriptive about the built form would permit the consideration of alternative forms of construction. Less prescription would also help reduce construction cost, especially in rental apartments. We respectfully request that you consider these comments. Slab tower formats when designed thoughtfully can be aesthetically pleasing and contribute positively to the public realm. For your information, a copy of a letter from Reinders and Law, as well as some floor plates have been enclosed for your information. • We strongly encourage staff to abandon form based zoning and continue to work with City Design staff and the professionals to develop solutions to challenges of properties on a site specific basis. • We also note that many of the proposed SGA zones appear to reflect current conditions. Considerations should be given to amend these permissions particularly where the Criteria for Upzoning as per 15.D.2.5 have been satisfied or in areas where there is no immediate residential zone adjacent and other locational and contextual criteria such as proximity to the LRT have been taken into consideration. In addition, on a general note suggestions on other potential higher zoning on some sites not owned by our client but that could be redeveloped include: Lands along Ottawa Street unless it backs onto low rise residential should be considered for increased development potential; Market Square; • 27 Pine Street Parking; and, • Grand River Hospital site. Section 18.4- Deemed to Comply or Requested Upzoned Development Applications: Please ensure that the following sites are deemed to comply or proposed for increase in zoning: • 926 King Street E. o The proposed zoning is SGA -2 and the proposed Official Plan designation is SGA -A. o We propose that the subject lands be zoned SGA -3 to recognize the approved height of 10 storeys for the site. The proposed development conforms to the transitioning outlined in Table 6-5 of the amended Zoning By-law. The subject lands are adjacent from lands zoned SGA -4 and is consistent with the built form in the area. o Additionally, we propose that the subject lands be amended on the Official Plan to reflect the above zoning, moving from a land use designation of SGA A to SGA B.; 5 Page 840 of 1179 • 83-87 Weber Street W. and 79 Weber Street consolidated ownership of parcels with site specific permissions that include up to 32 storeys so propose an SGA -4 zone; • 332 Charles Street currently is permitted to 27 storeys. There is little to know residential areas adjacent and right along the LRT line with a station stop in proximity. Request an SGA -4 zone to reflect current permissions and suggest remainder of the block to Stirling on the same side of Charles Street be also included in SGA -3 or SGA -4 zone ; • 1668 King Street E.; o The proposed zoning is Mixed Use 2 (MIX -2) with Special Regulation Provision 780R(M) and Holding Provision 94H(M) under Zoning By-law 2019-051. o The proposed use is permitted under Section 18.2.b) ii). Request that this be zoned to SGA -3 or MIX -3 as it aligns more with the existing MU -3 zoning. Amend Special Regulation to consider the proposed 24 storey height. • 130 and 140 Highland while outside of MTSA, we note the following which we request be adjusted in 2019-051: o The proposed zoning is Mixed Use One (MIX -1) with Special Regulation Provision 791R(M) and Holding Provision 103H(M) under Zoning By-law 2019-051. o The Special Regulation Provision permits the proposed building. However, in our opinion the MIX -1 designation is not representative of the CR -3 zoning acquired through the site specific Zoning By-law Amendment process. We suggest that a MIX -3 zoning is more representative of the lands located in a neighbourhood node and currently subject to a development proposal more intense than that permitted in any Mix -1zone in 2019- 051; Attached below for your review and consideration of higher SGA 3 or 4 zones is a more comprehensive list of properties owned by our client . In the case where the site specific regulations or permissions are more restrictive than the proposed SGA provisions, considerations to review these permissions as part of this process may be appropriate and it is suggested that this should be discussed with the property owners. We would welcome an opportunity to discuss these comments further or provide examples for your consideration. Thank you. Yours truly, MHBC 6 Page 841 of 1179 (14all-I !r, iJ:�✓ Fes- �� Juliane vonWesterholt, BES, MCIP, RPP Associate CC. Pierre Chauvin, MA, MCIP, RPP Partner Page 842 of 1179 15213 — DOWNTOWN & MTSA PROPERTY HOLDINGS Proaerty Proposed OP Proposed Zoning Requested Mixed Use with MIX -2 Specific Policy Area 94H(M) #69 SGA -2 SGA C SGA -3 96H(M) SGA B SGA -2 SGA A I SGA -2 SGA C I SGA -4 780R(M), I SGA -3 783R(M), Subject to site-specific Subject to site - application under specific application consideration under consideration Mixed Use MIX -1 791R, 103H SGA B SGA B SGA C SGA -2 SGA -3 SGA -4 MIX -3 to reflect approved permissions (note outside of Subject to next phase Subject to next of Growing Together phase of Growing zoning (Q4 of 2024) Together zoning (Q4 of 2024 Subject to site-specific Subject to site- Proposed SGA - application under specific application 4 to reflect 32 consideration under consideration Storey permissions SGA C I SGA -3 SGA B I SGA -3 SGA C SGA -3 SGA A SGA -2 SGA B SGA -2 SGA C SGA -4 788R(M), 100H(M) 8 Page 843 of 1179 Page 844 of 1179 SGA C SGA -3 SGA -4 (case for u zone SGA A SGA -2 SGA -3 (surrounded by low rise res Subject to site specific Subject to site SGA -4 little to specific no low rise io Page 845 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Victoria Grohn Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2023 2:54 PM To: Toby Howell Cc: Jessica Vieira; Growing Together (SM) Subject: RE: Growing Together Plan- DTK/Joseph Street Hi Toby, Thanks for your patience with a follow up. After some internal discussions following our meeting last week to discuss the properties at the most appropriate course of action going forward is to submit a Pre - Submission Consultation Application. This process would allow for City staff and external agencies, beyond those in Heritage and Policy Planning, to review and provide comment on the feasibility of a development proposal in this location. While heritage considerations are a large component given the location of these properties within the Victoria Park Area Heritage Conservation District (VPAHCD), there are other development -related factors that need to be considered. The properties at are representative examples of the Berlin Vernacular architectural style and appear to be in excellent condition. This architectural style is prevalent throughout and supports the existing character that has been established within the VPAHCD. As mentioned during our call, the intent of the VPAHCD Plan is to discourage demolition in residential areas. I've included an excerpt from the Plan below that references demolition policies within the district: Page 846 of 1179 BUILDING DEMOLITION [IUILDIWP CijMM1+ATjON FOLI ;Y - Mcholas Hill Architect .Manner INTRODUCTION The Victoria Faris Area is remarkably intact with few vamt lois as a result of demolition. The exceptim is 1 11Ctit Sit ;math, where a number of fine historic redden s were dernolished for new development ► hich did not maze. The empty sites diminish the stature and integrity of the rcrm ling step-- 113c interst of the Plat is to discourage demolition in the residential areas. In the then SVM South ooThdor, dernolidon is acknowledged as a passibility whem zoning permits significantly higher density that presently exists. NOUC E INTsurrmption There shall be a prewm Icon against demolition. The consmation of Nstode buildL s in the Area is a FaiaMy lid. Property owj)cn arc encouraged to work with existing buRda"ngs, altering, adding to and integrating them into new development rather than demolishing. Moving Why removal of an historic building is contemplated, mewing the building onto a now site shall beco=dened. Salrnge Where ,removal is not feasible, the -careful salvage of key historic buildi fabric l be llildmuken so [ilei~ it cim be wed in the restoration of other similar style buildings, Act 'Whem dentolidon is applied far, the p edums of the Ontario Heritage Act shall be folk we4 Features The retieval of architectural features from demolished buildings and theme iftelugion in a neer building is encouraged. 6 The proposed land use of the properties municipally addressed a Street is Strategic Growth Area A (SGA -A) and the properties are located within an area proposed to be zoned SGA -1. This land use and zoning category proposes the least amount of intensification within the boundaries of Growing Together. While there is opportunity to increase density in these areas, for residential properties Page 847 of 1179 located within the VPAHCD, it is strongly encouraged that property owners work within the existing buildings. Growing Together has introduced additional policy to ensure that there is compatibility between the regulations of the new proposed land uses and the provisions of the heritage conservation districts. This includes a new policy which outlines that should a conflict between the policies of the Official Plan and policies of a HCD plan occur, then the provisions of the HCD plans prevail. This new policy is in accordance with the regulations of the Ontario Heritage Act. I trust this provides some additional information/direction going forward. Should you have any further heritage -related questions, please contact heritage{a1kitchener.ca. Thanks, Victoria Victoria Grohn (she/her), MPian, BES Heritage Planner I Planning Division y City of Kitchener 519-741-2200 x 7041 1 victoria.grohnCaMtchener.ca "Please be advised that I will be going off on maternity leave starting December 18, 2023** From: Toby Howell Sent: Friday, December 8, 2023 1:11 PM To: Victoria Grohn 4Victoria,Grohn@kitchener,ca� Cc: Jessica Vieira <Jessica.Vieira@kitchener.ca> Subject; Re: Growing Together Plan- DTK/Joseph Street Hey everyone I Thanks for the call the other day. Appreciate all of your time. I know we discussed setting up a follow up meeting with a city planner involved with the Growing Together plan. Any idea when you'd want to set that up? The closer we get to Christmas, the more open my schedule usually is so whatever works. I know Jeff said he's free every Wednesday. Talk to you soon and have a great weekend. Sender notified by F -I Mailtrack On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 1:27 PM Victoria Grohn <Victoria.Grohn@kitchener.ca> wrote: Hi Toby — Thanks for providing these questions in advance. This is helpful to guide our discussion tomorrow. Page 848 of 1179 Chat soon, Victoria Victoria Grohn (she/her), MPlan, BES Heritage Planner I Planning Division I City of Kitchener 519-741-2200 x 7041 1 victoria.grohn(aD-kitchener.ca From: Toby Howell Sent: Tuesday, December 5, 2023 9:45 AM To: Victoria Grohn <Victoria.Grohn@kitchener.ca> Cc: Jessica Vieira <Jessica.Vieira@kitchener.ca> Subject: Re: Growing Together Plan- DTK/Joseph Street Hey Victoria, Sorry for the delay, it ended up being a pretty busy week so I didn't manage to get this to you: The main questions are as follows: 1) -How do the heritage districts fit in the Working Together plan? Was there collaboration between heritage and the planning committee when deciding the boundaries of the growth areas? 2) -Does heritage assess the individual historical importance of all homes within heritage districts or are they all just grouped based on blocks? From the research I've done, there doesn't appear to be any documented history of any of the three homes at the corner of Joseph/Richmond. I guess from my perspective, there isn't anything extraordinary about these homes that isn't evident in other century neighborhoods around DTK. 3) -With the goal to increase housing units in the transit areas in mind, what development within heritage districts would be considered? My discussions with John Zunic/Adam Clark indicate the properties would be ideal candidates in the Growth Area 1 Zone. With that being said, I think it's worth reviewing any possible outcomes as the demand for housing in the core will only increase. - 15.D.2.8. In a Heritage Conservation District, where there is a conflict between the policies in this land use designation and the Heritage Conservation District Plan, the Heritage Conservation District Plan will prevail. 4) Are there any examples of more recent redevelopment/densification within the heritage districts in Kitchener other than duplex/triplex conversions? Once again, this is more for general information about how the project will impact the Victoria Park Heritage District so any additional info and discussion will be greatly appreciated. Page 849 of 1179 On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 4:03 PM Toby Howell rote: Thanks! I'll come up with a list of questions for Wednesday and forward them to you this week. Are you able to add the invite? On Tue, Nov 28, 2023, 2:46 p.m. Victoria Grohn <Victoria.Groh n0kitchener.ca> wrote: Hi Toby, We're able to meet with you on Wednesday December 6 at 9.00am. We have another engagement at 9:30, so will have to keep the meeting to half an hour. If possible, it would be great if you could provide any specific questions or points of discussion you'd like to address so that we can make the most of our meeting time. I'll follow up with a Teams invite. Please feel free to forward on to your neighbour as well. Thanks, Victoria Victoria Grohn (she/her), MPIan, BES Heritage Planner I Planning Division I City of Kitchener 519-741-2200 x 7041 1 victoria.grohnakitchener.ca From: Toby Howell Sent: Tuesday, Novem er , Page 850 of 1179 To: Victoria Grohn EVictoria.Grohn@kitchener.ca> Cc: Jessica Vieira <Jessica.Vieira@kitchener.ca> Subject: Re: Growing Together Plan- DTK/Joseph Street You don't often get email fro . Learn why this is important Any chance first thing, 9 or 9:30AM would work next Wednesday? 0n Mon, Nov 27, 2023, 5:14 p.m. Toby Howe rote: Thanks for the quick response Victoria! I was under that impression with heritage rules, but wasn't sure how the new proposed changes to the official pian tied in with the heritage community. I was very surprised to see the map included that area in the strategic growth 1 zone. Without written notice, something like this would have never crossed my mind. Was there much collaboration between the heritage planners and those involved with the "Growing Together" plan? I can be free almost anytime during business hours next week. I'd like to include my neighbour Jeff if possible, so if there is a specific time that works best for you, 1 can run it by him. Let me know! Thanks. On Mon, Nov 27, 2023, 1:15 p.m. Victoria Grohn <Victoria.Grohn@kitchener.ca> wrote: Hi Toby, Thanks for reaching to Herita*Pjlmanninastaff to start discussions aboutthe atential redevelopment of the properties addressed as I've also copied my colleague, Jessica Vieira, to as we because willa Heading a on parental leave in a few l I I weeks and likely will not be in office if an application comes in. b Page 851 of 1179 We would be happy to discuss potential redevelopment plans with you. I will preface this by noting that demolition within heritage conservation districts is not something that is generally supported, particularly when properties are still in sound condition. However, we can still discuss what redevelopment on this site might look like and what heritage requirements would be. Perhaps a Teams meeting may be the best way to meet and discuss. What is your availability like next week? We can coordinate on our end if you have some dates and times that would work for you. Looking forward to chatting. Kind regards, Victoria Victoria Grohn (she/her), MPlan, BES Heritage Planner I Planning Division I City of Kitchener 519-741-2200 x 7041 1 victoria.grohn(5)kitchener.ca From: Toby Howel Sent: Monday, Novemer R,PR To: Victoria Grohn <Vctoria.Grohn@kitchener.ca? Subject: Growing Together Plan- ©TK/Joseph Street You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important Hey Victoria, Hope you had a good weekend. I was hoping you'd have time for a quick chat sometime this week regarding the growing together official Ian amendment that has been in the works. Our property itchener falls within the Strategic Growth Area 1 and over the past week I have had a few chats with Adam and John, city planners on the growing together committee. -There are three properties (our triplex at t and adjoining neighbour at ve) that are interested in selling our properties in the near future. !Both 9 had listed their properties for sale previously, but did not sell. We were considering waiting un i Pe spring Wuni the information on the strategic growth plan came our way. With this new information, we have discussed selling all three properties as an assembly. Page 852 of 1179 ' My discussion with Adam indicated that the three properties would be an ideal candidate for redevelopment (meeting setback requirements and 11m, 3 storey max height) and so long as the design conformed with heritage ` rules, may be a possibility. The idea would be (if this is possible), to approach smaller developers like Vive or Neo who are focused more on quality over quantity, to design a heritage fitting, higher density building that fits with the Growing Together plan. What that means from a heritage perspective I am not sure of, which is where you come in! If you have time to chat about this, It would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! Best Regards, Toby Howell TrilliumWest Real Estate Brokerage �o❑ F-1Sender notified by Mailtrack Page 853 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2023 1:27 PM To: Juliane vonWesterholt; Growinq Toqether (SM) Cc: Natalie Goss; Pierre Chauvin; Stephen Litt Subject: RE: Growing Together comments Hi Juliane, Staff has begun our evaluation of submissions with planning management. Changes will be recommended in our staff report as it is finalized over the next few weeks. Thank you, The Growing Together Team From: Juliane vonWesterholt Sent: Friday, December 8, 2023 4:21 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Cc: Natalie Goss <Natalie.Goss@kitchener.ca>, Pierre Chauvin tephen Litt Subject: Growing Together comments You don't often get email fra Learn why is is important Good afternoon Natalie, As promised, here is my letter on behalf of our client VIVE. Please review as part of the responses to the draft OPA and ZIBA and general feedback on the documents. Should you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me. In addition, we would welcome an opportunity to meet and discuss the comments in more detail or provide any clarifications. Sf V1ti eYe4 jkL%Rm vov, westerkoLt JULIANE iron WESTERHOLT BES, MCIP, RPP Associate IT 1■gaTa� Architecture Follow us: Webpage I Linkedin I Facebook I Twitter I Virneo i Instagram i Page 854 of 1179 October 24, 2023 Mr. Craig Dumart Senior Planner Planning Division, City of Kitchener 6t" Floor, 200 King St W. Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 Re: Dear Sir: Development, Kitchener, ON P,EINDERS + LAW AFRP-HITE'ETURE . ENGINEERIN5 Project No: 22048 In response to the committee's directive earlier this month, which focused on exploring increased density in exchange for enhanced community benefits, Vive Development Corporation has taken the initiative to coordinate a comprehensive design team to evaluate this opportunity. This cross -functional team comprises architects, geo-technical engineers, various structural engineers, mechanical and electrical engineers, building energy consultants, the modular building contractor, pre -construction project managers, and Vive's extensive team of financial analysts and proforma experts. At the heart of the community benefits we aim to provide is the commitment to achieving energy efficiency levels exceeding 40% of the building code standard. To realize this objective in a cost-effective manner, we have identified modular building systems as a crucial component. These systems enable rapid construction while ensuring a high-quality, airtight building envelope. It's important to note that the modular system under consideration for this project is heavier than traditional cast -in-place concrete. As a result, we must spread the weight of the tower to distributed to a wider area to prevent it from punching through the moderately yielding soils on the project site. Additionally, the design for a taller tower requires enhanced structural shear resistance due to wind forces, leading to an elongated design. A taller tower also has more exposed facade to outdoor weather conditions and less cladding area to interior floor plate ratio was required for energy considerations. A slab tower allows us to reduce this ratio reducing the energy loss through the building envelope. In summary, the design we are presenting today is a more cost-effective and practical approach to achieve our objectives of energy efficiency, affordability, and accessibility. Our dedicated team has worked diligently to assemble this proposal in just under one week. Page 855 of 1179 EREINDERS + LAW ARCHITECTURE. ENGINEERING We remain committed to upholding the principles of urban design and tall building guidelines. Slab tower formats, when designed thoughtfully, can be aesthetically pleasing and contribute positively to the public realm, much like point towers. Vive's past projects featuring slab tower designs stand as a testament to this approach. We are steadfast in our support of this approach to bolster housing supply, which is a critical need, particularly in the midst of the ongoing housing crisis. Should you have any further questions, please let us know. Yours truly, :n Y r f. F � 3 Kyle Reinders, OAA, VP - Architecture Reinders+Law Ltd. Page 856 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2023 3:49 PM To: Chris Pidgeon, Growing Together (SM) Cc: Brandon Flewwelling; Caleb Miller Subject: RE: Charles Place Submission (by Rockway Holdings Limited) Hi Chris, Confirming receipt of the submission. Staff has begun our evaluation of submissions with planning management. Changes will be recommended in our staff report as it is finalized over the next few weeks. Thank you, The Growing Together Team From: Chris Pidgeon Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2023 3:42 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Cc: Brandon Flewwelling aleb Miller Subject: Charles Place Submission (by Rockway Holdings Limited) You don't often get email fr Lean why this i s im porta t All: Attached is our submission materials, including: - Master Plan by ABA Architects - Planning Justification Letter by GSP Group - Aeronautical Assessment by IDS North America Ltd Please confirm receipt of these materials? Thank you, Chris www.ciswrouA.ca 1 Page 857 of 1179 GSP group December 12. 2023 City of Kitchener 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 SHAPING GREAT COMMUNITIES MM000ME1111167 Attn: Adam Clark, Senior Urban Designer (Architecture and Urban Form) Dear Adam: Re: Growing Together Charles Place - Planning Justification Letter Street, commonly referred to as "Charles Place" (the Site"). Collectively, these twelve (12) properties make up the entire block bounded by Charles, Sydney, Delta and Preston Streets_ On behalf of our client, Rockway Holdings Limited (the parent ownership company), I am writing to request that the City give consideration to applying the SGA4 zoning to the Site through the very important City initiative — "Growing Together. Approach to Growth and Change" — to respond to Provincial directives and the housing supply crisis. This letter refines and supplements submissions made for Charles Place on October 5, 2023 for the consideration of the Strategic Growth Area 4 ("SGA4") zoning. In this letter. I provide a brief overview of the proposed redevelopment concept and vision, and planning justification in response to the City of Kitchener Official Plan for your further consideration of the appropriateness for the SGA4 zoning classification. Development Concept and Vision: The attached Master Plan for Charles Place was prepared by ABA Architects (dated December 4, 2023), in response to the City of Kitchener draft SGA4 zone. The overall concept is to redevelop the mostly vacant, assembled site into an integrated mixed-use development comprised of residential, assisted PLANNING URBAN DESIGN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Page 858 of 1179 living / long-term care, hotel, neighbourhood and service commercial, office, medical / dental and community / institutional uses. The Owner seeks to provide compatible land uses in a neighbourhood close in proximity to the many commercial amenities along King Street East and Ottawa Street South, and in proximity to two LRT stations at Borden and Mill. The vision is to frame Charles and Sydney Streets with podiums and towers and have fingers of courtyards and open spaces extend out towards Rockway Golf Course with a central connected promenade. The "public walkway", running parallel to Charles, would divide the 2.3 hectare block lengthwise, anchored by a conservatory as a gateway feature, knitting together the development, the outdoor amenity and garden spaces. Charles Place will become a "gateway" to the City of Kitchener where no gateway currently exists. It has sufficient area to achieve a scale and density of development, promoting employment, residential, commercial and institutional uses within one block. This development will become a catalyst for future redevelopment and intensification of the mostly single or two storey built -form in the adjacent neighbourhood. Charles Place will be a transformative project that anchors Kitchener's gateway on the approach from Highway 401. The Master Plan achieves the contemplated regulations of the SGA4 zone. Those regulations require podiums of 3 to 6 storeys, 3m stepbacks at 7 storeys, maximum tower dimensions, physical separation, and reduced floor plates at 13, 19 and 37 storeys, with a particular attention to ground floor facades fronting a street — all achievable as illustrated in the Master Plan for Charles Place. The Master Plan contemplates seven towers, ranging in height from 25 to 46 storeys. An Aeronautical Assessment of the Waterloo Regional Airport was conducted by IDS North America Ltd. to confirm the maximum building heights permitted in proximity to the Airport flight paths. The maximum height is geodetically established to permit a maximum building height of 46 storeys without impeding the airport runway, particularly departure, operations. A copy of the Assessment Report is included for your information. It is noted that a Record of Site Assessment has been completed for the Site and a Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks Acknowledgement has been obtained. City of Kitchener Official Plan: Charles Place is proposed to be located within a Protected Major Transit Station Area in the Official Plan Amendment for the "Growing Together" initiative. These areas are anticipated to be redeveloped to support transit through intensification of integrated residential, office, commercial and institutional uses connected by a variety of transportation modes, with attractive, pedestrian -friendly, streetscapes and built -forms. Charles Place is entirely located within 600 and 1,000 metres of the Borden and Mill ION stations respectively, anticipated to generate thousands of daily LRT ridership trips per day. Charles Place is proposed to be designated as Strategic Growth Area C in the Official Plan Amendment for the "Growing Together" initiative, intended to achieve significant intensification at higher density with a minimum Floor Space Ratio of 2.0. In addition to high density residential uses, non-residential uses are anticipated for employment, commerce and community facilities such as medical facilities and senior's housing / institutions. GSP Group 12 Page 859 of 1179 Policy 15.D.2.5 of the proposed Official Plan Amendment allows for the consideration of site-specific applications for Zoning By-law Amendments through numerous factors. The following provides an outline of the factors and responses for the properties to be zoned SGA4 High -Rise Growth Zone: Policy 15.D.2.5 - Notwithstanding Policy 4.C.1.8 and 4.C.1.9, site specific applications which seek relief from the implementing zoning through a minor variance(s) or special zoning regulation(s), seek to amend the Zoning By- law to change land use permissions, and/or seek to amend this Plan to change from one land use designation to another, will consider the following factors: a) Compatibility with the planned function of the The properties are located within a Protected subject lands and adjacent lands Major Transit Station Area which are areas intended to accommodate a significant intensification through higher density growth. Charles Place is located approximately 600 and 1,000 metres from the Borden and Mill ION Stations. The proposed mixed-use residential, (office) employment, commercial and institutional uses are anticipated to generate thousands of LRT trips per day from the Charles Place site. The proposed redevelopment will assist the City in achieving the provincial density target of 160 residents and jobs per hectare. A large portion of the area to the northwest and northeast is occupied by single and two-storey employment uses, and a mix of institutional, commercial and low-rise housing forms. Those uses are an underutilization of the lands and could be redeveloped and/or assembled to provide opportunities for intensive mixed -uses. Charles Place will create a catalyst for future redevelopment to more transit -supportive uses within the Protected MTSA. Finally, the properties are proposed to be designated as Strategic Growth Area C, which permits a range of medium and high-rise development. The preliminary development concept discussed with the City through Pre - Submission Consultation on October 18, 2023, included a significant employment and residential mix of uses. The Aeronautical Assessment completed to assess maximum building heights due to Waterloo Regional Airport operations limit the height to 46 storeys. Notwithstanding this, significant density can be achieved on this large, consolidated site, while also achieving design objectives for an attractive, pedestrian realm. GSP Group 13 Page 860 of 1179 b) Suitability of the lot for the proposed use and/or Charles Place is an acquisition of twelve (12) legal built -form parcels, which combined create an overall site area of approximately 2.3 hectares (5.7 ac.). The assembly of the twelve lots with access to Charles, Sydney and Preston streets creates opportunities for an enhanced pedestrian promenade connecting through the Site from north to south and east to west, providing great accessibility to the open space courtyards, amenity spaces, and tower uses. This combined with podiums and towers that frame Charles and Sydney streets, with staggered setbacks will create a visual attractive redevelopment as the gateway to Kitchener. The consolidation of the properties is what creates the opportunity for intensive redevelopment at a scale, height and built form anticipated within the Protected MTSAs, while achieving the zoning regulations envisioned in the SGA4 zone. c) Lot area and consolidation as further outlined in The proposed Charles Place Master Plan illustrates Policy 3.C.2.11 the site as a single consolidated entity. The twelve properties have been acquired in various "holding companies" of Rockway Holdings Limited. Upon the consideration and approval of planning applications that would allow for high-density mixed-use development, the properties will subsequently be consolidated on title. d) Compliance with the City's Urban Design Manual and Urban Design Manual Policy 11.C.1.34 In October 2023, the preliminary development concept submitted to the City in support of the Request for Pre -Submission Consultation took into consideration applicable policies of the City's Urban Design Manual, including those pertaining to tall buildings (former Tall Building Design Guidelines). The preliminary development concept and now refined Master Plan includes: • Podium heights of 3 to 6 storeys • Minimum 24m tower separations • Staggered tower floorplates to create variety in tower viewsheds • Tower stepbacks and floorplate areas that meet the zoning regulations at 7, 13, 19 & 37 storeys • Maximum building lengths and • Particular attention to the ground floor and public realm. GSP Group 14 Page 861 of 1179 GSP Group 15 Page 862 of 1179 Proposed Policy 11.C.1.34 -indicates that new tall building development must have consideration for tall building design principles, including separation, overlook, height, floor plate area, tower placement, orientation and building proportions. The policy further states that the zoning by-law will provide for design regulations to mitigate microclimate environmental impacts, create high-quality design, ensure compatibility with surrounding low and mid -rise contexts and ensure the development of future adjacent or nearby buildings can achieve these standards. It is our opinion that the Master Plan demonstrates the site can be redeveloped with a high degree of sensitivity to the surrounding uses that are a mix of low/mid-rise residential, institutional and employment uses that will likely transition into more intensive transit -supportive uses. As noted above, the Master Plan concept incorporates a number of urban design guidelines and requirements with respect to tall building design. Through further detailed design, we believe that these factors can be further enhanced to meet the policy objectives of 11.C.1.34. Furthermore, we believe that the development concept creates an opportunity to provide for a high-quality design along Charles and Sydney streets with commercial/retail, office uses at grade, appropriate podium heights and sufficient tower stepbacks, enhancing the streetscapes. The Master Plan includes a conservatory (public art) opportunity facing south that would be visible approaching on King Street, to demarcate a gateway to the City of Kitchener. e) Cultural heritage resources, including Policy 15.D.2.8 Not applicable It is our understanding that there are no Designated or Listed heritage resources proximate to the subject properties. f) Technical considerations and other contextual or site It is our expectation that all technical specific factors considerations and requirements for redevelopment of Charles Place will be directed by a formal Master Plan to include Master Site/Servicing/Landscape/Streetscape Plans, supported by a Traffic Impact Study and Parking Justification Report, Stationary and Traffic Noise Assessments, Pedestrian Wind Assessments, GSP Group 15 Page 862 of 1179 Functional Servicing and Stormwater Management Report, Urban Design Report and/or Guidelines. Conclusion: The Site is an excellent opportunity to realize a signature redevelopment and establish an urban gateway to the City of Kitchener. Currently, the gateway to Kitchener is underwhelming and reflective of a previous era in the history of the City of Kitchener. As you arrive to Kitchener from Highway 8, the gateway is Rockway Gardens — a wonderful, tranquil park -setting for horticulture and photographs — but not indicative of the vitality of a major urban city in Ontario. The Charles Place redevelopment provides opportunities to create a vibrant, urban mix of residential, employment and community land uses that celebrates the transition of Kitchener into a diverse, urban, mixed use, community -integrated environment that welcomes visitors, employers, residents and investors to the City of Kitchener - showcasing the transition and sophistication of intensification and redevelopment in support of the LRT — a modern urban centre. The Charles Place redevelopment has excellent connectivity to the broader community. In addition to excellent vehicular connectivity afforded to the Site via King and Charles, the Site is within the 8 - minute walkshed (+/- 600 metres) of the Borden LRT Station, and the Iron Horse Trail, arguable the most extensive "urban" trail in the region, extending across the "frontage" on Delta Street. Based on our review of the November 2023 "Approach to Growth and Change", the SGA4 Zone is appropriate to realize a transit -supportive mixed-use development, with little or no impact to surrounding uses. The SGA4 zone fulfills the City's objectives to provide employment, residential and community uses on large -scaled sites that can demonstrate an ability to achieve massing and design that meet public interests — and in this location, as a catalyst for future redevelopment at the gateway to Kitchener. We respectfully request that you accept this submission to assist you and your team in the consideration of the Protected MTSA designation and SGA4 zoning in the planning instruments to implement the "Growing Together" initiative. GSP Group 16 Page 863 of 1179 If you would like to discuss further or require any additional materials to assist in your review of this request, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, GSP Group Inc. Chris Pidgeon, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner Enclosures: - Master Plan for Charles Place, prepared by ABA Architects - Aeronautical Assessment, prepared by IDS North America Ltd. C.C. Bill Seegmiller/Seth Jutzi — Rockway Holdings Limited GSP Group 17 Page 864 of 1179 CHARLES PLACE ok 669-705 CHARLES STREET EAST, KITCHENER, ON, N2G 2R6 ISSUED ON 2023.12.04 1.3 SITE STATISTICS i.4 RESERVED 1.5 AERIAL SITE PLAN 1.6 GROUND FLOOR PLAN 5.1-5.9 MASSING VIEWS LLj Q T z — z i�Els Q , , MAURICE ST. amu; s �ax E p�p RRA o S� \� �'..� TOWER7..-. j _`-•0��(F 36 STOREYS m30000 O CD O _ oaw a w ae ; N CHARLES ST. E. & --- I.P rTMETI IMAM7* FLORAL CRESC.- ,M .IX . as o 0 as 0 a Page 867 of 1179 .g 1.6 40 211, tp ISO, a— — w I I. N"It"ll 4. owal 'g, o , OR off I 1,� oo Pon OFF, 3 LU U LU LU 2 O Z O ■ �s Page 869 of 1179 5.2 Nq 7,0,0 OFF A.-OPINOW AlOw" MIA VIEW FROM TRAIL AT ROCKWAY GARDENS LU CLU w w CL ■ �S Page 872 of 1179 5.5 SITE APPROACH FROM BORDEN LRT STOP Page 873 of 1179 5.6 ENTRANCE FEATURE/ PLAZA AT INTERSECTION Page 874 of 1179 5.7 VIEW FROM TRAIL AT SYDNEY STR G� w LU U w w CL ■ �S Page 875 of 1179 5.8 VIEW FROM TRAIL INTO COURTYARDS Lu ILU w w CL ■ �S Page 876 of 1179 5.9 I LAS an IDS InMnena Dei Sistemi company Aeronautical Assessment Construction Project around Kitchener/Waterloo Airport SYDNEY/CHARLES STREET PROJECT ABA Architects Inc. 26 April 2023 Page 877 of 1179 INTRODUCTION AND AIM OF THE REVIEW ABA Architects Inc. requested that IDS North America Ltd. conduct a review of potential aviation impacts on Kitchener/Waterloo Airport (CYKF) for the proposed multi -stories development east of the airport. IDS North America Ltd. has been tasked to review the aspects related to TP 308 surfaces. This analysis does not cover the Airport Certification constraints, Airport Zoning Regulations, other zoning or planning requirements, and other requirements (obstacle markings, etc.) were not reviewed. In this review, we have used our tool Flight Procedures Design and Airspace Management (FPDAM) to evaluate the surfaces in comparison to what is currently published by Nav Canada in the Canada Air Pilot (CAP) as of April 20, 2023, and any known improvements to these published Instrument Flight Procedures (IFP). The surfaces of the current and known planned Instrument Procedures were loaded to verify the potential impact on these. This review does not replace or exempt the proponent to obtain all required approvals at the City level, Regional level, from Nav Canada or Transport Canada as applicable. Situated approximately 3.61 nautical miles east of RWY 08, and less than 0.5NM form the extended centreline of the runway, the location of the proposed project is not relevant to some proposed future airport plans (extension of other runways, addition of a new parallel runway, etc. DIMENSIONS OF DEVELOPMENT Building information was provided by ABA Architects Inc. and were used to define georeferenced shapes to be analysed in 3D against the TP308 surfaces related to the various Instrument Approaches and Departures procedures providing accessibility to the CYKF Airport in low visibility / low ceiling weather conditions (Instrument Meteorological Conditions). The method used will provide worst case scenario as the surface used is larger than the actual buildings but has no detrimental effects on the assessment results for the TP 308 surfaces analysed. The figure below shows the site located between Charles Street and Rockway Golf course. 3.61 nautical miles east of RWY 08, and less than 0.5NM form the extended centreline of the runway. 2 Page 878 of 1179 4 Figure 1— Location of the analysed site No dimensions were provided by the proponent as the purpose of this study is to determine the highest permissible height of construction in the plotted area without causing any negative impact on the airport's operations and accessibility. EXTENT OF THE REVIEW The review consists of assessing the potential impact of the construction project to determine highest elevation for a building or group of buildings without having an impact on the TP308 surfaces related to the various Instrument Approaches and Departures procedures providing accessibility to the CYKF Airport. CYKF is currently serviced by various ILS, GNSS and Departure procedures as follows: - ILS RWY 26 - RNAV (GNSS) Z RWY 26 - RNAV (RNP) Y RWY 26 - RNAV (GNSS) Z RWY 08 - RNAV (RNP) Y RWY 08 3 Page 879 of 1179 - RNAV (GNSS) RWY 14 - RNAV (GNSS) RWY 32 - Various Departures RWY 08, 14, 26 and 32 NSTRUMENT PROCEDURES REVIEW at CYKF The Airport Certification status for Runway 08 is published in the Canada Flight Supplement (CFS) and the Canada Air Pilot (CAP), and as found in the Air Navigation Database. Consequently, the airport is declared Certified with Runway 08 certified AGNIIIB — Non -Precision. It also shows an airport elevation of 1,054' ASL. And a Rwy 08 Threshold Elevation of 1,023 feet ASL. With the proposed construction site at approximately 3.61 nautical miles (6.7Km) from the threshold of runway 08, only the approach procedures to RWY 08 and Departures RWY 26 are relevant IFPS for the analysis. No planned changes to these Instrument Procedures are currently known. The Kitchener Waterloo Airport has identified a runway extension project for runway 14-32 which would require modified IFPS for these two runways (14 and 32) but would not be relevant to the site. The proposed site has no relevant potential impact for IFPS to runway 26. The planned extension of runway 08-26 (at the threshold of runway 26) would make it even less relevant in the event of this extension as currently planned. Extension of the runway at threshold 08 would be impossible due to its location relative to the river. On the other hand, the proposed building at the analysed location is in the axis of the runway 08-26 at CYKF at approximately 3.61 nautical miles from threshold of runway 08. In this case, the proposed construction site does fall within the Final and / or Intermediate Segment of the approaches to Runway 08. The site is also within the departures off runway 26 and within the missed approach segments of the approaches to runway 26. The departures off runway 26 offer much more constraints than the missed approach runway 26, therefore the departures were assessed as the significant constraint. Departures Off RWY 26 Figure 1 shows the Site Location relative to the Departures Runway 26 OES. The site is located in Zone 2 of the Obstacle Evaluation Surface (OES), right in front of the flight path of departing aircraft off runway 26. The Departures off runway 26 surface will have an elevation of 1,566 feet above the proposed site. This is the highest building elevation before imposing a minimum climb gradient to aircraft departing runway 26 at CYKF. 10 Page 880 of 1179 Figure 1 — Site Location (in blue) in relation to the Departures Runway 26 Approaches to RWY 08 The proposed site is approximately 0.64 nautical mile of the Final Approach Fix (IKMID) and located in the primary area of the Intermediate Segment of the RNAV (GNSS) Z Rwy 08 as shown in Figure 4. Considering the current minima based on the existing obstacles and terrain surrounding the CYKF airport, the Intermediate segment surface is at 1600' ASL. The proposed building could have an elevation of elevation is 1,600' without having any impact on the currently published LNAV to runway 08 at CYKF. The LNAV/VNAV, LPV and RNP Rwy 08 provide similar restriction in the intermediate segment with obstacle evaluation surfaces (OES) between 1,600 and 1,608 feet. Page 881 of 1179 k. e. *�Co'� e laga Co;eg . JUat as • _ � - OKi �neY lamar�ial A mm Icustome �,..ai"`T .fit - WP V Wj • .', ► v e A T r`S aeamhrtlg,' eu`tte= rr 4my R "uperMre Hi # • Sha _ 6f� ; r � 1 a �%+C onepDga,u ege *vva ernoq . t � M F Ke [Nat rlooStore) A 44 "' � •�• i e i j .�,� >�'�� , germs• � �' 1 - - Rene;MemorlalAudttorlum [customerP. . * Real L adlan Supersto a Hlgfiland Road 3 y. —4,Camaridge zf Chsaapee f ��� Su'nvise SYtd pang Centr 'ry a .� " `��„ Park 6 .4-- - 7r MIMMARY Table 1 shows the elevation of the TP308 protection areas above the various planned sites versus the proposed building elevation at each site. It is to be noted that the most restrictive constraints are imposed by the Departures off Runway 26 at CYKF. Table 1 —TP308 Obstacle Evaluation Surfaces Elevations for each IFP versus the proposed building elevations. As shown in Table 1 above, the highest elevation of any structure on the proposed location identified by ABA Architects Inc at the corner of Sydney and Charles Street is 1,566 feet above sea level (477m ASL) and would not create any impact on the Instrument Flight Procedures at Kitchener Waterloo. This review does not replace or exempt the proponent to obtain all required approvals at the City level, or Regional level, or at the airport level, or from Nav Canada, or Transport Canada as applicable. Page 883 of 1179 DEPARTURES RNAV (GNSS) RNAV (GNSS) RNAV (RNP) RWY 26 RWY 08 - LPV RWY 08- VNAV RWY 08 ABA 1,566 Ft 1,600 Ft 1,600 Ft 1,600 Ft Architects Inc. (477 m) (487m) (487m) (487m) Table 1 —TP308 Obstacle Evaluation Surfaces Elevations for each IFP versus the proposed building elevations. As shown in Table 1 above, the highest elevation of any structure on the proposed location identified by ABA Architects Inc at the corner of Sydney and Charles Street is 1,566 feet above sea level (477m ASL) and would not create any impact on the Instrument Flight Procedures at Kitchener Waterloo. This review does not replace or exempt the proponent to obtain all required approvals at the City level, or Regional level, or at the airport level, or from Nav Canada, or Transport Canada as applicable. Page 883 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2023 4:48 PM To: Stephen Litt; Growing Together (SM); Juliane vonWesterholt Cc: Natalie Goss; Pierre Chauvin; Mark Hoculik Subject: RE: Growing Together comments Good Afternoon, Thank you for your comments. We are evaluating all comments, but wanted to provide you with an opportunity to meet our submission requirements for site-specific requests. As discussed, we have asked all proponents to provide the following in a written submission for each property or assembly of properties where a change is being sought; 1) Proof of lot consolidation or lot ownership 2) A conceptual design demonstrating compliance with the desired zone and; 3) A scoped planning justification that addresses proposed official plan policy 15.D.2.5 which states: 15.D.2.5. Notwithstanding Policy 4.C.1.8 and 4.C.1.9, site specific applications which seek relief from the implementing zoning through a minor variance(s) or special zoning regulation(s), seek to amend the Zoning By-law to change land use permissions, and/or seek to amend this Plan to change from one land use designation to another, will consider the following factors: a) compatibility with the planned function of the subject lands and adjacent lands; b) suitability of the lot for the proposed use and/or built form; c) lot area and consolidation as further outlined in Policy 3.C.2.11; d) compliance with the City's Urban Design Manual and Policy 11.C.1.34; e) cultural heritage resources, including Policy 15.D.2.8; and, f) technical considerations and other contextual or site specific factors. The Growing Together team met with planning management on Friday December 8" to review submissions made prior to the comment deadline of November 30th. We are meeting again this Friday, December 15th to consider additional submissions. In order to consider site-specific submissions, please provide the above materials in advance of the 151H Please also note that any active applications, including 83-87 Weber St. E. remain subject to their site-specific application and are not proposed to be zoned through Growing Together. Approved developments, such as 1001 King St. E. are also able to proceed via their approved OPA/ZBAs through the transition regulations in Section 18.4 of the zoning by-law. Further, please note that while staff are evaluating submissions seeking a different zone through this process, that additional, new site-specific regulations are not in scope for Growing Together. We are continuing to evaluate the rest of your feedback, but wanted to make sure you had an opportunity to make any site-specific submissions in time for staff to review. Thank you, The Growing Together Team From: Stephen Litt Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2023 2:03 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca>; Juliane vonWesterholt Page 884 of 1179 Cc: Natalie Goss <Natalie.Goss@kitchener.ca>, Pierre Chauvi Mark Hoculik RU Je FeRroMwingPoglMercommients You don't often get einail frog ! .7rn why this is iniportint I suspect we will need to meet again and go over in detail with staff given our magnitude of impact on our housing projects Thank you all I Get outlook for iC)S From: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca, Sent: Tuesday, December 12 2023 11:27:07 AM To: Juliane vonWesterhol Growing Together (SM) cG row i neTogeth e r@ k itc h <Natahe.Goss kitchener.ca>, Pierre Chauvin ; Stephen Litt AWW Subject: RE: Growing Together comments Hi Juliane, Staff has begun our evaluation of submissions with planning management. Changes will be recommended in our staff report as it is finalized over the next few weeks. Thank you, The Growing Together Team From: Juliane vonWesterhol Sent: Friday, December S, 2 To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether @kitchener.ca> CcOwwrnents kitchener.ca>; Pierre Chauvi ;Stephen Litt You don't often get email fro Learn wiry this is important Good afternoon Natalie, As promised, here is my letter on behalf of our client VIVE. Please review as part of the responses to the draft oPA and ZBA and general feedback on the documents. Should you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me. In addition, we would welcome an opportunity to meet and discuss the comments in more detail or provide any clarifications. SI.ALve4 J L,C UC3 VLe vo vu Western oLt JULIANE von WESTERHOLT BES, MC:IP, RPP Page 885 of 1179 Associate M H BC Planning, Urban Design & Landscape Architecture P Y E iA� R S MHBC PLAN N I NG URBAN DESIGN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Instagram This communication is intended solely for the named addressee(s) and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, protected or otherwise exempt from disclosure. No waiver of confidence, privilege, protection or otherwise is made. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, please advise us immediately and delete this email without reading, copying or forwarding it to anyone. Page 886 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2023 10:04 AM To: Kristen Barisdale Cc: Natalie Goss Subject: RE: Growing Together November 2023 Draft Documents - Hi Kristen, We are currently not in receipt of a concept plan that demonstrates compliance with the desired zone (SGA -4), particularly with respect to setbacks and physical separation to the rear lot line. The tower floor plate area is also not noted. We have also generally been receiving more detailed information about property ownership. However, we are currently considering apply a holding {provision to all submissions to require lot consolidation, and can evaluate what you've already submitted with that in mind. Thanks, The Growing Together Team From: Kristen Barisdale Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2023 11:38 AM To: Growing Together SM <Growin To ether kitchener.ca3 Cc: Fariborz Fallah ; Ian Istvan Natalie Goss <Natalie.Goss@kitchener.ca7; Adam Clark <Adam.Clark@kitchener.ca> Subject: RE: Growing Together November 2023 Draft Documents - Importance: High You don't often get email from kbarisdale(6g7sRgroug.ca. Learn why this is important Hi all, Just following up an this again as Friday is coming up quickly — I need further direction as to whether or not any additional material is required from our end. Kristen Barisdale FVICIP, RPP VACATION ALERT: Please note that I will be away from the office from December 22, 2023 to January 8, 2024. 1 Page 887 of 1179 From: Kristen Barisdale Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2023 12:20 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Cc: Fariborz Falla ; Ian Istvan Subject: RE: Growing Together November 2023 Draft Documents - Good afternoon, Thank you for your response and feedback. Our initial submission to the City on November 30, 2023 includes a detailed summary letter and planning justification for our request, as well as a copy of the preliminary development concept shared with the City as part of our request for Pre -Submission Consultation (please note that our pre -submission consultation occurred on November 23, 2023). Please refer to attached email. I believe that our November 30 submission addresses in detail the considerations noted below. Can you please confirm or clarify what additional material and information you would like to see from our group to assist with these discussions? Thank you. Kristen Barisdale I�SP MCIP, RPP r group Vice President, Planning VACATION ALERT: Please note that I will be away from the office from December 22, 2023 to January 8, 2024. From: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Sent: Monday, December 11, 2023 4:55 PM To: Kristen Barisdale Subject: RE: Growing Together November 2023 Draft Documents - Hi Kristen, On Friday, staff began our evaluation of site specific submissions with planning management. We wanted to provide a quick response to your submission on 924-944 King Street West. In order to evaluate site-specific submissions, we have been asking for the following materials; 1) Proof of lot consolidation or lot ownership 2) A conceptual design demonstrating compliance with the desired zone and; 3) A scoped planning justification that addresses proposed official plan policy 15.D.2.5 which states: 15.D.2.5. Notwithstanding Policy 4.C.1.8 and 4.C.1.9, site specific applications which seek relief from the implementing zoning through a minor variance(s) or special zoning regulation(s), seek to amend the Zoning By-law to change land use Page 888 of 1179 permissions, and/or seek to amend this Plan to change from one land use designation to another, will consider the following factors.- a) actors: a) compatibility with the planned function of the subject lands and adjacent lands; b) suitability of the lot for the proposed use and/or built form; c) lot area and consolidation as further outlined in Policy 3.0.2.31; d) compliance with the City's Urban Design Manual and Policy 11.C.I.34; e) cultural heritage resources, including Policy 35.D.2.8; and, f ) technical considerations and other contextual or site specific factors. We wanted to provide you with the opportunity to submit these materials for 924-944 King St. W. for evaluation. Our second opportunity to evaluate submissions with planning management is this Friday. However, there is some additional context we should provide. Staff are currently evaluating a lot of feedback about the built -form transition policy between the SGA -2, 3 and 4 zones and the SGA -1 and low-rise residential zones. This will result in some recommended changes—which have not yet been finalized—which may have an impact on a high-rise proposal next to SGA -1 lands such as this one. Depending on the outcome, it may not be possible for staff to recommend a re -zoning of these properties through the Growing Together process, and proceeding with a site-specific COPA/ZBA application may be the best option. We just wanted to give you that heads up before you direct any time or resources toward a full submission. Please let us know if you have any questions, The Growing Together Team From: Kristen Barisdale Sent: Thursday, Novemer P, PRPPM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowineTogether kitchener.ca] Cc: Natalie Goss <Natalie.Goss kitchener.ca>; Adam Clark <Adam.ClarkL kitchener.ca>; Fariborz Fallah Ian Istva Subject: Growing Together November 2023ra !Rcumffls You don't often get email fr Learn whythis is important Good afternoon, On behalf of our client, please find enclosed commentary in response to the Growing Together November 2023 draft documents as they related to the above -noted development. We would like to set up a meeting to review and discuss the attached comments with City staff, prior to the finalization of the proposed CIPA and ZBA. Please advise as to your availability over the next few weeks and we will coordinate with our team. Thanks! Kristen Barisdale G MCIP, RPP group ro u pSR Vice President, Planning Page 889 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2023 9:35 AM To: Scott Patterson; Growing Together (SM) Subject: RE: (37H) - Pattandon and Ottawa Good morning Scott, Thank you for your submission. The team will review your submission with Planning Management this Friday. Changes will be recommended in our staff report as it is finalized over the next few weeks. We will, however, do our best communicate our direction and continue to collaborate on the process in the interim. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Scott Patterso Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2023 8:59 AM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: (37H) - Pattandon and Ottawa You don't often get entail from scottPipplan.com. Learn why this is 'important Hello I have reviewed the Draft Zoning Mapping and Amendment materials as they relate to the lands at the intersection of Ottawa Street South and Pattandon Ave. These lands were subject to OPA22/05 and ZBA22/08 which were fully approved. (37H) intends to carry forward and apply a holding provision to the lands that was the result of these previous processes. We have obtained the attached clearance letter from the Region of Waterloo. The letter confirms: "As indicated above, the addendum letter and subsequent email response are satisfactory to Regional staff. The applicant/developer will be required to enter into a registered development agreement with the City of Kitchener through a condition of approval for a future Consent or Condominium Application." I attach the email as well from Regional staff noting that the landowners could advance to lift the "H As such, can the (37H) be removed from the Zoning Amendment and not be applied to the lands as it would appear that the conditions to release the "H" have been satisfied. With thanks Scott Page 890 of 1179 Scott J. Patterson, BA, CPT, MCIP, RPP Principal Patterson Planning Consultants Inc. Page 891 of 1179 Region of Waterloo Craig Dumart, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner City of Kitchener 200 King Street West, 6t" Floor P.O. Box 1118, Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 Dear Mr. Dumart, PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES Community Planning 150 Frederick Street 8th Floor Kitchener Ontario N2G 4A Canada Telephone: 519-575-4400 TTY: 519-575-4608 Fax: 519-575-4466 www.regionofwaterloo.ca Melissa Mohr 226-752-8622 File: D17/2/22005 C14/2/22008 April 26, 2023 Re: Stationary Noise Review OPA 22/05 and Zoning By-law Amendment ZBA 22/08 368-382 Ottawa Street South and 99-115 Pattandon Avenue Patterson Planning Consultants (C/O Scott Patterson) on behalf of the Coptic Orthodox Patriarchate Saint Maurice Church and St. Mary's Coptic Orthodox Church CITY OF KITCHENER Regional staff have reviewed letter entitled "368, 372, 374 and 384 Ottawa Street South, and 99, 103, 107, 111 and 115 Pattandon Avenue, Response to Regional Comments regarding Stationary Noise Review for OPA 22/05 and ZBA 22/08 (Ottawa and Pattandon)" prepared by J.E. Coulter Associates Limited, dated December 23, 2022, and subsequent email response from Scott Patterson, Patterson Planning Consultants Inc. dated April 25, 2023. This report and subsequent email were prepared in response to Region comments dated June 28, 2022 on the original Noise & Vibration Study (J.E. Coulter Associates, March 3, 2022). Based on these submissions, the Study is acceptable to Region staff. The Region required the applicant to assess stationary noise sources associated with the underground parking garage. Since the original report, two garage exhaust shafts have been identified and relocated one at the northeast and one at the southeast side of the building along Ottawa Street South. The report assessed the impact of these two noise sources (as well as all other on-site noise sources previously identified) on off-site Document Number: 4368629 Version: 1 Page 1 of 3 Page 892 of 1179 and on-site noise sensitive receptors. It is noted two (2) new sensitive receptors closest to Ottawa Street S. (R6 which is located on site and R7 which is located off site) have been assessed as a result of the relocated exhaust shafts. The noise level criteria assumed for these two (2) receptors is 60 dBA for the daytime period based on ambient (road traffic) noise levels whereas criteria assumed for R1 thru R5 is 50 dBA, both of which are consistent with Class 1 noise level limits under the MECP NPC -300 noise guideline. Based on the garage exhaust mechanical equipment assumed in the report, the predicted cumulative impact on receptors are summarized in the Table on page 2 of the report, which indicate sound levels are within the MECP NPC -300 noise level limit for a Class 1 acoustical environment during daytime hours. Regarding nighttime noise levels, the report indicates garage exhaust fans typically operate on CO monitors and that fans are triggered to start (and stop) only if CO/NO sensors detect a drop in air quality; and that this usually occurs during peak daytime and evening periods (rush hour). Operation during the nighttime period (23:00 — 07:00) would be a rare event and that mitigation is not required. The report indicates if the fans were to run for 5 minutes at night, predicted sound levels would be well within the guideline limit for the nighttime period. In addition the report notes the MECP considers events rare if they occur only once per month and less than 30 minutes per hour. This is satisfactory to Region staff. Finally, a certificate of compliance from a Professional Engineer should be provided to indicate the noise sources identified in the Study comply with the MECP NPC -300 noise guideline limits. This requirement should be secured through an agreement with the City through a future consent or condominium application. Conclusions: As indicated above, the addendum letter and subsequent email response are satisfactory to Regional staff. The applicant/developer will be required to enter into a registered development agreement with the City of Kitchener through a condition of approval for a future Consent or Condominium Application. 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. Document Number: 4368629 Version: 1 Page 2 of 3 Page 893 of 1179 Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Yours truly, Melissa Mohr, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner C. Scott Patterson, Patterson Planning Consultants (Applicant) Document Number: 4368629 Version: 1 Page 3 of 3 Page 894 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Thursday, December 14, ,2023 1:49 PM To: Kristen Barisdale; Growing Together (SM) Cc: Natalie Goss Subject: RE: Growing Together November 2023 Draft Documents - 924 to 944 King Street West Good afternoon Kristen, We will accept your submission for review on Monday, December 18th. The team is appreciative of the time taken to thoughtfully respond to the comments provided. Please be advised that due to the holidays, it would be challenging for staff to accept and evaluate a submission made later than December 181h. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Kristen Barisdale Sent: Thursday, Decem , To: Growing Together (SM) =GrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Cc: Natalie Goss <Natalie.Goss@kitchener.ca> Subject: RE: Growing Together November 2023 Draft Documei You don't often get email fror earn why this is important Thanks for the clarification regarding the concept —this is very helpful. Would the City consider extending the deadline to Monday in this specific circumstance? It would afford us a bit more time to respond to the request from this morning in a more meaningful and helpful manner. Kristen BarisdaleGSP MCIP, RPP group Vice President, Planning VACATION ALERT: Please note that I will be away from the office from December 22, 2023 to January 8, 2024. From: Growing Together (SM) <Gro�vingTogether kitchener.ca> Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2023 10:04 AM To: Kristen Barisdal Cc: Natalie Goss <Na a I c enr.caas Subject: RE: Growing Together November 2023 Draft Documents - 924 to 944 King Street West Page 895 of 1179 Hi Kristen, We are currently not in receipt of a concept plan that demonstrates compliance with the desired zone (SGA -4), particularly with respect to setbacks and physical separation to the rear lot line. The tower floor plate area is also not noted. We have also generally been receiving more detailed information about property ownership. However, we are currently considering apply a holding provision to all submissions to require lot consolidation, and can evaluate what you've already submitted with that in mind. Thanks, The Growing Together Team From: Kristen Barisdal Sent: Wednesday, Dec�M To: Growing Together SM rGrowin Toer kitchener.ca> Cc: Fariborz Fal{ah Ian Istvan Natalie Gass <Natalie.Goss@kite ener.ca>, Fam am. ark kitchener,ca> Subject: RE: Growing Together November 2023 Draft Documents Importance: High You don't often get email f Learn why this is important Hi all, Just following up on this again as Friday is coming up quickly — I need further direction as to whether or not any additional material is required from our end. VACATION ALERT: Please note that I will be away from the office from December 22, 2023 to January 8, 2024.. From: Kristen Barisdale Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2023 12:20 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <GrowineTogether@kitchener,ca> Cc: Fariborz Fa11ah -Ian Istvan Subject: RE: Growing Together November 2023 Draft Documents Good afternoon, Thank you for your response and feedback. Page 896 of 1179 Adam Zufferli From: Growing Together (SM) Sent: Friday, December 15, 2023 9:18 AM To: Bill Reitzel; Growing Together (SM) Subject: RE: Weber/Lancaster Good morning Bill, Thank you for your submission. The team will review your submission with Planning Management this Friday. Changes will be recommended in our staff report as it is finalized over the next few weeks. Sincerely, The Growing Together Team From: Bill Reitze Sent: Thursdayecem er , To: Growing Together (SM) EGrowingTogether@a kitchener.ca] Subject: Weber/Lancaster You don't often get email fro earn why this is important Natalie and Growing Together Team: 1 understand potential changes to the draft ZOning By-law are being considered for their compliance with Section 15.D.2.5 of the draft Official Flan Amendment. In response, please find the attached letter describing compliance with the policy. As you know, we are requesting that be considered SGA 2 Zone so as to be consistent with the balance of our consolidated lands. Note, works are already underway for the proposal with a pre -submission consultation meeting having been held on September 19, 2023. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Thank you, Bill Reitzel Page 897 of 1179 November 30, 2023 City of Kitchener —Planning Division 200 King Street West, 6t" Floor PO Box 1118 Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 Attention: Natalie Goss Manager, Policy and Research Reference: Growing Together, Draft Approach Further to the letter submitted November 27, 2023, the Owners of the properties municipally described as (the "Subject Lands") have reviewed the draft Official Plan Amendment (the "Draft OPA") issued on November 3, 2023. After speaking with staff, we have a better understanding of the implications of this policy. With that we offer the following additional comments. The Draft OPA proposes to designate the lands as Strategic Growth Area A (SGA A), whereas the balance of the block fronting Weber Street is to be designated Strategic Growth Area B (SGA B). Terminating the Strategic Growth Area B designation at appears to be arbitrary and, as such, we request that the Strategic Growth Area B be extended to Lancaster Street. Extending the SGA B designation to Lancaster stands to reason as the properties share the same conditions as those to the west, in that, the lands are adjacent existing low-rise residential lots. The above-described lands differ, however, in that the lands include parcels that front Lancaster Street— a Major Community Collector Street per Map 11 of the Official Plan. Given this, granting the ability to accommodate slightly higher density on this parcel would be appropriate. I note that the SGA Zoning regulations requiring stepbacks from low-rise residential uses will continue to remain, however, Weber - Lancaster oriented massing would have additional potential. Below I provide a recommended limit to the SGA B designation. With this letter, I trust staff will consider revising the proposed Official Plan Amendment. Should you wish to discuss, please feel free to contact me. Regards, Bill Reitzel 1678838 Ontario Inc Cc: Carl Reitzel, 1678838 Ontario Inc Page 898 of 1179 Figure 3: Proposed limit of Strategic Growth Area B Page 899 of 1179 December 20, 2023 City of Kitchener Planning Division, 6th Floor 200 King Street West Kitchener, Ontario N2G 4Y9 Attention: Natalie Goss, MCIP, RPP Manager, Policy and Research Dear Ms. Goss: Re: Growing Together Response to November 2023 Draft Materials SHAPING GREAT COMMUNITIES File No. 23246 On behalf of Snider Corporation, please accept the following commentary and response to the draft OPA and ZBA documents released on November 3, 2023 for the "Growing Together" initiative as related to the above -noted properties. Snider Corporation has acquired t with the intent of providing for a consolidated, comprehensive mixed-use, mid to high density redevelopment project. Snider Corporation is currently pursuing the acquisition of , to be consolidated with- - The properties are located on the north side of King Street, approximately 200 metres north of Grand River Hospital and associated iON Station. The property is currently occupied by existing low-rise residential uses. It is my understanding you had previous discussions and correspondence with Snider Corporation regarding the subject properties as they relate to the "Growing Together" initiative. The property is proposed to be located within a Protected Major Transit Station Area in the Official Plan Amendment for the "Growing Together" initiative, which are areas intended to support transit through accommodating future growth and development through a mix of residential, office, institutional and commercial uses that provide for connectivity to various modes of transportation and have streetscapes and built forms that are pedestrian and transit friendly. The properties are located approximately 200 metres north of the Grand River Hospital iON Station, which will be planned to achieve a minimum density of 160 residents and jobs per hectare. The properties are proposed to be designated as Strategic Growth Area A in the Official Plan Amendment for the "Growing Together" initiative, which are areas intended to accommodate intensification within predominantly low-rise residential neighbourhoods, lands further away from Rapid Transit Station stops, and/or lands where existing lots are generally too small to support high - PLANNING I URBAN DESIGN I LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Page 900 of 1179 rise buildings. The Strategic Growth Area A designation is intended to accommodate a range of low and medium density residential uses, along with compatible non-residential uses, with maximum building height of 8 storeys and a minimum Floor Space Ratio (FSR) of 0.6. Finally, the properties are proposed to be zoned SGA -2: Mid Rise Growth Zone in the Zoning By-law Amendment for the "Growing Together" initiative, which permits a range of low and medium -rise residential uses with a maximum building height of 8 storeys, a minimum FSR of 1.0 and no maximum FSR. Snider Corporation supports the proposed Protected Maior Transit Station Area designation. We believe the subject properties represent an excellent opportunity for intensification proximate to the Grand River Hospital iON Station and can be redeveloped as a high-density, mixed-use project designed to be compatible with and sensitive to the existing low rise residential uses on the north side of Dodds Lane. However, Snider Corporation does not support the proposed Strategic Growth Area A designation and the SGA -2: Mid Rise Growth Zone as applied to the properties. We request the properties be designated Strategic Growth Area B and zoned SGA -3: High Rise Growth Zone (Limited). The subject properties combined represent a small pocket of existing low rise residential uses on the east side of Pine Street; the subject properties are situated between Mount Hope Cemetery to the north, additional municipal open space to the east and existing surface parking lot the south. The subject properties are separated from the existing low rise residential uses on Mary Street and Herbert Street by Pine Street. The subject properties are within 200 metres from the Grand River Hospital iON Station and as consolidated, create a moderately sized parcel for redevelopment. It is our opinion that redevelopment of the subject properties can be designed to be compatible with and sensitive to the existing open space use to the north and east, and existing low-rise residential uses to the east, as demonstrated by the appended preliminary development concepts. Policy 15.D.2.5 of the proposed Official Plan Amendment for the "Growing Together" initiative allows for the consideration of site-specific applications for Zoning By-law Amendment through the consideration of a number of factors. The following provides a summary of the requirements of proposed Policy 15.D.2.5 as well as commentary and justification for the properties to be zoned SGA -3: High Rise Growth Zone (Limited) as requested. Notwithstanding Policy 4.C.1.8 and 4.C.1.9, site specific applications which seek relief from the implementing zoning through a minor variance(s) or special zoning regulation(s), seek to amend the Zoning By-law to change land use permissions, and/or seek to amend this Plan to change from one land use designation to another, will consider the following factors: a) Compatibility with the planned function of the The properties are located within a Protected subject lands and adjacent lands Ma"or Transit Station Area, which are areas GSP Group 12 Page 901 of 1179 GSP Group 13 Page 902 of 1179 intended to accommodate a significant portion of future growth and development. The properties are located approximately 200 metres north of the Grand River Hospital iON Station, which can be accessed directly via Pine Street, future mixed-use, mid to high- density development will assist the City in achieving the required density target of 160 residents and jobs per hectare identified for this area. A large portion of the area that surrounds the Grand River Transit iON Station is occupied by long-standing local business and a Regional hospital that are unlikely to be redeveloped or intensified in the short to medium-term, significantly impacting the ability to accommodate intensification in the Grand River Hospital iON Station Area. With very limited options for redevelopment along around the Grand River Hospital iON Station, the subject properties provide an opportunity for transit -supportive intensification that can be designed to be compatible with and sensitive to surrounding open space and low- rise residential land uses. We believe the proposed development of the subject properties can be designed to be compatible with the surrounding uses and reasonably scaled to provide for appropriate residential intensification proximate to the Grand River Hospital iON Station while adhering to the design objectives of the Strate is Growth Area 8 designation b) Suitability of the lot for the proposed use and/or The properties are a consolidation of four (4) built -form legal parcels, which combined create an overall site area of approximately 1,343 square metres. The consolidation of the four (4) lots with access to a local road (Pine Street) allows for the redevelopment of a larger parcel with the ability to accommodate important design considerations, including site access, building setbacks and steps, height and massing and compatibility. It is our o inion that it is the consolidation of the four GSP Group 13 Page 902 of 1179 GSP Group 14 Page 903 of 1179 (4) lots that makes the overall site suitable for the proposed redevelopment. c) Lot area and consolidation as further outlined in The proposed development concept includes Policy 3.C.2.11 the four (4) properties at 49, 51, 53 and 55 Pine Street. The properties at 49, 51 and 53 Pine Street have been acquired by Snider Corporation (currently under the same umbrella company); Snider Corporation is currently in the process of acquiring the property at 55 Pine Street Upon the consideration and approval of planning applications that would allow for mid to high-density residential development, the properties will be merged on title. d) Compliance with the City's Urban Design Manual The preliminary development concept and Policy 11.C.1.34 submitted in support of this request takes into consideration the proposed zoning regulations and development standards associated with the SGA -3 Zone as well as the applicable policies of the City's Urban Design Manual, including those pertaining to tall buildings. The preliminary development concept proposes a 25 -storey tower with approximately 140 dwelling units and includes a rear yard tower setback and side yard tower setback of 6.0 metres where the subject properties abut open space currently owned by the City and Mount Hope Cemetery. The preliminary development concept has been designed to include appropriate tower stepbacks, as specified in the draft Zoning By- law for the "Growing Together" initiative. The preliminary development concept includes two access points to an underground and podium parking with the provision of a total 58 parking spaces (approximately 0.41 spaces per unit). Policy 11. C. 1.34 of the proposed Official Plan Amendment for the "Growing Together" initiative indicates that new tall building development must have consideration for tall building design principles, including separation, overlook, height, floorplate area, tower placement, orientation and building proportions. The policy further states that the GSP Group 14 Page 903 of 1179 Based on the commentary noted above, we believe that the properties should be designated and zoned to permit mid to high-rise residential development that is compatible with and sensitive to surrounding land uses. We respectfully request the properties be designated as Strategic Growth Area B as part of the proposed Official Plan Amendment and zoned SGA -3: Hiah Rise Growth Zone (Limited) as cart of the aroaosed Zonina By-law Amendment for the "Growing Toaether" initiative. We would like to meet with City staff to review this request in further detail, in advance of finalizing the proposed Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments for the "Growing Together" initiative. GSP Group 15 Page 904 of 1179 zoning by-law will provide for design regulations to mitigate environmental impacts, create high-quality design, ensure compatibility with surrounding low and mid - rise context and ensure the development of future adjacent or nearby buildings are not frustrated. It is our opinion that the preliminary development concept demonstrates the subject properties can be redeveloped with sensitivity to and compatibility with surrounding open space and low-rise residential land uses. The preliminary development concept has incorporated a number of urban design guidelines and requirements with respect to tall building design; through further detailed design, we believe that these considerations can be further enhanced to meet the policy objectives of 11. C. 1.34. e) Cultural heritage resources, including Policy Not applicable 15. D.2.8 It is our understanding that there are no Designated or Listed heritage resources proximate to the subject properties. f) Technical considerations and other contextual or It is our expectation that all technical site specific factors considerations and requirements for a future planning application will be summarized as part of the formal Record of Pre -Submission Consultation. We expect that these technical studies will include but are not limited to a Traffic Impact Study and Parking Justification Report, Stationary and Traffic Noise Impact, Pedestrian Wind Assessment, Urban Design Brief and Planning Justification Report. Based on the commentary noted above, we believe that the properties should be designated and zoned to permit mid to high-rise residential development that is compatible with and sensitive to surrounding land uses. We respectfully request the properties be designated as Strategic Growth Area B as part of the proposed Official Plan Amendment and zoned SGA -3: Hiah Rise Growth Zone (Limited) as cart of the aroaosed Zonina By-law Amendment for the "Growing Toaether" initiative. We would like to meet with City staff to review this request in further detail, in advance of finalizing the proposed Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments for the "Growing Together" initiative. GSP Group 15 Page 904 of 1179 ENTRANCE U/G PARKING I-- W Z LL ENTRANCE PODIUM PARKING 40.1 rC T7 - 19 3.0 elk L l 1 6A j II- � M � IN 1 I 1 CT LO 32.0 0 3.1 co M T 40.2 —� _ _77 DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT 49 - 55 Pine Street, Kitchener SITE AREA: 1,343M2 PARKING: 58 spaces UNITS: 140 units cO Ji saa"�"Nnl DENSITY: 1,042 upha GFA: 16,940m' FSR: 12.61 HEIGHT: 25 storeys MIN. TOWER SEPARATION: NIA UNDERGROUND PARKING: LI PODIUM: 18 spaces 10 spaces I I I I L _ J L2 - L4 PODIUM: 30 spaces I I L ---J y 1Nm GSP group Scale 125 1 —m -ID, NILi I P, -N". 2i256 I —m y:MN Page 905 of 1179 6 STOREY PODIUM I 12 STOREY 1 3.0 1 25 STOREY I RESIDENTIAL BUILDING v 16,940m2 GFA �I 1 g 140 (±750sq.ft) r.0 1 1 26.6 3.0 elk L l 1 6A j II- � M � IN 1 I 1 CT LO 32.0 0 3.1 co M T 40.2 —� _ _77 DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT 49 - 55 Pine Street, Kitchener SITE AREA: 1,343M2 PARKING: 58 spaces UNITS: 140 units cO Ji saa"�"Nnl DENSITY: 1,042 upha GFA: 16,940m' FSR: 12.61 HEIGHT: 25 storeys MIN. TOWER SEPARATION: NIA UNDERGROUND PARKING: LI PODIUM: 18 spaces 10 spaces I I I I L _ J L2 - L4 PODIUM: 30 spaces I I L ---J y 1Nm GSP group Scale 125 1 —m -ID, NILi I P, -N". 2i256 I —m y:MN Page 905 of 1179 On behalf of Snider Corporation, we respectfully request to be notified of all meetings, reports and progress related to the "Growing Together" initiative in the future. Please don't hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or would like to discuss further. Sincerely, GSP Group Inc. • e . Kristen Barisdale, MCIP, RPP Vice President, Planning cc. Gord Snider, Snider Corporation GSP Group 16 Page 906 of 1179 From: Natalie Goss To: Growing Together (SM) Subject: FW: Growing Together - Policy Comments Date: Wednesday, December 20, 2023 11:35:42 AM Attachments: imaae018.Dno imaae019.Dna irnaae020.una imaae021.Dna imaae022.Dno imaae023.Dna imaae024.Dna image025.Dng image026.png image027.Dng image028.i)ng image029.i)ng image030.Dng image03l.i)ng image032.Dng image033.Dng image034.Dng image035.Dng From: Alyssa Bridge <ABridge@regionofwaterloo.ca> Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2023 10:49 AM To: Natalie Goss <Natalie.Goss@kitchener.ca> Cc: John Zunic <John.Zunic@kitchener.ca>; AKutler <AKutler@regionofwaterloo.ca> Subject: RE: Growing Together - Policy Comments IYou don't often get email from abridge(a4zegionofwaterloo.ca. Learn why this is important Hi Natalie, I hope this finds you well. Further to Amanda's comments below, the Region would like to provide the comments below with respect to the Regional Official Plan and the Growing Together Official Plan Amendment: Regional Official Plan Amendment No. 6 Regional Council adopted Regional Official Plan Amendment 6 (ROPA 6) on August 18, 2022. This amendment came into effect on April 12, 2023 following its approval by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing. ROPA 6 strengthens and modernizes the Regional Official Plan in several key areas, including climate action, equity and inclusion, growth management, and "missing middle" housing, and planning for Major Transit Station Areas and local economic development. It also updates several other Regional planning policies to conform to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2019, and to align with the Provincial Policy Statement. The City's proposed Growing Together framework broadly conforms to ROPA 6 by prioritizing intensification and higher densities in strategic growth areas located along the ION rapid transit corridor. However, it does not implement some of the more detailed policy aspects of the amendment. While we recognize that the Growing Together initiative predates much of the policy work develop through ROPA 6, and that the City will undertake a future update its Official Plan to conform with ROPA 6, we recommend the following refinements to bring the proposed policies into closer alignment with ROPA 6. Section 2.13.1 Vision • While we support the proposed changes to the vision statement, we suggest enhancing the vision to include some other key planning themes consistent with ROPA 6. These themes could include climate change mitigation and adaptation, social equity and inclusion, and local economic development. Please refer to Section 1.2 of ROPA 6 for more information and examples on how these important themes could be integrated into your proposed policy framework. • Section 2.13.1 also reflects the goal of planning Kitchener as a "compete community". Although we generally this goal, ROPA 6 has replaced and enhanced the term "complete community' with the concept of "15 -minute neighbourhoods'. These are compact, well-connected places where people can meet their daily need for goods, services, and employment within a 15 - minute trip from home by walking, cycling and rolling, and where other needs can be met by direct, frequent, and convenient Page 907 of 1179 transit. Such communities support several community -building objectives, and provide the foundation for achieving transformational climate action. We would encourage the City to adopt the "15 -minute neighbourhood" concept as part of the Growing Together initiative, or to revise the definition of a "complete community" to reflect the key attributes of the Region's 15 -minute neighbourhood concept. Please to Section 2 (Where and How to Grow) of ROPA 6 on how to integrate this concept into the Secondary Plan. Protected Major Transit Station Areas • In Policy 3.C.2.16, we recommend replacing the word "designated" with "delineated" to better align with the terminology used in ROP Policy 2.D.2.1 and in the Provincial Growth Plan. • Please confirm that the boundaries of the Protected Major Transit Station Areas align with the boundaries of these areas delineated in ROPA 6. • For clarity, and to assist the reader, the proposed new second sentence in Policy 3.C.2.16 could be refined to note that the identification of "Protected Major Transit Station Areas" (as opposed to Major Transit Station Areas) is specifically intended to support the implementation of inclusionary zoning in Kitchener. • We support the planned function of Protected Major Transit Station Areas outlined in Policy 3.C.2.17, but recommend it be refined to include the following key elements consistent with Section 2.D.2 of ROPA 6: o is transit -supportive and prioritizes access to the station area and connections to any nearby major trip generators by providing: (i) connections to regional and provincial transit services to support transit service integration; and (ii) mobility networks for walking, cycling, and rolling, including sidewalks, bicycle lanes, and secured bicycle parking; o provides for a diverse mix of uses, including additional residential units and affordable housing; o supports the implementation of inclusionary zoning. • In Policy 3.C.2.17, we support the addition of the last paragraph but suggest adding that the appropriate scale and form of any development on lands within a Protected Major Transit Station Area will be subject to the relevant policies in the City's Official Plan. • Map 2 (Urban Structure) identifies the boundaries of the Protected Major Transit Station Areas, but does not appear to label the individual station names. To assist the reader, it may be helpful to delineate and individually label the PMTAs on a separate schedule in addition to showing them on Map 2. • We support the proposed new design requirements for PMTAs identified in Policies 11.C.1.36 and 11.C.1.37. However, we recommend that you consider adding the following additional provisions in keeping with the key considerations outlined in ROP Policy 2.C.2.2, such as: o promoting designs that enable a modal shift to most trips being made by walking, cycling, and rolling; o improving resilience to extreme heat, increased precipitation, increased frequency of extreme weather events and other impacts of a changing climate; o integrating green infrastructure; o promoting building designs and orientations that maximize renewable energy generation and conservation, including the use of alternative and/or renewable energy systems, and the creation of net -zero operational carbon buildings; o improves accessibility for persons of all ages and abilities and at all times of year by addressing built form barriers which restrict their full participation in society; Page 908 of 1179 Strategic Growth Areas • Proposed new Section 15.2.2 outlines the overall policy framework regarding strategic growth areas. While we generally support this section, we note that it does not identify or include any policies to implement the Regional Intensification Corridor shown conceptually on Map 1 of ROPA 6, a portion of which extend across the study area. Section 2.D.3 of ROPA 6 outlines the policy directions regarding Regional Intensification Corridors. Specifically, Policy 2.D.3.2 requires area municipalities to refine and delineate the boundaries of the Regional Intensification Corridors shown on Map 2 in their official plan based certain criteria. Area municipalities are also required to establish minimum density targets for these corridors, and ensure they are planned and designed to achieve the criteria listed in Policy 2.D.34. Given that the proposed official plan amendment will update Map 2 (Urban Structure) and revise other structural components of the Official Plan (i.e., UGCs and PMTAs), we recommend that it be revised to implement the Regional Intensification Corridor provisions outlined in ROPA 6. If this City decides not to implement this policy as part of the Growing Together initiative, we would encourage the City to address this requirement as part the next conformity update to its Official Plan. • In Policy 15.D.2.3 b), the references to supporting major transit infrastructure could be strengthen by adding "and to provide connection points for inter- and intra -regional transit consistent with Policy 2.D.1.2 of ROPA 6. • Policies 15.D.2.10 and 15.D.2.14 seek to discourage the development of new uses within the UGC and in PMTSAs that would conflict with the planned function of these areas (e.g., car washes, drive-through facilities). We would encourage the City to strengthen these policies by prohibiting such uses outright within these important strategic growth areas, consistent with ROPA Policy 2.D.2.2 (f). Should you have any questions on these, please let me know. Alyssa From: Amanda Kutler <AKutler(@reRionofwaterloo.ca> Sent: December 15, 2023 3:32 PM To: Natalie Goss <Natalie.GossC@kitchener.ca> Cc: John Zunic <lohn.ZunicCcDkitchener.ca>; Brenna MacKinnon<BMacKinnon(@regionofwaterloo.ca>; Janine Fletcher <JFletcher(@regionofwaterloo.ca>; Adam Clark <Adam.ClarkC@kitchener.ca>; Growing Together (SM) <GrowinfzTogetherhkitchener.ca>; Alyssa Bridge <ABridfze(@regionofwaterloo.ca>; Rosa Bustamante <rosa.bustamanteC@kitchener.ca>; Danielle De Fields<DDeFields(@regionofwaterloo.ca> Subject: RE: Growing Together - RSCs/Noise/Transportation/Airport Hi Natalie, In response to your question regarding transportation noise, Policy 2.1.2.2 of the ROP states the following: "Where a development application for a sensitive land use is submitted in the vicinity of an Existing Regional Road, Provincial Highway, Planned Regional Road or Provincial Highway, the rapid transit system, transit terminals, railways or area Municipal roads, a noise study may be required in accordance with the provisions of the Regional Implementation Guideline for Noise Policies. The noise criteria shown on Table 5 will be used in determining appropriate noise mitigation measures for the proposed development. Any required noise mitigation measures will be implemented through the development application review process." Implementation of this policy is typically achieved through the completion of a transportation noise studies. These studies assess noise impacts from roads and rail lines and recommend any mitigation required to meet noise level objectives. These studies are most often reviewed through an Official Plan Amendment or Zoning By-law amendment to ensure the proposed development is feasible with detailed studies often required through Holding provisions in the Zoning By-law. Because the Growing Together project is being undertaken comprehensively across several Major Transit Station Areas and would Page 909 of 1179 result in potentially eliminating the need for site specific zoning by-law amendments, we recommend that this requirement could be addressed would be through the use of a Holding Provision requiring a detailed transportation noise study prior to site plan approval for properties adjacent of within 200 meters of a Regional Road and a detailed noise and vibration studies for properties adjacent to or within 75 meters of a rail line. With respect to stationary noise, Policy 2.1.1.1 of the ROP states the following: "The Region and the area municipalities will ensure that majorfacilities and sensitive land uses are planned and developed to avoid, or if avoidance is not possible, minimize and mitigate any potential adverse effects from odour, noise and other contaminants, minimize risk to public health and safety, and to ensure the long-term operational and economic viability of majorfacilities in accordance with Provincial guidelines, standards and procedures." Implementation of this policy is typically achieved through the completion of a stationary noise study. These studies assess compatibility with adjacent major facilities as well as assessing the impact of proposed development (specifically HVACs or other mechanical equipment) on nearby sensitive land uses. These studies are most often reviewed through an Official Plan Amendment or Zoning By-law amendment to ensure the proposed development is feasible with detailed studies required through Holding provisions in the Zoning By-law. Because the Growing Together project is being undertaken comprehensively across several Major Transit Station Areas and because these areas are rapidly changing, it is challenging to determine at this scale, which properties would require a stationary noise assessment. One way that this could be addressed would be through the use of a Holding Provision requiring a detailed stationary noise study prior to site plan approval for properties subject to the Growing Together amendments. A similar approach was taken in the Northdale area of the City of Waterloo. The implementation of a holding provision would not necessarily require a detailed stationary noise study but would allow this to be assessed based on the site specific context of a property at the time of development. Region of Waterloo International Airport Many Major Transit Station Areas within the 'Growing Together' project are either located within an Airport Zoning Regulated Area (AZR) or in an area impacted by the Nav Canada Runway 08 approach. The Region is committed to ensuring the long-term operation and economic role the Airport plays within the Region is protected by discouraging land uses which may cause a potential aviation safety hazard in accordance with section 1.6.9 of the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 and Section 5.A.20 of the Regional Official Plan. In order to conform to this policy, Regional staff require the City implementation of the maximum heights, including any crane, established within "Land Use Assessment CYKF- Kitchener/Waterloo, ON, RNAV (RNP) Y RWY 08-RNP0.3" prepared by IDS, previously shared with the City by email on October 27, 2023. Further, Regional staff require policies within the Growing Together policies to ensure the Region of Waterloo International Airport is not impacted. As per the City's request, we are working on coordinating a meeting with Nav Canada however we don't expect these ceilings to change as a result of the meeting. We would be able to consider individual applications to determine the final height on a site specific basis if supported by an aeronautical assessment acceptable to the Region. TABLE 1- Summary of ceiling height limitation for each area. AREA RNP 0.3 RIMY 08 Proposed RNP 0.3 RWY 08 RNAV (GLASS) RWY 08 DEPARTURE RWY 26 No 1 1,6017' ASL 1,600' ASL 1,600' ASL 1,748' ASL No 2 1,600' ASL N/A * 1,600' ASL 1,6&0' ASL No 3 1,600' ASL N/A 1,500' ASL 1,635' ASL No 4 1,600' ASL N/A 1,600' ASL 1,603' ASL No 5 1,600' ASL N/A 1,£100' ASL 1,663' ASL No 6 1,600' ASL N/A 1,51)0' ASL 1,634' ASL No 7 1,600' ASL N/A * 1,600' ASL 1,573' ASL No 8 1,600' ASL 1,600' ASL 1,600' ASL 1,530' ASL No 9 1,600' ASL 1,600' ASL 1,600' ASL 1,596' ASL No 10 1. 1,600' ASL L 1,600' ASL 1,600' ASL 1,534' ASL `: A very small portion of the area falls within the intermediate segment of the proposed RNP 0.3. This could be avoided with a very minor reshaping of areas 2 and 7. See Figure 2. Page 910 of 1179 Source Protection The proposed changes to the City's OP polices and Zoning should be consistent with the Source Water Protection policies in the Grand River Source Protection Plan for the Region of Waterloo, and Chapter 8 of the Regional Official Plan, particularly with respect to managing stormwater, the use of winter de-icing salt, and geothermal wells or earth energy systems. The following in 11.C.1.37 d) of the revised OP: "[The City will] encourage Low Impact Development ("LID") water management techniques, including materials and plantings that have a high infiltration rate within boulevards and setbacks, to reduce the impact on the city's stormwater management system;" should further state only in those areas of the City, and in circumstances where LID is permitted, consistent with the City of Kitchener Infiltration Policy Update (Draft June, 2023) in the City's Stormwater Master Plan. Moreover, the City's Official Plan should generally speak to the need to manage the use of winter de-icing salts to help reduce its impact on the environment and the community's drinking water supply. Staff notes in Section 19 Site Specific Provisions of the proposed By-law that geothermal wells and earth energy systems are prohibited in a number of zones (e.g. SGA -2,3,4 and Mix 1,3). The former By-law 81-1 contained a policy that prohibited private water supply wells and geothermal wells in areas of the City of Kitchener serviced by municipal water. This policy was originally introduced by the City of Kitchener and Region staff continues to support it, consistent with the Source Water Protection Policies in Chapter 8 of the ROP. Also, a definition for geothermal wells and earth energy systems should be included in Section 3 Definitions With respect to your clarifications re: RSCs noted in italics below — my response is in red. As previously noted, we are providing this information within the limitations of our existing data. Further, on a comprehensive scale we do not have the benefit of a site screening questionnaire for additional context nor do we know what activities may have occurred on site post the issued RSC. RSCS Clarification is needed on the following in order to finalize where a RSC will need to be flagged in the zoning by-law amendment. • The orange highlighted properties on the attached spreadsheet will be removed from the list of RSC flagged properties as per your email below as it is our understanding that the RSC condition has been met. Ok • Several properties highlighted in yellow — which were ones indicated by the Region is ones that required further review remain. They were not indicated as having had an RSC condition met in your email below. Can you please confirm the status of these properties? Is Regional staff continuing to assess these properties or have they been confirmed that an RSC condition is required? 1 have attached an updated spreadsheet with a legend. We wouldn't consider the RSCs prior to 2011 and / or for non-residential purposes to be relevant. Anything highlighted in orange, red or blue we would consider requiring a RSC. With respect to the few properties located within the plume it has come to my attention that the boundary may have shifted and I am re -confirming that the properties are still within the plume. It is likely the case but I will provide that confirmation next week. • Several properties on the attached spreadsheet have no threat level, no landfill, and no plume indicated but are on the spreadsheet with a 'YES' in the RSC column. Clarification is needed as to whether these properties need an RSC condition applied to them. As we previously discussed you were only interested in Known and High sites. When we originally ran the query we found it picked up some adjacent sites having RSCs so this could be why. Let me know if you would like to set up a meeting to discuss further. Thanks, Amanda From: Natalie Goss <Natalie.Goss(@kitchener.ca> Sent: December 13, 2023 7:32 PM To: Amanda Kutler <AKutler(@regionofwaterloo.ca> Cc: John Zunic <lohn.Zunic(cDkitchener.ca>; Brenna MacKinnon<BMacKinnon(cDregionofwaterloo.ca>; Janine Fletcher <JFletcher(cDregion ofwaterloo.ca>; Adam Clark <Adam.Clark(cDkitchener.ca>; Growing Together (SM) <GrowinRToRetherPkitchener.ca>; Alyssa Bridge <ABridge(@regionofwaterloo.ca>; Rosa Bustamante <rosa.bustamante(@kitchener.ca> Page 911 of 1179 Subject: RE: Growing Together - RSCs/Noise/Transportation/Airport —EXTERNAL ALERT" This email originated from outside the Region of Waterloo. Hi Amanda, Thank you for the confirmation regarding an anticipated response time on the RSC questions. I have attached the two notices that were sent to agencies, including the Region, and note that within them a comment deadline of November 24, 2023 was indicated. Despite this deadline, I acknowledge and appreciate our ongoing conversations and as per my email from December 8, have requested all comments by December 15. I also acknowledge the information provided regarding airport height matters, however as we discussed in our December 4 call, we continue to have questions about this information that would best be answered by NAV CAN directly. We are confident that we can find a solution to this matter that is acceptable to all and is also in keeping with the intent of the use of relevant Planning Act tools (i.e., Official Plan policies, zoning by-law regulations, site plan control). We very much look forward to your response on the below noted matters by December 15. Natalie From: Amanda Kutler <AKutler@reRionofwaterloo.ca> Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2023 9:08 AM To: Natalie Goss <Natahe.Goss(@kltchener.ca> Cc: John Zunic <lohn.Zunic(@kitchener.ca>; Brenna MacKinnon<BMacKinnon(@regionofwaterloo.ca>; Janine Fletcher <JF [etch er(@region ofwaterloo.ca>; Adam Clark <Adam.Clark(@kitchener.ca>; Growing Together (SM) <GrowingTogether(@kitchener.ca>; Alyssa Bridge <ABridge@regionofwaterloo.ca> Subject: RE: Growing Together - RSCs/Noise/Transportation/Airport Hi Natalie, I'm following up on the RSC questions and should be able to respond by the 15th Airport staff are following up on the meeting with Nav, however we will have to work with their schedules. I think we have the information from them that is available at this point but we are still trying to get a meeting asap. Is there a reply date associated with the circulation of the draft amendment? We have circulated the draft internally as well but did not see a date for comments to be submitted. Thanks, Amanda From: Natalie Goss <Natalie.Goss@kitchener.ca> Sent: December 8, 2023 9:49 PM To: Amanda Kutler <AKutler(@regionofwaterloo.ca> Cc: John Zunic <lohn.Zunic(@kitchener.ca>; Brenna MacKinnon<BMacKinnon(@regionofwaterloo.ca>; Janine Fletcher <JFletcher(@regionofwaterloo.ca>; Adam Clark <Adam.Clarkk@kitchener.ca>; Growing Together (SM) <Growin Tg_ogether(@kitchener.ca> Subject: Growing Together - RSCs/Noise/Transportation/Airport Importance: High "EXTERNAL ALERT" This email originated from outside the Region of Waterloo. Hi Amanda, Thank you for your email and providing additional information on RSCs. We have the following additional questions/items of clarification and status update regarding RSCs, noise, transportation, and airport. In order to be able to incorporate necessary Regional matters in the Growing Together zoning by-law amendment that is on track to proceed to committee of council in late January, a response is needed no later than end of day December 15. Should you require any additional information from us or Page 912 of 1179 have any questions, please let us know. RSCS Clarification is needed on the following in order to finalize where a RSC will need to be flagged in the zoning by-law amendment. • The orange highlighted properties on the attached spreadsheet will be removed from the list of RSC flagged properties as per your email below as it is our understanding that the RSC condition has been met. • Several properties highlighted in yellow —which were ones indicated by the Region is ones that required further review remain. They were not indicated as having had an RSC condition met in your email below. Can you please confirm the status of these properties? Is Regional staff continuing to assess these properties or have they been confirmed that an RSC condition is required? Several properties on the attached spreadsheet have no threat level, no landfill, and no plume indicated but are on the spreadsheet with a 'YES' in the RSC column. Clarification is needed as to whether these properties need an RSC condition applied to them. We have met with our CBO and he is comfortable using his authority under the OBC to require a RSC for lands with existing non - sensitive uses where a sensitive use is being proposed through Growing Together. We are compiling that list of properties and will provide confirmation in writing reflecting this intent shortly. Pending receipt of the clarification needed outlined above, for all remaining properties the Region has identified a RSC condition, we will include the requirement in a site-specific holding provision in the Growing Together Zoning By-law amendment. Transportation and Noise Further to your email on November 28, we are awaiting confirmation of any site specific noise and transportation study requirements. Confirmation of this is needed no later than end of day December 15. Airport Further to our call on December 4, we confirm that an immediate next step is that a call is being scheduled with NAV CAN staff to enable the city to better understand their requirements and also understand how best to implement the through the tools available. It is imperative that we keep momentum going on this matter and we request that a meeting be scheduled no later than the week of December 18. We acknowledge that the Region is awaiting this call and any outcomes from it before providing us with comments on this matter. Thank you for your continued help with these matters. Natalie Goss, MCIP, RPP (she/her) Manager, Policy & Research I Planning Division I City of Kitchener 519-741-2200 x7648 I TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 natalie.goss(@kitchener.ca 00000000 From: Amanda Kutler <AKutlerPregionofwaterloo.ca> Sent: Thursday, December 7, 2023 4:50 PM To: Richard Kelly-Ruetz <Richard.Kelly-Ruetz(@kitchener.ca> Cc: John Zunic <lohn.Zunic(@kitchener.ca>; Natalie Goss <Natalie.Goss(@kitchener.ca>; Brenna MacKinnon <BMacKinnon(@regionofwaterloo.ca>; Janine Fletcher<JFletcher(@regionofwaterloo.ca> Subject: RE: TID / Noise Hi Richard, See attached spreadsheet for sites within MTSAs where our data indicates a Record of Site condition for residential purposes was filed after July 1, 2011 (when regulations changed). Our data may not capture other sites where a RSC exists if we were not notified about it and it is not within our database. So, it is not necessarily an exhaustive list but it is the data we have available. Let me know if you have any questions or wish to discuss further. Page 913 of 1179 Thanks, Amanda From: Richard Kelly-Ruetz <Richard.Kelly-Ruetz(d)kitchener.ca> Sent: November 23, 2023 2:46 PM To: Amanda Kutler <AKutler(@regionofwaterloo.ca> Cc: John Zunic <lohn.Zunic(@kitchener.ca>; Natalie Goss <Natalie.Goss(cDkitchener.ca>; Brenna MacKinnon <BMacKinnon(@regionofwaterloo.ca> Subject: RE: TID / Noise "EXTERNAL ALERT— This email originated from outside the Region of Waterloo. Hi Amanda: Just checking in the RSC property request and if we're generally on track for end of the month. Let me know if there's anything we can do on our end. We've been working our way through the RSC spreadsheet as well to try and sort out which ones would be captured by our CBO. Regards, Richard Kelly-Ruetz, BES, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner I Planning Division I City of Kitchener 519-741-2200 ext. 7110 1 TTY 1-866-969-9994 1 richard.kelly-ruetz(@kitchener.ca 000000000 -----Original Appointment ----- From: AKutler <AKutler(cDreRionofwaterloo.ca> Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2023 7:49 PM To: AKutler; John Zunic; Richard Kelly-Ruetz; Natalie Goss; Brenna MacKinnon Subject: TID / Noise When: Friday, October 27, 2023 1:30 PM -2:30 PM (UTC -05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada). Where: Microsoft Teams Meeting Please join if your schedules permit -----Original Appointment ----- From: Amanda Kutler <AKutler(@regionofwaterloo.ca> Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2023 7:48 PM To: Amanda Kutler; Natalie Goss; Brenna MacKinnon Subject: TID / Noise When: Friday, October 27, 2023 1:30 PM -2:30 PM (UTC -05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada). Where: Microsoft Teams Meeting Microsoft Teams meeting Join on your computer, mobile app or room device Click here to join the meeting Meeting ID: 255 708 206 925 Passcode: pDrNBM Download Teams I Join on the web Learn More I Meeting options Page 914 of 1179 From: Matthew Warzecha To: Growina Together (SM) Cc: Joseph Puopolo; Mike Puopolo; Craig Dumart; MCIP RPP David A. Butler; Richard Kelly-Ruetz Subject: RE: 455-509 Mill Street Date: Wednesday, November 29, 2023 12:30:05 PM Attachments: imaae001.pna Ltr to N Goss re Growina Toaether Nov 2023.pdf Natalie, Craig and Team — Further to our previously submitted letter, please find attached comments regarding the Draft Zoning By-law as it relates to our property at 455 — 509 Mill Street. We are requesting a meeting with staff to discuss the implications of the proposed zoning on the Council approved Development Concept. Our understanding of the proposed Zoning results in a 'blend' of the current and proposed Zoning By-laws, which potentially compromises the feasibility of the project. Given the complexity of the project, we think it is necessary that this meeting be held to find a mutually agreed upon approach to the revised zoning. Please advise of your availability and we will work to your convenience to the best of our ability. Thank you, Matthew Warzecha MCIP RPP Director of Planning and Development I Polocorp Inc. POKIDORP This e-mail is confidential and intended only for the addressee. Disclosure of this e-mail to anyone else is not intended as a waiver of confidentiality or privilege. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately. From: Matthew Warzecha Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2023 5:25 PM To: growingtogether@kitchen er.ca Cc: Subject: RE: 455-509 Mill Street Natalie and Team — Following up on my previously submitted letter and email below. Polocorp would like to request a meeting with staff, including Craig Dumart, to discuss the impact of the proposed changes to the zoning on 455 —509 Mill Street. Page 915 of 1179 If you could please advise on your availability, it would be appreciated. Thank you, Matthew Warzecha MCIP RPP Director of Planning and Development I Polocorp Inc. POLOM"LORP This e-mail is confidential and intended only for the addressee. Disclosure of this e-mail to anyone else is not intended as a waiver of confidentiality or privilege. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately. From: Matthew Warzecha Sent: Friday, August 25, 2023 11:41 AM To: ,rg owingtogetherna kitchener.ca Cc: Subject: 455-509 Mill Street Hi Natalie— Polocorp Inc are the owners of 455-509 Mill Street, which received approval of Site -Specific Zoning in May 2023. Please find attached letter in support of the proposed SGA4 Zone proposed through the Growing Together Study, provided the necessary site-specific regulations to facilitate our development concept are carried through to any new zoning category. With this letter, I'd like to request a brief meeting to discuss the proposed SGA4 Zone and the implications on our property. I have cc'd Craig Dumart as he was the Planner on file for the amendment application and is familiar with the necessary site-specific regulations. We are reasonably flexible to meet, if you provide a few times you are available. Thank you, Matthew Warzecha MCIP RPP Director of Planning and Development I Polocorp Inc. Page 916 of 1179 :10-1 P( ice lnkl:� November 29, 2023 City of Kitchener Planning Division 200 King Street West, 6th Floor P.O. Box 1118, Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 Attention: Natalie Goss, MCIP, RPP Manager, Policy and Research Reference: 455-509 Mill Street Growing Together, Proposed Zoning Further to the letter submitted by Polocorp Inc on August 25, 2023, we have reviewed the draft Zoning By-law Amendment (the "Draft ZBA") issued on November 3, 2023. The Draft ZBA proposes to rezone the above-described property as Site -Specific Strategic Growth Area 4 (SGA4 (362) (43H)). The proposed zoning carries -over the current site-specific zoning, passed May 2023, however, our understanding is that the implementation of the Draft ZBA will result in a 'blend' of the current zoning (By-law 2023-063 under By-law Zoning By-law 85-1) and the Site -Specific SGA4 zone, per the Draft ZBA. A 'blended' by-law is problematic as the Development Concept, as it was considered by Council, would not conform to the Draft ZBA. Notably, the Development Concept may conflict with Maximum Building Length, Maximum Floor Plate Area and Physical Separation provisions introduced through the SGA4 Zone. The current Zoning By-law does not contemplate these provisions and, as such, no site-specific provisions were included to address them. Further, the SGA4 base zone grants relief to other provisions, including height, FSR and parking, that do not apply to our lands as a result of the carried - over site-specific provisions of the Draft ZBA. Ultimately, the above-described conditions result in additional constraints on the development lands such that the Development Concept is no longer feasible. Given this, Polocorp requests a meeting be scheduled with City staff, including the Growing Together policy development team, as well as Craig Dumart, Development Planner who prepared the original Site-specific Zoning By-law. During this meeting we would like to discuss a site-specific approach to the development lands that will result in the ability to implement the Development Concept with the benefit of the SGA4 Zone. 11Page Page 917 of 1179 We understand that Staff intend to bring the final By-law to Council for approval in the new year. Given this, we trust that a meeting can be scheduled as soon as possible and that a mutually agreed upon solution can be determined. We are available at your convenience. Regards, Polocorp Inc. Matthew tWar cha Director of Planning and Development Cc: Craig Dumart, City of Kitchener David Butler, The Butler Group Consultants Joseph Puopolo, Polocorp Inc Mike Puopolo, Polocorp Inc Page 918 of 1179 From: Growing Together [SMI To: Anne Michelle Doran Subject: RE: Concerns about Wowed Businesses in SGA -1 Date: Tuesday, December 12, 2023 9:25:00 AM Good Morning Annie and Marcus, Thank you for your comments, the Growing Together team has begun evaluating all submissions received throughout November. We are currently evaluating a range of feedback regarding permitted uses in the SGA -1 zone. Changes will be recommended in our staff report as it is finalized over the next few weeks. Home occupations are proposed to be permitted in the SGA -1 zone, as are other non-residential uses that will help create complete communities to support residential growth, helping to meet a broader range of people's daily needs in more accessible ways. While the proposed zoning does permit non-residential buildings in the SGA -1 zone, it limits them in size to 200m2, which allows for small, local businesses, boutique -type shops, small cafes and home businesses, which have all been strongly supported throughout our community engagement. A number of those uses are subject to a regulation that requires them to be located only on corner lots. This ensures a focus on missing middle residential development in the SGA -1 zone, while providing flexibility for small, local business owners to meet their unique needs and serve an evolving community. Best, The Growing Together Team From: Anne Michelle Doran Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2023 1:16 PM To: Growing Together (SM) EGrowingTogether@kitchener.ca> Subject: Concerns about Allowed Businesses in SGA -1 You don't often get Good afternoon, and apologies if this is a repeat (i'm experiencing some weird technical issues) Thanks for all the effort going into these consultations. There was so much work and engagement that went into the previous plan before you were directed to do it all again with the province's new mandate. This is so frustrating for all, and we just couldn't dedicate the same amount of time to attending meetings and asking questions as in the past. Page 919 of 1179 That said, we have tried to catch up on where the plan is right now, and have some deep concerns about the business zoning being proposed in our neighbourhood as part of the new Growing Together plan, and are struggling with understanding why this change is even being proposed. Our understanding is that the changes being proposed to our zoning/land use are a requirement of Bill 23, and are meant to increase housing, particularly near transit stations. Why is it then that businesses are being allowed in SGA -1 that do not have a residential component to them, that are not 'home occupations'? How does allowing current available housing to become business -only buildings help create better access to housing, especially when there is lots of access to business -only spaces just a block or two from here? My concern is that this could remove existing housing and would thin out the community that is already here (rather than adding to it!). We would just have fewer neighbours and less community around in the evening and at night, which is especially not desirable in a downtown residential neighbourhood just from a safety perspective. The beauty of home occupations is that they could create the `undercurrent of creativity and a positive energy' and would help our neighbours find that sense of belonging that is so vital. They bring in unique spaces that people are drawn to without jeopardising the community that is already here. We are currently next door to Frontier Music School, and not only does that enrich our lives here with great access to lessons for our kids, we also get to support our neighbours, get to know them better, and be more integrated into the community because of it. And, when the end of a working day comes, we are not next door to a vacant property, we are still next door to our neighbours, we still have people there who care about the community and whom we get to socialise with and help each other out. We still have part of our community, which would not be the case if that was only a business. Instead of being a boon, it would be a liability, a concern, and it would make us more isolated. Please remove the options for non -home occupations from the SGA -1 zone. We need our residential neighbours in order to be a vibrant and healthy community. We need interactions here that are beyond monetary, and we need people to love and care for this place and value it beyond that of a business opportunity. These are the things that keep a community going, and that applies to all the slated SGA -1 zones, not just the one here in Olde Berlin Town. Annie and Marcus Doran Page 920 of 1179 From: Growing Together (SM) To: Stephen Litt; Growing Together (SM); Juliane vonWesterholt Cc: Natalie Goss; Pierre Chauvin; Mark Hoculik Subject: RE: Growing Together comments Date: Tuesday, December 12, 2023 4:48:42 PM Attachments: imaae001.Dna Good Afternoon, Thank you for your comments. We are evaluating all comments, but wanted to provide you with an opportunity to meet our submission requirements for site-specific requests. As discussed, we have asked all proponents to provide the following in a written submission for each property or assembly of properties where a change is being sought; 1. Proof of lot consolidation or lot ownership 2. A conceptual design demonstrating compliance with the desired zone and; 3. A scoped planning justification that addresses proposed official plan policy 15.D.2.5 which states: 15.D.2.5. Notwithstanding Policy 4.61.8 and 4.61.9, site specific applications which seek relief from the implementing zoning through a minor variance(s) or special zoning regulation(s), seek to amend the Zoning By-law to change land use permissions, and/or seek to amend this Plan to change from one land use designation to another, will consider the following factors: a) compatibility with the planned function of the subject lands and adjacent lands; b) suitability of the lot for the proposed use and/or built form; c) lot area and consolidation as further outlined in Policy 3.62.11; d) compliance with the City's Urban Design Manual and Policy 11.C.1.34; e) cultural heritage resources, including Policy 15. D.2.8; and, f) technical considerations and other contextual or site specific factors. The Growing Together team met with planning management on Friday December 8th to review submissions made prior to the comment deadline of November 30th. We are meeting again this Friday, December 15th to consider additional submissions. In order to consider site-specific submissions, please provide the above materials in advance of the 15th Please also note that any active applications, including 83-87 Weber St. E. remain subject to their site-specific application and are not proposed to be zoned through Growing Together. Approved developments, such as 1001 King St. E. are also able to proceed via their approved OPA/ZBAs through the transition regulations in Section 18.4 of the zoning by-law. Further, please note that while staff are evaluating submissions seeking a different zone through this process, that additional, new site-specific regulations are not in scope for Growing Together. We are continuing to evaluate the rest of your feedback, but wanted to make sure you had an opportunity to make any site-specific submissions in time for staff to review. Thank you, Page 921 of 1179 The Growing Together Team From: Stephen Litt Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2023 2:03 PM To: Growing Together (SM) eGrowingTogether@kitchener.caa; Juliane vonWesterholt Cc: Natalie Goss <Natalie.Goss@kitchener.ca>; Pierre Chauvin <pchauvin@mhbcplan.corn>; Mark Hoculik <mh@vivedevelopment.ca> Subject: Re: Growing Together comments IYou don't often get emai . Tern xy y this is itt suspect we will need to meet again and go over in detail with staff given our magnitude of impact on our housing projects Thank you all I Get Outlook for iOS From: Growing Together (SM) <Growin Tg_ogether(@kitchener.ca> Sent: Tuesday, December 12, 2023 1.1:27:07 AM To: Juliane >; Growing Together (SM) rG rowi ngTogether(O kitchener.ca> Cc: Natalie Goss <Natalie.GossPkitchener.ca>; Pierre Chauvin ; Stephen Litt Subject: RE: Growing Together comments Hi Juliane, Staff has begun our evaluation of submissions with planning management. Changes will be recommended in our staff report as it is finalized over the next few weeks. Thank you, The Growing Together Team From: Juliane vonWesterholt- Sent: Friday, December 8, 2023 4:21 PM To. Growing Together (SM) rGrowingTagetherQkitchener.ca> Cc: Natalie Goss <Natalie.GossPkitchener.ca>; Pierre Chauvin >; Stup �_ [r Litt Subject: Growing Together comments You don't often get email . Learn n13E t is important i� tarn Good afternoon Natalie, Page 922 of 1179 As promised, here is my letter on behalf of our client VIVE. Please review as part of the responses to the draft OPA and ZBA and general feedback on the documents. Should you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me. In addition, we would welcome an opportunity to meet and discuss the comments in more detail or provide any clarifications. Si VI Zey-eLi ' J aL�O vie Vov�' vvestelrhoLt JULIANE von WESTERHOLT BES, MCIP, RPP Associate M H BC Planning, Urban Design & Landscape Architecture +�+�► PLANNING URBAN DESIGN & LANDSCAPE Y E A" R S MHBC ARCHITECTURE This communication is intended solely for the named addressee{s} and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, protected or otherwise exempt from disclosure No waiver of confidence, privilege, protection or otherwise is made. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, please advise us immediately and delete this email without reading, copying or forwarding it to anyone. Page 923 of 1179 From: Juliane vonWesterholt To: Natalie Goss: Growing Toaether (SM) Subject: VPdE properties Date: Thursday, January 4, 2024 2:06:36 PM Attachments: imaae003.ono arowino together site specific Dec. 22.gdf 23-163 YounoWeber ConcentPlans-ZC.ndf 23-162 46-56Colleae ConceotPlans-ZC.odF 22040 865Kjng ConcW0ans-Modf 23-155 CrownePlazaParkinaDeck ConceptPlans-ZC.odf 22048-79-87WeberSt-ConcetrtPla ns-ZC. ndf Importance: High IYou don't often get email from jvonwesterholt@mhbcplan.Com. Learn why this is important Hi Natalie, Happy New year to you! Here are the plans and the updated response letter with justification on the Growing Together requests on Behalf of VIVE. Please let me Know if you require anything else. J aLL O v.e VoVk, westel hott JULIANE von WESTERHOLT BES, MCIP, RPP Associate M H BC Planning, Urban Design s Landscape Architecture • • ►►►I- ger, - Rlii iuiM�T1 Tii1 .�'�'•r�rl. P L A N N I N G p URBAN DESIGN & LANDSCAPE Y E A R S MHBC ARCHITECTURE This communication is intended solely for the named addressee{s} and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, protected or otherwise exempt from disclosure No waiver of confidence, privilege, protection or otherwise is made. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, please advise us immediately and delete this email without reading, copying or forwarding it to anyone Page 924 of 1179 �KITCHENER ! WOODBRIDGE I LONDON 9 BARRIE I BURLINGTON PLANNING III URBAN DESIGN LANDSCAPE Y E A R s MHBC ARCHITECTURE January 2, 2024 Natalie Goss Manager Long Range and Policy Planning Kitchener City Hall, Planning Division 6t" Floor 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 Dear Ms. Goss: RE: Growing Together Site Specific Considerations OUR FILE We are writing on behalf of our client VIVE, as it pertains to the properties outlined below. Further to our letter sent you on December 811' and your subsequent email on December 12tf', the following response is intended to provide the rationale/ justification for inclusion of site specific permissions for the properties noted below in accordance with Section 15.D.2.5 of the Official Plan. In support of the request for site specific zoning considerations, proof of ownership together with a conceptual design has been included with this letter for each site. 79 and 83-87 Weber Street 79 Weber Street has been recently acquired by our client and is currently shown as SGA -2 zone which permits a maximum height of 8 storeys. Immediately to the east of this property, are lands currently owned by our client (83-87 Weber Street), which have undergone a site specific OPA and ZBA process to permit 32 storeys with an FSR of 18 for purpose built rental units. Our client has acquired the 79 Weber Street property in order to consolidate these lands with the 83-87 Weber Street lands, so that they can be comprehensively redeveloped. In your email noted above, it was mentioned that a site specific policy will be applied to the 83-87 Weber Street lands to allow the permissions obtained by the private amendments to permit the 25 storeys. As the client is intending to consolidate the 79 Weber St. parcel with these lands, we request that this consolidated parcel also have the same permissions without a height limit rather than applying the site specific regulations, and that they all be zoned SGA -4. The SGA -4 zone would not have any height restrictions, would not require parking and have no FSR limit. The site specific permissions has the 32 storey height limit, caps the FSR at 18 and seeks setback reductions for front and rear yard as well as no parking. Generally, the site specific regulations align with the proposed SGA -4 zone save for the setback reductions. Site specific setback regulations may be required for the consolidated parcel. Justification The proposed reduction in the minimum front and rear yard setbacks is requested to provide a building design which appropriately addresses the frontage with active uses with a reduced front yard setback, while maintaining an adequate rear yard setback from adjacent established uses to the rear. Typical downtown buildings are constructed with minimal or zero front yard setbacks in order to establish a consistent street line setback. As the Urban Growth Centre and this block develop over time, it is anticipated that front yard setbacks will be minimal in order to provide for active frontages to the pedestrian realm. The reduced rear yard setback is minimal, and the proposed tower design and orientation has been designed to minimize impacts on adjacent land uses during daylight hours. To keep the 79 Weber St. parcel in the SGA -2 zone would create an orphaned parcel with a narrow lot width and a maximum height of 8 storeys that will likely never be developed to this height and density potential on its own. The site is located within the MTSA along the fringe of the core and on a planned transit corridor, all of which are priority areas for intensification in the Official Plan. Our Client intends to develop the lands comprehensively, which aligns with the planned function to intensify these lands. The lands on their own, would likely not achieve the maximum development potential, however, as part of a consolidated parcel, it would be able to be developed at a density that will help support transit use and make more efficient use of land and infrastructure as directed in OP policy 3.C.2.11 which states "that the City will discourage a reduction in the /otarea ofproperty If the reduction in lot area has the potential to compromise intensification. Consolidation of properties will be encouraged in the interest of comprehensive planning to achle ve better site configuration, the provision of amenities and land use and design efficiency'. We have attached diagrams that demonstrate general compliance with the good urban design practices including the Tall Building Guidelines. 46-56 College St. The 46-56 College Street property is currently owned by our client. The lands are developed with an older recently renovated 3 storey apartment building, are located within the City Hall Major Transit Station Area and are currently shown as being within a proposed SGA -3 zone, which would permit a height of 25 storeys. On behalf of our client, we are requesting the SGA -4 zone, which would permit higher densities and no prescribed height limit to the building. We have provided a conceptual plan showing that a building with a 900 sq. m floor plate and a height of 36 storeys could be developed on the subject lands and still meet the principles of tower separation. The lands to the west with frontage on Water Street are also shown as SGA -3 and are currently not adjacent to a residential neighbourhood. A 16 storey apartment building (Alexandrian) located at 74 Water Street is immediately behind the subject property. Justification The subject lands, though currently developed, have the potential to be intensified. As they are located within the City Hall MTSA and are adjacent to the UGC, both of which are areas given the 2 Page 926 of 1179 highest priority for intensification in the City's Official Plan as stated in Section 3.C.2.3 and therefore are appropriate for additional density and height. Additionally, the planned function of the MTSA in accordance with policy 3.C.2.17, is to provide a focus for growth through development to support existing and planned transit and rapid transit service. The lands are located 178 metres from the City Hall transit stop and further intensification will help support transit use. This area has a mix of building heights and is not within or adjacent to a stable neighbourhood and would therefore also be compatible and appropriate for intensification. The lands if redeveloped as shown on the attached sketch, would also provide additional residential rental units to aid in the housing shortage experienced by the city and province. The property itself is not listed on the Heritage Register and the entire block on which these lands are located is not on the register, however, there are buildings in the vicinity with various levels of heritage significance. To facilitate the redevelopment as shown on the sketch, some site specific relief for setbacks will be required. The proposed 36 storey building would also be in proximity to the 16 storey apartment, which would provide a transition in building height in this area and add to the City's skyline. 58, 60 and 64 Weber and 96, 102 Young Street This consolidated property currently contains two buildings approximately 2-21/2 storeys that are currently uses as apartments. These lands also owned and assembled by our client are currently intended to be zoned SGA -2 which would permit heights of 8 storeys. Our client is requesting an SGA -4 zone for the subject lands which would have no FSR or height restrictions. A proposed concept for a 36 storey tower has been provided to demonstrate how the lands could be intensified. Justification The subject lands, though currently developed, have the potential to be intensified. As they are located within the City Hall MTSA and are adjacent to the UGC, both of which are areas given the highest priority for intensification in the City's Official Plan as stated in Section 3.C.2.3. Additionally, the planned function of the MTSA in accordance with policy 3.C.2.17, is to provide a focus for growth through development to support existing and planned transit and rapid transit service. The consolidated lands are located 172 metres from the City Hall transit stop and further intensification will help support transit use. The lands also have frontage onto Weber Street, which is a planned urban transit corridor, which is also a priority area for intensification. The proposed building mass would be oriented toward Weber Street at the northwest intersection of Weber Street West and Young Street, thereby maximizing separation to the residential neighbourhood to the north which include properties that are listed on the Heritage Registry. Potential shadows from this proposed development would not be cast in this direction beyond the morning hours and would move to the north east toward Ahrens and then back toward Weber Street, thus having minimal impact on any lands within the civic district neighbourhood. The additional density would also help increase the rental housing supply in the City that is walking distance to higher order transit and the UGC. Site specific setbacks may be required to implement the proposed concept. 865 King Street West The subject lands also owned by our client has the potential to be comprehensively redeveloped in this mid -town location. The lands have been assembled and are currently proposed as SGA -4 (along 3 Page 927 of 1179 King Street West) and SGA -3 for the Pine Street lands. The lands are currently developed with 3 commercial buildings and surface parking lots and are currently underdeveloped lands. Our client is requesting that the lands be zoned SGA -4 in their entirety to facilitate a more comprehensive redevelopment as shown on the attached sketch, which includes a 4-6 storey parking podium with 4 towers ranging in height from 16,18, 44 and 55 storeys. The majority of the building mass is oriented along King Street, with the shortest tower fronting along Pine Street. The lands are located in the Grand River Hospital Station Area and are directly at the Grand River Hospital Ion station stop. Justification The subject lands, though currently developed, have the potential to be intensified as they are currently underutilized. The subject lands are located within the Grand River Hospital MTSA and are located in the Mid -town area of the LRT route, which is an area given the highest priority for intensification in the City's Official Plan as stated in Section 3.C.2.3. Additionally, the planned function of the MTSA in accordance with policy 3.C.2.17, is to provide a focus for growth through development to support existing and planned transit and rapid transit service. The consolidated lands are located at the station stop and further intensification will help support transit use as well as providing residential units to contribute toward increasing the current housing supply in the area. There is an opportunity to create a mixed use presence along King Street at this location. The subject lands are across the street to the KCI high school, which has been listed on the City's heritage register. The lands are well removed from a residential neighbourhood to the north with the large green space and Cemetery lands acting as a transition to residential lands to the north of the cemetery. Lands to west along Mary Street contain low density residential lands. Potential shadows from this proposed development would not be cast in this direction beyond the morning hours and would move to the north east over the cemetery lands, thus having minimal impact on any lands along Mary Street. Crowne Plaza property Benton and Charles The subject lands are proposed as SGA -3 in the Growing Together by-law. Our client has acquired these lands and are requesting an SGA -4 zoning. The parcel is large enough to accommodate some intensification, is located in the Frederick Street MTSA and is 83 metres from the Frederick Station Area. The lands are also located within the City Centre District of the UGC with direct frontage along the LRT Route on Charles Street with the Queen Street and Market stations also in proximity. The proposed redevelopment concept includes a 20 storey tower mid block along Charles Street with the retention of the existing hotel along Benton Street, as shown on the attached concept drawings. Justification The subject lands, though currently developed have the potential to be intensified as they are currently underutilized. As they are located within the Frederick Street MTSA and are located in the UGC with direct frontage on the LRT route, which is an area given the highest priority for intensification in the City's Official Plan as stated in Section 3.C.2.3 increased density and intensification is appropriate. Additionally, the planned function of both the UGC and the MTSA in accordance with policy 3.C.2.17, is to provide a focus for growth through development to support existing and planned transit and rapid transit service. The consolidated lands are located within 83 m of the station stop and further intensification will help support transit use as well as providing residential units to contribute toward increasing the current housing supply in the area. There is an 4 Page 928 of 1179 opportunity to create a mixed use presence along both Benton and Charles Streets at this location. The site is highly underutilized and would support intensification and does not abut any residential neighbourhoods and would therefore are not anticipated to create any significant adverse impacts to surrounding properties if intensified. 19 Benton St., which is a portion of the Subject lands, is located within the Schneider Creek Cedar Hill heritage district. The site would provide at least 9 m of physical separation to adjacent hotel property and 3m to the Hall's Lane. We respectfully request that you consider the submission for increased zoning permissions on these key locations for the reasons cited above. Should you have further questions or require additional supporting information, we would welcome the opportunity to meet and discuss this with you. Yours truly, MHBC Pierre Chauvin MA, MCIP, RPP Partner cc. S. Litt 5 Juliane vonWesterholt, BES, MCIP, RPP Associate Page 929 of 1179 F74' WEBER ST W. PROPERTY1�7c) (9 .Ir ZA W^,0„ I 164 WEBER ST. W. PROPERTY I I k 28 124 m SGA-4 ZONING COMPLIANCE REQUIRED PROPOSED FOR STOREYS 19-36 LOT WIDTH 42.Om 50.2m LOT AREA 2,000 sq.m. 1786 sq.m. FRONT YARD SETBACK 6.0m 3.Om EXT. SIDE YARD SETBACK 6.0m 4.7m MAX. BUILDING LENGTH 48.Om 40.7m MAX. FLOOR PLATE AREA 900 sR.m. 1000 sR.m. PHYSICAL SEPARATION 12.Om 1.62m !m OWN 102 YOUNG ST PROPERTY i i i 6.40• 6.2D fi.40 fi.40 fi.40 low 2BEo iSFJ 2BEU 81en' ._. 6BA0 4,71 YOUNG ST PROPERTY WEBER ST WEST v i v e D E E L O P M E N T REINDERS Y UN -WEBER ZONING COMPLIANCE STUDY +LAWZC lGE-A"H101 AweNrtee.uEte.ENciNE:E:FxiN LNER, N Dare zonaaz-zo --^.,.o. SCAIf 1:125 SGA -4 ZONING COMPUANCE REQUIRED PROPOSED FOR STOREYS 19,36 LOT WIDTH 42.Om 39.2m LOT AREA FRONT YARD SETBACK 2,000 sq.m. 6.Om 1358 sq.m. 3.Om EXT. SIDE YARD SETBACK 6.Om 3.Om MAX. BUILDING LENGTH 48.Om 32.8m MAX. FLOOR PLATE AREA PHYSICAL SEPARATION 900 sq.m. 12.Om 850 sq.m. 3.0m 4 -56 COLLEGES RE T R1TC ENER, N 21.35 COLLEGE ST 58707 L'EGE ST PROPERTY I I I I I I I I I I I I� I I I I I I I VlVeD E V E L O P M E N T �REINDERS ZONING COMPLIANCE STUDY +LAW ZC iiiniO4ainn nmrmnnn MW COLLEGE ST 58707 L'EGE ST PROPERTY I I I I I I I I I I I I� I I I I I I I VlVeD E V E L O P M E N T �REINDERS ZONING COMPLIANCE STUDY +LAW ZC 21 PINE STREET INS -2 ZONED I i r% //, I I I I I 1 I r � • I F L -1- - I I I I I I ---------- ROW, I 1 I I 8 4-872 KING ST TBG ANALYSIS KITC ENER, 1N vivINDeM �RLAW ERS DALE: 2023-f2-12 TBG SCAlf 1:400 ZONING STATISTICS v i ve- D E V E 1 0 P I F N T Ei REINoERS +L.AW DALE: 2023-f2-12 PL 1 INS -2 ZONED -------.� - - - _= - ------------------- 864-872 --------_--_--8 4-872 KING ST � -OF PROPOSED GROUND FLOOR �,- ENER, N ZONING STATISTICS 11Z I ,&m viveM D e v F 1 o v m F H REINDER5 +LAW77— � ...... .C7 P ./// DATE: 2023-f2-12 V ■ SCAff 1'350 ZONING STATISTICS v i v e - D E V E 1 0 P I F N T Ei REINDERS F +LAw p 1 ZONING STATISTICS v i v e - D E V E 1 0 P I F N T F-1 EINDERS +LAw ...... ❑ DATE: 2023-f2-12 P2 INS -2 ZONED ZONING STATISTICS ,& " r.. viveM - ----------------------------------- oevPM dREINDER5 2 23-12-12PROPOSED TYP. RESIDENTIAL UNITS +LAWP3 El 8 - 16 ❑ KITC ENER, fN DAZE: 2023 -f2 -of SCNf 1'350 �I I�., il�l.l� V� ■ INS -2 ZONED ZONING STATISTICS ,& " r.. viveM - ----------------------------------- oevPM dREINDER5 2 23-12-12PROPOSED TYP. RESIDENTIAL UNITS +LAWP3 El 8 - 16 ❑ KITC ENER, fN DAZE: 2023 -f2 -of SCNf 1'350 ZONING STATISTICS v i v e - D E V E 1 0 P I F N T EINDERS +LAw P4 ZONING STATISTICS v i v e - D E V E 1 0 P I F N T Ei REINDERS F +LAw P5 ZONING STATISTICS v i v e - D E V E 1 0 P I F N T Ei REINDERS F +LAw P6 ZONING STATISTICS v i v e - D E V E 1 0 P I F N T Ei REINDERS F +LAw ❑ DATE: 2023-f2-12 P7 KING ST EAST SGA -4 ZONING COMPLIANCE REQUIRED PROPOSED FOR STOREYS 19-36 LOT WIDTH 42.0m 179.2m LOT AREA 2,000 sq.m. 3371.2 sq.m. FRONT YARD SETBACK 6.Om 3.Om EXT. SIDE YARD SETBACK 6.Om 9.Om MAX. BUILDING LENGTH 48.Om 72.Om MAX. FLOOR PLATE AREA 900 sq.m. 950.5 sq.m. PHYSICAL SEPARATION 12.Om 9.Om C 0 NE PLAZA �11- ENER, NEl CHARLES ST EAST viveM F—.R'EIN0ERS ZONING COMPLIANCE STUDY+LAW ZC SCAff50220 WEBER ST. EAST f�sm E L j 32 Storey Tower 105.6. HEIGHT/540. LENGTH I j i28.5m TBG SETBACK i I � I I j I I I I 4 Storey Podium I j 11—El T— SGA-4 ZONING COMPLIANCE REOUIRED PROPOSED FOR STOREYS 19-36 LOT WIDTH LOT AREA2,000 FRONT YARD SETBACK 42.Om q... 6.0m 702m 2629.2 sq.m. 1.4m EXT. SIDE YARD SETBACK 6.0m WA MAX. BUILDING LENGTH MAX FLOOR PLATE AREA 48.0. 900 sq m. 54.0. 1285.4 sq m. PHYSICAL SEPARATION 12CM 44m vive D E V E L O P M E N T 79-87 WEBER ST. �RLaw ER5 ZONING COMPLIANCE STUDY ZC `1, 1 ENER, N � ❑ oaTe: zo2a-lz-zo scams 1:1sD BUILDING DATA- Revised Proposal TOTAL PROJECT ABOVE GRADE METRIC (sq...) IMPERIAL(sq.ft.) PARKING 1 BED 2 BED 3 BED TOTAL LEVEL I- MAIN LEVEL PARKING 1254.8 13507 29 LEVEL I - ENTRY LOBBY/GARBAGE/CORES 349.9 3766 LEVEL 1 -COMMERCIAL 406.7 4378 LEVEL 2 -COMMERCIAL 406.7 4378 LEVEL 2 -PARKING 1572.5 16926 33 LEVEL 3 -COMMERCIAL 406.7 4378 LEVEL 3 -PARKING 1572.5 16926 33 LEVEL 4 -COMMERCIAL 406.7 4378 LEVEL 4 -PARKING 1572.5 16926 33 LEVEL 5 -COMMERCIAL 406.7 4378 LEVEL 5 -PARKING 1572.5 16926 33 LEVEL 6 -COMMERCIAL 406.7 4378 LEVEL 6 -PARKING 1572.5 16926 33 LEVEL 7 -COMMERCIAL 406.7 4378 LEVEL 7 -PARKING 1572.5 16926 33 LEVEL 8 -COMMERCIAL 406.7 4378 LEVEL 8 -PARKING 1572.5 16926 33 LEVEL 9 -PARKING 1979.2 21304 41 LEVEL 10 -RESIDENTIAL 1148.5 12362 14 4 0 18 LEVEL 11 RESIDENTIAL 1148.5 12362 14 4 0 18 LEVEL 12 RESIDENTIAL 1148.5 12362 14 4 0 18 LEVEL 13 -RESIDENTIAL 1148.5 12362 14 4 0 18 LEVEL 14 -RESIDENTIAL 1148.5 12362 14 4 0 18 LEVEL 15 - RESIDENTIAL 1148.5 12362 14 4 0 18 LEVEL 16 -RESIDENTIAL 1148.5 12362 14 4 0 18 LEVEL 17 -RESIDENTIAL 1148.5 12362 14 4 0 18 LEVEL 18 -RESIDENTIAL 1148.5 12362 14 4 0 18 LEVEL 19 -RESIDENTIAL 1148.5 12362 14 4 0 18 LEVEL 20 -RESIDENTIAL 1148.5 12362 14 4 0 18 LEVEL 21 -RESIDENTIAL 1148.5 12362 14 4 0 18 LEVEL 22 -RESIDENTIAL 1148.5 12362 14 4 0 18 LEVEL 23 -RESIDENTIAL 1148.5 12362 14 4 0 18 LEVEL 24 -RESIDENTIAL 1148.5 12362 14 4 0 18 LEVEL 25 -RESIDENTIAL 1148.5 12362 14 4 0 18 LEVEL 26 -RESIDENTIAL 1148.5 12362 14 4 0 18 LEVEL 27 -RESIDENTIAL 1148.5 12362 14 4 0 18 LEVEL 28 -RESIDENTIAL 1148.5 12362 14 4 0 18 LEVEL 29 -RESIDENTIAL 1148.5 12362 14 4 0 18 LEVEL 30 -RESIDENTIAL 1148.5 12362 14 4 0 18 LEVEL 31 -RESIDENTIAL 1148.5 12362 14 4 0 18 LEVEL 32 -RESIDENTIAL 1148.5 12362 14 4 0 18 TOTAL GFA - ABOVE GRADE 44260.5 476416 301 322 92 0 414 FSR (1896.Hsq- LOT AREA) 23.3 Parking Spates/Unit 0.72705314 SITE STATISTICS ITEM Z ToTu�r�1 zeza� am a Iml weEI-1 m lu,/ usM., 11-1 NTIA.xssrnocs m mm Na,ia���s M. wxoN�srclrsl c a.o n.e COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL • COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL —o c UNITT UNIT UNIT3 I UNI74 UNIi.'� ENOE LOBBY/AMENITIES ' v 8 I GARBAGE/ I e LOADING i FFTTF F— RAMP UP i 29 PARKING (SPACES20 I sw, SLOPE-ossm i I I 1 � I I — vive. D ' E V E L O P M E N T �RENEF 5 7 F -RE -87 WEBER ST. PROPOSED GROUND FLOOR +LAW S `RISC ENER, N ❑ oaTE: zo2a-lz-zo - v P 1 scams i:/sD ICOMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL ,COMMERCIAL COMMERCIAL (OTB) (OTB) (OTB) I (OTB) (OTB) 11i - - I - Y - I �\ 33 PARKING (SPACES i I 26 6 � I i_ 6400 i. 6400 i. • 6400 i_ •6400 i_ •6400 RAMP UP I I5%SLOPE -0.85m I ,� 1 I v PET ElfV.2 3 I m O o Z WFEA \ 3 f RAMP ON RAMP UP I 5%SLOPE 0.85m5%SL\ OPE-0.85m I e 17 8 I � I 6400 • i_ 6400 i. 6400 i. 6400 i. 6400 i. vive DE V E L O P M E N T �REINDER5 79-87 WEBER ST. PODIUM +LAw LEVEL 2 - 8 P `RISC ENER, N1416t ❑ oa�E: zo2a-iz-zo sca�E i:iaa I 8 41 PARKING (SPACES i - I 26 18 i_ 6400 i_ 6400 i_ 6400 i_ 6400 i_ 6400 6400 6400 6400 6400 I54 RAMP UP I 5%SLOPE -085m I 8 1 I � Z TYPE A \ \ 3 I 8 RAMP ON RAMP UP I 8 5% SLOPE 0.85m 5% SLOPE - 0.85m I 17 8 I g I 6408 i_ - 8600 i_ 6400 i_ 6400 v�ve REIN DERS 79-87 WEBER ST. LEVEL 9 �� ARCNREcivaE.EN KITC ENER, N ❑ ❑ gAC4lf� �2 �1 PAIVAlE4ALCONY PAP/AiE 6A1GONY PAIVAIE BALCONY NNIEBALCONY PRIVAiE—UNY I mm I 7 BED 621 BED 1 BED 1 BED 1 BED 1 BED 2 BED 57.3 m' 57.5 m' 70.2 m' 582m' 50.9 m' 7 g 1 BED I 1 BED I -rFv, 1 EtE . 2 571.7 0 — I ELEV 3 I 1 BEDS 1 BED 54.00 54.6 mz I 1 BED 1 BED 1 BED 1 BED 1 BED f 62.9ml 62.9 m2 62.9 m2 .9 m? 2IBED • 8 78.9 a? ' — PAIVAIEJNLCONf �AIVAiEBALCONY PRIVAIE BPLCON'L �ANAiE841CONY PRIVAkJ3AlCONY i. 6400 i. 6400 i. 6400 -'fi400 —7 •• 6400•—i:' O6—':-6400 is' 6400 "-6400 vi'vel REINDERS 79-87 WEBER ST. TYPICAL TOWER LEVEL C+SAW LEVEL 10 — 32 ❑ AR`"RE�aE.E" P3 KITC ENER, N 0A1E: 2023-f2-20 SCAIf 1:100 From: Miles 5chwindt To: Growing Together t$M1 Subject: New growth areas Date; Friday, January 5, 2024 3:09:02 PM IYou don't often get email from miles_schwindr@yahoo_com_ Learn why this is important Good afternoon I support the new strategic plan for growth areas within Kitchener to allow for higher density housing in the draft plan. I would encourage the council to approve this plan in January. Best regards, Miles Schwindt Page 949 of 1179 From: Lesley Oakley To: Growing Taaether (SMI Cc: Natalie Goss: Helen Jowett: Lori Delon®; Joseph Puopolo; Joe Woodhouse: Tommy Rakic: Steven Ruse: Shaddi Fahel: Brian Prudham: Bernie Nimer; Larry Kotseff: Jim Dodd: Allan Drewlp: Holly Edshom Scott Higgins; Helen G. Jowett Subject: Growing Together - Build Urban Response Date: Monday, January 8, 2024 2:38:18 PM Attachments: 2024-01-02 - Growina Together Letter - Build Urban Final. BuildUrban Backarounder FINAL.pdf You don't often get email from to@vivedevelopmentca. Learn why this isim op rtant Good Afternoon Natalie, Please find the attached response from Build Urban regarding the Growing Together Initiative. With thanks, Vv � LESLEY OAKLEY Pro'ect Coordinator Planning & ❑esign VEVELOPMENT Page 950 of 1179 build urban. January 2nd, 2023 Natalie Goss Manager Long Range and Policy Planning Kitchener City Hall, Planning Division 6th Floor 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 Dear Ms. Goss: RE: Growing Together Comments — BUILD URBAN Thank you for the opportunity to be involved in the community engagement process regarding the proposed Growing Together project which intends to designate and rezone lands in the Strategic Growth Areas including the Urban Growth Centre and the Major Transit Station Areas. Generally, we are very encouraged by the forward thinking toward intensification of the Strategic Growth Areas. After reviewing the draft planning instruments (draft Official Plan Amendment and Zoning by-law Amendment) we have the following comments and/ or questions for clarification. The comments are broken down into Official Plan, Zoning by-law and General comments for ease of reference. Official Plan Strategic Growth Area B The downtown core, which is a primary intensification area, has a significant portion designated as SGA -B which has height limits to 25 storeys. What is the rationale for this limit on height, in particular on lands that do not have heritage significance or are adjacent to a stable neighbourhood (eg. block on the north side of King Street West)? Supposed fractional ownership or lot fabric should not be a reason to downzone a parcel of land in our opinion. Strategic Growth Area C Lands within this area are intended to accommodate significant intensification at high density. Policies 15.D.2.52 -15.D.2.54 indicate that there may be no maximum height and refers to site specific increases in building height. This continues to suggest that their height may be limited despite this being the highest intensification area. Is there opportunity for stronger language that creates more certainty, particularly on sites that meet the intent of Tall Building Guidelines and provide for adequate transition to lower density uses? It is encouraging that the language says "may," however the flip side to that is that one "may not" permit some additional height and this is somewhat subjective. Page 951 of 1179 hud11 ur an. Zoning by-law 2 Definitions Floor Plate Area- means the gross floor area of a storey of a building. It is suggested that you insert the words "within the tower of a tall" after the word storey and delete the words "of a" as this should not reference low density or medium density -built forms. Suggested definition Floor Plate Area - means the gross floor area of a storey within the tower of a tall building. Physical Separation - means the distance from a tall building tower's face to its interior side lot line and real lot lines. When two or more towers are on the same lot, the total distance between each pair of towers in any direction is to be calculated as the sum of both individual separations. Can you clarify what is meant by this definition and perhaps provide a diagram? In particular, explain what is meant by the sum of both individual separations. Also, is it necessary to meet internal separations on a site as there are other methods such as tower orientation and positioning to mitigate overlook conditions? By not regulating the on-site tower separation, perhaps more flexibility is achieved to provide better off-site separations. When a developer and their designers are able to master plan their own multiple tower project, it should be at their own preference and artistic interpretation to place towers as their wish — they do not limit neighbouring offsite projects. Section 6 Section 6.2 contains Table 6-1 which lists the permitted uses within the SGA zones. We note that cluster and stacked towns are not permitted specifically and respectfully request that they be permitted as they are under 4 storeys, and that the regulations for Table 6-1 be adjusted accordingly. Table 6.4 in Section 6.4.3 sets out regulations for the entire building for storeys above the 711 storey and for transition to low rise residential zones. Accordingly, the Section pertaining to the tower above the 7th storey, has minimum side yard setback of 6.0 m, minimum building length of 60 m and maximum floor plate size of 2000 m2, which in our opinion are too low. These should be determined by the Tall Building Guidelines and not be embedded in the zoning. Please consider adjusting these as described further below. We would be happy to discuss this matter with you in more detail. In a similar manner Table 6.5 regulates Multiple Dwellings, Mixed Use Buildings and Non -Residential Buildings. We have concerns over the following: Page 952 of 1179 3 hud11 ur an. General • Minimum Street line ground floor building height should be revised to provide more flexibility in our opinion 7-12 storey • For storeys 7-12, the minimum front and exterior side yard setback at 6.0 m is too restrictive and will result in fewer units per floor • The maximum building floor length should be increased from 60 m to 90 m • The minimum physical separation of 6.0 m should not be regulated but should be determined through Tall Building Guidelines to provide flexibility 13-18 storey • The maximum building length for 13-18 storeys could be achieved if lengthened • Maximum floor plate site should be increased to 1400 m2 19-36 storey • The maximum floor plate should be revised to 1200 m2 37 and above • The maximum building length should be increased to 48 m • The maximum floor plate should be increased to 1200 m2 Section 6.6 Priority Streets Section 6.6a) ii and iii which does not permit the location of structured parking in the podium structure or permits only 50% of the area of the street line fagade within the base of the building is problematic for smaller sites. It is suggested that this be permitted above the first two floors if it cannot be located on the ground floor with some glazing or appropriate screening or wrapped with units where feasible. Section 6.7 Private Amenity Space Section 6.7a) I and II require 4 m2 and 8 m2 respectively of private amenity space. This seems too high, and we suggest reducing this amount to approximately 2.0 m2 for 1 bedroom and 3m2 for two bedroom. It is further suggested that this be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. General comments • In the situation of a corner lot how would the building length would be applied? Is it applied to both frontages? • Also, in the case of an L-shaped building the floor plate size would never be complied with. Page 953 of 1179 4 h,,;id ur an. • After reviewing this information, it became apparent that properties in the King Street East corridor, as well as some downtown areas have not been targeted for increased density, which may be a missed opportunity. We ask that you reconsider these areas as part of your final document as many of these properties do not abut low density stable neighbourhoods. • Consideration should be given to fewer restrictions related to the built form, as this would provide flexibility for tower design. This is particularly important when considering alternative forms of construction such as energy efficient construction through the use of modular construction methods. The modular form of construction is heavier than traditional cast in place concrete and therefore necessitates that the weight be distributed to a wider area to prevent it from punching through moderately yielding soils. • Additionally, the cost of construction is more efficient in a slab format than that of a point tower. These costs or reductions in cost are passed onto the consumer or tenant of the building in the case of a rental apartment. Being less prescriptive about the built form would permit the consideration of alternative forms of construction. Less prescription would also help reduce construction costs, especially in rental apartments. We respectfully request that you consider these comments. Slab tower formats when designed thoughtfully can be aesthetically pleasing and contribute positively to the public realm. • We strongly encourage staff to abandon form -based zoning and continue to work with City Design staff and the professionals to develop solutions to challenges of properties on a site specific basis. • We also note that many of the proposed SGA zones appear to reflect current conditions. Considerations should be given to amend these permissions particularly where the Criteria for Upzoning as per 15.D.2.5 have been satisfied or in areas where there are no immediate residential zone adjacent and other locational and contextual criteria such as proximity to the LRT have been taken into consideration. In addition, on a general note suggestion on other potential higher zoning on some sites not owned by our members but that could be redeveloped include: • Lands along Ottawa Street unless it backs onto low rise residential should be considered for increased development potential; • Market Square; • Grand River Hospital site. In the case where the site-specific regulations or permissions are more restrictive than the proposed SGA provisions, considerations to review these permissions as part of this process may be appropriate and it is suggested that this should be discussed with the property owners. Page 954 of 1179 hud11 ur an. We would welcome an opportunity to discuss these comments further. Some of our members have provided examples for your consideration with their own comments and concerns separately. Thank you for your continued innovation in core area Kitchener planning. Yours truly, BUILD URBAN Stephen Litt Build Urban — Founding Member Page 955 of 1179 urban. WHO WE ARE Build Urban is a collection of Urban developers who, through their projects, play a significant role in shaping the future urban landscape of Waterloo Region, as well as its economic prosperity. The group's members share a commitment to an active and progressive form of city building that includes residential, commercial and institutional land uses that are inclusive, healthy, sustainable and vibrant for the community. OUR GOALS Build Urban's goal is to be a consistent two-way communication channel between urban development stakeholders and all levels of government. We are able to offer our technical expertise to government committees, educate through thought leadership white papers, and constructively provide new and fresh perspectives in order to build partnerships in urban development. Through their real estate work, Build Urban's members are playing a significant role in furthering the economic success of Waterloo Region through shaping the urban landscape. We are committed to an active form of city building to support thoughtful urban, residential, commercial, and institutional land use that will serve Waterloo Region and Ontario as we continue to grow. AUUi Y iv}rlr AL INFORMATION The physical and community structure of Ontario cities remains in a state of change as the provincial government proactively puts forth solutions for the current housing crisis, social inequity and climate change. Part of that change will involve new planning objectives, processes, infrastructure, and the need for new collaborative partnerships between the public and private sectors. Waterloo Region and the Province of Ontario is at a crossroads when it comes to development, and sustainable, thoughtful urban development will be crucial to ensuring that we can achieve our shared goals. We are committed to finding housing solutions for the places that we call home, and we are certain that we can be of help for all levels of government. Together, we can build strong and resilient housing solutions that provide the homes that Canadians want and need. Page 956 of 1179 From: Labreche, Victor To: Natalie Goss: Growing Toaether (SM) Cc: 5andro Bassanese, eolsen{da1928393.com: Jeff Henry: Betty White Subject: submission Comments on Proposed "Growing Together' OPA and ZBA Amendments regarding 181 - 197 Frederick Street, Kitchener: Date: Wednesday, January 10, 2024 2:23:26 PM Attachments: imaaetlnl.ana PTL GrowinaTmether 181-197Frederic642024 ).1-10.odf IYou don't often get email fry Learn w v this is important Good afternoon Natalie and City of Kitchener Planning Staff. Please see attached comment letter regarding the above subject. Please reply to initially confirm your receipt of this letter. We are available at your earliest convenience to discuss this further. Please also ensure that we are included on the city's circulation notice list for further updates/notices on this subject and when it will be scheduled to be considered by the City's Planning and Development Services Committee. Thank you, Victor Labreche, MCIP, RPP Associate Principal I Practice Lead, Planning Arcadis Professional Services (Canada) Inc. G'+ARCJ>DIS This email and any files transmitted with it are the property of Arcadis and its affiliates_ All rights, including without limitation copyright, are reserved_ This email contains information that may be confidential and may also be privileged_ It is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s)- If you are not an intended recipient, please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in d is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please return 9 to the sender and then delete the email and destroy any copies of it. While reasonable precautions have been taken to ensure that no software or viruses are present in our emails, we cannot guarantee that this email or any attachment is virus free or has not been intercepted or changed. Any opinions or other information in this email that do not relate to the official business of Arcadis are neither given nor endorsed by it_ Page 957 of 1179 Ms. Natalie Gross Manager, Policy and Research City of Kitchener Planning Division 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 PARCADIS Date: January 10, 2024 nmm�� Comments on Proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By -Law Amendment (Growing Together) 181-197 Frederick Street & 134-147 Lancaster Street East, Kitchener Dear Ms. Gross, On behalf of our client, 1928393 Ontario Inc., owners of the subject lands identified as 181-197 Frederick Street & 134-147 Lancaster Street East, Kitchener, please accept this letter in response to the City's proposed "Growing Together" Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By -Law Regulations (hereafter the "Growing Together" amendments). This letter reviews the proposed changes to the Zoning By -Law applicable to our client's lands and the proposed transition provisions. Based on the below review, we respectfully request that the City provide similar transition provisions for the "Growing Together" Zoning By -Law amendments as were provided for the original approval of Zoning By -Law 2019-051. Background It is our understanding that the purpose or intent of this proposal is to create `Strategic Growth Area' designations and zones within the PMTSAs west of Hwy 7/8, replacing various low/medium/high density residential/non- residential/mixed designations and zones, eliminating parking requirements, and abandoning FSR regulations in favour of form -based regulations. The proposal concludes the process of applying the new comprehensive Zoning By -Law 2019-051 to the impacted lands that remain zoned Zoning By -Law 85-1 within the PMTSAs west of Hwy 7/8. Our client's lands, 181-197 Frederick Street, are located within the limits of this proposal and are specifically within the Frederick Station PMTSA as identified in Figure 6c of Regional Official Plan Amendment No. 6. Our client's lands received Approval in Principle of Site Plan Application SP19/086/F/GS on March 12, 2020 and previously received approval of Minor Variance Application A2019-123 to facilitate the redevelopment of the site into a 10 -storey mixed-use building with 134 residential units. We and our client are at the final step with City of Kitchener staff (Sandro Bassanese and Bev Grant -Cambell) to permit the registration of the applicable Site Plan Agreement and has also submitted and revised Building Permit Applications in accordance with City comments, which would permit the redevelopment of the subject lands in accordance with the existing Zoning By -Law 85-1 regulations and previously approved Minor Variance Application. Page 958 of f179 Ms. Natalie Gross City of Kitchener January 10, 2024 Our Request Based on our review of the draft "Growing Together" amendments, while the proposed and imminent redevelopment of our client's lands conform to the existing Zoning By -Law 85-1 and approved Minor Variance, the redevelopment would not conform to the proposed new restrictions on building height, building setbacks at the 7th storey and above, and minimum landscaped area. Based on the "Growing Together" Official Plan Amendment, these would require further relief by way of a Minor Variance Application. When the City of Kitchener originally adopted Zoning By -Law 2019-051, it included transition provisions as follows ( mphasis add( ): 18.2 COMPLETE APPLICATION TRANSITION MATTERS 1) For the purposes of this Section: a) For the purposes of this Section: i) "complete application" means an application that contains sufficient particulars and information to allow it to be processed and approved. An application that is incomplete becomes a complete application on the date that the required particulars and information are provided to the City. ii) "complied with the provisions of By -Law Number 85-1" means: a. the land, building, or structure fully complies with the provisions of By -Law Number 85-1 as it existed immediately before the effective date of this By -Law; or, b. the land, building, or structure fully complies with a minor variance from the provisions of By -Law Number 85-1 which was approved on or after January 1, 2017. iii) "effective date of this By -Law" means the date on which the lands to which the provisions of section 18 apply, were included on Appendix 'A', either through the initial passing of this By - Law, or by amendment. b) Despite Sections 1.7 and 1.8, nothing in this By -Law applies to prevent the issuance of any building permit where: i) a complete application for such building permit was made on or before the effective date of this By -Law and said complete application complied with the provisions of By -Law Number 85-1; or, ii) a complete application for such building permit was made after the effective date of this By - Law and is in respect of a lot to which Subsections c), d) or e) apply and the said complete application complied with the provisions of By -Law Number 85-1; c) Despite Sections 1.7 and 1.8, nothing in the By -Law applies to prevent the issuance of any: i) site plan control approval where a complete application for such site plan control approval was made on or before the effective date of this By -Law and the said complete application complied with the provisions of By -Law 85-1. ii) approval of a minor modification, as determined by the Director of Planning or designate, to an approved site plan which was approved on or after January 1, 2017 where a complete application for such modification was made after the effective date of this By -Law and the said complete application complied with the provisions of By -Law 85-1. d) Despite Sections 1.7 and 1.8, nothing in the By -Law applies to prevent the issuance of the final approval of a plan of subdivision where draft approval for such plan of subdivision was finally granted. e) Despite Sections 1.7 and 1.8, nothing in the By -Law applies to prevent the issuance of the final approval of a plan of condominium where: www.arcadis.corri 2/3 https://ibigroup.sharepoint.com/sites/Projects/111303/Project Documents/02.0 Correspondence/2.2 Ext/PTL_GrowingTogether_181-197FrederickSt.docx\2024-01Pej$jt`je 959 of 1179 Ms. Natalie Gross City of Kitchener January 10, 2024 i) draft approval for such plan of condominium was finally granted; or, ii) A complete application for plan of condominium was made after the effective date of this By - Law and is in respect of a lot to which Subsection b) applies and the said complete application complied with the provisions of By -Law Number 85-1; 18.3 TRANSITION SUNSET CLAUSE Sections 18,1 to 18.3 are automatically revealed on the third anniversary of the effective date of this By- La� and the provisions of Section 34(9) of the Planning Act shall thereafter apply in respect of any buildings, structures, or uses established or erected pursuant to any such complete application. The proposed new transition provisions in Section 18.4 for the "Growing Together" Zoning By -Law Amendment provide similar flexibility, but only for lands where site-specific Zoning By -Law Amendments were approved. The effect of the proposed transition regulations would be to prevent a building permit being issued for our client's long -planned, fully designed, City staff -supported mixed-use building containing 134 residential units on or after the effective date of the "Growing Together" Zoning By -Law Amendment. In our opinion, the current proposed transition provisions are insufficient and would unnecessarily and unintentionally delay the redevelopment and the construction of much needed new housing stock by our client. Therefore, we respectfully request that the City provide similar transition provisions for the "Growing Together" Zoning By -Law amendments as were provided for the original approval of Zoning By -Law 2019- 051. An alternative and our preferred approach would be to include site specific zone regulations on the subject lands within the "Growing Together" Zoning By -Law amendments that recognizes and permits the proposed 10 storey mixed use building with 134 residential units as approved by Minor Variance Application A2019 — 123 and Site Plan Application SP19/086/FIGS. Conclusion We appreciate the opportunity to provide comments. In addition to our request regarding providing necessary and appropriate transition provisions, we also request that we be notified of any future meetings and decisions on the proposed Growing Together Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By -Law Regulations. Please contact our office if you have any questions or would like to discuss this matter further. Respectfully Submitted, ARCADIS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (CANADA) INC. Jeff Henry, M.A. Planning Urban Planner Victor Labreche, RPP, MCIP Associate Principle — Practice Lead, Planning www.arcadis.com 3/3 https://ibigroup.sharepoint.com/sites/Projects/111303/Project Documents/02.0 Correspondence/2.2 Ext/PTL_GrowingTogether_181-197FrederickSt.docx\2024-01Pej$jt`je 960 of 1179 From: Natalie Goss To: Growing Together (SM) : Adam Clark; John Zunic Subject: RN: 1122 IGnq Street East Date: Thursday, January 11, 2624 11:24:12 AM Attachments: imaae0Q3.ona January i(- Growina Together reouest.odf Importance: High FYI. From: Juliane vonWesterholt Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2024 11:00 AM To: Garett Stevenson eGarett.Stevenson @kitchener.ca>; Natalie Goss <Natalie.Goss@kitchener.ca> Cc: Tim Seyler <Tim.Seyler@kitchener.ca>; Pierre Chauvin >; Gamboa, Vicente > Subject: 1122 King Street East Importance: High Good morning Garett, Please see our attached letter with the request to withdraw private applications for OPACZBA and the request to proceed with the Growing Together process for the designation and zoning of these lands. Thank you. S�VLLereLt ' J"Ll O vl e VOIL westel+oLt JULIANE von WESTERHOLT BES, MCIP, RPP Associate M H BC Planning, Urban. Design & Landscape Architecture Follow us: Webpage I Linkedin I Facebook I Twitter I Vimeo I Instagram .�'�►�+� PLANNING URBAN DESIGN & LANDSCAPE Y 1=A R S MHBC ARCHITECTURE This communication is intended solely for the named addressee{s} and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, protected or otherwise exempt from disclosure No waiver of confidence, privilege, protection or otherwise is made If you are not the intended recipient Page 961 of 1179 KITCHENER I WOODBRIDGE I LONDON I BARRIE I KMAILTON •r+•N►♦�. P L A fel IN I IN G 'URBAN DESIGN & I ANDSCAPF MHBC ARCHITECTURE January 11, 2024 Garett Stevenson Manager Development Review Kitchener City Hall, Planning Division 6t" Floor 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 Dear Mr. Stevenson: RE: 1122 King Street East OPA/ ZBA application and Growing Together Implications We are writing on behalf of our client MG Urban Developments Inc., as it pertains to the property outlined above. Applications for Official Plan (OPA) and Zoning By-law (ZBA) amendments were submitted late in 2023 and since then, the City has advanced Its station area planning with draft Official Plan and Zoning By-law documents that would affect these lands. The proposed Official Plan designation is SGA -B and proposed Zone is SGA -3, which would permit a tower of 25 storeys as the client originally requested in the private amendment applications. Proposed Policy 15.D.2.49 states that no building will exceed 25 storeys in height, which would support the proposed development of our client for the above noted lands. Additionally, 15.D.2.47 states that Strategic Growth Area B land use designation would accommodate medium and high density housing types, such as the proposed 25 storey apartment contemplated by our client. It would be the expectation of our client that these permissions for the subject properties be advanced as part of the Growing Together process. In speaking to Mr. Tim Seyler, Senior Planner, we were advised that the subject lands could be designated and zoned by the City's Growing Together process in lieu of advancing the site specific OPA and ZBA applications already submitted. We have spoken to our client and have been advised to proceed under the City's Growing Together process. In turn, we would respectfully request that our application for OPA/ ZBA be withdrawn and that the fees be returned to our client. Please confirm acknowledgement of this letter and we look forward to working with the City through the Growing Together process. Yours truly, MHBC Pierre Chauvin MA, MCIP, RPP Partner Juliane vonWesterholt, BES, MCIP, RPP Associate cc. V. Gamboa- MG Urban Developments Inc. N. Goss, Manager Long Range and Policy Planning, City of Kitchener Page 963 of 1179 From: Juliane vonWesterholt To: Natalie Goss: Growing Together (SM) Cc: Stelihen Litt; Mark Hoculik; Pierre Chauvin Subject: final growinq together request for 698-711-lCharles St. East Date: Thursday, January 11, 2024 12:0(1:(14 PM Attachments: imaaen02.uno January 10 GT letter For 698-710 Charles Street final.odf You don't often get email from jvonwesterholt@mhbcplan.com. Learn whgthic, is important Good Morning Natalie and Growing Together team, Attached for your consideration is a final letter concerning properties owned by our client VIVE with a request for site specific considerations through the Growing Together OP and ZBA process. Please let me know if you have any questions, we would be happy to meet with you. S[VI ZereLl. ,J � Lt n o,e voo, WesterhoLt JULIANE vont WESTERHOLT BES, MCIP, RPP Associate M H BC Planning, Urban Design & Landscape Architecture YE"ARS MHBC P L A N N I N G URBAN DESIGN & LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE This communication Is intended solely for the named addressee(s) and may contain information that Is privileged, confidential, protected or otherwise exempt from disclosure. No waiver of confidence, privilege, protection or otherwise Is made. If you are not the Intended reclplent of this communication, please advise us immediately and delete this email without reading, copying or forwarding It to anyone. Page 964 of 1179 �KITCHENER ! WOODBRIDGE I LONDON 9 BARRIE I BURLINGTON PLANNING III URBAN DESIGN LANDSCAPE Y E A R s n HBC ARCHITECTURE January 11, 2024 Natalie Goss Manager Long Range and Policy Planning Kitchener City Hall, Planning Division 6t" Floor 200 King Street West Kitchener, ON N2G 4G7 Dear Ms. Goss: RE: Growing Together Site Specific Considerations OUR FILE We are writing on behalf of our client VIVE, as it pertains to the property outlined below. Further to our letter sent you on December 22111, the following response is intended to provide the rationale] justification for inclusion of site specific permissions for one additional consolidated property noted below. In support of the request for site specific zoning considerations, with a conceptual design has been included with this letter for each site. 698-710 Charles Street The property is a consolidation of three former properties 698, 704 and 710 Charles Street East. The lands are located on the north side of Charles Street between Sheldon Ave S. and Preston Ave S. and each currently contain a single detached dwelling. The subject lands are located within the Borden Ave. Station Area which are proposed for an SGA -3 Zone and SGA -C designation and are geographically situated within the King Street East corridor. The proposed SGA -3 zone would limit the height to 25 storeys. Our client is requesting an SGA -4 zone with unlimited FSR and height and no parking requirements which aligns with the SGA -C designation which is intended to accommodate intensification areas at a higher density for lands that have been consolidated. Proposed policy 15.D.2.53 indicates that lands designated SGA -C may have no maximum building height. Our client has included plans for a 36 storey building on the site. Site specific setback regulations may be required for the consolidated parcel including front, rear and side yard setbacks. Justification The proposed reduction in the minimum front, side and rear yard setbacks is requested to provide a building design which appropriately addresses the frontage with active uses with a reduced front yard setback, while maintaining an adequate rear yard setback from adjacent established uses to the rear. Typically in more urban locations, buildings are often constructed with minimal or zero front yard setbacks in order to establish a consistent street line setback and further, as the subject block develops over time, it is anticipated that front yard setbacks will be minimal in order to provide for active frontages to the pedestrian realm. The subject lands back onto commercial lands with frontage onto King Street East at the end of the Station Area boundary. In addition, there are two single detached homes along Sheldon between King Street and Charles Street, with a recently constructed street fronting town house block at the south east corner of King Street East and Sheldon Ave. The reduction in rear yard setback is minimal from 7.5m to 6.31m, and the proposed tower design and building orientation has been designed to minimize impacts on adjacent land uses during daylight hours by orienting the building closer to the intersection of Charles Street and Preston Ave. There are no heritage properties in the vicinity. As the lands are located within 644 m of the Bordon Station, the proposed density at this location would support transit use and would achieve the City's objective to intensify priority intensification areas such as the MTSAs. Our Client intends to develop the lands comprehensively, which aligns with the planned function to intensify these lands. The lands on their own, would likely not achieve the maximum development potential, however, as part of a consolidated parcel, it would be able to be developed at a density that will help support transit use and make more efficient use of land and infrastructure as directed in OP policy 3.C.2.11, which states "that the City will discourage a reduction in the lot area of property if the reduction in lot area has the potentlal to compromise intensification. Consolidation of properties will be encouraged in the interest of comprehensive planning to achieve better site configuration, the provision of amenities and land use and design efficiency'. Further land consolidation of the block bound by Charles Street E., Preston Ave S., King Street E. and Sheldon Ave. S. may occur over time. We have provided a conceptual plan showing that a building with a 900 sq. m floor plate and a height of 36 storeys could be developed on the subject lands. The intensification of the subject lands would help meet the planned function of the MTSA, which is to support transit usage and to facilitate the intensification of a priority area as identified in Section 3.C.2.17. MTSAs are identified as areas to provide a focus for accommodating growth through development which supports transit, helps achieve a mix of residential and non residential uses in the area and contributes toward the creation of pedestrian oriented streetscapes. Additionally, the proposed designation to an SGA -C designation would suggest that additional height beyond the proposed SGA 3 zone limit of 25 storeys, may be considered without height restrictions where appropriate. By permitting the SGA -4 zoning on the subject lands the vision of high density intensification can be realized for these lands and the vision for the SGA -C designation can be implemented. Lastly, the proposed development of these lands would compliment the development recently approved for 1251 and 1253 King Street East and 16 Sheldon Avenue for 8 to 24 storey towers immediately to the west of the subject lands. Together these sites would provide additional density to support transit use and provide a transition in built form height, thus adding interest to the City's skyline. We respectfully request that you consider the submission for increased zoning permissions on these key locations for the reasons cited above. Should you have further questions or require additional supporting information, we would welcome the opportunity to meet and discuss this with you. Yours truly, 2 Page 966 of 1179 MHBC Pierre Chauvin MA, MCIP, RPP Partner cc. 5. Litt Juliane vonWesterholt, BES, MCIP, RPP Associate Page 967 of 1179 From: Adam Clark To: Michael Brisson Cc: Growina Toaether (SM) Subject: RE: Growing Together OP & Zoning Changes - 11 & 19 Braun St. Date: Wednesday, January 10, 2024 4:39:06 PM Good Afternoon Michael, We are in the final stages of preparing materials for our January 29th committee date. You may submit any materials or additional comments to growingtogether@kitchener.ca and we will do our best to include them in our comment record. However, it is generally not in the project scope to apply new site-specific regulations that would be better justified through site-specific, applicant -initiated development applications, as Growing Together is a City -initiated Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment to establish a new planning framework for Kitchener's Major Transit Station Areas more broadly. Please let us know if you have any additional questions, Adam Clark (he/him) Senior Urban Designer (Architecture & Urban Form) I Planning I City of Kitchener 1519-741-2200 X7027 I TTY 1- 866-969-99941 adam.clarkgkitchener.ca -----Original Message ----- From: Michael Brisson > Sent: Monday, January 8, 2024 4:33 PM To: Adam Clark <Adam.Clarkgkitchener.ca> Subject: Growing Together OP & Zoning Changes - [You don't often get email . Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutS end erl d entific ation ] Sent from my iPad Hi Adam, I have reviewed the proposed OP & Zoning changes proposed for these parcels and tailored multi -unit designs for each to comply as best as possible to the proposed changes as posted by the city in Nov. 2023. 1 would like to submit requests for site specific provisions for the above noted parcels to be incorporated into the bylaw to be presented to council committee on Jan. 29. Please direct me to the correct member of staff to which I can submit graphic material setting out the need for the particular site specific provisions for each parcel. Thanks Michael Brisson Page 968 of 1179 From: Growing Together (SM) To: Dnaht Point: Growing Together [SM] Subject: RE: Zoninq and Land use for 154 Victoria Stmt !North Date: Friday, January 12, 2024 1:30:19 PM Good Afternoon, Apologies, I believe you called and left a voicemail a couple of days ago. Unfortunately we are working through an enormous volume of work at the moment and our responses can be a bit delayed. 164 Victoria Street North is proposed to receive a Strategic Growth Area C (SGA -C) land use and to be zoned Strategic Growth Area 3 (SGA -3). More information can be found at engagewr.cal rg owin tgto eg ther These land uses and zones are not yet implemented. Staff are taking the Growing Together project to council for approval on January 29tH I can confirm that, as the property owner, you were mailed a postcard in late October to notify you of the draft materials, and again earlier this week to notify you of the public meeting on the 29th. If you have any other questions, please don't hesitate to ask. Thanks! The Growing Together Team From: Bright Point > Sent: Thursday, January 11, 20241:26 PM To: Growing Together (SM) <G rowi ngTogether@ kitch ener.ca> Subject: Zoning and Land use for 164 Victoria Street North You don't often get Hello, My name is Lyons, the owner of Metro Restaurant. am writing to you inquiring if 164 Victoria Street North, Kitchener N2HSC6 has been re -zoned to SGA3 (SLAC) for zoning & land use? Because I did not receive the fall postcard mailed out to property owners who fall within a proposed SGA3 zone, either I missed it. Cheers, Lyons Page 969 of 1179 Project Report 15 August 2018 - 17 December 2023 EngageWR Growing Together Visitors Summary Highlights MAX VISITORS PER TOTAL VISI DRAY 15k 8.4 1 288 NEW c] 1 pk REGISTRATI ONS 26 5k ENGAGED INFORMED AWARE VISITORS VISITORS VISITORS ''--tib— --------- _ ` 1 May '23 1 Sep •23 51 2.1 k 14.5 k _ Pageviews Visitors _ 'ivew ru�l�lydiiutlS Aware Participants 4,460 Engaged Participants 51 Aware Ac ons Performed Par c pan s Engaged Ac ons Performed Reg s Bred unver fled Anonymous V s ed a Projec or Too Page 4 460 Informed Participants 2,140 contributed on Forums Participated in Surreys 0 0 0 0 0 0 Informed Ac ons Performed Par c pan s Contributed to Newsfeeds 0 0 0 V owed a v deo 139 V owed a pho 0 0 Participated in Quids Polls 0 0 0 Down oaded a docu men 1 599 Posted on Guestbooks 2 0 0 V s ed he Key Da es page 158 Contributed to Stories 0 0 0 V s ed an FAQ s Page 106 Asked Questions 6 0 V s ed Ins agram Page 0 Placed Pins on Places 9 2 0 V s ed Mu p e Projec Pages 1 733 Contributed to deal 0 6 5 Con r bu ed o a oo (engaged) 51 Page 970 of 1179 EngageWR : Summary Report for 15 August 2018 to 17 December 2023 INFORMATION WIDGET SUMMARY 13 0 5 1 0 DOCUMENTS PHOTOS V DEOS FAQS KEY DATES Widget Type Engagement Tool Name Visitors Views/Downloads Document Growing Together Draft Approach to Growth and Change pdf 570 066 Document Draft Zoning Mapping (November 2023) 5 9 865 Document Draft Official Plan Amendment (November 2023) 382 567 Document Draft Official Plan Mapping (November 2023) 376 522 Document Draft Zoning By law Amendment (November 2023) 362 6 7 Document Community Brief to Land Use and Zoning pdf 254 3 5 Document Community Guide to Land Use and Zoning 220 348 Document Growth Workshop Presentation 57 2 4 Document What We Heard: Workshop Engagement Summary 32 229 Document Workshop Smart Model Summary pdf 50 79 Document Growing Together Card Deck pdf 49 72 Document Workshop Assumptions Analysis pdf 48 73 Document Summer 2023 Engagement Summary 4 23 Key Dates Key Date 58 203 Faqs faqs 06 28 Video ntroduction to land use planning and development 6 63 Video Our vision for Kitchener 59 03 Video Tall buildings 54 56 Page 3 of 30 Page 971 of 1179 EngageWR : Summary Report for 15 August 2018 to 17 December 2023 INFORMATION WIDGET SUMMARY Widget Type Engagement Tool Name Visitors Views/Downloads Video Tall buildings 54 56 Video Zoning bylaws and minor variances 37 37 Video Community Guide Video Explainer 2 22 Page 4 of 30 Page 972 of 1179 EngageWR : Summary Report for 15 August 2018 to 17 December 2023 QANQA Ask a question Visitors Contributors ® CONTRIBUTIONS ( Jahn MacDonald What s the proposed format of the upcom ng n person workshops? Are they structured as drop- ns, or s there a form a presentat on at some po nt dur ng the t me per od? Cheers, Publicly Answered The March 25th event at K tchener Market w be a drop- n format, w th 1 on 1 or sma group conversat ons and no f orma presentat on. The March 23rd workshop s a hybr d drop- n/ workshop, w th a 15 m nute presentat on and gu de d exerc se beg nn ng at 6pm. However, you are we come to drop- n at any t me. A other events w be a hybr d drop- nlworkshop format as we , w th a presentat on and gu ded exerc se start ng at Spm and 6pm, respect ve y, but w th dr op- n ava ab ty from 2pm to Bpm. Thank you! Xavientois_ Can we drop n on the workshop at any t me? If so, how ong w the March 23rd workshop at the KPL be? Archived There s a 15-m note presentat on and gu ded exerc se beg nn ng at 6pm on the 23rd. but p ease fee free to drop n a ny t me between 6 and 8. The event runs a tota of two hours, but p ease attend at a t me that s conven ent for you a nd stay for as br efly or as ong as you'd ke. Thank you! Page 5 of 30 Page 973 of 1179 EngageWR : Summary Report for 15 August 2018 to 17 December 2023 QANDA Ask a question Sminke How ong do the "br ef" presentat ons at the workshops ast? /q Publicly Answered The presentat ons are schedu ed to be 15 m nutes n ength. Page 6 of 30 Page 974 of 1179 EngageWR : Summary Report for 15 August 2018 to 17 December 2023 GUEST BOOK Final Draft Framework Visitors Contributors ® CONTRIBUTIONS r `3 November 23 I'm confused abou why he G v c Gen re proper es (KPL, reg ona offices, Cen re n h skf a Square, WRPS offices, K chener c y ha , cour houses, a c) are a marked as be ng open o h gh-r se cons ruc on. To me, ha reads as f he c ylreg on wou d po en a y s e off he and o deve opers. As someone who ves c ose by (Cen ra Feeder ck), I rea Aon s D sAGR s HL y wou d ha e o see K chener ase he c v c b ock bounded by Freder ck1E en/Queen/ 0 0 f ' Weber. I ke ha he en re b ock are pub c bu d ngs, because ha a so g ves he c ylr L! 4Jr V eg on space o deve op h ngs n n eres ng ways - for examp e, expand ng he C v c C en re Park or ear ng down he o der WRPS bu d ng w h he n en on of bu d ng a ne w pub c resource, ke a museum or a new Down own Commun y Gen re o rep ace h e ex s ng one. I a so make fee as f some of hose bu d ngs are no 'permanen ,' k e he Reg ona offices cou d ge up and move a any me. -er 23 Overa. I ove he new SGAs and he draf zon ng map. 8u I h nk he m n mum sea ba Aldo Culqulcondor cks for SGA -1 shou d be reduced. AGR s D SAon s Ll 0 0 Page 7 of 30 Page 975 of 1179 EngageWR : Summary Report for 15 August 2018 to 17 December 2023 GUEST BOOK Final Draft Framework Wha an abso u e n gh mare of a "v s on" for down own K chener and 'abu ng' ne ghb TiredKitchener ourhoods. You're go ng o hrow ou wha a bu and na ua her age here s wha I p resume w be he d s r c former y known as he her age d s r c o so greedy deve ape rs can bu d proper es for preda cry and ords. And hen you ge o ca yourse f 'prob e ACR s D sAGR s R PL m so vers' 'cause you're 'bu d ng more hous ng'-- wha a sham! K chener has a Ong I'i h s cry of des roy ng every h ng ha made he c y un que, every h ng ha en se f o a V ny semb ance of a persona y. No ma ure rees, no arch ec ura h s cry or d vers y. Ch eap y made, pre -fab bu d ngs ha a ook he same and w be to ng apar n 10+ year s, f you're ucky - ny s ree rees ha never grow more han 15-20 fee a , no h ng of subs ance or mean ng. I rea ze you' d sm ss my commen s as perhaps 'fr nge' or 'over wraugh ', perhaps 'emo ona'. Even hough I have ved n he ne ghbourhood for 20+ y ears. I am emo ona. I used o ove h s p ace. I used o care, a o. Bu for some reaso n, CoK s he 'ben on crea ng a c y where fe ong Wa er oc Reg on and K chener res den s no onger be ong here. There s NOT ING n your p ans ha address your own r epor on he Urban Fores from 2015 ha made c ear how d re he s ua on s w h re es n h s c y, spec a y n he core. As far as I can see, your new p ans w on y exacer ba e h s ssue. I's ok, we don' need any greenspace, r gh ?! A hose condo and agar men dwe ers can jus use ne ghbourhood awns as o e s for he r pe s! I hones y am unsure why I ook he me o make h s commen . You won' change your p ans. I's a f u - me job o par c pa a fu y n a your consu a ons. Mun c pa a ec ons don' chang e any h ng. I jus wan you o know how your work d rec y con r bu es o he d senfranc h semen and ma a se of ong- me res den s ke myse f. Thank you for he p ng o make K chener a p ace where I fee ke a s ranger n my own home. Thank you for crew ng add ona s ress as I despera e y ry o make p ans o ge ou of h s he scape of ac y. r_v Novemb_j3 23 The proposed changes are much co b g o be answered n such a shor me. Res den GRP s have been send a card w h ess han a mon h o d ges a huge amours and n he ab sence of wo counc ors who are no ab e o gu de us on wha he proposa means. o w s ha Grow ng Toge her? Wha s he rush when you wan o engage w h he comm AGR s D 5AGR 3 R PL s un y? ow can ha pass b y happen when many of us have jobs, lam y and o her ob 0 0 k. ga ons o occupy our days. Pease, ex end he dead ne un January 31. 3 Overa I'm happy w h he d rec on he pan s ak ng! A ack of res den a supe y due J1234 o zon ng regu a ons s why ren s are so h gh and why cos s so much o buy proper y so h s p an re ax ng hose zon ng regu a ons s how we ge o ower ren s and reduced pr ces for proper y. I'm d sappo n ed SGA1's cap bu d ngs a 3 s oreys. A cap of 4 s ore AGR s D sAGR s R PL S ys s ess burdensome and w ncrease res den a supe y. A so ge r d of he se backs 0 � V p ease. If enough peop a wan o buy proper es w h se backs, he free marke w mak e hose ava ab e w hou need ng o be n zon ng po cy. Page 8 of 30 Page 976 of 1179 EngageWR : Summary Report for 15 August 2018 to 17 December 2023 GUEST BOOK Final Draft Framework d ivuve, nue, L: F rs of a , Congra u a ons! Th s s ncred b e work o pu cge her and c ear y show res William T u s of genu ne consu a on w h he pub c. Love he ncreased perm ss ons, pr or y s r ee s, e m na ed park ng m n mums, and I h nk he SGA 1 zone cou d be app ed hrou ghou mos of he c y. I have a few sugges ons for some of he zon ng prov s oras: 1. T AGR s D $AGR s R PL s he pr or y s ree s are grea and I wou d ke o see app ed o (ween s ree sou h of K r, ng o he edge of he PMTSA, and app ed o Freder ck o he end of he PMTSA. These are aqua y mpor an ma n s ree s as V c or a, hey bo h to ow he ex s ng OP des gna on for Urban Grow h Cen re, and hey are a ready far more pedes r an fr end y han v c or a. Pr or y S ree s cou d a so be app ed o Char es a ong more of s eng h, and ma ybe cour and/park. I a so h nk here s an oppor un y o app y pr or y s ree s o one s de of a s ree where may he abu ng ower n ens y areas, ke Joseph. 2. "Pr va e A men y Space" s a new y defined arm and s on y app ed o SGA 2, 3 and 4. 1 h nk h s needs a b of rev ew. I's an assump on ha ow -r se bu d ngs w , by defau , have p r va a amen y space prov ded by he m n mum yards - m gh occur ha a 14 un bu d ng w have a yard used by one dwe ng un , bu no access b e o anyone a se. I a s o h nk m gh be w se o separa a pr va a amen y space from common amen y space and requ re more common amen y space from he arger bu d ngs (e. Every dwe ng un shou d have a eas X sq. m. of a her pr va a or common or a m x, bu arge bu d n gs mus have a eas X sq. m. of common amen y space.). I go arger dove opmen s have more financ a means o accommoda a more, bu he way h s s wr en g ves he mpress on ha on y dwe ngs n arge bu d ngs need pr va a amen y, when he n en wou d be o requ re more common amen y. Why m common amen y o jus he res d an s of he bu d ng. 3. "Phys ca Separa on" s a new y defined erm. I don' h nk 's q u e here, ow s he firs sen once d fferen from a se back for he 9 h s prey and abov e from he n er or s de o ne and he rear o ne? The second sen ence s ndec pher ab e: "When wo or more owers are on he same o , he o a d s ance be ween each p a r of ewers n any d rec on s o be ca cu a ed as he sum of bo h nd v dua Phys ca s epara ons." I h nk 's ry ng o define wo arms: he se back o he yard, and he separ a on d s once be ween owers? Page 9 of 30 Page 977 of 1179 EngageWR : Summary Report for 15 August 2018 to 17 December 2023 GUEST BOOK Final Draft Framework 15 November 33 Thank you very much o he Grow ng Toge her Team for pu ng oge her he Graf Fra Sam 1 mework for he MTSAs wh ch s very mpor an for he grow h of our,C y. I requ res a o of hard work and ded ca on o come up w h such a de a ed p an. I have a few requ as s for some of he proposed zon ng prov s ons. I w grew y apprec a e f you cou d p AGR s ❑ sAGR. s 1 PL = ease cons der hese reques s g ven be ow; 1. "Res r c ve 12m Trans on Requ remen i' 1 for SGA2": The Trans on requ remen of 12m for mu p e dwe ngs n SGA2 adjo n ng f� 0 V SGA1 (Sec on 6.4.3, Tab e 6-4) s very res r c ve. Th s requ remen s more res r c ve han he Curren m d -r se R-7 zon ng under Zon ng By- aw 85-1 as we as he m d -r se RES -6 zon ng under Zon ng By- aw 2019-051. 1 a. Under R-7 zon ng (by- aw 85-1, Sec on 41.2.6) for mu p e dwe ngs he M n mum S de Yard requ remen for bu d ngs a e r han 10.5m s on y 6m vs. 12m proposed for SGA2. 1 b. Under RES -6 zon ng (by- aw 2019-051, Sec on 7.3, Tab e 7-6) for mu p e dwe ngs he M n mum S de Yard requ re men s on y 4.5m vs. 12m proposed for SGA2. Fur hermore, n RES -6 here s no ran s on requ remen adjacen c ower r se areas. Are we ry ng o make MTSAs more res r c ve vs. a o her (non-MTSA) areas n he C y? The shou d no be he case as MTS As are supposed o be more n ens fico on fr end y. The proposed raps on requ reme n for SGA2 makes assemb ng and deve op ng wo adjacen SGA1 o s w h zon ng ch ange o SGA2, very d fficu . For examp e, e s say he new assemb ed o w d h s 30m exc ud ng he rans on areas on of and r gh s des (adjacen o SGA1) he resu ng bu d ng w d h a owed s on y 6m (30-12-12=6m). The means one can on y bu d a very narrow 6m w de s r p for 4 h o 8 h sores wh ch v sua y w ook veryodd and may no make much econom c sense for he deve aper. Th s fee s ke a m ssed oppor un y for an area n such a c ose v c n y o he LRT s a ons. P ease cons der remov ng h s Tran s on requ remen for SGA2. If he s no poss b e p ease cons der reduc ng h s Trans on requ roman o a eas me ch RES -6 (.a. 4.5m) or Curren R-7 (.e. 6m) and m s app ca on on y o he o s he are very w del ong e.g. o s w der/ onger han 75m or 10 Om. You may wan o cons der he same for SGA3/4 as we . 2. "Res r c ve Max mum Bu d ng Lang h for SGA1 ": The Max mum Bu d ng Lang h requ remen for SGA1 n Se c on 6.3.2 Tab e 6-3 for mu p e dwe ngs does no ake o dep h n o cons dera on. F or examp e, deeper o s w be forced o d spropor one e y m he bu d ng eng h and have a o of amp y space n he back of he bu d ng. There are many deep o s n he p roposed SGA1 areas. If someone wan s o bu d 11 + un s he bu d ng eng h s res r c ed o on y 36m wh e he dep h of many deep o s may be 65M+ (and even 85m+). For a eas 11+ dwe ng un s p ease cons der ncreas ng he Max. Bu d ng Leng h requ re men for deep o s o some h ng ke 60m. 3. "Res r c ve Max mum Bu d ng a gh for SGA1 ": The proposed max mum bu d ng he gh of 3 s or es (11 m) for SGA1 s qu e d s appo n ng. G van he h s area s so c ose o rans we wou d have ked o see a eas 4 s ores a owed w hou he need for any zon ng amendmen s or m nor var ances a c. P ease cons der chang ng o 4 s or es. To mee he grow ng demand for affordab e ho us ng and ncreased pressure on green I agr cu ura ands we need o make sure h s Offic a p an and Zon ng amendmen makes fu use of he huge eves men of our ax d oars n bu d ng he LRT and pu he C y of K chener on a grow h pa h he w se us up for meq ng he hous ng needs for he upcom ng few decades. 10 or 20 years down he road we canno move he LRT o a new oca on and s ar fresh w h n ens fica on as w be mprac ca. Le s make he bes use of ex s ng res den a ands such he o ur fu ure genera ons can be proud of ourse ves and don b ame us for e m na ng he green ands. Thank you Page 10 of 30 Page 978 of 1179 EngageWR : Summary Report for 15 August 2018 to 17 December 2023 GUEST BOOK Final Draft Framework Dear K chener, Pn 2014, you had he w sdom and fares gh o under ake a Cu ura er Baseborden age Landscapes S udy. The s udy s purpose was o crea a an nven ory of your prec o us cu ura her age andscapes o serve as a p ann ng oo n he managemen of he d en fled asse s as he commun y evo ves. Ano her of your goa s w h he s udy was o Acs s o sAOR 3 R PL po en a y, "red rec he deve opmen of he c y n such a manner ha preserves and pr I'i o ec s den fled resources ha m gh o herw se go unno ced or be a r sk." Pu ng ha V framework n p ace wh s a he cusp of n ens Pica on was smar and se f -aware, espe c a y cons der ng your poor rack record of va u ng and presery ng her age asse s ha g ve a c y s charac er. The Onward Avenue Ne ghbourhood (my'hood— nc ud ng Bor den and Onward Avenues be ween K ng and Weber S ree s, p us Crescen and Dane S ree s) s den fied n he s udy 4L-NBB-3) as one of he 12 res den a ne ghbourhood s w h cons derab a her age va ue and s gn ficance. You expressed a des re o ensure ha, " he va ue of he her age resources n hese wonderfu ne ghbourhoods s no gno red or m s n erpre ed n fu ure p ann ng n a ves." Good on you, I hough a he me. Fas forward o oday. K chener, wha happened? NOW you re propos ng o app y SGA -1 zon ng o he Onward Avenue Ne ghbourhood?! Are you rea y choos ng o gnore yo ur own recommenda ons ou ned n he Cu ura er age Landscapes S udy? Do ng s o wou d be a grave m s ake, and cou do be undone. My b gges concern s abou h e s ze of nfi deve opmen s SGA -1 (as proposed) wou d perm . I s oo aggress ve for he Onward Ne ghbourhood. G ven he o s zes, he SGA -1 zon ng w perm bu d ngs ha have no park ng, con a n 10 un s, are 11 m a , and 24m (!) ong. They w seem m ons rous, ak ng up every poss b e nch of rea es a e, hu k ng over and crowd ng ou h e r ne ghbours. A ess n ense form of deve opmen cou d ma n a n he charac er and c harm of h s ne ghbourhood, wh e s mee ng he n ens fica on goa s. App y ng SGA - 1 zon ng (as proposed) o Onward Ave. Ne ghbourhood wou d des roy —one of he fe w rema n ng cu ura her age andscapes of cons derab a va ue and s gn ficance n our C y --one of he rare a gems ha g ves our c y a sou . I shou d be preserved and pr o ec ed! No sacr (iced. K chener, de he r gh h ng. Amend he proposed SGA -1 zon n g n h s ne ghbourhood o address he recommenda ons you w se y se ou n your 20 14 Cu ura er age Landscapes S udy. Page 11 of 30 Page 979 of 1179 EngageWR : Summary Reporf for 15 August 2018 to 17 December 2023 GUEST BOOK Final Draft Framework I ivuvtmuer L: I s rang y d sagree w In a er ng he ex s ng ow -r se res den a zon ng o he proposed JDL SGA1, and wou d ke e s ar by ask ng f he Prov nee has spec fica y d rec ed ha Mu n c pa es des gna a ow -r se res den a o be zoned SGA1 (or some h ng s m ar) n M ajor Trans S a on Areas, or f h s s he C y n erpre ng Prev nc a po cy o n ens fy AGR s D $AGR s R PL s hese MTSAs by zon ng he exs ng ow -r se res den a ne ghbourhoods as SGA1 ? If t', s he a er, why has he C y moved forward w h h s spec fic zon ng change w h n he se ex s ng ne ghbourhoods, nc ud ng some ha have cu ura her age va ue, when he se s amp a space for nfi deve opmen a ong he major corn dors of he MTSAs nc ud ng K ng S ., V c or a S ., d awa S ., Freder ck S ., and Weber S . There are a ready ho usands of un s for mu p e projec s n var ous s ages of des gn and deve opmen for h e K ng S . and C awa S . n ersec on a one. As such, I wou d ask ha f h s spec fic z on ng change s no a Prov nc a requ remen , ha he C y remove he SGA1 zon ng en re y from hese ex s ng res den a ne ghbourhoods, and ❑n y a ow mu -un res den a nfi deve oilmen s a ong he arger roadways w h n he MTSA areas, av ng sa d h a , I have five (5) commen s re a ed he SGA1 zon ng w h he assump on ha hese z on ng changes are mm nen and w no be a ered based on commun y concerns. 1. There are curren y no mechan sms w h n he C y o d rec ha hese un s be des gna ed as ren a s or condos, ha any un s be made o a cer a n s andard or s ze (fam y vs, s ud o), nor ha hey be made affordab e/a a nab e. There are a so curren y no mocha n sms for he C y o con ro he des gn or aes he cs of hese proposed nfi deve opme n s as he C y s urban des gn requ remen s can no he app ed o deve oilmen s of he s ze a owab e w h n he SGA1 zon ng. As such, I wou d ke o see he C y deve op ar ch ec ura emp a es for deve opmen s w h n hese areas o ensure ha he nfi bu d ngs are compa b e w h he ne ghbourhood sca e, form, and genera acs he cs; as we as des gn ng floor p ans ha can prov de he ype of hous ng needed mos for he r resp ec ve ne ghbourhood. 2. I has been ess han a year s nce he mp emen a on of a pr oposa o a ow up o four res den a un s on any ow -r se res den a proper y prow ded o s ze s suffic en — a ow ng basemen agar men s, as we as backyard homes or un s. And now he C y s jump ng ahead a a ow up o 10 un s on hese same s ng a-fam y res den a o s f he fron age and square foo age are suffic en . I wou d reques ha he C y de ay he mp emen a on of he SGA1 zon ng un can be de erm ned f he p rev ous proposa for gen e n ens fica on has an mpac on he °m ss ng m dd e" hous n g n he se ec ed ne ghbourhoods. 3. The C y s power ess o proven deve opers from ak ng rejec ed c a ms for m nor var ance o he On ar o Land Tr bursa (OLT) — wh ch s (n)famous y pro-deve aper — where proposed nfi deve opmen s cou d be expanded b eyond wha he SGA1 zon ng a ows. The C y has prey ous y rejec ed m nor var ances for se ec deve opmen s, and ye has abandoned oca res den s o appea hese unacc ep ab a deve opmen s a he OLT. W h a ack of resources, know edge of he process, and overa exper op n ons o coun er deve oper c a ms of m nor var ance, hese cha e nges a mos exc us ve y are dee ded n favour of he deve oper. I wou d ke o see a b n d ng po cy mp emen ed by he C y ❑ he effec ha f C y s aff and he Comm ee of Adjus men unan mous y rejec c a ms for m nor var ance and/or zon ng by aw amendm en s ha he C y wou d au oma ca y n a e an appea were he deve aper o appea h e dec s on a he OLT. av ng he fu we gh of he C y s resources n any appea wou d cer a n y be a de erren for mos deve opers ook ng o ake advan age of a deve oiler -fr end y env ronmen o ncrease he gh s, reduce m n mum off se s, ncrease bu d ng f oo pr n , and genera y decrease he compa b y of he proposed deve opmen w h n he ex s ng ne ghbourhood. 4. Ano her concern w h h s s ra egy s w h he ack of he ugh owards he Prov s on of add ona greenspace w h n hese no ghbourhoods. P ea se refer o he n erns documen °P aces and Spaces" s ra egy o g ve a be er dea of he park and defic n many of he ne ghbourhoods shown — spec fica y he K ng Eas n e ghbourhood. Th s s one of he mos underserved areas of he C y w h no pub c gre en space w In n s boundar es, and w h each success ve deve opmen app ca on — s ee 926 K ng S E., 321-325 Cour and Ave. E. ( he former Schne der proper y on Cour and), 1001 K ng S . E., 169 Borden Ave. N., a c. here s ess and ess green space pr ov ded, and fewer oppor un es for he C y o es ab sh any subs an ve ne work of gre enspace. Add ng add ona res den a un s w h n he fabr c of hese ne ghbourhoods on y exacerba es he ack of green space for cca res den s and he r lam es. 5. There are numerous ns ances n he C y s Oflic a P an ha reference he C y s respons b y e eva ua a appropr a eness of deve opmen , as we as prov de he pub c w h oppor un es o become nvo ved n he processes and mp emen a an of he Offic a P an — Sec on 1.A.1., Sec on 1.A.4, Sec ❑n 17.E.3., e c. To da e, he C y of K chener has n a ed some pub c consu a on; however, as s a ed prev ous y, we of he Ward counc ors mpac ed by hese changes are no presen or ava ab e o he r cons uen s o ans wer ques ons and Prov de gu dance. As hese changes o he zon ng are s gn fican an d have far reach ng mpac s now and n o he fu ure, I wou d a so echo he reques of an ex ens on for he pub c consu a on process un such me as hese we Ward counc ors are ava ab e, have fam ar zed hemse ves w h he proposed changes and are ab e a respond o he r cons uen s concerns. Page 12 of 30 Page 980 of 1179 EngageWR : Summary Report for 15 August 2016 to 17 December 2023 GUEST BOOK Final Draft Framework I s grea o have a p an and add more un s and haus ng o he marke bu I m wonder William 'Glad ng f here s any p ans o make harder for o her peop a who owns many proper es fr om buy ng hose new un s and ren ng ou a us. I m a con rac or and do a o of wor k on severa proper es unfor una e y mos of hose houses s ren ed ou as rooms and ne-� S D SAGR S R PL s some mes as beds. 0 hers ves ups a rs and basemen s w h enan s. more han 90% r of hose house owners own a second and h rd house and buy ng agar men un s o re n ou as an nves men or he deve oper keeps he bu d ng and ren cu as uxur ou s un s and mos of hem don even ve n he KW area. M dd e c ass are ook ng for a norma no uxury apar men for ren because he Canad an dream o ve n a de ached house w h a backyard s a defin e y Jus a dream now and can come rue anymore. I be eve he prob em we have now s no a shor age n he haus ng marke on y, s he greed n peop e o buy as many proper es as poss b e and ren ou (pass ve ncome on ne erm hey be eve n) B g corpora ons w h b g names and nd v dua s or nd v du a s crea ng any corpora on name are arge ng any s ng a de ached house o buy as s or cash and he prob em ha hey a ready owns severa proper es. P ease add ha ma er o your fu ure p an and do some nves ga on and you w be surpr sed and he wh o e c y w be for ren on y. Thank you I h nk your proposa s are mos y grey ! Good work eam, br n ng K chener n ne w h AverageJoe many o her p aces. A b of feedback: 1) Pr or y 5 ree Ne work s good! I sugges he f o ow ng mod fica ons A) wou d be good o ex end Queen and Ben on hrough o Cou r and and he cross s ree s n be ween. Tha sec on of down own cou d become a ver AGR 5 D SAGA. s R PL s y un que des na on as s up on a h , and ceu d even ua y be a n ce ex ens on of he fl f1 r„ commerc a area of down own. B) Ex end Char es s ree hrough o 0 awa - no need o IBJ ALJ' +b sopa Ben en as a m x of uses sure y wou d make ha s ree more enjoyab e. C) Park s ree wou d be a n ce comp emen o V c or a Park. Dj Duke s ree E) Ex end Queen a nd Fredr ck o he edge of he boundary. 2) For your Pr or y 5 ree ne work, p ease mak e sure you m he amoun of en rances and ramps and h ngs ke ha . You have den fied Cedar s ree be ween K ng and Char es as a pr or y s ree , bu here s curren y p ark ng, and wo new ramps on he sou h s de of he s ree . Tha 's hardy an ac ve spac e. 1 's d fficu , bu ry censure ha he mp emen a cn mee s w h he nen and m hese dead spaces. 3) Thank you for propos ng he remova of park ng. The c ylreg on s grow ng and f dr vers enjoy re a ve y e conges on now, we can' encourage more dr v ng because we' even ua y mee he Phys ca m s of he reg on. Wou d you cons der ower ng he max mum ra es hough? Change s scary, bu I h nk you're do ng a go od b of forward h nk ng here. You are ry ng o pro ec he C y's asse s and enab a ne w peop a and bus nesses o se e here. I ke . Though unre a ed o zon ng, I agree w h he sen men ha many of he C v c D s r c bu d ngs shou d rema n pub c and no b e so d, hough n he rema n ng spaces, wou d ove o see n ens fica on. In par cu ar a he park ng o s!! 4 Nlr `,mbc; 23 Zon ng enab ng 24-s ory bu d ngs s unaccep ab e. I hough he ac ons nvo v ng Be Sf m3 man reso ved h s for he area. Th s approach favours deve opers and s no suppor ed by ev dence. AGR S D sAGR 5 R PL 0 Q [ Page 13 of 310 Page 981 of 1179 EngagewR : Summary Report for 15 August 2018 to 17 December 2023 GUEST BOOK Final Draft Framework Regard ng SGA4 zone abu ng SGA1 zone (V c or a Park er age Conserva on D s r Sheldon c ) across he w h of Joseph S ree , he proposed regu a ons are who y nadequa e. I s mposs b e c re a n he a mosphere of he VP CD when bu d ngs of un m ed he g h are perm ed separa ed on y by he w d h of an adjo n ng s ree. Desp e a pro es a ons o he con rary, appears o me ha he C y s n en on gnor ng "The po c es n o ur er age Conserva on D s r c P ans and Cu ura er age Landscapes." (Grow ng T oge her Commun y Gu de). Thank you for he work you have done n h s mass ve rezon ng process. I apprec a ed Peggy he sec on n he Commun y Gu de n wh ch you responded o he many ques ons yo u heard hroughou he process. I w sh here had been more me for res den s o work hrough a he nforma on prov ded - I know many who were n eres ed bu overwhe m AGR S D SAGA. s R PL S ed w h he amoun of decumen a on and shor response me - ess han a mon h - an 0 0 � d jus d dn' even ry o prov de npu . I wou d ke o see more rans on be ween res de V V n a areas and SGA 4 areas, for examp e, a ong Joseph S ree . SGA4 aga ns SGA1 p rov des NO cans on a a . av ng un m ed he gh d rec y across from 2-3 s orey res den a homes s un h nkab e. I a so am concerned ha here s s no add ona park s pace be ng den fled and acqu red a h s advanced s age of p an ng for down own n ens fica on. Even hough I know h s s no your area, as p anners I don' see how you can pan for add ona n ens fica on and popu a on w hou mee ng he ex reme y m ed amoun of park space n DTK. MJN 30 November 23 1 ve on Mary S ree , a ove y fam y fr end y ne ghbourhood w h o s of k ds. I was sho Jane _ Mary St. eked o see he proposa o comp e e y change he charas er of he b ock by a ow ng no n -res den a uses. Re a ve o o her areas near LRT s a ons, Mary &amp; erber s re e s are un que. They prov de he perfec comb na on of a rue res den a s ree bu w AGR s D SAGR S R PL S h n easy wa k ng d s ance o oads of amen es. G ven he r prox m y o K ng S, Un on S &amp; up own Wa er oo, hese s des s ree s do no need shops &amp; cafes. The M ary-A en ne ghbourhood has a ways been res den a and has worked hard o make a tam y fr end y p ace o ve. Mary &amp; erber S s be ween Un on &amp; P ne are ha f n K chener &amp; ha f n Wa er oo. My Wa er oo ne ghbours have no been adv s ed of h s change. The who e b ock &amp; ne ghbourhood shou d be rea ed as one. W by change he charas er of ha f a b ock? I recommend remov ng he we par a b ocks of Mary &amp; erber from he zon ng change and keep hem n sync he res of he r K chener/Wa er oo ne ghbourhood. 30 November 23 Thank you for he work your eam pu forward. I am sa shed w h he proposed framew EP orks. In par cu ar I h nk he move owards more perm ed uses n res den a areas s a grey dea. AGR S D SAGA. S R PL S 0 In r 30 November 23 I have concerns w h he ,proposed Zen ng Map, n par cu ar, he area around Cedar an Andrew Head d Duke s ree s shor s gh ed. The recommenda on s o re zone h s area o SG1 and SG2 wh ch m s he gh . G ven ha here are severa ex s ng proper es and curren p ann ng app ca ons ha exceed he proposed he gh m s s seems shor s gh ed. W h severa ve and approved app ca ons (as we as recen deve opmen s) ha exceed he proposed he gh m s n h s area wha s he ra ona o m ng he he gh n h s ar ea. Andrew ead Page 14 of 30 Page 982 of 1179 EngageWR : Summary Report for 15 August 2018 to 17 December 2023 GUEST BOOK Final Draft Framework Ju ivu+ie, nue, L: € ve n he V c or a Park er age D s r c . I do no see enough n he p an abou preser AnnaL v ng he her age d s r c . The sma res den a s ree s around V c or a Park are par of K chener s h s ory and show d be preserved. Eur hermore, peop e enjoy wa k ng a ong hese s ree s as we as wa k ng n he park, These no ghbourhoods add va ue o a res AGR s D $AGR s R PL s den s of he c y, no jus hose who ve here. - I see h s s a emen n he p an. "We w an ❑ crea a he bes pass b e cans on be ween zones.... he pr nc p e s ha we ha l ve red o p ace he SGA2 zone nex ❑ he SGA1 zone, he SGA3 zone nex ❑ he SG A2 zone, and he SGA4 zone nex o he SGA3 zone" The d agrams of wha k nds of b u d ngs m gh be n each zone show a n ce rans on from SGA1 o SGA2 o SGA3 o SGA4. Ye a ong Joseph S . be ween Gauke and Franc s he p an has SGA4 on one s de of he s ree and he V c or a Park er age D s r c on he o her s de. Tha makes no sense! A ne ghbourhood of sma h s or c houses canno ex s bes de un m ed he gh g ass skyscrapers. - There s no enough n he p an ab❑u park space. I see n he "Con cerns" sec on ha "Pub c Space" s men oned. There s a d fference be ween pub c s pace and park and. Gauke S . may be pub c space bu s no park space and s ug y. We need grass and rees. V c or a Park s becom ng VERY heav y used and w h he projec ed popu a on grow h we need far more park and. There a so needs o be a rans on zone be ween he a apar men bu d ngs and he park. - A he corner of Joseph S. and Dav d S . here s curren y a p ece m ss ng from V c or a Park. R gh now, has a park ng ❑ and w❑ houses. I s proposed for SGA2, so cou d become an 8 s Dray spar men bu d ng. I shou d ns ead become par of he park. - A so a he corner of Jo seph S . and Dav d S . s he V c or a Bark Schoo bu d ng, a her age bu d ng. I s on a b ock des gna ed as SGA3. Tha s no cempa b e w In a ow -r se her age bu d ng. - I see concerns of shadows and w nd for a bu d ngs, bu here s a so he no se made by arge exhaus fans of arge bu d ngs, wh ch des roys he peace and qu a of o d ne g hbourho❑ds. n�,,---,ber 23 The proposa s unba anced when cans der ng he need for a VARIETY of new Nous ng GRP and he needs of ex s ng res den s o ma n a n he r homes and ne ghbourhoods. If he re s o be a o of hous ng around MTSAs, hen he var e y of Nous ng needs mus cons der every eve of ncome need. The owes ncome earners are no be ng cons dered. AO;� 5 D sAca S PL They have he GREATEST need for a va e y of househo d ypes. Th s proposa s oo c omp ca ed for mos res den s ❑ unders and. Wha does he abe S ra eg c Grow h Are a ac ua y mean? Yes, he MTSAs are a s ra eg c grow h area s nee here s no po n n pu ng rans s a ons where peop a are no v ng. Bu , shou d hese areas be s ng e b edroom agar men s (a mos 80°/ are ab❑u 500 sf n s ze). Deve opmen s need ❑ vary by s ze and pu ng un m ed grow h near MTSAs w h e rans on o ex s ng ow r s e res den a hous ng w nega ve y mpac hese ne ghbourhoods. And ha s cer a n y he case and hese ne ghbourhoods are h s or c, her age haus ng . Yes hey are pro ec ed w h n hem o a m ed ex en . Bu wha ab❑u he edges? These her age consery a on d s r c s con r bu e ❑ he h s pry and cu ure of K chener. To deva ue ha her age by hav ng bu d ngs of UNLIMITED EIG T ACROSS T E STREET s damag ng o h e C y of K chener and s res den s. Th s "award w nn ng" n a ve shou d be rad ca y changed f no d scarded. Page 15 of 30 Page 983 of 1179 EngageWR : Summary Report for 15 August 2016 to 17 December 2023 GUEST BOOK Final Draft Framework Thank you for he oppor un y o prov de feedback o your s udy and many hanks o a Victoria Park Resident to ow res den s who have aken he me o rev ew and respond ❑ he proposed Zon n g By- aws and Off is a P an changes. Look ng for more c ar y on he fo ow ng: - Ex s n g er age Conserva on D s r c boundar es and Cu ura er age Landscape boundar A& 5 o sAGR s R PL s es - hese are no nc uded n he proposed Drat Zon ng mapp ng — cou d hese avers (t r p ease be added n n order o h gh gh he r cu ura s gn ficance and he need for a car �1 efu and gradua rans on be ween Down own Core and adjacen her age ne ghbourh cods. - Ex s ng vs Proposed zon ng - more c ar y around where we are oday n erms of ex s ng zon ng wou d be he pfu - .e. by aws 85-1 and by aw 2019-051. P ease exp a n and nc ude ex s ng and as of r gh cond ons as a s ar ng po n . None of he ex s ng by aws names or curren zon ng maps are even men oned w h n your Commun y Br of or Commun y Gu de documen s. We are no s ar ng from scra ch, zon ng by aw 2019-051 s qu a recen as o hers have men oned, so we need o be er be nformed on where we are now n order o be er unders and where we wan o go. - In ne w h he above, p ease h gh gh proposed changes more c ear y, us ng compara ve d agram s - such as s de by s de us ra ons of wha s ex s ng and wha s proposed, wha a s r ee oaks ke oday, wha he curren zon ng a ows, and wha he proposed zon ng wou d en a . As res den s, we need c be c ear y nformed on wha he mpac of he propos ed changes w have on our proper es, our ne ghbours proper es and our commun y as a who e. - For ns ante, wha does mean o go from an ex s ng R-5 zon ng o a pr oposed SGA -1 zon ng on a res den a s ree n he V c or a Park er age D s r c ? The se de a s are cap ured n your by- aw documen bu hey are no h gh gh ed / or exp a ned very c ear y n he Commun y Gu de and Br ef. These changes are s gn fican and ensur ng c ar y and ransparency abou hem s cr ca. For ns ante, he Draf Zon ng By- aw Amendmen documen s a es over 30 perm ed uses under SGA -1 (Tab e 6-1: Perm ed Uses w h n he S ra eg c Grow h Area Zones, p.7B), nc ud ng 17 po en a c ommerc a uses (F ness con re, gh repa r opera on, payday oan es ab shmen , paw n es ab shmen , res auran , e c). Curren y R-5 perm s on y 11 uses, a res den a. ow do you env s on accommoda ng hese uses w h n es ab shed res den a ne ghbou rho❑ds? ow w he uses be mp emen ed (w here be any percen age m n mums 1 m ax mums of he d fferen uses?) none of h s s c ear. - In genera, he ex s ng zon ng by - aws 85-1 and 2019-051 have a very fine gra n eve of de a for d fleren areas w h n and around he down own. SGA -1, SGA -2 and SGA -3 seem o overs mp ty he down c wn core and any h ng w h n range of he MTSAs. Th s approach s eras ng a o of he spec fic y of he ex s ng fabr c and ex s ng zon ng, homogen zes he urban fabr c an d erases va uab a cu ura her age. - PMTSA vs MTSA's - wha are MTSA's pro ec ed f or - one of your s des nd ca es ha hey are pro ec ed from appea s. Wha does h s m can more spec fica y? - Are here any pro ec ed areas for fu ure schoo s w h n each of he he PMTSAs? Isn' as mpor an o be w h n 400 - 800 m from a schoo as s fro m a rans s a on? We are see ng par ab es appear on our schoo grounds - h s shou d be an ear y s gn of concern for c y p anners as much as hey are for us paren s. The se are he ype of spec fits ha one wou d ex pec o be den fied, addressed and pro e c ed a he ear y p ann ng s ages you are under ak ng. - S m ar concern for ack of p an ned new open space w h n your s ra egy o f he needs of he proposed popu a on gr ow h - h s s no some h ng ha ge s addressed hrough POPS or be er s ree stapes a one. The C y's recen y re eased P aces and Spaces S ra egy den fies Cr ca Need s Areas w h n he C y. C y Commerc a Core area s 'we be ow he c y -w de average for oca park prov s on' w h zero schoo grounds. - Las bu no eas , he G obe and M a has recen y re eased 's s of he op 100 mos vab e c es n Canada - K chener has no made he s. am on (39), Gue ph (41), and Wa er oc (56), among many o h er On ar o c es have. I am h gh y concerned ha he d rec on of he Grow ng Toge her p ann ng framework w ge us even fur her away from ha goa . Page 16 of 30 Page 984 of 1179 EngageWR : Summary Report for 15 August 2018 to 17 December 2023 GUEST BOOK Final Draft Framework SGA1 s s oo res r c ve. Th s s how you shou d be zon ng he suburbs, no MTSAs. mikedoherty SGA1 shoo d be 4 or 6 s oreys. And he fron se backs are much oo arge - shou d ke 2m. Le peep a bu d r gh up o he s roe ! The b anke perm ss on for non -res den a uses s grea . Every res den a zone shou d be h s way. The s epbacks for upper f!oo A i S D SAC rs are bad. Jus e peop e bu d n ce y-decora ed boxes! Shade s good, ac Lia y! No an gu ar p anes! No z ggura s! Le peep a bu d norma bu d ngs! S op m crornanag ng h s s uff, ha s how you crea ed h s hous ng supp y cr s s n he firs p ace! F rs , I'm mpressed by he consu a on ma er a s and he p ann ng eam's hough fu c m druker ons dera on of ssues around urban change. And overs I am suppor ve of he change s be ng pu forward here for accommoda ng more peep e a ong our core w h c earer r u es around wha can be bu . I par cu ar y apprec a e he moves o form based codes AGA S D SAGA: s R PL s and o remove car park ng m n mum ru es. Park ng m n mums espec a y near rans ar V 0 C e huge y coup erproduc ve and I am exc ed o see deve opmen w h fewer park ng sp V aces, so we can accommoda a more peep e w hou ha ensur ng more raffic. My ma n concern s ha m ng changes ke h s o a pre y narrow see on of he c y and on y around ION s probab y no enough o address he needs for urban grow h n he c y. I recogn ze ha h s s a s ar ng po n , bu he focus on rans ons o effec ve y penman en y ow r se sec ons fee s ke some h ng ha w make hard o ex end m d -r se and m xed-use zones beyond h s s udy area. The ma er a s sugges ha "peep a who wou d ke o ve n a ow -r se area near rans shou d have he oppor un y o do so", and € have a hard me see ng how hese areas don' become ncreas ng y exc us ve enc ave s. I seems reasonab a ha we may have ow -r se areas of he c y, bu ma n a n ng ha charac er a shor wa k from he down own and ION does no make sense o me. I don' know how can f! n o hese k nds of po c es bu I wou d be very n eres ed o see som e aneway nfi - s here a way ha we can add o he s ree ne work o be er supper he grow h of hese areas? Page 17 of 30 Page 985 of 1179 EngageWR : Summary Report for 15 August 2018 to 17 December 2023 ENGAGEMENT TOOL: PLACE Priority Streets Exercise Visitors Contributors CONTRIBUTIONS p easan a wa k hrough NCotio Address: 58 Ahrens S ree Wes, K chener, On ara N2 4B7, Canada h p:liwww.engagewr.ca/grow ng age herlmapsipror y -s ree s -exert se?repor ng= rue #marker 111707 p easan o wa k hrough, ye no many amen es ou s de of workp aces NCotle Address: 36 Bre haup S ree, K chener, On ar o N2 5G6, Canada h p:Hwww.engagewr.caigrow ng age her/maps/pr or y -s ree s -exert se?repor ng= rue #marker -111708 Open area s used as dog park a ready and presen s a grea oppor un y o crea e a m Michael Morgenroth uch needed green space and commun y cen re o offse he popu a on pressures on h s ne ghborhood from he h gh r se S a on Park deve opmen s (an euphem sm n nam e because has no h ng n common w h a park). 7=' r Address: 73 Wa er S ree , K chener, On ar o N26 1 S2, Canada h p:liwww.engagewr.calgrow ng age her/maps/pr or y -s ree s-exerc se?repor ng= rue #marker -112051 Love see ng Gauke s ree used for performances, vendors, and jus s ng and mee n Mel B gw ho hers Address: 44 Gauke S ree, K chener, On ar o N2G 1 3, Canada h p://www.engagewr.ca/grow ng age her/maps/pr or y -s ree s-exerc se?repor ng- rue #marker -112097 Th s area has some Brea bus nesses bu jus needs some h ng more o br ng peop e Mel B o more (c ase off o cars on weekends?) Address: 18 On aro S ree Nor h, K chener, On ar o N2G 1A3, Canada h p://www.engagewr.calgrow ng age her/maps/pr or y -s ree s-exerc se?repor ng= rue #marker -112098 Cu e s ree ha has he po en a for much more, espec a y as a' horeughfare' be wee Mel B n he on and he marke . Address: 17 Eby S ree Sou In, K chener, On ar o N2G 3K6, Canada h p:liwww.engagewr.calgrow ng age her/maps/pr or y -s ree s-exerc se?repor ng= rue #marker -112099 A cu e s ree ha seems o come a ve on Sa urdays dur ng marke me. Mel B Address: 23 Marke Lane, K chener, On aro N2 1A1, Canada h p:llwww,engagewr.ca/grow ng age her/maps/pr or y -s ree s-exerc se?repor ng= rue r- #marker -112100 Page 18 of 30 Page 986 of 1179 EngageWR : Summary Report for 15 August 2018 to 17 December 2023 ENGAGEMENT TOOL: PLACE Priority Streets Exercise Th s area s home a o s of fo ks (houses, apar men s, condos, subs d zed hous ng, e Mel B c) wh ch s err fie - bu sn' a ove y area o wa k due c oo much road space and he pr or za on of veh c es. Move h s road back o we anes and add w der s dews ks and for pro ec ed b ke anes. Address: 64 Ben on S ree, K chener, an ar o N2G 251, Canada h p:Nwww.engagewr.calgrowng age herfmapslpror y -s ree s-exerese?repor ng= rue #marker -112101 Th s area has come a ong way n recen years bu has he po en a for more. The Gre Mel B en and Gaud e's Lane are ove y and 's grea when hey are 'ac va ed' n someway - more of ha p ease. A so, wou d ove o see he Duke Food B ock fi ed up aga n. Address: 16 Queen S ree Nor h, K chener, On ar a N2 1 A2, Canada h p://www.engagewr.ca/grow ng age her/maps/pr or y -s ree s-exerc se?repor ng= rue #marker -112102 Res auran s, sp ash pad, fes va s Siff Address: 219 K ng 5 ree Wes , K chener, On aro N2G 1A9, Canada h p:Nwww.engagewr.calgrow ng age her/maps/pr or y -s ree s -exert se?repor ng- rue #masker -112170 Area around fu ure cans hub s pre y du . Wou d benefi from res auran s, a sma gr Skf ocery s ore, coffee shops, a c. Surface park ng a Kaufman Lot s s was ed space (park ng garage or underground park ng wou d be be er o free up surface space). Address: 16 V c or a S ree Nor h, K chener, On ar o N2 3T9, Canada h p:11www.engagewr.calgrow ng age her/maps/pr or y -s ree s-exerc se?repor ng= rue #marker -112171 Good area w h C v c Gen re Park and LITS. Recen y mproved w h b ke anes. skf Address: 170 O o S ree , K chener, On aro N2 2M6, Canada h p://www.engagewr.ca'grow ng age herimapslpror y -s ree s-exerc se?repor ng= rue #marker -112172 Surface a be ween park and KPL shoo d be removed and rep aced w h an ex ens on skf of he park - sp ashpad and baske ba cour s wou d he dea Address: Ahrens S ree Eas , K chener, On arc N2 2M6, Canada ;-A h p://www.engagewr.ca/grow ng age her/maps/pr or y -s ree s-exerc se?repor ng= rue #marker -112173 Wou d be n ce o have some res auran s w h n a b ock or we of he Cen re n he Squ skf are, o v s before a show. Address: 170 O o S ree , K chener, On ar o N2 2M6, Canada h p:llwww.engagewr.calgrow ng age her/maps/pr or y -s ree s-exerc se?repor ng= rue #marker -112174 Page 19 of 30 Page 987 of 1179 EngageWR : Summary Report for 15 August 2018 to 17 December 2023 ENGAGEMENT TOOL: PLACE Priority Streets Exercise Marke Square fron age a ong Freder ck s a so d wa w h no en ryways. No very p e SI; asan o wa k a ongs de. Address: 15 Freder ck S ree , K chener, On aro N2 6M7, Canada h p:llwww.engagewr.calgrow ng age her/maps/pr or y -s ree s-exerese?repor ng= rue #marker -112175 Grea (and beau fu) shops fron ng h s s ree , bu s dews ks are narrow and doesn' fee fr end y o pedes r ans or cyc s s. Can nua on of one-way from On ar o S S up o Duke S wou d open up space for be er s dewa ks and a separa ed b ke ane, and a so open up space for b ke park ng and some ab eslcha rs for peop e o nger. Address: 32 On arc S ree Nor h, K chener, On ar o N2G 1A3, Canada h p:llwww.engagewr.calgrow ng age her/maps/pr or y -s ree s-exerc se?repor ng- rue #marker -112176 Se back pa o here s n ce o be fur her away from veh c e raffic wh e s ea ng ou do r ors. Lo s of space here;. wou d be n ce o see some greenery added near he s ree o h e p b ock he no se and v ew of cars, and o have ano her 1-2 res auran s open ng n o h s space. Cou d rea y urn n o a p aza w h a s of peop e s ng and ea ng hroughou he day. Address: 131 K ng S ree Wes , K chener, Un ar o N2G 1 A7, Canada h p://www.engagewr.ca/grow ng age her/maps/pr or y -s ree s-exerc se?repor ng= rue #marker -112177 Th s area cou d see be or zon ng s nee 's reg ona road, con re of k chener, cou d be Carlos Rogersl sga3 Address: 474 O awa S ree Sou h, K chener, On aro N2M 3P5, Canada r h p:11www. engagewr. ca/g row ng age her/maps/pr or y -s ree s-exerc se?repor ng= rue #marker 112259 Th s cou d be m xed used ho ghr se area s nce 's so c ose ❑ r . Carlos Rogersl Address: 498 O awa S ree Sou h, K chener, On aro N2M 3Pb, Canada h p://www.engagewr.ca/grow ng age her/maps/pr or y -s ree s-exerc se?repor ng= rue #marker -112260 Why s here so much surface park ng w h n a s one's hrow of he ION s a on? Lud cr mikedoherty ous was a of va uab a and Address: 280 Joseph S ree, K chener, On ar o N2G 1 L5, Canada h p://www.engagewr.ca/grow ng age herimapslpror y -s ree s-exerc se?repor ng= rue #marker -112304 W des s ree of our c y. Need o conver o commerc a shops a firs floor snd h gh r se GARTH GREEN on op. Th s cou d be 2nd down own of c y,be ng ckosecyo h ghway parks r, Address: 502 O awa S ree Sou h, K chener, On ar o N2M 3P5, Canada h p://www.engagewr.ca/grow ng age her/maps/pr or y -s ree s-exerc se?repor ng= rue #marker -112359 Page 20 of 30 Page 988 of 1179 EngageWR : Summary Report for 15 August 2018 to 17 December 2023 ENGAGEMENT TOOL: PLACE Priority Streets Exercise V bran and fun s ree o wa k on dur ng Sa urday morn ng marke me Mary R. Address: 14 Eby S ree Nor h, K chener, On ar o N2 2V6, Canada h p:ilwww.engagewr.calgrow ng age her/maps/pr or y -s ree s-exerc se?repor ng= rue #marker -112393 Gauke b ock has rea y ransformed n a a v bran and fun p ace o check ou regu ar y f Mary R or 's var e y of even s, fes va s, and ga her ngs Address: 69 Joseph S ree, K chener, On ar a N2G 1 X7, Canada - h p:11www. engag ewr.cafg row ng age her/maps/pr or y -s ree s-exerc se?repor ng= rue #marker -112394 Th s s ree a ways fe emp y even hough here's so much po en a. E her for mus ca Marcy R. ac s, s ree vendors, pop up s ores, m n even s. Def !nab y needs more o be done! Address: 336 K ng S ree Wes , K chener, On ar o N2G 1 B7, Canada CA GORY h p://www.engagewr.ca/growng age her/maps/pr or y -s ree s-exerc se?repor ng= rue S ree s h_=. #marker -112395 co A V c or a S ree s so prom s ng, g ven s oca on and proposed new zon ng. Curren y Becubed 's depress ng, qu a frank y. Du and decrep bu d ngs w h very few bus nesses ha p roma a commun y (Sm e T ger sap excep on). Th s area cou d become v bran and, I hope, make a s rang pas ve firs mpress on of he c y for v s ors arr v ng a he new r _.. ,.- ans hub. Address: 144 V c or a 5 ree Nor h, K chener, On ar o N2 5C3, Canada h p:{iwww.engagewr.ca/grow ng age her/maps/pr or y -s ree s-exerc se?repor ng= rue #marker -112583 Th s s he ma n connec on o he C y a LRT s op, and 's pre y b and - fee s dom n skf a ed by park ng garage en rances and s dewy ks are broken up w h huge gra es. Wou d ke o see on -s ree park ng removed or a eas reduced o make space for some ab es, rees, ar , e c. Address: 31 Young S ree , K chener, On ar o N2G 1 A9, Canada h p:Nwww.engagewr.calgrow ng age her/maps/pr or y -s ree s-exerc se?repor ng= rue #marker -112591 Down own Commun y Cen re needs grea s gnage a On ar o and Weber S ree s. I's skf comp e e y h dden away and I had no dea was here for he onges me. Pedes r an- fr end y areas for nger ng ou s de he commun y cen re shou d be pr or zed as we , perhaps by remov ng 6-8 park ng spa s n he o . Address: 130 On aro S ree Nor h, K chener, On are N2 3Z1, Canada h p:llwww.engagewr.ca/grow ng age her/maps/pr or y -s ree s-exerc se?repor ng= rue #marker -112592 Long sk nny ho a park ng o s end ess o wa k a ong. Remova of on -s ree park ng we skf u d prov de space o p an rees. Wou d a so be a good spa o ns a a ong mura so h a we can ook a ar ns ead of cars. Address: 47 Chares S ree Eas , K chener, On aro N2G 3G9, Canada CA GORY 5 ree s h_=. h p:llwww.engagewr.calgrow ng age her/maps/pr or y -s ree s-exerc se?repor ng= rue # marker- 112593 do Page 21 of 30 Page 989 of 1179 EngageWR : Summary Report for 15 August 2018 to 17 December 2023 ENGAGEMENT TOOL: PLACE Priority Streets Exercise Trees needed here - road d e from 4 o 2 apes wou d Prov de ons of space for rees o n bo h s des. Th s s ree s no par cu ar y bar ng o wa k down, bu IS ex reme y ho d ur ng he summer. Wou d make he wa k o schoo much n cer for Suddaby s uden s. Address: 131 Freder ck S ree , K chener, On ar o N2 2L9, Canada h p:llwww.engagewr.calgrow ng age her/maps/pr or y -s ree s-exerc se?repor ng= rue #marker 112594 Ac ua pa hway needed here o connec VIA/GO s a on o he s ree. Peop a are curre w n y c mb ng over guardra s o access he s a on. There's been a sma a emp o and scape bes de Weber S , bu 's pre y b and and no nv ng for pedes r ans. Address: 104 V c or a S ree Nor h, K chener, On ar a N2 5C3, Canada un h p:llwww.engagewr.ca/grow ng age her/maps/pr or y -s ree s-exerc se?repor ng- rue #marker -112595 The Cherry Park ra shou d con nue across K ng S ree and o Weber. A ra a ong h Peter KH a racks has he oppor un y of crea ng a p easan way o wa k a ong V c or a S and o he condo owers on V c or a S Nor h. V c or a S w never be an enjoyab e p ace o w a k because s a w de ar or a road w h fas mov ng raffdc and sk nny s dewa ks. The ra wou d con nue on a he root of he GO rans p a form as o no o cenfl c w h peo p e board ng GO ra ns There's a so an oppor un y of hav ng bus nesses wh ch face h e wa k ng he ra Address: 520 K ng S ree Wes , K chener, On ar a N26 1 C7, Canada h p:llwww.engagewr.calgrow ng age her/maps/pr or y -s ree s-exerc se?repor ng= rue #marker -112645 K ng S shou d be pedes r an zed n order o make he res auran s a ong K ng S more Peter KH econom ca y v an e. The res auran s have very m ed sea ng. Some are akeou on y. Pedes r an z ng K ng S prov des he oppor un y of much anger res aurae pa as. (A s o commerc a ren n dawn own K chener s nsane y expens ve) Address: Sco abank, 1 V c or a S S, K chener, On ar a N2G 1 C2, Canada h p:llwww.engagewr.ca/grow ng age her/maps/pr or y -s ree s-exerc se?repor ng= rue #marker -112646 The park and h s or c houses are he gem of down own K chener Peter KH Address: 69 Ahrens S ree Wes, K chener, On aro N2 488, Canada h p:lfwww.engagewr.calgrowng age her/maps/pr or y -s ree s-exerc se?repor ng= rue SCA L:ncqr #marker -112647 Good e's ane cou d use some ave Peter KH Address: 1 [ween S ree Nor h, K chener, On arc N2G 1A3, Canada h p:llwww.engagewr.caigrow ng age her/maps/pr or y -s ree s-exerc se?repor ng= rue #marker -112649 Page 22 of 30 Page 990 of 1179 EngageWR : 5urnmary Report for 15 August 2018 to 17 December 2023 ENGAGEMENT TOOL: PLACE Growing Together - Kitchener's MTSAs Visitors IL Contributors CONTRIBUTIONS tea`' planjaminB planjaminB CA GORY Where wou d you ke o ve w h n K chener's MTSAs? 2023 03 21 10:01:46 0400 planjaminB CA GOR Wh ch areas do you no v s K chener's MTSAs? -" ^ 1 1 17:39 04r.. skf CA GORY Where wou d you ke a ve w h n K chener's MTSAs` 2023 04 12 11:18-.40 0400 skf CA GORY Wh ch areas do you no v s n K chener's MTSAs? Page 23 of 30 I ove he K chener Marke Address: Serr n a Cafe, K chener marke , K chener, On ar o N2G 2L3, Canada h p:Hwww.engagewr.calgrow ng age herlmapslgrow ng- age her -k chener-s-m sas?re par ng= rue4marker-102063 S a on Park! Address: 575 K ng S ree Wes , K chener, On ar o N2G 1 C7, Canada h p://www.engagewr.ca/grow ng age her/maps/grow ng- age her -k chener-s-m sas?re par ng= rue#marker-102064 Address: 355 O awa S ree Sou h, K chener, On arc N2M 3P3, Canada h p://www.engagewr.calgrow ng age her/maps/grow ng- age her -k cheners-m sas?re par ng= rue4marker-102065 Near V c or a Park Address: 88 Wa er S ree Sou h, K chener, On ar o N20 1 Z4, Canada h p://www.engagewr.ca/grow ng age her/maps/grow ng- age her -k chener-s-m sas?re par ng= rue#marker-103471 Indus r a area; very park ng o heavy; no draw f you don' work here Address: 150 S range S ree , K chener, On ar o N2G 1 R4, Canada h p:/Avww.engagewr.calgrow ng age her/maps/grow ng- age her k cheners-m sas?re par ng= rue#marker-103472 Page 991 of 1179 EngageWR : Summary Report for 15 August 2018 to 17 December 2023 IDEAS Complete Communities Visitors Contributors i CONTRIBUTIONS Mel B Convenience store Mel B Green Grocers Sma -sca a grocery s ore such as Fu C rc e and Legacy Greens Mel e Gallery pop-up space Sma ga ery or pop-up space offer ng ad spay area for oca ar s sand on repreneurs o showcase he r works, on a ro a ng bas s. Mel B Patios Spaces ha can eas y be ransformed n o pa o space n warm wea her. Mel B Businesses allowed to operate out of homes A ow homeowners and enan s o prov de var ous bus ness sery ces from he fron /ma n floor of he r home (a sma ar s ud o, spec a y marke , e c). Peter KH Restaurants Page 24 of 30 Res auran s down own have o charge crazy or ces due o super h gh commerc a ren . Res auran s n peop es houses can make a profi wh a charg ng ess for food Page 992 of 1179 EngageWR : Summary Report for 15 August 2018 to 17 December 2023 Complete Communities Peter KH Brick & mortar Etsy shops Cand es, soap, scarves 25 Ju y 23 Peter KH Bakery Peter KH Chocolater Peter KH Bicycle Shop Peter KH Wedding planner Peter KH Makerspace Garage w h oo s ha can be used by ne ghbours mikedoherty Patios Res aurae s, bars, cafes. Jus ons of pa os mikedoherty Podestrianized streets No a bus ness, bu jus a rem nder ha no every h ng needs o be br ck and -mor ar s orefron s. Food rucks, e s ages and so on on pedes ran zed s ree s are a so a grea op on! Page 25 of 30 Page 993 of 1179 EngageWR : Summary Report for 15 August 2018 to 17 December 2023 IDEAS Complete Communities mikedoherty Just be less proscriptive S cp ry ng o m cromanage fe n h s c y, jus a peop a do coo h ngs9 30Juy23 Mary R. Piayscapefindoor activities store A p ace o p ay some phys ca gameslspor s e her so o or jo n w h o hers. Le g ow n d ark go f, rock c mb ng, bou der ng, skf Grocery store Page 26 of 30 A sma -sca a grocery s ore ( ke a Va umar or Cen raj r gh near an LRT s a on wou d be a grea chance for someone o hop off he ra n on he r way home and grab grocer es for d nner on he way. Page 994 of 1179 EngageWR : Summary Report for 15 August 2018 to 17 December 2023 IDEAS Draft approach to growth and change Visitors Contributors CONTRIBUTIONS o Juv23 kroonariel Opportunity for local small business owners I wou d ove o see more ndependen grocers, oca y -owned coffee shops, and non -ch a n corner s ores go n o hese new bu d ngs. These are mp❑r an p ace -mak ng s es, where he commun y 1 ne ghbourhood can ga her, and espec a y he grocers he p o m ga a he "food deser " phenomenon ha so of en p agues down owns n c es. I hope ha he ren w no be oo h gh and ha he c y can encourage s c zens (new and w h a egacy here) o rea ze he r en repreneur a dreams. Wou d ha e o see cha n s ore S go n. kroonariel No condos please K chener needs o noes more n apar men s and no condos. Condos are no a sus a nab a or affordab a op on for so many peop e. kroonariel Green roof requirement f LEED building status requir ement Wha says on he n. E her ha or so ar pane s. The c y sh❑u d ook carefu y n o bu d ng con rac s and he r sus a nab y s ra eg es and cer fica ons. RUDY Bell Why Ottawa street south houses are SGA 1 from ke hllottawa intersection to Patterdon/ottawa intersectio n? Page 27 of 30 You a ow o bu d m d r se on New Dundee road, where here s no bus on Sa urday Su nday and you h nk ha ❑ awa s ree sou h, 500 me re c ose o m s a on on y qua fy for SGA1 . I had houses ha are 100 year o d. Are u go ng o ake r o h s new dunde e road m dr se???No. IS T ERE BETTER LOCATION IN KITC ENER IN 15 YEARS T EN MILL STREET TO BUILT IG RISE? Page 995 of 1179 EngageWR : Summary Report for 15 August 2018 to 17 December 2023 IDEAS Draft approach to growth and change Cdeaville@0675@g Can someone explain what is Sga1 and what's point mail.com ? V._I sgal does no make sense for our c y. G ven amoun f money spend on r and how a x payer money s eves ng n p anners c y; p an be er. . Wins us hus Sgal ? Make a area w h n 800 me re sga3. Tha 's wha our c y need n 15 years when we run ou of and. Wake up, h nk 20 years from now. There w be no more money for more r . Ther e w be no and. Le peop e p an wha hey can do now e h proper y based on sg3 and sg4 near r S a on. Abo sh sg1 and sg2 near r . Th s s no fa r ❑ ax do ar nves ed n r and s aga ns aifordab a hous ng s ra egy. Carlos Rogersl More opportunity for Sga 2 or 3 I s unfor una a ha mos area fa n flood p ane around m s a on. On order o make b es use of of over area around m s a on r , I firm y be eve ha marked area n my p ho o shou d be Sga3 or a eas sga2. Prox m y o emp oymen area, parks , r , 's pert ec cand da a for h gh r se mikaedoherty Great zoning ideas -- do more These m xed-use zones are a grea s ar , bu why are we do ng so a of ? We shou d be chang ng vas swa hes of he c y o use hese new zones, bu ns ead 's on y sm a areas of he down own core. Tha wou d be a huge was e of h s oppor un y o flu d a more affordab e, v bran , greener, be er c y. Mos ne ghbourhoods n K chener nee d o be upzoned, espec a y ou s de of down own. GARTH GREEN Metz is probably far compare to all area marked yell ow. One side of road is Sga1 and other side Sga3 to 4 One s de of o awa s roe sou h , ha s much fur her from r s a on s marked Sga4. A cross he s ree , 's sga 1 even hough s so c ose compara ve y. Why? Is h s dec s on based on fac of who owns and a ready? I rea y don' unders and why on y hose pa rce of and go Sga3 and 4 ha are owned by deve oilers or some commun y when he re are o of parce near m s a on ha are rue oppor un y n fu Lire ,curren y owned by homeowner o be sga3 ra her hen Sgai. Wha s og c? Par a y? Beth -Liz More green spaces need to be added with increase d housing density. Where are the new green spaces on these maps? Page 28 of 30 Why don' he deve opers bu d ng he mass ve ❑wers need ❑ prov de any green spac es for he r res den s? The bu d ngs a ow pe s bu don' prov de any green space so d og owners use nearby green parks and green spaces for he dogs o poop and don' c can up, win ch ru ns pub c parks for commun y members o enjoy. Even nearby schoo yards c ase o new Owers are now be ng used as dog parks because hey are fenced n yards. Dog poop s a over he yard so k ds can' p ay and 's n ended for k ds o en; oy and ge exerc se a recess bu hey can' use - schoo yards are no n ended o be used as a dog park. Bu d more green spaces! Page 996 of 1179 EngageWR : Summary Report for 15 August 2018 to 17 December 2023 IDEAS Draft approach to growth and change We need to make it easier for residents to purchase property. Please limit investors being able to purcha se so we have a chance of ownership Melanie Claire Ottawa street south, within 500 meter walk from L rt should be SGA 3 Inorder o jus fy cos of mu m on projec on Lr , and aST oppOr un y o save green space around c y, p anner have no chance of rn s ake. Any h ng w h n 500 o 600 me ers shou d be abso u e y SGA 3. Any h ng fur her cou d be SGA 2. Any and w h n 500 o 600 me er wa k mus be for h gh r se affordab a hous ng , peop a who canno afford c ars. P anners shou d unders and, c y canno (rear cos of more r. T CS IS IT. wake up ca . Any 500 o 800 me er proper y shou d be sga 3 or m n mum 2. 1 shou d be deve o per cho ce how hey accumu a e and make bes ou of o s. We canno afford o nose more green space o deve op h gh r se. I's a owed around c y a unusua p ace o bu h gh r se w h no prox rn y y o r s a on. Why u sk pp ng he area near r where ma ke more sense? Melanie Claire Sga 3 suggested in area ottawa street south. 2 arge Warks, access o h ghway, Bank, ns u on, ma , reg ona road, r w h 600 me ers, arge o s, o d houses, h gh r se across s ree , Ymca, h s area s perfec cand da e o crea a ano her m xed use h gh r se. SgA 3 sugges ed for houses oca ed n be ween k nz e o awa n ersec on un m s ree s a on. I s perfec rans on compa be w h across s ree Sga zon ng. AustinD Love the removal of parking minimums from all zone sl These zon ng recommends ons seem ke a grey way o reduce he back and for h be ween deve opers and he p ann ng count , where seems ke here s a cons s err d es re o bu d ess park ng han our Curren ru es requ re. Th s seems ke a huge cos s aver for new projec s. Th s park ng has been ea ng up our c y for so ong, and I h nk b u d ng hese new denser ne ghborhoods w h good cans and ac ve ranspor a on op ons s exac y he ype of c y I wan o ve n. Disabled Human Accessibility for those with disabilities isn't mentione d anywhere. Page 29 of 30 Access b y needs o be n egra ed n every s ng a aspec of p an ng. Every h ng from he des gns of he homes, o he spaces hey're n, he oca on hey"re n, he resources ava ab a around , he resources o ge around , and so on. D sab es are a so more han wha mee s he eye. DTK s naccess b e for many w h d sab es as s. Con nu n g o p an and deve op nfras ruc ure wh a no even men on ng access b y once n he en re drat s sadden ng. Page 997 of 1179 EngageWR : Summary Report for 15 August 2018 to 17 December 2023 IDEAS Draft approach to growth and change Peter KH Wellington St should be SGA3 We know ha h s w be he case 20 years from now. M gh as we do h s now and ge some benefi for he c y n do ng . Peter KH King St should be low rise. K ng S - he p easan shopp ng s ree - sheu d be ow r se. A of Char es and Duke S c an be h gh r se. Peter KH Frederick St up to Frederick Mall should be SGA4. We know ha h s w be he case 20 years from now. M gh as we do now and reap some benefi s for he c y Peter KH Why isn't the Conestoga College bus terminal an M TSA? Peter KH Why isn't FairView park mall an MTSA? Paul H The quality of existing neighbourhoods does not nee d to be sacrificed for the sake of growth. In ens fica on can and shou d accommoda a he ex s ng charac er of our c y, no run r oughshod over . Th s means, for examp e, ha ex s ng and v bran ow -r se res den a ne ghbourhoods shou d no be re -zoned for bu d ngs up o 12 s or es. Paul H Intensification needs to include a full spectrum of ho using choices and options, not simply high rise Gond ominium towers. Page 30 of 30 Grea er a en on shou d be pa d o affordab y and accommoda ng arger fam y un s (.e., he "m ss ng m dd a"-- su ab a ow -r se, h gh-dens y hous ng such as ow -r se mu -bedroom apar men s, row houses, and ownhomes). Page 998 of 1179